Similar posts

Holdwater #conspiracy tallarmeniantale.com

I realize fully that the reader must have been awash in the prevailing view that there has been an Armenian “Genocide” during the days of W.W.I’s Ottoman Empire. (Nobody can argue the catastrophe suffered by the Armenians was genocidal in its impact; where the deception lies is that the impact of genocide was felt singularly by the Armenians and not by all of Anatolia's citizens, and the assertion [which is what "genocide" basically means] is that the destruction took place as a policy of state.) After all, Turkey has never been seriously interested in explaining what truly occurred until the early-to-mid 1980s, and Armenians and other Turk haters have had the field wide open to tell their side of the story, virtually unopposed. The Turks made the very mature decision to not dwell on the tragic events of the period... not to sweep crimes under the rug, but to look forward and avoid the destructive forces of hatred.

(...)

Therefore, the site targets the Western reader who is interested in getting to the bottom of what really took place. I can understand the Westerner is not going to trust Turkish sources, as the word of an accused criminal will always be held suspect. Save for commentaries and the occasional Turkish source, an effort has been made for the information in this site to come from impartial Westerners. As opposed to the handful of web sites that present the Turkish viewpoint (that I’ve seen), this one also presents various Armenian sources.

As a matter of fact, this site is a unique one. I combed through Armenian sites, of which there happen to be no end (in fact, Armenians are so obsessed with the genocide issue, they have constructed pseudo- "generic genocide" sites along with pseudo-"Turkish" sites, which is pretty immoral; meanwhile, there are extremely few Turkish "genocide" sites put up by individuals, because the Armenian "Genocide" is simply not a driving force of life)... and I was hungry for the best facts the Armenians were ready to throw out. Unfortunately, that's what many of these "facts" deserved... to be thrown out. Aside from the incredibly deceptive garbage long recognized as forgeries and falsifications (such as the Talat Pasha telegrams) that many of these sites still unethically present as genuine, the best defense the Armenians offer are charges of Turkish "lies," "propaganda," "revisionism," and the ever popular "The Turkish government says..."

I did not hide a thing. The more incriminating the "evidence," the more I chose to highlight it on this site. Anything I couldn't analyze with the real facts or just plain common sense and logic, you will see I've been man enough to admit.

The reason? If the Armenian "Genocide" were to be proven as a genuine fact tomorrow, it wouldn't make a bit of difference to me. Genocide is a terrible crime, and I wouldn't be proud about the episode... even though the event took place under a Turkish government the current one worked to overthrow. What am I going to do, allow this historic episode from a century ago bend me out of shape, as with some Germans who are still struggling with guilt... and by the same token, should I also not be able to live with myself for what Americans did to the Indians? It would also be a great help for me to know the Armenians violently provoked the events (unlike the Jews of WWII), by committing the ultimate treason.

Turks choose to live in the present, and Armenians choose to live in the past; the Armenian "militia" has made the "genocide" a cause for their existence. Their obsession and deep pockets allow them a clear upper hand in the West, regarding the information war. I maintain an open mind... and when all is said and done, I really don't know if there was a state-sponsored extermination policy by the Ottoman government. (Although after preparing this site and learning all I have, I'm convinced more than ever there wasn't.) And anybody who says they know for a fact the genocide occurred are either deluding themselves, or hoping to delude others. All we can go by are the cold, hard, reliable facts...and the only factors that guide me are truth, honor and integrity.

By the same token, Armenians have been allowed to get away with murder (which can actually be taken literally) in the presentation of their story, and it is very frustrating to see lazy-thinking Westerners blindly accepting their version of events. I will at times not hide my emotions, and consequently talk to you on a human level at this site, and not in a cold, clinical and scholarly way. In fact, those times when I'm not outraged by the degree of deception on the part of the Armenians, I believe the examination of this subject matter calls for some humor now and then... since it's unbelievable in this day and age Westerners still choose to overlook the volumes of impartial evidence against the genocide argument. (Admittedly, this is a kind of "bitter" humor, but the situation is so absurd, it's kind of funny.)

The main reason for why Westerners have been unable to shake their deeply-ingrained belief systems, of course, is that there are very few outlets that present the contrary, Turkish view. Even many professors think twice about going against the Armenian grain, as they have learned during this last quarter-century (or so) how harmful Armenian fanaticism can prove to be to their reputations, or worse.

While Turks will no doubt make use of the information presented here and will enjoy the impartial facts and figures which serve to absolve them (in a "one-stop shopping" kind of a place, which can be very useful), this site was not prepared with Turks in mind. I have put myself in the shoes of the non-Turk. This was easy for me to do, as I was born and raised in the United States, and have had little contact with Turkish people. (The reason for that is there have been few Turks. American immigration policy only allowed for the cream of Turks to enter the country... the scientists, doctors and other skilled professionals... until around perhaps a generation or so ago, when the “ordinary Turks” were allowed to trickle in. Living in New York City, by the way, my best friends — not just regular friends — in different phases of life have been Greeks. At least at one time there were more Greeks living in NYC than in Athens, so it's not very hard to cross paths with a Greek.)

I can only hope Armenians and Greeks who come by will consider the material here with an open mind... but I know that unlike Turks — who are generally raised to look upon these peoples (with whom they have shared a common history for so long) as their brothers and sisters — too many Armenians and Greeks are raised with hatred for the Turks. Coming across information that counters their deeply ingrained belief systems often proves too rattling, and such information will likely be dismissed as lies... no matter how impartial and sensible the information sounds. Not all Armenians and Greeks are like this, of course; such is the danger of generalizing. However, there is a definite pattern with the great majority of them that cannot be ignored.

The difficulty in presenting impartial Western sources is such: Turks are not just unpopular with the Orthodox peoples; since the Crusades, the “infidel” Turks have been regarded as the enemies of the West. (And it is precisely this historic Christian-Moslem animosity that Armenians and Greeks have learned to exploit, in selling their sob stories to the sympathetic West.) The average Westerner has grown with a negative impression, regarding Turkey. Therefore, few Westerners are going to make it their business to learn about a people they have come to regard as historical villains... and fewer are going to write books and articles in defense of the Turks. (Turkish people themselves could not defend themselves in the West... until the last half-century, few Turks had been living in the West, and those that were Western residents had other things on their minds besides presenting the Turkish viewpoint... assuming they possessed the language skills of their new countries to effectively do so.)

All the more reason to keep in mind the Western sources in favor of the Turks (that are comparatively much more difficult to come by than the Western sources in favor of Armenians and Greeks) can be trusted. The reason? Those Westerners who spoke/speak for our Orthodox friends often had/have their own prejudices and agendas... and very few were/are impartial. However, the Westerners who speak for the Turks grew up like any other Westerner, where the image of the Turks has almost always been negative. In their delirium to discredit anything that comes across as "Pro-Turkish," Armenians and bedfellows are known to make unsubstantiated charges that these people must be getting paid by the "sinister" Turkish government, as if the Turkish government has so much money to burn... but if you don't buy into this nonsense, you can easily conclude the only motivating force for those who speak for the Turks is respect for the Truth.

If you think this logic makes sense, and realize there really isn't a reason for a typically prejudiced, anti-Turkish Westerner to speak well of the Turks except for reasons of integrity, then... generally speaking... regarding information that comes from a "Pro-Turk" Westerner, please keep in mind the following scientific formula : Pro-Turk = Pro-Truth.

Unknown author #fundie en.minghui.org

I am a 7-year-old practitioner. Since I was 5, I have studied Zhuan Falun every day.

Each time when I finish reading the entire book, I could feel a significant change both physically and mentally. I really feel that Master is looking after me all the time.

Now, I am able to join the group Fa study and sharing, and to be involved in projects for saving people.

This month, when I finished another round of reading Zhuan Falun, Master opened my third eye for me. Whether my eye is open or not, I can clearly see the scenes that occur in other dimensions when Dafa practitioners study the Fa and send forth righteous thoughts.

I told everyone, and we decided to write an article to share this because of Master's new article: “A Reminder,” and the Dafa Association's “Strengthen Sending Righteous Thoughts.”

What I see in other dimensions is limited, due to my cultivation level. This article is only for sharing. Fellow practitioners should regard the Fa principles as the sole standard to follow.

The book Zhuan Falun is really a treasure. When I read it, I can see various colors and glitter – the same as Master describes.

When I read the Fa, I see lotus flowers blooming on my lips. Many pink lotus flowers gradually grow bigger and bigger, descend on the book and then fade out.

Sometimes, I see those pink lotus flowers fly to the characters with Master’s image sitting in the lotus position. Master has blue hair and is very sacred.

The lotus flowers then form to become Master’s lotus seat; the process is extremely wondrous.

But, I also notice that when mistakes occur in Fa study, such as omitting a character, mispronouncing a word, or reading a wrong line, the lotus flowers from my lips turn grey and disappear quickly.

What surprises me the most is when I am in a poor state of mind, or am not paying enough attention, the lotus flowers show a black color, which is very ugly; I feel very sad about it.

Dafa practitioners cannot be perfunctory or not pay attention when it comes to Fa study. We must read each character in the book accurately and sincerely.

If we always produce grey or black lotus flowers, how much harm will we bring to ourselves and the beings around us?

One evening, my mother asked me to listen to Master’s Fa teaching, and I readily promised. As soon as my promise came out, I saw some golden lines appearing in the room.

Then I sat on the bed with my eyes shut, and I suddenly saw, from my third eye, a huge image of Master teaching the Fa while sitting on a lotus seat.

The golden lines were actually rolling up and down under the lotus seat. Numerous divine beings were sitting on top of their own thick round mats in the lotus posture to listen to Master’s Fa teaching.

They piously formed numerous layers around Master. Not far from Master, there was a gigantic golden palace, of which the magnificence was beyond anything that you could believe.

I told my mother what I had seen, which cheered her up very much. She said that Master had shown me the scene of Fa-study in other dimensions.

We should respect Master and the Fa more. My mother also reminded me not to be elated, and then she played a Fa teaching video.

At that moment, with my eyes open, I saw numerous Buddhas, Daos, Bodhisattvas and fairies fly into our room in an instant.

Layers upon layers of them were sitting in the lotus posture, and all the spaces in the room were taken. When Master’s Fa teaching started, each of these divine beings had Zhuan Falun in their hands and read carefully.

Since then, whenever I read the Fa on my own or listen to Master’s Fa teaching with other practitioners, I can see those divine beings every time.

As long as Dafa practitioners start Fa study, numerous divine beings arrived at the venue immediately and occupied all the spaces.

Master showed me that Dafa practitioners’ Fa-study is a very sacred event, for which we must show due respect. But in Fa-study, sometimes, I didn’t sit with a correct posture, fidgeted, or excused myself to drink water or go to the toilet.

I am aware that I was terribly wrong. Now seeing that every day I studied Fa with many divine beings in other dimensions, I really felt very sacred.

I hope my fellow practitioners can show due respect to Master and the Fa, and attach importance to the precious daily opportunity to study Fa!

Sending forth righteous thoughts is one of the three things that Master requires of us. I often see incorrect postures for sending forth righteous thoughts when family members are in a poor state of mind.

I also often cannot complete the whole process and end up going out to play.

Recently, Master allowed me to see the scenes in other dimensions of sending forth righteous thoughts, which was really a battle between good and evil!

At the four set times each day, when practitioners started to conjoin the hands to cleanse themselves, the evil rotten demons and dark minions, together with the Communist evil specter, appeared immediately.

They really did what Master described, lining up in position and ranks, and stomping. Sometimes, I could even hear the evil's shrill.

I was startled to find that when I was sending forth righteous thoughts in my mother's room, the evil jumped out of her working computer. The first two entities started to stomp, and other evil followers gathered together quickly.

Groups upon groups of evil beings held the five-star, red communist specter flags and shouted, “Left, right, left!” They lined up and jumped up fiercely, with various weapons in their hands, like swords, spears, red-tasseled spears and pistols.

Master set up a protective golden dome for each Dafa practitioner so that the evil couldn’t harm them.

The Gong sent forth by Dafa practitioners formed numerous light balls shooting at the evil. As soon as the evil touched the light balls, they disintegrated in the blink of an eye.

I told everyone what I had seen and they felt heavy-hearted.

My mother said that as she didn’t pay enough attention to sending righteous thoughts, and so the evil in other dimensions could be so arrogant and able to fight such a large scale battle.

Later, everyone studied Master’s new article “A Reminder” and the Dafa Association’s “Strengthen Sending Righteous Thoughts.”

We were all aware that we must make a radical change in sending righteous thoughts, overcome sluggishness, and assume the responsibility to save sentient beings and eradicate the evil.

After a period of time, Master allowed me to see another type of scene in sending forth righteous thoughts. When we were sending righteous thoughts in the sitting room, I saw the evil jump out of the TV.

This time, the evil was not in the same form as what I saw previously. They were in all various types of cartoon forms.

They jumped out of the TV and ran around the room in a panic.

Dafa practitioners sent powerful Gong forming numerous golden lights, which chased the mutated lives. As soon as the light touched them, they immediately disintegrated.

I was attached to cartoons too much. Though my parents didn't allow me to watch, I was still fixated on it — even watching cartoons at a friend's home.

Now, Master showed me that the cartoon figures were all degenerated lives far away from the Fa and should be targeted by Dafa practitioners’ righteous thoughts.

My parents discussed the issue with me and planned to get rid of all my ordinary books and toys. Dafa practitioners’ attachments provide an opportunity for the evil, which pollutes the energy field and interferes with the three things that we are supposed to do.

I suddenly recalled that Divine Beings were never near to two types of places at our home when practitioners came to study —the computer desk [for my mother's work] and the TV.

After seeing the scene, I realized that computers, TVs, and smart phones are all sources of evil lives.

As long as they are switched on, evil lives will come out and interfere with Dafa practitioners. Those degenerated lives are really filthy things that easily exert a negative influence. Even divine beings in other dimensions try to stay away from them.

Some practitioners, like me, are attached to those degenerated things. Whatever the situation, those degenerated lives interfere with Dafa practitioners’ cultivation too much, even directly affecting Dafa practitioners’ saving sentient beings.

I hope fellow practitioners can learn this lesson and strengthen sending righteous thoughts. Otherwise, when will the evil forces be cleared away?

With such repeated interference, how can we do our best to help Master?

Aysia #fundie acne.org

The same scientists which you so cleverly admire... are now the ones who are apologetically licking Creationist ass, and confessing they were indeed wrong. Also, you and volant didn't answer any of the questions thus posed by Gumby or I - giving only meaningless links which is about as helpful as a broken condom... You merely read a few words out of a well-thumbed and outdated, pro-evolution GCSE textbook and carefully tacked it where you thought it was necessary, and actually thought this was good enough to validate your piss-poor argument.

Ken Ham #fundie answersingenesis.org

During his interview, Nye reportedly said,

That debate started with an offhanded comment I made on Big Think. I said, “If you want to believe the Earth is 6,000 years old, that's fine, but don't make your kids believe it.” And in lots of states, kids are taught that evolution is just one possible theory that explains how life came about, and that creationism is another.

We need these kids to be part of the future. We need them to innovate and change the world. But if you raise a generation of students who don't believe in the most fundamental idea in biology, it's a formula for disaster. This is against our national interest, and if you raise a generation like this, they're victims.

What Bill Nye is saying is that creationists can’t innovate or “change the world.” Well, he is obviously blatantly ignoring the many biblical creationists who can—and do—advance scientific knowledge and innovation every day. During our debate, I even gave him some compelling examples and introduced him to Dr. Raymond Damadian, the inventor of the MRI scanner that has saved millions of lives. Dr. Damadian is a biblical creationist, and he was certainly innovative! I also shared a video clip of Dr. Stuart Burgess, who has invented parts for NASA/ESA spacecraft. Dr. Burgess is also a biblical creationist and an innovative engineer.

So it is completely ridiculous and demonstrably untrue to claim that children and adults who are taught biblical creation won’t be able to innovate or change the world. By the way, our latest scientist to join Answers in Genesis, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, has a PhD in biology from Harvard University.

I’ve asked Bill Nye and other secularists many times if they can name one piece of technology that was developed because of a belief in molecules-to-man evolution. They still haven’t answered this question, and nor will they, because there aren’t any examples! Evolution is completely unrelated to technological innovation. As Dr. Damadian and Dr. Burgess clearly show, you don’t need to be an evolutionist to be an innovator!

And evolution is not “the most fundamental idea in biology,” as Nye says it is. As I pointed out in a blog post earlier this year, evolution is a way of explaining the origin of the universe and life naturalistically (atheistically). It is one framework through which to interpret the observational evidence. And far from being the foundation of biology, evolutionary ideas have done nothing to further our understanding of biology.

warner #fundie bbc.co.uk

>>>'There's nothing amusing about blasphemy '
But at least it's a victimless crime.<<

It might appear so, to you. For those who acknowledge that respect and authority are important, it is a sign of the disintegration of society which leads to anarchy and all manner of evils, including rape, GBH and murder.

The consequences of 'lack of respect' for (the possibility of) the supreme being, leads to wives not respecting husbands, men not respecting leaders, leaders not respecting
ie. complete turmoil

Yaroslav Korobatov #fundie nytlive.nytimes.com

In yet another installment of outrageous news that seems like it should be fake, but is all too real, a popular Russian newspaper — the week before Vladimir Putin signed an amendment decriminalizing domestic violence — ran a column that tells women to be happy about being “smacked around by their husbands.”

The shocking column, titled “From Evil Men Boys Born,” was written by Yaroslav Korobatov and published in the science section of Komsomolskaya Pravda, a longtime tabloid newspaper. Korobatov’s column based its claims on the work of a controversial evolutionary psychologist named Satoshi Kanazawa.

“For years, women who have been smacked around by their husbands have found solace in the rather hypocritical proverb, ‘If he beats you, it means he loves you!’’ However, a new scientific study is giving women with irascible husbands new grounds to be proud of their bruises, insofar as women who are beaten, biologists confirm, have a valuable advantage: They’re more likely to give birth to boys!”

Parts of that incendiary and offensive passage have since been removed from the online version of the column by the paper since it was first published on February 1. A web archive capture of the article as it appeared on the Komsomolskaya Pravda website on the day it was published shows the piece originally contained the “proud of their bruises” language. This Google translation also shows that the language that originally existed in the first published draft of the article translates from Russian to English in the form that it’s widely being reported. The current form of the piece no longer contains that passage and includes a disclaimer, saying, “Some readers will make a ridiculous conclusion: If you want to [sic] baby boy — let’s pummel his wife!” The passage goes on to warn that the paper is “strongly opposed to any kind of battering” because doing so is “immoral.”

But that certainly wasn’t in the original version of the article, which just began making news and stirring up outrage in Western media late Wednesday into Thursday. According to The Independent, Korobatov drew his conclusions from two studies published by Kanazawa: “Violent men have more sons” and “Why do some battered women stay?” Korobatov also relied on some outdated thinking that suggests parents should value having a boy over welcoming a baby girl to bolster his point.

fschmidt #dunning-kruger reddit.com

For many years I had a fantasy about forming a sane community. The fantasy was to gather the sane remnant from this insane world and form a community for reasonable people. This was partly inspired by the concept of the remnant of the Israelites in the Old Testament after the fall of Israel and Judah. But this idea has a fatal flaw. There is no remnant. Humanity has become pure trash, there are no reasonable people left.

The Old Testament talks about such a time in the story of Noah. Clearly most of humanity needs to be wiped out. We have another example of this in the fall of Rome. If you read original source material from decaying Rome, you will see that these people were complete morons at a similar level to the morons of today. In The Antony Option I described the "good" people as those covered in Early Christian Lives who left Roman society to live in the desert. But from this book it is clear that these people were also complete morons. They had no interest in intelligence or quality or anything of real value. They just wanted to get close to God and hoped that this would give them supernatural powers. Eventually monasteries formed and some people moved near them. This had a slight beneficial effect in removing these people from dysgenic Roman culture. But the reality is that it took 1000 years and huge population drops before these people could escape the idiocracy caused by the decay of Rome.

I see no significant difference between the decay of Rome and the decay of modern culture other than that modern culture is almost universal. When Rome fell and Europe became a pure idiocracy, at least the Arabs, guided by Islam, were able to produce a civilized culture. But the fall of modern culture is producing a worldwide idiocracy that would take at least another 1000 years to escape from, if ever.

I view the traditional Anabaptists as the best group today. But they are not good enough. Besides the obvious problem of their pacifism, they are not eugenic enough to produce real intelligence. But even with these faults, it would impossible to form anything like traditional Anabaptist communities from any other population today. The conservative Mennonite groups were fully formed by the end of the 1950s, a time before today's idiocracy. Today people are just too stupid and undisciplined to form any kind of real community. This applies to all people of all races and all religions, all are just worthless.

Even trying to form any kind of informal group around some sense of quality is hopeless. My /r/GoodSoftware was an attempt to do this for good software, and it clearly failed. No one cares about quality in today's decayed idiocracy.

Having described the current bleak situation, I will propose a solution. The solution must be intrinsically eugenic since the best that one can hope for is to produce reasonable people in another 200 years. The current population must essentially be viewed as subhuman mammals with the potential to once again evolve into full humans. So the question is how can one breed such mammals in a positive way.

While humans have lost all intelligence and all sense of quality, there still remains a range in human reproductive strategy based on r/K selection. So what needs to be done is to form an informal community of human K-strategists where people can cooperate in raising their children. Such a community would naturally select strongly for K-strategy genes. When modern culture inevitably collapses and strong survival pressure reasserts itself, this survival pressure applied to a K-selected community would produce rapid evolutionary advancement.

Now I will describe how to do this. I would have an informal organization called something like "raising good children". It is critical that this organization have no rules and membership. This prevents it from being hijacked and taken in another direction. Anyone who wants to participate can, but the nature of such a group would only appeal to K-strategists. We would focus on things like improving education and health of children in the group, and in passing the religion of the parents to the children.

Who would I target for such a group. The obvious choice is Muslims. While Muslims are generally stupid (like everyone else) and undisciplined, at least they understand that modern culture is a threat to their children. And they understand that the modern world is a mess. They are too lazy to do much to fix this, but they would support in principle something that could improve the situation for their children. What I am describing here is based on my experience at my local mosque.

But there still remains a problem of motivation. The group should be willing to take real action of at least a basic kind to actually produce better children. The goal is to first improve the culture by actually raising better children, and then wait for selection pressure to improve the genetics. This should mean that each generation should be better than the one that came before it, reversing the current trend. So for example, parents should get rid of their televisions. But Muslims are extremely unmotivated to take action of any kind.

My solution to this is to get Muslims to visit conservative Mennonite churches. Most Muslims view things as basically hopeless, and a visit to a Mennonite church should cure this. Again I know this from experience, from taking the leader of my local mosque a Mennonite church. He was very impressed and was motivated for a while to try to follow the Mennonite example. But the problem is that the closest Mennonite church is too far away for easy trips. So I want to move where Muslims and Mennonites live close together, and I am looking into Harrisburg, PA for this. My hope is that when Muslims see how Mennonites successfully raise children outside of modern culture, and how Mennonites keep their religion across generations, Muslims will be motivated to follow this example.

But unlike Mennonites, I don't want to form a religious community. Islam has a lot of baggage that Muslims won't be able to fix until their IQ goes up by 20 points. So the solution is to make the "raising good children" organization clearly not religious and open to people of any religion. But I can't see anyone other than Muslims actually being interested in such an organization because no other religion recognizes the problems of modern culture.

If such an organization can be formed, I would hope that children raised in the organization would remain as adults. Naturally many wouldn't, many would leave. And this is good because this process would purify the K-strategy genes in the community.

For me personally, the next steps are visiting Harrisburg, PA often so I can judge it, and developing at least something of value for children to serve as a starting point. For this, I plan to add a 2D game API to Luan and use that to offer a programming class for children.

I have discussed this idea with my main contact at my local mosque, and he is supportive of this idea. I will visit Harrisburg, PA for a week later this month and hopefully learn enough to decide if this works as a location.

Art Kohl #fundie fbbc.com

Over the last few decades, the semantics of this issue have changed. It has gone from Sodomy to homosexuality to gay or lesbian to sexual orientation. Today’s reference to it as sexual orientation has certainly taken the sting out of the sin.

The focus of the debate has turned from a behavior to an issue, like abortion where the debate has turned from the procedures of abortion to an issue.

If one would focus on the behavior that homosexuals admit to, they would agree with the Scriptures which says they are “abusers of themselves with mankind.” Should any government official condone abuse even between consenting adults?

“Stay out of our bedrooms, stay out of our private lives,” is a defensive posture we hear from pro-homosexuals. There are many different laws that affect each of our private lives. Laws against adultery, fornication, pedophilia, beastiality, incest, torture, rape, even seat belt laws. Most laws in some way legislate morality. Do not kill, do not steal, etc.

Homosexuality is fatal. The average homosexual, whether male or female lives about 45 years. This is 30 years less than the average heterosexual male or female. This is alarming! Only 3% of homosexuals reach their 65th birthday. Each statesman should work to warn the populace of this danger. Some in government have gone to great lengths to discourage cigarette smoking. They have sued the cigarette companies. They have had enough of the deaths that this behavior causes and the dollars spent on treating tobacco related maladies, yet cigarettes takes an average of 6 years off of an adult’s life. Homosexuality takes 30 years off. We should stand against homosexuality even if only for health reasons.

Justification for homosexual behavior is often given from the “look at the great contributions they make to our society” angle. Do our contributions justify our life style? Would this exonerate a child abuser, pedophile, prostitute, incest, beastiality or any crime or criminal? Of course not! There are certain laws I must obey in private and in public that legislate morality that are good safeguards for myself, my wife and family. I can not beat my wife and children with a baseball bat in the privacy of my home. It would endanger them and rightfully so I would be arrested. As we have seen, homosexuality endangers those who are involved with it in private.

It is best for society to believe the Scriptures in its opposition to this abominable lifestyle.

Rebbetzin Feige #fundie aish.com

Dear Rebbetzin Feige,
I am 29. My husband and I love each other and share our Jewish life and ideals. But for the first two years of our marriage we decided not to have children. My husband was always traveling up and down the country for his job, and I followed him as much as possible. We said to each other we wanted a father to be present at home and a family to be more "sedentary" before having children.
Now he has been offered a position that requires more moving around over the next few years. It's a great opportunity, but this would mean having a further delay in trying to have kids (for at least the first year so we can settle down and organize our lives). We are afraid that we will decide too late. We usually think of a woman having career plans that may come into conflict with family plans. I never thought my husband's job could produce the same effects.
JZ
Rebbetzin Feige responds:
My dear reader, Your conundrum as to whether to proceed now or postpone having a baby in favor of a later date -- perhaps a more propitious time -- is, in one form or another, the stuff of life that requires perspective.
Clearly, the way we view the circumstances of our life can change from moment to moment. The fact that you have written indicates a desire on your part to get a handle on how to sort out the variables in order to find a reliable index of where things are really at.
Historically, when the children of Israel were ready to enter the promised land, the tribes of Gad and Reuven approached Moses requesting permission to settle on the east side of the Jordan where the land could support their extensive stock of cattle. Their request was framed in the following way: We shall build corrals for our cattle and cities for our children...then we will join forces with the rest of the nation to help them conquer the west side of the Jordan.
In his reply to them, Moses conceded but reversed the order of their request: "build cities for your children and then corrals for your cattle." They had prefaced provisions for their cattle first and for their children last. Moses corrected them and assigned top priority to the children.
At face value, this scenario is quite startling. Did members of the exalted 12 tribes really need reminding that children come before cattle?

The commentaries explain that their priorities were unquestionably intact and their intention was never to assign greater importance to their cattle than to their children. Their reasoning in seeking to settle their cattle -- their holdings -- first, was to secure a livelihood so that they might better provide for their children's future. Indisputably, the children were the overriding objective, but perhaps, they concluded, if they attended to the peripheral first and planned for everything, the context of their children's lives would be a better one.

Itisamuh #fundie mmo-champion.com

A new law in Iran that allows men to marry their adopted daughters at the age of 13 has caused major concern that the country's new president is not as progressive as originally thought.

As far as I'm concerned, if you've been through puberty, you're ready for sex. Let's face it, people at that age are going to do it whether they're supposed to or not. The only reason it's illegal is because we decided to make it so, not because there's any legitimate sense behind it. People change physically and mentally through their entire lives, there's no one age where someone is suddenly mature enough to not be taken advantage of. Adults get taken advantage of and played all the time, that doesn't mean they're getting raped.


Cheerleader, Molly Shattuck, Rapes 15-year-old boy, has to spend weekends in jail.

Another fine example of why statutory rape laws are largely bogus, and age of consent in general is a flawed system. In most of these cases the teenager knows exactly what is going on, and loves every second of it either way. And before anyone suggests it since they always do, I would feel the same if the genders were reversed. An adult man hooking up with a teenage girl, an adult woman hooking up with a teenage boy. It makes no difference to me either way, because it should not be a crime at all in my opinion. People that age are going to be having sex anyway, so there is no point punishing their partners over something harmless.


If it were up to me, the first time someone committed a crime, it would be (depending on the crime) however much time in jail or prison, and a fine. If that person later commits the same crime (so any repeat offender of anything) then they would be executed. If the penalty for crime was greater, people would be less likely to do it. The only problem I really see with my idea is with rape. Too often these days is that getting falsely accused, and if the people had sex, there is no way to really prove whether it was or was not forced. As an anti feminist, I would hate a system where if a guy gets unlucky and dates two bitches who accuse him of rape after they break up, he gets executed.

IGEORGETOWN, Texas – A 19-year-old Texas man who could face years in prison for making brownies laced with marijuana and hash oil said Wednesday he remains scared despite new evidence that his attorney believes should reduce the charges.

How amusing that this site is so pro drug. I hope he gets locked up for a very long time (not life) and learns not to be so stupid in the future.

State seizes 11-year-old & arrests mother after he defends medical marijuana
On March 24, cannabis oil activist Shona Banda‘s life was flipped upside-down after her son was taken from her by the State of Kansas. The ordeal started when police and counselors at her 11-year-old son’s school conducted a drug education class. Her son, who had previously lived in Colorado for a period of time, disagreed with some of the anti-pot points that were being made by school officials. “My son says different things like my ‘Mom calls it cannabis and not marijuana.’ He let them know how educated he was on the facts,” said Banda in an exclusive interview... Banda successfully treated her own Crohn’s disease with cannabis oil.

Seems perfectly fair to me, seeing as she proved herself to be an unfit parent. Legal or not, there is no excuse for drugs, much less around a child.

Mike King #racist tomatobubble.com

The nerve of a U.S. envoy to lecture Thailand about "civil rights". The Slimes quotes Daniel Russel: “Thailand is losing credibility in the eyes of its international friends and partners by not moving more quickly to end martial law, to restore civil rights and to ensure that this effort to engineer a new constitution and hold elections is not purely a top-down affair.”

Newsflash Zio-America! Most Asian countries no longer give a rat's rear-end about your pious posturing. Last May, Thailand's military threw out the pro-western "democratic" regime and Sulzberger doesn't like it. With the grace of God, the day may soon come when a truly "free world" defiantly declares to the Sulzbergers and the Satanyahus, in unison, to go pound kosher salt up their putrid posteriors.

Though we don't claim to be experts on the internal politics of Thailand, recent developments, combined with the Sulzberger Family's and the State Department's anger, are very positive signs. Another hopeful indicator is the growing popularity of Adolf Hitler, in Thailand!

image

Young Thais understand that you don't have to be White to appreciate the greatness of the Great One and his system (use the right hand when you 'Sieg Heil', sweetie).

Hitler Fried Chicken! Waffen SS themed weddings! Student NS marches!

image

Your intrepid reporter here rolling on the floor laughing in delight.

A government sponsored video teaches children to be disciplined and virtuous. It features Thai children painting a portrait of Hitler.

Hitler-mania is out in the open in Thailand, and the chosen ones are "horrified".

image

Forgive me, dear reader. I can't help myself!

The Globalist's interest and strategy in Thailand has to do with the general encirclement policy aimed at Russia and China. Thailand is to China what Ukraine is to Russia, sort of. Indeed, the military leaders of Thailand now have the support and friendship of China. Major railway projects linking Thailand to China have just been approved; a fact that western newspapers have lamented in recent months. Russia is also building ties with the new military government as well.

Let Sulzberger's scribblers whine all they want about "civil rights". We at The Anti-New York Times believe that the more nations that can break free of the NWO's "democratic" death grip - the better. Sieg Heil Thailand, sieg heil!

Burma - Thailand - Malaysia - Indonesia: All bucking the Globalists and forging ties to the Russia-China bloc. Keep that in mind should Thai Airliners start going down.

The recently ousted Thai Prime Minister was very flirtatious with Obongo. Sorry cutie, but Obongo plays for the "pink team".

kalidurga #wingnut #fundie en.kalitribune.com

Political correctness is rightly considered to be a vague term. However, this by no means warrants anyone to infer that it doesn’t exist and sway our lives to an enormous extent. The very point of deeming something inexistent by pointing out that it is vaguely defined is a tell-tale sign of the real root of what we call “Political Correctness.”

Namely, the idea that morality is purely a matter of strictly systematized application of language stems from the age old principle of what philosophers call nominalism, the doctrine that assumes that cognitive process is nothing but the apprehension and conceptualization of sense data.
While this process is at work in everyday experience, nominalists omit one extremely important – in fact essential – element inherent in human knowledge, namely: that things themselves have essences or “natures” which mold our notions about them.

By denying the necessary, or indeed: any, intrinsic substantial nature to beings, nominalism empowers it’s adherents to define and redefine them at will.

This is a true meaning of so-called “Occam’s razor”, a method named after a Medieval English Franciscan philosopher William of Occam, stating that, in paraphrase, “any multiplications of beings unnecessary to satisfactory explanation is false”.

Of course, nominalists are not prone to examine their own assumptions and they take for granted that what we see, hear, touch, smell or taste is all there is to know, not taking into account that very principles they profess cannot be based on this, because they are meant to apply to all conceivable instances.

If all knowledge is a cognition of perceivable individuals – of manifold chaos with no intrinsic unity – how can then anything be applied to all conceivable instances?

It can’t.

In the series of podcasts we hereby present, the political correctness is defined as an instance of extreme moral nominalism. Namely, there’s a one characteristic feature of nominalist minded people: while denying anything remotely spiritual in this world, they at the same time tend to deny all substance – even the matter itself, while making their own notions about reality absolute.

It’s a kind of magical thinking where words are considered to have a power over reality.

This is by no means surprising, because real knowledge is based on concepts and not on sense experience and if we cannot rely on our notions, we can really rely on nothing at all. Things we perceive are in eternal flux and if there’s no unity in them, then there’s no stability which could provide us with certain knowledge.

Like averybody else, nominalists want to have certain principles and moral rules they can rely on. But given that they deny the possibility that world itself provides us with them, they venture to make them up themselves.
And when they succeed at imagining them, they have a compulsive need to impose them upon the world and other people, because that is the only way left open for them to make sense of it.

The things have to conform to the labels nominalists paste upon their surface.
Sounds familiar?

Gender quotas, humanitarian bombing, redefining oneself’s sex, humans merging with the machines, sanctioning of all things possibly offensive, safe spaces in Universities … being called a bigot because you accidentally looked at someone sideways?

If it is, then you are on the right track because you’re not living under the rock. Political correctness is an inherently totalitarian system of moral nominalism, where words and labels are everything, because all else is deemed unreal. It is an utmost and to date the most perfect system of essentially denying the very possibility of morality.

Therefore, it is an elaborate, well thought out, system of evil.

In this three-part podcast, we’ll explore how moral nominalism functions, why is it always accompanied with the compulsive need for strict legalization of it’s principles and how it in effect serves to destroy the language.

A nominalist cookbook

In the first part we explore why is PC so hard to define and why no knee-jerk reactions to it are really valid. While standard fare PC phenomena irritate the hell out of people, when interrogated as to why they get so irritated by, say: legal proscription of three or more different gender toilet labels, they are usually at the lack to give a satisfactory explanation of their dissent.
This is one of the main strengths of PC, namely that it’s adherents can use slurs, memes and emotionally charged rhetoric, while the only weapon at the disposal of it’s opponents is an act of analytical discernment which can be very demanding and never provides one with flashy phrases and one-sentence answers.

We propose that the reason for this is nominalist principle of reduction of reality to utterly simple, atomic, facts that can only be reflected in simple language. Thence follows the famous Occam’s razor dictum that only simple answers are the right ones.
So, for instance, there’s no use to suppose that 9/11 was an elaborate operation, perpetrated by whole network of vested interests, because the idea that it was perpetrated by few amateur pilots of Arabian descent is much simpler and therefore true.
On the other hand, this approach allows promulgators and adherents of PC enormous freedom in defining their concepts which need not relate to anything but “atomic facts” of reality. We illustrate this point by example of Richard Dawkins and his statement that “there’s nothing morally reprehensible in eating human roadkill”.

As nominalism takes into consideration only atomic facts “roadkill” and “eating”, while “human” is only a subjective qualification on the same level as “animal”, there’s no difference in cooking and eating the dead animal and dead human.

All this stems from inability of nominalists to affirm existence of anything that is not based on simplest sense perceptions. And human nature, which is the thing forcing us to essentially discern animal from human, is something you cannot perceive by senses.

The result is that political correctness becomes moral system completely detached from moral reality which seeks to make itself absolute. In order to do that PC individuals are forced to seek it’s legalization, i.e. to turn their ever expanding principles into laws.

soul8love #fundie soul8love.tumblr.com

Cosmic update:

Sisters and brothers,

There is a massive shift happening right now in the collective field of awareness and it is moving rapidly and intensely. There are notes for each of you.

Sisters, purge it out! Let it go! Scream, cry, wail if you must. We have not received what we deserve yet, and at the same time, it’s been in our favor. The contrast and polarity has simply given us greater relative awareness of what we do desire. We have even more clarity than ever before and while all of this has been the Creation process designed as it is in agreement between our ‘Divine Parents’, our egos have felt the sting of it. We were meant to. Our temporal selves access greater consciousness through contrast and to reach the greatest states of infinite possible outcomes, we needed the contrast to expand us into more realization of what is possible in even grander ways.

That said, in order to shift into the next stage of your conscious evolution, all that has been must be released and healed. This means that we cannot repress any emotions that hold negative vibrations. If it’s coming up, don’t stuff it down. Purge, purge, purge. Some are reporting that it feels like dying. Have no fear. It is only the impermanent aspects of self that are dying, as they need to, in order to embody even more expansive divine energies and integrate more codes that you have been receiving. In order for the new 'programs’ to be activated, the old ones must be removed and your system refreshed. Purge until you feel the neutral energy again. From there, move into gratitude and love. Focus on the men in your life that have done right by you, and if you can’t think of any, then go ahead and fantasize. Feel the love and gratitude for the masculine showing up as you desire in your personal experience and on a global scale. From there, it is highly recommended that you take the time to write it out. This writing process incorporates body, mind and spirit in the act of spell-ing out the desires of the divine feminine. Be sure to write it in a positive manner for the best possible effect.

Example: Instead of saying, “you will never cheat on me”, you would say, “you will always be faithful”. Instead of, “you won’t start anymore wars”, you will say, “you will bring peace and healing to this planet and all of its inhabitants”.

Self care is vital. Drink lots of clean water, eat healthy light organic foods, rest, soak in sea salt baths, get into nature, express creatively, and anything else you typically do to express self love. You can do this. You are Goddess rising and saying, 'ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!’

You are righteous.

Brothers, hold space and listen. There is no need to get caught up on drama or guilt. Hear truth in what you hear and/or read from the women in your life. You have played your role well and have done so for perfect reasons. You were meant to. Forgive yourself for any perceived failures or wrongs and integrate the new divine masculine codes.

That said, if you are experiencing any overflow from the women in your life, be willing to hear any truth that is being spoken and realize that even though it was meant, there is still pain within the women for all that they have been through in this earthly creation. There is a pendulum swing of energy. The formerly subservient versions of the silenced feminine is integrating with a roar. She is rising now and that means you are too. Stand up. Stand strong. Break yourself free from all that is false and integrate the highest vibration aspects of yourself. You already know how to do this, even if you aren’t aware of it consciously. Meditate, pray and go deep within. The answers are on your heart. It doesn’t matter who you have been. It matters who you are becoming. There is no more need, nor room, on this planet for outdated masculine programming. You are being upgraded in this process as well. Surrender to it. Be willing to hear what is being requested of you and all your brothers globally. While there may be fears of the feminine turning into the dominant ones, just remember that there is balance being sought. This means equality, integrity, commitment, loyalty, peaceful dealings, interdependent relationships and more. The desires the feminine has of you are what you desire of yourself. Move into that and know that it is for the greatest good of all AND the individual fulfillment of each. You can do this. We have faith in you.

If any of you find yourselves overwhelmed and it becomes too much for you to handle alone, reach out to someone. There are many healers that have been prepared for this moment (including us). Some of you already have your favorites and for the rest, find the one(s) that resonate with you the most. There is no reason to suffer alone. Many healers even work on a sliding scale and/or donation basis so that you don’t have to go it alone because of patriarchal limitations. You are worthy of a facilitator that can help you find your way back.

You are all loved. This is a very intense month but the worst of it is almost over and was infinitely valuable, even if you’re challenged to see it in the moment. Trust with faith and patience that greater things will be revealed soon.

Much love to all of you ????????

Brian Niemeier #fundie #wingnut #conspiracy brianniemeier.com

That's the Satanic Temple suing to stop an Indiana abortion law signed by Mike Pence. Is it a total abortion ban, a heartbeat bill, or even a bill requiring abortuaries to practice the same sanitation as Wendy's?

No. The Indiana law simply mandates disposing of fetal remains with the same dignity as other human remains, via burial or cremation.

The Satanic Temple is pursuing legal action to prevent murdered babies from receiving a decent burial.

These satanists claim the law could pose undue hardship to mothers seeking to murder their children.

Why? Because it might incline them to think of their dead babies as human beings?

There's another, darker motive.

The Death Cult which rules us, including the Satanic Temple, Disney, and Netflix, don't want these children buried.

They want them sacrificed.

Hollywood, the media, and academia belong to a heretical faith disguised with flimsy secular trappings. Their ultimate aims are not wealth and power. They instead seek warped spiritual ends that are perverted reflections of Christian graces.

Preferred pronouns are the Death Cult's version of transubstantiation. They believe they can turn men into women by uttering the right formula. This article of faith is so sacrosanct to them that they have enacted blasphemy laws protecting these incantations.

Erasing whiteness is an attempt to reverse the Death Cult analogue of original sin. But instead of immersion in water, the one whose skin announces his guilt can only be baptized in his own blood.

But the Death Cult's highest sacrament, the public liturgy which constitutes the deepest expression of their identity, is child sacrifice.

The glib rhetoric claiming they sought to protect women's best interests has been revealed as a sham. If abortion were a mere matter of civics, private companies like Disney would have no cause to risk involving themselves in a political controversy guaranteed to alienate huge numbers of their customers.

Disney, Netflix, and the Satanic Temple just want to keep murdering babies. They need to. The precepts of their diabolical faith dictate that the innocent blood must flow. The children must be fed to Moloch. They must not be interred in the ground--especially not ground consecrated to the hated Christ.

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]

WikiLeaks #racist dailydot.com

image

...

"The Wikileaks account subsequently tweeted some explanations of what the offending tweet meant, suggesting that “neo-liberal castle creepers” had appropriated the racist-turned-anti-racist solidarity gesture, turning it into “a tribalist designator for establishment climbers.” A clarifying tweet also misspelled “gesture” as “jesture,” which further stoked accusations of witting anti-Semitism.

...

Wikileaks ultimately defended the decision to delete the tweets, saying they’d been intentionally misconstrued by “pro-Clinton hacks and neo-Nazis.” It’s also been maintaining a pretty aggressive public relations posture regarding these latest leaks. It threatened MSNBC host Joy Reid for tweeting that she planned to discuss an “affinity” between the group and the Russian government on her show, saying “our lawyers will monitor your program.”

...

So, again, not the best tone for a group dedicated to prying open closed organizations, regardless of their desires. It also responded to an article by Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall, investigating alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin, accusing him of “weird priority” for focusing on the method of the correspondences' release rather than the data dump itself."

Etti #conspiracy barenakedislam.com

Muslims being made scapegoats? Well there’s a surprise.

When people barge into a country, tell lies, set up terrorist training camps, worm their way into the government, airports, laboratories, deliberately produce large numbers of babies, demand the best social housing and handouts and make it known in accordance with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Strategy Plan for the takeover of the West, that they intend to convert the country to a cruel, outdated ideology, quote “by force if necessary”, the non-Muslim victims might feel justified in airing a negative opinion about these people.

Most Westerners do not want the stoning of raped women, hand chopping, killing of gays, FGM and forced marriage of underage girls. Most Muslims, and I speak of the educated ones, do want this insanity to rule everyone’s lives. Add to this the obligatory squatting when defecating and using the hand or preferably stones to wipe the behind, and it becomes obvious why we do not welcome the Muslim invaders.

Jim #racist #wingnut #sexist blog.jim.com

[From "Deus Vult"]

Trump cannot get stuff done, because he is merely president, and the permanent government is full of people that hate him.

But it is not just the permanent government. His political appointees are in bed with his enemies, and are subverting his agenda. Two years after Hitler was elected, Hitler had a Nazi running ever boy scout troop and every trade union chapter. Trump cannot even get a Trumpist running border security.

The one area where Trump has been successful is putting his people in the judiciary. Trumpist judges, though still massively outnumbered, are coming in at every level. Trump has been effective in appointing judges, because he has a big bench he can draw upon, which bench knows who whom, which bench is self policing, which bench can be relied upon to carry out his program without him needing to be on their back. Personnel is policy, and the Federalist society has a supply.

Reflect on the Federalist society: They have their article of faith – original intent. And they have a network to identify their fellow faithful. Just as Constantine adopted Christianity that provided him with a cohesive group to staff his government, in a Roman Empire disintegrating from elite incohesion.

To govern, you need a synthetic tribe, which Hitler had, which Constantine adopted, and which Trump lacks, except for the federalist society which is narrowly focused on judicial process.

The Federalist article of faith (Original Intent) that provides unity and cohesion is also an effective antibody against enemy outgroups. It is something no leftist can admit is even thinkable – to them, just words with no meaning that they dare conceive of. So when leftist entryists attempt to infiltrate the Federalists, they use their shibboleths incorrectly, like a Marxist purporting to be channeling Adam Smith, and wind up babbling random nonsensical meaningless scripted formulaic NPC gibberish.

We, on the other hand, agree with the leftists, that original intent is not really going to fly, while we agree with the Federalists that judges exercising executive, legislative, budgetary authority is intolerable. One emperor is a stationary bandit. A thousand little emperors is mobile banditry and anarcho tyranny. We, however, propose a solution far more radical than that of the federalists – that the final court of appeal should be the Sovereign, should be Moses, the King, or the President, and he should be able to intervene in any case, and fire any judge. We also propose William the Conqueror’s “forms of action”, meaning that judges should be reduced to data entry clerks filling out forms that result in remote procedure calls to a system of central databases, similar to the system used by Australia’s border control force for dealing with “Illegal persons”. (Australian Border Force is Judge Dredd with more typing required than Judge Dredd had to do, but the same refreshing speed, efficiency, and absence of lawyers and priestly robes as with Judge Dredd.) William the Conqueror’s “Forms of action” kept judges in line for seven hundred years, and modern databases and remote procedure calls make William the Conqueror’s solution lightning fast, so that it can be applied by a cop on the beat, after the fashion of Judge Dredd and the Australian Border Force.

We have our mailing lists and forums, like the federalist society. What we don’t have is some articles of faith, a canon, a creed, a catechism. Constantine’s Christians had a creed. Trump’s federalist society has one. By getting agreement on certain principles, we can identify our fellow faithful, we can provide a tribe capable of governing. Our basic plan is that someone grabs power, needs a tribe to actually govern. Ideally, a warrior grabs power at gunpoint, swiftly discovers that guns do not suffice, realizes he needs a priesthood, looks around for a priesthood, finds us, as Constantine found Christendom, and Trump found the Federalist Society. When Trump appoints someone in charge of border security, he does not necessarily get someone who favors border security. When Trump appoints a Federalist Society judge, he reliably gets a Federalist, as Constantine reliably got a Christian, and Hitler reliably got a Nazi.

The political appointees that Trump appoints are frequently disloyal to Trump and hostile to his agenda. The Federalist Judges he appoints are loyal to federalism, thus reasonably loyal to Trump and supportive of his agenda. Indeed the left regularly complains that federalist judges are more supportive of Trump and his agenda than they are to federalism, which is not true, but has a substantial grain of truth in that federalist judges appointed on the basis of their federalism are more supportive of Trump and his agenda than are political appointees appointed on the basis of loyalty to Trump and his agenda. The Federalist society polices itself. Trump is not having much success policing Trump political appointees.

[...]

So: here are the articles of the Canon:

Throne
Altar
Freehold
Family
Property

Throne

Division of powers, divided sovereignty does not work, more rulers means mobile banditry and anarcho tyranny. A stationary bandit has better incentives than a mobile bandit.

Altar

You cannot separate state and church. The church will undermine the state and take state power for itself, or the state subvert the church, or both at once. Harvard is our high holy Cathedral. A holiness spiral ensues as the priestly classes, the professoriat, the judiciary, and the media, pursue power by each being holier than the other. Obviously we have a state religion a state religion that every day becomes crazier, more dogmatic, and more intrusive, and that state religion needs to be formalized and made official so that the high priest and grand inquisitor can stop holiness spirals.

[...]

Freehold

Freehold necessarily involves and requires rejection of the principle of equality before the law, and property rejection of equality of outcomes. Not all men were created equal, nor are women equal to men, nor is one group or category of men equal to another. Stereotypes are stereotypical, because the stereotype is usually true for most individual members of the group or category.

We have never had equality before the law, and are having it less every day. Cops have a special right to use violence, blacks have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted, similar to that of the traditional aristocracy, Hispanics and illegal immigrants in California have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted.

State building is coalition building to rule. We need a coalition of the smart, the cooperative, and the productive, ruling the stupid, the disruptive, and the destructive. The doctrine of equality means you cannot reward the elite with status? What! Of course the ruling elite is going to be rewarded with status, and that is exactly what is happening.

The ruling elite always gets rewarded, the ruling coalition always gets rewarded. Members of the ruling coalition always get a superior right to use violence, and a superior right to not be insulted. That is the way it is, and that is what we saw when white people were ethnically cleansed out of Detroit. The doctrine of equality before the law was always a lie intended to destroy the coalition of the smart, the cooperative, and the productive, to guilt the best people into surrender, so that they could be destroyed by a coalition of the worst.

Freehold means that we acknowledge that some state power is in fact private property, and the sovereign lets his loyal vassals enjoy their privilege, because if he tries to meddle, he will be overwhelmed by detail and complexity, so best to formalize that privilege and make it official. If we don’t have the aristocracy that so offended the founding fathers, we find ourselves with blacks exercising aristocratic privilege over whites. Equality before the law is an unworkable ideal, hypocritically betrayed in actual practice. Some people are going to be unjustly privileged. Let us try to make it the best people rather than the worst people, and try to make it the people that the state draws is wealth and coercive power from, rather than the people who sponge off the state.

Family

The immense biological and reproductive differences between men and women means that they can only cooperate for family formation on asymmetric, unequal terms. The wife has a duty to honor and obey, the husband to love and cherish. To ensure cooperation between men and women, the state, the family, society, and religion have to force men and women who sleep together to stick together, to force them to perform their marital duties, to force the man to cherish and the woman to obey, otherwise you get defect/defect, and reproduction and family become difficult for both men and woman.

For hypergamy to be eugenic rather than dysgenic, taxpayers and warriors need to have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted. For marriage to work, pimps, sluts, and whores need to have a substantially less protection against violence, insult, and rape. For marriage to be incentive compatible for women it has to be simply legal for a respectable man to chain a slut up in his basement, and if she does not want to risk that outcome, she needs to sign up in a nunnery or submit to husband. A right to protection should require chastity and/or submission to the authority of a husband or father. Sluts shall have legal authority equal to chaste women? What! This inevitably results in sluts being given legal status higher than that of chaste woman, and that is exactly what is happening. Wives, like whites, are very much second class low status citizens. We have an aristocracy, and black whores are at the top.

Women always wind up heading off the protection of the most alpha male around. If that is the protection of uncle Sam, you get what we have got.

You will notice that the doctrine that all women shall be equal required and led to the doctrine that all women are naturally chaste, enshrined in our current law on rape and sexual harassment, which presupposes that the primary person who is harmed by rape and sexual harassment is the woman, and the primary person who is going to object to it and be distressed by it is the woman, rather than the father, her biological kinfolk, and the husband. The transparent falsity and absurdity of this doctrine leads to the transparent falsity and absurdity of all rape and sexual harassment charges and convictions, as near to all of them as makes no difference. Legal equality necessitates and results in a denial of biological inequality.

Rape and sexual harassment laws that give women equal status to males are a problem, because in practice their resistance to rape and sexual harassment is a fitness test – they are pissed at you if you fail the test, not pissed by being successfully raped. So rape and sexual harassment charges based on the legal theory that these are crimes against the women herself, rather than her husband or family, always originate from failed shit tests – and the overwhelming majority of these failures do not involve rape and sexual harassment. What happens in the vast majority of cases, for all practical purposes all of them, is that a woman is sexually attracted to a man, hits him with a brutal and hard to pass shit test out of the blue, he fails, she feels creeped out, and comes to believe that something must have happened that legally justifies her feeling of being creeped out. In the rare and unusual occasions when they are based on an actual attempt at rape or sexual harassment, they are based not on the rape or the sexual harassment, but on the man failing her fitness test by retreating from her hostile response. They originate from male behavior that is not all that bad – just weak, the male trying something, but then retreating in the face of determined opposition.

We cannot give women the same legal right to protection against violence and insult as men, because they fail to cooperate in that protection. The best we can do is grant state backing for nunneries, husbands, and fathers protecting their wives and daughters, because husbands and fathers are are going to cooperate in that protection, and the male priests supervising the nunnery will cooperate in that protection. Violence and insult against women has to be handled as an offense against the male authority that cares for them, because if handled as an offense against the women themselves, the women are unhelpful, untruthful, deluded, and uncooperative, failing to report the kind of offenses that we want to suppress, and delusively reporting non offenses.

Men and women want families. Men and women want to cooperate to have families. But prisoners dilemma gets in the way. To fix the prisoner dilemma problem, need to hit women with a stick.

Property

Anti discrimination law violates people’s property rights. Google hates us, but the problem is not primarily too much capitalism, but too little. In the James Damore affair, Google’s Human Resources Department (the Human Resources department being a tentacle of the state inserted into every corporation) threatened the board and the management of Google with a lawsuit for not hating us enough, issuing an official opinion that thinking forbidden thoughts constituted a “hostile environment for women”. Because stereotypes are usually true, private individuals and corporations should be free to make use of the information expressed by stereotyping. The trouble with libertarians and libertarianism is that they support every socialist intervention that is destroying our lives and our economy.

Family law and anti discrimination law violates the fourth amendment and the seventh, eighth, and final commandments

[...]

Technological advance and industrialization comes from Ayn Rand’s heroic engineer CEO, mobilizing other people’s capital and other people’s labor. We first see this archetype appear immediately after the restoration, when Charles the Second made it OK to use the corporate form to get rich. Unfortunately, Ayn Rand’s hero is not heroically on our side, contrary to what Ayn Rand promised. He unheroically endorses the official religion, knowing his property could be attacked if he does not. But we should keep in mind that this makes him merely the instrument of power, not power. When we are in charge he will support our official religion and scarcely notice the change in the slogans posted in the rec room, which formerly endorsed coveting what belonged to others and females adopting male clothing and roles, but will then condemn coveting and endorse males performing male roles and females performing female roles.

Rand’s superman is not on our side. But he is not on the progs side. He is his own side, and this makes him largely irrelevant for political power, which requires cohesion.

The state can facilitate science by being a customer and buying high tech stuff. Indeed, a great deal of advance has come from the state seeking means to hurt people and break their toys, but when the state tries to itself advance technology, it usually turns out badly: Nasa could not build rockets. Kidnapped Wernher von Braun. Asked him how to build rockets. Still could not build rockets.

Nasa puts Wernher von Braun in charge. Now it can build rockets. Puts a man on the moon.

Wernher von Braun retires. New types of rockets don’t work. Old types of rockets gradually stop working no matter how much government money is poured down the toilet.

Where did Nasa find Wernher von Braun?

Nazis kidnapped him from the German rocket club which they shut down.

Seems obvious that we would have wound up with a whole lot better rocket technology if the rocket club became, or spawned, a bunch of startups, one of them led by Wernher von Braun, and governments outsourced rockets. Which is what gave us the reusable booster that lands as a rocket should land.

Before Wernher von Braun, american government rockets did not work. After Wernher von Braun, government rockets gradually stopped working. And the rocket club, not the Nazis, and not NASA, found Wernher von Braun.

Radar and wartime electronics present a similar story. Harvard created a huge radar and counter radar program during the war – which led nowhere, as NASA’s rockets went nowhere after Wernher von Braun retired.

markoh #fundie acapella.harmony-central.com

[I think that the rationale that many anti-evolutionists have is that they believe life has a purpose and they believe that complex life developing out of aggregating compounds means that life has no purpose.]


See, I'm annoyed because you think creationists believe what they believe because of emotion. It blows my mind that you really can't conceive that there might be scientific reasons for postulating a creator. Don't you ever look at nature for yourself? Who taught you that you're not allowed to think for yourself?


[And in addition, i get into this argument mainly because i'm concerned about what students learn in school and because i absolutely hate it when American political strategists use Christian ideas or beliefs to rile up voters, which is exactly the purpose of the "wedge strategy." It is abhorrent.]


Yeah, I know. you want power, you want to be able to tell my kids what they should learn in school. Buzz off. Mind your own business. But you make one of my points - evolution is a leftist political thing. It could never survive without forced indoctrination of little skulls filled with mush.

John Ward #wingnut #quack #conspiracy #dunning-kruger lewrockwell.com

Is It Time for Civil Disobedience Against The Covid19 Cult of Failed Advice?

This is today. It is not 1933. But the global mob rule we are witnessing is as old as the hills. As old, in fact, as the ancient Greeks who warned that the Herd Instinct, when married to Herd Ignorance, would inevitably lead to the Führerprinzip.

Plato predicted this earlier than most, but latterly George Orwell offered us a more exact description. For some forty years now, the Internationalist bourgeois Left has treated Nineteen Eighty-Four as a blueprint. Bizarrely, the globalist/blocist Corporate State builders have been doing exactly the same.

So for example, the Guardian’s Executive Editor instructed her journalists in 2016 to call Climate Change doubters deniers. This same collective noun is now being extended to Covid19 empiricists. But at the same time, unelected bureaucracies have promoted those like top UK civil servant Sir Mark Sedwill and US Global Pharma creature Dr Fauci to positions of enormous power and influence….using completely unregulated censorship at will to dub contrarian Covid19 commentators ‘Science deniers‘.

In recent years, one socio-political issue after another has been treated to the same formula of rigid ‘framing’. Those with doubts about the multicultural model of society are diversity deniers. Supporters of Brexit are Little Engander globalism deniers….and racists to boot. Those noting the spread of Islamic Jihadism and Pakistani rape gangs are Islamophobes. Critics of some elements of male homosexual lifestyles are homophobes. Attacks on the radical feminist creed are the work of sexists lasciviously obsessed with male rape.

Over time, such framing has trickled down in an even more simplistic form to the mass electorate, creating a knee jerk mode of acceptance I call ‘Estuary pc’….such that, in 2012 I employed a plumber who actually said, “In terdayzz mult-culchural-siety, that is a totelee hunacceptable dibollikal libe’ee”.

The link back to the shot of Hitler Youth at the head of the post is extremely pertinent: for acceptance is now turning into not just unquestioning obedience, but also demands that contrarians be told to shut up ‘for the Common Good’.

During the development of the official coronavirus narrative, we have all been treated to the Holier than Thou fascist who begins with “It’s people like you that…”. Who has not coughed in a queue for shopping and been greeted by glares from others? During the 2016 Brexit referendum, the day after Jo Cox’s assassination Leave supporters were treated to threats, and screams of “murderers” – Nigel Farage (not even remotely connected to the alleged assassin) was accused of being responsible for inciting the attack.

The metamorphosis of ideology into creed is rapidly creating a self-styled mob of Spanish Inquisitors – precisely the sort of bullying that led to the furious Groupthink of Krystallnacht eighty-five years ago. Whether that mob be Momentum, The London Times, Antifa, the New York Times, Channel Four, Common Purpose, Black Lives Matter or the BBC, there is an enthusiasm for – an asumption, in fact – that the Bertold Brecht Weltanschauung of The Good Lie is not only acceptable, it is essential. The naysayers must be silenced.

So much for diversity.

Such does not exactly provide rich soil for the discernment of lies and promotion of more effective (as in, less tunnel-vision) policy. 84% of Brits now see Lockdown and the wearing of masks as ‘necessary to control the virus’, even though the masks on offer are close to useless and lockdown has been shown to achieve little beyond approaching national bankruptcy.

Nor is the climate of ignorant fear a good one in which to put forward obvious contradictions between policies in use and the “science” they are supposedly led by.

And finally, the construction of informed conjecture about the real purposes of whipped-up Covid19 fears is so far beyond the closed mind, it is dismissed at Twitter – the ancestral home of bullying – with insults like “you thick c**t”.

All this darkness accepted, here and there one sees some signs that the largely silent Thinkers – estimated at around 16% of the adult population – are beginning to wonder whether this virus has rather more to do with globalist finance, multinational Pharma profits and surveillance permissions than anything remotely approaching “science”.

This therefore seems to me like a good opportunity to take one overriding element of the majority approach to Covid19 – a fairly easy one to understand – and leave both the Mob and the Establishment with a question they will surely find it impossible to fend off.

From Day 1 of the Covid19 saga, we have been watching a tug-of-war between two sets of medical interests.

The highly regarded French newspaper France Soir has been creating a Covid19 drug-trials niche for itself by raising all kinds of methodological anomalies in relation to the Recovery trials being headed up by Peter Horby. The articles are compelling because the paper’s director of publications Xavier Azalbert is that rare thing, a distinguished scientist who then switched to journalism. But although the telling findings fly over the heads of most of the population, Azalbert’s overview about who the politicians listen to in the field of virology is a fascinating one that, for me, represents a genuine insight.

Neil Ferguson (the man of multi-billion Pound mistakes) is an epidemiologist, and professor of mathematical biology. He has never been a medical practitioner in his life.

Peter Horby is an epidemiologist, and Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases and Global Health. He has never been a medical practitioner in his life.

Anthony Fauci’s first degree was in classics. He went on to medical school later. The sum total of his clinical experience was a two-year hospital internship from 1966-68. He has never been a general practitioner in his life.

Chris Whitty, UK Chief Medical Officer, worked as a doctor and researcher in Africa and Asia and is a practising NHS consultant. He has never worked in general practice, and his total experience in the current century has been as a Professor, administrator and public sector office holder at Gresham College and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). In 2008, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation awarded the LSHTM £31 million for malaria research in Africa. At the time, Whitty was the principal investigator for the ACT Consortium, which conducted the research programme. I probably don’t need to remind you of the lingering ethical doubts relating to that “vaccination” programme.

Ferguson, Horby and Fauci also have a long history of being funded by Big Pharma.

In short, the front line of Anglo-Saxon advice to government are all people Low in clinical experience and High in Big Pharma funding. They are model builders, theorists and fund-attracters laden with multivariate conflicts of interest, and little or no depth in the vital process of patient obervation. Their careers, needless to say, are all littered with groundless alarmism, major mistakes in counsel and the belief that vaccination is the answer to every problem….even a virus which, many practising medics contend, is highly unlikely to ever work on a mutating coronavirus – let alone within two years to include drug trials.

This is the tug-of-war team that has a monopoly on access to government. The other team – the practical, experienced medical practitioners – are variously depicted as minority nutjobs, eccentrics, headline-chasers, small-time and narrow deniers – there’s that word again – who are a constant risk to millions of human lives, and must be ignored. In fact, never mind ignored – for the good of the cause, they must be smeared, censored and refused access to the debate.

In fact, it is the Horbys and Faucis that are the tiny minority infecting genuine medical science with their corrupted ideological creeds and flakey models.

So now, here is the $64 trillion question that the Establishment war-tuggers and the hopelessly general political class they blind with science can’t avoid: why are you listening only to atypical academic twaddle-theorists with conflicts of interest who have at best been hopelessly wrong and at worst lied about Covid death stats and ruthlessly manipulated drug test trials?

This is in no way an unfair framing of the question. Ferguson’s death toll estimate was wrong, Horby’s drug trial of HCQ was fiddled, the entire process of lockdown was unaffordably broad, economically unaffordable and incompetent in the area of protecting the vulnerable, there is an inquiry going on into PHE’s massively overestimated UK death toll, and the Horby trials are being redone at yet more public cost. Dr Fauci has deliberately misled the American People about HCQ, and his conduct has been the subject of some excoriating criticisms by the practitioners’ supporter, the American Medical Association.

As I said, for the time being – until such time as the public mood changes – keep it simple. To those who are awake, the reasons why all these dubious activities – the Bigging Up of Covid19 – have been undertaken are clear. Nevertheless, park the power, money, geopolitical and Alt State hegemony madness and focus on this one question: why are you still taking the advice of the folks who’ve fucked up?

Yesterday, Chris Whitty flatly stated that “Coronavirus cases are rising in the UK because ministers pushed lockdown easing measures to their limits”. He openly rubbished Boris Johnson’s plan to get the UK back to normal by Christmas, insisting that “relaxing rules further will absolutely, inevitably lead to a resurgence of the virus.”

Whitty put his foot down: lockdown loosening measures had to be ‘stopped now’ and maybe even ‘pulled back a bit’ because they risk allowing another large-scale outbreak in the future.

This was based on a daily death toll figure of 38. Out of 76 million. In the US on the same day, the light use of lockdown produced 5 deaths. Out of 330 million. Lockdown has been at the very best a questionable policy, and a certain gdp disaster for a Britain that can ill afford one.

Whitty is not interested in even considering that his strategy (which, let’s face it, not a single government anywhere knows how to emerge from) is flawed, that the dangers are wildly overstated, and that Britain must move on or collapse. And Boris Johnson’s Cabinet shows no sign of even considering that Whitty is a Pharma tool and, economically, a dangerous fool.

Firepower #fundie eradica.wordpress.com

Can leaders be blamed for not wanting to helm a passel of poltroons goose-stepping in wifebeaters? It isn’t only the stupid Leftist Hippy Kidz degenerated from generations of propaganda by Government Publik Skool indoctrination: Both sides are infected with stupids. The completely stupid produce similar movements. You can’t make a silk purse from a pig’s ear. You all know of Martin Luther King, Jr., but none of you know who the fuck James Earl Ray is; it’s apparent, for none of you’ve ever mentioned him. While your kids are forced to worship MLK, you don’t even teach them of JER.

Say you eradicate every colored, every jewzoid, every zoggie. What do you then do? It’s whites that are the true anti-wn power. ummmmm…. America was already once a WN Empire – that, if you ain’t noticed, is gone.

Chris Matthews, Jerry Brown, The Clinton Cabal or Harry Reid types won’t just sit by and let you run free just because you ignore them, beat up on Charles Krauthammer and Herman Cain and have your blinders on to automatically accepting the whiteness of Core Liberalism.

Years ago, piggi wouldn’t dare let you even say “black person” on his pussified blog; now, the fucker’s David Duke. You are in The Cold Civil War.

Fearsome though they be, coloreds and jews and feminists aren’t your worst enemy, even when united. Your worst enemy is…… Bill Maher, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Nancy Pelosi, Walter Cronkite, and Bill Clinton types. It is these LNs in the past who indeed won; those in the present who seemingly will win – the future fuhrers: These are your worst enemy – other whites. MLK couldn’t have done what he did without JFK and LBJ giving it to him – JFK even knew mlk was a degenerate pervert, white hooker-orgy fucking colored “man of God” liar. Is that God’s Plan – give it all away free to Affirmative Action descendants of a sex-pervert? Looks like it is. Relying on “odin” or “god” gets you that kind of inexplicable bullshit we call mysticism.

That,is the perfect formula of pablum proven again and again to lull Murkans to sleep. The interwebz and its abundance of babblers afraid to call the spade a spade are a problem. Can you follow one so afraid of Big Government, that they dare not offend? The answer, sadly – is yes. It’s why you see the stagnant failure that is the opposition to the FFOL and Liberal Nazism.

If the entire MRM faced-off against just the Vancouver BC Slut-Walk, them grrls would have souvenirs of pockets-full of testicles.

Winning is possible. Only if “wn” unites with other different factions in the Right Fasces under the banner of simply eradicating Liberalism is victory won. This is how the FFOL achieves rulership powers. To simply hate Leftism is enough. If not, you get Democrats wielding election power because Republicans are fragmented against Libertarians, MRMs and TEAs etc. and vice-versa.

This takes education; something our side sadly lacks, just as the idiots on the left. Both camps in The Cold Civil War™ are just as stupid from years of the successful diseducation propaganda campaign run by the left in Big Government Skoolz. The Elite want stupids; they need them to rule a country sitting on a mountain of guns.

Foolishness abounds: Flyy Farmers do Uncle Beast’s subjugation for him and literally beat their swords into plowshares.

Nationalist whites don’t deserve to win a nation. Not with the way they behave. Until they’ve earned the right to win, they’ll be no different than PUAs and MRMs.

Today’s wn is as satisfied with venting as is the He-Man PUA-Haterz Klub & the Men’s Rights Bowel Movement. It is manifest in those wishy-washy sites you tire of hearing me mention. I won’t pick on your poor little troopers today, they’ve accomplished so much! Firepower says: If your enemies do not fear you, they fuck you up the ass.

Dante Ardenz #conspiracy realjewnews.com

The Malaysian Flight disaster is, IMO, the Jewish Response to Putin's success in South America.

Jews operate by the same perpetual formula. They pinning this on Putin like he personally ordered this or pulled the trigger himself.

"Remember THE MAIN-Lusitania-Pearl Harbor-Gulf Of Tonkin-911. ALL JEW FALSE FLAGS.

This is the closest to the lies about Lusitania that Rothschild stooge Churchill pulled as Admiralty Secretary to get the USA into WW1.

Scott Lively #conspiracy barbwire.com

I have come to believe that Obama orchestrated the Ukraine coup to re-start the cold war to prevent Russia from leading a global revolt against his most sacred cow, the LGBT agenda. While there were clearly important geo-political factors in Obama’s decision to initiate regime change in Ukraine, I am convinced that the primary impetus was to nip opposition to the international LGBT political steamroller in the bud ... Unfortunately, Obama’s strategy has worked and Russia has been forced from its former trajectory toward global cooperation with the west into an increasingly adversarial posture as Obama and the GOP Establishment Neo-Cons (united by perversion) continue to portray Russia as a pariah state while simultaneously attempting “regime change“ within its borders.

I believe a consequence of the “punish Russia” strategy is (dangerously for Israel) the transformation of Iran into the key player of the Middle East and the US has been forced to become a suitor (e.g. the sweetheart nuke deal) to our “former” arch-enemy in an attempt to thwart the strengthening of Russian/Iranian relations as Russia turns eastward away from the cold shoulder of the west. And, of course, (dangerously for us) Russian/Chinese relations have warmed considerably for the same reason.

I place the blame for this disturbing transformation squarely at the feet of Obama, whose allegiance to the LGBT agenda supersedes all other concerns, even the very real and growing risk of nuclear war.

I still believe that Russia offers an albeit imperfect model for the west on standing up to the Cultural Marxists but with the US push toward revival of the cold war, the incessant anti-Russian propaganda in the western media, and Russia’s increasing political shift to the east, I hold less hope for an international Russian-led cultural revolution in family values.

Ironically, however, if any hope remains, it may be kept alive by Ukraine, itself. As an astute political observer of my acquaintance recently noted, Kiev thought the West offered them bread but instead gave them LGBT propaganda. Now Ukrainians are protesting in the streets against the “gay” agenda.

Obama might yet fail in poisoning the western world against Russia, as he has failed in so many areas of foreign policy. I for one would like to see a restoration of the cooperative trends we saw in US/Russian relations before Obama decided to sabotage them, and in the aftermath of that failure I think unity on family values would go a long way toward healing the rift he has exacerbated between Russia and Ukraine and toward weakening the US/EU perversion agenda in the rest of Eastern Europe and the Baltics.

Allan Wall #racist vdare.com

War On Christmas—War On American Food—War On America?

It’s not enough that Christmas is being replaced in the name of diversity–so is American food, at least according to the Main Stream Media, which wants to lecture us on how this means the historic American nation is inevitably being replaced too.

For years, we’ve been told that salsa now outsells ketchup in the US...But a recent Associated Press Article took it a step further, reporting that several well-known American foods are now being outsold by Mexican foods.

[...]

The AP article reports that

•“Tortillas and taco kits outsell hamburgers and hot dog buns”
•“Sales of tortilla chips trump potato chips”
•Tomato-based salsa not only outsells ketchup, but outsells ketchup 2 to 1

Gloatingly, the article explains that this is part of a demographic transformation (which, it implies, is inevitable and all good people support):

As immigrant and minority populations rewrite American demographics, the nation's collective menu is reflecting this flux, as it always has…This is a rewrite of the American menu at the macro level, an evolution of whole patterns of how people eat.

And we are reminded this is all due to a particular group of people who cannot be denied:

The biggest culinary voting bloc is Hispanic.

Ah, hah! Just as in electoral politics, the MSM is trying to persuade us that Hispanics trump all.

[...]

In fact, Hispanics make up only 17 percent according to the Census. But you get the idea.

This seeming contradiction is resolved via a coded racial slur by the Tortilla Industry Association’s CEO Jim Kabbani. Kabbani [Email him] is quoted as quipping:

"Having been raised on Wonder bread, I didn't think that this could displace the sliced bread that was such an item of the American kitchen."

This evokes the pejorative “white bread” epithet often hurled at traditional mid-20th century American culture.

The article ends with a contradictory quote from Terry Soto, an Ecuadorian woman who is “president and CEO of About Marketing Solutions, a consulting firm specializing in the Hispanic market”:

"There is a larger segment of the population that wants the real thing. It's not so much the products becoming mainstream. It's about ethnic food becoming that much more of what we eat on a day-to-day basis."

The contradiction is resolved—American Hispanics are, apparently, an authentic cultural bloc who will eat their own “real” food, while “white bread” Americans haplessly follow along until they are finally replaced.

[...]

The MSM multiculturalists are engaged in a bait-and-switch. They lull Americans to sleep with romanticized images of immigration, huddled masses, Ellis Island, etc. Then Americans wake up and are told their country has been irretrievably transformed into something else. That’s why we are told we can’t have Christmas anymore. In this case, it’s culinary fashion that is being used to promote the Demographic-Change-Is-Inevitable theme.

There’s that other subtext in the Hispanic Cuisine Hype.

Old White Anglo-European America—Bland and Boring—“White Bread”

Vs.

New Hispanic Multicultural America—Spicy, Vibrant and Exciting—“Salsa”

As a descendant of Old America, I naturally dispute its being characterized as “boring.” But that’s what the diversity-mongers want us to believe.

Whatever—the historic American nation has an origin, history, and identity. Is it to be radically transformed, beyond recognition, without our permission?

Apparently so, unless we can stop it.

It’s about who’s coming to dinner—not what is served on the table.

icareviews #racist icareviews.wordpress.com

*FUNDIE REVIEWS DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES*

Here is a worthy addition to the venerable Apes franchise. Like the original Heston classic, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is by turns poignant, thought-provoking, and unintentionally humorous in telling the tragic story of what befalls humanity in the wake of its decimation by a simian flu and the resulting collapse of civilization.

What little remains of Bay Area humanity lives together in downtown San Francisco, led by capable ex-soldier Dreyfus (Gary Oldman). The civilizationally ascendant apes, led by intelligent chimpanzee Caesar (Andy Serkis), inhabit the forest surrounding the city, unaware that humans have survived the plague.

When a chance encounter and death bring the two mutually resentful species into conflict, members of both groups believe their continued existence is at risk. At stake in this exciting installment of the franchise is whether peace is possible or full-scale war between the two tribes is an inevitability.

4.5 stars.

[WARNING: POTENTIAL SPOILERS]

Ideological Content Analysis indicates that the symbolism or subtextual resonance of the ape/human relationship in Dawn is variable, changing in meaning from scene to scene, so that a single comprehensive interpretation is impossible. Anecdotal analysis follows, however, yielding the following diagnoses:

4. Multiculturalist. All races live together in harmony in progressive post-collapse San Francisco. The diverse makeup of the human element, including blacks, softens the association that racially insensitive viewers are likely to draw between apes and blacks. That parallel is exploited, however (see no. 3), and the abstract sense that the apes are akin to the teeming anthropoid scatology constituting the world outside the West – and, increasingly, the West itself – is also unavoidable. (cf. no. 1)

3. Anti-gun. With the planet essentially set back to zero, the original sin that disrupts this new potential Eden is not the eating of fruit, but the bearing of arms. Carver (Kirk Acevedo), a character who bears a suspicious resemblance to George Zimmerman and who, given his Anglo name, is presumably supposed to be some kind of “white Hispanic”, sets the plot in motion when he panics and shoots a (no doubt angelic) chimp in the forest. Apes, at first hopeful of peaceful relations, confiscate and destroy a few of the humans’ guns. Carver later disobeys Caesar’s terms of cooperation by sneaking a gun into ape territory, putting a baby chimp in danger and alerting emotionally susceptible moviegoers that the guns in their homes are a multitude of dead baby tragedies waiting to happen.

2. Green. It is man’s energy dependency which brings him into conflict – in this case, with apes – when Dreyfus determines to get a power plant operating again. No alternative energy is available, viewers are told, the implication being that, had America’s government, in its wisdom, been allowed to invest more of its tax booty in clean, green energy alternatives, the humans’ post-apocalyptic plight might have been avoided.

1. Crypto-Zionist. The misleading notion that the American energy appetite – lust for oil, for instance – is responsible for drawing the country into its conflicts abroad only serves to distract from the reality that it is the Israel lobby, not hootin’, hollerin’ Texas oil barons, who have exercised a Svengali-like influence on American foreign policy in recent decades.

More interestingly, the climactic sequence of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes invites an interpretation according to which the humans, led by Dreyfus, are Jews, and the apes are the primitive gentile hordes. As this interpretation would have it, the climax of the movie presents a kind of encrypted dialogue between two competing Zionisms. Some explanation may be necessary for the uninitiated in matters Judaic as to why goyim might be cast as apes. What too few gentiles understand is that Talmud-taught Jews hold non-Jews to be subhuman, their word for a gentile woman, shiksa, meaning an “unclean animal”. The Yiddish slur goyim, furthermore, is used synonymously with “cattle“.

The name of the human leader, Dreyfus, calls to mind the notorious Dreyfus Affair, which, as Jewish history would have it, constitutes one of the most rabid episodes of anti-Semitism in the history of Christendom (practically the entire history of Christianity being a mere buildup to the “Holocaust” if Jewish historian Raul Hilberg is to be believed). The name Dreyfus, then, suggests a Zionist martyr, as do his words and actions in this momentous sequence.

Toward the end of the film, the simian army has taken control of San Francisco, with bloodthirsty ape usurper Koba* (Toby Kebbell) and his followers occupying a downtown tower as headquarters. Dreyfus and his fellow human-Jews, unknown to the ape-gentiles, have planted explosive charges under the tower – a tactic clearly reminiscent of the Israeli Mossad‘s controlled demolition of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

Dreyfus, defending his decision to eradicate the ape-gentiles when fellow human Malcolm (Jason Clarke) expresses his horror and his hope that ape/human reconciliation is still possible, explains that he is detonating the tower in order to save the human race (i.e., Jews). His position, in other words, is that every ape-gentile must die so that Jew-humans might survive. He then proceeds to explode the tower, himself along with it, considering his act of mass murder a selfless martyrdom. The actual result of his action, however, is that full-scale conflict between ape-gentiles and Jew-humans is now a permanent feature of their inextricable histories. Ape-gentiles will always be hostile and on the defensive from now on because the vindictive Jew-humans can “never forget”.

The Jewish screenwriters of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes appear to intend for their film to function both as a symbolic cover-up for the Jews in subliminally excusing them from principal responsibility for America’s wars of intervention – and, for the tuned-in members of the audience, as a warning to the hardcore terrorist Zionist establishment represented by such figures as Adelson, Netanyahu, Silverstein, Chertoff, Zelikow, Kissinger, Zakheim, Krauthammer, Kristol, Perle, and the rest of the Talmudic rats responsible for the Jew World Order under which gentiles are currently dying and suffering unnecessarily. Push too hard, they caution, and you might just give away the game.

*”Koba”, whether coincidentally or not, was the nickname of supposedly anti-Semitic Joseph Stalin (responsible for the “black years” of Soviet Jewry).

TarznanaWomen #fundie latimes.com

[Kayla Eland and Lindon Pronto say sharing a dorm room hasn't been awkward. The mixing of genders is a generational issue, Pronto says, and "Over the years, this division between men and women, which was so big, is slowly closing"]

What???? A non biological related raging hormone 21 year old male grossly immature to make such a comment. A young inexperienced women has a vagina, a male a penis, when mixed together just inches sleeping in close quarters is a 100% certain formula for rape, sexual harassment, compulsive masturbation and obsessing with a naked women you can hear breathing inches apart. A colossal recipe for disaster, pregnancy, failing grades, depression, emotional chaos that these youngsters won't be able to control, nor understand..biological anthropological reproductive hard wiring mating instincts override immature childlike undeveloped brains. What is with the Fathers of young college girls thinking it's okay for her to sleep with a man and think this will be an uplifting experience free from harm. Sexual drive does not change as these young fools profess, has nothing to do with some imaginary "division". Liberalism is a mental disease.

SchrodingersDick #crackpot #sexist #homophobia #transphobia incels.co

[Blackpill] My theory on lesbianism and feminism.

(It’s kind of all over the place. Not meant to be an essay; I copy pasted what I wrote offhand in a group chat with some homies.)

Possible lesbian formula:

1: Ugly: can’t get chad, sexually unsatisfied, never experienced submission to a larger-than-life dominant man

2: High standards: only wants gigachad because she is aware of his existence. No other man can match up, doesn’t want anything less than the best she’s aware of. It would be settling but she doesn’t see it as settling. finds herself not attracted at all, so thinks she’s not attracted to men period, except for the exceptional men.. Keenly receptive to mogging. Also prob damaged from being ugly in high school. Had a bad time immediately after being thrust into the sexual market/adult social hierarchy as a low value female.. did not recover.

3: Low self awareness: doesn’t realize that her disgust of 99% of men doesn’t mean she hates men with very very few exceptions/flukes, just means she’s a normal, healthy eugenicist

I dont have any personal experience with lesbians, but I seriously doubt that if you were to put one (any girl really) in a room with a gigachad, that she wouldn’t get wet, submit, and love every second of it. “You know even though I’m a lesbian, I weirdly liked it teehee I’m quirky I had these feelings I can’t explain and I felt so safe” .. shit like that. MAYBE some robust high T lesbians wouldn’t like that.. like the masculine one in a dyke relationship..

And girls turning dyke faster and with less resistance than guys “turning” gay or coming to the conclusion that they’re gay could just be female to female dynamics being unlike male to male dynamics. Foids are ok in close proximity with eachother, sharing a mate and shit.. men in proximity with eachother are sexual competition and will kill eachother for eggs.

The default life strategy for women is to trade their looks for the best deal they can get. Whether this be through prosecution, marriage, onlyfans, dating, even applying to jobs while wearing makeup, getting promotions by being hot/putting out, etc... so the Formula for a feminist is just be ugly and unable to leverage your eggs to make it through life comfortably. Be unable to exercise the default strategy for a women because you have very little value to trade and hence can not trade it for a good enough deal.. Be unsettled by this and imagine a world with an alternate source of value for women, one in which you could be considered high value (mandatory that this value metric be malleable. Personality, career, education, sense of humor, emotional strength, etc)... And then campaign and screech for society to recognize some other, malleable, source of value for women, in which, conveniently, you would have value and power in the eyes of society and most importantly your own eyes. “Women are more than their looks” - says the ugly girl.. “men are more than their height” - says the manlet. Same principle as trannies thinking their problems will go away, they will get to live in a new world with a new, more enlightened metric of value, and they will accept themselves but only after everyone else accepts, validates, and entertains their delusions. It is expecting the non malleable to adapt to the malleable. That is not how adaptation occurs. Adaptation takes the path of least resistance.

It’s really a defensive reaction to learning an uncomfortable truth about personal value, it being non malleable, and the unequal nature of people’s value. The world being generally cruel and unlike what Disney said it would be. So the world must change and there is nobility in being on the front lines. And like kaczynski said, it’s an outlet for hostility and satisfies the need for power.

The ugly feminist will stop being a feminist if she becomes hot. She won’t believe any of it anymore and won’t care about women’s progress or w/e the fuck unless doing so conspicuously confers social status to her. Feminists don’t want to be feminists, they just want to be hot. Feminism/striving for an alternate source of value is the next best option for curing their low self esteem.

The manlet will stop saying “height doesn’t matter” if he gets taller, unless for the same reason the now hot former feminist still preaches feminism. And like the feminist, the manlet doesn’t really want height acceptance, he just wants to be tall. Advocating manlet acceptance/bluepill ideology is the next best thing for his self esteem/life outcome/sexual success.

I don’t have an explanation for hot feminists. Strictly status seeking/herd mentality/tribe acceptance, or seeking high value in both metrics, both in looks, and in malleable metrics. or the handicap principle is applied. “Teehee I’m a feminist that just so happens to be hot, And I think girls shouldn’t be judged on their looks, even though I’m judged positively on my looks.. I dont put effort into my looks (because I don’t have to) and I’m still hotter than you.. im more than just my looks, I’m beauty AND brains”. Still, I’d imagine a girl with conservative friends would assimilate their beliefs and attitudes pretty quickly. Bitches are like water.

Every fake aspect of a removed-from-reality worldview is either a convenient lie or a supporting lie to back up some other convenient lie. Most people are professional copers.

g0ys.org #homophobia #transphobia #wingnut g0ys.org

(Warning: Much of the site is NSFW due to heavy use of homoerotic and even pornographic inages.)

Welcome to: G0YS.ORG - Reorient Your Paradigm!

"N0 TOPS, N0 BOTTOMS, N0 ANALSEX, N0 BITCHES, N0 MANGINAS, N0 GENDERFUCK, N0 DISRESPECT:
SIMPLY REAL MEN WHO HAPPEN TO LOVE OTHER MEN - AS MEN. WE ARE THE G0YS!"
Remember to bookmark / add to favorites!


Optimized

Love, Trust, Respect, Discretion, Masculinity
FACT: The Majority of Men Admire Masculinity; -But Do NOT identify as: "GLITQEtc"!

Men who look into the rapidly growing G0YS movement find there is a place for men who love masculinity, but don't feel comfortable with contemporary "GAY-Male" culture due to the entrenched stigmas & appalling health statistics surrounding it (I.E: a rate of sexually transmitted diseases that is [according to the American Red Cross] +4,000.00% higher than the general population)! G0YS represent the majority (say "majority") of men (+60%), -who experience affection for masculinity & choose to express it in an atmosphere of pure respect - without the least hint of moral compromise - NOR a compulsion to promote unhealthy, emasculating stereotypes. G0YS: A sane, sober, approach to masculine intimacy; -with comprehensive theological apologetics for those men who have serious concerns about the religious & moral aspects of M/M affections. G0YS: Unapologetically rational -&- politically liberty-centric!

Most of the men who discover the g0ys (spelled w. a zer0) men's movement are looking for answers to some serious questions about themselves. Most are shocked when they learn that +60% of all men have similar feelings (Yes, +60% - a majority)! Most (but not all) of these men have feelings for women, but grapple with questions arising from the fact that they also deeply appreciate masculine aesthetics & experience affections for other men! But, such men don't identify as "GAY" because that term has been welded with odd, x-gender behavior & AnalSex []; -Activities that most men consider odd, unhealthy, disgusting, & emasculating. Because of these core differences - g0ys do NOT fit into the (GLIBTQETC...) alphabet-soup culture & find much of it to be antagonistic to our masculine ethos.

"G0YS" know instinctively that loving other men has nothing whatsoever to do with AnalSex, gender-bending, x-dressing or otherwise playing the female role! G0YS, -by our very nature, find the entire notion of AnalSex [] in any form to be dirty, dangerous, degrading & damn-un-masculine. And, by shunning casual sexual encounters & completely rejecting AnalSex, G0YS avoid the very perils that spread +98% of ALL STI's/STD's among men! Among g0ys, STDs/STIs are virtually nonexistent compared to the STD/STI figures for the GAY-male community - which are (according to the Red Cross) +4000% higher than the general population! So, while "GAY"-men are plagued with STDs/STIs; - G0YS are NOT! These massive differences are why the g0ys movement matters! If this was merely some superficial argument about petty subjective matter, - then our position would be no different than the likes of meaningless arguments about trivia & personal biases. But, the g0ys movement does center around germane issues of human behavior: Specifically - why men of good conscience need to loudly reject the extremely perilous & injurious actions of a flood of old, dead, callous fools who killed themselves by their very actions & a vestige of shallow cultural progeny who wish to perpetuate their deadly mantras into the future in the name of "diversity" & "tolerance".

Many men who discover the g0ys movement have been abused by religion & told that Same-Gender-Affections (SGA) are "sin". G0YS know that this abuse by religion is so severe that an in-depth section of the main g0ys website has been developed to give substantial, exonerating, in-depth theological answers from several sources (including a Rabbinic PhD who has thoughtfully written on the subject matter). What we have proven in the theological section is how relying on the actual Scriptures represents the real strength of our position (instead of trying to water-down or deride Biblical texts as so many "pro-gay" churches do). G0YS also go into great depth to explain the rationale behind what was & wasn't prohibited in the Torah & more importantly: WHY. G0YS also expose serious, intentional mistranslations in the Bible and how a gigantic LIE arose over time due to those very mistranslations! The theological section is absolutely liberating & very essential for men who demand solid, in-depth, in-context answers to reconcile their faith & feelings without compromising truth, safety or morality. In this regard, G0YS claim to be one of the most comprehensive resources for answers on the planet!

Also within the g0ys main site are many essays that give analytical insight into 3000+ years of history; -proving that it always has been completely normal for men to seek a deep bond with other men -even on the physical level (a/k/a "Bromance+"). And we show how the modern, so-called "gay movement" has shamed M2M affection for decades as it was hijacked by pornographers, perverts, & sociopathic-personalities -- all with agendas that attempt to link their emasculating & disease-spreading fetishes with all Same Gender Affections (by suggesting that it's all part of the same "movement" [GLIBTQETC...]). It's essential to understand how a socialization movement can be perverted by special interests, & how important it is to reject that movement after it has been irreparably perverted by unhealthy agendas. G0YS show how natural male affection has been discredited & contaminated by a gender-bending, pro-AnalSex [], disease-spreading set of fetishes; --And how the term "GAY" has morphed into a word used to push every perilous sex act & bizarre behavior under the guise of "tolerance". G0YS understand that when a social movement results in actions that indiscriminately harm others --then it's time to STOP TOLERATING IT. So: Even though you are a guy who loves men /too -doesn't mean that you need to embrace the culture that is called "GAY". Men loving men is NORMAL; -- NOT gender dimorphic, nor part of some minority with bizarre & unhealthy fetishes! G0YS reject the entire "Gay Paradigm" & choose an older, healthier & far nobler path!

Within the g0ys main site you will also find links to other g0y-centric groups that are growing at a rate almost too fast to keep up with. We've listed many of them with space to add yours if you decide to become pro-active as a g0y, too. We have over a decade of commentary in some of the core groups & encourage your participation after you've taken some time to look over the main site. Doing so will get many of your initial questions out of the way -so that your appearance in the groups won't leave you too "green" as to the general posturing of the members & movement overall.

The g0ys groups also contain a collection of astonishing images of handsome men. You'll discover that g0ys aren't prudes at all & we have no qualms against nudity. We do insist that images be tasteful, & never showcase disrespect of a model. We believe that love is totally awesome & we have no qualms with images that display it between men. We do not believe that "genderfuck", abuse, pain or forms of domination constitute acceptable content (unless such images are used to deride abusive principles themselves). G0YS are all about respect. Our use of imagery tries to relay the clear message that men can totally love other men without anyone losing his respect nor making any sacrifice of masculinity.

George Paddeck #fundie livescience.com

Since "science" the scientific principle and the scientific approach are all creations of man and man is an imperfect creature, then it lends to thought that man's theories are also imperfect. This is proved by man as he has yet to create any "perfect" item. (and I do mean any) If "man" with our imperfect minds is somehow right about evolution then our lives are fruitless, amounting to nothing, and death should be no more than a moment's passing thought When man dies he returns to dust having not improved anything...he has just moved along the evolutionary time line.

If Christians are right, then at death man without belief will find his soul in one hell of a hot place.

Since neither theory can yet be proven correct or incorrect your use of the word "fact" is erroneous, once again proving that man and his theories are imperfect.

You will note that man's science books are outdated in 5 years and are constantly being updated to "fit" new "evidence". Religion has no such updating now does it?

Those who fail to challenge idiocy are destined to be governed by it!

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #pratt #wingnut #homophobia #transphobia #racist rottenwebsites.miraheze.org

1. Overall, FSTDT is similar to RationalWiki in that it's a left-leaning, mostly atheist and agnostic echo chamber where members more often act like petulant jerks who, by their own admission, love mocking and "calling out" people for saying things they don't like to hear instead of defeating others' arguments rationally. The key difference is that, unlike RW, FSTDT does not masquerade as an encyclopedia.
2. In 2014, a former 40-year atheist and blogger named Stan described the site as a place "…where Atheists and skeptics can have a safe harbor in which to ridicule that which they take out of context. Actually there is a link to context, but no one seems to have used it in my case. It's the sort of snake pit where the target du jour is countered with comments like "asshole", and the standard logic errors which they insist are the logical answers to the "idiot" they are trashing
3. The fact that many users choose to remain anonymous proves that they know what they're doing, while not illegal per se, is unethical enough that they don't want to get caught doing it, especially by the religious friends that many members claim to have in real life.
4. Their whole business model is flawed because, if there were no more writings they don’t like for them to quote on the Internet, the enterprise would lose its purpose and collapse.
5. Their arguments against whatever quotes they find are generally one-sided and full of logical fallacies, often as extremely ideologically biased towards the left as are those on RationalWiki or SJWiki, especially since quotes are taken out of context.
6. They tend to give tags to quotes that do not reflect the quote authors' original intentions, including giving the tag "#fundie" to quotes that have only minimal to no religious connotations. This makes it clear that they want their interpretations of anything they quote to be the only true and correct interpretations.
7. Although they aim to provide links to context for every one of their quotes, users don't seem to reference or pay attention to that context.
8. Many of their arguments amount to nothing more than argumentum ad hominems, or personal attacks, with childish insults and name-calling as well as lazy, unimaginative sex jokes solely to get a rise out of people.
This is often the case with their comments on many quotes under their tag "#dunning-krueger," which refers to people that they believe are "not nearly as smart as they think they are." It's another way of saying, "You're dumb because we said so!" and renders them guilty of the same sense of elitism that they condemn various quoting targets for showing.
The same principle applies to their tag "#pratt," an acronym for "Point Refuted A Thousand Times," which indicates a sense of laziness and unwillingness to have a civil debate and basically says, "We’re right, you're wrong, so shut up already."
9. The people running and/or contributing to it do a terrible job at sourcing for their quotes: many links to context are dead (happens a lot with links aged 10 years or older); image only; and unarchived social media posts that can be easily forged, deleted, or modified.
10. They hate U.S. President Donald Trump so much that they normally avoid saying "Trump" like the Bubonic Plague and do not offer any impartial criticism or say anything forgiving about him, believing that anyone who shows any sympathy or forgiveness towards him is a racist, neo-Nazi, or "wingnut" by association.
They like to whitewash originally well-intentioned but nowadays corrupt and violent groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the feminist movement.
11. They deny that feminism in history has come in waves and that, in the recent past with third-wave feminism/feminazism, the feminist movement is now a shell of its former self. They even accuse anti-feminist women of being "hypocrites".
12. Anyone who does not support toxic modern feminism is automatically a "#sexist" in their eyes.
13. Anyone who does not support BLM's violent behavior is automatically a "#racist" in their eyes.
They mislabel people guilty of ethnic hatred or xenophobia as "racist" even though individual human races/skin colors are not one and the same as ethnicities or national identities.
14. Like many social justice warriors, they promote minority groups in ways that even minority groups themselves might find offensive. For example, they support LGBTQ2+ characters being inserted casually into entertainment regardless of quality or consequences, force everyone to accept them and condemn anyone who doesn’t accept them or care about their activism, and suggest that anyone who isn’t pro-LGBTQ2+ is automatically a homophobe. All of this essentially gives the LGBTQ2+ community in the real world a bad name.
15. They give credence to the idea that there are more than two genders.
16. As their Website's title implies, they have no qualms in using Christophobic (anti-Christian) language. For example, when discussing matters of Nazism and religion, they often go on screeds about how Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party were (allegedly) Christian. In reality, Hitler was staunchly opposed to mainstream Christianity, according to his Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, and saw it as a branch of Judaism, which he of course hated even more. He thus invented the false religion of "positive Christianity" to deceive German Christians of the day into thinking that they were doing "God's work" by serving the führer.
17. Though one of their tags is "#moonbat" for quotes composed by "left-wing nutjobs," this tag is hardly ever used compared to "#wingnut" for quotes written by "right-wing nutjobs." This makes it even clearer that they are biased towards the left.
18. They like to present readers with crudely-made conclusions instead of letting the evidence speak for itself. This is more of an act of insecurity as they fear that people will not see things the way they do and expect every argument they make to be taken seriously.
19. Many of its members act toxically and intolerantly towards anyone who so much as disagrees with them.
Although they claim to have Christian users, hardly anyone ever comments on quotes to offer a Christian perspective nowadays.
20. They are extremely pro-social justice: they are primarily interested in attempting to correct people and being right, aggressively attacking all who disagree. They claim that this is for their own self-amusement when they write like they would establish dictatorial control over what people say on the Internet if they could, believing that what they do to their targets is somehow "needed". They admit that the only reason they support free speech is so they can have something to attack!
21. It underwent a major revamp in 2019, but its basic, blocky, blandly-colored aesthetics without any modern graphics or features make it look like it's from the late 1990s-early 2000s era.
22. That said, it suffers from a poor Website design overall because it lacks many features and technical conveniences that would be normally present on a message board. For example:
- There is no menu to select how many quotes/comments can be viewed per page, including in search results.
- Search engine filters/results sorters are not always as accurate as they could be.
- The search engine only works with finding quotes, not comments; nor does it list the number of results per search query.
- Sometimes, the last page of a search results list, for whatever reason, turns up completely blank.
- There is no option to report comments (probably intentional, given how the site encourages people to be mean-spirited).
- User pages are nothing more than lists of quotes users have found and comments they've made (probably to preserve their anonymity).
23. Its painfully unprofessional and outright immature logo features a "sexy flying Jesus penis," a crudely-photoshopped devil version of pop singer/songwriter Taylor Swift practicing martial arts, devils in flying saucers, a reptilian alien-type creature with devil horns, a NyQuil bottle with devil horns surrounded by fire, and what appears to be a Biblical leviathan in a bathtub (in reference to one of their more popular and infamous quotes from 2009) eating fast food from McDonald's.
24. If anyone dares to object to the 2020 Coronavirus quarantine or criticizes how governments handle it or how the media misrepresents data and statistics surrounding it, FSTDT will surely go on a witch hunt after them.
25. They do not take responsibility for their actions: they blame others for getting themselves quoted by FSTDT, even if they realize that they have the power and the choice not to quote people they don't like and not to let silly things people write online offend them so much. Moreover, no self-respecting FSTDT user will ever admit to SJW-type behavior.
Likewise, in their FAQ section under "But You're Defaming Me!" they try to rationalize their efforts to defame people by arguing that their targets are sabotaging themselves, not considering the possibility that the quotes they find might have different intended meanings than what they read.
26. When people on other Websites criticize or counter-mock them, they do not usually take the criticism or counter-mockery well.

Al Kelz #racist stormfront.org

Re: Super-viruses could be engineered to exterminate certain ethnic groups, expert warns

I’m not joking .

I am well aware of the threat of this being used on us which is why I want us to strike first . Technology has made the world a smaller place . To small in fact .

It may no longer be adequately possible to seperate different and incompatible species of humans on the same planet . Even Darwin predicted that advanced races would hunt the more primitive humans to the point of extinction .

Darwin essentially advocated a Turner Diaries solution a century plus before Dr. Pierce even started writing .

Other races do not share our compassion . Some may aspire to and attempt to emulate us but when the chips are down they invariably reveal their true nature . That true nature is a product of their DNA .

I would prefer such weapons never be contemplated much less developed but that is not up to me .

Others have already explored the idea . There are internet postings about Chinese officials debating the possibility of biological attacks to depopulate North America . And there were rumors of experiments on captured American soldiers in Korea / Vietnam wars to develop such weapons and of course articles about Israel developing them as the final solution for the Palestinian problem .

All of these should be taken with a grain of salt . Even if they were true those in position to actually do anything aren’t going to be broadcasting their intentions all over the internet .

But eventually the power to do so will likely become a reality . Right now there are no Pro-White goverments so we are at a disadvantage in a biological arms race . But most people smart enough to do this are White . They could sabotage or steal the formula or release it on their own .

If I had the power to kill our enemies and biological competition I would act unilaterally to do so . Without a White Goverment , and with most Whites conditioned from birth not to be on the side of their own species , something no race but ours has to cope with and with a impending genocide loooming .

If I could kill them all , I would and hope for the best . Any viruses developed would be living things and living things evolve . So a weapon designed to kill one group may well evolve and once it evolves there is no telling what it may do ? Once it runs out of hosts it will die and it may not take its impending extinction any better then I do . It may look for a new host ? but at some point that may be a risk we have to take .

But with the deck stacked against us so bad . And with so many people unwilling to lift even a finger to help us . At this point , something like this may well need to happen for us to survive .

Sorry . My .02 .

Jorge S #fundie bibleforums.org

Evolution is based on analogy and extrapolation of observational data. The more Evolutionists dig the more they bring out information saying: "look, folks, there are so many variables and conditions necessary to enable and sustain life that we can't really figure out how it happened." Worst of all, it was a once-off phenomenon without witnesses to rely on except the One they want to erase from the picture: The Creator Himself.

We should thank them, though, for confirming that our Heavenly Father is, indeed, VERY SMART!!! [...]

Talking about our Heavenly Father, let us give our tireless Evolutionists a hearty piece of advice. The Courts of Heaven are going to be really busy with this Evolution Lawsuit at the Final Judgement. There is a long queue of defendants, as you may expect. Please, be considerate and prepare your defence in advance. The Supreme Judge is known to ask every defendant in a very benevolent tone: "Son, why have you wasted so much energy in denying My Authorship when I openly left so many proofs of My Handwork? As you can see now, I just made you in My Own Image and after My Likeness, and I also made a perfect world for you and your fellow humans. Why did you despise My Word in The Bible!?"

Vox Day #fundie voxday.blogspot.com

[Research found different neural pathways in men's and women's brains]

It's amusing how they can't help but describe their findings in a futile attempt to appeal to women rather than to offend them. It's not the map-reading that is relevant; the real takeaway here is that women are less logical on average because their right hemisphere interferes with the ability of their left hemisphere to logically process information. It's never been any secret that women are less logical; among other things, that's why women weren't permitted to vote in the first place. But now, thanks to science, we are beginning to understand that limits such as these weren't set out of simple prejudice, but rather out of the straightforward desire for societal self-preservation.

And, as the consequences have demonstrated, the West violated those limits at its peril, a mistake for which we are all, men and women alike, paying the price.

It should be fascinating to see what happens when similar studies begin providing unavoidable scientific explanations for the differences between various human population groups that everyone observes, but affects to either deny or explain away.

Richard Allan Wagner #conspiracy thetruthaboutshakespeare.com

Hopefully you, the reader, have come into this discourse as a reasonable and unbiased individual—a seeker of Truth. If you’re not already aware, there exists much controversy and debate over who actually wrote the works attributed to the highly mysterious author known as “William Shakespeare”.

Yes, the vast majority of people on the planet have generally (and unknowingly) accepted the premise that a man named “William Shakespeare” (of Stratford) wrote the literary works attributed to him. The problem rests with the fact that there is scarce evidence of the Stratford man’s existence—but more importantly, there is NO TANGIBLE EVIDENCE the “Stratford man” wrote the literary body of work for which he is given credit—in fact, there is a mountain of hard, legitimate evidence to the contrary!

As extraordinary as it may seem, there is an avalanche of substantial evidence that reveals Francis Bacon to be the true genius behind the creation of the Shakespearean works! The evidence further reveals Bacon to have been the first (secret) son of Queen Elizabeth I. Moreover, the evidence also shows Bacon to have been the founder of modern, Speculative Freemasonry.

The Shakespearean works consist of a vast infrastructure of encryption—all of which rely on the precision and beauty of Numbers. The hard evidence (as we shall see) overwhelmingly shows that Francis Bacon artfully wove coded numbers into the Shakespearean tapestry not just as an amusement, but rather as a vehicle intended to serve as a paradigm of enlightenment designed to move the reader to much higher levels of understanding!

Categorically the cryptic “Shakespeare Sonnets” are at the apex of the Shakespeare Treasure Trail because they are understood by the vast majority of Shakespearean scholars to represent the Author’s Autobiography.

It is generally assumed that “1609” was the year in which SHAKE-SPEARES SONNETS was first published. However, as Edward D. Johnson has effectively demonstrated, 1609 is a code number rather than a publication date. Therefore, 1609 is a false publication date. Johnson states: “In 1609 anything written by Shakespeare was in great demand—the quartos of the plays were reprinted over and over again.”

“If these Sonnets had been published in 1609 then there would have been so great a demand for the work of a popular writer as Shakespeare that this book of Sonnets would have been reprinted again and again. Why was it not reprinted? Because it was not originally printed in 1609. The absence of reprints is a problem which has never been explained by the Stratfordians [or by the Oxfordians].” “There is absolutely no mention of the Sonnets as a complete body of verse or any phrase or quotation in letters, diaries, printed book or pamphlet between the years 1609 and 1624, a period of 15 years. This book was not seen by the public until 1640, when an edition was printed, 31 years after 1609.”

Finally, Johnson concludes:

“That there was neither printed nor published any book entitled Shake-Speare’s Sonnets in 1609 is also proved by the fact that there is no reference to this book by any Shakespearian commentator between the years 1609 and 1640.” The hard evidence unequivocally establishes the original publication of the Shakespeare Sonnets could not have occurred prior to 1621. All 154 sonnets and their accompanying “cover pages” are heavily encrypted with Bacon’s Kabbalistic Masonic code—clearly, nothing about them can be taken at face value.

larry lunchpail #fundie christianforums.com

proofs are for scientists, and/or people with time to amuse people of your ilk, im an artist, i can go around making all the outrageous unsubstantiated claims that i wish. in addition to my own general apathy, the fact that you took that [pro-evolution] site at face value without investigatings its claims on your own (hey if its online its gotta be true) leads me to believe that youre immune to proofs anyhow. theres some logic for ya, thatll hafta suffice. 'prove this, prove that wah, wah, wah' hahahaha dude you know what i said was true, youre just trying to get me to do your homework, so to speak.

hilLIARy #racist fstdt.com

Let’s face it: integration is a complete failure for both Whites and Negroes. Everyone is unhappy with the results. Whites do not want to be anywhere around the Negro. Wealthy whites (liberals) voluntarily segregate from them because they are financially able. Other whites are forced to live among the negro because the government mandated it. Many people at the time of this policy change, knew this was a major mistake. It would not work. Yet they were forced to go along with this plan. Like communism, on paper to some, it seemed like a good idea. In practicality a disaster! Everyone says it in private, but is afraid to say it in public because of the Red Guard of political correctness.

Even the great ‘white liberals’ feel this way. While they give lectures at universities, chit chat at bow tied cocktail parties, write books no one reads about the merits of multiculturalism, diversity and integration, behind the scenes they move into lily white areas, and send their kids to private schools, away from the Negro menace. The poor whites, Asians and others, are stuck and left behind have to pay the consequences of the hypocrisy of the liberal mindset. Their kids do not have a chance in hell to get a good education because of the lowing of scores and being immersed in the garbage culture of rap and hip hop that surrounds them. The Anti-education culture of the negro. They are too young to know the poison this culture is. To some it becomes their reality. They are lost to the world. They become wiggers. On the level of skid row bums.

Without segregation the Negro has sunk even lower. Living without strict rules and regulations set up by the white man, they are unable to cope with modern society. Hence look at their neighborhoods, their crime rates, and their malfunction as functioning members of a civilized society. They have no capacity to govern themselves. This was stated hundreds of years ago by the founding fathers. Nothing has changed!

We must re-segregate. Whites and Asians on one side, and Negroes on the other. I know many liberal whites are thinking: what kind of crazy racist post is this. But deep down you know that a world without the Negro, is a much better place to be. Think of New York with the Negro menace. One variable: the train stations. Think how different they would be without the negro criminal waiting to strike. The crime, the degradation and disintegration of all communities they inhabit would be confined to their areas. There schools are a disaster whenever they are in the majority. Do you want your kids to become wiggers by osmosis learning about African bushboogies? Or do you want your children to become first rate scholars learned in the ideals of Western thought of science and logic. Why do liberals force the poor whites Asians in a world, they have no intention of living themselves! For example: The Clintons had no intention of sending their child to a Washington DC majority black school system. Yes they professed the merits of integration (just not for their child).

Start thinking what is best for you, and your family, not what is best for social engineering plans concocted by people who have no intentions of living themselves!

Plus, for the Negro this would be an ideal situation. You can have a world away from the White man and Asain corner stores, and live any way they want. You can have as much crime, as you like. Illegitimacy can be 100%. Rap can be your national culture. No white man looking over your shoulder shaking their head in disgust. A 75 IQ would be considered a genious. 40% would be a passing grade, Oprah would be the standard of beauty, no white woman to make negresses feel ugly. Free of White supremacy, Asian brain power, and Western thought. Become completely Afrocentric. Act anway you want. Elect 50 cent as your president. Your schools can teach the legends of great Negro dynasties where Christ, Moses, Mozart, Bach, Einstein, Freud, George Washington were Negroes. The Negroes built the pyramids, Europe, China, landed on the moon all the while the white man was living in caves. Teach your kids the negro invented the White man in laboratories. While the white man splits the atom you can split the watermellon. Everthing is equal of merit. Going to jail would give you more pride than going to medical school. You can have the world you desire. It is a win win situation for all.

Have a nice day!

André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

image

The 9th of November 2016 was a great day. We will remember it as well as our parents remember the first moon landing in July 1969 or the fall of the Berlin wall. Liberal mainstream media—almost a pleonasm—are either stunned or agitating. Some of these crybullies clamour to themselves how “fearful” they are, lament on the “destruction of the West”—a curious expression as it seldom appears under leftist pens—or have difficulties to acknowledge that the man they have despised and defamed every day for months will be the 45th President of the United States.

Outside the US, The Donald’s victory is creating waves, too. So many liberals allegedly connected to the Canadian Immigration website to crash it. In France, the bourgeois bohemians who work in the media, academia and everything that constitutes the big left establishment do the same posturing than their American counterparts, whereas the petits blancs (impoverished, disenfranchised whites) and local “righters” rejoice.

In Brazil, where your humble servant lives, the official media is making some tedious comments that deliver a flabby criticism. Local leftist talking heads condemn the “white protestants” and reality shows in a very cliché posturing that mixes anti-white prejudice with a critique of capitalism, whereas some new traditionalists, among whom some have been avid readers and makers of Alt-Right content, are grateful.

This is our victory.

A pro-Pepe Facebook group has had a substantive discussion about where a red-pilled foreigner considering moving to the US after the Donald won should go. To make a long story short, some have advised potential newcomers to go live in the Midwest, in Texas as long as one stays away from Houston or Dallas, in Wyoming for the gun rights, in Pennsylvania excluding Philadelphia and the urban areas, close to the Appalachian mountains if one enjoys outdoors, while staying away from Illinois. Most of those who participated were whites, but I have spotted some Latino and Arab names. Some made jokes on these names but no fuss.

And here the following question arises. What defines us? Liberals have been shrieking about “xenophobia” or “racism” all the time. Yet, strictly national boundaries are much less relevant than before, even for us, even when we all rejoiced about Trump’s promise to make a wall. All over the world we are rejoicing around the GOP candidate’s victory.

American “Trumpists” undoubtedly feel closer to non-Americans who have been dissenting from the NWO on the Internet and wanted the Donald to pass than to American libtards. A lot of us are OK with having non-whites around: we don’t pander to arrogant, aggressive anti-whites, but that does not mean we would have to be “racists” as the liberal caricature wants us to be. To cut in more personally, I know of no genuine red-pilled or Alt-Righter who would have rejected me as a frog, although I remember some stars and stripes cucks blaming me for daring to speak about American politics without owning a US passport.

So, once again, what defines us? Why are we a “we”? Race plays a role for sure. We struggle to keep the white people from getting dissolved into the acid bath of wide-scale miscegenation and dispossession. We want a right to solidarity based at least partly on race, i.e. on lineage and identity, just like all the pseudo-minority groups out there. We fight the double standard that allows them to be communitarian, tribalistic, nepotistic, without being ever responsible of what they do, whereas we are supposed to keep our heads down and be taught everything by liberal social engineers in a world where we would have no freedom, no future, no dignity.

But even then, there have been Blacks, Latinos, and many women who participated into bringing The Donald to the White House. I have a race-mixed friend who supported Trump all along. This is not to say “I’m not a racist!,” afraid cuckservative-style, but to show there are some and we know it firsthand.

It is no mystery why most of us are white: we are united around a civilization that was primarily built by people of European descent. But there is more, too.

And this “more” that, I think, defines and binds us; this “more” is shared awareness.

We are all aware, broadly speaking, of the same phenomena and trends. We have witnessed the break-up of families and harmonious relationships between men and women. We have been faced with the untold prohibition to make the least critic of feminism, “minority groups” aggressive identitarianism, and with the pervasive omnipresence of these leftist norms commonly referred to as political correctness. We have seen neoliberalism allowing a handful of careless, irresponsible assholes sending the jobs overseas, importing third-world immigration, then force us into a life of chronic unemployment or endless struggles against other low-wage individuals for a small place under the sun.

We saw how conservatism was a sham that never faced the genuine problems. We witnessed societies crumble, conflictual “minoritarian” group identities being crafted by the likes of Soros, and the meritorious worker or professional—whatever his race—getting exploited to the benefit of the lower and upper parasites. We saw the liberal establishment using various social categories like pawns to create horizontal struggles and depopulation.

Of course, some disagreements can be found on this or that particular issue, but we all see the same devastated landscape in lieu of the brilliant civilization the West once was.

Wyatt's Torch #fundie moonbattery.com

"Wyatt, the last 8 years were a disaster. And while I am not thrilled over this first year of Obama's first term, I recognize he was not going to wave a wand and fix the mess created by your "free markets" and (not so) small government. It is also amusing how you call Obama a "cult of personality" while blogs like this almost have a daily circle jerk to Sarah Palin."

No one is circle-jerking to Palin except liberals who can't get laid and need some fantasy life. Oh yes, you KNOW that's true. You guys have such a hard-on for her because you know she's a real woman, unlike the always-angry, crystal-wearing, Prius-driving, always-have-a-headache, tofu-eating, organic-veggie-vegan women you're stuck with. (i.e. Professor Amy Bishop!)

As to "my free markets", that says everything I need to know about you. PROGRESSIVES f-ed up the economy, education, the media, and BUSH WAS A PROGRESSIVE. It's been going on since the early 1900's.

But I'm not going to educate you, son. You are a lib. Your day is past. You are less than nothing...and you KNOW it.

Send your name and address and an Amy Bishop tee shirt will be on it's way to your door!

AJ #racist realjewnews.com

Putin is incredibly deft and knows how to handle the Jews!

It would be foolish for a world leader or someone in such a prominent position to attack the Jews directly because they possess too much power. When Hitler attempted to remove the Jews from Germany from within, they mercilessly attacked Germany from without and then WWII happened.

Like Bruce Lee, Putin knows the art of fighting without actually fighting. He must have internalized the Chinese philosopher and military strategist Sun Tzu’s philosophy:

“Supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.”

“It is useless to fight against people’s rigid ways, or to argue against their irrational concepts. You will only waste time and make yourself rigid in the process. The best strategy is to simply accept rigidity in others, outwardly displaying deference to their need for order.

“On your own, however, you must work to maintain your open spirit, letting go of bad habits and deliberately cultivating new ideas.”

Kent Hovind #fundie kenthovindblog.com

Open letter to House speaker John Boehner and all US Congressmen,

HOLD FIRM! NO TAX INCREASE FOR ANYONE! NO increase in the Debt ceiling! The government needs more money “from the rich” like a drug addict needs “one more fix” before he decides to quit or an alcoholic needs “one more beer” before he starts to sober up! STOP RIGHT NOW!

It should be obvious to anyone with one eye and half a brain that the REAL goal in all this political posturing by Barak Obama and many Democrats is simply the advancement of Communism in America. I don’t understand how ANYONE- Republican, Democratic or Independent can want to increase “revenues” even one more dime! There is a spending problem not a revenue problem but it goes even deeper than that!

The entire idea of “take from the rich and ‘redistribute’ to the poor” is pure Communism 101. Go to ANY communist country to see how they got there and the end result. They always follow Karl Marx’s thinking and the idea that you take two steps forward and one step back. Everyone thinks they backed up but they are actually one step closer to the goal! That is all Barak is doing. Don’t “compromise” ONE INCH!

Everyone in Congress, the Senate and the Executive branch (and judicial branch!) took an oath to follow and defend the U. S. Constitution. I would suggest they ALL get it off the shelf, dust it off and read it. It’s only a few pages long. It gives the clear limits of government. I can solve the financial crisis in 10 minutes! Follow the Constitution! Why are “The Feds” involved in: education? a war on drugs? foreign wars that don’t involve us? welfare of any kind? medical decisions of any kind?

You should follow the Constitution and “coin money” and shut down the mis-named “Federal Reserve” and put us on a real money basis. Why do you let private bankers print our “money?” Shut down about 95% of all government programs and lay off about 95% of the government workers and release all federal prisoners who did commit a crime on federal property like Post Offices and Military bases and scale the Fed WAY back to what the founders envisioned. Stop calling ANYTHING an “entitlement.” There are NO entitlements. No one is “entitled” to welfare, Social Security, Obama Care, Medicare, education or 1,000 other programs at the federal level. If ANY program cannot be found in the Constitution you swore to uphold, shut it down. Stop funding it! That is your job. That would “balance the budget” in 10 minutes!

There you have it. Everyone else seems to be giving their ideas on the fiscal cliff so I’d throw in my 2 cent’s worth. We went over the cliff MANY years ago. The ONLY solution to America’s SERIOUS problems is found in II Chronicles 7:14. Our problem is spiritual and the solution is spiritual not political. We need to return to our godly heritage. God would have spared Sodom if He could have found 10 righteous people. Are there 10 in Congress? The Senate? In the Executive branch? Judicial? I pray so!

The founders knew that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. They also knew the power to tax is the power to destroy. They gave CLEAR instructions in the Constitution about taxes and what the federal government could and could not do. Go to www.wallbuilders.com and read what the founders said. They gave great advice for times like these!

Speaker Boehner, you folks in Congress are supposed to control the purse strings. Well, DO YOUR JOB PLEASE! Don’t vote for ANY spending outside the limits of the very document you swore to uphold. If the president wants to go over the cliff, let him. DON’T have your fingerprints ANYPLACE ON IT PLEASE! We need Statesmen NOT politicians! Ignore the polls, the Senate, the media, the critics and follow the Constitution please. For all of us!

Kent Hovind – POW in America

Mike Soussan #conspiracy thoughtpursuits.com

In mathematics, prime numbers are those divisible only by one and themselves. Examples of prime numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19 etc.. Prime numbers have very peculiar properties such as the fact that any nonzero natural number greater than 2 can be factored into primes. In this sense, they constitute the building blocks of all other numbers. This and many other characteristics make them really intriguing entities and mathematicians are still pondering about many of their aspects and feverishly working at cracking one of their most unyielding mysteries: the presence or not of a definite pattern in their sequential enfoldment.

Lately, I have been studying the Riemann Hypothesis, which is considered by many in the field as the greatest unsolved mathematical mystery of all times (with the Fermat Last Theorem and the Poincare Conjecture having already been proven). I will not burden you with the nitty details of what this famous conjecture seeks to prove, but just that it has to do with prime number sequences and the presence or not of a sensible pattern in their seemingly infinite distribution. I do not claim to understand the hypothesis in its entirety, and as a matter of fact, I often felt dizzy going up and down the complex equational hills and negotiating the convoluted formulaic bends of what I am convinced was a premeditated attempt by a hermetic and sinister click of beady-eyed, vicious and self-centered abstraction-paranoid professional scientists to obfuscate the view from a closely held secret, one that is reserved only to the very select and the initiated.

Read more at: http://www.thoughtpursuits.com/prime-numbers/

This is what I gleaned from my frustrating outsider proddings:

No doubt about it, prime numbers must have a pattern and the pattern will be most likely found when we arrive at a deeper understanding of the space-nature of time, its physicality as opposed to its abstracting chronological aspect. In the same manner that the known 92 or so naturally occurring chemical elements are the building blocks of the natural physical space, prime numbers, in their apparently random sequencing have a method in their madness, are indeed a mathematical notion of the most relevant and deep kind and are the building blocks of the natural physical time, time being that hyper-dimensional ocean of existence, that subtle vibrational fountain-head from which everything manifest emerges.

dapoxetine in bangladesh generika deutschland achat priligy france dapoxetine online kopen oder emla. reliable dapoxetine pharmacies emea dapoxetine atarax online cheap … what is hydroxyzine pamoate 25mg capsules used for … stop atarax reviews

As weird and flaky as it may sound, numbers are things, and some particular numbers are very special things ( and I did arrive at this conclusion many years ago while studying guess what… Mathematics? Chemistry? Physics? No, abnormal psychology, but that is another of my stranger-than-you-can-suppose stories, however true and non-confabulated :). Numbers are not just imagined representations but are truly the one-dimensional source-points from which higher dimensional categories ramify forming the backbone of our five-senses’ revealed reality. I believe that prime numbers are not just sterile mental abstractions but have instead a character, a property, a flavor and a distinct energy store valacyclovir at room temperature, viagra super men’s health pharmacy dapoxetine online between 59 and 77 degrees f (15 and 25 degrees c). buy levitra that makes them as palpable and real as oxygen, carbon or hydrogen. I came to be convinced that the prime numbers’ role in the general architectonic configuration of being, is that of forming the joining vertices of the distinct polyhedral buy generic valtrex online canada resource cost of brand name zoloft continue sale and use and engineering are much full-time against m. as of zoloft online nov 6, 2014 – order dapoxetine no prescription – buy quality medications from reliable online pharmacy, absolute privacy guaranteed, bonus pills per no , geometric structures of the hyper-dimensional body of time and the axial poles around which they spin, gather “cosmic dust” and eventually appear (thru some not yet fully understood “alchemical” process) as the spiral tornados of manifest objects that make the three dimensional landscape (from microscopic DNA helices of the human gene to the light-years spanning galactic arms of the Milky Way), and the long and undulating corpus of history that filters thru our lower-dimensional consciousness as the discreet and concatenating string of unfolding natural and cultural events.

I have about 25 pages of further material on the subject, with formulas and equations to boot, just to show that this is not just brass-sounding or cymbal-tinkling rap but a serious scientific hypothesis. I will elaborate more once I find a simpler and more dignified way of hanging out this stinky salmon to dry.

Anonymous #conspiracy griperblade.blogspot.com

I think it's interesting that they canceled Beck's show right before the election. As with most liberals, they would rather silence a dissenting voice rather than try to answer his talking points. The Democratic Party portrays themselves as smarter, more concerned, for the little people, etc. When you're motivated by hated, you will eventually be consumed by it. I'm a conservative Libertarian. In the '60s I was a radical liberal, but I grew up when I saw through the hypocrisy and hatred for anything conservative. I don't hate blacks, hispanics, or anyone else by virtue of their skin color or beliefs. The liberals are already playing the race card with Obama, saying that America is a racist country. So if he doesn't get elected, it won't be because of his questionable associations or policies that will essentially destroy this country, but America's "racism." Pennsylvania's former Governer, Bob Casey, wasn't allowed to speak at the Democratic Convention because he was pro-life. And being a Democrat didn't matter--it was that one issue that prevented him from speaking, even though he had no intention of even mentioning anything about that subject.
In other words, freedom of speech is only allowed if the speech is liberal. Period. End of story. Reading all the hate posts here is amusing--especially considering it's coming from caring, concerned liberals.
Incidentally, I found this site by typing in something very different. I'll leave you to figure out what it was.

Scott1 #fundie puritanboard.com

There is no biblical rule that requires abstinence from "cinema."

There are, however, biblical principles and commandments that apply to movie going as to many areas of life.

There is much pop culture worldly garbage marketed as entertainment that a Christian ought abstain from.

Is the content geared toward profanity? Blasphemy? Mockery of what is good? Glorification of what is evil?

Is spending the money on it good stewardship?

Is spending the time attending, talking and thinking about the movie good stewardship of time?

One aspect of sanctification will be less tolerance of the profane, more care in spending money, more concern about idleness, less concern about amusing oneself, and more concern about what is true, good and pure.

OnlyTheGhosts #conspiracy deviantart.com

OnlyTheGhosts: Just a curious little thing that many people aren't aware of, because they don't pay attention;

The Stux virus was detected in Fukushima on computers there about 3 days before the big quake. On the day of the quake and tsunami, NONE of the emergency safety systems functioned as designed - engineers had to do everything manually. The Stux virus certainly didn't cause the quake, but it was likely the main culprit as a contributing factor for those systems failures that confused the technicians, and the Stux virus was created by the USA and Israel.

Genny-Raskin: Riiight. Because Israel is obviously hates Japan. Wait what?

You also tend to forget that Israel always the first country to offer humanitarian help during such disasters, including to our "enemies". And sends people to help people who were trapped from ruined homes and houses. Doctors to heal the wounded and the sick, medication, food and supplies and etc.

You know, not every hacker that creates some kind of shit: does it for his/her own country or represents it. They usually do this for their own amusement.
Also there is no way you could possibly predict an earthquake for more than 24 hours prior. So it was just an unlucky coincidence, if it even happened.
And also, even if there was a virus, then how does it makes the physical structural damage? Oh right, It was an earthquake.

You know, you can find thousands of reasons to hate someone. You can find justifications for these reasons. You can believe in them with all of your heart. But all these - don't make them true.
I'd suggest finding a new hobby, which does not include hate, prejudice and conspiration theories.

Have a nice week.
I deem this conversation over.

OnlyTheGhosts: You really are dumb. Read and educate yourself, twit.

http://www.thejournal.ie/irishman-shows-the-world-the-dangers-of-stuxnet-31544-Oct2010/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/stuxnet-will-come-back-to-haunt-us.html?_r=0

https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/10/the_story_behind_the.html

Stux spread worldwide, out of control, to other nuclear facilities using the same type of systems. Fukushima was one of those places.

I never said a damn fucking thing about predicting any quakes 24 hours before - that's just your silly shit.

However, the virus infecting the computers and disrupting the safety systems was most likely a contributing factor to the Fukushima nuclear disaster, making the radiation and fallout a WHOLE LOT WORSE - whether intentional or not.

By the way, it may also have escaped your limited attention span that back in 2011, just before the Stuxnet worm was discovered in Fukushima computer systems, that the Japanese government pissed-off those nutty Zionists in Israel by recognising and dealing in polite, friendly, properly diplomatic, and humane manner with the Palestinians - unlike apartheid Israel with it's policy of terrorising thousands of Palestinians by slaughtering them with a trumped up "war" every couple of years for the past six decades.

You can take your craziness and paranoia elsewhere. Fuck off, idiot. You're blocked because you react like a moron with knee-jerk stupid defence of Israel, which is a fucked-up racist warmongering loony nation anyway - - - instead of treating FACTS and LOGIC and REALITY with the respect that a sane, intelligent person should.

Matt Palumbo #wingnut bongino.com

Just days ago, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders repeated a claim from a highly dubious Washington Post study, that “in 2016, counties hosting a Trump rally saw a 226% spike in hate crimes.” Ilhan Omar has repeated the claim, as have the NAACP, MSNBC’s Joy Reid and Joe Scarborough, among many others.
Politifact gave a generous ruling to the claim in grading it “half-true” because of some caveats they found in the study, such as the fact that “the data can be subject to ‘statistical noise’ [unexplained variability] and jurisdictional differences in hate crime definitions and police aggressiveness, and that cause and effect are hard to pinpoint.”
A bigger problem isn’t that the definitions of hate crimes differ from jurisdictions, its that the Post doesn’t use a database of hate crimes at all in their study. In fact, that Politifact even thought jurisdictional issues would be relevant here calls into question how heavily they scrutinized the study. As the popular Facebook fact checker “Meme Policeman” noticed when he began diving into the numbers, the list of hate crimes that the Post used in their analysis wasn’t a list of hate crimes as traditionally recorded:
Their definition of hate crimes included anti-Semitic comments made on Snapchat, and trash talk between 13-year olds at a soccer game. While acts of bigotry, the ADL’s definition of hate crimes is far more liberal than the FBI’s (which includes physical assault, threats, harassment, and vandalism). As I pointed out in a prior article regarding the ADL’s statistical looseness, the ADL had previously made headlines with a study claiming that anti-Semitic hate crimes rose 57% in 2017. The entire rise was attributable to a single individual who was phoning in bomb threats to Synagogues. Without him, anti-Semitic violence actually had decreased by 47% according to the ADL’s own statistics. That’s an enormous amount of variability.
Furthermore, Sanders tried to give the impression that counties which held Trump rallies then saw 226% explosions in hate crimes, but the Post didn’t actually do a “before and after” comparison in their study. Rather, they compared counties that held Trump rallies with “comparable” counties, without ever telling us what a comparable county is. A county of the same size that never held a Trump rally? A county with the same income demographics? The same racial demographics? We’re not told.
Luckily, the Meme Policeman actually did an exhaustive analysis of the FBI’s statistics, and it contradicts the Posts findings:
There were 1,433 hate crimes in all cities and counties that Trump had campaign rallies in during 2015, and that increased 1% to 1,450 in 2016. Population in those cities and counties rose more than 1%, representing a decline in hate crimes committed per-capita.
Or to put this in other terms, hate crimes increased 4.6% in 2016 but only 1% in areas where Trump held rallies.

Erik Rush #fundie wnd.com

Like black Klansmen and male sorority sisters, “gay marriage” simply doesn’t exist. Oh, we have monogamous homosexual couples playing house, and certain states issuing marriage licenses to them, but there’s no marriage there. This is because marriage is not a civil union; it’s an ordained one.

I continue to find this amusing, despite the clear and present danger it represents to our culture. Here we have the opponents of this farcical instrument of societal destruction actually engaging in the debate over whether or not to “allow” something that simply doesn’t exist.

In the case of the Boy Scouts of America, they have simply bought into – or very nearly bought into – the aforementioned pro-homosexual propaganda. Here, we have the fact that homosexuals do not account for the percentages that activists tout; in reality, 1 to 3 percent of the overall population is probably fairly accurate. The entertainment media and the press would have us believe that it is closer to 10 percent, and if you watch television, you’re likely to surmise that every third person you set eyes on is homosexual.

There’s much more, of course: The widespread myth that homosexuality is normal rather than aberrant, that it is hard-wired into individuals rather than being a persuasion or choice, that it is not harmful to society, and that it is not harmful to children. One particularly dangerous fallacy advanced by homosexual activists is that pedophiles (such as those who have been charged with molesting Boy Scouts over the years) are not homosexuals.

These submissions against better judgment are analogous to capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so. Obviously, the child does not know better; as the developmentally sound individual present, it is that person’s responsibility to refuse his or her requests, not defer to them.

#1890055 #fundie fstdt.com

This is becoming a habit, you know, and probably not a good one. But you had some questions, you said? Something about Kosmos, on our world known as "Tranzis," torture, and the prospect of becoming what you fight.
I had cause, recently, to do some research on the definition of insanity. One I found, and that I almost agreed with, said that "Insanity consists of doing everything the same and expecting a different result." I say "almost" because there is a corollary to that: "Insanity also consists of doing everything differently and expecting the same result."
This is perhaps the only real difference between a current day Marxist and a current day Transnational Progressive, or Tranzi. The Marxist expects a different result from doing everything important the same, as if there is any freedom that doesn't include economic freedom, as if there is any path to socialism that will not be paved with bodies, as if socialism has ever managed to create anything beyond corpses, poverty and oppression . . . oh, and lots of pieces of third-rate military equipment and a new entrenched upper class backed by a ruthless secret police and outrageous propaganda, too, of course.
The Tranzi, on the other hand, expects to maintain and expand modern, enlightened, prosperous, liberal society while opening up the borders that shelter that society to unlimited numbers of the least assimilable and most reactionary, most traditional and hidebound, least economically productive cultures on the face of the Earth. This wouldn't be so bad, or so insane, did they not at the same time insist that nothing be done to even try to assimilate the immigrants from those cultures to modern, enlightened, liberal values. (Do you suppose there were pro-Vandal, pro-Hun and pro-Goth immigration public interest groups in ancient Rome? Societies usually rot from the inside out so it does seem likely.)
The Tranzi also insists on enlightening the rest of the world, but rejects any and every means that might actually work.
This, friend, is the other kind of insanity.
Of course, that first definition is not the only interesting quote that has an amusing corollary. For example, it has been said more than once that you should choose enemies wisely, because you are going to become just or, at least, much like them. The corollary to this is that your enemies are also going to become very like you.
In human conflict this really is and always has been everywhere apparent: Hannibal adopts Roman arms and something like the manipular legion for his forces. Sparta and Rome, landpowers to begin, face Athens and Carthage, seapowers, and both Rome and Sparta build enormous and effective fleets. German tank designers adopt Russian tank design philosophies. Russians become operationally deft. British and American troops are plagued with Indian irregular tactics and techniques during the French and Indian War and so adopt light infantry and riflemen. The Soviet Union provides free meals to school children and we begin to as well. (And then there are those, all over the world, who hate the United States and express that hatred regularly and virulently. One wonders why they never contemplate what it will be like when we begin to really hate them. They should be afraid, very afraid.)
It's partly propaganda driven but partly also driven by the act and process of learning from those who have most to teach us, by harming us, our enemies.
If I could speak now to our enemies, I would say: Do you kill innocent civilians for shock value? So will we learn to do, in time. Do you torture and murder prisoners? So will we. Are you composed of religious fanatics? Well, since humanistic secularism seems ill-suited to deal with you, don't be surprised if we turn to our churches and temples to find the strength to defeat and destroy you. Do you randomly kill our loved ones to send us a message? Don't be surprised, then, when we begin to target your families, specifically, to send the message that our loved ones are not stationery.
This seems lost on the current enemy but, then, he's insane. It's very sad. Yes, it's very sad for us, too.
In any case, that, friend, is some of what I've tried to illustrate in this book. Do I like torture? No. It's a nasty technique that dirties everything it touches. No sane man who engages in it is likely to ever be quite right in his head and heart again, for he will have seen man at his lowest and joined him there. No sane man ought want to engage in it. No society that uses it to any great extent is likely to feel moral again for quite some time.
This, however, is not the same thing as saying it never works, as any number of either very stupid or very dishonest people have tried to claim.
(Do I like reprising against civilians who happen to share blood and culture with specific enemies? No. I don't particularly like reprising against, in effect, wounded in hospitals that an enemy is using for ammo dumps, either. The latter, however, is clearly necessary sometimes and, when your enemy is socially organized not as formal military units but around ties of blood, the former may well be unavoidable if the enemy is to be deterred from certain kinds of conduct. Or beaten, for that matter.)
Stupid and dishonest . . . it's sometimes hard to tell the difference, isn't it? What's one to make of a politician, one who has experienced torture personally, to all appearances a decent and brave man, who can say in one breath that (I'm probably paraphrasing, here), "People will say anything under torture," and in the next say, "Torture doesn't work"? He's either dishonestly pandering to the crowd (Am I being redundant by saying "politician" and "dishonestly pandering to the crowd"? I suppose I am.) or he's too dumb to realize that, if torture's that bad, and with a modicum of ability to spot-check for truth, the victim of torture will also tell the truth rather than risk more torture. One has to wonder about the fitness for high office of such a man. I mean, really? It's being neither cleverly dishonest nor honestly stupid. I'd prefer he say, "Even though torture works, we would prefer to be destroyed or enslaved than violate our principles and use it."
Of course, he'd get few votes that way. He sure as hell wouldn't get mine, though at least he'd have my respect. What would get my vote? Oh . . . something like, "Whatever it takes to preserve our civilization, our nation, our people, and our way of life, without hesitation or unnecessary restraint, and consulting no one who does not have our best interests at heart, that shall I do, always remembering that there's a price for everything."
Votes . . . what does it say about us or our preferred democratic system that so many of our people prefer the palatable lie to the unpleasant truth? Nothing good, surely. Thomas Carlyle had this much right, though: "A lie will not stand." Indeed, the Islamofascists are going to knock it down around our heads while at the same time removing any restraint of ours behind which they hide. Then again, as mentioned, they're insane.
"'Are going to?'" you ask. Oh, yes. This goes back to torture. Many people who would otherwise object to torture would permit it in the so-called "Ticking Bomb Scenario." This is, though few seem to realize it, an admission that, given a means of immediate feedback, torture works. But what is al Qaeda, what is the entire Islamic Fundamentalist movement, in an age of nukes and bugs and gas, except one big ticking bomb with an unknown time of detonation?
Is it the immediacy of the threat that makes torture valid in the ticking bomb scenario? Immediacy hardly seems an absolute moral principle. How about immediacy times potential harm; isn't that better? So if you can morally break out "Skevington's Daughter" (Look it up; I don't have a sample here to show you. Not my thing.) for five hundred pounds of TNT in a van somewhere now, can't you break it out also for a nuke in New York in ten years? For a dozen nukes scattered about the U.S. or Europe in twenty-five? For a world-scourging plague in fifty?
I think you can. If the threat is real, I think you—we—must.
As I said, it's very sad.
And then, too, let us not forget the real poltroons. You know the type: "We'll officially forbid torture but if you—soldier or law enforcement officer or intelligence agent—engage in it illegally with the intent of protecting me and mine and it turns out that you just might have protected us then we'll pardon you. Then we can feel clean and safe and pure and virtuous and still be properly grateful."
Despicable moral cowardice; that's what that is.

CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

The White Shitlib Ego is ravenous. It’s why shitlibs would rather oversee the destruction of White Civilization than admit their Equalism religious beliefs are based on falsehoods.

The Confederate statues being torn down across the South are just the latest battle fronts opened up by shitlibs who obey the credo that a good offense is the best defense. As the shitlib religion sits on a very shaky foundation that the Maul-Right is currently rupturing with seismic waves of realtalk, it behooves shitlibs to press their hate machine forward, into enemy territory, for to give even one inch of ground to heretics would mean the eventual reversal and defeat of every belief that shitlibs hold dear and former social, philosophical, and political grounds they occupied. And shitlibs know this, because it is the art of rhetorical war that they have practiced and perfected for decades against cuckservatives, solidifying and entrenching the Left’s march through the institutions.

The lesson: never give the Left an inch. They’ll take a parsec. Confederate statues today, books authored by White men tomorrow, until it finally reaches end game: second class status for all Whites outside of a few Acela elites who sufficiently grovel at the altar of anti-Whitism.

The human shitlib ego is the most powerful force in the cosmos. And never have the fortifications guarding that ego been under relentless attack like it is now. Shitlibs can sense it. The deluge is coming for them. Equalism is dead. The race and sex gaps won’t disappear any time soon. This is why leftoids are flirting with insanity; their interventions to solve the Gaps have been one failure after another, so they’ll need to adopt increasingly extreme anti-White postures to explain the persistence of the Gaps.

Hence the humiliation porn fix driving shitlibs to tear down symbols of White Southern heritage. This isn’t about honoring heroes of the Confederacy or showing the Confederate flag (which in point of fact was never a social crisis in America until shitlibs made it one in the past few years); it’s about shitlibs needing to dig deeper into the fever swamps of anti-White hatred to explain away race and sex gaps that make mockery of shitlibs’ guiding principle: the equalist belief that all humans, under the hood, are the same in aptitude, behavior, and moral worth, and that only White racism prevents the flowering of their Equalist paradise.

Make no mistake, the Left’s Confederate statue cultural sanitization project is JUST THE BEGINNING. Soon, it’ll be “the mere presence of Whites is keeping the black man down” and shitlibs will have their hamster rationalized justification for, say enforcing anti-White employment quotas.

As a Gab follower wrote in response to the preventable Manchester terror attack,

" shitlibs are so emotionally invested in their beliefs, they would rather be martyred by their invaders than admit they’re wrong, which would force them to change their sense of identity."

The shitlib ego is impenetrable, even by muslim nail bombs. Shitlibs will never give up on their Equalism religion; they’ll have to be forced out of power and shamed into hiding.

The follow-up question would be: why are shitlibs so invested in their obviously false belief in the equalism of humanity and protective of their egos? My answer gets to the reason I wrote this post: it could be genetic (shitlibs have inherited disfigured brain architecture) or it could be that social atomization, cultural balkanization, and mass society (SCALE) have reduced the scope of identity to ideology alone.

In sum, shitlibs cling to their outmoded and frankly dumb Equalism ideology because globohomoist forces of complexity and organic community destruction have created a social atmosphere where ideology is the only communal touchstone left for them to feel like they’re part of a group larger than themselves.

Related: The Chinese are even getting in on the act of mocking self-annihilating White shitlibs. They’ve come up with a word to describe them: baizuo, which means “white left”. Soon, the whole world will laugh at White shitlibs, and then and only then will their egos finally be defeated, and then there won’t be another White Left rule for a thousand years.

John #racist occidentaldissent.com

Da troof!

Chick-fil-A thing is fascinating. I bet it is being monitored by other private companies.
As the demographic drift of hispanicization and Africanization (are those things words?) continues more companies may find that catering to rich or conservative working class whites is a good strategy. There’s no reason why they couldn’t find ways to show their true colors without crossing a boundary into legal jeopardy. Opposing this or that policy is a good targeted way to poison discourse. Rahm and Mikie really fouled up. Opposing gay marriage is a perfectly respectable political stance. There are critically important social structures that are undermined if gays can get hitched. When that lesbian strategist attacked Ann Romney for being a rich housewife there was picture released of her adopted nigger pet kid and her wifband (another dykie
lawyer.) two lesbians adopt a Somalicoon and then get divorced. It’s a mockery of travesty to allow twisted shrews like her to ape a biological family and bring over a kid who will Likely become savage later in life.

re_nortex #wingnut freerepublic.com

["See nutscases like re_nortex give Conservatives a bad name and Christians too for that matter."]
[Came in with the comment 're_nortex is a poe and is known to be one in the Freepwatching world. Still, he's funny as heck.' But it's amusing so here]

Let us be reasonable, FRiend, in a calm, rational manner. Since you have seniority on me, I'll deal with each item in a respectful, point-by-point, local manner without resorting to name calling or engaging in any form of raising doubt about your sincerity or good intentions. I'm sure that we both adhere to the Free Republic principles of being pro-God and against all forms of the homosexual agenda.

1). Sodomites have a death wish as clearly evidenced by the way they live.
Kindly explain what part of that is untrue. The homosexual deathstyle is just that. They die far younger than normal people because of their filthy ways.

2). Since they brazenly reject God, they have no sense of morality.
Given that God Almighty has declared sodomy to be nothing less than an abomination, how can it be that homosexuals do anything other than repudiating the Lord by the deliberate choice they made to engage in wickedness? They are certainly not "born that way" regardless of what leftist "scientists" falsely claim.

3). Thus a sodomite thinks nothing of murdering others while on a suicide mission.
Please refer to this well-researched Breitbart article, Germanwings Co-Pilot Surfed Gay Porn and Suicide Websites Before Crash. While not yet conclusively proved, it's quite plausible that the sodomite Amtrak engineer was doing likewise. My only bone of contention with that article is the improper use of the term "gay" for happy and joyous are precisely what sodomites aren't.

Samuel James #fundie patheos.com

The phrase “culture war” is a little bit like the word “abortion.” Both terms exist to obscure and soften what they really mean. Everyone knows that abortion means the termination of unborn life, yet the term itself is a neutral one, having no special lexical connection to fetal life or even the medical profession. The reality behind the word is muddled by the word itself; thus, voters can feel in the word “abortion” a valuable human right of sexual autonomy that they wouldn’t feel in a term like “fetal suction aspiration.”

“Culture war” is another (though less toxic) species of muddle-word. Most people understand what it means–the aggregated debates and legal contests between conservatives and progressives on issues like abortion, euthanasia, education, and marriage. But look closely at the phrase. It is ambiguous and a little superficial (“culture” can mean anything from philosophy to food to the Kardashians), and more than a little negative and combative. Combine those elements and you get a word that conjures up images of low-stakes shouting matches between factions that probably have no skin in the game beyond the political power they’d love to wield over the lives of strangers.

This connotation is why, I think, it’s so commonplace to hear people disparage the notion of “culture war.” The critique is often predictable: Culture war is causing division and acrimony in American society, with no real benefits other than power and influence to those waging it from above, and therefore we should stop culture warring and learn to love. Nike could summarize it as: Just Don’t.

I think David Brooks is giving too much credit to this erroneous understanding of culture war in his column today at The New York Times. The beginning of Brooks’ piece shows that he understands the greater spiritual and human dimensions to contemporary cultural debates. He surmises, correctly, that traditional Christianity is no longer a merit badge for Americans, and that many Christians now fear being seen as “pariahs” in their own communities. Having lost the battle for the legal definition of marriage last week, Christians and social conservatives, according to Brooks, now have a choice: Do they “fight on,” (to use Brooks’ description of this SCOTUS symposium last week at First Things), or they make a change?

Consider putting aside, in the current climate, the culture war oriented around the sexual revolution.

Put aside a culture war that has alienated large parts of three generations from any consideration of religion or belief. Put aside an effort that has been a communications disaster, reducing a rich, complex and beautiful faith into a public obsession with sex. Put aside a culture war that, at least over the near term, you are destined to lose.

Consider a different culture war, one just as central to your faith and far more powerful in its persuasive witness.

This other culture war that Brooks is describing would be, in his words, the war against social “formlessness and radical flux.” Brooks believes that this culture war is a war against poverty, familial decay, social stagnation, and loess of transcendence. In his words:

The defining face of social conservatism could be this: Those are the people who go into underprivileged areas and form organizations to help nurture stable families. Those are the people who build community institutions in places where they are sparse. Those are the people who can help us think about how economic joblessness and spiritual poverty reinforce each other. Those are the people who converse with us about the transcendent in everyday life.

Yes and amen. This is precisely what conservatives should be doing. The question is: Why must they be doing this OR fighting for marriage, instead of AND fighting for marriage?

It seems to me that Brooks is oscillating between a right and a wrong understanding of culture war. On the one hand, he says that speaking transcendence into a individualistic, fragmented society is a sort of “culture war.” He’s right. Personal autonomy, a doctrine that features prominently in the philosophy of the Sexual Revolution, has wrecked my generation onto an island of loneliness, shattered homes, and relational backwardness. Going against the religion of personal autonomy is culture war.

On the other hand, Brooks seems to think of the culture war over traditional marriage as an expendable sort of culture war. It’s a culture war that we should opt out of if we decide, in Brooks’ words, that “the defining face of social conservatism” is not one that is winning over our neighbors. If talking about marriage and the more explicit features of the Sexual Revolution makes us politically anathema, then, Brooks writes, we should change what we talk about.

But the culture war that Brooks thinks we should be having is connected in a meaningful way to the one he thinks we shouldn’t be having. Warring against society’s brokenness is, especially for Christians, a war against living, spiritual realities. Christian theology has a word for the decrepit state of our world, and the word is sin. Sin is why things are not the way they should be. For Christians who understand the world through the lens of Scripture, the battle for civilization is not ultimately a battle for civilization but a battle for souls, a battle to proclaim the victory over sin, both at the individual and societal level, achieved on the cross by the Son of God.

You can see how the term “culture war” obscures reality. For “culture war” is not, as its cynics might suggest, an intramural spat between aspiring gatekeepers but a spiritual and philosophical struggle for ideas and institutions that genuinely matter. Certainly there are skirmishes of the culture war that deserve far less attention than they receive. But my generation’s confusion about the definition of marriage is not simply a tug-of-war between the remnants of the Religious Right and the emerging “post-Christian” Left; it is a confusion about who we as human beings are, why we exist, and to Whom we belong.

I think David Brooks understands this. What I wish he would have written is that the definition of marriage and the personhood of the unborn are precisely the kind of ‘transcendence” that social conservatives must be speaking into our culture. I wish he would have directed our attention to the legacy of the pro-life movement, a generation of “culture warriors” who have fought in the shadow of Roe v. Wade for 40 years to win not just laws but hearts and imaginations to see the personhood of the unborn. From free health clinics to crisis pregnancy centers to shelters for those fleeing the sex industry, pro-life conservatives have spoken a Gospel word of hope and salvation to a post-Roe society, a word that has borne much fruit and will, I believe, bear much more. Would such fruit have happened if these pro-lifers had determined that the cause of the unborn was no longer a “persuasive witness”?

The Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage last Friday may not be as lethal as its redefinition of personhood in 1973, but the fact remains that marriage is a transcendent, spiritual institution, one whose right ordering is of urgent interest in any society that wishes to flourish. It matters that our laws reflect a proper valuation homes with mothers and fathers. This is a culture war worth carrying on, because culture war isn’t just political theater. It’s a conversation about the shape of our society and where we must go to thrive. That’s a question worth getting right.

Noprovison #fundie rr-bb.com

I was shocked and offended by one particular scene in the "Green Lantern" movie. When Hal Jordan, played by Ryan Reynolds, was whisked away from Earth to be "trained" and initiated into some galactic police force (something like that), he was placed on a cross-shaped table in a classic crucifixion posture. He was wearing only a loin cloth and during the "procedure" he was injured by some sort of energy that caused him to scream in pain as first, his hands and then his feet and then the right side of his abdomen glowed red for a few seconds. Then he was wrapped up in his green uniform and given great powers.

I was quite offended and saddened by this blatant blasphemy. I didn't know at the time that the G.L. character was supposed to be homosexual too. There were also a lot of occult symbols prominently featured in some scenes. I guess a lot of atheists are threatened by the reality of Jesus and take Him very seriously - in a backwards kind of way.

Neological Technologies #crackpot #magick #dunning-kruger #mammon neologicaltech.com

Directions:

After your purchase you will be given a link to a digital download of a MP3 file which will be made available after you complete the check out process. It is located in the checkout bin at the bottom of your order invoice. If you miss this step someone will have to email you the link which may delay your order. The file is approximately 62 MB and delivered as a .ZIP file. If you are using a smart phone or tablet device you may need to locate a .zip extractor app to access the file contents. Manifestation of magic requires the alignment of intent and belief system of the operator to will into action. No refunds please.

Quantum Grid Prime

What happens when you combined the most powerful sacred geometry and an advanced Radionics Control plate, psychotronic orgone grid power source that is combined with a virtual power amplification device which is connected to psionic amplifiers that run in parallel through a dimensional vortex. The vortex is controlled by a of group magical ancient mind machines and focused through an array of psionic antennas.

Manifest your desires and use the secret of the law of attraction to your advantage. The secret is directing life force and the key is genuine to hacking your reality.

BioGeometry is a modern form of alchemy based on subtle energy interactions of geometrical shapes. In Bio-geometry, a pyramid shape is energized and emanate a carrier waved of energy. Sacred geometry configuration produces and amplifies that energy. This is why my energy images devices are made using sacred geometry.

Quantum Grid Prime Plus 3.0 was designed from the ground up to be the most powerful psionic energy core available. The quantum equation used to program this energy core has now extended to over 80 pages long. The extreme complexity of this technology is quite staggering. What would have taken me years to create I am able to produce within 10 months. Having a powerful Qi source is the key to faster more accurate and focus manifestations inside of this holographic universe.

In this package, I have also taken the original quantum grid formula and ran it through the 2019 quantum equation algorithm. So, you will receive two unique and very powerful Radionics plates. I have also included a third plate that contains pure life force G energy that is designed to be the purest ever produced on this planet. The three images can be printed out and stacked together or you can use the trinity power plate which is provided for you in the pro version system.

This is the most powerful Quantum energy image I have ever created. Use it with your radionic software, radionics box, or as a stand-alone device. The Quantum Grid Prime Plus will elevate your Radionic operations to near God levels. Quantum Grid Prime Plus is an excellent healing tool that works in all areas of your body. Print out the image and place it underneath your radionic device so that you can increase the power output to mega power output. If you place a candle on the image and focus on your intent, you can send the energy of the image to any place on the planet. You can also put a sigil and a picture of your target onto the center of the image and energy will instantly be transmitted to that target.

I have included the Quantum plate where you can place a copy of the image onto the Quantum plate alongside a sigil and energy will be sent to the target.

Quantum Grid Prime Plus is designed to protect you on an energetic and physical level. It includes all of my spiritual shielding technology. Quantum Grid Prime Plus is able to blast through energetic blocks faster than anything else on the market. It protects against all things dark and evil. Use this protection spell to protect yourself from demons, vampires, aliens and anything else that goes bump in the night.

What's New:

Over 3000% more power than Quantum Grid Prime plus

More powerful Radionics amplification

Multiple sigil amplification

Ability to operate on multiple targets

Faster manifestations

Advanced Radionics control plate

Includes video caster:

Video Radionics a Broadcaster Works with standard Radionic rate book

Video caster allows you to work on eight Radionics operation simultaneously

Pro version includes:

Alchemist Shield Pro (Powered by Quantum Grid Prime plus 3.0)

Cloak of invisibility (Powered by Quantum Grid Prime plus 3.0)

<Only 900 dollars>

Yvette Bowden #fundie dailycamera.com

A longtime employee of Boulder's Parks and Recreations Department says that a new supervisor targeted her after learning that she was a lesbian and that the city's human resources department did not protect her.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court earlier this month, Sally Dieterich, who served from 2007 to 2014 as assistant to the director of Parks and Recreation and secretary to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, said that positive performance reviews and a warm personal relationship with her supervisor turned sour after she served on a panel during LGBT ally training and after she shared that she had recently married her partner of 25 years.

Dieterich is alleging the city discriminated against her on the basis of sex and retaliated against her when she sought redress, in violation of federal civil rights law. The lawsuit also alleges violations of the Colorado Antidiscrimination Act. She is seeking unspecified damages for emotional distress, inconvenience and loss of enjoyment of life, as well as attorneys' fees.

Boulder spokeswoman Sarah Huntley said the city could not comment on litigation.

"The city values inclusivity and diversity but cannot comment on specific litigation involving employment matters," she said. "We will respond to these allegations through the legal process."was the assistant to previous director Kirk Kincannon from 2009 to 2014 and then served as the assistant to interim director Jeff Dillon, the parks superintendent, and to Yvette Bowden, who was hired as deputy director in 2014 and eventually chosen as the new director.

"In the first months of working together, Ms. Bowden frequently told Ms. Dieterich that they 'made a great team' and gave her high fives to express her appreciation," the lawsuit said. "Ms. Bowden even suggested that she and Ms. Dieterich open the shade covering the window between their offices so they could 'better connect.'"

That changed, the lawsuit alleges, in October 2014 when Ms. Dieterich was invited to serve on a panel during a training for department directors on being an ally to gay, lesbian and transgender employees.

Neither Dillon nor Bowden attended the training, the lawsuit said, and when Dieterich returned to the office and told Bowden it had gone well, Bowden responded with a "flat 'that's nice' and promptly left the office."

Excited about the success of the training, Dieterich told Bowden later that day that she had recently married her long-time female partner. According to the lawsuit, Bowden said nothing and quickly turned and walked away.

"From this point forward, Ms. Bowden and Ms. Dieterich's working relationship changed drastically," the lawsuit said. "Ms. Bowden was no longer warm towards Ms. Dieterich and began treating her differently from other city employees."

According to the lawsuit, Bowden asked Dieterich to stop assisting her and avoided eye contact.

Dieterich's difficulties soon extended beyond a chilly work environment. Within a month, she was accused of conspiring to steal gasoline from Fleet Services and placed on paid administrative leave. The lawsuit said that Bowden personally escorted Dieterich out of the office past her co-workers, causing unnecessary humiliation.

According a Boulder Police Department report about the alleged gas theft, Dieterich had inadvertently used an incorrect code to get gasoline and did not even know the Transportation Department employee with whom she was accused of conspiring. The charges were determined to be unfounded.

But when Dieterich returned to work in January 2015, she was moved to the front desk of the Iris Center instead of the private office she had used in the director's suite for the previous eight years.

The lawsuit said that Dieterich was berated about her posture, stripped of her purchasing duties and most of the duties related to being secretary of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. She was told to stop calling herself the assistant to the director, and at one point, she found her nameplate in her mailbox.

A sexual orientation discrimination complaint that Dieterich filed with the city's Human Resources department was determined to be unfounded, though in the lawsuit, Dieterich says no one was interviewed except Bowden.

When Dieterich took medical leave after being diagnosed with breast cancer, she received a termination letter, allegedly for failing to turn in the appropriate forms, though she said she had turned in the forms and provided evidence of having done so.

Dieterich's attorney, Charlotte Sweeney, could not be reached Monday.

Tim Murray #fundie eurocanadian.ca

he most significant thing about this story is not Bernier's gutsy comments, but the predictable reaction to them. The nauseating cant issuing from Scheer's spokesman Brock Harrison, and Michelle Rempel's tightrope walk over both sides of the fence was to be expected. Unless an organ donor steps forward to offer his brain, I can’t help Harrison. But I can help Rempel. If Michelle wants data to support the argument that ours is not a “functioning pluralism”, if she sincerely wants to learn about the costs of diversity, she only need to google Robert Putnam + Bob Birrell + a myriad of other studies related to theirs. Or if it would be more convenient, she can take a look at this or this or a comprehensive reference list like this.

There is even a University of Victora statistical study conducted in 2010, led by Zheng Wu, that found that many new immigrants feel comforted and protected by settling into ethnic neighbourhoods and that they are less apt to feel loyalty to Canada by doing so. Or as Wu put it, life in ethnic enclaves reduces immigrants' "sense of belonging to Canada." So voluminous is the data that even a casual perusal of it would lead any impartial researcher to assert that the onus of proof is clearly on those who promote diversity, rather than those who question its benefits. The game is over and the final score is Evolutionary psychology 1, Social Engineers 0.

As if we needed more proof, the “Bernier” incident reveals once again that the Conservatives are a a "Me Too" party. Liberals dressed in blue who share the all-party consensus that rapid immigration driven population growth and continuing ethnocultural fragmentation is self evidently good for the country. Rather than follow the Ford formula, rather than tap into the vast pool of disgusted non-voters, Scheer prefers to compete for the favour of the 5% swing voters in the middle because pundits tell him that this is the only way that a political party can win. Accordingly, he is desperate and determined to silence mavericks like Leitch, Belak and Bernier so that they can't provide Trudeau with the ammunition he needs to brand the Conservatives as party of bigots and extremists. In effect, Scheer and his coterie of strategists are allowing the CBC and the MSM to determine what kind of Conservative is fit to lead or speak for the Conservative Party.

Conservatives need to understand that the number of people who cast ballots in federal and provincial elections is not fixed. It is not a certainty that more than four in ten of registered voters will continue to stay home on election day. The only reason they do is that they understand that all the main parties are mere factions in a ONE PARTY state. They realize that parliament is a closed shop. And that as long as there are party whips, as long as there are virtually no free votes in the House, political parties will not feel obliged to listen to the feedback of their constituents. While it has become the fashion of politicians of all parties to hold "town hall" meetings in their constituencies, they do so only to give constituents the false impression that their views will be decisive in determining how their parliamentary "representative" will vote on any given issue.

Four in ten of us recognize this charade as a fraud, and we register our cynicism by abstention on election day. It is not about voter apathy, it's about voter rebellion. Some rebels spoil their ballots, some formally refuse them if they can, and some stay home. Instead of chasing after swing voters with a progressive mentality, instead of working within the closing Overton window of acceptable PC discourse, instead of conceding more and more ground to anti-Western cultural demolitionists, Conservatives should appeal to the rebels. They should think and campaign outside the box. They should weaponize the muzzled majority.

Here is some unsolicited advice to Tory strategists and convention delegates. If you want to know what leadership candidate to select — the candidate who has the best chance to win the next election— pick the candidate that the CBC and the MSM vilifies most, the one they say has no chance of winning, the one who would, they warn, lead the Conservative Party to oblivion or permanent marginalization. The one who dares to challenge the shibboleths of multiculturalism and immigration. The one whom they say does not represent "Canadian values".

That would be the candidate whose victory will send them into shock and horror and prove, once again, that the political class hasn't a goddamn clue about how the masses think, or any concept of what "values" guide them.

There is a reason why "outsiders" and "extremists" like Ford and Trump win. It is because they are not outsiders or extremists. They are "insiders". They dwell inside the world and thinking of ordinary people. The real outsiders live in bubbles. In newsrooms, broadcast studios, and ivory towers. And the real extremists are the ones who have pushed the extreme agenda of hyper-immigration, demographic displacement, quota hiring, transgender ideology, runaway political correctness, censorship, the criminalization of speech, and the conscription of tax payer dollars to subsidize those who lobby for this agenda — most particularly the radical ideologues in the CBC.

Progressives on both sides of the border contend that Trump's victory emboldened "haters" and "normalized" hate. But the truth is that haters have long been emboldened, and hate speech has long been the norm. The only reason that Leftists didn't notice it is that the hate was coming from their direction. It was looking at them in the mirror. Hating white people and Western civilization is quite the norm these days, and those who spew such hatred are rather bold about it, don't you think?

The sad thing about this affair is that Bernier's twitter comments are treated as controversial, instead of what they should be. A statement of the blatantly obvious.

Linda Harvey #fundie missionamerica.com

I attended a recent "gay pride" parade in Columbus. I'd been to one a few years earlier, and the bad news is that the event has grown much, much larger.

Corporate support is everywhere. Macy's, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, JC Penney, Chipotle, Frito-Lay, and many others. Local Ohio banks, Fifth-Third and Huntington. American Family Insurance. All had sizeable contingents of marchers and banners.

So the continuing high incidence of HIV among males who have sex with males, generating around 29,000 new cases per year in the U.S., is acceptable to these companies and their boards of directors? Just asking. This abundant fruit, so to speak, of the homosexual community is now ignored by the media and considered a big yawn, except by those infected, of course.

JC Penney even sponsored a "Teen Village," with activities for teens from ages 13 to 19 well into Saturday evening following the parade. Aside from the disturbing thought of 13- year- olds socializing with 19- year- olds (apparently no one is concerned here about the potential for child molestation), the teen program advertised that it would include performances by "drag queens and kings," which are males and females flamboyantly dressed as the opposite sex.

And we wonder why some kids are seriously messed up?

Also among the parade marchers were proud politicians. And churches: Episcopal, United Methodist, Evangelical Lutheran and Metropolitan Community Churches, which are founded on a pro-homosexual platform.

One banner from the New Creation Metropolitan Community Church included a prominent slogan: "United Against the Flood of Homophobia." I looked around. There were thousands of cheering people and not one visible expression of homophobia, or even disapproval, much less anything like a flood. And of course, the lavish parade itself, including banners on all the city streetlight poles, was allowed on Columbus' main thoroughfare. Hyperbole, anyone? But no surprise. This movement has cut its teeth on over-the-top whining and victim posturing.

The most disturbing element was the children, lots of them, many with some sort of rainbow jewelry, flag or banner on a stroller. Signs like, "I love my two dads," which the nine or ten-year old next to "dad" had stopped holding and dad was doing for him. Again, what about the mom deliberately left out of this picture? Children want to know both their moms and their dads. To deny them this, is to be selfish, immature parents.

What these folks are proud of is deeply disturbing as a cultural trend but more importantly as an indicator of the depraved values they accept and are working actively to promote. Homosexuality is profoundly disordered, is often harmful physically [think, anal sex between two guys], is empty of the creation of new life, and ends up hurting the participants themselves as well as those to whom their lives are connected. And it's not "hate" to say so-just fact.

Homosexuality is also a considerable threat to religious liberty and free speech, as the demand to show "respect" for these lifestyles is fast becoming a club to silence people who won't assent and don't want homosexual approval taught to their children. The leaders of this movement talk about tolerance, but check out what they do, not what they say. The unfounded harassment incidents are starting to pile up.

BikPillPres #sexist #pratt incels.co

I could never envy the life of the average male, because I've done all the things they've done to try and attain what they have, and I felt absolutely pathetic doing it, and I look back now thinking even if it had yielded results I likely still would not be alright with it

Here's the reality about dating and relationships that I rarely see discussed in a direct manner

YOU ARE EITHER ATTRACTIVE ENOUGH TO KEEP A WOMAN "EXCITED" JUST BY BEING AROUND HER, OR YOU HAVE TO BECOME HER FUCKING PET JESTER TO MOTIVATE, TRICK AND/OR GUILT HER INTO TRYING TO BE ATTRACTED TO YOU

That's it, that's the summary of how attraction in dating works, all this PUA fuckery is literally just JESTERMAXXING, its just men employing psychological tactics to trick, motivate or guilt a woman into trying to be attracted to them, it isn't "natural"

Chad doesn't have to memorize pick up lines, rehearse body language, insult a woman indirectly to lower her guard, etc to gain a woman's attention and attract her, his mere presence alone is enough

That's why I find it so amusing to see all these men who boast about "having game", its like boasting about who is the best pet, who can do the best tricks to please their master, WHO'S A GOOD BOY, YOU ARE, YOU ARE (here's a treat, you get a few sessions of medicore sex with some used up holes, she'll put in around 50% of the effort she does when fucking Chad, congrats)

To make it worse, there isn't even any security in your trials anymore, a man can Jestermaxx like a pro, "win her over" and have this amazing story of effort to tell his children about "how he met their mother", and ironically said children may not even be his (paternity fraud is at new highs these days), or she may have been cheating all along, or even at the current point of that relationship while he's talking to his kids, there's no security even after all the embarrassing, undignified shit you put yourself through, just to gamble for used up pussy

I mean if you had to do all this shit to get a virgin wife it would still be ridiculous, but it would atleast be understandable, but what the average man does to himself for used goods today, will always amuse me, also the remarks of incels who are "looking for love" and "female affection/validation" :feelskek:

Game is nothing to take pride in, if you have to use game, its an admission that you simply aren't attractive enough to JUST BE YOURSELF and have women be attracted to you. Its something you do to compensate for your lack of "natural ability"

BlckPllPres #crackpot #sexist incels.co

The Average Male Is "JesterMaxxing" (That's All That "Game" Really Is), Nothing Worth Envying

I could never envy the life of the average male, because I've done all the things they've done to try and attain what they have, and I felt absolutely pathetic doing it, and I look back now thinking even if it had yielded results I likely still would not be alright with it

Here's the reality about dating and relationships that I rarely see discussed in a direct manner

YOU ARE EITHER ATTRACTIVE ENOUGH TO KEEP A WOMAN "EXCITED" JUST BY BEING AROUND HER, OR YOU HAVE TO BECOME HER FUCKING PET JESTER TO MOTIVATE, TRICK AND/OR GUILT HER INTO TRYING TO BE ATTRACTED TO YOU

That's it, that's the summary of how attraction in dating works, all this PUA fuckery is literally just JESTERMAXXING, its just men employing psychological tactics to trick, motivate or guilt a woman into trying to be attracted to them, it isn't "natural"

Chad doesn't have to memorize pick up lines, rehearse body language, insult a woman indirectly to lower her guard, etc to gain a woman's attention and attract her, his mere presence alone is enough

That's why I find it so amusing to see all these men who boast about "having game", its like boasting about who is the best pet, who can do the best tricks to please their master, WHO'S A GOOD BOY, YOU ARE, YOU ARE (here's a treat, you get a few sessions of medicore sex with some used up holes, she'll put in around 50% of the effort she does when fucking Chad, congrats)

To make it worse, there isn't even any security in your trials anymore, a man can Jestermaxx like a pro, "win her over" and have this amazing story of effort to tell his children about "how he met their mother", and ironically said children may not even be his (paternity fraud is at new highs these days), or she may have been cheating all along, or even at the current point of that relationship while he's talking to his kids, there's no security even after all the embarrassing, undignified shit you put yourself through, just to gamble for used up pussy

I mean if you had to do all this shit to get a virgin wife it would still be ridiculous, but it would atleast be understandable, but what the average man does to himself for used goods today, will always amuse me, also the remarks of incels who are "looking for love" and "female affection/validation" :feelskek:

Game is nothing to take pride in, if you have to use game, its an admission that you simply aren't attractive enough to JUST BE YOURSELF and have women be attracted to you. Its something you do to compensate for your lack of "natural ability"

Which reminds me of another thread I made:
Intelligence Is Just A Substitute For Capability
(Submitter’s note: Link leads to FSTDT quote of that rant)

The average man is not in a stable relationships, their relationships are quite unstable, with no security, and that's because the glue that holds the relationship together is a cheap knockoff of the best brand "physical attraction", its artificial, its women forcing themselves to be attracted to you, due to social norms and social pressures, while simultaneously having the choice and ability to monkey branch to an upgrade at a moments notice, that's a ridiculous framework for relationships when it comes to sustainability, it just isn't going to work long term

Chateau Heartiste #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon

I. Never say ‘I Love You’ first

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

II. Make her jealous

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

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

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

IV. Don’t play by her rules

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

V. Adhere to the golden ratio

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

VI. Keep her guessing

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

VII. Always keep two in the kitty

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

VIII. Say you’re sorry only when absolutely necessary

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

IX. Connect with her emotions

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

X. Ignore her beauty

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

XI. Be irrationally self-confident

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

XII. Maximize your strengths, minimize your weaknesses

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

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

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

XIV. Fuck her good

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

XV. Maintain your state control

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

XVI. Never be afraid to lose her

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

***

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

Best,

Your Lord and King

Atavisionary #sexist atavisionary.com

Women have a much stronger preference for security and safety than men, and vote that way. They like social safety nets and related things because of an instinctual fear that they may end up as single mothers and in poverty. There is also a component of “cat-lady syndrome” to this where women more often suffer from excessive altruistic desire without having access to enough wisdom to do so in a sustainable or pragmatic manner. They also tend to pay a lot less in taxes, so they don’t have to worry about that particular harm as much. The result is that this creates an unaffordable social entitlement structure and it creates very bad incentives for family dissolution. Every western country currently has massive amounts of debt thanks to excessively generous social welfare benefits. The only partial exceptions to this occurs when there is a substantial cache of natural resources which can be used to supplement insufficient taxes. The entitlement bubbles get more extreme and more ready to pop every year.

Women’s suffrage was certainly a massive mistake. I wouldn’t say, however, that women’s suffrage is the root of the problem. Suffrage of any form is the root of the problem. Women’s suffrage merely served as an accelerative catalyst. Men can and will also vote themselves free stuff if given the opportunity, but a greater proportion of that population has more to lose from increased taxation so the overall rate of entitlement related government degeneration is significantly slower. Yet Cthulhu still swims left. Let’s not also forget that it was men who voted and decided to grant women’s suffrage in the first place. And universal male suffrage was a result of granting only propertied men suffrage. Once the franchise is given on a partial basis it is basically inevitable that it will be gradually and continually expanded to include less and less suited populations until the strain is so high and unsupportable there is a collapse and/or balkanization. Typically this is goaded forth by cynical politicians who (usually rightly) believe they will be more secure in their power thanks to the newly introduced voting population being much more in favor of them. Even today, a major motivation for unlimited immigration is the cynical understanding by current democrats that their political positions are more secure when they elect a new electorate. This is actually a recipe for disaster, however, because at some point legacy Americans are going to, and currently are coming to the realization that they have no interest in being told what and how to do things by alien ethnic groups. Hence the waning support for universal suffrage democracy. Open civil war is not at all unlikely if the current trends continue. The desire for self determination has been both strong and consistent throughout history.

In my book, smart and sexy, I have literally hundreds of citations from scientific papers going over the biologically based differences in intelligence and psychology between men and women. In short, intelligence is substantially an X chromosome linked trait and many intelligence boosting (and lowering) genes are recessive. The result, which is easily viewable in IQ test data, is that males are substantially more variable than females. On one end, this means you have many more mentally handicapped males. On the other, you have many more very intelligent males. Since intelligence is necessary for competence in essentially every occupation that exists, including in government, you are going to have far more males competent and suited to the highest level positions than females.

You could say that probabilistically speaking, there are going to be some number of suitable women and on that basis argue that even if we can accept that there will always be a smaller absolute number of women, we should still leave the doors open for the exceptions that come about. There are a couple of problems with this. First, a population requires a certain minimum birth rate to stay stable. It has been estimated that this rate is approximately 2.1 children per woman. Encouraging women to prioritize anything above motherhood is thus detrimental to the society as a whole and should not be generally tolerated. Allowing exceptions means allowing the existence of poor role-models for the average girl. Careerism in women also seems to be harmful to the women themselves. Despite all the “advances” made by feminism in the last 100 years or so, women are more unhappy than they have ever been and a huge number are now on anti-depressants and other psychiatric medications. A large number of women are completely ignorant of the biological foundations of their fertility and its rapid decline after the age of 30. Many women who wanted to be mothers thus now find themselves unable to have children because they wasted their time pursuing unfulfilling careers instead of arranging for their families during the optimum window. It is quite sad actually to see some of these lonely, old, cat-lady spinsters. A realistic understanding and teaching could have prevented the vast majority of these cases. Instead we have a growing class of middle aged or older women who have an iredeemable life regret and thus are rendered completely miserable.

http://atavisionary.com/it-just-didnt-happen/

http://atavisionary.com/career-women-are-dysgenic/

Then lastly for this interview, workforce and employment statistics strongly indicate that even very intellectually talented women have a strong tendency to leave the workforce early or only work part-time. In general, women don’t actually want to work the same long hours that men do and this can be very detrimental for important jobs that society needs to be filled. For example, part (obviously not the only part) of the problem with our medical system being so expensive is a relative shortage of doctors. Well, this doctor shortage is largely a result of pushing women into medicine combined with their much greater rate of leaving the workforce.

becauseHElives #fundie thechristianbbs.com

Posted by mikerica (Member # 1499) on May 19, 2003 08:38 PM : I want to see this movie but I'm worried that some might say that this is blasphemy. I can remember when I was a child, I used to wish that I had God's power. Who hasn't wished that? But because the movie has Jim Carey doing stupid things that obviously God wouldn't do, I'm worried that people might say that I'm committing blasphemy by watching this film. [Eek!] My husband has told me that God knows what is in your heart and that's the most important. But I don't want to be like some who praise and worship behind close doors then goes out and sins against God. [Eek!] I'm so paranoid that God will become angry at me because of something I consider funny. [1zhelp] What's your opinion? [youpi]

Posted by Cameron (Member # 1090) on May 19, 2003 09:59 PM : I don't think that God is going to get angry at you for being amused at something. Take the movie as it is intended...as entertainment.

Posted by becauseHElives (Member # 87) on May 19, 2003 10:56 PM :
God (YEHWEH) is not amused at the entertainment of today, Mocking HIM, just the title is enough for anyone with a reverent fear of the LORD to know they should stay away.

Just a little poison every day is all it takes to kill someone

Matt Forney #sexist mattforney.com

It’s time to stop beating around the bush: feminists want to be raped.

It’s the only logical explanation for how they behave. It’s the only way to understand why they can cheer on hordes of Muslim “refugees” swarming into Europe to rape and pillage. It’s the only way to comprehend why they can whip themselves up into a frenzy over masculine men meeting up for a beer and smearing them as leading “pro-rape rallies.”

Everything feminists do, from holding up “Refugees Welcome” signs at airports to passing affirmative consent laws, is geared around encouraging men to assault them.

This isn’t a conscious urge. No feminist wakes up in the morning and thinks to herself, “I’m gonna try and get raped today!” There’s no Protocols of the Elders of Seneca Falls laying out a secret plot to turn females into walking fuckdolls for rapist men.

But deep in the recesses of her lizard hindbrain, the average feminist wants nothing more than for a man to shove her into a wall and force himself deep inside her.

Here are the reasons why feminists want to be sexually assaulted, and why they’re working around the clock to aid rapists.

1. Feminism is an r-selected ideology, and rape is an r-selected sexual strategy.

As Anonymous Conservative has shown repeatedly, leftism and conservatism are merely expressions of two competing reproductive strategies: r-selection and K-selection. To review quickly, K-selection breeds children to compete in a world of limited resources through a two-parent upbringing, defined by high sexual dimorphism, monogamy, late sexual maturation, and loyalty to the in-group (i.e. wolves). R-selection breeds children for a world of abundant resources through a single-mother upbringing, defined by low sexual dimorphism, promiscuity, early sexual maturation, and disloyalty to the tribe (i.e. rabbits).

The conflict between leftism (of which feminism is a subset) and conservatism is the conflict between r and K. K-selected individuals want a world that encourages competition and meritocracy, while r-selected individuals want a world of free resources: free food, free money, free shelter and free sex. In a K-selected world, men and girls have to compete to earn the right to mate with one another; in an r-selected world, men and girls have sex with no thought as to the consequences.

What does this have to do with feminism and rape? Simple: rape is the ultimate r-selected sexual strategy.

By its very definition, rape is an act of entitlement: forcing yourself on someone who doesn’t want to have sex with you, whom you haven’t earned the right to sleep with. Much in the same way leftists feel entitled to take other peoples’ money away through taxation and welfare, rapists feel entitled to stick their penises in girls’ vaginas. In fact, you could say that rape is an inherently leftist form of sex, which would explain why so many male feminists, such as Jian Ghomeshi and Hugo Schwyzer, enjoy assaulting and abusing girls.

Sexual assault is sexual socialism: redistributing nookie to the least privileged in society.

Feminists, being leftists, are r-strategists themselves. The purpose of feminism is to eliminate restrictions on female sexuality: allow girls to sleep around without getting pregnant, let them legally kill their unborn babies when they do get knocked up, and have it all funded by the taxpayer.

From an r-strategist’s perspective, rape is a good thing, because it allows a female to have children without having to do anything, aside from breathe.

It’s well-known that a great many girls have rape fantasies, and a significant number of rape victims claim to have orgasmed during their assaults. Both these points serve as evidence that a portion of the female population—the r-selected, leftist portion—not only wants to be raped, but is physiologically adapted for it.
Once you accept the premise that feminists subconsciously desire to have their vaginal walls torn up by psychopathic men, their behavior suddenly makes sense. For example, feminists are unwilling to condemn the Muslim “refugees” who have been assaulting girls in Germany and other European countries (and indeed, have accused those who talk about the story of “racism” and/or “Islamophobia”) because they want those refugees to keep raping.

The Muslim “refugees” streaming into Europe from the Middle East are the consummate r-selected cowards. Instead of fighting for their families back home, they’re fleeing to safe countries where they can live off government benefits. Instead of being grateful that Europeans are willing to take them in, they throw temper tantrums because their Internet isn’t fast enough, their food isn’t tasty enough, or they don’t have enough to do, showing that they are parasites looking for someone to leech off of.

Muslims rape European girls for the same reason that they riot over slow WiFi: they believe they deserve to get something for nothing.

Some right-wing personalities have tried to explain the left’s embrace of Muslim “rapefugees” with such nebulous concepts as “pathological altruism,” but the reality is much bleaker. In the darkest recesses of their minds, feminists want swarthy refugees to punch them in the face, tear their clothes off, and spit roast them like plump, juicy swine. Don’t expect them to suddenly realize the truth, either, because…

2. Feminists encourage girls to get raped, then deny all responsibility for their actions.

In the past few years, even the slightest suggestion that girls have a responsibility for their own safety is met with a chorus of “MISOGYNIST!” “DON’T BLAME THE VICTIM!” The oft-repeated feminist chant, “Don’t teach women not to get raped, teach men to not rape,” is an explicit call for girls to place themselves into situations where they’re likely to get sexually assaulted, then dodge all blame.

While some feminists are no doubt doing this out of naivete, the subconscious motivator for many of them is their r-selected psychology.

Personal responsibility is a K-strategist concept; in the rabbit warren, things just happen. By discouraging girls from protecting themselves, feminists are implicitly encouraging them to get violated, then pinning the blame on an undefinable “rape culture.” Which brings me to my next point…

3. Feminists talk about the West having a “rape culture” because they want a rape culture.

As mentioned above, the worldwide leftist outrage against Roosh and the Return of Kings tribal meetups far outstripped their reaction to the Muslim gang rape attacks in Germany and Sweden during New Years’ Eve. This isn’t just because of hysteria and slander: r-selected leftists are more threatened by masculine men than by cowardly Muslim rapists.

One of the most laughable claims feminists make about game/red pill/PUA culture is that it encourages men to feel “entitled” to sex and female companionship. Even skimming a manosphere blog will show that this is the opposite of the truth. “Game” and “red pill” philosophy teaches men that they have to earn girls by improving themselves: lifting, dressing better, having interesting hobbies, and being entertaining conversationalists.

If a morbidly obese basement dweller came onto the Roosh V Forum and started whining about how he couldn’t get laid, he’d be laughed at and told to hit the gym and get a life.

The reason why there’s always been an overlap between the seemingly hedonistic manosphere and the more traditionalist alternative right is because both groups have the same view of sexual relationships: men and women need to earn the right to sleep with and marry each other. The end destinations may be different, but the road is the same.

Feminists oppose this because leftists oppose competition in general. Feminist obscurantism in regards to sexual relationships (e.g. their claims that the “friendzone” doesn’t exist or claiming that men just need to “treat women like human beings” if they want to get laid) is about stripping men of their ability to compete for a mate. Similarly, pushing “fat acceptance,” tattoos and piercings, and encouraging girls to be “bossy” and sarcastic is about crippling females’ ability to compete for men.

To make matters worse, feminists have been trying to train men to rape girls for years. Their constant claim that the West has a “rape culture” is just wishful thinking: in actuality, rape has been on the decline for decades. Because of this, feminists have tried to legislate masculinity away through “affirmative consent” and “yes means yes” laws, which force men to explicitly beg for permission at every step of a sexual encounter, branding them “rapists” if they don’t comply.
Affirmative consent laws and “rape culture” claims are a two-pronged attack on masculinity, designed to advantage sneaky males and hurt masculine men, and there’s no sneakier male than a rapist.

Unfortunately, despite all the rape hoaxes the mainstream media conjures up, the “rape culture” that feminists screech about has yet to materialize.

The UVA rape story, for example, turned out to be a lurid, masturbatory fantasy passed off as “news.”

Because feminists couldn’t create a rape culture, they imported one from the Middle East.

From here, all the pieces fall into place. We see clearly why the European Union is debating banning one man from their borders and libeling him as a “rape advocate,” while letting millions of actual Muslim rapists flood their countries.

We see why leftists are driven to protest masculine men but not sneaky “refugee” cowards who abandon their families in search of government freebies and “easy” white women.

The goal of feminism is to turn women into rape-meat.

Every feminist, deep down, wants nothing more than a rapist’s baby in her belly. The armada of horny, restless, greedy Muslims storming into Europe is a bounty for the r-selected feminist. Leftists will wave “Refugees Welcome” signs no matter how many girls are forcibly DP’ed by angry Arab invaders, because Europe’s skyrocketing rape rates are a feature, not a bug.

The only thing that will stop the rape-lust of feminists and their poorly-endowed Muslim abusers is Western men having the courage to call it out.

There can be no compromise, no peace with these traitors inside the walls. While more moderate women can be saved, no one will ever be able to convince the termagents of the left that they should be more afraid of Muslim rapists than white “racists.”

They are our enemies, just as much as the dusky hordes planting their flags on our soil

Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

While relying on these violent labels without definitions, Kilian has the nerve to say that
Duchesne...relies on populist clichés like "establishment," "elites," "transnational elites," and "cultural Marxists." He never defines them.
This is not true. I defined "cultural Marxism" along with other key terms requiring definition, such as "Euro-Canadians." There is no reason to define works like "establishment" which are commonly understood by everyone. Those who actually read my book will know that the meaning of the words I use are evident within the context they are used.

The One Potentially Fair Objection

The one potentially fair objection Kilian makes is too imprecise and illogical to be of much value to readers. He writes:
Duchesne...cites Canada's first census, in 1871, to argue that the new country had just 23,000 natives, barely more than the 21,500 blacks. But an Indigenous population that small wouldn't have kept the Hudson's Bay Company in furs for two centuries before Confederation.
The population of First Nations on the B.C. coast alone was estimated at 60,000 in the 1860s — before a disastrous smallpox epidemic wiped out 20,000 of them and shattered their centuries-old societies. The population of the coast before the first arrival of smallpox in the 18th century was likely 100,000 or more. Duchesne takes no notice of the demographic disasters that conveniently depopulated the Americas for the Europeans.
First, to be sure, the 1871 census does say that the native population was 23,000. Now, I should have qualified this statement by adding that these figures "are for the four original provinces (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia) only." The census was counting the population of these 4 provinces because these were the provinces that came to constitute Canada a few years earlier in Confederation in 1867. Manitoba and Northwest territories joined in 1870, and BC in 1871.

Yes, one can argue that this census left out the natives of these newly integrated provinces in 1870 and 1871, but, as Kilian himself adds, the 60,000 he guess-estimates for BC in the 1860s was reduced by 20,000 soon after. It is also the case that the natives in these newly acquired provinces were mostly outside Canadian legal society, and that, in this respect, it would have been inaccurate to count them as "Canadians" since they were members of autonomous tribes living in the wild. Moreover, by the same token, this 1871 census is not counting the European population in the other provinces and territories apart from these four provinces. The European population in BC was about 36,000 in 1871.

I do refer to the demographic disasters the natives suffered, calling it "tragic." But my intention in offering numerous statistical facts about the ethnic composition of the Canadian population was precisely to avoid the notion that natives should be elevated into major participants in Canada's history insomuch as they were drastically reduced in numbers. I wanted to offer an accurate account of their contribution to the making of Canada's institutions, rather than a moral account driven by White guilt.

But this is exactly what Kilian tries to do in the review, once his sentence on the epidemics is completed, he goes on to exaggerate the contributions of "Chinese, Hawaiians, South Americans and countless others" in the making of Canada, totally ignoring the masses of demographic statistics I offered on the ethnic distribution of Canada's population, which totally refute his statistical fabrications.

Moral Posturing While Ignoring The Subject

The rest of Kilian's review is full of moral grandstanding coupled with bromides about Donald Trump and Anglo supremacists. He completely ignores the arguments I made, opting for the claim that I am fascist who writes history "without concepts." What about the four theoretical chapters I offered on Kymlicka, Taylor, Strauss, and Schmitt? Kilian claims that I offer "an attitude, not a thesis, that life was better under European rule because Europeans are (indefinably) superior." It is the other way around, this lazy journalist never asks one of the cardinal questions reviewers must ask: what the intention of the author was in writing the book?

My intentions were:
Why is everyone in the Canadian establishment, from left to right, engaged in a program of diversification without open debate?
Why is everyone saying that Euro-Canadians stand to be enriched as they are reduced to a minority in their own homeland?
Why are historians, and the elites, insisting that Canada is a nation of immigrants, lying to millions of students, when there is no historical evidence for this claim?
What are the roots of the ideology of multiculturalism and the obsession with excluding Euro-Canadians, and only Euro-Canadians, from affirming their ethnic identity?
Why does multiculturalism encourage the group rights of non-Europeans, while openly excluding the group rights of Euro-Canadians?
Why are Canadians being told that Canada is historically unique in its multicultural identity when we know that they are making the same claim about the unique multicultural identity of European nations, United States, Australia, and New Zealand?

I offered answers to all these questions. Kilian ignored them all and opted for a repetition of what the banks, politicians, and the lying media say about those who criticize diversification. No one respects men like Kilian; they may be called "nice" by Asians and Blacks, but they are never respected. Deep down everyone knows that a man who trashes his own ancestors lacks honour and basic human decency. There is just something wrong witnessing Kilian take regular snipes against the men who built this nation as "mediocrities," making fun of our most respected Prime Minister, Mackenzie King, while always praising foreigners-to-become immigrants as morally superior.

Roosh V #fundie #sexist #crackpot returnofkings.com

ELLIOT RODGER IS THE FIRST MALE FEMINIST MASS MURDERER


Since originally publishing an article describing how a male-friendly culture encouraging Elliot into self-improvement (game), legal prostitution, and foreign marriage with Southeast Asian women would have prevented his murderous rampage, I did something that most people won’t bother to do: I read his manifesto. Not even halfway through, I began to understand exactly why the media has been pushing the narrative that PUA (game) may have been the cause: Rodger was one of their own.

Here is the PDF of his manifesto (http://abclocal.go.com/three/kabc/kabc/My-Twisted-World.pdf). If you take the time to read it, you will likely come to the same conclusion I have that Elliot Rodger is in fact a feminist. In other words, the killings of six individuals stem in part because of his mainstream feminist beliefs that, after intersecting with his dark traits of narcissism, entitlement, loserdom, and hopelessness, led him to kill. The fantastical mainstream media articles you have come across trying to pin Rodger upon us is nothing more than a defensive measure to distance themselves from a killer that was a card-carrying member of their own progressive club.

1. He put pussy on the pedestal, just like feminists do
Feminist theory speaks a whole lot about equality, but it’s actually an ideology that seeks to absolve all women from their amusing but sometimes dangerous stream of mistakes. Feminism (and progressivism in general—they might as well be interchangeable terms) treat women as flawless snowflakes that must be coddled and spoon-fed happiness and validation. Any act by a woman, even if it results in failure or bodily harm (like an abortion), is an “empowering” statement of independence and strength, while any failure by men is seen upon as proof that they are out-of-touch doofuses, a fact that is readily displayed on television, movies, and advertising.

Rodger’s manifesto exactly matches this feminist belief. He shows little genuine hate towards the object of his affections—women—and their poor choices, instead lashing out against the men who were successful with those women. Feminists do the same, always ready to blame men for their failures in life, even going so far as saying that society would be better without men, who are mocked as mere “sperm donors.” In spite of the bad choices that women make by dating bad boys at the schools he attended, Rodger gave them a pussy pass and continued to believe that they were flawless angels who should be cherished, especially the blonde ones.

Rodger’s hate for those men isn’t much different than that hate displayed to me and my colleagues here at ROK. Just take a look at this supposedly professional woman having an embarrassing emotional meltdown on a news show because she didn’t agree with what I said, resorting to blatant distortion and lies about “rape culture” and other such nonsense that was unrelated to the piece she was critiquing:
https://youtu.be/g3w-5-b4mhM

Elevating women as the superior sex, which is what both feminists and Rodger have done, means that discrimination and outright hatred must be then applied to the “inferior” sex—men. It’s no surprise that the most violent killings performed by Rodger were on his three male roommates with a knife, who surely endured more suffering and pain than the cleaner executions he did on his female victims.

2. He was awash in blue pill knowledge

We have an often-used metaphor called the “red pill,” which stands for the pursuit of truth concerning human nature, no matter how painful those truths can be. The opposite of the red pill is the blue pill, of people who choose to be placated by lies describing reality. Both feminists and Rodger were firm adherents to the blue pill world—of believing in a way of nature that doesn’t actually reflect actual human behavior. For example:

Both Rodger and feminists believe that attraction should be automatic and easy instead of being based on sexual market value or other components that can be changed (such as game).
Both Rodger and feminists believe that men should be blamed for problems of society or personal relationships.
Both Rodger and feminists were deluded into having standards way beyond their level of attractiveness (e.g., fat feminist cows actually think they should be able to date a good man).
Both Rodger and feminists believe that all a man has to do to get a girlfriend is to be “nice” and a provider, a strategy that no longer works in today’s America.
Both Rodger and feminists hated players who did well with women
As final proof that Rodger was as blue pill as you can get, simply reverse all the gender references within his manifesto and pretend it was written by a woman. What you would then have before you is a pity party of a self-absorbed feminist who thinks that men are the cause of all her problems. If he lived a couple more years, I have no doubt that Rodger would even be a proud moderator of the Blue Pill subreddit.

3. He didn’t believe in self-improvement, just like feminists
In spite of all the loneliness and pain that Rodger went through, he still couldn’t be bothered to lift one finger to improve his station. Compare that to what we teach here at ROK, where we strongly advise you to start your game training with at least 100 approaches, with the expectation that you’ll probably have to do thousands during your lifetime. In Rodger’s manifesto, all 140 pages of it, he details only saying “Hi” to one girl and practically running away from fear. In other words, he did one aborted approach with zero follow-up. That’s not game anywhere in the game universe, and if he came to us saying that he has yet to get laid after putting such an half-assed attempt, we’d tell him to do 10 solid approaches the following day and stop whining like an entitled child.

The fact that Rodger was a member of PUAHate, an online community of social retards who despised game and believed only Brad Pitt and millionaires can get laid, further highlights how vehemently anti-game he was. Why wasn’t he open to improving himself? Why wasn’t he ready to expend the labor to make himself more attractive to women? For that answer, we might as well ask some feminists, who share the exact same belief as him in not having to lift a finger in making yourself more attractive to the opposite sex. Look no further than feminist’s cause-du-jour, fat acceptance, a culture of de-improvement—and frankly, de-evolution—where women gain massive amounts of weight and then flaunt their blubber on social media, ready to attack any man who dare finds their display to be unattractive or repulsive.

Fat acceptance has become so pervasive that we had to dedicate one whole week on ROK tearing it to shreds, but in spite of that, not much has changed. America continues to get fatter and feminists continue to attempt to normalize obesity as actually being beautiful, just like how Rodger tried to convince himself of the idea that having a BMW would be attractive to women.

Take a look at this quote by Rodger:

“Everyone treated me like I was invisible. No one reached out to me, no one knew I existed. I was a ghost.”

Does that ring a bell to you? It’s almost identical to the rant we recently witnessed on the Louis CK show when a morbidly obese female went on to whine and bitch about how being a fat ass is not getting her the man she wants. It’s no surprise that fatties rushed to praise Louis CK for his act of sedition against men and acceptable standards of beauty. There is almost no difference between Rodger and a modern American woman who subscribes to feminist thought.

Now take a look at this passage:
“All of the hot, beautiful girls walked around with obnoxious, tough jock-type men who partied all the time and acted crazy. They should be going for intelligent gentlemen such as myself. Women are sexually attracted to the wrong type of man.”

Let’s do a swap on the genders:

“All the handsome men walked around with blonde bimbos who don’t have a good career like me and knowledge of reality television shows. These men should be going for a strong, empowered, independent, fabulous woman such as myself. Men are sexually attracted to the wrong type of woman.”

The overlap in mindset would be comical if it didn’t result in tragedy.

Another question worth asking is this: when today’s American woman can’t find the man of her dreams, does she look in the mirror and blame herself? No, she blames men for not finding her unattractiveness attractive. This is actively promoted by feminist thinkers on the most widely read American blogs like Buzzfeed, Gawker, and Huffington Post. Rodger shared this same viewpoint. His manifesto is dripping with entitlement of why girls don’t find him to be “marvelous” just because he happens to own a fancy pair of sunglasses. Feminists and Rodger, it turns out, are like two peas in a pod.

4. He believed that men should be chivalrous and kind, like feminists do
Please don’t forward us another listicle on a feminist-friendly blog about how men need to be nice, friendly, and awkwardly consensual by applying legalese speak in the bedroom before passionate fornication. Rodger believed much of the same, thinking that you had to be a “supreme gentleman” that catered to the material and emotional whims of women, doing everything possible to please them in exchange for a sexual reward. We can only imagine how nauseatingly “gentlemanly” he would have been if he actually managed to land a date on his terms.

I have no doubt he would have agreed with just about all the mainstream bullshit advice on being a gentleman, particularly the Thought Catalog piece The 20 Rules Of Being A Modern Gentleman. There is also a Buzzfeed quiz titled How Much Of A Gentleman Are You? that Rodger would have gotten an A+ on. The end result of his loneliness (killing six people) was obviously not gentlemanly, but before that rampage he treated girls with a gentlemanly shyness, reverence, and respect that feminists would have applauded him for. Rodger and feminists believed in the exact same demeanor that men should have around women.

5. He hated game, like feminists do

No one hates game more than feminists, who have gone so far as to equate it rape ([1], [2], [3]). They absolutely despise any attempt by men to improve their value in the sexual marketplace because then that would mean fewer men to put up with their obesity, short hair, or bad attitude. Rodger believed the same, going so far as becoming an active member in the PUAHate community which dedicated the bulk of their efforts to criticizing game and its adherents like a woman’s gossip circle. (On PUAhate there had been over 100 threads criticizing me and other ROK staff.)

Would you be surprised if I were to tell you right now that Rodger and a mainstream feminist shared the same views on PUAHate and game? I hope not, because that’s exactly what I found. A popular feminist writer who has worked for Newsweek, Jezebel, Buzzfeed, and Dissident magazine, Katie JM Baker, publicly declared that PUAs (i.e. us) are actually worse than PUA Hate.

“The men that lurk in the PuaHate forums are almost worse than the PUAs themselves…”

Let that soak in for a second. Feminist rage is so deep and emotional against game that they have supported a forum with “hate” in the title that cultivated and gave comfort to a mass murderer. I gave Baker a chance to change her opinion about believing a forum of hate was less worse than men who practice game:

[Image of a Twitter Feed, Transcript:

RoK: @katiejmbaker, for the record, do you still believe that we are worse than PUAHate? Or did the recent murder Rampage change your mind?

Katie Baker: lol, what are you even talking about?]

A feminist refused to reverse her position that game practitioners are not worse than Rodger’s favorite hangout. That tells me that Rodger and Baker would get along very well in their hate for men like us who teach game and try to improve men’s lives.

6. He subscribed to The Young Turks Youtube channel, a feminist darling

This is a minor point but one worth mentioning. We don’t know how knee-deep he was into The Young Turks liberal positions, but it’s a fact that he was not a subscriber to my channel or forum. We can only speculate as to how much TYT molded his pro-feminist view.

7. He hated alpha males, just like feminists do
Whenever a feminist encounters these parts, she immediately bashes our alpha/beta concept of male sexual hierarchy. She instead spouts tired cliches that are supposed to help men in their pursuit of sexual happiness but which actually do nothing of the sort:

“People are people!”
“Just be yourself!”
“Don’t be an asshole/creep/jerk/rando!”
“Having sexual standards is, like, misogynistic!”
Of course these phrases don’t explain human mating behavior and why some men get way more women than others, but that’s no matter since feminist theory does not have the slightest intention to explain the world in an accurate or truthful manner.

Like feminists, Rodger despised alpha males, who he called “obnoxious.” Here’s some relevant quotes from his manifesto:

“I noticed that there were two groups of cool, popular kids. There were the skateboarder kids, such as Vinny Maggio, Ashton Moio, Darrel, Wes, and Alex Dib. And then there were the boys who were popular with girls, including Vincent, Robert Morgan, and [redacted]. They all seemed so confident and aggressive. I felt so intimidated by them, and I hated them for it. I hated them so much, but I had to increase my standing with them. I wanted to be friends with them.

[…]

I thought all of the cool kids were obnoxious jerks, but I tried as best as I could to hide my disgust and appear “cool” to them. They were obnoxious jerks, and yet somehow it was these boys who all of the girls flocked to.”

If Rodger was alive right now, he’d be giving feminists high fives for sharing the exact same viewpoint on sexually superior but “horrible” males who have figured out the dating game and what women actually want.

8. He shared many personality traits with your modern American feminist
Rodger might as well have been a woman, which has raised speculation if he was actually gay. He took selfies like women. He was addicted to Facebook like women. He was obsessed with his appearance. He was narcissistic, vain, and materialistic. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was also addicted to his iPhone like your standard issue American woman. Heartiste does a good job of highlighting the similarities:

“[The effeminate male, like Rodger, is an] indictment of this infantile Millennial generation, which daily provides evidence that their ranks are filled with effeminate males who, like women, expect the world to cater their needs, no questions asked, no demands made. Elliot Rodger couldn’t stand how unfaaaair girls were to date uglier men than himself, how unfair life was that his car and clothes weren’t a magnet for hot white sorority chicks, how unfair the cosmic laws were to require of him a little bit of effort if he wanted to put an end to his virginity.

Egotistic, attention starved, solipsistic, passive aggressive, perpetually aggrieved, and unwilling to change when posing as a martyr feels so damn good… there’s your new American manlet, same as your new American woman.”

Like I already mentioned, a quick find/replace gender swap on his manifesto will pass the Turing test in convincing most spectators that he was actually a 22-year-old empowered feminist who participates in “Take Back The Night” walks and thinks that posting mindless #YesAllWomen tweets on Twitter comprises her good deed of the month. Rodger was effeminate and a negative person overall simply because he possessed beliefs that are undoubtedly shared by feminists.

9. He wanted to be a social justice warrior, just like feminists
He had a victim complex of being held down by invisible forces outside of his control. Feminists also believe that the “patriarchy” is holding them down, and they flock to Tumblr to reblog facile images and memes to spread lies that men make more than women for the same work, for example. These Tumblr crusades have even led to my own family being prank called at late hours, all because my words hurt their feelings, just like Rodger’s was hurt that pretty girls didn’t find him automatically attractive.

It turns out that Rodger was a budding social justice warrior, perhaps not far from establishing his own Tumblr beachhead:

“I formed an ideology in my head of how the world should work. I was fueled both by my desire to destroy all of the injustices of the world, and to exact revenge on everyone I envy and hate. I decided that my destiny in life is to rise to power so I can impose my ideology on the world and set everything right. I was only seventeen, I have plenty of time. I thought to myself. I spent all of my time studying in my room, reading books about history, politics, and sociology, trying to learn as much as I can.

[…]

I seriously started to consider working towards writing an epic story. I was always creating stories in my mind to fuel my fantasies. Usually those stories depicted someone like myself rising to power after a life of being treated unfairly by the world.

[…]

To be angry about the injustices one faces is a sign of strength. It is a sign that one has the will to fight back against those injustices, rather than bowing down and accepting it as fate. Both my friends James and Philip seem to be the weak, accepting type; whereas I am the fighter. I will never stand to be insulted, and I will eventually have my revenge against all those who insult me, no matter how long it takes.”

Both Rodger and feminists feel the only way to get what they want out of life is not self-improvement, but attacking others they disagree with. Their shared ideology is one of destruction. We have to wonder if Rodger would have eventually participated in any feminist event like SlutWalks to right the world of fantasy injustices that prevent them from being seen as beautiful, marvelous, gentlemanly, and so on.

10. He was not far away from being the epitome of a white knight, a man that feminists collect for their friend zones

If you see a feminist in the wild, a white knight won’t be far. He’s the man who enables her false view of the world and provides her with good feels and encouragement for her social justice campaigns. While Rodger wasn’t quite a white knight in this sense, he nailed all three white knight components:

“1. He is the ever-present servant.
2. He pines silently for a single woman.
3. That woman wants little to do with him, and it shows.”

In other words, if you inserted him in feminist company, he would be the glove to their chubby bear claw fingers. His personality is wholly compatible with how feminists believe men should behave: servile and wimpy while never taking real action on their sexual desires.

Conclusion

The only things in common that Rodger had with us is that (1) he wanted sex with attractive women, and (2) he had a functional penis. That’s it. The overlap of thought and belief between Rodger and feminists, however, should convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that Rodger was in fact a feminist, even if he didn’t himself know that his peg fit snugly into the feminist hole. I’ve actually met self-described feminists who were less feminist than Rodger was.

While I stand by my argument that game would have helped Rodger, I am beginning to wonder if being a feminist was the seed that drove him to desperation and delusion, eventually leading to a tragic loss of life. This line of thought is worth pursuing by people who want to understand why a man felt that taking other lives and his own was seen as the best solution. You definitely won’t read about this conclusion in the media, which is too busy trying to toss Rodger to our side like a hot piece of coal, even though Rodger shares absolutely no similarity in thought and behavior to game practitioners.

I have logically come to the conclusion that Rodger was in fact the first male feminist mass murderer that we have seen in America. I’m afraid that if the feminist ideology contained within Rodger’s head is allowed to continue spreading, we are likely to see more violent acts by men who believe in the exact same things that feminists do.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

A Christian's life is in constant opposition to the non-Christian outlook and agenda, and as long as a person is a non-Christian, he lives every moment of his life as a rebel against God's kingdom and his people. Therefore, on this spiritual level where things really count,the Christian and the non-Christian maintain a constant hostility against each other. Although this should not translate into physical violence, this does not reduce the enmity between the two. Unthinking people regard physical violence as more dangerous or more worthy of attention, but the conflict on the spiritual/intellectual level runs much deeper, and carries greater long-term influence and significance. This does not mean that you have to be constantly abusive toward unbelievers. However, there must always be a clear awareness of what they are, so that when you interact with them, you will not operate on false assumptions about what kind of people they are and where they stand. Many Christians are often tempted to allow a sense of solidarity with men to override their obligation and allegiance to God. But God is pleased with those who will put him front and center in all that they think and do (Exodus 32:25-29; Numbers 25:3-13; Deuteronomy 13:5-16; Deuteronomy 33:8-11).

A number of hurdles in theology and apologetics exist for many believers because of this – on those issues they stand with men rather than God. Otherwise, there is no reason that a Christian should have any hesitation or difficulty in answering a challenge such as, say, the so-called problem of evil. It has never been a rational problem for Christianity, but when the objection is raised, believers sometimes sympathize with men's bitterness against God, and allow a problem to take root where there should be none. You are generally permitted to associate with unbelievers, but there are biblical restrictions and exceptions, which I cannot enumerate here. In any case, you must no longer behave toward them the way you did before, and you must abandon the idea of maintaining intimate and meaningful relationships with any of them. Since your deepest commitments are now vehemently hostile to theirs, it is no longer possible to have the deepest kind of communication and comradeship with them. Even the closest relationships between Christians and non-Christians must remain superficial. Anyone who disagrees with this either compromises their Christian commitment, or fails to understand what it is to have a truly deep friendship.

This reality finds its most acute expression in the marriage relationship. Now, of course a Christian must not marry a non-Christian, so we are considering a marriage in which one of the two unbelievers converts, or in which a Christian marries a non-Christian in defiance against God's command. Since the marriage relationship is supposed to be the closest possible relationship between two human beings, this is also the closest possible relationship between a believer and an unbeliever, but because such a relationship is doomed to come far short of what marriage is intended to be, it is also the most tragic. In fact, in a relationship where two people are supposed to become one in spirit and in body, these two individuals are divided at the deepest level, torn apart by the vast gulf that separates heaven and hell. This separation is already present and manifest in their daily life, and unless the other person also converts, one day it will become complete and permanent.

In contrast, the marriage vow between two believers is taken from God's own word (Genesis 2, Ephesians 5, etc.) and taken before God as their witness. Their ability to fulfill this vow comes from their constant contact with God's power in sanctification, and their confidence in each other is also derived from this. Just as a Christian relies on the Holy Spirit to sustain his spiritual life, and to grow in knowledge and holiness, he depends on this same power and grace to make progress in his marriage. On the other hand, there is no power and no promise for the non-Christian who takes the marriage vow. He relies on his own moral integrity and ability, and since he has neither of these or at best only an appearance of these, his marriage and all his relationships – like all his thoughts and activities – are without meaning and substance. The question of how much we are to interact with unbelievers is frequently mishandled. People err toward both extremes. There are those who think that we must deliberately disassociate with unbelievers as much as possible, but this extreme is not common in our circle. Rather, there is sometimes a need to correct a misapplication of the teaching that believers are to be "in but not of the world." Some Reformed and Evangelical believers carry this very far, riding on their version of the "cultural mandate," their denial of any "sacred vs. secular" distinction, and the false doctrine of "common grace." This line of thinking is sometimes used to excuse their licentiousness, and their lust for worldly culture, amusements, and associations. But to be "in" the world, or even to be very involved in it, does not mean that we are to embrace and befriend it.

(..)

Our interest here is whether Christians should shun all immoral non-Christians. Paul gives a negative answer, but this comes within the above context and cannot be universally applied without discrimination or qualification. Also, what reason does he offer? And what does his explanation imply? Again, Paul states that it would be impossible to shun all immoral non-Christians, because all non-Christians are immoral people, and they are everywhere. The only way to avoid them is to leave this world. At least in this passage, he does not say that to shun non-Christians is morally wrong in itself – he states only that it is practically impossible to do so. And at least in this passage, he does not say that to associate with non-Christians is in itself a desirable thing, but only that it is a practical necessity. Therefore, based on this passage, one cannot assert that the opposite of not shunning non-Christians is to befriend them and to have intimate and meaningful relationships with them.

Of course there are other reasons to associate with unbelievers. Besides the practical impossibility of avoiding them in social and business transactions, God has commanded us to bear witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ before all people by our words and deeds, through which God will summon to faith those whom he has created and chosen for salvation, and harden those whom he has created and chosen for damnation. But nothing in the entire range of our activities before the world requires us to become intimate friends with unbelievers. And in fact, it would be a spiritual, intellectual, ethical, and practical impossibility to do so – again, unless either the Christian or the non-Christian compromises his deepest commitments, in which case either the Christian is no longer a Christian, or the non-Christian is no longer a non-Christian. Therefore, although it is indeed possible for a Christian to be on friendly terms with a non-Christian on a superficial level, an intimate and profound communion is out of the question.

Sue Bohlin #fundie probe.org

As pro-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) voices and values grow louder and more insistent in the culture, what about those people of faith who experience same-sex attraction and don’t want it? What are they supposed to do with feelings and desires at odds with their faith? How are they supposed to learn to reconcile their faith and their sexuality?

The cultural narrative has become, “LGBT represents normal, healthy variations in human sexuality, so everyone should support and celebrate all forms of sexual diversity. And if you don’t, we’re going to punish you, shame you, and squelch your voice.”

Part of the punishing and shaming includes outrage over “Conversion Therapy.” A growing number of states outlaw it. What makes it so bad and why are people so angry about it?

What is Conversion Therapy?

Conversion Therapy is usually defined as therapy designed to change a person’s sexual orientation. But is that what it really is? Therapy is a shortened form of the word “psychotherapy,” which means the treatment given by a licensed mental health professional such as a psychologist or psychiatrist, a social worker, or a licensed counselor. So Conversion Therapy isn’t therapy without a professional counselor of some kind, with the goal of changing someone’s sexual orientation.{1} But do a Google search for organizations being labelled as doing (or even promoting) Conversion Therapy—which will include a number of churches—and you’ll find neither element happening.

Conversion Therapy is the current buzzword that instantly communicates something that smears hate, shame, judgment and probable suicidality in those who undergo it, forced or not. It is not acceptable to say there’s anything wrong or unhealthy about any form of “sexual diversity.” Those that do—for example, anyone who holds to a biblical, traditional view of marriage and sexuality—are labeled as haters, bigots, prudes, outdated . . . and wrong.

Anne Paulk, director of Restored Hope Network, describes it as “an ideological term used by the GLBTQ activist community and their supporters who seek to link compassionate spiritual care and talk therapy with horrible, clearly disreputable practices.”{2}

These “disreputable practices” include stories of some extremists who used torture, pain and punishment to try and exorcise homosexuality from people. Most notably and recently, the movie Boy Erased purports to show the true story of a teenage boy whose parents sent him to a strict camp that left heartbreaking wounds on his soul. (It should also be noted that the producers took a number of creative liberties to produce the most dramatic moments of the film, none of which actually happened per the book.) The cultural narrative lumps extremists with all those engaged in helping those with unwanted homosexuality, painting them all with a broad brush of condemnation.

Helping Those Who Want the Help

A number of ministries and churches actively seek to help those who don’t want their same-sex feelings or their discomfort with their gender. Or, even if they don’t fight against their feelings, they want to live lives honoring to God despite their desires, which means not giving into them. These ministries and organizations neither offer nor promise conversion of homosexual attractions into heterosexual ones. That would be like offering to make someone stop loving chocolate and start loving kale. Not gonna happen, right?

But they can teach what God’s word says about sexuality, discipleship, and living a life pleasing to God. They can help people (note: choose to, not be forced to) submit every area of their lives to the lordship of Jesus Christ, including sexuality. There are many who define and identify themselves by their sexuality; God’s word calls us to define and identify ourselves by our relationship to Him.

Human sexuality is a complex, many-layered issue comprised of a lifetime of experiences, perceptions, habits, and ways of thinking. There’s nothing simple about it. It has also, for every one of us, been impacted by the Fall and the pervading presence of sin.

But Is Change Even Possible?

Ever hear the pejoratively-used phrase “Pray away the gay”? That’s as effective as praying away fat. A prayer like, “Please Jesus make me stop wanting people/things/food I shouldn’t” has never worked because He doesn’t have a magic wand. He says to all those who want to be His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me” (Matthew 16:24). That means saying no to ourselves and to our flesh, the part of us that operates independently of God. The apostle Paul instructs us in Romans 12:2 to “be transformed by the renewing of your mind. . .” Cooperating with God to renew our mind means submitting our thoughts and habits to Him, “taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5). The call to surrender every part of us, including our sexuality, as the way to obey and honor God, is a difficult one, and it takes community. It takes the support of other Christ-followers to walk alongside us, pray for us, speak God’s truth to us, encourage us, challenge us, restore us when we stumble and fall, and help us keep going.

Change is not only possible, it is the mark of things that are alive. And it is the fruit of the gospel. Lasting change comes not from human effort but from supernatural transformation as we surrender to the work of God in our lives. We experience change as we are transformed into the image of Christ (2 Corinthians 3:18). Christlikeness produces change in how we think, what we believe, how we see ourselves and others, our behavior, and finally—like the caboose on a train—our feelings. But there’s no point in trying to change the feelings apart from the rest of the process.

Discipleship is often what’s happening in ministries and churches that are smeared with the label of “Conversion Therapy,” being lied about and attacked by people who can’t abide any position other than their own.

Next time you see the term “Conversion Therapy,” know that it’s not about shutting down bad therapists. It’s about shutting up people who agree with God about sexuality.

Michael Majalahti #fundie returnofkings.com

The Inglorious Death Of The West

Michael is arguably the most acclaimed and accomplished pro wrestler in history out of Northern Europe, as well as the pro wrestling pioneer of Finland, where he has lived since 1996 after moving from his homeland of Canada. Michael is known as an outspoken figure that bucks the system and swims against the tide. Known in pro wrestling circles as “The Rebel” StarBuck, Michael has been a champion the world over, in addition to being a rock vocalist in three bands, a personal trainer, a voice-over pro, a business owner, an actor, an artist and a husband.

We have obviously come to the end of the West and Western civilization as we know it. No longer does it take a sociological “expert” or someone with a university degree to argue the point. Now it’s apparent all across the board. Our Western culture, whatever that even is anymore, is fastly disappearing and dying. And we’re letting it happen without even putting up a fight. This, I argue, will be to our own deserved demise.

We need to take a cold, hard look at what has led the West down the road of cultural ruin. After all, we’re only getting what we’ve ordered not too long ago.

Nietzsche the Prophet

I steadfastly argue that the single greatest factor that has led the west into the shitstorm it is now faced with is the abolishment of God and its resignation from all things even remotely Christian. Simply, we became inconvenienced with and ashamed of God and His statues regarding how we ought to orchestrate our lives. Even after the founding fathers of the West chose God-fearing, Biblical statutes to orient the ethical direction of the free world, we chose to balk at the freedoms and blessings afforded us under its banner and umbrella. Excuse my bluntness, but what the fuck?

What the hell was the big problem to begin with, that our Western society had to get rid of God and become so secular? Was it the allure of all things dark, forbidden, and sinful, much like the tempting apple in the Garden of Eden? Or was it just rotten, base human nature that tends to fuck up everything it’s given unless its spiritual self wakes up and enlightens the individual to better living? Or perhaps it was it the sins of the Catholic Church at large throughout world history, with its Crusades and and Inquisitions?

Any reasonable, sane person would understand that just because there is a killer loose in Disneyland, it doesn’t imply that the fault lies with Mickey Mouse. Anyone with even the slightest amount of intellect should be able to discern the obvious difference between what is faith and what is religion: one is a belief system that ordains personal decisions and and conduct of life at large, the other is a social construct of political yoke that serves to bind its members to its bylaws, rules and regulations.

Then again, the same applies to any secret society, alma matter, or club at large. So let’s get real for a moment and ask the hard, central question: what was wrong with the statues and morals of the God of Christianity, that we, as the West at large, decided to dump Him and move out from under His protective hand, as it were?

I suddenly recall a report that came out about the public school system in Canada back 1988, after the government decided to pull the Lord’s Prayer from schools in Ontario, where I spent the majority of my youth. What followed was a plummeting of school grades across the board, funny as that may seem. Don’t try to connect the dots, only consider the consequences at face value. The bottom line is, something happened in conjunction with this paradigm shift, and it wasn’t for anyone’s betterment.

Friedrich Nietzsche was right with his “death of God” analogy back in the day. We decided to kill God off from our lives and our society – societies that were largely built on Biblical principles and safeguards to ensure the posterity and safety of its people – and we left the door open for a horde of diverse and tumultuous demons to come in. We made our collective bed, in which we now lay. And the wages of sin is death. How fucking inconvenient for us!

The Fallacy of Relative Morality

There’s really no use or sense in complaining. It was a completely willful and conscious decision by us as a people and a collective society. God didn’t fit into our big picture and so we discarded the nagging voice of right and truth. We wanted our very own, custom-tailored, relative morality. We wanted to all be special snowflakes who would have their personalized cake and eat it, too. And in our deliberately blind gluttony, heresy, hedonism and salaciousness, we laid the groundwork for the inescapable law of reaping as we’d sown. Hey, don’t be fooled!

God is not mocked, and neither is the still, small voice of common sense and conscience within each and every one of us.When the dam broke, we were too ignorant to fix it. We let the landslide advance, unabated. The West let in the aggressive demands and doctrines of the east, the doctrines of which were adverse and foreign to the West to begin with.

The healthy not only tolerated but sought to accommodate the complaints and wishes of the perverse. The waters became muddied, unassimilable, and undrinkable. We were like spectators at the Colosseum, watching our own, unethical passion play unfold before our eyes, amused and sedated by it all at the same time. Things went from bad to worse and we just clamored for more fun, frills, and entertainment to fill our empty heads and void lives. Anything to dull the unnerving voice and moment of truth that kept beckoning to each and every one of us.

We didn’t protect our borders, our customs, our beliefs or our values, because we didn’t respect what we had. Someone else built the house which we inhabited; it wasn’t any skin off our own backs. We had no more sense of collective self, of tribe, clan or us. It became every dog for themselves. Me, me, me and even more me. Not you, not us. Just more of what’s in it for me, for my own, personal benefit, entertainment and pleasure. We took it all for granted, and now it’s being taken away from us.

With the death of God, we adopted new gods, albeit lesser gods at that. Mock gods like those offered at the altar of television, a conduit that taught us to believe whatever was fed through it; the media, who we believed all too eagerly at face value, without enough critical sense to question absolutely everything and ask the crucial and central question: “In whose interest is this message being sold to us?”

Popular music and its altar of indoctrination that has been admittedly so stealthy and shrewd, that even I, as a musical artist for nearly 20 years, can only marvel at its potency in conditioning the behaviors and attitudes of its audience.

Only as you age and grow as a person do you begin to see more clearly, but only if you steer clear of the mass sedation being force-fed all around you. That said, these new faux gods—and many others like the aforementioned—have filled the spiritual vacuum left behind by the absence of light that took immediate effect following the death of God, as foreseen by the accidental prophet, Nietzsche.

The Wages of Sin

In hindsight, we, as the West, have raped, spit on, shamed and insulted the Christian values that our lands were built on. We’ve become so goddamned secular, so boastful in our arrogant pride, that we’ve been ignorant of replacing the dismissed guards of our ethics and societal self with new, virtuous guardians of any kind. We’ve simply let ourselves drift, happily clueless, on our sea of indulgence and hedonistic pleasure. No one saw the hordes in waiting, and now it’s too late.

In our weakened state of constant self-gratification, we, as the West, have become weak. We’ve become milksops: easily offended and readily yielding, fragile individuals who hide behind the cloak of Big Brother. How the prolific words of Benjamin Franklin ring loudly now: “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.” Indeed.

Even what’s left of our weakened, watered-down Christianity has become a feminized, ineffective, dead symbol of religious ritualism and ineffective, empty clamor. Gone are the strong men of old, the spirit of the founding fathers. Gone is the bravado, the chest held high with its breastplate of uprightness, the strong and unmoving fortitude that was ready and able to wield the sword of truth and brandish the shield of faith. Woe to us, for gone is the faith that was steadfast, the powerful beliefs that steered the moral uprightness of entire societies. We’ve got it coming to us, folks. In spades.

Summa Summarum

We need that old time Christian warrior mentality now more than ever. Our lands need it. Our people need it. The West needs it. Because the West will not survive without a return to its Christian roots. The secular mindset will not accommodate laws to protect the West, for were it able to provide that, it would have offered them up already. The proof is in the pudding, we’ve already seen the degeneration and decline of morality and societal spine under the banner of secularism.

No religion, no bullshit. Just rock solid Christian values and respect for the freedoms afforded by the vastly gracious nature of Christian and Biblical beliefs. The proof is in our past, if you need further evidence.What have you got to lose? Only the last, scarce remnants of your personal freedoms that are all being stripped away, falling through your fingers, if you choose to remain embedded in secular indoctrination. And if that be your choice, good riddance.

Brian Tomasik #fundie reducing-suffering.org

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

...

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

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

...

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

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

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

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

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

A hundred years ago the Czar and his family were murdered, which murder foreshadowed and led to the murder of huge numbers of ordinary people.

Progressives, including supposedly very moderate centrist progressives, made, and continue to make all sorts of myths justifying and rationalizing the murder, revealing their intent to do it all over again.

Myth: The Czar was brutal and oppressive, but the soldiers refused to fire on the revolting masses, so he was overthrown, and thus the communists, representing the masses to power.

Reality: The Czar was a cucked progressive. He had Lenin and Stalin his hands, guilty of all sorts of crimes that gave him grounds for execution or indefinite imprisonment, but let them off because letists are holier than thou. There were no revolting masses, just a series of coups made in the name of the revolting masses, and such riots and looting as occurred, occurred Ferguson style – the police were ordered to stand back and let the mobs loot stuff and smash stuff.

The February revolution was no revolution – rather the elite allowed the mobs to knock over a few breweries, to provide an excuse for them seizing power from the Czar while he was away at the front.

The communists did not overthrow the Czar. The Kadets overthrew the Czar. Then Kerensky overthrew the Kadets with a policy of no enemies to the left, no friends to the right, which meant he disarmed the military officers, and armed the communists. Then the communists overthrew Kerensky. The leftism of the Czar led to his overthrow by the even lefter Kadets, the indecisive leftism of the Kadets led to their overthrow by Kerensky, and the radical leftism of Kerensky led to his overthrow by the even lefter communists, who then murdered the Czar, and millions of peasants, until the madness ended with them murdering each other.

What happened to Russia was leftism leading to more leftism.

Progressives agree that serfdom was absolutely horrid, and perhaps it was. If it was horrid, the solution should have been to free the serfs and leave the land with the lords. Or perhaps give some of the land to the more competent, successful, and wealthy serfs. But this solution was considered unthinkably horrible and inconceivably reactionary, which implicitly acknowledged that most serfs were not ready to run their own lives. What progressives wanted was the serfs freed with the land. But quite obviously, most serfs were incompetent to operate a small farm. So progressives wanted them to operate the land collectively. But if one man trying to run a small farm is hard, one hundred men trying to run a large farm is considerably harder.

So, Alexander the liberator freed them with collective ownership of the land. Which was predictably a disaster. And there was thereafter a succession of ever lefter government measures to try to deal with the problem, each of which made the problem worse. Russian agriculture still has not recovered. By freeing the serfs and giving them the land collectively, but not individually, Alexander the liberator set in motion a slide ever leftwards that continued steadily all the way to the liquidation of the kulaks.

The liberation of the serfs with collective ownership of the land created a crisis, for which the solution was always more leftism, which led to more crisis. This created an expectation that the way to power was to be lefter than thou. The Czar’s generals and bureaucrats outflanked him on the left. Kerensky’s socialists outflanked them on the left, and the Communists outflanked Kerensky on the left. Then the communists proceeded to outflank each other, till Stalin put a stop to that.

If at any time any of Alexander the Liberator’s successors had been so horribly repressive as to demonstrate that lefter than thou was a seriously bad career move, as Stalin belatedly demonstrated, the slide leftwards would have halted and stayed halted. But instead the Czars allowed to the progressives to guilt them into doing whatever the progs demanded, which merely excited progressive bloodlust.

Cryptid Wiki #crackpot cryptidz.fandom.com

Air rods, called "flying rods" and sometimes referred to as "sky fish," are something like crop circles in that even some skeptics believe in their existence. The only question is what they really are. Invisible to the eye, they are picked up by cameras all over the world.

image

Explanations

Are they living creatures, alien probes, or some sort of 3D electromagnetic smudge? To believers in the cryptozoology-based theory of air rods, air rods are probably living creatures, and they are possibly related to older stories of atmospheric beasts.

Air Rods might not be made of matter. Perhaps they are made of electromagnetic fluxes or some other form of energy. It is possible that an electromagnetic flux of the right sort would affect film but not be visible to humans. If this is true and air rods are alive, they would be the first living creatures of that sort we have ever discovered. If air rods are made of some sort of electromagnetic flux and are not alive, they should still be studied because they represent a weird phenomenon that science could probably learn a lot from.

Another suggestion is that air rods are made of some undiscovered, fifth phase of matter (other than solid, gas, liquid and plasma). If that were true, confirming their existence would be doubly exciting. A totally new life form and a new phase of matter all in one!

The total lack of dead air rod bodies also leads some researchers to consider that they might be made out of something other than conventional matter. If they are made of conventional matter, their bodies must disintegrate into tiny particles at death, or their bodies might not be recognizable as air rods after death. Perhaps they just look like a loose collection of broken fly wings or other parts that people assume must have broken off from known insects.

Whatever air rods are, they are exciting and deserve scientific research, whether they are living creatures or just some sort of anomaly that happens to fly around as if it is alive.

Another theory suggests that, if Air Rods are one and the same with Atmospheric Beasts, they could have evolved from the organisms that are native to the clouds.

Hoax

To skeptics, air rods are bits of flying debris, insects or birds filmed under unusual conditions, or blips on film that are due to errors in film processing.

People were scared and shocked when they realized that rods might be living creatures, so the first thing they did was try to disprove this by showing that air rods were something normal that simply showed up on film in an odd way. They already had solid proof that rods were not two-dimensional blotches on the film. This meant that rods could be insects, birds, or something else that was somehow blurred weirdly as it was being filmed. However, all attempts to deliberately create air rod footage by filming insects and birds in odd ways failed to produce anything that matched the features of rods. Airborne debris, such as bits of straw, also failed to duplicate air rods. The most studied air rod films showed air rods swooping within a dozen feet of the camera, coming close to the ground and going between objects with nearby trees and bushes visible behind the air rods, so that they couldn't be long, thin birds or precise lines of insects seen in the distance, as some skeptics claimed.

However, when people tried to duplicate air rods using fake models that were thrown or pulled rapidly through the air, they got much closer. It is absurdly easy to hoax air rod photographs using models or computer generated images. Hoaxing air rod films are harder because it is much more difficult to make your models move and behave like air rods. However, hauling them about skillfully enough on fine wires can do the trick. You just need some skill in puppetry. Faked air rod photographs or films differ from the genuine air rod footage in that the faked items are generally easier to see and more whitish in color. It is harder to create the glass-clear and blurry air rods that are more typical.

However, these fakes prove nothing. It is obvious from the sheer number of air rods that hoaxers could not have pulled off even one percent of the pre-discovery air rod footage. How many movie studios do you think let air rod hoaxers run around pulling their models through the air in the background of films decades ago? And how did so many air rods get into normal home videos from all over the world? Not only is a hoax of this scale completely absurd, but it would have been uncovered years ago if it had existed. Air rod models, unlike genuine air rods, are perfectly visible to the naked eye. People would have been aware of what was happening, even if you could somehow coordinate that many hoaxers for a whole century!

Therefore, any successful attempt to show that air rods are not real would have to bring forth some phenomena that could be accidentally filmed, something that the skeptics have so far failed to do. This hasn't stopped skeptics from putting forth many ideas that don't even come close to explaining air rod footage. Skeptics still rely on the ideas of insects, birds and windblown debris fairly frequently.

Also, since it is hard to disprove the historical air rod footage, many skeptics have chosen to concentrate their energies on the most tender and vulnerable area of the air rod phenomena. This is the fad that gained momentum after the initial discoveries. The idea of air rods attracted all sorts of weirdos and kooks. Also, since it is so easy to hoax air rod photographs, many hoaxes began showing up to complicate the issue. It is fairly easy to attack these hoaxes, so that is what skeptics did. In fact, all post-discovery air rod footage is suspect unless it can be solidly proven that the filmmaker was not trying to get air rod footage. A true professional hoaxer could skillfully use puppetry and/or computer generated images to produce fake films that would be quite hard to detect.

Most air rods have been debunked as a problem with cameras that shows an insect's several wing beats instead of one, creating a rod effect (see picture above).

Sightings

image
Artist's rendering

Air rods were discovered in the 1990s. People found that some films of all types, ranging from home videos to movies seen in theaters, had odd disturbances that looked something like blurry rods that were mostly transparent, occasionally whitish in color. Most of these disturbances were fast-moving and barely visible to the eye. These rods show up best against large areas of the same color, such as the sky.

The people who examined films for anomalies of this sort started calling what they did "sky fishing" because they usually started by looking at the areas of sky that were visible in films. They found that these rods were widespread. Countless films had them lurking almost imperceptibly in the corners, including old television shows, movies, films of sporting events, almost everything imaginable. There were simply too many examples to study them all, running into the thousands or tens of thousands. There were also air rods visible in photographs, but these were hardly studied at all for reasons that will become clear below.
Description

Close study of air rod films revealed a number of very interesting features. As these rods zoomed about, they displayed all the features of three-dimensional objects. In other words, they were not two-dimensional blotches on the camera lens or on the film itself, but something out there in the environment that was actually being filmed by accident. This three-dimensional nature of air rods has been proven without a doubt by the types of measurements and tests that only professionals can do. Careful measurements showed that most rods were between four inches and three feet long. They seemed like uniform cylinders without any difference between the head end and tail end, with pairs of appendages along the length of this cylinder.

image
Flying Rod in the night time. Insect? New Species? Or something alien?
In some air rods, these appendages look like fins that vibrate rapidly along the entire length of the cylinder in undulating waves. Other rods have appendages that look more like very rapidly beating bee wings. Most of the time, rods are blurry and transparent in color, making them inconspicuous. A rare few are very white in color, sometimes an even, solid white. The cylinder part often resembles an out-of-focus hair on the camera lens, but the appendages along with the three-dimensional turnings and motions mean that genuine air rods cannot possibly be hairs on the camera lens.

In addition to their three-dimensional character, these rods seemed to act in intelligent ways. Sometimes several rods followed each other and seemed to play with each other in the manner that butterflies might play. Rods sometimes followed people. They never went through other objects, they always went around them, even when this meant deviating from the path they had been on before. This seemed to indicate that they could not pass through solid objects and that they might be alive.

History

However, if they were living creatures, why had people never seen them? Why did they only show up on film? And what could they possibly be made of?

This fad has produced a mountain of recent photos and films. Suspiciously, the whitish air rods that are easy to see are showing up much more frequently in these pictures. Also, since rods are blurry, a great number of rather ordinary things that probably are random anomalies of film developing or hairs on the camera lens have been identified as air rods by amateurs. It is easy for skeptics to demolish such pictures. However, if something has never been taken seriously by serious air rod researchers, skeptics don't prove anything by debunking it.

It has become popular among the faddish air rod supporters to claim that air rods can be seen with the naked eye, something that serious researchers have never suggested. It has also become popular to claim that air rods are not living creatures, instead, they are UFO probes sent by aliens. There is no particular evidence connecting aliens and air rods, people just think that it seems like a good idea. This idea is so popular that many believers have started calling air rods "Roswell rods" after Roswell, New Mexico, a town with a famous history of UFOs. Also, this is because the famous "cave footage" (one of the clearest known films of air rods) was filmed in New Mexico, but not in Roswell.

Apart from the fad and the people this fad has attracted, serious researchers are still trying to find a solution to the air rod mystery. The biggest part of this mystery focuses on what air rods might be made of. How can something be visible on film (even if it is inconspicuous) but never to the naked eye? There is no known material substance that has this property. Faddists like to claim that air rods move too fast for people to see them. This is simply not true. Although air rods are fast, many films show them taking several seconds to circle a person. Anything going at such a speed ought to be visible.
Air rods do look as if they vibrate at a high rate, lending them a blurry character, but this phenomenon is like that of quickly rotating blades in a fan. As the blades speed up, they become a blur and then gradually become almost transparent, but you can still see them. It might be possible for air rods to be nearly invisible if they are made of a small number of thin, transparent surfaces that vibrate or beat the air very quickly. If this is what air rods are made of, they are probably insects of some kind. They would be a new species since nobody has ever reported invisible insects before. Even so, it does seem suspicious that people cannot see them but the camera can. Even if they are transparent, quick-moving and blurry, it seems like people ought to be able to see them without the use of cameras.

imageRod effect

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

(Figures that he's a presuppositionalist, seeing how van Til, the one who founded the idea, was also a Calvinist.)

Some Christians attempt to defend the faith with scientific arguments, such as those based on physics, biology, and archaeology. Along with the unbelievers they assume the reliability of science and attempt to "do science" better than the unbelievers can. If what I am saying is correct – that is, if what Paul is saying is correct – then of course we are able to do science better than the unbelievers, since Christians possess presuppositions that correspond to reality, that tell us the truth about God and his creation.

That said, the scientific method itself precludes the knowledge of truth, so that even with the correct presuppositions, science is totally unable to discover or describe the nature of reality. As Ronald W. Clark writes, "Contemplation of first principles progressively occupied Einstein's attention," and in such a context, he quotes Einstein as saying, "We know nothing about it at all. All our knowledge is but the knowledge of schoolchildren....the real nature of things, that we shall never know, never." Of course, he could speak only for science and not revelation.

Karl Popper, who has produced a number of works on the philosophy of science, writes as follows:

Although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it....In science there is no "knowledge," in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth....Einstein declared that his theory was false – he said that it would be a better approximation to the truth than Newton's, but he gave reasons why he would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory.

Scientists conduct multiple experiments to test a hypothesis. If observation is reliable, then why do they need more than one experiment? If observation is less than reliable, then how many experiments are enough? Who decides? [...]

The probability of drawing the correct curve (about experiments determining the exact boiling point of water, taking into account minutely different observations) is one over infinity, which equals zero. Therefore, there is a zero probability that any scientific law can be true. This means that it is impossible for science to ever accurately describe anything about reality. Thus Popper writes, "It can even be shown that all theories, including the best, have the same probability, namely zero." [...]

Scientists, of course, attempt to get around [affirming the consequent] by having "controlled" experiments, but they are faced again with an infinite number of things that may affect each experiment. How do they know what variables must be controlled? By other experiments that affirm the consequent, or by observation, which we have shown to be unreliable?

Bertrand Russell was a celebrated mathematician, logician, philosopher, and wrote much against the Christian religion. So he was not attempting to endorse Christianity when he wrote:

All inductive arguments in the last resort reduce themselves to the following form: "If this is true, that is true: now that is true, therefore this is true." This argument is, of course, formally fallacious. Suppose I were to say: "If bread is a stone and stones are nourishing, then this bread will nourish me; now this bread does nourish me; therefore it is a stone, and stones are nourishing." If I were to advance such an argument, I should certainly be thought foolish, yet it would not be fundamentally different from the argument upon which all scientific laws are based.

Yet many who speak this way refuse to draw the logical conclusion that all science is irrational and without justification.

Most people feel compelled to respect science because of the practical success that it appears to achieve; however, we have noted that affirming the consequent may yield results but not truths. Remember what Popper said about Einstein: "He would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory." The typical college student would disagree, but the typical college student is not Einstein. Accordingly, although science sometimes achieve practical ends, it has no authority to make pronouncements concerning the nature of reality. If the scientist does not know his place, an informed believer should not hesitate to put him back in his place. Theology is the ruling intellectual discipline, not science.

Jedidiah Van Horn #sexist identitydixie.com

[From "Sexual Utopia in Power"]

It is well known to readers of this journal that white birthrates worldwide have suffered a catastrophic decline in recent decades. During this same period, ours has become assuredly the most sex-obsessed society in the history of the world. Two such massive, concurrent trends are hardly likely to be unrelated. Many well-meaning conservatives agree in deploring the present situation, but do not agree in describing that situation or how it arose. Correct diagnosis is the first precondition for effective strategy.

The well-worn phrase “sexual revolution” ought, I believe, to be taken with more than customary seriousness. Like the French Revolution, the paradigmatic political revolution of modern times, it was an attempt to realize a utopia, but a sexual rather than political utopia. And like the French Revolution, it has gone through three phases: first, a libertarian or anarchic phase in which the utopia was supposed to occur spontaneously once old ways had been swept aside; second, a reign of terror, in which one faction seized power and attempted to realize its schemes dictatorially; and third, a “reaction” in which human nature gradually reasserted itself. We shall follow this order in the present essay.

Two Utopias

Let us consider what a sexual utopia is, and let us begin with men, who are in every respect simpler.

Nature has played a trick on men: production of spermatozoa occurs at a rate several orders of magnitude greater than female ovulation (about 12 million per hour vs. 400 per lifetime). This is a natural, not a moral, fact. Among the lower animals also, the male is grossly oversupplied with something for which the female has only a limited demand. This means that the female has far greater control over mating. The universal law of nature is that males display and females choose. Male peacocks spread their tales, females choose. Male rams butt horns, females choose. Among humans, boys try to impress girls—and the girls choose. Nature dictates that in the mating dance, the male must wait to be chosen.

A man’s sexual utopia is, accordingly, a world in which no such limit to female demand for him exists. It is not necessary to resort to pornography for example. Consider only popular movies aimed at a male audience, such as the James Bond series. Women simply cannot resist James Bond. He does not have to propose marriage, or even request dates. He simply walks into the room and they swoon. The entertainment industry turns out endless images such as this. Why, the male viewer eventually may ask, cannot life actually be so? To some, it is tempting to put the blame on the institution of marriage.

Marriage, after all, seems to restrict sex rather drastically. Certain men figure that if sex were permitted both inside and outside of marriage there would have to be twice as much sex as formerly. They imagined there existed a large, untapped reservoir of female desire hitherto repressed by monogamy. To release it, they sought, during the early postwar period, to replace the seventh commandment with an endorsement of all sexual activity between “consenting adults.” Every man could have a harem. Sexual behavior in general, and not merely family life, was henceforward to be regarded as a private matter. Traditionalists who disagreed were said to want to “put a policeman in every bedroom.” This was the age of the Kinsey Reports and the first appearance of Playboy magazine. Idle male daydreams had become a social movement.

This characteristically male sexual utopianism of the early postwar years was a forerunner of the sexual revolution but not the revolution itself. Men are incapable of bringing about revolutionary changes in heterosexual relations without the cooperation—the famed “consent”—of women. But the original male would-be revolutionaries did not understand the nature of the female sex instinct. That is why things have not gone according to their plan.

What is the special character of feminine sexual desire that distinguishes it from that of men?

It is sometimes said that men are polygamous and women monogamous. Such a belief is often implicit in the writings of “conservative” male commentators: Women only want good husbands, but heartless men use and abandon them. Some evidence does appear, prima facie, to support such a view. One 1994 survey found that “while men projected they would ideally like 6 sex partners over the next year, and 8 over the next two years, women responded that their ideal would be to have only one partner over the next year. And over two years? The answer, for women, was still one.”[1] Is this not evidence that women are naturally monogamous?

No, it is not. Women know their own sexual urges are unruly, but traditionally have had enough sense to keep quiet about it. A husband’s belief that his wife is naturally monogamous makes for his own peace of mind. It is not to a wife’s advantage, either, that her husband understand her too well: Knowledge is power. In short, we have here a kind of Platonic “noble lie”—a belief which is salutary, although false.

It would be more accurate to say that the female sexual instinct is hypergamous. Men may have a tendency to seek sexual variety, but women have simple tastes in the manner of Oscar Wilde: They are always satisfied with the best. By definition, only one man can be the best. These different male and female “sexual orientations” are clearly seen among the lower primates, e.g., in a baboon pack. Females compete to mate at the top, males to get to the top.

Women, in fact, have a distinctive sexual utopia corresponding to their hypergamous instincts. In its purely utopian form, it has two parts: First, she mates with her incubus, the imaginary perfect man; and, second, he “commits,” or ceases mating with all other women. This is the formula of much pulp romance fiction. The fantasy is strictly utopian, partly because no perfect man exists, but partly also because even if he did, it is logically impossible for him to be the exclusive mate of all the women who desire him.

It is possible, however, to enable women to mate hypergamously, i.e., with the most sexually attractive (handsome or socially dominant) men. In the Ecclesiazusae of Aristophanes the women of Athens stage a coup d’état. They occupy the legislative assembly and barricade their husbands out. Then they proceed to enact a law by which the most attractive males of the city will be compelled to mate with each female in turn, beginning with the least attractive. That is the female sexual utopia in power. Aristophanes had a better understanding of the female mind than the average husband.

[...]

Fallout of the Revolution: “Date Rape”

A few years into the sexual revolution, shocking reports began to appear of vast numbers of young women—from one quarter to half—being victims of rape. Shock turned to bewilderment when the victims were brought forward to tell their stories. The “rapists,” it turns out, were never lying in wait for them in remote corners, were not armed, did not attack them. Instead, these “date rapes” occur in private places, usually college dormitory rooms, and involve no threats or violence. In fact, they little resemble what most of us think of as rape.

What was going on here?

Take a girl too young to understand what erotic desire is and subject her to several years of propaganda to the effect that she has a right to have things any way she wants them in this domain—with no corresponding duties to God, her parents, or anyone else. Do not give her any guidance as to what it might be good for her to want, how she might try to regulate her own conduct, or what qualities she ought to look for in a young man. Teach her furthermore that the notion of natural differences between the sexes is a laughable superstition that our enlightened age is gradually overcoming—with the implication that men’s sexual desires are no different from or more intense than her own. Meanwhile, as she matures physically, keep her protected in her parents’ house, sheltered from responsibility.

Then, at age seventeen or eighteen, take her suddenly away from her family and all the people she has ever known. She can stay up as late as she wants! She can decide for herself when and how much to study! She’s making new friends all the time, young women and men both. It’s no big deal having them over or going to their rooms; everybody is perfectly casual about it. What difference does it make if it’s a boy she met at a party? He seems like a nice fellow, like others she meets in class.

Now let us consider the young man she is alone with. He is neither a saint nor a criminal, but, like all normal young men of college years, he is intensely interested in sex. There are times he cannot study without getting distracted by the thought of some young woman’s body. He has had little real experience with girls, and most of that unhappy. He has been rejected a few times with little ceremony, and it was more humiliating than he cares to admit. He has the impression that for other young men things are not as difficult: “Everybody knows,” after all, that since the 1960s men get all the sex they like, right? He is bombarded with talk about sex on television, in the words to popular songs, in rumors about friends who supposedly “scored” with this or that girl. He begins to wonder if there isn’t something wrong with him.

Furthermore, he has received the same education about sex as the girl he is now with. He has learned that people have the right to do anything they want. The only exception is rape. But that is hardly even relevant to him; he is obviously incapable of doing something like that.

Uri Berland #fundie youtube.com

[Translation and commentary is sourced from Reddit]

0:00 The existence of life after death has been scientifically proven by an Ural Federal University student. The young scientist has even created the corresponding mathematical formula.

0:09 "Life is a function of time. Thus, death is the limit of that function as time approaches infinity. The solution is a finite quantity, which means that a crisp, determinate perception awaits us after death. That proves that life after death exists."

0:29 Based on that mathematical formula, Yuri says that after the physical death of one's body, certain information persists that they had been perceiving during their lifetime. The student thinks that that substance is intangible.

0:36

Formula

Let L = f (t) where t - time L - life expressed as information

then D= Lim f(t),t -> +infinity, where D is information about death and ensuing events

D=Limf(t)=[8/8]=S(ABC)i/ABC=const

0:42 Now the mathematician is planning to tell the scientific community about the discovery and even publish an article in a foreign journal. Furthermore, Yuri is nominated for the Youth Nobel Prize of one million rubles which will be awarded in Yekaterinburg at the sixth Eurasian Youth Economic Forum. By the way, Yuri has already planned his own afterlife.

1:05 "If Benjamin Franklin took lightning from the gods, that means I took away... life after death, because now I know what it depends on and can influence it. You just need to control your cognition. To put it simply, choose it. Since we can see that consciousness persists, that information persists, that means the ability to choose persists as well."

[commentary]
And here's his crowdfunding campaign, which contains gems like "According to biochemistry ... when we don't have a brain to think with, nothing is left" and "We can view life as a function of two variables: information and time" and also a 9/11 picture for some reason.

dagur-berserker #conspiracy #racist #crackpot deviantart.com

So recently I ended up getting quite a bit of flack from the leftists. Though ironically, the leftists are more willing to go up and harass civic nationalists and call them racist and white supremacists than they are to attempt to even debate or even speak to us. I'm not mad at those who make articles about me, but I'm amused as they're only putting my message out there. Ironically, one of my friends, a former black co-worker who didn't call me racist even though he heard that I was a white separatist, believes that socialism and multiracial societies could work if it were done in love somehow. This ironically is the same mentality as the capitalist whites who are civic nationalists, only they don't agree with socialism.
Though apparently, I confronted one of the commenters who claimed I was an absurd conspiracy theorist and yet didn't even try to back up her claim with any sources. It just goes to show that this abortionist only had ad hominem fallacies and personal attacks with no basis to them. That same person who claimed that I was a conspiracy theorist so happens to be pro-abortion as well. When I confronted her about it, I was harsh and rightfully so and this is how she responded.
"I am not an 'anti-white racist babykiller' as you so rudely put it. I don't just love all races, I embrace all of them because we are all human beings. Whether you are too, however, is debatable, but I can only say that you're an ass through and through. Hell, I even think you're being the racist one yourself. You are also pro-birth for the whites, pro-mandatory abortion for other races. You've just proven yourself you have zero regard for bodily autonomy either way. You're 100% quantity over quality."
This claim about "muh quantity over quality" actually shows how heartless they really are. They are willing to put material comforts above the lives of other human beings. Plus not once did I ever call for mandatory abortions against blacks or any other race, but in fact I stand with many black identitarians who are against abortion because they see this as a means of snuffing them out in the process as well. Plus the pain I have seen on the women's faces when they shared their abortion regret on YouTube whether they were white, Hispanic, Black, or Asian broke my heart. This talk also of "Muh bodily autonomy" is a coomer's/slut's argument in favor of a promiscuous lifestyle because such autonomy is forfeited when two people decide to have sex.
Plus what quality to the abortionists claim to provide the women except an opportunity for greater material gain? It is pretty much the same as going in and murdering someone for their material possessions or even murdering a toddler, child, or teenager because they're costly. Plus the best way out of poverty is the free market which is available for everyone but the only ones supporting the free market in majority are the non-Hispanic whites who are an ever shrinking demographic thanks to immigration, miscegenation, and abortion. Plus the demographic change in California has not been for the better as it is now the most expensive state in the union to live in and services such as garbage disposal and healthcare are in short supply. On top of that, the plague and leprously have returned as a result of California being a sanctuary state.
That was thanks to both legal and illegal immigration but people ignore the damage that legal immigration has done alone most of the time. With the lower birth rates, it has been propagated that we need more immigrants to replace our people but in doing so, our population has grown at a faster rate than if we even did have a stable birth rate and thus a large labor field has left more competition for the jobs and thus people coming in from the third world are more willing to work for lower wages than our native born citizens and thus the supply of workers has driven the wages for everyone down as to 'be fair.' Ironically, in her favorites, she had a stamp that condemned opposition to immigration as 'muh racism' and another stamp that supports legal immigration. So she lied saying that she accepts all people of all races because she's fighting against white people's right to exist. Simultaneously, the argument of quality over quantity of life is clearly thrown out the window as she's supporting the very process that is driving down wages for our working class and favoring only the corporations and the top 1%, hence more proof that their arguments are basically lies.
"You wanna see 'babykillers,' try going back in time to the ancient past where Hebrew boys are slaughtered soon after birth, or newborn baby girls left to die because they 'cannot inherent anything.' It's safe to say that these practices are pretty barbaric back then because we're more civilized today. Back then, though, these actions are two of the many examples of genocide, by the definition itself. You're just no different from what those people have done, regardless if you're civilized or not. If you seriously think that the mass slaughter or genders, races, cultures or ethnicities doesn't count as genocide to you, then I don't know what the hell does (that, and you're obviously not right in the head). No, abortion doesn't even count as genocide because a fetus isn't race, gender, culture or ethnic-specific. You won't even know what it is until it's born (discounting modern medical technology)."
Of course what she goes on here next is an obvious red herring fallacy in trying to divert the conversation. But interestingly enough, the ancient Hebrews, when they did begin to drift from God, did incorporate many of these barbaric practices such as child sacrifice in the worship of Ba'al and Moloch. Plus this same barbarism survives in the descendants of the Hebrews today as sadly up to 80% of Jews favor abortion to be legal in all or most cases. It's ironic how she claims that I'm no different when she's supporting the same practices under a different guise. If I didn't think that the slaughter and mass genocide against other genders, races, cultures, and ethnicities which is why I am against abortion and interestingly enough, this process of abortion isn't just a means of trying to snuff out the white race but the same people are also trying to snuff out the black race to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8hAfi3wiiQ&t=8s
Not that this will make any difference among black people for me saying this but Margaret Sanger herself referred to black people as human weeds. Eugenics was then passed off as a means of protecting the white race but that was a lie to. It turns out that Margaret Sanger's husband, who helped to spread the eugenics propaganda was a Jew. The attempt on the black people with eugenics was only the test run because they were able to use it in the mainstream via abortion and it is now mainstream via abortion. The one detail left out in the video in the elimination of blacks was miscegenation because too many conservatives have been too scared to call out this barbaric race mixing process.
Seeing as how this girl denied abortion being genocide, she has no regard for those most at risk of being snuffed out in our own country be that the non-Hispanic whites, the African Americans, the Native Americans, and the Hawaiians. Already the Hawaiians have been made into a minority in their own island and their low status in the population as well as limited financial power have left them as easy prey to the same Zionists who abuse white America like Mark Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg, the same man who advocated for illegal immigration via DACA, also bought land in Hawaii that was not for sale and sued the Hawaiian people for the right to buy the land. This is what we propertarians call another violation of reciprocity and is the equivalent to our national monuments being knocked down.
"Also, if you're really desperate to know why I didn't answer in the past three or so hours, I have a life off the computer, you know. That sort of life I have requires me to wake up at 5 in the morning, go to my workplace in another town which requires the use of the freeway, use the same freeway to go back home, and sometimes take naps to catch up on my sleep. This is one of those times. Apparently, you have not learned the meaning of patience. And you most likely have no life outside the computer because all you ever do anymore is spread lies saying that 'you're the most moral person on the planet next to former President Ganguro' and all you ever care about is being right."
It doesn't matter how much money you make or how long you work if the only thing you're doing it for is money. This just goes to show that the Masonic and Zionist elites want to reduce us to mere consumers and mercenaries. This also goes to show the fallacy of assumption as she's attempting to degrade anyone who calls her out on this. Plus making money isn't the only thing that makes you a good citizen, a good customer, or a good neighbor. Plus when we the people, those who do most of the work and actually produce what keeps our civilization thriving such as families as well as jobs, are told that we are only concerned about being right when we see our civilization, our culture, and our way of life die, then you know how hateful and how racist the abortionists really are.
This same plot in destroying the black race, the white race, the Native Americans, and the Hawaiians is being fueled via the funds from the central banks as they mooch off of the taxpayers of every country on Earth except for North Korea and Iran. With interracial marriage also being on the rise in China, China also has a vastly limited supply of women as there is only one woman for every seven men and thus a terrible demographic winter is upon them which is why the Han government are beginning brutal crackdowns upon every other people group as they fell for the Masonic/Zionist trap via communism and birth control and the evil just doesn't stop there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrVnt9J2QUo
This same plot will not just stop with mixing all of us together but the plot of the Masonic lodge involves reducing the population world wide till they are only half a billion and this can be seen on the Georgia Guidestones. The Georgia Guidestones contain the ten codes for the New World Order. This also shows the plot in destroying most of humanity's languages as to unite humanity under one language and even today it is said that if things keep going the way they are going, the German language itself will be extinct. If the first world nations were to collapse today, any aid the third world receives to attempt to help their people will bet cut off and most likely the people in Africa and Latin America, given how heterogenous these countries are will kill each other off and 10 to 1 the devastation from this warfare would expand the Sahara desert until it unites with the Kalahari, thus leaving some of Earth's most beautiful regions today to become nothing but barren wastelands in the future.
Another commandment of this cursed New World Order is for nations to govern their internal affairs but use international governance as a means of solving external affairs which is really just a softer term for imperialism. Does this sound familiar? Sounds pretty much like the UN, the EU, the African Union, and the Union of South American states. Freemason president Harry Truman helped to put together the UN and Freemason Kalargi helped in establishing the European Union as well. It breaks my heart that Africa and Meso-America have followed our bad examples of falling for the Masonic trap.
However, with nationalism, separatism, and populism on the rise world wide, it has the globalists freaked out. Of course Brexit is finally about to happen and anti-EU sentiment has been furthered even more so in Poland with Confederacia on the rise. Poland and Hungary alone are taking down the EU from the inside. On top of that, the Union of South American Nations is practically dead already with only five member states left. Ironically, Peru itself was so based that they got kicked out of the Union of South American nations.
When the Brazilians elected Jair Bolsonaro, they essentially voted for Brazilexit. In March of last year alone, Bolsonaro has essentially withdrawn Brazil from the Union of South American Nations. Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Paraguay left the year before and the only nations left in the Union of South African Nations are essentially the Marxist/leftists ones such as Guyana, Venezuela, Bolivia, Suriname, and Uruguay. Ironically, where these Marxists have ruled, many have become Christian republics where Christ has united people despite different racial and ethnic differences in nations like Brazil, and nationalism has emerged even stronger.
Ironically, a few other countries that were under the thrall ring of communism, some in Europe and one in Africa, today are lands where the majority of the people love and serve God with their hearts and their nations are leading as proud examples of their region. Ghana ended up becoming communist at the time of its independence but today thanks to the influence of Pentecostal and Catholic missionaries, the people there are on fire for Christ, true conservatives, and nationalists as well. Ghana today is also the envy of Africa and will most likely become Sub-Saharan Africa's first developed nation.
Simultaneously, Hungary, which suffered under communism now has a majority Christian population who have elected a godly leader who ironically was once a communist himself. Simultaneously, his wife, who led Orban to the Lord, was once a Jew. Poland as well, have a nationalistic and Christian population which constantly messes up the plans of the EU. Ironically, the lands that stand up against this globalist injustice the most are the lands who's inhabitants are strong Bible believing Christians which shows that Christ ultimately is the leader of the fight for freedom. Abortion and socialism are but symptoms of a greater disease than globalism itself and that disease is godlessness which is why the ultimate form of resistance and defiance is giving one's heart to the Lord and God will guide us to do the rest.
Ephesians 6:12
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

Eugene McCarthy #crackpot macroevolution.net

Okapi: A giraffe-zebra hybrid?

imageOn their rumps and legs, okapis have striping like that of a zebra.

imageThe okapi has a giraffe-like head.

The okapi (Okapia johnstoni), also known as the forest giraffe or zebra giraffe, is a good example of the way theory affects both perception and research activities. Okapis mix traits otherwise seen only separately either in the giraffe or in the zebra, and under ordinary circumstances this fact would constitute strong evidence that okapis are giraffe-zebra hybrids. Moreover, old news reports say that peoples native to the region where the okapi occurs believe it to be a giraffe-zebra hybrid.

And yet it seems no scientist has investigated this possibility. Why? Well, in trees representing accepted notions of evolutionary descent, giraffes and zebras are placed on widely separate branches. So any biologist worth his or her salt will tell you: The two are simply too far apart for giraffe-zebra hybrids to be possible. Thus, it is not surprising that there are no reports of attempts to produce giraffe-zebra hybrids. Experimentation does not occur because theory says it would be useless to try.

imageOkapi tongue

imageGiraffe tongue

The okapi and the giraffe were assigned to the same order (Artiodactyla) because they both have cloven hooves, and to the same family (Giraffidae) because they share certain distinctive features: Both have large eyes and ears, thin lips and a long, extensible tongue that allows them to lick their entire face (even the ears); their backs slope upward from rump to withers; they also share the same dental formula: (i 0/3, c 0/1, pm 3/3, m 3/3) × 2 = 32. Both, unlike any other mammal, have molars with rugose enamel and bony horns that remain covered with skin throughout life (Nowak 1999, vol. 2, p. 1085).

Yet the rump and legs of an okapi are covered with black-and-white stripes exactly like those of a zebra. Perhaps, then, if okapis had solid hooves instead of cloven ones, they would be classified as perissodactyls (Order Perissodactyla) and would be considered more closely related to zebras than to giraffes? An okapi is about the same size as a Burchell’s zebra.

The chromosome count of an okapi is also like that of a zebra, to which it is not supposed to be related, and unlike that of a giraffe. Giraffes have 30 chromosomes (Taylor et al. 1967; Hösli and Lang 1970; Koulisher et al. 1971), whereas okapis have a variable chromosome number of 44-46, depending on the animal in question; most seem to have 2n = 45 (Ulbrich and Schmitt 1969; Hösli and Lang 1970; Koulisher 1978). The chromosome number of Grevy’s zebra is 2n = 46 and plains zebras have 2n = 44 (Benirschke and Malouf 1967). Variation in chromosome count is itself unusual among mammals, but common in hybrids.

Okapis also produce high levels of abnormal sperm, which is consistent with the idea that they are the products of a distant hybrid cross. Thus, Penfold (2007) reports that 52% percent of the spermatozoa produced by these animals are morphologically abnormal. As those authors state, “okapi semen collected by electroejaculation routinely contain high numbers of non-motile and plasma membrane-damaged spermatozoa, apparently unrelated to season or the length of time since the male was housed with a breeding female.”

imageGiraffe and zebra drinking together Giraffe and zebra drinking together at Kruger Park.

It is, of course, well known that giraffes and zebras exist in mixed herds in various parts of Africa, and therefore are in potential breeding contact (these regions include those where okapis occur).

However, zebras are much smaller than giraffes, which might lead one to suppose that they would be physically unable to mate. And yet, hybrids sometimes occur between animals where the disparity in size is even greater. Male Steller sea-lions (Eumetopias jubatus) often mate, and sometimes even successfully hybridize with female California sea-lions. And yet the former average around 1100 lbs while the latter weigh only around 200 lbs., a ratio of 5.5:1 (the female often dies in such encounters) Such cases are nothing unusual in the literature on hybridization. Florio (1983) reports a case of a lion father who weighed 550 pounds (250 kg), while the leopard mother weighed a mere 84 pounds (38 kg), a ratio of 6.54:1.

In the case of a male giraffe 2,628 pounds (1,192 kg) with a female zebra, 770 pounds (350 kg),the weight ratio is only 3.4:1, that is, the difference is less disparate than in either of the two crosses just mentioned.

And this difference would be even smaller with the cross reversed, that is, with a female giraffe and a male zebra. Giraffe females weigh nearly a thousand pounds less than males, while zebra males weigh a bit more than females, which would yield a ratio closer to 2:1, not at all unusual in a hybrid cross. Moreover, giraffes do sometimes lie down, and a male zebra would, of course, have much better access to a recumbent female giraffe.

A final fact consistent with the idea that okapis might be giraffe-zebra hybrids is their rarity at the present day and their absence from the fossil record. Hamilton (1977) says that while giraffes are well-known as fossils, paleontologists have seen no trace of okapis. Zebras, too, are known from fossils (Eisenmann 1992). The IUCN rates the okapi as endangered, although it also states that “there is no reliable estimate of current population size.”

Bernie Suarez #conspiracy thesleuthjournal.com

Let’s remember that humanity is now subjected to yet another full year of spraying with metal particles. Not just humanity but all the poor creatures on earth are being sprayed, every plant and every tree, the bees and birds, the soil and all the little creatures that live in it, even the fish and inhabitants of the sea are suffering as aluminum, sulfur, barium and other toxic metals pile on everywhere altering the pH of the soil, contaminating the water and attacking the very essence of life on earth.

Yes, chemtrails spraying is this big a deal and as another year goes by the globalist and their military industrial complex marches forward with their insanity to control the weather, deliberately engineering a much cooler planet by literally blocking our sunlight, and dumping enough toxic metals all over the planet to explain the destruction and slow death of many crops (ie food supply), all to the benefit of companies like Monsanto and the U.S. government.

So as we wrap another year, let us refresh our memory and lay out 15 points about chemtrails and chembomb spraying that everyone should be mindful of. Points that can be used as a weapon to silence online “contrails” trolls whose only mission is to keep the blind sheep asleep and in doubt about the otherwise plain-to-see, in-your-face evidence of the chemtrails/chembomb geoengineering programs which are ongoing. Let’s remind our uneducated friends and online trolls that:

1. Often we see ordinary planes who are not spraying, flying in the same air space and altitude as those who are spraying leaving long trails. Given that “contrails” are dependent predominantly on the temperature and humidity of the surrounding atmosphere at that particular atmospheric pressure (which is measurable), and given that changes don’t occur very quickly in nearby airspaces, this should offer no less than a head scratch for anyone with an understanding of the issue and willing to apply science, reason and common sense.

2. Planes spraying are almost always unmarked, not ordinary commercial planes with passengers. To this day, no one has filmed an ordinary commercial (labeled) passenger jet spraying. It doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened or is not happening, but it is something to consider. This goes along with the unusual government dual strategy of both:

A. Admitting that spraying is real, it’s necessary, cheap, important, developing and well planned, all in an effort to save the planet.
AND

B. Simultaneously the government and in particular its politicians and media and (Hollywood) TV mouthpieces have made a collective decision to DENY chemtrails spraying 9/11 style. Amazingly, when the issue is brought up to the general public it is said to not be happening and it’s all a “conspiracy”. The unmarked planes is a reminder of their commitment to operating in a clandestine manner while simultaneously advancing their plans and quietly conditioning the scholastic types that these are indeed legitimate programs to save the earth.

CORRECTION:

I was entirely wrong about the filming of commercial jet spraying. I came across this video showing 100% proof of several clearly marked commercial passenger planes in mid air spraying us. See video here. Though most of the planes seen and actually videotaped spraying us have been largely unmarked planes, clearly there is video proof evidence as well for commercial airlines involvement with the U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense to cooperate with the spraying programs. – Bernie Suarez

3. Planes that are spraying almost always fly with transponders off. One can verify flight data information by logging on to a site like flightaware.com and look for the plane when it flies over. Rarely if ever, will you see the plane show up on the website flight listing because it is not sending out signals. This speaks again to their commitment to secrecy and denial.

4. Spraying planes seem to fly in senseless patterns. They often fly in directions not commonly known for commercial flight including making U-turns and sharp turns.

5. Easily verifiable money-making weather modification and atmosphere-manipulating patents are available for anyone to review. These are not conspiracies or secret rumors, these are real patents. These patents are in use or they wouldn’t exist.

6. Spraying planes don’t follow any order of nature with respect to temperature and humidity (important to the “contrails” claims). Unlike a natural (“contrails”) event, the chemtrails we see being sprayed in our skies sometimes every day follow no set temperatures or humidity. In Southern California for example, we see spraying regardless of whether the temperature on the ground is 50, 70, or 90 degrees Fahrenheit. We also see the spraying at very low and very high humidity. This disjointed pattern with nature’s temperature and humidity is a stark contrast to what government geoengineers claim is the nature of contrails. All supposed government “contrails” studies show that “contrails” will only form under certain specific temperatures and humidity in accordance to the rules of nature. In other words, according to the rules of nature there are set temperatures and humidities that guarantee no contrails. These temperatures and humidities unfortunately never translate over to reality when one applies the Environmental Lapse Rate (ELR) formula to the known current temperature on the ground to calculate the temperature at plane altitude level.

7. Jets that spray our skies can often be seen to stop their spraying suddenly then restart seconds later. Something characteristic of a deliberate shutting off or perhaps a pause to change chemical canister from which the chemicals are being drawn from. With contrails on the other hand we would expect a smooth steady continuation of the condensation trail being created by (supposedly) the ice crystals that (supposedly) form spontaneously from the combustion of ordinary jet fuel. This is not at all what we see when we look up.

8. Throughout the year anyone can easily predict when they chemtrails will stop. In regions with very steady climate as in Southern California, this prediction is based strictly on observation of their spraying schedule not on the temperature or humidity. Hot or cold, we will see spraying throughout the year, and we’ll see the spraying (predictably) stop at specific times of the year.

9. We can observe weather patterns that are often inconsistent with the established weather forecast. The difference? The spraying of the sky. Often the forecast calls for sunshine and blue skies and we’ll observe the planes ruin the sky leaving cloudy overcast skies instead. A sharp difference from the predicted weather.

10. There are known weather modification private companies who admit they manipulate the sky for the purposes of weather modification. This information is public, real and easily verifiable.

11. Attempt at cloud seeding, weather modification, engineered drought, rain making and other manipulation and geoengineering of our skies is admitted by government agents, educators, geoengineers and other entities all claiming it’s for the purposes of “global warming” and planet cooling. This admission is nonetheless the proof these programs are ongoing.

12. Patents for specifically aluminum resistant seeds are secured by the USDA and promoted by Monsanto. A bizarre coincident if this is not related to spraying programs which also employ the spraying of aluminum in the sky which eventually falls back to the ground.

13. Photographs of our skies prior to 2000 show little to no lines in the sky. Everyone with a photos collection has this proof in their hands.

14. Where is the documentation of protestors protesting sky lines back in the 1990’s? How about the 1980’s, 70’s, 60’s, 50’s etc? Where is the history of genuine writers (not government scientists), authors of books and activists writing about the problem of lines in the sky? Where are the photos of activists packing the streets protesting sky lines in the 1970’s? Did no one care about the environment back then?? These images and activist literature don’t exists because movements only occur to address things that are actually happening in that generation. Chemtrails and sky lines are actually happening now thus we NOW have a movement to address this serious issue.

15. Trolls and disinformation agents claim ordinary planes have always made persistent contrails when they combust fuel and these trails inevitably change our weather and global climate as a result and block our sunlight. These wild claims suggest that dating back to the Wright brothers invention of the first plane, the invention turned out to be a weapon of mass destruction. As bizarre as this sounds, this shifting of the blame for the destruction of our skies from today’s U.S. government, U.S Air Force, the DOD and all its private contractors and accomplice allies to the Wright brothers is inescapably at the root of their argument. Also at the root of this argument is that blue skies were never the norm even in sunny southern California or Hawaii due to natural contrails formation. This bizarre argument of course is a psyop on those who are unaware of the issue and the younger generations who are now being conditioned to believe this statement is true and that massive weird feathery and smudgy looking clouds injected in the stratosphere and troposphere with chemical trails flown into them is normal.

Andre Vltchek #fundie journal-neo.org

How Come the World is Suffering from Stockholm Syndrome

It may sound incredible, but it is true: in countries that have been damaged, even totally robbed and destroyed by the West, many people are still enamored with Europe and North America.

For years, I have been observing this ‘phenomena’, even in the most plundered, devastated war zones and slums. Often I was shocked, other times thoroughly desperate. I did not know how to respond, how to react, how to describe what I have been observing.

Then, a few days ago, in Syria, right next to the Idlib battlefield, close to the deadly positions of Al-Nusra Front, in a country where the West and its allies have murdered hundreds of thousands of people, one of my interpreters exclaimed in a ‘patriotic’ outburst: “Look how beautiful this land is! It is almost as beautiful as Europe!”

And at night, another guide of mine began nostalgically recalling his glorious days in Europe, when he could still go there; before the Syrian war began.

An interpreter did not know who Fidel Castro was (I had his portrait, lighting up cigar, as my phone screensaver), but both of them – my local companions at the battle ground – were fluent in Western slang and the worldview. They knew, however, near zero about China.They were patriotic and they fully supported their country, but at the same time they admired the West and Western journalists from the mainstream media – those very same propagandists who helped to bring their beautiful and unique Syria to the state in which it is now.

It all felt schizophrenic, but definitely not new.

I could not take it, anymore. I decided to write this story, despite the fact that it is an intellectual ‘minefield’. I decided to write it, because it is how it is. Because I have to tell it; someone has to. And above all, because it is absolutely essential to combat the crooked selfie image with which the West has been infecting almost all nations of the world, including all those that it has been plundering and raping.

*

Are we dealing with the so-called “Stockholm Syndrome” here? Most likely, yes. The victim falls in love with her or his tormentor.

For long centuries, the West has been colonizing, usurping, literally terrorizing the entire planet. Hundreds of millions have died as a result of colonialism, neo-colonialism, and imperialism. Wealth, cultural and educational institutions, hospitals, transportation, parks – all that Europe and North America possess to date and boast about, was constructed on mountains of bones, on genocide and unbridled plunder.

That cannot be disputed, can it?

Slavery, mass murder, genocidal expansions; the West robbed the world, and then consolidated its power, promoting its exceptionalism through relentless brainwashing (called ‘education’), propaganda (called ‘information’), and twisted entertainment for the masses that inhabit poor countries (called ‘culture’ and ‘the arts’).

Shockingly and absurdly, Europe and North America are still loved and admired by many, even (or especially) in such places where Western governments and companies plagued everything like locusts, leaving to the locals only burned land, poison and miserable slums.

*

How is it possible?

For years, I have been working in Africa, a continent which was entirely subjugated by the U.K., France, Germany, Belgium and other European expansionist nations. Africa from where millions of men, women and children were brought in chains to the “New World”, as slaves. Where millions died during the ‘hunt’, where millions died in ‘transit centers’, and then, on the open seas. That’s tens of millions of ruined lives. The complete plunder of the resources, the unimaginable humiliation of the people, broken cultures, genocides and holocaust against local individuals from what is now Namibia, to the Democratic Republic of Congo. Great African heroes like Lumumba assassinated by the Western rulers.

And yet, many Africans see the West as some great ‘example’, as a ‘guiding light’, as a severe but respectable ‘daddy’, who uses the belt when it is necessary, but who also rewards justly those of his ‘children’ who ‘behave properly’.

It is repulsive, but undeniable.

The greatest African writers are now teaching at U.S. and U.K. universities. They have been ‘neutralized’ and ‘pacified’, many of them out rightly bought. In many countries, African judges wear comical white wigs, doing their best to look like their British counterparts. The children of corrupt elites are collecting diplomas from the U.K. and French universities, imitating upper-class European accents.

To behave, to look and sound like the colonizers, is something that brings respect.

The same on the Sub-Continent, of course.

The mannerism among the upper classes in India and Pakistan are those of the U.K. (and lately, of the U.S.). Elites there go out of their way to be more British than the Brits; more Californian than the inhabitants of the U.S. West Coast. Countless private Indian universities call themselves ‘American’ or ‘British’, with ‘Oxford’ or ‘Cambridge’ frequently ‘decorating’ their names.

‘To be accepted’ in Europe or North America is the highest honor, in almost all former colonies, therefore, in almost the entire world.

‘Well groomed’, well-educated and modern Asians, Latin Americans, Africans and the Middle Easterners are expected to ape Westerners; to dress like Westerners, eat (and drink) like the Westerners and to ‘defend the same values’ as them.

In fact, they are expected to be much more Western than the Westerners.

But ‘expected’ by whom? Yes, you guess correctly: very often by their own people!

*

Ask and many in the ‘South’ will tell you: everything that comes from the West is beautiful, progressive and dandy.

“Every bule is beautiful,” I was informed, recently, by a young indigenous professional lady in the totally environmentally plundered island of Borneo/Kalimantan. Bule is a vulgar, derogatory Indonesian word for the ‘whites’, and literally means ‘albino’. However, the lady was not joking, it was a compliment: she was brought up believing that every bule is actually superior and fine-looking.

In the indigenous Mexican state of Yucatan, right after the elections that brought to power the left-wing President Obrador, I overheard the conversation of a dozen or so upper-class housewives in a Western chain café. Their references were fully European and North American: From vacations in Italy and Spain, to the films they were watching, books they were reading. Europe was their ‘mother-continent’, while Miami, their only true comparison. Before Obrador came to power, indigenous people were increasingly living in misery, their roofs broken, jobs disappearing. But the elites were, as always, in a European state of mind. The real Mexico was not on their radar. It did not matter, or didn’t even exist.

Even some of the poor in the ‘conquered world’ who are actually ‘concerned’ about Western imperialism, see it as an abstract problem.They see it as a strictly political, military or economic issue. The fact that Western imperialism has ‘culturally’ immobilized entire nations and continents is hardly addressed.

Even in those proud countries that are determinedly struggling against Western imperialism – China, Russia, Iran, or Venezuela – the Western narrative of exceptionalism has already managed to cause tremendous damage.

In China, for instance, almost everything ‘Western’ had been, until recently, associated with modernity. Being ‘against the West’ was considered boring, gray and outdated, somehow connected to the ‘Communist propaganda’ of the past (the fact that the ‘Communist propaganda’ was often correct, mattered nothing). This attitude allowed the great infiltration of Chinese universities by Western academia, as well as the injection of Western nihilism into Chinese arts, culture, even way of life. Only recently, has this dangerous trend been reversed, but not after it had already caused great damage.

The admiration of everything Western destroyed the greatest progressive experiment of modern history – The Soviet Union and the so-called “Eastern Bloc”.

The power of negative Western propaganda packaged together with the promotion of extreme individualism, selfishness and consumerism, literally wiped out all internationalist zeal, humanism and higher principles, from the minds of tens of millions of young Czechs, Poles, East Germans, Bulgarians, and even Soviets.

The once proud Communist Eastern Bloc, after liberating dozens of countries from colonialism, after fighting for an egalitarian world, showing solidarity with all oppressed nations, was then gradually defeated by such shallow bullshit as blue jeans labels, the nonsensical lyrics of rock and pop songs (a favorite weapon of the West), greed, religions (another Western weapon), and slogans like ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ (the Western world which has been denying freedom and democracy to almost all countries on our planet, cynically turned the truth upside down, and fooled East Europeans, by skillfully applying centuries long propaganda methods).

In the end, confused and increasingly cynical, what many East Europeans demanded was not ‘freedom’, but more money, more labels, and the ability to join the bloc of the countries that have been plundering the world.

*

So, what makes the West so successful, when it comes to brainwashing people all around the world? How is it possible after all that banditry, terror and ruthlessness, that most of the oppressed and conquered countries are still showing plenty of respect to the masters that reside in New York, London or Paris?

I believe that if we find the answers to this question, we will be able to save the world, and reverse this deadly trend.

First of all, after interacting with thousands of people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Oceania and Latin America, I am coming to the conclusion that the West (and Japan) is often admired for the ‘high standards of living’.

In such miserable and collapsed countries like Indonesia, I often hear nonsense like: “European countries are more ‘Muslim’ than we are. They treat people much better than we do.”

Middle and upper class Southeast Asian families are travelling to Netherlands or Germany, and then exclaim after returning home: “Look at their parks, hospitals, bicycle lanes, trams, museums… We have to learn from them! They do so much for improving our world.”

That’s precisely what Africans admire about Europe. That’s how many ‘educated’ Indians or Southeast Asians feel. That’s what Peruvians, Hondurans or Paraguayans love about their Miami.

Are they wrong? Isn’t there, after all, plenty that poor countries could learn from the West?

Yes; definitely they are wrong. Totally wrong!

Let’s see ‘why’?

The West ‘arranged’ the entire world in accordance with its own feudal system of the past centuries. It brought the system of shameless oppressive regime to the global level.

To admire this monstrous and regressive global system would be like admiring the arrangement of European societies some three hundred years ago. It would be essentially like saying: “Look, the aristocracy of France or England was actually quite fine, egalitarian, educated and healthy, and we should learn from how they lived, and copy their examples!”

Of course, the aristocracy, the royalty and the church of Europe has always lived well, even 300 years ago. They had good schools for their children, they had decent medical care, palaces, summer villas, sanatoriums with mineral waters, theatres, lavish parks, and tons of servants.

The only ‘tiny’ problem was that some 95% of the population had to work for the luxury they enjoyed, subsisting in total misery. Plus, of course, those tens of millions of un-people in the colonies were being exterminated like animals.

The same is happening now. The entire Europe (with the exception of the poor people there) has moved to the bracket of new aristocracy, at least comparatively. And the rest of the world is laboring, dying, being raped and plundered, in order to maintain this ‘wonderful-looking’ social-state project of the West. Even the U.S. and its relatively brutal turbo-capitalist model is still ‘socialist’ (for the U.S. citizens), compared to such countries as Indonesia, India, Peru or Nigeria.

Western standards of living cannot be replicated elsewhere. To believe that the West would allow Africans or Southeast Asians to build a social state is naïve, almost intellectually insulting. Singapore, South Korea and Japan are rare exceptions, where the West closed both eyes, for strictly strategic reasons.

In order for the West to prosper, maintaining a super high standard of living, with all the benefits for its citizens, billions of the ‘serfs’ all over the world have to suffer, sacrifice themselves, and work for close to nothing; the more of them that live in hell, the better.

Nature has to be plundered in places like Borneo and Papua, DR Congo and soon in Brazil.

People have to be ruled by pro-Western corrupt oligarchs, and by the military and religious leaders. Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and now Brazil, are perfect countries for the West: they happily and willingly sacrifice their own people, guaranteeing Western prosperity.

You did not know? Nonsense! You did not want to know. All those people who matter are very happy with this arrangement: The Western rulers, citizens of Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, as well as the rulers/elites in the poor countries. The only ones who are truly suffering are those billions of the poor, worldwide, but they matter nothing, and they are not told anything anyway, because the media is in the hands of the West and their lackeys, and so is ‘education’.

And as they are not told anything, they – the wretched of the Earth – are admiring the West, too. They eat Western junk food if they can save few dollars a month, they drink Nescafe instead of their traditional coffee, listen to the shittiest music, watch pirated Hollywood blockbuster movies, wear fake sneakers and jeans, and masturbate to Western porn (if they have internet). They also dutifully follow religions, which were injected and upheld by the West, into their countries.

The poorer the country, the greater appear to be the green hills and pastures of the Western paradise.

And so, it goes on and on.

In India, Indonesia, Uganda, Jordan, Fiji, Honduras, I hear the same crap, from semi-educated, or West-educated local citizens: “People in the West are actually very good people, but their governments are bad.” Are they sure about that? I wonder.

*

Frankly and honestly, I am tired of this status quo. And I don’t find this amusing at all: hearing admiring statements about European and other Western countries in the middle of the monstrous war zones, famine-stricken areas, brutal mines, on the banks of poisoned rivers and inside the slums.

I am an ‘old-fashioned’ revolutionary. Slaves have to rise and fight, if necessary die for freedom; not to admire their masters and tormentors.

The crimes of the colonialists have to be exposed. The insane arrangement of the world has to be defined and then smashed into pieces.

The cute trams, bicycle lanes, parks, museums, operas, cafes, universities and hospitals in Europe are built on rivers of blood and the bones of ‘The Others’. I said it three years ago on the floor of the Italian Parliament, and I will repeat it again and again, wherever I go.

There is no other topic that matters, right now, on our planet.

Everything is connected to this, including the fear and hate that the West feels and spreads about countries like Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, South Africa, Syria or Cuba.

They hate us; they hate those who resist, who are standing tall. And they should and will get back the same in return, hopefully, if the truth is pronounced often enough!

Michael & Stephanie Relfe #conspiracy metatech.org

The Lacerta Files

Interview with a Reptilian

[...]

Question: Can you tell me something about the natural history and evolution of your species? How old is your species? Have you evolved from primitive reptiles as mankind has evolved from apes?

Answer: Oh, this is a very long and complex story and it sounds certainly unbelievable to you, but it’s the truth. I will try to explain it in short. Around 65 million years ago, many of our unadvanced ancestors from the dinosaur race died in a great global cataclysm. The reason for this destruction was not a natural disaster—an asteroid impact as your scientists believe falsely—but a war between two enemy alien groups that took mainly place in the orbit and high atmosphere of your planet. According to our limited knowledge about the early days this global war was the first alien war on planet earth but it was definitely not the last (and a future war is coming soon, while a “cold war”—as you call it—between alien groups is ongoing since the last 73 years on your planet).

The opponents in this 65 million year old war were two advanced alien species, whose both names are again not pronounceable for your tongues. I’m able to say them but it would hurt your ear if I tell you the names in their original way. One race was humanoid like your species (but much older) and was from this universe, from a solar system in the star constellation you call “Procyon” today in your maps. The other species—about which we know not so much—was a reptilian species, but they have nothing to do with our own species, because we have evolved from local saurians without exterior influence (except the successful manipulation of our own genes by us. More about that later). The advanced reptilian species came not from this universe but from a—well, how should I explain it to you. Your scientists have not really understood the true nature of the universe, because your illogical mind is not able to see the easiest things and relies on wrong mathematics and numbers. This is part of the genetic programming of your kind to which I will come later. Let me say, that you are nearly as far away from the understanding of the universe as you were 500 years ago.

To use a term you will maybe understand: the other species came not from this universe but from another “bubble” in the foam of the omniverse. You would call it maybe another dimension, but this is not the right word to describe it correctly (by the way, the term dimension is generally wrong in the way you understand it). The fact you should remember is, that advanced species are able to “walk” between bubbles by use of—as you would call it—quantum technology and sometimes in special ways only by use of their mind (my own species had also advanced mental abilities in comparison to your species, but we are not able to do the matterstring/bubble changing without technology, but other species active on this planet are able and this looks to you like magic as it had to your ancestors.)

Back to our own history: the first species (the humanoids) had reached Earth around 150 years before the reptilians and they built some colonies on the former continents. There was a large colony on the continent you call “Antarctica” today and another one in the continent you call “Asia” today. These people lived together with animal-like saurians on the planet without problems. When the advanced reptilian species arrived in this system, the humanoid colonists from “Procyon” tried to communicate peacefully, but they were not successful and a global war started within months.

You must understand that both species were interested in this young planet not for its biology and undeveloped species, but for only one reason: raw material, especially copper. To understand this reason, you must know that copper is a very important material for some advanced species (even today) because it is—together with some unstable materials—able to produce new stable elements if you induce a high electromagnetic field in the right angle with a high nuclear radiation field to produce an over-crossing of fluctuating fields. The fusion of copper with other elements in such a magnetic/radiation field-chamber can produce a force field of special nature that is very useful for various technological tasks (but the base for this is an extremely complex formula you are not able to discover because of the restrictions of your simple mind).

Both species wanted to have the copper of Planet Earth and for this reason, they fought a not very long war in space and orbit. The humanoid species seemed to be successful during the first time, but in a last battle the reptilians decided to use a mighty experimental weapon—a special kind of fusion bomb which should destroy the life forms on the planet but should not harm the valuable raw materials and the copper. The bomb was fired from space and detonated at a point of your planet you call “Middle America” today. As it detonated in the ocean, it produced an unpredictable fusion with hydrogen and the effect was much stronger then the reptilians had expected. A deadly radiation, an over-production of fusion-oxygen, a fall-out of different elements and a “nuclear winter” for nearly 200 years were the results. Most of the humanoids were killed and the reptilians lost their interest on the planet after some years for (even for us) unknown reasons—maybe because of the radiation.

Planet Earth was on its own again and the animals on the surface died. By the way, one result of the fusionbomb was the fall-out of different elements and materials created in the burning process and one of that materials was Iridium. Your human scientists today see the Iridium concentration in the ground as an evidence for an asteroid impact that killed the dinosaurs. That is not true, but how should you know that?

Well, most of the dinosaurs died (not all in the detonation but in the bad things which came after the war, especially in the nuclear winter and in the fall-out). Nearly all dinosaurs and reptilians were dead within the next 20 years. Some of them—especially those in the oceans—were able to survive for the next 200 to 300 years even in this changed world, but these species also died, because the climate had changed. The nuclear winter ended after 200 years, but it was colder on earth then before. Despite the cataclysm, some species were able to survive: fish (like the sharks), birds, little creepy mammals (your ancestors), various reptiles like crocodiles…and there was a special kind of small but advanced dinosaur which had developed together with the last large animal-reptilians like the species you call Tyrannosaurus.

This new reptile was walking on two legs and looked at little bit like your reconstruction of an Iguanodon (it originated in this family) but it was smaller (around 1.50 metres tall) with some humanoid features, a changed bone structure, a larger skull and brain, a hand with a thumb which was able to grab things, a different organism and digestion, advanced eyes in the middle of the head like your eyes and…most important…with a new and better brain structure. This was our direct ancestor.

There are theories that the radiation from the bomb took part in the mutations of the organism of this new breed, but this is not proven. Nevertheless, this little humanoid-like dinosaur evolved during the following 30 million years (as I have said earlier, a species need generally more time to evolve then you think, if the evolution is not artificially induced like in your case) from an animal to a more or less thinking being. These beings were intelligent enough not to die in the next millions of years, because they learned to change their behavior, they lived in caves instead in the cold nature and they learned to use stones and branches as first tools and the use of fire as help to warm them—especially to warm their blood which is very important for our kind to survive. During the next 20 million years this species was divided by nature into 27 sub-species (unfortunately, former reptilian species were prone to divide themselves in a more or less illogical way into sub-species during the evolution process. You can clearly see this in the unnecessary high number of animal-dinosaur species in earlier times) and there were many (mainly primitive) wars between this sub-species for dominance.

Well, nature was not very friendly to us and as far as we know from the 27 sub-species, 24 were extincted in primitive wars and in evolution, because their organism and mind was not developed enough to survive and (as main reason) they were not able to change their blood temperature in the right way when the climate changed. 50 million years after the war and after the end of Dinosaurs, only three (now also technological) advanced reptilian species were remaining on this planet together with all the other lower animals. Through natural and artificial crossbreedings this three species were united to one reptilian species and through the invention of genetic manipulations, we were able to “eliminate” the dividing-prone genes in our genetic structure.

According to our history and belief, this was the time when our final reptilian race—as you see me today—was created by use of genetic engineering. This was around 10 million years ago and our evolution nearly stopped at this point (well, actually there were some minor changes in our look toward a more humanoid and mammal-like appearance during the coming ages, but we have not divided again into sub-species). You see, we are a very old race in comparison to your kind, which was jumping around as small monkey-like animals in the trees at this time while we invented technology, colonized other planets of this system, built large cities on this planet (which disappeared without a trace in the ages) and engineered our own genes while your genes where still those of animals.

10 million years ago the small simians started to grow and they came down from the trees to the ground (again because of the change of the climate—especially on the so-called African continent). But they evolved very slow as it is normal for a mammal and if nothing extraordinary had happened to your kind, we wouldn’t be able to sit here and talk because I would sit in my comfortable modern house and you would sit in your cave clothed with fur and trying to discover the secrets of fire—or you would maybe sit in one of our zoos.

But the things had developed differently and you believe now you are the “crown of creation” and you can sit in the modern house and we must hide and live beneath the earth and in remote areas. Around 1.5 million years ago, another alien species arrived at Earth (it was surprisingly the first species since over 60 million years. This would be more surprising for you if you would know how many different species are here today).

The interest of this humanoid species—you call them “Ilojiim” today—was not the raw material and the copper, it were to our astonishment the unadvanced ape-humanoids. Despite our presence on this planet, the aliens decided to “help” the apes to evolve a little bit faster, to serve them in the future as some kind of slave-race in coming wars. The fate of your species was not really important for us, but we didn’t liked the presence of the “Ilojiim” on our planet and they didn’t liked our presence on their new “galactic zoo” planet and so your sixth and seventh creation was the reason for a war between us and them. You can read about that war for example partly in the book you call “Bible” in a very strange way of description. The real truth is a very long and difficult story. Should I continue?

Question: No, not now. I’ve made some notes about your history and now I have some questions.

Answer: Please ask.

Question: First of all, you handle with a very large time scale. You claim that your primitive ancestors lived together with the dinosaurs, survived the—as you called it—artificial cataclysm and evolved then over 40 million years and your evolution was completed 10 million years ago. This sounds very unbelievable to me. Can you say something to this?

Answer: I understand that this must sound absolutely unbelievable to you, because you are a young and genetically engineered species. Your historical horizon ends at a scale of just some thousands of years and you think this is right. But it isn’t. This is impossible. Your programmed mind is obviously not able to handle with such large time scales. Our evolution time may seem incredibly long to you, but this is in fact the original way of nature. Remember, your early mammal ancestors developed together with dinosaurs and they survived the bomb like us. They evolved slowly during the next millions of years and they divided into various species and shapes, some of them larger, some of them smaller. This is evolution of the body.

But what about their mind and intelligence? They were simple animals. The mammals evolved since—let us say—150 millions of years, but only in the last 2–3 millions of years they were able to become intelligent and thinking. And within this small period beings like you were created. From nature? 148 millions of years time for the evolution of animal-like mammals, 2 millions of years time for the development of (more or less) intelligent beings like you? Ask yourself: Do you really think this accelerated evolution is natural? Then your species is more ignorant then I’ve thought. We have not evolved wrong but you.

Question: I understand. But I have another question. You’ve mentioned many facts about the ancient war between the aliens 65 million years ago. This happened very long before your kind became really intelligent (as far as I have understood you). Why do you know so many things about that “first war” and about the evolution of your species?

Answer: This is a good question (much better then the previous) and I have not explained it properly to you. Our knowledge about the first war comes completely from an ancient artifact, which was found around 16,000 years ago from our archeologists on the continent you call North America today. They found there a round plate with a diameter of approximately 47 of your centimeters The plate was made of an even for us unknown magnetic material and inside the plate there was another smaller crystal plate which contained an enormous amount of information coded in the molecular structure of the crystal.

This “memory plate” was manufactured from the last bomb survivors of human race from “Procyon” already 65 million years ago but it was completely intact when we found it. Our scientists were able to encode the messages and data and so we heard the first time about the events which took place in the distant past and which led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. The plate contained detailed descriptions of both species (but more about the humanoids) and about the events and weapons, including the fusion bomb. It contained also a description of the animals and saurians on earth, including our pre-intelligent ancestor species. The rest of our knowledge about our evolution comes from skeletons and from the back-reading and de/encoding of our DNA. You see, we know the real truth about our roots since 16,000 years. Before that time, there was a more religious idea of our creation.

(Note by Michael Relfe: Assuming that this female is providing accurate information, from what she has been taught, it now becomes apparent that everything the “reptilians” understand about their history is from an unknown alien artifact, created by an unknown alien group at an unknown time for an unknown purpose. Just as the reptilians enjoy subjecting humans to propaganda and disinformation, it seems that some other group is “running a game” on the reptilians as well. So this “advanced” reptilian race has no hard facts on their history, contrary to what they would have humans believe.)

Gally #racist eivindberge.blogspot.no

What follows is a guest post by a man who has recently joined the Men's Rights Movement after a run-in with one of the laws we fight to abolish because it constitutes an evil criminalization of male sexuality. His experience also highlights the importance of the emerging alliance between the MRA and MAP communities. We are in this together, because while most men are not primarily attracted to minors, most men are certainly attracted to minors to some extent well under the age of consent, down to and including what is sometimes called hebephilia. And it is just common human decency to oppose bad laws and persecution of pedophiles just for existing. Or should be.

My name is Gally.

I take this online handle in homage of "the greatest warrior who has ever lived," "Battle Angel Alita" (Yoko von der Rasierklinge), whose story of epic struggles with coming to terms with her past, understanding herself, and accepting what she is and also what she is not, has provided me with more inspiration than any other story I have ever read, real or fictional. It is a great manga, better even than Evangelion in my opinion, and for those interested you can find it here: https://www.mangareader.net/battle-angel-alita-last-order.

As such, I have a few reflections that I would like to share with you. First a disclaimer though: I am a minor-attracted person and most would consider me a pedophile. Although that is technically inaccurate; pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children and I am attracted to pubescent minors, so the more precise term would be "hebephile," but in lieu of distinguishing the term "Minor Attracted Person" (MAP) is recommended.

So, if this upsets or triggers you, you are welcome to not read any further, but I would respectfully request that if you chose to comment, you do so after having read through what I have to say.
I would like to add though, that MAPs basically either think that contact with minors is okay or they don't think contact with minors is okay, and I'm mostly in the latter camp as I have found that personally it's hard for me to hide that I like somebody, and therefore I advice other MAPs to also not get too socially involved with minors that they find themselves having an attraction to, given that it might lead to contact that is too intimate and/or age-inappropriate.

So please consider that people can be and act sensibly and responsibly -- in fact, most people do act responsibly and considerately regardless of sexual orientation, kinks, or mere fantasies, fetishes, or paraphilias.

That aside, in a related issue it has been said that we are what we do, but I would argue that we are also information.

The DNA in all the cells in our body (only ten percent of which are actually human; 90% of "our" cells are bacteria without which we would be unable to digest carbohydrate-based food such as proteins, but only fat and sugar), if unraveled to a string, would reach to Pluto and back. Eleven times. The DNA of all human beings currently alive on our planet Earth could encircle the Milky Way (which is 130,000 light-years in diameter) 20 times over. The combinations of any one pairing of a sperm cell and an egg holds the potential of randomly mixing 43 chromosomes -- one half from the sperm, the other half from the egg -- in two to the power of 43 different ways (2^43).

The number of humans who have ever lived on our planet is thought to be only about 20 billion (counting from the last 10 million years of Homo sapiens thought to be a genetically distinct species), meaning that just by chromosomal pairing alone, only 1/3500-part of what we as a species, what humans are, has ever surfaced from the vast sea of potential humans that can be brought into existence.

The real number may be incalculable, considering that recent research has revealed that our DNA is actually not static, set from birth to death, but changes according to our environment -- and possibly even according to our experiences, influenced by brain chemistry -- our mood, whether we are happy or depressed, at peace or subjected to violence, if we experience freedom or oppression.

What was once thought to be mostly "junk DNA" may not be so after all, but like medical conditions such as heart disease, does not always manifest itself at all times but could be triggered by unknown, hitherto unpredictable and unimaginable combinations of events.

No longitudinal studies have been carried out on this as of yet, but as DNA sequencing becomes exponentially cheaper, we might discover connections between the environment and our evolutionary process that could be as shocking to science as the theory of evolution once was.

To quote a clip from the computer game Alpha Centauri (Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri Secret Project: The Human Genome Project):
"To map the very stuff of life; to look into the genetic mirror and watch a million generations march past. That, friends, is both our curse and our proudest achievement. For it is in reaching to our beginnings that we begin to learn who we truly are."
Genetic analysis (comparison of actual mutations to known rate of mutation of male and female chromosomes) has already revealed that throughout human history, only half of males have succeeded in reproducing, whilst almost all females have. Which, one could argue, means that evolution -- and thus, progress -- is almost exclusively a male endeavor. Which also explains why males have more variation -- there are more male geniuses than female geniuses, and more males who never find a mating partner (1/3 of all men in Norway) than females who never find a mating partner (1/6 of all females in Norway).

We are information above all, and there is nothing that is more Holy of Holies than Knowledge, for only knowledge can bring understanding, and only understanding can create with intent -- with a goal in mind. Be that evil, to gain power over the weak, or good, to bestow powers upon them.
To quote the science-fiction author Peter Watts:
Evolution has no foresight. Complex machinery develops its own agendas. Brains — cheat. Feedback loops evolve to promote stable heartbeats and then stumble upon the temptation of rhythm and music. The rush evoked by fractal imagery, the algorithms used for habitat selection, metastasize into art. Thrills that once had to be earned in increments of fitness can now be had from pointless introspection. Aesthetics rise unbidden from a trillion dopamine receptors, and the system moves beyond modeling the organism. It begins to model the very process of modeling. It consumes evermore computational resources, bogs itself down with endless recursion and irrelevant simulations. Like the parasitic DNA that accretes in every natural genome, it persists and proliferates and produces nothing but itself. Metaprocesses bloom like cancer, and awaken, and call themselves I.
Our interactions shape others, as theirs in turn also shape us.

Our identities, therefore, are in constant flux, as noted by many religions -- from the Bible's "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another" to Buddhism's reflections on the transitory nature of man, to the Native American story of the struggle between the "good" wolf and the "bad" wolf that lives inside of our hearts, and how feeding the "good wolf" that is cultivating constructive and positive habits and behavior is recommended if you want him to win the struggle with the "bad wolf."

My point being, behavior is changeable, we are creatures of habit, we can change and we can improve ourselves and the lives of others and even the course of history by our participation in it.

We can learn from our mistakes, and for many this is the primary way of learning -- trying, failing, and improving -- but we cannot learn from mistakes that we are not able to make -- or that we are not allowed to make, as we fear an ever-watching, ominous presence of mass surveillance by people whose only intentions is to punish and harm us.

We can do good towards one another. But only if we understand the difference between good and bad. And we can seek peaceful, ethical solutions to problems that in the past may have seemed almost intractable, impossible to solve. We can think; not just feel. We can understand -- or at least accept -- reality as it is, not just condemn others, and by doing so, through proxy curse our common humanity. We can be generous; not just selfish. We can seek what is best for others, not just what we desire.
And we can have progress. Real, tangible, measurable progress, social growth, care for the weak and the confused and even for those with little self-control or ability to reflect upon consequences.

One of the oldest recorded stories is that of the "Fall from Grace," or as it is also called, the "Original Sin." Woman rebelled against a meaningless command by a dictatorial authority, allied with Man, and in the story it is said that God himself admitted that now they had both "become like God, knowing good and evil" -- by gaining experience-based knowledge of the difference between Good and Evil, through rejection of a meaningless "evil" as the eating of a piece of fruit from a particular tree was.

The price paid was to be cast out, and living a life of hardships and struggles.

A high price, that not many are willing to pay, but instead bend their knee and accept commandments to not think for oneself, but obey unquestioningly, even to meaningless absurdities.

Right now the world is in a dire state.

The level of freedom and independence of the press has never been lower, at the same time as we are manipulated by fake news, politically controlled propaganda, and an almost insane denial of the truth and a blatantly open disregard for empirically provable, reproducible, peer-reviewable scientific facts. Surveillance equipment is exported from western nations to repressive regimes all over the world, and Human Rights that were introduced after the second world war are being gradually rolled back for carefully selected minorities.

The ones whom it is easy to portray as evil.

As sick.

As disgusting.

As dangerous.

As abominations that are inhuman and must be purged, or locked away for as long as possible, as a way to frighten others not to commit similar crimes, rather than be offered any meaningful preventative therapy or harmless outlets.

People like me, whose crime is being different in that I am more attracted to teenagers than to women my own age, and whose rights to the liberal progress that other minorities have enjoyed to the betterment of society in general (such as homosexuals and transgenders), are being denied.

Many who experience such a degree of hatred, kill themselves -- especially young pedophiles, who would rather die than ever risk harming a child.

Others suffer through recurring depression, a feeling of alienation from society, despair and fear, and engage in substance abuse.

And then there are those whom the authorities succeed in convincing that they are evil, not in control of themselves, sick and destined to commit crimes sooner or later, and who chose to do so, fulfilling the only role that society prescribes for them.

They -- we minor-attracted people -- are being used as a spearhead to drive through changes in our societies that makes the rule of law become less based on objective and established principles, but more on subjective abuses of power. The argument being, exceptions must be made to the way the law is practiced, and one must punish harder because the current harsh punishment is clearly not working and therefore, the "logic" goes, it isn't harsh enough, because of course punishment -- in the eyes of those who see punishment as preferable -- is the only thing that helps.

They say that "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail", and also that "if you truly believe you can compensate for incompetence by increasing your efforts, there is no end to what you cannot do."

In the same vein, "Military Idiocy" is defined as "It didn't work, so we need to do more of it," and "Police Idiocy" isn't much different: "It doesn't work, so we need to continue doing it."

So with their incompetence the only solutions they understand are punitive, violent, cruel and sociopathically sadistic, and as a result they are in the process of causing changes that make governance of the people be more about control under the threat of punishment, than about preventative measures through guidance, acceptance, and inclusiveness. Changes that alienate us from each other, that make us wary of speaking our minds, thinking our independent thoughts and questioning others', and make us fear expressing ourselves in ways that we are uncertain could be used against us at some point in time.

Changes that are even measurable in how far from home children have been allowed to roam, as documented at http://freerangekids.com/. "Stranger danger" is a divisive tactic that splits local communities, and Divide & Conquer is the oldest strategy in the book. Make people fear their neighbors, and they will never be able to cooperate sufficiently to protest against exploitation.

In addition, surveillance makes everybody who is not rich enough to not have to work or obtain an education and build a career in cooperation with others too concerned with their employer's reputation and angsty about making mistakes, which makes it harder for the 99% of the population who are not born rich to ever learn from their mistakes and understand elementary facts of life such as that we cannot just eat cake if we do not have bread, and thus gain life experiences that makes us compassionate of others, tolerant, forgiving, and wise.

In comparison, the one percent who are born filthy rich can write books like Chicks O'hoi where they describe how they have an entire suitcase full of sex toys and love having their asshole rimmed and how their jaw is almost cramped from sucking dick for so long. The author of that book is anonymous, by the way, but let's just say I have a very strong suspicion I believe I know who she is. And if she is reading this: stylometric analysis revealed that J.K. Rowling was the author of a book she didn't want people to know she wrote, and your entire Instagram-account has been downloaded and I have no problems finding the programs that can do such an analysis.

The ignorance of the rich -- and their self-satisfaction from being "better" than others through having more money -- has always been a great comfort for the state, since if they really understood how others suffered from hardships that they themselves have never experienced, they could have made meaningful change towards and actually contributed to the betterment of society.

For the other 99% who are not as docile and indolent due to being spoilt rotten, surveillance is in effect a way for governments to be dumbing down the people, make them fearful and obedient, and above all: not protest against injustices and abuses of power. Lest our own lives comes under scrutiny, and every word we have ever written is combed through and analyzed, taken out of context or misrepresented, and used against us.

The plan is well underway to turn human beings back from free citizens with rights, to serfs who are under the control of whatever local official is effectively lording his power to define what "law" means and whom it applies to, under his personal jurisdiction.

The police and the military welcome this return to serfdom, as it caters to their psychopathic delusions of grandeur and dreams of powers over even the thoughts and feelings of others.

I recently had the pleasure of attending such a display of police psychopathy, as I was accused of downloading child pornography, what the police wants to define as "documentation of sexual abuse against children," while including cartoons, written stories, and defines "children" to include those over the legal age of consent.

One thing even the police managed to testify truthfully was that the vast, vast majority of the material in my possession involved teenagers posing in the nude. Pictures produced by a professional photo model studio, with the parents' consent, as documented at https://wikileaks.org/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn.

In other words, at the very lowest level of what the law considers child pornography, and in my personal opinion very comparable to mere nudism -- which is not now, nor ever can, be made illegal.

Unless, of course, we adopt standards for morals that are applied in countries which have been the most reluctant to adopt human rights, to the point of actively working against their acceptance in their particular region of the world -- where workers are exploited as slaves and people in practice have no rights or protection under the law.

In the Western world, we have enjoyed human rights because we have been needed as workers in industry and production of commercial goods, and our labor and creativity has caused an economic growth of 3-4% annually since public education was instituted in Great Britain in 1876.

This is changing with the coming of the second machine age, where human cognitive labor is gradually being replaced by machines.

We are becoming less needed, and people without jobs are said to "have the Devil's idle hands," as they have time to think about the crimes, incompetence, and illegitimacy of those in power.

And question why we allow them to rule over us in all things, instead of being allowed to make decisions for ourselves.

Why some small group of people decide that our country (Norway) should support a war halfway across the world, why we should be subjected to decisions made by other countries (The EU, which we are not a part of but still subjected to), why our resources should be exploited at our loss (our country's hydropower generation exported at European market price), why we should invest in activities with no certain profitability (opening up of polar-circle oil fields) that contribute to environmental degradation (at least for the fisheries there and in turn the local communities).

It is easy to make people obey other, incompetent people in power, and accept their illegitimate rule.
Just tell them you are the only ones who can protect them from monsters.

Find some "useful Jews" that you can pretend are the monsters.

Pick out the worst of those who commit crimes, and relentlessly proclaim that they are representative of all of them, then crank up the propaganda and claim that you are now finding it to be even worse than what the public has been told in the past.

Describe the hideous crimes of the extremely few in as graphic, gory, and tabloid detail as possible. Do not encourage reflection by mentioning numbers such as how many percent of men are attracted to pubescent teenagers, and yet never do any harm.

Fuel the outrage and ride the waves of the moral panic. When people panic, they lose the ability to carefully think things through in a calm and rational manner.

And people will obey.

Because you will have convinced them that you are their Savior.

While in reality, behind the scenes a surveillance apparatus is being created that will put an end to social growth, destroy the middle class, and end human progress as we have known it.

A totalitarian police state is emerging, ruled by psychopaths and the most infantile, ignorant, incompetent, imbecilic, inept, insular, and spoilt rotten selfish rich people, positioning themselves to return society to a state of aristocracy and serfs, and we are letting it happen because in reality, we don't really care about the rights of others as long as we can have shiny things to play with.

How blind we have become. And how childish.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler.

I was born on the 6th of March, 2017, as that was when I decided to set my foot upon this battlefield. I did that with the full knowledge and acceptance that nobody voluntarily goes to war, expecting a long, prosperous, or happy life.

I still chose.

It has now been a year; I have met the Enemy, and He has taught me much.

I have risen from a mere "Lehrling" to now just recently, becoming a "Krieger" (http://battleangel.wikia.com/wiki/Panzer_Kunst).

I am now officially at war.

I do not expect my life to be a happy one.

Or long.

But I decided of my own free will, to join this battle, after hearing a story.

You can find it yourself, if you go look for it.

At the time, I used the handle "LytaHall" on quora.com.

The story was told to me by a retired police investigator, who for twenty years had specialized in cases involving the sexual abuse of children.

He told me of a man who had lured a ten-year-old girl from the neighborhood into his bedroom, where apparently he had made inappropriate advances that had been rejected, and due to the harsh punishments -- this was in the US -- he killed the girl out of desperation that she would tell on him.

I have never in my life experienced anything like what I experienced when I realized what an ABYSS of helplessness and powerlessness I was standing in front. There was nothing I could do, or say, that would change that innocent child's death, the investigator was retired and was only interested in idle conversation, the police are not in themselves drivers for policy or social changes, and if the development of the kind of harsh punishments for such crimes reach Norway, motivated by political posturing and moralistic-based virtue signaling, instead of us looking to nations such as Germany with their successful "Dunkelfeld" program, then that is going to happen in Norway too.

I can change that.

I can read books, I can argue the case for offering free mental health care and harmless outlets before somebody commits a crime, rather than merely waiting for them to do something wrong and then punish them afterwards.

And I am willing to do so.

Even at the cost of my own happiness and health.

Because I wish to do good.

I wish to help make this world a better place, and I am smart and knowledgeable enough to make a difference.

My enemy has taught me much.

I am still learning.

But although I may make mistakes, the true sign of a warrior is not to never suffer defeat, and not to never strike a blow that misses, but to keep on fighting, and to get up again after being defeated.
And to grow stronger.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler, klasse Krieger.

And I shall now use what I have left of my life to try my very best to prevent the kind of abominable, perverted criminal "justice" system that they have in America (Filling Up Prisons Without Fighting Crime: Mark Kleiman on America's Criminal Justice System), from reaching Norway.

Because looking at the numbers, in the US 13 times more children are killed than in Germany (http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1658-5-ways-were-making-pedophilia-worse.html), and part of that is undoubtedly that "two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead."

To quote parts of the philosophy of panzerkunst:
Panzer Kunst also provides a definite tactical advantage, since it gives its user the ability to analyze an opponent's fighting style and to retaliate accordingly. Therefore, a Künstler will rarely be defeated in a second combat with a given enemy. Künstlers also seem to have been imbued with a sense of fanaticism and willingness to sacrifice themselves if necessary to carry out a mission.
I am Gally.

And I am now (and until my death) at WAR.

Defiance. Because my Conscience does not allow me to stand idly by, as People in Power hurts others for their Personal Careers (Two Steps From Hell - Freedom Fighters).

Perry Marshall #fundie #crackpot amazon.com

(Description of the book "Evolution 2.0: Breaking the Deadlock Between Darwin and Design". Emphasis original.)

Creation Evolution Debate: 150 Years Later, it Still Rages. Both Sides Are Half-Right. And Both Are Wrong.

Meet the opponents:

In one corner - Proponents of Intelligent Design like William Dembski, Stephen Meyer, and Michael Behe. Many defy scientific consensus, maintaining evolution is a fraud. They challenge decades of data in biology, chemistry, genetics and paleontology.

In the other corner - Devout Neo-Darwinists like Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Jerry Coyne, who insist evolution happens "willy nilly." Strangely, they sidestep the latest science, glossing over crucial questions and fascinating details.?? But what if both sides are half-right?

What if both sides are missing vital details, clinging on to outdated views, theories, and interpretations?

There is a third way. Evolution 2.0 is the first book to lay out the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis in plain English. This new paradigm is rocking the foundations of evolutionary biology right now.

Evolution 2.0 reveals experiments which prove that, while evolution is not a hoax, neither are changes random nor accidental. They are targeted, adaptive, and aware.

You will discover:

-Nearly every cell in your body can edit its own DNA, combating random destructive copying errors, charting a path for its transformation (page 82)

-Genes - far from being set in stone - actually change and adapt to the environment.

-How germs re-engineer their genetic destiny in real time by borrowing DNA from other organisms (page 94) (it's why your doctor tells you to never stop taking antibiotics halfway through your prescribed course)

-How bacteria communicate, organize themselves into armies, then stage coordinated attacks on your immune system (page 110)

-Brand new species in 18 months, sometimes 24 hours - Through two empirically proven, reliable systems of natural genetic engineering (page 146)

-How and when cells generate new information and genes that did not exist before (page 150)

-Why DNA, which is digital instructions for building proteins, is not merely like code but is code, the same way as the software on your smartphone is (page 38)

-How cells switch genes on and off in response to the environment, activating new traits that get passed from parents to kids (page 115)

If creationism seemed leave out important potentials, here you'll find missing clues.

You will discover fascinating real-time evolutionary lab experiments by an eminent scientist in the 1940s, whose work was recognized in 1983 by a Nobel prize & US postage stamp, but then... is still rarely mentioned in school science curricula.

High priests of scientific establishment actively oppose research that threatens antiquated theories, labeling results in scientific publications a "media fiasco".

This book explores 70+ years of under-reported evolutionary science. Evolution 2.0 chronicles bestselling author Perry Marshall's 10-year journey of in-depth research. As an Electrical Engineer, author of an Ethernet book and world-renowned business consultant, Mr. Marshall connects the dots in a new refreshing way. He tackles hard questions about evolution with precision, making it clear when information is proven with hard data and when it can only be inferred.

This book will open your eyes and transform your thinking about life, evolution, and creationism. You'll gain a deeper appreciation for our place in the universe. You'll the see the world around you as you've never seen it before: adaptive, efficient, and incredibly elegant.

$3 Million Technology Prize: Origin of Information is one of the central problems in modern biology. No one knows where the genetic code came from; no one knows how the first cell developed. To solve this, the author has organized a Private Equity Investment group, Natural Code LLC. They are offering a prize, reminiscent of the X-Prize, for a natural process that produces coded information. The prize amount is $3 million USD as of November 2016. Details in Chapter 23 and Appendix 4.

Caamib, Elliot Rodger, various incels #sexist pastebin.com

(Caamib's translation of an article about an interview between him and German news magazine Der Spiegel in 2014)

Male, single, life-threatening

The man who killed six people in Santa Barbara in May, was a member of an obscure community: So-called Incels live involuntarily as single, and some develop a hatred of women, which can be fatal. Who are these men?

Written by Takis Strangler

Marijan says there are people in his community who hate the summer. In summer they have no choice but to see more of the women, their skin, their bare knees, tight clothes and their breasts. Marijan says he does not look at women, and he was trying to avoid places where he has to see naked female skin. He says: "If you're hungry but cannot eat, you're not going into a street fully loaded with cakes."

Marijan, 26, from Zagreb wishes a girlfried, and because he’s unable to find one, he experiences his life as a torment. He is lonely, but in his loneliness he is not alone. His community meets on the Internet.

He belongs to a group of people who answer to the moniker "Incel", which is the abbreviation for the English term "involuntary celibacy”. Marijan frequents forums in which an own culture of solitude has developed.

People who gather there are almost always men, a few hundred in total. How many there are exactly, can be difficult to estimate, there are English, German, Dutch, Australians and especially Americans.

One of them wrote in the past year on an internet forum: "One day the Incels will realize their true strength and number and overthrow the oppressive feminist system. Imagine a world in which the WOMEN FEAR YOU. "

The author of these lines was student Rodger Elliot. On 23 May this year, Rodger (22), from Santa Barbara, California, recorded a video from himself. He put the camera on the dashboard of his BMW and sat behind the wheel.

He said: "This is my last video. Tomorrow is the day of retribution. The day on which humanity will experience my retaliation. Which you all will experience. In the past eight years of my life, since I reached puberty, I was forced to endure loneliness, an existence full of rejection and unrequited desire. All just because women never felt attracted to me. In the last years I rotted in solitude. "

Now and then Rodger laughed in the camera, a handsome young man with black hair and white teeth. Through the window of his car palm trees were visible.

A short time later, he killed three fellow students in his apartment. Forensic scientists examine which weapon he used. The wounds of the corpses are not clear. The police secured fingerprints on two machetes, a knife and a hammer.

When the men were dead, Rodger took his Sig Sauer P226, his Glock 34 and two semi-automatic pistols, and went out in the neighboring community of Isla Vista. He knocked at the house of a sorority. Nobody answered him.

A few steps further on he shot two students. He went into a snackbar and shot and killed a customer. Then he climbed into his car, drove through the town and shot at passers-by, injuring 13 people.

He rammed his BMW into a cyclist, slammed into a parked car and killed himself with a shot in the head. Rodger left a few videos and a 137-page manifesto. In it are phrases like: "Women are like a plague. They are like animals, completely controlled by their animalistic instincts, and corrupt feelings and impulses. "

Many men who became lone gunmen have, as Rodger had, a sick relation with women in general. Eric Harris, one of the boys involved in the 1999 at Columbine High School shooting in the United States, killing 13 people and killed himself, wrote in his diary: "Maybe I just need to have sex. Perhaps that would change this shit. "

And his accomplice Dylan Klebold wrote: "I do not know what I do wrong with people (especially women) - it is, as if they hate me and scare me. "

During a shooting rampage in Winnenden in 2009 Tim Kretschmer killed eight female students, three female teachers and a male student in his former school.

In the same year the American George Sodini shot three women and wounded nine more, before taking his own life in a gymstudio. Previously, he had written in his blog:

"Women simply don’t like me. There are 30 million desirable women in the United States (is my estimate) - and I find none "!

These gunman leave questions:

Why people had to die? Exists there a connection between the murders and the loneliness of the perpetrators? What has this incel community from the Internet to do with the murders?

Rodger can answer no longer, and even if he could, he could hardly give any clear answers. But there are people who understand a few of his thoughts. Because they share his anger at women and his loneliness. One of them is Marijan (not his real name). You can reach him on his blog, thatincelblogger.wordpress.com.

After a few emails he agreed to meet, in Zagreb, Croatia, his hometown.

Before a pizzeria near the Cathedral a handsome young man, tall, with jet black hair and a three-day beard is waiting, he wears a white, loose T-shirt and cropped trousers.

While shaking hands he does not look one in the eyes. As he sits at a table, in the back, in a quiet corner of the restaurant, he says: "I'm going to look bad in the article, but what have I got to lose? "

He says he was angry after Rodgers rampage. The whole world again only talked about tougher gun laws. But no one thought about other reasons that drove Rodgers to his rampage. No one had thought about incel.

Marijan talks much and long. He doesn’t allow a lot of questions. It is less a conversation but rather a series of lectures, which he conducts with great precision.

Sentence after sentence, lecture to lecture, he leads the listener deeper into his world, deeper into the darkness in which there seems to be no happiness, only immeasurable hatred.

Excerpts from lecture one, subject: Women.

Women are simply designed robots with the desire to procreate. Young women in past generations always had help from their grandmother. She helped with finding a man. She said: This is a good type, he will take care of you. These grandmothers were replaced with the magazine Cosmopolitan. Today women want to marry up. They want improve their station. I would not say that we Incels hate women. But if you were rejected 50 times, then you develop negative feelings, which is normal.

Excerpts from lecture two, Topic: seduction game.

Women can now provide for themselves, so their preferences have changed from breadwinners to seducers. A minority of men has sex with the majority of women. The successful men are the Bad Boys. If you want to have a woman today, you need to become a Bad Boy and lose your ethics.

Excerpts from lecture three, theme: a better world.

I want a society in which a group of men cooperates in total trust. Each man gets a woman. The women are fairly distributed. People are monogamous and marry as a virgin. If a man wants sexual diversity, he goes to a prostitute. Feminists would be made prostitutes in this society. When a man tries to seduce multiple woman, he is killed instantly.

Marijan and other Incels meet on various forums on the Internet. the forum, that Elliot Rodger used, is now closed. Another is a relatively moderate forum called love-shy.com. The members speak there about topics such as pick-up lines, plastic surgery and other ways to escape their despair.

The users of the forum had opened a discussion about Elliot Rodger. On the first page a moderator writes that he condemns the deed and that Rodger did not reflect the philosophies of loveshy.com. The moderator announces that all posts glorifying the deed will be deleted.

One user writes on one of the later pages: "I think about Elliot Rodger ... why didn’t he just rape a slut at gunpoint? "

Another user wrote: "I was always taught to respect women and not to be sexually aggressive. That was a bucket full of shit. All what they really want is a muscle man who fucks them in the ass instead of fucking a real person with feelings”

A user writes on one of the last pages about Rodger: "He is a martyr, in the real sense of the word, one must give him that. "

On the forum Marijan calls himself "Dante Alighieri”, as the medieval poet. Dante started his poem “the Divine Comedy” with the words: "Halfway through the path of human life I found /myself in a devious dark forest/ Because I strayed from the right path."

On the morning after the first meeting Marijan wears the same clothes as on the day before. He says he did not sleep well, because the conversation had him stirred. In the café he ordered a chocolate cake and tells his life story.

Marijan grew up in a middle class family, he has a brother, and both parents were employeed. In school he had many years of little contact with girls. As he started to get interested in girls, they were alien to him. He was afraid of them. "My brain has not developed normally, " Marijan says. He was "love-shy". The American psychology professor Brian Gilmartin invented this term in 1987. The men who suffer from this condition complain about their complete inability to enter into a romantic relationship.

Some men report panic attacks, when they are alone with women, some break out in sweat, others can hardly move anymore when they think of a date, to which they look forward to. Marijan developed a morbid fear of women mingled with a steadily growing demand for a relationship with a woman.

He says: "My standards are very low, as long as the woman is not overweight or is unhygienic. And I have trouble with bad teeth. "

At 19, he met a girl through an SMS Chat. She was 16 and said to Marijan, that she wanted to sleep with him. She showed him how she likes to be kissed. The girl became Marijans girlfriend. He was happy for a moment.

Then she went on vacation over the summer to an island. Before parting, Marijan was angry because he did not want her to go, and told her that maybe they should become just friends.

The girl went anyway. Marijan sent her many SMSes and self-written poems. When she returned, she told him that she no longer liked him. Marijan could not cry for three days. Then when he finally cried, he didn’t go to the university for months and stuffed himself full with chocolate. He didn’t get over it, says Marijan. After one year he wrote on an Incel forum on the internet that he was planning on shooting himself and the girl. The owners of this forum contacted Interpol. Marijan got a visit of the Croatian police.

He testified that he no longer wanted to kill. The policemen nevertheless arrested him and charged him with the suspicion of murder threats and put him in pre-trial detention. After a month a judge released Marijan because he hadn’t threatened anyone directly. The judge said, so tells Marijan: "Maybe you’ll meet another woman just outside the court."

It was followed by two years without a kiss.

As Marijan turned 24 years old, he wrote on an Internet forum that he was a male virgin and looking for a woman, that would deflower him. A Croatian woman contacted him, visited him in Zagreb, slept with him and then said that he was pathetic , as he tells it.

In the years after he managed to bed three other women. "One of them was crazy and
a total bitch, "says Marijan. When she left him for another, he remained lying in bed for months, he says. He thought about suicide, and spent five days in a psychiatric ward.

Later he earned a degree in Medieval History at the Zagreb University. But he never wanted to work, because, as he says, he didn’t want to pay taxes that will reward sluts.

Today he says he no longer dates because he never want to feel disappointment again. He’s been alone for a year.

Most gunmen send out signals before their deeds, signals which could have been interpreted as warnings in retrospect. Allusions, threats, videos on the Internet.

Some gunman stuck a note on the school toilet wall, on which was written: "Tomorrow you're dead." Some men start wearing black clothes and leather jackets before they act. Elliot Rodger wrote his fantasies on blogs.

Marijan says: "There are a lot of broken people waiting to die. And he says:" I do not know when I will snap. " This English word "Snap" has several meanings. It can mean break, tear or explode. Marijan says: "I think Incel that can cause people to shoot or kill with a bomb. "

He smiles, it seems as if he enjoy the moment. Psychologists and psychiatrists that deal with school shootings, try to explain why men kill women, but women almost never kill men. Testosterone was one reason, the researchers say, and gender roles are also to blame, since men are more likely to resolve conflict with force and women are more likely to retreat. At the end they still lack a satisfactory explanation.

The FBI, the American Federal - police, writes in a report about shootings at schools that offenders are often focused on perceived injustices. One goes through life and picks out everything, that offends them. Every stupid comments of a classmate is remembered, each breakup with a girl finds his place in the collection of misery, until someone thinks the whole society is against you.

Many gunman also like to play videogames, where it’s the goal to shoot people’s head off. And many suffer from a narcissistic disorder.

But correlation does not equate causation, so no handy formula like this one can be derived: loneliness + computer games + narcissism = rampage. There are many lonely, narcissistic gamers who never shoot people.

In the life of a crazed gunman something happens, that the psychiatrists and psychologists cannot explain. Evil is sometimes greater than a simple explanation.

The assassin who tried in 1981 to shoot U.S. President Ronald Reagan, said when interviewed: "You know a few things about me, sweetheart, for example, that I’m obsessed with fantasy, but why don’t you understand, that fantasy in my world becomes reality? "

Another gunman from the USA heard voices that told him: "You have to kill all. You have to kill the whole world. "

According to Wikipedia: "The trigger of a rampage is a combination of an advanced psychosocial uprooting of the offender, the loss of professional integration through unemployment, demotion or transfer, increasingly experienced insults and partnership conflicts. "

After all, what Marijan tells about himself, he has few friends, no job, no partner, and he experiences his life as an insult, which becomes greater each passing dayl. Those looking for long enough, will realize that the template fits him.

The last meeting with Marijan is in the evening and takes place in a restaurant, again at a table away from the other guests. It is a warm evening, but Marijan sits down inside the restaurant, the place where no one else sits. He says that he wished that women have the right to vote taken away.

Then he says that he once tried to kill himself with sleeping pills, but one and a half days later he had woken up. His eyes light up with pleasure when he takes on the theme rampage. Then he unleashes the bad thoughts from his mind in the world. He says: "I will cause dissatisfaction. I want to make people angry. I do not think that I'm going to kill people. " After a moment of silence, he says: "I want to spread a little panic. "

He again starts talking about similar topics as on the first day, always it comes to women, and always it comes to himself, he says: "I've started to see women as the filth that they are. " A little later he says: "I do not like people."

This article attempts to explain about the Incel community and the research leads to different men, who identify as Incel. One dreams of to find a farm where Incels can live together. The farm dwellers could agree to import women from Mexico and divided them amongst themselves. One sat with radiant eyes in a small German town and told of how he overcame his fear of women by simply spending more time with women. He looked happy and said it was probably a good idea if the Incel forums were monitored by psychiatrists to ensure that the users can find professional help.

Another hopes to, finally, in his mid-twenties, to kiss a woman. A few of these men seem lost. Nobody seems dangerous. And in end it became clear that there is no Incel community. There are only a few lonely men.

Many men from the Incel community can simply find no partner and look for help on the internet. For them the forums can perhaps save them. For other men the forums offer the opportunity to cultivate their hatred in a group.

For 20 years, such people would remain in their hole, alone with their bad thoughts. Probably a man is difficult to love when he is full of hatred. While carrying these thoughts, it’s possible to want to kill everyone around you and yourself. The potential gunman becomes Incel. And not the Incel a potential gunman.

Elliot Rodger was in his mid twenties when he died, he had visited several therapists, he had been bullied at school, he had his own blog on the Internet.

Marijan is mid-twenties, he has visited several therapists, he was bullied at school, he wrote his own blog on the Internet. One was a mass murderer. The other meets with a journalist and eats chocolate cake.

Rodger left us with the question:

Why did six people have to die? There is no logical explanation. His 137-page manifesto that he wrote before he became a murderer, ends raving about the prospect of killing people. It shall be the punishment for not getting a woman who loves him. Rodger has named the work "My fucked-up world ". He writes that he will retaliate and punish everyone. The last sentence of the manuscript is as follows:

"Finally, I can show true value to the world. "And in the penultimate sentence Elliot Rodger, 22, a young man from California, who had his whole life before him writes: "And it will be beautiful."

Marijan wrote recently a new entry on his blog. He analyzed why he is lonely: "I finally understand the depths of madness and sexism in our society. All the betrayal, the whole heartless and horrible behavior of women were seen as my fault. That is hatred. "

Robert Smith #racist amren.com

How a Young Black Man Became a Race Realist

I am a 21-year-old black man. I am an atheist, a registered Republican, and a member of Mensa. Already a minority within a minority within a minority, I have yet another idiosyncrasy that puts me in an even more unusual category: I am a race realist. I believe that consistently observed racial disparities in societal outcomes are largely rooted in genetic differences, primarily differences in average levels of intelligence.

High school

This was the first time race predominated in the social climate. I started to notice people self-segregating along racial lines. But most confusingly, black students who did not conform to stereotypes were considered “Oreos:” black on the outside, but white on the inside. I remember the following comments:

“You’re so quiet. Do you consider yourself black?” This from a white classmate, genuinely confused as to why I bucked the general black trend of rambunctious and loud behavior.

A white classmate says something racially offensive in my presence and another asks, “Why would you say that with a black person standing by us?” Answer: “It’s fine; he’s white at heart!”

An Asian classmate: “You’re an embarrassment to your race.”

A group of black students are listing black classmates whom they think act white, and include me: “Yes, he’s white on the inside. He has no accent and hangs out with too many white boys.” (The person who said that flunked out at the end of the school year. He enrolled in a predominately black high school and went to an HBCU. Two months ago, as of this writing, he was killed in a black-on-black crime. There were no protests or riots carried for him, since his death could not be made to look like black victimhood. He got nothing but a few people on Facebook posting his obituary. Maybe he should have acted more “white.”)

I not only saw blacks accuse other blacks of “acting white,” but, even more often, I saw whites accuse their black friends of “acting white.” My Asian friend — of whom I was quite fond — would often say that he didn’t consider me black. I found this extremely puzzling. To me, “acting white” meant being an Uncle Tom — someone who is intentionally betraying his race and cares more about the approval of whites than of other blacks. Being called an “Uncle Tom” is definitely not a compliment. In fact, it is one of the harshest insults for a black person.

The self-hating black person is derided in black culture, as in Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks and Clayton Bigsby from the Dave Chappelle Show. Many blacks would rather associate with a murderer than with an Uncle Tom. This is not mere hyperbole. The black community eagerly embraces thugs and criminals who destroy their neighborhoods while it ostracizes its most principled members — educated and conservative blacks.

Even more confusing, I noticed that the more intelligent blacks would be particularly prone to accusations of “acting white.” All my life I had believed that trying to come across as an intelligent and civilized person, working hard, speaking standard English, assimilating into American society, not playing the race card, and not acting like a minstrel show character were characteristics of intelligence — not traits associated with any particular race. That ghetto blacks would accuse others of “acting white” I could, to some degree, understand. After all, the more academically oriented blacks did tend to associate more readily with white people than with other blacks, who tended to be ignorant. But what was truly mind-boggling to me was how whites and Asians could accuse blacks — even their own friends — of “acting white.” Why did they mock their black friends for doing what they were supposed to do? Why were intelligent and civilized blacks so often called race traitors by both blacks and whites?

Like an idiot, I succumbed to this pressure. I came to view hard work and academic success as “white” activities. I began to take school and life less seriously, approaching it with a half-hearted attitude, as if giving it my all would be “white,” and antithetical to the very core of my identity. I tried to the greatest extent possible to distance myself from my white classmates — not a good idea at a school that is 90 percent white.

I ended up graduating nowhere near the top of my class but still got into an elite college due to affirmative action and good test scores. I felt a bit guilty for gaming the system, but I felt I experienced discrimination — because of the “acting white” comments — and affirmative action was my way of getting back at an unfair system. (The same college also gave offers of admission to two other blacks from my high school. Their level of achievement was, obviously, high by black standards but also nowhere near the level that would have been required of a white or Asian.)

College

In college it soon became clear that I was woefully mismatched. I began to doubt whether I was smart enough to work at such an elite level. Perhaps the problem was me, not society.

Other black students were constantly on the watch for imaginary racism. They felt so self-entitled they drew up a document intended to force the school to accept more students and hire more professors from underrepresented races.

I doubted my abilities to such a great degree that I decided to get my IQ tested. My FSIQ (full scale IQ) was 141 — 99.7th percentile!

image

I have included my hand in the photo to confirm that I am black.

Acting white

For years I was convinced that the major cause of black social pathology was this “acting white” accusation and the phenomenon of having to “prove” one’s blackness. It had certainly had a great effect on my life and impacted other high-IQ blacks around me. However, one day I came across a brilliant article by Steve Sailer addressing this topic.

He made the incisive point that doing well in school would not be considered “acting white” if blacks and whites had the same average IQ. That was my turning point. I realized that this was not a discrimination issue at all or even evidence of racial bias. What my white and Asian classmates meant when they accused blacks of “acting white” was not to call them “Uncle Tom” or “race traitor,” but something more along the lines of “you act more like a stereotypical white person than a stereotypical black person.” Factor in the differing average IQs, and it’s no wonder why the more intelligent blacks are often accused of “acting white.”

Of course high-IQ blacks will tend to associate more with a group that has an average IQ of 100 than a group with an average IQ of 85. This “acting white” phenomenon is exactly what one would expect when groups differing as significantly in intelligence as do black and whites co-exist: Behavior that is associated with intelligence becomes associated with whiteness.

I am now amused by how difficult it is to separate behavior that is stereotypically black from behavior that is generally associated with low IQ: making poor life decisions, failing in school, getting in trouble with the law, being loud and obnoxious, speaking poorly, promoting destructive and ignorant behavior, etc. Conversely, it is difficult to distinguish behavior that is “white” from behavior that reflects high IQ: being polite and civilized, showing emotional restraint, working hard, speaking articulately, being educated, being goal-oriented, listening to classical music, etc. It’s as though everyone subconsciously picks up on the IQ differences even if they don’t explicitly realize that what they’re noticing is different levels of intelligence.

I continued to study the question. I found that that other black members of Mensa are commonly told they are “acting white.” This pattern holds true throughout the world. High-achieving blacks in Britain hear the same thing. Successful Brazilian blacks are called the complimentary term “black with a white soul.”

I learned that literally everywhere in the world where blacks are found in large numbers, they exhibit lower rates of educational success and higher rates of criminality than other races. It’s no mystery why blacks who buck these trends are seen as different from other blacks.

I got my own DNA tested. I found out that I am 25 percent European — which is to be expected among American blacks. More interestingly, I learned that I was in the 96th percentile for Neanderthal ancestry among African-Americans. I find it amusing that I’ve so often had my blackness questioned; I’m unusually high in genetic material that is completely absent from pure Africans.

Compelling quotations

Here are a few observations by blacks that have stuck in my mind.

“Most of the people who were popular in my high school are either dead or in jail.” — my aunt

“This area was so nice when white people lived here.” — my grandmother, driving through a black ghetto

“I have been called ‘white’ my entire life. It’s a shame that just because I didn’t get high, skip class, and steal from the corner store I was thought of as a lame individual.” — a female cousin

“It’s not too often we get a young brother like you here. You’re proper. Most of the young black men I know besides you are thugs.” — a middle-aged black man I met during a summer internship

“N*ggers are terrible.” — my father, who often comes into contact with ghetto blacks in his line of work

“If it’s stupid, they like it.” — my grandmother, referring to young black people

“Why do we always have to come up with dumb shit?” — my extremely militant and pro-black uncle, lamenting black people’s proclivity for ignorance

It’s IQ, not racism

I now have no doubt about race realism. All the lines of evidence, from history to life experience, point to the same conclusion. All the usual excuses for black dysfunction are epiphenomenal and stem from the basic fact of lower average black IQ. Others viewed us as inferior because we never developed the wheel, a written language, a calendar, a mechanical device, or a two-story building. Slavery happened because whites (and Arabs before them) were able to enslave blacks; they had better technology and capitalized on the lack of black cohesion. Historians estimate that 90 percent of the slaves shipped to the New World were first enslaved by other Africans. (This is also consistent with Phil Rushton’s application of r/K theory; Africans have always shown low in-group preference.) All the usual explanations for black failure melt away once the fact of lower IQ is acknowledged. Anti-intellectual culture, poverty, bad schools, single-parent families, lack of role models, you name it — they are exactly what you would expect in a population with a lower average level of intelligence.

I certainly have learned much more about how the world actually works from great men like Phil Rushton, Richard Lynn, Steve Sailer, and Jared Taylor than I have ever learned from hucksters like Ta-Nehisi Coates, Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton. One might find race realism to be a depressing worldview; of course no one wants to believe that his race is much less intelligent on average than other races. But I truly believe that if you evaluate the evidence from an unbiased perspective and use logic rather than emotion, you cannot come to any other conclusion.

Furthermore, a worldview that takes into account human biodiversity is certainly more realistic and even hopeful than eternally yearning for whites suddenly to “wake up to racism” or voluntarily renounce their thirst for destroying “black bodies” — something Ta-Nehisi Coates thinks comes naturally to them. It is more hopeful than waiting for blacks around the world to stop creating “cultures of incompetence,” for which they seem to have quite a knack. It is more hopeful than waiting 250 years for the achievement gap to close or 228 years for the black-white wealth gap to close.

I now know what would theoretically be needed to close these gaps: a higher black IQ. I am free of any resentment against whites, for no matter how bad slavery, Jim Crow, or any other misdeed that whites are frequently made to feel guilty for, blacks around the world are infinitely better off than they would have been if whites had simply left them alone to live in mud huts and tote spears in Africa.

I feel empowered, for I now know that there is no impenetrable wall of white racism holding me back. In the words of the founder of logic, Aristotle, “The high-minded man must care more for the truth than for what people think.” If admitting the truth makes me an “Uncle Tom,” so be it.

As for my uncle’s question, “Why do we always have to come up with dumb shit?”, applying Occam’s razor will yield an elegant and parsimonious answer.

ww2truth #conspiracy #racist ww2truth.com

ILYA EHRENBERG – THE MAN WHO INVENTED THE ‘SIX MILLION’

But Ehrenburg was perhaps most notorious for his viciously anti-German hate propaganda in World War II. In it, he exhorted Soviet troops to kill all Germans they encountered without pity.

In one leaflet entitled “Kill,” Ehrenburg incited the simple Russian soldier to treat the Germans as subhuman. The final paragraph concludes:

“The Germans are not human beings. From now on, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. From now on, the word ‘German’ strikes us to the quick. We have nothing to discuss. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day … If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime … If you have already killed a German, then kill another one — there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed. Kill the Germans! … — Kill the Germans! Kill!”

mass-rape-in-germany-by-soviets
And in another leaflet: “The Germans must be killed. One must kill them … Do you feel sick? Do you feel a nightmare in your breast? … Kill a German! If you are a righteous an conscientious man — kill a German! … Kill!”

This is typical of the steady diet of pathological hate fed to millions of Soviet troops by this Jew, safely ensconced far from the front.

Ehrenburg in the 1960’s, living out his life NOT as a war criminal, but as a hero is Israel.
But it wasn’t only the ordinary German soldier Ehrenburg was talking about, whom he accused of the very atrocities the Communists were themselves committing. Ehrenburg’s incendiary writings were, in fact, a prime motivating factor in the orgy of murder and rape against the civilian population that took place as Soviet troops rampaged into the heart of Europe. Appealing to the lowest, most subhuman instincts of this Bolshevik horde, he reiterated his genocidal message:


“Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the fascist beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army.”

The crowning achievement of Ehrenburg’s career came on December 17, 1944, when this hate-crazed fiend became the first person to mention the kabbalistic figure of Six Million alleged Jewish victims of National Socialism, and then proceeded to introduce that figure into Soviet propaganda.

After the war he joined with co-racial and fellow propagandist Vasily (Iosif Solomonovich) Grossman to produce a fictitious “Black Book” and lay the foundation for what has come to be known as “The Holocaust.” The rest is history.

Ehrenburg never forgot his Jewish roots, and before his death he arranged for the transfer of his private archives to the tribal cult center at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.

And so, it is altogether fitting that the birthday of this psychopathic lie-master should have been chosen as a day on which to remember the hoax which he concocted and of which he was the original inventor.

What was the result of this hateful propaganda?

Between the months of April and May, the German capital Berlin saw more than 100,000 rape cases according to hospital reports, while East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia saw more than 1.4 million rape cases.

Between the months of January and August of 1945, Germany saw the largest incident of mass rape known in history, where an estimated two million German women were raped by the Soviet Red Army soldiers, as written by Walter Zapotoczny Jr. in his book, ‘Beyond Duty: The Reason Some Soldiers Commit Atrocities’.

Hospital reports also stated that abortion operations were being carried out daily across all German hospitals.

Natalya Gesse, who was a Soviet war correspondent at the time, said that the Soviets didn’t care about the ages of their victims. “The Russian soldiers were raping every German female from eight to eighty. It was an army of rapists,” she said.

This caused the deaths of no less than 200,000 girls and women due to the spread of diseases, especially that many eyewitnesses recounted victims being raped as much as 70 times in that period.

Red Army soldiers would mass rape German women as a kind of revenge against their enemy: The German army. They felt that it was their earned right to do so as the German army had ‘violated’ their motherland by invading it. In addition to not being in contact with women for long periods causing their animal instinct to be heightened.

In his book, Zapotoczny said that even female Russian soldiers did not disapprove of the rapes, some finding it amusing.

“Our fellows were so sex-starved,” a Soviet major told a British journalist at the time, “that they often raped old women of sixty, seventy or even eighty – much to these grandmothers’ surprise, if not downright delight.”

In 1948, rape cases decreased vastly after Soviet troops were ordered back to their camps in Russia and left residential areas in Germany.

sources:

https://rense.com/general75/ehr.htm

https://dailyarchives.org/index.php/history/1939-how-german-women-suffered-largest-mass-rape-in-history-by-soviets

Here is the original article by Ilya Ehrenburg called “To Remember” from Pravda, December 17, 1944:

Die Pommersche Zeitung writes “Our struggle was honest from the very beginning; we did not cross our borders in blind madness intending to subjugate other nations. On the contrary, needing to leave our borders behind us, we went as the messengers for a new order and a new justice. Not one German ever dreamed of annihilating Englishmen or punishing Frenchmen or enslaving the Dutch or any other peoples, in order to live by the blood and sweat of other nations. On the contrary, our victories emitted tranquility.”

Poor dears, apparently they were forced to go to the Caucasus and to Egypt in order to emit tranquility and now when they were allowed to return to Cologne and to Eastern Prussia, they meekly say “whoever we hurt, we don’t hold it against them.”

What were their intentions when they crossed their borders? This question can be answered by the maps they published between 1939 and 1942. This is an atlas of “blind madness:” “Greater Germany” included Lille and Kiev, Riga and Nancy.

They did not want to enslave other nations and live by others’ blood and sweat? Not long ago didn’t Grupenfuhrer Gasse declare to the newspaper Hamburger Fren den blatt: “The former Russia will be colonized by Stormtroopers and their childen”? And the Danzigger Fortpost was estimating “Every German colonizer will be served by eight to ten families.” Yes, at that time they were not overly modest. And the German firm Bremen was promising stockholders cotton from Turkmenistan. At that time they declared that “a nation of merchants, Englishmen, do not deserve a place on Earth.” (Felkisher Beobachter) At that time they were threatening: “Shooting hostages will show the French that nothing will stop us.” (Parizer Tzeitung) Shipping off the Dutch to the Ukraine, they declared “Only history books will remember Holland as a state.” (Antriff)

Where did they “emit tranquility”? In the “desert zone” or perhaps stoking the ovens of Majdanek or Treblinka?

Isn’t it too early for them to renounce themselves? They are still shooting and already starting to whimper. They are still tearing children’s bodies apart and already starting to wash their bloodied hands.

We have a saying “To remember is to live.” Indeed, a man who loses his memory loses half his life and starts to fade away. But to remember means not only to live, it also means to save a life, to save future generations, to preserve the idea of what it means to be human.

There occur historical events which confound wise men. Hitler’s Germany is not a sphinx. It is typhus-bearing lice. Now everyone understands what fascism is but not everyone wants to remember what they understood. To forget means to forgive. And to forgive the stokers of Majdanek means to bring up children for even more efficient future ovens. I am not a politician but in my work I deal with human feelings because every writer is a psychologist. Every writer is also a moralist even if he does not think about morality. As a writer I want to remind you about the sources of fascism.

For many years the Nazis brainwashed German youth. What were they conveying to the little fascists? A feeling of superiority. Now the world knows what racial or national arrogance means. If every nation decided that they are first in the world and therefore have the right to order others about, we will see new Majdaneks in the 20th century.

So where is the foundation of this German feeling of superiority? In the past, some will say. There is no doubt that in the past Germany had remarkable philosophers, musicians, poets, and scientists. No anti-fascist thinks about putting down Goethe or Beethoven, but you cannot live off the legacy of culture. Culture is a continuing process of creation. And in fascist Germany nothing is left from the glorious past. We laugh at the degenerate who tries to replace a lack of wisdom and knowledge with an impressive past. It is ridiculous and despicable for a nation to burn museums and libraries while at the same time pointing to Schiller and Kant.

Others would argue that Germans are proud of their present. What is there to be proud of? A money-grubbing Goering? A lascivious Goebbels? Ignorant and lewd ministers? A hardworking Himmler? Or are they perhaps boastful of their sophisticated technology, well-kept cities, and comfortable houses? But the fascists did not create any of this: Hitler only ravaged Germany. It is also good to recall that American technology is higher, that Dutch cities are cleaner, and Swedish housing is more comfortable. Besides, technology alone cannot be the pride of a people unless the strength of a nation is connected to its higher aspirations. And in fascist Germany civilization serves only the lowest aspirations. So the gas chambers for the mass murder of children became a natural expression of German technology.

No, the feeling of superiority that the fascists instill in their children is based neither on the past nor on the present. German superiority is steeped in prejudice, in the belief in the magic properties of German blood, a conviction that everything German is better than anything non-German. . . .

The origins of rivers of blood appear to be seemingly innocent swamps of human stupidity. Children sometimes make fun of things they are not familiar with; then mothers reproach them and the child, as he grows up, learns that the world does not end at the corner of his street. Each person and each nation loves what they grew up with. What Russian would be indifferent to a white birch tree? But we have never claimed and never will claim that a birch tree is more noble or more worthy than a cypress tree or a cedar tree. Your mother may be smarter than your neighbor, but you do not love her for that, you love her because she is your mother. Genuine patriotism is modest and has nothing to do with nationalism: patriotism—is brotherhood; nationalism—is carnage and death. . . .

In the countries they captured, the Germans killed all the Jews: the elderly and nursing babies. Ask a captured German why did your compatriots annihilate six million innocent people. And he will say: “They are Jews. They are black (or red) haired. They have different blood.” This began with vulgar jokes, with name-calling by hoodlums, with graffiti, and all this led to Majdanek, Babi Yar, Treblinka, to ditches filled with children’s corpses. If before Treblinka antisemitism could appear to be a common, ugly outburst, now it is a word soaked with blood; the Polish poet Julian Tuwim says “Antisemitism is the international language of fascists.”

The whole world now sees the consequences of racial and national arrogance. The ovens of Majdanek, where the Germans consumed people of thirty nationalities because they were—Russians, French, Poles, or Jews—these frightening ovens did not emerge right away. They grew out of an upbringing based on the hatred of whole nations. People all over the world need to remember that nationalism is the road to Majdanek. If a nation builds its freedom on the oppression of another, if a state restricts the rights of citizens of a different color, if a society persecutes a man because the shape of his nose or the way he speaks differs from that of his neighbors, so that nation, that state, that society is in danger. . . .

We must remember: fascism was born out of the greed and stupidity of some, and the perfidy and cowardice of others. If mankind wants to put an end to the bloody nightmare of these years, it must put an end to fascism. Half measures will not do here. If fascism is left somewhere to breed, then in ten or twenty years we will again see rivers of blood. A nail drives out a nail, but you cannot drive out fascism with fascism. You cannot liberate nations of one brand of fascism and deliver them into the hands of fascists of a different brand. Fascism—a terrifying cancerous tumor. It cannot be treated at mineral spas. It needs to be removed. I do not believe in good-hearted people who cry over executioners: these alleged do-gooders are preparing the death of innocent millions. The nations of Europe fought courageously against the invaders; and nations are not Moors who could leave after finishing their work. The French have a good saying: in his house, the collier is a master. Not only the French understand this saying. The Red Army has demonstrated what it means to liberate: the Poles, Norwegians, Serbs and Slovaks understand this. We do not install half-fascists in place of fascists: we liberate without quotation marks. We know that democracy is the daughter of a nation and not a glamorous lady whom you could only adore from a distance. . . .

Nations who experienced the fascist tyranny will understand us without any lengthy explanation: this is a time of nations and not diplomats. The courageous people of France will understand us. Our allies will understand us. There was a time when the British believed in the magical properties of the English Channel. Now they understand that the Channel is not a barrier against fascism. For a long time, the British prohibited the entry of dogs into the country: this is how they try to protect their country from rabies. But rabid, two-legged creatures in contrast to four-legged ones possess different “Fau.” And only complete destruction of fascism—from Warsaw to La Linea—can protect England from a new disaster.

When Die Pommersche Zeitung dares to claim that the Germans crossed their borders as the most peaceful missionaries, it means that the fascists now have only one hope: the loss of memory. After a severe injury, doctors sometimes diagnose a condition called amnesia. The injuries to the world are immense but nations do not suffer from amnesia. They will remember everything in the days of judgment. Even after the victory, they will not forget these terrible years. We must remember: this is our obligation to the dead heroes and to the children.

These cruel visions must remain before our eyes: this is the price for saving our world. I know that it is easier to forget but we will not forget. We solemnly swear: remember, remember, remember!

Source: https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-human-behavior/to-remember-ilya-ehrenburg

Mohamadreza Mehdinia #conspiracy correctpi.com

Incorrect value 3.141592653...for circle area & circumference & its subordinated values: 0.785398163..., 1.273239545..., 0.6366197724..., 0.2146018367...

The correct value for a circle is 3.125 and its subordinated values: 0.78125, 1.28, 0.64, 0.21875.

Also Mantle area and Total area even Volume of Sphere & Cylinder and Cube relationship are 2/3 or 3/2

[...]


I have investigated and researched on Pi for 35 years and it has taken me this long to come to these conclusions. To share my knowledge and discuss the contents of my book with fellow colleagues I have put a few words together on this site.

Old methods of identifying and calculating Pi have not been mentioned, discussed or used in this book. History of Pi has not been mentioned either. This book only considers a new idea and new formulas. To understand and get a complete view of the new formulas and ideas one has to study the book.

The first time I published this book was in year 2000 in Sweden and the second time in 2003.

The book is divided into two parts. The first part contains seven chapters, explaining the correct value for Pi. The second part contains six chapters, each chapter covering different mathematical areas. Part 1 explains the basic geometric shapes and how these are related to each other.

jamesE82 #fundie jamese82.deviantart.com

So there I was, minding my own business, trying to hold to the pledge to keep political discourse to a minimum for a while, when out of the blue I receive a comment from a woman who was, um… unhappy is how I’ll put it. She was unhappy, and being… oh, how shall I put this… difficult. Yes, that is the most polite way to say it; she was being a difficult woman, who was unhappy at me. She was unhappy and felt the need to be difficult because of comments I made two months ago on someone else’s page, where I showed my support for the page owner’s posting of a pro-Christmas picture. A pro-Christmas picture in December, it seems, made this difficult woman unhappy, and she felt the need to let me know about it. While doing so she did what liberals usually do, which is to assume they know Christianity better than Christians do, accuse me of having the negative qualities that she herself was displaying, deny that America was founded on Christian principles, etc. There was nothing new in her outrage that my support of Christmas caused in her, and I considered showing her comment the attention it deserved by not responding, but one particular word she used got me thinking…

Theist. Why is it, I wondered, that she was using that term while discussing a Christian holiday, on a posting made by a Christian, and while talking to a Christian? Seems that an awful lot of people who become outraged by things like Christmas, the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance, roadside crosses to mark fatal crash sites, and so on, rant about theists. Why do they do that, when they are clearly angered at displays of Christianity? Why not just come out and say they hate the religion that has sparked their outrage and disgust? Why not have the guts to just come out and say it? When I’m talking about 9/11, I don’t blame “theists” for the terrorist attack, after all. :confused:

It is also worth noting that when called on it, these people will say that they hate all people of faith (and state it like they deserve a medal for doing so). Really? That is not, in my experience, the case. “Theist” haters will come up with pictures of lions eating Christians and say they are funny, but where are the “funny” pictures of Jews being gassed and thrown into Nazi ovens, or Buddhist monks on fire? They’ll draw every blasphemous depiction of Christ they can imagine, but where are the allegedly humorous cartoons of Anne Frank being murdered, or Muslim women being stoned to death, or Tibetan Buddhist nuns being raped? If they actually do hate all theists, then shouldn’t these things be just as amusing to them as the crucifixion of Jesus?

:shrug: So I made a stamp. Not a very special stamp, but there you go. We all suffer from selective outrage, I suppose, and this deviation is about that: in this case, the hatred liberals have for Christianity over all other religions, and their bizarre (cowardly?) penchant for denying it. I’ll preemptively say that fine, not all liberals hate Jesus, that some enlightened people really do despise all forms of faith, and so on. I’m not seeking confrontation in posting this, but as it was spawned from a confrontation caused by my defense of my faith, I suppose I should expect some. Again, :shrug:.

If anybody actually wants to use this stamp, please do, but also tell me so I can give you a :highfive:.

Y.Marianov #fundie #wingnut #homophobia unification-family.blogspot.com

<From the rebranded right guard Moonies>

Members often ask me, what exactly is 'Humanism'. Well, Divine Principle is very clear. Humanism reverses all Subject-Object relationships; it expanded as a Cain-type ideology (product of our Physical Mind reversing dominion over our Spirit Mind). After Satan left Communism his power moved totally in the secular culture of Humanism and Relativism that destroyed morality and the foundation of the family in the last half a century. If we want to stop the degradation of our children, win the cultural war and open the way for peace, it is vitally important to reveal the twisted satanic nature of humanism and overcome it ideologically with the truth.

As Tim LaHaye wrote in his book, Battle for the mind, "Most of the evil in the world today can be traced to humanism, which took over governments, United Nations, education, television and other most influential fields in life." Humanism controls the society today by a network of organizations - humanistic associations, the education, trade unions, pro-sex programs, universities, porn magazines, even the hospitals and the textbooks of our children. But how much the aims of humanism are beneficial for humanity? It turns out that the values they promote are extremely destructive to the family and society, and especially dangerous for our young people.

What Secular Humanism infiltrates in people's minds

This becomes obvious when we check their main philosophical base expressed in the Humanist Manifesto:

1. Humanism rejects traditional moral values. They reverse good and evil. Not only values are made relative, but anyone who mentions what's right or wrong is marked by them as evil.

2. Humanism denies obedience to any authority, including parental, or the authority of God.

3. Humanism promotes selfish-individualism - extreme individualism, as the highest good: It propagates that everyone can do what he wants to satisfy his momentary desires.

4. Humanism directly attacks marriage and the family as outdated, claims free sex, homosexuality, sex with animals and sex with children are normal.

The culmination of the "humanist manifesto" is that the freedom of any kind of sexuality should be allowed: Including same sex relations, sex outside marriage, sex with many partners, or sex with small children and animals. At the same time Humanism's aim is that "the family" should be denied as an outdated and unnecessary unit.

This philosophy directly aims to liberate people from any moral standards and social responsibility. This Humanist mass-propaganda brought the collapse of morality in less than half a century. Understanding of it's essential nature and origin comes when we see that in fact Humanism promotes philosophically the four fallen natures.

The real evil in Humanism is REVERSING SUBJECT/OBJECT; Reversal of dominion on all levels... Thus destroying the order, destroying family, destroying society. And more and more, they are very open in proclaiming their evil goals. But they are very good in rationalizing why that's what what we should want.

EXAMPLES: Forbidding parents to discipline and teach values to their children, meanwhile they are Killing children, Raping children, making children Homosexual and Lesbian etc.

Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca


Actually, Gardner's determination to identify instances of simple numerical accounting among primitive peoples as viable demonstrations of the "universality" of logical-mathematical reasoning constitutes an egregious downgrading of the very meaning of this form of intelligence. This intelligence has been characterized by stages of development from a sensorimotor stage, through pre-operational and concrete operational stages, to a formal operational stage. In the chapter where Gardner's writes that Piaget "painted a brilliant portrait of development in one domain — that of logical-mathematical thought," he forgets that adolescents in traditional cultures (not educated by the West) barely reach and cultivate the final stage of development in Piaget's theory, the stage of formal operations, in which young adolescents exhibit a capacity to figure out the "implications that obtain among a set of relative propositions" (to use Gardner's own words, 19).

No just in primitive cultures, but outside the West, the logical-mathematical intelligence barely exhibited its full potential. Mathematics is essentially a European accomplishment. Gardner says that "it is left to the greatest scientists to pose questions that no one has posed before, and then to arrive at an answer" (149). Does he know that Europeans and North Americans account for 97 percent of scientific accomplishment?

The history of logic, too, is overwhelmingly European. The magisterial eleven-volume work, Handbook of the History of Logic (2004 –2012), which was written from a "global perspective," and contains four chapters in the first two volumes on Indian and Arabic logic, cannot but dedicate all the other chapter and volumes to the West since almost all developments in logic came from this civilization.

Europeans have also been the best in "linguistic intelligence." Most of the examples of great poets, essayists, and novelists Gardner mentions are Western. We all know that humans have an innate capacity for language, but Europeans have developed the literary capabilities of their languages to the highest degree. Take the novel; it is really a European invention. The word “novel” came into use at the end of the 18th century in England as a transliteration of the Italian word “novella.” The roots of the novel can be traced back to i) Spanish picaresque tales (1500s) with their strings of episodic adventures held together by the personality of the central figure; ii) Elizabethan prose fiction and the translation of ancient Greek romances into the vernacular, iii) French heroic romance (mid 17th century) with its huge baroque narratives about thinly veiled contemporaries who always acted nobly and spoke high-flown sentiments. What British novelists added in the 1700s was a more unified and plausible (down-to-earth) plot structure, with sharply individualized and believable characters, and a less aristocratic (or more “middle class”) style of writing. The novel, in these respects, was invented in Europe, particularly after 1750 (Watt 2001). It was “associated from its inception,” in the words of Roy Porter, “with individualism and a certain political liberalism” (2000: 283). England played the leading role in this genre, cultivating a new sensibility for authenticity, personal experience and feeling, a spirit of nonconformity towards rigid and “insincere” conventions, a fascination with the inner depths of the self. Samuel Richardson’s Clarissa was one of such novels, as was Pamela and Sir Charles Grandison by the same author; as well as Sarah Fielding’s The Adventures of David Simple (1744), Henry Brooke’s The Fool of Quality (1765), Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) and Moll Flanders (1722), Lawrence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy (1759–67) and A Sentimental Journey (1767).

Same goes for musical intelligence. All humans have this intelligence but it is empirically beyond question that the European world produced most musical styles, the most sophisticated forms of musical notation, and a new polyphonic music where sounds could be seen as a phenomena moving through time, written on a paper using a codified and standardized system of notation for all sounds and rests. Europeans developed into their current forms almost all the known musical instruments. All the greatest classical composers in history are Western.

We are told that "spatial intelligence" refers to an ability to think in terms of physical space, as do architects and navigators. Drawing, jigsaw puzzles, maps, all rely on this intelligence, as well as models, graphics, charts, photographs, drawings, 3-D modeling, multimedia. Again, it so happens to be the case that almost all the greatest navigators, explorers, and geographers in history were European. The invention of modern maps, the cartographic revolution, was strictly European. Europeans are responsible for the development of models, charts, photographs, and the like. Gardner tries to downplay this reality by saying that "the capacity to make one's way around an intricate environment, to engage in complex arts and crafts, and to play sports and games of various types seems to be found everywhere" (p. 200). But most of what he says about spatial reasoning relies on Western instances. His appeals to spatial reasoning outside the West for the sake of pushing the notion that all cultures are equal constitute a downgrading of the very meaning of intelligence.

Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is about body awareness, using the body effectively and graciously, body language, hands-on-learning, making tools. Again, Europeans cultivated the highest instances of this form of intelligence. Europeans, for starters, are better athletes in most sports. Gardner says that "of all the uses of the body, none has reached greater heights...than the dance" (p. 222). Well, Europeans invented most of the dance forms in history, including the dances which reached the greater heights in difficulty and creativity, ballet and modern. They are also the greatest dancers and the greatest hands-on inventors.

Europeans have exhibited the highest levels of "naturalistic intelligence" in their far higher understanding of nature, their sensitivity towards plants and animals, their unique love for pets and for street animals. The creation of national parks is a Western achievement.

jong #fundie mrctv.org

jong:
And SCOTUS has been proven wrong by themselves changing what is allowed and what is not. And no the Government does not have to remain silent upon the matter for that would violating their rights. And yes a police department can have it on their door. But, trying to teach people like you history is rather useless. You have to remove your head from your nether regions first.

Ambulance Chaser:
SCOTUS has never been "proven wrong," just reversed on a few occasions by later Supreme Court decisions. At which point, the earlier decision is no longer law.

Until that happens, it remains the law.

jong:
Incorrect. NONE of it is Law. It is only opinons.

Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, opinions that MUST be followed, regarding what the law says. So, law.

jong:
Not quite. Their opinons are only as valid as can be enforced like anything else. And no its not law. And they are only one third of the three branches of govenment. In fact if both Congress and the President told them to get screwed they could do it. That is how it is set up. No one branch can dictate to the others

Ambulance Chaser:
"Congress and the President can dictate to the Supreme Court."

"No branch can dictate to the others."

Aside from the fact that you contradicted yourself within the space of three sentences, Congress and the President haven't told them to "get screwed" so your point is moot.

jong:
Incorrect. The point is that one branch can not over rule the other two. I guess you missed that part of civics class.

Ambulance Chaser:
I did, because it's not true.

jong:
Actually it is. That is how our government is set up. But, I guess you missed that class

Ambulance Chaser:
Okay, so why were the courts able to stop Trump's Muslim ban? Twice? Why did they partially overrule RFRA? Why did they overrule Bush's military commissions program?

jong:
Oh come now you profess to practice law and want to pretend that you dont have any idea about the Ninth and the amount of times it has been over ruled? In fact they have been over ruled so many times that the entire Ninth needs to be "reshuffuled"

Ambulance Chaser:
Yes the Ninth Circuit has been overturned sometimes. So what?

Can we get back on topic now? You said courts can't overrule the other branches. I just showed you a bunch of times when they did. How is that possible?

jong:
Actually in the end IF Trump had wanted to and Congress concurred he could have over rulled the courts. That is a matter of history or dont you understand how our government was set up??

Ambulance Chaser:
So why hasn't he?

jong:
Why are you asking me a question you should be posing to him?? And you are once again deflecting. Which is no real surprise.

Ambulance Chaser:
Here, I'll just answer it: because he can't. Presidents are not above the law.

jong:
And I never said they were. You did. What I did say is that you are very limited in your education not to understand that our government is based on three legs. And one leg of it can not stand against the other two. But. go ahead and blather on your lies and idiocy are some what amusing in that it most certain shows your lack of learning

Ambulance Chaser:
Are you trying to say that if the president and Congress decide to pass a law after the Supreme Court that doing so is unconstitutional, they can do it anyway? Because no, they can't.

jong:
If both Congress and the President agree upon a law and enforce their will the courts would have little choice. Once again showing how really little you know. You should get out of a court and into reality. A court order like a law is only as good as enforcement. That is why with the over whelming amount of liberal courts their orders will soon be useless. They simply make little or no sense in any way shape or form.

Ambulance Chaser:
And how exactly would that happen? If there were some type of military coup that shattered the social order and brought about the end of the United States as we know it? Then yes, I suppose Supreme Court rulings would probably be fairly useless under the new martial dictatorship.

Is that what you're talking about? Because fine, I'll concede that the Supreme Court would become irrelevant in your twisted, post apocalyptic revenge fantasy.

ROBERT JENSEN #fundie feministcurrent.com

The art of avoiding definitions: A review of ‘Trans*: A Quick and Quirky Account of Gender Variability’

“Let me define the terms, and I’ll win any debate,” a friend told me years ago, an insight I’ve seen confirmed many times in intellectual and political arenas.

But after reading Jack Halberstam’s new book, Trans*: A Quick and Quirky Account of Gender Variability, I would amend that observation: Debates also can be won by making sure a term is never clearly defined. The transgender movement has yet to offer coherent explanations of the concepts on which its policy proposals are based, yet support is nearly universal in left/liberal circles. Whether or not it was the author’s intention, Trans* feels like an attempt at an outline of such explanation, but I’m sorry to report that the book offers neither clarity nor coherence.

I say sorry, because I came to the book hoping to gain greater understanding of the claims of the transgender movement, which I have not found elsewhere. Halberstam — a professor in Department of English and Comparative Literature and the Institute for Research on Women, Gender, and Sexuality at Columbia University — has been writing about this subject for more than two decades and is one of the most prominent U.S. trans* intellectuals. The table of contents looked promising, but the book only deepened my belief that a radical feminist and ecological critique of the transgender movement’s ideology is necessary.

Rather than be defensive about the ambiguity of the transgender argument, Halberstam celebrates the lack of definition as a strength of the movement, an indication that trans* offers deep insights for everyone. If we shift our focus from “the housing of the body” and embrace “perpetual transition” then “we can commit to a horizon of possibility where the future is not male or female but transgender,” he writes. Instead of “male-ish” and “female-ish” bodies we can realize “the body is always under construction” and “consider whether the foundational binary of male-female may possibly have run its course.”

The very act of naming and categorizing imposes limits that constrain the imagination, according to Halberstam, hence the use of the asterisk:

“I have selected the term ‘trans*’ for this book precisely to open the term up to unfolding categories of being organized around but not confined to forms of gender variance. As we will see, the asterisk modifies the meaning of transitivity by refusing to situate transition in relation to a destination, a final form, a specific shape, or an established configuration of desire and identity. The asterisk holds off the certainty of diagnosis; it keeps at bay any sense of knowing in advance what the meaning of this or that gender variant form may be, and perhaps most importantly, it makes trans* people the authors of their own categorizations. As this book will show, trans* can be a name for expansive forms of difference, haptic [relating to the sense of touch] relations to knowing, uncertain modes of being, and the disaggregation of identity politics predicated upon the separating out of many kinds of experience that actually blend together, intersect, and mix. This terminology, trans*, stands at odds with the history of gender variance, which has been collapsed into concise definitions, sure medical pronouncements, and fierce exclusions.”

I quote at length to demonstrate that in using shorter excerpts from the book I am not cherry-picking a few particularly abstruse phrases to poke fun at a certain form of postmodern academic writing. My concern is not stylistic but about the arguments being presented. After reading that passage a couple of times, I think I can figure out what Halberstam’s trying to say. The problem is that it doesn’t say anything very helpful.

To be fair, Halberstam is correct in pointing out that the instinct to categorize all the world’s life, human and otherwise — “the mania for the godlike function of naming” — went hand in hand with colonialism, part of the overreach of a certain mix of politics and science in attempting to control the world. But like it or not, humans make sense of the world by naming, which need not go forward with claims of imperial domination or divine insight. We define the terms we use in trying to explain the world so that we can meaningfully communicate about that world; when a term means nothing specific, or means everything, or means nothing and everything at the same time, it is of no value unless one wants to obfuscate.

But, if Halberstam is to be believed, this criticism is irrelevant, because transgenderism “has never been simply a new identity among many others competing for space under the rainbow umbrella. Rather, it constitutes radically new knowledge about the experience of being in a body and can be the basis for very different ways of seeing the world.” So, if I don’t get it, the problem apparently is the limits of my imagination — I don’t grasp the radically new knowledge — not because the explanation is lacking.

After reading the book, I continue to believe that the intellectual project of the transgender movement isn’t so much wrong as it is incoherent, and the political project is not liberatory but regressive. What this book “keeps at bay” is a reasonable, honest request: What does any of this mean?

In other writing — here in 2014 and again in 2016, along with a chapter in my 2017 book The End of Patriarchy: Radical Feminism for Men — I’ve asked how we should understand transgenderism if the movement’s claim is that a male human can actually be female (or vice versa) in biological terms. If transgender signals a dissatisfaction with the culturally constructed gender norms of patriarchy — which are rigid, repressive, and reactionary — I’ve suggested it would be more effective to embrace the longstanding radical feminist critique of patriarchy.

Rather than repeat those arguments here, I want to try another approach, stating simply that I have good reason to believe I’m real, that the human species of which I am a member is real, and that the ecosphere of which we are a part is real. That is, there is a material reality to the world within which I, and all other carbon-based life forms, operate. I cannot know everything there is to know about that material world, of course, but I can trust that it is real.

The cultural/political/economic systems that shape human societies make living in the real world complex and confusing, and the ways those systems distribute wealth and power are often morally unacceptable. But to challenge that injustice, it’s necessary to understand that real world and communicate my understanding to others in clear fashion.

In left/liberal circles, especially on college campuses, “trans*” increasingly is where the action is for those concerned with social justice. It offers — for everyone, whether transgender-identified or not — the appearance of serious intellectual work and progressive politics. Endorsing the transgender project is a way to signal one is on the cutting edge, and work like Halberstam’s is embraced in these circles, where support for the transgender movement is required to be truly intersectional.

My challenge to those whose goal is liberation is simple: How does this help us understand the real world we are trying to change? How does it help us understand patriarchy, the system of institutionalized male dominance out of which so much injustice emerges?

Halberstam likely would put me in the category of “transphobic feminism” for “refusing to seriously engage” with transfeminism, but I am not transphobic (if, by that term, we mean one who is afraid of, or hateful toward, people who identify as transgender). Nor do I refuse to seriously engage other views (unless we describe a critique of another intellectual position as de facto evidence of a lack of serious engagement). I am rooted in radical feminism, one of those “versions of feminism that still insist on the centrality of female-bodied women,” according to Halberstam.

On that point, Halberstam is accurate: radical feminists argue that patriarchy is rooted in men’s claim to own or control women’s reproductive power and sexuality. Radical feminists distinguish between sex (male XY and female XX, a matter of biology) and gender (masculinity and femininity, a matter of culture and power), which means that there is no way to understand the rigid gender norms of patriarchy without recognizing the relevance of the category of “female-bodied women.” It’s hard to imagine how the binary of male-female could “run its course” given the reality of sexual reproduction.

This is where an ecological perspective, alongside and consistent with a radical feminist critique, reminds us that the world is real and we are living beings, not machines. In discussing his own top surgery (the removal of breasts), Halberstam speaks of working with the doctor:

“Together we were building something in flesh, changing the architecture of my body forever. The procedure was not about building maleness into my body; it was about editing some part of the femaleness that currently defined me. I did not think I would awake as a new self, only that some of my bodily contours would shift in ways that gave me a different bodily abode.”

We all have a right to understand ourselves as we please, and so here’s my response: My body is not a house that was constructed by an architect but rather — like all other life on the planet — is a product of evolution. I resist the suggestion I can “build” myself and recognize that a sustainable human presence on the planet is more likely if we accept that we are part of a larger living world, which has been profoundly damaged when humans treat it as our property to dominate and control.

This is the irony of Halberstam’s book and the transgender project more generally. After labeling the project of categorizing/defining as imperialist and critiquing the “mania for the godlike function of naming,” he has no problem endorsing the “godlike function” of reshaping bodies as if they were construction materials. There’s a deepening ecological sensibility in progressive politics, an awareness of what happens when humans convince ourselves that we can remake the world and ignore the biophysical limits of the ecosphere. While compassionately recognizing the reasons people who identify as transgender may seek surgery and hormone/drug treatments, we shouldn’t suppress concerns about the movement’s embrace of extreme high-tech intervention into the body, including the surgical destruction of healthy tissue and long-term health issues due to cross-sex hormones and hormone-like drugs.

I have long tried to observe what in rhetoric is sometimes called “the principle of charity,” a commitment in debate to formulating an opponent’s argument in the strongest possible version so that one’s critique is on firm footing. I have tried to do that in this review, though I concede that I’m not always sure what Halberstam is arguing, and so I may not be doing his arguments justice. But that is one of my central points: When I read this book — and many other arguments from transgender people and their allies — I routinely find myself confused, unable to understand just what is being proposed. So, again, I’ll quote at length in the hopes of being fair in my assessment, this time the book’s closing paragraph:

“Trans* bodies, in their fragmented, unfinished, broken-beyond-repair forms, remind all of us that the body is always under construction. Whether trans* bodies are policed in bathrooms or seen as killers and loners, as thwarted, lonely, violent, or tormented, they are also a site for invention, imagination, fabulous projection. Trans* bodies represent the art of becoming, the necessity of imagining, and the fleshy insistence of transitivity.”

Once again, after reading that passage a couple of times, I think I understand, sort of, the point. But, once again, I don’t see how it advances our understanding of sex and gender, of patriarchy and power. I am not alone in this assessment; people I know, including some who are sympathetic to the transgender movement’s political project, have shared similar concerns, though they often mute themselves in public to avoid being labeled transphobic.

I’m not asking of the transgender movement some grand theory to explain all the complexity of sex and gender. I just need a clear and coherent place to start. Asking questions is not transphobic, nor is observing that such clarity and coherence are lacking.

funmudder #fundie rr-bb.com

(Thread: If you were President how would you start fixing the economy?)


(1) Press (1) for English is immediately banned. English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can.

(2) We will immediately go into a two year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude. NO imports, no exports.
We will use the 'Walmart' policy, 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.'

(3) When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on it.

(4) All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border until Texas residents (not politicians) tell us the situation is under control. (six month tour)

(5) Social security will immediately return to its original state.
If you or your spouse didn't put nuttin in, you ain't gettin nuttin out. The president nor any other politician will not be able to touch it.

(6) Welfare - Checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40 hour school week and the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade.

(7) Professional Athletes --Steroids - The FIRST time you check positive you're banned for life.

(8) Crime - We will adopt the Turkish method, the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There is no more life sentences.
If convicted, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim; gun, knife, strangulation, etc.

(9) One export will be allowed; Wheat, The world needs to eat.
A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil.

(10) All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes. When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can make the decision whether it's a worthy cause.

(11) The Pledge of Allegiance will be said every day at school and every day in Congress.

(12) The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc.

Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes but a vote for me or Maxine will get you better than what you have, and better than what you're gonna get.

The Look-Up Team #conspiracy look-up.org.uk

Reports are saying that a Germanwings Airbus A320 has crashed near Digny in southern France. The plane, flight 4U 9525, had been en route from Barcelona to Düsseldorf with 142 passengers and six crew on board. The plane issued a distress call at 10:47 (09:47 GMT), according to sources quoted by AFP news agency. We spoke to Airbus UK who had no information on the incident and refused to speculate at this stage.

...

Why is this relevant to Climate Engineering ?

Those that follow us will know that Airbus A320 are the primary tool for one of the current Climate Engineering programs, and produce most of the higher altitude cloud types, or cirrus as they like us to think of them. All A320s belonging to the 3 Airline Alliances have been retrofitted with a 3-pipe aerosol delivery system used to spray substances into our skies that turns into cloud-like formations.

When we predicted this some time back, after the MA370 debacle, we stated that the reason that so many of these aircraft are going down might due to the unbalanced loading caused by storing ULD – Unit Load Devices – full of the chemicals used in the cargo holds. It is unclear still how much the pilot knows about what he is carrying. Every pilot receives a load sheet prior to take off that details the weight and distribution of the cargo. On the basis of this sheet the pilot calculates thrust and other variables in the take off and landing procedure.
1. If the aircraft is being flown on manual – ie by the pilots – and both pilots succumb to Aerotixic Syndrome this would obviously cause the aircraft to crash. There have been countless cases pilots becoming sick, with many having to retire as a result, with this ‘mystery’ condition but we never hear about it in the press of course. Despite the mystery label we think we know exactly what the cause is. This can easily be discounted by the apparent distress call put out shortly before crashing.
2. If the weight distribution changed significantly during flight without the pilot being aware of this fact, his reaction to the instruments and behaviour of the aircraft during flight would not be accurate. This situation could arise from the release of large amounts of the chemicals, obviously reducing the load at one end of the aircraft. In the case of the Airbus A320 we know this to be the font cargo hold and in the case of Boeings the rear cargo hold.
3. We have been pondering another possibility for the last couple of years. We know that our air is saturated on most days by tiny polymer plastic fibres, as a result of one of the other 3 main programs (sprayed from Boeings). We also know that assorted other substances from the Airbus programs are also found in very high concentrations at cruising altitudes where they are sprayed. There is the possibility that these substances might be collecting in the engines, or affecting the engines in some way. Obviously the engines draw in air for combustion from the atmosphere so if the air is saturated with plastic or other substances such as Barium or Aluminium compounds this could have a significant detrimental effect on the engines performance, possibly leading to catastrophic failure over time.

Hunter Wallace #racist occidentaldissent.com

[From "John Wayne: “I Believe In White Supremacy”"]

The media is going crazy with faux outrage over this:

“Wayne was also asked about educator/activist Angela Davis and discrimination. He responded, “With a lot of blacks, there’s quite a bit of resentment along with their dissent, and possibly rightfully so. But we can’t all of a sudden get down on our knees and turn everything over to the leadership of the blacks. I believe in white supremacy until the blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I don’t believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people.”

[...]

There is so much truth in these comments.

1.) First, Jim Crow was a Southern system of race relations, and most of America had been integrated for generations before segregation ended in the 1960s. W.E.B. DuBois, an early 20th century civil rights leader, graduated from Harvard in 1895.

2.) Second, John Wayne’s position was mainstream in the early 20th century. The British, for example, saw their African colonies as “trusteeships.” They were educating and civilizing black Africans to prepare them for eventual independence. The famous African explorer David Livingstone summed it up in his formula: Christianity, commerce, civilization. Rudyard Kipling called it “The White Man’s Burden.” British colonialism in Africa was more paternalistic than malicious and most African colonies were a financial drain. In fact, the British dealt with the Boers more ruthlessly than any African tribe.

3.) Third, the mainstream consensus used to be that it was reckless and unwise to grant African colonies independence that were unprepared for it. Churchill made this point to FDR. Europeans in Africa abolished slavery and cannibalism. They introduced Christianity. They introduced air travel, railroads, electricity, hospitals, sanitation, public health measures against malaria within a span of less than 75 years, etc. They build modern cities like Leopoldville and Stanleyville in the Congo.

4.) Fourth, the early 20th century was a time of relative peace and rapid social and economic development in Africa, especially compared to Europe and East Asia which went through World War I and World War II. After World War II, the US and Soviet Union both embraced anti-imperialism in order to expand their spheres of influence in the Third World at the expense of the European powers. They wanted the British and French out of Africa so that they could move in.

5.) Fifth, the combination of decolonization, anti-racism, political correctness and independence led to disaster in nearly every country in sub-Saharan Africa. The only possible exception is Botswana which has wisely managed its wealth from diamond mining. Most African states were barely prepared for independence and even those that had developed a native intelligentsia and some degree of Western institutions like Ghana destroyed themselves pursuing Afrocentric Marxism. Thrusting independence on African states that were grossly unprepared for it created nothing but misery for the vast majority of several generations of Africans who ended up under “big men” like Mobutu and Mugabe.

6.) Sixth, the same thing had happened in Haiti and Liberia long before it overwhelmed the rest of sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean. It is worth noting that the states where “white supremacy” lasted the longest like Guadeloupe and Martinique or Barbados and South Africa led to a higher standard of living for blacks. Compare Haiti to Guadeloupe and Martinique.

7.) Finally, it eventually got so bad in sub-Saharan Africa that Europeans intervened to put a stop to the civil wars in Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast and Liberia, tried to stop the clan violence in Somalia, split South Sudan from Sudan, intervened in Darfur, rescued Ethiopia and the entire Sahel from famine, fed the Hutu refugees who fled from the Rwandan genocide, etc. The UN has more or less taken over Haiti. Sub-Saharan Africa would be vastly better off today if it had remained pacified under colonialism until it had learned to become prosperous like Hong Kong.

“Woke” journalists are condemning John Wayne for pointing out the obvious truth that sub-Saharan Africa was grossly unprepared for independence. It was their romantic attitudes that destroyed Congo, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Guinea-Bissau and lots of African states.

broew #fundie pinoyexchange.com

As all honest people who do not lie to make those who are inferior feel better, we know women and girls are useless, primitive creatures. They cannot do anything alone, they would always require some sort of assistance from a male. Women always claim to be independent, however, that is false and it is just another way for females to get attention. Little immature girls always need attention, because they get lonely and cry. They never stop whining because they never seem to grow up and act their age. Will they ever have anything in their boring pathetic shameful lives than to be playing with their doll houses and touching that shameful untidy bean like clitoris on top of that ugly smelly mouth like thing (A.K.A vagina)? I do not care whether they flunk like some girls I have known because they don’t pay attention in class or because they fall asleep, but I just wish they would stop complaining just because they are jealous of males. I know girls get really jealous easily, and they become angry when their labium is getting too uncomfortable in their pants or their tampons and sanitary napkins get disgusting. Oh well, girls will be girls. Girls know (Or should know) that people lie to them to make themselves feel better becasue there is nothing good about them.

Here are SOME of the things boys and men are better at than primitive pathetic women and girls. I could not post all, as there is way too much:
1) Proven by insurance companies, girls are horrible drivers; in fact, the top worst 5 drivers are women
2) Girls die from many more diseases involving their untidy vagina’s and breasts.
3) We mature faster, we don't act like giggling dimwitts.
4) Girls are less creative, and from what I have seen, they lack skill in anything which takes imagination and creativity.
5) We are proud about ourselves, unlike girls who don’t like talking about themselves because they are ashamed.
6) Our statements are not based on opinion, unlike girls.
7) We can get away with speaking however we want on the internet.
8) We always get the upper hand in contests.
9) In some countries, girls are disposed of due to their uselessness.
10) They cannot carry on the family name.
11) Being a man is a compliment, being womanish isn’t.
12) Boys have way more useful skills than girls.
13) We can throw.
14) Bratty little girls are always scolded by their parents.
15) We are the dominant group.
16) We have better social skills
17) We are not lazy
18) The man of the house = the boss of the house
19) We don’t stuff tampons up bleeding holes.
20) We don’t have smelly vaginas that are always getting infected
21) We don’t need to use sanitary napkins
22) We are more successful at work and school, instead of flunk all the time
23) We don’t have gross habits
24) We don’t have labia that annoyingly changes color
25) We are not disgusting and smelly creatures that need to put on perfume.
26) We have merits
27) We never have to feel the pain of giving birth
28) We don’t need makeup to make ourselves look better. Girls NEED them.
29) We don’t get cheated on easily and lose our money
30) We don’t need to sit down whenever we go to the bathroom.
31) Our wives do all they can to make us happy.
32) We never have to make sandwiches ourselves.
33) Our private areas are not untidy and messy.
34) Every hero is a male
35) We aren’t the helpless girls who always need help from boys.
36) We get to boss you around.
37) We can style our hair more than one different way.
38) We don’t all look the same
39) We are funny when we try to be, unlike girls and women who are least funny when they try.
40) We are able to think and talk with the “head” on our shoulders.
41) ^We don’t talk with our vaginas when looking for a relation
42) Always being right.
43) We aren’t affected by rejection.
44) We don’t cry or get upset as easy as a baby.
45) We complete tasks without assistance.
46) We have greater pride.
47) We think before we do.
48) We don’t get in the way when trying to help.
49) We don’t have any flaws.
50) One man can have as many women as we want.
51) More fun being me.
52) We do not hide from people we have crushes on.
53) We don’t faint so easily.
54) We get to drive without crashing.
55) We don’t have panic attacks.
56) We are stronger against alcohol.
57) We are braver.
58) We are taken seriously.
59) We don’t hate each other.
60) We can draw better.
61) We are better at all classes, even in P.E.
62) We are so perfect that we need to make the women feel better about themselves.
63) We rule the world.
64) We create everything important in life.
65) We get to hang out with our friends without being jealous of each other.
66) We have a great time in life.
67) We have a purpose in life, people remember great men much more than women.
68) We take part in the government.
69) We never have to worry about dishes.
70) We don’t have a hard time getting along with anyone around us.
71) We don’t need to worry about broken nails.
72) It is impossible to offend us.
73) Are not afraid to say our birthdays.
74) The ability to drive.
75) The ability to remain calm in difficult situations.
76) Never having to worry about a **** punt in the clitoris.
77) Never have to hide a stretched out labia.
78) We have a good image.
79) We can surpass girls and women even in jobs considered feminine.
80) We have confidence in ourselves, and a positive self-concept.
81) We can adapt to any environment.
82) We have always been superior in the history of man.
83) ^History on MAN
84) Mankind, not womenkind
85) We value loyalty over inanimate objects.
86) We are not greedy and selfish.
87) We don’t stuff ourselves with food and get fat.
88) Women and girls love us.
89) We are not secretly being kept as low-class family members.
90) We are smarter.
91) We can do jobs that require brainwork.
92) We don’t get love crazy.
93) We have better things to do in life than play with dollhouses
94) We don’t need to worry about how we look, because we always look great.
95) We don’t spend hours combing our already perfect hair.
96) Girls have to give chocolates on Valentine ’s Day.
97) We don’t need to wait for a nice handsome strong boy to comfort us.
98) We don’t look at our private parts and go “eww, how can anyone be attractive to this?”
99) We don’t have an annoying labia that gets uncomfortable in out pants.
100) We don’t have to put makeup every morning.
101) You are limited to seating posture.
102) Our jealousy never gets the better of us. Girls get jealous of their friends and boys, start an immature fight.
103) A short urethra leads to waking up wet in bed.
104) When you’re turned on you don’t get wet and disgusting.
105) We don’t have to trip over high heels.
106) We will never get breast cancer.
107) We will never get vaginal yeast infection.
108) Your voices sound the same and dull.
109) We will never break our bones from failing at P.E class.
110) Our body structure is made stronger.
111) We can run.
112) We will never know the feeling of being kicked in the vagina, and the foot going into that second mouth between a girls legs.
113) We don’t have a shameful bean like clitoris.
114) Our hair doesn't get in the way.
115) We dont have to piss blood every month.
116) During puberty the whole world doesn't know!
117) We don't leave used tampons in the toilet, or drop them on the hallway of the school.
118) We don't need to pretend our clothes and shoes are comfortable when they are not.
119) We don't need to pretend to think we are the best, we already are.
120) Our "We are better" reasons are not outdated and false.
121) We cook better. Image of a chef or cook is a man.
122) Did I mention the time two girls in my class could not make it to 10th grade? There were only like 12 people in the class and two girls flunked. I guess it was expected, girls are always in the danger of FLUNKING.
123) We don’t need to worry about stretch marks.
124) We have logic skills.
125) We can go to the bathroom alone.
126) Our formal clothing isn’t just a simple piece of cloth.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut #fundie #mammon brianniemeier.com

The Left has gone from strength to strength while Conservatives wring their hands and posture about possibly thinking about looking into taking it under advisement to maybe do something after the next election. This is because the enemy has the confidence of their convictions, and our supposed leaders have neither confidence nor convictions.

Political and economic crises are collateral damage in the real battle between the West's foundational Christian faith and an invading hysterical death cult. Republicans tried to slow the rate of spiritual attrition with appeals to normal Americans' sense of disgust and the free market. They failed. Atomized individualists will fare no better with empty demands to be left alone to smoke and copulate according to their personal preferences.

The decision rapidly approaching us all comes down to a choice between eking out a wretched existence as despised tax cattle in a heathen tech-fiefdom or living in nations where public life is informed by Christian faith and morals.

You'd much rather live in the latter, I assure you. So would David Atkins.The last normal man leaving California will have to pry Dave off his ankle.

NB: Since we are now living in Combat Frame XSeed's back story, it behooves you to support the record-breaking XSeed: S crowdfunder to get all four prophetic books. We've got a host of new perks to choose from, including Series 4 Trading Cards, the Illustrated CF Tech Guide, and CFXS Card Game Playtesting!

We're also down to our last Build-a-Mech and Pro Editing perks, so claim yours now!

Ann Barnhardt #fundie barnhardt.biz

Because remember, Diabolical Narcissists, like the fallen angels they mirror, are INVETERATE AND FACILE LIARS. Projection is a specific form of lying.

Unless you have been in a very, very deep coma for the past half century, you have seen this on a daily basis out of the political class. If I may be so bold, every day I see you all who still cling to the legitimacy of the political system trying to square the circle and process these events as if the Constitutional Republic still existed and this isn’t kabuki theater entertainment, and the term “mind screwed” leaps to mind, indeed.

Every time a politician puffs himself up and starts bloviating about “fiscal irresponsibility”, “disregard for the Constitution” or any such thing, whilst committing capital crimes on a near-daily basis – crimes of treason, crimes against humanity, and crimes against peace that literally merit execution, this is the quintessence of “projection”.

Having the people who exposed the PlannedParenthood baby parts trafficking prosecuted for attempted baby parts trafficking is societal end-stage projection.

Hillary Clinton railing that all women who report rape should be assumed to be telling the truth while she has spent her entire adult life character assassinating (and possibly having murdered) women who were raped by her serial rapist husband is societal end-stage projection.

Judas Iscariot lecturing Our Lord and the other Apostles about THE POOR (TM) and how the flask of spikenard Mary was anointing Our Lord with should be sold and given to THE POOR (TM), while being himself a thief (John 12: 3-6). Yeah, that’s projection. Just a l’il bit. L’il bit.

When our lord and savior jorge bergoglio, a textbook diabolical narcissist and likely sociopath, rails, for example, against “namecalling” and “labeling”, whilst delivering homily after homily doing exactly that – Hor-hay project-ay. The best example of this is in Bergoglio’s um, document, Evangelii Gaudium, specifically the jawdroppingly oblivious paragraph 94. Behold:

94. This worldliness (said the man who is completely obsessed with being adored by the world) can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console (like Soul Annihilation, or false ecumenism, or “who am I to judge?”, for example?) and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers (I’m in charge around here! All authority rests in me! I’LL TAKE THEIR HATS…!) and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past (like 1974?). A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic (wheee!) and authoritarian elitism (WHEEEEEE!!), whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others (“O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men…” said the inveterate namecaller, literally AS HE IS NAMECALLING), and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying (said the pathological, persistent namecaller). In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others (like when he refuses to genuflect to the Consecrated Host, and tells atheists NOT to convert so that they can continue to amuse him). These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism (said the man who openly preaches humanism). It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity (said the most violent and enthusiastic adulterer of Christianity, well, since his homeboy Luther).

In micro terms, a Diabolical Narcissist will tell you that you are insecure, needy, self-absorbed, judgmental – whatever the DN is, he will accuse you of being that. If he is a liar, then YOU are the liar. If he is a cheater (assuming a romantic relationship or marriage), then he will inevitably accuse YOU of cheating. If he is stealing from you, he will accuse you of stealing from him. If he is acting like a child, he will accuse you of acting like a child. If he is lazy, he will accuse you of being lazy. If he drinks too much, he will accuse you of drinking too much whether you do or not. I could go on like this ad infinitum.

Alia_Harkonnen #sexist reddit.com

Female Personality Evolution

Despite most of them being fuckable, women have to compete too. Every woman wants to not be like other women but her ability to climb up the ranks of uniqueness depends on many factors, such as her intelligence, looks, environment, inborn personality, creativity, and more. This list is quite simplified but it helps define female evolution from its simplest forms to the most complex ones.
Goal is simple and universal to all but the last type: “To maximize number of sustainable high quality orbiters and to obtain the greatest possible appreciation and commitment level from the best available Chad.”
LEVEL 1: Basic Stacy
Life revolves around being validated on social media, make up, identifying with Beyonce's songs, and Chads cock. When eventually too old for Chad to keep on fucking, she sells herself to the highest bidder, has kids, gets fatter, dies.* Chad of Choice: Justin Bieber
*keep in mind, if attractive enough, she doesn’t have to compete with anyone below level 8. Especially in Gym Stacy version, which is Basic Stacy attending gym.
LEVEL 2: Basic Stacy Deluxe
Same exact script but with some thought put into rationalizing and romanticizing it to sound deeper than it is. For example, social media obsession is actually her networking or being artistic, and the top 40 songs she identifies with are ballads sang by crap female singers with great vocal range such as Adele, which in her social group counts as having a taste. Will finish college and have some type of career in something like education, and if she ends up purposely unemployed with kids, she'll base her decision on research. She likes Chad because of his confidence and personality and when she gets pumped and dumped she'll actually overcome an abusive relationship. Chad of Choice: Christian Grey
LEVEL 3: Good Girl
Average in every single way, and less attractive than her Stacy friends without actually being ugly, she usually went unnoticed. She appeals to men by being decent and stable, which is what many look for especially in comparison to her friends who can get sponsorships just for fucking around. Often from religious or at the very least overprotective families. She doesn’t drink, doesn’t do drugs, doesn’t sleep around, is average in school, wants to marry and be a mom, and soon enough when removed from school setting where she’s surrounded by more flashy girls, she finds men who are very happy with this offer. What these husbands to be don’t understand is that they bore her to tears, that she dreams of the same Chads who fuck her best friend she’s living vicariously through, and that the only reason she isn’t living it up is fear. She’s a ticking time bomb that will blow up and result in an especially shocking affair, divorce, and sexual exploration (drunk orgies) later in life. Chad of Choice: Her beta boyfriend’s alpha best friend or her best friend Stacy’s Chad
LEVEL 4: Basic Tomboy
Can range from attractive to ugly, this one is just smart enough to perceive than despite all the attention, men don't really value basic Stacy and her "interests", especially once in a relationship with her. Being interesting doesn’t come naturally to her due to complete lack of original thought, so instead of copying basic Stacies from her circle, she copies basic Norman/Chad in an attempt to get an edge over other girls by being more fun and in tune with the male brain. So she passionately follows sports, denounces anything fancy and girly, wears only natural looking make up, and forces herself upon a group of male friends who accept her because she lets them fuck her. The other part of her personality focuses on desperately trying to please every stereotypical male desire that stereotypical Stacy stereotypically fails at. This one is a treat for the right kind of guys since in her endless quest to prove how non difficult she is and how much she gets the male mind, she tolerates being cheated on, makes sandwiches, embraces porn, and takes it up the ass. Chad of choice: male best friend who is alpha in her pack - this one doesn’t annoy men with celebrity crushes, and they aren’t masculine enough for her anyway
LEVEL 5: Quirky fat girl
Unattractive enough when compared to 50% of Stacies around her, and not athletically or socially talented enough to be one of the guys, this one is under the impression she developed a personality. That means putting a lot of thought into standing out. Usually this is achieved through elaborate and irritating fashion choices such as wearing something from the 50ies or making a certain colored lipstick her thing. She also reads. Young adult fiction, of course. Thinks she's a bit of a geek cause she talks to her more nerdy male friends about Harry Potter and acts like she too has a crush on Emma Watson. Attempts humor a lot, think Amy Schumer. Men actually can't stand her but is a relatively easy fuck during her younger days which leads to resentment and turning to popular feminism later in life. Then she becomes a typical twox/askfemales poster explaining how women wear make up for themselves and how objectified she felt that one time when a drunk guy catcalled her although/because she knows he was actually addressing her friend. Has an office job and cats. Chad of Choice: supporting vampire character from Twilight whose fantasy gay relationships she writes fanfictions about (she knows the saga sucks but it’s her “guilty pleasure”)
LEVEL 6: Tomboy Deluxe (also known as The Gamer Girl)
Good looking and a bit smarter than the average tomboy, she doesn’t have to sell herself short to get an edge over basic Stacy. Claims to get along better with men but makes sure to look cute during. She wants her beta orbiters to really worship her and finds she can get more adoration from the romantic “nerdy” crowd. There she can also find Chads with better earning potential and more willingness to commit than when fishing among average jocks. Since she perfected the formula of mixing universally popular geeky interests (as long as they don’t require too much effort getting into) and cleavage, her ego is over the roof. This also makes her get bored of most men (never the attention though) which makes her sadistic until the right Chad comes along and makes her his bdsm bitch. Chad of Choice: The Joker
LEVEL 7: The Intellectual
Smarter than Gamer Girl, this one is actually able to read a book that isn’t young adult fiction and watch a three hour long black and white European movie where everyone smokes and feels unhappy. She gets some form of personal pleasure from it although mostly just because she knows she’s one of the rare ones who get it. Got into a decent college and will never miss the chance to mention her degrees, including during online arguments. Normally tries to get at least a few of those because being a college student is important to her identity. Is a more advanced level feminist, environmentally and politically aware, liberal, likes to think she’s cynical but is really just sarcastic when applicable. Worked hard to obtain resting bitch face and to appear as disinterested with everything as possible, including sex. Has few friends with benefits among her philosophy student male friends who validate her as a fascinating, smart and witty individual she’s not. Once they turn exclusive men tend to develop deep loathing for her, which is fine because she loathes them back. Chad of Choice: Her philosophy or English literature professor, at least until they finally have sex
LEVEL 8: Manic Pixie Dream Girl
Very beautiful face that always made men idolize her over slutty big tittied Stacies. Never really felt overly pressured to compete with women in her surrounding because men always fell in love with her whenever she smiled at them. Isn’t completely dumb but her energy is mainly focused on unproductive self analysis because everyone convinced her she's fascinating. What she needs validated is that this is really true, because on some level she knows that she is actually pretty boring. Her challenge is picking the right Chad worth settling for, and in the process she breaks many men’s hearts and egos. She doesn’t really know what to focus on and doesn’t like to feel like a bad person, so she deals with her hypergamy by creating a very flaky, inconsistent personality that mirrors adored and special types of women in popular culture. Often turns to drugs out of boredom but without seriously committing to them either, and develops existential depression every time she gets too settled into anything, because she is never sure if she’s missing out on something better. She looks for artistic talent Chads to provide what she herself can’t in her hopeless, exhausting attempts to be creative. Her taste in art boils down to her appreciating whatever is pretentious enough to make her think she doesn't get it. Chad of Choice: Lead singers from hipster bands such as Arctic Monkeys
LEVEL 9: The Unicorn
Had at least one big trauma or unhappy childhood which fucked her up, combined with receiving extreme adoration from men later in life. This created a fun mix of insecurity and ego, and a few mental disorders. She is usually a very sexually conflicted asexual. She has a good ability to at least subconsciously read people and she adapts her personality to mirror the fantasies of the men she is talking to. This is because she is always looking to be everyone’s everything. Her introductions are great, after which she enters a depressive phase and then goes into total destruction mode. Because she wants to leave a lasting impact without restricting herself to one person or one life, she does it by leaving scars so that they think of her even in her absence. She can’t fall in love with individual men, and is mainly solipsistic. Thinks of herself as completely emotionally empty and most likely is an addict, but can keep on bouncing back for a while due to everyone in the world wanting to support her. Chad of Choice: N/A
Level 10: Level 9 that manages to murder you and through it become the most significant person in your life while also being free of you and able to play the same crucial role in other people's lives. Role only reserved for a small percentage of female psychopaths, but if you're searching for one, places like this is where you find them so don't stop believing....

David Garrett #fundie returnofkings.com

(Submitter's note: SPOILER ALERT!)

Why Star Wars: The Force Awakens Is A Social Justice Propaganda Film

Spread my warning across the galaxy, Padawans.

The Force Awakens is spectacularly replete with the handiwork of the avowed Social Justice Warrior JJ Abrams. So where can I possibly start in my criticisms? From the casting, which puts minorities and women incessantly and ridiculously in your face to make a political point (not tell a story), to the laziest of all space battles, the problems with the Episode 7 are more than numerous.

Let’s make no mistake: Abrams is a capable filmmaker, when he wants to be. Parts with General Hux, especially his speech and the destruction of the Hosnian system, are glorious. The visuals, not just those with CGI, are stunning. Abrams’ mission, though, is to distract viewers with impressive scenes and some chunks of capably written dialogue so as to implant his take on “girl power” and safe spaces for non-whites.

The Mary Sue of all Mary Sues

Is there anything she can’t do after reading a third wave feminist tract?
The female Rey, who it is heavily implied is Luke’s daughter, is the most underdeveloped character yet in over 14 hours of Star Wars films. Her story arc is practically-speaking non-existent and only the veneer of her sadness about her family leaving her on Jakku is painted over it. Whereas with other major Force-wielders in the series their abilities have previously developed or are developed over years, Rey seemingly does it in less than 12 seconds, rather than parsecs. Her whole trajectory in the film reeks of “god mode”, which for non-gamers like myself refers to the cheat codes that make a game character invincible.

Big question: did she fart in the wind on Jakku and the blowback from the desert winds grew her Force powers to monolithic proportions? That’s the only possible explanation.

In the case of Anakin Skywalker in the prequels, by contrast, we learn that he is the only human pilot to engage in pod racing. His mechanical know-how has been honed over some years, culminating in his construction of both his own pad racer and the droid C-3PO. And when he destroys the droid control ship above Naboo, it is largely as a result of his good fortune, not just long-acquired skill. A decade later and with continuous training, he additionally fails to best Count Dooku on Geonosis.

Two hours into the first film, with no training, Rey beats Kylo Ren. Four hours into the original trilogy, and with the training of Ben Kenobi and Yoda, Luke loses his right hand. Go girls!
Cast your mind back to the original trilogy, too. Aside from a little kid’s play with his father’s lightsaber at Ben Kenobi’s hermit pad and onboard the Millennium Falcon, Luke does not wield the weapon at all in A New Hope, let alone in combat against the likes of a Vader. He does destroy the Death Star as a very novice X-wing pilot, but this is after years of him taking out his stuck-on-bloody-Tatooine frustrations on womp rats in his T-16. Moreover, Luke would have been burnt space toast without the intervention of Han Solo and the Falcon. Oh, and in The Empire Strikes Back, after the tutelage of Yoda, he still gets his hand cleaved off by Vader.

So I am meant to believe that Rey could savage and nearly kill her presumed cousin Kylo Ren, whether he is injured or not? Ren is not yet a Vader in his powers. That much is clear. But this is the man who helped slaughter, as a boy or teenager, basically all of the talented pupils of Luke Skywalker. Luke then disappears and Kylo Ren is given more or less free rein, only to be wounded once by Chewbacca’s crossbow, once by apparently non-Force-sensitive Finn (“This is for slavery, whitey!”) and three times by Rey (“Fuck the patriarchy!”). Fuck off—that’s a plot fueled by meth.

To boot, Rey’s piloting and mechanical skills, to the point of knowing everything, is mind-boggingly “get more women in STEM” in its motivations. When she starts teaching Han Solo about the Falcon, things become breathtakingly contrived. It’s as if Abrams was paid by a female science scholarship foundation to drum up some public service announcements via film.

The plot is IQ-damagingly dumb

They put twenty times more effort into the parade than organizing the base defenses. And they didn’t learn from either the first or second Death Star debacles. Or Abrams and his writing team were too busy making Rey a goddess.
I take no issue with some of the artistic license Abrams uses in The Force Awakens. How the First Order managed to create a sun-sucking super weapon on a preexisting ice planet can be explained one day by some talented PhD graduate from the University of Coruscant. So, too, can the appearance of the Starkiller’s death beams and the destruction of the Hosnian system in the sky above far removed Takodana.

What matters, though, is the plot. Scientific ambiguities and inaccuracies can be tolerated if the story functions. But it’s entirely lacking here. For a start, the film borrows from or plain copies so many elements of A New Hope that I lost count. A non-exhaustive list would include a girl being held captive at the flagship facility of a military junta, a space battle to prevent the noble guerrillas’ base from being obliterated, and the death of an older character just as the younger infiltrators are about to leave for home. For the sake of free words, I cannot mention them all.

Beyond just the formulaic plot, here are a few of the frankly stupid elements of the story:

Finn just happens to be an ex-sanitation worked at Starkiller Base, in a galaxy where the First Order forces are now so numerous and powerful that the New Republic has to use the Resistance as a weak proxy to fight it. So he knows where to find the oscillator, which will destabilize and then obliterate the planet if destroyed. Makes perfect sense!
Both in its size and complexity, Starkiller Base makes the two Death Stars look like plasticine renderings. Yet there is no fleet to protect it? And a paucity of very ineffective turbolaser batteries and TIE fighter squadrons? A Resistance member at their headquarters light years away mentions them losing half their X-wings during the battle, as if that was so hard when they launched about, um, three and a half of them.
The amazingly overblown female character Captain Phasma is held at gunpoint and forced to lower Starkiller Base’s shields. These shields can be lowered so easily and without the immediate knowledge of General Hux or someone else? Oh, please, spare me.
Han Solo exits hyperspace no more than a few hundred metres from the surface of the Starkiller planet. And he announces it with “Now!” Hooray! Base infiltrated with common sense!
Finn is likeable but nevertheless a glorified white knight. Trained from just after birth to be a fighting machine, he does nothing relative to Rey and devotes the whole film to trying to protect her.

Tick the boxes with plenty of female and non-white characters

Game of Thrones’ Jessica Henwick was a cast a female X-wing pilot. Again, cast for her race and gender.
You can sniff out Abrams’ leanings from the start. As First Order troopships prepare to land to take out a village on Jakku, the first villager who pulls out a a blaster in defense is a woman. And it is some sort of big, mounted-looking one! This girl power is really paralleled in our world, where millions of young Western girls are so keen to protect their village or country that they won’t even join up, as their male contemporaries are forced to, in places like Finland and South Korea during peacetime. Or make the slightest squeak about the double standard. Well done, JJ.

Captain Phasma is given command of the First Order’s elite stormtroopers but she has the same biology as in our world, where no woman has ever passed the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course. Another female stormtrooper reports to Ren about the failed attempt to locate Rey. And, after years of pretty much male-only recruitment, the New Republic’s affirmative action policies have been copied by the First Order, with large numbers of female military panel operators, technicians and officers.

The same goes for the racial choices. Insert a token female Asian and black male pilot. Black and Asian pilots were actually first done long ago (in Return of the Jedi) but JJ needs more, more, more! All while the plot suffers. Funny how an overwhelmingly male military combat force in a film is considered “unrealistic” when it is almost a carbon copy of our own reality in 2015.

Do not watch this film (at least by paying)

Pretty much sums it up.
Somebody has to watch it and for ROK that person is me. Our proprietor Roosh has refused to and all power to him and anyone else who has abstained. It helps when a limited few of us view it, to pick it apart piece by piece. An understanding of how entertainment is being used to propagandise acceptable social narratives is important.

It’s laughable how critics can butcher the revelation in the prequels that the Force is just the interaction of symbiotic organisms called midi-chlorians and other living things but laud The Force Awakens as a piece of sophisticated, “progressive” filmmaking. Some outlets have even resorted to naming and implicitly shaming critics who disliked this new addition. For a good parody of the pro-SJW obsessions of The Force Awakens, see Steven Crowder’s recent takedown.

For the time being, when it comes to deciding whether to see this film, take evasive action. It’s a trap.

Ai Jun #fundie globaltimes.cn

Have Western media given up duty of objective reporting?

Time magazine recently published an article about Mihrigul Tursun, a Uyghur woman who claimed she came from a Xinjiang vocational training center, and tweeted a video clip of her testimony of alleged torture with tears and sobs.

I did an experiment: Sending the link to ordinary Chinese I know. Most of them laughed when they heard Tursun's testimony. "It's nonsense," was their first reaction. Why did they react this way? The question should be left for editors from Time magazine to answer. If they treated her testimony more skeptically, figured out how outdated was the language she used and whether her remarks were reasonable, then the magazine wouldn't have made such a fool of itself. China has made enough explanation. But those editors are still unimaginably ignorant of China. Will more explanation work?

Similar reports and interviews with Tursun can be found in many other Western media outlets. Western media love her, as if they hit the jackpot and finally seized the testimony of a witness to attack China, while being so indifferent to all the loopholes in her words.

Some foreigners buy Tursun's stories as they have a severe misunderstanding of China which stems from ignorance. Quite a few Westerners still believe that China is generally an underdeveloped country where its people work in sweatshops and have very little freedom. Does China have cars? Does China have electricity? Do Chinese love freedom? These are the tip of the iceberg of questions raised on the Quora question-and-answer website in 2017.

It is supposed to be the mainstream media's responsibility to answer these questions with objective and comprehensive information. Sadly, editors from Time have no basic knowledge of China and they have become the creators and spreaders of rumors.

Their mind-set is still stuck in the Cultural Revolution. Before publishing relevant articles, they might have hardly had any chance to actually visit China or talk to a real Chinese. How can people trust their reports?

Tursun's stories alike are hardly new. It happened more than once that the testimonies given before the US Congress were found to be false with fabricated stories. The purpose was to support US political and military actions.

It is unfortunate to see Time magazine, which enjoys an influential readership among US intellectuals, degenerating into one of the media that focuses more on selling eye-catching, groundless stories rather than proven facts.

At least these reports showed some insights into the US perception of China. Why did the trade war occur? Why are there always radical thoughts against China in the US? Why is there constant untrue speculation about the number of Muslims who have been sent to vocational training centers, which can be 1 million today or 2 million tomorrow? One can't help but wonder if the Western media have given up their responsibility to objective reporting.

Matt Barber #fundie barbwire.com

[From an article titled, "Jesus Joins the NRA":]

In response to the explosive global threat of Islamic terrorism, Wayne Lapierre, president of the National Rifle Association (NRA), recently observed, "When evil knocks on our doors, Americans have a power no other people on the planet share: the full-throated right to defend our families and ourselves with the Second Amendment."

But it's not just a Second Amendment right.

It's a God-given right.

Or so says Jesus.

He told His disciples, for instance, "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe" (Luke 11:21).

Additionally, as he was preparing to selflessly surrender Himself for imminent crucifixion, He likewise encouraged His followers to arm themselves for imminent self-defense, saying, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" (Luke 22:36).

Contrary to "progressive" wishful thinking, that sword wasn't for opening letters.

And the modern equivalent of the sword is the gun.

But what, you ask, of the verses that say, "Turn the other cheek" (see Matthew 5:39), "Live by the sword, die by the sword," (see Matthew 26:51), and "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord" (see Romans 12:19)?

Those who exploit these and other scriptures to suggest that Christ forbade self-defense, up to and including the use of justifiable deadly force, are taking these passages out of context. Christ's "turn the other cheek" comment referred specifically to forgoing revenge and to being persecuted for His name's sake by those who hate Christianity. It does not suggest that we parents must passively hand over our children to demonic Islamists so they can rape and behead them in our presence.

[...]

Moreover, Christ's "Live by the sword, die by the sword" reproach of Peter, when taken in context, clearly refers, explicitly, to instances, or a lifestyle, wherein one affirmatively acts from an offensive rather than a defensive posture. When God says that vengeance is His, he means that we "shall not murder" or otherwise take revenge for some perceived wrong. Vengeance falls within God's purview alone.

So, again, it's biblically unfounded to suggest that, when the shooting starts, and if there is no escape, Christians must line up like sheep to the slaughter.

[...]

No, the Bible is clear. Christians may - indeed we should - arm and defend ourselves against evildoers.

[...]

Jesus did say, "Blessed are the peacemakers."

So I'll be keeping my Peacemaker within reach.

Just in case.

Khem_Allah #fundie assatashakur.org

Well, well, well…the white devil lawmakers of the state of New York have finally made marriage between nasty, same-sex, freak monsters lawful, thanks to the support of the so-called pro-family conservatives. Imagine that; now, with the political concurrence of the leaders of American society, gay sex monsters named “Bob” and “Bill” can pretend to be married, and pack stinking rectal feces in the name of Christianity! image With the political blessing of your local lawmakers, hairy lesbian super-butches like “Sally” and “Heather” can now pretend to be married sex vermin who crawl under each other and nibble like nasty sewer rats. image Oh my! America continues to sink precipitously into savagery by the micro-seconds.

Liberal Negroes parrot white devils and say that it is political suicide for elected officials to oppose such lifestyle of decadence. But let’s think about this for a second folks. What civilized persons in their right minds would favor such a political posture? Spineless jellyfish who pass for political leaders and who promote feces-packing, man-humping, gay marriages are beneath honor and should be ashamed of themselves. They care not for the true responsibility of a leader to always uphold the highest standard of civilization. Instead, today’s so-called leaders would rather sell their souls to the blue-eyed devils by promoting homosexuality and all manner of degeneracy, just so they can keep a sweet and cozy political relationship with the white establishment.