Similar posts

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.

Boobly Noobly #sexist i.redd.it

(Concerning Elliot Rodger’s taste in fiction.)

image

[transcript:

Boobly Noobly: At least Elliot liked Avatar the Last Airbender, and not that lesbian piece of shit released after it. He had good taste for an autist with anxiety problems and sociopathic episodes.

Romano Cooms: As an actual SJW, Korra was lazy, spiteful, edgy fanfic - The Internet Police

kalackninja: You both are cancer and need the Jew raped out of you, btw haven't watched either.

]

Wilson #racist the-spearhead.com

Conquest through genocide is not actually immoral, since there is no “social contract” being violated, though the greed of it may be questionable. Fleig would support a genocide against whites, so she is in no position to judge anyway, and her motivations–spite, malice, nihilism, betrayal–are much more evil than Columbus’s straightforward and productive ambition

Colombie #fundie mb28.scout.com

It seems to me that this alternative discipline psycho babble is a relatively new phenomenon. For generations parents have spanked their kids and society seemed much safer and much more orderly. I think there is definitely a correlation between lack of physical discipline and a society that degrades itself to a godless society. Remember when the phrase "wait 'til your father gets home" put fear into the hearts of children. It was a respectful fear that should be exuded towards all authority figures. In summary, I believe more kids these days need a good spanking. Maybe we would have less of the Columbines (school shootings) and rebelliousness in the world if more Fathers acted like fathers.

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

I get disgusted every time I meet military women, particular the older hags. They are bossy, jerks, bullies, tough, rough and rotten people in many cases. They make ungodly feminists everywhere proud! Feminism is the rot of America. I cannot stomach manly women who give orders. I walk away from them in disgust laughing. This bratty breed of rebellious females today, who get offended every time women aren't elevated to the level of a man, are a curse upon our land.

This is what is meant about the coming Antichrist in Daniel 8:25b, “...and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” Democracy is mob rule! America is a ticking timebomb! We are utterly destroying ourselves with the liberty and freedom God which has entrusted to us. We are fools! God didn't give us freedom to fornicate and commit adultery, and to have abortions to murder the unwanted children conceived through sexual immorality. God didn't give us freedom to walk around nude in public, take the Lord's name in vain in every movie, get drunk at parties, and to legally marry homosexuals and let them adopt children. We have abused our freedom, destroying ourselves with peace. When the Antichrist comes, he will complete the destruction, taking liberty to the ultimate low as the reigning Man of Sin!

Something is very wrong in a society when women are liberated to positions of leadership, cops, judges, soldiers and senators. In ancient Rome it was not so. Women knew their place in society. Any time women rise to power, so does Satan! Look at the fruit of feminism in America—a degenerate culture of lesbianism, abortion, fornication, divorce and rebellion. The facts speak for them self! America has become 'THE GREAT SATAN' in the eyes of the rest of the world. We are arrogant, full of hubris and stubborn pride, which we think is a good thing, but it is destroying us. We have no right to force our abortion filth, through forced sterilization programs on other nations. We have no right to force our homosexual filth on others. Who do we think we are? Who do we think we are to force our naked American culture on other cultures? We are so spoiled rotten as Americans! Our attitudes are contemptible. American women wear clothing as do prostitutes, yet we condemn and call for women's rights in Muslim cultures, so they can become sluts, whores and naked barbarians like our shameful females. I SAY, TO HELL WITH THE UNITED STATES!!!

There is nothing more despicable today than America's empowered, angry and rebellious women. American woman, stay away from me!

007.5 #fundie city-data.com

(in reply to a query from a Scandinavian about the "extremism" of American atheists)

Theres a few reasons why american atheism is so outwardly hostile and even militant :

1. It has a few key Leader/Gurus who fancy the notoriety of making atheism a quest to stomp out any and all semblences of God especially Christianity ; such Leaders have become popular thru published books to spread secularism and hedonism which are two fundamental tenets of atheism pertaining to lifestyle --- they bash the Christian Faith in order to enjoy and try justifying these tenets.

2. It has taken advantage of freedom of speech laws to preach an unrelentless barrage of hate, vitrol, defiance, and apathy for the Cause. And when it feels resistance from the Christian Community , it fuels the resentment they have toward godliness, Godly values, Godly ideologies, and especially absolute moral laws which are needed for civility of a Nation.

3. It has formed dedicated Associations such as The American Atheist Association which hold many regional conferences, a very large national conference annually, in addition to atheist kids camps to groom young people to be hateful and spiteful . The ultimate motive is to eliminate all forms of religion they see as an affront except of course for their own secular religion of (now defunct) Darwinnian Evolution and continuance toward playing the charade of Naturalism and Materialism as a worldview --- without a shred of scientific evidence and based solely on speculation, opinion, and enormous faith in the incredulous. (IE: World reknown Atheist Scientists calculate atheistic first life appearing at 1 in 10^40,000 th probability giving it every possible chance) . Atheism is a religious FAITH.

4. It feels greatly threatened with the upsurgence of proactive Christians and Theists exposing the many fallacies of atheism as a worldview or lifestyle .... and anything which stands in the way of total autonomous living whereby One makes SELF his/her god ..... is something it finds resentful even though they volitionally started the war first .

Theres other reasons, but suffice it to say, these are the major ones why hostile and militant Atheism has gained popularity in recent years . It will continue to escalate and the fury strengthened as it sees it impossible to squelch the Christian Faith (IE: ' Within 3 decades the Bible will be extinct' --- Atheist Voltaire whos own house in France is now the largest BIble distribution center to the world) .

Glad to hear its not as bad in Scandinavia ...but it is full of excitement here in the U.S. lol

Greg Morse #fundie desiringgod.org

Much of our modern sexuality pontificates with Pharaoh, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice?” (Exodus 5:2).

Some teachers can no longer say “boys and girls” in classrooms. In some school districts, young men can go into girls’ locker rooms simply with a note from a parent. Recently, actress Kate Hudson shared her plans to raise her daughter, Rani Rose, with a “genderless approach.” What a sad time to be alive. But not only sad: also dangerous and rebellious.

Into the gender confusion of our day, even razor companies are stepping forward to help groom the next generation into healthy expressions of masculinity. Therefore, Christians, of all people, need to be clear that brutality, passivity, complacency, and effeminacy miss the mark of manhood. Jesus Christ did not domineer, live disinterestedly, or act like a woman — and he is the model of God-honoring masculinity. But the inclusion of effeminacy in that list may prick some sensibilities today.

Lance Welton #fundie vdare.com

Atheists are genetic mutants who, for the most part, would never have been born if we hadn’t managed to break free of pre-industrial conditions of Darwinian selection. This was the conclusion of a paper published just before Christmas in the leading journal Evolutionary Psychological Science[The Mutant Says in His Heart, “There Is No God”: The Rejection of Collective Religiosity Centred Around the Worship of Moral Gods is Associated with High Mutational Load Edward Dutton, Guy Madison & Curtis Dunkel. (PDF).] and it sent establishment psychologists into spasms of rage.

To be sophisticated, these days, means that you’re an atheist. Academia is overwhelmingly atheist and average intelligence weakly correlates with not believing in God [High IQ turns academics into atheists,’ Times Higher Education, byRebecca Atwood, June 12, 2008]. For SJWs, the religious are at best stupid and, at worst, racist bigots who vote for Donald Trump and Brexit. So it’s no surprise that the paper was greeted with disbelief by the SJWs who fill departments of psychology.

Reactions ranged from “Amazing!” to condemning it as the worst paper of the year and “one of the most egregious papers I’ve ever read.” Reported in newspapers worldwide [Atheists more likely to be left handed, study finds, by Olivia Rudgard,Daily Telegraph, December 21, 2017], its authors presumably delighted in the reaction.

And the reaction was all the more ferocious because the paper’s conclusions are difficult to dispute. The researchers—British anthropologist Dr Edward Dutton, Swedish psychologist Prof. Guy Madison and Western Illinois University psychologist Curtis Dunkel—presented a beautifully simple case:

Until the Industrial Revolution, we were under harsh conditions of Darwinian Selection, meaning that about 40% of children died before they reached adulthood. These children would have been those who had mutant genes, leading to poor immune systems and death from childhood diseases. But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind. This is because the brain, home to 84% of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression... but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.

Under these conditions, prevalent until the nineteenth century, we were individually selected for but we were also “group selected” for. Ethnic groups are simply a genetic extended family and some groups fared better against the environment and enemy groups than others did, due to the kind of partly genetic psychological adaptations they developed.

Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality. Belief in these kinds of gods was selected for, they maintain, because once we developed cities we had to deal with strangers—people who weren’t part of our extended family. By conceiving of a god who demanded moral behaviour towards other believers, people were compelled to cooperate with these strangers, meaning that large, highly cooperative groups could develop.

Computer models have proven that the more internally cooperative group—which is also hostile to infidel outsiders—wins the battle of group selection [The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation by Max Hartshorn, June 2013]. This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.

The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40% genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.

And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.

Woodley suggests that weakened Darwinian selection would have led to the spread of “spiteful mutations” of the mind, which would help to destroy the increasingly physically and mentally sick group, even influencing the non-carriers to behave against their genetic interests, as carriers would help undermine the structures through which members learnt adaptive behaviour.

This is exactly what happened in the infamous Mouse Utopia experiment in the late 1960s, where a colony of mice was placed in conditions of zero Darwinian selection and eventually died out. [Death squared: The explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, January 1973(PDF)].

So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousness—the collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800—should be associated with these markers of mutation. In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.

And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.

It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood, but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.

Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.

They then look at data on left-handedness. In agricultural societies we are overwhelmingly right-handed. Left-handedness means an asymmetrical brain and thus, to some extent, mutation. They show that there is a weak but significant trend whereby the more strongly religious you are the more likely you are to be right-handed, just as the theory would predict. Finally, they turn to plain ugliness—asymmetry. This shows that your immune system is so deficient that you haven’t been able to maintain a symmetrical phenotype in the face of disease or that you simply have mutant genes that make you asymmetrical. Believers in the paranormal have less symmetrical hands than do controls.

...

Dutton & Co.’s research is so incendiary because it is presenting the SJWs with what they really are: mutants; maladapted people who undermine carefully evolved, evolutionarily useful structures—such as religion—meaning they make even non-carriers maladapted; discouraging them from breeding or from defending their ethnic group.

Under normal Darwinian conditions, prevalent until the Industrial Revolution, these mutants would simply never have been born. They are, just like the mutant mice, people whose influence will ultimately lead to the collapse of society, as intelligence declines, and we return to a new Dark Age in which people are likely to be very religious indeed.

But perhaps there is some good news. It’s quite clear from the Mouse Utopia experiments that if the mutants are removed, then the society will recover.

Vox Day #conspiracy voxday.blogspot.com

The "March For Our Lives Demonstration", which was supposedly inspired by the so-called Parkland school shootings, was planned "several months prior" to the drama performed at the Florida school

image

Everything about that "school shooting" was fake. Everything. It is beyond reprehensible that no one in the mainstream media will do any investigatory reporting.

Mike King #racist tomatobubble.com

Trumpstein's declaration of war and call for a boycott on the NFL & NBA represent a classic case of a clever politician doing the right thing, but for the wrong reasons. With his conservative / nationalist core constituencies shrinking due to his tiresome buffoonery, leftward movement and broken promises, this calculated move to fire-up the patriotard base may turn out to be a stroke of political genius for Ivanka's daddy. Though Sugar and I, er, "The Editorial Board" of The Anti-New York Times can see right through the Orange Clown's tactical trickery, any damage done to the National Felons League will come as a welcome side-effect.

Yes, it's high time that these Jewish-run leagues and their stables of ungrateful, whiny, low-IQ, anti-White, spoiled-rotten multi-millionaire, deadbeat dad brats be taught a lesson by the lazy fat White guys who attend their games, purchase their merchandise and watch them on the Idiotic Box. And to whatever extent that a sports boycott ends up re-focusing Boobus Footballicus attention on matters political, something good may actually come out of this -- maybe. Let the leagues die and let the protesting punks work as dishwashers, janitors, busboys, pimps and crack dealers --- those who don't end up dead or in prison within a few months, that is.

"Yo man...the anthem be racist."

One can only imagine how many fatherless Black kids these notoriously promiscuous multi-millionaire morons have sired and abandoned. They are also notorious for blowing millions of dollars of women, drugs, and extravagance, while doing little if anything to offer financial support or mentoring in the "oppressed" ™ Black communities.

As for the libtarded whining about Trumpstein's "divisiveness," it is important to note that these childishly provocative anthem-protests began in 2016 as a direct consequence of the relentless, multi-year incitement against innocent police officers by Mr. & Mr. Obongo and the rest of the usual suspects above and below them. The meaning of the circus has since morphed into a protest of "racism" ™ in general. A bit of essential chronology is called for here:

2009: Obongo publicly accused the Cambridge, MA police of "acting stupidly" for arresting Black Communist Harvard professor Henry Gates after Gates began abusing police officers merely for questioning him as to why he was breaking into a home. The pinko professor could easily and calmly have explained that he was the new rightful renter of the property who had lost his keys, and then shown them his documents. Instead, he chose to make a public spectacle in the exclusive neighborhood.

2012: Obongo took up the cause of a Black thug named Trayvon Martin who was killed by George Zimmerman, an armed neighborhood watchman who shot Martin in self-defense as the drugged up "teen" was bashing Zimmerman's head into the pavement. Said Obongo of the dead beast: "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon."

2014: Obongo made a Federal case of another justified killing of a thug that occurred in Ferguson, MO. A 6'5"- 300 pound beast, Michael Brown, had to be put down by White Officer Darren Wilson after he had robbed a convenience store and then tried to kill Officer Wilson. Obongo's surrogates, the Reverend Al Charlatan and the Black Lives Matter terrorist group, then incited riots as Obongo's Attorney General, Eric Holder, persecuted the Ferguson police department.

2016: Clad in black leather and draped with bullets, the glorified go-go girl skank Beyonce, who is as "as thick as thieves" with Mr. & Mr. Obongo, used the occasion of the Stupor Bowl to pay a half-time tribute to the cop-killing Communist Black Panthers.

Building upon the sustained hate campaign against police -- an evil effort that actually led to the execution murders of several police officers nationwide -- San Francisco 49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick -- a mulatto who was raised by a loving White family after his Black biological father disappeared (so typical!) -- began dropping to one knee instead of standing before the National Anthem. When asked to comment on the controversy, Obongo actually defended the anthem protest:

"I don’t doubt his (Kap's) sincerity. I think he cares about some real, legitimate issues that have to be talked about. If nothing else, he’s generated more conversation about issues that have to be talked about... “I’d rather have young people who are engaged in the argument and trying to think through how they can be part of our democratic process than people who are just sitting on the sidelines not paying attention at all,”

Kap's anti-White / anti-cop antics have since spread to other teams and other sports. So you see, it was the administration of Mr. & Mr. Obongo, backed by the promotion of the all-mighty Judenpresse, not Orange Man, that started this whole divisive nastiness.

Frankly, this trite tradition of playing the National Anthem before every single sports game is a malignant form of self-worship that was instituted at baseball games on the suggestion of Woodrow Wilson. The purpose was to whip up fake patriotism for World War I -- a tragic event fought only for the benefit of Globalism and Zionism. Even back then, "they" (cough cough) understood the power of sports.

If players were to take a knee to protest something real, such as the America's political and military oppression of the world, or the erosion of liberty here at home, we would strongly support that. But because these idiotic protests are motivated solely by bigotry against Whites and blind hatred against police officers, The Anti-New York Times, - in spite of Trumpstein's manipulative personal motives in calling for it, wholeheartedly endorses the "mancott" of the NFL and NBA. So, these disrespectful, hateful, bigoted ass-clowns want to drop to one knee, eh? Then the big bad White man needs bring the whole damn pack of them to their metaphorical knees, financially.

In the vernacular of ghetto thuggery: "Let's tear the mutha down!"

The drunken little White boys in fat men's bodies need to sober up, grow up, shape up and fight for something real!

Boobus Americanus 1: I read in the New York Times today that Trump is calling for a boycott of the NFL.

Boobus Americanus 2: That's so divisive. Football is our national game.

Sugar: No Boobuss! Defending frickin' cop killerss and biting the hand that feedss you is what'ss divissive!

Editor: White Sport-tards who turn a blind eye to this have no self-respect.

Chapo Trap House #sexist #racist #moonbat #homophobia nytimes.com

The people in the crowd were angry, and “Chapo Trap House” wanted them to stay that way. The five hosts of the popular socialist podcast wanted everyone to know they had all been lied to. About everything.

The media they consumed was fake news aimed to distract them from the only war worth fighting: the class war. Politesse, civility, even pleasure — those were tools of the neoliberal oppressor. The right answer is rage.

“That joy,” the Chapo co-host Will Menaker said to the crowd gathered in Iowa City on the eve of the Iowa caucus. “That’s good but it’s not as good a motivator when you’re really going to war as spite.”

“Let the hate feed you,” the co-host Amber A’Lee Frost added as the audience roared.

And it does. Especially toward other Democrats.

Supporters of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. are “gelatinous 100-year-olds.”

Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg is “a bloodless asexual.”

“The gayest thing about him is he descends from an ethnic group that’s like a little toy dog,” Ms. A’Lee Frost said.

When Senator Elizabeth Warren’s name came up, the crowd made the sound of a snake hissing. She had accused Senator Bernie Sanders of saying that a woman could not beat President Trump, and so she is a snake.

“Yes, my sssssoldiers,” Mr. Menaker said.

Former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s run appalls them. “Beat him so badly that this midget gremlin won’t even have a shot even with a trillion dollars,” Mr. Menaker said.

“Kill him,” someone shouted from the audience. These were jokes, of course. Everyone was laughing.

As Mr. Sanders rises in the polls and claims strong showings in early states, a new set of media stars is on the rise, too. Leading the pack are the hosts of “Chapo Trap House,” the Pied Pipers of the candidate’s online movement.

In their rowdy, vulgar weekly podcast, they are stoking the fires of a political insurgency led by their 78-year-old idol. The man stands for the movement, the movement is the man.

“Our boy Bernie” they call him.

The fivesome of “Chapo Trap House" are not the only bards of the new American left — there is “Red Scare” and another whose name cannot be printed — but they have led the way for a movement that together generates millions of dollars a year. They are on their way to becoming the socialist’s answer to right-wing shock jock radio. Their primary targets, in evidence at that show in Iowa, are not the Republican Party or even Mr. Trump but rather centrist liberals, whom they see as the major obstacle to a workers’ revolution.

The main draw of the show is their banter, the hosts distilling the news of the week and checking in on their favorite and least favorite characters. But they have had major guests, including Mr. Sanders himself.

“These people on top are so powerful that the only way we bring them down, the only way we make the kinds of transformation this country absolutely requires is when millions of people are prepared to stand up and fight back,” Mr. Sanders said during his interview.

And the Sanders campaign maintains a close relationship with the podcast. His senior adviser, David Sirota, and his national press secretary, Briahna Joy Gray, have also been on the podcast. At the Iowa show, a Sanders volunteer stood at the door with fliers and pins to hand out and an email list to gather names.

Their followers — on the night in Iowa City more than 700 strong — come to hear them rage for three hours against the student debt, the high rent, the dead-end creative class jobs, and the feeling of hopelessness fighting against a liberal political establishment that seems polite when they are angry.

They were promised a better life, a more dignified life, and they are done waiting for it.

An additional challenge is that as the free-floating anger they stoke finds community, it is escalating and souring into sometimes violent and ugly rhetoric — the kind of rhetoric that other Democratic contenders have fashioned into a major critique of Mr. Sanders.

On Monday, the Sanders campaign fired a campaign organizer, Ben Mora, after his private Twitter feed was revealed to include derogatory comments about 2020 candidates. The Chapo hosts publicly supported Mr. Mora, praising his organizing work and saying, “I hope the campaign doesn’t cave to these whiners and losers.”

For the hosts and their fans, those sort of tweets and the podcast language are all jokes. The audience understands the difference, they argue, and anyway the real problem with the Democrats is that they’re overly sensitive. A bunch of self-serious P.M.C.s (members of the professional-managerial class).

Anonymous #sexist desuarchive.org

You know you're right, I think having that type of thing in the show would serve to illustrate the downfall of letting children be raised by unnatural families.

Although I'm aware that personal experience isn't fact, this always seems to be the case from what I've seen. Especially with lesbian parents and male children.

Grew up with one of these kinds of kids, and he was particularly fucked. Never really had a supportive father growing up and his mothers certainly didn't help with his emotional development.

As a result, he grew up sexually confused trying to emulate his parents and became very spiteful because of it. The only people who hung around him weren't exactly what I'd call tard wranglers, but rather, they wanted to be the last ones he shot the day he decided to go postal.

joseph #conspiracy answers.yahoo.com

Obama knew and blocked the FBI from denying gun sales to Omar Mateen.

Obama is only concerned with taking guns from non Muslims. Obama wants Muslims to have all the guns that they want.

When he calls Christians terrorists but refuses to call Muslims terrorists, Obama has an ideology issue. Obama's policies will continue and no one in the liberal media will say a word.

Obama has ordered the FBI, DHS, TSA and DOJ to STAND DOWN when investigating Muslims. Obama gave Omar clearance to work for G4S where he had access to military grade weapons. Obama knows Seddique Mateen, Omar's father. Seddique has made numerous visits to the White House. Seddique Mateen is a known Taliban fighter and probable terrorist. In spite of Seddique Mateen's involvement in the Orlando shootings he still has not been arrested. At some point you have to ask, "What the hell is going on?"

The liberal media is just as dangerous as Obama's policies because the liberal media shares his ideology and refuses to report the facts. And it will get worse. Obama is bringing in radicalized Muslims by the hundreds every day.

David J. Stewart #fundie #sexist #conspiracy jesusisprecious.org

Ladies, Obey Your Husband As Unto the Lord and Husbands Love Your Wife. The divorce racket is now a sickening $50,000,000,000 a year racket in America. Don't let ungodly judges and lawyers prey upon your marriage, children, home and assets for their greedy sakes. Luciferian Freemasons control the U.S. court system. Satan has a bid for your marriage and home! People nowadays will gladly destroy your marriage, and then go their merry way like the serpent in Genesis after the damage is done! If you are married: Watch your back Jack! I have watched several dozen episodes of Forensic Files—crimes that were solved by use of studying forensic evidence. It is a fascinating area of science. Sadly, one of the common themes that I noticed, as a motive for murder, is that wives had a sassy, selfish and rebellious attitude toward their husband, which pushed him over the edge. Ladies, you have more power over your husband than the Word of God does according to (1st Peter 3:1). Eve led Adam away from God (Genesis 3:6). Jezebel stirred up her husband Ahab's heart to do evil (1st Kings 21:25). Job's wife encouraged him to curse God and die (Job 2:9-10). No man ought ever hurt a woman, regardless of what she says or does, but in reality, a rebellious woman is often to blame for the destruction of her own marriage and home (Proverbs 14:1).

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

I encourage my web visitors to think objectively. Challenge everything! Is it Biblical? There is nothing wrong with thinking objectively. In fact, that is exactly what 1st John 4:1 commands us to do. We ought to test everything against the inspired Word of God, which is the inspired King James Bible!!! God curse is upon America because of all these fake Bible versions today. There are literally several hundreds English Bible translations today. There is nothing wrong with your King James Bible!!! The Holy Bible was not meant to be easy to understand, clearly evidenced by Peter's frustration over Paul's hard to understand writings (2nd Peter 3:16-17).

“So foolish was I, and ignorant...” (Psalm 73:22)

It was in the May 2016 news, that in Florida a school camera caught 25 boys herding into a men's restroom to have sex with a willing young girl (slut). The boys were so despicable that they filmed the youth behaving like animals, having multiple boys having carnal knowledge with her, uploading the video to the internet. What do you expect when there is no moral standard in the schools? Without the Holy Bible, anything goes, which is exactly what the Luciferian elite want. Who do you think removed the Word of God from the schools? I'll tell you, Freemasons, whose God is Lucifer! An alarming amount of American youth today are on drugs, obese, teen parents, fornicating, suicidal, confused, bitter against God, ungrateful, full of blame, proud, resentful, angry, rebellious, et cetera. There is nothing respectable about a satanic cult like Freemasonry that destroys the lives of young people! And I am sick of their retarded All Seeing Eye everywhere we look nowadays. It is really getting annoying! The only eyes I care about are the eyes of the Lord!!!

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

Feminism is not the same thing as women's rights, people sometimes get these confused. Every woman is entitled to her rights. Feminism is rebellion...rebellious women refusing to submit to their husbands (or refusing to marry at all). Feminazis like to help destroy other marriages (especially marriages that are new or struggling). Often, feminists refuse to marry (and resent any woman who is happily married). The feminazi movement in America is trying to castrate men by weakening their authority. The idea that it takes a man to do certain jobs is constantly under attack by the feminists. It offends feminist women when I say that I don't believe a woman belongs in The White House. Like it or not ladies, men and women are different. There's just some things that women can do better than men...and some things that men can do better than women. God made men to lead, it comes natural for them. Women are natural followers. For a woman to try to lead men is silly, she is taking on the disposition of a man. I have met a few "He-women" (the opposite of a He-man) in my lifetime. These are the "toughies." These are the feisty women who like like to start fights, run their mouths and cause trouble for men. These feminist women act like little babies because they have never grown up in their minds. They are immature. You can be liberated.

Woman are always poor leaders over men. The women who are successful leaders have lost their femininity and act more like business men than women. The price to pay to be a career woman is very high. I read about women freezing their eggs and holding off on having children until their careers are over. How insane can you get? God wants women to marry, bare children, guide the house, and live above reproach (1st Timothy 5:14). Feminism is an insane form of thinking in the mind of a woman.

"I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully." -1st Timothy 5:14

Sadly, most women in America are fools and have little regards for God or His Word. They have turned aside after Satan and sin.

"For some are already turned aside after Satan." -1st Timothy 5:15

Have you turned aside after Satan? Are you living for self and sin? Do you care at all about God in your life?

It's not an over exaggeration to say that some women literally HATE men with a passion. Some women don't even want to have a baby by a man, they'd rather have artificial insemination and live with another woman. Whoa! Talk about bizarre. The entire lesbian community was created by feminism. Yes, it true! Feminism confuses both women and men about who they are. Feminism is one of the most destructive forces in the United States today, if not the most. It is also the primary cause of divorce. The divorce rate has been steadily increasing ever since the turn of the 20th century. As feminism has crept like disease into our homes, women today rarely wear dresses anymore. Increasingly...American women are becoming arrogant, boisterous, rebellious, hateful, perverted, psychotic, home-wreckers. A virtuous woman is hard to find nowadays.

propolisoasis #sexist #wingnut reddit.com

Im transgender, but I avoid female friendship.

I have a long story of chasing away left-leaning women trying to be "friends". The way they try to assert superiority over you throwing themselves into a virtuous posture (while trying to leech anything they can from you) absolutely disgusts me.

I never enjoyed left-leaning men for the same reasons, but at least they cant get away with most things women do, specially when trying to get sexual favours, if any men did what so many feminist women said and tried to do to me, they would be arrested or lynched.

But its not just the harrassment, the narcisistic tendecies of the average women seem over the roof. I constantly got disappointed by how the same people who claim to be so emotionally aware can also get away with being completly terrible.

A friend of mine (which is also transgender, let's call her "A") used to have a feminist girlfriend (let's call her "B") that was 100% silent about radical feminists attacking "A". "B" just started to fight back when the same radfems LIGHTLY criticized her about she going out with a prostitute (something she boosted about, because she wanted to look so edgy and empowered, but it backfired because it looked like she was exploiting another woman, but they didnt even gave her an actual hard time for it).

Im tired of seeing shit like that daily, in different contexts and listening that this is "anetodical". Im sick of being suffocated as if I had to pledge alliance to a group that doesnt deserve it, otherwise I wont be allowed to have a voice and will always be persecuted (and for the last ten years, I am! (I am 27 btw)).

This all because I dont want to give free praise to a group of people that mutilate their male sons out of convenience (circumcision).

I think it's very difficult sometimes not to lump all women in with feminists or "relationships". I think women are cool, and I value the friendships I have with women. However, the romantic / sexual relationship model is horrible, gynocentric and best avoided at all costs. It is this, and not women themselves that I can't stand. Feminism is a supremacy movement. Not at all different from the KKK or the Nazi. Doesn't "the future is female" sound a bit like "manifest destiny" to you? But I like women. I also recognize that a lot of white people died in the civil war to free the slaves, and a lot of Europeans ended up marrying native Americans. Likewise, there are a lot of cool women who really do recognize the nature of feminism and the way sex is used to control men.

But the traits that I quoted are encountered even in women that arent feminists. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, I dont like them. When there is one I am willing to interact with is, it is usually despite their gender.

Feminists when listening to an anecdote that agrees with them: "Lived experience is the only evidence anyone should need."

Feminists when listening to an anecdote they don't like: "Not a real feminist."

Is it even anectodical if the same experience repeats itselft in different enviorments and different people as a rule?

Alphabet Agency Alert Award

Various Incels #psycho incels.co

RE: [Based] Man shoots childhood bully to death

(AccountError)

But of course, normoids will never learn from this and will go back to bullying. They will think "this'll never happen to me!" as usual.
Fuck normoids.

(based_meme)

Based and revenge pilled.

Imagine waiting until you're almost 70 to get your revenge. Literal lifetime of patience.

(Incel Gamer)

Too bad he didn't go ER in highschool! He could have got revenge on more bullies. Also back then there wouldn't be metal detectors and a high amount of security at high schools.

(SA incel life)

i wish i can do this to my bullies at my school reunion, but i plan to blow up his car, i put a bomb under the fuel tank of his car and i cellphone-trigger the bomb, a murder will trigger a serious investigation

(Rambocel)

All bullies deserve death. Soyciety makes every exception for their shit and when bullied decide to take action (because no one else will) they are the ones vilified.

I don't condone mass shootings and wouldn't do one anyway (it would be meaningless to hurt people who don't even know me) but I can certainly understand why they happen.

It is still a ridiculous structure of society. It's ok to bully people and 'authority' even shrugs it off. But take revenge on your bully? All the sudden you're the bad guy. Being bullied is worse than death because you don't die. You just suffer emotional and physical pain while everyone laughs at you.

(TINMAN)

Every person in that room was in on the bullying.

But as these things happened such a long time ago, I would never have imagined that he would have killed his friend like this. We are all shocked by it.

his friend

This is the level of gaslighting that normies will pull on you. Bullying bad enough to cause a 50 year grudge is "just joking between friends"

(yeshuallah)

Holy shit someone should make a movie about this hero.

i wish i can do this to my bullies at my school reunion, but i plan to blow up his car, i put a bomb under the fuel tank of his car and i cellphone-trigger the bomb, a murder will trigger a serious investigation

I would like to decapitate mine, feeling their blood on my hands. It's only fair.

(manicel)

Based as fuck. That's my dream tbh i want to shoot the fucking bullies that ruined my life

(cryptic__egg)

If we're on the edgy of roping anyway might as well bring down those bullies. Based move

Patrick Scrivener #conspiracy reformation.org

The story of how ex-Marine "Lee Harvey Oswald" defected to the Soviet Union, and was given a job at a top secret radar factory in Minsk, is one of the most sinister MI6/CIA covert operations in history.

Only a thorough knowledge of spies and spying can help unravel the mystery. Throughout history, doubles or look-alikes have been used as spies. In Russia today, a Putin look-alike is actually President of that great country.

Incredibly, in 1952, "Marguerite Oswald" moved all the way from New Orleans to the Bronx to be near her eldest son who was serving in the Coast Guard.

There is a photo of the young "Lee" taken outside the Bronx Zoo. Even back then there were fake "Oswalds" sighted in different parts of the country.

There is a picture of the real Oswald taken at Beauregard Junior High School in 1955.

Oswald was 16 at that time.

Oswald was mentally challenged and basically a dunce in school.

The only Russian word he knew was Sputnik.

The only redeeming feature that high school dropout Oswald had in the Marine Corps was the fact that he had a look-alike or double. The counterfeit was in fact much older, and taller, but the Office of Naval "Intelligence" decided that the resemblance was close enough.

Nobody knows what happened to the real Oswald after he was discharged from the Marine Corps. Most probably he was titaniced (man overboard) and just disappeared until Judgment Day.

The counterfeit Oswald joined the Marine Corps at the same time as the real Oswald.

That Oswald studied Russian, and worked at the top secret radar facility at Atsugu, Japan.

That Oswald imposter was a well trained CIA agent.

The Oswald double was a well trained Naval "Intelligence" agent or spy. He worked at various U.S. Naval Bases and was stationed at Atsugu, Japan. Of course he spoke Russian fluently but with an American accent. He would never be sent to live in Russia as a spy because a native Russian speaker would detect his foreign accent immediately.

The counterfeit "Oswald" defected to the Soviet Union in 1959!!

The fake Oswald arrived in Moscow on October 15, 1959, and wrote a letter to the Supreme Soviet demanding Russian citizenship. Oswald told the Russians that he was an ex-Marine who had worked at a top secret radar facility and had much clandestine information for them.

On October 15, 1959, Marxist Marine "Oswald" arrived in Moscow and stayed at the Hotel Berlin.

He wrote a letter to the Soviet government and demanded Russian citizenship.

Naturally, the Soviets, suspecting that he was a CIA spy, denied his request, and ordered him to leave the country immediately.

As a result of his citizenship denial, Oswald feigned suicide and he was "discovered" with a slit wrist in the hotel bathtub. "Oswald" was then rushed by ambulance to Botkinskaya Hospital where he received 5 stitches. He remained in the hospital for 3 days in the psychiatric ward and 4 days in the somatic ward for observation.

The "suicide attempt" delayed his deportation from Russia because the Russians feared an international incident if an American killed himself or died in the Soviet Union.

On October 31, the fake Oswald walked in to the American embassy in Moscow, threw his passport on consul Richard Snyder's desk, and demanded to take the oath renouncing his U.S. citizenship.

Snyder was a CIA agent assigned to the U.S. embassy.

[...]

How Oleg von Mohrenschildt became Lee Harvey Oswald!!

After the charade in Moscow with the fake "Oswald" attempting suicide, the scene now shifts to Minsk, capital of Belarus. Minsk was an industrial town about 500 miles southwest of Moscow. Oswald was given a high paying job and scenic apartment overlooking the Svislach River:

Lee started his job in Minsk on January 13, and in March he was awarded a pleasant one-room apartment with a view overlooking the river. His financial situation was superb. He earned $70 to $90 a month at work and received an additional $70 a month in the form of a Red Cross subsidy. He had as much monthly income as the director of his factory. Lee did not particularly like his job. It was mere manual labor, while he had hoped for a place in an institute and a chance to study full time. But as the object of much attention and the recipient, like every foreigner, of many favors, he was at first reasonably content. (McMillan, Marina and Lee, p. 79).

The high school dropout from New Orleans was certainly warmly received in Russia.

The "Lee" in Minsk was actually Oleg von Mohrenschildt, illegitimate son of Dallas resident George de Mohrenschildt.

On March 25, 1961, Oleg, aka Lee, met Marina Prusakova at a dance.

Marina–a fluent English speaker–was a "honey trap" and well trained KGB agent.

The KGB was formed by British Secret Service agent Nikita Khrushchev in 1954. Marina was the daughter of a high ranking KGB colonel named Ilya Vasilyevich Prusakov, who was stationed in Minsk at that time.

The KGB was the Russian counterpart of the CIA. Marina said that "Oswald" spoke Russian with a Baltic accent:

Almost immediately a knot of young men formed around her and she was introduced to one named Alik, who seemed instantly drawn to her. They danced, and when they spoke, she noticed he spoke Russian with a slight accent. At first she thought he was from one of the Baltic parts of the Soviet Union–Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania–but then found to her surprise that he was an American named Lee Harvey Oswald living in Minsk. (Epstein, Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald, p. 135).

Marina said that she called him Alik because Lee sounded like a Chinese name. A Texan speaking fluent Russian with a Baltic accent. What a fairly tale that only strong VOODOO could make people believe.

KGB "honey trap" Marina Prusakova married Oleg aka Lee on April 30, 1961.

No fiction writer could have invented a more improbable scenario . . . except that it really happened.

Her KGB assignment was to "help" Oleg aka Lee join his father in Texas and maybe do a little spying for his country.

When the time for the assassination of President Kennedy drew near, Oleg aka Lee decided that his decision to defect was not a good idea after all. To this his wife Marina eagerly concurred.

The "workers paradise" was not what he expected, even though he earned a higher salary and had a better apartment than workers twice his age.

Oleg aka Lee contacted CIA consul Richard Snyder and was told that he still had his passport. By that time, Oleg and Marina had a baby girl named June. Diplomats who married Russian wives had to wait for years for their spouses to get visas to leave the Soviet Union.

Femme fatale Marina–the female version of the Russian Guy Fawkes–rarely smiled.

If only Oleg's friends in Minsk knew that he was going to be framed for assassinating the President of the United States.

[...]

The man from Minsk was FRAMED for the murder of the President!!

It was a highly complicated psyop to get the man from Minsk in the right place to be framed for President Kennedy's assassination. Everything did work out perfectly until the aftermath of the shooting.


About 12:15 p.m., Oleg left the building; walked 7 blocks to Elm and Murphy, and then boarded a bus bound for his lodging house in Oak Cliff.

The bus was stuck in traffic so he got off at the Greyhound Bus Terminal and took a cab.

The driver entered the time in his logbook as 12:30 p.m.

The President was shot at 12:30 p.m., so how could the man from Minsk be in 2 places at the same time. The Russians are a super race to survive Napoleon, Hitler, and the Cold War but they are not omnipresent.

The whole diabolical assassination scenario took years to plan but it all depended on Oleg the "patsy" being killed immediately afterward. You could say it all began after April 15, 1865.

Our Great JEHOVAH intervened and the police failed to kill the man from Minsk in the Texas Theater. Since that time, literally hundreds of people associated in any way with the assassination have met violent deaths or were suicided.

Don Stewart #fundie blueletterbible.org

When the Bible speaks of God, it speaks of Him as being all-powerful or omnipotent. The word omnipotent comes from two Latin words, omnis, meaning all, and poetntia or potens which means power. Hence the God of the Bible is the God of all power. The Bible says.

And I heard, as it were, the voice of a great multitude, as the sound of many waters and as the sound of mighty thunderings, saying, "Alleluia! For the Lord God Omnipotent reigns (Revelation 19:6).

He Upholds All Things

Scriptures says that He upholds all things.

And he is the radiance of his glory and the exact representation of his nature, and upholds all things by the word of his power. When he had made purification of sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:3).

Jesus Christ is said to hold together all forces of the universe.

He is before all things, and in him all things hold together (Colossians 1:17).

God Is Free To Do What He Pleases

God is free to do anything that can be done - there is no limit to His power. He can get people to carry out His purpose.

For God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by agreeing to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled (Revelation 17:17).

In the Book of Romans it says.

So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses (Romans 9:18)

However, this does not mean that He can do contradictory or evil things. He can only do things that are consistent with Him for reasons known only to Himself.

There Are Two Sides To God's Omnipotence

There are two sides to God's omnipotence. First, He has the freedom to do all that is consistent with His nature. Second, He is able to carry out all that needs to be done.

God's Omnipotence Is Seen In Creation

The omnipotence of God is illustrated in creation. By the His will God brought about the entire universe.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1).

The psalmist wrote.

For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it stood firm (Psalm 33:9).

God spoke, and it came about.

Then God said, "Let there be light," and there was light (Genesis 1:3).

He willed that light appear, and it appeared.

He Appeared As The Almighty God

He appeared to Abraham as the Almighty God.

I am Almighty God; walk before me and be blameless (Genesis 17:1).

There Is Nothing Too Difficult For Him

God said that nothing was too difficult for Him to do. Anything that can be done, God can do.

Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh. Is there anything too hard for me? (Jeremiah 32:27).

The psalmist testified of His power:

Come and see the works of God; he is awesome in his doing toward the sons of men. He turned the sea into dry land; they went through the river on foot . . . he rules by his power forever; his eyes observe the nations; do not let the rebellious exalt themselves (Psalm 66:5-7).

His Purpose Cannot Be Stopped

God's planned cannot be stopped. Job said of the Lord.

I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted (Job 42:2).

Daniel the prophet said.

All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does what he wills with the host of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth (Daniel 4:35).

He Does Not Get Tired

God does not ever grow tired.

Do you not know? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom (Isaiah 40:28)

All Things Are Possible For Him

Jesus said all things were possible with God.

But Jesus looked at them and said, "For mortals it is impossible, but for God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26).

Not all things that seem impossible and contradictory are really so. Many things that are impossible for humans are possible for God.

He Has The Power To Save And Keep Believers

God's power is shown in His ability to save and keep the believer. Peter wrote.

Who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Peter 1:5)

He Raises Believers From The Dead

God's power was demonstrated when He raised Jesus, and will be demonstrated when He raises the believer from the dead.

By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also (1 Corinthians 6:14).

There Are Limits To What He Can Do

But does this mean God can do anything? Can God destroy Himself? Can He make a being that He cannot control? Can God make two plus two equal five? No, God cannot do what is logically or actually impossible. He cannot contradict His nature or character. That is not within the realm of His power.

God Cannot Lie

There are limits to what God can do. For example the Bible says that God cannot lie:

In hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began (Titus 1:2).

God Cannot Be Tempted To Sin

God cannot sin; He cannot be tempted to sin.

Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God;" for God cannot be tempted by evil, and he himself does not tempt anyone (James 1:13).

God Cannot Deny Himself

The Bible says that God cannot deny Himself.

If we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself (2 Timothy 2:13).

God Cannot Go Back On His Promises

God has also stated that He cannot go back on His Word:

Forever, O Lord, your word is settled in heaven (Psalm 119:89).

Since there are certain things that God cannot do how can He be all-powerful?

A Proper Understanding Of God's Omnipotence Is Needed

The answer lies in a proper understanding of God's omnipotence. Omnipotence does not mean God cannot exercise self-limitation. God cannot contradict His nature or the nature of things as they are. It is not possible for God to either lie or to die. Neither can He make two plus two equal five.

The biblical God has limited Himself only to acts that are consistent with His righteous, loving character. Therefore, God's power is self-restrained. He cannot do evil and He cannot do anything irrational. He cannot go back upon His word. He is all-powerful when it comes to doing things that are right, but He has no power to do things wrong.

Summary

When we speak of God being omnipotent or all-powerful we must understand exactly what that means. It means that God is able to do anything that is consistent with His holy character. He is not able to lie, do anything sinful, or do anything that is logically impossible. This does not limit His power. He can do everything that is holy and wise.

GreenEyedLady #fundie rr-bb.com

[In response to someone asking what people thought about the idea of her son getting a heavy metal christian band CD]

I don't believe ANY rock or metal music can or should be called Christian.
It is not the words that effects, but the actual beat and tempo of the music that causes us to react in our flesh. There is a rebellious spirit in any rock or metal music. I would not let him touch it with a ten foot pole. Trust your gut, if you don't like it....there must be a reason why.

Fair Child #fundie reddit.com

I hate to admit it, but most of the younger women here - including myself - do not feel much empathy or compassion for men. Instead, we generally use men as a mirror to reflect our own vanity. And often we provoke their desires in cruel and capricious ways, simply for our own self-gratification. Only our children can inspire a true feeling of love within us - at least if we have normal maternal affections.

In reality, our primary interest in men is obtaining a life of comfort and security - both for ourselves and our children - which is why we still value marriage. And since younger men are becoming increasingly reluctant to marry, many of us are proclaiming to be anti-feminists to help assuage their fears and secure a long-term commitment.

Fortunately for women, men's sense of chivalry is still strong. Men are still eager to believe that women have a caring and unselfish nature. So by feigning compassion for men, we are likely to find a husband with good financial prospects - a husband whom we can always divorce if we become dissatisfied, while continuing to enjoy an affluent lifestyle.

That I'm afraid, is the real nature of women. Perhaps this page should be renamed, "The Myth of Female Beneficience". And yet, even though I am revealing our inner motivations, most men will despise me because they prefer a beautiful lie to a painful truth. However, in spite of my selfish instincts, I have spoken the truth - fully aware that you shall only heap derision upon me.

Mike King #conspiracy realhistorychannel.org

NY Times Headlines:
* Trump's Easter Back-To-Business Goal 'Catastrophic'
* Trump Says Reopen by Easter, Corporate America Says Not So Fast
* Coronavirus Advancing. All Americans Need to Shelter in Place.
* Dollar Signs Versus Vital Signs
* Trump Wants U.S. ‘Opened Up’ by Easter, Despite Health Officials’ Warn

In this tactical tug-of-war over whose script will be chosen for the final act of Coronavirus: The Movie -- we have, on one side, Trump and the patriots proposing the “happy ending” version of re-opening businesses and resuming the counter-attack on the Deep State by Easter Weekend (April 10 -12) --- and, in the other camp, there are the undefeated and still-mighty Globalists whose version of the closing scene climaxes with the “Herbert Hooverization” of Trump and allies worldwide by imposing an indefinite economy-killing “shelter-in-place” regime upon Planet Earth. Psychopath Bill Gates for example -- who, in my perfect world, would to be beaten to death with hammers on live TV -- is calling for up to an additional TEN WEEKS of shut-down.

As the above-listed pro-depression / anti-“get back to work” headlines clearly indicate, we know which ending that “the paper of record” prefers.

For the benefit of the historically rusty, a bit of Real History precedent review is in order here.

In 1928, Republican Herbert Hoover was elected President by winning 40 of the then-48 states. It was the third consecutive Republican landslide (Harding, 1920 & Coolidge, 1924). Hoover had inherited from his predecessors the booming economy of “The Roaring Twenties,” -- and optimistically spoke of continued peace and prosperity for the nation.

About six months into his term, the Federal Reserve and its subordinate banks deliberately choked off the money supply – crashing the highly leveraged stock market in October, 1929 and ushering in the Great Depression. As businesses across the country fell like dominoes, the Fed continued to contract the money supply so that both businesses and individuals couldn’t get their hands on enough currency to repay the old debts from the bubble years.

Hoover, for the most part, resisted the commie call for "action" -- wisely stating:

"Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement. Economic wounds must be healed by the action of the cells of the economic body - the producers and consumers themselves."

That sure didn't go over too well with the Globo gangsters (cough cough) who engineered the crash. Like a trio of con-artists working the same “mark,” the Fed continued to throttle the economy, whilst the Fake News falsely blamed Hoover for not “doing enough,” whilst the Communists organized “spontaneous” street actions like the 1932 “Bonus March.” The End Result: The election of 1932 brought an end to 12 years of conservative Republican governance by installing Franklin Demono Rosenfeld in the White House in a 42-state landslide -- along with a Democrat super-majority in the Congress (most, but not all of them leftists). America would never be the same again.

Early on in his presidency, Trump took control of the Fed by dumping Globalist Janet Yenta Yellen (cough cough) and appointing Jerome Powell (the first non-Jew to chair the Fed in over 30 years). With the Fed having been tamed, the removal of Trump by the tried & true tactic of spiking interest rates / contracting money supply -- which was the original plan (here) -- was no longer an option. CoronaMania was therefore designed to do what the Central Bank could no longer do, namely, crash -- Herbert Hooverize -- the Trump's stock market and economy – albeit by different means than those utilized in 1929-1932.

Right on cue, from RealClearPolitics.com, March 25, 2020:

Headline: Will Trump Become the New Hoover? (here)

And this from the Washington Compost, March 23,2020 (accompanied by images of Trump and Hoover)

Headline: Covid-19 may destroy Donald Trump’s presidency

Sub-headline: Has Trump plunged America into another Great Depression? (here)

Bastards! But should we really be surprised? (((They))) don't care about how many people they murder in foreign wars; so why would (((they))) give a rat's butt-hole about how many American get thrown out of work? Our lives mean NOTHING to these monsters which so many millions of normies hold in such high regard as "public servants."

Like the “Russian Collusion” hoax of 2017-2019; and like the “Ukraine Phone Call” hoax of 2019-2020 – CoronaMania seems destined to backfire – maybe. The unpredictable “X-Factor” here is that 24 of America’s 50 states (including the two most populous states of California and New York) have Demonrat Governors. If enough of these repugnant villains (Newsome (CA), Cuomo (NY), Pritzker (IL), Murphy (NJ) et al) were to collectively scheme to keep their respective states on shut-down -- in spite of Trump’s Easter target date for a return to normalcy -- the Governors (and some big city Mayors) could inflict enormous damage not just upon the people of their own states, but on the nation as a whole.

It will be interesting to see how the coming civil war between the conveniently all-of-a-sudden “states’ rights” Demonrat Governors and the President plays out. Our money is on Trump coming out of this latest take-down scheme smelling like roses again. However -- if mass arrests of the criminal perps who just caused us to dump 2 Trillion on the National Credit Card don’t come out of this golden “National Emergency” opportunity; then one has got to start wondering how and when “The Storm” will ever happen. Not getting discouraged here – just a little antsy. We just need to see some bad guys disappear and die soon. That’s all.
– That being said, where the hell is Tom Hanks?"

In accordance with the dictates of New Jersey's insane and evil Governor Phil Murphy of Goldman Sachs, the Boobus Brothers are at home, "sheltering in place" ™ as they "social distance" ™ from their equally stupid and frigid wives.

St. Sugar: When the Boobusses sstart to feel the pain of not having a paycheck, they will sside with Trump againsst the Governorss!!
Editor: That's quite possible -- but the script for the final act of this secret war can still go either way, in my judgement.

PleaseKillMeLoseSkin #racist incels.co

Your Looks Match Right now or in the Future

(video titled "mudshark misery")
Also don't forget "YOUR" tax money is used to subsidized single mothers bad decisions chasing Tyrones and Chads. If you're an incel currently working a slavewage job YOURE A CUCK, if you can't get ass and think that by marrying a single mother will get you out of inceldom YOURE A CUCK, if you're currently married to a single mother you possible already know YOURE A CUCK. While you were slaving your ass off trying to get that promotion at work or studying for a stem degree your looksmatch was out fucking as many men as possible knowing that in a few year her "nice guy" would be waiting for her, unfortunately for you all the experimenting she did with chad she won't do for you and soon enough you'll be like those cucks on /r/DeadBedrooms/.

America when we become minority majority:
(video titled "Shocking! Multicutural FAILURE. Dr. William Pierce - The Lesson of Haiti". The thumbnail displays subtitles reading "The full-blooded African is paramount. Even the mulattoes and half-breeds are disliked, and have been barbarously")
image

AV Publications #fundie shop.avpublications.com

Questioning today’s Holy Bible is just as rebellious as questioning ones gender. God did it right the first time. A man-made makeover brings “confusion” and defaces and mutilates God’s creation. Only pride and perversion would propel men to presume that they could improve upon God’s own handiwork. This book will bring Greek and Hebrew study out of the closet for the first time. Tumbling out come the starving skeletons of the authors of Greek and Hebrew study tools, lexicons and editions, the sordid sources from which new versions, such as the NIV, TNIV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, and HCSB take their corrupt words. These are the very same study ‘aids’ which kill a sermon or Bible study when used to ‘define’ a word in the Holy Bible. Lexicon and Bible dictionary authors dug down into the depths of pagan lore, then ransacked the English dictionary to find a match which could burn the Bible word-by-word. The smoke darkens the directing light of the holy scriptures. This book will document that men who want to change and redefine the Holy Bible are likely to want to change anything – even Bible doctrine, their own gender, and their god. For example, Luciferian connections shadow Trench’s New Testament Synonyms and Ginsburg’s TBS Hebrew Masoretic text.

Andye Murphy #conspiracy gaia.com

13 Signs You Are an Indigo Child

Indigo Children are an upgraded blueprint of humanity. The term Indigo Child first came up when addressing the aura colors of these very different kids. Prior to their predominance, human auric fields were expected shades of the rainbow, the Indigos’ field however was dominated by this royal blue color which established a change of course for humanity.

WHO ARE THE INDIGO CHILDREN?
Gifted souls, on a clear mission to challenge and shift reality, they first began appearing in the 1970’s. Beyond psychic awareness, they are highly driven and creative with a perception that sees through the established norms of society. Old souls indeed, their mission is clearly laid out to shake up the modern world and pave the way for future generations to create greater peace and harmony for all.
Both of these generations of “children” are well into their teens and adulthood, so don’t allow the label to dissuade you from exploring the possibility that you are of this unique soul group.

13 COMMON TRAITS OF AN INDIGO CHILD
If you wonder if you might be of this distinct soul lineage, here are a few traits which may feel familiar.
1. YOU FEEL ENTITLED
You were born feeling special and know it.
2. YOU ARE DESTINED TO BE HERE
You are confident and even arrogant at times – and emboldened by something larger than you can name.
3. YOU HAVE HIGH EXPECTATIONS OF YOURSELF AND OTHERS
This can make for a challenging relationships and interactions. You see only the best and expect others to live up to it. Toward yourself, you can be unrelentingly self critical.
4. YOU ARE PERCEPTIVE
Indigos see the world differently. Coupled with innate-self assurance, you often think your way is right and are offended if others cannot see, much less take action, on your point of view. If Indigos ruled the world, you are confident no problems would exist.
5. YOU QUESTION AUTHORITY
You are not one to negotiate, so certain in your views and ways, you are often rebellious and critical of those in power.
6. YOU WANT TO OVERTURN THE MAN
Difficult and rigid systems seem foolish to you and you often become antagonistic to what others experience as normal.
7. YOU ARE CREATIVE
Musically and artistically gifted, your art invites others to see the world around through your eyes.
8. YOU ARE A CHANGE MAKER
Your perception on the failings of society is so keen that you are a magnificent leader, offering better methods of business, society and ways of being.
9. YOU ARE A LOST SOUL
You feel out of place with others as you recognize you are different than most people. You can tend toward being a loner or rebel, unwilling to compromise just to fit in.
10. YOU ARE DRIVEN
As the Indigo soul mission is encoded in your very being, you are unwilling to back down from confronting what feels out of integrity.
11. YOU ARE PASSIONATE AND FOCUSED
While fiery temperaments may be hard to take, you are not one to be still or silenced.
12. YOU ARE HIGHLY PSYCHIC
Without any need for development, your psychic capacity is finely tuned. While you see nothing special in your ability, it gives you an advantage in reading others with ease and seeing through masks.
13. YOU ARE FRUSTRATED
Coupled with their big-picture vision and restless soul drive for change, you become easily frustrated with society and others who are not shifting quickly enough. Patience is something that should be developed.

Some incels #sexist reddit.com

Re: REMINDER: The Racepill.

image

(Manletangelo)
Women for comparison: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcSsuW5XcAAZ1ao.jpg

Source: http://gss.norc.org/get-the-data

IT retard spazzing out after being confronted by an incel: https://i.imgur.com/3TcNX7R.png

(JorgitoEstrella)
Ethnic women are fucking more than white women, and in the other hand ethnic males are fucking less by far than white males.

JBW theory confirmed. And women can’t be incels/femcels confirmed.

(Itookthewrongpill)
Man, black women are having the least amount of sex and have the highest rate of STDS. That's rough.

Meanwhile Noodlewhores are noodlewhoring to an extreme.

(collectorcel)
Well noodlewhores are disgusting, as the perspective of a white european point of view. Even if I had a chance, I wouldn´t one of them, they are golddigger from the finest, no differents if you go to a hooker.

(collectorcel)
If I am seriouse, who would fuck a black chick, someone can call me a Vocel, but I am not suicidal. I would never stick my dick in black biological weapon, you may get Aids or I don´t know maybe they are hidding Anthrax in their pussies.

(arissiro)

so black femcels are real?

Sort of real but not so really. I’ve kept up with Black women bitching and moaning about their sexual situation with quite keen observation, and this is what I can tell you: black “femcels” are often middle class black women who grew up in predominantly non-black environments, and can’t attract the non-black men in their (predominantly non-black) social circles and workplace.

Many of them look down on black men the way Asian and White women do. If you actually look at online dating stats, Black people in general fail when they go for other races; the black “femcel” problem could resolve itself if they stuck to Black men. The disadvantage faced by Black women in online dating however is peanuts when compared to what Asian men (East and South) face. If Black men held higher social value then Black women could be compared to Asian men more accurately.

Black “femcels” exist for the same reason any “femcel” exists: their hypergamy goes beyond their own reach.

(Thanks4HoleStranger)
Black women are the most unattractive by a rather large margin. Simple as that.

Both sexes prefer lighter skin but also prefer a physique in line with their preferred sex. Asians are very feminine in general and blacks are very masculine in general, so asian men and black women are the least desirable. But black women have the double whammy of having dark skin and a more masculine physique. Asian women hit the jackpot with light skin and feminine physique, and white chads get the masculine frame with light skin. That's why asian women and white men are the most preferred among their sexes.

Black women are just ugly, that's all there is to it.

(LeninistSkynet)
Mayocels are mostly just mentalcels with far-right issues. Blackcels are mostly too smart, nice, geeky and introvert to fit in with their primal low-inhib negroe community. The only real trucels are Asians and Indians.

(ITtears)
Hitler's dream is coming true. Only whites reproducing

(uthant123)
I suspect the romantic prospects for Asian men were always poor. Early surveys probably skewed towards newly arrived/immigrant couples or men with strong connections to the old country where they could find a partner.

In the mid-2000s, it seems we begin to see that the sons of these couples are feeling the full brunt of the racepill as they lack any of the advantages of their parents.

(youknow889)

How the fugg are there more sexless blacks than whites

you obviously don’t hang around a lot of black people. most black men get zero girls. serious. black women don’t like black men these days or are only going for hyper athletic, rich and tall blacks.

black people use hookers more than any other race. vast majority of women will never date or have sex with 99.99% of black men.

Dalrock #sexist dalrock.wordpress.com

From the discussion of both my post on manface and girlpower characters it is clear that even in the men’s sphere there is much love for “strong women”. In my most recent post the discussion eventually turned to the question of teaching women to defend themselves (martial arts, weight lifting, concealed carry, etc).

Before I go any further, I’ll state that:

My own thinking on this topic has changed over time, as I started with something closer to the mainstream conservative view.
I’m inclined to generally respect other men’s choices regarding their own families.

Temptations of the kickass gal.

With bullet point number two above in mind, I think we need to be aware of the temptations involved. The kickass gal is a well established conservative feminist trope, and we should be aware of this when considering how we direct the training of our wives and daughters. Feminists know why they want our daughters to move out on their own in the big city and experience the carousel. Conservatives on the other hand pride themselves in knowing how to make this feminist goal “safe” for our daughters to achieve.

The kickass conservative gal trope is easiest to spot when it comes to guns. Conservative shooters love the idea of guns as a realization of the feminist dream. If you aren’t familiar with the subculture, go to any online forum on guns and you will find a group of men eager to explain how tough their pistol packing wives/daughters are. One of the local DFW gun ranges understands this culture well, and features pictures of a kickass gal with a pink gun on their website. This is not, I should add, a range dedicated to women shooters. I’ve been to their store, and their target customers are the same group of men every other range/store in the area caters to. The same is true of another gun shop just a few miles away, B&S Guns. They have a billboard* by the freeway with a picture of a woman shooting a rifle that says something to the effect of “Don’t worry, we won’t tell your husband.”

If you decide you want to teach your wife/daughters to shoot, keep in mind that the entire culture you are bringing them into is designed to tempt them into a feminist rebellious frame of mind. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it, but you shouldn’t kid yourself about the temptations you are throwing their way.

There is also the reality of the difference between men’s and women’s interests when it comes to masculine pursuits. All of the men I know who shoot enjoy going to the range to practice, and even enjoy breaking their guns down to clean and maintain them. I have yet to observe a wife or daughter who takes this level of interest in shooting. They may embrace the “empowerment” of it, or simply enjoy infrequently going to the range for a bit of shooting, but I’ve yet to come across a woman who really “got into it” the way men do. This, plus the realities of men’s and women’s different instinctive response to violence means that training and arming women is going to be much less effective than gun owning feminists desperately want to believe.

Again, I’m not saying you are wrong if you decide to teach your wife or daughters how to shoot. My wife enjoys coming to the range with me from time to time, and I plan on teaching our daughter to shoot. However, we need to be realistic about the risks and benefits involved with this.

We’re so manly, even our women are like men!

There is another temptation involved with this, and this temptation is for the men involved. Part of the appeal of the kickass conservative gal is the idea that the man who masculinizes his women is proving how much more manly he is than other men. This tends to start with selecting a specific masculine pursuit and declaring it to be the very definition of manliness. In a general sense this could include marriage and fatherhood or even the ability to attract women, but for this specific example it is something like shooting, hunting, rebuilding an engine, weight lifting, or martial arts. These are all positive pursuits for a man (in the right context), but none of them are essential for being a “real man”.

The base temptation for men is to declare that one of these manly pursuits is the real test of a man, and any man who doesn’t do them isn’t a real man. The tie in temptation is then to add another layer cementing the man’s status as the only real man in the room, by declaring that any man who doesn’t think highly of masculinizing women in this specific way is merely too much of a girly man to appreciate strong women. This is a standard feminist slogan, but it comes from a conservative I’m more manly than you are position.

*I’ll try to make it over to that section of town so I can snap a picture of the billboard.

DianaVic #sexist rape.is

[OP of "[Theory] Business pitch: we should have a chain of sex slave brothels called RapeStations"]

I was thinking about this. Road trips are boring as hell, so in addition to gas stations, we should have rape stations.

Normal whores are expensive as fuck, ugly, bossy, bitchy.

In an ideal world where rape is legal, yes rape would be free, but the selling point of a RapeStation would be convenience and value. What if you are tired after a long drive? What if you want a cute rape slave right fucking then and there? What if you are a framelet who cannot rape foids easily? Since the RapeSlaves are slaves we will significantly reduce labor costs. The RapeSlaves will be fitted with collars which can punish any disobedience. They will be fed cheaply, just enough so that they can continue to generate revenue. We'll have different lines for people of different tastes. MiniSlaves, TeenSlaves, BlondeSlaves, et cetera...

There will be a small fee of course because rent and utilities don't come free, I'm thinking maybe $20-30 an hour base in the U.S., maybe a bit higher in expensive areas like NYC, maybe cheaper in middle America. We can have discounts if they want to book multiple RapeSlaves or for longer stays like 3 hours plus. Since normies pay $80 for a nice dinner, why wouldn't they spend just as much in a RapeStation?

Our business model would be to use the RapeSlaves as loss leaders, with high-margin add-ons to generate profit. Do you know how Costco sells rotisserie chickens for only $4.99? It's called a loss leader -- even though they lose money on the chickens, they actually generate more revenue overall because the cheap chickens generate more foot traffic, and people will buy high-margin items (like snacks and sodas) near the checkouts. For example, you can upgrade to a Premier RapeRoom or a RapeSuite with an added jacuzzi where you can fuck a RapeSlave while both of you are pummeled by jets of water. Or maybe a bottle of Fiji water, or a chocolate bar, a cup of coffee, a stack of pancakes to get your energy up in preparation for raping. Do you need a beer or a glass of champagne to lower your inhibitions? Maybe you forgot your Viagra? Just ask at the front desk. Want some cocaine? No problem. Need to rent a toy? A collar? A whip? A pair of slippers? A spanking paddle? We got you covered.

In the big city, RapeStations placed next to office buildings can offer quick 15-minute Rape Sessions during the weekday. Say, you're an investment banker with a short lunch break? Don't worry, we'll throw in a lunch hour combo for a RapeSlave, a sandwich, a bag of chips, and a bottle of water for just $20 plus a tip for housekeeping. She can suck your dick and lick your butthole while you work on your discounted cash flow models.

We could put RapeStations in airports too. Imagine your flight getting delayed and you're stuck on a 6-hour layover at JFK or LAX, so what do you do? Fuck a RapeSlave. To drum up business, partner with airlines, hotel chains and credit card companies: for example, Amex Platinum cardholders and United MileagePlus 1K members can pre-book their favourite rape slaves in advance. We can also earn money from our own RapeStation membership/loyalty programs for our favourite customers.

We can recruit gymmaxed hiring managers (to take and mentally condition the freshest of rapemeat) and high IQ quality control managers (to ensure they perform) from incel forums. Rapey members can be part of upper-level management.

What does everyone think?

lilnas313 #fundie reddit.com

'Although I was born in America I identify myself still as being from Yemen when I'm asked. Identifying ourself with the lands of kuffar makes us forget who we are and it desensitizes us to their crimes and makes us accept their culture of kufr thinking it's ok. A little harsh but that's the truth.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/2vibzy/three_killed_said_to_be_muslims_in_chapel_hill/coiaiw0/?context=3)

'in any hood I lived in wether it be Detroit, Harlem, Bronx, Brooklyn if you get hit up but don't aim back you a bitch you not a real nigga cause you got slipping' (https://www.reddit.com/r/hiphopheads/comments/33wy4q/lil_waynes_tour_bus_shot_up_after_show_in_atlanta/cqqs4uu/?context=3)

'I was 80 east side skyline piru (one of the original sets that made up the bloods)

I joined up when I was 13

Got jumped in by 5 YG's for 30 seconds then given my flag

I did the usual gang banged, jumped people, robbed people, shot people, fucked hoes, sold dope.

Became somewhat known because I was middle eastern and not black so people took notice. At first it was cool but then I noticed I caught the wrong peoples attention for the wrong reasons.

I was active up until I was 21 almost at Y.O.G status.

I stopped because I moved every few years and everywhere I went I noticed bloods and crips and every city had different "knowledge" (gang history you're taught prior to initiation)

For instance on the west coast it's more of a block thing everyone knows the big homies so if you claim you're part of a set and people approach that sets big homie and he don't know you, that's your ass. On the east coast it's UBN (United blood nation) and its ran like the mob rather then OGs YOG YG and BG they have bosses and capos. UBN knowledge starts with how the millers made a NYC connection and the nine trey set was started in the 90s completely different from what I was told. When I went to the south I seen that the crips had gangster disciple knowledge and bloods had vice lord knowledge and most of they're sets were non-existent in the west coast.

The gang shit is hella flimsy. I left that life alone and I have a family now and own my own businesses. But sometimes these these young bitch made motherfuckers step up and I have to let them know who the fuck they're talking to.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3qoyte/serious_former_gang_members_of_reddit_what_was_it/cwhip2y/?context=3)

'Shooting someone doesn't make you hard or respected. All it does is it makes people cautious of you. Because of me being an angry edgy teenager I got into fights and committed violent crimes (even though I came from an educated well off family). People started to distance themselves from me include a lot of gang members who weren't as active and seen me as a destructive person, so I just kicked it with other G's who had the same classification. It bothered me not being invited to party's anymore, girls being afraid to talk to me. The old ladies in the neighborhood would avoid eye contact with me. There's no glory in being a killer, you don't do it cause you want to you do it for the set cause you have to.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3qoyte/serious_former_gang_members_of_reddit_what_was_it/cwhrumo/?context=3)

(In response to the claim that it is a myth that all gay men want to have sex with all men) 'I get my fair share of attention from the ladies, but the amount of gay men and trannies that check me out on dating apps is ridiculous so this isn't really a myth.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/42asa3/which_persistent_misconceptionmyth_annoys_you_the/cz96zrz/?context=3)

'O you who believe! Intoxicants (all kinds of alcoholic drinks,drugs,stimulants that alter the mind), gambling, Al-Ansab , and Al-Azlam (arrows for seeking luck or decision) are an abomination of Shaitan's (Satan) handiwork. So avoid (strictly all) that (abomination) in order that you may be successful. (5:90)' (https://www.reddit.com/r/trees/comments/3vavvm/got_high_and_tried_to_convert_myself_to_islam_and/cxmq7oq/?context=3)

'I mean I'm pretty strict when it comes to my religion and at times have been called fanatical however islamically women are equal to men if not have a higher place in society due to them having more rights than men according to sharia law. On the topic of homosexuals they aren't lesser human beings because In Islam homosexuality is seen as a mental illness. You can not punish one for having homosexual thoughts however there is punishment carried on someone who commits homosexual acts, such as punishment for someone who has pre marital sex, adultery or rape.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4l1jkj/switzerland_muslim_students_must_shake_teachers/d3kot5g/)

(In response to the claim 'The fact that Palestine still exists should show that Israel isn't the warmongering oppressors that the media paints them to be') 'Jews still exist guess the nazis aren't the warmongering nation the world made them out to be.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4n6nrr/shootings_reported_at_food_and_retail_center_in/d41v952/?context=3)

'Let me dumb it down for you ,culturally homosexuality has never been accepted, neither has it been accepted in Islam. So I as an individual don't accept it now nor will I ever. You on the other hand can go have as much fun as you want.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/arabs/comments/4nykwl/saudi_arabia_condemns_orlando_shooting/d48az9i/?context=3)

'Yemeni here, Islam is the only thing that unifies us and keeps us in line. Now that islam isnt the implemented law of the land we've gone back to solving simple disputes with murder. I've seen it to many times, customer mad about price of tomatoes or any other produce, argument ensues, Ak47s are pulled (it's customary to walk around with an assault rifle hanging off your shoulder) then someone dies. The army is to busy now to do anything so usually the tribes of the two familys clash leaving more dead.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/arabs/comments/4qa1b8/til_that_abdullah_i_of_jordan_secretly_agreed/d4rszf4/?context=3)

(In response to the question of why God created evil) 'As a test to mankind. All life is, is a test. This life isn't forever. What comes next is eternal.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/4r4s35/youre_standing_in_front_of_god_he_says_you_can/d4ymm0l/?context=3)

'Fuck attaturk bring back the empire and caliphate. Attaturks values are less than 100 years old, the caliphate values stood in place for hundreds of years.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4t18sh/coup_d%C3%A9tat_attempt_in_turkey_livethread/d5dybuj/)

(In response to a woman talking about how she got her date jailed for drug dealing and possession) 'That's fucked up. You ruin a mans life cause he left you at a restaurant? If that was me you would've had someone in your living room the next night.' (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/526dll/what_is_the_worst_date_that_you_have_been_on/d7i1nuq/?context=3)

Article2-Section1-Clause 5 #conspiracy freerepublic.com

"President" Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama is trying to create a marxist/socialist dictatorship. In order to achieve this, he and his Dem/RINO allies must destroy the U.S. Constitution, which stands directly in their way.

Soetoro and his allies are attempting to destroy the constitution by creating a wedge. The point of their attack is the NBC Clause. Soetoro and his Dem/RINO allies are trying to mainstream the idea that that clause of the constitution does not really matter. Once that section becomes delegitimized, they can do the same with other clauses in the constitution they don't like, and so on.

Once you understand this, you understand the true motivations of a lot of pols out there. For example, Soetoro's allies support him *because* he is not a natural born citizen, not in spite of it. This way, his non-NBC status becomes a tool for destroying the NBC clause of the constitution.

The Dem role in this deception is to, among other things, play the race card. They are out selling the idea that anyone who questions Soetoro's legitimacy is a racist. No one wants to sound like a racist, so the idea that Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 is important becomes further marginalized. (Racist clause written by old white men, so they like to say)

The RINO role in the deception is to propagate the idea that if the issue of Barry Soetoro's legitimacy is pressed, then Republicans will lose in 2012. The point of this is to scare conservatives into silence. Don't raise the issue or demand that your reps/candidates do the same, they say, or the dems'll win. This scare tactic is a lie, as proven by numerous polls on the issue. The purpose of this line, like the purpose of the dem race card line, is to marginalize the importance of the NBC clause from the mainstream.

Barry Soetoro, and his communist/marxist/dem/RINO allies don't really care that much about the NBC clause of the U.S. Constitution. They simply want to find a clause, *any* clause, that they can marginalize. Because once they marginalize one clause, then they can easily marginalize the next clause they don't like, then the next, and so on. They have opportunistically zeroed in on Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 as the first point of attack.

This is about more than just Barry Soetoro's place of birth, or his forged certificate. This is about a subversive effort to de-legitimize the entire constitution, starting with one clause, and then all the way to a marxist dictatorship.

Ray Comfort #fundie facebook.com

Something wonderful happens when a giraffe is born. It drops about six feet to the ground, stands up, wobbles for about an hour, and then walks behind its mom. No diapers. No learning to crawl. No learning to walk. No potty training. It has arrived, and in one hour it’s ready to go.

Why couldn’t it be that way for the human race? They are virtually helpless until they are 18 years old. Perhaps if there was a six foot drop at birth…

Sue and I raised three children. When they were young we were warned by sincere folk that we should expect them to become rebellious during their teenage years. It didn’t happen. They never brought us a moment of grief, and we believe that that was simply because we adhered to certain guidelines and principles from God’s Word.

These principles are not an absolute guarantee that any child isn’t going to become rebellious and turn his or her back on the things of God. But they worked for us, and it is our earnest prayer that they work for you and those who are most precious to you.

Perfect Timing
I was on a red-eye flight on the way from Los Angeles to Atlanta, Georgia. The man next to me had slept for most of the flight, and I waited for him to wake up so that I could share the gospel with him. I had spoken to him earlier and shared a little about our TV show. I knew that he had studied psychology, and so when he did stir I said, “Hey, Steve. I’ve got a question for you in light of your study of psychology. Kirk Cameron and I often ask this question to people on our TV show. What do you think is on the other side . . . what do you think happens after you die?”

He thought for a moment, then said, “Nothing.” I asked, “Are you an atheist?” He said that he was, so I said, “Could you believe me if I told you that this plane fell together by accident? Its jet engines, windows, seats and wings were not built. They came from nothing and fell together.” He said that he could believe that. This man was a no-brainer, so I decided that I would quickly move from his professed intellect to his conscience, and took him through the Ten Commandments.

After realizing that he had broken four of the Ten Commandments he admitted that if God were to judge him by them, he would end up in Hell. When I asked, “Does that concern you?” he quickly answered that it didn’t. It didn’t concern him at all.

I then told him about a friend of mine who at the age of 20 years was told that he had terminal cancer. His “friends” told him to enjoy his last six months by spending it with prostitutes. He wasn’t interested, because he had something stronger than his sex drive. It was his will to live. A cry came from his heart, “Oh, I don’t want to die!”

By this time the passenger next to him had tuned in, so I pointed to him and said, “God has given you that same will to live.” I looked at the professing atheist and earnestly said, “He has also given you the will to live Steve.” Just then, the plane, which had begun a slow descent, suddenly revved its engines, and in a split second changed to an ascent. This had the terrifying effect of throwing all the passengers into a momentary and nauseating weightlessness. Faces looked alarmed. Many of them shouted out in terror. I looked at Steve and said, “That sure kicked in the will to live.” He looked stunned, and said, “Absolutely!”

The timing was perfect. From that point on, he sat and listened to everything I had to say, and even took one of my books. There are no atheists in an air pocket.

I don't know if God caused that plane to do that, but there comes a time in the life of a Christian where coincidences happen so often, it becomes illogical to use the word. The timing was so perfect, and that's the way God works. His timing is always perfect. He's never late for anything. What may seem to be too late, isn't. Red Seas can be opened, lion's mouths can be shut, and even the dead can be resurrected. Nothing is hopeless, because with God, nothing is impossible. So never panic about the spiritual life of your child. Ask God for his salvation, then thank Him for it. Rest in the Lord. Trust Him. Faith never loses its peace; it even sleeps in a storm.

From, "How to Bring Your Children to Christ and Keep Them There." Available on e-book:

http://www.amazon.com/Bring-Your-Children-Chri…/…/B00AECAF3Q

Also avialable on wwwlivingwaters.com

David J. Stewart #fundie #sexist #psycho #homophobia #conspiracy jesus-is-savior.com

There is great deception in America... civil rights. Many moral right's issues are deceitfully being labeled as “civil rights.” Thus, many moral right's issues are being violated in the name of “civil rights.” Listen, just because you're a U.S. citizen doesn't give you the right to disobey God. For example: Being a U.S. citizen gives you the “right” to vote; but, it does not give you the right to be homosexual. I don't care what the Supreme Court says, the Word of God condemns homosexuality!

America is filled with demented homosexuals and murderous abortionists who boast of being respectable citizens, who commit their sins with the government's permission; but, God will judge them for their wickedness (Romans 1:32). I am not trying to be unkind, I am taking a proper stand against a moral menace to society.

No one is born “gay,” because God doesn't make mistakes. God created male and female, which is normal. For anyone to claim that God made them a homosexual is to say that God made a mistake, because they cannot bear children nor have normal sexual relations. God didn't make a mistake, you did.

The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a Communist, anti-family, anti-Christian, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their babies, practice witchcraft, abandon homemaking, and become lesbians. Please read, Woman Admits Feminism Ruined Her Life.

Every woman has her rights; but, there's a world of difference between human rights (which we are born with), civil rights (which are granted to all U.S. citizens), and moral rights (which belong to God alone). A mother who claims the “right” to murder her baby through an abortion is violating God's moral rights. We have no sinful rights. Any honest person knows that abortion is wrong. The Bible calls it murder (Exodus 20:13). Nearly all abortions are the result of human irresponsibility, i.e., fornication. No one has a right to sin! Abortion is cold-blooded murder! This is a moral right that belongs to God alone, because only God can give life, and only God should take life. Again, we have no sinful rights.

Feminism is not the same thing as women's rights. People oftentimes get these two confused. Feminism is a sin; but, human rights certainly are not. Human rights are granted at birth, and apply to everyone. In contrast, feminism is rebellion, i.e., rebellious women refusing to submit to their husbands (or refusing to marry because they won't be ruled over). Some feminists are so "militant" about their rebellion that they are referred to as “Femi-Nazis.” Femi-Nazis like to destroy other people's marriages. Sometimes feminists refuse to marry, and strongly resent other women who are happily married. Many feminists CHOOSE to become lesbians. Homosexuality is a choice—no one is born homosexual. Feminism and homosexuality are inseparable. You show me a homosexual, and I'll show you someone who hates the King James Bible (which condemns homosexuality as a morally reprehensible sin. See Romans 1:22-32).

The feminist movement in America is trying to castrate men by DEMANDING equal authority. The idea that it takes a man to do certain jobs is repulsive to a feminist. Yet, who do we ALWAYS see holding the flag when we drive by a construction site? ... a woman! It's the men who are doing the rough work. Also, feminists are completely quite when it comes to the unfairness of child support and alimony payouts that men are often unfairly forced to pay! What hypocrites! Feminist women want EQUAL rights when it's to their advantage, but they don't want EQUAL rights for the man. I believe that a man ought to support his own children, but the U.S. legal system is abusive, catering to rebellious wives. A Christian husband has NO RIGHTS in the U.S. court system to enforce his wife's Biblical obligation to cook, clean and be an obedient wife (Genesis 2:18). This is wickedness!

For example: If a husband feels that it is in his marriage's best interest to shelter his wife from certain troublesome friends or a meddling mother-in-law, U.S. courts consider that “Domestic Abuse.” In reality, Biblically, every Christian husband has a right to decide who his wife associates with. A husband has a right to track his wife's whereabouts, but the U.S. Courts define this as “Domestic Abuse.” Husbands have few rights these days in America! In fact, the ungodly U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1988 that a man's pregnant wife can abort the child, even if the biological father objects to the abortion. She can murder his child! This is cruel and evil. Sadly, and tragically, marriage licenses have become weapons against husbands in today's ungodly U.S. court system. Judges and lawyers are predators, who profit from the calamity and hardships of others. No wonder Jesus preached the stern warning . . . WOE UNTO YE LAWYERS!!! Luke 11:46a, “And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne.”

Ted Nugent #racist wnd.com

Welcome to the Honest Society, be it ever so briefly, Mr. President. If I may quote the controversial one on Marc Moran’s “WTF” podcast recently:

“Racism, we are not cured of it. And it’s not just a matter of it not being polite to say nigger in public.”

Well, there you have it. The Honest Society is a rather large and growing club, clan if you will, that is not afraid of speaking honestly without fear of politically correct word nazi’s going berserk.

Along with President Obama and my hero Richard Pryor, we join Howard Stern, Johnny Cochran, Mark Furman, O.J. Simpson, Kid Rock, James Brown, the mighty Funkbrothers, Al not so Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Malcom X, Kanye West, Fifty Cent and pretty much every black rapper and hip hopper on earth, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, a few thousand NBA, NFL, MLB sports stars, legions of famous and not so famous musicians, actors, politicians, media personalities and assorted celebrities of every color, creed, ethnicity and walk of life, along with a few million others around the world who have used and continue to use the word nigger at one time or another.

The dishonest referencing of the word by its first letter is the epitome of political correctness gone mad.

For those who have chosen terminal denial and have completely lost touch with the real world, the word nigger has historically been used in a powerfully positive way when describing the proud heritage and history of deeply respected, even revered “blackness.”

For my entire life, whenever I performed my most soulful and emotional guitar playing, I received the greatest compliment a musician could ever dream of when the word was used to describe my Motown touch.

The word is used constantly across America in a friendly, even tribal greeting and salutation with no hint whatsoever of negativity nor hostility.

It is foolish and dishonest to discuss a given word, or language overall for that matter, by not saying the word and sheepishly referencing it by a letter.

Does anyone truly believe the title “WTF” of Mark Maron’s podcast doesn’t stand for vulgar street slang? Does the swapping of the universal F-word colloquialism with the term “freakin’” really absolve one from vulgar language?

Like the ever resonate “MF” word, it can be used in every imaginable way possible. There is a difference when someone assaults you with a knife, demanding “Turn over your wallet MF’r!” and the ultimate compliment given to anyone performing to the absolute best of their ability when praised as a “stone cold MF’r!”

Anybody not get that? Anybody not aware of that? Anybody so insulated, ignorant and disconnected to claim otherwise?

Semantics is one thing. Context something else altogether.

For our society to dare claim that any and every use of the word nigger is hateful and wrong is just plain dishonest, foolish, denies the truth and only hurts those we wish to protect the most.

As blacks blow away blacks in record numbers in Chicago and other urban hellzones each weekend, does anyone have the audacity to believe that words play any role in this insane widespread criminality?

Who thinks if certain words could be eliminated that any lives would be saved?

What sort of politically correct zombie could actually believe that the elimination of a word or a flag would reduce the evil of racism?

What sort of goofball could possibly believe that certain words are OK for one group of people but forbidden by others?

That, by the way, is the definition of racism.

When discussing hate and criminally evil behavior, could it possibly matter what words are uttered or symbols are displayed when an innocent life hangs in the balance?

The president’s use of the word as stated was honest and useful. His statement, this time, should be respected and learned from.

Everybody knows that Richard Pryor’s use of the word in his award winning-comedy recordings and routines and in his “Blazing Saddles” movie was honest, harmless and clearly funny beyond belief. The iconic artist was rightly honored with the Mark Twain Award at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, all knowing how he used the word nigger in a non-threatening, non-racist way throughout his personal and professional life.

Until we as a people break free from the shackles of political correctness and honestly admit that words and context have meaning, we will continue to focus on nonsensical symbolism instead of meaningful upgrade.

I for one would rather save lives, not worry about hurt feelings.

BadBob #fundie cseblogs.com

I am a high school science teacher. So far I have been able to teach creation science a couple years without being stopped by administration. I spend as much time if not more teaching creation science as I do going thru the textbook they make me use. Of course, I skip all the chapters with evolution. I use Dr. Hovind’s seminar notebook and his book Are You Being Brainwashed. In a couple weeks I will be going at it again. I pray I can continue to do the same as I have been.

Dr. Hovind’s plight exposes how corrupt our judicial system has become. With the advent of Verichip we are now just that much closer to the mark of the beast becoming a reality. And there is the prospect of Hillary Clinton becoming our next president. The future of America is very precarious at best. In the public schools and government all across our nation the wicked seem to be securely in charge while the righteous our at their mercy.

Our family prays for the Hovinds daily. It grieves us greatly that our government is treating them as such.
God’s judgment is heating up on America. In my life time I have witnessed drugs abuse, venereal and other fatal diseases, abortion, crime, rebellious youth, illegal aliens, oppressive taxation, perversion, etc. etc. etc.

We either are headed to revival or the end. Most those that claim to be Christians are so confused about what Christianity really is I fear the latter. God is not going to bless a nation and people who have turned their backs on Him and persecute His messengers.

Jesus Christ #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

The Most Hateful People Are ''Gay''

Gay = Happy ?
I know personally of 4 attempted rapes of children by Gay Men.

I also believe the Military is behind this
LGBTOMGWTFBBQ

Rape was a tool used in Psyche Warfare.
I'm unsure who started this but the LGBTOMGWTFBBQ community appears to want to violate love, ruin the country, bring in adopted foreign kids from ugly countries, and destroy TRADITION EVEN AT THE COST OF SELF-DESTRUCTION.

The military [church of Rome] has abused so many women by hoarding wealth from virtuous people who must join their mafia before receiving a place in the matrix to have a family with a woman who hides the secret of hosting the demons of guilt inside, from previous abuse.


I've never seen a military man love a woman, the love is lost in the chain of command [follow orders] so the woman is like the Greek story of the caged bird.

Yes the Military industrial pharmaceutical corporate monopoly IMV has destroyed women as a hobby of conquest.
As a game, as a joke.

And homosexuality [after studying this psychology many years] is the product of the military.
Putting bunches of men together to sleep snore fart and shower incites a strange/queer mentality.

Wherever there is war there is cross-breeding, mixing of races as troops rape and pillage where they go, leaving children without tribal loyalty.

The LGBTOMGWTFBBQ is brought to you by the military unlite. The invasion of ethnics too, it is military corporations selling off lands and assets to foreign control at civilians expense.

The Media will blame everyone but the guilty because
they are owned and until a person will live without money telling bankers to get lost the blame will always seek some scapegoat.

You are now surrounded by foreign invaders and LGBTOMGWTFBBQ and look no further than the alcoholic
Sergeant Pecker's Lonely Old Farts Band for the responsible party.


Loveless, creating loveless ...
so the corrupt can say "WE ARE NORMAL"

it is sickening ...
i see drunks, queers, ugly immigrants, females with rectangular not hourglass shaped bodies, men with doughnut/beer bellies like a basketball, perverts,
dope-heads, genetic-malformaties and in general monsters
where once humans existed.

and hate is everywhere.
depression, doomlust, fascism, and spite instead of understanding.


the military did this, and they will fix it, its their mess,
love walked out the door.

Fundie of the year results 2019 #announcement

The votes for fundie of the year are in! Here are some of the folks who made this show impossible:

Religious Fundie: Lady Checkmate (11/17)

She’s no longer a public figure, but she will always live on in our hearts and memories for her for her extreme censorship, troll paranoia and homophobia.

Go forth and conquer, fellow sockpuppets of Peewee.

Wingnut: Rabbis For Hitler (8/17), Monarchieliga (8⁄17)

This one was a draw between these two.

I’ll just let the phrase “Rabbis for Hitler” stand on its own. I have nothing to add to it.

As for the monarchist movement? I’ll just link to the anti-reactionary FAQ if you want to see it debunked. Or, if you prefer, I’ll just declare myself king and order the monarchy to be torn down, like the end of Magic Knight Rayearth. That show managed to be though-provoking and fun at the same time in a way that TV rarely manages.

Moonbat: EmmaRoseheart (7/17)

Alternatively, she could earn the “Hitler Ate Sugar” award for concluding that verisimilitude, being a root characteristic of fascism, is therefore fascist. A classic “there is no world outside of literary criticism” moonbat.

CT: Jacob Wohl (6/17), Deep State Exposed (6⁄17)

Two anti-feminist houses, both alike in insanity, come to another draw. Wohl pulls a bizarre concept where teh femenists somehow hate locked briefcases for their manliness, while Deep State Exposed takes “transvestigation” to it’s illogical conclusion and decides that the First Ladies of the United States were all trans.

Racist: Cuyen (9/17)

But incels are just a support group. Nothing problematic at all about sex tourism, and using your white privilege and money to extort sex. No, sirree, bob, nothing but a support group.

Ableist: Judith Newman (11/17)

You know how most bigots lighten up when it gets between them and their family, and you sometimes make fun of them for being hypocrites? I’d rather Judith Newman was a hypocrite.

Grifter: Sandra Porta (8/17)

wut

Mary Sue: Caamib (7/16)

Nobody takes you seriously, caamib. That’s probably a bad thing, considering the chance that you might shoot up a school or something, but your beliefs are so far outside of the norm that other self-identified incels aren’t sexist enough for you. In spite of others’ doxxing you and digging up newspaper articles about you, there’s a part of me that refuses to believe that you’re for real.

Funniest Quote: DJS (Pillowfucker) (10/17)

I voted for the “seven elements of a crime” one, but the masturbation guru one is pretty funny, too. Davey also comes across as not-for-real, but at least he has the excuse that he was born into Christianity, rather than coming to it on his own like an incel must have.

Nightmare Fuel: Rev. Ronald E. Williams and Patti Williams (9/17)

This is actually a third-party article based on a boarding school that has been in FSTDT’s Top 100 for over a decade. And it thoroughly deserves being reposted. This isn’t just evil, it’s kind of dumb, proving that anyone who does it is so twisted that they not only don’t act charitably towards infants, they don’t even act in their own best interests any more. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you, Mr. and Mrs. Williams?! And why aren’t you in jail?

Magnetic Crank: Sherry Shriner (8/18), Victor Justice (8⁄18)

One more draw. Sherry Shiner combines “New Age” quackery with Christianity, both, by name. She seems to think that the New Ages are right about everything, while simultaneously thinking they’re in league with the Devil. The post is borderline keyword-stuffing with its talk of DNA strands, androgyny, lizards, and gold.

Victor Justice, at least, seems to at least follow recognizable tropes of wingnuttery, and everything seems to follow from there. He just wants to discredit the environmentalists, and will do anything else necessary to pull it off.

Board: Daily Stormer (9/16)

Andrew Anglin desperately wants to be The Joker. Maybe he can follow Heath Ledger’s example?

Movement: QAnon (8/17)

A warmed-over version of old Satanism hate, combined with political conspiracy theories, and turned into a dumb meme. Truly, it is representative of the pinnacle of the decade.

Submitter: Bastethotep (9/17)

My friend, and fellow moderator. You have been around here longer than I have, and every sign shows no sign of stopping any time soon. You are truly a constant in this ever-changing world. Thanks.

Comment: Skidie(1) (6/17)

Dang, you can be harsh. But what’s better, unlike several commenters and most fundie OPs, you’re also completely fair. I just hope your optimistic view of the future really does come to pass.

Graham H. Seibert, reviewing the book “Race Differences in Ethnocentrism” by Edward Dutton #racist #fundie amazon.com

Stating the obvious, Dutton will be richly vilified by right-thinking people. Rather, left-thinking

Edward Dutton is a phenomenon. I attempt to review most of his books as they come out, and it is almost a full-time job.

His interests cover a wide spectrum, but they all seem to radiate out of evolutionary biology. His key insights are:

• Human populations have evolved to be profoundly different
• Race is a real and useful marker, a product of evolution
• Evolution is ongoing and rapid
• Evolution brought European peoples to the apogee of their intelligence about the time of the Industrial Revolution, and they have been in decline ever since.
• Two causes of the decline are obvious – smart people are not having children, and Europeans are being replaced by less capable immigrants.
• A less obvious cause is the accumulation of deleterious, "spiteful" mutations in the populations, rendering them less fit to reproduce and less intelligent. The unfit no longer die in childhood; society no longer keeps the unfit from reproducing.
• Racial and ethnic groups have different group interests. Ethnocentrism is the topic of this book, though it weaves arguments involving all the above.

Dutton does constant battle against the dominant dogmas of our age, chief among them multiculturalism and political correctness. Multiculturalism specifically denies the group interests of native Europeans. Political correctness has made it difficult to discuss these facts.

Dutton's conclusion is obvious, almost anti-climatic. White Europeans are the least ethnocentric major population on earth. Their denial of their own self-interest amounts to suicide. And yet, through the agency of political correctness, they are constantly vilified as being racist. This is so much the opposite of the truth that it's champions cannot let up on their propaganda. The big lie of white racism must be perpetuated at all costs.

Dutton calls on scientific research from every quarter to support his arguments. However, by their very nature his arguments are difficult to support conclusively, even through the application of statistics. Instead, he relies on corroborative evidence from many different fields pointing to what must be true.

This methodology, necessary as it is, lends itself to the criticism that he has not convincingly proven his arguments. He is arguing merely from preponderance of evidence. Opponents will thus attempt to belittle his work, claiming that he hasn't proven anything, and suggesting that he simply be ignored.

This is wrong, obviously wrong. The preponderance of evidence is quite weighty. An honest rebuttal would seek to marshal a similar number of arguments that go the other way. This, however, is impossible. The people who support multiculturalism and political correctness do so entirely on the strength of moral claims, and rare;u attempt to use science to buttress their positions.

Science is a collaborative effort. Newton allegedly said that if he had seen further, it was because he was "standing on the shoulders of giants." Dutton makes extraordinarily good use of both historical and modern giants. As a top 500 Amazon reviewer with an interest in most of the fields that occupied Dutton, I am in a good position to judge. There are 380 references in his bibliography. I recognize the names of 36 (in comment 1 below) and have reviewed about half of them. I know enough to say that no author who disagreed with Dutton's major points could compile a bibliography half as rich. Dutton is in line with most modern thinking in the realms of genetics, evolutionary psychology, sociobiology, religion, human evolution, paleontology and other related fields.

If the book has a flaw, it is that Dutton works so fast that he does not eliminate all of the typographic errors, small syntax errors, and repetitions. One can say that given the modest readership of books that tweak the nose of the powers that be, he is certainly doing an adequate job. The scholarship of the book is not in any way diminished. A five-star effort.

With a title like "Race Differences in Ethnocentrism" Dutton is just about obliged to name those groups whose ethnocentrism's prejudicial to native European populations (i.e., white people). He does not disappoint. He presents the consensus of evolutionary biologists, (the few brave enough to risk the wrath of the Powers that Be) as to who they are and what motivates them, whether consciously or from deep cultural memory.

Edward Dutton and Michael Woodley of Menie share a YouTube channel called "The Jolly Heretic." These are often discourses by Dutton on topics that interest him, such as why English men are so attractive to foreign women, why Eastern European women are so attractive to foreign men, how to judge people by their looks, and why people get tattoos. At other times they are discussions with fellow authors such as Kevin MacDonald. Although the YouTube medium demands more of your time for a given quantum of input, it is always entertaining. Recommend you look in.

Osten #racist stormfront.org

To all the members of this forum: Thank you!!!! I have learnt so much about the dark hands behind the curtain of manipulation that is plaguing America today. I have never felt so liberated than when I realized that Jews are the real cause of all the terrible experiences that have happened to me through my modelling career.

I now truly understand why, even though white women are undeniably the most beautiful humans aesthetically (tho whether other races can be properly classified as human is like open to discussion imo), we are being pushed out of magazines and ads at an alarming rate. It is because the Jewish propaganda machine wants to push their multicult mentality on us by hailing these mongrels as "edgy" and "hip". But most importantly, Jews want to control the males of our population through one big thing: SEX.

Our sex obsessed culture is what is really bringing us down, pushed by the Jewish media machine. This machine exploits the basic male desire to have sex. Once white men accept mongrel or non white women as "sexy", then they become so much more easy to manipulate because you can market anything or any stupid idea to them through this method.

But I wanna tell every white man who visits this board:

THIS 'BEAUTY' IS FAKE!!

Having worked in the fashion industry for quite a few years let me tell you the truth: White women are the only ones who don't need a ton of airbrushing and make up to look beautiful in fashion shoots. Non whites and mixed women are always buried under a mountain of powder and foundation to - guess what? Look WHITER. That's right. Underneath white liberal male's supposed hots for "ethnic" women, still lies the REAL desire for WHITE WOMEN. But this desire is being warped and twisted by JEWS to make you think that this beauty is something non-whites share. Well guess what, it's NOT.

If you are still a real white man, then own up to yourself that you actually LOVE WHITE WOMEN. You want to breed with us. You want to preserve and love us. You want to make America great and white again.

Feel free to argue with me, I'm up for it cos I've done it a million times with my ex 'friends', liberal douchebags.

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.

Kevin Rigby Jr. and Hari Ziyad #racist racebaitr.com

We want whiteness banished to history—to an other-space of that which is unknown and impossible. There is no way in which whiteness can move that is freeing or liberating for Black people, so there is no way for white people to free or liberate.

Whiteness is indivisible from white people. To identify as white is to claim the social structure of whiteness, is to always wade in the waters of anti-Blackness. Sociologist Anthony Giddens criticizes our general conceptualization of social structure for having “a tendency to view structure and symbols as somehow alien to the actors who produce, reproduce, and transform these structures and symbols” (The Structure of Sociological Theory, Turner 1991: 523). It is this tendency that so easily clouds our understanding of whiteness and motivates us to embrace white allyship. Black liberation would mean the destruction of whiteness, but whiteness is upheld by all white people. White people cannot escape upholding it.

Constitutive of progressive white people and spaces has always been the question; “How can I, as a white person, work affirmatively in the struggle for Black liberation?” People have engaged this question as a genuine possibility throughout history; of there being a way, however not-yet-understood, for white people to do whiteness well, and, in doing so, aid Black people in getting free. But on a very real level, Black liberation would radically necessitate the refusal of anyone knowing themselves as white. It would mean the actual end of white selves, including the well-meaning white selves seeking the answer to how they can address racism. Black liberation means that white people can only destroy their own whiteness or be destroyed with it. White people cannot exist as white and do anything to address racism, because whiteness in action is racism.

But as much as this argument is a stance against whiteness, it is also a deep affirmation of the totality of Blackness; a declaration that Blackness is enough. More than considering the place or non-place of whiteness, we are concerned with the dream-work of Black folks, that reflexive work we do and have always done trying to better know how to love and be with and in community with ourselves and each other. That work has forever been Black, has never needed whiteness, has best succeeded when we refused whiteness.

There is no answer to the question of what white people can do for Black liberation, but racism veils reality so easily and efficiently. It is anti-reality. It makes the impossible seem not only possible, but a worthwhile endeavor. It truly does keep you, as Toni Morrison said, “from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again.”

The dilemma of what white people should do to address racism has the same exhausting function of racism, because this dilemma is racism. Because for white people “to do” anything means that whiteness must be centered in a way that would perpetuate its oppressive essentiality.

There is nothing redeeming or redeemable about whiteness—by definition. Only the radical negation of it is helpful or freeing. And it is not enough for us as Black people to encourage or allow white people to try their hand at addressing racism. It is necessary instead to adopt a politic of exclusion. This is to build upon Malcolm X’s claim in The Autobiography of Malcolm X that “Where the really sincere white people have got to do their ‘proving’ of themselves is not among the black victims, but out on the battle lines of where America’s racism really is,” (X, Haley 1964: 383–384) with the vital understanding that Black victims exist everywhere whiteness does.

Therefore, white people should move comfortably in neither Black spaces nor white spaces. Even those who are well-meaning should drive themselves into the ground trying to figure out how to occupy a positive whiteness—because it is impossible. Only in this frenzy, when the sense of order that is critical to whiteness turns to chaos in every place, can the motivation to destroy it overcome the compulsion to reform it.

Contending that whiteness has no value or role in the struggle for Black liberation is an immense claim, but it is a necessary one if we are to be free. The sooner we take seriously that Black people are the best articulators, dreamers and fighters for the future in which we are liberated, the closer we are to the manifestation of freedom. Important to remember is what is made possible for Black people, is made possible for all people. There is no need to consider how whiteness can operate in this. It can’t. It shouldn’t. It won’t in any future in which we are free.

The question of “doing whiteness well” is a question which centers a discussion about Black liberation on the actions of white people. We know that white people maintain hegemonic presences in all institutional forms of power. So, to have a conversation about white people working for Black liberation is to have a conversation predicated on the need for white people to wield institutional power and influence to help Black people. In this context, white people maintain systemic power, and Black people are the recipients of their benevolence. That white people might maintain power in shaping and dreaming up Black liberation is counterrevolutionary. Black liberation must always center on the assault against and defiance of these institutions. “We do not negotiate with terrorists.”1)

Indeed, when we’ve seen white people try to do whiteness well, try to operate their spheres of power and influence well, we’ve also seen the martyrdom of Black women murdered by police to bring white people to reckon with their sins. We’ve seen white men starting campaigns professing the beauty of Black women, only to soon after realize it came hand in hand with the violent claiming of and sense of entitlement to Blackness and Black bodies.

This is all to say, importantly, that whiteness cannot be done well, cannot be done without violence or without being in opposition to Blackness and Black freedom. But the extent of this lies far beyond ashy campaigns and disturbing open letters begging other white people to atone for their sins using the blood of Black women. We must critically engage the possibility that whiteness is only violent to Blackness, is only and can only ever be antithetical to Black liberation.

That we conceptualize whiteness as having a positive operation in the fight for Black liberation is perhaps the single greatest success of the normative functions of a colonialist State. That is to say, we have been successfully hoodwinked to believe that which harms us most vitally might also be able to save us.

“Rather than emerging from a scientific perspective, the notion, ‘race,’ is informed by historical, social, cultural, and political values,” writes Teresa J. Guess in The Social Construction of Whiteness: Racism by Intent, Racism by Consequence, “thus… the concept ‘race’ is based on socially constructed, but socially, and certainly scientifically, outmoded beliefs about the inherent superiority and inferiority of groups based on racial distinctions.” What this means is that race is designed as a hierarchal structure, and whiteness is constructed for no other purpose than to occupy the space of racial superiority. Therefore, to exist and act as white is to reinforce the dominance of whiteness.

Indeed, there would be no white race, no “race” as we know it, if whiteness weren’t positioned in violent dominion. That is the only thing it can do. Whiteness cannot operate in any way that does not first perpetuate white supremacy.

This, of course, is not to say that white people have not been the conduits for necessary Black liberation work. White people surely played integral roles in the freedom rides, abolition movement and the Civil Rights movement. But those roles were meticulously crafted by the toils, lives, death and suffering of Black people. The energy forced through those conduits was painstakingly produced by Black folks. To credit it as anything else is to fall prey to the same tempting veil of racism that motivates us to seek the impossible from our white allies. White people playing a role in liberation work are always merely actors, and the work done with them always done entirely in spite of their whiteness, not because of it.

All ways of addressing Black liberation for which white people are praised is always work Black people—Black poor and working class women, trans, non-binary, disabled and queer people especially—have already done and been doing and have made possible for white people to know.

Even John Brown, the white abolitionist who was executed in 1859 after leading an insurrection against pro-slavery forces, furthered the legacy of the likes of Nat Turner and other Black folks who fought and died for their own freedom before him. We must be sure in recognizing that dying for freedom did not begin with Brown, was not his legacy to create. Though perhaps in death, in a significant sacrifice of self, he and those like him have shed light on what it could mean to give up whiteness for good. When whiteness is so seeped into your being, might giving it up necessitate a threat to one’s safety and existence?

And where do white people exist in safety? In settler colonial societies, positions of power are designated and protected for whiteness. Perhaps the only action white folks can take—barring physical disappearance—in the struggle for Black liberation, for them to successfully put an end to their own whiteness, is the absolute absolving of their places and power. Their literal disappearance from the State and its institutions. It is worth exploring what this would mean for the the persistence of capitalism and the State. Is demanding the destruction of whiteness from the State to demand the destruction of the State, which was created by and has only ever known itself in service to (and in tandem with) whiteness? Which, each together, have only ever worked to maintain capitalism, anti-Blackness, and the disappearance of Indigenous people?

As John Stanfield writes in Theoretical and Ideological Barriers to the Study of Race-Making, “Racism and race-making are part and parcel of the manner by which major industrial, European-descent nation states such as the United States have originated and developed” (Stanfield 1985:161-162). This is how capitalism, anti-Indigeneity and anti-Black racism are intrinsically tied. None can exist in any way that is good for Black people. The presence of each is specifically predicated on Black subjugation.

After whiteness is obliterated, at that point, what the people who now identify as white should do is a giant theoretical exercise: what comes after whiteness? How does someone become not white? That is the legitimate and critical work of many. But our focus is always on Black folks figuring out new and better ways to get free—independent of white people and capitalism and the entirety of western empires. We are confident that our dreamings of freedom can crumble whiteness, capitalism and empire without giving deep consideration to the question of “what do we do with it”. We’re only interested in the work of building past it.

Kevin Rigby Jr. and Hari Ziyad are Black, queer, non-binary dreamers who, in some reality not yet here, are married, gendered or ungendered without colonial restriction, and free.

Britt Gillette #fundie end-times-bible-prophecy.com

Transhumanism In Bible Prophecy

Transhumanism and the great rebellion

Is transhumanism in bible prophecy?

That's a great question, because this generation is poised to witness the emergence of a radical new social movement known as transhumanism.

Expressing an unshakable faith in the continued and rapid advance of human technology, transhumanists look to the future with what can only be described as a religious fervor.

Many of this movement's adherents point to the singularity (an exponential increase in technological advancement so rapid the unaided human mind is unable to grasp its implications) as the climax of human civilization.

Believing this event will usher in a new era for the human race in which limited mortals transcend their biological bodies and set out to conquer the universe, transhumanist anticipation of the singularity is comparable to Christian anticipation of the second coming of Jesus Christ.

Ironically, the bible points out that in the time just prior to the second coming of Jesus Christ the world will be characterized by unparalleled human arrogance. Led by the Antichrist, the human race will not only launch a spiritual rebellion against God, but an actual physical confrontation between themselves and the King of kings, Jesus Christ.

The apostle Paul foresaw this conflict almost 2,000 years ago:

"For that day will not come until there is a great rebellion against God and the man of lawlessness is revealed - the one who brings destruction. He will exalt himself and defy every god there is and tear down every object of adoration and worship. He will position himself in the temple of God, claiming that he himself is God." 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 (NLT)

The Tower of Babel

To properly understand the origins of this rebellion, we must first examine the development of human civilization in the aftermath of the flood. It is a time marked by another rebellion first chronicled in Genesis Chapter 11.

It's the story of the Tower of Babel:

"At one time the whole world spoke a single language and used the same words. As the people migrated eastward, they found a plain in the land of Babylonia and settled there. They began to talk about construction projects. 'Come,' they said, 'let's make great piles of burnt brick and collect natural asphalt to use as mortar. Let's build a great city with a tower that reaches to the skies - a monument to our greatness! This will bring us together and keep us from scattering all over the world.'

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 'Look!' he said. 'If they can accomplish this when they have just begun to take advantage of their common language and political unity, just think of what they will do later. Nothing will be impossible for them! Come, let's go down and give them different languages. Then they won't be able to understand each other.'

In that way, the Lord scattered them all over the earth; and that ended the building of the city. That is why the city was called Babel, because it was there that the Lord confused the people by giving them many languages, thus scattering them across the earth." Genesis 11:1-9 (NLT)

In this story, God scatters the human race and confuses them with different languages. His reason for doing so is to avoid the inevitable disaster wrought by global government and a common language.

Why are these things a concern?

Are you confident you can weather the current economic storm? Learn how to build an online business that works.

Because if they continue unabated, in due time, "nothing will be impossible" for the human race. This is more than a flippant comment by God. It's a prophecy of things to come.

It's a prophecy of something so bad, God put a stop to it the moment He first saw it. God knew that, left to pursue its technological development, the human race would one day challenge Him. After all, what was the motive for building the Tower of Babel in the first place?

"Let's build a great city with a tower that reaches to the skies - a monument to our greatness!" Genesis 11:4 (NLT)

The human race set out to build a monument to its own greatness, exalting mankind above God and extending its tower far into heaven with the sole intent of usurping God's glory and authority. This innate human desire did not end with the Tower of Babel. It continues to this day, and soon it will result in one final attempt to usurp the authority of God.
The Great Lie

The motive for this great rebellion will be predicated on lies. The bible predicts that deception will be rampant in the end times.

And just as God hardened the heart of Pharaoh for putting faith in his own power, He will do the same to the inhabitants of the earth who will become drunk with their own power:

"So God will send great deception upon them, and they will believe all these lies." 2 Thessalonians 2:11 (NLT)

Paul makes it clear that these people will be deluded into believing "the lies."

But what exactly are the "lies" to which he refers?

A cursory examination of the first book of the Bible reveals a quote from the originator of lies. In fact, it's the very first lie referenced in the bible:

"'You won't die!' the serpent hissed. 'God knows that your eyes will be opened when you eat it. You will become just like God, knowing everything, both good and evil.'" Genesis 3:4-5 (NLT)

These lies from the Garden of Eden are the same lies to which Paul refers.

The same lies which brought sin into the world will be the same lies which spark the ultimate rebellion against God Almighty. Humanity will come full circle.

In the last days, the same construction projects envisioned by the Tower of Babel architects will result in mankind achieving a level of technological sophistication so advanced that "nothing will be impossible for them."

The human race will come to believe the great lies of the serpent.

In his arrogance, man will believe he is:

1) Immortal
2) All-Knowing

and

3) Just like God

Mankind will mimic the earth-shattering arrogance of Lucifer by freely joining in his rebellious attempt to usurp the throne of God. Because without Jesus Christ, fallen mankind's ambition is the same as Lucifer's.

Centuries ago, Isaiah described this fallen being and his sinister motives:

"How you are fallen from heaven, O shining star, son of the morning! You have been thrown down to the earth, you who destroyed the nations of the world. For you said to yourself, 'I will ascend to heaven and set my throne above God's stars. I will preside on the mountain of the gods far away in the north. I will climb to the highest heavens and be like the Most High.'" Isaiah 14:12-14 (NLT)

In the last days, this passage will not only be an accurate depiction of Satan, but of all mankind.
The Transhumanist Movement

The latest incarnation of man's rebellion against God is the transhumanist movement.

Many within the movement believe the singularity will lead to the emergence of "post-biological humans" who are able to shed their biological bodies and "upgrade their hardware." Others believe that by downloading themselves into a network, they will effectively become "immortal."

True believers have modified their diets, exercise routines, and entire lifestyle in an effort to increase the likelihood of living to witness human reversal of the aging process and eventual human "immortality."

Ray Kurzweil - inventor, author, and transhumanist - is considered one of the best in the world at accurately forecasting short-term and intermediate technological trends.

In Chapter 7 of his bestselling book "The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology," he describes his view of the ultimate outcome of our technological advance:

"The matter and energy in our vicinity will become infused with the intelligence, knowledge, creativity, beauty, and emotional intelligence (the ability to love, for example) of our human-machine civilization. Our civilization will then expand outward, turning all the dumb matter and energy we encounter into sublimely intelligent - transcendent - matter and energy. So in a sense, we can say the Singularity will ultimately infuse the universe with spirit."

According to Kurzweil, the universe will be infused with "spirit" as a result of the natural advance of our human-machine civilization. This infers that the universe is not already infused with "spirit," and that if God exists, His designs are inferior to those that will be created by the predicted human-machine civilization.

In the next paragraph, he describes the advancement of the human-machine civilization as approaching the very conception of God. Ironically, he admits that the accelerating growth of evolution can never achieve the infinite character traits exclusive to God:

"Evolution moves toward greater complexity, greater elegance, greater knowledge, greater intelligence, greater beauty, greater creativity, and greater levels of subtle attributes such as love. In every monotheistic tradition God is likewise described as all of these qualities, only without any limitation: infinite knowledge, infinite intelligence, infinite beauty, infinite creativity, infinite love, and so on. Of course, even the accelerating growth of evolution never achieves an infinite level, but as it explodes exponentially it certainly moves rapidly in that direction. So evolution moves inexorably toward this conception of God, although never quite reaching this ideal. We can regard, therefore, the freeing of our thinking from the severe limitations of its biological form to be an essentially spiritual undertaking."

The concluding sentence of this paragraph should send up red flags for every student of bible prophecy. According to Kurzweil, as the human race moves forward, it will seek to free its thinking "from the severe limitations of its biological form."

The bible reveals that one day mankind will gather its armies in an attempt to "break the chains of God and set themselves free from His bondage." Psalm 2 describes this confrontation:

"Why do the nations rage? Why do the people waste their time with futile plans? The kings of the earth prepare for battle; the rulers plot together against the Lord and against His Anointed One. 'Let us break their chains,' they cry. 'And free ourselves from this slavery.' But the one who rules in heaven laughs. The Lord scoffs at them." Psalm 2:1-4 (NLT)

Could this passage describe an attempt by post-biological humans to overthrow the rule of God?

Could the chains which hold them in bondage be the "severe limitations of their biological form"?

Remember, when this event occurs, Satan and his fallen angels are also inhabitants of the earth:

"Rejoice, O heavens! And you who live in the heavens, rejoice! But terror will come on the earth and the sea. For the Devil has come down to you in great anger, and he knows that he has little time." Revelation 12:12 (NLT)

In his arrogance and desperation, Satan will advance the dark powers of the spiritual realm, aided by a fallen mankind with powers beyond our current limitations, in a last ditch effort to defeat God.

The technological advancements of the near future will provide mankind with unprecedented power, and the ambitious goals of the transhumanist movement are already in direct conflict with God Himself.

The following verse provides additional support for believing transhumanism will play a pivotal role in this final rebellion. In the New Testament, when Jesus describes the signs of His Coming to the disciples, He makes an interesting statement in light of our times:

"And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." Matthew 24:22 (KJV)

Throughout the centuries, this verse has been interpreted as meaning the Second Coming of Christ will arrive just in time to save the human race from itself, meaning human wars would threaten to cause the extinction of the human race.

However, it might mean that "no flesh will be saved" because a nakedly ambitious human race will transform itself into a race of "post-biological humans" intent on reshaping the universe according to an alternative agenda.

Given the history of human rebellion against God, it would be unwise to discount this possibility.

The Great Rebellion

Just as Paul prophesied, human ambition will ultimately lead to a great rebellion against God. This rebellion will reach its zenith at Armageddon, an actual geographical location in modern day Israel. The gathering of the world's armies at Armageddon will not be (as some believe) a war of humans versus humans, but rather a literal physical confrontation between rebellious mankind and the King of kings, Jesus Christ. In addition to Psalm 2, this battle is referenced multiple times in scripture, and it's clearly referenced twice in the Book of Revelation:

"These miracle-working demons caused all the rulers of the world to gather for battle against the Lord on that great judgment day of God Almighty." Revelation 16:14 (NLT)

"Then I saw the beast gathering the kings of the earth and their armies in order to fight against the one sitting on the horse and his army." Revelation 19:19 (NLT)

The "one sitting on the horse" is identified as Jesus Christ. Literally interpreted, both these passages state that the world will gather for battle against Jesus Christ. The bible is clear about this, yet for countless generations, these passages have been interpreted as a mere spiritual battle and not as a literal physical conflict. It's not difficult to image why. The idea of mankind physically engaging God in battle seems so preposterous that these passages have given way to numerous symbolic interpretations over the years. Yet scripture is clear. Remember what God Himself said about the human race that will ultimately fulfill His Tower of Babel prophecy - "nothing will be impossible for them!"

In fact, the Book of Daniel reveals that the Antichrist will manage to attack "the heavenly armies, throwing some of the heavenly beings and stars to the ground and trampling them":

"From one of the prominent horns came a small horn whose power grew very great. It extended toward the south and east and toward the glorious land of Israel. His power reached to the heavens where it attacked the heavenly armies, throwing some of the heavenly beings and stars to the ground and trampling them. He even challenged the Commander of heaven's armies by canceling the daily sacrifices offered to him and by destroying his Temple." Daniel 8:9-11 (NLT)

The power of the Antichrist and the human beings of his era will far exceed what our generation can currently imagine. As proof, Daniel describes a time when the Antichrist will engage Jesus Christ Himself in battle:

"He will even take on the Prince of princes in battle, but he will be broken, though not by human power." Daniel 8:25 (NLT)

The human race, led by the Antichrist, will take on the Lord Himself in battle. Like the Tower of Babel generation, the arrogance of this final generation will extend all the way into the heavens, where the human race will attempt to usurp the glory and authority of God Himself. But just like the Tower of Babel generation, their efforts will end in utter failure.
Conclusion

The transhumanist agenda serves as a reminder of what the human race is without the blood of Jesus Christ - an enemy of God. A movement which views its ultimate purpose as bringing enlightenment to the universe sets itself up in direct opposition to God's own purpose. This is the very definition of rebellion, and it's the inevitable result of fallen mankind's sinful nature.

Yet despite our sinful nature, God provided us with the free gift of salvation through His Son Jesus Christ. All we have to do is accept this gift. Those who accept it will experience peace and everlasting life, but those who reject it will become slaves to sin, and their ambition - like Satan's - will one day lead to an outright physical confrontation with God Himself. It's a battle that God will win.

Fiveos2 #racist reddit.com

We could be like Jews? Uh...they have a country.

But sure...i guess that when we no longer control our own country we could enjoy life by subverting, weakening, and plundering the people who replaced us. We can stop worrying about lofty goals like the pursuit of knowledge and be a totally self serving force ruled by spite and a desire for revenge. I'm fine with that.

Once white people go the entirety of progress and civilization will likely follow, seeing as there is only one racial and ethnic group that has routinely been able to produce and push the limits of human evolution further.

onlytheghosts #wingnut deviantart.com

(submitter note: bit of a pain to get this because the guy has blocked me on dA, likely over a debate we were having years back, but still)
Hate Speech is a toxic propaganda term
Anything that restricts free speech, freedom of thought, freedom of opinion is wrong. When people are REQUIRED to avoid saying certain things, it can lead to disaster. When it becomes a habit, it often leads to tragedy and horrible misunderstandings. That’s why I refer to it as being like living in a communist dictatorship. It’s a big part of the reason for the fall of the Soviet Union; people could not speak their minds, they could not say the truth, so the situation got worse and worse without any of the leadership at the top able to know just how bad things had become. Eventually the split between what was real and what was said became so great that nobody could believe anything. It was all lies, word avoidance, dodging the real issues, pretending real problems weren’t there, because of political correctness.

The leaders of the Politiburo had no knowledge of how bad the economy was, about food shortages, about the problems of the people… because NOBODY was allowed to speak freely. So, the Soviet policies continued to lead to further disasters, the whole time with the leadership out of touch and nobody allowed to say “Hey, things are really bad, we need to fix such and such” because nobody could say what the real problems were.

Instead of worrying about the violent intent of individuals, “hate speech” advocates always wanted to ban utterances, gestures, conduct, or writing that they didn’t like. A George Orwell 1984 concept. As far as I know, the term has never been narrowly defined only against encouraging genocide or violence since there were already laws for that sort of thing, and threatening others is already a clearly understood term. There was no need for such a new term as “hate speech”. It was promoted on college campuses, leading to a rash of new speech codes and other imaginative methods to control what people say and think, with no relation at all to the “genocide” or “threats”, because those terms were already existing. It’s just a way to introduce speech codes and control people, the entire goal from the start. The advocates of "hate speech" have used the term and concept as a way of silencing other people, and have always used the term to get around the 1st Amendment protection for Free Speech in the USA. It's been used in a similar manner in other Western nations. It’s been used in a similar manner in other Western nations in order to erode the common Western concept of freedom of speech, freedom of thought, that had become a strong pillar of Western democracy and culture for centuries. This pillar is under attack.

In many Western nations, the concept of defining what people say as “hate speech” is used to attack traditional cultures , attack Christian beliefs, oddly avoiding apply the same rules to Muslims and Jews, or anyone else. Anglo-Celtic culture is attacked in Australia by the “Racial Vilification” laws and similar. In the state of New South Wales, many slang terms are now illegal. Traditional Anglo-Celtic Australian culture is attacked, censored, and the views of the majority of the population on numerous issues aren’t permitted.

In the United Kingdom, people have been fined heavily and their lives ruined because the police have punished them for actions which do not legally constitute a crime such as tweeting a rude word online or posting the lyrics of a song in a blog. The police have tried to “check your thinking” as they say. They have got away with this many times to intimidate the common public despite no laws being broken by the individuals the police are harassing. Telling the truth in the Western nations is becoming rapidly defined as “hate speech” for more and more subjects.


The Nazis pushed speech codes and political correctness of their version too. Do you think the Nazis could have ruled Germany so tightly if they had freedom of speech? North Korea does it. Do you think North Korea can ever solve it’s problems when nobody is allowed to say “Hey we got problems here in our food supply!” Cuba does it. When the excuse of “It offends people” is used repeatedly, it becomes toxic. It kills free communication of ideas.

When you do that, it’s dangerous, confusing, and leads to more trouble. Instead of solving real problems, the politically correct lie about them and pretend the problems aren’t there. The Social Justice crowd then spend huge amounts of spite on creating fictional victimhoods and other fantasy “problems” with which to attack people about. They use these to bully people, censor, shutdown opposition, and push policies that are increasingly divergent from the real world issues that truly need to be dealt with. They create more problems then try to blame everyone else for these, while refusing to accept any personal responsibility for their part in actions that led to the creation of looming disasters.

You can see this in personal experience. Perhaps like me, you have been on car trips with people who haven’t a clue who decided where the hell everyone is going, everyone assuming that it was a group decision while in truth it was a total misunderstanding. I’ve sat in company meetings with executives trying to work out what the problem is, while NOBODY has a clue because NOBODY told them the true issues, just beat around the bush, so the entire meeting is everyone trying to GUESS. This is why I hate speech codes and political correctness so damn much. Nobody can communicate properly. A lot of the time those who get “easily offended” are just acting that way as cry-bullies to shut other people up.

They use their claims of “hate speech” like a sledgehammer to shut people down, to scream at them to not say anything which disagrees with political correctness.

It’s wrong. Period.

You can’t go half this, and half that, on Free Speech

It’s all – or nothing

If you have only degrees of it, it isn’t free speech

Time to tell the cry-bullies to shut the Hell up. Like the majority of people, I’m tired of the nonsense used by the politically correct, the lies from the social justice crowd, the screaming of “I’m a victim” from people who are fantasizing new issues to have a temper tantrum about.

Do you think the corona virus pandemic would have got this bad if doctors in Wuhan were allowed to say “We have a very dangerous new virus!” back in early December?

sr982 #sexist reddit.com

Your children being ugly is a valid argument to be completely honest.
If I were to marry an ugly girl who drastically improved her features through cosmetic surgery it would be like shitting all over my genetic bloodline. If it becomes commonplace it would assist in allowing people with inferior genes to multiply aka shoot higher than they are worth. If your face is a 3 then you should compensate with other things. Just think about the implications of plastic surgery in that dynamic. A 6 can upgrade themselves to a 7.5 paying just a little money while having done nothing to improve themselves as people while still carrying the genes of a 6.

Also there is even scientific proof that genes do in fact contribute to personality traits. I'm afraid I wouldn't want my son to have an insecure, shallow, beta loser personality either. I think plastic acceptance nonsense is one of the dumbest liberal asshat jokes of this generation. Why are you trying to combat the shame of fakeness by trying to alter public opinion on the subject? Because it doesn't fit into your own personal paradigm that's why.

These are the kinds of thoughts that enter my mind when considering whether to date a fake plastic woman. And don't get me started on the plastic men who walk around looking like clowns with shiny bbcream on their faces. They make me chuckle. I don't even consider them human.

J.K. Rowling #transphobia jkrowling.com

This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an issue surrounded by toxicity. I write this without any desire to add to that toxicity.

For people who don’t know: last December I tweeted my support for Maya Forstater, a tax specialist who’d lost her job for what were deemed ‘transphobic’ tweets. She took her case to an employment tribunal, asking the judge to rule on whether a philosophical belief that sex is determined by biology is protected in law. Judge Tayler ruled that it wasn’t.

My interest in trans issues pre-dated Maya’s case by almost two years, during which I followed the debate around the concept of gender identity closely. I’ve met trans people, and read sundry books, blogs and articles by trans people, gender specialists, intersex people, psychologists, safeguarding experts, social workers and doctors, and followed the discourse online and in traditional media. On one level, my interest in this issue has been professional, because I’m writing a crime series, set in the present day, and my fictional female detective is of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues herself, but on another, it’s intensely personal, as I’m about to explain.

All the time I’ve been researching and learning, accusations and threats from trans activists have been bubbling in my Twitter timeline. This was initially triggered by a ‘like’. When I started taking an interest in gender identity and transgender matters, I began screenshotting comments that interested me, as a way of reminding myself what I might want to research later. On one occasion, I absent-mindedly ‘liked’ instead of screenshotting. That single ‘like’ was deemed evidence of wrongthink, and a persistent low level of harassment began.

Months later, I compounded my accidental ‘like’ crime by following Magdalen Burns on Twitter. Magdalen was an immensely brave young feminist and lesbian who was dying of an aggressive brain tumour. I followed her because I wanted to contact her directly, which I succeeded in doing. However, as Magdalen was a great believer in the importance of biological sex, and didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises, dots were joined in the heads of twitter trans activists, and the level of social media abuse increased.

I mention all this only to explain that I knew perfectly well what was going to happen when I supported Maya. I must have been on my fourth or fifth cancellation by then. I expected the threats of violence, to be told I was literally killing trans people with my hate, to be called cunt and bitch and, of course, for my books to be burned, although one particularly abusive man told me he’d composted them.

What I didn’t expect in the aftermath of my cancellation was the avalanche of emails and letters that came showering down upon me, the overwhelming majority of which were positive, grateful and supportive. They came from a cross-section of kind, empathetic and intelligent people, some of them working in fields dealing with gender dysphoria and trans people, who’re all deeply concerned about the way a socio-political concept is influencing politics, medical practice and safeguarding. They’re worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights. Above all, they’re worried about a climate of fear that serves nobody – least of all trans youth – well.

I’d stepped back from Twitter for many months both before and after tweeting support for Maya, because I knew it was doing nothing good for my mental health. I only returned because I wanted to share a free children’s book during the pandemic. Immediately, activists who clearly believe themselves to be good, kind and progressive people swarmed back into my timeline, assuming a right to police my speech, accuse me of hatred, call me misogynistic slurs and, above all – as every woman involved in this debate will know – TERF.

If you didn’t already know – and why should you? – ‘TERF’ is an acronym coined by trans activists, which stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. In practice, a huge and diverse cross-section of women are currently being called TERFs and the vast majority have never been radical feminists. Examples of so-called TERFs range from the mother of a gay child who was afraid their child wanted to transition to escape homophobic bullying, to a hitherto totally unfeminist older lady who’s vowed never to visit Marks & Spencer again because they’re allowing any man who says they identify as a woman into the women’s changing rooms. Ironically, radical feminists aren’t even trans-exclusionary – they include trans men in their feminism, because they were born women.

But accusations of TERFery have been sufficient to intimidate many people, institutions and organisations I once admired, who’re cowering before the tactics of the playground. ‘They’ll call us transphobic!’ ‘They’ll say I hate trans people!’ What next, they’ll say you’ve got fleas? Speaking as a biological woman, a lot of people in positions of power really need to grow a pair (which is doubtless literally possible, according to the kind of people who argue that clownfish prove humans aren’t a dimorphic species).

So why am I doing this? Why speak up? Why not quietly do my research and keep my head down?

Well, I’ve got five reasons for being worried about the new trans activism, and deciding I need to speak up.

Firstly, I have a charitable trust that focuses on alleviating social deprivation in Scotland, with a particular emphasis on women and children. Among other things, my trust supports projects for female prisoners and for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. I also fund medical research into MS, a disease that behaves very differently in men and women. It’s been clear to me for a while that the new trans activism is having (or is likely to have, if all its demands are met) a significant impact on many of the causes I support, because it’s pushing to erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender.

The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.

The third is that, as a much-banned author, I’m interested in freedom of speech and have publicly defended it, even unto Donald Trump.

The fourth is where things start to get truly personal. I’m concerned about the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition and also about the increasing numbers who seem to be detransitioning (returning to their original sex), because they regret taking steps that have, in some cases, altered their bodies irrevocably, and taken away their fertility. Some say they decided to transition after realising they were same-sex attracted, and that transitioning was partly driven by homophobia, either in society or in their families.

Most people probably aren’t aware – I certainly wasn’t, until I started researching this issue properly – that ten years ago, the majority of people wanting to transition to the opposite sex were male. That ratio has now reversed. The UK has experienced a 4400% increase in girls being referred for transitioning treatment. Autistic girls are hugely overrepresented in their numbers.

The same phenomenon has been seen in the US. In 2018, American physician and researcher Lisa Littman set out to explore it. In an interview, she said:

‘Parents online were describing a very unusual pattern of transgender-identification where multiple friends and even entire friend groups became transgender-identified at the same time. I would have been remiss had I not considered social contagion and peer influences as potential factors.’

Littman mentioned Tumblr, Reddit, Instagram and YouTube as contributing factors to Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, where she believes that in the realm of transgender identification ‘youth have created particularly insular echo chambers.’

Her paper caused a furore. She was accused of bias and of spreading misinformation about transgender people, subjected to a tsunami of abuse and a concerted campaign to discredit both her and her work. The journal took the paper offline and re-reviewed it before republishing it. However, her career took a similar hit to that suffered by Maya Forstater. Lisa Littman had dared challenge one of the central tenets of trans activism, which is that a person’s gender identity is innate, like sexual orientation. Nobody, the activists insisted, could ever be persuaded into being trans.

The argument of many current trans activists is that if you don’t let a gender dysphoric teenager transition, they will kill themselves. In an article explaining why he resigned from the Tavistock (an NHS gender clinic in England) psychiatrist Marcus Evans stated that claims that children will kill themselves if not permitted to transition do not ‘align substantially with any robust data or studies in this area. Nor do they align with the cases I have encountered over decades as a psychotherapist.’

The writings of young trans men reveal a group of notably sensitive and clever people. The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, if I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition. The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge. I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager. If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he’d have preferred.

When I read about the theory of gender identity, I remember how mentally sexless I felt in youth. I remember Colette’s description of herself as a ‘mental hermaphrodite’ and Simone de Beauvoir’s words: ‘It is perfectly natural for the future woman to feel indignant at the limitations posed upon her by her sex. The real question is not why she should reject them: the problem is rather to understand why she accepts them.’

As I didn’t have a realistic possibility of becoming a man back in the 1980s, it had to be books and music that got me through both my mental health issues and the sexualised scrutiny and judgement that sets so many girls to war against their bodies in their teens. Fortunately for me, I found my own sense of otherness, and my ambivalence about being a woman, reflected in the work of female writers and musicians who reassured me that, in spite of everything a sexist world tries to throw at the female-bodied, it’s fine not to feel pink, frilly and compliant inside your own head; it’s OK to feel confused, dark, both sexual and non-sexual, unsure of what or who you are.

I want to be very clear here: I know transition will be a solution for some gender dysphoric people, although I’m also aware through extensive research that studies have consistently shown that between 60-90% of gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoria. Again and again I’ve been told to ‘just meet some trans people.’ I have: in addition to a few younger people, who were all adorable, I happen to know a self-described transsexual woman who’s older than I am and wonderful. Although she’s open about her past as a gay man, I’ve always found it hard to think of her as anything other than a woman, and I believe (and certainly hope) she’s completely happy to have transitioned. Being older, though, she went through a long and rigorous process of evaluation, psychotherapy and staged transformation. The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law. Many people aren’t aware of this.

We’re living through the most misogynistic period I’ve experienced. Back in the 80s, I imagined that my future daughters, should I have any, would have it far better than I ever did, but between the backlash against feminism and a porn-saturated online culture, I believe things have got significantly worse for girls. Never have I seen women denigrated and dehumanised to the extent they are now. From the leader of the free world’s long history of sexual assault accusations and his proud boast of ‘grabbing them by the pussy’, to the incel (‘involuntarily celibate’) movement that rages against women who won’t give them sex, to the trans activists who declare that TERFs need punching and re-educating, men across the political spectrum seem to agree: women are asking for trouble. Everywhere, women are being told to shut up and sit down, or else.

I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class. The hundreds of emails I’ve received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive. Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning. I understand why trans activists consider this language to be appropriate and kind, but for those of us who’ve had degrading slurs spat at us by violent men, it’s not neutral, it’s hostile and alienating.

Which brings me to the fifth reason I’m deeply concerned about the consequences of the current trans activism.

I’ve been in the public eye now for over twenty years and have never talked publicly about being a domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor. This isn’t because I’m ashamed those things happened to me, but because they’re traumatic to revisit and remember. I also feel protective of my daughter from my first marriage. I didn’t want to claim sole ownership of a story that belongs to her, too. However, a short while ago, I asked her how she’d feel if I were publicly honest about that part of my life, and she encouraged me to go ahead.

I’m mentioning these things now not in an attempt to garner sympathy, but out of solidarity with the huge numbers of women who have histories like mine, who’ve been slurred as bigots for having concerns around single-sex spaces.

I managed to escape my first violent marriage with some difficulty, but I’m now married to a truly good and principled man, safe and secure in ways I never in a million years expected to be. However, the scars left by violence and sexual assault don’t disappear, no matter how loved you are, and no matter how much money you’ve made. My perennial jumpiness is a family joke – and even I know it’s funny – but I pray my daughters never have the same reasons I do for hating sudden loud noises, or finding people behind me when I haven’t heard them approaching.

If you could come inside my head and understand what I feel when I read about a trans woman dying at the hands of a violent man, you’d find solidarity and kinship. I have a visceral sense of the terror in which those trans women will have spent their last seconds on earth, because I too have known moments of blind fear when I realised that the only thing keeping me alive was the shaky self-restraint of my attacker.

I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable for all the reasons I’ve outlined. Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they’re most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk. Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men.

So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.

On Saturday morning, I read that the Scottish government is proceeding with its controversial gender recognition plans, which will in effect mean that all a man needs to ‘become a woman’ is to say he’s one. To use a very contemporary word, I was ‘triggered’. Ground down by the relentless attacks from trans activists on social media, when I was only there to give children feedback about pictures they’d drawn for my book under lockdown, I spent much of Saturday in a very dark place inside my head, as memories of a serious sexual assault I suffered in my twenties recurred on a loop. That assault happened at a time and in a space where I was vulnerable, and a man capitalised on an opportunity. I couldn’t shut out those memories and I was finding it hard to contain my anger and disappointment about the way I believe my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety.

Late on Saturday evening, scrolling through children’s pictures before I went to bed, I forgot the first rule of Twitter – never, ever expect a nuanced conversation – and reacted to what I felt was degrading language about women. I spoke up about the importance of sex and have been paying the price ever since. I was transphobic, I was a cunt, a bitch, a TERF, I deserved cancelling, punching and death. You are Voldemort said one person, clearly feeling this was the only language I’d understand.

It would be so much easier to tweet the approved hashtags – because of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter – scoop up the woke cookies and bask in a virtue-signalling afterglow. There’s joy, relief and safety in conformity. As Simone de Beauvoir also wrote, “… without a doubt it is more comfortable to endure blind bondage than to work for one’s liberation; the dead, too, are better suited to the earth than the living.”

Huge numbers of women are justifiably terrified by the trans activists; I know this because so many have got in touch with me to tell their stories. They’re afraid of doxxing, of losing their jobs or their livelihoods, and of violence.

But endlessly unpleasant as its constant targeting of me has been, I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces. Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.

The one thing that gives me hope is that the women who can protest and organise, are doing so, and they have some truly decent men and trans people alongside them. Political parties seeking to appease the loudest voices in this debate are ignoring women’s concerns at their peril. In the UK, women are reaching out to each other across party lines, concerned about the erosion of their hard-won rights and widespread intimidation. None of the gender critical women I’ve talked to hates trans people; on the contrary. Many of them became interested in this issue in the first place out of concern for trans youth, and they’re hugely sympathetic towards trans adults who simply want to live their lives, but who’re facing a backlash for a brand of activism they don’t endorse. The supreme irony is that the attempt to silence women with the word ‘TERF’ may have pushed more young women towards radical feminism than the movement’s seen in decades.

The last thing I want to say is this. I haven’t written this essay in the hope that anybody will get out a violin for me, not even a teeny-weeny one. I’m extraordinarily fortunate; I’m a survivor, certainly not a victim. I’ve only mentioned my past because, like every other human being on this planet, I have a complex backstory, which shapes my fears, my interests and my opinions. I never forget that inner complexity when I’m creating a fictional character and I certainly never forget it when it comes to trans people.

All I’m asking – all I want – is for similar empathy, similar understanding, to be extended to the many millions of women whose sole crime is wanting their concerns to be heard without receiving threats and abuse.

John Allen #fundie quora.com

(In response to "Who would Win in a fight: Jesus or Odin.")

I came upon this months after it was posted but I feel some context is needed. First, Jesus died on a cross for the sins of the world, an act of mercy and grace. If Odin did exist, he would be considered a false god as far as the Bible is concerned. Jesus is stated by the NT as being the embodiment of Yahweh of the OT (the Word of God [John 1:1, 1:14)(Colossians 2:9). In the Book of Revelation Jesus returns as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah and pretty much hands all rebellious humans and rebel angels (i.e. false gods) their collective heads, especially in chapter 19 where He is the rider on the white horse and has the hem of His robe dipped in the blood of His enemies. He is the Creator of the universe (Genesis chapter 1) and therefore the entire universe responds to and belongs to Him. In other words, Jesus would imprison Odin for his rebellion and false presentation of himself as a god forever. This means that Odin is one of the rebellious angels and Yahweh’s creation and, therefore, less than Yahweh. In the Bible’s context Jesus takes this in what cannot even rise to the level of a “curbstomp”. This is pure “spite” as a battle from the perspective of the Bible.

Mike Grimmel #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Is the Vegas shooting a BLACK OP or Occult sacrifice? [Thread will curate all known facts & links]

Let's examine some facts pointing this to be far more than just a "lone nut" incident:

1) Paddock is a no-name, nobody. No record, no social media. Could be a patsy or MK-ULTRA victim. We'll find out more eventually.

2) 32nd floor, two windows broken, 9 windows in between, 11 windows in total. Smart people here know the significance of these numbers. There appears to be no logical reason why the shooter would break two windows so far apart.

3) Eye-witnesses reported two Hispanic individuals, a male and female, tried to warn everyone in the crowd that they were "all going to die" 45 minutes before the shooting. They made such a scene they were escorted out by security. L.E. has made no mention of them.

This alone blows a hole in the official story. Now we know at least two people had knowledge a shooting was coming, and when it was coming.

More details about this in this thread:

Thread: YOU'RE ALL GOING TO DIE' – SHOCK WARNING 45 minutes before attack (Multiple shooters???)

4) Paddock's "roommate" and/or wife is Marilou Danley. Her casino players card was apparently found in the hotel room, yet she is "out of the country" and not considered a suspect, according to L.E.

5) Marilou Danley's husband or ex-husband is 76 year old Geary Danley. His Facebook account is rife with Leftist ideology, dozens upon dozens of "likes" of every Leftist and anti-Trump group imaginable, including ShareBlue and most importantly, Rubicon Training Group, a gun training and gun course company.

Have a look: [link to archive.fo (secure)]

Geary has knowledge and a proclivity for guns, as a careful reading of his FB will reveal. Paddock and Geary Danley share one degree of separation.

Even though Geary supposedly lives in Arkansas, public records reveal he has a decades-long history of living in the state of Nevada:

[link to ghostbin.com (secure)]

6) The crowd was full of country music fans, mostly White and likely Republican.

7) Many reports of multiple shooters, including a report of a man entering Bellagio's employee entrance with a rifle and reports of bombs and suspicious devices.

8) The shooting itself required careful planning, including renting a hotel room specifically at Mandalay Bay, an east-facing room on a weekend, without going detected, while hauling in 10 rifles, setting up "platforms" and "cameras" and breaking two windows, each 9 windows apart in between (people reported glass falling, but no gunshots, suggesting windows were broken some other way). This careful planning suggests long-term pre-meditation.

9) "10/1 Human Sacrifice Atomic Bomb Planned for North Korea’s Hotel of Doom" -- See link for the chilling T-shirt depicting Chernobyl, 9/11, and Pyongyang Hotel on 10/1:

[link to alternativeinfotome1.com (secure)]

10) This was a month or two ago, Vegas cops ignored it:

"New ISIS video appears to threaten Las Vegas"

[link to www.lasvegasnow.com]

11) Last night's episode of Rick and Morty was called Rickchurian Mortydate.

12) Keep an eye on this thread:

Thread: Vegas thread last night.. now I can't find it..

More to be added as links and facts come in.

---

While I don't think the shooting was a "fake" or a "hoax" like Sandy Hook, the following should be taken into consideration:

1) One of those creepy infamous Craigslist postings for "crisis actors" appeared two weeks beforehand.

[link to pbs.twimg.com (secure)]

2) One eye witness claimed the shots were "fake" or not real gun shots:

3) Twitter user claims some eye witnesses are crisis actors:

[link to twitter.com (secure)]

wetwareproblem #fundie wetwareproblem.tumblr.com

in response to this post

Wow. You know so much about me. We have tried literally everything, with varying degrees of success. From holding him down so he didn’t hit me anymore to running away to Both me and my wife had to go to the hospital on different occasions.

Seriously, go fuck yourself you self righteous fuck. You know jack shit about what has gone on

As to cops, it’s not their job to deescalate meltdowns. It’s their job to enforce laws. But hey, I do know a mentally ill person killed two cops in California who were calming talking to him by drawing out a gun and shooting them while they tried to deescalate. One was set to retire in December and the other just got back from maternity leave. I’m sure they would be alive if they had you peoples edgy training. [..]

I will say it again and slowly. IF THE FORCE RISES TO LETHAL, POLICE CAN USE LETHAL FORCE IN DEFENSE. THE MENTAL STATE OF THE SUBJECT IS IRRELEVANT

See? No advocating killing aspies. No saying meltdowns warrant lethal force. Only if lethal force is offered it can be returned. That’s it. That’s all I’m saying. Apparently reading comprehension is an issue in your diagnosis as well
And if you say cops shouldn’t use lethal force because the subject is mentally ill, you don’t deserve to be in a grown up conversation

Replying and blocking so the person can’t respond. Nice echo chamber. Why am I not surprised that a cop is also a blatant fucking hypocrite?

You know what I notice every time you talk about dealing with your son’s meltdowns? You’re always - literally always - talking about what you did for yourselves. Nowhere on that list is anything to do with addressing the cause of the meltdown, removing your son from the circumstances that are overwhelming him that badly or removing the thing which is causing it. Nowhere in there is even the slightest shred of awareness of what meltdowns are and why.

You have demonstrated, right here in this post, by your own explanation of what constitutes the boundaries of “everything,” that you have tried everything except treating your child like a fucking human being with a mind and reasons for these actions.

I might not know every single detail of your life. But I know your type, I know the way people like you operate, and - this is key - I know a world more about autism and meltdowns than you ever will, you arrogant abusive fuck.

I also noticed the bit where you said lethal force is justified to take down someone who presents a threat to no one but themself - how exactly is that in keeping with literally any definition of public safety or justice?

Now, since you obviously won’t listen to people whose lived experiences demonstrate a pattern of police violence that is not in keeping with a just society, try looking at the cold, hard data:

About 18.2% of the population of the US is mentally ill. Yet 50% of police shootings involve mentally ill victims. For the current situation to be justified, as you hold, mentally ill people must be 2.5 times as violent as the general population.

The problem is, we’ve done the research on this. Extensively. The conclusion? Mentally ill people are no more prone to violence than the general population. The most stigmatized illnesses, such as schizophrenia, tend to be less probe to violence than the general population. However - and this is important - the belief that mentally ill people are prone to violence is used to justify violence against them, making them more likely to be victims.

So if police use of force against the mentally ill is justified, we should see mentally ill people involved in about 18.2% of police shootings. Instead, that number is fifty goddamn percent, two and a half times higher than is reasonable.

There is absolutely no explanation for this that does not involve systemic violence and wildly unjustified force by police. Period. And people like you, trying to use the violence that has been done to us in the past to justify violence done to us in the future? You’re an excellent illustration of where the fucking problem lies

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

If the Archaeopteryx specimens really are genuine, there are several reasons why Archaeopteryx can be considered to be a bird and not a reptile:

1 - Scientists say it is only a bird and not a transitional species. It is significant that a special scientific meeting was held in 1982, a year before the furor over the Hoyle-Watkins declarations that Archaeopteryx was a hoax (which we will discuss shortly). The International Archaeopteryx Conference was held in Eichstatt, Germany, not far from the limestone deposits where all the specimens were originally found. At this meeting, it was decided by the evolutionists that Archaeopteryx is a "bird" and not a reptile, or half-bird/half-reptile. It was also decided that Archaeopteryx was not necessarily the ancestor of modern birds.

Therefore, the scientific community now officially declares Archaeopteryx to be, not a transitional species, but only a bird!

2 - How could scales turn into feathers? Although zealous evolutionists have always claimed that this creature is a descendant of the reptiles and the ancestor of the birds, yet they do not explain how the scales on a reptile can change into feathers.

3 - Bones like a bird. Archaeopteryx is said to have thin, hollow wing and leg bones—such as a bird has.

4 - Not earlier than birds. Archaeopteryx does not predate birds, because fossils of other birds have been found in rocks of the same period (the Jurassic) in which Archaeopteryx was found.

5 - It has modern bird feathers. The feathers on Archaeopteryx appear identical to modern feathers.

"But in Archaeopteryx, it is to be noted, the feathers differ in no way from the most perfectly developed feathers known to us."—*A. Feduccia and *H.B. Tordoff, in Science 203 (1979), p. 1020.

6 - No intermediate feathers ever found. Transition from scales to feathers would require many intermediate steps, but none have ever been found.

7 - Well-developed wings. The wings of Archaeopteryx were well-developed, and the bird probably could fly well.

8 - Wings designed for flight. The feathers of Archaeopteryx are asymmetrical, that is the shaft does not have the same amount of feathers on both sides. This is the way feathers on flying birds are designed. In contrast, feathers on ostriches, rheas, and other flightless birds, or poor flyers (such as chickens) have fairly symmetrical feathers.

"The significance of asymmetrical feathers is that they indicate the capability of flying; non-flying birds such as the ostrich and emu have symmetrical [feathered] wings."—*E. Olson and *A. Feduccia, "Flight Capability and the Pectoral Girdle of Archaeopteryx," Nature (1979), p. 248.

9 - No prior transitions. There ought to be transitional species from reptile to Archaeopteryx, but this is not the case. It cannot be a connecting link between reptile and bird, for there are no transitions to bridge the immense gap leading from it to the reptile. It has fully developed bird wing-bones and flight feathers.

10 - Bird-like in most respects. Archaeopteryx gives evidence of being a regular bird in every way, except that it differs in certain features: (1) the lack of a sternum, (2) three digits on its wings, and (3) a reptile-like head, but there are explanations for all three points. Here they are:

[a] - Lack of a sternum. Archaeopteryx had no sternum, but although the wings of some birds today attach to the sternum, others attach to the furcula (wishbone). Archaeopteryx had a large furcula, so this would be no problem.

"It is obvious that Archaeopteryx was very much a bird, equipped with a bird-like skull, perching feet, wings, feathers, and a furcula, wish-bone. No other animal except birds possess feathers and a furcula."—Duane Gish, Evolution: the Challenge of the Fossil Record (1985), p. 112.

- Digits on its wings. Archaeopteryx had three digits on its "wings." Other dinosaurs have this also, but so do a few modern birds. Modern birds with wing claws include the hoatzin (Oplsthocomus hoatzin), a South American bird, which has two wing claws in its juvenile stage. In addition, it is a poor flyer, with an amazingly small sternum—such as Archaeopteryx had. The touraco (Touraco corythaix), an African bird, has claws and the adult is also a poor flyer. The ostrich has three claws on each wing. Their claws appear even more reptilian than those of Archaeopteryx.

[c] - The shape of its skull. It has been said that the skull of Archaeopteryx appears more like a reptile than a bird, but investigation by Benton says the head is shaped more like a bird.

"It has been claimed that the skull of Archaeopteryx was reptile-like, rather than bird-like. Recently, however, the cranium of the ‘London’ specimen has been removed from its limestone slab by Whetstone. Studies have shown that the skull is much broader and more bird-like than previously thought. This has led Benton to state that ‘Details of the braincase and associated bones at the back of the skull seem to suggest that Archaeopteryx is not the ancestral bird."—*Duane Gish, Evolution: the Challenge of the Fossil Record (1985), pp. 112-113.

"Most authorities have admitted that Archaeopteryx was a bird because of the clear imprint of feathers in the fossil remains. The zoological definition of a bird is: ‘A vertebrate with feathers.’ Recently, Dr. James Jenson, paleontologist at Brigham Young University, discovered in western Colorado the fossil remains of a bird thought to be as old as Archaeopteryx but much more modern in form. This would seem to give the death knell to any possible use of Archaeopteryx by evolutionists as a transitional form."—Marvin Lubenow, "Report on the Racine Debate," in Decade of Creation (1981), p. 65.

11 - Ornithologist agrees. *F.E. Beddard, in his important scientific book on birds, maintained that Archaeopteryx was a bird; and, as such, it presented the same problem as all other birds: How could it have evolved from reptiles since there is such a big gap (the wing and feather gap) between the two.

"So emphatically were all these creature birds that the actual origin of Aves is barely hinted at in the structure of these remarkable remains."—*F.E. Beddard, The Structure and Classification of Birds (1898), p. 160.

12 - Other birds had teeth. It may seem unusual for Archaeopteryx to have had teeth, but there are several other extinct birds that also had teeth.

"However, other extinct ancient birds had teeth, and every other category of vertebrates contains some organisms with teeth, and some without (amphibians, reptiles, extinct birds, mammals, etc.)."—*P. Moody, Introduction to Evolution (1970), pp. 196-197.

13 - Could be a unique bird. Archaeopteryx could well be a unique creature, just as the duckbilled platypus is unique. The Archaeopteryx has wings like a bird and a head similar to a lizard, but with teeth. There are a number of unique plants and animals in the world which, in several ways, are totally unlike anything else.

The platypus is an animal with a bill like a duck and has fur, but lays eggs; in spite of its egg-laying, it is a mammal and nurses its young with milk and chews its food with plates instead of with teeth. The male has a hollow claw on its hind foot that it uses to scratch and poison its enemies; it has claws like a mole; but, like a duck, it has webs between its toes. It uses sonar underwater.

The platypus is definitely far stranger than the Archaeopteryx, and there are no transitional half-platypus creatures linking it to any other species.

14 - Totally unique. Regarding the Archaeopteryx, *Romer, the well-known paleontologist, said this::

"This Jurassic bird [Archaeopteryx] stands in splendid isolation; we know no more of its presume thecodont ancestry nor of its relation to later ‘proper’ birds than before."—*A.S. Romer, Notes and Comments on Vertebrate Paleontology (19M), p. 144.

From his own study, *Swinton, an expert on birds and a confirmed evolutionist, has concluded:

"The origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved."—*W.E. Swinton, Biology and Comparative Physiology of Birds, Vol. 1 (1980), p. 1.

Other scientists agree. Here is an important statement by *Ostrom:

"It is obvious that we must now look for the ancestors of flying birds in a period of time much older than that in which Archaeopteryx lived."—*J. Ostrom, Science News 112 (1977), p. 198.

"Unfortunately, the greater part of the fundamental types in the animal realm are disconnected [from each other] from a paleontological point of view. In spite of the fact that it is undeniably related to the two classes of reptiles and birds (a relation which the anatomy and physiology of actually living specimens demonstrates), we are not even authorized to consider the exceptional case of the Archaeopteryx as a true link. By link, we mean a necessary stage of transition between classes such as reptiles and birds, or between smaller groups. An animal displaying characters belonging to two different groups cannot be treated as a true link as long as the intermediate stages have not been found, and as long as the mechanisms of transition remain unknown."—*L. du Nouy, Human Destiny (1947), p. 58.

ARCHAEOPTERYX—That name surely sounds scientific. But it covers, what many scientists consider to be, yet another contrived hoax. Notice how carefully each "feather" is separated from the one next to it. None overlay others, as would occur if the bird was pressed flat by natural conditions. Instead, the artist carefully scratched out separated "feathers."

15 - Modern birds in same strata. Bones of modern birds have been found in Colorado in the same geologic rock strata—the Jurassic—in which archaeopteryx was found (Science 199, January 20, 1978). According to evolutionary theory, this cannot be; for millions of years ought to be required for Archaeopteryx to change into a regular bird. If it was alive at the same time as modern birds, how can it be their ancient ancestor? Birds have also been found in the Jurassic limestone beds of by researchers in Utah.

16 - Modern birds below it! Not only do we find modern birds in the same strata with Archaeopteryx,—but we also find birds below it!

"Perhaps the final argument against Archaeopteryx as a transitional form has come from a rock quarry in Texas. Here scientists from Texas Tech University found bird bones encased in rock layers farther down the geologic column than Archaeopteryx fossils."—Richard Bliss, Origins: Creation or Evolution? (1988), p. 46 [also see Nature 322, August 21, 1986; Science 253, July 5, 1991].

No bird bones of any type have been found below the late Jurassic; but, within the Jurassic, they have been found in strata with Archaeopteryx, and now below it: Two crow-sized birds were discovered in the Triassic Dockum Formation in Texas. Because of the strata they were located in, those birds would, according to evolutionary theory, be 75 million years older than Archaeopteryx. More information on this Texas discovery can be found in *Nature, 322 (1986), p. 677.

Shawntheimmortal942 #sexist #wingnut deviantart.com

(he is reacting to a YouTube video by far right YouTube personality TheQuartering, who has been chased out of the Magic The Gathering community for sexually harassing cosplayers, saying “I wouldn’t even rape you” to people, and espousing far right and Neo-Nazi political beliefs, as well as being a spiteful and crude bully in multiple nerd communities)

Why? Why? Why? Why? Why!? Does every industry have to go broke to slap some sense into them? I MEAN C’MON! Anakin as an Incel? These people are paid millions to make a show, movie, or comic about their fan fiction where men suck. Civil war 2 had Captain Marvel locking people up without trail so she should become a fascist in her next series, right? It makes sense! These ass pats must feel amazing for so many of these companies to bend the knee and lose millions. Lemme try for a sec...ALL MY CHARACTERS ARE GAY! Now I wait.

It’s just more SJWs who hate men and only see men who get angry as “white male rage” and not character development.

Conrad Procter #fundie bbc.co.uk

A man has been spared jail after chasing a councillor down the street with a running chainsaw and threatening to cut his head off.

Conrad Procter brandished the chainsaw at Labour councillor Paul O'Kane, who was campaigning for former party leader Jim Murphy ahead of last year's general election.

The incident happened in Barrhead, East Renfrewshire, on 6 April last year.

Procter was sentenced to a Community Payback Order at Paisley Sheriff Court.

Sheriff Seith Ireland said 40-year-old Procter had "come very close" to going to prison.

The court had previously heard how Mr O'Kane, 28, had been canvassing in Procter's street in the Auchenback area of Barrhead ahead of the general election.

Procter, who was in his garden at the time, was heard shouting "Red Tories get out of here" before telling Mr O'Kane: "I'll cut your head off" while holding the chainsaw and chasing him down the street.

He had denied behaving in a threatening or abusive manner by shouting, swearing, acting in an aggressive manner, threatening violence while in possession of a running chainsaw and following Mr O'Kane down the street while holding it.

But he was convicted following a trial last month, with sentence being deferred for him to be assessed by social workers.

When Procter returned to court for sentencing, defence solicitor Raymond McIlwham described his client's conduct on the day in question as "unusual and very serious."

He added: "He accepts involvement in this incident but he continues to dispute that any persons were pursued down the street - what he disputes is any movement by him outwith his garden area.

"He's not stupid and fully appreciates how serious this is. Such behaviour simply can't be tolerated in a civilised society.

"It was a gross overreaction fuelled by temper and fuelled by passion on Mr Procter's part, which was totally misplaced and wholly unacceptable."

Ann Barnhardt #fundie barnhardt.biz

With regard to the Church and the Alpha-Beta structures and dynamics, I personally believe that people who are actually controlling and calling the shots BELIEVE IN THE FAITH… because they are Satanists. I believe that the key Alphas in the Vatican and the key outposts in the Church, the people who send out the orders and are literally at war with God are literal Satan worshippers.

The “Beta” caste is the group that I have defined as those who “Don’t Actually Believe Any of That Bullshit” – and by “bullshit”, I mean Catholicism. I believe the massive bureaucracy that is, right now, before our very eyes, destroying the Church from the inside out, is almost entirely comprised of men who don’t believe any of it to start with, who think that actual Catholicism is all “bullshit”. They are the Beta DUPES, PATSYS, and WISEGUYS, groveling before and taking their cues and orders from a caste of psychopaths that literally worship Satan, and thus believe in all of it: The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, the existence of Hell and eternal damnation, the supernatural reality of The Church, and, interestingly, the words of The Mother of God, particularly at Fatima. Oh yes. The Satanists believe EVERY BIT OF IT. Make no mistake.

And yes, I believe that Bergoglio is in the Beta caste, and doesn’t believe in any of it, and thinks it is all bullshit. I think that Bergoglio is a bootlicking Beta Diabolical Narcissist that was installed precisely because he would do ANYTHING the Alphas wanted, not only because he is a DN with delusions of grandeur that craves Narcissistic Supply, but also because he is a profoundly unintelligent man, and thus very easy to manipulate and control. (If you’re thinking of Obama as a direct analogue at this point, you’re right on.)

The Alphas aren’t gunning to drive people OUT of The Church – they are gunning to get as many people to engage in Eucharistic desecration as possible. They want people coming and receiving the Eucharist in mortal sin. What they are doing is aimed, first and foremost, at “hurting” and “humiliating” God. The loss of souls to hell is secondary, and derivative of their hated of God and spite. They want people to go to hell precisely because God loves them. It is the Satanic inversion of the Second Great Commandment: hatred of man for the hatred of God. They don’t want to shoot the Bride of Christ in the head – they want to RAPE the Bride of Christ forever – and make God watch.

If you think this uncharitable of me, consider the alternative – that Bergoglio is an actual Satanist. I doubt it. The only thing Bergoglio worships and adores is Francis.

alanorei #racist sarahmaidofalbion.blogspot.com

[The rest of the article is equally as disturbing]

All right-thinking Britons who love their country should oppose interracial marriage. The implications of race-mixing are much more sinister than is commonly understood - individual objections notwithstanding. Integrationists by definition are far too blinkered to see the big picture.

It is common knowledge that the mainstream media and many leading politicians exert considerable pressure in favour of race-mixing and scream 'racist!' whenever any sane individual protests against this kind of coercion.

Such pressure is mainly directed towards blacks and whites. In spite of the abominable practice of Muslim 'grooming' of mainly vulnerable white adolescent girls, Asians will almost exclusively favour their own kind for longer-term relationships regardless of any outside pressure. Muslim women risk so-called 'honour' beatings and even killings if they don't [like Banaz Mahmod, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6733919.stm ]. Heinous as this cruelty is, it simply reinforces the point.

Large-scale white and black liaisons are of course unlikely to occur in spite of media and political pressure. They could, however, be enforced by the EU, via Europol and the Euro-army, when Britain is fully absorbed into the EU Superstate or ['golden garrotte'] concentration camp following the treason of Gordon Brown in May 2009, compounded, sadly, by royal assent. The aim, as always, is to destroy white Anglo-Saxon Celtic Britain, both as a nation and as a people.

Alexander Gofen #fundie judeochristianamerica.org

THE CIVILIZATION SHUTS THE LIGHTS…

America has soiled the pants. She soiled the pants the second time in a row by reelecting … a thief, an identity thief. In a slavish elation of loyalty, America reelected the thief whose all docs are counterfeit, and whose name has never been certified: Obama? Soetoro? Soberkach? America reelected the thief whose political luggage included tens of violations of the Constitution and the laws, some amounting to treason (the Benghazi case just the latest). America reelected the thief having no organized opposition at all (the Repooobs grotesquely played a con man). In a belch of servility, America rushed to pronounce the victory of the usurper – in spite of that almost all votes of the Army and Navy were lost or procrastinated beyond the deadline. (By supporting the usurper, these very Army and Navy betrayed their oath to uphold the Constitution in 2008 and 2012 both).

This is an unprecedented disgrace for the former "beacon of the civilization", "the bright city on the hill". To fall so low, to display such a disregard to the obvious truth, to placate the plebeians so willingly – this is unheard of among the civilized nations. It is an infamy.

However, also the rest of the world bears a part of responsibility for this infamy. Since 2008, any nation of the world could (if they wished) to inquire about ineligibility of this impostor via the diplomatic channels. By doing so, they would force the Supreme Court of the US to hear this case in merits, exposing this impostor and fraud momentarily – as Dr. Orly Taitz stressed since the very beginning of the mess. But… not one nation wished.

It goes without saying that islamic crapistans did not wish. Yet also the European (covert) enemies of America did not wish too. To weaken America, to make her look more like themselves thank to the friendly impostor in the White House was their dear dream. The entire world "voted" for Obama/Soetoro offering him both financial and moral support – up to the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize given in advance.

However here is a question: Why did Israel join that chorus of the nations silently watching America being taken by the Manchurian candidate? The candidate representing the world community seeking the destruction of Israel? Since 2008 I have been warning every interested party in Israel, yet my warning fell on deaf ears. Israel could topple Obama already 4 years ago, yet she did not do it then, nor does she do it now. Then why does Israel hypocritically lament and complain that the usurper stayed in the place?

The Portal #conspiracy #ufo #crackpot #wingnut 2012portal.blogspot.com

<multiple links removed throughout to shorten entry>

As we are now right before the dawn of the new Golden Age, a strong purification must occur before we as a planet can enter the Light. This purification is called the end time madness.

The end time madness is happening individually, with many people freaking out and showing dysfunctional behavior, but also globally.

Since they know now that their end is inevitable, the Cabal wants to destroy the surface human population in the process of their own downfall.

They attempted that in December last year by triggering the financial collapse through the repo market, and that did not work, they tried that in early January through escalation with Iran, that did not work, they tried to engineer a false flag in Virginia, that did not work, so what is left?

A global pandemic scare.

2019-nCoV is an advanced ethnic bioweapon that targets mostly Asian population:

The current epidemic is a result of covert biological warfare that goes on between China and USA.

Chinese long term military strategy against USA is based on bioweapons to a great degree:

And upgraded it into a bioweapon at the lab in Wuhan:

Then a USA agent, previously infiltrated into the Wuhan lab, and involved in the development of the virus, stole a sample of coronavirus and spread it into the Wuhan seafood and animal market. From then on the virus was spreading with geometric progression that can really look scary:

It is interesting to note here that Peter Salama, a renowned epidemiologist that worked for WHO and a board member of GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, died on January 23rd:

The Pleiadians are working tirelessly to stop the epidemic. On Friday, January 24th, they have developed the first Stardust nanopowder to erase the virus and have spread it towards the surface of the planet from their ships stationed in Low Earth Orbit. The virus has reacted to the nanodust and mutated into a slightly less lethal and slightly more transmissible form.

Learning from the reaction of the virus, the Pleiadians have developed a more advanced version of Stardust and applied it on Monday and Tuesday (January 27th and 28th).

As as result of this, the virus is not spreading anymore with geometric progression as it was until now, and appears to be slowing down:

The Light forces are expecting that the spread of infection will even out in a week or two, with less and less new cases reported after that.

After enough attempts, the Pleiadians will be able to completely hack the virus and stop it from spreading, exactly in the same way they stopped the Spanish flu pandemic in 1918:

The viruses can only spread effectively when they receive support from the dark forces on the plasma plane.

Also, all remaining Chimera plasma spiders, which are up to a few miles in diameter, are extremely starved and on the brink of extinction, and now they are rushing to Wuhan and other cities with high number of infections to feed off fear and suffering.

This is a perfect trap for them, as the Light Forces can clear them much more effectively when they all gathered in such a small space and are not evenly spread around the surface of the planet anymore.

The Light Forces are now intensively clearing all the infection-supporting plasma and all plasma Chimera spiders and with this rate of purification, all plasma Chimera beings will be gone in a week or two, with only physical Chimera in US Space Command and DARPA remaining.

The Light Forces are asking everybody that feels so guided to support this clearing process by visualizing violet flame purifying all virus-supporting plasma and all plasma Chimera spiders.

Michael Pearl #fundie #wingnut nogreaterjoy.org

Q: “Should a mature ten-year-old be allowed to switch a two-year-old if the mother is unavailable, for example, during a temper tantrum?”

A: If a child is not old enough or mature enough to spank the younger sibling, he is not qualified to be the temporary guardian. A child should never be left in the care of one who is not trusted to assume authority to spank when needed. If you can not trust them to execute discipline, then you can not trust them to be the primary care taker of your child. If a child is ever left in the presence of one who does not have full authority, then you are allowing the child a dispensation of unrestrained rebellion. When a child says to another, “You can’t tell me what to do, you are not my mother,” you can be sure the mother can’t tell the child what to do either.

True submission comes from the heart and is not restricted to one or two feared authority figures. Every mature person is consciously or subconsciously aware of an inherent rule of law to which we are all obligated. This is a growing consciousness in children. This understanding is placed in us at creation (Gen.3:22), and is enforced by what we see in nature (Rom. 1: 19-20), and by a direct moral light from Jesus Christ (John 1:9). The child reared in the Christian family has the added light of Scripture and example. Same as adults, children are often tempted to ignore the dictates of conscious and to peruse a course of self-gratification and rebellion. As their understanding of moral obligation emerges, they must be taught and disciplined to follow this law of love and good will. If they are caused to view their obligation as extending no further than their parents, they are given the false impression that their parents are the highest law. They should be taught that there are no exceptions to their obligations; they are never out from under the law of love, decency, goodness, kindness, respect, etc. No matter who reminds them of their duty, whether it be a younger child or a stranger, they should recognize the authority of a law higher than all earthly authority, and bow in submission. To rebel against another who is attempting to enforce that law is to rebel against God who placed this law in all men. A ten-year-old ought to be mature enough to discipline a smaller child. If they are not, one of the things that will help them mature is to give them real responsibility over the small child. If you want to breed hostility and cause divisions in the family, just put a ten-year-old in charge of a four-year- old and forbid the ten-year-old from disciplining the younger child. He or she will despise the rebellious child and resent being put in that position. It is totally irresponsible to all parties involved to place a child under one whose hands are tied. In our house, there was no difference between the parents and the older children in authority over the younger children. I supported the commands of my twelve-year-old over my four-year-old just like I did the commands of my wife.

green---- #sexist reddit.com

List of "Life fuel" events

When women are raped, which they deserve.

When women are killed, which they definitely ask for.

When liberals get arrested for trying to be edgy

When nu males get beaten to a pulp.

When ISIS kills people.

When Chad dumps acid on a woman's face and she realizes how incels feel.

When women pretend to be depressed.

When normies get cucked.

When I hear about shootings on the news.

When normies or r/inceltears users family members die, especially u/reillyyyyyyjj 's.

When r/inceltears members die.

Heidlerr #racist stormfront.org

Re: When Asian Women Are Harassed for Marrying Non-Asian Men

One interesting thing she said in the article is that she was never attracted to Asian men because, growing up, the only Asians she knew were her relatives. That makes sense in a way but shows what can happen in multiracial societies and why we shouldn't have them.

That's an excuse for self hate. Asian women literally Worship White men like we are Gods. This Asian girl straight up stalked me in High School it was scary, I actually asked her why she wouldn't date her own kind and she made this motion with her fingers and said small cock.

East Asian women are the most self hating women in the World and the men are the most Beta men in the World. 99% of East Asian men don't know how to communicate in a normal way because their T levels are so low they always think about how to be "non confrontational , non offensive they can't even communicate."

Only new one Asian guy who wasn't a Nerd short, weak looking. He was a tall Chinese guy over 6' and lifted weights. He did fairly well with girls and he ended up in Finance.

Most Asian men can't get dates and live alone if they haven't brought wife from the home country or aren't part of a tight knight Ethnic community. I know of several Asian guys that are past 30 and still Single. I check their facebook to see if they are no longer single. Asians must be the group with highest sexless men in America hands down easily.

Her mudshark race traitor race mixing of s husband should be shunned by any sane white person

Mitch is a CUck married to an Ugly Asian woman. Didn't even have children with her. Just a Status seeking 3rd World Whore. There everywhere where I live.

All Ethnic women even Black, want to be with a White guy where I'm from. We are like Gods here. As long as you're over White, 5'10 and not deformed Ethnic women will literally throw themselves at your feet all day.

So I understand why White men sometimes marry Asian. I've seen many White men here married to East Asians or Curries. Not so much Latinas or Blacks because they generally don't go to College and do low status jobs even if they do. East Asians Worship Money and Status so they go well with some White guys.

Where I live the Best looking girls are Jewish because their Father's are Jewish Laywers, Doctors, Politicians, CEOs ect and they get the best looking White women.

I don't find East Asian women very attractive most have flat faces, slits for eyes, and no body. My friend says it's tighter and better and that looks don't matter that much as long as they aren't fat.

Some Jewish, Latinas and Persian girls can be very attractive. I'd prefer a White looking Persian or Latina to a Regular White American girl. Most White AMerican girls are fat and aren't attractive unless they are from the country. But those country folk just have a different culture than me.

Where I live the best looking girls are Jewish. Because their Fathers are Doctors, Laywers, CEOs, Politicians and get the best looking White women who want to marry up for Status.

Linda Harvey #fundie barbwire.com

WE WILL TELL YOU WHAT TO BELIEVE

The vicious bullying of Christians by “LGBT” activists has reached a tipping point. The end game is no longer disguised and it’s this: Christians will be prohibited from exercising their First Amendment constitutional rights to object to homosexual behavior or gender confusion. That is, if the activists get their way.

In other words, the Human Rights Campaign, GLSEN, GLAAD and other “LGBT” bullies will tell us what we can and can’t believe.

The Gospel According to “Gay” is here, or so they hope. But in spite of the pending Supreme Court review of same sex so-called ‘marriage’ followed by a possible tsunami of homosexual tyranny, the rainbow radicals are stunned by a bit of push-back. They fret that their lavish funding and incessant thuggery are not producing the expected result, which is the easy overthrow of Judeo-Christian moral values in America.

Take for instance, the Archdiocese of San Francisco, instructing its school faculty to be respectful of the tenets of Catholicism both on and off the job. Don’t promote abortion or homosexuality as marriage, for instance, even on social media.

But San Francisco’s city government and “gay” community are not known for logic and respect. Outrage has greeted the notion that any church would require those in its employ not to bite the hand that feeds them. Bay Area “gays” want to dictate to the Archdiocese what it can and can’t believe, thank you very much, and the controversy may be headed to court.

That’s what they think of the First Amendment.

A number of cities and states are getting wise to the fascism of pro-homosexual public policies. Sexual orientation and gender identity provisions in discrimination law (SO/GI measures) are being turned back. Americans are figuring out that these laws do “protect“ homosexuals and transvestites, but only from opinions they don’t like while handing them a club to bash people of faith. As people lose jobs simply for having the wrong opinion, and small businesses close after months of threats and leftist harassment, the public understands what is really happening: tolerance is a one-way street for sexual anarchists.

For faithful Christians, there will be no mercy.

Americans don’t agree. A new poll published by Family Research Council and the National Religious Broadcasters found that a whopping 81% agreed with this statement: “Government should leave people free to follow their beliefs about marriage as they live their daily lives at work and in the way they run their businesses.”

In the wake of an absurd state regulation passed in Minnesota for schools, a parents’ group commissioned a survey of voters and 90% agreed that students should have privacy rights for bathrooms, locker rooms and showers, including separate male/female facilities. A bill has just been introduced in both the MN House and Senate, called the “Student Safety and Physical Privacy Act” to mandate separate facilities for biological males and females and to overturn the recent school sports’ transgender policy.

In Arkansas, SB 202 just passed the legislature and was allowed to become law by the governor. It prohibits amending local discrimination policies with new categories, and that means “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” can’t be added.

This blow to “LGBT” dreams of glory follows on the heels of a successful December referendum in Fayetteville repealing a local transgender bill. The repeal effort featured intense lobbying by Michelle Duggar of the 19 Kids and Counting cable show.

And then in a stunning victory for freedom, an SO/GI ordinance just failed in Charlotte, North Carolina by a 6-5 vote. The measure would have prevented faith-based objections — i.e., no First Amendment religious rights.

The Human Rights Campaign spent a lot of time and money on the Charlotte bill and they are furious at the rebuff. They hoped to pass a bill with no faith exemptions. HRC calls religious freedom proposals “license to discriminate” bills, referring to proponents as the “anti-LGBT rump.” A paper HRC published called “Chipping Away at Equality” predicts these bills would allow Christians to turn away divorcees, Jewish people and biracial couples from businesses, and that EMTs would refuse to treat dying transgender patients using these bills as an excuse. No examples where such actions have occurred were provided.

And the roll-back doesn’t end there. Kansas Governor Sam Brownback by executive order rescinded a SO/GI discrimination order put in place by former governor Kathleen Sebelius.

And in Georgia, where Atlanta fire chief Kelvin Cochran was fired for expressing his traditional Christian moral beliefs in a book, a bill is moving through the legislature to secure First Amendment rights in such cases. The radical group Get Equal spread misinformation in an email blast about the Georgia bill, alleging that it “…would make it legal for anyone citing a ‘sincerely-held religious belief’ to have a free pass to discriminate against just about anyone — LGBTQ or not.”

A Florida bill has been introduced that would restrict restrooms to people of the same biological sex. A new Michigan bill would allow adoption organizations to exercise religious freedom. There’s a similar bill in Congress, the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, sponsored by Congressman Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) and Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wy.)

And of course, we can’t forget the current Jezebel of “LGBT” tyranny: Houston mayor Annise Parker in her ongoing fight to deny citizens a vote on a local “LGBT” measure. A city clerk affirmed that more than enough signatures had been received to put the ordinance to a vote of the people, but the mayor’s shady maneuvers held it up. A judge rejected her plea to avoid a jury trial brought by local pastors whose sermons she subpoenaed in a thinly-disguised intimidation tactic.

One piece of legislation some are hailing as good news is actually the opposite: a Utah bill barring “LGBT” discrimination was supported by the LDS Church because it included religious exemptions. But it’s a trap. The bill language contains subjective “weasel” clauses allowing employers to make final determination about free speech, which qualifies “…unless the expression… is in direct conflict with the essential business-related interests of the employer.”

Welcome to the land of major loopholes. Many companies are already in bed with the “gay” lobby or afraid to limit their demands, so this language hands the “LGBT” bullies a tool to render the faith exemption meaningless.

And why is any church endorsing homosexual and “transgender” lifestyles anyway? That is what SO/GI “non-discrimination” bills do. They don’t just secure a right to an apartment or a job. It’s the right to have an apartment as an open and proud homosexual or transvestite (even if your landlady is a single Christian widow who believes this lifestyle is a sin). It’s getting a position while proudly proclaiming private deviant practices, even if co-workers believe marriage is male/female. Dare to express traditional values on the job and any Christian is guilty of harassment. These folks will have their lawyers all over you.

There is no respect in Scripture for these sins, but quite the opposite: our Lord calls homosexual sex an “abomination.” I don’t know how a church somehow justifies a “right” to housing and employment solely based on a sin identity.

The good news is that lots of Americans do understand and are standing up for what we believe and what our Constitution guarantees. The Lord Jesus Christ has framed the parameters of our faith and no wicked deceit the lavender lobby devises will every change that.

James Powers #fundie youtube.com

Sorry atheist fool, but I'm a 58 year old retired doctor that's studied these topics for almost 50 years. That means my education dwarfs yours. My facts can't be debunked: Existence of God? Creation? The best example of God’s existence is his best creation: The human being. Mankind is BY FAR the most intelligent, resourceful and powerful entity in the universe, and we don't have a clue as to how to design/create the high-complexity/high function as that found in the human being, and create it from NOTHING. So whoever did design/create the human being, has intelligence, resources and power FAR BEYOND that of mankind. Only a brilliant divine God could design/create the high-complexity/high function found in the ready-to-reproduce human being, which has all the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in symmetry and order that only a DIVINE MIND could produce. And we certainly didn’t come from the non-existent MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution) that CAN’T
EVEN THINK. Also, the lies of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution) have no LIFE, INTELLIGENCE or MORALITY to give, so it’s IMPOSSIBLE that the lies of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution) are the source for LIFE, INTELLIGENCE & MORALITY. The ONLY OPTION of the source of life, intelligence and morality, is from our living, intelligent moral God. It’s not even a conversation. Atheism = shallow thinking rebellious stupidity.

NEVER has there been a KIND of animal that has produced a new anatomical feature or function to begin a new KIND of animal (evolution). "Dogs" remain "dogs" no matter how far back you go. Same with bacteria. Richard Lenski of Michigan has been breeding ecoli strains for thirty years now, he and his lab, have generated 66,000 generations of ecoli and none have changed to anything but ecoli. No lab on the planet earth has observed one bacterium, one insect or animal morphing into anything else. And not even beginning to, w/ no anatomical change whatsoever. Atheism and it's religion of evolution is easily debunked... obviously.?

Aubrey Huff #sexist #racist twitter.com

In light of today’s post about rescuing Iranian women from that shit hole. This is what I would imagine grateful Iranian women would do to show their appreciation to any man who saved them from the assholes that beat them, & make them wear a long tunic & scarf in 110 degree heat.

image

[Image depicts a stick figure man lying on his back in a reclining chair while three stick figure women surround him. The first woman is fanning him, the second women is holding a bunch of grapes, and the third women is grabbing the man’s left foot.

The second woman has a speech bubble saying “Oh, Thank you Mr. Huff from saving us from the hell in Iran! We will be forever grateful!”
The man has a speech bubble saying “You’re welcome, gorgeous! May all you ladies flourish in the land of the free and home of the brave! Welcome to the greatest country on the planet America! A little more pressure on the feet there sweetheart!”
The third woman has a speech bubble saying “Anything for you Huffdaddy”
]

Robert Oscar Lopez #fundie englishmanif.blogspot.co.uk

The completely petulant and histrionic response from gay parents like Ryan Murphy to Dolce & Gabbana's comments can give average Americans a small taste of what children in such homes will have to deal with. You can't be a good parent and want to have absolute control over what your kids think and feel, in addition to what the whole world thinks and feels about you and your kids. It's a recipe for emotional abuse of whoever is under your power. Look at the punitive urge, the lust for vengeance, the despotism. That is what I see in Ricky Martin, Jeremy Hooper, Ryan Murphy, and Elton John. These are men who will terrorize human beings if they can, if they are within their striking distance. They acquired children the way they get everything they want in all aspects of their lives: through economic leverage, intimidation, and sheer arrogance. Imagine being a helpless and confused child longing for a mom, and being under the power of a dad who throws out clothing and calls for all-out destruction of anyone who hints that you have lost something by being denied a mom. Imagine not one such man lording over you, but two. This is horrible. These people are disgusting. I hope and pray that Dolce and Gabbana do not capitulate to them. These repulsive tyrants must learn at some point that they are not gods, and they cannot bring the world to their knees.

Don Croft #conspiracy ethericwarriors.com

I think a big stage in the development of our personal discernment is to recognize what the enemy are capable of, as opposed to what they claim to be capable of. Not long ago, when these sewer rats announced their murderous and destructive intentions we could be confident that they were going to carry them out. By 'announce,' of course, I mean in their characteristic way such as the inscribed Georgia Guide Stones. By the time those monuments were erected, though, in the 1980s they were already losing ground and were not achieving their stated goals. My favorite failed goal was their prediction (on those stones) that the population of the earth would be reduced to half a billion before the year 2000. The UN's depopulation programs never came to fruition because the targeted third world countries' governments simply refused to comply . If you want to read real horror literature, check out Lucifer [Theosophy] Trust's strident UN official literature about depopulation that was published in the 80s. We'd be hard pressed to find science fiction that could match that (failed) dark-future scenario.

CERN is still a favorite fear-porn subject for 'alternative' [read: disinformation] internet and magazine sources. There's probably so much orgonite there, by now, that I'd be surprised if they could still even kill a goat in a satanic ritual, there. The probably-obsolete HAARP array in Alaska, similarly, probably has so much orgonite on the site that you'd need to walk carefully not to trip over it. The enemy are still producing fear porn about HAARP in Alaska and by now there are probably ten thousand weather weapons that are more powerful than that one. It doesn't take a lot of people to disable all of the enemy's etheric weaponry, fortunately.

I don't know if Laurent's report of the first CERN orgonite campaign survived the last NSA destruction of this forum (July, 2010?) because our website didn't finally become secure until August, 2010 when Azti took responsibility for our continuity, here. As Laurent mentioned there were already several visits to CERN with orgonite that he knew about but right after he put orgonite on the ground all around that underground gigantic ring structure, on the eve of the announced debut of the mysterious tech there was a catastrophic failure of the device, if I'm not mistaken. Laurent and another Swiss fellow had earlier cleaned up Lake Geneva and they actually got brief credit for it in a major newspaper. The lake had become quite polluted and noxious. I mention 'old victories' from time to time so that our newer readers can know a little about some of the people who post field reports, here.

The next time CERN announced another 'experiment' Axel in Austria went there and put more earthpipes around the gigantic ring and that time the failure was even more catastrophic, including underground conflagration. Around that time, too, Axel also put orgonite all around a nazi drug cartel lab that had produced a new bioweapon to be injected into millions or billions of people and that 'predicted, promised deadly global pandemic' also failed to materialize . His report is still available here, I think. There were some brilliant field observations in it and he apparently got there just in time.

There are probably at least a dozen CERNs around the world by now but the media whores and fake alternative sources only focus on the one in Switzerland. We believe stargates have been around and in use on our planet since before the dawn of recorded history, otherwise. We used to focus on finding the underground weapons in the chatroom and most of them outside of China and Russia are probably well flipped by people on the ground. Even if the enemy were capable of bringing armies of murderous draconians through existing portals I don't think the draconians, et al, want to risk invading us, any more. Nor are the enemy apparently capable of causing much mayhem at all with their more expensive and frightful creations. 'If they could have, they would have' by now and even that would, some believe, depend on approval from Peking, which I doubt is forthcoming.

One of HAARP's stated purposes was to map underground features. The Japanese orgonite makers affiliated with Tetsuzi Moriwake evidently found that orgonite cloudbusters have influence deep underground as well as in the atmosphere and they put a couple hundred of them along Japan's major faultlines, along with a couple thousand earthpipes. They finished on the eve of the offshore quake that is blamed for the destruction of the Fukushima nuke plant. By the way, people who are addicted to fear porn can't easily be persuaded to take an objective approach. I've been unable to persuade enquirers in Japan over the years to simply get a radiation counter in order to determine, for themselves, that radiation sickness is a threat. I've never heard from or directly about anyone in Japan who has experienced radiation sickness, by the way. Jim Stone did a nice exposé, I think, about the demolition of that reactor: http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima1.html and it reminds me of the way the enemy overtly dynamited the levee (dike around the city, which is now below sea level) to flood New Orleans after 'Hurricane' Katrina failed to make landfall, there

A cute aspect of this global, unorganized effort is that when people lack complete confidence in orgonite's ability they tend to toss out a lot more than is needed and the more orgonite there is in the environment, the better. Typically, people who subscribe to Google/NSA's Chinese Opera of fakers and disinformants will not gain genuine confidence in orgonite's ability until they wean themelves from featured and promoted liars, chest pounders, 'saviors.' and the rest of the misrepresentatives that search engines send everyone to. Because of all that theatre, though, untold thousands of orgonite cloudbusters were built or bought by benighted people who believe that they're breathing chemtrails. Only people who are twelve to twenty thousand feet tall can still breathe it, of course, because it hasn't fallen to the ground since 2002. Whenever these people contact me I can assure them that the main, designed benefit of the device is to balance local weather, which it does very well so I can at least assure them that the money was well spent. Disabling the chemtrail agenda was a side benefit. I can usually assume that an enquirer has been influenced by disinformants when they call the orgonite cloudbuster 'chembuster.'

The savvy orgonite flinger will conserve ammunition and thus cover more territory. This is a basic principle of warfare and this is certainly a war, even when militant pacifists and confused people are flinging orgonite. The current challenge is to inform these people that orgonite is only as effective as the volume of the metal content but it seems like we're making progress. It's still a mystery to me how this forum can still set reasonable, rational standards in spite of our relative obscurity.

EastSaxon #fundie englisc-gateway.com

The problem is not Christianity itself. The problem is cultural Marxism which has penetrated every aspect of Western culture.

Sadly the Church has been infiltrated and needs to be as nice, friendly and inclusive as possible to put bums on seats. Christianity is being watered down in an attempt to be as popular as possible against the rising tide of militant atheism. This is not a failure of Christianity itself, but a symptom of the modern world which puts a monetary value on absolutely everything and doesn't really care about identity, tradition or faith. It is a weakness of the people involved who devalue their religion out of fear and a desire to be liked.

These people are heretics and should be burned at the stake not gifted with public money.

I'm sympathetic to both Christians and pagans. They both make up part of our history, tradition and identity. Paganism is ours, they're our gods, the English are descended from Odin himself. It is a religion deeply bound up with ethnic identity. However, even paganism has been hijacked by the left. It's popular amongst the hip young crowd who are looking for some deeper spiritual meaning in life but who have been taught to despise Christianity and themselves and their people. The agenda behind hating Christianity is rooted in the same desires to make white people feel guilty for the slave trade and to hate themselves in general.

The love that Christians seem to have for Israel is a modern aberration aided by cultural Marxism and populism. Christians should not support Israel. The correct point of view is that because the Jews reject Jesus they are going to Hell for their beliefs. That is what the people of this country believed up until the modern age, when Jews were shunned and expelled from the country. Imagine what a powerful idea it would be if fifty million English men and women in this country believed that Jews were going to Hell.

Like I mentioned, I'm sympathetic to pagans too. Not the pagans that I'm sure we've all seen: the hippies, the lefties and other degenerates who profess to be pagans or bloody witches just to be different and edgy. They don't have any moral objections to homosexuality or abortion or any of the other social plagues we are facing because they don't have any real faith. They picked an obscure religion so they could be tool cool for the universe and rebel against the current system, but without doing anything actually rebellious such as speaking out against immigration.

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

Is there a connection between free markets and Poz. Is a sound reactionary polity somewhat socialist?

In the comments some have been making the stupid argument that poz is the result of evil Jewish capitalists pursuing profit, that gay marriage was promoted to sell wedding cakes, which argument scarcely deserves a reply.

But others have been making more sophisticated arguments, which arguments deserve to be promoted into a post.

Obviously sound economic policy is trade with outsiders, which requires the Christian program of peace with outsiders, which is apt to result in the hyper Christian holier than Jesus program of surrender to outsiders.

Obviously the Libertarian Party promotes free markets, and also promotes poz that will at best result in whites being ethnically cleansed out of America, and males being spiritually castrated, and at worst could result in whites being physically genocided and males being physically castrated. This started with the nineteenth century English prime minister Gladstone building a coalition between economists and the hyperpuritan leftist evangelicals, which was swiftly devoured by the left, and ever since then libertarians have been trying to revive that coalition by accepting ever greater levels of ever more suicidal poz and ever more emasculating poz.

So in this sense, obviously there is a connection between sound economic policy and suicidal poz, manifest in the logic of trade, manifest in the holiness spiral of Christianity, manifest in Gladstone and manifest in the Libertarian party.

(But not however manifest in capitalists selling wedding cakes to gays, nor in capitalists selling mortgages to cat-eating illegal immigrants with no income, no job, and no assets. Obviously making marriage gay reduces marriage, does not increase it, obviously gays do not get married except to humiliate Christians and prevent straights from getting and staying married, and obviously selling mortgages to cat-eating unemployed illegal immigrants loses money. Obviously very few non Asian minorities can successfully handle a substantial mortgage, thus attempts to provide a substantial number of non Asian minorities with substantial mortgages inevitably and entirely predictably blew up in the loss of a trillion dollars. Whiteness predicts loan repayment better than credit history, except for the longest and most stringent credit histories. Even Asian nonwhites have substantially higher levels of credit scam for the same level of credit history, and non Asian non whites are all scammers, as near to all of them as makes no difference, just as all female CEOs and board members blow up the company as if it was a marriage to a beta male. If a non Asian nonwhite repaid a mortgage, it is solely because he flipped the house for a profit, and the real estate agent had to take the back payments on the mortgage out of the sale, in order to deliver a clean deed to the buyer. If he had a clean credit history before he took the mortgage, it was faked up. All women are like that, and all non asian minorities are like that.)

Carlylean Restorationist argues

Are you happy with Poz so long as there’s a free market liberated from central planners?

I’m sorry but I’m just not, at all. I’d rather live in 1988 Berlin not because I love five year plans, Soviets deciding what brands of breakfast cereal will be on the shelves (if any) and tanks on every corner.
I’d rather live in 1988 Berlin than 2018 Berlin because 2018 Berlin’s violent, rapey and full of filth, while 1988 Berlin isn’t.
I’d feel safer, more at home, in the 1988 version of Berlin.

(I use Berlin rather than London not because of any preference for it – quite the opposite in fact. The reason is that 1988 Berlin had the worst kind of economic policy imaginable to one of our mindset. The thing is, in spite of that policy – or (red pill) because of it – it doesn’t suffer from what 2018 Berlin suffers from under global relatively free trade.)

Well yes, but the brown face of the Democratic party, like Venezuela, has close to the worst economic policy imaginable, and also at the same time has poz at ethnic cleansing levels, in that the whiteish minority is being driven out of Venezuela Kristallnacht style.

Eighteenth century England had reasonably sound economic policy, and also far less poz than any twentieth or twenty first century society.

So, if we compare 1988 Berlin with 2018 Berlin, or with the suicidal ethnomasochist globohomo policy of the Libertarian party, looks like a strong connection between sound economics, and suicidal poz.

If we compare eighteenth century England, with Gladstone’s England, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, and seriously damaging levels of poz. Gladstone began today’s attack on the family, began the replacement of marriage with child support, and turned the British empire into the anti British empire, foreshadowing today’s anti American “International Community” empire.

If we compare the Libertarian Party with almost anyone, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, suicidal ethnomasochism, and globohomo self castration.

On the other hand, if we compare Trump’s America with Venezuela, or Trump with the brown face of the Democratic Party, or eighteenth century England with almost anywhere, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, free markets, and lack of poz. The libertarians attack Trump for insufficient capitalism, and insufficient poz, while the brown Democrats attack him for excessive capitalism, and insufficient poz.

The emancipation of the Russian serfs was simultaneously suicidal poz, and bad economic policy. I read that the “lavish lifestyles” of the nobility were harshly curtailed, and I also read that famine followed so it would seem that the lavish lifestyles of the serfs were also harshly curtailed. Which only makes sense if leftism did exactly what it always does: Knock over the apple cart to grab the apples. The emancipation of the serfs was a disaster for almost everyone in agriculture, particularly the serfs. The emancipation of the serfs was a disaster from day one, and steadily got worse and worse all the way to the liquidation of the kulaks, because the emancipation was accompanied by the introduction of collective land ownership. The correct solution was to emancipate serfs without land, converting them into agricultural laborers, tenant farmers, and sharecroppers. But the left was already campaigning vehemently against emancipation, and had it been done that way Alexander would have gone down in Whig history as worse than Vlad the impaler. So in Czarist Russia we see a connection between unsound economic policy, and poz leading to suicidal poz. Bad economic policy, in the form of collective land ownership, led to more poz, which eventually led to a disproportionately Jewish communist party taking charge. (Albeit Stalin continued bad economic policy while massively reducing poz.)

So yes, there is a connection between sound economic policy and ethnomasochistic rule by globohomos, since sound economics favors peace with outsiders, and favoring peace with outsiders is apt to blur into favoring surrender to hostile outsiders.

But Charles the second introduced sound economic policy at the same time as he exiled poz, and burned poz at the stake for heresy.

Roosh V #sexist #fundie #homophobia rooshv.com

[From "6 Signs That A Woman Is In Rebellion"]

Most women you meet are in a state of rebellion. They have rejected the natural order and God, along with the notion of biological sex roles. While in rebellion, a woman will not respect the authority of a man or submit to him for long. Such a woman will be the source of great misfortune and heartache. Below are the most common signs that a woman is in rebellion.

She rejects the natural state of her body
She does not want to accept the body that was created for her. It is not beautiful or capable enough, so she begins an intensive crusade to morph herself in what trend-makers—who are in rebellion themselves—say is beautiful or capable.

In the early stages of rejecting her body, a girl will apply profuse makeup, dye her hair, or pierce her body in areas besides the earlobe. Still unsatisfied—and there is no other option for her to be unsatisfied when rejecting God’s gift—she will then adorn herself with fake nails, eyelashes, and even eyebrows. Almost always, rebellion against her natural beauty takes the form of adopting plastic beauty that is cultivated, advertised, and sold by corporations and the medical industry. Adopting their commercial wares may get her more likes on Instagram, but decreases her overall beauty to any man who is not in rebellion himself.

[...]

Obese women are in indirect rebellion from being in a state of gluttony, one of the seven deadly sins. Their proclamation of “beauty at any size” is intended more as a comforting rationalization than an attempt to attack God, but the end result is the same: she refuses the natural body she was given and morphs into a different creation.

She idolizes herself
The rebellious woman wants to be seen as a goddess or queen, and may even use those terms to describe herself. She wants to be worshipped by men and admired by women. The quality of those who worship her is less important than the quantity: her goal is to increase the number of individuals who admire her or “follow” her on social media platforms, because it provides an objective number to her goddess-like status that can be compared to others (the analog for men is sexual notch count). To learn how to be a goddess, women will eagerly follow other popular women on Instagram, mimic them, and drool over the prospect of being as popular as them. She soon becomes addicted to compliments of her appearance.

[...]

She rejects her traditions, countrymen, hometown, or nation
A woman in rebellion will be eager to run away from who she is. If she was born a Christian, she will take up yoga or be sympathetic to Islam. If she’s German, she will bring home to mom and dad an African man named Mutambo who arrived to Europe by boat. If she’s from a rural Midwestern town, she will escape to Miami or New York City. A manifestation of rebellion is to seek out the extremes, far away from what is familiar.

Whenever a woman from a foreign country slept with me, she was passing up on countless of her native men—men who shared her traditions, language, and religion, and who would make a far better long-term partner than I could. In some cases, she was directly cheating on a native man with me, her enabler and tempter. Fornicating with me was a way to reject those men and the country of her father. It’s no surprise that many foreign women I’ve slept with possess multiple rebellious qualities. While abroad, I adopted the view that if a foreign woman was quick to sleep with me, she couldn’t possibly be a suitable long-term partner.

[...]

She prefers the virtual over the real
It’s hard to carry out a successful rebellion while fixed in the real world. There is a physical limit to how many men a woman can interact with at any time. There are bodily flaws that can’t be hidden no matter how much work is done to conceal them. But in the online world, anything is possible. She can be perceived as a goddess from a shockingly high number of men who covet her photoshopped images taken at angles that camouflage her flaws. She can easily play out the fantasy of who she wants to be.

[...]

She has completely divorced sex from reproduction
The way a girl in rebellion believes she will achieve enlightenment is through her vagina or anus. She owns several sex toys and masturbates to them often. She believes being penetrated by a sexy man who doesn’t love her will fulfill her or make her happy, but as sexy as that man may be, she fears being impregnated by him because her career is not yet “established.” She has been on birth control since she was a teenager and is in favor of abortion.

[...]

She trusts in her own abilities above that of a man who loves her
God created Adam. God saw that Adam could use companionship, so He created Eve from the substance of Adam. God intended Eve to submit to Adam who then submits to God. While God gives equal blessings to men and women, he intended for women to follow the authority of men. Women in rebellion barely respect men, let alone follow them. They won’t listen to their fathers, their boyfriends, or their husbands, and will only fake submission for a short period of time when they want to deceive a man to gain a material reward. They believe that through their own knowledge and confidence, they are deciders of their fate and must only follow the result of their feelings and unseen demonic influences.

If you get involved with a woman in rebellion, you will have to suffer her punishment, just like how Adam following Eve into sin caused him to be condemned alongside her. You cannot isolate the pleasure you experience from a bad woman without also enduring the negative effects of deceit, lies, cheating, and other forms of manipulation. If a man can’t find a suitable woman, he is better off alone, because at least that fate will not lead to spiritual death as it did for Adam.

She is gay
The most severe form of rebellion is homosexuality. Such a girl has completely refused the natural order and the authority of men to develop a deep-seated hatred for both. Since a woman cannot penetrate another woman without the use of a plastic toy made in a Chinese factory, she has essentially chosen a life of masturbation in place of genuine love and intimacy.

It may seem “hot” when you see two attractive girls in a bar, but such situational bisexuality is an effort to spite God to receive attention. Indeed, stay away from harlots you only noticed because they were committing a severe act of rebellion.

Conclusion
If a girl is rebelling against God, her Creator, she will rebel against you. It’s not a matter of if, but when. Many men foolishly think they can tame a rebellious woman, but this is the same as thinking you can tame Satan himself. It’s fine if a girl who chooses against rebellion requires additional guidance or knowledge from you to stay out of rebellion, but if she’s in active rebellion, I suggest you run away unless she humbles herself before God and repents.

Most men are tempted to extract casual sex from a girl in rebellion, since she so freely gives it up, but understand that that sex act will not be free, and may haunt you for years to come while risking your salvation. Currently, I am single and can walk with Christ in peace, so I don’t feel compelled to take a risk on a woman who spits on God and sees herself as a goddess. Choose the women of your life very carefully, because your very soul may depend on it.

NewtC #racist dailykos.com

I'll tell you why it's wrong. Because there is no monolithic "white man" who picks on people of color. It's wrong to instill in children an erroneous concept. And you can't stop contemporary racism while you're making up nonsense about the past. It's like saying Americans are bad because we have rich people forcing our government to start wars. The vast majority of Americans are good hearted people, as are the vast majority of Caucasian people. We're generous and we care about the world and other people. That said, any large rich nation is going to be subverted by greedy rich people, and we've been fighting that here for two centuries.

If you're going to teach history, be honest about human behavior. The native Americans who were in North and South America when the Spanish came here had already killed other groups before them. In fact, it's now know that Caucasians lived in the Americas before descendents of native Americans came over the Bering Straight. Why isn't that taught in US History? Why the focus on big bad English whitey when it was mostly Hispanic invaders who attacked and overcame native Americans? Why not teach what really has happened throughout human history so kids can analyze and understand contemporary human problems: Stronger groups have almost always overpowered weaker and less technologically advanced groups. It's human nature. Why do you think the Irish have read hair? Because they invited the Vikings to come breed with their daughters over and over for centuries? Why is there no uproar about the fact that black people in Africa held as slaves today? Because their owners are other black people? No bad whitey to criticize? Is that the same reason that even AP History students think English Europeans are bad and Hispanic people were historically picked on, in spite of the Spanish lineage of those who committed genocide throughout the Americas?

Trying to install white guilt in today's children serves to keep the established oligarchy in power. We need our kids to think, understand and act. They can't do that while their teachers and curriculum are busy framing history in terms of big bad whitey being mean to others instead of an honest evaluation of human behavior and its effect on historical events.

Ann Coulter #racist anncoulter.com

[From "GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ..."]

Everything said about President Trump's "Muslim ban" is a lie -- including that it's a Muslim ban.

The New York Times wore out its thesaurus denouncing the order: "cruelty ... injury ... suffering ... bigoted, cowardly, self-defeating ... breathtaking ... inflammatory ... callousness and indifference" -- and that's from a single editorial!

Amid the hysteria over this prudent pause in refugee admissions from seven countries whose principal export is dynamite vests, it has been indignantly claimed that it's illegal for our immigration policies to discriminate on the basis of religion.

This is often said by journalists who are only in America because of immigration policies that discriminated on the basis of religion.

For much of the last half-century, Soviet Jews were given nearly automatic entry to the U.S. as "refugees." Entering as a refugee confers all sorts of benefits unavailable to other immigrants, including loads of welfare programs, health insurance, job placement services, English language classes, and the opportunity to apply for U.S. citizenship after only five years.

Most important, though, Soviet Jews were not required to satisfy the United Nations definition of a "refugee," to wit: someone fleeing persecution based on race, religion or national origin. They just had to prove they were Jewish.

This may have been good policy, but let's not pretend the Jewish exception was not based on religion.

If a temporary pause on refugee admissions from seven majority-Muslim countries constitutes "targeting" Muslims, then our immigration policy "targeted" Christians for discrimination for about 30 years.

Never heard a peep from the ACLU about religious discrimination back then!

According to the considered opinion of the Cato Institute's David J. Bier, writing in The New York Times, Trump's executive order is "illegal" because the 1965 immigration act "banned all discrimination against immigrants on the basis of national origin.”

In 1966, one year after the 1965 immigration act, immigrants from Cuba suddenly got special immigration privileges. In 1986, immigrants from Ireland did. People from Vietnam and Indochina got special immigration rights for 20 years after the end of the Vietnam War.

The 1965 law, quite obviously, did not prohibit discrimination based on national origin. (I was wondering why the Times would sully its pages with the legal opinion of a Grove City College B.A., like Bier! Any "expert" in a storm, I guess.)

In fact, ethnic discrimination is practically the hallmark of America's immigration policy -- in addition to our perverse obsession with admitting the entire Third World.

Commenting on these ethnic boondoggles back in 1996, Sen. Orrin Hatch said: "We have made a mockery" of refugee law, "because of politics and pressure." We let in one ethnic group out of compassion, then they form an ethnic power bloc to demand that all their fellow countrymen be let in, too.

As the former Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, described "diversity" in Der Spiegel: "In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

That's our immigration policy -- plus a healthy dose of Emma Lazarus' insane idea that all countries of the world should send their losers to us. (Thanks, Emma!)

Americans are weary of taking in these pricey Third World immigrants, who show their gratitude by periodically erupting in maniacal violence -- in, for example, San Bernardino, Orlando, New York City, Fort Hood, Boston, Chattanooga, Bowling Green and St. Cloud.

The Muslim immigrants currently being showcased by the left are not likely to change any minds. The Times could produce only 11 cases of temporarily blocked immigrants that the newspaper would even dare mention. (Imagine what the others are like!)

For purposes of argument, I will accept the Times' glowing descriptions of these Muslim immigrants as brilliant scientists on the verge of curing cancer. (Two of the Times' 11 cases actually involved cancer researchers.)

Point one: If the Times thinks that brilliance is a desirable characteristic in an immigrant, why can't we demand that of all our immigrants?

To the contrary! Our immigration policy is more likely to turn away the brilliant scientist -- in order to make room for an Afghani goat herder, whose kid runs a coffee stand until deciding to bomb the New York City subway one day. (That was Najibullah Zazi, my featured "Immigrant of the Week," on May 1, 2012.)

Point two: I happened to notice that even the stellar Muslim immigrants dug up by the Times seem to bring a lot of elderly and sickly relatives with them. Guess who gets to support them?

House Speaker Paul Ryan's driving obsession (besides being the Koch brothers' lickspittle) is "entitlement reform," i.e., cutting benefits or raising the retirement age for Social Security and Medicare.

I have another idea. How about we stop bringing in immigrants who immediately access government programs, who bring in elderly parents who immediately access government programs, or who run vast criminal enterprises, stealing millions of dollars from government programs? (I illustrated the popularity of government scams with immigrants in Adios, America!image by culling all the news stories about these crimes over a one-month period and listing the perps' names.)

Point three: Contrary to emotional blather about the horrors refugees are fleeing, a lot are just coming to visit their kids or to get free health care. One of the Times' baby seals -- an Iraqi with diabetes and "a respiratory ailment" -- was returning from performing his responsibilities as an elected official in Kirkuk.

That's not exactly fleeing the Holocaust.

While it's fantastic news that most Muslim refugees aren't terrorists, the downside is: They're not refugees, they're not brilliant, they don't have a constitutional right to come here and they're very, very expensive. Until politicians can give us more government services for less money, they need to stop bringing in the poor of the world on our dime.

In Christ #fundie rr-bb.com

Satan is running rampant and decieving many on this earth. Not all things are God's will. I will state that everything that has breadth is a creation of God and God loves all people, but maybe there is a reason ethnic groups are to be separated and not intertwined (I am not an expert on this), but I will reach for God's word. In Gen 11, the people all spoke the same language and rebelled against God, they rose and thought they could build a tower that would reach to heaven and essentially be Gods. God saw this and thwarted it by confusing the language all people spoke and scattered them each with his own across the face of the earth.

The muslims think that allah is God. They think he/it (the moon God) is the supreme creator/ruler, allah and God are not the same... In Noah's day (after the flood) when Gen 11 took place I will emphasize that God scattered the people. So why is it that today, we feel the need to undo what God did, to bring all the people back together again, to coexist our religious beliefs etc... I ask, is this of God?? Will God once again scatter the people? The only way I can see the muslims imposing "sharia" law on the public as the will of our God would be to further the cause of the end-times. I have often asked myself why did God scatter the people in Noahs day? Was it because of the rebellious attitude that would ensue if peoples were brought together or forced to live together and at odds, was it because of the power they would feel to disregard all things of God? I do not see any good coming from intertwining the muslims with the Christians... I see this as the work of Satan...

As in the days of Noah... Look up our redemption draweth nigh...

Alia_Harkonnen #fundie reddit.com

(Submitters Note:
Warning: Extremely edgy!)

I want to fuck my dead sisters corpse while my mom watches and masturbates to it and her Chad lover is on the floor convulsing and screaming that he doesn't want this kind of life

IncelTears, does this make me:

a) a narcissist

b) a loser

c) a troll

If you said c) a troll, would you argue that my motivation is:

a) seeking attention

b) raising awareness

c) telling the truth in the way that sounds too outrageous for people to believe it because on some level deep down inside i care what you think of me and I still believe I have a chance to receive Porgy's nudes like dannymason allegedly did

If you are tempted to say "all of the above" to any of these, remember this isn't askreddit and you're too retarded to be an armchair psychologist

Jakeyjake #fundie boards.straightdope.com

How would you act if given absolute power over an alien civilization?

There is an episode of the Twilight Zone called the Little People where a couple astronauts get stranded on a distant planet and while repairing their ship, they stumble upon a race of tiny humans a who are sophisticated enough to build houses, boats, trucks, cities, and appear in all aspects to be identical to the humans in every way except their size.

You can probably guess what happens next. An alien version of Conrad's Heart of Darkness. One of the astronauts decides he's going to be their God and begins to dominate the little people through fear and cruelty, based on no godly qualities except the advantage of having evolved to be massively bigger than them. It was a cool episode.

Anyway, what's interesting and possibly shocking to some, is I don't think I'd act very differently from that guy in his circumstance. I could see myself becoming a tyrant to them and enjoy every second of it. If I somehow came across a planet of tiny little aliens that were the size of ants to me, I don' think I'd have much of a problem with crushing a few of their towns, provided that that no one (or at least no one who mattered) would find out or try to punish me for it. I'd actually think it's hard to blame a guy like me for taking advantage of the size difference. I would love the chance to be revered as a god, even if I'd very much be an old testament god. Well, except that instead of meting out discipline with lightning, I'd be tyrannizing the little aliens by squashing dissenters with my giant stinking feet. If they needed me to press a giant sneaker-shaped footprint in the middle of their capital to remind them to worship me, then that's fine. Actually, I'd probably do that anyway.

Here is where you may disagree, but to me it seems like nature taking its course and I don't think I can fault some giant alien who came to Earth doing this either. In the immediate moment he's planting a huge foot down on NYC, I'd probably think the alien was a giant jerk, but looking at the big picture, I know I'd be too insignificant to this being to even get his attention, much less communicate in any meaningful way. And does Godzilla care about the humans he steps on? Besides, I already step on bugs all the time, often purposely.

In spite of what I'd do in the above situation, I wouldn't consider myself to be evil, immoral, or unethical. Rather, I'm generally considered to be an all-around great guy by friends and coworkers. I help people all the time for nothing in return, have donated to charities, given people rides, and I even volunteer as an EMT when I can. I run competitively, coach track for no pay. I've never been arrested, vandalized property, or wanted to hurt anyone.

What do you think of the behavior I described? How would you behave when in a situation where you gain absolute power over others? Would you be kind or cruel? Or would you walk away from the situation? Try to stay respectful of one another!

Linda Harvey #fundie wnd.com

When certain families raise their children in today’s culture to be God-honoring, productive, respectful young adults, it’s an astounding accomplishment.

It still happens, praise God, and many of you are still trying to do this.

But the forces allied against such happy outcomes are growing, metastasizing through the disease of secular American culture.

To keep protecting our children, we must recognize honestly what’s going on, even if it is a deeply sobering, heartbreaking picture.

It’s all-out war, one that God is possibly allowing for a time as part of judgment on America.

The left calls the transformation of America “progress.”

But no, it is instead an insane race toward the crumbling temples of ancient barbarism, leading our children by the hand as the sacrificial victims brought willingly to the pagan feast.

Can God “turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children”? (Malachi 4:6)

It may be a divine consequence, if not judgment, of America’s callous slaughter of 60 million unborn lives. God has a habit of giving us what we want.

We are reaping the fruit of abortion: marriage abolition via the homosexual and gender confusion agendas. “Don’t want the blessing of faithful husband/wife love – new human life? OK, take the emptiness of fruitless pleasure instead.”

Sexual promiscuity and cohabitation before marriage were just the beginning. The severe spiritual disorientation that results in the disintegration of male and female norms is being visited on the next generation as we fail to guard their hearts, their eyes, their bodies.

Corruption is “cool”; protectiveness is stifling. The bar of “education” in sexual matters is moved ever lower until Ph.D.s in anti-Christ mythology are dragging youth through a gutter of horrific abominations in grade school. Students are tutored in masturbation as a child, then mutual masturbation as a pre-teen, then experimentation in all directions as a teen. Abortion is always a “health care” option.

And sometimes, adults break a sacred trust and violate children themselves.

The result? More children who exhibit the classic signs of demonic oppression.

Many are behaviorally unhinged, some unaccountably anxious. Others are perennially dissatisfied, proudly rebellious, even self-destructive through cutting, drug use, eating disorders. And then there are those with violent impulses – teen rapists, looters, vandals.

Gender anarchy is one of the last stops on this nightmare trail, a natural outcome of rejecting the sanity and beauty of male and female God-designed identities. Homosexuality was the stop before. And while homosexual desires arise from some level of gender confusion, many stop short of a complete repudiation of the anatomical reality of masculinity and femininity. Or at least, they used to.

Satan is not done with our precious sons and daughters yet. He wants us to hand our children over willingly, believing it’s for their own good, and scream in outrage at any who try to issue warnings.

It’s now “cruel” not to let boys dress in skirts and eyeliner and disrobe in the female locker rooms at school.

Watching this descent into the hell of child corruption for four decades, it’s difficult to understand why more people who call themselves Christian are not radically upset. Some are – that’s our hope and promise.

But for instance, America’s most fervent pro-life activists often avoid any stand on this issue. It may be fear, or it may be that they resist connecting the dots about where decades of sowing disrespect for the fruit of marriage takes us.

After killing millions of our own offspring, Americans are jaded and desensitized to the sexual corruption of our children. Many believers now contend, unbiblically, that it’s un-Christian not to cooperate with these diabolical delusions.

This blindness may also be God’s judgment.

We are more afraid of the worldly label of “hate” than the divine label of “unfaithful.”

Parents allow schools to teach children detailed elements of sexual perversion in sex education. Should 11-year-olds learn, inaccurately, that anal sex is a manageable “genital” activity? Do we not weep in despair at the smashed innocence in a sensitive child?

Friendly librarians hand our children “young adult” literature selections that include pornographic passages. Parents trust that what a school recommends will have no negative effect. This category of literature has exploded in the last 15 years – complete with rape scenes, homosexual sex, masturbation, oral sex, gender fluidity – only because parents are not the watchdogs they used to be. The healthy skepticism that once accompanied parental oversight is quickly vanishing.

So we have porn-obsessed boys who crave sex with other boys – but are willing to accept sex with a predatory adult male.

We see teen lesbians who hate males flirt with witchcraft and think abortion is a sacrament.

And highly disturbed middle schoolers are exploited by social media and radical teachers and threaten suicide unless parents support them in identifying as the opposite sex and beginning hormone “treatment.”

Does any parent bring a baby home from the hospital and proclaim, “Oh, I can’t wait until he is a 17-year-old drag queen who begs to have castration surgery!”

Do any parents pray that their adorable baby girl grows into a foul-mouthed, tattooed “gender-queer” who damages her breasts permanently through chest-binding?

Of course not. America is drowning in parental tears. “I never thought this would happen!” “What did I do wrong?”

Sometimes parents do bear some responsibility. But sometimes it’s the corrupt world that is increasingly impossible to screen out.

We must change it.

What can America do to turn this around? First, we must face the war that is being waged and search our own hearts, with repentance and conviction.

Read and study Scripture about the nation that turns from the Lord:

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.
Because you have rejected knowledge,
I will also reject you from being priest for Me.
Because you have forgotten the law of your God,
I also will forget your children." ( Hosea 4: 6, NKJV)

Can we save our children? Yes. But first, we must save ourselves.

LoveIsAMyth- #sexist reddit.com

Something I noticed while talking to girls over the years is that somehow they all seem to be in a relationship. In every conversation I had with them they bring up their boyfriend multiple times and whatever is going on in their lives. Ive fugured that's just an involuntary defense mechanism to stop someone like myself from ever trying to make something between us, but thats not the point.

Whether is one dude or another, there's seemingly no period between them. It's like they break up with their current boyfriend and whoosh, they already got another one. No news, no sadness, no nothing.

And then it hit me. They don't go chase a new partner when they break up with the old one. They already have one. That's how women get partners, once they get tired of you, they start looking for another, without telling you of course. They want to make the transition as fast and cold as possible.

Remember, youre never safe. Women are never taken, they are currently in a relationship but open for an upgrade.

Steve King #fundie doggiescare.com

Congressman Steve King [R, Iowa] believes dog fighting should not be illegal in in the United States.

His explanation for this baffling statement? Since humans are allowed to fight, why not allow dogs as well? ‘It’s wrong to rate animals above human being’ King opinatined during an interview at a town hall.

‘There is something wrong with society to make it a crime to watch dog fighting, but there is no law that bans somebody to watch people fight’. (An audio recording of his statement can be listened below in the video).

[Commentary by the author removed]

Unfortunately, Mr. King has a lot to catch up. I have also learned that this is not the first time Congressman King has sparked outrage in the animal rights community.

1. In February 2010, King tweeted that he chased and shot a raccoon because the helpless animal had tried to get into his house during a powerful storm.

2. In July 2012, King strongly opposed the McGovern amendment (in connection to the 1012 farm bill) that would have established penalties for knowingly attending an animal fiht and for bringing underage children to such events.

3. King was also one of the members that voted against an upgrade of penalties for transporting fighting animals across state lines in 2007.

GROIDSSUCK #racist niggermania.net

I was at my parents’ cemetery paying my respects today...it’s a very large cemetery and I often drive around after paying my respects, looking at the variety of gravestones, some of which are very ornate and creative, and some have interesting inscriptions or sculptures on them....

Well as I was driving around, I was rounding a corner at the far end of the cemetery grounds, and a small grave site caught my eye...no gravestone, but there were brightly colored flowers to mark the spot, and various things left at the gravesite as adornments or mementos, so I got out of my car to check it out...Alas, it was the grave of a no-good gangbanger nigger.

It had no gravestone giving its name or date of expiration, but its fambly left some metal block letters on the grass that spelled “Snacky” which must have been this nigger’s gang name when it was alive and causing mayhem....A bunch of gaudy brightly colored plastic flowers were jammed into the ground at the spot, and there was one of those signs formed from flowers spelling “DAD” so this nigger obviously reproduced and left us with another precious nigger “legacy” out there somewhere....

There was also a printed page attached to a metal frame holder thrust into the ground, proudly festooned with over 15 photos of the dead nigger gangsta, all of them showing the nigger (looking about mid-20’s in age), in typical saggy pants, wearing lots of bling, flashing gang signs and flipping the middle finger, one shot was the nigger posing with its shiny gold toofuses in front of its ghetto hooptie, etc....so “endearing”....I guess the nigger never had any proper studio portrait ever taken of it while it was alive....

So apparently this nigger’s fambly cannot (or will not) afford a proper gravestone for its deleted nigger, and instead they go through the trouble of littering its gravesite with typical tacky Niggerish mementos and adornments. I’m surprised the cemetary management allowed it.....I did not have a camera on-hand to photograph this haphazardly decorated nigger gravesite, otherwise I would have posted it here...it was a sight to behold...

Anyway, I stood directly on top of the grave as I scornfully looked it over (standing directly on top of the grave, specifically to show disrespect to the nigger) and spoke aloud to the dead nigger there, “You damn, ugly stupid nigger....even in death you still look like an asshole...So were you deleted in a gang drive-by shooting? Or did you try fighting some cops and got ventilated? Or did your sprog play with your gun and pop a cap in your dumb nigger noggin? How DID your miserable, worthless life end, nigger? I bet they even buried you with your pants sagging, and had your cold dead hands form some stupid gangsta hand signs, didn’t they, nigger?” And I spat on the grave just out of spite. God, that felt good.

Out of deference to the cemetery, I was very careful NOT to touch or disturb or vandalize the site, just spit on it. But I wished I could piss on it or leave a turd on it...or spell “Nigger” on the grass using gasoline so the grass would die and leave the lettering for anyone to see....but I restrained myself. Niggers in death deserve no honor, respect or due deference....damn all niggers to Hell....

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Fears are very useful tools for driving rebellious souls back into submission. But they are equally useful in pushing the obedient on to deeper levels of communion with God. When God boxes you in with fear, it’s like He’s pulling you into a small dark closet with Him and saying, “There are some important things that I want to discuss with you.” Intense fears act like the limiting space of that closet: they sharpen our focus on God and motivate us to really listen to what He has to say. Often what God wants to teach us are deeper concepts which will take years for us to get a firm grip on. Not because the concepts are complicated, but because fully absorbing them requires a radical change in how we think. God will go over and over the same principles with us and use the pressure of fear to help us stay focused. Once the fears have served their purpose and God has moved us on to a deeper level of communion with Him, He will take them out of our lives. Eventually we’ll be able to look back and see radical shifts in our thought patterns—shifts which seem almost impossible to explain. Concepts which positively terrified us before simply don’t threaten us anymore. We have become free, and we know that it was God who freed us—a God who we now know much better than we did before.

Fears make total sense to us when we are caught in the midst of them, yet they keep us in a state of misery that we eventually get tired of enduring. Fears start off as oppressive burdens, but they morph into golden opportunities for us to develop deeper communion with God. Every negative element that God brings into our lives is like a priceless gift that’s wrapped in very ugly paper. Instead of pushing these things away from us, we need to ask God to unwrap them for us and show us the good gift that He has hidden away inside. It’s all starts with submitting to Him as the Supreme Authority in our lives and being willing to believe that He really is as good as He claims to be.

Eden Decoded #fundie facebook.com

Blacks sound stupid when they say that Republicans are racists. The Republican Party voted to free Blacks from slavery (they initiated the Civil War); The Republican Party voted against Jim Crow (meanwhile the Democrats pushed it into law); Republicans were the ones that voted for us to get land, political status, and voting rights (meanwhile the Democrats consistently passed laws to make it difficult and virtually impossible for Blacks to amass land and wealth to lead politically).

Meanwhile Blacks don't even know that the Democratic Party has over 150 years of White Supremacy and racist policies.

The reason why the Democrats want open borders and easy immigration, is so they can continue to NOT give Black Americans what's been owed to them for decades. The Democratic Party's mission was and will always be to keep Black Americans at the foot of society until they are no longer relevant.

It's absolutely embarrassing to see Blacks dancing on the Democratic stage! You don't know how foolish and ignorant that makes you look. You look like those rats that the Pied Piper led to their drowning death.

The love of sin is the reason why a Black Christian would vote for Hillary Clinton. She stays true to her Democratic roots: racism. She's just upgraded it to abortion (eugenics), NAFTA (closing tens of thousands of factories that employed Blacks; welfare (monetary reward for women that embrace whoredom and having bastard babies); and ObamaCare (giving the false illusion of free with a high price tag).

Too many Christians are showing God exactly how lazy they are. Pretending to be holy, when really they are just hiding behind their favorite sins.

Trump doesn't have a record of racism. Nor does he have a track record of disenfranchising Black Men. He's actually created a NEW DEAL contract with Black America: to make it possible for us to have viable businesses, stable families, and the ability to compete fairly in the workplace again.

So what do Black people have to lose by voting for Trump?

Steve McMahon #fundie returnofkings.com

Women Should Not Be Allowed To Vote

At the dawn of the 20th century, Britain had the greatest empire the world had ever seen. It stretched from the boreal vastness of Canada to the ice floes of the South Pole, from the scorching deserts of Egypt to the steamy jungles of New Guinea.

In 1900, British king Edward VII ruled over a quarter of the world’s population. His navy was the largest, most modern, and most ruthlessly efficient fighting force on the planet. His was the empire on which the sun never set, the undisputed global leader in science, technology, and commerce.

BEgoods

And then, in 1918, the British Parliament made a historic mistake. It gave women the vote. In 1920 the United States followed. Women’s suffrage rapidly spread around the world. Nearly 100 years later, how’s that working out for us?

Men were free in 1900
A man in Britain or the United States was free to say what he liked, subject only to the ancient laws on slander, treason, and incitement to crime. Men were the heads of their households, and they commanded respect as fathers and husbands. The majority paid no income tax. You were free to start a business without having to fend off legions of government busybodies. There was no welfare state, the only people who expected to live off their fellow men were beggars and drunks.

Western civilisation was unashamedly patriarchal and capitalist. Masculine virtues had propelled Europe out of the dark ages and colonised the New World, creating mighty new nations from scratch. Freed from feudalism and serfdom, the fertile mind of Western man produced an incredible series of discoveries and inventions. These allowed our forefathers to tame the forces of nature which had dominated and immiserated human beings since the first primitive hominids gazed in wonder and fear at a sunset on the African savannah.

Electricity let us push back the night. The steam engine brought us factories, mass production, and railways, which made mass prosperity and mass transit possible for the first time. Modern agriculture eliminated the ancient evil of famine in every country that bathed in the light of Western science. The world began to knit together as the primordial forerunner of the internet—the telegraph—brought regions and then nations and then continents together in almost instantaneous communication.

tesla_3

The intellectual crowning jewels of the West lay in its universities, from the medieval institutions of Europe to the Ivy League. These were places where serious and ferociously bright young men studied law, philosophy, and science. Where the secrets of the atom were probed, life-saving medical advances were made, astronomers mapped the cosmos, and engineers dreamed of ways to take us there, one day, into space.

The Western world in 1900 was not Utopia. There was poverty, bigotry, and injustice, but opportunity was real and a man with grit and ability could make something of himself. Many of the richest and most famous men of that era had been born poor and were self-taught.

Where stands Western civilisation today?

Men are not free in 2014
Most Western countries have a labyrinthine code of laws designed to jail you for saying the wrong things. Even in the United States, which stubbornly clings to its First Amendment, a man’s career can now be ruined and his reputation traduced if he offends against the latest dictates of political correctness.

Half or more of your income ends up in the pockets of the government, thanks to its bewildering array of taxes. Fathers and husbands—when they’re not being ridiculed as the butt of every joke on television—are second class citizens. If your wife decides she wants to take your house and your children away from you, she easily can with the full force of the law behind her.

If you try to start a business, you will find that not only are you not free to hire whoever you want, but you must also satisfy every whim of town planners, environmental bureaucrats, and health and safety commissars—all of them paid for by you, the taxpayer, to tell you what to do.

Another thing that you, the taxpayer, are funding is the welfare state. The welfare state exists to allow lazy people who don’t feel like working to live off you without going to the trouble of begging you for your money. The welfare state pays single mothers to squat out feral kids by multiple men without having to hold down a husband to pay for it all. The welfare state means the government is substitute Daddy for these women and their bastard offspring.

One fifth of US households now claim food stamps. That’s 47 million Americans, living in the richest and most successful society that has ever existed, where food is cheap and plentiful beyond the wildest dreams of people living 100 years ago, who are supposedly so pathetic and helpless that they need the government to feed them, as if they were children.

Our universities have become a bizarre combination of daycare facility, pick-up joint, and grotesque circus of left-wing drama. Universities are no longer places for serious thinkers to hone their minds. They’re places where braying young idiots go to learn to parrot feminist and Marxist slogans before reality punches them in the face with the realisation that their joke degrees are worthless.

gammamale2

The days have gone down in the West. Behind the hills, into shadow.

How did it come to this?
The state of modern society is a disaster for many fathers. But of all the self-inflicted wounds perpetrated on Western civilisation, votes for women was the most easily avoidable. It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, in 1918 and 1920, when Britain stood at her peak and the United States looked to the century ahead with supreme confidence. But women are not like men. They don’t think in the same way. They don’t understand or value freedom the way men do. Women have a herd mentality. Rugged individualism, healthy masculine debate, and raucous male laughter offend their sensibilities.

As soon as American women were allowed to vote, alcohol was banned in the United States. The temperance movement had been a female dominated nuisance for decades, but now hopelessly misguided female busybodies had electoral power. It was a farce that turned a nation into lawbreakers and birthed organised crime on a massive scale.

Slowly but inexorably, the United Kingdom and the United States, and other societies that allowed women to vote, began to tilt leftward. Welfare states were created, largely because women feel that it’s not “fair” to allow people to succeed or fail on their own merits. And it’s not “fair” that a woman should have to rely on the father of her children to support her, when she can make men in general pay for her upkeep through the tax and welfare systems.

Government, which had once been small and limited, began to spread its tentacles like a rape-beast from the sickest Japanese anime porn until it penetrated the lives of every citizen. Taxes started to rise in order to pay for all these new entitlements and programmes, and an entire caste of useless bureaucrats emerged to run them. Family and divorce law gradually warped into the anti-male Kafkaesque nightmare it is today because of politicians chasing female votes.

As with most female demands, capitulating to women’s suffragists didn’t satisfy them. Not content with invading the traditionally male space of political affairs, women started insinuating themselves into every other masculine sphere. The universities admitted them, which is why male students today find themselves harangued about imaginary “rape culture”. They swarmed into the workplace, which is why working men today find themselves terrified of sexual harassment or discrimination accusations from spiteful female co-workers. Even the military became feminised and sensitised, with deleterious consequences for the fighting man.

suffragewants

The modern religion of the West—political correctness—is every feminine vice writ large: bossy, deceitful, petty, and false. Almost everything that is wrong with modern life can be traced to the decline of masculine virtues and their replacement with feminine vices. For civilisation itself is the triumph of masculine energy, vision, and courage.

For the sake of our civilisation, for the sake of all men and women, we must undo this historic wrong turn. Women have no business voting in elections for public office, let them stick to voting for things they understand, like the X-Factor. This may seem like a quixotic idea. But remember—so was women’s suffrage, once.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Stefanie Nicholas #fundie #homophobia #transphobia onepeterfive.com

I immediately recognized the painful truth of these words in many regrettable actions I have undertaken in my own life. When Eros becomes a god himself rather than being submitted to God, we give him powerful sway over us. He can lead us to do the unthinkable out of this hollow feeling of intense love — and perhaps even more dangerously to society at large, he can lead us to justify the unjustifiable in the behavior of others.

Mere decades ago, the cry of love became an argument for couples of the same sex having relationships together, with a demand for “marriage” following soon after. Is it so hard to imagine that most people in the not too distant future will find themselves able to stomach “consensual” ephebophilia and pedophilia, slaves as they are to this unchained Eros? The foundation for this acceptance is already being laid.

It’s easy to view the LGBT lobby and especially the pedophilia-as-sexual-orientation faction purely from the perspective of carnal desire. Even aside from the most sex-crazed antics of “Pride” parades and gay bars, they base their entire existence as group on the erroneous concept of “sexual orientation.” We need to understand once again as a society that sexual desires may be complex and nearly infinite, but chastity in spite of temptation is simple and universal (and, with the aid of grace, possible!). This must be emphasized, particularly now, as we see the push for severely disordered pedophilic tendencies to be recognized as an “identity.”

However, though it is undoubtedly important, it is not enough to control what C.S. Lewis calls Venus — sexual love. We must think broadly of Eros, of romantic love, as well in order to truly understand the actions of these confused human beings, particularly when we consider just how many of them are victims of sexual abuse themselves. They, like us, live in a world awash with free pornography, immodesty, and contraception, which no doubt fuels their disordered inclinations even further. Instead of speaking the truth in charity, we await their evil actions with open arms, closing our hearts to the person whom God has made in order to embrace a ghost crafted by human hands. We’re all looking for love, in one way or another, and it is those most starving for love whom Eros is quickest to devour.

It would be foolish to ignore him in this clash of mores, thinking that once we sort Venus out, all will be well. Eros is not to be underestimated. He’s a lot harder to keep on a leash.

APieceOfFemShit #sexist reddit.com

The majority of people are degenerates. Unfortunately, no one is going to settle with a non-traditional atheist woman with the values of a conservative. I will then be single and without PIV for life. Masturbation and phone sex has been my only savior.

Now that women are slutty degerates, pretty women are now dominating the market with their forever expanding vaginas because ugly women have no leverage whatsoever in the game anymore. They have not only enhanced their bueaty with technology, but raised the beauty standard beyond any attainable reality for even average women. The only way an average woman can compete is spreading like mayonnaise. Average and ugly women are now lonely, suffering, getting fucked over and chopping their fucking noses off to not be considered subhuman. For an ugly woman the only option is 'fuck now' or I'm leaving for Stacy or an upgrade. Men are disgusting animals, and dumbass Stacy's have surrendered over what little power women had while simulitaneously making men worse than they already were, men these days have no standards whatsoever and will fuck anything and ultimately undateable. STD's, pedophila, fascism, white nationalists, violant black people, false rape, insane religious fundies, misogynistic freaks, whores, slutty deplorable males and green haired women are destroying our society and you wonder why I don't #justjoinin.

In spite of popular believe a sexual experienced man that has lot's of casual sex lowers his value to floor. Degenerate men that run through the gaping vagina coursel that believe opposite are in for a rude awakening when they get tired and coming looking for something different. When Rome falls this sub will be the last one standing, and they won't be accepting degenerates. I hope you fuckheads are happy.

"Now that women are slutty degenerates, pretty women are now dominating the market with their forever expanding vaginas because ugly women have no leverage whatsoever in the game anymore. They have not only enhanced their beauty with technology, but raised the beauty standard beyond any attainable reality for even average women. The only way an average woman can compete is spreading like mayonnaise."

I don't think this is true or at least I hope it isn't

I guess it depends where you live or some of the femcels on here are way, way below average

Sorry, but I have seen plenty of below average women with boy friends it might be your dating pool or where you're looking but just because a female is not a stacy doesn't really mean its all over for them

I'm serious, maybe try online dating or find a church

Ugly women don't actually exist as people. They existed behind 'Stacys', who are the representatives of our gender. When STACY fucks up, we all fuck up. And now that Stacies and higher tier women are spreading like mayonnaise for dudes, they expect this of ALL women, and if not, hypergamously move upward to more attractive women they can get it for free from. Unattractive women in order to compete have to either give up sex early on or subject themselves to subhuman treatment in order to be considered an eligible candidate. Sure, there are some moids that will date an unnatractive, average, hideous women, but they have ran a TRAIN through mentally ill Stacy's that have fucked them up for life, turned them into miosgynists with subhuman views of women and now think they can get 'saved' by some lower-tier woman desperate for love and dick. They are in for a rude awakening. I certainly don't want those fuckheads.

And you know what drained out Stacy can still doafter making misogynists? Get a non-misogynistic man.

I'm an atheist. I have no fucking interest in church.

David Crank #fundie unlessthelordmagazine.com

Birth Control in America. Birth control was first popularized in America by a few women's rights advocates in the early 1900s. Most prominent and influential was Margaret Sanger, founder of the "Birth Control Federation of America" which later became "Planned Parenthood" - a more pro-family sounding name which helped improve the acceptability of birth control. Of course Planned Parenthood was never about truly planning to be a parent - it was about planning how NOT to be a parent or to have as few children as possible.

Prior to this time, birth control was almost universally rejected by Christians in America. It was viewed as being sinful and interfering with God. Most Christians held to the same views as the great Protestant reformers (Luther, Calvin, etc.). These same views clearly dated back at least as far as the early church fathers.

But in Europe in the previous century, Malthus had argued the dangers of overpopulation. Others had joined him in concern that the lower classes were breeding too rapidly, damaging the genetic stock of their nations! Birth control was first advocated primarily for the poor, but it was the rich and the immoral who really saw its value. When Margaret Sanger began her association with these European free thinkers, much of the “right to choose” she was personally looking for was the right to choose infidelity and immorality without fear of resulting pregnancy. She made very full use of her new rights in spite of her marriage.

Are many "Pro-Life" Christians more "Pro-Choice" than they think? The "Pro-Choice" position is that every woman has the right to choose for herself whether or not to have a baby. The "Pro-Life" position is one of giving babies a chance for life outside the womb.

Though most Christians consider themselves "Pro-Life" and are clearly anti-abortion, many seem close to the "Pro-Choice" camp in what they believe and actually practice. Though generally denying a choice for an abortion, many will insist that every woman does have the right and the responsibility to choose for herself, if and when she will have a baby.

Most Christians today wholeheartedly endorse this right to choose, that is championed by the “Pro-Choice” groups. The difference is that most Christians believe the choice is already made, intentional or not, once conception has occurred. But the "Pro-Choice" groups maintain that the right to choose continues up to the point of birth. Focusing only on the woman’s rights, this seems a logical end for this viewpoint. If every woman has a fundamental right to choose whether she will have a child, what difference is there whether she prevents it's life from starting or if failing that she ends its life before it is born? Either way there is one less life and she has avoided the birth experience and any subsequent responsibility for the child. [Yes, in the one instance a life is destroyed - murdered. But from their point of view, what is the difference? In both instances the birth does not take place. They don’t see such a big difference between preventing the birth at the point of conception or doing so shortly thereafter.]

Though Christians are mostly opposed to abortion, some favor certain exceptions such as rape or incest. Others fail to realize the fact that certain forms of birth control are also producing early abortions. Increasingly Christians are becoming aware of how these forms of birth control actually work and avoiding them. But you can be very anti-abortion without being very pro-life. Few are pro-life in the sense of granting life in the first place, by encouraging as many children as God will provide or seeking to raise as many children for the Lord as possible.
Uncomfortable Similarity. Now I know some of this sounds really hard, comparing advocates of birth control with advocates of abortion. Of course there is a difference. With abortion an already living child is murdered. With birth control, the gift of life is mostly never given in the first place. The point is to get you to think about the uncomfortable similarity between the abortionists and many Christians who believe in birth control. Consider that the same people who finally convinced the churches to accept and even advocate birth control are those who also have championed abortion, immorality and a good many other things contrary to God's Word.

Utack #fundie washingtonpost.com

Do you really think we can all just "get along"? The more different we are, the more we have to fight over. The more likely different groups are to compete with one another, instead of cooperating.

We all "shared" this planet for many centuries, but only in the past 70 or so years have European governments decided to allow massive amounts of immigration. When will there have been enough immigration? When the standard of living in Europe is equal to that of Africa or Asia? Good luck convincing Europeans that is a good thing for their children. Or maybe the motive is to reduce worldwide racial diversity so everyone looks more alike, and racism will come to an end? Then why aren't all the African peoples, or Latin American peoples, or east Asian peoples, or Native American peoples, being diluted?

Admit it: this is all about destroying the economic, cultural, and genetic inheritance of white people. Whether you agree with it because you feel like it is justice for colonialism and imperialism, or because of jealousy and spite, or because it is the socially trendy thing to do, you are advocating for genocide. Please understand this.

Ronnie Barnes #racist rawstory.com

A Louisiana man could spend up to six months in jail after he was charged with attacking a 12-year-old black child over the weekend.

The 12-year-old boy’s mother told WAFB that she sent her son into the Good To Go convenience store in Clinton on Saturday to pay for gas when 54-year-old Ronnie Barnes targeted him because of his dreadlocks.

According to East Feliciana Parish Sheriff’s Office, Barnes asked if the boy was a girl and then pulled down the child’s pants.

Surveillance video shows Barnes backing the boy into a shelf after pulling down his pants. Investigators accused him of using the N-word and then hitting the child in the head.

Barnes was initially charged with simple battery, but the District Attorney’s Office upgraded the charge to a hate crime after investigators conducted additional interviews.

“The sheriff takes race issues very seriously, and if someone you know commits a crime against someone because of their color, because of their sexual orientation, because of any reason, then we are going to do our best to fully investigate it,” East Feliciana Parish Sheriff’s Office Det. Kevin Garig explained to WAFB.

“Because a simple battery occurred and because it occurred because of racially motivated issues, that’s what makes it a hate crime,” he added.

Garig noted that just calling a child the N-word was not a crime.

The boy’s mother said that the incident made her worry for all of the children in the community.

“I haven’t slept since. My son hasn’t been sleeping either,” she said. “We can’t even be safe in a store to pay for gas. It makes me afraid for all the black children in the community.”

Fred Butler #fundie fredsbibletalk.com

And then fourthly, Chaz must not be aware of some of the more "anti-intellectual" comments coming from his side of the aisle. The way he carries on, you would think scientists are these humble individuals who honestly follow the evidence where ever it leads. Because the hard, scientific "evidence" supposedly points away from any idea of God and always disproves the Bible, there is no choice on the part of the serious minded intellectual but to separate religion from science; to place them into two compartments where never they shall interact. Hence, in order to be intellectual, you have to lay aside a belief in the Bible or your scientific endeavors will be ruined. Is that how these so-called intellectual really think? Consider some of my more favorite candid quotes from atheistic "scientists:"

Professor D.M.S. Watson, once a leading biologists and writer:

"Evolution is a theory universally accepted not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible."

Science writer Boyce Rensberger,

"At this point, it is necessary to reveal a little inside information about how scientists work, something the textbooks don't usually tell you. The fact is that scientists are not really as objective and dispassionate in their work as they would like you to think. Most scientists first get their ideas about how the world works not through rigorously logical processes but through hunches and wild guesses. As individuals, they often come to believe something to be true long before they assemble the hard evidence that will convince somebody else that it is. Motivated by faith in his own ideas and a desire for acceptance by his peers, a scientist will labor for years knowing in his heart that his theory is correct but devising experiment after experiment whose results he hopes will support his position." [Rensberger, How the World Works, p. 17-18]

Then an all time favorite, Richard Lewontin, a fellow Marxist anarchist like Chaz, wrote in a 1997 The New York Review article,

"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

Does it sound as though these scientists are being intellectual? Intellectual implies using the rational faculties of the mind. Is it rational to believe in something utterly absurd like non-living inanimate material gave rise to complex biological life just because the only option is to recognize a creator? Sure, the Church has had its share of superstitious beliefs over the years, to which those purveyors of superstition should be faulted and rebuked, but Marxist, anarchist atheists also have their superstitions that are equally anti-intellectual.

Leland #fundie worldmag.com

[Comment on a story that Mark Driscoll engaged an agent to arrange for sufficient sales to put his book on NYT bestseller list for one week so he could call himself a bestselling NYT author. Bill Gothard was suspended by his ministry for sexually abusing girls]

I do not see this as news worthy. Furthermore I am starting to wonder about Warren Cole Smiths motives. He seems to thrive on digging up dirt about some ministries. His artical about Bill Gothard being placed on administrative leave as similar in tone and just as damaging to that ministry. When we are doing something to expand God's Kingdom, the devil will always come against us. Not all of us us are perfect, (thank God) and He does not expect us to be. How many examples are the in the Bible of God working in people in spite of their faults. I can see Warren Cole Smith's title articals Woman saves Israelite Spies from certain death "But wasn't she a prostitute". "King Commits Adultery and murder" yet we read he is a "Man after God's Own Heart". Strongest man alive was a selfish womanizer, but God worked though him to save his people from the Philistines and grant 20 years of peace. "Wisest man on earth can't raise his children right" Lets focus on the log in our own eye before we publicly cast doubts on others character.

Mike King #conspiracy tomatobubble.com

Eisenhower’s presidency had coincided with a long period of peace and prosperity. Indeed, the title of the popular 1970’s TV show, Happy Days, refers to its setting in the 1950’s. The Eisenhower years mark the peak years of “the baby boom” and upward mobility of all classes and ethnic / racial groups. Apart from a minor and short-lived recession in 1958, the 50’s truly were “the good old days.”

One would therefore think that the Republican Party (aka GOP for Grand Old Party), with its popular and superficially likable “war hero” presiding over these “happy days,” would have greatly expanded, or at least maintained the Congressional majorities which Ike inherited upon winning the 1952 election in a massive landslide. This was not the case. To the contrary, in spite of two massive Eisenhower landslides, the 1950’s turned out to be a history-altering bloodbath for House and Senate Republicans, and it was not by accident.

1952 & 1956: Eisenhower won two historic landslides and remained popular for the full eight years of his presidency. Meanwhile, conservative Republicans in Congress were picked off by the dozens. Why?

There were two elements driving this extremely odd paradox of such a popular president not having any election “coat tails” for his fellow Republicans to grab onto. First, the Globalist media, while constantly exalting Eisenhower on one hand, trashed what was then a mostly conservative, anti-communist, constitutionalist Republican Congress with the other. But the real death blow of the one-two punch knockout of the GOP Congress came from Eisenhower himself.

During the 1954, 1956, 1958 and 1960 election seasons, Eisenhower -- with the exception of a few liberal “modern Republicans” -- refused to lift a finger in defense of his beleaguered colleagues. He was the one man in America who could have protected the patriotic anti-communist Republican Congress from the daily whipping it was taking from the Globalist press, but he refused. Robert Welch describes Ike’s silent treachery of 1954, which only grew worse in subsequent Congressional elections, and peaked during the 1958 mid-term elections in which the GOP lost an additional 49 seats in the House, and 14 in the Senate. Welch:

“Nor can there be any slightest question about the disruption of, and damage to, the party being intentional. Eisenhower not only refused to do any campaigning for, or to give any White House moral support to, the Republican Senatorial and Congressional candidates – he left their campaigns permanently disorganized through his deliberate delaying tactics with regard to his expected support, which was never forthcoming. Then, at the very last minute, he went through face-saving motions, of which a high-school politician would have been ashamed, with his fantastically childish scheme of chain telephone calls.” (6)

“Delaying tactics,” eh? Just like the World War II delays which got so many Americans killed while preserving Eastern Europe for Stalin! The final paradoxical results of Eisenhower's sabotage were truly astonishing -- all the more so when we consider how popular Ike had remained from start to finish of his 8 year reign of ruin. Here are the final "before and after" numbers:

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

1952: 221 Republicans and 213 Democrats = R +8

1958: 153 Republicans and 283 Democrats = D +130

SENATE

1952: 49 Republicans and 47 Democrats = R +2

1958: 35 Republicans and 65 Democrats = D +30

As shocking as those statistics are, there is more to the numbers than meets the eye. You see, many of the Senate and House Republicans who did manage to survive the Eisenhower purge were "modern Republicans" -- today known as "RINO's" (Republican in Name Only). And most of the incoming Democrats who replaced them were of the extremist Marxist variety. Their dominance would shape the course of America's political, economic and cultural decline for decades to come.

There can be no doubt. Eight years of Ike killed the Republican Party, just as it had the conservative majority of the Supreme Court... by design. No bloody wonder Democrat Sulzberger's New York Slimes and Democrat Meyer's Washington Compost endorsed him, twice.

The Democrat Party, which had been on the brink of destruction just six years earlier, knocked out the Republican Party in an epic rout. Yet “Republican” Eisenhower always remained popular. The result pleased Eisenhower and Democrat Senate Leader Lyndon B. Johnson very much.

Sandy Hook truthers, et al #conspiracy seattletimes.com

Amazon reviews hijacked by causes, conspiracies, rage

Organized groups are using the Amazon review system to push political and social agendas often only tangentially related to the products being sold.

Most book authors know they need to endure critics, even comments that may be malicious and personal.

But the venom that runs through more than three dozen reviews on Amazon.com of Scarlett Lewis’ latest book are particularly scathing.

“This Scarlet Lewis person is a real sick human being,” writes one reviewer named Kevin.

“Scarlett Lewis is a fraud and a sellout to all of humanity,” writes another, anonymously.

“Scarlett Lewis is a lying traitor,” writes a reviewer named David Weiss.

Those reviews might suggest that Lewis is a polemic politician, treasonous spy or scurrilous financier. She’s none of these. Lewis is the mother of Jesse Lewis, a 6-year-old boy who was murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School three years ago.

She wrote “Nurturing Healing Love: A Mother’s Journey of Hope and Forgiveness” to describe her journey after the massacre and help others choose love and forgiveness instead of anger and resentment in their darkest moments.

The rage in those reviews is fueled by the conspiracy theory that the Sandy Hook shootings were a hoax, perpetuated by the government to push for tougher gun-control laws. Several were posted after a YouTube user who goes by the handle “RadMc02” uploaded a video on Oct. 18 encouraging viewers to “Truth Bomb the Shit Out of Amazon Reviews!”

Reviewers have long used Amazon as a platform to vent about products that failed to live up to their expectations. Some have even used it to attack authors whose views differ from their own.

Increasingly, though, people are launching coordinated campaigns to push political and social agendas through negative reviews often only tangentially related to the product for sale. They are able to do so because Amazon welcomes reviews regardless of whether the writer has actually purchased the product.

Lewis isn’t the only target of the Sandy Hook tragedy deniers. “We want to hit this woman as hard as we can,” says a narrator in a YouTube video as he walks viewers through posting 1-star ratings and negative reviews for “Choosing Hope: Moving Forward from Life’s Darkest Hours,” by Sandy Hook Elementary first-grade teacher Kaitlin Roig-DeBellis. The video, posted by “Peekay22,” even guides viewers to click a “Yes” button indicating they found other negative reviews helpful.

Since Peekay22’s video posted on Oct. 16, “Choosing Hope” has received more than 170 1-star reviews out of just over 250 total reviews. That’s tanked the book’s rating down to 2.1 stars out of 5.

“Amazon is giving these people a forum … ,” Lewis said. “Obviously, Amazon should remove (the reviews).”

But Amazon appears to have no intent of doing so. To the company, as long as the reviews are “authentic,” they have a place on its website.

“All authentic reviews, whether the reviewer bought the product on Amazon or not, are valuable to customers, helping them make informed buying decisions every day,” Amazon spokesman Tom Cook wrote in reply to questions about its review policy. He declined to address questions about specific reviews.

Critics long welcome

Amazon’s reviews system has long been a source of pride for Chief Executive Jeff Bezos. In his 2003 letter to shareholders, Bezos crowed about ignoring critics who wondered why the company would allow negative reviews that might discourage shoppers from buying products on Amazon’s site.

“Though negative reviews cost us some sales in the short term, helping customers make better purchase decisions ultimately pays off for the company,” Bezos wrote.

Still, Amazon has cracked down on some bogus reviews. Earlier this month, it filed a suit — the second this year — against reviewers who post positive product evaluations in exchange for payment from third-party sellers on the site.

“We continue to use a number of mechanisms to detect and remove the small fraction of reviews that violate our guidelines,” the company said after filing the most recent suit. “We terminate accounts that abuse the system and we take legal action.”

But Amazon doesn’t view coordinated campaigns to flood its review system with negative comments as abuse.

“We terminate accounts that abuse the system and take the appropriate legal action, whether it’s a 1- or 5-star review,” Cook, the Amazon spokesman, wrote. “The issue isn’t whether the reviews are negative or positive, it’s whether they are authentic or not.”

Forum for activists, too

It’s not just angry conspiracy theorists who use Amazon’s review system to air their views. Grass-roots political activists have figured out how to turn Amazon.com into a bullhorn as well.

A year ago, PepsiCo launched a new mid-calorie soda called Pepsi True exclusively on Amazon. That caught the attention of activists at the Rainforest Action Network and SumOfUs, who have condemned PepsiCo for its use of so-called “conflict palm oil,” the harvesting of which is causing deforestation, in its snack products such as Doritos.

The two groups decided to target Pepsi True through Amazon’s review system because they knew it was a low-cost way to make a high-impact statement. SumOfUs called for a “Pepsi True Amazon.com takeover!” on its Facebook page, and the Rainforest Action Network called on its Twitter followers to “Join in” the effort.

And it worked. Nearly 4,000 followers gave Pepsi True 1-star ratings and posted negative reviews that, among other things, ripped Pepsi for supporting “rain forest destruction by buying unsustainable palm oil.” Pepsi was caught so off-guard that it asked Amazon to take down the page.

“We totally sabotaged their product launch,” said Laurel Sutherlin, a Rainforest Action Network spokesman.

Pepsi, which eventually decided to revive the product page despite the negative reviews, said in a statement that Pepsi True was “subject to an orchestrated effort to post inaccurate information” about the company’s palm-oil policy. A spokeswoman declined to comment beyond the statement.

Even one of Amazon’s own products has been targeted by a coordinated, agenda-driven campaign. Greenpeace has long criticized Amazon’s lack of transparency regarding the type of energy it uses to power the massive data centers that run its cloud-computing business, Amazon Web Services.

Greenpeace brought that concern to last year’s debut of Amazon’s Fire Phone, launching an email campaign that encouraged users to post negative reviews and leave 1-star ratings on Amazon’s own website.

Gary Cook, Greenpeace’s senior IT analyst, said the group stopped counting reviews related to its environmental concerns after the number reached 1,500.

“We got an overwhelming response,” he said. “People enjoyed having the opportunity to talk to Amazon where it lives.”

While the Fire Phone failed on its own, the Greenpeace-prompted comments — including “Make a ‘smarter’ phone supported by clean, renewable energy!” from IT-Berater — remain on the site.

These campaign-driven negative reviews may promote agendas, but they often add little to the discussion about the product itself. That’s because the vast majority of reviewers responding to those calls-to-action have never used the products they are critiquing, a point they often acknowledge in their reviews. In the process, those reviews often overwhelm comments from customers who have read the book or used the product.

Rainforest Action Network’s Sutherlin believes removing reviews would limit the expression of opinions. But Amazon has always retained the right to control the information posted on its site. Its “General Review Creation Guidelines” include plenty of restrictions, including barring reviews with “profanity or spiteful remarks,” as well as “advertisements, promotional material or repeated posts that make the same point excessively.”

It would be hard to argue that some of the posts about Scarlett Lewis aren’t spiteful. And the very purpose of these coordinated campaigns is to make the same point excessively so as to drown out positive appraisals. Amazon’s Cook declined to respond to questions about the company’s process for determining if reviews violate its guidelines and how they are taken down.

One way to stifle the coordinated outrage would be to limit reviews to those who have actually purchased the product they want to evaluate on Amazon. The company already lets shoppers filter reviews by “Verified purchase only,” though that’s not the default. Sutherlin acknowledges that such a limit would have made the campaign against Pepsi True impossible.

“I doubt that most people weighing in would buy the product,” Sutherlin said.

“System is creaking”

But don’t expect Amazon to make that change. Cornell University science and technology professor Trevor Pinch, who has studied Amazon’s review system, said the company benefits from as many shoppers posting on its site as possible.

“The reason Amazon cannot just use verified reviews is simple. Most of the content at the site is from free customer reviews, and it would mean it would lose most of its content,” Pinch said.

And while some of those reviews are spiteful, repetitive and off-topic, the vast majority are not.

But Pinch also cautions that coordinated campaigns of negative reviews, as well as bogus paid-for positive reviews, can’t help but take a toll on the system’s credibility.

“These are signs that the whole system is creaking,” Pinch said. “As cases of abuse mount up, it does lead to more distrust.”

For her part, Scarlett Lewis is living her book’s message of compassion and understanding. She refuses to be upset by the hateful reviews or Amazon’s decision not to remove them.

“Once you’ve had a child murdered, shot in the forehead, there’s not a lot that can ruffle your feathers,” Lewis said.

natkra09 #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Why would we need to come up with any new evidence when there is already so much evidence that Atheists ignore? Atheism is based on either spite for God, or "scientists", but not science, and definitely not on solid reason. People are so easily swayed by what the guy on TV says that they rarely look into the evidence themselves. Have you ever figured out how complex a cell is in the most simple form. A cell is much more compicated than a PC. It is next to impossible for a cell to have come from soup by natural selection. Have you ever asked yourself a very simple question? Do accidents breed destruction, or complex life forms? Anyone with half a brain could tell you that accidents breed destruction. Yet people still believe that there is no God simply because anyone who questions macro-evolution is hushed and jeered as if it's a political arena, and not a science arena. This is because modern "science" has turned into politics. If you want evidence, just look around at the complexities of life. It is just too complex to say that natural selection did it, especially if you want to call it science.

Lance Welton #fundie vdare.com

Two hundred years ago, human beings were subject to harsh Natural Selection. People born with mutant genes, those who had a poor immune system, simply didn’t grow old enough to procreate. Forty percent of us died before we reached adulthood. This is now down to negligible levels in developed countries.

Accordingly, Woodley of Menie and his team aver that Calhoun’s experiment–which created a “Mouse Utopia”–will provide a good indication of what will happen to us.

In Calhoun’s “Mouse Utopia” at the University of Maryland, there were no predators, no bad weather, no possibility to escape, and no epidemics, because the mice were ensured to be healthy when they entered. There was a huge amount of space. It was, in other words, paradise for mice.

In July 1968, the experiment began. The parallels with the Industrial Revolution are simply spooky. Just as with the Industrial Revolution, which witnessed the collapse of child mortality due to improved medical science and living conditions, there was an enormous population spike. Numbers doubled every 55 days until there were 620 mice.

At this point population growth began to slow down, just as happened in Western countries in the early Twentieth Century. Doubling then only occurred every 145 days. And, just as in the West, Calhoun started to see more and more elderly—and even senile—mice.

By day 315, Calhoun started to notice interesting behavior changes in the mice. More and more males became what he called “the beautiful ones.” These effete males would make no attempt to fight or copulate with females. They simply spend their time washing each other and eating.

By contrast, female behavior became increasingly aggressive: they would attack males, throw their offspring out of the nest too young, attack their young, and actively avoid sex.

...

Calhoun put this collapse down to the consequences of overcrowding. But Woodley and his team showed that the colony was nowhere close to overcrowded when the population growth began to decline. Woodley and his team see the problem as much more fundamental.

They argue that all health problems, both physical and mental, are interrelated. This is because they all reflect the same phenomenon: what the team call “high mutational load.”

For example, consider autism. It is definitely a result of mutant genes because it is more likely to develop the older your father is, meaning it a result of defective, mutant sperm. Autism is associated with all manner of other mental and physical health problems.

The Woodley of Menie team further argue that the brain is extremely sensitive to mutation, because it is fantastically complicated. 84% of our genome relates to the brain. This means that even a small number of mutations can have a massive impact on behavior. The effect is magnified in social animals like mice and men behavior is learned and mutations can interfere with social processes which allow adaptive behavior to be correctly taught.

Woodley of Menie calls these “spiteful mutations.” And as the carriers grow in number, they can pressure even non-carriers to conform to their maladaptive behavior.

For example, childless women may encourage other women not to have children. Mothers are shamed as “failures” because they didn’t focus on a career. Even non-carriers of maladaptive behavior are impacted.

In other words, mice have key evolved instincts which allow them to survive. Every generation, some mutant mice—who lack these instincts–are born. But their maladaptive instincts—no desire to breed or fight, or zero maternal instinct—are a product of mutation. They also carry other mutations, leading to poor immune systems or physical weakness. So they die young, and don’t pass on their mutant genes.

But in Calhoun’s mouse experiment, these mice survived and had children. The children survived and more and more mutations built-up until the potentially normal mice were a tiny minority who didn’t have the chance to learn appropriate behavior or how to relate to other mice.

And, ultimately, almost all the mice were mutants. The rest were totally maladapted and the population died out.

This “Mutational Meltdown” is happening in the West. The authors present clear evidence for it: huge spikes in autism and genetic disorders. This could be extended to include the prevalence of eating disorders, homosexuality, sexual identity problems, and the desire to not have children.

“Spiteful mutations” undermine things like religion, which is little more than a way of promoting evolutionary imperatives. For example: go forth and multiply, cooperative with each other, repel the invader.

But we now have liberal religion, which is basically post-modernism plus a vague religious sense. It reflects the increasing number of people whose instinct is to destroy their own genetic interests.

Humans have evolved instincts. In the past, those with mutant genes causing them to lack them died young without passing on their genes. Now, this is not the case. They live to adulthood, often pass on their own genes and, even they don’t, they still alter the carefully selected nature of the group.

Put simply, we are living in a society increasing composed of and dominated by mutants. And they can be tentatively identified by the fact that they reject the behavioral norms and views which were the unquestioned norm only a few generations ago.

But there is crucial difference between Mouse Utopia and the West. We are the scientists who are maintaining our own utopia. There is a growing body of evidence that intelligence is decreasing. Eventually we won’t be intelligent enough to sustain utopia and we will collapse back to pre-industrial levels of Natural Selection.

The current model of society, like the “Mouse Utopia,” is heading to collapse.

The only questions are whether we can turn it around.

And, if we can’t, what will succeed it.

Sarah Palin #fundie comcast.net

(snippets from news article)

epublican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin describes herself as a "hard-core pro-lifer" and expresses confidence that in spite of disheartening polls, "putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4."

In an interview with evangelical leader James Dobson that aired Wednesday, Palin said she thought Republican presidential candidate John McCain would implement the GOP platform if elected — "I do, from the bottom of my heart" — but McCain doesn't support the platform on three issues important to evangelicals: abortion, gay marriage and embryonic stem cell research...

..."To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder," Palin said. "And it also strengthens my faith, because I'm going to know, at the end of the day, putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4. So I'm not discouraged at all."

She also used terms like "prayer warrior" and "intercession" — words that might be unknown to the average listener but are common vocabulary in Pentecostal Christianity. Palin spent 20 years in a Pentecostal Assemblies of God Church, but she usually refers to her faith generically as Christian, not even evangelical.

"It is that intercession that is so needed and so greatly appreciated," Palin told Dobson. "And I can feel it too, Dr. Dobson. I can feel the power of prayer, and that strength that is provided through our prayer warriors across this nation."

She continued: "When we hear along the rope lines that people are interceding for us and praying for us, it's our reminder to do the same, to put this all in God's hands, to seek his perfect will for this nation, and to of course seek his wisdom and guidance in putting this nation back on the right track."

(no name given) #conspiracy nodisinfo.com

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

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

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

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

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

Yet, it gets even more inane that this:

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

Who in the world believes such nonsense?

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

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

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

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


image


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

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


image


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


image

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

image


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

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

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


image

Does Mr. Rahim appear to be a believable cohort?


image

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

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

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

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


image


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

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


https://youtu.be/iAAZAkAIVgo


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

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

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

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

Who is “they?”

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

image

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

image

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


image

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


JesusChristRep #fundie blizzforums.com

hello........uh.....im new  1. where did all the matter in the universe come from?  2. how did life originate?  3. why do creationists say that evolution viloates 4 known laws (1rst and 2nd law of thermodynamics, law of cause and effect, and law of biogenesis)?  4. also why do creationsist say that evolution doesnt qualify to be a theory? and that special creation however does...?...  7.how come we see that there is evidence for a global flood if iy aint true?  8. why are you blind to the Truth by your rebellious sin nature and hardend hearts?  9. why say that stuff coming from creationists websites is junk, and push peer reviwed articles, when you quote talkorigins?

Erik Rush #fundie wnd.com

What is Islam? It, too, is a belief system – one that advances xenophobia, institutional deception, murder, rape, extortion, slavery, pedophilia and a host of other grievous affronts to the human spirit – an embodiment of the inhumane.

If we’re being honest with ourselves, it doesn’t matter if five guys goose-stepping in circles in a garage down the block or a billion people worldwide subscribe to something; if it embodies the inhumane, we want no part of it. The only agencies that continue to doggedly insist that Islam is a benign religion meriting protection under the First Amendment are those in collusion with Islamists.

Why should the left have a cat if I disrespect Muslims in such an impudent manner? Who cares what one big fat narrow-minded meanie and Islamophobic bigot has to say, anyhow?

Well, imagine all of America suddenly becoming aware of what a dire threat Islam truly is. Their first question would be: Who left us so vulnerable to those of that vile creed in the first place? Then, they would start looking at the great many calamities for which America has been put at risk, and who is responsible. Ultimately, they would get to the causation of discrete hazards such as the recent rise in ethnic tensions, the advancement of sexual ambiguity, the shameless proliferation of crony capitalism, the weaponizing of government against the people, the marginalization of Christians and the insinuation of enemy operatives into sensitive security positions in our government, to name just a few.

The ensuing momentum of that mass of angry Americans on the march could entirely crush not only the radical left, but progressivism as well.

The left, the Obama administration and progressive Republicans know that a climate wherein Donald Trump is doing so well in his bid for the GOP nomination not in spite of, but because he is saying the things he is saying suggests that a few more prominent voices joining those such as mine could lead to the undoing of a hundred years of their evil work.

justoldog #conspiracy beforeitsnews.com

To those who adamantly express your desire for a completely disarmed human race, I say RELAX. It’s only a matter of time till you get your way. After the sufficient number of real and staged “mass shooting” events, the citizens, in a state of fear and exhaustion, will give up their rights (and means) for self-defense. The vast majority of humanity will then be successfully disarmed, leaving the exclusive use of force in the hands of the military, the “enforcers”, bodyguards and protectors for the “elite”, and the criminal element. Those of us who chose to obey “the law” will then be at the complete mercy of these armed groups. Those groups will then be able to do whatever they wish to the helpless population. And they will. Those deemed useless, rebellious, unattractive, defective, or some sort of “threat” to those in power will then be eliminated. Don’t worry, no one will say: “I told you so” to the “gun control,” advocates. Because most of you will be gone, along with all those now deemed subversive/unnecessary. I’m not saying that, considering the militarization of the police (Backed by the military), that an armed population would have much chance against them in some sort of rebellion, but with a disarmed population, ANY rebellion or protest is no longer an option. Consider very carefully if you choose to give a complete monopoly on the use of force to those who orchestrated 9/11, put the poison Fluoride in your families drinking water and commit endless crimes against humanity and our world. Throughout history, multitudes of disarmed peoples have been led to their deaths by criminal governments. (It’s called: “Democide”. Look it up-) So…to all you supporters of the human disarmament movement, REST EASY! You will be victorious! Those behind the movement are very, very clever. Smarter than you, smarter than me. And when they lead you and yours to death or eternal slavery, be sure to tell your families how well your intentions were

Amos Moses #fundie christiannews.net

Amos Moses:
No, you are confused......... and you are trying to confuse the issue...... XX or XY..... done and done........ all of this other nonsense is just that... we do not choose our gender.. it is not "imposed" by society..... that is all subjective nonsense...

Gender Ideology Harms Children
Originally posted March 21, 2016 – a temporary statement with references. A full statement will be published in summer 2016. Updated with Clarifications on April 6, 2016.
American College of Pediatrians

(Transphobic copypasta from the American College of Pediatricians)

Ambulance Chaser:
OK, that's nice, but the American Association of Pediatrics has taken the exact opposite position on this measure. So there are some "doctors, men of science, pediatricians" who strongly disagree with this law. So now you have to make a choice: which are you going to believe?

1. The American Association of Pediatrics is the official, nationally-recognized organization for representing pediatricians. It has over 60,000 members nationwide and publishes the respected Journal of Pediatrics.

2. The American College of Pediatricians was founded in 2002, specifically to oppose everything the AAP says. They have somewhere around 200 members (at best) and put forth no scientific evidence to support their positions. Those positions are basically the Republican platform on everything medical. In other words, they're a fringe group that exists solely to oppose liberal ideas and the AAP, while sounding like a legitimate medical organization so that right-wingers can quote them and sound important.

Amos Moses:
i am going to believe Christ..........................

Ambulance Chaser:
What was it you said before about not being able to refute the points?

But hey, that's your prerogative. You can "believe in Christ" on this issue. What was it He had to say about transgenderism again?

Amos Moses:
Matthew
19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Oh, gee,,,,,NOTHING there about transgenders......... just MEN AND WOMEN.....XX and XY....

Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, as you said, nothing about transgenders. He doesn't define "male" and "female" and there's certainly nothing about chromosomes in there.

Amos Moses:
The bible is not a science text.......... So it would not say those things...... especially the so called modern English terms.... people invent words to avoid being told they are wrong.... God created men and women....... there is nothing outside of it.......... except sin and confusion.......... make all the convoluted arguments you want.... it wont change anything ...

Ambulance Chaser:
No, I'm sure it won't change anything for you. You've made it clear that you aren't interested in hearing facts.

Amos Moses:
If you ever find any........let me know............. but i doubt you have any to begin with.......

Who do you say Christ is?............

Ambulance Chaser:
If you really want to learn about transgender people, you might start with the APA's position paper. It's full of answers, backed up research, and publicly available.

Who do I say Christ is? I don't know what that means, but I don't think much about Christ on a daily basis because the subject has zero impact on my life.

Amos Moses:
Good to know your opinion on Christ.......... the rest of what you write about then......... is of no interest to me because......... it lacks any verifiable truth...............

"6 Reasons Why Most Scientific Research is Fake, False or Fraudulent"

(Citation to Waking Times, a conspiracy site)

Ambulance Chaser:
Well, aside from the fact that Waking Times appears to be a nutcase crank website (it cites Cracked as a source!?), let's assume that what they say is true.

Okay, so now we've established, for the moment, that something is not automatically true just because it's written in a scientific journal. There could be flaws, bias, whatever.

So, what are the flaws in, oh, pick a study on transgenderism. Any one. And critique it.

No, don't throw me more crank websites or arguments against "science" as a whole. Those aren't useful or relevant. No peer reviewer ever earned a grant by saying "hurr durr, science isn't reliable, so this study is false lol!" I mean ACTUALLY read it, critically, and with an eye toward any problems it may have.

Yes, what I'm asking you to do is HARD. It's work. I mean, graduate-level psychology-type work. Work I can't do, by the way; I freely admit it's beyond my skills. But it shouldn't be a problem for you, because you believe that your knowledge of psychology is greater than that of the preeminent experts in the field.

So what do you say? Are you up for this?

Amos Moses:
It is all fallacious... it cannot be science..... it is all subjective "feelings".... by definition.... NOT science........ unless one thinks a person is just a mixed bag of blood and electro-chemical processes and that men have no control over who and what they are...... which is also fallacious............

"I was born this way"..... is just garbage reasoning for "my feelings" are the only thing that is important........... Hey....... i was born the way i am....... a christian with a sound mind...... so who are any of them to tell us that we are wrong and they are right if that is all it is.............. It is NOT!.........

Ambulance Chaser:
It's "all fallacious?" So then, a few posts ago, when you were trumpeting the American College of Pediatricians' position as "scientific" was that fallacious too?

Amos Moses:
No, because it lines up with scripture, science, and common sense............. just because a scientist says it.......... does not make it science........... and peer review only costs about $500 and you can get pretty much any nonsense published....

Ambulance Chaser:
So, science is great and we should all believe science, as long as it's science that supports what you want to believe. Otherwise, it's fake.

Got it.

Amos Moses:
Very good......... because that is exactly what many "scientists" are doing today ..... they have "a Priori" removed certain conclusions based on nothing but their biases and beliefs.... and that belief is "materialism"......... so that even if all the evidence points to anything outside "materialism" ................ it is "a Priori" dismissed as being the correct answer......................

Dr Scott Todd, an immunologist at Kansas State University
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic."

The prominent evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin
"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

So DESPITE the claim of an "Open Mind" and "Following the Evidence"..........they have clearly stated that they.... and a vast majority of "scientists" .......WILL NOT follow the evidence.................. So anything they have to say............ IS NOT SCIENCE...................

Dasho #racist #conspiracy #fundie #psycho boards.christogenea.org

[On David Duke]

He hates Jews, but only in ways that reaffirm their lies and ultimately serve their interests. The bible says the Caananites should be killed, and those who are not killed by us will be killed by Christ when he casts them into the lake of fire. Duke just wants to deport them all to Israel or let them take over and run China instead. Jews have a "right" to a nation, Jews are who they say they are, Jews run the media and maybe some of the banks but the Holocaust happened and Hitler was a bad guy because he turned people off of Nationalism for Europeans.

Only Jews could admit their own crimes in such a way that you end up giving them what they want regardless of the admission. Were it not for the fact that I've already looked into it and am quite sure he's ethnically white, I would suspect Duke of being a Jew himself. As far as I can tell, he's just an incredibly weaselly and spineless collaborator.

The big reason I came to CI, and started taking everything CI says more seriously, is because of the overwhelming secular evidence that the Israelites were in fact Aryan. Which is the more proper term for European, since Europeans didn't actually originate in Europe, as I'm sure all of you are already well aware. I don't need theology or even the bible to prove this: it can be proven on its own merits without bringing religion into the discussion at all, although the biblical accounts of the ancient Israelites certainly do help immensely. And yet in spite of all the evidence FOR this, only CI and maybe one or two other voices would actually talk about or accept that truth. Literally everyone else takes it for granted that the Jews are Israelites, and a surefire way of finding a Jewish shill is to say the Jews are not and wait for the explosion. I actually think it's an even bigger lie than the Holocaust: the masturbation machines and bicycle powered brain bashers are all a recent invention, but Jews have been peddling the Israelite swindle for the better portion of two thousand years.

Duke doesn't have to be CI to believe or accept this truth. I wasn't when I did. It's absurd to believe a physically frail race of chronically ill liars and merchants are the same as the warriors who conquered half of the ancient world. No Egyptian would ever bother enslaving a Jew and putting them to work as a laborer, you'd have to beat him senseless to get anything out of him at all. Any Jewish slave would be better served doing paperwork or chained to a desk counting coins, and even then I wouldn't trust them to do it, since they're liable to cook the books or miscount your gold simply to spite you. Since when have the Jews ever been great farmers or cattleherds? When was the last time you saw a Jew with a shepard's crook? Quite frankly, the street preacher Hoteps have a more believable story! At least a nigger could have done some of those things. A Jew couldn't do a single one! The evidence is all there, but David Duke doesn't want to see it. As in all other things he does, his racism and "nationalism" only exists within the context of serving Jewish interests. He is the defination of kosher controlled opposition. He does what his FBI handlers tell him to do, and I'm sure more than a few of them go to synagogues on Sunday.

For Duke's own sake, I almost wish he was a distant crypto Jew. I can't even imagine what his punishment would be in God's kingdom if he were white. Lies on top of lies, treason on top of treason. He willfully chose chains and Satanic lies instead of freedom and truth for his earthly life, so I can only imagine him having to endure it for the rest of eternity as well.

Mike King #conspiracy tomatobubble.com

The crisis actor Hoax-of-the-Month, carried out just as Trumpstein warns about "Islamic Terrorism" TM from Israel, takes us to Manchester, England -- the scene of a concert by Illuminati skank Ariana Grande. Who will "take credit" -- via Twitter -- for this latest bit of CIA-MI6-Mossad false-flag-fakery? Will it be it ISIS? Al Qaeda? Or maybe the dreaded "lone wolf" TM next door? (Cue dramatic music). The plot thickens, as does the bullshit.

For that minority element of our readership that still gets set off whenever we call out crisis actor fakery on these staged "beheadings" and mass killings, "youse guys" (Jersey lingo for the plural of you) need to get over the psychological blockage and simply analyze the pictures with a critical mind. They are ALL fake events --- the Aurora Movie theater shooting, the Sandy Hook School shooting, the Boston Marathon Smoke Bomb, the Charleston Black Church shooting, the San Bernadino shooting, the Orlando Fag Club shooting, the Nice, France truck attack, the Paris concert attack, the Brussels attack, the Berlin attack, and so many others that we can't even recall anymore.

Before some of you cancel your subscriptions and sent us a hate E-mail, do a Google Image Search for:
•dead bodies in manchester bombing
•dead bodies in sandy hook shooting
•dead bodies in charleston church shooting

•dead bodies in orlando night club
•dead bodies in aurora movie theater
•dead bodies in nice truck attack

What will you find? --- NOTHING -- What?! No video cameras or I-phones in nightclubs, theaters, schools, busy tourist boulevards and crowded arenas???

Then do a Google Image Search for:
•charles manson murders
?OJ simpson murder scene

.... and see the blood and dead bodies.
Still doubt the fakery? Just have a look at manifest goofiness of these fresh images from Manchester:
image
image
image
1. They cut his pants off at the scene, applied a few bandages (where's the blood?), and then helped the poor bloke leave the scene. A bit old to be at a teenie-bopper concert, no? 2. The young lady suffers the same bloodless injury to the knee -- again, jeans cut off at the scene before being helped to walk away. 3. Good made-for-TV drama, but why are there never any bodies at these crime scenes?

Well, at least we can all be grateful to our masters for committing harmless hoax attacks instead the real attacks of years ago -- such as the 9/11 attacks (2001), the Madrid Train Bombing (2004), the 7/7 London Bombings (2005) etc. Evidently, there must have been some push-back from within the ranks of the clandestine agencies over the constant killing of so many innocent people. Somewhere along the line, the decision was made to use "drills," fake blood and "crisis actors" instead. Also, when nobody actually dies, there will be no pain-in-the-ass family members who might organize and push for a deeper investigation of the event, as happened with 9/11.

But in spite of the bloodless nature of these fake events, the misunderstanding of these silly stunts is endangering innocent lives nonetheless. You see, each fake "Islamic Terror" TM attack brings us closer and closer to the day when our governments, under the pretext of "fighting terrorism," will ultimately succeed in "going after the terrorists" and kicking off the great Middle Eastern war for Greater Israel. That's the plan, and don't "youse guys" ever forget it!

This just in!

How conveeenient (as the "Church Lady" of old Saturday Night Live fame would say) that Georgina Callander (18) -- the very first "victim" to be identified -- just happened to have had her picture taken with Satanist Ariana Grande two years ago, in an unusually chummy pose. You nailed it, Church Lady!

Boobus Americanus 1: Did you hear about the latest terror attack in England? Nineteen dead.

Boobus Americanus 2: My heart is aching over those images. Something has got to be done about Islamic terrorism!

Sugar: Weep not for the "dead," and their "grieving" publicity-seeking "family members," Boobuss. They are all being paid very well, I'm ssure.

Editor: There is no shortage of Satanists and money-hungry lowlives in the modern world. A few million dollars and a signed non-disclosure agreement is all it takes to pull off such scams. The Fake News and the force of public credulity will do the rest.

Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

7 Ways Modern Women Treat Men Like Dogs

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

For all the feminist criticism of men supposedly treating women like dogs, it is actually today’s feminism-infected women that are treating men like domesticated animals.

While the majority of women still prefer masculine men for relationships, I’ve been noticing how more and more women today are defying their biology for ideological reasons and are pursuing long-term relationship with men they’re not even attracted to just because they are supplicant and effeminate. If this trend continues unabated, I expect the entire male population to turn into weak and feckless bonobos who grovel around to serve female interests.

Observe the following comparisons to see how men are being turned into dogs for both women and the state:

1. Dogs are optional

Dogs as pets are optional. People get a dog only when they want one; it’s not a necessity. Men today are also increasingly becoming an object of utility for a woman rather than a man whom she forms a bond with for a nuclear family. She will marry a man when she wants to (if at all) and she will dump him when she feels like it.

2. Once attached, dogs offer unconditional loyalty

If you want a picture of what the feminists want from men, just imagine a world where all men are male feminists.

Once dogs have a human to call a master, it doesn’t care whether he is a scumbag, loser, criminal, or homeless. Dogs are faithful no matter who their master is and what he does. In fact, they’re so loyal that they’ll even remain with an owner that mistreats them. And that’s exactly what feminists want men to be.

If you observe the rhetoric of the feminists, you’ll notice two general themes: first, the desire to be free from all criticisms. And second, for men to believe them and “support” them no matter what. Feminists want their prospective low-testosterone boyfriends and husbands to fully accept them for who they are no matter how disgusting, slutty, crass, and toxic they are. They want their men to show unconditional loyalty so that they can openly cheat on them and brag about it. And men, if they don’t want to be called a misogynist, must never question their partner’s past or present behavior and remain faithful even if they’re treated like garbage.

3. Dogs do what they’re told

Once the owner has secured his dog’s loyalty, he can train it to behave on command. Some owners enjoy the power they have over their companions and they will order their dogs around for fun.

Western women today have discovered that there are truck loads of desperate men who will do just about anything for them to win an ounce of female approval. These women have successfully used men to take them out on expensive dinners (only make fun of them on their blogs afterwards), buy pizza for them for free, shovel snow for them, and so on. The women who order these men around like dogs didn’t even have to train them as they’ve already been conditioned from birth by the society to do what women tells them to do.

4. Dogs are treated for good behavior
image
Dogs need to be treated to reinforce good behavior; the same is true when you want to domesticate men as second-rate citizens.

Women understand just how desperate the general male population is for affection and sex. Women today are leveraging this power over men to make them behave the way they want them to, rewarding these simps with faked compliments so that they’ll continue being good boys.

5. Dogs defend their masters
image
One serves a man, the other serves the government and its harem of women.

Besides companionship, the main roles dogs play is to defend their masters. In spite of all the calls for equality, the reality is that women still expect men to defend and save them. The men suffering from white knight syndrome will go as far as sacrificing their own lives to rescue women they don’t even know.

Feminists also don’t mind that many men are serving the police and military force to serve their alpha boyfriend: the government. Women are innately attracted to power and the government is the new protector and provider of women that grows bigger and stronger each day while ordinary men are becoming weaker and irrelevant.

6. Dogs are neutered

Although men aren’t getting physically neutered the way dogs are, other methods are being employed to psychologically castrate men. This includes the epidemic use of ADHD drugs to tame boys, ridiculous laws aimed at controlling men’s sexual interactions with women, and the overall cultural currents to shame masculinity while promoting all sorts of degeneracy that dilute it. Today’s wives don’t even want to get sexual with their husbands.

7. Dogs that are not domesticated are pests

“Masculine men are organizing a meeting? They must be rapists!”

When a dog is not owned by a human being, it is considered a pest that needs to be controlled.

Men today who do not submit to the feminist agenda are constantly attacked as being losers, sexists, misogynists, rapists, and so on. In today’s feminist society, you either serve the female imperative or you’re a Neanderthal who is out of touch with the times. Steps are already being made to control every aspect of male behavior in public.

You should also remember that dogs are natural pack animals (think of their cousins, wolves). By being removed from the pack, they become isolated and dependent on their masters. Can you see how the same applies for today’s men?

The Differences

In addition to being dogs, men are also expected to serve as drones to keep the feminist nanny-state running.

In spite of all the similarities, there are differences that need to be addressed.

First, unlike dogs whose owners house them and feed them, men are not supported by women. Women are free to throw men away like used tampons or divorce their husbands to extract their cash. If anything, men are usually the ones who must provide for their wives.

Second, whereas dogs are under the responsibility of their owners, men are expected to be fully responsible in all their interactions with women. It is the man’s job to ensure that a woman is giving consent even if both parties are drunk; it is men who must watch over their own behavior to ensure that what they say is non-offensive and conforming; and it is men who must ensure that women feel perfectly safe and comfortable in all their interactions. If you so much as walk past a woman in the wrong manner, you’ll be accused of rape. Again, it is the man’s responsibility to ensure that he is acceptable enough to share the same space as women, not the other way around. Feminists want “equality” without accountability.

Are men becoming collectively domesticated?
image
The domesticated cows we see on farms didn’t end up the way they are now naturally. It was through thousands of years of herding and selective breeding that they became smaller, more passive, and accepting of their conditions. But the fact is, it doesn’t take thousands of years to transform entire species. In this article which I recommend you read, a Soviet project to domesticate foxes have shown that it only takes several generations of selective breeding to transform wild foxes into effeminate and tamed versions of themselves.

The global testosterone level around the world has been mysteriously dropping for the past few decades. While chemical toxins in all the products we consume and come in contact with has been given as one possible explanation, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that we as species are gradually becoming emasculated at a genetic level through the selective breeding process. In other words, we are becoming socially engineered to be effeminate. It’s not something impossible when you consider that easily tamable beta males, the sperm donors, are usually the males women select as their mates after they themselves are done riding the cock-carousel. I think it’s a factor we should consider besides the emasculation through cultural degeneracy that we’re already familiar with.

Men are supposed to be men unleashing their primal energy through raw adventure instead of getting tamed into submission. I have no doubt that the systematic domestication efforts of today is what is causing collective male nihilism, depression, and frustrated energy. Men who are awake must allow themselves be men.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.