Similar posts

Ben Shapiro #wingnut townhall.com

[Yes, it’s from 2002. I am not letting this kind of nonsense go.]

I am getting really sick of people who whine about “civilian casualties.” Maybe I'm a hard-hearted guy, but when I see in the newspapers that civilians in Afghanistan or the West Bank were killed by American or Israeli troops, I don’t really care. In fact, I would rather that the good guys use the Air Force to kill the bad guys, even if that means some civilians get killed along the way. One American soldier is worth far more than an Afghan civilian. For the past decade, the United States and Israel have been attempting to prove their moral superiority by attempting to minimize civilian casualties. That’s all well and good. Unfortunately, this policy also means that politicians put our soldiers in harm’s way in order to save “non-combatants.”

The New York Times reported on July 21 that “Flaws in U.S. Air War Left Hundreds of Civilians Dead” in Afghanistan. In its own, unique “objective” style, the Times noted: “the American air campaign in Afghanistan, based on a high-tech, out-of-harm’s-way strategy, has produced a pattern of mistakes that have killed hundreds of Afghan civilians.” The New York Times and other news services call both Afghan “non-combatants” and American “non-combatants” civilians. This is disingenuous. American civilians are people who go about their daily lives without providing cover for terrorists or giving them money. Afghan civilians are not. Take, for example, the “wedding party” in Afghanistan that made front-page news after being strafed by American warplanes. The American pilots claimed that they came under fire from the wedding party. The Afghan interim government claimed that 48 civilians were killed in the attack and that the Americans had never come under fire. Perhaps, they suggested, the pilots were confused by Afghans firing their guns in the air in celebration. Whom do you believe? The American pilots, who say they were fired upon and respected the rules of engagement? Or the Afghan “civilians,” who claim that American pilots were bored and decided to have target practice with women, children and goats? I believe the Americans. The Afghans tolerated and supported the Taliban for years, no matter what President Bush says. A group doesn’t conquer 95 percent of a country unless it has some support among the populace. The Afghans are fundamentalist Muslims.

D. O'Leary #fundie fathersforlife.org

Boys who are excessively "pretty", sickly, sensitive, non-athletic, youngest brothers, fatherless, or whose mothers are psychologically troubled are at greater risk. There is some evidence that adopted sons may be at-risk, perhaps because of separation anxiety or because the father may find it more difficult to bond with a non-biological child than the mother. "At-risk" does not mean that a homosexual outcome is inevitable, only that it is more likely than in a boy who shows none of these symptoms. The symptoms of an at-risk boy are:

1) Fear of rough and tumble play

2) Lack of same-sex playmates

3) Dislike of team sports

4) Doll play

5) Cross dressing or interest in women's clothes or shoes

6) Effeminate speech or mannerism

7) Playacting in which the boy takes a feminine part.

8) Frequent statements that he wants to be a girl or is a girl.

These symptoms usually appear between 2 and 8 and then in some cases fade away as the boy is pressured by peers. The fading away of the more external manifestations should not however be taken as a sign that the problem has resolved itself. Often it merely goes underground and emerges in adolescence as same-sex attraction.

When symptoms are observed, early intervention -- basically more father/male influence and less mother/female influence -- is usually effective, particularly if accompanied by counseling of child and parents. However, since these boys need male closeness, they are easily targeted by pedophiles and therefore need positive male relationships and extra support throughout childhood and adolescence.

A comprehensive review of the literature on how homosexuality develops in males leads to the conclusion that it is a cumulative process in which one trauma leads to another, Each trauma increases the chance that the boy will be retraumatized and each trauma intensifies the effect of the subsequent trauma. A boy who doesn't have a good relationship with his father, turns to his mother. This makes the relationship with his father worse. A boy who is over-identified with his mother and feels unloved by his father will find it difficult to relate to male peers. Teasing by peers intensifies feelings of alienation from his father and drives him to seek comfort from his mother. This child is particularly vulnerable to child molesters and likely to interpret the molestation as evidence that he is homosexual. And so on.

Xtragal3 #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

OMG Big Metroid UFO Intercepted by Helicopter

I was my house with a friend when my friend staying near the window said he heard a weird helicopter sound.

At first I didnt care being just a helicopter but being my friend kept insisting I went toward the window and could also hear how strange the helicopter sounded.

While it sounded as a helicopter the sound was somewhat different, my first though was maybe it had engine troubles.

In a hurry I grab my videocamera and zoomed in on the helicopter that looked like Yellow I belive it was from
Civil Defense unit:
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"Civil defense, civil defence (see spelling differences) or civil protection is an effort to protect the citizens of a state (generally non-combatants) from military attack. It uses the principles of emergency operations: prevention, mitigation, preparation, response, or emergency evacuation, and recovery"

Now why would Civil defense be there if there was no Catastophe, Fire or Military atack?

I kept on zooming and looked in the direction the Helicopter was facing since it was like Observing something.

I was Surprised to see a Huge UFO in the middle of the sky
My Adrealine skyrocket as i observed through the tiny videocamera how the object seem to be landing behind a building and in the middle of the Town

Zooming in it looked like those Metroids in Nintendo Videogame that grab you and suck out your blood.

It was Greenish and for me seemed like it had 3 lights around.

I showed my friend the video and he was shocked but said the 3 lights looked like windows.

On the video you can see 2 persons hanging under the Object which make you believe is a parachute.

I not saying is Not a parachute but i never seen one with 2 person under it and looking like a Green Metroid.

Also why would Civil defense helicopter be in the air if it was only a parachute..

And who would parachute in the middle of the town when this is probaly forbidden.

Also why was the helicopter making so strange sound
(you can not hear the engine on the video at the moment i recorded this for some reason the helicopter engine was not heard in the video)

I decided to Call it Metroid UFO
as that is how It looked like to me.

I have seen parachute before But NEVER ever seen something that looked like a Metroid

Heres my video:
[link to www.youtube.com]

Now For me it was UFO as it was this Big unknown metroid looking thing that was realy realy creepy.

If this was a parachute it most be the coolest parachute in the world

I will email this video to more friends see what they make out of it.

Your-uncle-dave #fundie your-uncle-dave.tumblr.com

It’s never okay to kill non-combatants in war. Never. The Law of Armed Conflict, a series of international agreements concerning the conduct of warfare, and which my fellow vets and I have had drilled into us constantly during our service, forbids such and correctly labels it a war crime.
The first principle of LOAC is distinction: “In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” This is why civilized, responsible combatants wear uniforms – to show the other side who it’s okay to shoot at.
The problem is, not since Vietnam – and even then, not all combatants – have our enemies distinguished themselves from the surrounding civilian populace. The NVA wore uniforms; the Viet Cong did not.
Nor do the terrorist pieces of shit we’ve been fighting since 2001. They deliberately hide among civilians and illegally site warfighting equipment in LOAC-protected civilian structures…so that when we respond to their attacks, WE’RE the bad guys in the international press and among the American left – exactly as the terrorists want. NOTE: Placing military equipment in a protected structure – school, hospital, etc. – causes the structure to lose its protection under LOAC. Therefore, we’re free to blow the mosque to hell…and we’ve done so when warranted. And there’s nothing the terrorist-lovers can do about it.
America is a civilized nation, and despite what some believe, we fight wars in a civilized manner.

anarchyst #conspiracy #racist holocaustdeprogrammingcourse.com

If a country were hell-bent on genocide, WHY WOULD THEY KEEP RECORDS?? WHY would they build “camps” hundreds (if not thousands) of miles away with sanitary facilities, housing, medical and other ancillary facilities. Would it not have been easier to just “eliminate” them without going through all of this trouble? The jewish communist Bolsheviks did just that with the non-communist civilian populations of the conquered countries in the communist orbit.

Something BIG “stinks” in this whole jewish “holocaust ™” deal. It is no secret that jewish Zionists made “deals” with the Nazis in order to make life “uncomfortable” for jewish Germans.

The establishment of a “homeland” was a Zionist “dream” since the 1800s. What better way to encourage “emigration” to a barren land than to make things difficult for the “cream of German society” (jews)?? The TRUTH about the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” is out . . .

The so-called jewish “holocaust ™” has been turned into a de-facto “religion” in which no deviation from orthodoxy is permitted. In fact, in most European countries, independent investigation into jewish “holocaust ™” truths is strictly forbidden under pain of fines and imprisonment. In the USA, things are not quite as bad, only job loss and personal and professional destruction at the hands of those of the “tribe” that FEAR the real truth of the jewish “holocaust ™” being exposed is evident.

When the truth about this historical event comes out, it will change much of the world’s perception about those that are using this event as a “cash cow” that “keeps on giving”. . . “there’s NO business like “SHOAH business”.
Jewish complicity in this event is carefully “covered up”.

It is curious to note that jewish interests will hunt down and imprison a 90 plus year-old German “camp guard” while looking the other way when their “own kind” was involved in truly brutal actions. Camp “capos” and “sonderkommandos” (who were primarily jewish) come to mind. Not one of these jewish “collaborators” has been brought to (jewish) justice. I guess blood is thicker than water.

A good example of present-day censorship is the fate that awaits those that dare question “official” jewish “holocaust” orthodoxy. Most European countries have criminalized ANY line of thought that deviates from the “official” jewish “holocaust” story. WHY?? In fact, TRUTH is no defense when it comes to “all things holocaust”.
Ask noted WW2 researcher David Irving, who was forced to recant TRUTH in order to avoid punishment. . .

If people only knew of the planning that took place (among those of the “chosen”) to engineer the jewish “holocaust”, there would be a pogrom of massive size. You see, the jewish “holocaust” was necessary in order to force the establishment of a jewish state. In this case, the ENDS justified the MEANS. There have been many “holocausts” of much greater misery throughout human history, yet the jewish “holocaust” is the only one that counts . . .

Most jews will never be satisfied with knowing that those that commit evil deeds on earth in this lifetime will pay for it in the next life . . . they have taken vengeance from the Creator and appointed themselves the exacter of vengeance (in contradiction to mosaic law but not their anti-gentile talmud).

Most jews are vengeful people that will never pass up a chance to “make a buck” by screwing a gentile (goyim) out of money or property. jews were hated in Germany for taking advantage of the non-jew Germans between the two world wars. The average German did not have a pot to piss in while his wealthy jewish neighbor was trading food for land . . . taking advantage of the jewish bankster situation in Germany.

Look at the “commercialization of the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” while the much larger communist (true) holocaust is conveniently forgotten. To assure a continuing supply of jewish “holocaust ™” “survivors”, jews are tattooing their ATM (oops, I mean “camp” numbers) on their children and grandchildren.

Since the jews declared war on Germany in 1933 (yes, 1933), the Germans had no choice but to complete the Zionist plan of marginalizing German jews (to say the least).. This fulfilled the Zionist plan of forcing German jews to emigrate to Palestine while making the world grant jews a “homeland”–Israel.

Zionists have been predicting a jewish “homeland” for the last two-hundred years while predicting a “holocaust ™” of 6 million for the same amount of time. The ACTUAL number of non-combatant deaths in the European theater of operations is approximately 731,000, NOT 6 million (official International Red Cross figures).

Regarding that “holocaust ™” “showplace” Auschwitz, there are engineering inconsistencies in the design of the so-called “gas chambers”. The doors are not of a gas-tight design; it would have been impossible to retrieve the bodies, and there is no means to ventilate the rooms after the so-called “gassing” took place”. From an engineering standpoint, these are very serious errors that would have caused the deaths of the “operators” of these supposed “gas chambers”.
American execution expert, Fred Leuchter travelled to Auschwitz, surreptitiously obtained samples from the purported “gas chambers”, had them tested and published his results. The absence of methylene blue in ALL of the samples, save one, was PROOF that the “gas chambers” did not exist. The one positive sample was taken from a room used to disinfect clothing.
Mr. Leuchter was rewarded for his search for TRUTH by his professional and personal character assassination by those of the “tribe”. He lost all of his federal and state contracts, and was prosecuted under an obscure Massachusetts “law” for “practicing engineering without a license”–a law which had never been used before or since. . .

It is no secret that after WW2, the Soviets attempted to “create” the “death camps” for propaganda purposes. Yes, there was extreme deprivation and suffering–many people perished. However, the prime cause of death was typhus. As allied bombings destroyed most of the infrastructure, typhus was at epidemic levels. THIS is what caused the massive amounts of human deaths . . .NOT gassing.

After the end of WW2, these same “camps” were used to intern German civilians. These German civilians were subject to much greater deprivation and suffering than the previous “occupants” of these “camps”. In fact, jews were controlling these camps, at the behest of the Allied forces, and were vicious in their treatment of those interned. In fact, the German civilians were defined as “disarmed enemy combatants” so that Geneva Convention rules did not apply to them.

Conan #fundie moonbattery.com

Not all Muslims are terrorists but ALL terrorists are Muslims!

Indeed, check out WHO has fragged their buddies since 1991. Muslim troops.

I had a Marine who was a muzzie and used his religion like a club, until I caught him drinking in the barracks. OOPS!

They don't assimilate. It is fact. They are as silent as mosque mice when asked to speak out against islamic terrorism. Silence = Consent.

None of them should be on active duty and if they ARE allowed to serve, located in non-combatant areas and weaponless. They ARE the fifth column.

juvenissun #fundie christianforums.com

{Regarding the Genesis story of creation - "You honestly think the sequence is in any way correct? Lovely. Since when did birds come before land animals?"]

Yes, I believe so. Even I do not understand why. (another one you may question is plants before the sun)

The reason that I can do this comfortably is because I established my faith from many other similar, but non-biological verses in the Bible. Compare to the nature of Paleontology, I rather believe what the Bible says. It is not just a blind faith (I don't do that). I have a lot of proofs.They are much better than those conclusions derived from simple logic used by paleontology.

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy truthernews.wordpress.com

By employing deductive reasoning, it can be deduced that Switzerland is in fact home to the CIA. The first step in this process is to follow the money which leads directly to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland, an organization which secretly funds the CIA’s nefarious activities.

Switzerland is unique from every other country on Earth, something expected from the nation which harbors the CIA. Because Switzerland is ultimately responsible for engineering the incessant assassinations, terror attacks and wars around the globe, it is naturally free of such mayhem.

In other words, Switzerland is the eye of the global storm—free of financial crises, free of state-sponsored terrorism, and free of war for over 500 years. After all, terrorists in the CIA need a sanctuary, a place of peace and safety where they can return to after executing black operations around the world.

Said terrorists also need a place where they can avoid prosecution, hence Switzerland’s permanently neutral position within the international community. This is why the bankers, pirates and terrorists formerly known as the Knights Templar and the Order of Saint John (see below) originally fled to the Alps, founding what is known today as Switzerland.

Because the CIA is in command and control of each country’s respective intelligence agencies and military, they are responsible for orchestrating virtually all of teh the assassinations, terror attacks and wars. This is where the concept of the Swiss Army Knife originally came from for Switzerland has every political and military option at their respective disposal.

Although Switzerland is noted for its Swiss Mercenaries who were strategically placed by the CIA in foreign armies, courts and governments in order to conduct assassinations and espionage, 99% of Swiss citizens have absolutely no idea that their country is in fact home to the CIA.

SWITZERLAND IS CIA:

1. Switzerland is located in central Europe
2. Switzerland is the only neutral nation on Earth
3. Switzerland is the only sovereign nation on Earth
4. Switzerland is home to Onyx Interception System
5. Switzerland is home to Holy See (i.e., the Holy C-I-A)
6. Switzerland is home to Bank for International Settlements (BIS)
7. Names for Switzerland (i.e., CH and Suisse) equate to CIA and SS
8. Swiss National Day is same date as the anniversary of the Temple of Spies
9. Switzerland is intimately tied to dictators (e.g., Hitler, Mussolini, Jong-Un, etc.)
10. Switzerland was originally founded by the Knights Templar and Order of Saint John

1198px-Switzerland_in_Europe_(-rivers_-mini_map).svg

1. CIA Located in Central Europe
It is imperative to note that the notorious CIA of the United States provides the necessary political cover for black operations (i.e., Special Ops) orchestrated by the CIA in Switzerland. In other words, America takes the blame for what Switzerland is ultimately responsible for. Although there is a Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters located in Langley, Virginia, it is just the local headquarters of the CIA within the United States. In order to sell the world on the notion that the CIA is American in nature, the words “CIA Headquarters” are always followed by “Langley, Virginia” in virtually all Hollywood movies. However, Langley, Virginia is not located in central Virginia, nor is the state of Virginia centrally located within the United States. Switzerland on the other hand is located in central Europe, hence the name “Central Intelligence Agency”. The term central is defined in part by Merriam-Webster as being “in the middle of something” or “located in the center of a thing or place”, definitions which are indicative of Switzerland, not Langley, Virginia. The term “central” is also defined in part as “controlling all other parts” and “having power over the other parts”, for the CIA in Switzerland is ultimately in command and control of all 205 countries and territories of the underworld. Although said countries and territories have different flags, languages and races, they all operate at the behest of the CIA in Switzerland.

2. Switzerland Only Neutral Nation on Earth
Switzerland is the only permanently neutral country on Earth. Neutrality is defined in part as “a sovereign state which officially declares itself to be neutral towards the belligerents”. However, if an allegedly sovereign state funds said belligerents, it is not neutral. Although Switzerland has been neutral since the end of its expansion in 1515, the Congress of Vienna fully re-established Swiss independence in 1815, making Swiss neutrality permanently recognized. Consequently, Switzerland has remained free of terror attacks and war for over 500 years. By remaining neutral, Switzerland can be intimately involved in the day to day business of every country on Earth while publically appearing to be nuetral. Switzerland is also the only neutral country which actively engages in armed neutrality. Consequently, the Swiss Armed Forces has roughly 200,000 to 400,000 active-duty soldiers, one of the largest standing armies in the world. The armed neutrality of Switzerland only makes sense when it’s understood that Switzerland is home to the CIA. In the event that Switzerland’s political cover is blown and they are fingered as the progenitor of assassinations, terror attacks and wars, its massive military will be able to defend itself against attack or a potential invasion.

Swiss Flag

3. Switzerland Only Sovereign Nation on Earth
Switzerland is one of only two sovereign entities on Earth. This notion is confirmed by the flag of Switzerland, one of only two square sovereign-state flags. The other is the flag of Vatican City, a city state within Rome which is coincidentally protected by the Swiss Guard. While the flags of all other countries (e.g., flag of China, flag of Russia, flag of the United States, etc.) are rectangular in shape, the flags of Switzerland and Vatican City are geometrically square for they represent the only two sovereign states on Earth. The term sovereignty is defined as a state or a governing body that has the full right and power to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme authority over some polity. In other words, Switzerland is the only country in the world (aside from Vatican City) which is in control of its own destiny. Consequently, the other 204 countries and territories of the underworld are not sovereign; meaning that another country (i.e., Switzerland) is ultimately responsible for its fate.

Onyx (2)

4. Switzerland Home to Onyx Interception System
If Switzerland were in fact a neutral country, it would not be home to the Onyx Interception System which is operated by the Federal Intelligence Service (FIS), the official name for the CIA in Switzerland. Considering that Onyx is admittedly “controlled by an independent [unnamed] control authority composed of members of the federal administration”, it can be deduced that is it under the command and control of the CIA. The stated goal of Onyx is to “monitor both civil and military communications, such as telephone, fax or internet traffic, carried by satellite”, effectively allowing Switzerland to spy on the rest of the world. That being said, it’s highly likely that Onyx is also used as a secure and encrypted means of communication between CIA Headquarters in Switzerland and its respective offices and detention facilities (i.e., black sites) around the world. Despite the fact that Onyx is a global system, the only admitted locations within Switzerland are found at Heimenschwand, Leuk and Zimmerwald. Although the CIA still employs thousands of secret agents around the world, a majority their espionage is conducted electronically via state-of-the-art technologies (e.g., cell phones, drones, GPS, internet, satellites, watches, etc.) which are likely all linked to and monitored by Onyx.

Curia Confoederationis Helveticae

5. Switzerland Home to Holy See
The Holy See (i.e., the “Holy C-I-A”) is the official name of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a term evidently derived from Confoederationis Helveticae, an original name for Switzerland. Although the Holy See is allegedly located in Italy, its name suggests otherwise. Consonantly speaking, the term “Holy” (H+L) was evidently derived from the “Hel” (H+L) as in “Helveticae”, while the term “See” (i.e., “C”) is an apparent acronym for “Confoederationis”. Founded roughly 40 years after the establishment of Switzerland in 1300 AD, the Holy See is touted as the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Church. The Holy See is the central point of reference for the Catholic Church and admittedly the focal point of communion due to its prominence. Consequently, the Holy See is viewed as the central government of the Roman Catholic Church. Diplomatically speaking, the Holy See acts and speaks for the whole Catholic Church. In other words, the Holy See is the highest form of government within the Catholic Church, just as the CIA is the highest form of government in the world. Similar to Switzerland, the Holy See is viewed as a sovereign state, having a centralized government entitled the Roman Curia. Coincidentally, the Federal Palace of Switzerland in the Swiss capital of Bern is entitled “Curia Confoederationis Helveticae”, further suggesting that Switzerland and the Holy See are in fact one and the same entity. The term “See” found within Holy See was derived from the Latin word “sedes” meaning “seat”, a reference to the Episcopal throne (cathedra) of the Catholic Church. In other words, the Holy See is the “Holy Seat” or the “Holy Throne” of the Greco-Roman Empire in the underworld.

BIS (2)

6. Switzerland Home to Bank for International Settlements
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland is the financial backbone of the CIA, secretly funding its nefarious operations around the world. Admittedly “the world’s oldest international financial organization”, the BIS funds 60 central banks (e.g., Bank of China, Bank of England, Federal Reserve Bank, etc.), which collectively make up 95% of the world’s GDP (gross domestic product). Although the BIS bills itself as an international organization of central banks which attempts “to foster international cooperation in those areas and to act as a bank for central banks“, it is solely responsible for orchestrating the world’s financial crises simply due to the fact that it alone has the power to create money. In other words, the BIS is responsible for creating and distributing the world’s fiat money supply which is in turn used to fund the world’s respective governments, intelligence agencies and militaries, as well as all the assassinations, terror attacks wars they engage in at the behest of the CIA. As the financial wing of the Central Intelligence Agency, the BIS is fiscally responsible for funding virtually all of chaos and madness seen in the world today.

Swastika and SS

7. Names for Switzerland Equate to CIA & SS
Because Switzerland is home to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), their respective names are intimately linked in numerology. According to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which is coincidentally located in Switzerland, the country code of Switzerland is CH (i.e., “Chi”), an acronym derived from Confoederationis Helveticae, an original name for Switzerland. When employing Jewish Gematria in respect to the Roman Score (i.e., the Roman alphabet) and/or the modern-English alphabet, the acronym “CH” numerically and consonantly equates to the acronym “CIA”. For example, the numbers/letters found within “CH” (i.e., C=3 and H=11) equate to “311” as the “H” symbol equates to the number “11” in the Roman Score. Conversely, the numbers/letters found within “CIA” (i.e., C=3, I=1, and A=1) numerically equate to “311” as the “I” symbol equates to the number 1 in the Roman Score. Since the letter “A” doubles as a Chevron symbol (i.e., “?”), the number/letter used to depict the letters “C” and “K” in the Roman Score, the acronym “CIA” equates to “CI?”, an acronym which can be depicted in a variety of different ways (i.e., CIC, CIK, KIC, KIK, CI?, ?IC, KI?, ?IK, ?I?, etc.). The double “?”, “C” and “K” are grammatically and numerological tributes to Chania, Crete, the birthplace of the Greco-Roman Empire which now rules the world via the CIA in Switzerland. This is why the coat of arms of the Holy See (i.e., the official name of the CIA in Roman Catholic Church) depicts two keys or two K’s (i.e., “KK”), for the term “Key” (K) consonantly equates to the letters “C” and “K”, symbolically depicting the name of the CIA (i.e., KIK). Considering that the CIA is predominately staffed by males of Jewish decent, the derogatory term for Jews is “Kike” (C/K+C/K), a term which consonantly equates to “CIA” when the letter “A” is deciphered as a Chevron symbol (i.e., “?”). Unbeknown to most, Switzerland is also home to the World Jewish Congress, an international federation of Jewish communities and organizations which is curiously never mentioned as an active political body. Whether the World Jewish Congress is part of the CIA is not known, but it’s highly likely considering the secretive nature of the group. One of the original names for Switzerland is Suisse, its current name in French. Consonantly speaking, the term Suisse (S+S) equates to “SS” or “CC” (pronounced “See See”) as the letter “C” routinely doubles as the letter “S” in the English language (e.g., cent, century, citrus, etc.). Consequently, a double “SS” equates to a double “CC” which is, as previously stated, is representative of the CIA (i.e., CI?). Historically speaking, the “SS” is found in the names of symbols of various groups which were and are being used by the CIA to kill and terrorize billions of people around the world. For example, the letters “SS” were used by the Schutzstaffel (i.e., SS), the largest and most powerful paramilitary organizations in Hitler’s Third Reich, as well as the Waffen-SS, the multi-national military force of Nazi Germany. Said organizations also donned the Swastika, a symbol which in the letter “S” is superimposed upon another letter “S”, resulting in an “SS”. In modern times, the Swastika is used by the CIA’s neo-Nazi groups around the world. Lastly, similar to the tem Suisse, the name of the state-sponsored terror group ISIS (S+S) contains a double “SS”, a grammatical tribute to the CIA in Switzerland which is using the group to terrorize the world.

FIS

8. Swiss National Day is Anniversary of Temple of Spies
Swiss National Day is the birthday/national day of Switzerland, a holiday which is celebrated annually on August 1, marking the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy. Coincidentally, August 1 is also the anniversary of the Temple of Spes (i.e., Spies). Spes (pronounced “'spe?s” as in “spies”) was the goddess of Hope in Roman mythology and religion because the Greco-Roman Empire hoped they would find out about potential threats and invasions prior to them manifesting in reality. Because Switzerland and its CIA spy on the underworld on behalf of the Greco-Roman Empire in Greenland, their respective birthday/national holiday is celebrated on the same day as the anniversary of the Temple of Spies. That is why the logo of the Federal Intelligence Service (FIS), which operates under the aliases of the Nachrichtendienst des Bundes (NDB), the Service de renseignement de la Confédération (SRC), and the Servizio di Intelligence Federale (SIF), depicts an outline of Switzerland superimposed upon an eye for the FIS is the official name for the CIA in Switzerland. Lastly, in what appears to be a modern tribute to espionage conducted by the state of Switzerland, the logo of Spy Optic sunglasses depicts a Greek Cross which is coincidentally found in the flag of Switzerland.

Mussolini and Hitler

9. Switzerland Intimately Tied to Dictators
Switzerland is intimately linked, albeit in a de facto manner, to a number of notorious dictators, namely Napoleon Bonaparte, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Kim Jong-un. In the case of Napoleon, Switzerland served as the staging ground for French battles against the Austrians and Russians. Despite being temporarily occupied by French troops, Switzerland was never attacked or invaded by Napoleon’s troops. Although 3.5 million deaths are attributed to Napoleon, Switzerland remained unscathed. Despite the infamous Operation Tannenbaum (i.e., “Operation Christmas Tree”), the allegedly planned but cancelled invasion of Switzerland by Nazi Germany during World War II, Hitler never attacked or invaded Switzerland despite having the country virtually surrounded. Although 7 to 9 million deaths are attributed to Hitler during World War II, Switzerland reportedly only suffered 100 casualties. In 1902, future dictator Benito Mussolini emigrated to Switzerland where he participated in a series of meetings that organized the communist revolutions and insurrections that later swept through Europe. Similar to his counterpart Hitler, Mussolini never attacked Switzerland despite the fact that it borders Italy to the north. Although 454,600 deaths are attributed to Mussolini during World War II, Switzerland reportedly only suffered 100 casualties.
Why Napoleon, Hitler and Mussolini did not attack or invade Switzerland (the richest country on Earth) while they raped and pillaged Europe only makes sense when it is understood that these dictators were funded and/or groomed by the CIA in Switzerland. Lastly, although North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un is routinely portrayed as mentally unstable, he is under the mind-control of the CIA in Switzerland and acts accordingly. Similar to Mussolini before him, Jong-un lived his “handler” in Switzerland where he was “spotted” a number of times while attending a so-called “private school” where he was likely being groomed for his eventual role as dictator of North Korea. Consequently, any causalities incurred by Jong-un and North Korea are squarely on the shoulders of the CIA in Switzerland.

Knights-Templar-17

10. Switzerland Founded by Knights Templar & Order of St. John
The Knights Templar and the Order of Saint John (e.g., the Hospitallers, Knights of Saint John, Knights of Rhodes, Knights Hospitallers, Sovereign Military Order of Malta, etc.) were two medieval Roman Catholic Orders whose merger ultimately spawned the creation of Switzerland around 1300 AD. Consequently, the respective colors and symbols of said Orders are now depicted in the flag of Switzerland. These notorious military Orders routinely engaged is assassinations, piracy, terror attacks and war, traits currently exhibited by the CIA in Switzerland. According to legend, the Order of Saint John wore black surcoats with a white cross during its crusades with the Muslims. However, in 1248, Pope Innocent IV approved a new standard military dress for the Order of Saint John which consisted of a red surcoat emblazoned by a white cross, the exact same color scheme and symbol now depicted in the flag of Switzerland. Interestingly, the flag of Switzerland is now synonymous with neutrality and innocence, an apparent tribute to Pope Innocent IV who sanctified the Order. The Order relocated to Switzerland shortly after the Protestant Reformation (c. 1170) when its leaders in the Margraviate of Brandenburg declared their continued loyalty to the Order of Saint John while publically accepting Protestant theology. The Protestant branches of the Order admittedly spread throughout Europe, including “Hungary, Poland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, France, Austria, the United Kingdom, and Italy”. After going undercover in the Alps, “It was established that the [Order of Saint John] should remain neutral in any war between Christian nations”. Since the flag of Switzerland bears the exact same color scheme and symbol as the Order of Saint John, and it’s the only permanently neutral country on Earth, it can be deduced that the Order of St. John became founded what is now known as Switzerland. Similar to the Order of Saint John, the Knights Templar were known for their white mantles with a red cross, a color scheme and symbol now depicted in the logo of the International Red Cross in Geneva, Switzerland, as well as in the flag of Switzerland, albeit the colors are reversed. The notion that the Knights Templar established Switzerland is corroborated by numerous scholars who believe that the “Templars fled into the Swiss Alps”. Since both the Knights Templar and the Order of Saint John admittedly relocated to Switzerland, and the color schemes and symbols of both Orders are evident in the flag of Switzerland, it can be deduced that the country of Switzerland was specifically founded so that these Roman Catholic military orders could fund and orchestrate assassinations, piracy, terror attacks and wars around the world under the guise of neutrality. Due to the wealth the Knights Templar confiscated during their centuries of conquests, the non-combatant members of the Order began to develop a massive economic infrastructure within Europe, creating financial techniques that became the earliest forms of banking, something Switzerland is now famous for. In 1150, the Templars began generating letters of credit for pilgrims traveling to the Holy Land, an innovative arrangement that became the earliest form of banking, leading to the formal system known today as checks. Consequently, the Order of the Knights Templar became the world’s first multinational corporation. Templar involvement in banking grew to the point where they began to practice usury, charging interest on money lent. Templar usury is still evident today in the form of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) which is located in Basel, Switzerland. In short, the BIS creates money out of thin air and then charges countries (and their respective citizens) interest on said money, keeping the world in a perpetual state of debt and slavery. Since interest rates can always be manipulated, no country can ever escape from their current economic status, regardless of how hard they work.

Sir Francis Dashwood #fundie freerepublic.com

Moses wrote Genesis. This is why such people will jump up and down screaming when the Ten Commandments are displayed or the Creationist idea of monogamy from the book of Genesis is introduced. The latter (Genesis) also ruins the illogical and non-biological arguments of homosexual monogamy. In a secular sense, homosexuality is an idolatry of perversion. It is in no way an anatomical function of the human organism, but a phantasmagoric creation from within the mentally disturbed human mind, a social psychosis, naked and on full exhibitionist display. This is the whole crux (pun intended) of their attack on creationism - - they are really frustrated by Genesis, but cannot destroy the axiomatic state of procreant human biology, it does not fit their religious agenda. Homosexual monogamy advocates seek ceremonious sanctification of their anatomical perversions and esoteric absolution for their guilt-ridden, impoverished egos. Neither of those will satisfy their universal dissatisfaction with mortality or connect them to something eternal. With pantheons of fantasies as their medium of infinitization, they still have nothing in them of reality, any more than there is in the things that seem to stand before us in a dream. Homosexual deviancy is really a pagan practice (and a self-induced social psychosis) at war with the Judaic culture over what is written in the book of Genesis (1:27, 2:18). This is exactly what the National Socialists were at war with... so, when someone uses the term "Gaystapo," they might not realize how close to the truth they really are. (Also, consider their eugenic breeding programs.) Many will seek ceremonious sanctification and esoteric absolution in some type of marriage rite, but that still fails to give them a connection to the eternal in both a religious and temporal, procreant sense - - the union does not produce offspring. Dissatisfaction with inevitable mortality only feeds the impoverishment of the ego further. Homosexuals really hate human life; their whole desire is rooted in the destruction of it...

got question #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Why did God condone such terrible violence in the Old Testament?"

Answer: The fact that God commanded the killing of entire nations in the Old Testament has been the subject of harsh criticism from opponents of Christianity for some time. That there was violence in the Old Testament is indisputable. The question is whether Old Testament violence is justifiable and condoned by God. In his bestselling book The God Delusion, atheist Richard Dawkins refers to the God of the Old Testament as “a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser.” Journalist Christopher Hitchens complains that the Old Testament contains a warrant for “indiscriminate massacre.” Other critics of Christianity have leveled similar charges, accusing Yahweh of “crimes against humanity.”

But are these criticisms valid? Is the God of the Old Testament a “moral monster” who arbitrarily commands genocide against innocent men, women, and children? Was His reaction to the sins of the Canaanites and the Amalekites a vicious form of “ethnic cleansing” no different from atrocities committed by the Nazis? Or is it possible that God could have had morally sufficient reasons for ordering the destruction of these nations?

A basic knowledge of Canaanite culture reveals its inherent moral wickedness. The Canaanites were a brutal, aggressive people who engaged in bestiality, incest, and even child sacrifice. Deviant sexual acts were the norm. The Canaanites’ sin was so repellent that God said, “The land vomited out its inhabitants” (Leviticus 18:25). Even so, the destruction was directed more at the Canaanite religion (Deuteronomy 7:3–5,12:2-3) than at the Canaanite people per se. The judgment was not ethnically motivated. Individual Canaanites, like Rahab in Jericho, could still find that mercy follows repentance (Joshua 2). God's desire is that the wicked turn from their sin rather than die (Ezekiel 18:31-32, 33:11).

Besides dealing with national sins, God used the conquest of Canaan to create a religious/historical context in which He could eventually introduce the Messiah to the world. This Messiah would bring salvation not only to Israel, but also to Israel’s enemies, including Canaan (Psalm 87:4-6; Mark 7:25–30).

It must be remembered that God gave the Canaanite people more than sufficient time to repent of their evil ways—over 400 years (Genesis 15:13–16)! The book of Hebrews tells us that the Canaanites were “disobedient,” which implies moral culpability on their part (Hebrews 11:31). The Canaanites were aware of God's power (Joshua 2:10–11; 9:9) and could have sought repentance. Except in rare instances, they continued their rebellion against God until the bitter end.

But didn’t God also command the Israelites to kill non-combatants? The biblical record is clear that He did. Here again, we must remember that, while it is true the Canaanite women did not fight, this in no way means they were innocent, as their seductive behavior in Numbers 25 indicates (Numbers 25:1–3). However, the question still remains: what about the children? This is not an easy question to answer, but we must keep several things in mind. First, no human person (including infants) is truly innocent. The Scripture teaches that we are all born in sin (Psalm 51:5; 58:3). This implies that all people are morally culpable for Adam’s sin in some way. Infants are just as condemned from sin as adults are.

Second, God is sovereign over all of life and can take it whenever He sees fit. God and God alone can give life, and God alone has the right to take it whenever He so chooses. In fact, He ultimately takes every person's life at death. It is not our life to begin with but God’s. While it is wrong for us to take a life, except in instances of capital punishment, war, and self-defense, this does not mean that it is wrong for God to do so. We intuitively recognize this when we accuse some person or authority who takes human life as "playing God." God is under no obligation to extend anyone's life for even another day. How and when we die is completely up to Him.

Third, an argument could be made that it would have been cruel for God to take the lives of all the Canaanites except the infants and children. Without the protection and support of their parents, the infants and small children were likely to face death anyway due to starvation. The chances of survival for an orphan in the ancient Near East were not good.

Finally, and most importantly, God may have provided for the salvation for those infants who would not have otherwise attained salvation if they had lived into adulthood. We must remember that the Canaanites were a barbarous and evil culture. If those infants and children had lived into adulthood, it is very likely they would have turned into something similar to their parents and been condemned to hell after they died. If all infants and young children who die before an age of moral accountability go straight to heaven (as we believe), then those children are in a far better place than if God had allowed them to live and grow to maturity in a depraved culture.

Surely, the issue of God commanding violence in the Old Testament is difficult. However, we must remember that God sees things from an eternal perspective, and His ways are not our ways (Isaiah 55:8–9). The apostle Paul tells us that God is both kind and severe (Romans 11:22). While it is true that God's holy character demands that sin be punished, His grace and mercy remain extended to those who are willing to repent and be saved. The Canaanite destruction provides us with a sober reminder that, while our God is gracious and merciful, He is also a God of holiness and wrath.

H #fundie lesbianplusfeminist.wordpress.com

Well. Notwithstanding having plenty of things to say, I haven’t been posting on my blog because it seems pointless. There’s the choir that I can preach to, and then there are the permanent Stockholm Syndrome sufferers who will cling to men’s ideas and the societal structures men have built and call it individuality and “gender identity” and “agency” and anything else they can come up with to obfuscate their various levels of conformity, while asking men for “equality.” If they even admit that men are the problem.

But today, I read something by a young woman who has autism. She can’t read social situations, and men, young and old, have been repeatedly taking advantage of her, everything from creepy staring to rape. I’m feeling like my head is going to explode. “Equality” isn’t going to do a damned thing for her. What shall we do, liberals? More useless askivism? More blogs and websites and wikis about “geek feminism” and “queer feminism” and goddess-knows-what-other sub-feminisms/pseudo-feminisms, onto which men invariably descend with everything from glib dismissal to overt rape threats?

I decided that it’s better to spend my time thinking about what womyn can DO. Frankly, I think it’s about time we moved straight on to violence and destruction. Sudden violence and destruction. I know. It sounds bleak and ugly and dangerous. Well, things are already bleak and ugly and dangerous for womyn. How much worse could it be, really? If you spend enough time thinking about it, enough hours fuming in impotent rage, perhaps you’ll find that risking your life, oh, say, bombing a men’s prison starts to seem worth it, for the future if not for yourself. What else is there? Imagine this: what if nearly every woman on Earth killed a man in his sleep tonight? How nice could tomorrow be? Imagine taking the offensive for once. Playing defense isn’t working. All the damage control in the world doesn’t prevent damage. Personally, I really like taking long walks alone late at night. Ever think about how men destroy even the simplest pleasures in life? Tired of it yet? Tired enough? I am.

I’m not the least bit ashamed to admit that I support male genocide. But I know that any liberals who may be in the audience think that is very mean, and wonder: what about the “good men”? All seven of them, three of whom just haven’t been caught killing or abusing women or children yet. The answer is: collateral damage. And men agree with me.

Yes men, who will bomb an entire country to smithereens and murder thousands of non-combatants to smoke out a handful of terrorists, agree that human collateral damage is acceptable for a “good cause.” Men, who will pay other men to risk their lives rooting about in a huge hole in the ground to mine the metal, and dump toxic waste by-products in poor neighborhoods to keep their corporations producing your iCrap, are ok with human collateral damage. Men will risk exposing thousands to radiation and making whole cities uninhabitable for generations so that we can have electricity, even after witnessing the fallout of other nuclear meltdowns. Who cares about dozens of possible cases of leukemia and mutations in the local wildlife? Men think we need lights, dammit. Etc.

Goddess. Mentally ill man just showed up. Enough for now.

T. Mark Graham #fundie akfiles.com

The time to bury it is the time to use it. If someone is coming to confiscate, just shoot them in the face. Check their driver's license and find out where they live. Then go over there, kill their entire family, cut their heads off, and place them upon stakes displayed in the yard. Oh, and their little dog Toto too, as a finishing touch. Burn the house to the ground, but be careful not to damage adjacent property.

Soon, confiscation will fall out of favor. Consequences tend to modify behavior.

(After being confronted for advocating killing women, children and animals:)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trey Magnus View Post
As much of an "Arrogant Bastard" as you are, I cannot believe that you are being serious. Regardless of the poor choices a man might make, advocating the murder of his wife and children, whose only crime is being related to said man, is abhorrent. If you are being serious, that makes you no better than the man in question. In fact, it makes you worse.
The reason terror has been used for all of human history, is that it works (really damn well).

Apologists argue that the deliberate targeting of non-combatants by the US and British bombers in WWII, against Japan and Germany, was moral, because the terror campaigns would bring a quicker end to the war and in the net, save lives.

I ponder questions such as this. Perhaps you have a better answer. How does one go about preventing a heavily armed and well supported force from engaging in criminal actions against a less powerful populace? The objective is not merely to stop one guy at one time and place, from carrying out his illegal activities, but to motivate all such people to cease the activities everywhere.

I submit that men are motivated by two primal factors: fear, and reward. And I suspect that what men fear most, is the loss of that which they hold most dear. For most, this would be family. It is also the weakest link in the logistical chain supporting the operator.

Should things get unpleasant, there will be those who embrace ruthless action, and those getting on boxcars.

Wolf Counsel #fundie freeconservatives.com

Believe it or not, I don't wage war against non-combatants. In other words, if you are a Muslim, and you keep your crap to yourself and don't get involved in the running of the country, and you don't associate with me, and I don't see you picking on innocent people, and you wish to die a natural death and got to Hell to get screwed every day by 72 virgin male camels and watch Allah hump goats and Pedohammed day in and day out, I won't touch you with even a pea shooter.

Christopher Cantwell #racist #wingnut christophercantwell.com

[From "They Tried To Silence Me, Again"]

It was the most ruthless deplatforming effort since August of 2017

You hear me say it at the beginning of every episode of the Radical Agenda. Our enemies came for your right to speak a long time ago, and now they are coming for your right to see and hear.

Surely you’ve already heard what happened in 2017. I was framed for a crime, then sued for nonsense. All the major social networks and payment processors shut down ChristopherCantwell.com and the Radical Agenda. Every attempt we made to reestablish ourselves was met with incredible resistance.

But with time, effort, and a significant reduction of living standards, I managed to reach a point where things were nearly sustainable.

Then there was round two.

Earlier this year I was banned from Gab, a so called “free speech” platform, for daring to suggest that suicidal mass shooters would be better off killing guilty people, than random non-combatants in houses of worship.

Days after that, I got kicked off yet another mailing list provider.

Even Outlaw Conservative, which I created specifically in an effort to comply with the ever expanding and ill defined “hate speech” policies of the censorious Jew run platforms, got kicked off iTunes, Stitcher, and Spotify.

But I persevered.

We set up our own mail system. Our own crowdfunding for Outlaw Conservative. We got more active on Telegram.

Then Round 3.

People who pretend to champion the same causes as us set out to defame me. They claimed falsely that I was doxing customers and giving customer data to the government. They said my Charlottesville body camera video was at the center of the indictments of the Rise Above Movement, which is not only false, but easily disproven. Some other sub-nigger-IQ retard tried to say TRS was in on all of this. All lies, from start to finish.

This was an intentional, dishonest, and coordinated effort amongst seemingly disparate factions of the White Nationalist movement, most of whom hide behind anonymity, to discredit me.

They made fake Telegram, Twitter, and other social media profiles pretending to be me. They spammed people with threats and insults using these impersonator accounts. They doxed my home address and phone number. They openly conspired with Charlottesville communists to bring bogus legal problems down on me, again.

The timing was no coincidence. Immediately after this, the next round of deplatforming ensued.

Apple threatened to remove Telegram from the App Store if they didn’t censor our channels and groups. Now you can’t follow me on Telegram from an iPhone. Surely the Google Play Store will soon follow suit.

One of the Jews who is suing me over Charlottesville is Roberta Kaplan. She’s also one the kikes who crammed gay marriage through the Supreme Court. She falsely claimed in court that I threatened her and tried to get the court to silence me. Instead the court enjoined me from “making unlawful threats” which is to say, this stupid Jewess cunt got a court to tell me to obey they law. Congrats, asshole.

[...]

All of this to stop me? These Jews must think I’m really fucking important.

Well, I won’t be stopped. The Jews are terrified of me, because if people hear what I have to say without their cherry picking dishonest nonsense, then there won’t be a safe place on this Earth for so much as a mischling. They are terrified of the truth, and of men with the courage to speak it in the face of adversity.

Ian Jobling #racist whiteamerica.us

While the policy of the American government was never genocide, that of the Indians certainly was. The Indians were never inhibited by any of the scruples that restrained the US army. The history abounds with accounts of “acts of devilish cruelty” that had “no parallel in savage warfare,” in the words of one army officer quoted by [Guenter] Lewy. Rape and the slaughter of non-combatants was common during Indian raids, as was torture of prisoners. The concepts of human rights and the ethical conduct of warfare are inventions of the white race. No other race invented them independently, and certainly, the Indians knew nothing of them. Far from being proof of the barbarism of the white race, then, the wars against the Indians testify to the unique compassion of Western culture.

Got Questions Ministries #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "How is the Islamic idea of jihad different from the violence in the Bible?"

Answer: Immediately following the horrific terrorist attacks on 9/11, many Westerners began to take notice of Islam for the first time. Many were shocked to find out that Islam’s holy book (the Koran) provides specific injunctions to engage in acts of violence as part of the “holy war” (jihad) in the cause of their religion. Soon many secular thinkers began to draw comparisons between Islamic terrorist attacks and the violence found in the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. But are these comparisons valid? Are the commands of Yahweh to the Israelites in the Old Testament the same as jihad as prescribed in the Koran? What is the difference between the violence found in the Bible and Islamic understanding of jihad?

To answer this question, we must define what we mean by “jihad.” The word jihad means “striving” or “struggle.” Within Islam, there are several categories of jihad. The word can be used to describe various types of struggles such as “jihad of the pen” (which would involve persuasion or instruction in the promotion of Islam) or “jihad of the heart” (a battle against one’s own sin). However, the most well-known form of jihad is that which involves physical violence or warfare in the cause of Islam. While the Koran does contain passages that encourage Muslims to engage unbelievers with grace and persuasion (Sura 16:125), the Koran contains other verses that appear to command Muslims to engage in offensive physical warfare against non-Muslims.

In Sura 9 we read, “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem [of war]; but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful” (Sura 9:5). Also in Sura 9, “Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, [even if they are] of the People of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Sura 9:29).

In addition to the teachings of the Koran, Muslims also follow the Hadith, a supposedly inspired record of Muhammad’s words and actions. The Hadith explains how Muhammad instructed his commander when sent out on an expedition, “When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to [accept] Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them” (Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4294).

But what about the violence commanded by God in the Old Testament? Is that any different? The most often-discussed episodes of violence in the Old Testament are Yahweh’s command for the Israelites to destroy the Canaanites and return to the land that He had promised to them. When assessing these incidents, we must understand the context in which these events took place. The Canaanites were a brutal and wicked culture that frequently engaged in incredibly decadent behavior. As Christian author Norman Geisler put it, “This was a thoroughly evil culture, so much so that the Bible says it nauseated God. They were into brutality, cruelty, incest, bestiality, cultic prostitution, and even child sacrifice by fire. They were an aggressive culture that wanted to annihilate the Israelites.”

By ordering the destruction of the Canaanites, God enacted a form of corporate capital punishment on a people that had been deserving of God’s judgment for some time. God had given the Canaanite people over 400 years to repent (Genesis 15:13–16). When they did not, the Lord used the Israelites as an instrument of judgment on an evil and deeply depraved society. The Canaanites were not ignorant as news of God’s awesome power had reached them (Joshua 2:10–11; 9:9). Such awareness should have driven them to repentance. The example of Rahab and her family is a sure proof that the Canaanites could have avoided their destruction if they had repented before Israel’s God (Joshua 2). No person had to die. God’s desire is that the wicked turn from their sin rather than perish (Ezekiel 18:31–32; 33:11). We must also remember that Yahweh did not sanction all of the wars recorded in the Old Testament, and that all of the wars that were specifically commissioned by Him beyond the time of Joshua were defensive in nature. A number of the battles that Israel fought on the way to and within Canaan were also defensive in nature (Exodus 17:8; Numbers 21:21–32; Deuteronomy 2:26–37;Joshua 10:4).

The more difficult question, however, has to do with Yahweh’s command to kill all of the Canaanites, including the women and children. In response to this, two points need to be kept in mind. First, while the Bible reads that such a command was given, it may well be the case that no women or children were actually killed. All of the battles would probably have involved only soldiers where women and children would likely have fled. As Jeremiah 4 indicates, “At the noise of horseman and archer every city takes to flight; they enter thickets; they climb among rocks; all the cities are forsaken, and no man dwells in them” (Jeremiah 4:29).

Moreover, Deuteronomy 7:2–5 uses the phrase “utterly destroy” immediately followed by “you shall not intermarry among them,” highlighting the fact that, at least in some instances, the biblical authors may have employed the rhetorical exaggeration (e.g., “all that breathes,” “utterly destroy,” etc.) common to ancient Near East military accounts. This leaves open the possibility that these phrases may express some degree of hyperbolic language, and thus, that no non-combatants were actually killed. The text nowhere explicitly narrates any women or children actually being killed in these battles.

Second, even if we interpret the text to mean that children were killed, this may have been God’s way of ensuring that these children would be saved and immediately brought into His eternal kingdom. The Scripture implies that all children who die before an age of moral accountability will enter heaven (2 Samuel 12:23; Matthew 19:14). Had God allowed these children to grow up in such a vile and heinous culture, these children would likely have grown up into something like their parents and been condemned to hell after they died. God knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10), and we are simply not in a position to question God as to what is best. Since God is the Giver of life, only He has the right to take it.

In conclusion, we have seen that there is a radical difference between the violence in the Old Testament and Islamic jihad. First, the violence prescribed by God in the Old Testament was intended for a particular time and limited to a particular people group. There was no precedent set to continue this practice beyond what God had commanded. In contrast, the Koran actually prescribes and condones military jihad in the promotion of Islam. At no time in the Bible do we see God commanding His people to kill unbelievers in the promotion of biblical faith. Second, it is beyond dispute that, in its earliest years, Islam was promoted by the sword. It is exactly the opposite for early Christianity. Many of the early Christians were severely persecuted and martyred for their commitment to Christ. As one Christian philosopher put it, “Both Islam and Christianity were spread by the sword, but the swords were pointing in opposite directions!”

Finally, for the Christian, the final and complete revelation of God is in Jesus Christ, who was remarkably non-violent in His approach. If a Christian engages in violence in the name of Christ, he is doing so in direct disobedience of His Master. Jesus taught that all who live by the sword will die by it (Matthew 26:52). The teachings and example of Muhammad are very different. A Muslim who desires to commit violence in the name of Islam can find ample justification for his action both in the Koran and in the words and actions of the prophet Muhammad.

junkers88 #racist stormfront.org

African cures for disease=0
Stable Jewish societies=0
Non-White societies, anyone would voluntarily migrate too=0

Lets ask the refugees what they think.
Free housing
Free health care
Free education
Free handouts to feed themselves
Free legal representation for criminals
Free, unmolested board and lodging in our prisons
Freedom to practice anti-social religions at our expence and plot our downfall


The beacon of the human species.
A step to far?
Imagine this planet with no White lands for the black Bastards to escape to.
No bill of Human rights
No Geneva convention

Without Whites this would be Planet of the Apes.

Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid #fundie islamqa.info

Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:

The basic principle is that a woman should remain at home, and not go out except for necessary purposes. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And stay in your houses, and do not display yourselves like that of the times of ignorance”

[al-Ahzaab 33:33].

Although this is addressed to the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), it also applies to the believing women. It is only addressed to the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) because of their honour and status with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and because they are examples for the believing women.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Woman is ‘awrah, and if she goes out, the shaytaan raises his hopes (of misguiding her). She is never closer to Allaah than when she stays in her house.” Narrated by Ibn Hibbaan and Ibn Khuzaymah; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Shaheehah, no. 2688.

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said concerning a woman’s prayer in the mosque: “Their houses are better for them.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (567) and classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.

Secondly:

It is permissible for a woman to go out of her house for work, but that is subject to certain conditions. If they are met, it is permissible for her to go out. They are:

- That she needs to work in order to acquire the money she needs, as in your case.

- The work should be suited to the nature of woman, such as medicine, nursing, teaching, sewing, and so on.

- The work should be in a place that is only for women, and there should be no mixing with non-mahram men.

- Whilst at work she should observe complete shar’i hijab.

- Her work should not lead to her travelling without a mahram.

- Her going out to work should not involve committing any haraam action, such as being alone with the driver, or wearing perfume where non-mahrams can smell it.

- That should not lead to her neglecting things that are more essential for her, such as looking after her house, husband and children.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen said: The field in which a woman works should be only for women, such as if she works in teaching girls, whether in administration or technical support, or she works at home as a seamstress sewing clothes for women and so on. As for working in fields that are for men, this is not permissible for her because it requires her to mix with men, which is a great fitnah (source of temptation and trouble) and should be avoided. It should be noted that it is proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have not left behind me any fitnah that is more harmful to men than women; the fitnah of the Children of Israel had to do with women.” So the man should keep his family away from places of fitnah and its causes in all circumstances. End quote.

Fataawa al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah (2/981)

If these conditions are met in your work, then there is nothing wrong with you doing it in sha Allaah.

We ask Allaah to grant you a righteous husband, for He is able to do that.

And Allaah knows best.

EmpathicDesign #transphobia deviantart.com

Just.. Lol. At least for some of it.

Lesbian - Biological females with a romantic and sexual desire for other women. Valid.

Gay - Biological males with a romantic and sexual desire for other men. Valid.

Bisexual - Biological females or males with a romantic and sexual desire for other men and women. Valid.

Transgender - An ideology based on the self assertion of being the opposite sex. Not relevant to sexual orientation. Invalid.

Queer - Another term for homosexual. Used ambiguously rather than a direct claim of ones homosexuality. Valid.

Questioning - Self explanatory, but not a sexual preference. Invalid.

Two-Spirit - Culturally inappropriate and not even remotely relevant to sexual orientations. Invalid.

Intersex - A biological anomaly that covers a variety of physical sex disorders. Completely unrelated to sexual orientation. Invalid.

Asexual - The total lack of sexual desire. Not a sexual orientation. Invalid.

Did I miss any? :3

M.

EmpathicDesign #racist #wingnut deviantart.com

If they did, the movement that set out to (apparently) defend the freedoms and protections of black people would actually care about black people and not use the untimely death of (criminal) black man at the knees of a white police officer (despite not being racially motivated).

BLM is nothing more than mindless, bigoted movement to destroy property and rob innocent, hard working people, all because of 'Feelings'.

If they can mobilize like that, why not tackle pedophilia, rape, domestic violence and abuse, of which there is ample amounts in the black community.
But no, they want to destroy the property of people who had nothing to do with George's death. Black people did not fight for freedom just to watch their future people kill each other ignore the real issues facing them.
Well, if they end up destroying themselves, so be it. If you don't listen, you don't learn.
Justifiable self destruction.

But here is more as to why black lives do not matter: Because black people are, by and large, not treating each other like they do matter; they do not challenge the state government that is neglecting their human needs but instead continue to elect the same government that neglects them whilst degrading the governments that would help them, they do not rally against the powers that oppress them and they instead of pointing their fingers to the formerly stated, they point their fingers to white people and white police, all because white people are by and large, doing better, but not because of the government, but because they put in the effort for themselves and their loved ones.

There is no point attacking and defunding the police, black people historically armed themselves against each other; gangs, drug dealers and hoods, and the more powerful the fire arms, the more powerful the police require their equipment needs to be to protect innocent citizens.

If black lives matter, then black people would act like they do, but they do not and have no one to blame but themselves for doing nothing about their circumstances. Period.

M.

Chateau Heartiste #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

Dating Market Value Test For Men

Here is a system for determining your dating market value if you are a man. Dating market value is a measurement of how you stack up against other men in the competition for attracting female interest. Be honest with yourself taking this survey. It will give you a fairly accurate assessment of the quality and number of women you are capable of attracting for a sexual relationship. Girls, you may take this quiz for your boyfriends to see if you are slumming it or about to be cheated on.

1. How old are you?

under 25 years old: 0 points
26-34 years old: +1 point
35-45 years old: 0 points
45+ years old: -1 point

2. How tall are you?

under 5’9?: -1 point
5’9? to 5’11”: 0 points
6' to 6’4?: +1 point
over 6’4?: 0 points

3. What is your BMI?

(Go here to calculate your BMI. I know BMI doesn’t account for very muscular physiques, but since most men are not Lee Haney, it is adequate for this survey’s purposes.)

under 20.0: -1 point
20.0 to 24.0: +1 point
24.1 to 27.0: 0 points
over 27.0: -1 point

4. How much do you bench press?

60% or less of your body weight: -1 point
61% to 80% of your body weight: 0 points
81% to 170% of your body weight: +1 point
over 170% of your body weight: 0 points

5. What does your hairline look like?

Full head of hair if you are over 35: +1 point
Full head of hair if you are under 35: 0 points
Receding hairline if you are over 35: 0 points
Receding hairline if you are under 35: -1 point
Bald (age irrelevant): -1 point
Bald but you are dark-skinned: 0 points

6. How much money do you make?

under $40K and you are out of college: -1 point
$40K to $70K out of college and under 40 years old: 0 points
over $70K out of college and under 40 years old: +1 point
under $40K and you are college age or younger: 0 points
$40K to $55K and over 40 years old: -1 point
$55K to $90K and over 40 years old: 0 points
over $90K and 40 to 55 years old: +1 point
over $200K (age irrelevant): +1 point

7. Do you have a car?

No (under 21yo): 0 points
No (over 21yo): -1 point
Yes (under 21yo): +1 point
Yes (over 21yo): 0 points
No, but you have a motorcycle (age irrelevant): +1 point

8. Are you good-looking?

(Self-assessment is somewhat unreliable, so if you are uncertain of your looks post your pic on hotornot and wait a week for your score. Or get opinions from unbiased and blunt friends. Hashing out the biometric details of what makes a male face attractive would require another lengthy post, so for now these two methods are acceptable substitutes.)

On a 1 – 10 scale:

0 – 4: -1 point
5 – 7: 0 points
8 – 10: +1 point

9. Have you ever played a leading role in a team sport?

No: 0 points
Yes: +1 point

10. What is your occupation?

(Since I won’t list every single high status job in the Department of Labor’s Occupational Handbook, you’ll have to make a judgment call on your own job. It’s a safe assumption that most people know a high status job when they see it.)

High status (doctor, lawyer, stockbroker, executive, professor, business owner, successful artist or musician or writer, professional athlete, etc.): +1 point
Neutral status (engineer, programmer, accountant, salesman, mid level manager, scientist, military officer, well-paid tradesman, etc.): 0 points
Low status (low paid blue collar, admin, construction, janitor, struggling web designer, help desk, etc.): -1 point

11. How many friends do you have?

0 to 3: -1 point
4 to 20: 0 points
over 20: +1 point

12. How many friends have you met through the internet that you have never seen in person?

0 to 2: 0 points
over 2: -1 point

13. When was the last time you went to a house party?

Within the past month: +1 point
Between one month and one year ago: 0 points
Over one year ago: -1 point

14. Have people besides your family called you funny?

None: -1 point
A few have: 0 points
Nearly everyone who knows me: +1 point

15. What is your IQ?

Under 85: -1 point
85 to 110: 0 points
110 to 130: +1 point
130 to 145: 0 points
over 145: -1 point

16. At a party, which happens first – you approach someone or someone approaches you?

I approach someone first almost every time: +1 point
I occasionally approach first: 0 points
Someone normally approaches me first: -1 point

17. Have you ever been in a serious fight where real punches were thrown and you felt like you wanted to kill your opponent(s)?

No: 0 points
Yes: +1 point
Yes, with a girl: -1 point

18. Have you ever been arrested?

No: 0 points
Yes: +1 point
Yes, for child pornography or public exposure: -1 point

****

It’s best to answer the following four questions based on your past experience with similar scenarios. Who we really are is not what we wish we were but what we have always been.

19. You are on a second date with a girl. You go to kiss her. She turns her cheek to you and says “Slow down, I’m not that kind of girl.” You reply:

(A) “Sorry.”
(B) “Yeah, well, no prob.”
(C) “This could be trouble ’cause I’m that kind of guy.” *smirk*

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

20. You’re chatting up a pretty girl you just met in a bar. After a few minutes she asks you to buy her a drink. You reply:

(A) “Sure.”
(B) “I’m not an ATM.”
(C) “No, but you can buy me one.”

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

21. You’ve just met a cute girl in a club and have been talking with her for five minutes when she abruptly changes the topic to a raunchy conversation about her multiorgasmic ability. You respond with:

(A) a huge grin and an eager “Damn! That is HOT!”
(B) a look of mild disdain.
(C) a raised eyebrow while saying “Hey, thanks for the medical report.”

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

22. The pickup has been going well. Later in the night she leans in and begins making out with you passionately. You feel like a king and your jeans suddenly feel much tighter. Do you:

(A) immediately grope her boob in return.
(B) continue making out with her for as long as she wishes.
(C) kiss for a little bit then push her gently away and look distracted for a second.

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

And finally, the critical thinking portion of the quiz. The following questions are based on the progression of a single pickup attempt.

23. You go to a bar. Twenty feet away are a pretty girl, a fat girl, and an average guy talking amongst themselves. The pretty girl briefly eye flirts with you. In reponse, you:

(A) eye flirt back and forth a few times before approaching 20 minutes later.
(B) immediately approach in a direct fashion maintaining strong eye contact with your target.
(C) immediately approach but from an indirect angle, looking around the room distractedly on the way over to your target as if you might see an even prettier girl somewhere else, and finally delivering your opener from over your shoulder.

(A): -1 point
(B): 0 points
(C): +1 point

24. Who do you address first?

(A) the pretty girl.
(B) the fat girl.
(C) everyone.

(A): -1 point
(B): 0 points
(C): +1 point

25. After getting the whole group engaged in conversation and having a good time, your target blurts out “Hey nice pink shirt! Are you gay?” You:

(A) say “No, I’m not gay!”
(B) ignore her.
(C) say “OK, who brought their little sister to the bar!”

(A): -1 point
(B): 0 points
(C): +1 point

26. In the middle of the conversation you have to pee. You say:

(A) “I have to go to the bathroom. I’ll be right back.”
(B) “Excuse me.”
(C) nothing. Just go.

(A): -1 point
(B): 0 points
(C): +1 point

27. You’ve managed to get her outside your front door. There is obvious sexual tension. You want to close this deal. You say:

(A) “So, um, ah, see you around.”
(B) “Why don’t you come inside?”
(C) “I’m thirsty. Are you thirsty? Let’s go inside and taste DC’s finest tap water. But you can only stay for a minute, I have to get up early.”

(A): -1 point
(B): 0 points
(C): +1 point

****

SCORES

There are 26 points to earn or lose based on the questions asked. The scoring breaks down as follows:

-26: Why are you still alive?
-25 to -20: You’re an omega. Celibacy has its charms.
-19 to -15: You actively repulse girls. Your kind will usher forth the sexbot revolution.
-14 to -10: You’re always getted foisted onto the warpigs.
-9 to 0: Lesser beta. You don’t immediately disgust girls; they just don’t notice you. With much painful effort you can redeem yourself.
1 to 9: Classic beta. You catch some girls’ eyes, usually the ones you don’t want. Try not to make fatty fucking a lifestyle.
10 to 14: A few attractive girls in the bar will be intrigued by your presence. But you need game to close the deal.
15 to 19: Congrats, you have crossed the alpha Rubicon. A lot of cute girls will be pleased when you hit on them. But you can still fuck up by being yourself.
20 to 25: You’re a natural. Many hot girls check you out and forgive your occasional pickup blunders. You always have a look of sexual satisfaction on your face.
26: Super Alpha. Booty sticks to you like bird shit on car roofs.

(Submitter's note: Compare and contrast Dating Market Value Test For Women)

Most Holy Family Monastery #fundie #homophobia mostholyfamilymonastery.com

[From "'Gay' Supporter of Bishop Richard Williamson Writes In"]

[THIS MAN POSTED A COMMENT ON OUR ARTICLE, Does God Create Homosexuals? BELOW IS OUR RESPONSE]

@Joseph Isaiah

You are lying, that is not and never has been the teaching of Mother Church. I remember being different from other boys as far back as age 3…

I am a Catholic and I accept whole and undefiled the doctrines of the Church. I identify with the Resistance of Bishop Williamson. So you cannot claim I am a Modernist, I am simply saying you are not accepting the true Catholic teaching on same sex attraction. It is not because of my sins, but original sin and our fallen nature and race that I have the attractions I have. I remember as a child, saying so many times to God, that He needed to fix my broken sexuality, because I couldn’t. No matter how much fasting, how many Rosaries, how many Confessions and Communions, no matter how much penance, nothing changed. I always was attracted to girls as well, but I always liked other boys as well. Christ gave this to me as a cross to take up daily.

The Holy Catholic Church was founded by Christ not as a prison of persecution, but a hospital for the broken men and women. Christ is our loving God and Saviour because we are not perfect, yet He loves us beyond the comprehension of man. It may condemn an action or heresy, but will never turn someone away who seeks Christ. His religion is the largest worldwide source of relief for the poor, the hungry, the sick, and repentant. It opens up the doors of unending compassion, for sinners of all kind, for single mothers, widows, orphans, married and divorced. For gay, for straight and for bi for the lonely and for sinners of all kind; her mission is the same. It is that of Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, Eternal King of the Ages, as she is His Mystical Bride made up of the Mystical Body. Her mission is to save souls. The Church teaches that although it is not of the Natural order that one is homosexual it is not a sin in itself, for one cannot sin if he has not done anything wrong. We are called to a life of celibacy and to be holy, just as all Christians are called to be holy. That is okay, because in reality what people long for is not sex, but love – to love and to be loved, it whatever form. Sexual love is just one form of love, but agape, love love on God can give is so much greater.

I don’t want to sound as if I’m not making Holy Mother Church’s teachings clear that sexual actions outside of a true marriage between man and woman are sinful, but rather I am also professing that with the Holy Church has always believed. That all people are children of the living God and He loves us all for whoever He made us to be. And that we all will be happiest and holiest when serving Him in the lifestyle He has by Divine Wisdom called us to. Because the Church is not for the Saint but the sinner. Those that are gay, are no different that those who are straight, we are all called to chastity and sexual purity. We all must unite ourselves the Christ and His cross, like Mary, Our Lady of Sorrows. St. Paul said in Scripture, I hath been crucified with Christ: now I liveth not, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loveth me, and gave Himself for me.” He is doing what all are called to do by Our Blessed Divine Lord, “Then Jesus saith unto his disciples: If any man wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.”

MHFM: Joseph, your letter is a prime example of why you remain afflicted with a perverted same-sex ‘attraction’. You are lying to yourself and rejecting the truth. Our position is very clear: same-sex attraction is not natural. It is the result of sin and a rejection of God, as Romans 1 teaches (see below). You make reference to some alleged ‘Catholic teaching’ which you believe contradicts our position. You believe this ‘teaching’ declares that there is nothing perverted about men being attracted to men, and women being attracted to women, but you cite nothing of course. That’s because no such teaching exists.

You also state: “I identify with the Resistance of Bishop Williamson. So you cannot claim I am a Modernist…” This is an example of how you are quite deceived. Identifying with the false resistance of Bishop Richard Williamson doesn’t prove you are not a modernist. On the contrary, it actually proves that your positions are heretical and schismatic, and that you are following a modernist. Richard Williamson is a modernist, a heretic, and a schismatic. He is not a true Catholic. You really need to watch this video: The Truth About The SSPX, The SSPX-MC, And Similar Groups (video). It proves that the ‘Resistance’ you are embracing is not Catholic.

You should also see this file on him: [B]Williamson, Bishop Richard of the SSPX: a schismatic and a wolf in sheep’s clothing[/B].

Among other things, Richard Williamson holds that one may attend the invalid, non-Catholic New Mass. He declared that the notorious idolater and apostate Antipope John Paul II was a “good man”. He declared that the notorious apostate Benedict XVI is “in good faith”. He denies the dogma Outside the Church There Is No Salvation, as all priests ordained by the SSPX do. He, in fact, holds that Jews, Muslims, etc. can be saved without the Catholic faith, contrary to the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Florence. He therefore does not profess the Catholic Church’s teaching on salvation. In addition to being heretical, his positions are TOTALLY SCHISMATIC and involve a rejection of papal infallibility. He does not have the true faith. His positions are a rejection of Catholic truth about the Papacy. The ‘Resistance’ is false and schismatic.

[...]

Even though you don’t say it explicitly, you imply that you were ‘gay’ from your earliest years, even from the age of three. We doubt you have such memories from that age. Homosexuals deceive themselves and frequently lie. But even if one were, for the sake of argument, to accept your claim to have been a conscious homosexual from the age of three, we would respond thus: if you claim to have been conscious of such things from the age of three, that suggests that you reached the age of reason at the age of three. Well, as soon as one arrives at the age of reason, he can reject the truth. He can resist or reject God and sin mortally. Deliverance to unnatural attractions can be the result of such a rejection of God, even from an early age. Some people are just not of the truth. Some people just refuse to have God in their knowledge (Romans 1:28), and they make that decision early on. St. Thomas explains that as soon as a person reaches the age of reason, he can direct himself to the proper end or he can refuse to do so. If he chooses to do the latter, he sins mortally. Since you claim to have possessed such an understanding of yourself and your activity from the age of three, then you could have refused to have God in your knowledge and rejected the proper end at that age. That could be why you have same-sex ‘attraction’, and had it from a very early age. But it’s more likely that you rejected God and the truth a number of years later than you describe, and that resulted in your perverted inclinations.

[...]

You were given over to homosexuality as a result of your resistance to the truth. You can be delivered from it when you actually become a real Catholic. Our material covers the true positions, and it explains how to become a true Catholic. But don’t expect to be delivered from your perverted inclinations while you are following a schismatic false resistance that denies papal infallibility, among other things. You will only be delivered if and when you embrace the true faith and get into the state of grace.

natsumihanaki20 #fundie natsumihanaki20.deviantart.com

1# Homosexuality is inborn


There's no proof that homosexuality is inborn. All of the studies often used to prove that homosexuality is inborn are fallacious. Why? Well, let’s begin with LeVay’s brain study. When looking at the methodology of the LeVay study, one of the key problems is that the study has never been reproduced. Another problem is that out of nineteen homosexual subjects used in the study, all had died of complications of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). AIDS has been shown to decrease testosterone levels, so it should be expected that those who suffered from that condition would have smaller INAH. Furthermore, in a scientific environment where controls and standards are a necessity, LeVay did not possess a complete medical history of the individuals included in his study. He therefore was forced to assume the sexual orientation of the non-AIDS victims as being heterosexual, when some may not have been. Also, there’s brain plasticity which is a fact acknowledged by most scientists. Given that we know today that the brain exhibits plasticity, one must ask if the act of living a homosexual lifestyle itself might be responsible for the difference LeVay noted? Another study often used by gay activists as a proof that homosexuals are ‘born’ that way is Bailey and Pillard’s Study. In this one there isn’t much to explain as the whole fallacy of the study can be proven with this one statement: If there was in fact a “gay gene” or “a gay combination per se” then all of the identical twins should have reported a homosexual orientation. This observation suggests that there is no genetic component but rather social component in homosexuality. In fact, more adoptive brothers shared homosexuality than non-twin biological brothers. If there was a genetic factor in homosexuality, this result would be counter to the expected trend. The other fallacious study we will be covering here is Dr. Alan Sanders’ study of x-male chromosome. Dr. Alan Sander’s study fails for this one reason: the results exhibited on the gay men were never compared to that of heterosexual males. Another thing as to why homosexuality cannot be inborn from an evolutionary standpoint is that: Being gay is a disadvantage as if gay people where everywhere this race would not produce offspring. Besides, there's no proof that homosexuality is caused by hormonal misbalances such as low testosterone, such claims are naught but mere hypothesis and thus, invalid. In fact, low testosterone has been associated with low sex drive and infertility so, there really isn't any ground for such hypothesis. So even if it did exist at one point it would be dissolved within a few generations. Things will evolve or die, since we are still here chances are it evolved away if it even existed. As you can see there's no study that even suggests that homosexuality is inborn.

2# Homosexuality is not harmful, it is just fine

Nowadays, there’s this myth that homosexuality is not harmful and an equal to heterosexual relationships; however, this couldn’t be further away from the truth. Homosexuality is a very harmful practice that results in many illnesses, it’s kind of like smoking a misbehavior that feels good but destroys your body. How can this be true? How can homosexuality be harmful when so many LGBT are such wonderful people? Well, let’s begin with how gays have shortened lifespan. Yes, homosexuals have shortens lifespan and this isn’t just my word as there are studies to back my claims. It isn't just the 1997 study that pointed to this grim truth, according to the article you attached, the 1997 study is fallacious because the lifespan of gays should have improved over time thus, so it shouldn’t be valid today. However, other recent studies have reported similar findings. Such studies include an study done by Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute and who held a poster session and presented the study at March, 2007 Eastern Psychological Association convention in Philadelphia. The facts of the Cameron's studies were these: the lifespan of homosexuals is 20 years lower than that of straights. They found that in the Canadian database, a decline in homosexuality was evident by the fourth decade of life. Those who identified themselves as homosexual constituted a relatively stable fraction of adults only for those aged into their mid-40s (e.g., one of every 47-48 adults). Thereafter, their proportion dropped regularly, down to one of every 234 adults in old age (65+), resulting in an overall estimate of 1.4% of adults who ‘were. In both the table and abstract done by the Cameron a precipitous decline in the homosexual population following middle age was noted. Taking a look at the statistics and studies regarding homosexuals, both old and new, it becomes evident what’s the real reason as to the reduction in homosexuals’ lifespan. Unlike what most pro-gay activist like to claims this reduced lifespans is not due to discrimination or stigmatization because these studies were conducted in countries were homosexuals are not persecuted, there's very little disapproval of homosexuality, and were homosexuals even enjoy special rights. The reason for this statistics is the nature of homosexual sex itself is harmful, and many of the harmful acts committed in such relationships are not committed by straights as often as by homosexuals. Like Diggs said the anus is not made for penetration and anal sex is extremely harmful for both homosexuals and straights. However, straights have the option to indulge in traditional sexual intercourse which is way safer than those homosexual practices. There's no such thing as safe homosexual sex for all the practices involved in their so called making 'love' ritual have been proven to be dangerous practices that often result in many illnesses. The use of a condom reduces the chances of HIV; however, it does not eliminate the risk especially during anal sex practiced mostly by homosexuals as 1 in 27 condoms will break during anogenital homosexual sex. Also, there’s no scientific evidence that condoms prevent the transmission of Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and Herpes simplex virus. The prevention of the these three STDs has not been absolutely quantified, because no one is suggesting that a person known to have one of these treatable infections have regular intercourse with an unaffected partner. Though, health professionals assume the usage of condoms reduces the risks of getting these diseases; however, as to what extent condoms prevent these diseases are unknown. Back to anal sex, this kind of sex is extremely dangerous and harmful. The use of artificial lubricants doesn’t make this practice any safer, in one study involving nearly 900 men and women in Baltimore and Los Angeles, the researchers found that those who used lubricants were three times more likely to have rectal sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Even after controlling for gender, HIV status, city, condom use, and number of sex partners in the past month, the association between lubricant use before receptive rectal intercourse and rectal STIs remained strong. Another study that subjected popular over-the-counter and mail-order lubricants to rigorous laboratory tests discovered that many of the products were toxic to cells and rectal tissue. Thus, lubricants don’t really make anal sex safer if anything it makes anal sex more dangerous. Anal sexual intercourse as Mr.Diggs noted does increase fecal incontinence as shown in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009–2010) done by Alayne D Markland and others which included 2,100 male participants. Anal sex is also known to increase anal cancer and it’s no surprise taking into account anal sex is done mostly by homosexuals that, gay and bisexual men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men. Other physical problems associated with anal sex are: hemorrhoids, anal fissures, anorectal trauma, retained foreign bodies. Oral sex practiced amongst heterosexuals and homosexuals but particularly among homosexuals is dangerous as well. Fisting is far more dangerous than anal intercourse; results of fisting can include infections, inflammation and enhanced susceptibility to STDs. Rimming a practice done by most homosexuals which increases the risk for Hepatitis A or B, gonorrhea, syphilis, and herpes/genital warts, though low, the risks are still there especially when most people perform unprotected oral sex. Another illness that is very prevalent among homosexual communities is Shigella, it can be transmitted through person-to-person contact, oral-anal sex, or sucking or licking of the anus (anilingus or "rimming"), may be especially risky.Many shigellosis outbreaks among MSM have been reported in the United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, and Europe since 1999. Frottage, when done naked or simply if the infected skin of a partaker rubs against the uninfected skin of the partner, can result in STDs transmitted by skin-to-skin contact which include: Herpes, HPV, genital warts, mononucleosis, Molluscum Contagiosum, and syphilis. Also, another risk of frottage is clothing rubbing on a lesion as it can irritate it risking either a secondary infection or a disease spreading through self-inoculation. Tribadism includes the risks of frottage as well. There is almost no published research addressing the question of whether fingering is transmits STDs or not. However, common sense says it should be extremely low but still, fingering is not risk free from STDs. The usage of latex condoms does not completely eliminate the risks of STDs during mutual masturbation and other forms of sexual contacts as it is not 100% effective and there’s also the risk of developing latex allergies. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that while men with same-sex attraction make up only 2 percent of the total population, they accounted for 63% of all newly-diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases in 2010. Despite what gay activist would like to believe, HIV among msm seems to be increasing as in 2014, gay and bisexual men accounted for an estimated 83% of HIV diagnoses among males and 67% of all diagnoses (CDC). When into account that gays are about 1.6% or 2.3% (counting bisexuals) of the population, according to a recent survey done by the National Health Statistics Reports (2014), it can be concluded by using basic math that being gay drastically increases your chances of getting many illnesses. In 2014, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 82.9% of all male syphilis cases and 61.2% of all syphilis cases in the US. In your article it was claimed that over time Homosexual’s ailments would become less common but it seems the opposite is happening as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(2014) noted that the number of cases of Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis is increasing among men and particularly the msm populace. A study done by Damien Stark(2007) resulted in indicating that MSM were more likely to have multiple parasites in their stool compared to non-MSM (43.5% versus 8%; P < 0.001). In a sexual health survey of MSM in Vancouver, 18% of men had been diagnosed with genital warts, 62% were infected with a strain of HPV, and screening for anal cancer detected abnormalities in 64% of HIV-positive men and 34% of HIV-negative men (suggesting anal cancer may be present). What’s more, it seems most homosexuals infected with HIV are unaware of their infection! A CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection. Another study conducted by Marc Martí-Pastor,Patricia García de Olalla, and others (2015) concluded that an increase in cases of STIs was observed in 2015, most of which affected mainly msm. The Marc and Patricia’s study revealed that 66.8 % of the HIV cases were men who had sex with men (MSM), 45.5 % of the gonorrhea cases were MSM.74.2 % of the syphilis cases were MSM and 95.3 % of the LGV cases are MSM. Homosexuality increases the risk to HPV as shown by the statistics presented in the journal Cancer (2004): 60% of gay men without HIV, 90% of gay men with, have human papilloma virus infection in their anal canal. A study conducted n 2002 by Susanne L. Dibble and others concluded that lesbians are at a higher risk of developing ovarian cancer. HPV (human papillomavirus) is common in WSW as HPV can be transmitted through skin to skin contact. A study published by the Gay and Lesbian Association concluded that lesbians have higher rates of breast cancer. The lesbians that chose not to do the screenings do them for the same reasons straights chose not to. Since oral-genital sex is a frequent practice of women who have sex with women, genital herpes transmission with both HSV-1 and HSV-2 can occur. A National survey from 2001-2006, reported that 30% of women who reported having same-sex sexual contact in the past year, had positive blood tests for HSV-2. This finding is contrasted with women who report no same-sex sexual contact, among whom 24% had positive blood tests for HSV-2. Other diseases abundant in homosexuals include: Hepatites A, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Proctitis, HSV, BV, HEP B, Giardia lamblia, Amebiasis, and mental disorders. The tendency of gay men to acquire many of these plethora of diseases, contrary to what most gay activists suggest, isn’t due to discrimination as public acceptance of gay/lesbian relations as morally acceptable grew slowly but steadily from 38% in 2002 to 56% in 2011 and is now holding at the majority level; the problems with the American LGBT community aren’t also due to lack of knowledge about ‘safe’ homosexual sex practices as since 2013 in The Real Education For Healthy Youth Act, an act that promotes homsosexual sex education by providing federal fund solely to programs that educate about ‘safe’ homosexual sex partners, has been in place. Also, there have been numerous LGBT education programs receiving federal funding before and many school districts teaching about safe homosexual sex education that date back prior the 2013. On the web there’s also a plethora of websites that cover safe gay sex available to homosexuals of any age, when you write the word ‘safe gay sex’ on Google you will get 36,100,000 results many of which cover on ‘safe’ gay sex practices with tips. So, it can be concluded that the many illnesses present on the homosexual community are more due to the harmful nature of the homosexual lifestyle and homosexuality per se rather than due to discrimination or lack of homosexual sex education. Homosexuality is asexual behavior, not a characteristic like a skin color, and when looking at all this statistics we can determine that homosexuality is a harmful sexual behavior such as smoking is a harmful behavior.

3# Children of gays parents do as well as those of straights

Children raised by homosexual parents don’t fare as well. Studies that indicate that children from homosexual households fare as well as those with heterosexual parents are fallacious. Such studies usually have relied on samples that are small and not representative of the population, and they frequently have been conducted by openly homosexual researchers who have an ideological bias on the question being studied. In addition, these studies usually make comparisons with children raised by divorced or single parents--rather than with children raised by their married, biological mother and father. They have also used selective recruiting instead of using random samples. And usually the reports are given by the parents instead of the kids themselves. Studies that prove kids under the care of same sex parents don’t fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents include: Regnerus(2012), Allen(2013), and Sullins(2015). Most of these studies have random samples with numbers that are representative of the children raised in same sex households.

4# Homosexuality cannot be changed

there's evidence that shows intervention to change ones' sexualities are actually pretty successful.Robert Spitzer conducted a study on 200 self-selected individuals (143 males, 57 females) in an effort to see if participants could change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual (2003, 32:403-417). He reported some minimal change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation that lasted at least five years (p. 403). Spitzer observed:

The majority of participants gave reports of change from a predominantly or exclusively homosexual orientation before therapy to a predominantly or exclusively heterosexual orientation in the past year (p. 403).
In summarizing his findings, Spitzer declared: “Thus, there is evidence that change in sexual orientation following some form of reparative therapy does occur in some gay men and lesbians.” He thus concluded: “This study provides evidence that some gay men and lesbians are able to also change the core features of sexual orientation” (p. 415).
Six years earlier, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) released the results of a two-year study stating:
Before treatment, 68 percent of the respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating that they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual (see Nicolosi, 2000, 86:1071).

The study also reported:
Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable (p. 1071).

These data are consistent with the ongoing research project of Rob Goetze, who has identified 84 articles or books that contain some relevance to the possibility of sexual orientation change (2004). Of the data reported, 31 of the 84 studies showed a quantitative outcome of individuals able to change sexual orientation. These studies are not mere speculation as they have numbers to back up their results. These studies are more than enough proof that homosexuality can be changed.

#faggots #gay #homosexuality #homosexuals #lesbian #religion #statistics #yaoi #yuri #antigay #boyslove #homophobe #homophobia #lgbt #misconception #myths #science #study #truths #boys_love
Once again God is right and humans are wrong.

TriggerFish #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

A Theory of Fukushima - HAARP Technology Caused the Nuclear Disaster?

I just found this profoundly interesting and disturbing theory (very different from the alt media's first take) They were trying to reduce the dramatic increase in air ionization levels over Japan. It was caused by plant overstress and venting during uranium/plutonium production in 2010.

A massive cargo of plutonium was exported to Japan's Fukushima reactors for processing in 2010 -2011

A problem developed where the reactors had three times more after heat and steam than normal.

Reactors were opened and they started blowing air into the atmosphere.

The release of air caused the ionization levels above Japan to skyrocket.

NATO and the IEA freaked out about the rising ionization levels.

First they tried to push the ionization down with geoengineering chemicals so the nitrogenshere would not explode. That failed.

Then HAARP was tried to reduce the ionization levels above Japan's nuclear reactors.

HAARP ran for 2.5 days according to Russian and Chinese sources.

The ionization cloud acted as a lighting rod grounding all the HAARP energy into the soil.

The powerful energy reached the rock infrastructure below the Pacific & Fukushima; The crystal structure in the ground started to vibrate.

Immense rock bed became unstable. The tectonic boundary under Japan started to move.

The HAARP hammer effect triggered the earthquake and resulting tsunami.

[link to presscore.ca]


HAARP Magnetometer data shows Japan earthquake was induced.


The United States Air Force and Navy has provided a visual insight into what caused the 9.0 magnitude off of Japan on March 11, 2011 at 05:46:23 UTC. The image above was downloaded from the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) website. It is a time-frequency spectrogram, which shows the frequency content of signals recorded by the HAARP Induction Magnetometer. This instrument, provided by the University of Tokyo, measures temporal variations in the geomagnetic field (Earth’s magnetosphere) in the ULF (ultra-low frequency) range of 0-5 Hz. Notions have been added to the image to show you what was happening the day the Japan earthquake and tsunami struck.

Lynn Wardell #fundie cnsnews.com

Legal marriage is a public institution, created by law to promote public policy and to further social interests including especially the well-being of members of society – particularly of children, mothers and families. Marriage has great significance for many important private interests, as well, such as for religion, for family ties, family history, and especially for personal identity.

What is deemed a marriage for purposes of the law may differ from what is deemed marriage for other purposes, such as for a specific academic discipline (such as sociology or ancient history, for example), or for a particular religious faith, private association, ethnic community, or for a specific set of cultural elites, etc. Just because a union is or is not deemed a legal marriage, this does not prevent any social subgroups from considering it a marriage (or a non-marriage) for their own (extra-legal) purposes.

The battle of what marriage means in the law can be seen from one important perspective as a battle among special interest groups each seeking to have their preferred understanding of marriage endorsed by the law and implemented in the law. Behind the marriage debate are political-economic interests.

Obsolescence is relevant. That is, if a huge gap opens up between the law and the moral order of society, one or the other must change or law risks becoming irrelevant. This “gap” also has profound significance for the legitimacy of the law. The very legitimacy of the law and even possibly the legitimacy of the legal system and its institutions (e.g., the courts, the legislature, the government) will be undermined if the law becomes obsolete. Thus, if legal marriage deviates profoundly from social understanding of marriage, both the institution of marriage and society in general are harmed.

The American form of government and legal system derive their just powers from the “consent of the governed,” according to the Declaration of Independence. The principle of popular sovereignty and ultimate popular control is the cornerstone of the American republic. Thus, the idea and understanding of any legal relationship in American laws, including marriage, should reflect the ideas about that relationship that arise from the people of America – if the law is legitimate.

Thus, the legitimate understanding and legal meaning of “marriage” in America and American laws should reflect the ideas about marriage and marriage values that prevail among the people of America. Reference to the consent of the governed is the acid test of whether a new law is legitimate or not. If that law was enacted by the constitutional consent of the governed – the procedures provided in the Constitution of the United States – it is constitutionally legitimate. If no, it is not. It’s really that simple.

By the standard of constitutional process and constitutional consent, the pedigree of same-sex marriage in the United States is very dubious. Same-sex marriage is the law of the land because five judges sitting on the Supreme Court ordered that all states must legalize same-sex marriage in their June 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. Four justices wrote blistering dissenting opinions in Obergefell. So, by the vote of just one judge same-sex marriage was mandated for all states.

The history of legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States before Obergefell v. Hodges shows a massive litigation campaign by advocates of same-sex marriage who were repeatedly stymied and frustrated in the efforts to legalize same-sex marriage by proper democratic legislative or popular referendum process. However, denied popular support by voters and legislators in the states, the supporters of same-sex marriage turned to the courts and filed lawsuits in which activist super-legislator judges (most federal judges) in nearly three-fourths of the states ordered the states to legalize same-sex marriage. So same-sex marriage in the U.S. is constitutionally illegitimate and is the result of an anti-democratic litigation campaign designed to circumvent the democratic will and constitutional process for making marriage law.

Polls in the United States reported general opposition to the legalization of same-sex marriage until 2010. Poll results split between support for and opposition to same-sex marriage in 2010 and 2011, which seemed to be transition years. Since 2012, however, many polls have reported support for same-sex marriage in the 50-percentile range, with opposition in the 40-percentile range (give or take). Of course, polling results and results of secret balloting in elections often vary – sometimes significantly.

There are two key ways by which an institution may become obsolete: First, it may become obsolete by its neglect and non-usage; Second, it may become obsolete by its alteration so that it becomes, for all practical purposes, another institution – maintaining only the label, title or form of the former institution but in substance and function a very different institution.

The campaign to legalize same-sex marriage – resulting in judicial decisions in lawsuits in three-fourths of the states – shows clearly that marriage is not obsolete in the United States. Marriage matters, and it matters very much to many people on both sides of the same-sex marriage policy question and other marriage issues.

The judicial legalization of same-sex marriage also matters because it undermines not only the integrity of the institution of marriage but the integrity of the institution of the courts. More than either of the other branches of our government, the judiciary depends upon the trust of and the goodwill of the people to function effectively. Lacking both sword (executive power) and shield (legislative power) the judiciary depends upon willing compliance in most cases. So when people disrespect the courts and believe that they are biased ideologically or otherwise, the prospects for voluntary compliance with judicial decrees lessen.

So marriage matters and the constitutional processes of our republic also matter. Both marriage and our constitutional system have been weakened by the illegitimate judicial legalization of same-sex marriage.

Melony Hill #racist theurbantwist.com

We Lost Another One. Serena “Hottentot” Williams is Engaged, and He’s White.

The fact that white men have lusted after, and when not offered, taken the body of Black women for centuries is sickening. The idea that a Black woman would voluntarily lie down with one is mind-blowing.

Last week I published an article titled “She’s Down With the Swirl”, pointing out high profile Black women who dated and married outside of their race. On the list was Venus Williams, her sister, Serena recently announced that she is engaged to Reddit co-founder, Alexis Ohanian.

I think I’m as liberal as the next, and while I recognize that we would not have had our first Biracial president if there weren’t people who dated outside of the Black race, I don’t like it. Yea I said it, in just 2 days it will be 2017 and even though I know I’m not supposed to say it in this day and age, it’s true. Why lie? I’m one who believes desegregation and legalizing interracial marriage destroyed the Black community. YES, I said it.

The more I watch Black men and women date and marry any race other than Black, the more I want to cry. We now live in a society where it is commonplace to see mixed families, where history books are being rewritten to erase the brutality that was enacted upon Africans brought to America. We live in a society where little Black babies are continuously being adopted by non-Black parents who neglect their real history and heritage.

Many of today’s Blacks seem to not even understand the struggle their ancestors endured to make sure we were treated fairly in this country. To many, Emmitt Till is a name from a disrespectful Lil Wayne song. These idiots are too blinded by what they think is good living to understand that Emmitt Till was a CHILD, a 14-year-old boy who DARED whistle at a white woman. Not only did it get him kidnapped from his family’s home, nor brutalized, it left him dead from such a horrific disregard for human life that we are still shocked by the funeral photos today.

People like the members of the Bilderberg group (PLEASE look them up) have mastered the art of using movies, music, television and social media to dumb the world down and desensitize you to things that SHOULD outrage you. The more we are bombarded with images of Black men and women dying at the hands of white officers, and civilians alike, the more they let the bodies lie in the street, reminiscent of strange fruit swinging from the trees in the south; the more the world looks at things as if they are normal.

The more the news shows you savagery perpetrated by Black Americans you think Black people are savages. The media does not highlight the same behavior from other ethnicity.

As a Black person, you should not be able to turn a blind eye to these things. You can and should not ignore that in 2017 we are seeing too much of the same behavior, rhetoric and malice that has plagued Black people in America for centuries. Nothing has changed. Before we “progressed” with desegregation, the Black community was a strong community. Black people had generational wealth and/or businesses to pass down through the family. Black people owned property, the Black family was close and the father was in the home.

From desegregation, we moved to equal opportunity jobs and homes. This was mainly given to single women and the elderly. Black women were pulled into the women’s rights movement, though white women hadn’t been fighting for our rights all along. Suddenly, Black women were chasing the white woman’s dream of freedom from under her husband’s thumb. White women longed to work, to go to school and create lives outside of their families. Black women have been working all along, many were educated. Old school Black couples understood that it took teamwork for their families to survive. Black women did not have the luxury of cooking and cleaning while waiting for the kids to come home. They were busy being mammy’s, maids, seamstresses and the like.

The government scammed the Black man out of the household, telling the Black woman she didn’t need a man and it was perfectly acceptable to raise her children alone. Over the years, the government enacted a series of laws to restore “law and order.” Somehow, these laws seemed to target minorities more. To Black women it said, we will house and feed you and your children as long as you stay single, uneducated and loyal. Government assistance, like section 8, bars convicted felons from living in homes paid for by the government. Meaning if your children’s father is a felon, he can’t be in the home to raise his children if you get government assistance.

Furthermore, the trap of cash assistance ensures that if a woman on government assistance actually tries to better herself, she fails. If you actually get a job or go back to school, your benefits can be cut immediately. The government, America and the old rich white men who run it, never meant for us to have a real chance at a productive life in America.

That’s why a woman like Serena Williams marrying a white man bothers me so much. The history of what was and is still being done to the Black race is not hidden. It’s public knowledge and can be researched with ones fingertips. The fact that white men have lusted after, and when not offered, taken the body of Black women for centuries is sickening. The idea that a Black woman would voluntarily lie down with one is mind-blowing. I look at paler Black people and literally SEE the oppressor in them. There have been times I’ve looked at a lighter skinned Black person and envisioned massa’ raping their ancestors.

Throughout her career that has not changed. On social media, she is constantly scrutinized and mocked for being too dark and too manly. This beautiful Black woman has been called a gorilla and ape more than Michelle Obama, and that is a LOT. In 2001, she told USA Today that after the 2001 BNP Paribas Opening she had been repeatedly called “nigger.” Her father reported blatant threats from the crowd. Serena boycotted the event for the next 13 years, finally appearing again in 2015. In 2014 Serena spoke out after Russian tennis federation president Shamil Tarpischev called her and Venus, the Williams Brothers, on Russian television. He was fined and subsequently, removed from his position. Last year when she was given the Sports Illustrated cover, the racist backlash was abhorrent.

Just earlier this year there were white women in Black face at the Australian Open and held a sign that said “keep calm and be Serena.” She has faced dehumanizing, hateful, race fueled comments her whole career and to my dismay, has even played into them. I was horrified when I saw this beautiful, incredibly talented woman trying to twerk for the camera. I was disgusted when Williams brushed off the incident where Caroline Wozniacki, Serena’s so-called “best friend” and fellow tennis player, came on the court with towels stuffed in the front and back, mimicking Williams shape in a match against Maria Sharapova.

Meanwhile while they degrade and ridicule, they stare at her in amazement as if she was a modern-day Sarah Baartman. They way white America obsesses over her shape and her ass, constantly sexualizing her as if her body type is in any way equal to or more important that her talent, is sickening. The way she seems totally happy to fit in, even when the joke is on her, is heartbreaking.

When news of her engagement broke one of my female friends said, I thought she was so pro Black and supportive of the cause. I laughed, knowing she had been down with the swirl, just like her sister. I told my friend, that Serena, just like Beyonce and many other Black celebrities of today, supports what’s trending and what will keep people supporting her and her businesses.

Anon #sexist dalrock.wordpress.com

SirHamster,

"Let’s see you build your non-obsolete society with 0 women, then."

Way to completely miss the point.

It is not about ‘women should not exist’. The point is : Women have proven that outside a tightly controlled life managed in a patriarchal structure, they have proven that they simply cannot be net contributors to an advanced society.

Read the point again if necessary.

Administrative_Worth & jeremyjimmy #sexist reddit.com

Re: Manlet ingested soy and took blue pill advice and went clubbing. You flew too close to the sun, brocel. (JFL They call him a creep for even existing in their vicinity)

image

(Administrative_Worth)

fashionmaxxed

hairmaxxed

groomaxxed

chad face

all rendered useless by his manletism

height > everything

I wouldn't say height over everything, but there's a minimum height requirement to even be in the game. It's a looks multiplier, everything under 5'10 gets a multiplier less than 1, eg 0.9 for 5'9.5 and gets a number higher than 1 multiplier when over 5'10, eg 5'11 =1.2x 6'2 = 1.5 6"4= 1.8x If you're below 5'5, you're multiplier score is 0, which means for all your looks, anything times 0 is zero. You're a non entity in the sexual world. It's brutal but true. You might be able to beta buxx with a very short woman

Yeah. If anything height is inverse for women. All the tall foids are always whining about being overlooked for short girls. Theyre basically tallcels

Tall foids just refuse to date short men. They're like the white women who complain about noodlewhores taking all the white men, not once considering to date a ricecel.

It's because their dating pool is guys of the same height, maybe a tiny bit shorter, and prefer taller guys. Their pool is already diminished and heavily competed over. I've dated a really short girl. years ago before I became a dsiabledcel. You could just pick her up at will, it's alot harder to do that with a tall girl.

tall girls aren't out of the market. They're just competing fo an already diminished group of society that is highy sought after. a 6'0 foid doesn't usually want a 5'11 or 5'10 guy, she usually wants 6'0 + in a much stronger way than normal foids want 6'0+. Her heightmatch is her settle. SO she has 10% of the populaton which are even acceptable beta buxxers.

Unironically this might be why. I have a very shitty frame and even I have won every fight I had with foids. They just can't throw a punch, all they do is push and kick and scream it's actually hilarious.

How many foids are you fighting man?

(jeremyjimmy)
I'll get shit for this but I'm not an incel, I'm just suffering from being majorly blackpilled. I've been talking to girls in private about the blackpill. They confirm IT ALL. They say shit like "yeah, height is the number one thing. I want a guy to be big." A girl I know who is 4ft 11 said that. She dated a 6ft 1 guy.

Literally every single girl I've brought this up with has confirmed the height thing, that it's super important. I'll admit, this shit is important to me too, I love short girls. If they're too tall I find them less attractive. This is where society has royally fucked up, they tell the truth about male sexuality and lie, for dumb, instinctual, animal like reasons, about female sexuality and preferences. So it's resulted in all this shitty behavior from women where they talk one way and act the EXACT opposite and then punish you or try to for noticing.

That's resulted in all these movements online, the blackpill, MGTOW, redpill. Then they start screeching about those, calling them misogyny. If it's misogyny then why does every girl I've met repeat all this stuff when they're alone? They all love black/redpill videos on Youtube because girls all hate each other. I don't even dislike women, I hate the people who lie to men about this stuff. More women do need to be honest about this stuff in public though.

Fading Light #racist stormfront.org

The Importance of Appearances to Opponents of White Nationalism

I was recently watching the video made from a broadcast by William Pierce in which he discussed the dissolution of Haiti into savagery after the Blacks committed mass genocide against the Whites who had created a high civilization there. He discussed the three occasions since that time in which Whites came back to the island and rebuilt civilization, only to end up leaving again—fortunately not due to mass murder by the Negroes on these other more recent occasions. All three times the rapid decay of civilization occurred again despite the resource-rich environment and the priceless gift of a very large head-start to proceed from, making it pretty hard for liberals to support a rational argument that the miserable state there can be blamed on Whites holding the Blacks back.

The really interesting part, however, was Pierce’s paraphrasing of Hesketh Prichard’s book, Where Black Rules White, A Journey Across and About Hayti:

“To the Haitians, the imitation of civilization is as good as the real thing. They believe that if they are able to dress like White men and speak the White man’s language and mimic the White man’s institutions, then they are as good as White men.”

Blacks, and in fact non-Whites in general, lack the intellectual capacity to comprehend the difference between form and substance. Appearances are all that matter to them. A Black man who is dressed in a suit and handed a high position in society that traditionally belongs to a White man is, in the eyes of himself and his fellow Negroes, every bit as good as a White man would be in that position simply because their inferior minds cannot comprehend the deeper requirements and necessities of filling the role.

Barack Obama is a perfect example of this. Having been handed every advantage in life out of race-pity—so many positions of power entirely unearned and unmerited—he is seen by non-Whites as a success despite being entirely bankrupt of any meaningful achievements in those positions, from his utter failure to turn out even a single paper during his time as president of the Harvard Law Review, to the over 300 roll-call votes he neglected to participate in as a U.S. senator, to the Nobel Peace Prize he was handed within days of being elected president with absolutely no accomplishment to warrant it. The suit is his success. The title is his success. His actual efforts (or lack thereof) are immaterial to them.

The truly disturbing part of all this, however, is that those same empty appearances are also just as good as the real thing to a very large group of White people: liberals. We see this every day on Stormfront, where our opponents eternal lambaste us about “discrimination based on SKIN COLOR.” Appearance is all that matters to a liberal. The idea that race involves more than skin tone is beyond their mental comprehension. A White person who is spray-painted brown has magically transmuted into a person of African descent. His genes have changed. His ancestry has been rerouted. Nothing but bewildered agitation results when we show them images of albino Negroes who are still quite obviously members of the Black race despite an exceedingly light skin tone.

This inability to fathom content over appearance is a critical element of which we must be aware if we are to understand our opponents’ methods. As childish as it seems, as embarrassingly simple-minded as it may strike us, it truly is the very core basis of their approach to solving problems. For example, under the Obama regime, the National Crime Victimization Survey has stopped tabulating crimes by race because, to anti-Whites, if the truth of Black crime can no longer be SEEN, it no longer exists. Black-on-White crimes are routinely concealed from the public by the Jew-controlled media because, to the leftists, that makes those crimes rare. The fact that this does nothing about the actual crime rates escapes their comprehension. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and George Zimmerman were just two of the recent examples of non-Whites being portrayed in the media with photographic adjustments to make their skin lighter because, to liberals, that makes them White.

This thinking (if that word can even correctly describe it) fits with virtually every social reform the left has ever attempted or proposed. In affirmative action, the NUMBER of non-Whites employed in various fields is to be increased even though the individuals being handed these jobs are not competent to do them. Liberal teachers in secondary education have been caught repeatedly giving non-Whites passing grades even though their academic performance was below the requisite threshold because, to them, a student who is simply given an A is every bit as smart as a student who earned an A. Money is to be transferred at gunpoint to non-Whites because a large income means success even if the recipient of the income did nothing to earn it and entirely lacks the monetary skills to retain it or use it rationally.

And it goes on into every other realm of their interference: Homosexual couples are to be treated like heterosexual couples because, if they are spoken of in exactly the same way as the commitment-bearing, sane members of that greatest of Western family institutions, the enormous rates of homosexual promiscuity and venereal infection will cease to exist. Politically correct speech laws are to be imposed on us because not being allowed to say anything “offensive” is exactly the same thing as not disagreeing with liberals (according to liberals at least).

I think they are going to get an especially painful lesson from that particular mistake pretty soon. This, too, is something we hear from them constantly on Stormfront: They literally believe that if there aren’t throngs of Whites standing up and speaking against their destruction of our race and civilization, they have won the war. They honestly believe that our silence in public means we will forever comply with their agenda. It’s the cognitive attitude of a five-year-old child, but it is the very best of which they are capable.

Liberals are, in every way, the appearance people, regardless of their race: They are the ones who achieve beauty not through superior genetics, but through hair dye, breast implants, nose jobs, colored contacts, skin-whitening creams . . . and sex-change operations for their mentally ill masses who pretend that genetics changes when the outside looks different. Beauty to a liberal truly is skin deep (at least right up until the revolting, dysgenic children start popping out).

I recently watched a video in which the narrator was discussing the enormous number of instances of Black rappers whose “bling” is actually fake because, to them, wearing imitation gold jewelry made of plastic is every bit as indicative of success as being able to afford the real thing. The video went on to cite numerous instances of camera tours of actors’ multimillion-dollar homes where it turned out that the home being shown wasn’t even actually theirs. The expensive cars they are seen in are very often rented. In a recent incident in which a Black actress’s pearl dress for the Oscars was stolen and described as being worth as much as ten million dollars, it turned out that the pearls were fake and the dress's true worth was less than $200.

The same appearances work for intelligence: Taking a Black actor and shoving him in front of a camera parroting some lines of sapient dialog makes all Blacks just as smart as Whites. A false claim on Wikipedia about performing the first ever operation separating conjoined twins turns a mediocre Black surgeon into the smartest doctor ever. A list of entirely fictitious Black (or Jewish) inventions "proves" the worth of those parasitic inferiors to White civilization. Nobel Prizes handed out for political reasons make Jews smart. An empty assertion about "jobs Americans just won't do" (whatever the heck that even means) makes illegal invaders from Mexico a boon to our economy. I would bet a quadrillion Zimbabwe dollars that the subhuman citizens of that cesspit nation feel rich as they walk around bearing arm-loads of bills covered in zeroes that aren’t worth the paper they are printed on. It’s all the same thing.

So now you know why our opponents lie to us here all the time. To their weak, pathetic little minds, the lie changes reality the instant they utter it. Explains quite a lot, doesn't it!

Anonymous #racist hapasons.wordpress.com

Oriental culture and biology is in most ways the most alien to white culture. Much more so than the Latinos, Blacks, and Arabs they despise. These are incompatible genes and cultures. It is called the FAR East for a reason, in that the Far East is furthest away from Western Civilization both in geography, and biological values. As Kipling wrote East is East, West is West and never the twain shall meet.

The largescale creation of a Eurasian-American population has taken place only since the 1970s. Thus you have 100,000 years of virtually 0 WMAF sons, and now 40 years of tens of thousands of 0 WMAF sons. This is the largest biological experiment on human genetics ever conducted. And the results have been a fiasco. Despite the huge numbers of WMAF sons, and their relatively privileged economic backgrounds, they have been complete social failures.That is a sad testament.In this short length of time, we have already uncovered supremely troubling facts about this new Eurasian race. The extreme degree of psychological instability, rage, and sexual frustration of the Eurasian male. Anger directed at their parents, society, and themselves. The victims of a relationship not based on love, but on racial and gender hatred. Essentially a way for white beta males who would have failed to reproduce in their own societies to ‘cheat’ sexual selection and reproduce anyway. They have not solved their problem, but given it to their sons. Asian genes seem to have a self-destruct mechanism that is activated in the WMAF pairing. The mother-offspring genetic conflict is highest in WMAF offspring, which is a likely cause of the huge number of pregnancy complications. Their own genes don’t want this birth to happen it seems.

Already WMAFs online are talking about giving up on the male half of their offspring and using abortions and white egg donors. WMAF expects to be treated by polite society, like a normal coupling, but they sure don’t behave like one.

It is a crime of 21st century society, that the plight of Hapa males born to this unnatural hateful pairing is totally ignored.

MAP Biology #sexist mapbiology.wordpress.com

Females in prehistoric societies

Ages 0-6, infants and younger juveniles:
Girls this age are a long way from reproductive age and it’s generally not worthwhile for a man to invest much effort in acquiring them as wives. Mortality is high and there’s a good chance a girl this age won’t even survive to reproductive age. If a girl this age is offered to man as a gift he might as well take her but it’s not worth investing effort in chasing after girls this age. It’s generally best for a man to ignore girls this young. There’s little competition between the males for girls this age.

Ages 7-11, older juveniles:
These girls are closer to reproductive age and it’s now worthwhile for a man to invest effort in trying to acquire them as wives. They’re past the younger juvenile stage and the chance of them surviving to reproductive age is over 90%. Competition for girls this age is rising as they approach reproductive age. Men often fall in love with girls this age and get married to them but won’t usually have intercourse with them until adolescence. Similarly, girls this age may be abducted by raiders from other tribes to be kept as wives but they won’t usually have intercourse with (or rape) them this young.

Ages 12-16, adolescents:
Now the heat’s really on. The girls are on the verge of reproductive age and approaching the deadline. They are ready to mate with but haven’t yet got pregnant. Competition for them is at its fiercest since the man who wins a girl at this age can have all her future fertile years to himself and won’t have to wait long before she starts reproducing. Fights often break out over them and sometimes result in death. At this age they’re at their greatest danger of being kidnapped by raiders. Their pristine, perky adolescent boobs and bodies make them stand out from the juvenile girls and the adult women whose bodies show signs of prior pregnancies such as drooping boobs and stretchmarks. Their faces and bodies have an adolescent sparkle that catches men’s attention and incites men to chase after and compete for them. Their vaginas are not yet damaged by childbirth. Girls this age without husbands or male protectors are routinely pushed around, sexually harassed, and raped by the other men in the tribe. I’m not just saying this to be shocking, this is how savage ancestral humans probably were.

Age 17 onward, adults:
Competition for girls now goes into decline. Girls this age have now started reproducing and are biologically adults. From this age onward the number fertile years women have remaining goes into decline. This decline is reflected in declining physical appearance. Their boobs get saggier with every pregnancy, their stomachs accumulate stretchmarks, their waists go flabby, their faces grow duller every year, and they develop cellulite and get fatter. Remember these people are near-naked and everything is on display. Women in modern societies can cover themselves up and wear bras that give the illusion their boobs are still pert and artificially recreate their adolescent attractiveness.

Albert Swearengen #fundie disqus.com

With the two best arguments now having been tabled, in one case the argument has been met with a rebuttal and in the other case it has not. A debate is meant to be a structured argument, wherein opponents on the battlefield of ideas meet each other on equal terms. The objections I have raised to the material advocated by Dan are these:

1. The authors of the article Dan cited were not equitable with the facts, opting rather to foist a false paradigm onto readers of their material than to be totally honest in their approach

2. Varve counts contain a demonstrable old cosmos bias

3. Circular reasoning: Varve counts and radio carbon dating are being used to calibrate each other

4. The original researchers, according to Dan’s own presentation, had to retract and amend their findings on the order of a nearly 40% adjustment downward. It seems clear this only happened in retrospect and in response to negative attention garnered from young earth creationists

Dan has been given the opportunity to respond to the rebuttal material I have submitted, but at no time have I been granted the same opportunity since Dan has steadfastly refused to interact in any meaningful way with the material tabled in my opening argument. In other words, Dan has refused to abide by the simple format of an actual debate, stating for his answer to this objection that he’s just not interested in the material I’ve submitted because it’s old and isn’t well enough understood. Either Dan has not the foggiest idea what it means to have an actual debate, or he thinks the rules do not apply to him but to other people only. Maybe Dan has confused the average Disqus conversation for actual debate. If so, I’m sure he’s not the only Disqus commentator to strain beneath the weight of that error.

My argument rests on the following premises:

1. The planets in our solar system each have measurable magnetic fields

2. All of the planetary magnetic fields are diminishing in strength and this fact is supported by empirical evidence. In all cases, the magnetic fields of the planets in our solar system have been measured and the majority of them have been measured multiple times. In all cases, a simple reading of the documented facts shows that the fields are weakening over time.

3. In the case of Earth’s magnetic field, if calculated into the past, field strength decay rates indicate the field cannot possibly be older than 10,000 years, because if it were older than that, the intensity of the field would have been sufficient to melt Earth's mantle.

4. While secular scientists acknowledge diminishing field strength, they have proposed that the fields somehow regenerate their strength and spontaneously recharge, in direct violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Secular scientists have never been able to come up with a model of how the fields are ‘regenerating’, but they steadfastly maintain the fields MUST be periodically regenerating, because their model of the cosmos is the correct model. This, again, is the exact opposite of any sound scientific method.

My debate opponent has had nothing to say about any of this, except that he believes the above except that he believes the above claims are confusing and not well enough understood by science. He offers nothing by way of support for that claim, however. He just says so and maintains that my arguments are somehow contrary to ‘good’ science or are otherwise beneath his dignity to address in any meaningful way.

The purpose of this debate is a simple one: The purpose is to show that one model, the Bible’s specified 6000 year-old model of the cosmos, is the correct model and that the preferred model of modern secular science is the incorrect model. I had intended to show that one model can withstand any manner of attack even from a reasonable and seemingly well-educated mind which has adopted belief in an alternate invalid model. Unfortunately, we have been partially cheated of that purpose because Dan has refused to comply with the rules. So be it. Any impartial observer of this debate has seen one side easily undermined by perfectly valid observations rendering the conclusions of the varve study a study in wishful thinking. The method for dating the Earth which the conductors of that study have latched onto, is a wholly useless tool for the purposes they have assigned it. They have guaranteed a false outcome from the outset based entirely upon the invalid presuppositions with which they begin their study. It is little different from the stilted outcomes generated by other flawed presuppositions, namely those which attend the conclusions drawn when supposing light has always and only traveled at a constant, unchanging and unchangeable speed. It’s a spurious assumption and the very scientific community which relies upon that assumption for other ways of supporting its model, has uncovered the proof of its unreliability. A non-constant speed of light is very often addressed in frank discussions within the secular scientific community:

Such is the problem with invalid assumptions and the far-reaching chaos those assumptions can generate.

One model of the cosmos is utterly unaffected by the ever-changing foundations of secular science. That is the biblically-valid model of a 6000 year-old cosmos. The Heavens and the Earth were created by God very nearly 6000 years ago. Scientists who begin with this understanding of our reality are not called upon to continuously conjure up fantastic arguments which, however implausible-sounding, just might provide the sliver of possibility needed to keep their model alive. But each time the so-called experts on the other side – with their ‘overwhelming consensus’ – come up with what they present to the world as bullet-proof arguments or sets of evidence which demonstrate the validity of their model to the exclusion of any young cosmos model…

…they are shown to have overplayed their hand every… single… time. And the example tabled by Dan for the purposes of this debate – a debate which never really happened – is no exception to that rule.

(Dan is now given the opportunity to respond by hopefully posting his own closing argument and that will conclude this debate.)

theTruth #fundie rr-bb.com

The Theory of [Atheistic] Evolution says that when the earth was volcanically active after being formed, life (the first simple cell) was synthesized from various non-living building blocks. However, the problem here is that non-living matter cannot produce living organisms. This invalidates any evolution in any definition past present or future.

The This is some long shit' edition of FSTDT.

Sande Van der Straten #ufo #magick bibliotecapleyades.net

These are the notes that I took at the meeting held February 8th, 1992 at Maleny, Queensland.

This is my version of my notes of the meeting with Robert Morning Sky a full blooded Apache/Hopi Indian. Who was raised by his two grandparents after his father was killed and his mother left the reservation.

From the age of 1-5 years, he had no contact with the white man at all. He was taught by his grandfathers and with a group of other young people by a group of people they called the Star Warriors - aliens he code-names Blues.

These people taught him to run 6 miles with a full mouth of water and not choke or spill a drop, then they would return and have to spit the water out at the feet of the Warriors. They had to stand with their backs to their elders who would shoot an arrow and they, the students, would have to turn and catch it mid-flight. He said they didn’t realize - the students - that they weren’t supposed to be able to do these things.

The policy of the Star Warrior is that knowledge is not given, it is earned. The way to learn is to be led to discovery.

There is an old Hopi prophecy (today’s red man is white tomorrows white man is green). The first alien contact started about 1947 - 1948 and they had either already, or were going to spend 50 years with the elders of the Hopi Indian reservation.

A description of the Star Warriors is of clear, translucent skin, large almond shaped eyes and small of stature. The main issue of their teaching was PURSUE YOUR PASSION, follow your own way, do your own thing, don’t be pressured into being anything but what and who you are.

A medicine man is not necessarily a healer, they are people who do their own thing with a passion, i.e. one that will make you practice your practice your own medicine, two, feel better - medicine people make both things one and the same. A warrior is a living example of passion.

What is passion, it is an inner feeling, a love activity. It is that which makes time flow quickly, that one will move heaven and earth to do, that one will make time for. Passion is the unity of union of love between man and woman, which has more power and energy than anything one earth and if harnessed can be unbeatable.

Harmony occurs when ones own heart beat moves in time with another, i.e. the drum music of the dance, the heartbeat of chosen one, the heartbeat of a nation, the heartbeat of the universe and the earth. Think about your passion, if it makes you feel good, and shivery, it is your passion. It is your passion that makes all things possible.

The Hopi tradition is that it is man’s job to make all things possible for the womenfolk. They must attract, but the women must chose.

The reason for long hair is enhancement of beauty and the "Indian love handle" - he mentioned that the caveman used to pull their women around by their hair, he says it was wrong, the Indian women catch their men by their hair!

Men must see the world through the eyes of women.

Passion
The fire, the individuality, the you. It is internal, we are told to be what you are supposed to be, don’t be anything else. We have a life force and energy that if harnessed could cause more damage than an atomic explosion. But we need to practice harmony and frequency. We find our own frequency and can raise it to match another and harmonize, match it don’t contend with it or anything else, or you will be destroyed. The first sensation we receive, is our mother’s heartbeat. We all need to be one harmonious heartbeat.

Body
Your job is to master your own body, if you don’t master your body, nothing will work for you.


Spiritual
Anything else is spiritual, the trees, air, water etc. To attain oneself, you have to move outwards, not grow inwards or else you will become like the black stars and implode.

Shape shifting - is possible by becoming that shape - my feeling is that in making self believe so much that a super imposed image forms in your mind and the mind of those around you - by increasing your own frequency you can become anything i.e. a microwave than excite water, so that it changes and becomes hot.

When our energy rise, so does our body temperature. We have the ability to raise our own and other peoples frequencies.
In 1943 the government conducted a series of experiments called the Philadelphia Experiment, to teleport articles.

It partly succeeded and partly went wrong. On January 8/9th, there was a terrific light storm that was not so much a storm as an immense light show. (During this storm I, Sande, was sitting of the front porch, connected to the storm, Robert, my guide, very clearly spoke to me and told me not to feed the storm). Robert Morningsky video-taped the storm and on part of the film, the form of a ship appeared.

December 19/20 Nexus magazine reported that a ship from the Philadelphia Experiment materialized into one of the bays in Australian Waters and then disappeared. picture (Courier Mail, 31/12/91).

If you are not in tune with your passion you cannot create your own reality. Your passion is your responsibility. Who cares what others feel and think.

Your answers and salvation are within.

1930-1940 World War II
Madman Hitler tried to create the perfect man, and conducted bio-genetic experiments
Work on flying saucers research, development what is known as Foo Fighters - (14.2.1944)
The US developed an atomic weapon and tested it in Northern New Mexico
Others tried to develop Time Travel. Out in the universe, alien nations viewed us and were dismayed. Can you imagine the SS Eldridge going through into another dimension. Whilst testing a new protection device called radar uncontrollable bursts of energy, several flying saucers were forcibly landed. The area of landing was the Arizona area. The Amerindians respected the aliens found.

1948
Several discs crashed, so a military force called blue force was formed, to remove all evidence of UFOs. A live alien was captured and he was called EBE, Extraterrestrial Biological Entity.

It was found that he was not able to eliminate waste through the normal way, it was eliminate through the pores of his skin. He took sick, and a famous botanist Jaro Mendoza was called in, but in 1952, EBE died. A project called Sigma was instigated to call EBEs brothers to come and find him but to no avail.

The satellite dishes were placed on Indian lands, and the workers, believing that the Indian race was non consequential, so gave them quite a bit of information, believing that they would not understand it.


1947
In the locker of one of the landed UFOs were found human parts.


1953
December, contact was made with Aliens. Astronomers found a bunch of space ships going around the earth. Contact was made outside one of the Indian reservations.

1954
Eisenhower met with the greys and was offered certain secrets in return for the use of people for research and experimentation. They informed the president that they were a dying race and needed help to get their bodies stronger and healthier. An agency MJ-12 was brought into effect, to monitor this program of experiments and implantations.

Negotiations were completed and treaty was signed in California. In Florida another body of Aliens arrived, called by Robert Morningsky, as the Blues.

They offered other advice, not to deal with the greys, it would only lead to disaster, but to follow your own path. They would teach with peace and harmony if men would disarm and listen. The military said no deal! So they left, but a few decided to remain and stayed in Northern Mexico and Arizona and made a treaty with the Hopi Indians.

These Aliens are known by the Hopi as Star Warriors.

The greys left an ambassador called Krill and adopted an equilateral triangle as their insignia. The military force name as the Blue Force became the Delta Force and was formed to study the greys. Two bases were built and called several names, the Earth base - Hanger 18, Dreamland or Area 51.

The greys went underground under the reservations in the four corner area of Mexico, Utah, Arizona and California. It was for the purpose of monitoring the Blues. The Blues had to flee the reservation and go into hiding, a few of the Elders went with them.

The Hopi legend is that there were two races, the children of the feather who came from the skies, and the children of the reptile who came from under the earth. The children of the reptile chased the Hopi Indians out of the earth, these evil under-grounders were also called two hearts.

The government has signed a treaty with the children of the serpent. The Hopi have signed a treaty with the children of the feather.

The greys want a perfect body, for a long time, there have been cattle mutilations. Always missing, were the organs of elimination. The grey’s bodies are always cold, and they feed on our energies, our fears, our out of control energies.

When you are fearful and out of control, the greys use and feed on that energy. What we need to do is know that it is o.k. to feel fear, but to flow with it, then control it by redirecting it into a positive event.

(NB - Do we not have an underground installation at Pine Gap that is run by the Americans? - Sande).

Control your passion - life force - you decide what you want, get an attitude! Don’t be afraid to say no! The government wants your money for their pet projects and the greys want your life-force, your energy.

Ask yourself these things.
1. Do the government make laws for themselves or for people.
2. Do they allow us to do our own thing.
3. Are we under their control on government subsidies etc...
The greys decided to stay on earth and needed acceptance, so they hired an advertising agency to come up with some good ideas - hence - My favorite Martian, ALF, Star Trek, Star wars, Alien Nation and ET.

The new program the Mutant Ninja Turtles and the Dinosaurs?? Look and be aware of the symbol of the triangle - TriStar Pictures??? Don’t rely on the government for your support, help yourself where you can. See the movie JFK.


1959
The Jason Society decided to do something about global warming:
1. Blow a hole in the ozone layer, to let the heat out.
2. Develop underground for the elite societies.
3. Develop other planets into colonies. The last two were adopted, but the first has since be done.
Several things have been happening to engender fear and to give more control to the government:
1. Release of dangerous Psychotics and early release of killers and menaces to society.
2. Wars and upheavals.
3. Drug induced societies and drug dependent societies.
4. Mainland China.


Kachina Hopi - great spirit fire

Any living thing that is stressed is food for the children of the lizard.

Robert saw for the first time pictures of crop circles, and recognized them as Hopi symbols. He professed that if he could see them in their correct order, he would be able to ’read them’.

He feels that Mother earth is calling out Help me!


Question time
Q: - Why would governments hide the fact that aliens exist?
A: - If we knew, we would quit doing what the government want us to do.

Q: - Do the greys know they are aliens?
A: - The Greys have interbred - the more they interbreed, the more chance there is that they will lose their memories of who they really are, they become half human and half alien and can be quite mixed up emotionally. They must be 5th and 6th generation greys by now, and who don’t know they are greys. (Where do you think we get all our information from - disgruntled greys!!)

Q: - How can we tell the children of the greys.
A: - They make you feel creepy and have reptilian looking eyes and features. Greys have large eyes and have difficulty focusing. They are arrogant. They will be a strong body odor they tend to drain one of energy. They need to wear sunglasses - CIA????

The Blues
Short, big eyes, wouldn’t describe too much, because they are preparing for something big. You will feel them, and you will know them!! It is possible that a 6th generation grey could end up marrying a 6th generation blue.

Our misuse of our energy can aid a grey to shape shift and thus not be recognized.
(At the meeting, I was with another person, and while the intermission was on, we were quietly talking, when the person appeared from nowhere, and introduced himself to me, using my name. [my name had not been mentioned, neither did I know this man. I did not have a name tag on].

It was an extremely hot day, and when I shook his hand, it was freezing cold and dry. He shook hands with my partner also. We watched him move back through the hall and disappear into a small of people. We watched the front door, and he did not exit through there. But when we looked for him later, he was nowhere to be found.

I have no idea what it all meant, I only know that it was a strange experience. Neither my partner nor I could remember the man’s name, although he has said it twice. No one else had contact with the man, or remembered seeing anyone. My partner was a very logical person, not given to fanciful visions etc.)
On December 21, 1991, a fragmented video tape would trigger a series of events that would permit these papers to come to life.

On the video tape were bits and pieces of information that confirmed what some American Indians have known for some time... that Alien Life Forms exist and walk amongst us.

Due to the release of information on that tape, it is now possible to reveal further information that could not be spoken of before this time.

An ages old code of silence could slowly and cautiously be unveiled. In the late forties and early fifties, a movement began on the pueblo Indian Reservations of the Southwest. It was the intent of the Elders involved to raise an isolated group of young Warriors in the "Old Ways". The teachings began but would soon receive an unexpected presence... the "Star Warrior". (Please read the chronology included).

Hand in hand with the "medicine warrior" ways, the "Star Warrior" ways would become the foundation of education of the young warriors. Hand in hand with the Elders, the Star Brother taught the Secrets of the Universe. Raised in the way of the Kachina, the children knew that the Spirit of things always looks different.

The appearance of the Star Brother was not frightening, he only looked a little unlike us... and... he played with us as a child would.

Knowledge must be earned. Wisdom must be learned... the "Way of the Warrior" would confirm that which was discovered and would give suggestion for direction, but Passion for knowledge MUST be exhibited... and so, the code was born - "confirm but do NOT originate.

Suggest and direct but leave discovery to the seeker of knowledge". These full-blooded Indian boys and girls spent their lives learning through discovery... and one by one they went out into the "outside" world. The author of these papers was one of those youngsters. The material in these papers does not violate the code, it only confirms information which has been uncovered by others.

It is hoped, however, that these papers may give researchers an idea or suggestion for a different perspective which may help to uncover further information on the "Grand Overview".

The information in these papers should not be accepted in and of themselves. You must seek our confirmation for yourself. The credibility of these papers does not depend on its author, but rather on what you discover from your study and investigation of the material presented.

CONFIRM EVERYTHING FOR YOURSELF! THIS IS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN BE SATISFIED WITH THE TRUTHS PRESENTED.

The material is presented in bold, forthright form. If you seek elaboration.

"Keys" are available upon request.



SECRETS OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN - HOPI LEGEND OF CREATION

The Hopi Indian Legend of Creation tells of three different beginnings.
One story says that we have arisen from an underground paradise through an opening called Sipapu.
The second story tells of the descendancy from our birthplace near a Blue Star.
And the third story relates of a migration from a faraway place across a great body of water.
All three are true.

What matters is not which came first, but that they are all true. (Focus not on the leaf, rather look at the whole tree).

This spot is thought by some to be Sipapu, entrance to the Hopi Underworld.
It is a sacred place of pilgrimage for the Hopi,
at the bottom of the Canyon of the Little Colorado above its junction with the Colorado River.

The story of Sipapu reveals that we emerged in a somewhat undeveloped physical state, much like the prehistoric man.

Our bodies were still forming and pliable, but our features were a bit brutish. Man, called Koyemsi or Mudhead had two small round lumps for ears, two protruding knobs for eyes and one large lump for a mouth. The head was smooth and round as a ball.

As man developed, his physical body and features became more refined until he looks as he does now.

THIS IS THE HOPI VERSION OF EVOLUTION - (Key 1)
- This story of creation says that the underground paradise was wondrous with beautiful clear skies and plentiful food sources.

It was because of the existence of those called Two Hearts, the bad ones, that refuge was sought in the upper world by the Hopi, the peaceful ones. The underworld was not destroyed but was only sealed up to prevent the Two Hearts from rising upon to the surface world.

(Suggested research Hollow Earth Theorists may want to look at this legend more closely. At least one government agency is said to continue monitoring the Hopi Indian, to see when and if a return into the ground begins).


THE SECOND STORY OF CREATION - (Key 2)
- Tells of the descent of the Hopi from the Blue Star of a constellation called the Seven Sisters. One version tells of our travel to earth on the back of Enki, the eagle. Grandfather, the Great Spirit allowed the first man to select his home from the many stars of the universe.

Enki told first man of his home earth, and brought him to visit. First man’s exploration of the earth convinced him that this was where he wanted his children to be born and to grow. First Man returned to the heavens to tell Grandfather of his decision. Grandfather was pleased and granted to first man the right to call earth his home.

First man soon returned to the green place or Sakwap with his family shortly afterwards.

(Many of the hero stories throughout time and through many different cultures refer to a valiant group of seven. Warriors descended from the stars often use the sign of the Seven Sisters on their shields and medallions).


THE STORY OF THE MIGRATION - (Key 3)
- From a great land across the big waters speaks of the departure from a paradise far away. This story parallels many other creation legends, but differs only in that no disaster or chaos seems to have caused the journey.

The purpose of the journey was to begin a new home and a new life. Some interpretations have the Hopi leaving their home in order to spread the Teachings of the Old Ones.


SORCERER VS MEDICINE MAN - (Key 4)
- In the Southwest, as in all areas of North America, there exist men and women who practice the use of power to achieve their goals. Sometimes called the medicine man or woman, sorcerer or shaman, these individuals have often been the subjects of books and even movies. Their practice is often referred to as magic.

Nothing is further from the truth. Magic is the un natural use of the Powers of Nature. They who turn to the practice of disharmony are more properly called witches, warlocks and sorcerers. (It is this disharmony that eventually undoes these practitioners and seals their doom). Medicine men and women work with the force of Nature.

(Move against the river, it weakens and ultimately destroys - move with the river, and the power of the river enters your soul and reveals its knowledge).

One series of popular books (Carlos Castaneda Series) refers to Don Juan. One of the Sorcerers of the Southwestern Desert. His apprentice was known as Carlos. Through the series of books, Carlos is guided by Don Juan and Don Genaro on a path to Sorcery.

The methods used by Don Juan are well known to the Medicine Men and Women of the Southwest and most of what is described in the first two books is a valid teaching technique of teaching by Distraction. However, due to the blinders Carlos refuses to move from his eyes, the two books seem to be rather confusing. This is not because of Don Juan.

Don Juan’s attempts to make him see in another way, are totally rejected by Carlos and the result is a mixed up re-telling of events. Do not accept the final book’s premise that Carlos has achieved the status of Sorcerer or knowing one - that is not the outcome. Those who refuse to remove the blinders and expand their awareness, will forever be trapped in a prison-world of their own making, and will never see the dangers around them.

(They who do not wish to see CANNOT; Those who do not wish to hear CANNOT; Those who do not wish to feel CANNOT. Suggestion - re-read the Don Juan comments carefully).


MEDICINE MAN/WOMAN (Key 5)
- At this point it would be well to mention that Medicine men/Woman are not necessarily healers. In fact, your medicine is your passion. Your medicine always makes you feel high while dancing, then dancing is your medicine. If you feel high while cooking, then cooking is your medicine. Your medicine will always help to cure that which ails you.

Your medicine will always give you the power to rise up and continue. (This medicine is of the spirit) Your medicine is also that which you do. Your conduct in the Land of Living Things, what you do is your signature in life and it is your medicine. how your treat others and how you react to the world is your medicine.

You medicine can help the ailments of others or it could, in fact poison them. What you do effects other at all times. (If your medicine is harmful to others, you, as a medicine man or medicine woman have failed in your task.) What you DO in the land of the living things is your medicine. (This medicine is of the body).

(It is the true medicine man/woman that makes the medicine of the spirit one with the medicine of the body.)

TRUTH AND WISDOM - (key 6)
- Truth and wisdom must always be sought out. Neither shall come easily. If at first, the teacher ignores you... Ask again!

All masters of Wisdom will succumb to the Passionate student. To demand a right to knowledge is to say you provide this for me. To ask for knowledge is to show respect for wisdom and to pursue knowledge is to show passion for truth. (In life, there are no RIGHTS, only privileges). Unlike power, truth seeks to come out. It does not hide, it is hidden by those wishing it to remain concealed. Truth and power are tools to be used. Not ends in themselves.

(Power can cover or uncover truth;...truth can only uncover power; Power can lead to truth...Truth always leads to power. Wisdom is knowing how to use both).

PASSION - (Key 7)
- In order to pursue your Passion, first you must recognize your passion. The following guidelines should help you to identify your passion:
1. Your PASSION always makes you feel on fire.
2. Your PASSION always makes time disappear (five hours always seems like five minutes.
3. Your PASSION occupies most of your waking thoughts.
4. Your PASSION forces you into action, you cannot sit.
5. Your PASSION is something you will always find time for.

AWARENESS - (Key 8)
- There are three parts to Awareness:
1. The Inner Spirit or the PASSION
2. The Outer Being or the BODY
3. The Outer Spirit or the SPIRITUAL
(Master the inner self first, the physical self secondly, then and only then, can the spiritual be conquered).

How can we master the more complex out of body experience if we cannot stop overeating? How can we stop overeating if we do not have Passion or discipline to accomplish it?

All spiritual teachings require mastery of the spirit. Development, or growth, is always outward, not inward. Mastery of the Inner Spirit or passion is first; Mastery of the body or Physical is next; Mastery of the Spiritual is the final step. Those who turn the order around will find their development moving inward and falling in on itself.

(Passion is the secret to all things. Master this and all things shall be revealed to you).

STAR WARRIORS - (Key 9)
- To follow the path of the STAR WARRIOR, you must first eliminate two concepts from your mind and spirit - Can’t and Impossible -. How long would you stay married to a spouse who constantly told you that you could not do something? You can’t go there; You can’t do that; You can’t say that! - Not very long.

So why then permit yourself to deny yourself? Remember, if you believe yourself inferior, you are! If you say to yourself, I cannot - you are right. If you say to yourself, I can - you are also right. To become who you wish to become, first establish who that person is and how they would act. Then, practice and rehearse everything that person would think and do.

(To become a deer, one must act, think, live and be as the deer - only then can the passion of the deer be yours).

In other words, create yourself. Write a script for your own movie. The hero is your. In the script, write all those things you wish for yourself, all those things you would like to do or feel. Then rehearse your script. Practice becoming the hero or heroine of your movie. Rehearse over and over again until you know the behavior instinctively. Slowly, you will begin to know how the hero acts and thinks. Slowly, you will become the hero of your movie and your life.

The only way to become a runner is to begin running - The only way to become a lover is to begin loving - The only way to become passionate is to practice passion - Practice being that which you wish to be...and soon you shall become it.

THE 10 COMMANDMENTS OF THE STAR WARRIORS - (Key 10)
1. I am a child of the Dancing Star born of chaos.
I AM BORN OF THE STARS. THE STARS WERE BORN OF CHAOS. THERE SHALL ALWAYS BE CHAOS, BUT I SHALL ALWAYS BE WARRIOR.

Only in challenge shall we find our greatest strengths and our weaknesses. Only in challenge shall our passions be made strong. The goal of life is outward development. NOT inner peace. Peace that brings no challenge means stagnation. Confidence in self wrought through challenge is TRUE peace.

2. I am fire.
I AM FIRE. I AM PASSION. ALL THAT I DO, I DO WITH PASSION. - Fire is passion. Passion is that inner force that distinguishes us from all others. Passion is that which makes the Bear become the Bear... never will you see the Bear trying to fly as the Eagle, for it is his passion to be the bear. Passion is the gift that allows us to be what we wish. To do anything without passion, is to go through the motions.

To be Passionless is to lose the fight of life. Those who have no fire are easy to conquer and manipulate. The study of Physics and other sciences tells us that all things are comprised of atoms which in turn are comprised of electrons, protons and neutrons...all are particles of energy or electricity. This energy cannot be destroyed, only changed. From these very same particles came the release of a basis of our existence, within our own bodies.

Herein, science has revealed the existence of a force unlike any on this planet, the force which directs each one of us in our path. This is our passion, this is our gift.

3. I see the fire in all things.
I SEE THE FIRE IN ALL THINGS - All things possess fire. All this have spirit. The only difference between man and animal is that they wear different skins. The only difference between man and all things is the skin, or outer covering. In the Hopi world, the spirit of a think is called kachina. It is the kachina that is the fire or passion. Those who can see and hear can learn from those kachinas around us. If you can communicate with another human being, you can communicate with the trees, the wind and all things of the earth.

4. I am but a visitor in the land of living things.
I AM BUT A VISITOR IN THE LAND OF LIVING THINGS - The skin we wear is but a temporary robe. That part of us which is most important is the inner spirit, or the passion. Yet, we must never forget that we are guests in this land and we must conduct ourselves as such. We respect all that is here.

That which we may receive in this place must be left here.. things cannot be taken with us, but all of our riches that we have accumulated in memories and knowledge shall go with us forever.

5. I walk the path of silence.
I WALK THE PATH OF SILENCE - In the Song of the morning sky, there is a line that says live as though you cannot speak. It means that what you do is more important than what you say. If you cannot speak, you must communicate your love and friendship through your actions. You must demonstrate that which you feel.

Let your actions be your measure. Only in silence can you learn. He who talks does not hear - only in silence can you defeat your enemy, he who makes no noise is invisible.

6. I am not seen or heard. I am only felt.
I AM NOT SEE OR HEARD, I AM ONLY FELT - The warrior must make himself felt. If he lives his life and the world has not felt him, he has failed. If he lives his life and grandfather has not felt him, he has failed. His passion must be experienced by others, not witnessed. He who uses his fire warms the world, he who shouts of his fire fills the world with noise.

7. I take only that which I can return.
I TAKE ONLY THAT WHICH I CAN RETURN. THE BALANCE OF NATURE AND HARMONY OF THE UNIVERSE MUST BE MAINTAINED - If the warrior takes a tree for use as a

Welcome To Bamsterdam #fundie npr.org

Europe/EU is not becoming non-religious -- it's simply changing its religious foundations from Christian to Muslim in a gradual, evolutionary process. Do you think the imams' call to prayer resounding through cities such as Paris and London is indicative of a "non-religious" culture ? The secular Europeans who represent the non-religious culture you refer to will be gradually supplanted in numbers, power, and influence by the ever-increasing immigration rates and immigrant birth rates from Muslim countries - it's merely a matter of arithmetic given the European fertility rates continuing to sink below replacement levels.

Given the spineless, head-in-the-sand response of European "leaders" - Cameron, Merkel, Hollande, et al., to the demographic and cultural reality of Muslim immigration and the aggressive religiosity of anti-Western Muslim clerics (e.g., Anjem Choudary) in their midst, the transformation should be complete in a few more decades.

There are about 80 sharia courts in the UK. Europe will not have a good future if it becomes like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia through Islamisation.

This network and the rest of the liberal media bombard their
listeners and readers on almost a daily basis with statistics indicating
"racial disparities" in home ownership, college attendance, disease
occurrence, unemployment, and everything else under the sun - up to and
including such allegedly profoundly meaningful statistics as National
Park visitation and Oscar nomination rates. The commentors above
simply raise the question why such "analysis" is absent when it comes to
urban crime rates.

Scott Lively #fundie scottlively.net

The next time you’re at a “gay ’ wedding with political, media or other important pro-gay-marriage celebrities, and one of them gets up with a glass of wedding punch to toast Partner A and Partner B for their courage to “be themselves,” here’s a question to shout out (in a feigned drunken slur) from the back: “Hey, Dude, why don’t you support bi-sexual marriage too? Are you some kind of bigot?“

Chances are if you’re reading this article, you’re not the sort of person likely to be found at such an event, but the point is that bi-sexual marriage is the very last thing that any of our opponents want to discuss, and we pro-family conservatives should really be forcing them to do it at every opportunity.

Think about it. A bi-sexual marriage would require an absolute minimum of four people. You’d have same sex partners A and B just like in the “gay marriage,” but you’d also need to have a heterosexual partner for both A and B.

You couldn’t get by with the same heterosexual partner for both A and B since that would mean Partner C wasn’t really a bi-sexual, but a polygamous heterosexual. (And we all know from “gay” activist rhetoric that polygamy can’t be a true sexual orientation. There’s never been a P in LGBT!)

So, for example. Male Bisexual Partner A would be partners with both Male Bisexual Partner B and Female Bisexual Partner C, While Male Bi-Sexual Partner B would be partners with Male Bi-sexual Partner A and Female Bi-Sexual Partner D.

I know it’s confusing but bear with me because this is important stuff. We’re talking essential human and civil rights for one of the four key groups in the LGBT community! In fact, one could argue that bisexuals are the most important sexual minority because they are the most neglected, even more than T’s (transvestites and transsexuals). No-one ever seems to talk about the rights of the Bs, not even their fellow Ls, Gs, and Ts.

[...]

Is “bi-sexual marriage” really relevant? Of course it is! Bisexuals are a core constituency of the LGBT movement. The other side CAN’T disavow them! They are the 800-lb gorilla in the room. Or, if you will, the “turd” in the punchbowl.

I debated whether to use that phrase, it being so crude, but in the end that’s the main reason I finally adopted it. “’Turd in the punchbowl” is a long-standing working-class metaphor for something dirty that completely ruins something clean. Once the crowd realizes there is a turd in the punchbowl, nobody is going to drink the punch. Ever. No matter what you do to it.

Marriage as God designed it is a clean and holy institution that sanctifies the sexual union of a man and a woman united as “one flesh.” It produces blessing for them and for society.

Marriages based on various forms of sodomy are unclean counterfeits that destroy true marriage by invalidating its central purpose, which is to enclose the procreative natural family in a socially unique protective cocoon. Once marriage stops being unique to the “one flesh” male/female procreative union, the concept of marriage loses all meaning.

Tziporah Heller #fundie aish.com

Women's quest for external power has left a frightening vacuum in Western society in the area of moral training, where women formerly held sway. Rampant crime, child abuse, kidnapping, and the dramatic rise in violence against women are symptoms of a society gone amok, where many people have no concept of right and wrong, of honesty, fairness, compassion or self-control.

Today's internal decadence is eroding the quality of life in America as fast as external political and technological advantages are improving it.

Clearly, the lot of women cannot be improved by political and financial progress if the inner dimension of society -- its morals and compassion -- is neglected by the very people who have traditionally been made its custodians: women.

A typical male analysis of such political problems customarily blames them on external factors, e.g., low income families in impoverished neighborhoods inevitably leads to a high rate of violent crime, substance abuse, etc.

If this were true, then Jerusalem's religious neighborhood of Mea Shearim, which has one of the highest poverty rates in Israel and where families typically number seven to ten children in a three-room flat, should be a hotbed of violent crime. Instead, Mea Shearim has virtually no violent crime and very little substance abuse, this despite the total absence of policemen on its streets.

[...]

Thus, defined Judaically, the issue is not whether women should or should not have power, but rather on the kind of power on which they should concentrate, both for their individual development as well as for the good of the whole society.

Junon #sexist islamicboard.com

Does Islam need feminism?

Salaam

No, judging by the damage it has done in western societies.

The book The Garbage generation was released in 1990. Gives a good insight into he kind of society feminists want to create.

The Garbage generation

The feminist/sexual revolution is not a breakthrough but a throwback. Its program, highly successful thanks to the betrayal of the family by the legal system, is to undermine and destroy patriarchal social organisation, based on male kinship, and to restore matriliny, the female kinship system whose results can be seen in the ghettos, on Indian reservations, in the islands of the Caribbean, and in surviving Stone Age societies.

In primitive tribal society matriliny is well adapted to the peoples needs. In civilised society it is pathological – the source of most crime, delinquency, illegitimacy, educational failure, drug addiction, infantilism, gang violence, demoralisation and sexual confusion.

According to todays lawmakers and judges, society must provide props for the strongest link in the family, the mother infant tie. According to Daniel Amneus, society must instead provide props for the weakest link, the fathers role. Mom got along without patriarchal society and the legal system for two hundred million years, but Dad has got to have them and have them on his side or there will be no two parent family.

The solution: place the children of divorce in the custody of the fathers rather than the mothers. This was the 19th century practice and it made the Victorian family a stable institution. There were only 7000 divorces annually in the 1860s, when John Stuart Mill wrote, ‘They are by law his children’.

Todays judges are virtual accessories to child abuse when they place children in female headed households where they are far more likely to be mistreated, neglected, impoverished and delinquent.

wwwarea #fundie deviantart.com

something and it was really stupid. Some people seem to argue that the act of having sex with a dog is "wrong" or should be illegal or is a good law if already a law becauseletting your dog be "the boss" is a risk to health between humans and stuff... and stuff like that.

Look, I am AGAINST abuse. However, consent is the only valid argument here, and if it's true dogs don't consent to having sex with humans, then it's bad, however if a dog goes right behind a human and does that toward the human, then I can't really say the dog was being raped, especially if the human didn't want that.
And that's a consent argument, and the debate about consent in this example is probably the only thing that matters.

But whenever I hear people use any argument OUTSIDE of that, I just cringe.
And let me kinda once again state this: I am against hurting any living being, and for example when you had sex with a dog without the consent of such dog for example, then I have a problem. Not sure about insects though, I might be fine with killing some with a napkin. Haha

But it's this dumb "fear" argument or "bad for your health" argument that pisses me off, and this argument alone is bad for anything involving law.

"It's good to have laws against sex with animals because letting a dog be boss could lead to problems to your health. And could make the dog and/or any similar behavior style non-human animal act crazy in the future!"
No, it's good to have laws if there is any abuse for example. And we should have laws against sex with any living being that lacks consent.
If a human WANTS to let their dog be boss, knows the risk of health toward the human person knowing, and allows it anyway, and the dog and human consents, then the person should have that right in privacy. It's not a legal excuse, but I'm trying to argue morally here. As for risk, there is MANY other ways that could lead a dog to being the boss, yet I have a feeling those are considered fine by many. That health and danger argument is just another bias argument that probably lacks any care about the non-human animal just so they can cause humans to suffer. I could be wrong, but this is ridiculous.
Yet, if a dog feels boss, does that mean it can't be handled? No! A situation like that could probably be control beyond such event, and one bad relationship is not evidence that it's bad for everyone.

That health and risk argument is one of the most dumbest and non-sense arguments I've seen, and even if I agreed that no non-human animal on this planet can consent with humans even though evidence may exist suggesting the opposite of such idea, that argument will always be a stupid argument in the same realm where "It's gross" or "it violates my religion" is used as if it's an "excuse".

Using ANY argument that has nothing to do with actual morality, means you're against freedom. And remember what I said about freedom, I think it's a right to enjoy life as long if no other creature is directly violated and isn't threatening to.
THAT'S WHY for this case, consent in awareness of sex should I think always be the the argument here and as long if such consensual act doesn't 90 to 100% lead to abuse in the future.

_______________

That being said, I remember seeing amazing arguments involving this taboo, and quite honestly, I think it was time to address these two arguments.
Again, this is about me having such a problem with people making up dumb excuses like this to decide something should be "wrong" and/or illegal. It should depend on consent for a case like this, and the same must be said for other sex stuff for example.
For example: Having sex with children is wrong because children can't consent. Using "Oh that is wrong because it's against a bible." is not a good argument to say it's wrong, however using "Children can't consent." and since it that statement is true is a valid argument. Get what I'm saying? Of course even if no one said the argument, it's still wrong because children can't consent.

I really hate it when someone who agrees a non-human animal has consented, but then decides to use a invalid argument after. That just shows they don't care about natural rights.
Again, as a person who questions popular beliefs a lot, this really needed to be said.


But what's the point? Even if I put out my damn disclaimers, some people are gonna go out and rant about this as a "WWWAREA DEFENDS BESTIALITY!" and will probably miss the point and promote false claims. Don't do that, it's really not cool. It's true, I do believe there is evidence of consent maybe, but still.

Paul Vonharnish #conspiracy geoengineeringwatch.org

It was -37 F (that's below 0) in Northeastern Minnesota the morning of January 30. Ground surface temperatures were well below reported temps in Alaska. Anything strange about that?

I've lived in Minnesota my entire life (so not a weather wimp) but have never experienced frost burns on my face with just over ten minutes of exposure. Chemical nucleation is being combined with pulsed ELF radio frequency modulations. I can hear and feel HAARP/SBX manipulations every time they come on line. Deleterious physical responses are being reported all over the web.

HAARP/SBX emissions affect all species who utilize magnetite crystals for polar field orientation. > I read this paper shortly after its initial release in 2001.

A scientific study “Magnetite-based magneto reception 2001” affirms the “sensitivity to electric fields and their role in navigation across wide range of species.” Please read: http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~jkirschvink/pdfs/COINS.pdf&nbsp;

Then review this page: The Disappearing Bees: CCD and Electromagnetic Radiation – UK Indymediae https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/392060.html

These "experimental" transmitters need to be Permanently shut down, and their designers and operators imprisoned for life…

Alan F. Alford #fundie bibliotecapleyades.net

WHERE did we come from?
Are we the product of a Divine Creation?
Did we evolve through natural selection?
Or is there another possible answer?


Introduction

In November 1859, Charles Darwin published a most dangerous idea - that all living things had evolved through a process of natural selection. Although there was almost no mention of mankind in Darwin’s treatise, the implications were unavoidable and led to a more radical change in human self-perception than anything before it in recorded history. In one blow, Darwin had relegated us from divinely-created beings to apes - the culmination of evolution by the impersonal mechanism of natural selection.

But are the scientists right in applying the theory of evolution to the strange two-legged hominid known as ‘man’? Charles Darwin himself was strangely quiet on this point but his co-discoverer Alfred Wallace was less reluctant to express his views. Wallace himself was adamant that ‘some intelligent power has guided or determined the development of man.’

One hundred years of science have failed to prove Alfred Wallace wrong. Anthropologists have failed miserably to produce fossil evidence of man’s ‘missing link’ with the apes and there has been a growing recognition of the complexity of organs such as the human brain.

Such are the problems with the application of Darwinism to mankind that Stephen Jay Gould - America’s evolutionist laureate - has described human evolution as an ‘awesome improbability’.


In Search of the Missing Link

Speciation - the separation of one species into two different species - is defined as the point where two groups within the same species are no longer able to inter-breed. The British scientist Richard Dawkins has described the separation quite poetically as ‘the long goodbye’.

The search for the missing link between man and the apes is the search for the earliest hominid - the upright, bipedal ape who waved ‘a long goodbye’ to his four-legged friends.

I will now attempt to briefly summarize what is known about human evolution.

According to the experts, the rivers of human genes and chimpanzee genes split from a common ancestral source some time between 5 and 7 million years ago, whilst the river of gorilla genes is generally thought to have branched off slightly earlier. In order for this speciation to occur, three populations of common ape ancestors (the future gorillas, chimpanzees and hominids) had to become geographically separated and thereafter subject to genetic drift, influenced by their different environments.

The search for the missing link has turned up a number of fossil contenders, dating from around 4 million years ago, but the picture remains very incomplete and the sample size is too small to draw any statistically valid conclusions. There are, however, three contenders for the prize of the first fully bipedal hominid, all discovered in the East African Rift valley which slashes through Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania.

The first contender, discovered in the Afar province of Ethiopia in 1974, is named Lucy, although her more scientific name is Australopithecus Afarensis. Lucy is estimated to have lived between 3.6-3.2 million years ago. Unfortunately her skeleton was only 40 per cent complete and this has resulted in controversy regarding whether she was a true biped and whether in fact ‘she’ might even have been a ‘he’.

The second contender is Australopithecus Ramidus, a 4.4 million year old pygmy chimpanzee-like creature, discovered at Aramis in Ethiopia by Professor Timothy White in 1994. Despite a 70 per cent complete skeleton, it has again not been possible to prove categorically whether it had two or four legs.

The third contender, dated between 4.1-3.9 million years old, is the Australopithecus Anamensis, discovered at Lake Turkana in Kenya by Dr Meave Leakey in August 1995. A shinbone from Anamensis has been used to back up the claim that it walked on two feet.

The evidence of our oldest ancestors is confusing because they do not seem to be closely related to each other. Furthermore, the inexplicable lack of fossil evidence for the preceding 10 million years has made it impossible to confirm the exact separation date of these early hominids from the four-legged apes. It is also important to emphasize that many of these finds have skulls more like chimpanzees than men.

They may be the first apes that walked but, as of 4 million years ago, we are still a long way from anything that looked even remotely human.

Moving forward in time, we find evidence of several types of early man which are equally confusing. We have the 1.8 million year old appropriately named Robustus, the 2.5 million year old and more lightly built Africanus, and the 1.5 to 2 million year old Advanced Australopithecus. The latter, as the name suggests, is more man-like than the others and is sometimes referred to as ‘near-man’ or Homo habilis (‘handy man’). It is generally agreed that Homo habilis was the first truly man-like being which could walk efficiently and use very rough stone tools. The fossil evidence does not reveal whether rudimentary speech had developed at this stage.

Around 1.5 million years ago Homo erectus appeared on the scene. This hominid had a considerably larger brain-box (cranium) than its predecessors and started to design and use more sophisticated stone tools.

A wide spread of fossils indicates that Homo erectus groups left Africa and spread across China, Australasia and Europe between 1,000,000-700,000 years ago but, for unknown reasons, disappeared altogether around 300,000-200,000 years ago. There is little doubt, by a process of elimination, that this is the line from which Homo sapiens descended.

The missing link, however, remains a mystery. In 1995, The Sunday Times summarized the evolutionary evidence as follows:
The scientists themselves are confused. A series of recent discoveries has forced them to tear up the simplistic charts on which they blithely used to draw linkages... the classic family tree delineating man’s descent from the apes, familiar to us at school, has given way to the concept of genetic islands. The bridgework between them is anyone’s guess.
As to the various contenders speculated as mankind’s ancestor, The Sunday Times stated:
Their relationships to one another remain clouded in mystery and nobody has conclusively identified any of them as the early hominid that gave rise to Homo sapiens.
In summary, the evidence discovered to date is so sparse that a few more sensational finds will still leave the scientists clutching at straws.

Consequently mankind’s evolutionary history is likely to remain shrouded in mystery for the foreseeable future.


The Miracle of Man

Today, four out of ten Americans find it difficult to believe that humans are related to the apes. Why is this so? Compare yourself to a chimpanzee. Man is intelligent, naked and highly sexual - a species apart from his alleged primate relatives.

This may be an intuitive observation but it is actually supported by scientific study. In 1911, the anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith listed the anatomical characteristics peculiar to each of the primate species, calling them ‘generic characters’ which set each apart from the others. His results were as follows: gorilla 75; chimpanzee 109; orangutan 113; gibbon 116; man 312. Keith thus showed scientifically that mankind was nearly three times more distinctive than any other ape.

Another scientist to take this approach was the British zoologist Desmond Morris. In his book, The Naked Ape, Desmond Morris highlighted the amazing mystery of mankind’s ‘missing hair’:
Functionally, we are stark naked and our skin is fully exposed to the outside world. This state of affairs still has to be explained, regardless of how many tiny hairs we can count under a magnifying lens.
Desmond Morris contrasted Homo sapiens with 4,237 species of mammals, the vast majority of which were hairy or partly haired. The only non-hairy species were those which lived underground (and thus kept warm without hair), species which were aquatic (and benefited from streamlining), and armoured species such as the armadillo (where hair would clearly be superfluous). Morris commented:
The naked ape [man] stands alone, marked off by his nudity from all the thousands of hairy, shaggy or furry land-dwelling mammalian species... if the hair has to go, then clearly there must be a powerful reason for abolishing it.
Darwinism has yet to produce a satisfactory answer as to how and why man lost his hair. Many imaginative theories have been suggested, but so far no-one has come up with a really acceptable explanation. The one conclusion that can perhaps be drawn, based on the principle of gradiented change, is that man spent a long time evolving, either in a very hot environment or in water.

Another unique feature of mankind may provide us with a clue to the loss of body hair. That feature is sexuality. The subject was covered in juicy detail by Desmond Morris, who highlighted unique human features such as extended foreplay, extended copulation and the orgasm. One particular anomaly is that the human female is always ‘in heat’, yet she can only conceive for a few days each month.

As another scientist, Jared Diamond, has pointed out, this is an evolutionary enigma that cannot be explained by natural selection:
The most hotly debated problem in the evolution of human reproduction is to explain why we nevertheless ended up with concealed ovulation, and what good all our mistimed copulations do us.
Many scientists have commented also on the anomaly of the male penis, which is by far the largest erect penis of any living primate.

The geneticist Steve Jones has noted it as a mystery which is ‘unanswered by science’, a point which is echoed by Jared Diamond:
... we descend to a glaring failure: the inability of twentieth-century science to formulate an adequate Theory of Penis Length... astonishing as it seems, important functions of the human penis remain obscure.
Desmond Morris described man as ‘the sexiest primate alive’, but why did evolution grant us such a bountiful gift? The whole human body seems to be perfectly designed for sexual excitement and pair bonding.

Morris saw elements of this plan in the enlarged breasts of the female, the sensitive ear lobes and lips, and a vaginal angle that encouraged intimate face to face copulation. He also highlighted our abundance of scent-producing glands, our unique facial mobility and our unique ability to produce copious tears - all features which strengthened the exclusive emotional pair-bonding between male and female.

This grand design could not be imagined unless humans also lost their shaggy coat of hair and so it might seem that the mystery of the missing hair is solved. Unfortunately, it is not that simple, for evolution does not set about achieving grand designs. The Darwinists are strangely silent on what incremental steps were involved, but however it happened it should have taken a long, long time.

There are three other interesting anomalies of ‘the naked ape’ which are also worthy of note.
The first is the appalling ineptitude of the human skin to repair itself. In the context of a move to the open savanna, where bipedal man became a vulnerable target, and in the context of a gradual loss of protective hair, it seems inconceivable that the human skin should have become so fragile relative to our primate cousins.

The second anomaly is the unique lack of penis bone in the male. This is in complete contrast to other mammals, which use the penis bone to copulate at short notice. The deselection of this vital bone would have jeopardized the existence of the human species unless it took place against the background of a long and peaceful environment.

The third anomaly is our eating habits. Whereas most animals will swallow their food instantaneously, we take the luxury of six whole seconds to transport our food from mouth to stomach. This again suggests a long period of peaceful evolution.
The question which arises is where this long and peaceful evolution is supposed to have taken place, because it certainly does not fit the scenario which is presented for Homo sapiens.

Nor have Darwinists explained adequately how the major changes in human anatomy were achieved in a time frame of only 6 million years...


The Mystery of the Human Brain

The greatest mystery of Homo sapiens is its incredible brain.

During the last fifteen years, scientists have used new imaging technologies (such as positron-emission tomography) to discover more about the human brain than ever before. The full extent of the complexity of its billions of cells has thus become more and more apparent. In addition to the brain’s physical complexity, its performance knows no bounds - mathematics and art, abstract thought and conceptualization and, above all, moral conscience and self-awareness.

Whilst many of the human brain’s secrets remain shrouded in mystery, enough has been revealed for National Geographic to have boldly described it as ’the most complex object in the known universe’.

Evolutionists see the brain as nothing more than a set of algorithms, but they are forced to admit that it is so complex and unique that there is no chance of reverse engineering the evolutionary process that created it.

The eminent scientist Roger Penrose, for example, commented:
I am a strong believer in the power of natural selection. But I do not see how natural selection, in itself, can evolve algorithms which could have the kind of conscious judgments of the validity of other algorithms that we seem to have.
What does the fossil record tell us about our evolving brain capabilities? The data varies considerably and must be treated with care (since the sample sizes are limited), but the following is a rough guide.

The early hominid Afarensis had around 500cc and Habilis/Australopithecus had around 700cc. Whilst it is by no means certain that one evolved from the other, it is possible to see in these figures the evolutionary effects over two million years of the hominid’s new environment.

As we move forward in time to 1.5 million years ago, we find a sudden leap in the cranial capacity of Homo erectus to around 900-1000cc. If we assume, as most anthropologists do, that this was accompanied by an increase in intelligence, it represents a most unlikely macromutation. Alternatively, we might explain this anomaly by viewing erectus as a separate species whose ancestors have not yet been found due to the poor fossil records.

Finally, after surviving 1.2 to 1.3 million years without any apparent change, and having successfully spread out of Africa to China, Australasia and Europe, something extraordinary happened to the Homo erectus hominid. Perhaps due to climatic changes, his population began to dwindle until he eventually died out. And yet, while most Homo erectus were dying, one managed to suddenly transform itself into Homo sapiens , with a vast increase in cranial capacity from 950cc to 1450cc.

Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling. It is widely accepted that we are the descendants of Homo erectus (who else was there to descend from?) but the sudden changeover defies all known laws of evolution. Hence Stephen Jay Gould’s comment about the ’awesome improbability of human evolution’.

Why has Homo sapiens developed intelligence and self-awareness whilst his ape cousins have spent the last 6 million years in evolutionary stagnation? Why has no other creature in the animal kingdom developed an advanced level of intelligence?

The Glory Land #fundie fundamentalforums.com

View Poll Results: Why do non believers don't go to church?


There are to many Hypocrites in the Churches 0%

They don't believe that the whole Bible is the Word of God 0%

They don't believe in tithing or supporting a Church 0%

There is just to many religions out there 0%

They have been taught not to believe in God 0%

Because of there Hardness of their Hearts, and closed ears to hear. 100.00%

Wotans Krieger #conspiracy aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.co.uk

What irritated me the most about this documentary and others like it is the political correctness and cowardice of today`s academic world in its obvious fear/distaste of putting the populations of Stone Age, Bronze Age and Iron Age Europe into an ethnic and racial context. Such a fear and cowardice was not present in the 1960s and 1970s when the aforementioned books were published and this makes them absolute gems in my eyes. These days archaeologists will shy away from referring to Indo-Europeans and Celts and will instead refer to the populations of these times as `Iron Age` people etc thus robbing them of an ethnic identity. What astounded me last night is that the programme presenters did not appear to discuss the population present or responsible for the building of phase III of Stonehenge[the finished product] and whilst they discussed phase II[not using that terminology] and referred to Beaker people they neglected or deliberately avoided any mention of Indo-Europeans. It would seem that reference to Indo-Europeans only gets a mention in programmes such as The Dark Lords of Hattusha where the Hiitites for instance as an Indo-European people are painted in dark militaristic terms, resembling a prototype of the Third Reich. It would seem then and only then do Indo-Europeans/Aryans get a mention!

Shoshana #fundie chabad.org

[Shoshana addresses a Gentile woman who is in a relationship with a Jewish man.]

Even if you "convert" you will not be Jewish. Because conversion means keeping the mitzvahs in the Torah. Even if some Jews have stopped keeping them, they are still Jewish because they were born to Jewish mothers and they never loose their Judaism. But if someone wants to gain admission to this unique club called Judaism, to be part of the people who stood at Sinai, then he must fulfill the Laws that were reveled to us at that time. Otherwise it's a phony and invalid conversion. And you might ask, "so what?" Because if your fiancee marries a non-Jew he is turning his back on the Torah that we received at Sinai, on his glorious ancestry starting with Father Abraham, on the Jews who sacrificed their lives to remain Jewish during the Spanish Inquisition, and the time of Chanukah, and on his own family. Marrying out is the greatest disloyalty to the Jewish people. HIS CHILDREN WON'T BE JEWISH AND IT IS THE DESTRUCTION OF JUDAISM. It is the SILENT HOLOCAUST.

Jccheapentertainment #fundie reddit.com

putting 'biotruths' in quotes does not invalidate the validity of the arguments invoked. and the word you're looking for is biology, which men and women differ on at a fundamental level, what a shocker right?
and by posing that question, you're essentially asking, "why is there a double standard?" which is an age old and played out question that has been repeatedly answered by redpillers, which I'd unabashedly identify as, and bluepillers, of which presumably you're one.

and the answer to that is it's not really a double standard, because for a man to become a "slut", he'd need to be at or at least near the apex of male attractiveness, which is a function of his physical fitness, resources, intelligence, social skills and perhaps some other relevant factors. whereas for a woman to be a slut, all she has to do is to say "yes" when propositioned, and open her legs. in other words, the amount of effort required are vastly different for the two sexes.

Waideland #racist forum.nationstates.net

The funny thing is that Hispanics aren't much worse off than non-Hispanic whites. Considering that many of them show up on our doorstep with no English skills, often illiterate even in their own language, no math, no science, etc, they still have a lower unemployment, and higher median incomes than Blacks. Last time I looked at unemployment numbers, all non-Blacks were separated by about 1%, with Blacks falling several points behind everyone.

Because of this, I tend to agree Quintium. American Blacks are the permanent Democrat welfare class because of how their culture views this country. They've had more opportunities to pull themselves out of the cellar than any other non-white group, and yet every other ethnic group and subgroup surpasses them, including black immigrants. By the time Hispanics have increased their numbers to a point that they can completely overthrow whites in the voting booth, their wealth and education will have increased to the point that they are no longer dependent on the Democrat welfare state. If that happens, I doubt they will still be voting 70/30 for socialism, abortion, and gay rights based solely on their immigration views.

Of course, that's assuming the country doesn't fall apart before then. In the short-term, providing education, medical care, as well as TANF, SNAP, and housing assistance to the tens of millions of people flooding the country will fall mostly on the shrinking number of upper-middle class whites. The large influx of cheap labor will also continue to drive wage stagnation for the bottom half of the country, turning the current middle class into subsistence only households with little or no disposable income, which means even fewer middle class wallets to pay for it.

Wage stagnation is my biggest fear when it comes to the near and distant future. While inflation isn't obscenely high, it is there, and puts more and more pressure every year on those 20k-100k a year jobs that are hallmarks of the middle class. If 20 years from now, a loaf of bread is $5, and a gallon of gas is $10, someone making $20 an hour isn't going to be middle class anymore. Having millions of people show up willing to pour concrete, drive forklifts, and work sheet metal for minimum wage is going to make that even worse.

HighIQPakiCel #sexist reddit.com

Cuckery Tier List - The Modern Man

Noncucked Tier - The man who

- Gives women no attention unless a return is more or less guaranteed

- Uses women for sex with no commitment (If they are capable of doing so, AKA Blackpilled Chad)

- Would only consider a relationship or marriage with a virgin

- Does not respect women who engage in any form of thottery

- Understands the biological nature of women

- Reaps what he sows financially, no other man profits off his labor (Non Wageslave)

Slightly Cucked Tier - The man who

- Wageslaves

- Watches porn

- Follows/likes women on social media

- Continuously attempts online dating despite failure

- Bluepilled to some degree

Cucked Tier - The man who

- Orbits women who would never fuck him (provides them with free validation/attention)

- Defends women online no matter how objectively wrong they are

- Dates and commits himself to nonvirgin women (Chad widows)

- Bluepilled completely

EXTREMELY CUCKED TIER - The man who

- Orbits to an extreme, providing money/resources to eThots/thots

- Dates/Marries a single mom (raises tyrones child)

- Dates/marries a woman who's 30+ (post wall woman who failed to secure chad, betabux time)

- Tolerates cheating (Actual cuck)

- Allows open Relationship (she fucks chad, he gets nothing. Actual cuck 2.0)

- Makes fun of incels online while unironically being one (IT)

THE ULTIMATE AND FINAL CUCK - The man who

- Has a daughter (Hits pipe)

So how cucked are you guys? I'm proud to say I'm 0% cucked after I escaped wageslavery.

bluecollarCEL #sexist incels.co

Feminism/Women Working/Hookup Culture has been an absolute nightmare. My 35yo oldcel observations on the state of Modern Women.

at the age now where I can see what is happening in these Nightmare Times, meaning I can see how life has ended up for the majority of my peers.

Some of my observations:

A ton of 40 something women going through midlife crisis and throwing their husbands out like fucking garbage.
Young 20 something women who are crazy liberal/sjw/pc freaks. They have colored hair and think that Donald Trump has "done" something to them on a personal level.
Women in their 40's who are childless and think that they can still have kids safely.
A shit ton of women in their 30's who are single mothers.

And as for my peers from HS/College(35yo):

I see a bunch of women who do have husbands but have 0 kids. Why did they even bother getting married. These are the so called "Career Women". They think some stupid fucking job is more rewarding/satisfying/gratifying than being a mother to a bunch of beautiful kids.

I also see a bunch of women that have only 1 fucking kid. 35yo and only 1 fucking kid. Back in the 1950's these chicks would of had 4-6 kids. And of course all of em did the alpha bucks and married some beta schmuck.

And then the rest of em are single Roasties who have jumped from cock to cock. 35yo: no husband, no kids, living in a shitty apartment but they have "Muh Career".

As for the men:

A lot of guys who have bastard kids. These dudes are paying Child Support.

Guys who have married below their level. A 4-5 guy marrying a 3-4 chick. They would of had looks-matched women in the past.

And a lot of the guys are single. The majority of the single guys are working shitty jobs. They aren't ugly or anything but they have limited money. I'm guessing these guys LDAR with their hobbies.

Seek The Truth #racist realjewnews.com

Isn’t one of the tenets of Judaism an attempt to destroy other strong cultures in order to keep them from rising and challenging Judaism?

When I go into Kroger’s supermarket, I literally see more White women with little Negroes than little White kids.

I was in Kroger’s today, and this bleached-blonde White woman asked me for school money for the little Black kid in her grocery cart.

I had to say no because I don’t want to see little White kids being neglected because the Jews hate the white Christian culture of the United States that created all the great cities and inventions, and who have taught American White women to despise the children of their own European, Russian based culture.

If a little White kid does manage to grow up without too much neglect and abuse from the Jew controlled schools, legal system and media, then he/she has to face “Affirmative Action” which means not being able to get a job or go to college in favor of Jews, blacks and illegal Mexicans.

Thus the communist Jews are able to destroy the once powerful white Christian culture of the U.S. through neglect, abuse, lies, mongrelization as well as endless wars.

Anna Merkaba #conspiracy sacredascensionmerkaba.com

Greetings everyone, this message to you is not going to be a channeling, but rather an explanation of various transmissions that I have been receiving for quite some time now, and the answer to many of your questions to me in the last few weeks in regard to Planet X.

There is a lot of hype going on right now about the supposed arrival of Nibiru, Planet X, The Winged Disc, The Death Star, whatever you wish to call it, in just a few weeks. First of all, from what I have been told a while ago and what has been confirmed recently, Nibiru’s full affect on human consciousness is not going to be fully felt until mid-2017. And although many are reporting seeing it in the sky and have videos and pictures to prove this, it should be really visible in the sky sometime starting from mid to end of 2017.

What I am being explained is that this celestial object known as Nibiru here on earth, is linked to human collective consciousness, which feeds the “matrix” that we are all part of. As such, it behaves according to the thought processes, and vibrations generated by all of us who are on earth. Based on all the transmissions that I have been receiving over the last few years, Nibiru’s arrival can tremendously boost the human awakening processes and help us make that shift from “EGO” based thinking to “ONENESS” based thinking, bringing with it change in one form or another.

Just like our very own cells which are constantly responding to a command from us via our thinking patterns and acting according to our thoughts, this celestial object is receiving a command from the consciousness to which it is connected – The Human Consciousness. This command is the collective energy of human beings on earth. Whatever emotions, thoughts and desires that we generate in relation to this particular celestial object or anything else in our lives, that is the type of outcome that we will be attracting towards earth. It is akin to a projector

And just like the moon or the suns flares affect us, so too does this celestial body; we are affecting it and it is affecting us by magnifying our thoughts and feelings. Hence many are feeling various discomforts such as panic attacks, digestive issues, acid reflux, constipation, diarrhea, headaches, artery issues, veins, heart related issues, blood pressure fluctuations, severe mood swings, etc., all of our already pre-existing issues are being pushed to the forefront for us to deal with both on the emotional and physical fronts. We are once again asked to cleanse and purify so that we can send out the purest of vibrations which will then be magnified and reflected back to us, in order to continue assisting us in this ascension process, helping us to get back to our very core, find balance within and finally BE that which we truly are.

It is the same as with anything, like attracts like. Here the concept is the same. If we fall prey to the fear based agendas of those who are constantly talking about cataclysms, and tsunamis, and whatever else horrific outcome that these prophets are predicting, then that is exactly what we will be attracting into our collective existence on this planet. If on the other hand, we fully understand our own power, and the power of our thought and how our own thoughts influence not only our very own selves, but many others around us, we can then influence Nibiru into conducting cooperative energies further supporting the Ascension and the transition of human collective consciousness into the Higher Octaves of BEing.

It is up to us to make the changes necessary to assist our very own selves and our beloved GAIA in extracting the most positive vibrations from Nibiru instead of giving into all the fear based programming that various people are trying to convey with chaotic videos and horrific prophecies of what might happen. Fear of the unknown is what is causing these misconceptions to occur. Misreading the ancient scripts and prophesy of eons past, we are missing the vital point of everything that our celestial counterparts have laid out before us, and that is to go deep within, listening to our very own higher selves and intuition, reaching to the very core of our beings and finally realizing that we are at the driving seat of all that occurs in our lives, that earth and her inhabitants are traveling back to their original frequencies and vibrations, lifting the veil of forgetfulness and being jolted awake.

What Nibiru can assist us in doing, is to generate massive energies which can suddenly awaken a massive number of people. Just as what happened in 2012 but on a much greater scale. Because so many have awakened back then, we have managed to shift human consciousness and tip the scales, the only thing that remains is to keep this energy steady and continue to open up more and more to our own powers, realizing and utilizing all that we have at our disposal to truly bring positive, everlasting, changes onto this planet.

We are all being supported by so many beings from all over the universe, and not just this universe! That, is how important what is happening on this planet at this moment in time is. We are being supported from behind the veil, and now from within the veil of forgetfulness, as each day NEW KIDS are arriving. I spoke about this over a year ago, new kids are going to be arriving daily to continue shifting the collective consciousness and continue to balance out the scales so that we can continue to sail smoothly through whatever turbulence might come our way.

But you don’t need to wait for any messiahs to come and save us, as the real messiahs are YOU. You are the ones who can save yourselves and assist all those around you to do the same. It is YOU who is choosing each moment of everyday to either walk in your power or give it away to someone else. It is YOU who can make your life a beautiful paradise or a hellish experience. Each moment you have a choice and that choice begins with your thoughts. Whatever you think, whatever you focus your attention on, that is what you will attract into your life.

So please, focus on the positive outcome for all involved. Remember how your thoughts influence everything around you. Think of how water is effected by your thoughts, and how your heart vibrations affect all around you, and remember that even electrons change their vibration when they are observed. I’ve shared information about all of this before, but if you wish to learn more please visit my blog at www.SacredAscensionMerkaba.com.

Once again, remember how powerful all of you are, and what gifts you bring into this world. Choose wisely whom you wish to give your energy to. Listen to your intuition on any subject matter that you come across, put everything through your heart, even this here message. Think how it makes you feel? Are you resonating with this at all? And go from there.

I urge you to always remain true to yourself. Listen to yourself first and foremost. Connect with your Higher Self. Walk into your own power. You are all amazing beings who are equipped to do whatever is necessary in order to persevere whilst ENJOYING each step of the way. BEing in JOY is HIGHLY important, and I feel we neglect this aspect of BEing a lot. So be sure to allow yourself to be in joy and harmony with yourself. I can go on and on, the bottom line is this: YOU ARE THE CO-CREATOR OF THIS REALITY AND THE AUTHOR OF A MASTERPIECE CALLED YOU!

As always I invite you to visit my blog for updates on the Ascension Process and for valuable articles and tips on how to stay balanced, in joy and harmony with yourself and all around you. And if you need my personal assistance, I would be more than happy to assist you with a Distant Healing Session which you can learn more about on my blog at www.SacredAscesnisionMerkaba.com . As always I send you the love of universal proportions, thank you for listening and thank you for BEing.

throwaway4587212 #fundie reddit.com

If we intend to transition from a society that oppresses women to a woman-centered society, we should start with education. From a young age, women need to be taught the dangers of associating with men. We'd also teach them about PIV and the dangers of Trauma-Bonding to a male that come with it. They should be taught about men's toxic sexuality, the dangers of hetero-captivity, and how they need woman only safe spaces. We would also tailor men's education to helping them resist their necrophilic sexual urges (in the off chance that their violence and sexuality stems from societal conditioning instead of their flawed biology), that they never should congregate in groups, and to never speak or talk over women or invalidate their experiences.

If we continue in this for a generation or two, it's only natural that women will find the prospect of birthing a male child to be a shameful thing. So naturally, upon discovering their unfortunate turn of fate, many will likely abort them. Those that resist doing the sensible thing will be entered into a lottery to see if they are allowed to keep the bastard. Ultimately, we hope to get the male population down to approximately 10% of what it is today.

There will be no gas chambers. That's a male idea and women don't subscribe to it.

At the same time, women will begin working towards parthenogenesis which will render the male forever obsolete. Why run the risk of birthing a defective child who will one day grow up to attack and oppress women when you can have a daughter. It doesn't make sense and may be part of the reason my sister rebelled against the truth I was sharing with her. She is pregnant and I was pushing her to abort if it was a male. Her mind has been too colonized by the men in her life to see the common sense behind such an action.

We'd also only allow the most docile and non-violent of males to donate their semen; in hopes of breeding out some of the worst male characteristics.

In addition, we'd levy a tax on males and would redistribute the taxed income to women. If they lost an additional 50% of their income, their ability to coerce women financially into hetero-captivity would be significantly diminished. This would help keep women safe.

Over time, we'd begin limiting the number of men that are allowed to congregate in one place. If they are too dangerous to exist alone, they are far more dangerous in groups. I would think no more than three in one place at any time would be acceptable.

We'd remove anything that glorifies men as something that they obviously aren't. We'd smash any monuments that glorify male accomplishments, ban any media that shows them having attributes that they clearly don't (empathy, sensitivity, the capacity for love, etc). We'd also ban male participation in sports. I was in a bar drinking Monday night and realized, for example, that football is legalized male violence and as such is wholly unacceptable and needs to be banned; not only for glorifying male violence but also for elevating men to a position where they can serve as a role model (men rejoice in violence, not only against women, but also themselves).

I don't know that we'd want men to continue to be literate. It doesn't enlighten them and only serves to help them find new and more creative ways to torment women and destroy the planet.

We'd also ban men from holding public office, participating in medicine (as modern medicine is biocidal to women), and participating in commerce. I'd think that ideally we'd train them in the manual arts and let them spend their days breaking rocks, cleaning the toxins they've polluted the planet with, and unmaking those things (e.g. nuclear power plants) that threaten to harm women's harmony with nature.

FactCheckMe had a rather entertaining solution that would also work, though I'm not certain if it is feasible in the short term. Though letting them resort to their base nature and take care of their own population problem behind concrete walls does seem rather appealing. http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/what-logistical-problem/

Makia Freeman #conspiracy #quack #ufo wakingtimes.com

The synthetic agenda is the over-arching agenda of the New World Order worldwide conspiracy. Think about it – so many aspects of the conspiracy are about supplanting the real with the fake, the organic with the inorganic, the carbon with the silicon and the biological with the artificial. In the synthetic agenda, everything in our world is being threatened with replacement by an inferior version or fake replica of itself – which sells itself as superior so as to increase the acceptance and assimilation of it.

As I covered in the series Everything is Fake: Top 40 Pieces of Fakery in Our World, almost everything around us is a facade, fake or fraudulent. For instance, we have vaccines, petrochemical drugs and radiation masquerading as “medicine”, foreign corporations masquerading as “government”, mainstream science masquerading as “knowledge”, GMOs masquerading as “food” and fiat paper masquerading as “money”. However, as David Icke in Phantom Self has been saying, the deeper reason is that all these fake things are being created from some sort of virus or distorted force that has hacked the source and digital-genetic code of life itself – and is madly spewing out an inferior version of everything in the only way it knows how. Ultimately, this force is using the synthetic agenda to entrain us onto its frequency, and transform us into a hybrid species that will no longer be able to be called human.

Synthetic Agenda: Synthetic Boobs, Synthetic Clothes, Synthetic Food
People laugh at how some women go in for a boob job – but how interesting that synthetic boobs are made from silicone implants. Scratchy synthetic clothes are indicative of the synthetic agenda too. A synthetic material such as nylon is inferior to many natural materials and fibers such as cotton, wool, hemp and silk. Did you know that so much of our food is full of plastic in so many ways – like when bisphenol rubs off the packaging onto the food, or when China is caught making rice out of plastic! GMOs / GM food is an obvious example of the synthetic agenda. GMOs are created by what is essentially random gene splicing. They are largely untested (Monsanto and its Big Biotech cronies deliberately halt clinical trials at around 3 months to cover up the long term damages), require tons of pesticide poison to grow, and constitute a clear assault on our food integrity, yet in the typical arrogant way of the synthetic agenda, they sold to us as superior! GMOs are a fundamental part of the synthetic agenda, because they change our DNA from the inside out.

Synthetic Agenda: Synthetic People Too
Another aspect of the synthetic agenda which is still mostly unknown to the population at large is human cloning. Yes it is real – and it’s happening in DUMBs (Deep Underground Military Bases) as we speak. There are now a proliferation of videos on YouTube which dive into the subject of synthetic humans, clones and organic robotics – synthetics for short. In particular, there are many videos showing multiple versions of the alleged same person, especially if that person is famous, such as a movie star or politician. Why are there multiple versions of Oprah, Nicole Kidman and other celebrities with different eyes, noses, ears and facial proportions? Why doesNicki Minaj literally look like a robot? Why has Minaj (and other celebrities such as B.O.B. and Tila Tequila) made reference to cloning centers on social media? Why did insider George Green claim in this 2008 Project Camelot interview that the US and other governments were given cloning technology by the Greys (alien extraterrestrials) and have been making clones since 1938? Microsoft recently acquired a company manufacturing synthetic DNA …

mviper #sexist incels.co

Incels as a solution to the Drake Equation

Most of you have probably been exposed to the concept that is the Drake Equation. All of the variables that contribute to the probability of the number of intelligent civilizations in the Universe capable of radio transmission, etc. etc. From this has been been generalized the notion of the Great Filter to account for the seemingly non-existence of detectable alien life forms. What if incels are this Great Filter? In every life form on Earth that reproduces sexually, there tends to be a power imbalance between the sexes, favoring one or the other as selected for by the environment and evolution over great time periods. In humanity, this phenomena waxes and wanes over much shorter time periods with the changing conditions of our civilizations, accelerated by the plasticity of language, culture and other higher-order emergent social structures. During the early stages of civilization, life is difficult and this favors the traits of men. As men build civilization and develop or rediscover technology, life becomes easier and ultimately leads to women being given the advantage.

What if every late-stage alien civilization that procreates through sexual reproduction and has advanced to the point of early space travel snuffs itself out due to neglecting the needs of its incels, who either effectively pull out the rungs holding up civilization causing an immediate collapse and/or are persecuted to the point of being rounded up and killed, resulting in a civilizational plateau and slow dysgenic decline (as civilization is geared entirely to the short term needs and desires of the female sex and ugly & dumb 5/10s ride imprisoned Chad's cock) from which there is no recovery? We see localized evidence of this in our own history, such as the Bronze Age Collapse and the Mycenians, for example.

I'm not sure what can be done about this. I don't think we can escape this trap politically, at least here in the West. We can do it technologically through AI/robot companions, eugenics, genetic engineering, but here we see feminists encroaching on this field through political means of control.

What options do we have? What strategies can we adopt

Human Stupidity #fundie human-stupidity.com

Human-Stupidity is open to science. Just prove me wrong, using science.
1.If unbiased free academic research can show that 17 year olds get traumatized for life for having sex with older people, we will support age-of-consent laws.
2.If the Rind study, and Susan Clancy can be proven wrong, by free unbiased academic research, we will support draconian decade-long punishments for all childhood sexuality.
3.We would stand corrected if the voodoo theory could be proven true, by free unbiased academic research: if it were proven that looking at photos of lightly clothed 15 year olds, downloaded for free from the internet does irreparable harm to the minors depicted. If that harm is so perverse that looking at the photos ruins the model’s life forever. And that downloading free photos truly stimulates the rape and abuse of innumerous children. Then we might agree that life in prison without parole is a proper punishment for possession of a few hundred photos, which are nothing else then 0’s and 1’s in files on a computer hard drive.

But against all odds, Milton Diamond, in peer reviewed research, proved the opposite: freely available child pornography reduces sex crimes against children, because many pedophiles can satisfy themselves merely by perusing pictures.

PoliticalAloha #conspiracy wnd.com

Are you serious?

There are so many ways for Obama to steal this election that if he doesn't win a second term then he is sleeping at the wheel.

1. Electronic balloting machines voting for Obama (this is actually a current news item).
2. Ballots missing in transit to be counted.
3. Ballots being destroyed beyond recognition.
4. Dead people voting.
5. Voting in more than one precinct and more than one state.
6. Denying absentee ballots to the military by delaying their delivery.
7. Having a foreign power count some of our votes (Spain comes to mind).
8. Having Chris Matthews count some of our votes
9. Have the black panthers intimidate people from voting.
10. Have the UN intimidate people from voting.
11. Have the international courts invalidate our ballots.
12. Have any court invalidate our ballots.
13. Hanging Chads
14. Pregnant Chads
15. Missing Chads (okay, it sounded cool)
16. Illegals voting
17. Non resident aliens voting
18. Legal challenges to the SoS declaring electorates for their state
19. Legislatures electing to choose the electors themselves
20. Electorates thinking they know best and vote for Obama.
21. Electorates in fear for their lives voting for Obama.
22. House of Representatives invalidate the Electoral College and vote for the president themselves.
23. MSM declaring the results, though they are nothing of reality, declaring Obama winner.
24. Obama declaring himself winner and the MSM ridicule anyone that questions his declaration.
25. Military Coup
26. Nation wide martial law implemented
27. Alien invasion from Mars

and of course the Chicago favorite, stuffing the ballot box

A youtube video shows the airing of the announcement of Obama winning the election two weeks before the election. You can see it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

So the video shows Obama winning over Romney with approximately 40M to 38M popular vote. Is this a signal to the Romney camp that the MSM will steal the election regardless of the outcome?

I have said before, it is not who counts the votes and it is not who casts the votes, but it is who reports the results that truly matter. The American people will believe anything they see on their televisions in their living rooms. Most believe that three towers came down by fire and two planes. Forget physics, they saw it with their own eyes!

Polcarp fan #fundie christianforums.com

Public schools have become a joke of a learning experience anyway. You go to biology class, learn the dribble about nothing to mud to monkeys to man and get on with your life learning the idiocy of evolutionary morality.

Evolution is not the big bogey man that secularism hails it as. It furthers condom sales and abortion clinics and promotes losing virginity at an ever increasingly young age, but once a child grows into an adult, they see reality as it truly is.

0 x 0 = an anti-God belief system.

Once math is applied properly, a person becomes enlightened and becomes a Bible-affirming Christian.

...You either become a mature adult or stay in a state of regrets you can't escape.

Christians are not reducing in numbers. So many people come to Christ after getting a college degree and without the stains of the education system that failed them so miserably staying with them for the rest of their lives. Go to a mega Church and see.

CrossRufus #dunning-kruger #conspiracy #fundie #crackpot #pratt reddit.com

One thing I have been increasingly taking notice of is how e-skepticals - you know, the "science, reason, facts and logic" crowd, people you can easily find at internet communities such as "Fundies Say The Darndest Things", "RationalWiki" and basically most left-wing forums - tend to be extremelly vain, ego-driven and arrogantic. For instance, let's illustrate this with a hypothetical situation: imagine it's scientific consensus that a few million years ago there was a frozen continent named "Lumumba" and that a random man named Edmund contests the existence of Lumumba; according to the skepticals Edmund is a mentally unstable idiot whose brain lives in an alternative reality. At a first glance it could seem fair to regard him as such, he's in disagreement with thousands of individuals who are educated on that field after all, right? However, let's take into account that Edmund currently has no means to verify these claims by himself (like most people) and it basically has no relevance at all to his practical life; having that in mind, one should start to question if it really makes sense to mock and belittle that person. Why must he believe what a bunch of people with diplomas tell him on the matter in order to not be deemed as intelectually inferior? If having an inquisitive mindset is so valued and praised by the "facts and reason" crew then why people like Edmund are supposed to just accept everything scientists say? Why does that say anything about his mental health if believing or not believing in Lumumba causes literally zero negative impact in his life or in the lives of others? The whole issue here comes down to the fact that these skepticals aren't really interested in promoting scientific thinking and skepticism but rather in feeding their own ego and trying to affirme themselves as smart and enlightened in comparison to the "idiotic science-denying bigoted cranky fundies"; that's why you have youtube videos with titles such as "physicist reacts to flat-earthers" and websites such as the ones mentioned at the beggining (RationalWiki and FDST), it's all a huge group session of intellectual masturbation.

And no, I am not strawmaning, that hypothetical situation is based-off something quite similar I saw on a FDST thread: it was a comment that labeled anyone who took Pink Swastika (a book about alleged homosexuals in the Nazi Party and the connection between homossexuality and the fascist ideology) seriously was clinically insane. I mean, really? The view one has about things that happened more than seven decades ago in another continent is really so relevant to the point of determining their mental health? I can kind of understand cases like the mockery of flat-earthers (well, actually I don't, thinking that the Earth is flat causes no damage to anyone, so why not just let them have their belief instead of starting this whole outrage?), since it's actually possible to verify by yourself that the Earth cannot be flat (for example, by looking at the clouds in the sky or realizing that people in other countries are under different time-zones), but having this same attitude towards something so inexact, imprecise, malleable and distant such as the study of the past is an attestation of arrogance.

"You clearly don't understand how science works, the scientific method is extremely rigorous and scientists have to stand scrutiny from their peers in order to have their findings accepted as factual. If you have doubts about a certain topic you can simply study and verify it by yourself" Ok then, I will study it by myself and come to my own conclusions, but until I'm in my right to have doubts and having them instead of just blindly accepting everything the scientific community says (like, let's be honest, everyone does) doesn't make me intelectually inferior to anyone. However, let's not ignore that it would take me years and years of study to "understans" just one specific topic, that I would still have to just accept as true everything that my peers from the hundreds of other fields say (no, you can't seriously expect someone to specialize on everything in a lifetime, come on) and that even in my own field I would have to assume as true the countless premises that it's based upon (for example, an archeologist has to accept this or that method of dating as the most precise so everything he has learned so far can make sense - this example may not be accurate but I just wanted something to illustrate what I meant)

"Yikes, the Dunning-Kruger is strong on this one. Ok Mr. Nuanced Contrarian, so if all doctors said that taking poison is harmful for your well-being and may possibly culminate in your death but a local charlatan claimed it would give you superpowers then you would take both claims as having the same weight just because you can't verify it by yourself first?" No, I would absolutely stand with the doctors on that one; however, that's not because they are science-people but rather due the fact I know from my own experience that poison is harmful (by seeing all the cases of people who took it and experienced negative effects). So yes, I agree that it's stupid to do certain things when you can verify with YOUR OWN EYES that it won't have a good outcome (not vaccinating your kids, for example)

"We know that science is accurate because it works" Why? Where that implication comes from? Just because a certain institution or group of people creates things that work and improve our lives it doesn't necessarily mean their explanations and theories behind their "inventions" are true; if that is the case then the healers of some amazonian tribe are correct in their beliefs about spirits just because some of their cures are effective?

"If you are so against science then why don't you just drop your phone, leave everything behind and go live in the wilderness?" Again, why? Where that implication comes from? Just because I don't accept as true some explanations of reality that the scientific community come up with it doesn't mean that I think everything related to science is evil and that we should reject all of it's inventions

"You are thinking of scientists as 'the others' when in reality they are just people like you. Also, it would make no sense for scientists to try hiding something from the public when in fact they would receive prestige for exposing the findings of their peers as false" Well, what if they are indeed 'the others'? I mean, who knows? There could be a lobby to push for some agenda or a certain conspiracy to cover something up; this may sound like silly conspirationism but you can't really know for sure. As for the "scientists will seek to disprove their peers instead of covering them up" part, it's just an assumption, there is no reason to say that scientists will necessarily have such mindset; it can be true but it could also be true that anyone who questioned the consensus would risk getting ostracized or even losing their diploma and their source of income - I mean, who knows?

"Science may not have the answers for everything but that doesn't mean your cranky nutjob theories are on the same level of accuracy and respectability" Well, that's a "case by case" situation since there are many different "cranky nutjob theories" out there, but to spare some words and space let's say that such affirmation is mostly true. What then? Just because the alternative theories are wrong it doesn't mean all criticism is invalid. Furthermore, you have to have in mind that different worldviews often come from differing premises and assumptions; science, for instance, is based on methodological naturalism, the assumption the explanation for every topic investigated must be a natural/material/non-supernatural one, while a religious person, for example, takes into account the existence of the divine and thus will likely come up with an alternative and supernatural view of the same phenomenon (what you mockingly label as "goddidit"). Yes, these people have a faith they embrace and because of that they think differently, what's your problem with that? Why can't you just let them be? Oh, I forgot: you guys are desperate for self-affirmation and in constant need of feeling smart and enlightened in comparison to the "cranks, bigots and fundies", right?

gumisgood #fundie city-data.com

(In a thread asking why conservatives care about gay marriage.)

It devalues the importance of the family unit. In my opinion a society should endorse the natural family unit as it leads to a strong and productive society. What is productive about homosexuality? It weakens society, it takes the emphasis of marriage away from being a gift for human production, rearing and ultimately human domination of the earth and its resources and switches it to that of hedonistic and self serving pleasure. It puts an individual's desires above anything else and forgets about humanity as a whole. It pits love against humanity, and it ultimately will lead to the destruction of love. People are going to stop loving other people. Man will stop loving woman if it is not emphasized to man that the his role is not his own pleasure..but the betterment of all humanity even at his displeasure.

It's insulting to me as a man to think that another man might think that he can love a man with the same intensity that I can love my wife. No man will ever love another man more deeply than I will love my wife. To think homosexual love is as strong as heterosexual love is insulting to what it means to be human. To be man and woman. Man belongs with woman and woman with man. Without man and woman there are no people. I love woman so deeply that I might become another person with her, put another being on this earth that is me and her, our creation. No two men can say that. You could never understand that love, to look at another person and realize it is not another person. It is something I could never say about another man and myself. If homosexual love is all about individual rights, then it is a lesser love. It is a selfish love. It is not love, not as heterosexual love..which is all about the non individuals rights. The other's rights.

It is an insult to my wife and children to think that what you have is anything close to what I will have.

It's a slap in the face to all the pairs of man and woman that even allowed you to exist to be here to read this. You insult your own blood.

Life is not about self serving pleasure, some of us are actually trying to push us forward. People want to chase hedonistic pleasures but life is not about your self, or your pleasures. People complain that life is hard, and that it is unfair. That your self is being neglected. Good. Life is supposed to be hard. You are supposed to suffer. It is not about you. That is what has made us the greatest species in this history of consciousness. Yet some think our position is certain, or that we have arrived, and can fall into hedonism and pleasure focused living. Like there is no room to improve. No. There is plenty of work, the human journey just started. This is not the end, this is the beginning. Life is a constant battle. Humans are very easily replaced. Some of you don't care to spread humanity, to continue pushing and fighting. I am not one of those people. And to those of us who aren't, it is both insulting to our efforts, and maybe an impediment even..

Humanity is not yet done evolving. But some of you are. You have no place in the future of humanity, it is why you can't reproduce. And it is why I can not accept.

Got Questions Ministries #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Is there an argument for the existence of God?"

Answer: The question of whether there is a conclusive argument for the existence of God has been debated throughout history, with exceedingly intelligent people taking both sides of the dispute. In recent times, arguments against the possibility of God’s existence have taken on a militant spirit that accuses anyone daring to believe in God as being delusional and irrational. Karl Marx asserted that anyone believing in God must have a mental disorder that caused invalid thinking. The psychiatrist Sigmund Freud wrote that a person who believed in a Creator God was delusional and only held those beliefs due to a “wish-fulfillment” factor that produced what Freud considered to be an unjustifiable position. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche bluntly said that faith equates to not wanting to know what is true. The voices of these three figures from history (along with others) are simply now parroted by a new generation of atheists who claim that a belief in God is intellectually unwarranted.

Is this truly the case? Is belief in God a rationally unacceptable position to hold? Is there a logical and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Outside of referencing the Bible, can a case for the existence of God be made that refutes the positions of both the old and new atheists and gives sufficient warrant for believing in a Creator? The answer is, yes, it can. Moreover, in demonstrating the validity of an argument for the existence of God, the case for atheism is shown to be intellectually weak.

To make an argument for the existence of God, we must start by asking the right questions. We begin with the most basic metaphysical question: “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?” This is the basic question of existence—why are we here; why is the earth here; why is the universe here rather than nothing? Commenting on this point, one theologian has said, “In one sense man does not ask the question about God, his very existence raises the question about God.”

In considering this question, there are four possible answers to why we have something rather than nothing at all:

1. Reality is an illusion.
2. Reality is/was self-created.
3. Reality is self-existent (eternal).
4. Reality was created by something that is self-existent.

So, which is the most plausible solution? Let’s begin with reality being simply an illusion, which is what a number of Eastern religions believe. This option was ruled out centuries ago by the philosopher Rene Descartes who is famous for the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes, a mathematician, argued that if he is thinking, then he must “be.” In other words, “I think, therefore I am not an illusion.” Illusions require something experiencing the illusion, and moreover, you cannot doubt the existence of yourself without proving your existence; it is a self-defeating argument. So the possibility of reality being an illusion is eliminated.

Next is the option of reality being self-created. When we study philosophy, we learn of “analytically false” statements, which means they are false by definition. The possibility of reality being self-created is one of those types of statements for the simple reason that something cannot be prior to itself. If you created yourself, then you must have existed prior to you creating yourself, but that simply cannot be. In evolution this is sometimes referred to as “spontaneous generation” —something coming from nothing—a position that few, if any, reasonable people hold to anymore simply because you cannot get something from nothing. Even the atheist David Hume said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” Since something cannot come from nothing, the alternative of reality being self-created is ruled out.

Now we are left with only two choices—an eternal reality or reality being created by something that is eternal: an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. The 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards summed up this crossroads:

• Something exists.
• Nothing cannot create something.
• Therefore, a necessary and eternal “something” exists.

Notice that we must go back to an eternal “something.” The atheist who derides the believer in God for believing in an eternal Creator must turn around and embrace an eternal universe; it is the only other door he can choose. But the question now is, where does the evidence lead? Does the evidence point to matter before mind or mind before matter?

To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points away from an eternal universe and toward an eternal Creator. From a scientific standpoint, honest scientists admit the universe had a beginning, and whatever has a beginning is not eternal. In other words, whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning is underscored by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang discovered in the early 1900s, the fact that the universe is expanding and can be traced back to a singular beginning, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. All prove the universe is not eternal.

Further, the laws that surround causation speak against the universe being the ultimate cause of all we know for this simple fact: an effect must resemble its cause. This being true, no atheist can explain how an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe accidentally created beings (us) who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Such a thing, from a causation standpoint, completely refutes the idea of a natural universe birthing everything that exists. So in the end, the concept of an eternal universe is eliminated.

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God's existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”

But the next question we must tackle is this: if an eternal Creator exists (and we have shown that He does), what kind of Creator is He? Can we infer things about Him from what He created? In other words, can we understand the cause by its effects? The answer to this is yes, we can, with the following characteristics being surmised:

• He must be supernatural in nature (as He created time and space).
• He must be powerful (exceedingly).
• He must be eternal (self-existent).
• He must be omnipresent (He created space and is not limited by it).
• He must be timeless and changeless (He created time).
• He must be immaterial because He transcends space/physical.
• He must be personal (the impersonal cannot create personality).
• He must be infinite and singular as you cannot have two infinites.
• He must be diverse yet have unity as unity and diversity exist in nature.
• He must be intelligent (supremely). Only cognitive being can produce cognitive being.
• He must be purposeful as He deliberately created everything.
• He must be moral (no moral law can be had without a giver).
• He must be caring (or no moral laws would have been given).

These things being true, we now ask if any religion in the world describes such a Creator. The answer to this is yes: the God of the Bible fits this profile perfectly. He is supernatural (Genesis 1:1), powerful (Jeremiah 32:17), eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), timeless/changeless (Malachi 3:6), immaterial (John 5:24), personal (Genesis 3:9), necessary (Colossians 1:17), infinite/singular (Jeremiah 23:24, Deuteronomy 6:4), diverse yet with unity (Matthew 28:19), intelligent (Psalm 147:4-5), purposeful (Jeremiah 29:11), moral (Daniel 9:14), and caring (1 Peter 5:6-7).

One last subject to address on the matter of God’s existence is the matter of how justifiable the atheist’s position actually is. Since the atheist asserts the believer’s position is unsound, it is only reasonable to turn the question around and aim it squarely back at him. The first thing to understand is that the claim the atheist makes—“no god,” which is what “atheist” means—is an untenable position to hold from a philosophical standpoint. As legal scholar and philosopher Mortimer Adler says, “An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition—one that denies the existence of something—cannot be proved.” For example, someone may claim that a red eagle exists and someone else may assert that red eagles do not exist. The former only needs to find a single red eagle to prove his assertion. But the latter must comb the entire universe and literally be in every place at once to ensure he has not missed a red eagle somewhere and at some time, which is impossible to do. This is why intellectually honest atheists will admit they cannot prove God does not exist.

Next, it is important to understand the issue that surrounds the seriousness of truth claims that are made and the amount of evidence required to warrant certain conclusions. For example, if someone puts two containers of lemonade in front of you and says that one may be more tart than the other, since the consequences of getting the more tart drink would not be serious, you would not require a large amount of evidence in order to make your choice. However, if to one cup the host added sweetener but to the other he introduced rat poison, then you would want to have quite a bit of evidence before you made your choice.

This is where a person sits when deciding between atheism and belief in God. Since belief in atheism could possibly result in irreparable and eternal consequences, it would seem that the atheist should be mandated to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his position, but he cannot. Atheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the charge it makes. Instead, the atheist and those whom he convinces of his position slide into eternity with their fingers crossed and hope they do not find the unpleasant truth that eternity does indeed exist. As Mortimer Adler says, “More consequences for life and action follow from the affirmation or denial of God than from any other basic question.”

So does belief in God have intellectual warrant? Is there a rational, logical, and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Absolutely. While atheists such as Freud claim that those believing in God have a wish-fulfillment desire, perhaps it is Freud and his followers who actually suffer from wish-fulfillment: the hope and wish that there is no God, no accountability, and therefore no judgment. But refuting Freud is the God of the Bible who affirms His existence and the fact that a judgment is indeed coming for those who know within themselves the truth that He exists but suppress that truth (Romans 1:20). But for those who respond to the evidence that a Creator does indeed exist, He offers the way of salvation that has been accomplished through His Son, Jesus Christ: "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13).

suol #fundie stream.org

(in response to a defense of same sex marriage)

"STDs are far more prevalent in the gay community than hetero-sexuals. It's an invalid comparison. Plus, marriage means one man and one woman, and if people actually stuck to that, you have virtually a 0% percent chance of getting any STDs."

Mark Carey, M Jackson, Alessandro Antonello & Jaclyn Rushing #moonbat phg.sagepub.com

Feminist glaciology asks how knowledge related to glaciers is produced, circulated, and gains credibility and authority across time and space. It simultaneously brings to the forefront glacier knowledge that has been marginalized or deemed “outside” of traditional glaciology. It asks how glaciers came to be meaningful and significant (through what ontological and epistemological process), as well as trying to destabilize underlying assumptions about ice and environment through the dismantling of a host of boundaries and binaries. The feminist lens is crucial given the historical marginalization of women, the importance of gender in glacier related knowledges, and the ways in which systems of colonialism, imperialism, and patriarchy co-constituted gendered science. Additionally, the feminist perspective seeks to uncover and embrace marginalized knowledges and alternative narratives, which are increasingly needed for effective global environmental change research, including glaciology (Castree et al., 2014; Hulme, 2011). A combination of feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology provide the intellectual foundation for feminist glaciology.

Most existing glaciological research — and hence discourse and discussions about cryospheric change — stems from information produced by men, about men, with manly characteristics, and within masculinist discourses. These characteristics apply to scientific disciplines beyond glaciology; there is an explicit need to uncover the role of women in the history of science and technology, while also exposing processes for excluding women from science and technology (Phillips and Phillips, 2010; Domosh, 1991; Rose, 1993). Harding (2009) explains that the absence of women in science critically shapes “the selection of scientific problems, hypotheses to be tested, what constituted relevant data to be collected, how it was collected and interpreted, the dissemination and consequences of the results of research, and who was credited with the scientific and technological work” (Harding, 2009: 408). Scientific studies themselves can also be gendered, especially when credibility is attributed to research produced through typically masculinist activities or manly characteristics, such as heroism, risk, conquests, strength, self sufficiency, and exploration (Terrall, 1998). The tendency to exclude women and emphasize masculinity thus has far-reaching effects on science and knowledge, including glaciology and glacier related knowledges.

Feminist glaciology is rooted in, and combines, both feminist science studies and postcolonial science studies to meaningfully shift present-day glacier and ice sciences. While feminist science studies focuses explicitly on gender and the place (or absence) of women in science, it can neglect specific analyses of the social relations of colonialism and imperialism, emphasizing instead Western women without sustained attention to indigenous, non-Western, and local knowledge systems that are the centerpiece of postcolonial science studies (Harding, Carey et al. Phillips and Phillips, 2010; Schnabel, 2014). The postcolonial perspective is crucial for understanding glaciological knowledges because the science of glaciology has historically participated in the imperialist, colonial, and capitalist projects associated with polar exploration, mountain colonization, resource extraction, and Cold War and other geopolitical endeavors.

More recently, glaciology has also been central to earth systems science that often relies on remote sensing from satellite imagery to suggest broader claims of objectivity but is actually akin to the “god trick of seeing everything from nowhere” (Haraway, 1988: 581; also see Shapin, 1998). Questions about epistemology in climate science, ice coring, and glaciology are only beginning to be asked, especially focusing on Cold War polar glaciology (Martin-Nielsen, 2012, 2013; Elzinga, 2009; Korsmo, 2010; Naylor et al., 2008; Turchetti et al., 2008; Macdougall, 2004; Finnegan, 2004; Heymann et al., 2010; Bowen, 2005; Hulme, 2010). Of these studies probing the discipline of glaciology, only a tiny subset analyze gender (exceptions include Bloom, 1993; Bloom et al., 2008; Hulbe et al., 2010; Hevly, 1996) or approach human glacier interactions from the perspective of feminist postcolonial science studies or feminist political ecology (exceptions include Williams and Golovnev, 2015; Cruikshank, 2005). Fewer still recognize indigenous knowledges, local perspectives, or alternative narratives of glaciers, even though large populations of non-Western and indigenous peoples inhabit mountain and cold regions near glaciers and possess important knowledge about cryoscapes (Carey et al., 2015; Nu¨sser and Baghel, 2014; Drew, 2012).

Feminist and postcolonial theories enrich and complement each other by showing how gender and colonialism are co-constituted, as well as how both women and indigenous peoples have been marginalized historically (Schnabel, 2014). Feminist glaciology builds from feminist postcolonial science studies, analyzing not only gender dynamics and situated knowledges, but also alternative knowledges and folk glaciologies that are generally marginalized through colonialism, imperialism, inequality, unequal power relations, patriarchy, and the domination of Western science (Harding, 2009).

An additional theoretical foundation for feminist glaciology is feminist political ecology, which has generally emphasized unequal vulnerability and disproportionate global change impacts, but which also contributes significant research on knowledge production, ontologies, and epistemologies. With hundreds of millions of people utilizing glaciers for everything from drinking water and hydroelectricity to recreation and spiritual sites, the disproportionate vulnerabilities and disparate adaptive capacities in these societies are critical to acknowledge.

Feminist political ecology addresses how inequality and unequal power relations — mediated and co constituted through gender dynamics — have silenced the knowledge of people “most affected and marginalized by neoliberal, colonial, and patriarchal systems” (Hanson and Buechler, 2015: 6).

Crucially for feminist glaciology, feminist political ecology argues for the integration of alternative ways of knowing, beyond diverse women’s knowledges to include — more broadly — the unsettling of Eurocentric knowledges, the questioning of dominant assumptions, and the diversification of modes and methods of knowledge production through the incorporation of everyday lived experiences, storytelling, narrative, and visual methods (Harris, 2015). This inclusion of alternative knowledges and narratives alongside analysis of colonialism and inequality, such as race relations (Mollett and Faria, 2013), fits squarely into more recent feminist political ecologies that increasingly go “beyond gender”. This means that the research builds on “a history of boundary-breaking ideas [that] makes possible the present-day spaces where feminist geographers explore power, justice, and knowledge production, ideas that encompass but also surpass a focus on gender” (Coddington, 2015: 215).

Feminist glaciology raises critical conceptual, analytical, and epistemological questions that are largely absent in the 21st-century love affair with glaciers and ice. The framework offered here strives to open discussions, to introduce avenues of investigation, and to suggest ways forward not only for scientific enquiry that includes the environmental humanities and social sciences, but also for public perceptions of glaciers. Examples within this review and synthesis article are primarily meant to expose the value and various dimensions of the feminist glaciology framework; they are not meant to be comprehensive, but rather starting points to indicate lines of future investigation into this major gap in glacier studies and its related contribution to global environmental change research and both human and physical geography.

An Open Letter From Concerned Physicians Regarding Antibiotic Resistance #fundie homeopathyusa.org

America and the world face a crisis.

It is now estimated that antibiotic resistant infections may kill an estimated 10 million people a year and cost the world’s economies some $100 trillion annually1 by the year 2050. Dr. Margaret Chan of the World Health Organization has recently stated that Earth may be approaching a time “when things as common as strep throat or a child’s scratched knee could once again kill.”

Solutions to this looming crisis must be found and found quickly. As some of America’s leading integrative medicine specialists, we believe it is time to look anew at a modality called homeopathic medicine.

Why homeopathic medicine?

As physicians, we are the first to acknowledge that the diagnostic and surgical tools of conventional medicine are scientific marvels - truly extraordinary and life saving. However, it is also a well-documented fact that many of the drugs currently used by conventional medicine carry risks that are often unacceptable, and in the case of bacterial infections – increasingly ineffective.

Signatories, and tens of thousands of our medical colleagues around the world, have repeatedly used homeopathic medicine to effectively and safely treat patients with a wide range of ailments, including serious, and in some cases, life threatening bacterial and viral infections, without the risk of creating further drug resistant organisms. We reached our decision to employ these medicines after careful experimentation and observation, in search of a drug system that relieved suffering without potential toxic side and after-effects.

Why are we recommending consideration of homeopathic medicine?

Let’s start by looking at what we know about it today

Homeopathic medicine is a 200-year-old system of medicine used by an estimated 500 million people worldwide2. The system relies on medicines made from individual plants, animals and minerals that are serially diluted and vigorously agitated during the manufacturing process. Twelve independent research laboratories in North America, Russia, Europe and Asia have now confirmed that all classically-prepared homeopathic medicines studied contain various nanostructures, including source and silica nanoparticles which are heterogeneously dispersed in colloidal solution 3 4 5 6. The above mentioned laboratories and others have found that homeopathic medicines, like modern engineered nanoparticles, have been found to act by modulating biological function of the allostatic stress response network, including cytokines, oxidative stress and heat shock proteins 7,8. Additionally, there are hundreds of peer-reviewed studies including randomly controlled trials and large observational studies on individual cells, plants, animals and humans, that show homeopathic medicines are exceptionally safe and have measurable and positive biological and therapeutic effects9.

Reliable and extensive clinical and public health records have also been carefully examined internationally, looking for evidence of homeopathic medicine’s efficacy during some of the deadliest epidemics of the past 200 years. The main findings of this research show that when homeopathic medicine was employed during these deadly events, mortality rates were routinely very low. This constancy remained regardless of the homeopathic physician, time, place or type of epidemical disease, including diseases carrying a high mortality rate, such as cholera, smallpox, diphtheria, typhoid fever, yellow fever, influenza and pneumonia10.

Some in the medical community will have reservations about exploring the potential of homeopathic medicine to treat dangerous bacterial infections and will base their objections on two factors: (1) the idea that homeopathic medicines at potencies above 12C contain no active ingredients and, (2) a study published by Shang, et. al. in 2005.

As stated earlier – nanoscientists at 12 independent research labs have now consistently confirmed that all medicines studied contain various nanostructures, including source and silica nanoparticles which are heterogeneously dispersed in colloidal solution – making homeopathic medicine the first known form of nanomedicine. What’s more – we now know from recent discoveries in nanoscience that each remedy manufactured using traditional methods of trituration and vigorous agitation must in fact contain nanostructures. As for the Shang study – it has been repeatedly invalidated by a number of medical researchers as methodologically flawed even within an allopathic medical framework11,12,13,14,15.

Finally – we make this recommendation while knowing that many of our colleagues will feel uncomfortable using homeopathic medicine singly. As a result – we are calling for a collaborative effort to investigate the efficacy of homeopathic medicine in the treatment of patients with these increasingly dangerous infections whereby homeopathic medicine is used only as an adjunct to conventional therapies.

All physicians are bound together by a passion to serve the sick and not by a blind allegiance to any class of drug makers. In the interest of enhancing care, we must set aside tribal divisions that began in the 1840s and come together in unbiased fashion to find solutions to meet the rising tide of antibiotic resistant bacteria that may, in short order, threaten the lives of millions annually.

Parapsychological Association #fundie parapsych.org

The Parapsychological Association, Inc. (PA) is the international professional organization of scientists and scholars engaged in the study of ‘psi’ (or ‘psychic’) experiences, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, remote viewing, psychokinesis, psychic healing, and precognition. Such experiences seem to challenge contemporary conceptions of human nature and of the physical world. They appear to involve the transfer of information and the influence of physical systems independently of time and space, via mechanisms we cannot currently explain.

The primary objective of the Parapsychological Association is to achieve a scientific understanding of these experiences. In view of this, PA members develop and refine methodologies for studying psi and its physical, biological or psychological underpinnings. They assess hypotheses and theories through experiments, conceptual models and field investigations, and seek to integrate their findings with other scientific domains. PA members also explore the meaning and impact of psychic experiences in human society, and assess the possibility of practical applications and technologies.

While covering a wide range of perspectives, the PA, as a whole, is committed to:

Promoting scholarship and scientific inquiry into currently unexplained aspects of human experience
Disseminating responsible information to the wider public and to the scientific community
Integrating this information with knowledge from other disciplines

Psi experiences have been reported throughout history, in all cultures. Even today, as multiple surveys show, a wide segment of the world’s population reports having had at least one experience that they believe to have been psychic.

These experiences, and the phenomena associated with them, are the subject matter of parapsychology. PA members use well-developed scientific methods to determine to what extent psi phenomena can be explained through presently understood processes -- whether physical or psychological -- and to what extent they may point to unknown forces and laws, or necessitate a revised model of consciousness and its relationship to the world. Historically, science has made major advances in its understanding of the world through observation of ‘anomalies’– phenomena or data that did not fit into the concepts of the time. On the other hand, scientific and academic institutions are justifiably cautious about adopting radically new principles, and they tend to be quite conservative in accepting the reality of anomalous phenomena.

The PA is dedicated to ensuring that legitimate caution does not equate to dismissal or active avoidance, thus merely propagating our ignorance. To preclude science from stagnating into dogma, it is vital that we improve our understanding of our world, of ourselves and our experience. If new principles of physics, biology or psychology do underlie psi experiences, then our current knowledge of human nature and the world around us is incomplete -- and it will remain so, until the scientific community makes a sustained effort to understand these experiences.

Most likely, psi phenomena involve complex interactions between various subjective, interpersonal and environmental factors. Accordingly, parapsychology is an interdisciplinary field, with specialists from the biological, physical, behavioral and social sciences. Approaches for investigating psi vary widely, including laboratory experimentation, field work, analytical studies, phenomenological approaches, case studies, surveys and historical research. PA members also engage in the construction of theoretical models and the development of new methodological and statistical tools.

The diversity found within PA membership also leads to many different ‘schools of thought’ regarding the phenomena studied -- ranging from those who suspect that psi will eventually turn out to be an artifact of no major significance, to those who believe it will be accounted for through new developments in physics or biology, to those who argue that psi phenomena suggest a basis for spiritual beliefs.

Davide Piffer #racist #sexist amren.com

Creativity, Genes, and Racial Differences

Davide Piffer is an Italian evolutionary anthropologist. He received a BA in Anthropology from the University of Bologna and a Master of Science in Evolutionary Anthropology from Durham University in England. His Master’s thesis was on the sexual selection of sleep patterns among humans, and was the first to link mating behavior to chronotype (sleep patterns during a 24-hour period) within an evolutionary framework. His research later shifted to quantitative genetics, and he published one of the first studies of the heritability of creative achievement. In 2013, he switched to molecular genetics, focusing on the polygenic evolution of educational achievement and intelligence, and this remains his main focus. Within this area, his main finding is that ethnic differences in intelligence are largely explained by the thousands of genetic variants that predict cognitive abilities within populations.

Grégoire Canlorbe: As Leonardo da Vinci pointed out in his notebooks, “The black races of Ethiopia are not products of the sun, for if in Scythia a black man makes a child to a black woman, the offspring is black; but if a black man inseminates a white woman, the offspring is gray. Proof that the race of the mother has as much power over the fetus as that of the father.” Besides skin color, how do you sum up what we know — or appear to know — about heritable racial differences in traits such as intelligence, creativity, or even the rate of maturation of male voices?

Davide Piffer: As I said, creativity has been neglected by geneticists and many psychologists, so unfortunately we know next to nothing about race or individual genetic differences in creativity. With regards to intelligence, there is a growing consensus, thanks to the work of myself and colleagues, that racial differences have a genetic basis. This comes from different lines of evidence, using the most recent methods of population genetics: admixture analysis and polygenic scores.

As for voice maturation, Philippe Rusthon proposed the theory that the Mongoloids are the most K-evolved and the Negroids are the least K-evolved, while the Caucasoids fall between the two, although closer to the Mongoloids. This theory is supported by a large amount of data. I made a new contribution to Rushton’s theory by presenting data on race differences in the age at which the voice breaks in boys. The prediction from Rushton’s theory and the hypothesis to be tested is that the voice should break at a younger age in Negroids than in Caucasoids. The hypothesis was successfully corroborated.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Your most conclusive investigations in behavioral genetics deal with the connection between sexual selection and sleep patterns — or that between sexual selection and both sex- and country-level differences in performance on tests of fluid intelligence. Could you tell us more about it?

Davide Piffer: I was the first to investigate the relationship between sleep patterns and sexual behavior among humans as part of my MSc’s dissertation at Durham University. My original work was later replicated by a researcher from Sri Lanka and a group from Germany. Sleep is well known to affect mating behavior in many animal species, and some heritable differences in chronotype also predict mating success among men, both in Western and non-Western societies.

The effect seems to go above and beyond personality (extraversion) and the propensity to engage in social activities at night. Being a night owl is associated with going out at night, thus increasing the chances of meeting a member of the other sex, but also with testosterone levels. We still don’t know if it is also perceived as an attractive feature in males, but it has significant sex differences, with males across different societies being more likely to be night owls than females, so it is a candidate target for sexual selection.

Some years ago, I published a paper in which I proposed an explanation of the paradox that more developed countries, with higher equality of the sexes, had a higher sex inequality in IQ scores. That is, in more developed countries, men are smarter than women, but this sex difference is much smaller or absent in less developed countries. For example, in Muslim countries, women have higher ability than men, so we could call this the Muslim paradox. This is the opposite of what one would expect from a purely environmental perspective, because women get more education in sex-equal countries. What I found was that smarter countries had higher sex differences independent of GDP or equality of the sexes.

A potential mechanism that I did not mention in the paper but that occurred to me later is that in industrialized countries, dysgenic fertility is mainly driven by highly educated females having fewer children and later in life, whereas male intelligence is not generally related to reproductive success. This sex disparity in dysgenic fertility would cause women to decline in intelligence relative to men.

This may not seem obvious. Because both men and women contribute to the genotypes of children, the fact that high-IQ women have few children should depress the IQ of both sexes, not that of women only. The question is more subtle, however, because many complex traits have sex-specific mechanism of expression, so that the same allele has different effects in males and females, even if the genes are not located on the sex chromosomes.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You devised a methodology to detect polygenic selection, a mechanism that acts on many genetic variants simultaneously. You have done this in particular with educational attainment. How do you summarize your approach?

Davide Piffer: My approach moves away from classical methods that focused on a single gene, because most traits are polygenic — the result of contributions of many alleles, or gene variants — and the effect of each is so diluted that you need to study many genetic variants in order to detect a pattern of selection. The frequency of a single allele is mainly affected by genetic drift unless that allele has a very strong effect on a trait such as, for example, sickle-cell anemia. Natural selection also affects population frequencies of alleles, but the effect on a single allele is typically so small that it can go unnoticed. However, when you simultaneously look at hundreds or thousands of alleles, you start seeing a pattern because the effects of random drift on each allele cancel each another out, and what is left is the directional effect of natural selection, which acts more strongly on some populations than on others, according to the environmental conditions or the sexual dynamics across the millennia.

Of course, these alleles are not picked at random from the genome. They come from studies called GWAS (“genome-wide association study”) which explore the correlation between millions of genetic variants or SNPs (single-nucleotide polymorphisms) and some phenotype or trait, such as years of education or height, using very large samples (from 100,000 to over a million individuals). These studies then find the SNPs with the strongest phenotypic effect, that is those that can increase an individual’s IQ by half an IQ point or increase height by as much as a centimeter.

The average frequency of alleles weighted by their effect on the phenotype (e.g. IQ) is called the polygenic score. Polygenic scores can be used to predict how well individuals do in school, or their height, or risk for cardiovascular disease. These scores are based on direct biological evaluation of a subject’s genome, so they are unaffected by culture, family differences, or any other factor that is commonly claimed to invalidate traditional IQ testing. I calculated polygenic scores for populations by averaging the scores of samples from different ethnic groups available on public databases. In the case of educational attainment and intelligence, I used between 2,400 and 3,500 of the most significant SNPs to compute polygenic scores.

What I found was that these population-level polygenic scores had a very high correlation of r=0.9 with scores on standardized intelligence tests. Ashkenazi Jews have the highest polygenic scores, followed by East Asians, then Europeans, South Asians, Native Americans and Blacks. A correlation this high would occur at odds of only one in 46,000 if the SNPs had been chosen at random. Furthermore, the SNPs associated with the greatest intelligence differences between populations were also associated with the greatest differences between individuals within a single population. This supports the view that both kinds of difference were the result of selection.

image

Grégoire Canlorbe: You made the claim that the north-south difference in Italy in fluid intelligence should be understood in terms of genetic differences between the populations. What data corroborate that hypothesis?

Davide Piffer: Historically, literacy levels and economic prosperity have been higher in the north than in the south. Data collected by Richard Lynn have shown that these differences are reflected in scores on tests of intelligence and scholastic aptitude (PISA and INVALSI).

There are strong genetic differences within Italy, recently corroborated by an in-depth study (Raveane at al., 2019). These differences were mostly established in pre-Roman times: Bronze-Age migrations from the Eastern European steppes (Indo-Aryans) in the north and West Asians from the Caucasus in the south. The Latin people who founded ancient Rome belonged to the Indo-European/Aryan group, along with other Italic tribes, such as the Veneti who later founded Venice.

Later migrations strengthened the pre-existing differences. In the first millennium BC, groups of Celtic people (originating from Indo-Aryans, like the native northern Italians such as the Veneti and the Ligurians) settled in the north and mixed with their ethnic cousins (that is why the Roman name for northern Italy was Gallia Cisalpina), and the Greeks heavily colonized the South (Magna Graecia) in the 1st millennium BC. In the Middle Ages, Germanic people invaded Italy and mostly added to the genetic pool of northern Italy (mostly Lombards and Gothic peoples) with some pockets in central and southern Italy (the Lombards in the Ducato di Benevento and the Normans in Palermo), whereas the south was conquered by Arabs.

Mr. Coulter #fundie godorscience.com

["All we have to judge you is statements like "you are all a bunch of butt fucking queers" or "Dr. Haucking is a slobberbox". Is it a surprise you now have to defend your intelligence?"]

Those who would engage in sexual intercourse by sticking their penis in another man's rectum, is being a butt fucker. Those who would encourage that behavior would themselves have to be a butt fucker.

Here is a question as it might appear on an IQ test.

1.All fags are gay. All fags are buttfuckers. Some gays are lesbians. All lesbians are carpet munchers. Which sentence is true:

A. All gays are fags.
B. All gays are lesbians.
C. All lesbians are butt fuckers.
D. All gays are an abomination.

2.All gays support homosexuality. Some non-gays support homosexuality. Most non-gays dont support homosexuality. Which sentence is true:

A.All gays are not homosexual.
B.Some non-gays are not homosexual.
C.Most non-gays are homosexual.
D.Homosexuality is an abomination.

Slobbering is a trait common amongst those who have little control of their saliva output. Those who are invalid, are big time slobberers. Invalids have difficulty controlling their saliva.

Pizzachu1 #fundie reddit.com

It's obvious that most people are repressed pedophiles. Try showing them a naked 9-year-old girl to someone and see if they actually respond like she's non-sexual. It makes people so uncomfortable exactly because they find it arousing, but they're too repressed to admit it. Compare it to how they treat naked 0-year-olds.

Maybe most people aren't pedophiles, but most people are definitely attracted to people younger than they admit. People married and had relations with "children" for thousands of years, people didn't just suddenly stop liking kids 100 years ago.

HumanSockPuppet #sexist reddit.com

Good day, class. This will be a recap (and expansion) of my original guide to bitch management. In it, you will learn how to manage your bitch(es) by turning your relationship into a game she plays - winning prizes of intimacy for good behaviour, and getting punished with demotion or exile if she fails.
Additionally, this guide will also cover:

What it means to manage a bitch, and the challenges you will face
Why bitch management is ultimately YOUR responsibility
Relationship strategies for maximizing happiness and minimizing drama
How to turn those strategies into lasting positive lifestyle changes

This guide will begin with some basic theory, describing why men are the arbitrators of relationships. It will then establish some common definitions and lay the groundwork for the strategy section afterwards.
As you read this guide, bear in mind that it is a model, not an absolute treatise. You are free (and encouraged) to modify any part of it to suit you. But for the most part, the principles outlined here should be fairly universal.
We say AWALT for a reason.

Disclaimers:

1) In order to sustain a prosperous relationship with a girl, you MUST be comfortable with bossing her around - being a bonafide Patriarch™.
You don't have to be a master of your emotions yet. But at the very least, you must be willing to be firm with her, give her orders, and tell her "no", even against a flood of her tears.

Why? Because ultimately, women get their behavioural cues from men. Remember, women are children: mentally, behaviourally, evolutionarily. They are not like us. They don’t think like us, or have the same deep sense of personal responsibility.

Even the most sociopathic man will intuitively know when he has crossed a boundary and offended another man. Whether or not he feels guilty about it is a different issue, but he at least knows he’s done something wrong. Evolving this instinct was the key to a man’s ability to either strategically make enemies or avoid unwanted conflicts.

Women, on the other hand, evolved no such instinct. On the contrary, women evolved the instinct to push a man’s buttons as a way of testing his willingness to face conflict head-on (what we call shit-testing). A man who is willing to fight against her will also fight FOR her. Likewise, a man who caves before her will most certainly cave before his enemies.

This is why bossing her around is key. She is evolved to push the boundary by picking fights with you. So unless you are strict with your girl, she will become as selfish and insufferable as you let her get away with.

2) A long-term relationship CANNOT be your end goal. You can only be OPEN to the possibility of having one.
Men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Since a relationship is what you have to offer, you mustn’t just give it away. It must be a reward she earns in small doses for inspiring your trust and devotion.

I understand that many of you want a LTR with a good girl – sometimes a series of flings isn’t enough to fulfill you. Believe me, I sympathize.
But winning a LTR is HER problem, not yours. Handing a girl your devotion won’t magically make her worthy of it. When you WANT a LTR too badly, you place your focus on the idea of having a relationship instead of evaluating the girl. You become fixated on your fantasy relationship and selectively ignore the things happening right in front of you: her deep character flaws, her indiscretions, and the red flags.

You must regard women as candidates applying for the job of being your girlfriend – a supporter, a lover, a comfort away from the everyday battles. Don't just hire a bitch because you want the position filled. Make sure you vet your candidates fiercely and hire the right girl for the job.
This guide will help you do just that.

3) This guide will be far less effective if you’re already married.

As a man, your ONLY power in a relationship is the power to revoke your attention, validation, and your time by walking away – sometimes for good. It’s the only strategy you have, but it’s a potent one, and for a very specific reason:
You may want a woman, but women NEED you. The problem with marriage is that it strips you of the ability to completely walk away. Sure, you can still get a divorce, but not without shooting yourself in the foot, possibly losing your children and a significant portion of your hard-earned assets in the process.

Our current social climate is not amenable to marriage. If you’re already married, you have my condolences. If you’re not married but plan on it, then you’re a moron and you have no one to blame but yourself when your mistake comes back to bite you in the ass. And bite you it will.

Theory: The Fundamental Principle of Sex and Relationships

The Fundamental Principle states that women are the gatekeepers of sex, and men are the gatekeepers of relationships. You should be familiar with it by now. If not, educate your ass here.

Beyond a man's Relationship Gate lies a paradise that every girl wants to live in. It is a magical place where pickle jars are opened, spiders are squished, rides are given, appliances are fixed, cuddles are administered, encouragement is provided, and order is firmly established. And all of that requires a man’s time and effort.

As a man, your time and effort is your most valuable asset. You use it to get shit done – most often shit that’s related to Your Mission. When you give that time to someone else, it is a tremendous gift which should be appreciated and respected. This is the key principle behind bitch management. You must demand that a girl appreciate and respect your time.

Some men don’t demand respect for their time. They are too liberal with who they let through their Relationship Gate. They've got no border patrol, no review process. Just a country full of free benefits for anyone who crosses over. These are the beta-orbiters, and they are constantly beset by every vagrant vagina and panhandling pussy that bats its attached eyelashes.

Other men are too strict about admission. They only issue temporary sex visas, and they often deport women without notice. These are the uninterested lone-alphas, and they have chosen a lifestyle of banging and then flying solo. YOU, on the other hand, are open to a LTR with a bitch – IF she earns it.Managing your life and your bitches comes down to awarding her ONLY the time that she has earned. You can decide just how much of your time a bitch has earned by assigning her with a “rank”.


Definitions: An Overview of "Ranks"

We use a lot of terms for describing a relationship with a girl: girlfriend, fiancee, one-night stand (ONS), plate, friend-with-benefits (FWB), etc.
But what do these terms really mean?
From a male perspective, each term implies a different level of investment in the girl – an investment of time, effort, emotions, and other precious male resources. As such, they can be arranged as ranks in order of how much investment each term implies.

Here is a list of ranks we will use (along with working definitions) ordered from least to greatest:
Level 0: One-Night Stand -or- Pump and Dump. You throw a fuck into this girl and never see her again (unless she reaches out to you). It is a single encounter that is casual, sexual, and impersonal. You may or may not have met her before the encounter, and you may or may not even know her name. She is a one-time answer to a physical necessity - nothing more.
Requires no maintenance and a very low investment of time.

Level 1: Plate -or- Fuck Buddy. You have sex with this girl more than once. You will know her name and just enough about her life so you can schedule sexual encounters. You may also know a little bit about her personally, so you can help her rationalize being your fucktoy, assuming she's uncomfortable about the idea of being one. Otherwise, she's down with it and you're both satisfied with being casual. She is a temporary answer to a physical necessity.
Requires some maintenance and a low investment of time.

Level 2: Friends with Benefits. You have sex with this girl more than once - typically as often as mutual convenience allows, but perhaps even when it's not completely convenient for her (because she likes you enough to go out of her way). You also spend non-sexual time with this girl, like eating out or pursuing activities of mutual interest. You know more about her personal life, and she knows more about yours, and as a result the two of you exchange mutual, non-sexual favours from time to time. You will most certainly have good memories of non-sexual time spent with this girl, which will lead to positive emotional investment in her, making her more than just an answer to a physical necessity.
Requires moderate maintenance and a moderate investment of time.

Level 3: Significant Other -or- Girlfriend. The highest level of intimacy a girl can earn. You have sex with this girl often, usually more often than you do any of your other girls. You also spend a considerable amount of non-sexual time with this girl, resulting in many shared memories and a deeper emotional investment. At this level, there is significant mutual concern for the other's well-being. The girl in particular will feel a great dependence on your direct and involved guidance in her life (rather than simple stoicism and confidence). Emotions are strongly felt at this level: affection is especially sweet, and betrayal can be especially bitter.

Requires significant maintenance and a significant investment of time.

Strategy: How She Plays the Game

The game itself is quite simple:
A girl begins the game at Level 0 or Level 1, depending on the context in which you two met.
If you met in a club, or began as total strangers grinding against each other at a house party, she's Level 0.
If you two met in a slightly more sociable manner - perhaps introduced by mutual friends, or she impressed you with her pleasant demeanour after you opened her at the local cafe, she's Level 1. She can also bump up from Level 0 to Level 1 if she reaches out and maintains pleasant and reasonable contact with you after a casual sexual encounter.

From that point on, a girl must perform NON-SEXUAL services for you in order to advance in rank.
These services can include, but are not limited to:
Cooking you a healthy meal. Either at your place or by invitation to hers.
Treating you out some place. A restaurant or an activity of interest to YOU. Bonus points if you've never done the activity but it looks like fun - that means she's really thinking about you.

Buying you a well-thought-out gift. Not just a random thing, but a gift which demonstrates an effort to understand your life and interests (example: therapeutic shoe insoles for a guy who likes running, or high-quality ear buds for a music-lover). The accuracy of her insight is more important than the cost of the gift.

Hand-making you an artistic gift. These might include a picture or painting, a poem, a knitted scarf, a calendar of her photography, and the like. The more personalized the gift, the better. A hand-made gift doesn't have to be highly useful (since making useful things is tough), as long as the gift shows patience, diligence, and an attention to detail.

The greater her investment of time and effort in the gesture, the more credit she earns with you. Eventually, if she shows a consistent pattern of investing effort in you, she can advance in rank by one level.

As previously stated, a girl must invest time and effort in you in order to get your time and effort in return.

Why Do the Services Have to Be Non-Sexual?

Simple. Because a girl doesn't have to exert any effort at all to have sex. If she is attractive enough, all she needs to do to get sex is show up. Someone will fuck her if she makes herself available.
This game only rewards effort. You should also remember this: sex is the most fundamental pre-requisite of any non-platonic interaction between a guy and a girl. You'll never find yourself in a situation where a girl is giving you gifts and cooking you meals, but NOT having sex with you (unless you’re both a coward and too daft to read the signs). If sex isn't happening, then something is terribly amiss and you must either correct it or next her. Which brings us to our next section...

Strategy: Punishment and Demotion

There are many ways in which a girl can make a mistake and upset you. Maybe she starches your shirts too much, or she burns the dinner she was making for you. These kinds of mistakes should not be punished with demotion because, despite her mistake, she is investing time and effort in you. You can think of a suitable punishment and repayment for your lost shirt without going to the extreme of knocking her down a rank.
Instead, demotable offenses should be offenses that are an affront to your dignity, your authority, or to the time and effort you have invested in her.
Offenses can be intentional or unintentional.

Unintentional offenses will usually come in the form of some indiscretion on her part, as she slowly loses attraction for you, her conscious effort wanes, and she slips back into her natural hypergamous state.

Some examples of unintentional offenses are:
Unconsciously being too flirty with another guy (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Failing to keep an important promise (usually by neglect or poor-planning), the consequences of which cost you a substantial amount of money or ANY amount of reputation (failing of respect, this offense will happen at Level 2 or above, since you don't entrust these matters to girls below Level 2).
Neglecting some important duty that you have assigned to her (failing of respect, typically occurs at Level 3).

Frequency of sex decreases, and she absently evades when you try to initiate sex (loss of attraction, can occur at any level).
Committing an unintentional offense should typically result in the demotion of the girl by one (1) rank.
Intentional offenses are far more vulgar than their counterparts. Intentional offenses are usually targeted shit-tests meant to re-assess your fitness. In some extreme cases they might even occur in the presence of friends and family, making them vindictive attacks against your reputation or dignity.

Some examples of intentional offenses are:
Consciously flirting with another guy, trying to arouse jealousy in you (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Openly insulting you (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Frequency of sex decreases, and she consciously and vehemently evades when you try to initiate sex or talk about it (loss of attraction, can occur at any level).
Committing an intentional offense should result in the demotion of the girl by two (2) ranks. Committing a vindictive attack against your reputation should result in a loss of three (3) ranks.

Now, this next part is important, so pay attention:
Once a girl has been demoted, her current level becomes the maximum level she can ever be again. She can only climb the ladder as long as she is flawless in the execution of her womanly duties. Once she commits a serious offense, she is demoted, and she can never rise again.

Some examples of transgressions and appropriate punishments:
A plate (level 1) who fails to provide sex on demand drops one rank to level 0, and she is replaced by a plate who will.
A friend-with-benefits (level 2) who remorselessly loses your expensive digital camera drops one rank and becomes a plate forevermore.
A girlfriend (rank 3) who drunkenly humiliates you in front of your friends at a party drops three ranks to level 0, and you quietly disappear and move on.
Now, I know what you’re thinking. Permanent plate status? Walking away for good? Aren’t these punishments pretty severe?

In reality, the offenses outlined above will generally only occur for one of two reasons:
You’ve slipped up in your duties as a Red Pill man and her attraction for you is beginning to wane.
She doesn’t have the sense to recognize her unworthy behavior because of a failure of parenting that occurred long before you met her.
If it’s reason 1, then you’re at fault, and you’re better off starting from scratch with a new bitch then trying to salvage a relationship that’s on a downward slope. If it’s reason 2, then the girl was never worth your time to begin with, and you simply didn’t know it until now. You can’t turn a ho into a housewife, so don’t even bother trying to reform her.

In general, you must be uncompromising whenever you punish your bitch. Remember what we’ve already established: girls look to you for cues on what’s okay. If you don’t crack down on bad behavior when it happens, a girl’s only assumption is that you are perfectly okay with whatever she’s done. Hypergamy is selfish by nature, and it shows no mercy. Tough love is the only effective response.

There’s also another benefit to being ruthless: meting out uncompromising punishment helps to keep you in abundance mentality. An uncompromising approach helps you to avoid the risk of developing oneitis, and it prevents you from being manipulated by women who are all too good at tugging at your sympathy to get just one/two/five more chances.

Keep your life drama-free by dropping troublesome bitches. With so many eligible bachelorettes out there looking desperately for a strong man like you, no single one of them is worth your grief.

Strategy: Naturalizing the Process

As you learn the rhythm of using rewards and punishments to keep your bitch enthralled, you’ll develop an intuition for how to play your part of the game. The process will become second-nature to you. You’ll naturally become bored with women who fail to show you the proper appreciation, and gravitate towards the ones who make your life more pleasant.

That’s the ultimate goal here: to make you a natural. You’ll never say to your bitch “You’re a level 1 plate now!” or “You’re going down a rank for that shit!” This system is for YOU – so you can have an abstract model with which to understand the game, until managing bitches becomes as natural to you as breathing or blowing a load on her face.

Final Thoughts

The key trait of the modern western woman is her absolute lack of concern for the desires of men. Our cuckold state has all but replaced men as husbands and providers, and so it would seem like the traditional relationship is basically obsolete – that women will never again need to concern themselves with OUR wants. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Though a woman can subsist off the benefits paid for by our taxes, the government cannot give her the love, the attention, the stability, the masculine reassurance, and direct intervention that are so crucial to her emotional well-being. A woman feels vulnerable in a role of leadership, and she feels lost without a masculine leader to boldly claim responsibility for confronting all of the challenges that terrify her. No government can provide that for her. For that, she must come to us.

And for that, we must demand a price.

My hope is that this guide has helped you realize just how much leverage you have in the sexual dynamic – much more than you once thought. Let this guide help you to capitalize on that leverage – for the sake of your happiness, and for the happiness of any woman who works hard enough to earn your time and effort.

Incel Wiki #sexist #transphobia #homophobia #crackpot incels.wiki

Trans-vestigiality hypothesis

The trans-vestigiality hypothesis is similar to the homocel hypothesis and the incel transbian pipeline in that it suggests that a significant segment of the transgender population used to be incel. It suggests that inceldom may cause gender dysmorphia in some people and by extension may lead a person to consider gender transitioning. Anecdotes from incels and studies on non-human animals suggest this may be due to a desire for the transitioning incel to avoid confrontation with stronger men (or disgusted women), to deincelize, and/or simply an attempt to live life on tutorial mode (i.e. as a woman). The case studies depicted on the trannymaxxing page (see trannymaxxing) or other one's depicted below show that transitioning to female can aid in deincelization. However, some incel-turned-transgenders remain incel (or transcel) upon becoming transgender.[1]

Some incel Youtubers have referred to many cases of male to female transsexualism as "advanced inceldom". Female to male transsexualism, which occurs at a slightly lower rate than male to female transsexualism, is also often seen by people in the incelosphere as a voluntary incelizing process, and as such is highly amusing to incels.

That being said, pretending to be a female is unlikely a sexual strategy due to a very low prevalence rate of transgenderism of 0,001% (see the criticism section).

Sexual mimicry in animals

Dr Erica Todd from the University of Otago is a leading researcher in the Trans-vestigiality hypothesis in non-human animals. She calls male animals who take on female imagery to increase mating success as "sneaker males". She explains how "sneaker males" disguise themselves as females to avoid aggression from larger males, and steal mating opportunities.[2] Her work focused a lot on Bluehead Wrasse fish. She found that the "sneaker males" had genes for male sex hormones turned off making them appear feminine but also had much more sperm production and sperm quality control. The "sneaker males" had near identical brain gene expression to females and much different brain gene expression than non-sneaker-males. The "sneaker males" often also changed roles to more masculine fish as they grew larger.

Phillipines

In the Phillipines, where the women are so disgusted by the local men that they pursue relationships with American incels, many native men from the Phillipines undergo fake breast surgery in order to make enough money to survive or move out of the country.

Case studies

There have been a few case studies suggesting that trannymaxxing can actually help one to escape inceldom. See for example:

Leslie case study
Remy case study

Further case-studies

Chris-chan

Criticism and statistics

With a prevalence of only 0.001%, transgenderism is unlikely much more prevalent than mutation-selection balance would predict, hence it is unlikely an evolved sexual strategy.[3] Many transgenders appear to use the protected class status of transgenderism as a means of status ascension (transtrender), which is evidenced by the fact that most revert their sexual orientation after a while. Many show signs of deleterious mutation or adverse social environments.

These claims are corroborated by the statistics below:

About 88% of children who have gender dysphoria do not hold those beliefs when they grow older.[5]
Only 12% of boys who believe they are transsexuals still believe so when they are older.[6]
MRI scans indicate that MtF transsexuals are either men aroused by the thought of possessing female genitalia or homosexuals who want to seduce straight men.[7]
Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide.[9]
Only 21% of transsexuals can sucessfully pass as the opposite gender.[14]
53% of mothers of transsexual children have Borderline Personality Disorder, compared to only 6% of mothers of normal children.[15]
16% of transsexuals have been sent to jail or prison, compared to 2.7% of the general population.[16]
Gay and transgender students are half as likely to graduate high school as straight students.[17]
Transsexuals are more likely to have autism than the general population.[25]
20-40% of homeless children are transsexuals.[18]
Children raised by gay couples are twice as likely to be in poverty as children of straight married couples.[20]
“24% of lesbians and bisexual women are poor, compared with only 19% of heterosexual women.”[21]
1/3 transsexuals are being treated for mental health.[22]
85% of transsexuals show signs of psychological distress or have been recently treated for mental health.[23]
44% of transsexuals show signs of clinical depression.[24]

BuddyDogeDoge #fundie reddit.com

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

@Onlyinmizzou

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

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

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

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

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

Who is right?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We say to the workers and peasants: Tear the masks from the faces of these liars, open the eyes of these blind ones. Ask them:

“Equality between what sex and what other sex?

“Between what nation and what other nation?

“Between what class and what other class?

“Freedom from what yoke, or from the yoke of what class? Freedom for what class?”

Whoever speaks of politics, of democracy, of liberty, of equality, of socialism, and does not at the same time ask these questions, does not put them in the foreground, does not fight against concealing, hushing up and glossing over these questions, is one of the worst enemies of the toilers, is a wolf in sheep's clothing, is a bitter opponent of the workers and peasants, is a servant of the landlords, tsars, capitalists.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/dec/23.htm

But why not reach this goal without the dictatorship of one class? Why not switch directly to "pure" democracy? So ask the hypocritical friends of the bourgeoisie for the naive petty-bourgeois and philistines gulled by them.

And we reply: Because in any capitalist society the powerful tell lies to either the bourgeoisie or the proletariat, while the small proprietors, inevitably, remain wavering, helpless, stupid dreamers of "pure", i.e., nonclass or above class, democracy. Because from a society in which one class opposes another there is no way out other than through the dictatorship of the oppressed class. Because the proletariat alone is capable of defeating the bourgeoisie, of overthrowing them, being the sole class which capitalism has united and "schooled", and which is capable of drawing to its side the wavering mass of the working population with a petty-bourgeois way of life, of drawing them to its side or at least "neutralizing" them. Because only mealy-mouthed petty-bourgeois and philistines can dream — deceiving thereby both themselves and the workers — of overthrowing capitalist oppression without a long and difficult process of suppressing the resistance of the exploiters. In Germany and Austria this resistance is not yet very pronounced because expropriation of the expropriators has not yet begun. But once expropriation begins the resistance will be fierce and desperate. In concealing this from themselves and from the workers, the Scheidemanns and Kautskys, the Austerlitzes and Renners betray the interests of the proletariat, switching at the most decisive moment from the class struggle and overthrow of the yoke of the bourgeoisie to getting the proletariat to come to terms with the bourgeoisie, achieving "social peace" or reconciliation of exploited and exploiters.

in fact, you yourself make this point, so i do not understand why you say that you cannot be for secret police and for democracy now!

Every state that has ever existed has forcibly silenced its enemies. It is unavoidable. In the same way the the US silenced labor unions and socialists who sought to subvert the government in the early 20th century, socialist countries silenced western-backed counter-revolutionaries. Others can provide more detail into how specific socialist countries dealt with dissent, but I hope that at least shows you why this argument is dubious at best.

@Onlyinmizzou

but stalin's legacy was, in my opinion and in the opinion of many leftists, mostly counterproductive.

you would call the ending of the NEP and the building of a planned economy, the liberation of europe, unprecedented achievements in healthcare, education, literacy, space, farming, the supression of revisionists, counter revolutionaries, kulaks, etc etc - counterproductive?

it is not "great man theory" - it is looking at history as it actually was! the only liberalism here is to disregard stalin, to deny facts, to refuse to look into the actual situation! the USSR is like a machine - you cannot pick and choose which bits you want to praise, you must take it in it's entirety. you cannot simply call some crucial elements "bad, counterproductive".

infact i will ask directly - what do you think was "counterproductive"? what actions? what specifically

Various incels #fundie incels.co

(weirdguy22)
Why do men hate ugly men?

I understand why women hate ugly men. But why do men hate us, too? Why are they programmed like that? There has to be a biological/scientific reason behind that behaviour.

(TheGambler2)
They do that because foids do it,and their bluepilled brains think that will help them get laid

(mental_out)
They hate whatever women hate. Why do you think men rip into men who have small dicks so much? Most men are complete slaves to women and just do their bidding, even a lot of the ones you'd think were chads.

(Inceltard)
To clear gene pool.

(Napoleon De Gesu)
Men hate unmanly men

(NoMoreSlaving)
Because ugly = bad genes = weak, unreliable in a tribe

(suckdick)
because most of them are faggots who want to suck chad's dick

(ElliotRodgerGod)
from what i've seen they try to pick on us in order to get foids to laugh and thus get foid attention.

(Emba)
I think it's fear.
Like they fear a drop in their "social credit" score. Or something.

(IlIlllllIlIl)
Conforming, hoping the foids in their vicinity will see their "alpha dominance" (srs). Red pillers say to do this all the time.)

(Invalidusername)
Because status.

Normans hate those of low status and they'll do their best to differentiate themselves from you whether it comes in forms of bullying you, socially excluding you, ostracising you, neglecting you, avoiding you, mocking you, etc etc.

They don't want to associate themselves with low status people because they:

1) think of themselves as better

2) don't want their norman peers to think less of them

Ferdinand Bardamu #racist eurocanadian.ca

The White race’s intelligence and behavior has been under intense selective pressure since late medieval times. These new environmental forces significantly increased White resilience in the face of adversity. The first of these was the Black Death that ravaged Europe from 1347 to 1351. As one of the most catastrophic pandemics in world history, it killed off one-third of Europe’s population. The evidence of bioarchaeology, drawn from skeletal analysis of burial remains from “Black Death” cemeteries, reveals that far from being random, the plague was very selective in its choice of victims (DeWitte, 2014). The weak and the elderly were at increased risk of infection. Given the strong correlation between poor health and IQ, the Whites who survived were much stronger, healthier and smarter than ever before. The dearth of peasant labor led to an increase in wages, rising living standards and the invention of labor-saving devices. This greater wealth and prosperity liberated many from the common drudgery of daily life. A century after the Black Death, the Renaissance scaled even greater heights of intellectual and artistic achievement.

The 17th century colonization of North America also subjected Whites to strong selective pressure. The first Englishmen to have disembarked on American soil had survived religious persecution in England as Puritans objecting to the “Roman idolatry” of Anglican ritual; they had survived the perilous transAtlantic voyage, unaffected by typhus or scurvy. In New England, the Puritans still had to contend with disease, the harsh winters and the “merciless Indian savages” that lay hiding in the primeval forests of the eastern seaboard. If the weak and unintelligent managed to survive the voyage, they would eventually be killed off by starvation or Indian tomahawk. This pattern of eugenic selection affected all English settlers, including those motivated by purely secular and commercial interests. By the end of the colonial period, the Anglo-Saxon in the Americas had emerged as one of the finest and most evolved specimens of the White race.

The purifying effects of eugenic selection had rapidly accelerated the evolution of Homo sapiens in Europe and North America: the fittest White men had always left behind the most offspring, but after the ravages of bubonic plague and the hardships of American colonization, their broods became larger, healthier and more intelligent. White men of lesser ability, if they were lucky enough to find mates, typically left behind few descendants, with fewer still managing to survive past childhood.

A significant increase in the population of intelligent Whites inevitably led to a rising per capita rate of innovation. This peaked in 1873, during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901), but declined rapidly after that (Huebner, 2005). With the new science and technology, the White man was able to raise incomes, improve public health and increase longevity across the Western world. Eugenic selection for higher IQ made it possible for the White man to develop more sophisticated military technology. This far surpassed anything that had ever been developed by the ancient Greeks and Romans or even non-Whites. By century’s end, approximately 84% of the earth’s surface was controlled by the colonial empires of Western Europe. Intellectual and creative development had scaled such heights that Europe even gave birth to a race of intellectual supermen. These were the Victorian polymaths, who numbered among their ranks the colorful Sir Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890). He was a man who excelled at every subject that commanded his undivided attention. He was a brilliant writer, scholar, explorer, geographer, translator, diplomat and swordsman. A master linguist, he spoke an astonishing 40 languages and dialects fluently. This period of continuous White evolutionary development wasn’t to last forever. By 1914, the golden age of White intellectual and creative superiority had come to an end.

II: Western Intellectual Decline from Late 19th Century to Present

The general intelligence of the Western industrialized nations has declined since late 19th century, according to a meta-analysis of over a dozen reaction time (RT) studies. A cognitive, but not an economic or thermodynamic, limit has apparently been reached. There are now fewer individuals with the intelligence to solve complex mathematical and engineering problems, which is why the rate of innovation has significantly decreased since 1873. “Genetic g” - g-factor in the absence of gene environment interaction - has decreased by 14 IQ points over the course of a century, at least in the Anglophone nations of the UK, USA, Canada and Australia. This means a decrease of 1.23 IQ points per decade (Woodley et al., 2013). To eliminate the possibility of overinflated RT latencies because of hardware and software lags (Woods et al., 2015), the meta-analytic findings were adjusted for lag time. The result was that the Victorians were still faster (and smarter) than modern Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

Measures of vocabulary, relatively insensitive to environmental influence because of greater overall gsaturation and heritability rate, provided additional evidence of superior Victorian intelligence. A study tracked WORDSUM item frequencies over the course of 150 years. For this, a database that stored 5.9 million texts from the 1500s to the present was used. The most difficult and therefore the most highly g-loaded WORDSUM items exhibited sharper declines in historical usage since mid-19th century, consistent with declines in “genetic g” observed among Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

After decades of “massive IQ gains,” cognitive reversals were observed in Norway (Sundet et al, 2004), Denmark (Teasdale & Owen, 2008), the Netherlands (Woodley & Meisenberg, 2013) and elsewhere. In one study, genes associated with educational attainment and cognitive ability had declined in frequency across birth cohorts in an Icelandic population. It was estimated that a loss of 0.3 IQ points per decade would substantially affect Iceland if allowed to continue for centuries (Kong et al., 2017). James Flynn, discoverer of the eponymous Flynn effect, has acknowledged the reversal of cognitive gains in certain Western countries, especially those of Scandinavia. At a 2017 conference hosted by the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR), he admitted: “I have no doubt that there has been some deterioration of genetic quality for intelligence since late Victorian times.” Flynn has projected substantial losses of about 6 or even 7 IQ points for Scandinavia over a 30 year period. Such a reversal in intelligence would have catastrophic effects on the societies and economies of Scandinavia, now being flooded by hostile elites with Third World “migrants.”

A relevant question is: “If the post-WWII consensus acknowledges the existence of massive IQ gains over the last century, how does one explain cognitive reversal in the most industrialized nations?” This phenomenon is known as Cattell’s paradox and its solution is Woodley’s co-occurrence model. Although phenotypic intelligence has increased since WWII, genotypic intelligence has decreased. The anti-Flynn effect is really a “Jensen effect” because it has resulted in losses on psychometric g.

III: The Role of Dysgenic Selection in Western Intellectual Decline

Mass “immigration” from low-IQ regions of the globe, such as the Middle East, South Asia and Africa, have no doubt contributed to declines in the average intelligence of the West. In one recent study (Woodley et al., 2017), Third World “immigration” was associated with IQ declines in 13 different nations. High levels of Third World “immigration” are always significant predictors of Western cognitive decline; its most pronounced effects are on IQ subtest batteries with the highest g-loadings. Nevertheless, Third World “immigration” does not fully account for dysgenic selection among Western populations. Declines in genotypic intelligence occurred long before the advent of Third World “immigration,” which only partially explains the Western world’s declining IQ.

The greater fecundity of intelligent Whites, compared to the unintelligent, had always been the norm, especially since the 1400s. This changed during the Industrial Revolution; more intelligent Whites delayed having children until later in life, through a combination of abstinence and contraception, to further their educational aspirations and develop their innate potential. Medical breakthroughs significantly improved general health and nutrition, which prolonged human lifespans. This allowed less intelligent Whites to survive childhood and have significantly more children than those who were more intelligent. The rise of social welfare liberalism in the 20th century merely exacerbated this trend. As Western governments progressively taxed their wealthiest and most intelligent citizens, their wealth was unfortunately redistributed to less industrious and less intelligent members of the White race, who squandered the money as they multiplied recklessly.

More recent studies have shed further light on the negative correlation between intelligence and fertility. In one study, the higher the intelligence and socioeconomic status of adolescents, the lower their likelihood of having offspring. This dysgenic effect was more true of females than males, indicating that women become choosier the more wealth and status they accumulate (Reeve et al., 2013). Among adults, a negative correlation between intelligence and odds of parenthood was discovered; every 15 point increase in a woman’s childhood IQ would decrease a woman’s odds of parenthood by about 20% (Kanazawa, 2014). The female role in the transmission of intelligence is a substantial one because the genes for intelligence are X-chromosomal; if more intelligent women since the late Victorian period have had less children than the unintelligent, one can only expect a gradual decline in the national intelligence of Western populations.

Analysis of a large genealogical database revealed that Iceland’s national IQ had decreased over time because more intelligent Icelanders were having less children. Although IQ declines per decade were small, statistical significance is attained when viewed from an evolutionary timescale. Dysgenic fertility may potentially undermine Icelandic economy and society within a few centuries, unless it is reversed (Kong et al., 2017). Polygenic scores, which capture selection against g (such as dysgenic fertility or “immigration”), are the most significant predictors of the century-long decline in “heritable g” (Woodley et al., 2018). The “neurotoxin hypothesis,” like all environmental explanations, fails to adequately predict temporal trends in general intelligence because cognitive ability is under much stronger genetic than environmental control. The worst environmental deprivations (i.e. severe malnutrition) or the most costly and ambitious environmental interventions rarely, if ever have a lasting effect on heritable g.

Most experts in intelligence, cognitive ability and student achievement now attribute the anti-Flynn effect to dysgenic fertility, Third World “immigration” and worsening educational standards in Western countries; in contrast, they are far more unanimous among each other in attributing environmental causation to the Flynn effect, in striking agreement with Woodley’s co-occurrence model (Rindermann et al., 2016). Based on the evidence, Western intellectual decline is largely caused by a negative IQfertility gradient, with Third World “immigration” becoming an increasingly significant contributor as time goes on.

IV: The Road to “Idiocracy”

Nobel laureate William Shockley proposed a Voluntary Sterilization Bonus Plan (1972). He presented this as a “thought experiment.” This would be open to all members of the American public, regardless of “sex, race or welfare status.” For each IQ point under 100, the recipient was to be given $1000, as long as he or she was willing to undergo vasectomy or tubal ligation. This was not an original proposal, as it had been first suggested over 40 years ago by American journalist and scholar H.L. Mencken, albeit in a rather humorous context. What all of these proposals neglect, and what modern eugenicists have failed to acknowledge, is the obvious sex differential in contributions to dysgenic fertility, probably because of the natural sympathy that men typically have for the opposite sex.

The low-IQ male, unless he is among the 20% of males considered physically attractive, is permanently excluded from the sexual market. This is because of his lifelong inability to acquire the material resources that allow him to compensate for his genetic inferiority. On the other hand, the low-IQ female poses a far greater threat to the mental hygiene of Western populations, by virtue of her role as sexual selector. For the low-IQ female, there will always be large numbers of reasonably attractive males willing to satisfy her many sexual and financial needs. If the low-IQ male must be handsome or rich, the low-IQ female must only be of childbearing age if she wishes to attract a mate of fairly decent genetic quality. The Industrial Revolution brought with it substantial improvements in public health and nutrition, making it easier for low-IQ females to survive childhood, only to breed as much as possible throughout their reproductive years.

When, in 1869, Sir Francis Galton made his famous scientific prediction of declining Western intelligence based on anecdotal observation of changing Victorian demographics, what he really observed was more low-IQ females than ever before surviving childhood to satisfy their instinctive desire for maternity. This trend has continued without interruption to the present, making low-IQ females the primary driving force behind the dysgenic fertility that has resulted in declining general intelligence in Western industrialized nations. No successful eugenic policy can exist without taking this into full account. In order for Dr. Shockley’s proposal to have made any sense from an evolutionary perspective, the bonus for females should have been quadrupled or even quintupled for each IQ point under 100.

Into this volatile mixture was added feminism, a pernicious ideology that grants both unrestricted individual autonomy and reproductive choice to women who should not be allowed to breed for eugenic reasons. In recognizing that all women have the same rights, feminism reveals itself to be just as dangerous as the Third World “immigration” promoted by hostile elites. By encouraging low-IQ females to engage in promiscuity, march in “slut walks,” wear “pussy hats,” and breed prolifically - while high-IQ females delay parenthood because of their educational aspirations - feminism has merely accelerated the decline in general intelligence among Western populations, already well under way since the Industrial Revolution. As Whites get dumber, their “Western uniqueness,” including their high intelligence, creativity and ability to produce more geniuses than any other race of people, will disappear with them. This radical transformation of the underlying genetic structure of Western populations could take place within less than a 100 years. Few people recognize the fragility of Western intellectual gains because of selective pressures exerted by the Black Death in Medieval Europe and the 17th century colonization of North America. By undermining Western mental and racial hygiene, feminism threatens to return Whites to the way things were before the agricultural revolution of the Neolithic age.

Helmuth Nyborg, extrapolating from present trends and projecting them into the future, allows us to better visualize in concrete terms the post-apocalyptic scenario that awaits Western civilization (2011). He shows what happens when a racially homogeneous society like Denmark, with a population of over 5 million, is subjected to both “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (IRDS), referring to the preservation and multiplication of the genetically disadvantaged, and “External Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (ERDS), in reference to “super-fertile” Third World “replacement migration.”

When both internal and external relaxation are combined, “Double Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (DRDS) is produced, a clear and unobstructed path to Western “idiocracy” in Denmark. By 2072, ethnic Danes will be reduced to 60% of the population, from a high of 97% in 1979; minority status will be reached by 2085. In 1979, Danish phenotypic IQ was 98, but by 2072, it is 93, having dropped 5 IQ points in less than a century. As national IQ decreases, Denmark will be gradually transformed into a Latin American “banana republic.” Ethnic Danes, demoralized by feminism and social welfare legislation, will have no choice but to acquiesce to the destruction of their own country. Significant damage to the economy and educational infrastructure are to be expected; a 5 point drop in Danish IQ means a 35% reduction in the nation’s GDP. Democracy will inevitably become unsustainable as average national IQ plummets below 90; it will be replaced by the authoritarian political culture and religious dogmatism found in Middle Eastern, African and Latin American societies.

Belief that “more White babies” are the answer to dysgenic fertility among Whites is just as dangerous and genocidal as the liberal belief that Third World “replacement migration” is “cultural enrichment.” Since low-IQ females leave behind more offspring than those of high IQ, more White births would reduce high-IQ females to an “endangered species.” This would intensify the “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” already occurring in Western populations. As Whites “devolve,” they will no longer be able to maintain their own Western industrialized societies. A demographic transition of such magnitude would transform Western Europe and North America, the Occidental heartland, into a cultural and biological extension of the Third World. Since women are loyal to wealth and power, but not race, one can expect genocidal levels of miscegenation between White females of low intelligence and the non-White foreigners who have dispossessed Whites and conquered the West.

To reverse the process of dysgenic selection, the White man must do three things:

He must get rid of the hostile elite.

He must forcibly repatriate all Third World “migrants,” including their descendants. Forced “remigration” is not an unrealistic policy; mass population transfers have been successfully carried out before, i.e. deportation of Germans, 1944-50, from Eastern and Central European countries to Germany and Austria.

If selective pressures in medieval Europe and colonial America led to the steady eugenic improvement of Western populations, making it possible for them to conquer 84% of the globe’s surface, only their re-emergence will reverse the dysgenic selection that has bedeviled the White race since the mid-19th century. This can only be accomplished through a rigorous application of classical eugenic principles.

If the White race is to survive, only its strongest and most intelligent members must be prepared for the harsh Darwinian struggle that lies ahead. Wasting precious resources on mental and genetic defectives is sheer pathological altruism. Race-conscious Whites have a collective interest in raising healthy and intelligent offspring, but no such interest can exist when it comes to those who are weak and unintelligent. They are “life unworthy of life”; even they would not consent to such a truncated and meager existence if given full possession of their normal faculties. From a White nationalist perspective, to bring such children into the world is selfish and morally irresponsible; they impose unnecessary fiscal burdens on Whites and use up resources that are better invested elsewhere.

The race-conscious White man is faced with a dilemma: because of liberal elite hostility to his own ethnic genetic interests, any program of eugenic enhancement would be outlawed under the current totalitarian leftist order; at the same time, he cannot simply wait out the elite-managed decline of Western civilization. In less than a few generations, most of his race may become drooling mental defectives, if they haven’t already miscegenated themselves out of existence into the burgeoning mass of Third World “migrants” who now infest his homeland. If he must take action, he must take it now, otherwise all is lost.

Race-conscious Whites must abandon all leftist-controlled urban areas to “live off the grid.” By colonizing relatively unpopulated areas of North America and Western Europe, the White man will return to a rustic existence, filling the countryside, the mountains, the forests, the tundra with Whites only settlements, similar to the Boer-only settlement of Orania in South Africa. Living the way his ancestors did centuries ago will ensure that no Third World “immigrant” follows him into the mountains or the wilderness. Self-imposed hardship will further intensify Darwinian selective pressure on Whites, jumpstarting the process of natural eugenic enhancement, just as it did during the early colonization of the Americas. Once race-conscious Whites have become sufficiently numerous, they must embark on a program of state-sponsored eugenics. This will be used to strengthen the White population until they are able to wrest control of North America and Western Europe from the hostile elites and their army of greedy “migrants.”

The new ethnostate will be constitutionally grounded on Aristotelian political philosophy and neoDarwinian biology; it will be a meritocracy based on eugenic principles. Eugenics, the scientific ideological core of the new White nationalism, is easily reconciled with the aristocratic political science of Aristotle; both are concerned with the development and formation of the best possible citizen, one along genetic and the other along characterological lines. Aristotelian philosophy is based on a linear hierarchical conception of reality; this overlaps with the dominance hierarchies of the animal kingdom and of all human socio-political organization. Furthermore, the capacity for superior moral development is improved substantially by superior genes. In an Aristotelian political order informed by eugenic principles, the state would ensure that all citizens have both the mental and physical capacity to live the good life. Mandatory genetic screening would be one of the conditions of citizenship; those at risk of transmitting hereditary diseases or conditions, such as criminality or low IQ, would undergo compulsory eugenic sterilization. Only the best and most virtuous citizens, the biologically and intellectually superior “aristoi” or natural-born aristocrats, would be the ones allowed total freedom of action in the political sphere.

In the ethnostate, the aristoi of the White race will determine who must give birth and who must be sterilized. These men are not petty bureaucrats, but aristocrats selected on the basis of health and IQ. Their sole task is the promotion of White racial survival, whatever the cost. For those who believe eugenic sterilization is barbarous and cruel, allowing the birth of children who suffer from mental retardation or cystic fibrosis is much, much worse. For this reason, only the healthiest, high-IQ females will be allowed to breed, even being massively incentivized to do so. Encouraging the natural increase of healthy, intelligent Whites, at the expense of the low IQ and genetically unfit, is the most White nationalist thing a White man can do for his race.

Some will necessarily object: “But state-sponsored eugenics will infringe on individual rights and freedoms!” This is a common, but groundless objection. The “right to procreate” is not an absolute. In 7 utilitarian ethics, rights are never ends in themselves; they exist to maximize the happiness of the greatest number and must be tempered by social obligation. Furthermore, not all men have the capacity for individual freedom. The Greek philosopher Aristotle recognized the existence of natural slavery because of the inability of some to reason autonomously, even though they may be responsive to reasoned instruction. Whether a man is free or not must be determined by his capacity to reason (for us, his IQ).

Legislation regulating some of the most intimate areas of our lives is hardly controversial; if we allow government to enforce this legislation, ostensibly in the interest of public safety, why not allow government to decide who gets to reproduce and who doesn’t? If the low IQ and genetically unfit are allowed to breed recklessly, as they do now, Western civilization will eventually be reduced to smoldering ruins. Unregulated breeding is far more dangerous than any black market specializing in the sale of illicit firearms or drugs. Society would be much safer if it allowed every citizen to acquire large arsenals of weapons without special licensing, but criminalized the marriage and procreation of the low IQ and genetically unfit.

If a large minority of race-conscious Whites emigrate, seceding from the leftist totalitarian state to independently pursue their own racial interests, reversal of dysgenic fertility and Third World “immigration” may be accomplished within a few generations. As race-conscious Whites strengthen their race through genetic enhancement, the totalitarian left will get weaker, forced to increasingly rely on low-IQ Whites and “migrants” for manpower. From their bases in the Pacific Northwest or Lapland, race-conscious Whites, stronger and more intelligent than ever before, would raid globalist-occupied territory, slowly enlarging their own dominions until the reconquest of North America and Western Europe has been completed. This is not without historical precedent. Medieval Spanish Christians, reduced to a small area of their own country, seized the emirates of Mohammedan Andalusia one by one, until the last emirate of Granada had been defeated, its Moorish inhabitants expelled from the Iberian peninsula in 1492.

Race-conscious Whites must live, think and breathe race, just as they did during the long and distinguished reign of Queen Victoria, when Whites were at the peak of their intellectual and artistic powers. In this age of drab multicultural uniformity, the White man’s race is his most formidable weapon, a thorn in the side of those who wish to replace him with the low IQ peasant masses of the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America. Nothing terrifies the hostile elites more than the prospect of encountering race-conscious White men bred for superior intellect and physical strength, able to aggressively pursue their own racial interests undeterred by elite and non-White hostility.

Incel Wiki #fundie wiki.incels.info

Welcome to the incel Wiki! Members are encouraged to detail the forums of incels, incel memes, prominent incels, historical events, lingo etc.

Rules:

Do *not* post content violating US/international law, create a page about someone under 18, or post calls to violence or encouragement of suicide

Do *not* post content not available to the public, or sensitive personal information like street addresses, private social media photos, social security numbers, and the like.

Disclaimer: Most things contained in this wiki are meant to be satire. Do not take this forum seriously. It is not your personal politics wiki. If you would like an image or whatever removed, please make note of so on the relevant talk page or for sooner removal PM 'master' in this discord server: link and also leave a message in the server. Incel Wiki is against any form of threatening comments or content, or content violating US/international law. Admins/mods endeavor to monitor & appropriately deal with any such material but can not be online all the time & as such it is members responsibility to act in accordance with the law. As such Incel Wiki takes no responsibility for the actions of others in this Wiki.

INCEL

An, "incel", is someone who has been totally shit on by the world to the point where they are 'involuntarily celibate' for six months or more. Incels are known for being poor, being victims of abuse, living with their parents, having medical disabilities, and spending way too much time on the internet. Many, but not all incels forums, subscribe to the philosophy of the, "blackpill".

Many people make fun of incels for having a victim complex. However it is completely justified for incels to have a victim complex given they are usually ugly or bullied/ostracized to the point of having bad social skills. The same people who tell male incels that they are entitled and whiney, are usually the same people who feel entitled to non-sexual emotional labor of others through government and the same people who tell men they need to express their feelings more. Apparently men are supposed to express their feelings but their feelings are 'invalid' and therefore 'should not be expressed'.

image
Incels are the vanguard of tearing down gender roles

Advice from Normies

Since normies don't like to pair up people anymore, they tell incels it's near 100% incels own fault that they can't find a partner. So they offer self-help "advice". Incels are told by normies that looks don't matter, but normies always are curious about how ugly incels are and assume they don't take enough showers or get enough haircuts. They tell incels to be themselves, but to pick up hobbies they don't like. They tell incels that pick up artists are full of shit but that incels don't have enough 'game' to date rape drunk women at bars 'pick up women'. They tell incels that they are too nice but also that they are assholes. They tell incels that sexual intimacy is not that important, but they themselves buy and/or create movies and songs about how sexual intimacy is one of the most important things in the world and they get upset if they have a few week long dry spell.

They tell incels that sexual intimacy isn't a commodity in a game with a reward, but think of male virgins as "losers" and tell incels that they don't "deserve" intimacy due to their actions.

For an incel, asking advice about dating from a normie is like phoning up a lazy customer service operator for a corrupt company. The operator will say whatever they can to get the customer off the line as soon as soon as possible without care for consistency or accuracy, or witnessing meaningful results born from their 'advice'.

Normies, especially feminist normies will often insist that incels are the correct batch of people not to be partnered up. After all it would make women and society seem a lot more just if that were the case. They will insist that sexual freedom is a sorting mechanism for male feminists and good personalities like OJ Simpson and Jeremy Meeks, and that your local grocery store bagger deserves to be an incel because maybe he went on 4chan once or twice.

image
Normies, when not lying to incels about celibacy being easy, in reality consider going even 40 days without sexual intimacy as complete savagery

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

There is not a more monstrous organization in the United States than the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (otherwise known as DCFS). In other areas across the nation, this same diabolical government institution is known as CPS (Child Protection Services). What a misnomer! DCFS and CPS abuse families!

DCFS, an organization which was allegedly started to protect families, has actually in many cases DESTROYED families! The emotional, physical, and financial tolls are oftentimes devastating. Many innocent families have been forced into bankruptcy because of nightmarish legal fees to defend themselves against this evil bureaucratic monster. CPS doesn't try to heal, build nor restore families; all they know how to do is steal, kill and destroy as Jesus said in John 10:10. That's their agenda, to destroy! CPS are devils!

No doubt, many mothers and fathers have ended up in the hospital because of the trauma associated with DCFS' brutal and never-ending persecution. My wife was often sick, vomiting from the turmoil, wondering if the Communist Police State was coming to take our child away. If you've never been targeted by the State, then you cannot possibly understand. CPS are largely a bunch of sick twisted freaks. The government is NOT God, but they act like it, swooping in like ravenous vultures to steal our children away forever.
“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”
—Charles de Montesquieu
Watch the following video which exposes the criminal CPS empire that is taking children away from good parents, caught up in legal kidnapping. The following video documentary is frightening...


The system converts children into cash which destroys families and their lives. The public schools are hunting ground for CPS. If your child has a mark from falling down in the school playground, the teacher can be arrested for not turning the parents into CPS for possible abuse. Once the call is made, innocent families are automatically sucked into a brutal bureaucracy of abuse, idiocy and irresponsibility. Children are quickly placed into foster homes and the biological parents banned by law from having any contact with their children.

“That which is not just is not law.” —William Lloyd Garrison (1805-1879)

According to The National Center For Child Abuse And Neglect in 1998 reported that “six times more children died in foster care than in the general public. And that once removed to official 'safety' these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation, than in the general population. Think what that number is today 10-years later. Child protective services seizes children using the very system that is paid for by the tax-payer, who actually believes it is used to protect abused and neglected children. The bureaucracy of workers benefit financially by a system that converts children into cash while destroying their families and their lives.”

CPS is an official government kidnapping ring.

Cornel Rasor #fundie spokesman.com

Idaho Republican Party leaders are calling on the state Legislature to invalidate local city ordinances that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation - like the one Coeur d’Alene passed after an emotional community debate just two weeks ago.

Six Idaho cities have passed such non-discrimination ordinances in the past year and a half, and a seventh, Idaho Falls, is looking into one now; the Idaho GOP wants them halted.

Cornel Rasor, a former Bonner County commissioner and chairman of the Idaho GOP’s resolutions committee, said, “I’d hire a gay guy if I thought he was a good worker. But if he comes into work in a tutu … he’s not producing what I want in my office.”

“Resolved, that the Idaho Republican State Central Committee recommends that our legislators support Idaho’s current anti-discrimination laws and policies and enact a law that would make unenforceable any municipal ordinances that would seek to expand categories of prohibited discrimination beyond current state anti-discrimination laws and policies,” the resolution states.

“If a guy has a particular predilection and keeps it to himself, that’s fine,” Rasor said. “But if he wants to use my business as a platform for his lifestyle, why should I have to subsidize that? And that’s what these anti-discrimination laws do.”

Matt McLaughlin #fundie oag.ca.gov

SODOMITE SUPPRESSION ACT

Penal Code section 39

a) The abominable crime against nature known as buggery, called also sodomy, is a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrha.

b) Seeing that it is better that offenders should die rather than that all of us should be killed by God's just wrath against us for the folly of tolerating-wickedness in our midst, the People of California wisely command, in the fear of God, that any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.

c) No person shall distribute, perform, or transmit sodomistic propaganda directly or indirectly by any means to any person under the age of majority. Sodomistic propaganda is defined as anything aimed at creating an interest in or an acceptance of human sexual relations other than between a man and a woman. Every offender shall be fined $1 million per occurrence, and/or imprisoned up to 10 years, and/or expelled from the boundaries of the state of California for up to life.

d) No person shall serve in any public office, nor serve in public employment, nor enjoy any public benefit, who is a sodomite or who espouses sodomistic propaganda or who belongs to any group that does.

e) This law is effective immediately and shall not be rendered ineffective nor invalidated by any court, state or federal, until heard by a quorum of the Supreme Court of California consisting only of judges who are neither sodomites nor subject to disqualification hereunder.

f) The state has an affirmative duty to defend and enforce this law as written, and every member of the public has standing to seek its enforcement and obtain reimbursement for all costs and attorney's fees in so doing, and further, should the state persist in inaction over 1 year after due notice, the general public is empowered and deputized to execute all the provisions hereunder extra-judicially, immune from any charge and indemnified by the state against any and all liability.

g) This law shall be known as "The Sodomite Suppression Act" and be numbered as section 39 in Title 3 of the Penal Code, pertaining to offences against the sovereignty of the state. The text shall be prominently posted in every public school classroom. All laws in conflict with this law are to that extent invalid.

Mike King #fundie tomatobubble.com

Here at TomatoBubble.com; we love all of our readers, including the Atheist / Evolutionists. From time to time an E-mail that reads something like the following will arrive in the inbox:

"Mike. I love your work but you really need to stick to history and current events. You do not understand the science behind Evolution and are only harming your credibility when you attack Darwin."

Though this type of feedback is certainly more cordial and tolerable than the occasional, "You are a stupid ignorant deranged 'Nazi' extremist who believes that a giant spaghetti monster created the universe in 7 days. Ha ha ha" - it is still a variation of the condescending you-do-not-understand-science ad hominem logical fallacy that Evolutionists always resort to. This rhetorical device is a weaponized trick that we shall now disarm.

First of all, the lack of any extensive "scientific background" does not necessarily disqualify a logical thinker from expressing an opinion on Evolution or any other matter related to science. If a man observes a rapidly darkening sky on a brutally hot and humid summer afternoon; followed by a sudden temperature drop and distant rumbles of thunder; would his lack of a "background in meteorology" invalidate his opinion that rain is forthcoming?

If a man opts to take the elevator downstairs instead of simply jumping out of a 40th floor window and into his waiting convertible; would his lack of a "background in physics" invalidate his fear of jumping out of skyscrapers?

This idea that any matters pertaining to science, or alleging to pertain to science, can only be discussed by those with the right "qualifications" is a clear example of another classic logical fallacy; the 'Appeal to Authority'. Every great philosopher from Buddha, to Confucius, to Plato, to Socrates, to Marcus Aurelius, to Jesus, to Schopenhauer and so many others specifically warned against the inherent errors associated with this type of boot-licking, group-thinking worship of authority figures. Buddha expressed the key to right thinking very well when he stated:

"Do not go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought."

In other words, "To hell with those diploma-decorated fools. Use your own reason and observation!" And with that, let us dispense with this puffed-up patronizing rubbish about "lack of a scientific background" once and for all. You see, it doesn't take a "scientific background" to understand the basic and timeless principles of what is known as "The Scientific Method". Ironically, it is the hallowed Scientific Method which dooms the "theoretical science" of Darwinian Evolution to the toilet bowl of pseudo-scientific error.

Had Darwin studied Greek or Buddhist philosophy, he would never have made such a monkey of himself.

What is the Scientific Method?

The Scientific Method consists of the flow-chart steps shown in the following chart:

image

Each step must logically flow into the next step until the process is complete. No skipping steps! As soon as the standards of any given step cannot be met, the game ends and the hypothesis goes into the garbage. Now, let's plug "Evolution" TM into the step climber and see what we get.

Step 1: Ask a Question

OK. This one is easy. Anyone can ask a question about anything. Here it goes: "How did we all get here?"

Step 2: Do Background Research

Gather data and observe it carefully. If you detect a pattern that suggests a plausible conclusion, then move onto the next step. What Darwin "discovered" during this step is that all living creatures share many common traits; and that the differences among them adapt them perfectly to their natural environment.

Step 3: Construct a Hypothesis

Based on your data mining, make an educated guess as to what the truth is. Not just any ole guess; not a wild and baseless guess; but an educated guess based on a compelling pattern of data. Here, at a very early stage of the Scientific Method, Darwin has already gone off the rails. In his own words:

"The real affinities of all organic beings, in contradiction to their adaptive resemblances, are due to inheritance or community of descent. Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed."

What Darwin observed is nothing that a retarded 8 year old, living 10,000 years ago, could not have easily noticed on his own; namely, that all creatures have much in common. For example, a lizard has two eyes, a mouth, teeth, a tongue, four limbs, a spine, a skeleton etc; and, a human being also two eyes, a mouth, teeth, a tongue, four limbs, a spine, a skeleton etc. And from that, and nothing more, Darwin "hypothesizes" that all living things came from an original "single-cell" organism? Really Chuck?

Darwin himself even admits that there is no data to support his hypothesis; which means that the hypothesis itself should never have been put forth in the first place. Again, from his own mouth:

"On this doctrine of the extermination of an infinitude of connecting links, between the living and extinct inhabitants of the world, and at each successive period between the extinct and still older species, why is not every geological formation charged with such links? Why does not every collection of fossil remains afford plain evidence of the gradation and mutation of the forms of life?

We meet with no such evidence. and this is the most obvious and forcible of the many objections used against my theory."

That's right Chuckie. The MILLIONS of "missing links' flowing from single-cell pond scum to modern man did not exist in the 1800's, nor have they been pieced together to this day. In fact, as even prominent Evolutionists openly admit, the fossil record actually appears to show that new life forms came on to the scene very suddenly.

Nonetheless, in spite of the fact that the standards of the 'Hypothesis Step' of Scientific Method have, by Darwin's own admission, not been met; let us, purely for the sake of argument, cheat a little and give the Evolutionists a "free pass" to the next step.

Step 4: Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment

I don't even know where to even begin with this one. How does one construct an experiment to "prove" that great-great-great grandma[x] was a piece of algae that spontaneously appeared in a pond, and "mutated" into millions of transitional species, culminating in what we are today. In the absence of any experimentation, one could conceivably skip this step and jump to an intense observation of unfolding natural processes; a "natural" experiment, so to speak.

But here again, there is nothing to observe. The reality is that trans-species evolution is not observable and has never been observed, neither in nature nor in the fossil record. Sorry Evolutionists, but a non-definitive skull fragment of some creature purported to be an "ape ancestor" does not meet the standard of observation; let alone constitute evidence that great-great-great grandma[x] was single-celled pond scum. The same goes for your desperately hyped-up finches, peppered moths, 'super rats', platypuses etc.

And speaking of "simple" single-cell organisms (which we now know are more complex than nuclear submarines and space shuttles!), a single-cell organism has NEVER been observed to "mutate" into a new species of two-cell organism. My God! The Evolutionists cannot even validate, neither in nature nor in a laboratory, the jump from one-cell bacteria to two-cell bacteria; yet they call us "stupid" for doubting that our common one-celled pond scum great-great-great grandma[x] "evolved" into the modern day human, elephant, bird, bumble bee, dolphin, eagle, spider, flower, tree etc.

Obviously, steps 5 and 6 of the Scientific Method are rendered mute; but that doesn't stop the dogmatic Evolutionists and degenerate Marxists from pounding their fists on the table and screaming "Science ... science ... science!" in your face; whilst viciously denouncing you as "uneducated" for daring to question their pond scum to human scenario.

The Theory of trans-species Evolution TM is neither testable nor observable. Likewise, the theory of life blindly coming from non-life is neither testable, nor observable; to say nothing of even being sane. Heck, these ideas were never even 'hypothesizable', and that was before our understanding of the incredibly complex DNA computer code we call the genome; a mind boggling instructional code that is programmed into all organisms, including those "simple" single-cell amoebas and bacteria!

Bottom Line: According to any honest rendering of the Scientific Method, Evolution TM is NOT science!

Na7Soc #conspiracy reddit.com

[Comment under "Fact"]

Hitler was right and just.

Jewish commissars like Lazar Kaganovich, Genrikh Yagoda (Him and his Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system) and Yezhov had an active Jewish wife making all of their spawn racial Jews. Just Yagoda was responsible for killing at least 10,000,000 people. Their Cheka in total killed upwards of 80+ million people.

Yet FDR recognized the USSR his first year in office and immediately established aid programs to develop the troubled agrarian state into an industrial power which in turn supported Mao in the Chinese Civil War which the League of Nations said "Originated in Moscow" and cabled Roosevelt to ask him to "use his new ally Stalin to stop (the civil war in China).

Franklin Roosevelt actually demanded that Chiang Kai Shek allow Communists in government or lose all US economic and military aid. Chiang had an emergency meeting with his generals who said to commit an all out attack on Mao's forces and sent them on their 1000 mile march into Soviet territory thinking if they were no longer in China that would negate his demand but it just made FDR even more angry. FDR says "There is no threat here in Communism, some of my best friends are Communists" while Dean Acheson at Harvard literally says "There is no inherent obstacle to implementing (Marxist) Socialism in America through a series of New Deals".

The United States had it's first Communist President under Franklin Roosevelt. All of the damn near a hundred new bureaucracies he created were hotbeds of Communist recruitment, infiltration, and assignment. The 67th Congressional Investigation discovered that the Institute of Pacific Relations was a hotbed for communist infiltration, sending Communist Jews like Solomon Adler to back up Harry Dexter White and Henry Morgenthau with their plan to crush Chiang's economy by illegally fixing the price of gold and silver which they later had to legalize. Solomon Adler used US Embassies to pass out propaganda to the Chinese calling Chiang a "Dictator for not allowing ALL Chinese representation in government" (Denying Communists) and the only way to fix it is to side with Mao against Chiang and secure US Economic/Military aid again.

The media also didn't report it when Mao's bandits attacked Japanese controlled Manchuria (which was a big deal because without their mainland assets Japan would have to go back to being third world again unable to industrialize, so they had an emergency military meeting and decided that Chiang was not capable of dealing with the Communists and since he was refusing Japanese help since he saw that as the first step to China becoming a vassal of Japan they would deal with the Communists themselves.

Western media portrayed it as Japanese Imperialism/Expansionism and totally neglected to mention the Soviet troop/tank presence in China supporting Mao.

And so this is why they had to invent the holocaust in order to create the false argument that we had to ally with Stalin since he is the "lesser of evils. It was clear that we were not fighting a just war and Britain had to invent what their Ministry of Intelligence called "Atrocity propaganda. Here is their letter to the Church and BBC demanding that they act convincing and passionate pushing these lies

Sir, I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter: It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us. But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for. We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently. We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country. We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them — and ourselves — from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject. Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of the “Corpse Factory,” and the “Mutilated Belgian Babies,” and the “Crucified Canadians.” Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry. Your expression of belief in such may convince others. I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, (signed) H. HEWET, ASSISTANT SECRETARY The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.

This letter is reproduced in a 1958 book entitled Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland by Edward J. Rozek, the image above is captured from the first edition (pages 209-210).

You can learn more about this greasy British action and the history behind it here

czakal #fundie diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com

The quest for knowledge, the passion for discovering objective truth, seems to me the most fundamental characteristic of Europeanness, one that we can already see apparent in the Ancient Greeks. Aristotle, for example, wrote a book that was just an objective description of all the animal species he knew about. No philosophy, nothing abstract. Just the facts. That’s Europeanness right there, thousands of years ago.
Ultimately, it was our civilisation’s passion for investigating objective truth through science that took it to global dominance. And it is our current fixation on the subjective – on psychology, emotion, motivation – that will be our downfall. Unless we can cure ourselves of it.

Rational debate about our future has become impossible due to the charges of impure motivation that are immediately flung at anyone who attempts to engage in it: racism, islamophobia, antisemitism, etc. Implicit in these charges is the idea that impure motivation invalidates everything a person says. The criterion of objective truth is disregarded.

We should never forget where this curious notion comes from: the Talmudic legal system and its obsession with the purity of a witness’s motivation.

More generally, non-Europeans, have played a critical role in pushing the obsession with the subjective upon us. The Jewish pseudoscience of psycho-analysis cast a long shadow over the 20th century, one whose influence is still with us today even though its “science” aspect has now been utterly discredited.

Power Point Paradise #fundie powerpointparadise.com

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

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

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

image

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

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

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

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

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

image

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

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

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

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

image

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

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

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

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

What All This Means For Us?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Various commenters #sexist stormfront.org

Re: California : Negro steals deputy's gun, shoots her

(Max)

Women should not be cops and blacks should be sent to Africa.

Standards have been lowered greatly across police departments and the military to accommodate women. Women are not an asset in the field they are a liability. A sheriff's department in California had to change their service weapons because women were too weak to handle the trigger pull needed to fire the weapons. That will only lead to more accidents.

There have been many incidents where female police officers have been overpowered by male criminals, some of them being killed.

This not only endangers the life of that female officer, but it endangers the lives of all police officers working with that weaker female officer.

(Onlyfear)

I only agree with the "blacks should be sent to Africa" part.

As a cop, you only agree because you aren't a cop. All women are useless on the force. Period.

(Manz)

Standards have been lowered greatly across police departments and the military to accommodate women. Women are not an asset in the field they are a liability. A sheriff's department in California had to change their service weapons because women were too weak to handle the trigger pull needed to fire the weapons. That will only lead to more accidents.

Indeed, standards for basic training have been lowered. I remember when you had to be over 6'0 to be a cop.

Most women should not be cops, manlets too. I've talked to NYC cops who say in certain precincts, it's forbidden to partner up a female with a male, they're always put with another female. Captains actually care and know that two women can't get into too much trouble together.

(Last To Speak)

Police should not be in a "shoot first" mindset. They should be able to subdue non armed individuals with non lethal means, be it a baton, taser, or even fists. Most police officers, therefore, should be more physically equipped than the vast majority of the population. With that in mind, 9/10 female police do not belong. They simply do not have the capacity to use anything other than lethal options should they encounter any type of violence. And, should someone get the drop on them, such as here, they may be overpowered in a moment and are murdered by their own gun. This happens to plenty of men, too, but it is far more likely with a woman.

This goes for firefighters, too. I work directly with firefighters every day as part of my job. They most definitely accommodate women's weaknesses to improve department diversity. One of the core elements of being a firefighter is being able to drag a brother out of a burning structure should something occur. I see firefighters I can only describe as "girls". They're 22 years old, 5'1", and 110 pounds. If they were in a structure and a 200 pound fellow firefighter were to become incapacitated he would burn to death because they couldn't drag him out. Again, this is true 9/10 times. I have met a couple of women firefighters who could easily meet the standards required. Most, the vast majority, don't. Firefighters are well aware of this and that is most certainly why there is "sexism" in fire services.

Standards should exist for these professions. They should not be altered for anyone. Cognitive or physical.

(OneLife1990)

Like others have said, freaking embarrassment. Solid proof women should not be cops. Her instagram photos were hilarious!!!

How the eff do you get overpowered by a skinny affro'd, half black half mexican teenager??????? And then you're screaming and stuff?

WHO THE F, LETS HIM GET THE GUN AND THEN YOU RUN???? A masculine cop woulda beat his a** at that close of range. What a moron of he has the gun and you try to jog away dibilitated for 20 to 35 yards.

This video just shows how much worse women in the military would be than this. Of imagine women in a combat zone in a live gun fight, vs taliban and al-qaeda in their own homeland. Of women screaming and crying, of dropping their weapons or getting disarmed, and then::: Instead of the female soldiers using their combat knife or hand to hand combat, the women just start fleeing jogging away?

(WhiteRights)

It's much better to have tall, strong men as cops, than individuals who can be easily overpowered by street thugs.

Remember that a big percentage of the people that cops have to deal with are drunk, stoned or stupid.

A friend of mine told me a cop, he knew, once complained that every time he went into a bar with a female cop as "back up" to deal with a situation; there would be a fight.

(TonySS)

In general I agree that most women should not be cops. My last two interactions with cops both involved female cops. One was in Australia where she was probably only 5' 0" and overweight but partnered with a huge male cop well over 6 feet and heavily built. But both looked like they couldn't run 50 feet before collapsing.

When I went to the US this year I had to talk to the cops and they sent two females. Both huge lard asses who wouldn't be able to do one sit up or push up. And surprisingly dumb as hell too (although that can apply to males as well)

And about a month ago I was parked across the street from the local area Police command and noticed a severely disabled guy walking along - the kind of walk that is so weird it's painful just to watch it. He sort of had to throw half his body forward and follow it up with the other half to move. Yes he was an armed cop. I assume he was only doing administrative duties but still it occurred to me almost anyone could push that guy over and take his weapon.

All this because they have to be "Equal Opportunity Employers" which is just ludicrous.

(Enzed)

Women should not be general patrol officers. They're needed for dealing with female victims of domestic violence and investigative work but beat cops no way. The height restrictions for males should be reintroduced too in those areas which got rid of them.

(Indelible)

Sadly, this happens all the time because women think they can do everything men do. But this isn't a movie, where you see women overpowering men.
She was lucky.

Hello There #racist answers.yahoo.com

because those people are not only racist themselves...they are too stupid to understand that diversity has nothing to do with equality.

there is a redefintion of what is "racist"... things like diversity dont speak of different races being equal... its first about white people needing to be "pro active" in celebrating other cultures while erasing their own.

this is liberal ideology that seeks to enforce Collectivism... racists dont understand that yes...the targets are white people at the moment when it comes to institutionalized racist policy... but they themselves are not immune, they are just being coddled and comforted in the short term even as they are worked over socially as there own identities are long since raped away. i am speaking in particular about racist blacks... these are the people who sing a song about pride...but truly and genuinely cannot conceive of an existence that does not include or preclude white people.

do you understand? you say white people and black people cant live together... in a few generations there wont be enough black people for you to have to worry about..they will have been supplanted almost entirely by mixed race folk.... who dont think like black people or a black community or for black interests...but as how disingenuous white liberals have trained them too.

they are already doing it... diversity is NOT equality or non racism. but they are trained to think that it is.

James De Young #fundie burningdowntheshackbook.com

Warning To Pastors Re. Young’s Universalism

By Dr. James De Young, senior professor, Western Seminary, Portland, Or.

Recently I read a posting by a Southern Baptist leader from Oklahoma, Rev. Wade Burleson, who endorses Paul Young’s newest book, Lies We Believe about God. Burleson claims that Paul Young, the author of The Shack, expresses just another, optional viewpoint about the atonement. He cited Al Mohler and Paul Young as both believing in the atonement but differing only on the issue of its extent. Mohler, following Calvin, believes that the atonement, the sacrifice of Christ for sin on the cross, was limited to providing atonement for believers only. Young believes it is for all human beings. At least this is how Paul Young has explained it to pastor Burleson.

Recently, John MacMurray, a supporter of Paul Young (note that he is named on the last page of the book, Lies), argued similarly and criticizes those who fault Young’s theology.

Now my discussion is not just about what Burleson believes. For I suspect that many pastors are in the same position that Burleson is. They are influenced by their personal experience with Paul Young and give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to understanding his theology. They fail to ask the right questions. But with his most recent publication Young has erased all doubt as to what he believes and how far apart he and Mohler truly are. For Burleson and other pastors to fail to recall their evangelical theology and church history is an inexcusable failure. They are uninformed how universal reconciliation has brought havoc to the church.

Paul Young’s History and Mine

Many pastors are being misled. I’ve known Paul Young probably far longer than most of them. Paul and I go back at least two decades. And in this time Paul has twisted the truth to accommodate his reputation as a “Christian” writer. Here is a summary of events. He renounced his “evangelical paradigm” and converted to universal reconciliation (UR) (in a 103-page forum paper in 2004); reaffirmed his new belief to me and my wife in a church foyer (probably in 2006 or so); wrote for his kids The Shack, which was full of universalism (about 2006); with two pastor friends took a year to remove the UR (2006-2007?); in my home before many witnesses said that he no longer believed UR (in 2007); published The Shack; then has written two more novels with UR as an undercurrent throughout (Crossroads, 2012; Eve, 2015). See my reviews and other articles at burningdowntheshackbook.com.

During all this time, I’ve tried to warn Christians about the subtle propagation of UR that exists in his novels and now in the movie. I wrote my book, Burning Down the Shack, to clarify both what universalism is all about and how it has deceived many in the church and to show how it is embedded chapter by chapter in Paul’s novel. Many people have neglected my warnings or downplayed them. Again my web site clarifies the heretical points of this universalism.

Now Paul’s latest release confirms all my warnings. In Lies We Believe about God, Young deliberately takes on 28 statements that we Christians affirm and he dismisses them all as lies. He openly confesses allegiance to “universal reconciliation,” that all people are already saved (p. 118). It is no longer a “hope.” He writes this under the “lie” stated as “You need to get saved” (chap. 13).

So I say to Pastor Burleson and others like him: the argument is not just about the extent of the atonement. It is a question about whether there was an atonement at all! Young does not believe that Jesus Christ took sinners’ place to make an atonement for their sins on the cross—to provide propitiation. Young explicitly rejects penal substitution. If you don’t believe me, ask him. Yes, Jesus died there. But it was not a place of judgment. Paul expands on this under a couple of other “lies”: “The Cross was God’s idea” (ch. 17; rather, Paul says that it was man’s idea); “God requires child sacrifice” (ch. 19; here Young denies that the death of God’s son was necessary to pay the penalty that God’s justice required); “Hell is separation from God” (ch. 15; no, God is in hell, and he uses “fiery love” to bring all people to himself from there); “Sin separates us from God” (ch. 27; no, nothing including sin can ever separate any human being, whether a believer or not, from God; no one has ever been separated from God; all are “in God”); “Not everyone is a child of God” (ch. 24; no, all human beings are children of God: all were in Christ in his death and resurrection, and because Christ is in God, then all are in God); and “God is One alone” (ch. 28; here Young rejects his understanding of the Trinity as derived from his “evangelical Christian fundamentalism”).

When Are Enough Lies Enough?

So now I speak more directly. Pastor Burleson, and others, do you not see how these attacks on what we Christians “lie” about go to the very heart of the Gospel of the NT? Do you not see that there is no gospel or good news for you to preach, of how God judged our sins on the cross (Rom. 3:23-26), if you embrace these corrections of the “lies” that Christians make? Do you still think that this is simply a matter of the extent of the atonement? Do you preach that all people are equally children of God? How many more “lies” would Paul Young have to attack before you have finally had enough? How can you be a faithful shepherd of your flock if you deceive them with Young’s teaching or downplay it the way you do? Note the Apostle Paul’s words about distorting the gospel in 2 Cor. 2:17 and 4:2ff.

Some Final Concerns

A couple other things you should note. First, you need to recall some history. UR has been a heresy propagated by heretics from the third century on, beginning with Origen. It was condemned as heresy in the 5th and 6th centuries. It declined. Then with the freedom of inquiry that the Reformers promoted it found new life. It came to Colonial America in 1740 in the person of John Murray and became so popular that one out of every five Baptist ministers, it is said, converted to it. But God raised up other Baptists, such as Isaac Backus, to begin exposing it. It went into decline from 1850 or so for a hundred years. Now it is experiencing a resurgence again, through the writings of Young, McLaren, Talbott, and Bell, and others, and their apologists. I’ve written an entire book refuting UR.

Finally, one more thing you should note from my history with Paul Young. In 2007 he said before many witnesses including my pastor that he had given up his universalism but refused to tell us what he did believe. Now, with the book, Lies, he confesses (p. 118) that he has believed UR all along.

Does this account not reveal deceit? Does this not identify the author of Lies as a liar himself? Should this affect our understanding of his character?

These are heart-wrenching questions. But as a pastor you need to clarify where you stand—with Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior as revealed in the Bible or with Paul Young? It is the truth vs. Lies.

The Lord Jesus will keep building his church, in spite of The Shack. But it may be without you.

Some of you say that you “hope” or wish that universalism is true. To hope for something that God has never said, and contradicts what God says, makes one a friend of Satan and an enemy of Christ.

And don’t ever align Paul Young with C.S. Lewis!

JustBantz1 #racist reddit.com

Lmao moving the goalposts, so fucking pathetic. I mean I get it, you feel like you got a bad deal in life and you react by affirming your identity.. its fine man do you. But if you're really gonna sit there and try to call the race that created nearly everything you own "inferior" it kinda paints you as a pathetic bitter insecure tard and basically invalidates what you're trying to do.

Ellis Washington #conspiracy renewamerica.com

Why does this existential, invidious racism against minorities who achieve outside the slave chains of affirmative action still exist in the twenty first century? Because the original intent of affirmative action was NOT equality, but egalitarianism (tokenism, racial quotas, and statistics), not real equality, but hypocritical counterfeit equality that for example, allows the Left to set up thousands of so-called "Office of Diversity" at colleges and universities all over America. White people aren't stupid. They are fully aware that these leftist bureaucracies don't further racial diversity, but on the contrary establish a progressive, socialist Groupthink throughout higher education because on average professors holding a conservative worldview (like me) are hired at the 0-10 percentile while those professors holding to a liberal, Marxist, progressive or postmodernist worldview are hired at the 95-100 percentile. Ergo, what type of students will American college propaganda factories likely produce – me or a Barack and Michelle Obama?

Is this affirmative action? Is this justice or is this White Democratic Socialist Party hypocrisy and invidious ideological racism? If it is the latter, it must be exposed and eradicated by more and more people in a power position to do so. America, stop allowing racist liberals, reactionary progressives, delusional evolution atheists and unhinged postmodernists the power to set up these phony institutions like affirmative action, Offices of Diversity, speech codes, hate crime statues and phony LBJ 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Acts which LBJ cynically bragged to two governors aboard Air Force One if he could pass through Congress "I would have those Niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years." Stop this insanity.

Let all people of good will rise up and with the Michigan voters who in 2006 passed Proposal 2 and say No to affirmative action. Let every Black American say No to the slave chains of White guilt, servile tokenism and racial quotas and have enough honor to say, "If I'm not smart enough to go to Harvard, then I'll go to Howard, but at least wherever I go to college I won't have the sword of Damocles hanging over my head, over my career telling all who view me that I didn't earn my education, my vocation, my rightful place in society."

End affirmative action, end affirmative slave chains!

CausticDreamer #fundie reddit.com

I saw the commercialization of Humanitarian values by the Progressive Left.
There's a moment of realization, when it just 'clicks' that these people don't actually care about anybody else but themselves. They don't value human life. I've seen Feminists talk about neglecting their sons to "suppress their violent tendencies," and Black Lives Matter activists screaming about how they want cops to die. None of this has ever been about helping people- Progressives want the legally sanctioned murder and theft of Western Civilization to non-Whites. I see mothers abandoning their children, their marriages, for drugs and sex. Hell, my own mother took part in this. I've seen my mother 4 times in almost 10 years. She has adopted two new children from a more wealthy, and more young man. She wasn't searching for financial and sexual liberation- she wanted freedom from parenthood and responsibility until she could find a situation where the luxuries
erased the struggles.

I saw the targeted propaganda and social engineering, which was designed to make Whites hate themselves and denounce their culture.

Between Google being exceedingly creepy in its suppression of exposure to white males and white women, an education system that strips all intellectual discovery and cultural pride from whites and attributes it to blacks, Affirmative action to coerce corporations to exclude white males in virtue of "diversity", the labeling of "It's okay to be White" as a supremacy statement, etc..... Between BLM marching through cities and tearing them apart in their eager hunt for whites to brutalize in their own "Night of Broken Glass" and the emasculation and romanticism of psychological disease in white culture.... Between the revisionist agenda of film, in which Victorian Europe is re-written to have Blacks as the higher status individuals of European society with no Whites to act as their class peers.... There's a clear agenda. I refuse to take the hemlock past my lips.

I knew that I'd die before I let my blood, my name, and my culture be taken from me. If we're to be hunted down and killed like cattle, they'll be met with so much devastation that they won't be able to revise history to cover it up.

Apparently, God has abandoned us. It's time for us to take things into our own hands. It's why I'm making my way into politics.

Aloysium #fundie forums.catholic.com

Darwinism fails on several accounts:

It does not consider the existence of the individual organism with its focus on its material constituents, genetic molecular changes. It sees as the driving force, merely the electrochemical processes of atoms, which are said to underlie the complexity we find in life. This is all said to be random. The shaping of living forms is held to be survival until procreation, when clearly so many factors are involved in mating, both physical and emotional. It speaks of species, thereby recognizing that they are more than abstractions, in conflict with the idea of this being a purely physical cosmos. The focus on molecules and species neglects the reality of ecosystems. An individual animal or plant exists solely because it is at the same time, part of a greater whole.

It fails most clearly and completely when we contemplate our own existence:

As I see this screen, pause to collect and connect these thoughts, feel the wonder, and move my thumb over individual letters, one person, the explanatory value of Darwinism is reduced to the infinitesimal. I can understand how the physical structure of the phone, in this setting that contains my still functioning brain, shapes the relationship I have with the material world and unknown persons with whom I am communicating. That material code running on the computer that is my relational Spirit results in this whole, cleaved into bits and pieces of experience while remaining one. All this complexity, to what end but the journey of creature to its Maker. Without God, without any acknowledgement of life’s ultimate purpose, any theory about the creation of the universe, all living beings and mankind, is going around in circles, providing illusion to people hungering for truth.

weev #sexist dailystormer.name

Over at Counter-Currents I saw a common assault against the values of WHITE SHARIA. Calling it “Whigger Sharia,” they allege it is an embrace of foreign ideals and barbarism:

" What is it that compels those who are otherwise pro-white to resort to fetishizing the culture of barbarous foreign peoples? … We generally try to end such barbarity wherever we go – even when doing so does not directly benefit us."

In response to the ridiculous utterance that we are promoting anything to do with foreign culture I already wrote an essay describing our values as the general attitude towards women that prevailed in Europe from pre-Christian Greece and Rome to the end of the neo-Classical period in the 19th century. We want to restore coverture and domestic discipline, and abolish birth control and marital rape laws.

With over 1700 Facebook likes and shares, it is the most well read and discussed document concerning the subject of all time. This point was then reiterated by Anglin in his essay “Revealing the Esoteric Nature of the White Sharia Meme” which is the second most well read and discussed document concerning the topic. Anyone claiming that we promote non-European culture is either woefully ignorant and we must question their intellect or is acting in utter dishonesty and we must question their motives.

Today, however, I am not here to lecture you about what traditional gender roles entail. I am here to give an urgently needed lesson in history, an education in which our critics suffer from a sore lack.

When one alleges that we are barbarous, a truthful answer to a single question may be uttered in refutation.

What kind of lives did actual barbarians live?

After we have answered this question, I believe that many of our readers and perhaps even our critics over at Counter Currents will be wonderfully enlightened.

The tribes the Greeks and Romans referred to as barbarians, Aristotle’s “belligerent nations,” had degrees of political equity for women unparalleled in white European society until the establishment of suffrage in the 20th century. Women used their political equity to garner vast political and economic influence, becoming loci for material wealth and common envoys to foreign civilizations.

Out of frustration with the cost of heterosexual relationships becoming excessively high and women bullying them with weird superstitions about faeries riding their accessory dogs, barbarian men frequently turned to homosexuality. The word barbarian was steeped in moral disgust. Most barbarians were weak faggots who could not control their women, and as a result were subjugated before the superior Roman physique and ingenuity.

Think I’m a liar with a sickening worldview corrupted by misogyny? Check the primary sources before you make your judgements.

Athenaeus: The Deipnosophists, Book 13:

" And the Celts, too, although they have the most beautiful women of all the barbarians, still make great favourites of boys; so that some of them often go to rest with two lovers on their beds of hide."

Didorus Siculus, Book V:

" Although their wives are comely, they have very little to do with them, but rage with lust, in outlandish fashion, for the embraces of males … And the most astonishing thing of all is that they feel no concern for their proper dignity, but prostitute to others without a qualm the flower of their bodies; nor do they consider this a disgraceful thing to do, but rather when anyone of them is thus approached and refuses the favour offered him, this they consider an act of dishonour."

Aristotle’s Politics II:

" Again, the freedom in regard to women is detrimental both in regard to the purpose of the constitution and in regard to the happiness of the state. For just as man and wife are part of a household, it is clear that the state also is divided nearly in half into its male and female population, so that in all constitutions in which the position of the women is badly regulated one half of the state must be deemed to have been neglected in framing the law. And this has taken place in the state under consideration, for the lawgiver wishing the whole city to be of strong character displays his intention clearly in relation to the men, but in the case of the women has entirely neglected the matter; for they live dissolutely in respect of every sort of dissoluteness, and luxuriously."

So wait, you’re telling me that the barbarians were hugely influenced by women politically? That all their women were living in the lap of luxury via the fruits of their harlotry? That all their men were catamites because their women were so manipulative and rotten, and thus were too weak to keep themselves from being trivially conquered by the Romans?

Wow, just wow. How progressive of the barbarians. They sound like perfect recipients of an Open Society Foundations grant. If those barbarians were here with us today most of their women would be into garbage like FEMEN and all the men would be passing through the Castro district of San Francisco.

The state of barbarians begs another question. How did the greatest and most culturally influential empire in all history manage its women in the same period?

" Roman women were expected to wear veils as a symbol of the husband’s authority over his wife; a married woman who omitted the veil was seen as withdrawing herself from marriage. In 166 BC, consul Sulpicius Gallus divorced his wife because she had left the house unveiled, thus allowing all to see, as he said, what only he should see."

LOL.

If average Romans were alive today they’d be being harassed out of their jobs for offensive statements about women, niggers and kikes. They’d be ruined in family courts and charged with domestic abuse. They’d be telling women dressed like whores, “You look like a fucking pig in heat, and if you get raped by a pack of niggers, it will be your fault.”

So now that we know what the lives of most barbarians were like, we have a firm intellectual basis for a dialectic of gender politics based in barbarism against civilization.

If you think the political equity of women is a good idea, you are obligated to then praise Jews. Jews brought us the political equity of women. They were there every step of the way, ending two thousand years of continuous European civilization to “liberate” women from coverture, physical discipline and the consequences of harlotry and let them make whatever choices they want. Jews were responsible for forcing the conditions of barbarians upon us. I must give the Jews credit for this accomplishment. The barbarians are here, they’re queer, and they’re well past our gates.

I, unlike our critics, stand against barbarism. I stand against the progression of time. I say we should punish these skanks like they damn well deserve, turn them into property and build an intergalactic empire even greater than the glories of Rome. Now that we have answered two important questions of knowledge, I would ask two more of you of loyalty.

Will you stand with the coming empire against the barbarian hordes?

Will you stand with WHITE SHARIA?

Nabuquduriuzhur #fundie gocomics.com

[A Pearls Before Swine comic makes fun of people on the internet saying the Earth is only 5000 years old]

The fact is that no one actually knows.
.
Various groups claim this or that, but there is invariably at least a large hole in the logic behind it.
.
For example, in getting my geology degree, all sorts of things were claimed. Some of them directly contradicted other science, but we were supposed to believe them, in the same manner that one believes a religion.
.
I don’t believe in magic, and thus I don’t believe in the 4.7 billion year idea. Too many contradictions of other established science.
.
It was so pronounced that I analyzed the matter in one of my books.
.
“Science “by insistence.”

It can be demonstrated that geologic dating (note that I didn’t say carbon dating, which has different assumptions and can be traced to approximately 9,500 years using non-fossilized plant and fungal materials still in existence) has several fatal flaws that render it completely inaccurate.
.
Yet, one is not supposed to argue those chemical, nuclear, astrophysical, geologic and thermodynamic flaws inherent in the idea and just believe that geologic dating is accurate and true. One simply musssst accept those scientific impossibilities, and assume it somehow works despite them.
.
As an example, take the illogical assumption that all “daughter product” isotopes in a mineral were incorporated into a rock after the rock formed— despite no mineral being able to magically “pick and choose” which isotopes it incorporates as each isotope of an element is chemically identical. That assumption introduces an error so great as to make the entire concept unworkable. However, one is supposed to just “assume” it works though, and not question it.
.
But…but… geologic dates can’t be calculated if we don’t assume all of a daughter product isotope didn’t come from decay, the proponents will say.
.
That is the problem exactly.
.
The dates cannot be calculated without that assumption and since that assumption is irrational (trace it through and it postulates magic because of the idea of a mineral having sentience or otherwise being able to pick and choose each isotope and thus it’s the realm of magic, not science), dates cannot be logically ascertained for non-carbon 14 dating methods.
.
But with that kind of illogical assumption, the error introduced makes the process completely unusable as one doesn’t know when the rock was formed— today or four point seven billion years ago. Several other assumptions render the process equally invalid.
.
But, one is still supposed to “just accept it.” As such, it becomes religion, not science. A matter of “belief.” "

admin #racist whitepridehomeschool.com

For years we have watched the downgrading of the educational system in this nation and nations abroad. It is an established, though not publicized, fact that the learning in America is being dumbed down. Billions of dollars are spent each year trying to lift up the non-white races to an equal playing field with white students. The money often looks to be well spent in the elementary school ages. However, upon reaching the teen years it is as if the non-white races have reached their peak. There are many reasons why this may be the case and we will not attempt to supply the answer.

If you are the parents of a white child you may become frustrated to know that your child’s lessons may become stagnate so that the others can continually play catch up. What shocks even more parents and college bound teens is the unfair manner in which most colleges around the country select their students. There is such a wide gap in the performance levels of white and non-white students, that universities have started to get creative in their selection process.

The selection process in many colleges is no longer determined on academic achievement, but on unique criteria with the sole intention of raising the acceptance levels of non-whites.

This all stems from the imaginary idea that all people are the same. While it is fair to assume that everyone should have an equal chance, it is not fair to decide that everyone should be promised the same rewards. For those who do not know or have forgotten what Communism is, let me tell you that this is in fact Communistic. We will discuss this more in another section.

The point I want to make is that the educational institutions are depriving our children of a quality education in order to satisfy the desires of social engineers.

But, it is not just the quality of education that we must be concerned with. That is not even the worst part. Adults can learn and make up for any lack of knowledge they did not receive as a child. What is scary is the true goal of social engineers. That goal is to instill a guilt complex in the people of white heritage.

When a person feels intense guilt, they will often give in to anything. They will put up with persecution and affliction. They will allow their rights to be trampled on. They will even put others first before their own families. They will do all of this in a sick perverted way of erasing their deep seeded guilt. They can be led down the wrong path.

This is the most dangerous aspect of the government school system in America, Canada, Europe, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, etc. The true goal of these educational leaders is not to teach your children reading, math, science, geography, communication, and so on. Their true goal is to change the values and morals of the nations. They are doing this one child and one school at a time.

We find this to be outrageous! Therefore, it is our goal to impress upon as many people as possible the need to take the education of their children seriously. Of course, there are already many people doing this and doing a fine job at it. But, in the last twenty years – the time in which home schooling has really become popular – we have neither seen nor heard of a website or resource for white nationalist parents. And by white nationalist parents, we mean parents who are concerned about their white brothers and sisters.

More parents are deciding to home school than ever before, but it is no different in the home schooling movement than it is in the rest of society. It is often very difficult to approach the subject of white pride or racial integrity. “What is your reason for home schooling?” they may ask. Of course, you know that it is because you are sick and tired of your kids being told to honor Martin Luther King, Jr. or to glorify homosexuals and their lifestyle. You don’t like your children’s school – day in and day out anti-white propaganda. Wouldn’t it be nice to get information and ideas from people that understand you and your family.

That is where this website, we hope, will fill the void. We do not intend to provide all the information, all the tools, books, etc. We will, however, help point you in the right direction. We will work to help you realize how important this is to your family and your nation. We will strive to provide encouragement and support. We consist of experienced home schooling families and we are all involved – and have been for many years – in the white nationalist movement. We love God, race, and nation. We hope you will find this website helpful.

BigEarthBear #sexist reddit.com

Ever since a recent discussion, I have had a frustration with POMO activism and how incorrect it is in regards to feminism. Another person and I were talking to the group about the need for sex-based hate crime legislation. What we find is it is nearly impossible to get valid and correct hate crime data on the percentage of hate crimes against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people. Here is how sex-based hate crime legislation is necessary as a category for LGBT.

Violence against lesbians is generally NOT classified as a hate crime because lesbians are classified as "female or "woman" in police reports therefore not subject to hate crime laws. So reports of corrective rape or gay bashing are instead put in the "women dead files". Sex-based hate crime laws would also put an end to "the women's dead files" because they can not ignore hate crimes in the same manner they do other crimes. This is why trans activists demand that trans women are reported as being TRANSWOMEN, not men or women.

It sparked the usual pomo crap. sex-based laws are noninclusive of trans people "TERFs" even though, like same-sex marriage, transgender people are already protected by the law, it is women who excluded from these protections based on their sex.

The conversation changed into the same old argument. My fellow activist is a "TERF." , "Trans women are women", "She's not a real feminist because her feminism does not include trans women." blah blah blah. Please note: There was no mention of trans men being men or trans men at all. Intersexed people were brought up out of context. The co-presenter was not attacked at all, I'm male, what a shock except to point out incorrectly that I am an alleged male feminist... people keep calling me a male feminist when there is no such thing as a male feminist.

I corrected them on two points during this discussion. 1) Feminism since it's beginning only focussed on female oppression. 2) Males cannot be feminists because it is a female movement. Feminism can affect how a male thinks or moves through the world but we can not claim feminism.

They immediately went to an explosion of talking a feminist theory or feminist writings out of context. Dworkin is the only 2nd waver I can recall that included transexuals. They even quoted the heretic Germaine Greer out of context. What I realized quickly is the misuse of the words woman and gender in regards to POMO TRA/ SJW/ Liberal Feminism vs feminism. At the time of those writings starting with the founding of feminism, being a woman was defined as adult human FEMALE the reproductive sex that produces large gametes and bares children. Gender was discussed as; men (males) patriarchal (male) oppression of women (females). So contextually it has always been solely about fighting female oppression. Trans women are males and trans men are females. Nothing that they quoted proved that feminism is about the inclusion of trans women and therefore the exclusion of trans men. It has always been focussed on reproductive biology if you take a serious thoughtful look at it.

Side note: Apparently I am a frustrating transphobic fag, according to that part of the group. They always call me a faggot.

Radladiesunite #fundie radladiesunite.tumblr.com

Dear trans women…

I dare your privileged first world asses to go to other parts of the world and tell women who have been victims of FGM and sex trafficking that you ‘identify’ as a woman and that you don’t like when they talk about their vaginas and how they’ve suffered for being born with a vagina because it hurts your feelings and makes you feel ‘invalidated’. ://////
Tell those same women that you love porn and feel like prostitution is 'empowering’. (((((i can already hear them:“hum hi yeah it’s not vaginas that are the problem it’s when you equate them to womanhood’. well you people think any mention of female biology is violent transphobia. Not everything is about you and your #firstworldgenderistproblems))))

#trans #transgender #cis #terf #anti #terf #transphobia #radfem #libfem

Some MRAs #sexist #fundie reddit.com

Post-Gamergate Study Blows Up Conventional Wisdom – Finds Female Gamers Are the Real Sexists

(xNOM)

The results confirmed their hypothesis “that the level of online sexual harassment behavior, especially toward women, will increase after playing a sexualized video game.” Harassment of men did not increase after playing the sexualized video game.

wtf does "especially toward women" mean?

However, in a surprise twist, the female gamers in both groups turned out to be significantly more likely to engage to send sexist jokes to their partner, and most of the sexual harassment was of men.

"especially toward women?"

The admittedly surprised researchers came up with a theory for their findings. They posited that the women sent more sexist jokes because they saw harassing each other as harmless fun and harassing men as a form of revenge.

Hey retards, that's exactly why men sexually harass women as well. There is no evil patriarchy full of toxic masculinity.

(ExpendableOne)

It's always been pretty clear to me that many, if not most, female gamers are far more sexist than your average male gamers. You see it on reddit all the time, grown women trying to victimize themselves because they received male attention; all the while glorifying attention from other women themselves(especially blatant when you look at "female only" subs like girl gamers which is deliberately discriminative) or demonstrating the exact same time of attention seeking behaviour(basically jumping on this "look at me, woe is me, i'm an oppressed female gamer" narrative for attention).

They will cry that lonely, depraved and awkward teenage boys will sexualize or romanticize them online, even when they are literally adult women in a position of power and privilege over them(both offline and online). There is a major empathy gap there not just in where at attention might be coming from but a major negative bias and hostile predisposition towards male attention in general(a dehumanizing and irrational disdain that I could only describe as toxic femininity). If men complained about female attention the way women do about male attention, it would be labelled as misogynous gate-keeping.

So many times, I see female gamers make everything about gender, when gender isn't necessarily a relevant factor, but neglect gender as a factor when it is actually relevant. Male to female sexual attention from a heterosexual man relates to gender, but female gamers will try to present this as misogyny because apparently all boys should act like eunuchs and treat girls no differently than boys(despite biology, sexual market value and romantic gender role expectations all being relevant factors). When a guy insults a girl online, even with it's totally warranted and in the most gender neutral manner, female gamers will make this a gender issue, and try to label the situation as misogyny(this is especially true if gendered terms like "bitch" are used, despite the context in which they are used had nothing to do with gender).

And that's not even going into the number of women who are absolutely toxic, hostile and condescending online, often explicitly so towards men/boys, just because they can(and, because they are women, there is very little to no accountability for their actions because most people wouldn't tell them they are wrong or would just automatically side with them because they are women). Or the fact that men seem far more open/comfortable with the idea of playing female protagonists than women seem to be with male protagonists.

(DJ-Roukan)

"Reality can be whatever I want" -Feminazis

Where proof and truth are subject to interpretation.

A team of scientists placed a frog on a table and ordered it to jump. it jumped

They then cut of it's legs and ordered it to jump, it did not.

They concluded that a frog with no legs cannot hear.

"Reality is often... disappointing" - Thanos

Exactly.

There is one glaring truth exposed in this study that they seem to either have missed or do not want to admit.

Women commit sexual harassment more than men because we hold men accountable, and we do not hold women accountable, but encourage it.

Does not take a team of scientist to understand that, and it seems they do not.

(omegaphallic)

It's fucking disgusting that people can't joke with each anymore, it's callled msygony or whatever now. The SJWs are fighting to make this a soulless, joyless world, utterly passionless and sterile. I'd rather be offended and just talk it out now and against this live like that, eggs all the time.

These Gamer Girls aren't sexist, they are just joking around like normal people do all the fucking time, this shit is just getting down right oppressive. You can't flirt safely anymore, you can't joke with friends, ect... Enough.

cadcoke5 #pratt #fundie disqus.com

"And if they're wrong, they're not wrong to the tune of 4 billion years plus." Actual tests show that these dating methods can be off by similar magnitudes.

Actually, the radiometric dating process shows a lot of inconsistencies. For example, if the entire earth were a giant diamond consisting of only Carbon 14, all of it would have decayed in the age that secularists assign to diamonds. Yet, it is there. True the C14 gives an "age" of 55,000, if we assume the current rate of C14 accumulation. Less radiation would inflate the age. So, unless we can calibrate theC14 formation rate, we can't really take these "ages" as valid. But, at the very least, it invalidates the billions of years normally assigned to diamonds.

Soft tissue has a comparable half-life type of decay rate. So, for the evolutionists, it is foolish to expect a dinosaur fossil to have soft tissue, yet it is there.

Since lava is supposed to start at 0 years, when it solidifies, we can compare known dates of lava formations, to what its radiometric dates give. But, when we do so, for lava that was known to erupt in less than 40 ago, we can get results over 3 million years, using the Potassium-argon method normally used for supposedly old samples. But, if the rock were to contain something that evolutionists expect to be from 3+ million years ago, it is assumed to be correct. There are various proposed solutions offered for the wrong dates for modern lava, but why are presumed older rocks immune from the same problems? Why should a method that tests wrong when we can verify it, be assumed to be right when we cannot verity it?

Gunnersup & RopeMaXXer #sexist incels.co

(Gunnersup)

[Serious] In the future, governments will neuter ugly males

Once the population gets too high, the government will assign tasks to different males. They will allow chads to impregnate foids, but they will neuter all sub-humans. I'm hoping a historian from the year 3000 will read this thread knowing that I predicted the outcome.

(RopeMaXXer)

Lmao they don't even need to do this. It's already happened.
Brainlets always think of dystopias as some sort of novel with draconian laws.
The dystopia is tiktok filtering ugly people, every hole with social media having a venmo link, rampant anti male quotas and 0 bargaining power as average male.
At this point were just meat robots waiting for our metallic counterparts to replace us.

Savagesusie #fundie freerepublic.com

They are one and the same. Both are irrational, vile behaviors and irrational ideology which uses others as a means to an end and is a collective, group-(non)-think, ideology where Truth (God/reality) and reason never exist.

That homosexuals “love” the people whom they desire to sodomize is the Big Lie. It is lust and desire to dominate (control). It is a perverted, warped vile desire (intrinsically disordered) which is caused because of child abuse and child neglect. All behaviors/desires are learned and habituated and trauma in childhood can really warp a child. Children in muslim cultures are severely traumatized, as are sexually abused children and those whom have no loving father figure or an evil mother.

Chastity Bono was raped by a lesbian as a child, as was Milk, Hays, Spacey, Milo, etc. etc. -—all behaviors are learned and habituated in childhood or perverted and warped because of neglect and abuse. The parent who allows the abuse to happen, loses all trust and the anger in a child will make them reject reality, Truth (God), etc. They hate and ability to “love” is warped completely. It is easy to emasculate little boys.

Warping children can be as simple as making little boys hate their fathers which is common for socialist (welfare) “mothers”. That natural need to connect to a male role model for little boys is severely warped and will lead to warped relationship with all males, as it is for girls who have no loving male role model (father). Destroying the Natural family was crucial to the Cultural Marxists who took over our institutions by the 50s—to collapse culture and destroy the virtue in children—so they will be warped.

The fixation in the puerile stage of latency is pure narcissism which is what homosexuality is—a fixation so that true love (selflessness) will not likely occur (the love of “the Other”—true diversity).

Islam is irrational, also, and sodomy is fine in islam, esp. with children. It is a homosexual culture and harems of boys are not abnormal. For procreation, they never allow the irrational concept of “homosexual” “marriage” since males learn to hate women anyhow, and visa versa, which is what homosexuality is all about—immaturity—the inability to love the Other.

Homosexuals love the Same which is always a fixation in latency. All little girls should prefer to play with girls and boys with boys. It is part of normal sexual identity formation which will lead to maturity if no trauma occurs (sex “ed” or rape or lack of loving role models of male and female).

Sex Ed now teaches little boys that they are homosexual in latency if they prefer boys over girls which warps their sexual identity.....as does ALL hyper sexualization of children. Sex Ed was a Lukacs/Adorno creation to destroy the Christian worldview in little children and fixate them in the latency stage and make them totally irrational, dumb, and immature (fixated in latency).

Immaturity is rampant in our culture now, because of the publik skool system which traps children in dependency and group (non) think for 12 years so maturity can never happen (thinking for self). Just programmed “bots” are what the evil, unconstitutional system pumps out.

Alexander Ash #wingnut #conspiracy incel.blog

(First article on incels.co’s new blog)

Incel Phenomenology

Phenomenology is the study of lived experience from a first-person perspective. As of yet, it has not been applied to incels. Here I will argue that it should be.

An incel is an involuntary celibate, a person who is unable to find a romantic partner despite desiring one. Previously ignored, incels have recently gained a staggering prominence among scholars of violent extremism. For example, this year the Royal Canadian Mounted Police added incels to their Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremism classification, effectively labeling them as terrorists.

However, from the point of view of incels, this is all rather baffling; while a handful may fit the mold, violence against the public by an ideology of extremism is as foreign to incels as it is to the reader.

Most academics do present their work by stating that the vast majority of incels are neither violent nor extremist. However, as existing research magnifies the attention given to the extremist variant, the impression is given that all incels are alike, and all are a danger. This is a failure of contextualization, one whose results we have seen before as research developed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks: Islam became securitized, not because it was a security threat, but rather because the majority of attention was focused on a few violent extremists, tainting in the process every other Western non-extremist Muslim.

For incels, the misattribution of their beliefs and desires has caused trouble for many of them: How are they to open up and discuss their plights of loneliness and hopelessness if public perception is that incels are people only interested in violence? The answer is that often they simply can’t.

Perhaps worse still, scorn received from outsiders to the community often leads to a process of chiseling, chipping away at the mental health of incels. Not only must then they carry a burden of solitude, but they also must retreat from the public eye in order to avoid further ostracizement. In practice, such alienation may eventually compound into mental disorders like anxiety and depression, or in extreme cases into self-harm and even suicide.

A proposed solution to this issue is phenomenology. For one, responsible research should seek to avoid unnecessary securitization and promote effective de-escalation. Secondly, resources should be significantly expended towards understanding inceldom as a life situation. The result will be a wider and better understanding of incels at large, as well as a more accurate portrayal of the community to the public.

Bryan Fischer #fundie barbwire.com

If there is any one thing the Mississippi constitution flatly and emphatically prohibits, it is a "marriage" between two lesbians. When the issue was on the ballot, 86% of voters in the Magnolia State pulled the lever for natural marriage.

Two lesbians getting married could not possibly be more illegal and unconstitutional anywhere in the United States than in Mississippi.

So how did lesbians NLF (initials used to shield their identity) and JRW get married last week in Mississippi and get an official marriage license to post proudly on Facebook? They committed biological fraud, that's how.

"Natalie" (not her real name) is so sexually confused she apparently believes she is a man trapped inside a woman's body, despite the fact that her DNA is 100% female and will be until the day she dies. She is a woman in every, single solitary cell of her body. Her birth certificate identifies her as female and will until the day she dies.

[...]

Natalie does not need to be enabled in this self-destructive path, she needs to be helped. Given the exceptionally high suicide rate among transgenders, she needs the kind of therapy that will help her reconcile her psychological identity with her biological one. She needs the kind of help that will enable her to leave the lesbian/transgender lifestyle altogether. Simple human compassion calls for nothing less.

[...]

This clearly is not a "marriage" that is permissible in Mississippi. Mississippi authorities, including the governor and attorney general, should immediately step in and invalidate this license.

And Mississippi's policy on transgenderism, if it permits this grotesque caricature of marriage, must be immediately changed.

Other states with marriage amendments in place should be on notice that Big Gay has found a way to bypass the will of the people and the supreme law of the state through fakery and pretense.

If Mississippi doesn't deal with this quickly, I expect we will soon see this couple featured on the cover of magazines and the front page of newspapers all across the fruited plain. They will be celebrated as the lesbians who pulled off an amazing feat: convincing good-hearted Mississippians to violate their own constitution under the color of the law.

Triweekly Antifeminist #fundie triweeklyantifeminist.wordpress.com

The esteemed commentator Chinzork wrote:

For one of the first posts on this blog, I think you should debunk all of the common talking points against abolishing the AOC. The talking points get repetitive after a while, so an article debunking all of them sounds good.

Alright then, you got it. Herein is a compilation of the 15 most popular Blue Knight arguments, each argument followed by a thorough dissection thereof.

#1: Teenagers only become sexually mature after completing puberty around 16.

This is a wholly metaphysical proposition; a statement of belief. The Blue Knight starts out from the premise that a “completion of puberty” is a prerequisite for this nebulous state known as “sexual maturity,” then makes the circular argument that, because a 13-year-old has not yet completed puberty, he or she are thus sexually immature. “Sexual maturity” is an altogether arbitrary concept, and there isn’t any way to measure it or test it.

The Blue Knight makes it seem like he or she has objectively examined the issue and reached the conclusion that the age of “sexual maturity” just so happens to start when puberty is over; but there has not actually been any such objective examination of the issue – it simply has been assumed (axiomatically) that this is the case, and the whole “argument” proceeds from this unproven, arbitrary, and essentially metaphysical assumption.

The Blue Knight argument posits that 1) without “sexual maturity” sex is harmful and as such should be illegal; 2) a full completion of puberty is a prerequisite for “sexual maturity.” You may well give the following counter-argument, accepting — for the sake of discussion — the former premise, while rejecting the latter, and say thus: “children become sexually mature after completing adrenarche around the age of 9.”

Fundamentally, however, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that a “sexually immature” person is necessarily harmed (or victimized) by sexual relations merely due to being, according to whatever arbitrary definitions one uses, a “sexually immature” person. I suspect that, as a matter of fact, “sexually immature” people often enjoy sex and benefit from it even more than the so-called “sexually mature” folks. And again, the very distinction between “mature” and “immature” is altogether metaphysical in this regard, like the distinction between “pure” and “impure” or “holy” and “unholy.” It is hocus pocus; theology not-so-cleverly disguised as biology.

According to Blue Knight “morality,” an extremely fertile 15-year-old female should be prevented from sex (because “sexually immature”), while a 55-year-old female who has no ovaries left should be free do get fucked however she likes. It is very clear that such a “morality” is really an anti-morality; it is against what is biologically natural, it is against human nature specifically, it is degenerate, and it is detrimental to the interests of civilization and the TFR.

#2: The Age of Consent protects young people from doing things (sex) which they don’t really want to do.

I have seen no evidence that young people “do not really want” to have sex. On the contrary, I have seen, and keep seeing, that young people greatly desire to engage in sexual activities. That is why they engage in them. If 11-year-old Lucy is a horny little slut who enjoys giving blowjobs to all the boys in the neighborhood (many such cases), the Age of Consent does not protect her from something which she is reluctant about doing; it prevents her — by deterring men from approaching her — from doing something which she does in fact desire to do.

The Age of Consent is simply not needed. Think for a moment about young people. Do you not realize that they are just as eccentric, and can be just as wild, as older people? Why is it that when a 19-year-old chick randomly decides to have an orgy with 3 classmates after school, that is okay; but when a 12-year-old chick likewise randomly decides to do just that, oh noes, she is a “victim” of a horrible crime? We accept that each person is unique, independently of age; and we realize that there are children –not to mention young adults — who are very much into X while others are very much into Y. Why, then, should it be so “shocking” when it turns out that some children, and plenty of young teenagers, are very much into sex? Being interested in sex is arguably one of the most natural things there are, on par with being interested in food; certainly it is more natural than being interested in physics and chemistry and mathematics, right? If we accept the existence of child prodigies, children who are naturally driven to pursue all kinds of weird and special callings, why can’t we accept that there are indeed lots of children who pursue the very natural thing which is called “sex”?

Young teenagers have extremely high sex-drives, and the idea that they “do not really want sex” is contradicted every single moment. This is all the more remarkable given that we are living in a puritanical, prudish, sex-hostile, joy-killing, pedo-hysterical, infantilizing society; yet teenagers manage to overcome this intense anti-natural social programming, and do what nature commands them to do. “Child innocence” is a self-perpetuating myth, which society shoves down the throats of everyone all the time since age 0, and then uses this self-perpetuating myth which has been forcefully injected into society’s bloodstream to argue that “oh gee, young people just don’t really want to have sex.”

The entire entertainment establishment is concomitantly brainwashing children to remain in a state of arrested development aka infantilization, while conditioning the consumers of this “entertainment” to only find old women attractive. That’s one reason why I believe that we must create Male Sexualist aesthetics – we must reverse the brainwashing done to us by the entertainment complex. The television box is deliberately hiding from you the beauty and the passion of young teenage women, and is actively engineering your mind to only find older women attractive. And yet, despite there being a conspiracy by the entire society to stifle young sexuality, young sexuality lives on and thrives. Well, not really “thrives” — young sex is in decline, which conservative total dipshits blame on pornography rather than pointing the finger at themselves for propagating a climate that is extremely hostile to young sexuality — but it still goes on, to the consternation of all Puritans and Feminists everywhere.

Blue Knights claim that young teenagers are “peer-pressured into sex.” This assumes that your average teenager is asexual or close to being asexual, and thus would only engage in sexual activities if manipulated into it by his or her environment. The reality, meanwhile, is that those 12-year-old sluts who have orgies after school time (or during school time) are often as horny as a 16-year-old male. They are not being pressured into sex – they are being sexually restrained by a society that is terrified of young sexuality.

#3: Young people who have sex grow up to regret it.

First of all, when the whole of society is determined to portray young sex as a horrid thing, it is no wonder that people — especially women, who possess a herd mentality — arrive at the conclusion that they’ve been harmed by it. If young sexuality were presented in a positive light by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, people would be more inclined to remember it fondly than regretfully.

The second thing is that it doesn’t even matter. People feel regret about doing all kinds of things – so what? Does that mean that for each and every case of such “regret,” society needs to go on a witch-hunt for “victimizers” in order to inflict punishments upon them? It’s time to grow the fuck up and accept the fact that people sometimes do things which later on they regret doing, and that this is an integral part of life, and that the state has no business protecting the civilians from “bad feelings.” That’s literally what this Blue Knight argument boils down to – “the state should punish men because women experience negative feelings due to their own behavior.” No, women should learn to deal with their bad fee-fees without demanding the state to find “abusers” to penalize. We are living in a totalitarian emotocracy (rule by emotions) and I’m sick of it.

Also: what is the difference between feeling regret about fucking at 13 and feeling regret about fucking at 17? Women generally feel bad about promiscuous sex (hence the phenomenon of “regret rape” false accusations), and they feel it at the age of 21 as much as at the age of 11; actually, older women may be even more regretful than young ones about sexual activity, because they’v been longer exposed to Puritan-Feminist brainwashing, and because their biological clock ticks much faster. So, according to the victimization-based morality of Blue Knights, men who sleep with 23-year-olds should also be punished. Again, the Blue Knights want men imprisoned solely due to some vague negative fee-fees felt by some women. This is emotocracy in action. No wonder that testosterone and sperm counts are in sharp decline – society is ruled by catladies, and is structured according to catlady morality.

The state simply should not protect people from the consequences of their own behavior – and here “protect” means “punish men,” and “consequences” means “vague negative fee-fees.” Our society is severely infantilized by the victimization-based morality, and infantilization is degenerate.

#4: Young sexual activity is correlated with many bad things.

That may or may not be so, but what are the implications? Generally, people who are natural risk-takers will do all kinds of things, some of which may be positive, others negative, and still others just neutral. The conservadaddy making the “correlated with bad things” argument implies that punishing men (and women) for young sex would somehow reduce those negative things supposedly correlated with young sex. That, of course, is bullshit. If a risk-taking 12-year-old decides to have an orgy with her classmates, she will remain just as much of a risk-taker whether or not her classmates or other people are punished. Depriving her of the opportunity to take “sexual risks” won’t diminish whatever other risk-taking behaviors she is prone to.

The thing about Blue Knight arguments is that they aren’t arguments at all. There is no logic in stating “young sex is correlated with X, and X is bad” and then using that to support the criminalization of young sex. This is the same logic used by pedagogues to justify pedagoguery, only in reverse: the pedagogues argue that education is correlated with intelligence (as measured by IQ tests), then use that claim to imply that education makes people smarter, and therefore everyone should undergo education. This is a wholly fallacious argument. At the risk of sounding like a spergtastic redditor goon – correlation does not imply causation. The Blue Knight argument is not an argument at all. It’s plainly illogical.

By the way, I’d say that there are plenty of negative things correlated with young sexlessness – such as growing up to be a school shooter, for instance. You’ll never hear Blue Knights discussing that.

#5: Some Statutory Rape legislation allows teenagers to have sex among themselves, and only prohibits older people from predating upon them.

This argument typifies what I call the “victimization-based morality” aka “victimology.” The people making it assume — against all the available evidence — that within any relationship between a young person and an old person, the former is necessarily victimized by the latter.

The individuals making this argument (usually you’ll hear it from women) will often tell you that it is “creepy” for older men to be interested in young women. They will pretend that young women are exclusively attracted to young men, when in reality they are attracted to men of all ages – to men as old as their father as well as to their classmates. My own life experience confirms this, as I personally, in-real-life, know of women who fucked significantly older men when they were aged 14-15. It was all passionate and voluntary and enthusiastic, believe me. And the many accounts you can find on the internet leave no doubt that it’s common for young women, pubescent and even prepubescent, to be sexually attracted to significantly older men.

It is important to stress the point that the women themselves pursue and desire those sexual relationships, because the Blue Knights have created the false impression that the entire argument for abolishing the AOC rests on our attraction to young women, an attraction which according to the Blue Knights is completely unreciprocated; whereas in reality, it is incredibly common for young women to initiate sexual relationships with men as old as their father. It takes two to tango – and the tango is quite lively indeed. Given the sexual dynamics elucidated by Heartiste, wherein women are sexually attracted to “Alphas,” it makes perfect sense that young women would be sexually attracted to older men even more-so than they are sexually attracted to their peers, since older men possess a higher social status than young ones, relatively speaking. Again, life experience confirms this.

Thus, there is no sense in punishing old men who fuck young women, unless, that is, one embraces the whole “taken advantage of” argument, an argument which relies on a denial of the biological and empirical reality on the ground, and simply defines (as an axiom) all relationships in which there is a “power imbalance” as “exploitative.” That is, there is no evidence that any “exploitation” is taking place in such relationships, and Blue Knights assume its existence because they refuse to believe that young women can be horny for older men.

Also, the Blue Knights will bring up argument #1 to “substantiate” argument #5, and argue that due to the “sexual immaturity” of the younger party, the older party must be forbidden from being in a sexual relationship with it altogether – because otherwise there may be “exploitation.” Again, the moment you realize that a 12-year-old female can be as horny as a 16-year-old male (who are, needless to say, extremely horny), the idea that the slut is prone to be “sexually exploited” by a sexual relationship with a man who is statistically likely to be high-status (and thus naturally sexually attractive to her) become absurd. And as we’ve seen, the whole “sexually immature” line is ridiculous – it has never been shown that maturity, for whatever it’s even worth, is reached at 16. In saner, de-infantilized times, 12-year-olds were considered to be mature, were treated as such, and evidently were mature. Hence my saying: “child (and teen) innocence is a self-perpetuating myth.”

#6: You only support abolishing the AOC because you’re a pervert.

A common ad hominem. Now, it is expected that possession of a naturally high sex-drive would be correlated with sexual realism (i.e. being woke about the reality of sex), because a high sex-drive individual would be much likelier than a low sex-drive individual to spend hours upon hours thinking about the subject of sex in its various and manifold aspects. But that only goes to prove that it is us, the “perverts,” who were right all along about sex – and not the catladies and the asexuals who haven’t ever thought about sex in realistic terms because they never had any incentive to do so. Our “bias” is a strength, not a weakness.

There really isn’t anything else to add here. When they accuse you of being a pervert, just agree & amplify humorously: “oh yeah, I jerk off 8 times each and every morning before getting out of bed – problem, puritan?”

#7: You only support abolishing the AOC because you are unattractive and trying to broaden your options.

Also known as “projection.” Well, actually, there also are men who make this argument and not just dried-out wrinkly femihags, so let’s address it as if a man said it. Again, this is an ad hominem that presupposes that your motivation to engage in sexual politics of the Male Sexualist variety is merely your desire to improve your personal situation in life. Now, even if it were true, that 1) wouldn’t matter, because what matters is the arguments made and not the ostensible motivation behind them; 2) there is nothing essentially wrong with trying to improve one’s situation in life – and “there are no rules in war and love.”

By the way, abolishing the AOC, by itself, is not going to get all of the incels laid over-night. There are other measures that must and will be taken to ensure sexual contentment for all of society. Abolishing the AOC is a crucial part of the program, but it’s not the single purpose of Male Sexualism, in my view. What I personally would like to see in society is maximal sexual satisfaction for everyone. There are many ways to try reaching that point.

Anyway, the point is that “you are motivated by a desire to increase your options” is not even true regarding most of the prominent Male Sexualists. Presumably. I won’t speak for anyone else, but I’m married, and very satisfied with my great wife.

14376_7
Big Beautiful Women are not for everyone, but I’m cool with it. In this scene from the Israeli film “Tikkun,” my wife — who is an actress — plays a prostitute. Sorry, Nathan Larson, I’m not sending you her nudes; this one should suffice.
As a matter of fact, as I wrote in one of the last posts on DAF, my own kind of activism would not be mentally possible for me if I were not sexually satisfied. I’m not driven by a personal sexual frustration; on the contrary, as I keep saying, what drives me is essentially a spiritual impulse, which has awoken to the extent it has as a result of getting laid.

#8: If you support the abolition of the AOC, it’s because you’re a libertine who believes in “everything goes.”

Some Male Sexualists are, unmistakably, libertines – and proud if it. However, others are faithful Muslims. The notion that opposition to the AOC must necessarily be tied to libertinism is nonsense. Look at traditional European societies 350-300 years ago – almost none had an AOC at all, yet they were hardly “libertines.”

This Blue Knight line is somewhat related to the “LGBTP” meme – they think that we are Progressives trying to advocate for pedophilia as part of a Progressive worldview. I think that it’s safe to say that no one in Male Sexualism belongs to the Progressive camp, which is the camp where Feminists and SJWs reside. That said, some versions of libertinism (sexual libertarianism?) aren’t so bad, anyway. As TheAntifeminist said in a comment at Holocaust21:

[M]y utopia as a male sexualist would be somewhere like 1970’s Sweden or Holland.

This is a legitimate view within the movement.

#9: If young people are allowed to have sex, their innocence will be ruined; sex is exclusively for adults.

Here we see the Enlightenment-spawned Romantic idealization of “childhood” as a period that, due to whatever values one attaches to it, must be preserved against encroachment and incursion from the “fallen world of adults.” This is the Romantic basis of modern-day infantilism.

It used to be understood that the purpose of “childhood” is growing up into adulthood. The so-callef ‘child’ should be made into an adult, should be given adult tasks, adult responsibilities, and — all the sooner — adult rights. Today, society does just the opposite, and infantilizes people with a historically unparalleled intensity. That’s the result of elevating “childhood” into an ideal form. No wonder that now, it’s not just teenagers who are called “children,” but people in their 20s. That’s the process of infantilization which society goes through.

As usual, conservative dipshits, addicted to their own Romantic conceptions, claim that “actually, children are not nearly infantile enough these days.” They don’t see the pervasive “kid culture” that has completely zombified kids into being basically a bunch of drooling retards; no, what the prudish-types care about is “MOAR INNOCENCE,” as usual.

Fact is, kids today are not shown anything about the real world; a whole culture of idiocy, blindness, silliness, and clownishness has been erected like walls all around them. It is the culture of the TV channels for kids, the culture of Toy-Shops, the culture of child-oriented video games. Muh “birds and bees.”

Look, I get the temptation to indulge in infantilism. In fact, I’m probably a hypocrite, because I haven’t yet begun doing anything to de-infantilize my own 19-month-old son. He, like most toddlers, also watches the stupid TV shows and has all of these damn toys all over the place. It’s not easy resisting the ways of the system. But the real problem is that society is not structured in a way that allows children to be de-infantilized. When people only get a job at 18 or at 21 or they are NEETs, and there is an age-ist Prussian School System that is mandatory and which brainwashes its prisoners to believe that “school is good,” and Feminist careerism is pushed on all potential mothers by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, it’s no wonder that people are very immature nowadays. That only goes to show how radically modern society must be transformed, in my opinion.

To get back on point: “childhood” and “adulthood” are both fictional concepts. These may be useful fictions, but they are still fictions. The telos of childhood is adulthood. It’s a transitional state, and if we must choose an arbitrary age when childhood should be officially and finally over, that age should be 9. That is, if we discover that 10-year-olds behave in an infantile manner nowadays, it’s because their parents — and, crucially, society at large — have not properly de-infantilized them. It’s a wholly artificial state of affairs, rooted in Romantic delusions.

Young people should have sex, because young people should experience real life in order to become functional adults; and an integral part of real life is — and should be — the sex life. Far from constituting a “problem” for young people, sexual intercourse is one effective way for getting young people to see the broader picture of reality. Deprived of sex, ‘kids’ grow up with warped and unrealistic notions about reality, and suffer dysfunction as adults. They don’t get to learn what’s important and what’s unimportant in life when they should learn it – young. Getting laid gives you a mentally clear vision of priorities in life, gives you a clarity of mind which allows you to deeply reflect on what’s actually going on in the world. Sex is necessary for young people, whose one and only task is to — repeat after me — become adults. Sex is a fundamental part of a fulfilled adult life.

#10: Young sex leaves young people traumatized.

No, it doesn’t. The ‘trauma’ stems entirely from being repeatedly and incessantly told by Blue Knights (Puritans, Feminists, Conservadaddies, Catladies, etc.) that a horrible crime has been committed against you by a wicked individual, that you have been “taken advantage of,” “deprived of innocence,” “ruined forever,” “sexually exploited,” “abused,” and the rest of the victimological jargon. The sex itself and the relationship itself feel good, and are indeed good biologically and psychologically; they bring fulfillment to one’s life and a satisfaction for one’s fresh and burning biological needs. The whole “trauma,” such as it is, is inflicted by society on the younger party, due to society’s strict adherence to a victimization-based morality.

That’s why I call for a Moral Revolution. This is not a troll. As long as people adhere to a victimization-based morality that sees “power imbalances” as inherently and fundamentally victimizing, people won’t be able to think logically about young sexuality. The current prevailing system of social morality must be replaced with a new one. Once that is achieved, all of this “trauma” — which is inflicted by the Blue Knights on horny young people — will dissipate and evaporate altogether

Young people greatly enjoy sex, and will go to great lengths to achieve it, overcoming the very many mechanisms of sexual oppression established by Blue Knights.

#11: Young people don’t know what’s good for them, and therefore need to be protected from risky situations.

If young people don’t know what’s good for them, it’s because society itself has successfully destroyed their ability to know what’s good for them. I mean, by the age of 10, a person should have a basic idea about what life is all about. If that’s not so for most or all people, something is deeply rotten in society.

And the reason for this indeed being the modern state of affairs is exactly because the protectiveness of parents, combined with wholesale cultural infantilization, has rendered young people incapable of independent thought. Thus, instead of “MOAR PROTECTION,” young people need infinitely less of it – so that they will learn to deal with reality.

And at any rate, sex is not as risky as the Blue Knights claim it is. They scare people about STDs, but then the solutions to that problem are well-known, and are completely independent of age – if instructed properly, and possessing a responsible personality, a 10-year-old can behave just as carefully — if not much more carefully — than many 40-year-olds.

Then there is the issue of pregnancy. First of all, what I wrote in the above paragraph about responsiblity applies here as well – the pregnancy-avoidance methods are well known. Secondly however, there’s a great differences in here: pregnancy is not a disease. It’s not a bad thing, but a good thing. I support young pregnancy and young parenthood. That is the primary “risk” which Blue Knight scare-mongers warn about, and I don’t see it as a risk at all. Instead of being protected from reproduction, people need to be instructed about how to reproduce. I once wrote, trollishly as usual, that if there should be any schools at all, then the “homework” of young females should be getting impregnated. The essence beneath the statement is on-point: pregnancy is good, because reproduction is good; fertility is good, while sterility is bad.

So, in my view, young people should not be protected from the “risk” of pregnancy. They should be instructed about it, made to comprehend the how’s and why’s of it, and then allowed to use their mind-faculties to figure-out what should or should not be done. That’s the gist of any de-infantilization program.

#12: Young people don’t desire to have sex.

Young people do, as a matter of actual fact, very much desire to have sex; much more-so, even, than many old people.

#13: If the AOC is abolished, parents will no longer be able to control their children.

What is the purpose — the very raison d’etre — of parental control over children? To turn children into functional adults, so as to allow them to form families and continue the bloodline. This cannot be achieved by hindering the ability of children (or “children”) to engage in the one thing that marks the arrival of maturity – sexual activity. Sexual activity is the thing that most unequivocally transforms an un-developed person into a developed person. Since the purpose of parenthood is the creation of adults, parenthood should serve to (at the very least) give-way in face of the natural maturation of children, rather than artificially prolonging “childhood” in order to extend the period of parental control. Parental control is only good insofar as it allows parents to facilitate the de-infantilization of their children; when, as in our deplorable times, parental control is used to exacerbate the infantilization of children, it is in the interest of society to tell parents to fuck off.

Since parents these days abuse their parental power and authority by artificially prolonging the infantilization of their own children, the abolition of the anti-natural AOC is exactly a thing that is needed in order to put parental control in check. The power of parents vis-a-vis their children must be drastically reduced when the child reaches the age of 8. That’s usually the age when sex, reproduction, and marriage all become relevant. If you want to argue that 8 is still too young, perhaps (maybe) we can compromise on 10. Point is, between 8 and 10, parental power should be dramatically restricted.

As a 23-year-old father, I can tell you that parents and family in general continue to significantly shape your life long after you cease being under “parental control.” An abolition of the AOC won’t result in all teenagers running away from home never to be seen again. But it will, God willing, result in the establishment of many new young households. That is something that we should strive for – getting teenagers to form families. That is the meaning of creating adults.

#14: Without an AOC, there will be grey-zone situations of child prostitution.

Child prostitution should be legal.

#15: Abolishing the AOC will increase pre-marital sex, which is a bad thing.

First of all, I couldn’t care less about whether or not sex is “pre-marital.” I had fucked my wife and impregnated her before we were married; so what? What matters is the bottom line: the creation of a patriarchal and stable household.

The second thing is, people today marry extremely late, and many forgo marriage altogether. This is related to the war against young sexuality: not reproducing when young, people struggle to reproduce when old; and living in sexlessness until the late teens or early twenies (or until later than that), a total sexual dysfunction takes over society, and people find it difficult to form long-lasting relationships at all. Young love shines the brightest, the younger the love, the brighter it shines; couples who start young last longer than those who start old.

Puritanical Blue Knights have brought about the plummeting of the TFR in Western Society. In my view, pre-marital sex should be accepted, as long as everyone involved understands that the purpose of any “romance” is the formation of a household. Early teenage marriage should be encouraged, and if early teenage sexual intercourse facilitates that, so be it – it’s all the better. It is not sex that is harmful to young people; sex is good for them. It is sexlessness that is the central and overarching problem of our times.

In conclusion
Man, that was exhausting, I gotta say. But hopefully, this post will serve as a guide to answering Blue Knight talking points. All of you must remember this: before you can annihilate Blue Knightism, you must mentally internalize what it is that we Male Sexualists believe in. In moments of uncertainty and doubt, consult this post, and you may find the core idea needed for you in order to formulate your own Male Sexualist position about any given issue.

There is a new revolution on the horizon. I don’t know how long I personally have left in this world. Perhaps the intelligence operatives threatening me will decide against killing me, or maybe they’ll slay me this very night. Who knows. What I want you to do is to take the ideas provided on DAF and now on TAF, understand them, and spread them. This is not a cult of personality or a money-making scheme. This is a political movement that has its own ideas, ideas that may initially appear groundbreaking but which in reality may also be primordial, ideas which we hope will be implemented in reality – be it 30, 80, or 360 years from now. At some point in the future, somewhere on the face of our planet, there will be a Male Sexualist country.

If during the next half-decade we manage to bring into the fold both edgy 4channers and 8channers (“meme lords”), and serious, intelligent, competent, affluent, deep-thinking, and strategizing supporters, we will be able within several decades to achieve our political objective.

Felices Pascuas #conspiracy curvaturasvariantes.com

Solving Quintic Equations with radicals from a geometrical point of view.

I think quintic functions could by understood as a rotational fractal formed by four entangled (related, intersected, interacting) functions. In this sense the quintic function or equation appears as a complex function formed by intersection of different parts of the functions related by the same kind of symmetry although different signs.

[...]

image
I bolded in red what would be one of the quintic equations that there are in this picture.

In a first attempt, it could be expressed in this way:
image

In (Z, -+Z1) Z is the Zero point at the center of the circumference, and -+Z1 is the first interval Li measured from the Zero point Z in the -+Z coordinate (the bottom right Z coordinate) in the picture below.

By crossing or intersecting the lines of the different functions in their intersection points we would be performing a subtraction (I think the result should represent a trivial zero in the Riemann Z function).

The Li (in red colour) segment is measured from the center of the circumference (the Zero point) until the center of symmetry of the square 0,50 (Inside of the central square 2).
Lr (in blue colour) is measured from Z until the center of symmetry of the square 0,25 (inside of the central square 1)
Li’ (in gold colour) is measured from Z until the center of symmetry of the square 0,75.

The bolded function in the picture above follows the Li intervals that carry the Li symmetry. The Li intervals converge at the power of 5 with the intervals Lr^7 = 0 Lr^7 = 0 of the Lr (in blue) and Li’ (in gold) functions.

[...]

image

image

Our mathematics can not be static if we try to explain Nature with them.

On the other hand, I think it is very interesting to remark the points of convergence of Lr^7, Li^5, Li'^4 = 0 because I think they would represent the critical zeros on the Riemann Z function. In this sense, the square area formed with the side measured from the Z convergent point (Lr^7, Li^5, Li'^4) until another Z convergent point (Lr^7, -Li^5, -Li'^4) should be a non-prime number.

Felices Pascuas.

12345 #fundie listverse.com

[Posted in an article listing 10 species related to the evolution of hominids]

I'm disgusted how dumb people are. A guy takes an actual progression of primate bones that you can witness changes in and sticks a homo-sapiens skeleton at the end which looks 100% different than any other skeleton in the line up, and you people don't even think to ask a single question? If humans evolved along side of these primates their wouldn't be any of our ancestors near the primates who would have fled away from being hunted by man. Plus old stories of humans claim we had to live underground. If this is true looking for our ancestors in a primate burial ground above ground in the wrong part of the world, is an obvious plight to control knowledge of history. This is why I laugh every time a scientist speaks about Atlantis. So called scientist have been looking for Atlantis, not where documents and legends say, but where Edgar Casey, a psychic, says it should be??? Scientist could have stuck Buzz Light Year at the end of the evolutionary scale and who would question it? Not any of you obviously. I'm so sick of people hiding behind science like a religion when they know 0 about it. Science is not a belief system it is a methodology of proving things false or true. Just because something escapes being proven wrong it does not mean it is true. And the same way if something has proven true so far it doesn't mean it is truth it just means humans don't understand how to test for truth. If they do I would love to see an example. No what science does is it takes situations that it already knows the outcome of and tests it. Einstein had an idea, relativity and he tested it and got results. Does anybody see the hypocrisy in that? Testing things you already know the outcome of? That would be like a scientist testing prayer knowing it won't work, and then rather than telling you prayer don't work they tell you it is proof that god doesn't exist. I'm using this example so you can see how they spin things. Testing for prayer has 0 to do with testing for god yet I have seen countless drooling science worshipers who think this study should get funding. Humans are 100's of thousands of years old and if our ancestors burned their corpses before they discovered mummification good luck sifting through dirt and ash to find the truth. Why do we have to be duped? We don't but everyone wants to buy BS. Why can't any of you realize we don't have the answers and we probably never will? Just think what a different world we would live in if people didn't flock to BS and every con man who says I have the answer? Look at primates and look at the length of their arms? Why are their arms longer that any homo-sapiens? Why are the arms missing or not shown on the evolution chart? Notice how they stick primate heads on human looking bodies on every history special, hmmm, but primates bodies are totally different and again their arms? Somebody really wants to convince you they know it all and they won because your tiny ego amongst other things just wants to pretend its better than everyone else for repeating lies. What do I know I was in science classes at Regis University in the 5th grade and was teaching elementary kids science by the time I was in middle school for a program called SIP. But all you bloggers who think you found a way to trash religion by repeating everything science says with out proof, you my friends are a new religion that will be used for dumbing down the population and new atrocities against your fellow man based on beliefs that have no foundation in reality. Theories.