Similar posts

Hunter Wallace #wingnut occidentaldissent.com

[From "American History Series: Review: Sociology for the South, or, The Failure of Free Society"]

The 1840s and 1850s were a time much like our own.

In the wake of the Second Great Awakening, an endless tidal wave of moral condemnation of the South poured forth from the Eastern press and Eastern politicians. Inspired by George Bancroft’s vision which was articulated in the volumes of his A History of the United States, 19th century liberalism was gaining traction and putting down roots among Eastern industrial and commercial elites. American society came to be perceived as wicked and in need of immediate and sweeping reform on many fronts. Secular reform and utopian religious movements sprung up all over the deeply unsettled region.

Southern slavery was over two centuries old at this point, but the evangelical religious revival that swept across the East created a new sense of urgency that it needed to be immediately abolished by righteous Yankees in order to stamp out sin, usher in the millennium and create a New Jerusalem on earth. This moment was the dawn of the American Left in a parade of social causes and religious cults: the Millerite movement, the Shakers, the Mormons, and Seventh Day Adventists, Charles Grandison Finney and the doctrine of perfectionism, temperance which culminated in Prohibition, women’s suffrage which culminated in the 19th amendment, opposition to Indian Removal, Transcendentalism, pacifism and opposition to the Mexican War. The various evil seen in need of reform at times was also tobacco, Freemasonry, Catholicism and even marriage which was an obstacle to free love. It was in this social context that abolitionism and racial equality also came to be seen as worthwhile causes.

As the South came under withering attack from these utopian dreamers, Southern conservatives became increasingly defensive and began to explicitly defend slavery as a positive good. Sen. John C. Calhoun led this defense of the South in the Senate for nearly twenty years in the Antebellum era from the Nullification Crisis to his death in 1850. Calhoun’s treatise A Disquisition on Government marked a conservative shift in Southern thought toward order, authority, security and the limits of liberty.

Thomas Jefferson was an ardent republican who represented the first generation of Southerners who abhorred slavery and believed that free blacks could enjoy equal rights in Africa. Liberia was established by his successors as an outlet for this philanthropic purpose. John C. Calhoun represented the second generation of Southerners who came to defend slavery as a positive good and broke with equal rights while remaining largely within the framework of Old Republican thought. Calhoun laid the groundwork for nullification and secession. Finally, George Fitzhugh was the sharpest thinker of the third generation of Southerners who were even more conservative than Calhoun’s generation.

This was the context in which George Fitzhugh wrote Sociology for the South, or, The Failure of Free Society which was published in 1854. The book builds on his earlier pamphlets Slavery Justified and What Shall Be Done With The Free Negroes? which are attached as an appendix.


Sociology for the South is significant because it was a truly radical conservative reimagining of the American Founding as well as a groundbreaking prescription for how to reset the American future. As Louis Hartz described it, the Southern Reactionary Enlightenment was “the great imaginative moment in American political thought, the moment when America almost got out of itself, and looked with some objectivity on the liberal form it has known since birth.” To put it mildly, it is a deeply illiberal book.


George Fitzhugh wasn’t just content to defend slavery like most of his contemporaries. He thought deeply about why slavery was being attacked and the motivations of its assailants. He deeply thought about his own society and its past, present and future. He thought about why the Southern model was good and how best to defend it from its critics. He thought about what was wrong about the Northern model and why it was a failure. In doing so, he laid the foundation for a new Southern conservatism.


In Sociology for the South, Fitzhugh marshaled the Bible, Aristotle, Sir Robert Filmer, Thomas Carlyle and Tory conservatism, the French sociologists and even the critiques of the socialists to launch a blistering counter attack on John Locke, Adam Smith and the political economists and the very roots of liberalism or what he labeled the system of “Free Society.” Fitzhugh was unfamiliar with his contemporary Karl Marx but echoed many of his most scathing criticisms of free-market capitalism.

[...]

George Fitzhugh explicitly saw the Revolution of ’61 as a Tory counterrevolution to the Patriot Revolution of ’76:

[...]

Everything would have worked out fine too were it not for the “pompous inanties of the Declaration of Independence.” The republican structure of the government was sound. The English tradition of constitutional liberty was sound. White identity and the English language, Protestant Christianity and the common law and virtually everything that America started out with that was promising and defined its new national identity was derived from its English parent. America’s vibrant culture of liberty was part of a tradition which was the “accretion” of countless generations of Englishmen – 170 years of the colonial era and further back than that into the time of King Alfred and the Anglo-Saxons in the Middle Ages – and had not sprung into the world from abstract doctrines of Enlightenment philosophers. It was the axioms contained within the Declaration of Independence which 19th century liberalism latched onto to legitimize itself that had wrecked the country and brought about the dissolution of the Union.

Alexander Stephens used Fitzhugh’s Tory theory and language in his Cornerstone Speech. The Confederates preserved the structure of the American Republic while pruning its liberal axioms. Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens both wrote volumes on constitutional liberty.

[...]

In “The Conservative Principle; or, Social Evils and Their Remedies,” Fitzhugh made clear that the slavery principle is synonymous with the conservative principle of order, subordination and government. He was unique in being able to step out of his time and anticipate that the diabolical nature of the liberal system would eventually demolish the social order entirely as it descended into anarchy.

[...]

Liberalism must be rejected.

Frankenstein’s monster has turned on his master and is now rampaging through our streets. The post-World War II attempt by the liberal establishment to base America on nothing more than anti-racism and the axioms of liberty and equality has led us to this dystopia.

Hunter Wallace #racist occidentaldissent.com

[From "Slavery: A Positive Good (2012)"]

Dixie

“But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good – a positive good.”
– John C. Calhoun, 1837

Is there a positive case for the domestic institution of negro slavery?

(1) In slave societies, negroes were a wealth generating economic asset: America’s slaves were worth more than its railroads, banks, and manufacturing industries combined.

In 1861, the average slave was worth $800. In 2009 dollars, a single slave purchased in 1861 would be an asset worth $135,000.

(2) In 1860, 49.8 percent of the population of Barbour County (AL) were slaves.

(3) In 1860, there were 2,717 free families in Barbour County (AL). There were 1,143 slaveholders. 42.1 percent of free families were slaveholders.

(4) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley as a whole, there were 47 slaveholders who owned over 100 slaves. If the average slave was an asset worth $135,000, then each one of these super planters in 1860 had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $13.5 million dollars.

(5) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 270 slaveowners who owned 50 to 100 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then each one of these middling planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $6.7 million dollars.

(6) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,193 slaveowners who owned 20 to 50 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these lower tier planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $2.7 million dollars.

Obviously, the planter class in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley was stupendously wealthy by modern standards – those numbers don’t include their non-slave property or investments and are based on the minimum number of slaves required to belong to each tier.

In 1860, there were 1,150 planters in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley. The planters were only 17.3 percent of slaveholders though. How’s that compared to the stock market?

(7) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,637 slaveowners who owned 10 to 19 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these upper middle class slaveowners had a fortune in slaves alone worth $1.35 million dollars.

(8) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,485 slaveowners who owned 6 to 9 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then the typical middle class slaveowner had a fortune worth $810,000.

(9) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 4,100 slaveowners who owned 1 to 5 slaves. 47 percent of slaveowners in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley belonged to this group. Every one of these slaveowners had at least one slave worth $135,000.

(10) In Barbour County (AL), 42.1 percent of free families were slaveowners – surely, the great majority of them were middle class slaveowners, while only a small minority were planters.

How much is the average negro household worth after 147 years of free society? The average negro household is worth $4,995.

As we have learned from Paul Kersey, the average single black woman in America has a net worth of $5, which is over a 99 percent depreciation in value from 1861. A third of blacks have a negative net worth. They are effectively bankrupt after 40 years and countless billions of dollars of wasted Great Society redistributive spending.

Freedom failed doesn’t quite capture the magnitude of the social and economic disaster that was abolition: it is more like freedom was a world shattering catastrophe that nearly crippled American civilization.

In free society, the average White household might have a net worth of $110,000 in 2012, most of which is locked up in the value of their depreciating suburban home – with both parents working in order to pay income taxes to a federal government that redistributes their wealth to millions of idle tax consuming negro voters.

In slave society, if you owned one slave, you had an asset worth $135,000 in 2009 dollars not counting your property or home, those slaves worked in direct proportion to the leisure time of a single male slaveowning patriarch, and there was no income tax because the government was funded with a revenue tariff.

(11) That’s the rub: under slavery, the negro was a fabulous wealth generating economic dynamo, the ownership of which emancipated White families from the drudgery of wage labor and significantly contributed to our national prosperity.

Under free society, the negro is the single biggest economic albatross in the United States and a civilization wrecking menace to public safety who through the genius of liberal democracy can vote himself a living from taxes and fees on the income and property of White families.

(13) Libertarians: What planter ever emancipated his slaves based on the assumption that liberating them would increase his wealth and make his plantation more productive?

(14) As a commodity, slaves were used as a store of value like gold and silver or stocks and bonds: a single slave in 1850 was worth $80,000 whereas a single slave in 1860 was worth $135,000.

(15) Paul Kersey writes:

“Black unemployment rates are directly correlated to the fact that a great many Black people are unemployable in America’s service economy, save for government/public jobs. Not institutional racism.”

The only known solution to this problem is slavery.

There are any number of industries where the millions upon millions of negroes who have an IQ less than 85 could be profitably employed today as slaves.

They could be put to work immediately as stoop laborers in the construction industry or in the fields harvesting fruits and vegetables. Alternatively, they could at least be hooked up to bicycles and used to manually generate cheap electricity to promote America’s goal of energy independence.

Even today, a slave society could find some use for them. Black women could be employed as domestics as they were in the Jim Crow South. They don’t have to become welfare queens shacking up with Mr. EBT to breed little Ja’Quares Walkers or Trayon Omar Washingtons in the Booker T. Washington housing projects.

If negroes were enslaved in such a way, we could empty our prisons, raise property values, raise per pupil spending on White students, slash law enforcement and court costs, fund an expedition to Mars, and slash the soaring cost of healthcare by curtailing epidemic black obesity.

(16) As far back as the 1830s, free negroes in the Northern states were notorious for elevating crime, destroying property values, and burdening prisons and other social services.

In free societies, the cost of negroes is socialized whereas it was privatized in slave societies: abolition eliminated natural masters (who provided employment for White working class overseers) who had a vested economic interest and legal responsibility for curtailing destructive behavior and promoting productive labor.

(17) Any student of the discipline of negro management in the Old South could have told you that emancipating slaves, blaming White people for all their various failings, and giving them access to drugs and firearms was a recipe for disaster. See the 21,000 black people who have been murdered by other black people in Detroit since 1969.

(18) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that the return on investment on negro education was quite low because of biological racial differences in intelligence.

(19) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that abolition and the politicization of the negro was a recipe for disaster based on previous experiments in abolition in Haiti and the British West Indies.

(20) Slave society promoted conservatism and racial solidarity in the Old South. It also created an indigenous elite that had the wealth and political power to resist the encroachment of the degenerating effects of liberal capitalist democracy.

Note: Virtually all the social ills that are commonly blamed on slavery are actually a consequence of freedom.

Slave societies didn’t tolerate or meekly subsidize negro criminals or flagellate themselves with racial guilt. The negro had no status as a citizen or a voter. He wasn’t a huge drag on our national prosperity as he is today in the 21st century.

Slavery was a positive good. It was a successful social system that broadly distributed wealth among Whites, created an elite invested in white supremacy, cultivated a moral sense based on the cult of honor, and most importantly, acted as a brake on the consolidation of power in Washington.

The success of slavery proved to be its downfall. It was a rival economic system that inspired enormous jealously, fear, and envy of the Slave Power in the North. As we all know, that’s what brought about the War Between the States, destroyed the White Republic created by the Founders, and set America down its path to the present racial disaster.

That’s not the fault of slavery though. It is the fault of slavery’s professed enemies.

Overkill Award

BestCarolina #racist #psycho identitydixie.com

[From "5 Reasons Atlanta Needs the Death Star Treatment"]

It is tempting to say that Atlanta, Georgia – the crime and corruption-ridden sprawling urban hellscape which symbolizes the dystopian nightmare of the New South – should be nuked from orbit by powerful spaceships. However, we do not wish to saddle the good people of Georgia with a large nuclear wasteland. Therefore, it would be much better to simply blast the awful metropolis with the Death Star (single reactor ignition should work).

Then, allow Georgians to reclaim the area as farmland. Maybe they could make a nice state park there. Something wholesome and traditional should surely replace that which is ugly, degenerate and post-modern, should it not? With that in mind, here are five of the top reasons that Atlanta should be blasted with lasers from space.

ONE Extensive Federal investigations have revealed rampant corruption that extends throughout the highest levels of the Black Democrat-governed city. Under the recent Kasim Reed administration, Atlanta was mis-governed like a banana republic. Former Chief Procurement Officer Adam Smith pleaded guilty to taking bribes and was sentenced to 27 months in prison. Mitzi Bickers, a political consultant who led Reed’s campaign efforts and was later appointed head of his Human Services Department, has been charged with taking $2 million in bribes to give city business to certain contractors. These examples just scratch the surface when exploring corruption in the city.

TWO Atlanta is crime-ridden and many areas of the city are dangerous. In 2016 it was named a top 20 murder capital in the American Empire. That year, the violent crime rate in Atlanta was 173% higher than the US national average. Gang violence is a growing problem in the city with Hispanic gangs from Mexico and Central America among the leading culprits.

THREE Around 17% of the 6 million people of the metropolitan Atlanta area care so little about assimilating into our culture that they do not bother to speak our national language. Over half of these foreigners speak Spanish, while a rapidly-growing immigrant population speaks various Asian languages. Taken together this is a huge population. If these foreigners in the Atlanta area were a city unto themselves it would be bigger than the entire metropolitan area of Columbia – the capital of South Carolina!

FOUR The soundtrack for the dystopian concrete jungle of Atlanta is undoubtedly produced by the rap or hip-hop music industry centered in the city. Atlanta has for many years served as a major capital of the US rap scene. Georgia leaders have linked that scene with gang violence and criminality. Rappers have even been shot and killed by fellow gang-bangers while in studio recording albums. The city has long been regarded as the “Black Mecca of the South.”

FIVE Atlanta has an out-sized impact upon the politics of the traditionally conservative Southern state of Georgia, pulling it sharply to the Left. As the city continues to grow, drawing in huge numbers of non-Southern transplants and Third World immigrants, the political future of the Peach State is threatened. Former conservative, mostly-Southern White suburbs are being rapidly transformed by the influx. Cobb County is one of the most populous counties in Georgia and is a prime example of this sad transformation. In 1960, it had about 114,000 people. Today, it has nearly 757,000 people. It voted overwhelmingly for moderate Republican candidate for US president Mitt Romney as late as 2012. That same county voted for the radical Black Leftist candidate for Georgia governor Stacey Abrams by 9 points last year. Demographic revolution, centered in Atlanta, make it a near certainty that Georgia’s traditional conservative majority will lose power at some point in the near future and be replaced by hostile leftists.

CONCLUSION There are many compelling reasons why the awful city of Atlanta should be blasted with lasers from space. The above list could easily be greatly expanded. We do not need Atlanta’s corruption, crime, un-assimilated foreigners, rap culture or radical leftist politics. Dixie – and, indeed, the entire world – would be better off if a hulking battle-station (“that’s no moon, DeAndre!”) reduced the offending city to rubble.

Fear will keep the other Third World cities of Dixie in line. Fear of this battle station.

Mohd Zulkifli Hashim #fundie freemalaysiatoday.com

Rompin council stands by decision to shoot pet dog Barney

PETALING JAYA: The Rompin local council is standing by its decision to shoot a resident’s pet dog last month, despite it wearing a collar with a valid licence.
The district local council’s chief, Mohd Zulkifli Hashim, admitted that the pet dog was killed by the council, in a joint operation with the Pahang Veterinary Department.
The operation, he said in a statement to FMT, was carried out on Aug 22 and 23 to prevent the spread of rabies, and to ensure “public safety”.
“Investigations conducted following the dog owner’s complaint, found that the dog was wandering around Pantai Hiburan Rompin’s public space without the owner’s supervision.
“Owners of licensed dogs should not let their pets roam around without supervision.”
The dog’s owner, Chong Man Sin told FMT a couple of days after the Aug 23 incident, that he found his dog named Barney lying motionless on the ground, at the back of his house, with what he suspected to be a bullet wound to the dog’s body.

However, Mohd Zulkifli clarified that according to the bylaws of the Rompin local council, dog owners must take appropriate steps to ensure their dogs did not wander out of their premises on their own.
The bylaws also state that if a dog is out in public, it must be leashed and walked by its owner.
“Any dog, licensed or not, whose owner cannot be found, can be shot on the council’s instruction, or by anyone who the council gives such power to,” he said.
Chong had told FMT that he and his wife had done everything the law required of them, in order to keep Barney.
They obtained a licence from the Rompin local council, vaccinated him and made sure he was in good health. They even ensured Barney wore a collar at all times so no one would mistake him for a stray.
However, on the morning of Aug 23, Chong found Barney dead, after he forgot to tie up the dog like he usually did every night.

Fundie of the year results 2019 #announcement

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

Religious Fundie: Lady Checkmate (11/17)

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

Go forth and conquer, fellow sockpuppets of Peewee.

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

This one was a draw between these two.

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

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

Moonbat: EmmaRoseheart (7/17)

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

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

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

Racist: Cuyen (9/17)

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

Ableist: Judith Newman (11/17)

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

Grifter: Sandra Porta (8/17)

wut

Mary Sue: Caamib (7/16)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Board: Daily Stormer (9/16)

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

Movement: QAnon (8/17)

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

Submitter: Bastethotep (9/17)

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

Comment: Skidie(1) (6/17)

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

Janet bloomfield #sexist judgybitch.com

Brock Turner is a rapist but not the kind that frightens me.

A guy I train with told me a funny story about mixing martial arts with alcohol. Like me, he’s not really interested in martial arts as a sport, but more in terms of real world applicability. He’s a fighter more than an athlete. He was training with a group who felt the most likely environment in which they would encounter real violence would be a bar, and alcohol would likely be involved, so they convinced their sensei to run a simulation that involved everyone doing tequila shooters, to test their reflexes and muscle memories under the influence. Could they drink tequila and still be able to handle real world violence? They turned the lights down and the music way up, which is not that unusual for a dojo. Lots of stress drills are done in low light, noisy conditions.

And then guzzled tequila.

Everything started out fine. Everyone was jokey and boisterous and having fun with the drills and even singing along to the hokey death metal band. And then tequila 2.0 arrived. When the full effects kicked in, people started getting hurt. The fight took on a whole new dimension. Wrist locks got brutal. People didn’t notice their partners tapping out. Choke holds were a little too enthusiastic. No one waited for a secure hold before reaping. It was mayhem!

It’s funny to hear him tell the story, because from the outside it seems like a terrifying drunken brawl, and it was, but the fighters enjoyed every minute of it. It was fun. Sensei had to cut the class short because people were getting hurt. Being drunk, they didn’t really realize it, and were thoroughly enjoying themselves. The next day, people had bruises and sprains and fat lips and black eyes and swollen joints and stuff that should never happen except by pure accident when sparring. Someone even dropped a 12-6 elbow between his opponent’s shoulder blades, which is pretty much a nuclear elbow strike you don’t pull out lightly. It’s actually sort-of illegal in most martial arts, but perfectly acceptable in self-defense. The fighters agreed to never drunk spar again, although I suspect that was a very effective lesson in teaching them just how much alcohol impaired their ability to use proportional violence.

The real point is that while the sparring was happening, the fighters were having a blast. They were doing what they do: fighting. I’m sure getting out of bed the next day brought a few regrets home, but in the moment, it was fun. The whole story made me think of the Brock Turner case – the Stanford athlete convicted of sexually assaulting a drunk woman outside a fraternity.

Let’s get a few things out of the way right off the bat: do I think Brock Turner is a rapist?

Yes.

Yes, I do. Turner claims he went outside with the woman and they were making out and I believe him. They were both drunk, but she was sloppy drunk and she passed out cold. Turner dragged her behind a dumpster, removed her panties, somehow managed to get rocks and dirt in her vagina, shoved his fingers in her, left her with scrapes and bruises and only stopped assaulting her when a couple guys noticed what he was up to, and then chased Turner down when he ran. Bystanders held Turner until police arrived.

Please note that this is exact opposite of feminist rape culture, in which rape is treated like a joke and condoned by the wider society. No one (except Turner’s father) thinks Turner’s action were amusing or acceptable. The Stanford police were involved right off the bat, the woman was found and taken to hospital, charges were laid and Turner was prosecuted successfully and sentenced to jail, even though the victim can’t remember a single thing about the incident. That doesn’t sound like condoning, celebrating or accepting rape to me. Or to Ashe Schow, who has written a nice explanation of rape culture as it relates to Brock Turner.

But of course, feminists are mad. They’re always mad. They’re mad at Brock because being sentenced to life isn’t harsh enough. Yes, you read that correctly. Turner got a life sentence. No, not in jail. He was sentenced to 6 months in jail, and will likely spend 3 months there, but he will spend the rest of his life on the Sex Offender Registry. That is punishment untempered by mercy, yet not punishment enough to satisfy feminists, ecstatic that they finally found an actual rape victim to get behind.

According to Emily Horowitz, who wrote [i]Protecting Our Kids: How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing Us[/i], sex offender registries don’t keep anyone safer. Speaking to Slate’s Christina Cauterucchi, Horowitz says. ‘Are sex offenders destined to reoffend? Not according to any research—sex offenders have lower recidivism rates than almost any other type of offender. Punishing [Turner] forever and destroying his life doesn’t make anyone safer.’

I’m sure you’ll be shocked to know that feminists don’t care. Read the comments. They want Turner to suffer for the rest of his life. They want him to pay for his idiocy for the rest of his life. They want revenge, not justice. It’s so rare for an actual, unambiguous rape victim to emerge, feminists are practically in shock. Whipping women up in frenzied fear, feminists have convinced almost 100K people to sign a petition to remove the judge who decided to temper Turner’s life sentence with reduced jail time. Justice must not have mercy? I’d be really careful with that demand, feminists. It could bite you in the ass, pretty easily.

The reality here is that Brock Turner is like the fighters who beat the shit out of each other while loaded. Turner has no reputation for being criminally sexually aggressive, but he is a predator. Like all athletes, he channels his natural desire to compete and triumph into a sport, and he was very good at winning. Competitors and predators come down to the same thing. No one wants to tie. It’s a zero sum game. I win. You lose. Civilization is the story of channeling this aspect of human nature into creation, rather than destruction. Brock Turner got drunk and behaved in a criminally foolish manner. An equivalent would be a drunk sparring partner who knocked his partner out and then kept hitting him. It crosses every line and deserves sanction and punishment.

Rapists like Turner don’t frighten me. Avoiding him is as simple as not getting black out drunk and refusing to go make out with him outside, in the dark. The trouble with feminist definitions of rape is that they confuse drunk couples who go outside and have mutually consensual sex, having fun in the moment, with actual rape. That is exactly what happened at Occidental College. Both individuals were drunk, both agreed to have sex, but she regretted it the next morning. If they had both been drunk, and agreed to spar, could she charge him with assault and battery the next day? Occidental says yes.

I say no.

People do stupid shit when they’re drunk. Alcohol lowers inhibitions, which is a key reason people like to drink it. But it doesn’t fundamentally change who you are as a person. The fighters my friend and I talked about did stupid stuff when fighting drunk they would never do sober, but none of them crossed the line into brutally beating an unconscious partner. It was just a kind of crazy, wild playfight that left a few people bruised and bleeding, but no criminal lines were crossed.

Most drunk sex, no matter how much one party or the other might regret it in the morning, is not rape.

What Turner did is rape.

Feminist definitions of regret=rape are now starting to trap women, too. When Rose grabbed herself a drunk guy and fucked him, she thought it was just a good time, had by all. And it was. In the moment. But when morning came and the guy saw he had just boned a fat chick, he turned campus rape laws on her and had Rose expelled.

This is nuts.

And awesome, at the same time. Turnabout is fair play, ladies. If you are going to expand the definition of rape to include sex one person regrets, you’re going to have to accept the uncomfortable truth that men make poor decisions when plastered, too, and stick their dicks in women they wouldn’t glance at twice when sober. If we’re going to call drunk sparring ‘assault’ and criminally prosecute it, any woman who downs a shooter and steps in the ring can be charged.

Is this really the world we want? Young men and women expelled from college, their futures blighted, because they got drunk and did something dumb? No one should be expelled from college for hooking up while drunk. Drunk sex is not rape. Rape is rape. It’s not that hard to tell the difference. Turner is a case study in campus rape. And even he doesn’t deserve a life sentence. He is extremely unlikely to reoffend.

Justice without mercy is cruelty. Is anyone surprised feminists are howling for exactly that when it comes to Turner, and by extension, all men accused of rape? The real danger here is that cruelty can be contagious. I sincerely hope the courts do not bow to the pressure of feminists and remove this judge. That will spread the contagion of feminism and we are already at critical mass.

Never forget that feminism is cancer.

What we really need are a few more fat bitches to get charged with rape. A few brave men are needed, to take one for the team. We need to show everyone the insanity of feminist ideals of ‘justice’.

Any volunteers?

Lots of love,

JB

coconutcurrychicken ,Jackson2615, azrael-legna #psycho reddit.com

[ in response to this post about someone being accused of poisoning ba neighbour's dog ]

coconutcurrychicken:"Maybe I'm heartless, but who gives a shit if a dog dies? Like why does that require police intervention to solve this "crime?" The dogs sound moronic, probably lapped up antifreeze while the owners weren't paying attention."

Jackson2615:"The world over reckless dog owners are letting their mongrel dogs bark constantly which drives the neighbours mad. Its no wonder sometimes someone cracks and takes matters into their own hands. It always amazes me that the barking dog/s don't seem to bother the owners??? As in this case doing the right thing only brings grief, frustration and ultimately NO help from the animal control authorities. BUT as soon as someone cracks the police are all over it trying to pin it on someone. If even 1/2 as much effort was put into making owners keep dogs quiet, especially at night, including removing the dog/s then it would be better for everyone including the dogs."

Azrael-Legna:"If you allow your dog to bark nonstop all the time, then it's 100% your fault if it ends up getting killed. And the people who killed the dog shouldn't be charged with anything, the dog owners should. They're the ones that allowed this to happen.

And that's assuming that someone killed the dog. The dog was obviously untrained, it could have gotten into it's stupid owners antifreeze, and the owners are trying to blame OP for payback for OP daring to not worship his masters (the dogs)."

Carol Brown #fundie americanthinker.com

As the Islamic invasion advances, mosques are proliferating across the United States at breakneck speed. And there appears to be no end in sight.

Since 9/11, the number of mosques in America has grown by 75%. The timing of this is no coincidence. Mosques are a symbol of Islamic supremacism. Islam attacks. Then it plants a triumphal mosque on the battlefield. And another. And another. And another.

The proliferation of mosques is also a sign of our incomprehensible response (or lack thereof) to the threat of Islam.

War has been waged against the United States and what have we done? We have welcomed the enemy with open arms. Dhimmitude has paved the way for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of new mosques since the day nearly 3,000 Americans were murdered in the name of Islam.

If we don’t put an end to this madness, we will ensure the continued assault against us – an assault that, ultimately, will spare no one. (Do you hear that, dhimmis? That includes you.)

Mosques pose a dual risk to Americans. First there is the nature of what is preached inside the walls of the mosque. Second is the nature of the walls themselves.

As to the first point, recent studies show that 80% of mosques preach jihad (through sermons and/or materials) and that more than 95% of Muslims attend such mosques.

But the horror doesn’t end there as one considers the issue of funding. While many Muslims claim they raise the money for mosques within the local community, there is reason to doubt this assertion in many cases. Common sense alone would cause one to question how, for example, tiny communities of Muslims could raise millions of dollars to built gigantic mosques. Common sense aside, there is evidence that shows that 80% of mosques in this country receive funds from Saudi Arabia.

[...]

Do you see a pattern here? It’s the same pattern we see with all aspects of the growing Caliphate as Islam spreads outward from the Middle East to engulf more and more nations. And toward that end there is the ever-present mosque – a place where jihad is preached and in some cases, a place from which the jihadist attack is launched. (If the idea of having jihad attacks launched from mosques across America does not seem plausible, in addition to pondering what I just wrote, look into the 3 stages of jihad.)

[All hyperlinks in original]

ElliotsSecondAscent #sexist reddit.com

[Summary: False dichotomy between "looks are completely irrelevant" and incel crackpottery. Conspicuously silent on numerical results. Also a "wonderful" demonstration of neochauvinists' failures at understanding biology and a nightmare to format.)

The Black Pill backed up by hard data and facts.

Preface:

All cursive text is not my own, they are quoted from the articles sourced under every title.

Black Pill Edition: Female nature
____
The relevance of personality as a petulant farce
____
Small Appetizer
____
Before we start with the more serious studies let me present you a small appetizer to stimulate the intake of the Black Pill.
____
A couple of years ago OkCupid conducted an interesting experiment. January 15th, 2013 was proclaimed by OkCupid as “Love is Blind Day” to celebrate the launch of a blind dating app released on that same day.

During “Love is Blind Day”, pictures were removed from OkCupid for a total of 7 hours and so data was gathered and the way people interacted with each other visibly changed!


As you can see, there was more and deeper conversation with an increase in exchange of personal information. A vast improvement for everyone! So, it seemed.

Here’s what happened next:

• When the photos were restored at 4PM, 2,200 people were in the middle of conversations that had started “blind”. Those conversations melted away. The goodness was gone, in fact worse than gone. It was like we’d turned on the bright lights at the bar at midnight.

Summarized in this graph.

Starting from the moment OkCupid released the photos, conversations died down almost immediately. The conversation life expectancy dropped nearly 30% just two messages later in the thread when the photos were back on.

There was another also another smaller experiment, that can be summarized by this excerpt:

• We took a small sample of users and half the time we showed them, we hid their profile text. That generated two independent sets of scores for each profile, one score for “the picture and the text together” and one for “the picture alone.” Here’s how they compare. Again, each dot is a user. Essentially, the text is less than 10% of what people think of you.

The second graph.

The text makes almost no difference on how you’re viewed.

Lastly, there was also the experiment where Okcupid let people predict personality based on profiles. In this case a beautiful picture strongly correlates with a beautiful personality when you let people be the judge. Third graph.

Conclusion:

Photos have a greater impact on the course of a conversation than the intimacy of that same conversation, which displayed the personality of both correspondents. The text added to your profile meant to introduce your characteristics, plays an insignificant role next to the photo. Your personality will be established in advance primarily based on your photo.

source: https://theblog.okcupid.com/we-experiment-on-human-beings-5dd9fe280cd5

What is beautiful is good, really good.
____
It's commonly known that "looks matter", but have you asked yourself the question: How much do they matter? Especially in regards to the widely and heavily emphasized personality?

Let us take a look in some more professional studies who have pondered this same question.
____
In the year 2015, a study in Italy (subject: social psychology) researched the effects of attractiveness, status and gender on the evaluation of personality.

quote:

• Present research examines the combined effects of attractiveness, occupational status, and gender on the evaluation of others’ personality, according to the Big Five model.

I chose this particular study, because it's recent and the first of it's kind. A myriad of older studies have already concluded that perceiving a person as good looking fosters positive expectations about personal characteristics (1).

• The effects of attractiveness are strong and pervasive. As Langlois et al. (2000) underline in their meta-analysis, attractiveness is a noteworthy advantage for both children and adults in almost every domain. Based on the “what is beautiful is good” effect (Dion et al., 1972), several studies (Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991); Feingold, 1992; Langlois et al., 2000) demonstrated that this phenomenon functions as a stereotype, making the perceived link between appearance and personality larger than the actual link

In short, attractive people are perceived as having far better personalities even when that isn't the case.

• Indeed, people seem to assume that positive interpersonal qualities and physical attractiveness are systematically linked (i.e., a “halo effect”) (Andreoni & Petrie 2008; Callan, Powell, & Ellard, 2007; Smith, McIntosh, & Bazzini, 1999).

Off topic personal note:

It’s not that incels have bad personalities, they are perceived as such because of their looks. Now you’ll say that we possess misogynistic and violent attitudes but ask yourself, was this behavior preempted by the way we were treated or did we grow towards it?


Now to the final closure of this particular study.

• In general, results are in line with the ‘beauty is good’ effect (Dion et al., 1972), as people seem to believe that physical attractiveness implies positive personality traits, but the effects of attractiveness are different for men and women.

The results came in as predicted, with the exception that there were differences for men and women. Attractive men were perceived as more extroverted and open minded than attractive women, creating an advantage for attractive men.

In other words, it’s better to be an attractive man than to be an attractive woman.

• For Extraversion the effect of attractiveness is the same for women and men but is stronger for male targets. Attractiveness has a positive effect on Conscientiousness only for women whereas it increases Openness only for men.

• Thus, overall the “beauty is good effect” seems to be greater for men.

I will not go too deep in the status aspect because it was stated as rather controversial.

source for the cursive text: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873083/


Female nature
____
Excellent genes or providing ability
____
The covering of personality serves as a foundation to grasp in a clearer manner for what I am going to say next. Now, what does a woman want when looking for a mate?

Let's look at this from an evolutionary perspective.
____
Physical attractiveness and especially masculinity indicate good genetic quality, which is important for healthy offspring while ability to provide amplifies the survival rate of offspring because it needs sufficient resources to survive as well(2).

The reason why masculinity plays an enormous role in the mating choices of the human female, is because masculinity in itself greatly enhances physical attractiveness. However, a female's desire for strong masculine features may be influenced depending on whether she wants a long term relationship or a short term one on which I'll come back later.

• From an evolutionary view, extremes of secondary sexual characteristics (more feminine for women, more masculine for men) are proposed to be attractive because they advertise the quality of an individual in terms of heritable benefits; they indicate that the owners of such characteristics possess good genes. In other words, such traits advertise the possession of genes that are beneficial to offspring inheriting them in terms of survival or reproduction

Females may choose less masculine faces in some cases (for LTR) because they will often associate masculinity with infidelity, masculine men will not be perceived as good long term partners(3). A woman needs a loyal provider to raise offspring. Masculine men are still preferred for copulation however, because they possess the best genes to pass on.

• Increasing the masculinity of face shape increased perceptions of dominance, masculinity and age but decreased perceptions of warmth, emotionality, honesty, cooperativeness and quality as a parent.

YOUR PERSONALITY IS ASSESSED THROUGH YOUR FACE

This may be well and good, but women want men who possess certain personality traits too. Someone who they can form an emotional connection with is what they claim. Funnily enough, the way your personality is judged is through your face. You will not be liked for your personality but in fact for your face. People do not care for who you are but what you look like. As you already know: “The better your face, the better your so called personality”.

• Personality traits are reported cross-culturally to be among the most important factors in partner choice by both sexes [1,118]. If desired personality is so important, it would appear likely that personality attributions elicited by a face would affect its attractiveness. For example, women who value cooperation and good parenting may avoid masculine-faced men. Thus, instead of feminine faces being attractive and this attractiveness driving positive personality attributions, it may be that the personality attributions are driving the attractiveness judgements.

They are essentialy saying that your personality equals your face. Personality = Face

The meme is confirmed true.

• One study has indeed demonstrated that a desire for some personality traits influences judgements of facial attractiveness [121]. Individuals valuing particular personality traits find faces appearing to display these traits attractive.

Even when it’s not related at all, if your face looks like a certain desired personality it will be attractive to the person who desires that personality.

Being aware of this prospect makes women pickier than thought before. At first women emphasizing the importance of personality made them seem much less shallow since anyone, regardless of looks can possess a certain personality. Now it is not really a certain personality they are desiring, but a certain face that looks like that personality.

• Thus, desired personality influences perceptions of facial attractiveness in opposite sex faces, changing the result to: ‘what is good is beautiful’ [121].

source for the cursive text: : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3130383/

THE INFLUENCE OF THE MENSTRUAL CYCLE

It's possible one could be thinking that none of this poses an actual problem because different women want different personalities, thus different faces. Following from that, most men should still have a shot.

Things are a little trickier than that, unfortunately.

During ovulation, when a woman is most fertile and the best moment for impregnation; her desires for masculine features increase significantly and so her chances for cheating in her quest for a sexy masculine man(4).

• Women prefer the smell of dominant males, more masculine male faces and men behaving more dominantly when at peak fertility than at other times in their menstrual cycle.

That’s not at all, during peak fertility they also prefer more masculine bodies and more masculine voices.

The perfect strategy for a female is to be impregnated by a masculine dominant man and be provided by less masculine more loyal and less dominant men.

• Cyclic preferences could influence women to select partners when most likely to become pregnant that possess traits that may be most likely to maximize their offspring's quality via attraction to masculinity or serve to help acquire investment via attraction to femininity.

source for the cursive text: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X07000360

For reference, from masculine to less masculine.

If you understand this, it’s far easier grasp how it comes that 8000 years ago when there was no civilization; 1 man used to reproduce for 17 women. I can only hypothesize the female copulated with the dominant masculine males while being provided by ignorant less masculine men(5).

Final conclusion:
____
You are not desired for your personality as man. You are desired for your looks, genes or ability to provide.

Fun addition:

It's been posted here some times before, but just to be sure.

http://www.webtoons.com/en/drama/lookism/list?title_no=1049

Black pilled fun to read manhwa.

Ken Ham #fundie answersingenesis.org

Discovery of King Hezekiah’s Seal Confirms God’s Word

I always get excited when I read about archaeological finds in the Middle East that confirm what God’s Word says. Such discoveries have happened many times over the years. Well, a recent find in Jerusalem gives us a personal look into the greatest king of Judah—Hezekiah, the great reformer. The biblical account of Hezekiah and his religious reforms is personally inspiring and encouraging to me. Last summer I wrote an article for Answers [i]magazine about raising up Hezekiah-type reformers today. I encourage you to read the online version of that article on our website.

Well, in the Old Testament we read of King Hezekiah, one of the greatest kings since David and Solomon. Living about 700 years before Christ, his greatness came from the fact that “he did what was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done” (2 Chronicles 29:2). Because he loved the Lord, this king of Judah “did what was good and right and true before the Lord his God. And in every work that he began in the service of the house of God, in the law and in the commandment, to seek his God, he did it with all his heart. So he prospered” (2 Chronicles 31:20–21). He destroyed the idols (2 Chronicles 31:1), purified the Temple and restored the sacrifices (2 Chronicles 29), and started celebrating Passover once again (2 Chronicles 30). Second Kings 18:5 says of him, “Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him.”

Events from the reign of King Hezekiah have already been confirmed by archaeology. Second Chronicles 32:2–4 and 2 Kings 20:20 mention Hezekiah’s tunnel, dug to prepare for an Assyrian siege (a siege God supernaturally kept from happening in 2 Kings 19:25–36), and it’s still part of Jerusalem’s water system today. The Bible mentions that Sennacherib laid siege to the Judean city of Lachish and conquered it (2 Kings 18:13), was defeated in Jerusalem, and then was killed by his sons in the temple of his god (2 Kings 19:37). Both the siege of Lachish and his death have been confirmed by archaeology.

Well, archaeology now offers us a more personal touch from Hezekiah. In the rubbish heap outside a royal building in Jerusalem, a tiny seal impression, called a “bulla,” was discovered. Barely half an inch wide, this seal reads, “Belonging to Hezekiah, [son of] Ahaz, king of Judah.” Eilat Mazar, a third-generation archaeologist who directed the dig, says, “The seal of the king was so important. It could have been a matter of life or death, so it's hard to believe that anyone else had the permission to use the seal. Therefore, it's very reasonable to assume we are talking about an impression made by the King himself, using his own ring.” This is the first seal bearing King Hezekiah’s name ever discovered by an archaeologist (others have been sold on the antiquities market, but they were not discovered by archaeologists, so their authenticity is questionable). It offers a personal look into King Hezekiah since the seal probably came from the ring on his finger. Take a look at a photograph of this seal.

This incredible find confirms God’s Word yet again. Isn’t it exciting being a Christian and seeing how science is constantly confirming the truth of God’s Word? Of course, since the Bible is real recorded history, this is exactly what we should expect—and it’s exactly what we see!

You can read more about archaeology and God’s Word in this chapter from The New Answers Book 1, “Does Archaeology Support the Bible?

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
Ken

This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.

The Fundie of the Year Awards

Fundie of the Year Awards Voting #announcement fstdt.com

Fundie Of the Year

The big one, selected from the top ranked fundies of the year we have three options that I figure almost everyone has to know.

Options:

1: Anna Diehl
The sinner in the hand of a vengeful god, and apparently quite content with that. Easily our most honest and disturbingly coherent fundie in years. A sample of her work:

Of course all of these theories are based on a refusal to accept that God could find true delight in torturing people. Well, tough. HE DOES. Are we really so arrogant that we think we can define who God must be, or that we can change truths about Him simply because we don’t like them? If our Creator gets high off of torturing His enemies for eternity—which He clearly does—then we need to face this fact square on and ask the Holy Spirit to help us deal with it. ...

Full Text Found Here

2: CAAMIB
And more other accounts than I even care to name, this guy... I actually feel kinda sorry for if his world really looks like that to him. But I sure as hell wouldn't let him inflict that on others.
I have and I still believe I'd have sex with a woman against her consent. The difference now is that when I wrote that I thought that rape is forceful sex against a woman's consent. I was wrong, since I didn't know enough history and was brainwashed my feminist propaganda.
Full Text Found Here

3: David J. Stewart
One of our more prolific fundies, both in what gets posted here and what he writes in general. Quoted in all three categories this year and frankly could have been nominated in either of the ones I'm doing awards for, but thankfully not quite all three categories on the site. I checked.
Religion is the WORST thing that has ever happened to this world; Countless Billions of souls have been doomed to Hellfire by false religion. Learn what the Bible has to say on the matter. I expose many false religions... not to be unkind... but because the truth has been hidden from the world's masses. Just remember, religion didn't die on the cross for you—Jesus Christ did!
Full Text Found Here


Conspiracy Theorist of the Year

It was a good year for insanity, and certain efforts should be recognized.

Options:

1: Anonymous Cowards, of GodLike Productions
I'm cheating here, but they're also the group with the highest fundie index on CSTDT for last year. The anon comments over on GLP are amazing, not always in a good way, but amazing.
I have recently had an epiphany about dinosaurs that makes perfect sense! You would have to be spiritual minded to see it so I suspect many scientific minded people will tell me I've lost it...that's okay.

Here was my idea, just as the fallen angels have manipulated with genetics to claim their own creations (and to piss God off), I suspect they took God's creation of birds and genetically altered them to make their own creation. That is why scientists claim dinosaurs evolved into birds because so much of the genetic code of birds is in them.
...

Full Text Found Here

2: Patrick Scrivener
Someone who tends to run the lines between fundie and conspiracy theory, but I think conspiracy wins out on his top quotes. Special thanks to Yossarian Lives for bringing us so many of these.
Before the advent of MI6 sponsored communism in Russia, the Orthodox Church completely rejected the heliocentricity of Galileo and the evolutionary myth of Druid Charles Darwin. They also rejected the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX which completely condemned all scientific progress—except advances in spying and cryptology.
...

Full Text Found Here

3: Wiley Brooks
Odd one out, as he's only had one approved quote, but it was pretty amazing. Still not sure what if anything it means, so let's all stare in mild confusion.

In order to understand why I have chosen these foods you must first know how the human bodies descended into the 3rd dimensional world in first place. This is not our natural home. Being here as long as we have been was not intentional. We didn’t plan to stay here permanently. You could say it was purely by accident that we ended up getting stuck in this 3d world. The Earth, without a doubt, is the most beautiful planet in the Milky Way galaxy and that is why it was "the" vacation spot of the galaxy for millions of years. There was always a constant stream of visitors coming here from Worlds and Galaxies far and wide.
...

Full Text Found Here


Quote of the Year

A new hit from an old favorite, a disturbing conspiracy and the funniest damn thing I saw this year. These are the top quotes from each category, which is the best?

Options:

1: AV1611VET, from Christian Forums
I hadn't seen much from him in quite some time, but he came back strong with this one.

First of all, up until the Tower of Babel, they had to speak some language.

What language was that?

What's the best candidate?
...
Thus we have all peoples, nations, languages and tongues, standing before the Judgement Seat, being read to from the KJB.

Thus if they speak Jacobean English in Heaven, I assume they spoke it on earth at first.
Full Text Found Here

2: Diana Napolis
I honestly have no idea what to say here, but entirely believe every WTF?! was warranted.
The Enemy has been busy forcing others to have sex with them. They have a method of copying sex responses and placing these responses within penises and artificial vaginal canals. They copied my vaginal canal and orgasmic response, and placed that response into other artificial canals so that the enemy could insert it into themselves.
...

Full Text Found Here

3: white male, from Beyond Highbrow
It won an award within 30 seconds of me starting to read it and has given an entire demographic a bad name. I don't really even need ot quote that much of it to show why it's here. Poe or not, funny shit.
um nope. I am a proud white male with an 18 inch cock, thicker than a gallon milk can. I have a pedigree going back 10 thousand years to the Aryan-Teutonics of Asgard and Atlantis, and the government is so frightened of my innate caucasoid potential that they made me file a non disclosure agreement of my superior white male dna supreme genetics.

You see white men are actually from the distant island of atlantis which was floating in the tuberclizician Stratosphere of Earth, which Gulliver christened as Laputa.
...

Full Text Found Here


Best Cult from an 80s TV show

This is a special request I could not help but follow up on. And as a single nomination vote you can enter 1 to vote for it, or 0 to vote against it and tell us if the following is the Best Cult from an 80s TV Show.

Option:

1: Wulf Ingessunu
Woden's Folk is invariably criticised and attacked by those whose aim is to discredit anyone who opposes the Global Order.
...
One of the main targets has been The Hooded Man Prophecy since this is an easy one to get at since it has no 'historical' authenticity - so we are led to believe.
...
Firstly, yes this does come from the TV series Robin of Sherwood and was no doubt made up for the series. But that does not invalidate this as a prophecy, but we can only recognise it as such through the knowledge of what its hidden meaning is.
...
In order to understand that The Hooded Man Prophecy is valid you need to understand the above ideas clearly, because without a knowledge of what an avatar is this will never be understood. Only through recognising that a god can actually incarnate in the flesh will we be able to understand what I am trying to say
....

Full Text Found Here


Pseudo-Intellectual of the Year

We had a few nominations for this request, but remember if they are not worth the honor you can always vote 0 to deny it to anyone.

Options:

1: John C. Wright
Despair is the key. It explains nearly everything that is so puzzling about the madness of modern life, the pack of self-contradictory dogmas that make up the default assumptions of the Dark Ages in which we live.

They have nothing else. No wonder they are bitter. No wonder they are irrational. No wonder they lie like dogs. No wonder they boast. No wonder they are full of envy and malice. No wonder they kill babies in the womb and fete socialist dictators and mass murderers. No wonder they love death. No wonder they admire, protect and love Islamic terrorists. No wonder they admire, protect, and love sexual perversion.

It is because they have nothing else. They live in a world of darkness, without hope, with nothing but their seven great friends to sustain them: pride, which they call self esteem; envy, which they call social justice; wrath, which they call activism and protest; sloth, which they call enlightenment; gluttony, which they call health food and legalization of recreational drugs; greed, which they call fairness in taxation; lust, which they call sexual liberation.
Full Text Found Here

2: W. F. Price
As for young women, higher education is an enormous waste in most cases. They spend their time learning from lesbian pornographers, drinking, whoring and learning to look down on their male peers even as they debase themselves. The old idea that it will help them find a suitable mate is so outdated as to be laughable, but it’s what keeps parents paying for college tuition for their daughters: they hope that daddy’s little girl will get hitched to some conscientious beta male instead of knocked up by a hoodlum. This is the single biggest reason parents send their daughters to college, and it’s a gamble that will only pay off about half the time these days as the female to male ratio approaches three to two at universities (not all college-educated men marry college-educated women, or marry at all). Not a good bet for roughly $100k, but it supports legions of hard-left ideologues, which explains the enthusiasm for the failing system in mainstream media outlets.
Full Text Found Here

I feel compelled to note, lesbian pornography was involved in my college experience, but not in the way Mr. Price is concerned about it. Funny story actually. Anyway, This year's voting form:

FOTY [X]
COTY [X]
QOTY [X]
BCF80TV [X]
POTY [X]

Submit the above as your comment, replacing the X with the number you vote for in that category. If you want to vote against the existing options enter the number 0, if you don't want to vote at all either leave the X or erase the line. Counts will be done at the end of the month.

Feynman and Coulter's Love Child #racist 3edgesword.blogspot.com

[From "Minnesota Burning"]

Who brought all the faggots and niggers into Minneapolis anyways?

In 1980, Minneapolis had 321,507 whites and 28,026 niggers in a city of 370,951 (86.7% and 7.56% respectively).

According to Wikipedia the white population of Minneapolis is now 64.2% white† and 18.6% nigger, which explains why there are so many of them committing so many crimes that eventually some bad apple police officers caused the whole tree to be rotted. And then burnt down. And then the forest was burned down too. Tribal gotta tribal.

† It actually was lower in 2000 and has rebounded, presumably due to all the fairies who moved in.

So what is it about Minneapolis that causes is to be such a hot new destination for nigger criminals like George Floyd (and yes, yet again it turns out the "innocent victim" was a criminal who was involved in a violent home invasion in 2008)? To borrow the phrase from violent niggers who started ruining Edmonton in 2007, who spoiled what was an idyllic safe haven of a city and now is one of America's most violent.

The answer, ironically, comes as much from Dachau as it does from the violent niggers of the 1960s racial protests. In 1967 three nights of violence rocked North Minneapolis and chased out much of the 'white' population...but even that isn't quite accurate because the ethnic group that fled wasn't white but [I]Jewish[/I]. Following WWII anti-Jewish sentiment rapidly declined which left the Jews who had been living in the slum of North Minneapolis start to expand out into the rest of the city. By 1967 the city even had a Jewish mayor. That set the niggers off though: now that Jews were using their economic skills (a small scale version of this old joke of mine from a few years back) to improve their lot in life that caused resentment from the unemployable-since-the-cotton-ginny crowd. Jewish businesses were firebombed, Jewish business owners were beaten, even a Jewish city councilor was Moltov-cocktailed. As with so many U.S. cities in the years after the Long Hot Summer the niggers got what they wished: even more of the city to themselves. Likewise as with so many U.S. cities in the years after the Long Hot Summer it turns out that without the whites and the Jews the economic prospects of the city dry up and the incompetent thugs left in charge can't maintain the lifestyle that they seem to think is inherent in a system and not built on the sweat of the entrepreneurs. So that's the story of how the city overall started its decent. But even that isn't the whole story: after all, 1968 to 1980 apparently was mostly a shifting of neighbourhoods rather than a wholesale abandonment of the city.

Then the scum from Somalia came to town. Again this is not unfamiliar territory: two years after violent Sudanese niggers caused death and destruction in Edmonton, violent [B]Somali[/B] niggers caused death and destruction in Edmonton. Like the Vietnamese a generation earlier, refugees fleeing civil strife in their third world country brings their third world pathologies with them, and the humanitarian cry for the first world to "do something" (never a good idea) causes people to forget the quality of folks we're getting are rarely the top notch ones. In 1993 the United States began "assigning" Somali refugees to Minnesota thanks to lobbying by two far-left organizations (Lutheran Social Services and World Relief Minnesota). By 1996 "demographic shifts" caused by this Somali relocation and also in part by the state's excessively generous welfare payments had caused Minneapolis to exceed NYC in its murder rate.

As the U.S. as a whole sees its crime rates falling, Minneapolis has continued to trend in the opposite direction. The crimes in general are a veritable "who's who" of nigger crimes: assault, rape, burglaries have all been consistently double the U.S. average since 2002. Additionally you see some weirdo ones stemming from third world pathologies like arson which spiked in the mid-2000s and has been declining towards (but still double!) the U.S. average ever since.

As Gilbert Cavanaugh notes, despite setting up the statistics to provide little useful information Minneapolis blacks are [B]16 times[/B] more violent than the other races (even Red Indians). That in turn drives out more whites who in turn cause more economic downtown which drives out yet more whites. You can see that the population losses of the white flight era have been replaced mostly with Somali immigrants and their active reproductive systems. There has been a rebirth of whites into the city: much of it is hipster gentrification (ie. uranists) who are discovering that their so-called "allies" will burn their homes to the ground as well.

Max Roscoe #fundie returnofkings.com

10 Things My Dog Taught Me About Women

I discovered ROK around the same time I became the owner of a puppy, and there are many parallels I have noticed while I am out with my dog about women and relationships. Here are a few observations:

1. Always be the master, not the slave

While I allow my dog the occasional freedom of running off-leash, at all times it is clear that I am his master, and he has certain boundaries. He knows he must stay within eyesight of me at all times. No barking or aggressive behavior towards others will be allowed.

He is constantly looking back to me for approval that what he is doing is allowed. With women, it is important to maintain frame at all times. If you are successful with establishing yourself as the dominant partner in the relationship (you make the calls, you decide the dates), then your woman will be far less likely to attempt reversing the roles and become dominating and vindictive.

2. A well trained partner will cause fewer problems

I enrolled my dog in a six-week training course, where we learned basic commands. More than the simple act of learning that the English pronunciation of “sit” means to place the rear end on the ground, however, is the importance that the dog learns that you are the master and you have certain expectations.

A well trained dog will know when it misbehaves, and will sense the disappointment or anger of its owner when it breaks the rules. Likewise, a woman should be trained to behave properly. Since Western civilization has abdicated its role in training members of both sexes how to behave politely and what proper roles are, men must take up this duty on our own.

If you firmly but politely lay out your expectations for your partner (no flaky behavior, I appreciate you cooking meals for me that we can enjoy together, you are to dress feminine but not slutty when we are in public, etc.), in my experience, the woman enjoys doing her part, the same way we enjoy our masculine role.

3. Slight corrections are needed from time to time

My dog knows how to walk on a leash, next to me, without dragging me all over the place. However, smells, sights of other dogs, and outside stimulus often get the better of him and he will wander too far away. A gentle tug on his leash and a verbal correction will quickly bring him back in line. Paying attention to the small details and “nipping it in the bud” before he’s off the sidewalk will bring him back to my side.

Likewise, it is far easier to maintain a happy relationship by addressing small missteps as they occur, before letting them blossom into major problems. Tell her to hit the gym when she’s gotten a bit out of shape, but don’t wait until she’s gained 20 pounds. Give her a limit on how much alcohol she can drink. Tell her she must inform you who she is going out with and where.

As we know, women are essentially large children, and like a teen who will gradually test the limits of his boundaries, a woman will push the rules to see how much she can get away with. Treat her like a father would his child, and let her know she is not to behave this way in the future. She will not only stop the harmful actions, but come to respect you even more.

4. Positive reinforcement works

The best way to train a dog is by offering treats, and giving strong, enthusiastic, loving verbal reinforcement when it does what is expected. The dog is happy that it is making its owner happy, and any owner can see this. Likewise, a woman’s instinctual nurturing side will blossom and she will be happy when she is pleasing her man. Kind of the inverse of happy wife, happy life.

The wife is happy because she is pleasing her husband, and she enjoys fulfilling her role in the relationship, the same way we naturally enjoy the rewards of hard work, the satisfaction of fixing things, and kind actions which bring a smile to the face of a woman who earns and has our affections.

5. Pay attention to details

The next time you see a dog, look closely. Does it have well groomed hair, or a matted, dirty, coat full of debris? Does it have a face of enthusiasm and happiness, or is it aggressive and violent? Does it playfully engage its owner and strangers, or is it skittish and anti-social? Does it respond well to its owner?

Likewise, there are visual clues that let us know the quality of women we are approaching. Does she groom herself well, with long, feminine hair, trimmed and painted nails, and conservative clothing? Does she smile? Does she interact socially with others, or is she glued to her smart phone screen and unable to hold a real conversation?

Does she have clear, radiant skin, or is her body mutilated with shrapnel and graffiti? Some women, and some dogs, simply are too far gone, and should be avoided, due to their unpleasant past.

6. The laws of Nature are supreme

Even a bad dog owner who has taught his dog no discipline, and has no control over his pet, cannot get around the fact that the dog relies on the owner for food, shelter, and water. The dog is subservient to its owner, and even in the worst of owners, this fact of nature cannot be reversed.

Likewise, a woman is naturally and normally the submissive partner to the man. No amount of short haircuts, business suits, you-go-girling or education can reverse the natural role than women play in the world. Women are different from men, and men are the more physically powerful, mentally strong, and emotionally caring of the two sexes. The unhappiness feminism has wrought on society is due to its attempt to subvert the natural order of things.

7. Dogs will test boundaries

My dog greets me every day when I come home by enthusiastically running to greet me in the yard, smiling, and begging to play, much the way a traditional father from the 1950s would be greeted by his family when he returned home from work. His time is a rare commodity, and the family was excited to talk to him, and to be in his presence.

Occasionally when I arrive, my dog will fail to rush out to meet me, and will just sit in the porch, wagging his tail, waiting for me to approach. When this happens, I will stop, and wait until he runs out to greet me, as I am accustomed, before walking any further. Likewise, with a woman, when she slowly stops the nice little extra things you appreciated, cleaning your bed after sex, making you a snack, whatever it is, you must immediately address and reinstate before things slip further.

8. Dogs don’t understand you

You can talk in a kind voice to a dog, and he will understand your loving happiness, and reciprocate, but beyond that, dogs are incapable of understanding you, interpreting your thoughts, empathizing, or using logic.

Likewise, it is a waste of time to get into deep discussions with women, expect them to rationalize or understand things, or even to truly empathize or love a man. This may upset you, but it is true. While a dog or woman can respect and honor you, and make you feel good, they cannot truly understand you, or love you the way you love them.

9. They appreciate small treats

A tiny reward can go a long way. The item itself is of less importance than the meaning behind it. Dogs respond well to a new toy or special treat like a bone for learning a new trick, or behaving especially well.

Likewise, when your woman deserves it, or just because you are happy with how she is treating you, feel free to give her a small token of appreciation. Cook a special meal she likes. Take her out to a movie. Have a picnic with her. Make her feel special. When you are rewarding good behavior, you are encouraging it to continue.

10. Dogs are accessories meant to bring happiness

A dog is an optional thing a guy can bring into his life if he wants something to occupy his time, and reward him emotionally. The same should be true with women. Never enter into a relationship simply because “you’re single” or due to outside pressure from family. Never stay in a relationship that is not productive or meeting your needs.

Having a dog is a hobby, one that requires a little work every day to maintain, but should always be pleasurable to the owner. Having a significant other is the same. If the woman is not doing things for you that make you happy, move on. If she is unresponsive to the basic training that a dog would adopt, then she is failing at a very fundamental level, and you would like be much happier with a pet than a nagging girlfriend.

Conclusion

Finally, remember that while having an obedient one by your side is rewarding and comforting, there are thousands and thousands of them available, so never become too attached to one.

However, when speaking of dogs, they are incredibly loyal, protective, and offer unconditional love, and will in some ways be more consistent, reliable, and rewarding than a woman. It’s often said that sexbots will be the end of the modern feminist. Dogs provide most of the positive benefits of women except sex, and owning one can benefit a man greatly.

They are also a great yardstick of comparison. If your woman is not making you happier than your dog, it’s time to next her.

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

Please understand that I believe a wife who is being physically abused should leave if she feels threatened; but not divorce. Such a wife needs to sincerely ask herself "why" her husband is being abusive--there's ALWAYS a reason. Some husbands are abusive; but 90% of all divorces are needlessly caused by a sinfully proud wife who causes grief for her husband, and he gets mad. A wife who refuses to be submissive causes the marriage to become a two-headed monster. Someone's got to be in charge, or there will be continual conflict. Ideally, a husband and wife should work together on everything; however, in those situations where there is a conflict, the wife is commanded by God to submit to her husband. In fact, Ephesians 5:22 commands a wife to obey her husband as unto Jesus Christ, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord." How many wives today obey this Biblical command? It would be like looking for a needle in a haystack to find such a woman today in America. No wonder Solomon said in Ecclesiastes 7:28, "One man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found." Solomon couldn't find one woman, out of all his wives and the women he had known, whom he could trust with all his heart. There were many feminists in Solomon's time, just as there are today. Listen to what Solomon had to say about the rebellious feminists of his own time ... "And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her." What a contrast from the virtuous wife of Proverb 31:28 ... "Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her." Which type of woman are you? What does your husband (or X-husband) have to say about you? God knows, and He does care, and you will have to give account for your laziness, carelessness, lies, deceitfulness, maliciousness, etc. You will give full account to God for all your words and actions. Matthew 12:36 warns, "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

biblicalgenderroles #fundie #sexist biblicalgenderroles.com

8 Biblical Differences Between Wives and Slaves

As we have previously shown from Exodus 20:17 and Leviticus 25:44-46, wives and slaves are both considered by God to be the property of men. And both wives and slaves are commanded by God to obey their masters in everything as Colossians 3:22, Ephesians 5:24, 1 Peter 3:5-6 tells them to do.

But this is where the similarity between wives and slaves ends and the differences begin. Below are eight Biblical distinctions between wives and slaves.

1. Slave owners don’t have to sacrifice themselves for their property – husbands do.

“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it“

Ephesians 5:25 (KJV)

2. Slave owners don’t have to teach God’s Word to their property – husbands do.

“And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.“

1 Corinthians 14:35 (KJV)

3. Slave owners don’t have to act as human instruments of God’s sanctification in the lives of their property – husbands do.

“26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Ephesians 5:26-27 (KJV)

4. Slave owners don’t have to love and care for their property as they do their own bodies – husbands do.

“28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church“

Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

5. Slave owners don’t have to give their bodies to meet the sexual needs of their property (nor should they) – husbands do.

“3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.”

I Corinthians 7:3-4 (KJV)

6. Slave owners don’t have to honor their property – husbands do.

“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.“

I Peter 3:7 (KJV)

7. Slave owners don’t have to give their property the fruit of their labors – husbands do.

“Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.“

Proverbs 31:31 (KJV)

8. God did not design men to be the property of other men. God did design women to be the property of their husbands.

“7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.“

1 Corinthians 11:7-10 (KJV)

Conclusion

We have shown conclusively from the Bible that contrary to modern humanist notions of equality, God has actually designated wives and children as the property of their husbands and fathers. And again, contrary to modern egalitarian views of what marriage should be, God commands wives to regard their husbands as their masters and like slaves to be obedient to their masters in everything. The obvious exception for both wives and slaves in their obedience is if their masters command them to sin against God. It is only in this case that they can and must disobey their masters as Acts 5:29 tells us.

Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

7 Ways Modern Women Treat Men Like Dogs

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

For all the feminist criticism of men supposedly treating women like dogs, it is actually today’s feminism-infected women that are treating men like domesticated animals.

While the majority of women still prefer masculine men for relationships, I’ve been noticing how more and more women today are defying their biology for ideological reasons and are pursuing long-term relationship with men they’re not even attracted to just because they are supplicant and effeminate. If this trend continues unabated, I expect the entire male population to turn into weak and feckless bonobos who grovel around to serve female interests.

Observe the following comparisons to see how men are being turned into dogs for both women and the state:

1. Dogs are optional

Dogs as pets are optional. People get a dog only when they want one; it’s not a necessity. Men today are also increasingly becoming an object of utility for a woman rather than a man whom she forms a bond with for a nuclear family. She will marry a man when she wants to (if at all) and she will dump him when she feels like it.

2. Once attached, dogs offer unconditional loyalty

If you want a picture of what the feminists want from men, just imagine a world where all men are male feminists.

Once dogs have a human to call a master, it doesn’t care whether he is a scumbag, loser, criminal, or homeless. Dogs are faithful no matter who their master is and what he does. In fact, they’re so loyal that they’ll even remain with an owner that mistreats them. And that’s exactly what feminists want men to be.

If you observe the rhetoric of the feminists, you’ll notice two general themes: first, the desire to be free from all criticisms. And second, for men to believe them and “support” them no matter what. Feminists want their prospective low-testosterone boyfriends and husbands to fully accept them for who they are no matter how disgusting, slutty, crass, and toxic they are. They want their men to show unconditional loyalty so that they can openly cheat on them and brag about it. And men, if they don’t want to be called a misogynist, must never question their partner’s past or present behavior and remain faithful even if they’re treated like garbage.

3. Dogs do what they’re told

Once the owner has secured his dog’s loyalty, he can train it to behave on command. Some owners enjoy the power they have over their companions and they will order their dogs around for fun.

Western women today have discovered that there are truck loads of desperate men who will do just about anything for them to win an ounce of female approval. These women have successfully used men to take them out on expensive dinners (only make fun of them on their blogs afterwards), buy pizza for them for free, shovel snow for them, and so on. The women who order these men around like dogs didn’t even have to train them as they’ve already been conditioned from birth by the society to do what women tells them to do.

4. Dogs are treated for good behavior
image
Dogs need to be treated to reinforce good behavior; the same is true when you want to domesticate men as second-rate citizens.

Women understand just how desperate the general male population is for affection and sex. Women today are leveraging this power over men to make them behave the way they want them to, rewarding these simps with faked compliments so that they’ll continue being good boys.

5. Dogs defend their masters
image
One serves a man, the other serves the government and its harem of women.

Besides companionship, the main roles dogs play is to defend their masters. In spite of all the calls for equality, the reality is that women still expect men to defend and save them. The men suffering from white knight syndrome will go as far as sacrificing their own lives to rescue women they don’t even know.

Feminists also don’t mind that many men are serving the police and military force to serve their alpha boyfriend: the government. Women are innately attracted to power and the government is the new protector and provider of women that grows bigger and stronger each day while ordinary men are becoming weaker and irrelevant.

6. Dogs are neutered

Although men aren’t getting physically neutered the way dogs are, other methods are being employed to psychologically castrate men. This includes the epidemic use of ADHD drugs to tame boys, ridiculous laws aimed at controlling men’s sexual interactions with women, and the overall cultural currents to shame masculinity while promoting all sorts of degeneracy that dilute it. Today’s wives don’t even want to get sexual with their husbands.

7. Dogs that are not domesticated are pests

“Masculine men are organizing a meeting? They must be rapists!”

When a dog is not owned by a human being, it is considered a pest that needs to be controlled.

Men today who do not submit to the feminist agenda are constantly attacked as being losers, sexists, misogynists, rapists, and so on. In today’s feminist society, you either serve the female imperative or you’re a Neanderthal who is out of touch with the times. Steps are already being made to control every aspect of male behavior in public.

You should also remember that dogs are natural pack animals (think of their cousins, wolves). By being removed from the pack, they become isolated and dependent on their masters. Can you see how the same applies for today’s men?

The Differences

In addition to being dogs, men are also expected to serve as drones to keep the feminist nanny-state running.

In spite of all the similarities, there are differences that need to be addressed.

First, unlike dogs whose owners house them and feed them, men are not supported by women. Women are free to throw men away like used tampons or divorce their husbands to extract their cash. If anything, men are usually the ones who must provide for their wives.

Second, whereas dogs are under the responsibility of their owners, men are expected to be fully responsible in all their interactions with women. It is the man’s job to ensure that a woman is giving consent even if both parties are drunk; it is men who must watch over their own behavior to ensure that what they say is non-offensive and conforming; and it is men who must ensure that women feel perfectly safe and comfortable in all their interactions. If you so much as walk past a woman in the wrong manner, you’ll be accused of rape. Again, it is the man’s responsibility to ensure that he is acceptable enough to share the same space as women, not the other way around. Feminists want “equality” without accountability.

Are men becoming collectively domesticated?
image
The domesticated cows we see on farms didn’t end up the way they are now naturally. It was through thousands of years of herding and selective breeding that they became smaller, more passive, and accepting of their conditions. But the fact is, it doesn’t take thousands of years to transform entire species. In this article which I recommend you read, a Soviet project to domesticate foxes have shown that it only takes several generations of selective breeding to transform wild foxes into effeminate and tamed versions of themselves.

The global testosterone level around the world has been mysteriously dropping for the past few decades. While chemical toxins in all the products we consume and come in contact with has been given as one possible explanation, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that we as species are gradually becoming emasculated at a genetic level through the selective breeding process. In other words, we are becoming socially engineered to be effeminate. It’s not something impossible when you consider that easily tamable beta males, the sperm donors, are usually the males women select as their mates after they themselves are done riding the cock-carousel. I think it’s a factor we should consider besides the emasculation through cultural degeneracy that we’re already familiar with.

Men are supposed to be men unleashing their primal energy through raw adventure instead of getting tamed into submission. I have no doubt that the systematic domestication efforts of today is what is causing collective male nihilism, depression, and frustrated energy. Men who are awake must allow themselves be men.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

biblicalgenderroles #fundie biblicalgenderroles.com

The Government’s Definition of Abuse Vs The Bible’s Definition of Abuse

“Physical Abuse: Hitting, slapping, shoving, grabbing, pinching, biting, hair pulling, etc are types of physical abuse. This type of abuse also includes denying a partner medical care or forcing alcohol and/or drug use upon him or her.”

The first problem with this definition is that it completely negates any type of physical discipline which is commanded by God for children (Proverbs 23:13-14) and is also allowed by God for adults (Deuteronomy 25:1-3, Proverbs 19:29 and Proverbs 26:3). Under this definition of physical abuse spanking of one’s child or one’s wife would be consider abuse (See my article “Does the Bible Allow Wife Spanking” for more on that issue). A mother or father slapping their rebellious child even with an open palm (front handed) would be guilty of physical abuse under this definition.

I agreed in my previous article on abuse that things like shoving and punching have no place in the home not even as methods of discipline because they risk serious bodily injury or even death in violation of God’s law regarding limits on discipline (Exodus 21:26-27). I also agreed that things like biting, kicking and hair pulling have no place in the home as methods of discipline as it should be done in love and in control and not as brawl or a fight. But again overall the biggest problem with the government’s definition of physical abuse is that its definition negates physical discipline in the home which God allows.

“Sexual Abuse: Coercing or attempting to coerce any sexual contact or behavior without consent. Sexual abuse includes, but is certainly not limited to, marital rape, attacks on sexual parts of the body, forcing sex after physical violence has occurred, or treating one in a sexually demeaning manner.”

First we will address where this government definition of sexual abuse aligns with God’s moral law and that is regarding children. A parent has absolutely no right under God’s law to touch their child in a sexual way, to coerce them or force them to have sex. This is a violation of God’s moral laws regarding incest (Leviticus 18:6).

But really the heart of this definition is directed at husbands in regard to how they engage in sexual activity with their wives. And when applied to the husband/wife relationship this definition of sexual abuse for the most part nullifies God’s Word.

This government’s definition of sexual abuse as with physical abuse nullifies a husband’s God given sexual rights to his wife’s body in marriage. It also nullifies his right to discipline her for sexual refusal. The Bible says that sex is both a right and responsibility in marriage (Exodus 21:10-11, Proverbs 5:18-19, I Corinthians 7:3-4) and that the only thing that must be mutually agreed upon in the area of sex is when a couple will NOT have sex (I Corinthians 7:5) for a short time. See my articles on sexual refusal, sexual consent and forced sex in marriage for more on what the Bible says about these topics.

Emotional Abuse: Undermining an individual’s sense of self-worth and/or self-esteem is abusive. This may include, but is not limited to constant criticism, diminishing one’s abilities, name-calling, or damaging one’s relationship with his or her children.

While we need to be careful of how subjective this government definition of emotional abuse is I think for the most part it aligns with what the Scriptures say that we should generally be trying to build people up and not tear them down(Ephesians 4:29,James 3:8-10). See my article on “What Does the Bible Say About Abuse?” for more on the subject of emotional abuse.

Economic Abuse: Is defined as making or attempting to make an individual financially dependent by maintaining total control over financial resources, withholding one’s access to money, or forbidding one’s attendance at school or employment.

This government definition of “Economic Abuse” is a complete addition to God’s moral law and it also nullifies a husband’s rights toward his wife under God’s law. And again let’s not kid ourselves that they are speaking equally to husbands and wives. This is an attack on patriarchy and men having their wives being economically dependent on them.

The fact is this definition of Economic abuse is exactly the opposite of God’s moral law on this issue. In Exodus 21:10-11 we are told that if a man does not provide his wife with food and clothing she may be free of him (divorced from him). God considers it economic abuse when a man forces his wife to economically independent of him, not when he forces his wife to be economically dependent on him.

And yes husbands under God’s law can absolutely forbid their wives from going to college or seeking careers as wives are to be subject their husbands in EVERYTHING as the Church submits to Christ in everything (Ephesians 5:24).

Also as far as household finances go – whether a husband allows his wife to work or not all the financial decision making comes under his direction. If he wants to take away his wife’s ATM card he can do that under God’s law.

Psychological Abuse: Elements of psychological abuse include – but are not limited to – causing fear by intimidation; threatening physical harm to self, partner, children, or partner’s family or friends; destruction of pets and property; and forcing isolation from family, friends, or school and/or work.

If read in a certain way, the government’s definition of psychological abuse may actually align with the Scriptures. God does forbid the use of threatening (Ephesians 6:9). If a husband or wife threatens to kill themselves or their children or pets or to destroy property if they don’t get what they want that is the very definition of threatening behavior which is condemned by the Word of God.

However a warning from an authority toward one under them of the consequences of their actions is not engaging in threatening or psychological abuse. If I isolate my teen son from friends that are bad influences on him is that psychological abuse? The answer is no. It all depends on my motivation. Is my intent simply to exert my power over him or is it actually for his own good? If it is the latter there is nothing immoral about this from a Biblical perspective.

Many people would agree that the example I gave is not immoral. But what if I replaced my son in that example with my wife? OH NO – that is completely different right? Why? Because she is an adult? The Bible however makes no such distinction when it comes to the discipline of wives and children. If my wife was talking to or hanging out with other women who were bad spiritual influences on her affecting her morals, relationship with God or with me I have absolutely ever right before God as her spiritual authority to restrict her access to those women.

The Bible teaches a clear social order – the husband, an adult male, is the head of the wife, an adult female and children are under the authority of their parents(Ephesians 5:23-24, Ephesians 6:1-3).

And for all you feminists out there the practice of a husband exercising his spiritual authority over his wife in these ways does not infantilize her or make her equal with her children. God has granted a wife and mother more rights than he has her children. She has sexual rights to her husbands body and she is given the position of manager of the home and of the children which are sacred and honored roles. She of course exercises these positions under the authority of her husband but by no means does the Bible make wives and children equals with another.

So when we throw out the straw-man argument that a husband exercising control over his wife infantilizes her we come to the real heart of the issue. Feminists don’t like the fact that while God gives women more rights than children he does not give women equal rights with men. In other words, its not about women be treated as children but its about women be treated as women. Feminists want women treated as men.

Oracle Z #fundie returnofkings.com

Why Women Are Like Cats And Men Are Like Dogs

CATS:

Cats are beautiful creatures. So are women. Especially when it comes to their faces, and more so their eyes. Staring in a cat’s eyes for long, can mesmerize you. So can a woman’s.

Cats are manipulative, prodigal creatures that only want you when they want you. Try picking up a cat at any time, and see how it will scratch you. A cat’s affection for you is essentially an act of investment on it’s end. There is nothing more fake than the dishonest affection of a cat, irrespective of its type. Cats only need affection on their own terms.

Cats know how to insinuate themselves into your affection, even if they are useless creatures. “Aw, look at the poor cute little thing!” A cat is a master at turning its weakness into its advantage. It would meekly rub its soft fur against you to garner attention. It would purr softly and sensually as you stroke it. It snuggles softly into your body, making you believe that it needs and ‘loves‘ you, but what it actually needs is the warmth of your body.

Cats are opportunistic. Cats live on opportunity. They stalk their prey. Women are the same, for they are hypergamous.

Cats are practically useless creatures. On an average, Cats spent 16 hours sleeping and the rest eating and lazing around. Cats can’t defend your home. A cat will only fight to defend itself, but never you. A cat’s life is engrossed with itself, and trying to exploit the resources of its master, without being of use in return. Cats are basically domesticated parasites.

Cats enslave you. A cat’s often ‘purpose’ in your home is to act cute. As mentioned above, they’re practically useless animals. Any home having a cat will be forced to acquiesce itself to its feline member. Essentially humans are the pets of cats, and not the other way around.

Cats are cruel and merciless creatures. Observe a cat with its prey (e.g. with a rat or an insect). A cat will play around with its prey’s half dead body before devouring it, much like a psychopath. Women more or less exhibit the same tendencies.

Cats can fuck up your home. Cats are worst when it comes to your furniture. A cat will happily allow itself to sharpen its claws on your furniture and ruin it.

Cats are insensitive and selfish creatures. Cats don’t think of anything, except themselves. Cats are essentially selfish creatures, except when it comes to their offspring. But a female cat is again never so protective of its young as a bitch is.

Cats are thieving parasites. A cat’s habit of stealing is legendary. The stealth predator that they are, cats will not hesitate to help itself to your stuff without permission. It’s a cat’s entitled nature to your stuff, as you’ve honored yourself by adopting it.

Cats are narcissistic creatures. A cat spends most of its time eating, exploring (to hunt or steal), sleeping, lazing around and preening itself.

Cats have seductive and feminine allure. Look at the graceful movements of a cat. Observe the lazy seductive stretches of its body. Cats are the natural exhibitors of female sex appeal. Any woman wanting to learn seductive female body language could learn well from observing a cat, and carry herself in a similar fashion. Humans have always been seduced by this appeal of these creatures from history.

Cats make valuable pets — to feminists.

Cats are disloyal creatures. As explained above, cats are only loyal to themselves, not to their masters. Cats are essentially mercenaries.

DOGS:

Dogs are honorable and loyal creatures, exhibiting essentially masculine virtues. A dog’s greatest quality is in its loyalty and honor when it comes to their masters. Dogs will always stick with you watch your back.

Dogs are intelligent, versatile and useful creatures. From guarding your home, giving you company and giving hope to humans in a modern world where the word loyalty has just become a tattoo, dogs are versatile pets. You can train a dog like no other animal.

Dogs are brave creatures. A dog’s bravery is legendary. So much that they were employed in war and domesticated to guard homes and livestock .

Dogs are self sacrificing creatures. A dog may run away when it comes to personal safety, but rarely backs down from danger especially when it comes to the safety of its master. A dog will fight for you and can even die for you. A dog’s spirit is essentially that of self sacrifice.

Dogs love doggy style. And so do men. No brainer there.

Dogs are often ignored, in lieu of cats. This happens usually in households where both the creatures are adopted. The dog’s loyalty and value is often ignored for the parasitical, undeserving and useless cat’s seductive appeal. Dispensable beauty often beats indispensable efficiency. This is just like how men—the indispensable gender necessary for the building of civilization—have become dispensable in modern societies.

A master can fool a dog, but not a cat. Dogs are trusting animals when it comes to their masters. Men are the same when it comes to their women. On the other hand, cats don’t trust you, even if you’ve raised them for long. One act of admonishment is enough for a cat to act as if it’s not your pet. Dogs can be fooled, because they’re essentially forgiving animals. Cats rarely forgive, but expect to be forgiven.

Dogs are sensitive creatures. Especially to a lack of love from their masters.

Dogs are direct and honest animals. A dog’s efforts to gain your attention are direct, not a subtle gauged seduction of you like a cat. But the problem with dogs is that they can’t act feminine and cute like cats to gain your attention. Dogs will lick you, bark at you and act funny so that you notice them. That’s how men are. A man’s sex drive and affections are the same – honest and direct. There is nothing deceptive about his interest in a woman than an erection when he sees her.

Dogs bear responsibility and adversity with fortitude. Dogs were domesticated to guard homes. The role of a guardian is a life of responsibility and peril. Dogs are masters at handling both eventualities with fortitude.

Dogs need freedom. One of the worst things people do to their pet dogs is to tie them up. A dog needs to explore and see the world, or it howls and becomes very aggressive. Dogs live for freedom.

Dogs are patient creatures. Until pushed too far. Cats are essentially impatient, and don’t tolerate unwanted attention at all.

Dogs can be easily assuaged. Your dog’s howling for some fresh air and freedom? Give it some food. Rub it. Dogs can be easily assuaged, and usually settle for little from their masters. A cat will move over to your neighbor’s home to find what it’s not getting from you. Dogs are essentially slave-like, while cats are mercenaries.

Dogs need love, and are receptive to affection. Dogs are happy with little, and need your company all the time. A dog without a master is indeed a sad dog.

Dogs bear responsibility and adversity with fortitude. Dogs were domesticated to guard homes. The role of a guardian is a life of responsibility and peril. Dogs are masters at handling both eventualities with fortitude.

Dogs need freedom. One of the worst things people do to their pet dogs is to tie them up. A dog needs to explore and see the world, or it howls and becomes very aggressive. Dogs live for freedom.

Dogs are patient creatures. Until pushed too far. Cats are essentially impatient, and don’t tolerate unwanted attention at all.

Dogs can be easily assuaged. Your dog’s howling for some fresh air and freedom? Give it some food. Rub it. Dogs can be easily assuaged, and usually settle for little from their masters. A cat will move over to your neighbor’s home to find what it’s not getting from you. Dogs are essentially slave-like, while cats are mercenaries.

Dogs need love, and are receptive to affection. Dogs are happy with little, and need your company all the time. A dog without a master is indeed a sad dog.

The biggest analogy? Just like how dogs do all their life, men chase cats, i.e. women. Even with the reversal of gender roles and tastes in the modern world.

Being called a dog and being called a son of a bitch are two different things. While the latter is essentially offensive and derogatory, being called a dog is essentially honorable if you consider the above points. The Mongols honored dogs in their culture. Genghis Khan famously called his commander Subudei “one of his dogs of war” – not in a derogatory sense, but to compliment Subudei on his loyalty, bravery and honor. Calling someone a cat is derogatory when taking a cat’s parasitical personality into consideration. A dog is an honorable and loyal creature, very much displaying the essence of true masculinity. But like men, it ironically gets the flak despite all its usefulness, so much that it’s name itself becomes a curse word.

Beta programming of modern men has often made them to behave in feminine ways like cats, and feminist modern women are behaving like masculinized bitches. Considering that, this analogy could rather be modified as “Why women were like cats, and men were like dogs.”

нσтησσв #sexist archive.li

I’m rather young, so i can’t really say if it’s been increasing or not, but i suspect so.

When i was 17, i was hugely obsessed with statistics, and i one day ran into a survey done asking female dog owners if they had ever had sexual intercourse with their dog. 1 in 10 stated that they had.
I haven’t been able to find it back as since then google’s search algorithms have been completely feminized so i can no longer find dick all on the net 🙁

So anywho, that got me thinking, about why so many girls had dogs as pets and not the cute fluffy cats 😛
Why they would always have a male dog, and never a female dog – wouldn’t you expect them to get a female dog?
I came to the conclusion that women were just extremely f~~~ed up and disgusting when it came to their sexual desires.

NOW! 5 years later!
I was on a movie set a few days ago, doing some gay ass artsy film lol… and the assistant director had a male dog… which she slept with.
This dog whined when ever he was away from her for more than 5 seconds!!!
So, it got me thinking, i mean, she sleeps with the dog every night, how on earth is she not f~~~ing it? I mean, who sleeps with their dog!
She actually literally cuddled with the dog… probably giving it more affection than any man she’s ever known… lol.

Just got me thinking, pretty entertaining thing to think of.

Since i was 17, i have noticed both a serious increase in feminism and female relations \w dogs… but i can’t really say if the two are linked or even if the latter has been increasing of if its just my increased awareness.

So… Thoughts?
Have you ever caught any women doing weird stuff with their dogs? LOL.

Fun topic eh? 😀

RadioFreeEurope – RadioLiberty #fundie rferl.org

September 14, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- Since the creation of the Islamic republic in Iran in 1979, the acceptability of dog ownership has been debated by the authorities.

Iranian officials say that according to Islam, dogs are considered to be dirty animals, and people who own dogs are viewed as being under Western influence. Some conservative clerics have denounced dog ownership as "morally depraved" and say it should be banned.

Friday prayer leader Hojatoleslam Gholamreza Hassani, who is known for his hard-line stances, was quoted a few years ago as saying that all dog owners and their dogs should be arrested.

In the past, dog owners have received warnings or were forced to pay fines for having a pet dog. Despite such harassment, dog ownership has increased over the years, especially among young people in Tehran.

One of them is 23-year-old Banafshe, whose dog was recently detained in Tehran for 48 hours and then released on bail. Banafshe says she was walking her young puppy, Jessica, when Iranian police snatched the dog and took her to a dog "jail." The dog's crime was "walking in public."

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #wingnut #dunning-kruger deviantart.com

{Submitter‘s note: Have you wondered what Colonel-Knight-Rider has been up to lately? Well, here‘s the gist: He‘s been harrassing a fellow DA user. There followed an attempt at apology. (Archived link)
That didn‘t last long.
Here (archived) and here (archived) is some interesting stuff but the real meat is here: (archived) which I quote from, bolding original, redacted the name of the OP:}

Ok you know what screw this where is that gun *grabs a revolver and takes one bullet and places in the revolver and spins the cylinder*

I'm just gonna come out and say it since no one else is brave enough to do so.

You, [REDACTED], are single-handedly the stupidest man on the entire planet.

Your right when you said I'm the most stupidest man on the entire planet I guess I am stupid

"Most stupidest?" Really? Was that intentional or accidental?

Yes, you are. And you know why you're dumb, [REDACTED]? Because you keep whining and moaning and complaining like, "I WANNA KILL MYSEEEEEELLFFF WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH POOR MEEEEE!!!! HAVE SYMPATHY FOR ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!!!!!!!" But you never do! It makes me wonder if these suicidal thoughts are even real.

I've told you once. I've told you twice. I've told you a thousand, thousand, THOUSAND TIMES that constantly complaining about how you're going to kill yourself and how much you hate yourself and your life does not attract people to your gallery. Have you noticed that no one is commenting on these suicidal status updates to show you sympathy anymore? That's because they've had it with seeing your same stupid shtick of round-the-clock raging about people you hate and whining about wanting to die so much every time they visit your page. So, go see a therapist, go talk to God, go talk to family, or go talk to a friend or a trusted coworker OFF THE COMPUTER because you need an attitude change. *Grabs you by the front of your shirt and pulls you up to his nose.* DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME??? DO I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR, YOU IGNORANT, UNGRATEFUL, WEAK-MINDED MOONBAT??????

Ok jeez

"Ok jeez" isn't gonna work this time, son. That usually means, "Okay, I'll do it, and then I'll forget about it the next day and do my same shtick again." Listen: I've been on this site longer than you have, so I know what it takes to bring people into my gallery: putting on a HAPPY FACE.

Now, I need you to show me some respect when I say that you need an attitude change. From now on, when I give you an order, I expect you to say, "Yes, sir." After that, I want you to follow up on that order. Any breaks from that order will result in disciplinary action. Do you understand?

Grizmoblust #fundie reddit.com

[OP of "Orthodox Russia teach a world a lesson"]

To Autistic Left, here's a post that'll piss you off. :)

Putin Russia build a new helicopter.

Putin Russia just recently killed over 130 ISIS military troops.

Putin Russia praise (((JESUS))).

Putin resurrect the destroyed churches from Atheist Jew-Communist Regime.

Russian Women are angels.

Putin is the leader of Faith, and Western Civilization.

What have USSA done? Absolutely nothing but brought misery to everybody's lives.

It is time to physically remove USSA Jews, Atheist-Commies, and Islam.

Emad Abed #racist #conspiracy queerty.com

Cheers was the name of a gay bar set to open soon in Minneapolis, Minnesota. But it might never see a single customer now that its owners anti-Semitic social media posts have caused an uproar.

Emad Abed, the bar’s owner, had his previous anti-Semitic posts shared online. In them, he claimed that the “Jew-nited States of America” is controlled by “a handful” of “zionist Jews” and that “all the world’s problems are caused by Israelis & Jews.”

In one particularly odious post, he wrote (with typos):

Did you know Israel & it’s people must be eliminated from existence. They are like cancer, Europe got rid of this disease in World War One & Two by moving this disease to ‘PALESTINE’. Now as Palestinians we are stuck with this horrible sh*t until we eliminate them from existence.

The bar was originally planning on opening this last Friday, according to its now-defunct GoFundMe page. But since Abed’s posts have circulated online, it has also deactivated its Facebook page and a local group called “Queers Against Cheers” has organized an upcoming protest.

[...]

In a response to critics of his anti-Semitic posts, Abed reportedly wrote:

This community is a joke. We don’t want their business or support. They can take their money to the Saloon & Gay 90. Without this group commenting on this post we will do big business and we will be the number one gay bar in town Without all the stupid losers commenting on this post (Facebook user) Andy Birkey can take his post and shuv it up his gay *ss. ?? this group here they are all racist, prejudice, biased and discriminatory, that’s why they are not welcome in my bar. My bar will still be number one without them and without their money.

Surely he’s trolling the entire community, right? You couldn’t invent a more cartoonish villain.

But considering that the bar was already facing eviction over $21,625.56 in unpaid rent and fees, perhaps Abed’s entire venture was never going to happen anyway, anti-Semitic posts or no.

metabuxx #sexist incels.co

[RageFuel] I told my sister about the dogpill

My sister was showing my parents pictures from the camping trip she took last week with her friends and there were NO pictures in which there wasn't a dog. Some of her friends had brought their dogs along and they were all hugging and kissing those brutes in those pictures. It was so fucking infuriating. I felt like ripping my face off.

When my parents were gone I couldn't hold it in any longer so I told her all about the dogpill. I showed her the gif in which a Stacy was sucking a dog's tongue. I told her that all female dog owners have sex with their pets when they are unable to find a Chad. I even showed her the blog written by a woman in which she was teaching other women how to fuck dogs.

And her reaction was like "What the hell is wrong with you?". To the gif she replied "Every dog owner kisses their dogs" and for the blog she said "Must be a troll pretending to be a woman". She was acting grossed out and told me to stay off the internet for a long time.

Typical female dismissive mentality, the moment a man comes close to discerning a woman's nature they start getting defensive. Then the shaming tactics comes in which they blame us for watching gross stuff rather than accepting the fact that they are ones doing it.

I wanted to show her bestality videos which had the potential to destroy each one of her lame arguments but I didn't want to take it that far so I backed off.

Saudi Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice and Sheik Abdul-Aziz bin Baz #fundie jonathanturley.org

[Links in original]

In Saudi Arabia, the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice is a religious police force that has been a constant presence in the Kingdom arresting woman having coffee with colleagues or forcing young girls to burn to death in fire rather than run out without their scarves. Then there was the time that the religious police in Dammam marched into a popular dinosaur exhibit and shut it down without any explanation of why the dinosaurs threatened the virtue of good Muslims. Then there was the flogging of a women who insulted them. Then there are the round ups of religious people for simply praying at home. Then there is the arrest of a man for standing in line with his wife at a grocery store. The list goes on and on. The latest entry is the arrest of young men for simply dancing at a birthday party. Birthday parties have been denounced by Saudi clerics as unIslamic, but this the first such arrest that many can recall that did not involve dancing with women.

The Vice police in Buraydah arrested the men for “loud music and inappropriate dancing.” The charge reflected the medieval views of the dominant Wahhabi sect of Islam. The police said that the young men were in “a comprising situation in their dance and shameful movements.” There was even a birthday cake. There is enough to send the Vice police into a fence. Recall that grand mufti Sheik Abdul-Aziz bin Baz declared that “It’s not permissible to take part in them. Birthday parties are an innovation . . . and people are in no need of innovations.”

The Vice police also noted that they saw the hair styles of the men as non-traditional and said that such styles are dangerous and “can lead to immorality and even homosexuality.”

RopeIsMyLove #sexist #psycho incels.co

Spousal """rape""" should be legal.

Marriage essentially is exchange-agreement. Husband provides material support for his wife, wife gives him access to his holes. In past it was most common way of getting access to foids hole for majority of men.
The fact that the husband doesn't even has exclusive access to his wife's holes makes marriage redundant enough, but what's cucked is that a husband needs to beg his wife for permission to said holes.

tl;dr; Concept of spousal rape is incoherent and illogical, because act of marriage is an act of consent.

Sex In Christ #fundie sexinchrist.com

If, on the other hand, a married couple feels their relationship would benefit from them establishing a loving involvement another woman, out of respect for the couple’s marriage, and out of respect for any marital attachments of the other woman, they must abide by certain limits and conditions:

(1) To avoid the impropriety of male homosexuality, a heterosexual couple should not under any circumstances form a threesome with another man.
(2) Both women involved in the threesome must be willing to keep within traditional female roles (i.e., not taking on masculine appearance or behavior in or out of the bedroom) and recognize the male as the leader in the relationship.
(3) If the wife’s lesbian sex partner is unmarried, it may be permissible for the husband to have relations with her only with his wife’s consent.
(4) If the wife’s lesbian sex partner is unmarried, but the wife does not wish her to have relations with the other woman, the husband should respect this.
(5) If the wife’s lesbian sex partner is married, her husband must not have objections to the relationship.
(6) If the wife’s lesbian sex partner is married, the husband should refrain from having any sexual relations with her, and should make every effort to control his fantasies about her. He should concentrate his attention on his own wife.

Personalityinkwell & ShadowTheEdgehog #sexist #psycho incels.co

(Personalityinkwell)

[SuicideFuel] The middle school orgy pill is one of the most brutal blackpills.

A roleta sexual dos adolescentes portugueses

using translate, this is the part I was able to get.

The sexual roulette of Portuguese teenagers

They consume pornography, have sex in the bathrooms of schools and nightclubs, meet for orgies washed down with alcohol and drugs.

"Sometimes we don't know who we're going to have sex with in that party - it's a surprise. In those parties we are with more than one person in the same night, normally only one at a time, unless we're doing the roulette game (in which they trade partners). These parties are only for the popular kids. The normal parties are for the virgins who do not smoke or drink, in these there is no sex."

Also, ever hear of "rainbow parties"?

The unsexy truth, the hookup culture | Lisa Bunnage | TEDxSFU

little girls are making boys penises rainbow, how cute :soy:

Lastly, girls who are 14 (and likely younger), are playing "The Sun", a game where they get a train ran on them by about 5 chads at once.

If you're a Chad, the way to "win" this game is to be the last dude to cum

NEW SEX GAME IN POLAND

In Ostróda, a small Polish town with 34,000 inhabitants located 200 km from Warsaw, and famous for its relaxing natural surroundings, the polemic is big. Five Polish girls around 14-15 years got pregnant after playing sex games with their schoolmates.

The controversy has originated after a game known as "star" or "sun" became popular among young Poles. In this sex game, girls lay on the floor in a circle with their heads together and eyes closed and boys copulate with them, taking turns. The winner is the boy who managed to finish the intercourse last.

IT fags will tell you these girls are "innocent", when they are attending orgies. IT will want to deny this, since they are incels themselves, but the proof is documented above in multiple sources.

as someone who is portuguese that google translation is accurate.brutal but it makes sense.top 10% nut on everything that is below a 7.Girls who are 7+ start acting stingy.

wait, so the stacylites and stacies act "stingy" towards chads?

Never had an orgy in my middle school years. It's over, isn't it?

tbh

@Ropemaxx remember when IT denied that kids in middle school have sex? :feelskek:

@ionlycopenow this stuff happens before college, I'm starting to wonder if it happened at my school. :feelshmm:

(ShadowTheEdgehog)

Portugal + Poland should be shelled for at least 3 years without pause. When it's all done we build two giant cathedrals on the burned ashes, cathedrals so big you can see them from space.

Katyusha Rockets - USSR

Jfl at the polish article trying to construe the situation against catholic puritans claiming that lack of sex educations does this. No you motherfuckers, those children don't need sex education, they need a beating bombing.

fixed.

In the Video you see Poland when I grab the power in 2030.

Activists Allege Russian Cluster Bombing in Syria

Weimar Republic levels of degeneracy yet again.

Bro, if I had a daughter and I got wind of this, I would wait for their next Meeting, bust in the room and detonate fucking Thermite Right on her exposed ass crack.

as someone who is portuguese that google translation is accurate.brutal but it makes sense.top 10% nut on everything that is below a 7.Girls who are 7+ start acting stingy.

Bro. Leave your Country ASAP. Word on the street says that Bomber Harris has risen from the dead and he's headed for Portugal.

image

im only 5ft8, maybe i can sneak there.

Maybe I can Sneak a tactical warhead in there.

image

image

@Ropemaxx remember when IT denied that kids in middle school have sex? :feelskek:

@ionlycopenow this stuff happens before college, I'm starting to wonder if it happened at my school. :feelshmm:

STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP

YOU JUST REMINDED ME I just to think it was weird in School how Kids would go to the bathroom, Girls and Boys after each other, you know? I had fantasies About sex in the bathroom but I thoguht that was just in my mind.

At some Point the School only let one or two People out at the same time.

I also just remembered that a Boy and a Girl got caught making out in an empty classroom.

HOLY FUCK IT WAS ALL REAL HOLY FUCK HOLY FUCK AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

image

Mike King #conspiracy #racist tomatobubble.com

It is amazing how this stinking movie genre of World War II lies, which started with The Great Dictator in 1940, is still going strong after 77 years! Boy oh boy, evidently The Great One (that's Hitler for all youse newbies and normies) must have really shaken the New World Order gang to its rotten Satanic core.

Though we just cannot bring ourselves to the theater and subject our volatile emotions to two hours of fraudulent filth on the big screen, based on reviewing several extended You Tube trailers, and in light of the fact that a “historian” named Joshua Levine (cough cough) was hired to help develop the script, we already know the oh-so-predictable historical spin of the Dunkirk “escape” that this propaganda film will surely present. Let us debunk the lasting lie about “the miracle at Dunkirk.”

Sandwiched around our explanation of why the British were able to so easily “escape” at Dunkirk, are critical bits of before and after historical context, excerpted from “The Bad War: The Truth Never Taught About World War II.”

1. As part of prepping the American public for eventual entry into World War II, Communist Charlie Chaplin, described in FBI files as a "secret Jew" (here), mercilessly mocks Hitler in 1940 film, The Great Dictator. 2. Fake historian Joshua Levine (cough cough) collaborated on the script of Dunkirk. 3. The Bad War (banned by Amazon) sets the record straight! (here)

OCTOBER, 1939 — MAY, 1940

HITLER PLEADS FOR PEACE WITH BRITAIN & FRANCE

The quiet period between the end of the German-Polish (started by Poland) war until May 1940, is dubbed by a U.S. Senator as "The Phony War." During this time, Hitler pleads for the Allies to withdraw their war declarations. Towards France he declares:.

“I have always expressed to France my desire to bury forever our ancient enmity and bring together these two nations, both of which have such glorious pasts."

To the British, Hitler says:

“I have devoted no less effort to the achievement of Anglo-German friendship. At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests—.Why should this war in the West be fought?”

Hitler’s pleas for peace are ignored as the allies begin to mobilize more than 2,000,000 troops in Northern France. Plans are openly discussed to advance eastward upon Germany, via “neutral” Belgium and Holland, as well as establishing operations in “neutral” Norway and Denmark, with or without their consent.

During his speech of October 6, 1939, Hitler pleaded for peace. Meanwhile, the British government shamelessly frightened its own people with idiotic tales of imminent German gas attacks.

MAY 10, 1940

GERMANY LAUNCHES PRE-EMPTIVE INVASION OF BELGIUM & THE NETHERLANDS

The massive invasion of Germany’s industrial Ruhr region is to come through the ostensibly “neutral” League of Nations member states of Belgium and The Netherlands, whose governments are under intense Allied pressure to allow safe passage for the planned Allied attack on the bordering Ruhr region of Germany.

As an act of national self-defense, Germany takes the fight to the Allies before they can bring it to German soil and reinstitute a 2nd Versailles Treaty. In a stunning advance westward, the German Blitzkrieg quickly overtakes the smaller nations and pushes the Allied armies into a full retreat towards the beaches of northern France.

The Globo-Zionist press, as well as today’s history books, portrays the Blitz as “the Nazi conquest of Holland, Belgium, and France.” But the menacing presence of the massive Allied force on Germany’s industrial frontier is conveniently ignored, as is the undeniable and extensive collaboration between the “neutral” Low Countries and the Allies.

After the invasion, the German government published “Allied Intrigue in the Low Countries.” which is a 50-page English language paper detailing the full extent of Belgian and Dutch cooperation with the Allies. The western press and modern court-historians have buried these allegations.

MAY 27 — JUNE 4, 1940

AS A SIGN OF FRIENDSHIP, HITLER ALLOWS THE ALLIED ARMIES TO ESCAPE AT DUNKIRK

After Germany’s stunning advance, the Allies are trapped on the beaches of Dunkirk, France. The entire force can be easily captured, but Hitler issues a halt order --- since spun by court historians as being due to concern over tanks getting stuck in mud or just plain carelessness.

The truth is, Hitler doesn’t want war. As a show of good faith towards his western tormentors, Hitler believes that the British will be more likely to make peace if they can escape with their dignity intact.

A massive boat lift involving British fishermen ferries the troops across the English Channel back to England. The Globalist Press maliciously spins Hitler’s gracious act as a “miraculous escape right under Hitler’s nose.”

The alcoholic Winston Churchill vows to keep fighting as he frightens the British people with tales of imminent German invasion.

"He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilization that Britain had brought into the world. ....He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church ­ saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany's position on the Continent. The return of Germany's colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties anywhere."

- German General Gunther von Blumentritt

MAY - JUNE, 1940

CHURCHILL DELIVERS HISTORIC RADIO ADDRESSES USING A VOICE ACTOR TO IMPERSONATE HIM

Throughout the spring and early summer of 1940, the brainwashed people of Britain cluster around their radios to hear defiant and motivational oratory from what they believe is the mouth of their new Prime Minister.

The ‘We Shall Fight on the Beaches’ Speech

On June 4, after the evacuation of the defeated British army from Dunkirk, the radio version of the British Mad Dog pledges:

"We shall fight on the seas and oceans. We shall fight in the air. We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets. We shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender."

“And if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British fleet would carry on the struggle until, in God’s good time, the New World (United States) with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”

It is now known, in spite of what some ‘in-denial’ Churchill sycophants still refuse to accept, that this radio broadcast and others, were made not by Churchill, but by an actor hired to impersonate him. Norman Shelley, who voiced for Winnie-the-Pooh for the BBC's Children's Hour, ventriloquized Churchill for history and fooled tens of millions of listeners.

Perhaps Churchill is too much incapacitated by drink to deliver the speeches himself; or perhaps his difficult-to-understand speech has been deemed not suitable for a radio audience. So you see, not only was Churchill the “literary giant” a proven plagiarist who also used ghostwriters; it turns out that Churchill the “orator” was also a sham!

- Nothing is real about the British Mad Dog — nothing! 2- Norman Shelley delivered the most famous radio speeches in 20th Century British History 3- Shelley later voiced for the children’s cartoon character ‘Winnie the Pooh’ -- an inside joke made to mock ‘Winston the Piece of Crap’, perhaps?

JULY 20, 1940

HITLER DROPS ‘PEACE LEAFLETS’ OVER LONDON!

With Germany in total control of the continent and the war situation, Hitler responds to Churchill’s unilateral air bombardment by dropping mass quantities of leaflets over London. The 4-page broadsheet contains an English language summary of Hitler’s recent speech before the Reichstag. The speech is entitled, “A Last Appeal to Reason,” in which he closes with a final appeal for peace:

"In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Great Britain as much as elsewhere. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal, since I am not the vanquished, begging favors, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I can see no reason why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices it will claim.

Possibly Mr. Churchill again will brush aside this statement of mine by saying that it is merely born of fear and of doubt in our final victory. In that case I shall have relieved my conscience in regard to the things to come.”

The British respond to Hitler’s sincere plea with mockery, threats, and more bombs. UK warmonger Sefton Delmer, the future head and mastermind of British “Black Propaganda,” is just about to make his debut broadcast to Germany on the BBC when he hears about Hitler’s "last appeal to reason." He rejects any notion of a compromise peace. Bigmouth Delmer announces:

"Herr Hitler," you have in the past consulted me as to the mood of the British public. So permit me to render your Excellency this little service once again tonight. Let me tell you what we here in Britain think of this appeal of yours to what you are pleased to call our reason and common sense. Herr Führer, we hurl it right back at you, right in your evil smelling teeth."

Delmer's inflammatory statement upset a few peace-minded Members of Parliament, but undoubtedly pleased Churchill, his Jewish handlers, and other assorted "patriots" very much.

And that, dear reader, is the true before-during-after story of Dunkirk that you’ll neither see nor hear out of Jewish Hollywood. Sight unseen, (other than the various extended trailers) we give this soon-to-be released "summer blockbuster" one big "rotten tomato." Save your money, and pick up a copy of The Bad War and/or The Hitler Photo Album instead.

Boobus Americanus 1: I am looking forward to that movie about the British escape at Dunkirk.

Boobus Americanus 2: Me too. World War II movies never seem to go out of style.

Sugar: That's becausse the &^%$#*%* @%&* run frickin' Hollywood, you idiot!!!

Editor: And the Fake News, and the major universities, and the banking system, and Wall Street, and the courts, and the arts too.

Robert DeNiro, MEP Michèle Rivasi, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Philippe Diaz and Cinema Libre Studio #conspiracy vaxxedthemovie.com

February 10, 2017 – America’s most controversial documentary, Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe, will premiere in Belgium, the U.K and France this week despite significant censorship attempts by European Union parliamentary members, the Mayor of Paris and a U.K. cinema owner. The film investigates the charges made by a whistleblower at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the leading national public health institute of the United States, who revealed that the agency manipulated data on an important study showing a causal link between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism.

Vaxxed captured international headlines last year after it was “de-selected” from the Tribeca Film Festival due to pressure put on the festival’s organizers from sponsors with connections to the pharmaceutical industry. Despite numerous attempts at incorrectly labeling the film as “anti-vaccine” and overt censorship from festivals and media outlets, the film was released theatrically in over 60 U.S and Canadian cities, with an additional 500 screening events, has grossed over $1.2 million at the box office and sold tens of thousands of DVDs and digital streams. The filmmakers have been touring the nation by bus, the [I]Vaxxed[/I] tour, and have recorded nearly ten thousand vaccine injury stories. Robert DeNiro, one of Tribeca Film Festival’s founders, who originally advocated for the film, famously said on national television, “I think the movie is something that people should see.”

Vaxxed was scheduled to have a European premiere on Thursday, February 9th at the European Parliament in Brussels as part of a Parliament sponsored discussion on vaccine safety organized by French MEP Michèle Rivasi. Due to a disinformation campaign led by a small, but vocal, opposition group with purported ties to the pharmaceutical industry, European deputies made the decision to censor the film and prevent it from screening at the Parliament. Both the screening and this unprecedented all-day vaccine safety debate with leading vaccination experts and scientific professionals from several European countries was moved to Espace Lumen and took place on February 9th. More information can be found here: https://www.suretevaccins.com

MEP Rivasi had also scheduled a screening of the film in Paris on Monday, February 13th as part of a vaccine safety debate with leading vaccination experts and scientific professionals to take place at City Hall in the 2nd arrondissement. Yesterday, the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, cancelled that screening without even seeing the film. The screening and the vaccine safety debate have been moved to an alternate venue and will continue as originally planned.

Last week, the Curzon Cinemas in London censored the film by cancelling what would have been the Tuesday, February 14th U.K. premiere after buckling to pressure from the same opposition group with propertied ties to the pharmaceutical industry. The February 14th London premiere of Vaxxed has also been moved to another venue, and will continue as planned.

“It is deplorable that the Mayor of Paris and some members of the European Parliament caved to the pressure of a small cadre of zealots, without having seen the film or having asked to see it. It’s even more deplorable that major press outlets like Le Monde or The Times embrace the polemic created from scratch by the pharmaceutical industries for the last 20 years to prevent a real study on vaccine safety. The reason for the fuss is due to the film’s director, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who questioned the safety of the MMR vaccine in 1998, which challenged the multi billion dollar revenue streams of Glaxo-Kline-Smith and Merck who hold the major share of the MMR vaccine market in the U.K. and U.S. This resulted in an unwarranted, coordinated smear campaign against Dr. Wakefield in the U.K. that is still present today,” says Philippe Diaz, Chairman of Cinema Libre Studio, the distributor of Vaxxed.

With a worldwide network of vaccine safety activists, organizations and whistleblowers in the U.K. and Europe including the [B]European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance[/B] (EFFV/UK), Info Vaccin Prevenar (France) and Mrs. Senta Depuydt (Belgium), Cinema Libre Studio will continue to move forward with the release of Vaxxed in the U.S., the U.K. and worldwide, to help aid open discussions about vaccine safety.

Vaxxed is produced by British filmmaker Polly Tommey of the Autism Media Channel and Del Bigtree, an American and former producer of the hit show “The Doctors.”

Vaxxed director Wakefield says, “The film is about self-confessed fraud in MMR vaccine safety science by Dr. William Thompson, a Senior Scientist from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC scientists concealed a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism, and destroyed documents to cover their tracks. The film is not about myself, although it supports my original research. The UK’s General Medical Council’s conduct and conclusions in respect to my 1998 Lancet paper have been heavily criticized and comprehensively overturned by the English High Court.”

Gingor #homophobia #transphobia reddit.com

Straight men of Ask Men who object to gay (and bi?) guys in the locker room: why?

They are men that might find me sexually attractive and I'm not gay.
They should get their own locker room.

If they're not sexually assaulting you, ogling you, or otherwise treating you in ways that are inappropriate, then why? What's your objection?

I don't want men to be attracted to me, and I certainly don't want men that are attracted to me anywhere near me when I'm naked.

The thought of two men together grosses me out a lot (nothing against gays, as long as they don't do PDA though, do in your bedroom whatever you want), and me being one of those men in someone else's head is just outright vomit-inducing.

Straight Men: Do you see male-to-female transsexuals as female and/or women? If so, would you pursue one?

I'd be perfectly happy to treat them as women, as it makes them feel better and I don't really care, but female they are not. Females are born female while gender can be chosen.

I'm only attracted to females.

Edit: And before someone claims it again: I don't hate transsexuals. I don't think they should be beaten or killed or what have you. I simply don't want to sleep with them and believe that they should state their transsexual status before having sex for the first time, as it's a dealbreaker for a lot of people.

Would you have sex with a [b]transman[/b] (pre-op or post-op)?
Pre-op: If he looked sufficiently feminine, yes.

Post-op: Nope.

I'm a trans guy (so I was born female, but identify as male and am starting to [b]transition with hormones, chest surgery,[/b] name change, dress, etc). I'm mostly into men


I'd be more open to a relationship with you as a straight man.
I mean, you were born a woman, so it isn't really gay. Might be worth a shot, just for the experience.

Feynman and Coulter's Love Child #sexist 3edgesword.blogspot.com

[From "Liberal Staffers are considering suicide. We should help them. With razorblade donations."]

By now you've heard the story about the pathetic assistant to a Liberal MP who is so incompetent and incapable of being a man that he has twice tried to commit suicide but can't even succeed at that. And now this pathetic little faggot is daring to lecture Canadians on "not doing enough".

Let's be clear: Paul Wernick is a sad pathetic excuse for a man. He always has been. Without somebody willing to tell him to stop whining and abandon his illegitimate sexual perversions he never will be. Like all homos (and many Liberal staffers) he has severe mental retardation. His brain is broken. And only he can fix it.

Don't believe me? Take a look at this pillow-biters hilariously obtuse 2014 article about fraternity life.

My childhood dog and playmate passed away. I decided to go to a Greek Hockey League game and as I saw one brother approach me, I was expecting to receive a firm handshake and a quick conversation to forget my troubles.

Instead I was called a homophobic slur for the hat I was wearing. I tried to laugh and pretend it was a joke but as I tried to create a conversation, the brother walked off.

I have always been one to accept challenges but I was not ready to meekly accept insults somehow deemed to test pledges. I brought the story to higher leadership within the chapter. I was told that this particular brother once had effeminate qualities with the implication that he had now grown out of it. Somehow this was supposed to help me understand what had happened to me.

What happened, Paul you pathetic uranist, was that you lost your dog. Yeah it happens. Being a dog owner is going to inevitably come with dog loss (unless, say, you jump off a bridge before that happens hint hint). You deal with this loss by DEALING WITH THE LOSS. Begging somebody else, who doesn't really actually know you mind you, to amortize your loss so that your monthly payments are smaller is a coping mechanism and not a particularly good one.

Good on your fraternity's "higher leadership" to call you out on this. You're being a pathetic sodomite. Expecting another guy who has wisely rejected this sick and evil lifestyle to feed into your toxic downward spiral (and eventually shove a dog bone up your ass) is foolhardy. Had you learned this lesson rather than wrote a butthurt article about it, maybe today we would be free of drivel from you about how "working 60 hour weeks" for a political power that you want to implement your evil sodomite policies needs to change just [U]because[/U] you can't cope with issues without trying to swallow rat poison.

(As an aside Paul, you can't get good rat poison in Canada anymore. You will just have to guzzle bleach. Lots of it. It's at Walmart)

Wernick said he didn't know about the EFAP option until after his first suicide attempt, when a longtime staffer told him about it, and that he'd like to see people from the Prime Minister's Office and minister's offices talk to new staff about the importance of taking care of themselves.

No. Absolutely no. I'm 100% against this.

IF YOU ARE A LIBERAL STAFFER YOU ALREADY KNOW EXACTLY HOW TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. YOU NEED NO HELP.

After all, I've seen your people's ideas on how to take care of the country and how you plan on taking care of citizens under your evil PM's yoke. They are horrible and destructive. So if that's your level of thinking, I want you to apply to to yourself.

Continue until you're as dead as Paul Wernick keeps trying to be but can't because he's a pathetic piece of trash.

Historical revisionists on Croatian Wikipedia #fundie balkaninsight.com

26 MAR 18

ANALYSIS

How Croatian Wikipedia Made a Concentration Camp Disappear

Unlike Wikipedia in other languages, the Croatian version refers to the WWII Jasenovac concentration camp as a “collection camp” - as well as playing down fascist crimes and ignoring right-wingers’ controversies.

Sven Milekic | BIRN | Zagreb

With its nationalist sentiments, factual mistakes, lack of academic references and omitted facts about World War II history, Croatian Wikipedia is not a reliable source, analysts have told BIRN.

Articles that refer to the Croatian WWII fascist Ustasa movement and its crimes are criticised as particularly unreliable, ideologically loaded and imprecise, thus downplaying the crimes.

The clearest example is the Ustasa’s biggest concentration camp, Jasenovac, which in the title of the Croatian Wikipedia article is referred to as “Jasenovac Collection Camp” - a term which does not have such negative connotations as ‘concentration camp’.

According to the Jasenovac Memorial Site, the Ustasa killed over 83,000 Serbs, Jews, Roma and anti-fascists in the camp between 1941 and 1945.

The camp was used as a concentration camp as well as a labour camp – in terms of labour being used to physically debilitate inmates, causing their deaths – and a death camp, as many detainees were executed at various sites in the camp system immediately or soon after their arrival.

The Croatian far right often refers to Jasenovac as a “collection”, “labour” or “punishment” camp.

Wikimedia entries in other languages – English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Russian – refer to Jasenovac as a concentration or extermination camp in their titles.

But on Croatian Wikipedia, even the biggest Nazi death camp, Auschwitz, is referred to in the title of the entry as the “Auschwitz Collection Camp”.

image

Hrvoje Klasic, a historian at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Studies in Zagreb, told BIRN that “there is a large difference” between English-language and Croatian Wikipedia.

He explained how sometimes he tells his students to look something up on English-language Wikipedia if the article has plenty of academic and scientific references.

“However, I would never give Croatian Wikipedia to my students if they want to learn something about the Croatian history. I myself saw that a number of articles and topics are done in a completely revisionist manner, with highly emphasised nationalist and, I would dare to say, pro-Ustasa sentiment,” Klasic said, arguing that entries on World War II, socialist Yugoslavia and Croatia’s 1990s war.

While the article on the Jasenovac camp in English has 187 reference notes, along with 37 references to books and two to academic articles, the Croatian version has 57 reference notes - with a large number coming from right-wing media and private blogs - and only three books.

Klasic said that although Jasenovac was in part a labour camp, referring to it as that alone is misleading.

“It’s completely the same as if I wrote a book on the Third Reich and simply stated that during its time, employment and industrial production went up, saying that citizens’ living standard improved. That is all correct if you exclude all that happened to all the others who weren’t seen as part of the German nation,” he said.

He also argued that by referring to Jasenovac as simply a collection and labour camp is to use “the same language” as Ustasa propaganda, which did not publicly mention killings in the camp. All this downplays the crimes committed there, Klasic said.

BIRN asked Croatian Wikipedia’s administrators for a comment, but received no reply.

In the talk section of the entry on Jasenovac, where readers can put questions to the administrators, they were asked about the use of the term “collection camp” back in 2012.

An administrator using the alias SpeedyGonsales replied that the camp was officially called Jasenovac Collection Camp by the Ustasa and that the description ‘concentration camp’ was just a “colloquialism”.

“Without a valid explanation, I do not see a reason for doing factual and linguistic violence to the article for the benefit of a colloquialism. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, let’s respect the principles of an encyclopaedia,” SpeedyGonsales said.

image

Wikipedia in English labels Jasenovac as a "concentration camp", while German puts "KZ", an acronym for Konzentrationslager (concentration camp). Photo: Wikipedia screenshot.

Goran Hutinec, a historian at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Studies in Zagreb said the problem lies in the fact that the official name for Jasenovac “does not truly describe the function of the camp”.

“It looks as someone isn’t aware that the term used back then [collection camp] may not have same meaning now. I mean, it partly had that function… but clearly not only that function,” Hutinec told BIRN.

He said that Jasenovac was used for the temporary internment of political prisoners – like Croatian politician Vlatko Macek, who spent five months in Jasenovac before being released – as well as a place for the execution of people “who didn’t even enter the camp upon arrival, but were quickly transported to nearby killing sites”.

Hutinec argued that even Auschwitz had “ten different purposes for which it was used” – as a death camp and a labour camp, amongst other purposes. He added that the same could be said about Jasenovac and other WWII-era camps run by the Ustasa.

He further argued that the Croatian Wikipedia has “many shortcomings, factual mistakes and ideologically loaded language” compare to the English and German versions.

The Jasenovac entry on Croatian Wikipedia has yet more disputed sections.

Almost 40 per cent of the entry on Jasenovac is given over to allegations that the name-by-name list of the victims of the camp – compiled by Jasenovac Memorial Site – is false.

It highlight allegations that with the number of people killed has been manipulated, and also talks about a post-WWII Communist-run camp at the same site, although there is no valid historical proof that it ever existed.

In these passages, Croatian Wikipedia mostly focuses on a highly controversial Zagreb-based NGO called the Society for Research of the Threefold Jasenovac Camp. The NGO mostly involves people who are not professional historians, who estimate the death toll as low as 1,500 – significantly lower than any other historians.

In the entry on Jasenovac, Croatian Wikipedia gives Igor Vukic, the Society’s secretary, a professional journalist, the same credit as professional historians.

image

Spanish Wikipedia refers to Jasenovac as a "concentration camp", while French labels it an "extermination camp". Photo: Wikipedia screenshot.

The English version mentions disputes about camp’s death toll, offering figures which have been offered by many historians, demographers and others, but it does not state that the current numbers have manipulated, nor does it mentions the alleged post-war Communist camp which is claimed by the Society to have existed.

Instead, the English version gives a lot of space to describing the living conditions in the camp, the mass murders committed there, and how many people coming to Jasenovac were “scheduled for systematic extermination”.

In describing the conditions, crimes and killings at the camp, Croatian Wikipedia gives one quote from a former inmate and one additional sentence.

The distinct difference that Croatian Wikipedia displays when covering the Ustasa past can be seen in entries on the movement’s leader, Ante Pavelic.

“Ante Pavelic… was a Croatian fascist general and military dictator who founded and headed the fascist ultranationalist organisation known as the Ustase in 1929 and governed the Independent State of Croatia a fascist Nazi puppet state built out of Yugoslavia by the authorities of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy,” the first sentence of the article in English reads.

It mentions large-scale crimes against Serbs, Jews, Roma and anti-fascists in the second sentence.

Croatian Wikipedia describes Pavelic as “a Croatian politician, lawyer, leader and founder of the Ustasa regime and poglavnik [head] of the Independent State of Croatia”.

The English version gives several times more space to the crimes of Pavelic’s regime and its dictatorial nature.

Also related to the topic of the Ustasa, in its article on the Croatian film director Jakov Sedlar, Croatian Wikipedia leaves out all the controversies surrounding his documentary on the camp, ‘Jasenovac - The Truth’.

The film, which premiered in Zagreb in April 2016, has been strongly criticised for appearing to downplay the crimes committed at the camp.

While the Croatian Wikipedia entry does not mention the issue at all, the English version has an entire section headlined ‘Controversies’, as well as a whole separate article on the film, mentioning all the alleged evidence that Sedlar used which was disputed.

Croatian Wikipedia also does not scrutinise some other controversial public figures.

In its entry on former Culture Minister Zlatko Hasanbegovic, Croatian Wikipedia completely leaves out weekly newspaper Novosti’s discovery that he wrote an article for a pro-fascist bulletin called the Independent State of Croatia in 1996, in which he described the Ustasa as “heroes and martyrs”. The English-language Wikipedia mentions it, and offers links.

Public figures on the left are put under much more scrutiny by the Croatian Wikipedia.

In the entry on ‘Left Extremism in Croatia’, veteran peace activist Vesna Terselic, Croatian Serb leader Milorad Pupovac and some anti-fascist organisations are named as proponents of extremism who block attempts to deal with Communist-era crimes.

Sometimes certain contributors on the Croatian Wikipedia have gone too far and the administrators – who approve all the articles – have had to step in and make changes.

When Predrag Lucic, a journalist, editor, writer, and one of the founders of the legendary anti-establishment magazine Feral Tribune died in January, the initial Croatian Wikipedia entry offered a somewhat insulting description of his achievements.

“By mocking people with different political positions, he has achieved tremendous success among Yugonostalgics, admirers of communism and opponents of independent Croatia. There is not a single serious journalistic piece [by Lucic] that a cultural critic would give a passing grade,” it read.


Note:

Who owns Croatian Wikipedia?

The Wikimedia Foundation Inc, a US-based non-profit charitable NGO, is the owner of the Croatian version of Wikipedia.

However, the Wikimedia Foundation is not the founder of the Croatian version, nor does it accept that it is responsible for the accuracy of its articles. It insists that it does not have any power over Croatian-language Wikipedia entries.

All the administrators and associates on Croatian Wikipedia are volunteers.

Beast0fNight #conspiracy reddit.com

Sleep paralysis is real, but so are paranormal encounters.
There are easy ways to tell them apart that shouldn't be disregarded.
Most sleep paralysis episodes disappear after a few seconds, and after you are fully awake.
In rare cases they will last several minutes, but during most of these rare cases it is more often than not that the victim of sleep paralysis cannot actually move.
The actual definition of sleep paralysis:
"A temporary inability to move or speak while falling asleep or upon waking."
Factors that contribute to an encounter not being sleep paralysis:
Being fully conscious and physically able during an encounter significantly reduces its viability of being sleep paralysis.
Most genuine sleep paralysis is extremely temporary, because it is affected by your bodies ability to fully leave REM sleep. Sleep paralysis occurs when the body enters REM sleep and then it wakes up and has a hard time transitioning out of REM sleep. Which means most true sleep paralysis episodes, a person will not be fully awake.
REM sleep is the state where the body reaches deep sleep and is essentially lucid dreaming. Sleep paralysis is like dreaming with your eyes open. Once the body is fully awake and conscious, enough to move, sleep paralysis can pretty much be ruled out as most sleep paralysis type apparitions will disappear after a few seconds if you're fully awake.
A good way to fully wake yourself during an episode, is to stare at the wall, away from what you might have seen, blink, move your head a bit, and think to yourself am I fully awake? What is it I'm seeing etc. If you're fully awake enough to turn around, and calculate your thoughts, any sleep paralysis apparition will likely be gone. If it is not gone. If you see the shadow of such figure on your wall, or you hear it interact with items in your room it is likely not sleep paralysis.
Two other major factors that rule out sleep paralysis.
Multiple witnesses.
Two people sleeping next to each other will not experience sleep paralysis at the same time, if two people wake up and see something abnormal, they both see it, it's probably there.
Pets are another factor that is able to rule out sleep paralysis.
How pets react is a huge one, they will not see your sleep paralysis based apparitions, however they will sense a paranormal presence, even before you. Dogs will likely bark like mad in fear, and some dogs will even piss themselves. As their sense of smell is so strong that they know when something they're seeing is not human or a common animal, and it will scare them probably even more than it scares you.
If this happens, if pets react, if someone next to you sees the same abnormal presence, there is a good chance it is not sleep paralysis.

Jackie Hammock #fundie rawstory.com

A man from Lake Wales, Florida this week was arrested after he released five dogs to attack a poodle owned by a man who he called a “Muslim terrorist.”

Azard Baksh told WFLA that the incident happened on Monday when his poodle, Myra, had stopped to relieve herself near 72-year-old Jackie Hammock’s home.

“He came out the side gate. He was nude. Yep, completely nude,” Baksh recalled.

Baksh said that Hammock had threatened to release the dogs previously, telling the poodle’s owner he was a “Muslim terrorist, Islamic Muslim terrorist. Go back where you come from.”

But on Monday, Hammock followed through with the threat, and sent his five dogs to attack the poodle.

“The big mother dog came and grabbed Myra, shook her like a teddy bear. And I started screaming,” Baksh explained. “He started calling me names and said, ‘Don’t walk in this street, you Muslim terrorist. Stay out of here.'”

Hammock’s wife eventually called the dogs back, but Hammock released the dogs a second time. Again, his wife called for the dogs to return, and then Hammock allegedly released them a third time.

Witnesses told police that Hammock was nude each time he came to the door to release the dogs.

“He was standing at his door and I was sitting right there. I had a straight shot. It was very disturbing,” neighbor Sue White said.

Myra was taken to a local veterinarian, but the poodle did not survive the night due to internal injuries, according to WFLA.

Officers told WFLA that they had to “plead” with Hammock to put on clothes, and the man admitted to sending his dog to attack Myra.

“Oh yes sir, absolutely. I hate that terrorist prick,” Hammock reportedly said.

Red Subijano #fundie quora.com

How do I deal with a husband (stepdad to my daughter since she was 2; biological dad is not around) who tried to touch my 16 year-old daughter’s private parts?

Divorce is legal in the USA and I am sure there are advantages to it. But people should not use divorce whenever however etc. Stop using divorce as an excuse to every little problem.

When there’s a will there’s a way.

Many people have suggested “NO TALK!” here. I am trying to compose and control myself here to abide with the BNBR policy but every time I see that, and remember the broken families very much common in western countries, I feel my blood boiling inside.

No talk? Imagine if nations on the brink of war had a “no talk” policy? An ambassador was assassinated? No talk, we bomb you! A foreign national was kidnapped and beheaded? No talk, our soldiers are landing at your beaches.

Sometimes problems can’t be resolved by communication but it SHOULD be the first attempt. You send a message or call the other head of state instead of launching missiles at once.

Am I saying a divorced family is worse than an abusive family? No.

Am I saying an abusive family is worse than a divorced family? No.

Both are terrible things. Both are things a child should not go through.

What I noticed though, is that the OP has a daughter and this husband is her stepdad. Which means the OP has already left and divorced her first husband, and daughter’s biological dad. These ladies have already gone through the experience of being in a broken family and divorce.

This incident has happened. That is clear. What’s done is done. The man has done it. He did this. He has broken their trust. He is at fault. I am clear on that.

Let us consider the possible outcomes.

She does get up and leave right there and then, taking the daughter with her. This will 100% guaranteed they are both going to go through the pains and struggles of divorced and being in a broken family again. That we can be sure of.

If they all decide to sit and talk it can end as:

he is given a 2nd chance. He tries it again sadly. Abusive family. They divorce and leave.
she decided to leave regardless of talking. Divorced family.
they work things out. He becomes the father he wanted to be, she gets the father she never had, OP gets the husband she deserves. Happy family.
There is a CHANCE at making things right. A CHANCE to be a happy family. Where as in the first option, that is absolutely 0.

When you get burnt by your oven, do you toss it away suddenly or try to fix and check it at first?

When you accidentally get zapped fidgeting around the wiring of your PC, do you punch the screen, kick the CPU and scrap your PC, or do you carefully check the wiring first and see what might have caused it?

“Until now, there was no attempt from both ends to sit down and talk about what happened and how to move forward”

Can you blame them? This is probably difficult for BOTH of them. She is embarrassed and scared to face him. He is embarrassed and scared to face her. If you just sit and wait, nothing will happen.

If you make a mountain of a molehill, if you escalate the situation drastically, chances are you might cause an unexpected negative reaction and lasting impact to either or both of them.

he could turn spiteful, depressed, violent or suicidal
she could turn spiteful, depressed, violent or suicidal
you could turn spiteful, depressed, violent or suicidal
I would suggest you personally plan, and sit down together with BOTH of them. You will act as the middleman and the neutral ground between two of them. You will be the one in charge of keeping the mood as non-aggressive and calm as you can. Tensions will rise and you will have the responsibility to make sure to call for a time out if it gets too much.

Remember:

This is not a random stranger on the bus or street, this is your husband and her stepdad.
You are married to a human being who is not perfect and can make mistakes. You are not married to the son of god or something.
Would he do it again? Maybe? Maybe not. It is the first time. You can not judge and condemn a person outright for a first time mistake.
She is not a child anymore, but still not an adult. She is 16. She is bothered by this but she is already capable of facing it and learning how to deal with life problems and situations, things she will surely face herself in the future.

It is up to the OP and her daughter to decide, and that the husband can only agree to whatever decision they make.

But talking opens up opportunities to hear both sides as well as for OP and daughter to set new rules and restrictions for husband and challenge him to regain their trust.
...

She can organize the talk, give a chance to the man to prove himself, and at the same time still protect her daughter. She is NOT leaving her daughter as bait.

Also I noted that the daughter chose to go and talk to him at first, even before this question was asked, leading me to assume that the daughter herself wants to work things out. This is what the daughter might want. The OP is just there to be with her throughout this.

You have said you has been with this man 14 years (daughter is 16 and he has been with you since she was 2)

which is why we should not resort to divorce outright!

2016 FSTDT Awards

Nominees and Candidates

The Nominations #announcement fstdt.com

Here are the candidates and nominaitons for the 2016 FSTDT Awards!

Thanks to everyone who made nominations! Also special thanks to my husband and Pharaoh Bastethotep for their help doing tl;dr snippets of the quotes

When casting your votes on quotes — for either a Fundie of the Year candidate or for a Quote of the Year nomination — remember that the snippets provided here are intended to be a convenience giving you a general gist of what the quotes are about. If you decide to vote for a particular quote, then you should first click its quote-number link and read the original quote in its entirety to make sure you don't have any second thoughts. It is also a wise idea to consider your second pick as well and read its full quote too before casting your final vote: if you change your mind after voting, your vote will not get to change with it. All votes are final with the exception of typos or similar errors. If you find yourself equally torn between two or more candidates, then you should definitely always read their full quotes before deciding!

You don't have to cast a vote on everything up for vote. You may abstain from as many or as few things as you like, but remember that you lose your abstained vote; you cannot use it as an "extra" vote somewhere else.

—

[font=sans-serif]Religious fundie of the year[/font]

• David J Stewart – #122928: Leviticus selectivity, shellfish ok, gehs bad
• Sassy – #122088: "I flew in a plane what is different between that space and the space higher up? Where did Jesus go to when he was seen ascending into heaven? If Space is above the clouds where is heaven? You see there is a difference between Man and God the heavens above and heaven"
• cmdrjones – #121628: "Atheists have constitutional rights by being citizens, but by denying the existence of a creator no one with two brain cells to run together would trust that they would respect anyone else's rights. So, they simply should never be afforded political power... What with their miserable track record and so on. "
• kingjameswriter1965 – #122435: "Now they claim they can use this hadron collider to bring forth the Devil and all his fallen ones."
• Mack Major – #118255: "People who come from a voodoo or an old southern hoodoo background know about spirit husbands. These are actual spirit entities that become attached to a woman through ungodly sexual and spiritual activity."
• Catholic Nationalist – #117704: "Catholicism is objectively the coolest religion. So cool in fact that the word cool is not nearly sufficient. What other religion allows you to literally eat God every day?"
_

[font=sans-serif]Right-wing fundie of the year[/font]

• Abolish Abortion Florida – #121877: "The political committee Abolish Abortion Florida (AAFL) has launched a ballot initiative to amend the state's constitution to punish abortion as capital murder."
• Donald Trump – #122148: [Donald's twitter tirades are, mercifully, already auto-summarized by Twitter's 144-character limit, but they are too numerous to list; we'll do a short vote on picking one if he wins. –shy]
• Jim (Jim's Blog) – #120562: "We should protect our gays from Muslims and kill them ourselves."
• Roosh Valizadeh – #120431: "Punish Trump haters with your cock: Besides the punitive element of withholding your cock from a Trump hater, we can also look at it from a time-saving perspective. If you are masculine, you simply won’t connect naturally with a feminist who hates Trump."
• Students Against a Democratic Society – #116770: "We’ve done slavery (Issue 3), we’ve done lynching (Issue 11) – well, we haven’t done them, but you know what I mean."
• The Last Trump – #118465: "[Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Virginia Transboy Who Sued School District to Use Men’s Restroom] THIS, is one of the biggest issues of our time!? Sort of reminds you of Nero fiddling while Rome burned doesn't it?"
• Vox Day – #121392: "TL;DR: The Alt Right is a Western ideology that believes in science, history, reality, and the right of a genetic nation to exist and govern itself in its own interests."
_

[font=sans-serif]Left-wing fundie of the year[/font]

• nikkipotnik420 – #120947: "You defend trans 'women' because its just another way for men to force women to coddle males and put them before our own needs and its transparant as fuck."
• Mark Carey, et al. – #117469: "Feminist glaciology is rooted in, and combines, both feminist science studies and postcolonial science studies to meaningfully shift present-day glacier and ice sciences."
• Johan Nygren – #118613: "Diagnoses are the contemporary equivalent of racial biology. [...] It’s ADHD and bipolarity and schizophrenia and autism was used to legitimize wage slavery"
• University of Capetown Students – #122204: "They believe that [...] you are able to send lightning to strike someone. So, can you explain that scientifically" [Response: "It's not true."] "What you're trying to do is collapse the space and make it antagonizing, which we will not allow. This is a progressive space for people to say their opinions."
• National Union of Students – #118198: "The National Union of Students’ LGBT Campaign has passed a motion calling for the abolition of representatives for gay men – because they 'don’t face oppression' in the LGBT community."
• Aysegul Gurbuz (Labour Party Moonbat) – #118102: "If it wasn't for my man Hitler these Jews would've wiped Palestine years ago. Sorry but it's a fact. [...] Not hating on Jews btw"
• Bailey – #117389: "It’s not irresponsible behavior to not tell someone you have hiv [...] It’s not irresponsible to have sex with somebody without telling them."
_

[font=sans-serif]Conspiracy theorist of the year[/font]

• GLP Anonymous Cowards – #122457: "DO NOT GIVE IN AND MASTURBATE BEFORE THE ELECTION. It will lower your core energy to the lower chakra levels where that the demonic scum need the population to reside in for their ritual magick to be effective."
• Nicolas Maduro – #123066: "He added that the situation is an attack by Colombian criminal groups and Venezuela's MUD opposition coalition "combined with international mafias via an NGO hired by the US Treasury." [...]The NGOs, according to the official, hire criminal organizations to move 100-bolivar bills, the largest bill in circulation now, to Colombia and from there to other countries, such as Switzerland, Poland, Ukraine, Spain, Germany and the Czech Republic, where the money is stored in large warehouses."
• Alex Jones – #118606: "I’m pro-human so I say, black people, especially, stop killing your kids and get them in church, whatever, take them away from Beyoncé, who wants to eat their brain with the CIA, literally."
_

[font=sans-serif]Sexist of the year[/font]

• nikkipotnik420 – #120947: "You defend trans 'women' because its just another way for men to force women to coddle males and put them before our own needs and its transparant as fuck."
• sexselector – #101724: "Pain should never be considered a part of life. Being in pain is not a good evolutionary strategy. [...] Men’s choices in the patriarchy *created* women’s pain."
• Matt Forney – #117165: "It’s time to stop beating around the bush: feminists want to be raped."
• Saint Elliot – #122565: "The pussy of females can be used even 2 days after their death. Their sexual resources get wasted with the current system and people often die because there aren't enough organ donors."
• David J Stewart – #120671: "If your husband wants his cereal in a certain bowl or wants you to wear a certain dress in public... JUST DO IT! If your husband wants you to rinse his glass for 15 seconds or asks you to roll his socks into a ball... JUST DO IT! If your husband wants more grain in his meals... JUST DO IT! If your husband doesn't like the smell of certain foods when you cook them... then DON'T DO IT! If your husband wants you to put the twist back onto the loaf of bread... then JUST DO IT! If your husband wants the toilet seat up at all times... then JUST DO IT! It may not seem fair to you but it is YOUR JOB ladies to HELP your husband."
• Vox Day – #117889: "If the definition of rape is stretched so far to include women who have not given consent, then I am absolutely a serial rapist. So, too, is every man I know."
• Navigator – #123052: "Rape should be legal. It is this simple. A woman is a sexual object."
_

[font=sans-serif]Racist of the year[/font]

• James Laffrey – #116723: "The jews say Adolf Hitler ordered a 'Final Solution' of extermination of the jews. But Hitler, a humanitarian, a vegetarian, an artist, did no such thing — although, again, he should have."
• Wotans Krieger – #117230: "In the Reich that is to come these bastardised noble familes will have no place of honour for they are enfeebled distortions of the once racially pure Germanic aristocracy. Thus we must begin again the restoration of the caste system. Building on the vision of the Rigsthula I propose that these reconstituted castes [...] The Rigsthula makes it clear that this caste was an alien one. The very presence of the Thrall in our lands represents a very real threat to our biological survival as a racial community. Some of these Thralls may outwardly appear to be people of our own blood but the obese, the sexual degenerate, the drug addict, the alcoholic and the career criminal should be regarded as part of this slave under class and the necessary corrective measures undertaken. They are the Untermenschen much prized by the liberal elite."
• Janet Bloomfield – #117222: "Don't ban [the burka]. Use it to pick the next one to deport. #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #WhyWomenShouldNotVote"
• Vox Day – #121315: "As it happens, the ruination of the United States is the result of the 'contributions' of two groups of immigrants, Irish and Jewish."
_

[font=sans-serif]Single-issue wonk of the year[/font]

David J Stewart: Creepy-ass Taylor Swift fixation
• #123073: "This perverted screenshot of Miss Swift to the right only appears in this 3:54 minute video for ONE SECOND TOTAL!!!"

Mack Major: Witchcraft and the Occult
• #122812: "The biblical word for medicine in the New Testament is pharmakeia: and it means SORCERY. In other words witchcraft, occult power, black magic and potions. Why would Jesus Christ expect His followers to rely on the power of witchcraft or black magic to save them???"

Navaros: God's Holy Righteous Penis
• #121503: "You will have to face HIM in ALL of HIS MALE PATRIARCH KING FATHER HOLY RIGHTEOUS PENIS-OWNING GLORY!"

Ann Barnhardt: Made-up fundie disease "Diabolical Narcissism"
• #122361: "Diabolical Narcissism is of the most severe variety, what we refer to as “psychopathy”, and thus she [Hillary Clinton] is an Alpha Narcissist, very much desirous of personal power, all the way up to the national and even global level."

WorldGoneCrazy - Anti-abortion crusader
• #120192: "All I know is that if fetuses could defend themselves with a gun, there would be no abortions."

Vox Day - Evolution denialism
• #120508: [Eric Hovind is refuted by a sixth grader] "t is a form of intellectual combat where the goal is to discredit the interlocutor. [...] Frankly, I'd be surprised and a little disappointed if I didn't have the kid in tears and questioning his faith in science within minutes after asking such a pair of stupid questions [...] Destroy the interlocutor."
_

[font=sans-serif]Vulture of the year[/font]

• #122859: Mack Major – "Someone may ask 'Why are you using this tragedy to promote your ebook?' The simple answer is because it saves lives! Hate to say I told you so, but had those who were partying read my ebook, they most likely would not have been there in the first place [at the Oakland warehouse fire]"
• #119803: crunchymama – "My heart is heavy over every aspect of this. that some of those killed were believers[...] that everyone involved turn to Jesus, that our 2nd Amendment rights aren't taken away"
_

[font=sans-serif]Batshit-insane person of the year[/font]

• usachinanukewar, #117354: "This divine pneumonia time bomb in my lungs implanted by Jesus years ago is the best ever gift I’ve received from Jesus."
• ComeOnPeople, #122200: "I know longer believe what the government told me about the world. To me they have taken the biblical account and turned it upside down. Making everything revolve around the sun, which is contrary to what the bible says and what scientists and historical artifacts claimed up until nasa."
• Vox Day, #119003: "War destroyed the body, but it did not destroy the spirit and the soul in the way peace and prosperity have."
• Joe Eigo, #116613: "His sword cuts through what NEEDS to be TRANSMUTED by Lord Zadkiel of The Violet Ray which is the Ray OF TRANSMUTATION AND MERCY AND ALCHEMY. Lord Michael comes along FIRST and TRANSFORMS IT (IN EASIER TERMS ,CHOPS IT ALL UP (NOT RIGHT TERM) AND LORD ZADKIEL LAUGHED WHEN HE SAID LORD MICHAEL LEAVES HIM THE "MESS TO CLEAN UP WITH THE SWORD OF VIOLET FLAME HE WIELDS OF TRANSMUTATION.WE ARE IN THE VIOLET RAY AGE RIGHT NOW. THE AQUARIAN ONE. IT'S THE 7TH RAY."
• Saint Elliot, #123058: "Heck, I even considered having sex with a dog cadaver that died outside my window but sadly the janitor threw it away before I could go out and get it at night."
_

[font=sans-serif]Funniest quote of the year[/font]

• #106783: "We will use your leaning tower of pizza to throw off homosexual"
• #120864: "Of course, [FSTDT commenters] are all socks of Valri, so the logistics are not too difficult. :-)"
_

[font=sans-serif]Nightmare fuel quote of the year[/font]

• #119250 (Ryon Travis sov-cit house of horrors)
• #120032: "Recent discourse on child pornography falsely portrays it, like child sex in general, as a disaster for the child. [...] Yet there are many children seen in child pornography whose words, facial expressions, body language, and orgasms show that they thoroughly enjoy the sexual activity, sometimes enjoying it immensely."
_

[font=sans-serif]One-liner of the year[/font]

• #122830: "You don't know how much you should fear Jesus"
• #119953: "If I could be in the bedroom of every pro-choicer's when they have sex just to talk to them, I would. I could make them see how beautiful life actually is."
• #121425: "Beware the beast Hildabeast Clinton and her Vagenda of Manocide"
_

[font=sans-serif]WTF?! quote of the year[/font]

• #122633: "[STEM] Syllabi promote the positivist view of knowledge by suggesting that there are correct conclusions that can be drawn with the right tools [...] the syllabi reinforce the larger male dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use to make correct decisions."
• #123064: "[Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop] explained that his first name represents 'the explosion of awareness of the interconnectedness of the infinite love in the universe.' Doo-doo 'is the struggle of our daily lives with that awareness, that with love comes chaos,' and Zopittybop-bop-bop 'is the outcome of that struggle, which is often ironic, especially because all life ends in death.'"
• #120864: "Of course, [FSTDT commenters] are all socks of Valri, so the logistics are not too difficult. :-)"
_

[font=sans-serif]Incel quote of the year[/font]

• #122565: "The pussy of females can be used even 2 days after their death. Their sexual resources get wasted with the current system and people often die because there aren't enough organ donors."
• #121548 "Modern Western women hate respect. They hate consent. They love bloody beatings. They love death. [...] You are the ones who don't see what's wrong."
• #123058: "Heck, I even considered having sex with a dog cadaver that died outside my window but sadly the janitor threw it away before I could go out and get it at night."

[font=sans-serif]Board of the year[/font]

• /r/IncelHeaven
• Return of Kings
_

[font=sans-serif]Commenter of the year (winner!)[/font]

• Hasan Prishtina
_

[font=sans-serif]Troll of the year[/font]

• TimeToTurn
• Anonymous "enlightened seer" (see here for where the madness begins — one can only hope it's a Poe)
_

[font=sans-serif]Conspiracy theory of the year[/font]

• PizzaGate
• The Mandela Effect

Mike King #conspiracy tomatobubble.com

Never let it be said that "the powers-that-be" (cough cough) do not reward their loyal goy agents generously. Here we are, more than a half-century after Winston Churchill, that vile, bumbling, drunken, cigar-chomping, lying, scheming, plagiarizing, sodomizing, warmongering, genocidal blob of human feces departed for hell -- and he is still being glorified on the big screen for the next degeneration of boobs to worship.

Hazmat suits and goggles on, boys and girls. Let's dive into Sulzberger's cesspool to review the review of Darkest Hour - Hollyweird's latest homage to the demonic beast we call, "The British Mad Dog."

The Darkest Hour reinforces the big lie of Churchill the Great, but The British Mad Dog, by yours truly (available at Amazon) will give it to you straight!

Slimes Review: In the late spring of 1940, German forces invaded Belgium and France ...

Rebuttal: The reader is left to assume that the big bad Germans were just rampaging throughout Western Europe for the fun of it. Omitted detail here: The review fails to mention the fact that "neutral" Belgium and Holland -- both members of "The League of Nations" -- were conspiring to facilitate a British / French invasion of Germany.

Slimes Review: ... and pushed most of the British army onto a beach in the French coastal town of Dunkirk.

Rebuttal: And what exactly were those 300,000 British troops doing massed along the Belgian and Dutch borders? Vacationing?

Slimes Review: Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister best known (then and still) for his policy of appeasing Hitler, was replaced by Winston Churchill, ...

Rebuttal: (sighing) The true "appeaser" during this tragic period was bloody Churchill. It was his obedient appeasement of his Jewish masters (Rothschild, Baruch, Strakosh, Lindemann et al) that blocked the more sensible elements of the British government from making peace with The Great One (that's Hitler for all you newbies and normies) before the minor war turned into a global bloodbath.

Slimes Review: Considered as history, “Darkest Hour,” ... offers the public a few new insights and details about the practice of statecraft in a time of crisis. Churchill is disliked by many of his colleagues in the Conservative Party (notably Chamberlain and his vulpine sidekick, Viscount Halifax) and distrusted by King George VI.

Rebuttal: True. Churchill was disliked, even despised, by many in Britain.

Slimes Review: The political situation is shaky, the military reports dire. The new prime minister, a man of large emotions and larger appetites, who drinks whiskey with breakfast and is rarely without a cigar, is plagued by frustration and doubt as he tries to navigate between two bad options. Will Britain enter into a ruinous war or submit to humiliating and most likely temporary peace on terms dictated by Hitler?

Rebuttal: Far from demanding "submission" to a "humiliating peace," The Great One was prepared to withdraw from all occupied territory without Britain having to concede a thing. To this end, The Great One enlisted Italian leader Benito Mussolini (not in the war at that time) to negotiate a peace between Germany and Great Britain. The proposal for a "sit down" with Mussolini was delivered by Italian Ambassador to the UK, Giuseppe Bastianini -- it being fully understood that any offer of peace would not be disadvantageous to Britain.

Slimes Review: The contours of this story are reasonably familiar. .... Churchill himself is among the most revered and studied figures of 20th-century history: a synonym for leadership; a great man in an age of monsters; a source of pithy quotations, some of which he actually said; an example to be cited by political mediocrities in need of an ego boost.

Rebuttal: What barf! Dating back to his first term as Lord of the Admiralty during World War I, Churchill was an abject failure in every government position he ever held. And as far as "monsters" go, no one relished death, war, human suffering and bloodshed more that the British Mad Dog. Here are a few of the "pithy quotations" which "he actually said" that don't even begin to reveal the depths of this monster's perverted blood-lust:

WORLD WAR I

"I think a curse should rest on me — because I love this war. I know it's smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment — and yet — I can't help it — I enjoy every second of it." - 1916 (writing of WW 1)
"No compromise on the main purpose; no peace till victory; no pact with unrepentant wrong -- that is the Declaration of July 4th, 1918." (speaking against calls for a negotiated truce with Germany)


WORLD WAR II

I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering.
There is one thing that will bring Hitler down, and that is an absolutely devastating exterminating attack by very heavy bombers from this country upon the Nazi homeland.
We never thought of peace, not even in that year when we were completely isolated and could have made peace without serious detriment to the British Empire. Why should we think of it now, when victory approaches for the three of us? (Letter to Stalin)
"I want proposals for "basting the Germans on their retreat from Breslau." (January 1945, 3 weeks before the genocidal firebombing of the civilians of Dresden)

Evil, sick bastard!

The rest of the movie review, which was written by Slimes film critic, A.O. Scott (cough cough on mom's side) deals not so much with Fake History, but rather, the film itself. Though still acknowledging Churchill as a "great man," Scott actually downgrades Darkest Hour for its excessive hero worship of Churchill. Yes, even for the Slimes chief film critic, the sanctification of the British Mad Dog was a bit too much.

In closing, we leave our readers with a pair of filmed quotes from the rotten old monster himself -- which we only just recently discovered. Those pro-Brexit British "conservatives" who worship "patriot" Churchill while condemning the European Union really need to read and then see this.

Churchill:

"We must recreate the European family in a regional structure called it may be the United States of Europe. ... If at first, all the states of Europe are not willing or able to join the union, we must nevertheless proceed assemble and combine those who will and those who can."
"This indispensable structure of regional groupings is coming into being. ... In this way alone, can the skeletal structure of world government be clothed with the flesh and blood of a living organism and the acts of state be confirmed by the passionate heartbeats of millions of men."

Boobus Americanus 1: There's a new movie out about Winston Churchill. It centers around his battle with the appeasers who wanted to surrender to Hitler.

Boobus Americanus 2: Had it not been for Churchill's iron will, we'd all be speaking German now.

Sugar: Boobuss, another year older and you're sstill jusst as frickin' ignorant as ever!

Editor:
Happy New Year, boys and girls!

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

Joe DiMaggio (1914-1999) had the right idea... we should all get mad. Joe was upset that his wife was giving her body, which belongs to him in marriage, to pigs to lust upon. I have a lot of respect for Joe DiMaggio after reading this information about him. A good husband should be jealous over his wife; but feminist trash like Marilyn Monroe just accuse their husbands of being mentally-cruel (which were her grounds for divorce by the way). Monroe divorced her husband in 1954, just 9 months after getting married, because she wanted to do things HER WAY.

This is the feminist trap. Most women are vulnerable, just as Eve was deceived the Bible says (1st Timothy 2:14); sincerely believing that women are victims of mental cruelty because of an authoritarian husband who puts his foot down. I'm not kidding. If you read some of the insane Domestic Abuse literature of women's rights groups today, they label husbands as “abusive” who keep track of their wife's activities, demand to know when a wife is coming back, wanting to know where she is going, et cetera. Biblically, every husband has a God-given right to scrutinize every aspect of his wife's activities, plans and life. It is demonic rebellion, which God considers equal with witchcraft (1st Samuel 15:23) for any wife to challenge her husband in this area of authority.

Bmalion #fundie boards.straightdope.com

The last resort
"Were you to glance up from the deserted beach below, you might mistake Tranquility Bay for a rather exclusive hotel.
...
Inside, 250 foreign children are locked up. Almost all are American, but though kept prisoner, they were not sent here by a court of law. Their parents paid to have them kidnapped and flown here against their will, to be incarcerated for up to three years, sometimes even longer. They will not be released until they are judged to be respectful, polite and obedient enough to rejoin their families.
...
Parents sign a legal contract with Tranquility Bay granting 49 per cent custody rights. It permits the Jamaican staff, whose qualifications are not required to exceed a high-school education, to use whatever physical force they feel necessary to control their child. The contract also waives Tranquility's liability for harm that should befall a child in its care.
...
Before sending their teen to Tranquility, parents are advised that it might be prudent to keep their plan a secret, and employ an approved escort service to break the news. The first most teenagers hear of Tranquility is therefore when they are woken from their beds at home at 4am by guards, who place them in a van, handcuffed if necessary, drive them to an airport and fly them to Jamaica. The child will not be allowed to speak to his or her parents for up to six months, or see them for up to a year.
...
Watched by chaperones, you read prescribed course books, take notes, then sit a test after each chapter. Two or three Jamaican teachers sit at the back of the room in case you get stuck, and they may be able to help. But to mark the tests, they have to use an answer key sent down from the States.
...
You may also write home to your parents, and though staff can read your mail, you may write what you like. But Tranquility's handbook for parents warns them not to believe anything that sounds like a 'manipulation', the programme's word for a complaint.
...
Tranquility is basically a private detention camp. But it differs in one important respect. When courts jail a juvenile, he has a fixed sentence and may think what he likes while serving it, whereas no child arrives at Tranquility with a release date. Students are judged ready to leave only when they have demonstrated a sincere belief that they deserved to be sent here, and that the programme has, in fact, saved their life. They must renounce their old self, espouse the programme's belief system, display gratitude for their salvation, and police fellow students who resist.
...
When most children first arrive they find it difficult to believe that they have no alternative but to submit. In shock, frightened and angry, many simply refuse to obey. This is when they discover the alternative. Guards take them (if necessary by force) to a small bare room and make them (again by force if necessary) lie flat on their face, arms by their sides, on the tiled floor. Watched by a guard, they must remain lying face down, forbidden to speak or move a muscle except for 10 minutes every hour, when they may sit up and stretch before resuming the position. Modest meals are brought to them, and at night they sleep on the floor of the corridor outside under electric light and the gaze of a guard. At dawn they resume the position."


That's enough quoting for one OP, but please, read the article. The second page describes the flimsy reasons that parents send their kids to this re-education camp, and the eerie, Stepford behavior of some of the "students".

It's not a school, it's a brainwashing facility. The "teachers" have more qualifications in torture than in education.

How can this possibly be legal? Parents would never be allowed to subject their kids to this here in the U.S., yet apparently they have no legal problem with sending their kids overseas to do it:


Rarely do I read a thread that makes me as nauseous as this one. Not because I'm disgusted with this post or that post but because the wounds are still fresh and painful.

However, I feel it is something of my duty to respond, fighting ignorance and all that.

I am one of those parents who have placed heir child in a 'boot-camp' type of home for troubled teens. This one was in the United States. (It never occurred to me to look outside of the U.S.A.)

For those of you who condem me or call me evil or assume I/m some kind of wierd, bible-thumping, frothing at the mouth loon, well, sorry, I'm not.

I agree that it could seem to be inhumane. I thank God that your home life/childhood/children was such that you are so far away from the anguish of this descision that you cannot imagine being here. Be grateful. (I am at work, so be patient)

When loving parents are faced with this it gets down to a "Sophie's choice" basically. For those who never saw the movie, Sophie was a WW2 Jewish woman who had to choose which child she would take with her to the Nazi work farm and which would be sent to the gas chamber. Horrifying. That's how it felt for his mother and me.

We sent our 15 year old son to that place in December of 2002 and I just came back from picking him up. He's been home for 14 days and whether it helped or not in the long run, well, it's just too early to tell. There is some improvement. He talks to us more readily and he's not lost his temper, yet. I think he's grown up a little.

I'll answer any questions that you may have on the mechanics of the process, the behavior that led us to that point and what we knew or didn't know. I will respectfully try to ignore any comments that assume I am a monster or that are merely insulting.

I am sure that your son was not kidnapped in the middle of the night and flown out of the country.

Actually, he was "kidnapped" in the middle of the night. The advice we recieved from all quarters was that this would be the best way to prevent violence or running away. It was done at 4:00 am and it was handled professionally and safely. It took about 90 seconds from start to finish. Then they drove to the airport. No cuffs.

You didn't read the article, did you? How do you come away with the impression that it doesn't involve physical and psychological abuse?

You bring up a good point. There is physical abuse. There is psychological abuse at these camps.

The problem has 3 reasons, I only speak from my experience.

1. The kids are usually not the best behaved bunch to begn with. They are the tough kids, the mean, nasty kids, the kids who get into fights and who's heroes are the thug-like rap singers and 'ganstas'. You have to be very firm and drill-sergent like in order to be in control or they'd be having chaos.

2. The people that work at these facilities are often just in it for the job. Especially in the south, where alot of these places are, the economy is not yet back on it's feet. If you've been in the military and you need to feed your family, this might not be such a hard way to make a living. Plus, these 'instructors' might be in danger of the prison guard/policeman burnout syndrome. The kind of thinking that has them saying to themselves, "Well, since these punks are all criminals anyway, I'll not feel bad about dishing out a few kicks or punches in the line of duty, they deserve it the little rats."

3. Money. If you staffed these places with trained professional counselors at every position, lots of testing and evaluation at every level. It would cost upwards of $5000.00 a month or more, then, only the rich could afford it. The poor people would have to muddle through as best they can. This is sort of what happens now. It was a real financial sacrifice for us to do this. I wondered if I would be better off renting him an aprtment and paying his utilities until he's 18. It would have been cheaper.

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

There are NO Biblical grounds for divorce. The biggest lie in churches today is that divorce is permissible in cases of adultery. If that were true, then what about all the other sins one's spouse can commit... murder, theft, extortion, lust? Jesus taught in Matthew 5:28 that lust is the same as adultery. If you believe that lust is a sin, then every wife of a husband who lusts has grounds for divorce. Clearly, Jesus did not intend for anyone to divorce, which He makes very clear in Matthew 19:8. Divorce is always a sin.

In Matthew 19:9 Jesus simply taught that if a man's wife divorces him, then he is the victim, and not committing adultery by remarriage. She filed. It was her self-righteousness that dragged the husband into court. By comparing Scripture with Scripture, it is plain that divorce is never permissible. The person who files for divorce is sinning, and has no Biblical grounds for remarriage (to do so is the horrible sin of adultery, Matthew 5:32). The Apostle Paul is careful in 1st Corinthians 7:10 to use the word “depart,” concerning the wife who leaves her husband; but Paul does NOT mention putting away (divorce). The wife who departs is clearly commanded not to shack up nor remarry.

Divorce is one’s unwillingness to forgive their spouse! No wife would ever divorce her husband if she truly loved him—not one! I don’t care if he beats her, she won’t divorce him (leave, yes; divorce, no). Say what you will, I don’t recall any disclaimer in the wedding vows for spousal abuse which would permit a divorce. And by the way, there are NO Scriptural grounds for divorce.

Society Has Gone Insane

Women today have been brainwashed by domestic violence literature to seek divorce at the first sign of abuse. I was recently reading a pamphlet from an organization called VARO (Victim’s Advocates Reaching Out). There are thousands of such non-prophet anti-violence and abuse organizations all across America. I couldn’t believe what the VARO pamphlet said inside. There was a listing of “signs of abuse,” with questions, and then at the bottom they requested for the reader to seek help at once if they answered” yes” to any of the questions. One of the questions was, “Is your spouse tracking your time?”

Another asked, “Does your spouse ever make any belittling comments to you in front of others?,” “Are you often criticized for little things?” Another question asked, “Has your spouse ever tried to prevent you from contacting friends or family?” One of the questions asked “Has your husband ever forced you to have sex against your will?” The implications are clearly against an authoritative husband who decides where, when, what, who, and why concerning his wife’s life, activates, and friends.

"Who’s teaching the women? We know that many socially conservative organizations are now teaching men to be good fathers. Think about it. Women are learning about issues of marriage and dealing with husbands through Women’s Studies courses (feminist and humanist propaganda), local “battered women’s shelters” (which disseminate more of the same in each community) and many other kinds of organizations that teach women to be independent—independent from husbands. Women are also taught by such organizations to know the incentives to divorce (propaganda and tactics that make divorce an easy lifestyle option for them). Most conservative organizations have been recipients of some of the same liberal, anti-family propaganda—many without knowing it." -Men's News Daily

You probably won’t like this; but a husband has a God-given RIGHT to decide who his wife associates with, where she goes, when she goes there, when she has sex with him, how she dresses, et cetera.

Holly Scheer #fundie thefederalist.com

Andy Richter Is ‘Eternally Grateful’ His Wife Aborted His Child

Andy Richter might be a comedian, with a career built around humor and making other people laugh on shows with Conan O’Brien, but abortion is no laughing matter.

Eternal gratefulness for an abortion shouldn’t be something to brag about, but that’s what Andy Richter just did at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser. The actor, who hosted the “Sexy Beast” fundraiser for the Los Angeles branch of PP, credits his girlfriend’s abortion back in 1992 with allowing them to live the lives they wanted.

These lives included eventually marrying each other, children when they decided they wanted to be parents, pets, and careers. What those lives don’t include is the realization that they will forever be missing a child.

Richter and his future wife, Sarah Thyre, lacked steady employment and were focused on building careers when they found she was pregnant. Richter explained what happened next:

Luckily for us Planned Parenthood existed. My girlfriend knew that she was not ready for motherhood, and I knew that I was in no way prepared to be a father. I drove from Chicago in my battered old Toyota pick-up to be with her when she went to Planned Parenthood to terminate her pregnancy. Her choice to get an abortion was a choice that she made with assuredness. She knew that she was doing the right thing for everyone involved. But I can’t say it was easy. She was sad, and I was sad, and it was sad. But to this day, I know that she will tell you that she made the right decision.

How Do the Kids Feel About This?

There is no possible way to explain this as the right decision for at least one person in this scenario: the older sibling of the Richters’ other children. Since they’re so open about this to strangers and made this a public issue, I’d imagine they’ve already discussed the abortion with their living children. One wonders whether they explained that if they had made different choices and had different priorities, there would be another child in their family.

As their living children grow and become adults themselves, maybe this choice will make sense to them. Maybe it won’t. It’s possible they’re distressed to know that had the timing of their conception been different, they could have been the one aborted, because that is a terrible thought.

When a family loses a member, that family is forever changed. No matter how that loss comes about, it is a loss. The lessons that we learn and the growth that can come from pain and grief might be something to be grateful for, but the opportunity to actively cause that loss should not be. That should be difficult, it should be wrenching, and it should not even need to be an option or an easy decision.

Many choices in life are not eternal, but abortion is. Once that baby is gone, it is gone, and future children don’t replace the life that was lost. Children are not interchangeable. They’re unique, each one with limitless possibilities and promise, and snuffing out one because of convenience and whims of parents ends those possibilities.

Richter Hints He’s Uneasy With This Choice

Richter doesn’t find it difficult to support Planned Parenthood after his personal history with abortion, however, and he wasn’t shy about his feelings about pro-life people: “It’s easy. Planned Parenthood helps a ton of people, and if they don’t agree with that, f— ’em. You can quote me on that. Tell them I said, ‘F— ’em.’”

People who are at peace and confident in their decisions don’t need to attack others. They can tolerate disagreement without rage. Pro-life people don’t seek to leave families without help and support, they desire the opposite: for all members of a family to be present and able to help. We want for all babies to have the chance to pursue their dreams, not just those lucky enough to be wanted.

Richter might be a comedian, with a career built around humor and making other people laugh on shows with Conan O’Brien, but abortion is no laughing matter. That sadness he and his wife felt was for a good reason. They were looking at temporary circumstances and making permanent decisions. That baby wouldn’t have ruined their future, but abortion ruined the chance for that child to ever have an opportunity at life. That’s something nobody can be eternally grateful for.

James Rink #conspiracy #ufo #crackpot supersoldiertalk.com

My Life In The Secret Space Program

My name is Bruce and I was in a black ops sniper group called Wraith in MARSOC in the Marines from 2008 to 2017, then I was in a black ops private Military from 2017 to 2018. This is my story. When I was a little kid in the 90s, I was abducted by Grays. I remember that it was at night and I was being pulled up by a tractor beam. I went through the ceiling. I remember seeing my parent’s house at night below me. A few of the lights were on. I then was facing the ship as I was coming toward it. It was a huge silver flying saucer that was about eighty feet across. I then remember being on the ship in orbit above the Earth. Because I have remote viewing, I see the ship in third person. I saw the ship and the Earth, and the stars in the background. The Earth was at the bottom left of my vision and the Sunlight was coming up over the horizon.
I was laying on a table in a round room that was whitish silver, and there was a cylindrical wall around it. There were four Grays standing there staring at me, and I was on an operating table. I don’t remember being operated on. I also saw porthole windows on the walls all around the room. In them, I saw the stars in the background, and there were little silver spherical drones going to and fro. They abducted me again many times from when I was fourteen to fifteen, and every time I would wake up with nose bleeds. Most of the time, I was above the Earth in orbit in varying degrees of distance; and there were a few times that I was in interstellar space past Proxima Centauri but not to the fourth closest star to us. Also from when I was a little kid up until I was seventeen, the Military would abduct me and take me to an underground base for training. I first got my memories of that when I was fourteen. I had a dream when I was fourteen that I was lying in bed, sleeping in the middle of the night when a whiteish blue rotating oval portal appeared on my open closet door. It was slowly rotating to the left of my vision and it had little streamers on it. An old man with gray hair who was wearing a black suit stepped through the portal and moved to the side and stared at me. He looked very much like Ben Rich, the former head of Lockheed Skunkworks. After that, a Marine wearing digital camo came through and stared at me. After that, I was on a super advanced mag leveled small transport with other kids. It was in silver and white and in an angular egg shape, and it was traveling at extremely fast speed. After that, I was in a super advanced deep underground Military base and me and the other kids were being trained for combat. That older guy with gray hair was the head of the whole thing. We did live fire training with regular guns, hand to hand combat, we shot what looked like experimental energy, sci fi guns, and trained our third eye. There were times when we were told to meditate together in a dark room with purple crystals taped to our foreheads, and we listened to isochornic tones. There was also a girl there that had telekinesis. I remember that there was a buffed up black guy that was our trainer and he was really hard on us sometimes and the older white guy always got onto him. I also put on a headset and had to fight aliens in fully immersive simulations, and the helmet was connected by thick capes that went to something on the ceiling. The most traumatizing thing that happened to me was that there were times that I was put in a deprivation chamber and in a tank underwater with a small breathing apparatus and I was told to stay calm after they had closed a lid on me and I was in total darkness, so I was not abused.
[…]
When I was eighteen, I was sent to Mars. The Military pulled up to my house, shot an anomaly into my room where I was at, and came in the house and activated me, then restored my memories. Then they took me to base. I was given my contacts that I put in my eyes, then I was hooked up to the exoskeleton. I was then injected with the two fluids, then I boarded a small transport craft that was black and shaped like a kind of stretched out pyramid laid on its side. There was a pilot and three seats in the back. After that, the craft went to above Earth orbit to a huge ship that was sitting at a spacedock. It was a ship that the Marines have in a separate Secret Space Program that they have where they patrol between Earth and Mars. It was about a mile long, tactical digital black, had red and white lights, and it had huge wings on the sides that stretched way out and tapered off. It was called the USS Vengeance (United States Starship Vengeance) and it had rows and rows, and rows of defenses on the wings that fired bullets, rockets, and beam-type weapons; and it had farce fields. On the inside, it was tactile digital black as well, and it had very dim red and white lights. Most of the Marines wore digital woodland camo, and the commander and higher up officers wore digital desert. It had glass windows, but most of the windows were actually screens that projected the outside of the ship on the inside, so it acted like a window. I remember that it looked like two gray outlines of a TV that was round at the edges, and it just looked like a rubber outline of a TV on the wall, and in the center was just the wall, but it was actually projecting the wall when it was on standby. And there was a button at the bottom left that I could press, and when it would be pressed, the image would disappear in little black blotches, and then they would disappear really fast and it would look like a section of the wall would just disappear and you could see out into space.

The commander called all of us Wraith members to the briefing room. He had gray hair. It felt very much like Starship Troopers. He stood in front of us and told us the basics of the Secret Space Program over all, that history of the Solar System, what is going on on Earth, and why were were going to Mars. I was briefed that there were many SSPs. I was told that every branch of the Military has their own, there are different patrol groups that patrol the Solar System and other systems as well, there is that group that the Marines have that is one of them, SSPs that other Countries have, an Illuminati type group that own most of the infrastructure out there that experiment with cybernetics in a bad way, and they are really into the occult, a Nazi group that works with the Draco, rogue SSPs, and many others that I don’t exactly remember. I was told that the Solar System had a super advanced civilization that have spread out across the Solar System from some planet, but they destroyed themselves and the planet they were on called Tiamat, that is now what we call the Asteroid Belt, and we haven’t found them yet. Also that the Earth had been free for many years, until the Draco arrived and used the Illuminati to enslave the planet. And we were going to Mars because the Draco had started attacking Human Military bases there on a bigger scale than normal.

As he was talking and pacing the room, these huge pieces of glass rose up from black raised up platforms that were on the floor in rows in front of us. They were cut sharply in angles at the top edges and when they had risen all the way up, they turned on and displayed pictures and information on different races. There were two pictures for each race, like profiles, and rows and rows of text below them. I was briefed on the Grays, the Alpha Draconians, the Mantis, the Connonains which are a humanoid doglike race, a blatlike race, the Lyrans, one Human looking group, a raptor race, and many other races that I can’t exactly remember. The Grays had been enslaved by their technology and a lot of them were cybernetic. Their race had been dying out and they had made clones, but that wasn’t working, so they abducted Humans to create hybrids to sustain their race. The Alpha Draconians are racists who believe that they are the master race in the Universe, and they went around and conquered and supplanted other reptilian races, and put them in their ranks. They have a pyramid cast system and their top people are fourteen feet tall white Draco that have wings and they are called Royal White Draco. I don’t remember anything about the Mantis. The Lyrans are huge humanoid lions who are spiritual Militarists and they are on our side. The Connonians are a huge buffed up humanoid doglike race that are spiritual Militarists. They are on our side. I don’t remember the story with the other races. I remember that most of them were reptilians and they were red colored,and the other ones were green. We were told that although we were fighting the Draco, the biggest threat is actually evil alien AI that would either be infected by a virus, be sentient, or be demonically possessed. I was also told about and given a medical device called a tourniquet that was like a black tube that had another black tube of rubber over it, and it had a needle that would come out of the bottom. When it would be used, it would instantly partially heal and seal up wounds. I was also told about another medical technology that was a holograhic medical regeneration bed that soldiers could lay down in, and it would heal them. It had large gel packs on it, and a clear sheet over that, and if a soldier’s arm was blown off at the elbow, he could lay in it and it would project an orange colored, gridded hologram of the arm down to the cellular level, and it would completely heal the arm in a matter of hours.

We were then given a tour of the ship and we were given galsspads to read whenever we wanted. It looked like a long rectangle, and when it would turn on, it would display rows of text in white. The girl that I saw in the first training area when I was a kid asked one of the crew if there were any androids on the ship. The guys said that there weren’t, but on some ships in that patrol group, there were androids in their crews. The front part of their heads are human, and the back is all robotic parts, and their voices are low, they carry, and they sound electric. I remember that they also had their own money. It looked like dollars, except that it had a lot more brown in it, and they had faces on them that were of different people. I was also given an ID card that I would use to clock in and out with. It had a special access clearance, my picture and info on it, and it had a black jell pack on it that contained nanites. It was so it could protect ships from getting viruses. I saw many parts of the ship, I remember that the engine looked like huge black metal spheres that were stuck together at odd angles, and there were multiple rectangular and cylindrical shaped housings stuck on them in random spots; and behind all that was a giant vertical rectangle, and underneath all that, there was a purple crystal. The ships main fuel source was zero point energy, and it had nuclear, solar, and chemical thrusters as a backup just encase something happened and they got lost. It used tachyons and quantum entanglement when it traveled. It could go faster than light and it could go intergalactic. I remember that the bridge was shaped like a forward facing rectangle. There were people on computers on the sides toward the front that wrapped around toward the front door. There was the commander standing with his hands behind his back way toward the front of the bridge, a small row of people on computers right in front of him, and the pilot at the front. The pilot operated manual controls, but he also had a headset and a glove that he could wear and he could pilot the ship with his mind. The glove was black and it had glowing blue lights on on the finger tips. It had four small windows up top on the sides of the front of the room. And a huge screen in the center.

After that, we went to Mars. The trip only took fifteen seconds. Mars is not red and it is not the dead planet that NASA wants people to think. It had a blue sky and it looked like the Arizona desert. It also is populated with many races, wildlife, had trees, bodies of water, and is very much like Earth. There is oxygen on it too that is breathable for a short time in the polar regions. The planet was once a lot more like Earth in the past, but there was a nuclear war there and the atmosphere got really messed up, but it is in the process of getting back to the way it was before.

I remember that Wraith has a base on Mars that looked like a smaller outpost and the commander was older with short gray hair and he was kind of muscular, with a scar on his face. We were in the Northern Polar region. I remember that I had digital tan power armor that had a pitch black visor on the helmet that displayed red information and a redicle in red and it acted as my spotter; and I used a sniper rifle that looked very much like the Barrett .50 Cal, but it was a little bigger and it shot a bigger round that had a black casing. The bullet was brass colored and after it would penetrate a target, the top layer of the bullet would break up in pieces and create a shockwave effect. It was designed to kill Alpha Draconians.

I remember very vividly some battles that were going on in a valley. I remember seeing human Marines and Draconians fighting each other far ahead of me toward the edge of the valley. I saw both people dying on both sides. I remember being way off in the background on a rooftop and sniping Draco as the battle was going on. The Draconian soldiers were dark green, seven to eight foot tall humanoid crocodiles. I remember shooting them. Most of them wore helmets, but some didn’t. And there were a few that I shot in the neck near the shoulder a few times and I saw a shockwave effect and they had a huge hole in their neck and blood sprayed everywhere. There were also times when I was with other Wraith members and we sniped Draconians together, and times when we had to take out key Draconoian Military leaders and sometimes do sync shots on them. There was one time when three of us had to take out three Draconian Military leaders in the middle of the night when it was raining and it was windy. They were walking around and talking. They were inside some kind of base that was up on a higher level off the ground, and they were inside some kind of pressurized room because they didn’t have any helmets on. We did a sync shot at the same time and shot through the glass and killed them. The were also two times when I killed Draconian generals with remote influencing. I remember that I was in a small cylindrical outpost looking building and I was standing in the central room facing a large window outside. Outside, I could see the Martian surface and the sand getting kicked up by the soft wind and the blue sky, remember that I was far away from my target, but I could see him because I have remote viewing. I could see that he was in a pressurized room in a base that they had built. He didn’t have his helmet on and I could see his reptilian face. I remember moving my right hand up in the air and balling it into a fist, then taking it down and unfolding my fist. I made him take out a long green knife and stab himself in the chest with it, and shove the blade through. I did the same thing and made the other general shoot himself in the head with his hand gun, I also made a Draconian politician that was on Mars shoot himself with a handgun, too.

For eight years, the Military would pick me up, take me to Mars, and wipe my memories, and take me back home. Sometimes, it was by the same small transport craft to the USS Vengeance and that would take me to Mars; and sometimes, if the ship wasn’t near Earth, the transport would take me all the way to Mars. I wasn’t in any space battles, but I remember that sometimes when I was boarding the carrier that I saw that it had bullet holes, missile impacts, and glowing red beam marks on the hull that were still smoking. I also remember having dreams of a bald Military man debriefing me, but it was more like an interrogation, and dreams of doctors injecting me with with needles. I also remember seeing dark green helicopters on Mars that had enclosed blades in rings like on the movie Avatar, except that the connector pieces to the rings were a little shorter, and they had no landing gear. I also saw large white drones that moved slowly along the sky, searching for targets. The Draconian ships were dark green, had wings that bent forward and downward, and when you would look at them from certain angles, they would change color and turn purple in some areas. In total, I killed 78 Alpha Draconians.

After that, I joined a black ops private Military called Hammerhead and I was with them for a year. They go after gun and drug runners, and they hunt down and kill Illuminati and Shadow Government soldiers. We wore a round black and blue patch that had a Hammerhead shark on it and it read: Hammerhead in white at the top. I remember that they have a base somewhere in America that looks like a completely blacked out unmarked building, and it goes underground, too. It has torsion field cannons on the roof for defenses.

Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Bar Lev #fundie failedmessiah.typepad.com

[Links in original - Bolding mine]

Authorities are seeking to extradite Malka Leifer from Israel. But she has made it clear to family and friends that she will do everything she can to avoid ever facing her accusers. And she has the support of leaders of an ultra-orthodox community harbouring her in Israel and who say she has done nothing wrong.

The mother of eight has been accused of molesting a string of girls, including three sisters, while principal at Adass Israel School in Elsternwick.

Two of them, suing Ms Leifer and the school, told the Supreme Court in May she explained the abuse as preparation for marriage.

One said she had been too fearful to complain because of Ms Leifer’s power in the ultraorthodox community.

It is understood Ms Leifer could face dozens of charges of indecent assault and rape if she ever returns to Melbourne. She fled in March 2008, with the help of school officials, hours after the school committee learned of the accusations.

Ms Leifer was arrested in September, pending extradition hearings. She was under house arrest: reportedly, at first in Migdal HaEmek (about an hour north of Emmanuel, where she had lived), and then in Bnei Brak, an ultra-orthodox city near Tel Aviv.

Emmanuel [chief] rabbi Yitzhak Meir Bar Lev said the senior rabbi had instructed locals to accept the family.

Molesting a child was no less than murder and should be reported, but his “sources” told him the charges fell short of serious misconduct, he said.

“If the allegations are true, it was only because she was trying to bring these girls in, trying to prevent them from destroying their lives (by leaving ultra-orthodoxy),” he said.

“The girls’ behaviour had passed the point where they could have been ‘saved’ with mere words,” he said.

“Perhaps that wasn’t the right method to choose; there is a very thin line between ‘kosher’ and ‘non-kosher’ educational methods.

"But I can tell you her actions were only motivated by a positive educational precept.

“She was right to try to bring them in — they’d crossed a lot of borders in the other direction. She had only the best intentions,” the rabbi said.

fschmidt #fundie coalpha.org

[Hyperlinks in original]

The big news this week is that two Islamist gunmen killed twelve people at the French "satirical" weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The world is almost universally outraged by this attack. But not me.

What exactly is Charlie Hebdo? It's in French and I don't read French, but I think a google image search conveys the basic idea.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Charlie+Hebdo&tbm=isch

From this, we see that "satire" is really just a polite way of saying ridicule. This is a liberal newspaper that ridicules religion and whatever else liberals don't approve of. We can see a similar style of cartoon by googling "nazi jewish cartoons".

http://www.google.com/search?q=nazi+jewish+cartoons&tbm=isch

There isn't much difference except that the Nazis had somewhat better taste than Liberals do. Of course the targets are different, but that doesn't matter, the concept is the same.

Should this kind of thing be tolerated? Whatever the answer, the answer should be consistent. If you are going to tolerate Charlie Hebdo then you should also tolerate Nazi anti-Jewish cartoons. Is France consistent? Please read about Hate speech laws in France. According to these laws, this kind of thing is "hate speech" and should not be tolerated. And in fact Muslims took Charlie Hebdo to court based on this law and lost. This is liberal hypocrisy at its finest. For a liberal, hate speech is only speech against something liberals like. Hate speech against what liberals hate isn't hate speech at all, according to liberals, it is free speech.

So let us summarize what a liberal is. A liberal is a hypocrite who ridicules opposing viewpoints, who is intolerant and legally censors opposing viewpoints, who is totally closed-minded and is unwilling to even listen to opposing viewpoints, and who come out in mass protest when their hypocrisy is threatened. In short, liberals are scum. But does this justify killing them?

On an intellectual level, this is a difficult question. But on an emotional, it is easy. I am filled with joy whenever I hear that liberals have been killed. How could I possibly feel any other way? I have an opposing view to liberals, just as these Muslims do, so the liberals have relentlessly ridiculed and censored me. They are totally incapable of respecting or tolerating opposing viewpoints like mine. Every interaction I have with liberals causes me to hate them more. How could I wish for anything other than their death?

On an intellectual level, I believe in free speech and live and let live. So in theory, liberals should be allowed to be scum and should be left in peace. But this only applies as long as liberals follow the same rules. When the liberal West interferes in the internal affairs of Muslim countries, Muslims have every right to attack back. The argument that these are innocent citizens of the West is absurd. It is precisely propaganda like Charlie Hebdo that causes the public to choose governments that attack Islam. So Charlie Hebdo is a justified target. My only criticism is that while France is quite intolerant internally to Muslims, it is not particularly active against Muslim countries. So Muslims who don't like France should just leave. The same cannot be said for America which relentlessly sticks its nose into the affairs of other nations. So attacks against America are entirely justified.

I am not Muslim, so this is not my problem. So while violence against liberals appeals to me emotionally, I have no intellectual reason to do this and I won't. I will just live my life in peace, and take pleasure in any news of violence against the liberals who I hate.

SerialBrain2 #wingnut #conspiracy voat.co

Did you listen to the last two speeches of the Maestro during his stay in Japan?

Ending his 2019 visit to the Land of the Rising Sun, the Maestro stopped by the JS Kaga with Prime Minister Abe where he made his first speech at 9:25 AM local time. Then, at 11 AM, he addressed Japanese and US troops on the USS Wasp.

As usual, he gave us very important information from the battlefield but also informed us of what is coming soon.

Ready?

The JS Kaga speech was mainly about security and was an opportunity for POTUS to pray for the victims of the stabbing attack that happened earlier in the morning in Tokyo link. You know what’s going on right? The black hats are flexing their muscles to force negotiations on DECLAS.

Q3113 What occurred the last time a countdown was presented? [FF] Do you believe in coincidences? Never interfere with an enemy…….. Ammunition is hard to come by. Q

Keep reading, you’ll soon see this is not me speculating.

First, the Maestro mentions Happy Memorial Day twice. Solving HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY=182 and memorial+stabbing attack, you hit the famous gun shape drop Q1440 with its 4 BOOMS, the price to pay (BLACKOUT) and this very important line: A WEEK TO REMEMBER. We are informed something historic is about to happen. Then, the Maestro says about the crew of the JS Kaga: “They love this ship. You all love the ship, right? You feel good about it, don't you? I do too. I feel very safe on this”. Did you solve? JS Kaga? Love? He’s talking about JameS Komey! You caught this ‘love’ was about the Mueller/Comey episode of the FISAGATE soap opera right? What do we do next? Since we know we are in Comey’s comms area, we use the Q645 translation template to decode the Maestro. He’s essentially saying: “Comey and his buddies are on a sinking ship and they know it. They are not feeling safe because they know what’s coming”. Do you now see the connection with the stabbing attack? You now know that Comey, just like J. Kerry or Michael, is a sleeper cell operator: since Japan has joined the Alliance, they will try whatever they can to destabilize it. This is the reason this JS Kaga event was scheduled at 21:25 POTUS DC time. We go to Q2125 and see it’s about the efficiency of the wall in Hungary, which is code for security measures taken against terrorism and destabilization. This is confirmed with the purchase of 105 stealth F-35s which, since MASONRY=105, is code for the infiltration of secret societies operating in Japan. The Maestro is revealing that tech and expertise is given to Japan to help them fight the Cabal. Here is the summarizing image:

image

The second speech was made at 22:00 POTUS DC TIME, we go to Q2200 and it’s about the dems offering to confirm Justice Kavanaugh in exchange for a pullback of DECLAS. This means the Cabal and its puppets are desperately trying anything they can to stop DECLAS and confirms the stabbing attack false flag. The Maestro started with: “At Ease! At Ease!” You know from this post that he’s referring to the Viv[a] L[e] Resistance network and the need to swap [a] and[e] to get the correct French orthography. SWAP? Now you know why the Maestro picked USS WASP.

The play on the letters [a] and [e] is also confirmed by the Maestro’s insistence throughout his speech on the words stEAlthy and stEAm. Did you catch that the ‘best submarines in the world’ were the anons who learned the comms? How about we have ‘plenty of time’? Yes: he’s promising plenty of jail time to members of the Viva le Resistance network. Then he says: ‘steam has only worked for about 65 years’. This 65 is referring to James Comey when he said this: videoYouTube. Why? Because WEASEL=65. Knowing this, you can solve the 900 million cost overruns on the electric catapult with the 3 matches for 900 in

image

YOU THOUGHT (...) OTHERWISE = 900

NO I DONT FORGIVE (...) POORLY = 900

I HONESTLY CANNOT SAY THIS (...) CREATION=900.

Do you know who the Maestro is talking about here? He’s talking about Satanists. How do I know? Because Comey coded his response for his brothers and sisters in the image used in his latest Wapo op-ed. Did you notice how he wrote ‘dumb lies’ in the title to send the message he wanted to make a DL=deal? Read his decoded message very carefully:

image

Now look how the Maestro shows a picture of McCabe and announces that the dead cat is about to bounce:

image

In the next tweet, he reveals who the cat is:

image

And just in case you still have doubts, he doubles down and asks you to be ready:

image

And this morning, the Maestro started the day reminding us that he always keeps his promises:

image

Do you still have doubts? The BOOMS are coming, buckle up:

image

Q2344 Are you ready to see arrests? Are you ready to see PAIN? Are you ready to be part of history? Q

fubusvitch #racist reddit.com

fubusvitch:

I'm a mod at r/IsraelExposed. Several of the mods there are Jewish. My wife is Jewish. I was married by my Rabbi under a huppa and our baby was named by the same Rabbi. We host Passover dinner at our house every year. We're active at our local Temple.

I fight to make sure that IsraelExposed doesn't become anti-Semitic. The trolls try. We constantly ban hitler apologists and anti-semites there. People don't recognize the difference between criticizing the Israeli government and being an anti-semite. This includes the op. The op is the kind of guy who'd call Bernie Sanders an anti-semite.

I also mod antifascistsofreddit. The op has made several accounts and has been ban evading and blowing up our modmail calling us "Nazis" among other things. The op has been completely unhinged and antagonistic to us. I can post screengrabs for proof if need be, if the other mods will let me. But there interaction with you here should be telling, as should this user having only a day old account should be an indicator.

This user is also u/Angry-Corbynista.

Angry-Corbynista:

Right. It was an anything goes cess pool but has been converted to a very typical for Reddit left wing antisemitic cess pool. You can’t openly glorify Hitler anymore but instead you glorify Hitler’s benefactors.

That there are Jews involved only makes it more disgusting. There are plenty of Jewish Antisemites; strangely they’re always found on the far left. 🤔🤔 Like Tony Greenstein,. suspended from labour for antisemitism. Do you know how hard that is? It’s like being too racist for the KKK.

Or Miko Peled, who gives speeches at events organized by Holocaust deniers, among many other displays Jew hate.

Or Holocaust denier Gilad Atzmon. Many many more, these are just the tip of the iceberg. And always among the very far antiZionist left.

You support Antisemites. Period. Saying a Jew can’t be an Antisemite is like saying an Isreali can’t be an antiZionist. It’s a meaningless statement meant to distract. And likewise there have always been Jews like this - kapos and Bundist far left Jews who told eastern and Central European Jews during the first half’s of the 1900s how safe they were in Berlin and Warsaw and how unnecessary Israel was . And before that, Hellenized Jews who opposed the Maccabees.

Also I call you left wing Nazis, bc that’s what you are. Left wing Nazis were socialist, anti Jew, antiZionist, anti capitalism... isn’t that you?

Everyone on earth recognizes the difference between criticizing Israel’s govt and antisemitism. Just as everyone on earth understands that what you ppl do most definitely isn’t “criticizing Isreali policy” and most definitely is lying to demonize the Jewish state. You’ll frame any and all Antisemitism as “criticizing Isreali policy”.. We’re all very familiar with your type of hypocritical Antisemitism.

fubosvitch:

I didn't say a Jewish person couldn't be an anti-semite. I said you're the kind of person who can't tell the difference between anti-Semitism and someone like Bernie criticising the Israeli government.

Donald Trump #fundie theguardian.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[...]

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

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

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

123cop #fundie city-data.com

California has also stated that all cats are now dogs. So dog owners.. you now have to rename your pets.

We all know that one guy and one girl are the only thing that can make one human baby.

We should not embrace or rejoice for a genetic mutation. How much longer is the majority in our nation going to suffer so the minority can thrive? My lord, we make businesses build ramps that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars so maybe 1 handicapped person can go in the business. We build thousands of handicapped parking spaces that are never used. We turn away intelligent and well qualified white students to let in not as qualified minority students. Why is it evil to be a white christian heterosexual? Yes, minorities need some protection but we've gone so far to the extreme it's unbelievable.

David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

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

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

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

(starts at 26:00)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gender pay gap madness

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

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

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

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

Race-baiting… again

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

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

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

But the media still lauded Clinton

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

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

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

waitin #fundie rr-bb.com

Oh boy, have Christians been getting attacked. I know myself, I have been getting hit from every side the last couple of days. I am home sick, when I left my job to go home today, the girl in work who hates me was very rude and disrespectful, made my daughter really mad that someone dissed her mom! And my husband attacked me last night, actually right in the middle of trying to post a thread here. He just was yelling and came over and shut off my computer and tossed my things about like a mad man. I of course had to leave my own home AGAIN, on a Sunday night not much is open, but thankfully, Barnes and Noble here in my town. And my dad was rude to me last night on the phone. I'm like [shrugging shoulders smiley, candle-holding smiley, running-around smiley, rolling eyes smiley, scratching head smiley, shrugging shoulders smiley]

Miles Williams Mathis #conspiracy mileswmathis.com

[From "The Glen Ridge Rape was Faked"]

This event allegedly happened in 1989, before the golden age of hoaxes, so we find no exposés of it on Youtube. I could find nothing off Youtube, either, but didn't look past the first pages on a search. So I guess I am in virgin territory here, so to speak. Just where I like to be. The first thing we find is that Glen Ridge is a very wealthy community in New Jersey where the median family income is above $175,000. Although the population is only about 7,000, Glen Ridge has a long list of notable people, including Buzz Aldrin, Tom Cruise, Edward Mitchell, Cindy Sherman, Kerry Bishé, Alison Stewart, Don van Natta, and internet hoax artist Mike Z. Tom Cruise graduated from the high school at which the event occurred, although he was of course there about a decade earlier. This leads us to the discovery Cruise's father worked as a defense consultant for the Canadian military. In other places this is scrubbed by telling us Cruise's father was an electrical engineer, but Wikipedia admits his father worked for the Canadian military as a defense consultant. The family moved around a lot, which leads us to ask what a defense consultant was doing in Glen Ridge in 1980. There must be a defense facility in the area we aren't told about. Perhaps it is the Picatinny Arsenal about 15 miles to the west. According to their website, they supply all conventional ammunition for the armed forces and 90% of the Army's lethality. Wow.

[...]

The next thing we learn is that one of the boys initially charged with rape in the Glen Ridge case was Richard Corcoran, Jr., son of Glen Ridge's Chief of Detectives. This is curious, is it not? That the Chief of Detectives in this small community would find his own son involved in the event? Well, it gets curiouser and curiouser. Lieutenant Richard Corcoran, Sr., was in control of investigating the case. We are told he assigned Detective Sheila Byron to the case, but they admit it was his decision who to assign, which means he was in ultimate control of the investigation. In 1994 the prosecution against Corcoran Jr. was dropped for no good reason. The reason given was that the victim's family no longer wished to press charges, but five years on that makes no sense. Why had the prosecution of Corcoran not proceeded long before that? Perhaps because Corcoran Sr. had stalled the investigation? Or was it to allow Corcoran Jr. to join Special Forces?

That's right, this same Richard Corcoran, Jr. applied to Special Forces and was accepted. How does that work? Is it the custom of Special Forces to admit young men indicted on nine counts of rape and torture? You will say he is innocent until proven guilty, but given that all these young men were found guilty in the press long before their actual convictions, that claim doesn't hold much water. Remember, Corcoran was accused by the victim herself in courtroom testimony of actually wielding the stick that penetrated her, so it is difficult to understand how he could not be one of the major players here or how he could not be one of the first ones taken to trial. Seeing that according to the mainstream story, Corcoran appears to have skated based on good fortune more than anything—or more likely the influence of his family—it is somewhat astonishing to find Special Forces considering him a good candidate. I have had friends go into Special Forces, and they background check you all the way to
Mars and back. The Glen Ridge event was a huge national story, so there is no way they overlooked it. I suspect they knew something about the event we didn't: namely, that it never happened.

What you need to know here is that Special Forces is closely linked to the CIA, since both their operations include covert ops and various other intelligence operations. Special Forces historically came out of the OSS and CIA. So to see Corcoran Jr. accepted into Special Forces after the Glen Ridge event is a huge red flag.

But the mystery doesn't quit, since in 2005 this same Richard Corcoran allegedly killed himself in an attempted murder/suicide near Ft. Bragg. To get to that story requires you go to the Wayback Machine, since it has been memoryholed by The New York Daily News and the Associated Press. We also learn from that story that Corcoran won a $200,000 settlement from Essex County in 1997 for malicious prosecution. That's right, not only did Corcoran mysteriously dodge prosecution despite testimony from the victim that he wielded the stick that penetrated her, he actually became $200,000 richer from the event. Given all that, do you believe this Richard Corcoran really died in 2005 at age 34? I don't.

What I suspect is that Corcoran Sr., the Chief Detective of Glen Ridge, also had a military or Intelligence background, and that he was linked somehow to a nearby base. The event would then have been coordinated from there. That is the way it is normally done. Curiously, a people search on this Richard Corcoran pulls up nothing at Intelius. There is no Richard E. Corcoran of his age listed as ever having lived in New Jersey or Glen Ridge. So Intelius has been scrubbed. If we go to InstantCheckmate, we do find a listing for him. He is 69 and has the same relatives as his son. He is also listed as having lived in Henderson, Nevada. This is curious in the extreme, seeing that Nevada is
famous for its secret military bases—and not just Area51. There is a large area south of Henderson blacked out in a Google Search. Beyond that, an unmarked base nearby was recently discovered by locals, making Youtube in 2013. If we take that info back to Intelius, we find that his son of the same name has also lived in Henderson.

[...]

The author, Bernard Lefkowitz, couldn't find any interest in the book from big New York publishers and had to settle for the University of Nebraska Press. In 2006, Steven Hart from Opinion Mill asked him about this, finding it odd that such a high profile case with so much publicity wouldn't interest a major publisher. No good answer was forthcoming. But I have a suggestion. University of Nebraska is in Lincoln and also has a presence in nearby Omaha. Offutt Air Force Base is between the two cities.
This is headquarters of the US Strategic Command, but in 1989 it also was headquarters of the Strategic Intelligence Wing. So it is possible Intelligence has its hand in U. of Nebraska Press. No, make that probable. Intelligence has its hand in all US publishing.

Lefkowitz is a curious character as well, having taught journalism at Columbia and also having been an assistant editor at the New York Post. The Post was run by the granddaughter of Jakob Schiff until 1976, when it was bought by Rupert Murdoch. Lefkowitz had been in the Peace Corps. All these things are potential red flags, as we know. But it is the Jewish connection that is most curious. He is Jewish of course, and it turns out the University of Nebraska Press has strong connections to the Jewish community, although we aren't sure why or how. It has a collaborative arrangement with the Jewish Publication Society.

A movie was then made based on Lefkowitz' book. See the under title photo above. Usually, when you see a movie made from a book like this—one based on a sensational headline story—that is more indication the event was faked. Hollywood was an Intelligence creation from day one, and one of the reasons it was created was to make films to back up their propaganda projects. First they run a fake event, then they hire someone to back it up with a book, then they make a film from the book. Each time the story is retold, another layer of lies and emotions can be added.

Now let's look at the event itself. The victim was said to be a mentally retarded girl, but with more research we discover she was co-captain of the high school's junior varsity softball team. Since captain is normally an elected position, it is strange to find a challenged girl in this position. It is also claimed she had been raped six years earlier. She would have been only 11 then. She is now said to work in a department store in that same town. Again, this would be impossible given her IQ of either 49 or 63.

[...]

In that one report, we get two major clues. Not everyone on the ground believed the event. Not even the girls who attended the high school believed it. But we rarely heard from them. And why didn't they believe it? Because it wasn't believable. Why would the handsome quarterback rape a retarded girl? He has his pick of dozens of hot girls, so why would he be interested in this retarded girl? The story makes no sense in dozens of basic ways. It is full of huge holes. That one hole was the first red flag that led me into this hoax.

[...]

After being convicted of rape, Chris Archer and the Scherzers were allowed to remain free on bail while the case was appealed. Really? Is that how it works? None of them served time until 1997, eight years after the alleged crime. In a real event, it wouldn't happen that way. They don't let convicted rapists roam free while waiting for appeal. Why would they? Say one of these guys rapes again: well, the victim can then sue the county for gross negligence and huge damages. It doesn't happen.

[...]

They went to a “campus-style youth correctional facility”. Although the Scherzers were 18 at the time of the crime, the judge classified them as “young-adult offenders”. You may wish to compare this to what you are told in other high-profile crimes, where 14 and 15 year olds are tried as adults. Kyle Scherzer was said to have been released in 1999, after serving 2 years of a 7-year sentence. The other two, said to have been sentenced to 15 years, are said to have served only 4 and 5 years. My guess is the young men weren't to be found at this youth correctional facility at all.

[...]

Of course the appeals court finding that the girl was both of age and complied with the acts was never reported in the mainstream or academic press. No one on either side of any debate ever mentions that fact.

Most will now admit this event is suspicious in the extreme, but they will say, “OK, maybe it was manufactured by CIA or someone, but why?” Why would anyone want to fake a horrible rape of a retarded girl by good-looking football players? Answer: as part of the longterm project to demonize men and boys, and especially attractive ones. See my paper on Ted Bundy, where I try to explain it for the first time. Or see the books of Christina Hoff Sommers, such as Who Stole Feminism? and The War on Boys. A resident scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, Sommers admits this has happened and is happening, and she outs many of the academic projects of the past 30 years. Unfortunately, after outing these projects, she pursues her own project of demonizing men and boys, though in a slightly more subtle way. I have recently outed her, and this paper was a spin-off of my close analysis of her books and bio. She uses the Glen Ridge case to support her own analysis of boys and men, which forced me to take this closer look at it. Of course she never questions the mainstream story, only giving us a 3-page retelling it, with no mention of the appeals court finding.

But why demonize men and boys? To separate the sexes. It has been a long term goal of the billionaire industrialists and Plutocrats to drive a wedge between the sexes. Why? Because this creates trauma, and trauma increases all sales. Scared and traumatized people buy more stuff, period. Happy people in good relationships are lousy consumers.

Lane Davis #fundie thedailybeast.com

Something had set Lane Davis off, but that wasn’t unusual.

It was a clear summer afternoon on July 14, on Samish Island—a small, idyllic community off the northwest coast of Washington state—where Lane, a balding, bearded, Donald Trump-supporting conspiracy theorist and prolific YouTuber and Redditor, known online as Seattle4Truth, lived with his parents.

Lane had spent that Friday morning as he did most mornings, on the internet. This day, like the others, Lane read and retweeted posts celebrating the Second Amendment, bemoaning diversity, and spreading conspiracy theories that alleged Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta was involved in a child sex ring and DNC staffer Seth Rich
had been murdered for leaking sensitive emails to WikiLeaks. It was the end of a busy week during which he contributed to the Donald Trump subreddit, and over on The Ralph Retort, a fringe blog where he worked as a political editor, (unpaid, according to the site’s owner), he had celebrated the idea of a Kid Rock Senate run, claimed America was under threat of Sharia law, and wondered whether CNN was “literally ISIS.”

image

Lane’s parents, Catherine and Charles Davis—Charles was known as Chuck to his friends—were used to their 33-year-old son’s outbursts. They had become so frequent that Charles had started recording the tirades on his phone. But that afternoon, they were tired of Lane’s screaming, wanted him to leave, and told him as much. Instead, Lane chased his parents around their home, spitting in his father’s face while screaming that he wasn’t threatening to kill them, but “pedophiles who were taking over the country.”

Catherine Davis called 911. The tape of her call was acquired by The Daily Beast.

“He’s not physically threatening us or anything,” Catherine told the dispatcher. “He just gets out of control and he’s ranting about stuff from the internet.”

Was Lane drunk, the dispatcher asked? On drugs? Was there any history of a mental disorder?

“No, not reported, but he’s not working and he gets on these rampages and he just needs to move on,” Catherine replied.

The dispatcher suggested Catherine and Charles stay away from Lane until the police arrived.

“We’re trying to but he’s chasing us around the house,” she replied. “He’s mad about something on the internet about leftist pedophiles and he thinks we’re leftist and he’s calling us pedophiles. And I don’t know what all.”

Catherine laughed. “He just lives on the internet and he gets really worked up about everything that’s going on. He needs an intervention of some kind here.”

Police were on their way, the dispatcher told Catherine, and she hung up. But Charles’s phone kept recording.

On the 12-minute audio file later recovered by Skagit County Detective Kevin Sigman, a manic Lane, enraged by his mother’s 911 call, says, “OK well, so here’s the deal. If I am going to go to prison for threatening to kill somebody, I mean...”

“Leave the knife alone,” Charles says while his mother tries to reassure him: No one wants to send him to prison, they just want some help.

Lane doesn’t seem to hear or believe his mother. “So, you are going to send me to prison?” he asks. “My life is over.”

Minutes later, Catherine called 911 again. The audio recording is hard to hear. In it, Catherine is running and the portable phone she’s using breaks up. Catherine screams “He stabbed him!” before the connection is lost.

As the 73-year-old maritime lawyer and grandfather of two lay bleeding on the back deck, stabbed by his son in the chest and the back with a chef’s knife, Lane walked outside, dropped his weapon and stood with his hands in the air, waiting for police to arrive.

Catherine called 911 once more. “He’s dead, he’s dead, he’s dead.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Andrew Levinson #fundie returnofkings.com

Christians in general, and Catholics in particular, are portrayed as puritanical and anti-sex. This raises a question: if Catholics hate sex so much, then why did they historically tend to have so many children? As recently as 100 years ago, child rearing was considered the proper object of marriage and sex. The blue pill script – go to college, get a good salaried job, marry young and for life, have two or three kids – retains its staying power because it used to be sound advice. The manosphere exists in part because it is sound advice no longer.

Pope Paul VI, who reigned from 1963 to 1978, was in many ways a weak and vacillating man. His predecessor, Pope John XXIII, described then Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini as, “our Hamlet,” always indecisive to the last. In an uncharacteristically bold move, he published the encyclical letter Humanae Vitae in 1968 that reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s opposition to all forms of artificial contraception.

At this point, many RoK readers may be thinking, “I’m sure this is terribly interesting to you Levinson, but I’m not a Catholic and the pill and the condom have been great for my sex life. Why should I care about this?” You should care because Paul VI called it: the easy availability of contraceptives paved the way for no-fault divorce, unleashed hypergamy, and sodomite “marriage.”

Marriage Then

Most of us take atomistic individualism for granted, in contrast to the ancient understanding of man as the political animal. “Who are you to say what two consenting adults can and cannot do in private?” is taken to be an unanswerable rejoinder to traditional understandings of sex and marriage. Sex seldom remains a purely private affair, especially in the era of social media. Among other things, sex can lead to love, marriage, hate, murder, children, disease, happy homes, broken homes, social cohesion and social disintegration.

As Pope Paul described it:

"Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage. Though this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties, no one has the right to assert that it is impossible; it is, on the contrary, always honorable and meritorious. The example of countless married couples proves not only that fidelity is in accord with the nature of marriage, but also that it is the source of profound and enduring happiness."

In other words, marriage was once considered a more public institution than it is today, not through legislation but through social convention. Young men were incentivized to make themselves good husband material if they wanted sex and children. Young women were encouraged to remain chaste and marry young. Divorce was unthinkable for our great-grandparents. Then, as now, women were much more ruthless about slut shaming than men.

Above all, marriage was ordered toward children:

"Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents’ welfare."

Marriage Now

In paragraph 17, Pope Paul predicts the consequences of the contraceptive mentality:

"Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law [emphasis mine – AL], and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection."

Players and sluts ye shall always have with you, but the world now incentivizes us to be this way. Men must constantly perform or else their unhaaaappy wives will blow up the marriage for cash and prizes. That is, if men choose to marry at all. Fewer do, and in all honesty, I can hardly blame them. Why should they? If they want sex, they can find plenty of willing ladies provided they have even a modicum of game, and they won’t have to risk losing their homes, their jobs, their children, and their sanity in the divorce grinder.

Women too have grown to devalue men. Would the carousel exist to the extent that it does if it weren’t for the pill? If they can have consequence-free sex, then they will pursue the apex alphas and ditch the frustrated betas who were the good husbands and providers of yesteryear. Women are more exquisitely sensitive to social pressure than men, and the social cues that existed in our great-grandparents day aren’t there anymore.

The key here is that artificial contraception radically separated marriage and sex from child rearing. Marriage used to be a recognized public institution that carried with it certain legal and social obligations to which the couple was expected to conform. If children are removed from the occasion, then marriage becomes all about romantic feelings.

Fuzzy Feels Are Optional

If marriage is nothing but a public declaration of romantic feelings, then two consequences follow: if the feelings go away, that’s a legitimate reason to end the marriage; and if sodomites have romantic feelings for each other, then what reason do we have to exclude them from marriage?

Traditionally, Christianity has taught that if you burn with lust, you should marry. The specific woman you married was a question of prudence like choosing a career or a new house. Nowhere did the Church say that God had created “the one” or your soulmate. Unfortunately, this thinking has infiltrated all Christian churches today with disastrous consequences.

Jesus Christ famously prohibited divorce in the Gospels but many Christian churches have creative methods for getting around that. In theory, the Catholic Church has stood strong alone among all Christians. Strictly speaking, she does not recognize divorce but she makes “declarations of nullity,” which means a couple never formed a sacramental marriage at the time of their wedding vows. The American Catholic Church in particular has been handing out annulments like candy for fifty years, so it’s understandable why outsiders think of them as Catholic divorces.

The Basis Of Civilization

The building block of civilized society is not the individual but the family. The great evil of our time is that our progressive overlords actively undermine the family at every turn. My tradcon friends vacillate between believing game is either a placebo or a set of irresistible Jedi mind tricks cads use to deflower innocent virgins. The media wonders why young men refuse to grow up, man up, and marry those sluts. I say the men of today are responding rationally to the incentives of a world gone mad.

Be honest gentlemen: if Marriage 1.0 were still the rule instead of the exception, how many of you would happily marry? The contraceptive regime radically disrupted the natural formation of families. Sex became an end in itself. From that conviction came the scourge of pornography. The logical conclusion is the development of sex bots. And an elderly, celibate Italian bishop saw it all coming more clearly than all of the experts.

pbjnmilk #psycho removeddit.com

I fantasize about killing dogs /vent(self.Dogfree)

The barking reverberates in my nerves throughout my body, it literally causes muscle tension in my hands and feet. Sitting in my room studying, out of no where the thing loses its f* mind, over nothing, on a regular f* basis. I fantasize about slitting a dogs throat. Chopping it up and cooking it. (I wouldn't do that only bc we have laws against it). I am here to vent as a stranger about how much I dislike, hate, dogs. All of them. I see their purpose in services, by that I mean strictly for the handicapped, as police dogs, etc. a TOOL. Regardless, I wish they would all disappear, into a national park for them, no one should OWN them unless for special needs. Which most dog owners act like it, they "need" them in their lives.

I can't stand the infatuation with dogs online, it's Everywhere, this isn't normal! The obsession is a sickness. Especially the people who value a dogs life above another human, that is a mental illness.

I don't understand why we can't eat dogs. What's wrong with dog meat?? Why can we eat fish, cows, etc. but dogs are somehow not ok?
[…]
When I hear the neighbors dog barking incessantly throughout the day and night, I fantasize about poisoning it. I don't date people with dogs, I have a theory dog people are emotionally stunted, they feed off that crutch, the positive feedback that Something "needs" them. I hate dogs bc they have no autonomy, no self-control. They have no reason to exist. No dog does anything good of it's own will. When I see the neighbors dog shit in the public space, I want to throw it at their home. I want to rip the ears off a dog, break its legs with a bat, and stomp on it.
[…]
Not even dogs, the ownership, I don't understand this, how can a being OWN another life? It is modern day slavery, conditioned from birth to be around you, IT DOESN'T BELONG TO YOU, it doesn't need you and you don't need it. Unless you have the breeds conditioned to Need you, bc without f* up their genetics, making breathing or running difficult, they wouldn't Need you or their Rx medications. Slavery isn't the right word, I don't have it.. manipulating their existence for your vanity, yet those same people claim they love them, no you don't love them, you love yourself and you love control. I don't really care for any animals, bunnies, cats whatever, but dogs.. god, I just want to rip them to pieces, set them on fire. /endrant

you(r) = dog owners

Donald Trump #fundie rawstory.com

John Oliver slams Trump’s trans order: If we want to protect women from predators, ‘ban the president’

In his Sunday evening “Last Week Tonight” episode, comedian John Oliver slammed President Donald Trump, calling him a hypocrite for his executive order against transgender students. The order would allow students to use their bathroom of their choice in schools. Obama’s order also allowed students to wear a tux to prom or a dress in yearbook photos if it is consistent with their gender identity.

Oliver played a clip of a Trump appearance on “The Howard Stern Show” from April 11, 2005, in which Trump brags about being able to walk into women’s dressing rooms during beauty pageants.

“I’ll go backstage before a show and everyone’s getting dressed and ready and everything else. And you know, no men are anywhere,” Trump told Stern. “And I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it. You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody okay?’ And you see these incredible-looking women. And so, I sort of get away with things like that.”

Some of those beauty pageant contestants were underage girls, and Buzzfeed interviewed four of them who said that Trump walked in on them during the 1997 Miss Teen USA pageant. At least one of the women was only 15 years old at the time.

“I remember putting on my dress really quick because I was like, ‘Oh my god, there’s a man in here,’” former Miss Teen Vermont Mariah Billado said. Trump reportedly told the girls, “Don’t worry, ladies, I’ve seen it all before.”

Oliver had a better idea for a new Trump executive order.

“Yeah, you do seem to sort of get away with it, which is exactly why if we really want to protect women from predators,” Oliver began. “Let’s stop wasting our time with pointless, vindictive bathroom laws and instead launch a military operation to ban the president himself from women’s rooms nationwide.”

Watch the full video below:

https://vid.me/nnj3

Hunter Wallace #racist #wingnut occidentaldissent.com

[From "“Civil Rights Icon” John Lewis Is Finally Dead"]

John Lewis is dead.

By the way the media has reacted, you would think one of the Apostles had just passed away. Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington calls him “justice in the flesh.” Joe Biden says “we are all made in the image of God, and then there is John Lewis.” Stacey Abrams calls him “a griot of this modern age.” Elizabeth Warren calls him a “giant” and a “moral compass.” The New York Times calls him “a human saint.”

For what is John Lewis deserving of such lavish praise? It is not for his accomplishments during the 33 years he served in Congress representing Atlanta. It is for one thing. It is for leading a mob in a march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, AL on March 7, 1965. After being ordered to disperse, John Lewis refused to do so and the mob was repulsed by Alabama State Troopers. The event was labeled “Bloody Sunday” by the media. It became part of the narrative of the Civil Rights Movement. It made John Lewis a “civil rights icon” and was a key event that led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In this sacred narrative, John Lewis was transformed from a mere human being made in the image of God into a saint and a civil rights martyr who advanced the cause of “equality,” “justice” and “progress” through civil disobedience against state and local authorities. The Edmund Pettus Bridge became a symbol. Religious pilgrims from across the world trickle into Selma to this day to see the relic which has become a modern equivalent of a Medieval shrine. Selma ceased to be a city in Alabama were people live and work and took on national significance. In 2014, the movie Selma was released which glorified MLK and John Lewis. The film was nominated for the Golden Globe Awards and Academy Awards.

In my lifetime, I knew Rep. John Lewis mainly as a civil rights dinosaur who was a throwback to another era who was fond of calling Trump a racist and illegitimate president. I also knew him for coming back to Selma every year for the holy pilgrimage in which he would reenact his march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge that made him famous. Every year in early March out of state progressive liberal politicians like Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and the media would parachute into Selma for a photo op on the bridge before leaving town and coming back a year later to reenact the same cynical ritual. By marching across the magic bridge, even the Rev. Al Sharptons of the world became righteous and holy.

There is another darker side of the legacy of John Lewis. Selma and the surrounding region never really ceased to be a place where people live and work after 1965. It just ceased to matter in anything but the symbolic sense to the media. After John Lewis left town, the cameras left, the marching stopped and civil rights legislation was signed into law, the people who lived in Selma and the Alabama Black Belt had to go on living under the new order. Black majority rule came to “Historic Selma.” History moved on and in the 55 years that have elapsed since “Bloody Sunday” the practical result has been that Selma has become the poorest city in Alabama and the ninth poorest city in the entire United States.

This symbol of “equality” is now one of the worst and most unequal places to live in the country. This symbol of “justice” is now unjust to anyone unfortunate enough to be born there. This symbol of “progress” is a blighted and abandoned television prop. The Voting Rights Act succeeded in establishing black majority rule. In doing so, it obliterated civilization because Whites didn’t want to live there anymore or invest in the community. As for “Bloody Sunday,” no one died on that day, but now Selma is the most dangerous city in Alabama and one of the most dangerous cities in the country.

In Game of Thrones series, The Doom of Valyria destroyed Valyrian civilization. Go to Selma in 2020 and you will see that John Lewis brought a similar Doom which has settled like a black cloud above the city. Selma is now a cursed place which is sinking into ruin and slowly being reclaimed by the wilderness. It is an American version of Pompeii that was destroyed by the Civil Rights Movement.

Roy Batty #fundie dailystormer.name

[From "These Bitches are Fucking Dogs Now"]

There is an epidemic of White girl dog-fucking that has gone largely unnoticed and unreported by the mainstream media.

But occasionally we get a glimpse into the underground world of dog fucking with stories like this.

Fox News

A woman in Scotland who shot cellphone video of herself in a sex act involving her pet dog and whipped cream has pleaded guilty to two counts of possessing pornography.

[...]

The poor dog.

White women have become such fat whores that no decent man wants them. As a result, many are resorting to dog-fucking to get their fix of sexual attention. Animal rights organizations like PETA have remained completely silent on this shocking trend of abuse.

Shame on them.

The problem is hard to accurately calculate because these thots are keeping it going on the down low. Just like all those teachers secretely fucking their students, lots of these thots are doing the same with the pets that have been entrusted to them.

And they use a secret code to communicate that they are in the market, looking for dogs to bang.

But it can be cracked.

Whenever you see a girl using the dog filter on snap chat, it’s actually a code signal.

It means, “I’m looking to fuck dogs.”

In general, a good rule of thumb is that any single woman with a large dog is actually probably fucking the poor thing.

There’s no other reason for a woman to want a large male dog as a companion otherwise. Only men take an interest in dogs like that because they’re cool, fun to play with, great protection and our best friends…not our fuck buddies.

Be careful out there, Stormers.

Without White Sharia, these women are literally going crazy. We already knew they were capable of fucking animals when they started fucking niggers, but this is a new low…or an improvement, I’m not sure.

At least dogs are loyal, serve a function in society and are good around children.

Not sure what niggers have going for them when compared to niggers now that I think about it. Regardless, we opened the doors to all this madness when we repealed White Sharia and allowed mixed-race relationships.

It was only a small step to bestiality from there.

We need to do something though. Think of the poor doggos out there forced to copulate with these disgusting women.

M #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

The San Bernardino False Flag: A Double Cross?

The San Bernardino shooting is a botched False Flag riddled with absurdities, irregularities, and mistakes indicating that there may have indeed been a double cross in this false flag ops.


Prior to the Thanksgiving Holiday President Obama chastised Americans to spend their time sitting around the thanksgiving table thinking about gun control.

Thread: White House: Americans Should Talk About Gun Control This Thanksgiving

Obama has repeatedly said that for his last year in office all his efforts would be put toward his top priority of Gun Control:

Thread: Obama says gun control to be top issue of final year

A pretty good indicator that mass shooting false flags are in order for the next year or so until Obama gets his way or leaves office.

Now in Nov, we had the planned parent shooting in Colorado Springs which was fit-to-order. It was Obama's and liberals wet dream. A white , Christian ,gun-lover attacked one of liberals most sacred institutions : abortion and killed three abortion workers. While the shooter looked like an MK-Ultra victim escaped from a mental institution, the leftist media was quick to seize the narrative of white Christian terrorist.

(See think progress “ Yes the planned parent hood shooter was a Christian terrorist” )


But this type of shooting does little to nothing to induce conservatives and moderates to give up their guns, as abortion clinics aren't sympathetic targets. More False flags were in order with targets that would prey upon the heartstrings of broader swath of the American population.

[We should note, around the same time as the planned parent hood shooting, there was a mass shooting in bunny park in which 17 people were injured. Of course this shooting was not ordered, the suspects were black, it didn't fit any of the pre-package scripts so it got little to no media coverage. Thread: There Was A Giant Mass Shooting NOBODY’S Talking About, Care To Guess Why? ]


Now comes San Bernardino. It was apparent Obama ordered a script white (probably Christian) anti-government gun lovers, to go on a senselessness rampage and attack a disability center. The reports on the police scanner indicate the shooters were three white males with body armor, military fatigues and automatic weapons and the Media seemed ready and eager to run Obama's script.

The shooters were obviously black-ops that are CIA/mossad/ or military, who are selected to advance this script. But Somebody apparently had ideas that they didn't like this script. Maybe a mid level manager of the operation changed it while Obama is over in paris, france doing -God knows what- for 12 days at the COP21 conference.

The script got flipped to the accused being a husband and wife, middle-eastern people. They conveniently are reported as dead, killed by police in a shoot out, despite zero footage of the shoot-out existing, which is incredible considering all police cruisers have cameras in them, there is tons of video surveillance in San Bernardino and some jurisdictions in California even require their officers to wear body cams. The accused may have been random muzzies taken out by black ops hit squads to fit the changed narrative or they may not even exist at all. All we know is the narrative conveniently puts them dead, with no chance of exonerating themselves and exposing a false flag.

The third reported shooter just disappeared down the memory hole.

In a press conference from Obama following the alleged mass shooting, Obama looks confused, frustrated and nervous. He doesn't understand how the script got flipped. In an attempt to defeat the new narrative he ridiculously categorizes the shooting as work place shooting of a disgruntled worker. .

Thread: Obama Just Said it! It May be 'Work-place Violence'--Gee, That Didn't Take Long Did It?


From here, the official narrative gets more absurd and stupid with a 100 plus journalist media circus being let into the accused's apartment, a crime scene (within 48 hours of supposedly the biggest terrorist attack since sept 11) to rifle around and create a forced narrative of muzzie extremists. The live broadcast from the crime scene featured the necessary Muzzie narrative trapping with prayer rugs hanging on the wall, Korans falling out of cabinets when opened etc. A stage show with a new level of ridiculousness with the media breaking and entering, criminally trespassing on private property, interfering with a federal investigation, Obstructing justice by contaminating the crime scene, and probably planting evidence to fit the muzzie narrative all to get the public to believe the new narrative was real.

Thread: Breaking!!! Over 100 JOURNALISTS destroy crime scene apartment in San Bernardino !!!!!!!!!!!!


It was as if somebody in the black ops department panicked and said “oh no” “now the script was changed we need to quick do something to reinforce the muzzie narrative”. Get the media and have the items planted.

Thread: Reporters Storm Mass Shooters' Apartment, Reveal Potential Evidence On Live TV


Soon after the Media Circus the F.B.I. held a quick press conference, in which they nervously and sheepishly claimed they let the media in, in an attempt to cover-their-asses and explain why evidence in a criminal investigation was flaunted by journalists on live TV and also officialize the muzzie narrative.

Thread: Just Watched the Press Conference on the Isis Shooting-Senators Demand Obama Release Immigration History of San Bernardino Attackers

All of this was probably much to the ire of President Obama who ordered a white Christian, gun loving, anti government shooter script and got crossed when somebody changed it to be a muzzie extremist scripted false flag.

From here they are stuck reinforcing the muzzie narrative in San Bernardino

With the CIA/mossad creation false flag and hoax group, ISIS issuing statements claiming credit for the attack

Thread: ISIS officially claims responsibility for San Bernardino shootings - meanwhile, Obama and the NY Times are continuing to push for gun control!!!

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Ever notice how the bad stuff is always black in horror movies? Ever notice how the evil beasts often have red, glowing eyes? Well, is there some rule that says God can’t make critters with red, glowing eyes show up in real life? No, there isn’t, and we need to be ready for these kinds of dramas. The power in a city goes out and suddenly there are black rats with red eyes swarming everywhere in the darkness, viciously attacking people. Such an act combines two elements which we find very disturbing: the spontaneous creation of large masses of critters, and critters acting in atypical ways. We will see God using these two themes over and over again during the end times. Sudden swarms of living things will appear out of nowhere and maliciously attack people. Footage of such events will abound on the internet and, well, it’s going to look like scenes out of a horror movie. Except it won’t be fictional, it will be real, and it will result in a lot of gruesome deaths. As a Christian, how should you respond to these things? And what do you do if you are personally caught in the middle of one of these events? Well, there’s no way to make such events pleasant. After all, when the firstborns were dropping over in Egypt, some degree of heartache was inevitable. But there is a major advantage to understanding that plagues are being controlled, and that the One controlling them is good in Character and acting out of positive motivations.

God is pro-human, and this is an important thing to keep in mind. It’s also important to realize that He is a very purposeful Micromanager. When snakes are raining down from the sky and biting people, your natural reaction is to freak out. But what exactly is it that is spiking that fear? There are couple factors. First, there is the element of spontaneous creation—a boatload of snakes are appearing out of nowhere. Well, yes, God is a Creator of infinite abilities and spontaneous creation is a very simple thing to Him. The second factor that freaks you out is that critters are acting in atypical ways. After all, everyone knows that snakes aren’t supposed to rain down from the sky. Well, frogs aren’t supposed to wander far from sources of water, either, since they depend on moisture to survive. Yet in ancient Egypt, Yahweh made frogs go hopping into homes, ovens, and beds—all of which were dry places. Why? What is going on in that amphibian brain when Mr. Frog keeps trying to hop onto the lap of some screaming, flailing woman? Who knows? God controls everything that He creates. It’s a very simple thing for Him to instantly create millions of frogs that all feel compelled to leave the comfort of the Nile River and go hopping over to where the humans are. It’s a simple thing for Him to suddenly turn hundreds of pet dogs against their owners without warning. One minute, Fluffy the poodle is sitting peacefully by your side, the next minute she’s snarling rabidly and trying to tear out your jugular vein. We are not in control of the created world—God is, and a fabulous way for Him to flaunt His supremacy over all things is to suddenly cause large masses of critters to act in atypical ways.

Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai #sexist reliablefatwas.com

Among the sweeping allegations of baatil made by a Dr. Hargey is his claim:

“Men and women have identical fundamental rights, with the Qur’an emphasising equality in the spiritual,intellectual, economic and legal areas.”

For this personal view of his, Dr. Hagey is unable to adduce any substantiation from the Qur’aan or Hadith. This view is at variance with the Shariah. Even a cursory glance at the teachings and proofs of the Shariah will establish the fallacy of this claim and make manifest that Dr. Hagey’s opinion is devoid of any Islamic credibility.

In the aforementioned statement, Dr. Hagey has made a sweeping claim without tendering the basis and proof for the claim which is couched in ambiguity. He speaks of “identical fundamental rights” without defining these. He should elaborate and expound his conception of “fundamental rights” so that the fallacy of his arguments in relation to the Shariah will become more vivid to Muslims. Ambiguity is always a cover behind which refuge is sought for unsubstantiated opinions and views.

It is quite a simple matter to launch an attack on the established institutions of Islam by means of high-sounding and ambiguous phrases. But, it is entirely a different matter to define, elaborate and substantiate such claims of baatil as are being traded under the name of islam. To enable us to comment further and in greater detail on this particular opinion of Dr. Hargey, it is necessary that he defines his understanding of “identical fundamental rights”.

In the second part of his claim (cited above), Dr. Hargey attempts to show that according to the Qur’aan men and women enjoy total equality in spiritual, intellectual, economic and legal areas. But, on the contrary the Qur’aan and the Sunnah refute this contention of equality of the sexes, an obsession with the modernists of our time. The following differences or Islamic differences between the sexes will conclusively assert the fallacy of Dr.Hargey’s view.

* According to the Shariah a woman can never be the Imaam in a congregation in which males are present. On the other hand, a man is always the Imaam in any type of congregation.

* If women happen to be performing Salaat in a jamaat in which men are, their position is right at the back–right behind the rows of children.

* When the Imaam in jamaat Salaat makes an error, his attention is drawn to the error my the muqtadis calling out “Subhaanallaah! But, it is not permissible for a woman who happens to be in the congregation to call out Subhaanallaah! to draw the attention of the Imaam. Her voice has to remain concealed.

* Nafl Salaat and Nafl Saum (Fasting) are acts of Ibaadat of very high merit. But, a woman is not permitted to resort to these acts of Ibaadat without the consent of her husband. On the contrary, her husband does not require her permission.

* A woman was never ever appointed a Nabi by Allah Ta’alla. This was the office exclusively of males.

* Juma’ Salaat is compulsory on men, but not on women.

* Eid Salaat is obligatory on men, but not on women.

* Taraaweeh Salaat is Sunnatul Muakkadah in Jamaat for men, but not for women. They are exhorted to perform individually at home.

* According to the Qur’aan Shareef the share of inheritance of a female is half that of the male.

* According to the Qur’aan the testimony (shahaadat) of two women is equivalent to that of one man.

* According to the Qur’aan men possess the right to discipline and punish women, even beating them when necessary while women have no reciprocal rights even if their husbands are in error.

* Men possess the right to administer divorce, not women. Women have no such right. Even khulah (the procedure whereby a woman buys her separation from her husband) is dependent on the acceptance of the husband.

* The husband is entitled to recall his wife after having given one or two talaaq even if the wife does not desire to be reconciled. It is his right to act unilaterily and retake her within the iddat period.

* The testimony of women is not admissable in crimes of the hudood category, e.g. theft, adultery. Even if a thousand pious, honourable and knowledgeable females bear testimony in such crimes, their evidence is not admissable.

These Islamic differences between man and woman are sufficient to highlight the fact that the Shariah distinguishes between the sexes, does not provide for identical rights for men and women and decrees the superiority of man over woman. These differences enumerated here will serve to indicate that the Shariah rejects the views and opinions of Dr.Hargey as blatantly baatil.

Dr. Hargey and other modernists of the same opinions should understand that to force equality between inequals is in fact reprehensible inequality, morally wrong and unjust. The Islamic inequality between man and woman is no insult to womankind. The glowing statements of the Shariah speaking highly of women negate any such charge which the enemies of Islam level.

In simple terms the lesser role lesser resporisibility and lesser rank to woman — a rank in subservience to men – all stem from the natural and inherent spiritual, physical and intellectual quality and condition of women. In these areas Allah Ta’ala has created in man dominance and in women subservience.

This state of affairs has been decreed by the Wisdom of Allah Ta’ala and the opinions of Dr. Hargey will not be able to alter the immutable realities created by Allah Ta’ala. Nor does the Ummah require or desire the personal opinions and views of doctors of philosophies, for the path and direction of the Ummah of Islam have already been fixed fourteen centuries ago. And that Path is the Path propagated by the Ulama-e-Haqq – the Path in which great emphasis is and will always be placed on “ritual and externals”, on dress codes” and codes of Islam which Hargey has branded as “empty observances”. May Allah Ta’ ala protect the Imaan of all Believers.

muzzleflash #conspiracy abovetopsecret.com

I, your friendly neighborhood Muzzleflash, WAS JUST ABDUCTED BY NORDICS!!! Freaking CRAZY right??!!!

Close Encounter of the Fourth Kind!

Wait - before I explain what happened during the abduction event let me explain why I think this actually happened: Ok last night I slept outside. It was a warm cloudless night. I went to sleep easily like any other night. And I had this "Dream", and we'll get to that in a minute... But OK so I woke up at 5:50 AM suddenly, like jilted awake. I opened my eyes and saw 3 UFOs hovering right over me.

It was still dark and they were lit up and moving slowly away. I couldn't see very clearly so I reached for my glasses, and knocked them over (because my eyes were fixed on the 'main' UFO which was the brightest and biggest one). I fumbled around frantically with my left hand for my glasses and found them, then put them on.

So I saw this one very slowly moving UFO moving towards to other ones, and then they moved to the other side of this large building. So I'm like immediately thinking about this "Dream" and what happened in it, which I'll describe in a moment. It matches perfectly with this. I was thinking things like "I'm gonna post this on ATS omfg! I think I was abducted!?!", and then one of the UFOs returned and flew back over slowly, I reached to grab my camera and this very bright slowly hovering large object began to dim - and by the time I was ready to record it had dimmed off so much I just like "FIGURES!!!" and of course, it cloaked. OF COURSE!!!!! Sigh...

Anyways, it doesn't matter because what happened while I was on their ship is the weirdest most important thing here. The story. Some grainy crap footage of a bright object hovering over me in the sky isn't going to convince any of the hardline skeptics anyways - they'd just complain and nothing will ever be good enough for them except their own encounter.

**** Important Note ****
I am an expert at identifying flying craft. I can name the specific model of any jet or helicopter merely by it's silhouette, I recognize all flying craft known in all air forces worldwide. Including the ability to recognize the new drones, though I don't know each drone model by name yet, too many new ones come out. I am in the top .1% of the population when it comes to identifying flying objects from meteors to weather balloons.

This freaking UFO (and to a lesser extent the other 2) did not have flashing lights, and it straight up cloaked in mid flight right overhead. Nothing we have does that, we don't have cloaking technology. I watch the sky regularly and have for decades, I know my #. It was NOT a satellite or the space station, these UFOs changed directions.

**** Note 2 ****
These things were RIGHT OVER me the moment I woke up from an abduction??? Normally I'd think this was just a weird "Dream" but this time I had a significant event that I see as strong evidence that this was much more than a mere "Dream". Looks like a Close Encounter 4.

**** Note 3 ****
Though I've seen various UFO events in my life, I have NEVER encountered an E.T. nor have I ever thought I was abducted. This is my FIRST recognizable "Abduction Event".

The Mother Freaking Abduction Event Ok it started that I came out of this "slide", it was like a waterslide at those water parks, it was a black tube. So weird man.

Once I came out of this "slide", I walked up to this EBE (Extraterrestrial Biological Entity) that was sitting at a station like a receptionist (a receptionist on an alien spacecraft? GOTTA BE KIDDING ME LOL!!!). First thing I said was, in pure astonishment "How did you know I was coming? What are you guys able to tell the future?? How do you do that??!!". And the alien receptionist explained something like "We planned you'd come".

Of course, I was NOT aware that I was abducted, I was not aware that they abducted me. I just appeared in this high-tech scenery with these entities and was clearly mind-blown by it. They were freaking Asgardians. That's all I know to compare them with. What they look like is totally important and I'll explain that in a few moments because it raises some startling and perplexing questions.

Ok so I immediately asked the receptionist "How can I get to tell the future like you? I wanna do that!", and this other individual that was standing there, came up and said "You're going to get sick". I looked around a little bit, and asked "Did you get sick?", and he responded "Everyone does".

So I started puking right there, a little bit, and I'm thinking they had some way of cleaning it up immediately. It was like the floor was a big grate of some sort and it vacuum sucked the puke away. I guess? I dunno man I was a spaceship and I didn't even realize it at first! I dunno what the # their tech is! It was weird! Ok so then, since I'm a super-self centered person I asked them about something important to me. I need insight into the dilemma of my own life. I didn't ask them about humanity or the planet or any of that gibberish - I asked them something I need to know:

"Please tell me about JT and why she did this to me? What do you know about her??" (My history with the person I'll call "JT" is completely pivotal in me becoming the Muzzleflash you know, and 'she' is the one thing I haven't figured out at all yet in life, all this other stuff was easy to unravel - but women omg are complete mysterious puzzles).

The guy sat down in this chair and like 15 TV screens popped up showing all these aspects of her life, each one representing themes or traits of her and what she's doing lately. I quickly scanned through them and was like "these are all unimportant and don't answer my question". I was looking at each one and saying a descriptive term about it and moving on like this: "She's grumpy - no, she's mad - no, she cheated on her husband - no, she is rude - no, she is crying - no" etc. Through all of these screens.

Then I turn around and she's literally there walking up to the receptionist. She was dressed in the weirdest cloths too - almost sorta like Lady Loki's outfit in Marvel comics. My impression was that she clearly thought she was some sort of diplomat or ambassador to these Asgardians on behalf of humanity or something. I didn't catch what she was saying to them, but she looked unphased. So I walked right up to her and yelled "YOU #ING B****!!!!" And she flinched and looked over at me all surprised like OMG what is Muzzle doing here??!?!

And I started griping at her like "how could you do this to me? you completely destroyed my life, you're a horrible person, you're a liar and a con, and you're cheating on your husband wtf?! Who are you cheating on him with??" Then I realized it was me, in this weird way. She was cheating on him with me. Ooops. LOL!!! So then I just said "Look, I forgive you. I'm sorry". Then something else happened which I don't remember very well, talking to the aliens, and boom - I woke up with UFOs flying right over me. They were close and right above me, very bright.

This was sorta like a "Dream", but I was awake and aware - though it definitely had some light-headedness and disorientation involved, and my memory of it is clouded or hazy though I recall distinct powerful emotional and mental events in a very visual way.

The EBE's, get this, I couldn't see them correctly. It was like they have this incredible power over our perceptions and can implant images into our minds which are like them putting a mask on over their physical location in my optical view. So it's like them being able to affect my optical vision in a strange way that causes me to not see them specifically but instead see an image that is in my mind which is placed on top of where they would be in my vision. There was also a strange physical disorientation that caused me to puke. This is probably related to the physics of the craft itself.

I'm calling them Nordics or Asgardians because one of them used the image of Thor from Marvel comics to place over itself. I think they were blue skinned people though, I only got a brief glimpse of them though I was standing in front of them the whole time. Also, the guy that used the projector to show me all the scenes of JT's life used the image of Tony Stark, weird I know. I even called him Tony Stark when I was talking to JT, like "Tony Stark over here said such n such". Hilarious actually.

I also at one point saw a baby sleeping on a bed - or something (??), after I puked and was standing by the guy at the screens. It looked like, Worf from Star Trek. It was SO WEIRD. I saw this off to the side around a corner near the area where the screens were. I walked around this area for a moment and looked at stuff. It was VERY Star Trek! Everything was metal corridors with lights and stuff. Inside a spaceship.

So they appear capable of:
1) Abducting me in a strange way, it might be similar to Star Trek teleportation but somehow this slide-tube thing is part of it.
2) Able to put me back where I was sleeping without major problems.
3) Projecting mental images over my optical vision to hide their true appearances, though it wasn't perfect.
4) Bringing up visual images of someone's life events. It was like they can record our perspectives. Maybe they have a device that can pick up brain wave frenquencies and record our visual images and thought patterns?? Looks like it.

What this means? It means they are here and know everything about us. They know our thoughts and what we do day to day. They can affect our perceptions and sensory organs in such a way as to totally deceive them. So I cannot guarantee you these were "Nordics". That's all I have to go with though ok? These entities have incredible power over our minds so there's no way to know at this point what's going on here. I dunno OK?? I am at the speculation guesstimate stage here. All I know is that I was in a spaceship and then I woke up to spaceships flying over me in real life. The ultimate confirmation of this would be if JT remembers having a "Dream" this morning where I walked up and yelled at her "You F'n B!".

If she had a dream like that last night, about being on a spaceship or something where I came up and griped her out, that would confirm this really happened for me 100%. Cuz she was there. They abducted her too, obviously. There was no medical exam or anything that I recall. I wish there was though, I need some advanced medical treatment on my finger at least. I hurt it bad last month.

Pauline Hanson #fundie news.com.au

Pauline Hanson: ‘Go buy non-Halal Easter eggs’

Megan Palin, news.com.au @megan_palin

PAULINE Hanson has urged Australians to buy “non-halal” Easter eggs and boycott brands that offer halal-certified products, including Cadbury.

The One Nation Senator made the appeal in a video posted to her Facebook page on Tuesday morning, in line with the party’s stance that buying halal-certified products equates to “financially supporting the Islamisation of Australia”.

Ms Hanson said one of the “biggest complaints” she has received since being elected was about halal certification.

“We see these products out there that are actually halal-certified, Cadbury chocolate for instance, halal-certified,” Ms Hanson said in the video.

News.com.au has contacted Cadbury, which sells several Halal certified products including Easter eggs, for comment.

Ms Hanson went on to plug Cadbury’s competitors including Lindt and Darrell Lea.

“If you want to get product that’s not Halal certified I’d suggest Lindt,” she said.

“And another great one is Darrell Lea, an Australian company not Halal certified.”

“Halal” is the Arabic word for “permissible”, and defines the food that Muslims are allowed to eat.

Halal certification indicates that a product does not contain traces of alcohol, blood or pork — all forbidden in Islam — and can be consumed by Muslims under Islamic religious rules.

It also applies to the way an animal is slaughtered, meaning animals are pre-stunned, but still alive when their throats are cut, so that the blood leaves their bodies.

But for some people and groups, including Reclaim Australia, halal certification is a “religious tax” and a sign that Australia is becoming increasingly “Islamified”.

Ms Hanson said some companies were “misleading” consumers by “not printing (‘halal-certified’) on the wrappers”. She informed supporters the information can instead be found on company websites and urged them to shop for Easter products at local newsagents.

“Go and buy some non-halal Easter eggs and chocolate and have a very happy Easter everyone,” she said.

Many other Australian staples including Vegemite, Bega cheese and Kellogg’s cereals are also halal-certified. As is most bread, milk, cereals and at least 80 per cent of chicken processed Down Under.

Worldwide, the halal market is valued at $2.1 trillion. In Australia, it is worth about $8.5 billion, $1.5 billion of which is in the meat sector.

Ms Hanson told viewers she was still waiting on answers to questions she put on notice to the government about how it was going to respond to recommendations handed down by the third party certification of food inquiry in December 2015.

“They’ve got 30 days to answer the question,” she said.

Council of Islamic Ideology #sexist indianexpress.com

Pakistan: Council of Islamic Ideology proposes ‘light beating’ of wife for defying husband

In a bizarre move, the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) has proposed its own Women Protection Bill, recommending ‘a light beating’ for the wife if she defies her husband.

The council has proposed that a husband should be allowed to ‘lightly’ beat his wife if she defies his commands and refuses to dress up as per his desires, turns down the demand of intercourse without any religious excuse or does not take bath after intercourse or menstrual periods.

It further suggests that beating is also permissible if a woman does not observe Hijab, interacts with strangers, speaks loud enough that she can easily be heard by strangers and provides monetary support to the people without taking consent of her spouse.

It says that there should be a ban on co-education after primary education, ban on women from taking part in military combat, ban on welcoming foreign delegations, interacting with males and making recreational visits with ‘Na-Mehram’.

It further states that female nurses should not be allowed to take care of male patients and recommends that women should be banned from working in advertisements. The council recommends that an abortion after 120 days of conceiving should be declared ‘murder’.

However, it says a woman can join politics and contract a ‘Nikah’ without the permission of parents. The bill suggests that anyone, who tries to force women to marry with the Holy Quran or facilitate this, should be awarded 10-year imprisonment.

Similarly, the proposed bill says if any non-Muslim woman is forced to convert then the oppressor will be awarded three-year imprisonment while the woman will not be murdered if she reverts to her previous faith.

The Express Tribune quoted sources as saying that this proposed bill is under consideration by the body and further deliberation will continue today when CII chairman Muhammad Khan Sheerani will give final recommendations with the consent of other members.

The three-member delegation of Justice (Retd.) Manzoor Hussain Gilani, Noor Ahmed Shahtaz and Muhammad Abdullah yesterday raised objections on many clauses of the proposed bill and urged the chairman to moderate the same.

They said the bill was drafted by Mufti Imdadullah, a member who belongs to JUI-F, adding that the above three members have insisted the chairman and Imdad follow the current circumstances while drafting the law. They said the bill was discussed by a panel comprising men as the only female CII member, Sameeha Raheel Qazi, was not present yesterday.

The bill was drafted after the CII rejected Punjab’s controversial Protection of Women against Violence Act (PPWA) 2015, terming it un-Islamic. The CII will now forward its proposed bill to the Punjab Assembly.

123xyz123xyz, EternallyMiffed and bland8126 #fundie reddit.com

[Comments under "The anti communist alliance" having as OP a pic featuring a Hoppean snake wearing Pinochet's cap and sunglasses, Pepe with a Nazi hat and a bird with the same hat as Mussolini]

@123xyz123xyz

Nazis and fascists are temporarily allowed as commie removal agents. But sadly their helicopters won't have enough fuel for the return trip. I'll miss u pepe.

@EternallyMiffed

They prefer walk-in ovens.

Nazis are National Socialists so they have to go too bud.

hirayama_ronin & SophisticatedBean #sexist reddit.com

Re: Benevolent Sexism Attractive To Women, Study Shows

(hirayama_ronin)
Just a comment to posters, why post studies without a comment of your own?

The purpose of the following observations is to situate what counts as benevolent sexism, according to the study's authors. The purpose of the study is to meet research into what is called benevolent sexism (the definition of which the authors may or may not agree with), with "parental investment theory."

However, the definition of "benevolent sexism" is eye-watering.

The following is quoted in the article, word for word from the study.

“Hostile sexism (HS) encompasses overtly prejudiced attitudes, whereas benevolent sexism (BS) involves subjectively positive attitudes (e.g., “women should be cherished and protected by men”), chivalrous behaviors, and attempts to achieve intimacy with women.”

Benevolent sexism includes attempts to achieve intimacy with women. This is either an Andrea Dworking-style, "all sex is rape" definition of sexism, that categorically places normal gendered behavior into a politically hostile ghetto (of rape or sexism), or it's a very poorly worded definition on the part of the study's authors.

There isn't a single example of benevolent sexism offered in the introduction that would situate the author's definition. It moves immediately to supposed consequences of BS (a convenient short-hand).

Here are the studies in support of this idea:

Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764-779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.70.3.491

I don't have access to this literature to see how their work grounds this definition.

Here are some examples found in the "Supplemental Materials" section at the end of the study:

Study 1a, BS condition

He feels that, no matter how accomplished he is, he is not truly complete as a person without the love of a woman. He thinks that a woman should be set on pedestal by her man. He is convinced that in general women are more pure than men and they tend to have a superior moral sensibility. Mark thinks that women should be cherished and protected by men. In case of a disaster or emergency situation, he thinks that women should be helped before men.

Study 1a, non-BS condition

He feels that he can be truly complete as a person without the love of a woman, especially if he is personally accomplished. He doesn't think that a woman should be set on pedestal by her man. He is convinced that neither sex is superior with respect to purity or moral sensibility. He thinks that women should not necessarily be cherished or protected by men. In case of a disaster or emergency situation, he thinks that a person's sex should not be a factor determining who is helped first.

Despite the “romantic” undertone, researchers noted, benevolent sexism still reinforces the notion that women are inferior.

In Study 2a, we find BS in how a man might help a woman. The study participants were offered two men, Robert and John, who were identical in every way, except in particular behaviors:

Robert/John and John/Robert are both colleagues of yours. You have got to know them both a bit because you have often worked in pairs with one or the other and you have attended a few meetings and short business trips with each of them. They both look about the same physically and they are both about as competent at their job as each other.

You have noticed that they behave slightly differently at times though. For example, on one occasion when you were attending a short business trip with Robert/John, you had to get from a train station to the hotel where your conference meeting was being held. The taxi had not turned up so you decided you had to walk in order to get there in time. It was December and it was very cold. [BS condition] After saying something about how cold it was, Robert/John took his coat off and gave it to you, even though he only had a thin suit jacket on underneath. On another occasion later that same month, you had been on another short business trip with John/Robert. It was still very cold and you were walking from the train station back to your office and it was about the same distance you had to walk in the cold last time. [non-BS condition] After saying something about how cold it was, John/Robert, who was wearing a thin suit jacket under his coat, did not offer to give you his coat.

Reading into this, I assume "attempts to achieve intimacy with women" means "attempts to charm women (into intimacy) by giving them preferential treatment."

Discussion

What feminism-driven research is attempting to do, which the authors of these studies is disrupting, is to position the preferential treatment of women as politically damaging treatment. This is actually a position I tend to agree with. I personally believe men's preferential treatment of women makes them weaker, lazy, less desperate to achieve success, thus less successful.

The problem is that feminism allows women to problematize the preferential treatment shown to them (turning a prima facie positive into a subtle negative), while benefiting from preferential treatment. It's grabbing resources, attention, and affirmation from men, while punishing men for offering those resources, attention, and affirmation, packaging it up as a form of political oppression (patriarchy), which men are solely responsible for.

Studies like this cut through the nonsense. It says: benevolent sexism may have negative consequences, but it's desired by women:

We propose an alternative explanation drawn from evolutionary and sociocultural theories on mate preferences: women find BS men attractive because BS attitudes and behaviors signal that a man is willing to invest.

If women express this unconscious bias toward BS men, even when they have conscious knowledge of the supposed negative effects of BS upon women politically, feminists can no longer claim BS is a product of male supremacy. It is a joint product of deep reproductive politics, for which women must take their share of the responsibility, as they take their share of the benefits of being placed on the pedestal.

As always,

feminism == equality + pedestal =/= equality.

(SophisticatedBean)

personally believe men's preferential treatment of women makes them weaker, lazy, less desperate to achieve success, thus less successful

Not doing so appears to cause PMS though.

feminism == equality + pedestal =/= equality

I guess we can shorten that to feminism ? equality.

Women will always be on the pedestal because men are hardwired to care for women and women are not hardwired for reciprocity. Instead, they are hardwired to exploit and to be unwilling to settle with a partner of lower rank. (The alternative would also be unstable anyway as a stronger male in her mating pool would be able to threaten her decision if she decided for a weaker male.)

So the patriarchy is exactly a means of counteracting this innate anti-(beta)-male bias; it is basically egalitarianism. It basically artificially makes men more attractive by rituals, affirmative action (e.g. boys-only domains/clubs), strict rank enforcement and economic dependence such that women more likely feel like actually having a valuable/high-status partner. This should also allow women to experience more orgasms in a monogamous society as they orgasm more the higher the economic status and confidence of their partner is. Not doing so should theoretically make monogamous bonds unstable and we are indeed seeing a growing divorce rates. Another prediction is that more men should be rendered unable to impress a woman by their relative socioeconomic rank; and fewer males should be motivated by classical courtship and incentives for achievements of founding a family, both of which should reduce overall reduce cultural drive, which we are likely seeing too (incels, Hikikomoris, opioid crisis; though all of those have an economic component).

Now, one might expect the negative utility listed above might have been canceled out by the utility of an improvement of women's lives, but it looks like feminism has not even made women happier as career-oriented women seem to often find themselves in positions in which they are not very satisfied because they cannot find a satisfying mate or because their career conflicts with motherhood. I also suspect feminism even increases BS, because men are being raised to be so agreeable, intimidated and soft that they fulfill any wishes. There is positive utility in shape of increased economic productivity, but it's questionable to which extent that has actually made us happier. Positive emotion is mostly associated with goal pursuit (cocaine, emphatemine), and as goals are becoming diffuse, gender-incompatible or unattainable, it obviously makes us less happy.

.
.
.

That said, the study posted by OP surprised me since even self-described feminists preferred the explicitly sexist hypothetical male.

Some women are sneaky like that. I think it is a result of the lack of true female-male or female-female competition. We are seeing the same in the lack of true competition due to declining economic growth in the West: things start to become corrupt, improper and sneaky because the free market does not eliminate behavior and assumptions that are misaligned with reality. The raise of bullshit jobs. Women are basically chronically in this position because they are mostly always desired by men for their reproductive organs largely irrespective of their behavior and assumptions. Which does not mean that this expresses in all women to pathological degree or that men do not have their own gender-specific pathologies, but feminism, even though it probably had the intention of improving this has actually made it worse by making men more feminine/agreeable and by eliminating corrective feedback targeted at women.

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

We are living in evil times when police cover for police, government covers for government, Freemasons cover for Freemasons, lawyers cover for lawyers, doctors cover for doctors, drug dealers cover for drug dealers; but families turn each other in to the authorities for anything and everything. While ignoring the massive treasonous crimes in Washington D.C., the rotten and lying newsmedia demonizes American citizens, spending all their resources on one murder or one sex crime. They turn it into a 3-ring circus, bringing in all the legal morons, and it goes on for weeks if not months. It's all intended to distract Americans from THE TRUTH about the criminals in the White House, the Pentagon and on Wall Street.

If you call 911 because your husband yelled at you and called you a female dog, they'll send out a S.W.A.T. team and raid the home, shooting the family pet, arrest your husband for verbal assault (and a half dozen other charges), and your husband will be in court for the next 4-years. It will cost him tens-of-thousands of dollars for legal representation. This is all by design. They want to ruin your marriage, foreclose on your home to steal it, take custody of your children to generate money for CPS, and legally forbid the couple from contacting each other. it's all meant to steal, kill and destroy.

You won't hear this stuff anywhere else, because most people have their heads buried in the sand. I'm simply saying that THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS OUT TO GET YOU!!! If you trip, they'll break your neck in the fall. If you have any family or marriage problems, they'll turn it into an all out war, dragging you into court, ravishing you financially, and leaving you broken, battered and much poorer. They'll walk away wealthy and without harm, loss or damage. They are snakes!!!

She That Liveth in Pleasure is Dead While She Liveth

I heard a woman criticizing her “conspiracy theorist” husband. She divorced him because she said he looked at some porn and went with a prostitute. What ever happened to forgiveness (Matthew 18:22)? She's not so perfect. The truth is that she divorced her husband because she has a hard heart of unforgiveness (Matthew 19:8). She no sooner told me about divorcing her husband and then she admitted sleeping with some local man at a hotel. What a hypocrite! She divorces her husband and then goes out to commit adultery herself.

JoeDubs #crackpot joedubs.com

[From "The Seven Alchemical Metals & Planets of the Week"]

Ancient Mesopotamian astrologers devised a seven day week inspired by the heavenly bodies that wandered about the sky. There were seven in total. The equally sized flashlight and nightlight in the sky, the sun and moon, along with the other five wandering orbs of light thus form the basis of this alchemical cosmology.

The word planet comes from the Greek planētēs, meaning “wanderer”. So by definition the Sun and Moon were considered planets to the Ancients.

Of the days that are not named directly after the seven planets, their name is derived from the Norse Gods associated with the respective planet. The origin of Sunday is of course from the Sun in the sky. Of the seven known metals, the Sun has always represented gold, irrespective of time and place.

Monday or more properly, ‘Moon-day’, is known as [I]Lunes[/I] in Spanish, and dies Lunae in Italian. (lunar space craft, lunar eclipse). The Moon has always been associated with silver. The word ‘month’ and ‘menstruation’ also have etymological roots in the Moon, in addition to having cyclical intervals of about 28 days.

The atomic mass of silver is about the number of moons -stacked side by side- that it would take to fill the space between the two cosmic bodies, roughly speaking.

[…]

“We see then that planetary movement is metamorphosed into the properties of earthly metals” -Rudolf Hauschka 20th Century anthroposophist and inventor

‘The orbital motion of the planet correlates in sequence with its corresponding metal’s conductivity… The slower a planet moves, the less able its corresponding metal is to conduct electricity!’ -Dr Frank McGillion

“He learned chemistry, that starry science” -Moffat’s biography of Sir Philip Sydney

[…]

The two standard sex symbols denoting male ♂ and female ♀ are derived from astrological symbols from the planets Mars and Venus which represent iron and copper respectively.

The two signs, planets, days, and metals sit diametrically opposed to each other at 10 and 2 o’clock on the heptagon above. Woman and Man. Venus and Mars, Friday and Tuesday. Copper and iron. The Norse and Germanic equivalents, Freya and Tiw, are also of course female and male.

Women are from Venus because Venus is associated with copper. Women have about 20% higher copper serum in their blood than men. Men have about 33% more iron in their blood than women. Of course Mars is associated with iron, the brute and rustic metal, and as the axiom goes, that’s where men come from.

neanderthalguy #fundie reddit.com

Good, old, patriarchal times

Patriarchy was furthered at the end of the Neolithic Era when women began to be traded as commodities. This was seen in arranged marriages between families or villages, women being used to have sex with visitors as a deed of hospitality by tribal chiefs, and the ritual rapes during festivals to insure prosperity. Women were treated as commodities, and from a young age became accustomed to this identification. Women’s values lay in their reproduction, especially in farming villages. In these villages, more people were needed to work the land and sustain the population, so women were expected to produce a large amount of offspring. Children became an economic asset, and if women were unable to produce them, they were seen as all but worthless (Lerner). The idea of women being only good for their womb has progressed even into today’s society.

As culture evolved, the patriarchal society grew increasingly misogynistic. Ancient Greece played a large role in the increase of patriarchal practices. A primary democracy can be seen in ancient Greece called the polis. This gave men somewhat equal rights; compared to the aristocracy they had known before. As men gained equal rights, women lost many of theirs. The family had before been a biological unit, but now took the form of a political and economic unit. Wives and mothers became obligatory, and women who did not follow the traditional functions faced legal consequences. Women were the legal wards of either her father or husband and had no rights of their own; they could not inherit property. A woman during this time did not even have custody over her children as they belonged to her husband. Additionally, if a woman committed adultery, they would either be banished or executed where men, who would occasionally suffer penalties, had many legal sexual outlets. There were highly trained courtesans and male and female prostitutes (Radek). As men were able to find sexual freedom with these outlets, most women could not leave their homes without permission from a father or husband.

Source:http://www.colorado.edu/wrc/2015/02/13/history-patriarchy

Native American #fundie freeconservatives.com

Similarly, many single people love their dogs dearly, in the same way we love our husbands or wives. They shower gifts upon their dogs, take care of them when they are ill, and may even ask the vet to allow them "visitation rights" when their beloved dog is in the hospital. Usually the "dogophobic" vet will deny them that "right", however.

And their dogs love their owner dearly, showering licks upon their owner's face, protect them when threatened.

Fortunately, most of them have no desire to bring their private bedroom activity into the public arena.

Depth of love doesn't establish the "right to marry", you see.

William Lane Craig #fundie reasonablefaith.org

So Christian theologians of all stripes have to face the challenge posed by animal pain. Here recent studies in biology have provided surprising, new insights into this old problem. In his book Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering, Michael Murray distinguishes three levels in an ascending pain hierarchy (read from the bottom up):

Level 3: a second order awareness that one is oneself experiencing (2).

Level 2: a first order, subjective experience of pain.

Level 1: information-bearing neural states produced by noxious stimuli resulting in aversive behavior.

Spiders and insects—the sort of creatures most exhibiting the kinds of behavior mentioned by Ayala—experience (1). But there's no reason at all to attribute (2) to such creatures. It's plausible that they aren't sentient beings at all with some sort of subjective, interior life. That sort of experience plausibly does not arise until one gets to the level of vertebrates in the animal kingdom. But even though animals like dogs, cats, and horses experience pain, nevertheless the evidence is that they do not experience level (3), the awareness that they are in pain. For the awareness that one is oneself in pain requires self-awareness, which is centered in the pre-frontal cortex of the brain—a section of the brain which is missing in all animals except for the humanoid primates. Thus, amazingly, even though animals may experience pain, they are not aware of being in pain. God in His mercy has apparently spared animals the awareness of pain. This is a tremendous comfort to us pet owners. For even though your dog or cat may be in pain, it really isn't aware of it and so doesn't suffer as you would if you were in pain.

Peter Bailey #fundie thegospelcoalition.org

The Bible does not support polygamy. The most one can say is that the Old Testament describes polygamy. And when it does, it doesn't cast polygamy in a good light. While it may have been a culturally accepted practice perhaps picked up by the neighboring nations, nowhere does God condone it. Most instances of the patriarch's polygamy resulted in problems (see Abraham, Jacob, David). In 1 Kings 11, Solomon's polyamory (many loves) and polygamy (many wives) turned his heart after other gods and was in direct disobedience to God. Verse 6 says it was "evil in the eyes of the Lord." I assume the Romans 7 passage you mentioned is Romans 7:1-6. In that section, Paul is explaining how we are freed from being bound to the law (to now serve Christ through the power of Spirit) using marriage as an illustration. Since we are united with Christ and Christ has died to the law, so now we are free from the rules of that relationship. Just like when someone’s husband dies, then and then only is the wife is free to marry another. If she has sex with someone who isn’t her husband while still being married, it’s adultery. Again, Paul’s use of marriage is illustrative for the purpose of talking about the law. It is not in any way condoning polygamy. In Matthew 19 what is in view here is Jesus being pitted between two popular Rabbinical ideas on divorce. The House of Hillel taught that a man could legally divorce his wife for “a thing of immorality,” which was their own interpretation of the Mosaic Law on divorce. This quickly led to an “any cause” divorce being permissible. The House of Shammai taught that a husband could divorce his wife on the grounds of sexual immorality. Jesus doesn’t take the bait. Instead he reminds them of God’s original design: two becoming one flesh. While you may be right in suggesting that only men are in view in Matthew 19 with regards to initiating the divorce, it's important to note that Mark’s gospel records Jesus as including women in the prohibition on divorce. In either case, polygamy is not in view and is in no way supported by the texts.

Old Man Montgomery #fundie oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com

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

From the website of ‘johnshore.com’

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

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

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

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

Here beings the tenets:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There are no moral vacuums.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

First Timothy 1 (written by that suspect Paul fellow)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This statement directly contradicts the command of Jesus.

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

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

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

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

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

This statement flatly contradicts Jesus’ teaching on the subject.

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

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

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

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

Another direct contradiction of Biblical teaching.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dinosaurs on the Ark? Sheesh.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To conclude:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Subverted Nation #fundie subvertednation.net

We need to start a new program to combat communist jew gun control efforts. Many times their efforts consist of false flag shootings like Sandy Hook, followed by the jewish media screaming how we’ll never be safe as long as guns are around. In the near future, we will have a section where anti-gun jew fucks and their supporters can be exposed and properly ridiculed, until such time as they can face the consequences of their treason.

Recently a bunch of feminist jew cunts thought they would protest guns on campus by giving out dildos. They look like a bunch of dildos doing it, so let’s start with them. These dumb uneducated commie feminist infected pustules figured since dildos were banned on campus, but guns weren’t, they would protest by acting like whores and handing out dildos. They are flanked by feminized bitches with mustaches and beards that I won’t dare call “males”or “men”, but they dress like guys anyway. These freakish abominations have a name for their protest “Cocks not Glocks”. I guess even these guys like cocks. In the pictures they seem to enjoy playing with them way too much.

This is what you have to look forward to if you don’t stand and fight for freedom and righteousness. Your women will all be degraded to a pile of bottom feeding fake ass feminist tramps who will drop their pants to anyone. Your men will be girly little bitches who like sex with men, dogs, and children as much as they do a grown woman. To top it off, you’ll all be disarmed useless pussies crying in “safe zones” because your fake candidate lost a fake election that never happened. (oh yes, we’ll cover that soon too)

I’m not really mad though. Anyone that thinks handing out dildos to protest guns is funny needs shot, and the idea of that makes these whiny bitches mad. Wouldn’t that be ironic? Going before a firing squad for trying to ban guns? I think that is very fitting, but this article is Nooses for Gun Control so back to that.

These snakes always speak with a forked tongue. Remember, they walk among us, appealing to our sensibilities. There is a reason the Marcus Cicero quote has been displayed so long on the front of this site. An enemy at the gates is less formidable than one who pretends to be just another America with a differing view.

“I do believe in the second amendment and the right to own guns and bear arms, however I don’t think that public university is really the place for that,” said one commie lying fuck. This pile of shit doesn’t believe in the second amendment, or your right to defend yourself. She wants guns banned, and picking away at this little thing is her method of helping ban them.

This Hegelian dialect says one thing, then turns right around and says the other. People always ask me, “how do you know this/that”, and the answer is always the same. You need to listen to how someone says something, not what they are saying. This person above is saying she wants to ban guns, but only here and there. She “believes” in the second amendment, but that doesn’t mean she will let you have it. Even the commie jew professors were filing injunctions to stop people carrying firearms.

Anyway, let us get to the point. They want to give away dildos for gun control, we will give away free rides in a noose to all gun control proponents. Nooses for Gun Control will cover all the expenses. Rope. Trees or custom built gallows, and even a bucket to kick out from under them! Every expense will be spared to ensure the least amount of comfort, but any gun control nut wanting to show their psychotic little heads will get free rides. No questions asked. Bodies will be burned and the ashes spread to the four corners of the earth for good measure.

Listen folks. It is really this simple. The only reason for gun control is to make you easier to kill. Stop beating around the bush and acting like they give a fuck about your safety. The moment they have your guns, the open slaughter will commence. These people mean to kill anyone who resists their take over. If you’re confused as to what this will look like, have a look at this movie about the Katyn forest massacre.

Too many people want to argue the points on gun control. They want to break out all the statistics, and try to “win” an argument based on the truth. The truth they rely on is that gun control only causes more trouble, and the enemy will counter with appeals to emotion and cries about saving the children. This will go on for eternity, but slowly they will whittle away our gun rights to nothing if we continue to allow discussion. If I have to spell out how this is being done already, take a look at this current article HERE where Obama the dark skinned jew and Socialist Security criminal mob are making up their own “rules” to stop people from acquiring guns.

Rights are like facts. They aren’t up for discussion or debate. I seriously don’t care what whiny emotional bullshit they use. Rights aren’t something that can be debated, because they are set in stone. Anyone trying to debate your rights is your enemy. Nothing else needs said, but they will try!

There is nothing to argue with gun control. Anyone who wants you disarmed means you harm. Period. Taking guns makes people easy to kill, and serves absolutely no other purpose. Oh wait, it does make it impossible for you to fight back. Look at the draconian measures being treasonously imposed by the corporation posing as the legitimate government in Commifornia. These fools pick away at banning all kinds of things, including now magazine releases they call “bullet buttons”. These commie jew fucks even require background checks just to buy ammunition! Ask yourself who ever gave them that power? Some commerce clause? What?

This communist shit hole Commiefornia would be a great place to set up gallows to hang treasonous twits. By the way, under the definition of treason, almost anyone working in government can be hung until dead. They are literally aiding and abetting enemies of our country in the form of the private corporations they serve. There are NO legitimate “government” employees today. They all work for a private company, but we’ll cover that at another time.

Anyone who has any reason they want guns banned here or there, or blocked from carrying this way or that, or just doesn’t quite feel comfortable with people having guns or using them for whatever reason is already guilty of treason. Stop trying to discuss the finer points of gun control with people who want to take your guns, just so they can kill you with guns. Nobody gives a shit about statistics. They don’t matter. The only thing that matters is getting as many gun control nuts free rides in a noose as soon as possible.

From now on, when you enter a gun control conversation, it will go like this. The gun control freak will try to tug at people’s emotions, “those poor children that got shot in that school, we can never let this happen again”. Your reply will be, “You’re right! Gun control is a serious problem that can only be solved by judicious use of a noose!”

What else is there to discuss? Anyone who wants your guns out of sight, wants them banned. Anyone who wants their use or carry curtailed, wants them banned. Anyone who wants them banned, wants to kill you. No more discussion. Every discussion about gun control should end in discussions about nooses from here on out, because there is NO DISCUSSION.

No Quarter.

Jojo #fundie escapistmagazine.com

As a matter of fact, yes, I do think that all dogs that even pose the slightest risk to humans should be destroyed. At the end of the day a dog is a luxury and if it's owners can't keep it under control then it shouldn't be allowed to exist. The dog in this video was possibly a threat, so it had to go. Put simply, I'd rather sacrifice 1000 dogs than let one child be killed by a rabid dog.

In that case lets start some genocide, I'll round up all dogs. Hey, they are all free thinking and therefore can be in a bad mood where they can potentially harm humans. So I'll start here in England, you start where your at, and we'll meet somewhere in Chicago at weeks end. First rounds on me, we'll go get slaughtered after down at a bar and spend the rest of the time high fiveing each other now we've made the world a little safer. Death to all dogs!!!!

To be honest I wouldn't give a monkey's ass if every dog in the world died tomorrow. I find it impossible to care for any creature other than humans.

John Hydenius #fundie returnofkings.com

Study: Homosexuals And Bisexuals Are More Likely To Be Mentally Ill, Drug Abusers

It’s summer now, and in Sweden that means it’s pride parade season. One thing that’s different this year is that the very gay Milo Yiannopoulos is coming here to lead a parade on July 27th. The reason is that this particular parade will go through Tensta, a suburb comprised of mostly immigrants, a lot of them Muslim. We’ll see how that goes.

In other gay news: a new survey has found excess health problems in gays, lesbians and bisexuals. These groups reported more health problems than straight men and women.

More prone to smoking and heavy drinking

The study was done in the US, with nearly 69,000 participants. The National Health Interview Survey has been around for many years, but in 2013 and 2014 it included a question about sexual orientation for the first time.

The researchers conclude that gay, lesbian and bisexual adults “were more likely to report impaired physical and mental health, heavy alcohol consumption, and heavy cigarette use, potentially due to the stressors that (they) experience as a result of interpersonal and structural discrimination.”

The results show that lesbians, compared to heterosexual women, are 91 percent more likely to report poor or fair health. Lesbians are also 51 percent more likely, and bisexual women more than twice as likely, to report multiple chronic conditions, compared to straight women.

Gays, lesbians and bisexuals are more likely to indulge in heavy drinking and smoking. 26 percent of gay men and about 40 percent of bisexual men reported at least moderate psychological distress, compared to about 17 percent of heterosexual men.

In the case of women, about 22 percent of heterosexuals had at least moderate psychological distress, compared to about 28 percent of lesbians and about 46 percent of bisexuals.

Gilbert Gonzales of the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, who worked with this study, thinks so-called “minority stress” may account for health differences between heterosexuals and gay, lesbian and bisexual people. He thinks bisexuals have it worse than the rest because they may not always be accepted by gay, lesbian and transgender communities.

Right off the bat, you know the researchers aren’t exactly unbiased in this matter, since they talk about “structural discrimination” of these minority groups in America, a country where they are constantly praised in the media and by the elites. But leaving that aside, their study does show some interesting results.

I can’t say that I’m surprised. There are many possible reasons why the LGB (and likely also T) community is having more psychological problems than heterosexuals. One reason could be that some people do treat them badly on account of them being so strange (there’s a reason why they’re called queers). If they insist on acting act out their weird sexual desires in public, it’s understandable that some will take offense to that.

Some might even go so far as to discriminate against them. A business owner with more traditional values might deny them service—for instance, refuse to be the host of a gay wedding. That could well cause the gay couple to feel distress. (Although I would say that that’s the business owner’s right in a free country.)

But I would argue that there are other factors that affect LGBT people’s mental health more than real life discrimination, which can’t be that common in Western countries. The fact that their situation is often described as a lot more bleak than it is, is something that surely must affect them in a negative way. If they’re constantly being told about how oppressed they are by white, cisgender men, and “the religious right” (but not Muslims, we can’t say that), then of course they’re gonna be worried about their safety and future.

In the same way, if you tell a black person enough times that the police are after him and want to shoot him to death, for nothing more than walking down the street, eventually he’s going to believe it and start resenting cops and society in general.

Why celebrate sexual deviance?

But there’s one other factor that I want to bring to this discussion. I’m not a scientist like Gilbert Gonzales, and I’m definitely going to sound like a prejudiced asshole saying this (although it wouldn’t be the first time), but I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with gays, lesbians and bisexuals. Wrong in the sense that they weren’t created as they were supposed to be.

People are, like all animals, supposed to mate with each other, otherwise we wouldn’t still be here. Hence, we’re meant to be heterosexuals. Ergo, gays, lesbians and bisexuals were born with a faulty constitution. And since they’re faulty, it’s no wonder if that reflects on their mental condition.

I’m not saying that there’s necessarily something morally wrong with being gay, just that they’re a small minority of the populace for a reason. It’s not something we should encourage people to be—the results of the study presented above support that case.

Should someone feel pride over being born faulty? Should it be paraded around in the street like it’s something we should celebrate? Should we embrace a condition that impedes our species’ ability to survive? I’m not sure I can agree with that.

Some incels #psycho #sexist #fundie reddit.com

(Officer_McGrady)

The fact that “step-families” are so normal now just proves how sick we’ve become.

[This got deleted for inciting violence, but, in a nutshell, it was: Him angry that he only ever wanted one dad, one mom and to be a blood family together, him angry that due to his mom’s “whoring” and his father’s “escapades” (some word like that) he now has a family where one of the parents obviously treats him differently than their biological children, and angrily finishing the post hoping this society will be punished by “the Lord” or “Chinese invaders with machine guns” (which is the violence-inciting part that got it deleted)]

(Safebrowse)

Tfw my mother broke up with my 5'6" hard working dad to be with an alcoholic guy who's a foot taller. First black pill of my life, really. Sometimes I question if I'm really my dad's biological son because luckily I didn't grow up to be that short.

Your mother cared more about her own fun than her child’s mental development.

Despite what Soyciety shoves down our throats, step-families aren’t a good thing.

Yeah I know, I know she regrets having me too, to an extent. She knows too, she knows that her moving us around constantly fucked things up for me, but I doubt she'd take it back. I try to move forward with my life but after a lot of self reflection I realized that she's the core to a lot of my issues. Step families are selfish and broken, I've never felt like I've belonged with any of my family members.

Also when she was "taking a break" from my dad, another guy approached her who was ridiculously rich and really, really kind. We would have been set for life, but he was also short and kind of chubby. She says that things just didn't "click" with him. Of course things clicked when the 6'6" guy popped into her life. He was living with his parents and apparently farted on their first date. Even burnt out Chad's don't have to try.

(IAMA124)

I agree, recently everytime I browse subreddits like r/relationships and r/amitheasshole (for some weird reason) they are full of words like "stepmom", "stepdad", "mother's boyfriend", "ex-wife", "stepbrother" and the like, makes me worried about my future... I don't want to work my ass off my entire life just to end up having a shitty family like that.

Hell, even my parents are divorced and my dad's already found a new woman and I'm pretty sure my mother's "friend" is something else as well.

(MerkuryNj)

I heard recently that only 50% of children in america live with both biological parents, and trending upwards. Crazy.

(actuallybrazilian)

it'll only get worse. women imperative will continue to grow stronger and it s not like the incentives for individualism will disappear.

step families put in evidence, more than normal, the transactional nature of male-female relationship, so it s no wonder it s disgusting to see.

at this point my objective is to get enough money and disappear in the countryside. society does not respect my opinion, does not follow my values and worse of all, 99% of the time i have to deal with bullshit whose origin is not even me, a faggot that does not have basic respect hearing music at max volume in the night, dogs pooping in the front of the house/barking with owners that don t give a fuck because what the dog fills in his void inside is more important than basic education, all types of family drama etc.

(CantoArchangel)

I was always glad my parents came frome other countries because they're still together. Their cultures actually take the vows seriously. Most American families are a mess lol, fucking degenerates.

(jotaro_kuj0)

being an indian, i was always surprized watching step-families in american tv shows & movies and was always weirded out..like what the fuck is this shit ? dont they have normal families anymore ? but yeah i feel for you.

(Basedafff)

My entire experience of consuming western media and culture has been a big WTF ever since i was 14.

I still vividly remember how the degeneracy in shows like 'Friends' or 'BBT' used to shock the fuck out of me.

Lol. When i was a child i believed tight knit blood families are the natural order of things because that's how things are here. Atleast for now. I couldn't ever fathom this step mom step dad bullcrap as a child.

One thing i tell you, it takes sacrifices. Something the selfish materialistic west doesn't have the patience for.

(FromHToA92)

I wanted to murder my step dad he was such a beta cuck piece of shit

(Serial_Piller666)

The worst situation is having a step or adoptive father who is dramatically less intelligent than you and made you feel self-conscious and like a freak growing up because he was incapable of comprehending your thoughts or interests or tastes and gave you this awkward "wtf" reaction to everything you said and did.

It's not true that everyone has a rich internal world and existential struggles just like you. There really are people out there who are just automata who don't care about anything except baseball and fishing, have never even considered the implications of having wasted their whole lives in miserable wagecucking, and are perfectly happy being a lifelong beta provider for Tyrone's used, expired goods.

Many of you here are an evolutionary divergence from human kind and should properly consider the masses to be a hostile outgroup with whom there is no social contract, no different from snarling animals in the wilderness.

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

My wife is NOT a feminist! She is a Christ-honoring woman and submits to my authority. My wife hates feminism because she knows it goes AGAINST God and His Word. We've been married now for 17 years. She likes to make the feminists mad when we're in the store. She'll ask me in front of feminist women if she can buy something. You can see the dirty looks on their faces. My wife likes to say, "wait, I need to go ask my husband" or "He pays the bills, ask him." It drives the feminists nuts when a wife submits to her husband. I really admire my wife's loyalty and obedience to the Word of God and me. She's my best friend.

Feral Apologist #fundie feralapologist.com

Have you ever encountered this chart? It calls the traditional and Biblical definition of marriage into question by examining eight “definitions” of marriage that are described in the Bible. Its intent is to denigrate traditional marriage, to make supporters of traditional marriage appear bigoted or hypocritical, and to make appeals to the “Biblical definition of marriage” appear ambiguous at best.

Does this meme succeed in its attack on traditional marriage, supporters of traditional marriage, or even the idea that there is such a thing as a “Biblical definition of marriage? We will take each example of marriage in turn, but first I would like to offer the following distinction, a distinction that was not made in the meme itself. There is a large difference between a purely descriptive account of what actually took place and a prescriptive description of what ought to be the case. One needs to be careful of the naturalistic fallacy – mistaking how something is with how it ought to be – and the moralistic fallacy – mistaking how something ought to be with how it actually is. Not all of the forms of marriage mentioned by this meme are problematic, but it would be a mistake to assume that those that are problematic are held up as positive examples.

Man + Woman = Nuclear family (Gen. 2:24).
This is what is meant by the “Biblical definition of marriage.” While I object to the characterization of the wife as “subordinate” to her husband, the Biblical role of the man is in authority, and wives are called to submit to their husbands. If you think that’s harsh, keep in mind what husbands are called to do for their wives. There are many excellent expositions of this concept. It is not sexist, nor should it count against the Biblical definition of marriage.

Interfaith marriages are forbidden, so that part is accurate, although it would be a mistake to interpret that as essential to the definition of marriage.

Most people today object to the concept of arranged marriages, so apparently the creators of the meme thought it would be damaging to include this aspect. The problem is, arranged marriages are as much cultural as religious – there is no Biblical mandate for them – and are practiced in various places around the world. There is even a growing group of individuals who turn to their parents for assistance with matchmaking, if not for actual arranged marriages.

It is true that a woman could be stoned unless proof of virginity could be produced. This is consistent with the punishment for other sexual sins. In fact, it is interesting to note how there are high penalties for all of the sexual sins. Given the extreme problems that sexual sins cause for the stability of marriage, and consequently for families and society as a whole, it could be that an extreme penalty was needed to ingrain the importance of marital fidelity. Regardless, the penalty for infidelity is not part of the definition of marriage.Most importantly, Genesis 218-24 indicates the standard for marriage that God intended, and Jesus referenced and upheld this standard when he was asked about divorce in Matthew and Mark.

Man + Wife + Concubines
The mere existence of concubines in scripture does not indicate that having concubines is moral or part of the definition of marriage, and it certainly was never upheld as a moral standard approved by God. Concubines were not wives but more like indentured prostitutes, so it is hard to see how this could affect the definition of marriage in scripture. Excessive wives and concubines were specifically prohibited for kings.

Man + Woman + Woman’s Property
The situation here is little different than with concubines; instead of being the husband’s property (a concubine) the woman was the wife’s property but used by the husband. God did not condone the practice in scripture.

Man + Woman + Woman + Woman…
Again, this practice is not condoned in scripture, it was merely a common cultural practice that actually went against God’s plan as originally intended.

Man + Brother’s Widow (Levirate Marriage)
This is a legitimate form of marriage in scripture (in fact, it’s a legitimate form of marriage today as well). Since the woman’s original husband was dead, her marriage to him was void. The original husband’s brother could then marry her (and actually was expected to marry her, if she had no children). This provided for the continuation of a man’s line after his death, since the first child produced by the new marriage would be counted legally as the dead man’s heir. This also meant the widow had someone to provide for her. So why was this very compassionate form of marriage put on a chart attacking the Biblical definition of marriage?

This is just another version of the nuclear family.

Rapist + his victim
While it is true that marriage was required after a rape, the phrasing of this chart is backwards: It is not that a woman was required to marry her rapist, but rather that a rapist was required to marry his victim (provided she was not already engaged). Sending a woman away after raping her was considered a disgrace to her greater than the rape itself; other men likely would not marry her, which meant she would have to live as a desolate woman. Imprisoning or killing the rapist would have served little purpose, but forcing the rapist to marry his victim forced him to provide for her and established some semblance of legitimacy for the woman.

This is also another version of the nuclear family.

Male soldier + Prisoner of war
Soldiers were permitted to marry female prisoners of war, provided they were virgins. The soldiers were required to allow the woman to mourn for her family, and were prohibited from treating the woman as a slave, which would have been common in that time. The woman would thus have been provided for through marriage.

This is yet another version of the nuclear family. Of course, the reason this type of marriage was included was because it offends modern sensibilities to think about marrying prisoners of war. Given that such prisoners were a common reality in context of the Israelite conquest of Canaan (when the permission was originally given), it is difficult to find another more humane way of handling the situation. In most cases the culture the Israelite were fighting was entirely destroyed due to their extreme wickedness, so the women couldn’t go home. Forcing them to provide for themselves would have only heightened their distress, and would have likely resulted in them being slaves. Marriage provided for them in practical ways and enabled them to establish new lives as part of the Israelite community.

Male slave + Female slave
Slaves were allowed to marry. If people wish to complain about this, imagine the outcry if slaves weren’t allowed to marry. Is it so odd that a slave would be permitted to marry other slaves? It is difficult to see how a slave getting married is offensive or somehow constitutes a new definition of marriage. As for the requirement of sexual submission, that is not supported by the reference the chart supplies.

This is still another version of the nuclear family. I suppose we could continue to multiply examples of the nuclear family (Farmer + Woman, Priest + woman, etc), but what would be the point?

To sum up, we have seen that each of the examples provided in the chart was either a version of the nuclear family with Biblical approval, or a violation of the nuclear family model with no Biblical approval (as descriptive, not prescriptive). Appeals to the “Biblical definition of marriage” are not ambiguous, but rather refer to marriage as God intended “from the beginning,” rather than the various unapproved versions of marriage in scripture.

It is likely that several of the versions of nuclear marriage are included not because they serve as alternate definitions of marriage, but rather merely for the culture shock they create. This culture shock encourages one to disavow Biblical forms of marriage out of a sense of moral superiority. However, several of the types of marriage described are more compassionate than they appear at first to modern Western sensibilities.

Finally, in the context of the same-sex marriage debates today, it is worth noting that all of the Biblical forms of marriage this chart addresses are heterosexual in nature, serving to underscore the traditional, Biblical view of marriage.

“But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; ?she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”
That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”

jonascord #fundie freerepublic.com

Bull. The Left will NEVER admit they were, or are wrong, stupid, in error, pick one or several.

If they can't win one way, they will try another.

Look at Hitlery's private army, Antifa.

They are out to overthrow the election, trash the Constitution, and put their Queen on the throne.

They won't be happy until the shooting starts, and then they will be amazed that The Great Prole Uprising doesn't spontaneously occur.

Like a mad dog, they will have to be "put to sleep".

It's deeply depressing to look into the future and see oceans of blood.

Uprising #racist kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com

Whites still behave as a race as if they are tending/ animals. You accept bad behavior from your puppy (at least initially). You accept your pet goat might eat the laundry (or random items) if it gets out from its enclosure. It is a subconscious supremacy over your pets. Whites have this subconscious supremacy over all other races/tribes. It is of course born of winning the war over other races/tribes in the past and stays with us today especially amongst women. The most liberal whites amongst us (again generally women) will tend to coddle the animals they take care of (think female dog owners with uncontrollable dogs) while the more conservative whites amongst us (generally men) will discipline and teach their pets to behave in a correct manner or face consequences. Whites exist along a bell curve from liberal to conservative in terms of political belief and it is of course entirely reasonable to assume genetics, hormones and brain neurochemistry are fractionally responsible in deciding where on the bell curve you sit (along with life experiences). At some point though the dog becomes too much for the single lady and has to be dealt with (biting the hand that feeds it).

The question then is two-fold. 1. When do liberals feel threatened enough that their perception of the other races changes. They are not “pets” anymore to care for. They have become dangerous and threatening and the enemy !! A shock to liberals of course. Not to anyone else.

2. When white men respond, will we have the ability to respond as needed? Will our capability and resolve still be there? In western countries when many of our women are fat carousel riding sluts, you wonder if things are worth saving except for your own skin.

I think the white race will survive. I certainly hope so. The white race has given the world science and technology and mozart. Africa?

In the end any true conflict will be won by technological prowess.

White men already see the enemy for what it is. You can live side by side with the enemy as long as you dominate it. Women on the whole are clueless. It is genetic. Women are frankly wombs. They will fulfill their destiny by mating whether it be with a white male or the new race that takes over the neighbourhood.

Giving women the vote in the west was a mistake. Each “family” should get one vote. And a family is a family headed by a male, not a single mommy. A productive unit. A unit that is a net payer of tax. You do not get to be a “decider” if you are not a producer.

Mad Monarchist #fundie madmonarchist.blogspot.co.nz

Why I shouldn’t be King of Great Britain: The UK embassy in Washington DC would be home to the world’s largest statue of King George III. If at all possible, I would try to face him toward Mt Vernon. Since I wish nothing more than for the English-speaking countries to be drawn ever closer together, this would not be a good thing for Anglo-American relations and yet, I know I would not be able to stop myself from doing it.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Spain: First visit to Mexico, I’d show up dressed like Cortes and carrying a flag. And, you know, they probably wouldn’t like that. Recently, King Felipe VI met with Martin Schulz and that highlights another reason because I could certainly never stomach shaking hands with the likes of Martin Schulz. (shudder) In dealing with certain Latin American leaders, I would not be able to stop myself at asking them to “shut up” but would probably include a string of epithets that would certainly not be conducive to Hispanic solidarity, which I would like to see more of.

Why I shouldn’t be Grand Duke of Luxembourg: I would spend all my time campaigning to be elected Holy Roman Emperor. I just couldn’t help it. Campaigning to evict the European Court of Justice from Luxembourg soil would probably also be seen as “too political” and “interfering” in government matters for current sensibilities.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Belgium: All foreign aid to the Congo would be in special currency bearing a portrait of King Leopold II. And that would be evil! They would probably also misunderstand it, assuming sympathy with atrocities carried out in his name rather than a swipe at the nature of “independent” countries being on the dole of former colonial powers.

Why I shouldn’t be King of The Netherlands: I would offer to annex any remaining Boer areas of South Africa. And I doubt that would go over well. Problems with Indonesia would also doubtless be unavoidable and I doubt the Dutch public could cash the checks my mouth would be writing -if you know what I mean. Referring, even in a joking way, to Belgium as “the Southern Netherlands” would probably also ruffle some feathers.


Why I shouldn’t be King of Denmark: The national coat-of-arms would be changed to show Reptilicus devouring Germany. And that would be weird. Hardly in keeping with the dignity and integrity of the oldest monarchy in Europe. (Bonus points to anyone playing along at home who actually knows who “Reptilicus” is)

Why I shouldn’t be King of Norway: I’m not proud of it, I don’t like to admit, but I must face facts and I have to be honest. At some point I would have to wear a helmet with two big horns on it and would constantly be threatening to raid someone.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Sweden: Constantly hitting on Finland and asking when we can get back together would probably not be considered a legitimate foreign policy. It would probably upset the Russians too.

Why I shouldn’t be Prince of Liechtenstein: I’d form a military and declare war on San Marino.

Why I shouldn’t be Prince of Monaco: I would probably bankrupt the place trying to buy Menton and Roquebrune from France. There would also be family tensions anytime Gad came up as absolutely no one is good enough for my dear Charlotte.

Why I shouldn’t be Pope: Perhaps this one shouldn’t count but the Pope is technically the sovereign of a legal state so it is included for that reason. My “Renaissance” style papacy would give the entire Catholic world whiplash after the reign of Pope Frank. Not good. Every address to the world would probably consist of me screaming, “You’re all going to burn in Hell you godless heathens!” Can’t see that winning many over honestly.

Why I shouldn’t be King of (insert name of predominately Muslim country here): I doubt an infidel monarch would last long. Aside from differences of belief, I don’t drink anymore so that’s not a problem and I can live without pork but…a whole month without being able to smoke? I would explode.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Lesotho: I would absolutely refuse to have any dealings with South Africa, which for Lesotho would make life pretty damn difficult considering that the country is entirely surrounded by South Africa.


Why I shouldn’t be King of Swaziland: Aside from how positively ridiculous I would look in the national costume, there are other aspects of life I could never adjust to. For one, I couldn’t do the whole polygamy thing. The idea of one wife is frightening enough. Good. God.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Bhutan: There is no way I could stop myself from hitting on pretty much every female member of the royal family -and that would be awkward. (seriously, they are ridiculously gorgeous)

Why I shouldn’t be King of Thailand: Constantly playing “One Night in Bangkok” would probably not be considered appropriate royal behavior. Some people are really offended by that…I know.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Cambodia: Pretty simple. On day one I would fire Hun Sen, upsetting Vietnam, end friendly relations with China and North Korea and probably be assassinated in quick order, plunging the country into chaos.

Why I shouldn’t be Emperor of Japan: I’d go to pray at Yasukuni Shrine wearing a kimono with a big rising sun on it and all the Chinese and Koreans heads would explode in a fit of rage that might start World War III. And nobody wants that. But, I’d probably also be assassinated by right-wing extremists for not going along with their ‘Japan is the only country that never did anything wrong ever’ mentality.

Why I shouldn’t be King of Tonga: After some rather rotund monarchs, having a king who looks like he was just rescued from the world’s worst POW camp would probably be too great a shock for the people of Tonga.

GoffSystemQB and Big Yikes #sexist incels.co

(GoffSystemQB)
[Blackpill] IT admits the blackpill

No longer about personality now it's about your shitty genetics and that you have to "accept" your place in society. They are confirmed eugenicists. All the women on IT are blackpilled.

Asbelowsoaboveme on r/IncelTears

Lol they can die mad with their dead end genes.

(Big Yikes)
The more powerful women get, the more honest they become. All these lies about personality are/were just a phase. Old women - and IT is mostly old/er women, I think: wine aunts - tend to tell more lies while younger women are already pretty vocal and open about how height matter, dick size matters, etc. r/FemaleDatingStrategy feels much younger and much more honest. IT is wine aunts predominantly babbling about how incels are wrong, FDS is younger women talking about how incels are right but have to shut up and rendered harmless via police and laws, etc.

I believe that in the future we will see more and more honesty from young women about how incels have to learn their place and how you are not "entitled" to sex and intimacy, that monogamy was just an evil invention of the patriarchy and so on and shit like that.

We're only witnessing the beginning now. Once the old boomers die it will become brutal AF.

Hot Coldman #racist godlikeproductions.com

How to lure a basic negroid

Before I get further into the subject, let's make it clear that luring a 'brother', as the American variant of negroid calls its species, is quite easy.
All you need is to get close to a 'brother', get its attention and then you simply engage in an kind of primal beat. Bongo drums, 'beat boxing', stomping on the ground while clapping, anything goes.

When you succesfully catch it or alternatively calm it, put it in a place you can remember. Now for the harder part. Next phase is knowing how to prevent it from running away!

To tame a negroid, you will need 3 basic things: a name, a food and a basic income your pet can collect while doing nothing.

1. The name
A negro, much like a dog, statistically responds best to names with two or three vowels. Anything you can make up on the spot goes because groids aren't picky. 'Sha-ni-qua'. See? A funny little name for a groid is as easy as that.

2. Food
Again, just like a dog, they typically enjoy being fed scraps of western society. Instead of typical surplus grade C pet feed such as dog or cat food, you may need to improvise. You see, blacks won't typically respond well to the cat or dog variant of pet feed but instead enjoys KFC fried chicken. However, because the nagger lacks self control, you will have to stop the dindu from possessing full access to your supply of 'groid feed'.


3. The basic income
US Dollars and Swedish Kroner works best.

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Lady Checkmate's headline: "Today's atheists are bullies -- and they are doing their best to intimidate the rest of us into silence"

(Cut and paste of Fox News story, link is here: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/20/todays-atheists-are-bullies-and-are-doing-their-best-to-intimidate-rest-us-into-silence.html

Lady Checkmate:
An atheist sock troll (who has multiple sock accounts to issue death wishes and death threats) used one of his sleeper socks to lie and attack me on a third party channel, here, note I was tagged from there , so in response, I posted this on our resolution channel, exposing the sock troll's dishonesty and sharing other background information, including the fact that the channel he used to target and harass me on has allowed the same sock troll using different socks to issue death wishes to me, there. I even provided screen shots of the death wishes sent to me and posted on Mack's channel, because as channel owner, he's responsible for ALL activity on his channel. Initially, he vehemently denied that such activity takes place on his channel, but when confronted with truth, he let loose with the attacks, LOL. Here is just bit of that exchange:
Me, again, presenting screen shots of a sock troll wishing death on me on Mack's channel:
image

Me, again, presenting screen shots of a sock troll wishing death on me:
image

Me exposing his deception and clarifying events:
image


Keep in mind that Mack is an elderly man and I respect my elders so I tried to reason with him, but as you may imagine, trolls don't respect reason. Well, the old feller then started an attack thread on his channel, targeting and harassing me, lol, here. Note, his claim to fame (besides written insults) was posting a picture of a man in a dress in front of a stained glass window...if there was joke there, I didn't get it because I'm all woman, but I digress):

image

Nevertheless, I've been chuckling at the thought of the old feller really doing his best to target and harass a lady who has done her best to show him respect...you can read our exchange at the link I provided to you to see that I did my best to respect him as an elder and share truth with him even after he was dishonest and repeatedly insulted me. STILL, (and this makes me LOL every time), I keep imagining him thinking he's coming across as this super tough guy for insulting, targeting and harassing a Christian lady online (actually assuming his Saturday Night Live memes are SUPER effective, bwahahaha) AND allowing a clinically insane sock troll to issue death wishes about me on his, Mack's channel. Well, between you and I, I keep imagining that wanna-be-tough-guy that likes to attack women online, as...
image
...and all I SINCERELY want to do is pray for the ol' feller. There are a million insults and memes I could post, but...nah. I sincerely hope the old guy gets right with God and finds peace. He was actually offended by the relaxed, respectful atmosphere on our resolution channel, but feels at home where women are issued death wishes, and targeted and harassed, lol. Talk about calling good evil and evil good. Somethings not right in that camp.

PurgingFalsehood #fundie youtube.com

These nasty liars & SLANDER MONGERS known as atheists must be admitted in mad-dogs hospitals for electric shock-therapy to fix loose nuts & bolts of their evil brains. These barking mad dogs are void of Wisdom & stick their whole life just with material & physical tangibility & do not see on other real directions; whether in fact Material is temp and transitional & has at the end no value.

These slander monger barking dumb deaf & blind dogs are shame for humanity and burden on this planet


What I say u here is not tht u go to ur Priest, Mulla or a clergyman to realize tht there is GOD & another real life aft this life, but I say u to read the most advncd, the most scholarly, the best scientific research & evidence tht shows you irefutable scientific evidence abt the existence of "Creator of this universe" & a very real life aft this life. Search a book in ur local library "Life After Life" by Dr. Raymond Moody. This evidence burns the roots of devil's cult called Atheism

John Nolte #fundie breitbart.com

Did the gay rainbow flag provoke Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, the 24 year-old naturalized American citizen born in Kuwait who murdered four Marines and a Sailor Thursday, to commit his heinous crime?

Abdulazeez, who was shot and killed by police Thursday, was a devout Muslim. And one thing we know about devout Muslims is that many vehemently oppose same sex marriage and consider homosexuality a sin.

Back In May, two mad dog Muslims attempted to murder everyone at a free speech event in Texas. Because good guys with guns were present, only the terrorists were killed.

Nevertheless, the media claimed that the Draw Muhammad Cartoon Contest and its organizer Pam Geller provoked the attack.

For weeks, both Geller and satiric free speech were blasted in the media for offending the Muslim faith and by extension causing a terror attack.

Just last month, a mad dog racist murdered nine innocent people in a South Carolina church. For weeks, the mainstream media blamed a flag — for weeks the media coordinated a shaming campaign against what many see as a symbol of hate and oppression.

The gay rainbow flag is seen by many Christians as a symbol of hate and oppression — and for good reason. Under that banner, there has been an all-out assault by the media and the Left against our religious freedoms. Under that banner, on the same day of the Chattanooga terror attack, a Jewish man was physically threatened in person and on social media by Inside Edition’s Zoey Tur, a man who identifies as a woman.

Moreover, the defiant act of flying of the gay rainbow flag, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling that legalized same sex marriage in all 50 states, is undoubtedly offensive to devout Muslims, and therefore provocative.

It is time to shame and marginalize the gay rainbow flag — this offensive, provocative symbol of hate and oppression must be tossed on the ash bin of history…

Before it kills again.

Kyle Trouble #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Ways Our Modern World Is A Pale Simulation Of The Past

Kyle is an entrepreneur and nomad who has been living abroad since 2016. He blogs at This Is Trouble. Follow him on Facebook.

When I was living in Kiev, Ukraine, I was spending a lot of time at business lunch. Essentially, it was a 3-5 course lunch time meal that restaurants in Kiev would do to entice people to come in and eat. Those 3-5 courses would usually cost about $3-$7 when it was all said in done. The most expensive restaurant in the city offered it for $6. Juice, bread, salad or soup, and a main course. It was a killer deal. My friends and I would go to one of these restaurants Monday through Friday, every day.

One of the major topics that always came up was the way that so many things in our modern world are simulated. Things that used to be typical in older times are now existent in our current culture, in a sort of fantasy. To me, there were five things that now exist in the world that basically simulate what people in the past used to do.

When we weren’t talking about how to handle Ukrainian women and the state of our dating lives, we had a lot of time to talk about life, how things have evolved in the last few years, and to bring these points into a more concise view of the world and how they have directly impacted modern day men. They deserve as much credit as I do for this post.

In short, these things all result in lower testosterone, depression, and a multitude of other symptoms that all can be traced back to what we’d consider to be the problems of modern society. These problems aren’t just pertinent to men, however.

1. Sports Replacing War

Gladiators used to fight in the Roman Coliseum for sport. These days, it’s simulated with things like football. “Violence and blood,” so to speak. Now, don’t get me wrong–if you’re active and participating in sports, it’s great. But it’s a substitute for literally going to war and killing off other tribes. Perhaps this is the one simulation on the list that isn’t a bad thing, on paper. Everybody should lead active and healthy lives. But then you look around and realize that many men are simply being spectators to sport.

Spending twelve hours on Sunday watching the NFL as a fan. It’s scary that the games kick off at 1pm EST and end at nearly midnight, if you watch the late game. Major League Baseball has 162 games in their season. I know that quite a few guys out there watch all 162 games of their respective teams.

It’s a simulation of replacing the long lost battles fought against other tribes. Instead, your “tribe” paints colors and logos on your face and goes to “war” with the other team’s fans. I don’t think you need to cut out sports (watching), and definitely don’t think they are 100% poison. Everybody needs a way to unplug once in a while. It’s not the worst vice you could have.

However, you must cut it down to manageable bits each week. Watch your favorite team’s football game. And when it’s done, it’s done. Don’t let it affect your mood for the rest of the week (or even day).

2. Porn, Dolls, and Virtual Reality, Replacing Sex

Everybody by now knows that porn is really, really bad for you. But people aren’t stopping their use of it.

Many men in Asian countries have all but thrown in the towel on having any sort of love life. They would rather use porn and blow-up dolls that simulate sex—pretty damn close to the real thing, I hear. Western men would rather stay home and jerk off to increasingly-disturbing levels of porn rather than travel abroad to remote places to meet Serbian women or Colombian girls. Hell, with the advancement of technology, blow-up dolls may be far more skilled at giving head than real girls in the not-so-distant future. Looking at the doll in the photo above is scary. You can tell she’s fake if you look closely, but from afar, I could be fooled.

With men, it’s all about the end release when it comes to sex. Women use porn (or at least say they do) at a less drastic rate. They also don’t seem to have quite the addiction to it. That’s because for women, the sex is all about the journey through it. It doesn’t matter if they have an orgasm. When you can simulate sex and still get the end release, it’s an effective simulation as opposed to the real thing—which isn’t that hard to get.

3. Pets Replacing Children

Dogs are a man’s best friend, but the way some people treat their pets is utterly pathetic. In a world where people are repeatedly being told now to have children (or to put it off in the case of women), they are finding other way’s to simulate raising children.

The entire biological point of our existence is to pass on our genetics. And yet people are being told that they really shouldn’t. Instead, they get dogs that fit into purses. And the sad part is that then those people become so reliant on the dogs that it’s the humans that need the dogs just so they can muster the courage to get on an airplane.

It’s disturbingly easy to get an emotional support animal these days.

4. Video Games Replacing Achievement

I’ve suffered from video game addiction myself. It’s a real thing. And I know exactly what achievement porn is. Video games suck you in now and don’t let you out. As men, we do work to achieve stuff. We get good feelings and a sense of accomplishment from it.

Video games take it up a level by adding fantasy to those achievements. Even though you’re pouring hours and hours into something pointless, you feel good because it’s accomplishment. It’s a false sense of working hard. The sad thing is, if you took those ten hours playing video games (a day) for achievement porn, and spent just three of them on building a business–you’d have a hell of a lot to show.

5. Food Replacing Pleasure

Food is a way to numb the pain for a lot of people. It’s a distraction from the day to day life of the office grind. You could throw alcohol into this discussion, too.

People are so disconnected from each other on a personal level, that’s it’s more comfortable to eat food instead of confiding in your friends and peers. Combine this with the sedentary lifestyle of the 9-5 grind, television (see #1), and it’s a recipe for disaster. It all goes full circle.

You’re now addicted and dependent on food for numbing pain. You have a “tribe” which just makes you sit on the couch more and more. You have a pet that replaces offspring, and a doll that replaces a lover.

That’s the life of simulation. And the worst thing? Most will never even realize what they’re doing. It’s time to wake up.

Alice Leszek #fundie books.google.com

There are doctors all over the world that are dealing with people with mental conditions. Statistically, I wonder how many are battling demons. How radical it would be if we treated people with prayer, with Jesus, so that they might be set free. There are people all over the world who celebrate Christmas and stop at that not knowing, not realizing, not truly understanding the power of Jesus and how powerful he could be in their lives.
There are demons that are wandering around in the spirit, who are no more powerful than you or I. They know Jesus is the Son of God, and they know the power he possesses; they fear him for that and rightly so. This experience I had was not a dream or vision. It truly lasted for days and days. At the time, I didn't know what was going on; it was only afterward, as time passed, that God revealed it to me, revealed himself to me, and gave me these scriptures to prove what he was revealing to me was true. How did he do this? After I was delivered by the Lord from the demons that had tormented me, I had another experience. It wasn't a dream or a vision, but rather, this time, I was caught up in the spirit by God. My human eyes were open, but in addition to that, God enabled me so that I could see in the spirit world. There was a noticeable difference between this experience and the one I had with the demons. God was in control, and throughout, there was nothing but peace. At first I wasn't sure what was going on, but then God started revealing and teaching things to me. This revelation commenced at a pace that I could handle. He told me he wanted me to understand, and we handled it like a Q&A session. He first told me that there are many demons in this world and that they want to live in human bodies. I asked why were there not more people running around mad. He told me that they are working on people in different ways, he told me that they are invisible to human eyes but that you can see them in the spirit, and then he opened my eyes to see. He pointed out a man to me, and I could see from a distance that there were demons inside of him. The Lord asked me how many there were, but I could only tell that there was more than one; yet he looked normal from the outside. As if reading my mind, the Lord said that he was not normal, and these demons were controlling this man's life and causing him to make bad decisions, and he can't sleep at night.
Next he showed me a woman, and I could see the demons inside of her. He explained to me that these demons caused her to overeat, and she also could not sleep at night. I was in Rosie's house as the Lord was revealing this all to me. I could see so far, it was astonishing. I could see the roads and into different houses, and there were demons everywhere. There was a particular man that the Lord showed me; he was in the road and a demon was just standing there, talking in his ear. The Lord said that this is something that commonly happens in people's lives: demons whispering in people's ears. As I watched, the Lord opened my ears to hear what the demon was saying and what the man was thinking. The man had had an argument with his wife and was very upset. He felt that he was tired of his wife. The demon asked the man why doesn't he just kill her. I could visibly see the man receiving these words. To himself, he said that no one would know it was him. The demon heard this thought and, even louder, said that he should kill his wife and added that no one would know that it was him and that this was the only way out of his marriage. The man received those words also and was convinced to think about it further.
[snip]
So the Lord said that if this man could say God's Word in his mind against those murderous thoughts, the demon would leave him alone. However, if he does not, he will continue to listen to this demon and kill his wife and be caught. How can you know God's Word if you don't read it? The devil knows this, and that is why he fights so hard against bibles being in schools and stuff like that. He knows that if children read the Bible and have this information, he will lose power over them. Instead, he encourages them to watch TV and get on the Internet so he can feed them whatever he wants.
The Lord showed me some men in a house that were smoking marijuana, and then he showed me a demon in a tree and indicated that he was the controller of the whole village. I could draw you a picture of what this demon looked like. It was so big it could look over the whole village. It had a body of a human from its head to where the wings started. Under its wings, it had hands with fingers on it and the legs of an animal with fur on it. The Lord told me to look at what the demon does to them after they smoke. This is what happened: This demon was on the tree far from where the men were smoking. It reached its finger across the way, and while the men were smoking, he commanded the first man to go steal. The man didn't hesitate and left immediately. He told the next man to go beat his wife up and to then go hide in the bushes and wait for another woman to beat. Again, this guy didn't hesitate either. The third guy in the house was Rosie's husband. The demon stretched his hand to him and commanded him to commit adultery with another woman, and off he went. This demon was watching them and was laughing and enjoying himself. The Lord showed me these men doing these things and explained to me that when these men smoked, they gave their minds up and were no longer in control of themselves. The demon waited until they were smoking and getting high and used that as an opening to use his power on them.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Re: LIGHT WORKERS, I ask for Knowledge of what Explains Beings of Florescent Blue Light

To OLOWLEYE:

I see them too, they travel on blue light it seems. They pet my dog, crawl in portraits, act to hold some kind of a screen, fix or doctor or mess with peoples faces. Demons maybe? Angels?

One theory is expressed in the movie, "They Live." It's on UTUBE.

The way they petted the dog made me think they were kind. They range from two to 12 inches high. The small ones look male and have suction cups for hands and feet. I think seeing them is part of having the Holy Spirit, but I don't know.

They look like female figures for the most part in a brilliant, shining, florescent, see through body, and are quite beautiful.

Not at all like the owl Abaddon is showing. Abaddon I don't know what you are saying???? Know nothing about astrology, etc.

There was a huge electrical storm prior to Thanksgiving, 2010. I live far north, it was -20 the prior week, then it rained and stormed for days on top of the ice. After this I seemed to be electrically charged, forks were sticking to my hands, def weird. Then the world looked different, I felt like the Bible came alive and I could see the kingdom of God.

There is more, but later...

And I am a Christian, the blue ones seem oblivious to my commands for them to leave in Jesus name, like they are in another dimension. What is going on? Can anyone tell me?

Daniel Payne #fundie thefederalist.com

It has become devastatingly clear that virtually the entirety of the gay-marriage activist effort was built on a lie. That lie, repeated ad nauseam, was this: gay marriage will affect nobody outside of the gays who wish to partake in it. This will become abundantly false as the Supreme Court-instituted gay marriage regime takes effect.

We did not actually need to nationalize gay marriage to realize this. We have had examples for years from the states that already legalized the practice. Combined with the growing public hostility towards supporters of traditional marriage, it is impossible at this point to deny that gay marriage is a growing and serious threat to the liberty of those who disagree with it.
Gay Marriage Doesn’t Hurt Anyone

Exhibit A comes to us from Gresham, Oregon, a state in which gay marriage has been legal since 2014. In Gresham, a couple of bakers declined to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Because the lesbians in question endured “emotional and mental suffering” after their cake request was turned down, the state’s labor commissioner demanded that the bakers—a husband-and-wife team—pay the plaintiffs $135,000.

In addition to this astronomical charge, the excitable commissioner ordered that the couple was not allowed to publicly proclaim their desire to not bake cakes for gay weddings. That is to say, the state slapped the Christian bakers with an enormous fine, then forbid them from advocating the point of view for which they were being fined.

Gay marriage, we’ve been told, will not affect you.

Exhibit B is found near Albany, New York, a state in which gay marriage has been recognized since 2011. At the Liberty Ridge Farm, another husband-and-wife team was fined $13,000 for refusing to host a gay wedding on their property (at which they host other public and private events). In 2012, a lesbian couple requested to use the property for their wedding. Believing in traditional marriage, the couple declined. Unluckily for the owners of the property, the phone call was being recorded. A judge subsequently determined the farmers guilty of “sexual orientation discrimination,” hence the fine. The farmers were also ordered to attend “staff re-education training classes.” The defendants have appealed the decision.

Just legalize it, we were told for years. It’s not going to affect you!
No More Churches For You

Exhibit C comes from the laughably-misemployed religion writer for The New York Times, Mark Oppenheimer: “Now’s the time,” he announced after the ruling, “to end tax exemptions for religious institutions.” Oppenheimer, you see, believes that a tax exemption is functionally identical to a “subsidy,” and because religious institutions and other non-profits can be “quite partisan,” they don’t deserve to receive “subsidies” that require the rest of us to “faithfully cut checks to them.”
Newspapers are using freedom to silence differing opinions on a critical, complex issue of serious public interest.

As a result of the Supreme Court declaring that homosexuals have the right to marry, in other words, we’re now facing an energized progressive intelligentsia that wishes to effectively shutter many if not most of America’s churches.

They told us over and over again: Gay marriage has nothing to do with you! You don’t have to worry about it!

Exhibit D—perhaps the most foreboding—is in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in which the editor of PennLive/The Patriot-News announced the paper “will no longer accept, nor will it print, op-eds and letters to the editor in opposition to same-sex marriage.” Under the First Amendment, the paper is free to refuse to print any letters it wants, of course. It is unfortunately utilizing that precious freedom to silence differing opinions on a critical, complex issue of serious public interest.

It is wholly plausible that many newspapers will follow suit, believing that opposition to or even skepticism about gay marriage is equivalent to, as the above newspaper’s editor put it, “racist, sexist, or anti-Semitic” opinions. Overnight, the sincerely-held opinions of a great many good, well-intentioned Americans became verboten. Reasonable dissent will not be tolerated.
Cheer Gay Marriage Or Face an Angry Mob

Over and over and over, the refrain went: Gay marriage is not a threat to you! Legalize it and nothing will change!
A ruling in favor of ‘love’ has instead resulted in open and unapologetic hate.

We have known for some time that this refrain was a lie—that it was a willful lie, and that these assurances were nothing more than a smokescreen of dishonesty and political chicanery. It is obviously not enough for gay marriage to be merely legal; progressives take it as a matter of personal offense that anybody, anywhere might not get behind homosexual matrimony as enthusiastically as the Left has done.

The Supreme Court’s decision will only galvanize this tendency. Thus comes the deluge, now on a national scale: the fines, the gag orders, the unfavorable tax treatment, the refusal to entertain the opposition’s opinion in polite society. The Supreme Court has unleashed a strange, almost comical beast upon the American body politic: a ruling in favor of “love” has instead resulted in open and unapologetic hate, and a public campaign made in the name of “tolerance” has instead resulted in a ruthless regime of intolerance.

Endlessly, it was repeated: if gay marriage is legalized, it will have nothing to do with you. Well, here we are. Gay marriage is legal. And it is clear that it will have everything to do with every one of us. We were lied to, and we will have to deal with the consequences, one silenced baker and bankrupt church at a time.

Metapedia #fundie en.metapedia.org

[Article "Nanking Massacre"]

The central issues surrounding the historical verification of the Nanking Incident are as follows.
• As a preface, there are very few images that have been definitively linked to the Nanking Massacre, but there are very many false or fabricated images distributed for the purposes of propaganda. Japanese revisionists are often objecting to the use of incendiary images, similar to fabricated Holocaust photos, which pollute legitimate historical discourse.
• In Japanese, the phrase "Nanking Massacre" is literally translated using the kanji characters "Great Slaughter in Nanking" (?????). The use of the "Great Slaughter" propaganda phrase is associated with the Communist Party and support for the Chinese government claim of 300,000 killed. But it is a well known fact, acknowledged by accredited scholars from many countries, that historical documentation cannot justify the enormous number of 300,000 deaths. The scholarly consensus is between 13,000 and 42,000 total people killed. (source) Therefore, many Japanese politicians avoid the term "Great Slaughter". Biased Western media report on this as "denying the massacre", even if they are in fact acknowledging that tens of thousands of people were murdered; see, for example, the reporting on Shintaro Ishihara (source).
• If those killed were civilians, we would expect to see many women and children among them. But in fact, only 0.3% of victims are recorded as having been women and children. The vast majority of recorded deaths were adult men.
• Western observers in Nanking witnessed Chinese soldiers changing into plain clothes, Chinese soldiers killing civilians, and Chinese soldiers killing other soldiers. The Chinese army in Nanking was in a state of chaos. This Japanese nationalist website provides many primary sources attesting to this. An army in a state of chaos can easily rack up enormous casualties, as was seen on the Eastern Front in World War II.
• All of this context is public knowledge in Japan, but it is censored in China. The Chinese Communist Party officially promotes the following myths, which can be seen at the museum about the incident in Nanjing: (1) that most photos purporting to be of the incident are real, (2) that no fewer than 300,000 people were killed, (3) that the vast majority of them were civilians, and (4) that all killings were done by bloodthirsty Japanese and none came at the hands of China's own soldiers.

There are a wide variety of opinions about the Nanking Incident in Japan, including some who endorse the Chinese narrative, but the general historical consensus remains unknown to the West.

Awesome Cat #sexist autogynephiliatruth.wordpress.com

Gender confirmation surgery

Horrific, experimental, massive and unnecessary surgical butchery and removal of healthy organs. A means to ensure that patients will spend their inevitably shortened lives under medical surveillance and supervision. An ideology based on the notion that with money and health insurance, one can purchase the “right body parts.” Advertised by transgender activists as “the basic health care they need to survive.

In females: Removal of breasts, ovaries, uterus, fallopian tubes. Possible fashioning of a fake “penis” through use of flesh from other parts of the woman’s body.

In males: Removal of testicles; de-fleshing of penis and inversion within body cavity so that it vaguely, very superficially resembles a woman’s genitals. However, it is merely a hole without any function but for another man to put his penis inside. It never properly heals and requires lifelong “dilation.” Also, “facial feminization surgery” and breast implants.

In the USA and some other high-income countries, these expensive, unnecessary surgeries are typically covered by health insurance. (Meanwhile, eyeglasses, dentistry, drugs for treating legitimate health conditions are often not covered.)

* These drastic surgeries are currently recommended for children as young as age 14.
* [b]Perverted mutilating doctors are keen to start cutting as early as possible.[/b]


Gender dysphoria

In nearly all “transgender” males: A symptom of obsessive sexualized narcissism.

In women: A symptom of internalized misogyny and sometimes internalized homophobia.

Psychologists and doctors focus on “treating” these symptoms, while ignoring (or not even thinking about) the actual condition at the root of the symptoms.

In children: An indication that parents may not have accurate information about their child’s “feelings” & behavior and are being told lies by psychologists or medical professionals. In some cases a sign that one or both parents may have Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, "borderline personality disorder" or just extreme narcissism, and are abusing their child.

In medical practice: “Feelings” and ideas that a child may have about actually being the opposite sex, as diagnosed through conversations with such children and their parents. Currently deemed unethical for clinicians to disagree with the child or to propose any alternative approaches to immediate “transition” – this is considered to be "conversion therapy" and essentially a “hate crime.” Indeed, it is now “medically necessary” to encourage and support such childish feelings and incorrect ideas, and it is not permissible to examine the possibility of attention-seeking personality disorders in children’s parents.


Gender identity

In men: An “erotic target location error.” In plain English this describes the result of several months or years performing endless secretive rituals of masturbatory self-hypnosis to develop a “female gender identity.” Invented by men to serve as a narcissistic excuse or alibi to conceal embarrassment about their sexualized dress-up sessions and subsequent public display of fetishistic fantasy.

In women: A discomfort with and resistance to prescribed sex role stereotypes (“gender”) without having knowledge that compliance with such stereotypes is totally optional.

In adolescents: Often indicates that the youth has received programming in school that manipulates common adolescent insecurities about body-image or sexuality by falsely teaching that people can change sex and that it’s totally fine if they want to do it. (Note: Such programming is now common in USA schools, as part of “comprehensive sexuality education.“) May also indicate that the youth has visited social media web sites where adult activists lurk with the goal of convincing confused young people that they are “really trans.”

In children: A sign that pathetic (or hapless) parents and devious doctors are filling the child’s consciousness with all sorts of harmful nonsense and lies about their bodies being “wrong,” when the child merely does not wish to comply with sex role stereotypes or is just confused. “Innate gender identity” propaganda in mass culture deploys example of supposed “trans kids” to help adult males elide embarrassment, as described above.

Julie Earth Angel Walker Longhill #fundie manataka.org


Imagine you are a child growing up in a prominent white family on a plantation in colonial America. One day you go into town with your parents and they say "we need to buy us some slaves ". At the auction block, dark-skinned people are lined up with metal collars around their necks and shackles on their hands and feet.

Some have been transported in large cages; their humiliation and hopelessness are palpable. Imagine that your young heart is broken when you witness these atrocities. Something inside you screams "This is not right!". Your family and society however, act as if this is normal. You soon learn the underlying message "conform or be destroyed ". It must have been very lonely for those people who grew up with human slavery, (knowing in their hearts that it was wrong).

Imagine you are a child growing up in an average family in modern America.

One day you go into town with your parents and they say "we need to buy us a pet". You enter what is called a "pet store", where all kinds of animals ( in cages and aquariums) are for sale. One of the clerks slips a metal choke collar on a puppy, hands the leash to a young couple, and they walk out. You feel the humiliation and hopelessness of the captive animals. Imagine that your young heart is broken when you witness these atrocities. Something inside you screams " THIS IS NOT RIGHT "! Your family and society however, act as if this is normal. You soon learn the underlying message "conform or be destroyed". It is very lonely for those people who grow up with animal slavery, (knowing in their hearts that it is wrong).

I grew up in the suburbs of America in the 1960's and '70's. We were taught that humans have a right to keep some animals captive, and we call these "pets". Our family owned many pets over the years: cats, dogs, mice, horses, turtles, fish, birds, hamsters, and even a raccoon. Most of these animals were kept in cages except for the dogs, cats, and horses. I truly loved our pets and a part of me felt their loneliness on some deep level even though I could not put it into words.

I remember when we bought our collie puppy and first brought her home. I stayed beside her many nights as she cried and cried. Only recently have I fully realized that she was taken away from her mother and siblings, and forced to live with our family. I secretly celebrated when she slipped out of her collar and got free, which happened a lot. I remember pony rides for children. I loved having the chance to be around them, but the ponies were sad and bored. As a teenager I went to a fancy horse show where they pranced around doing tricks for their riders. At the end of the show they let the horses run free in the rink for ten minutes. They were so alive and happy; it was my favorite part!

I had a pet cat (who had been rescued as a kitten) when I was a young adult. She was sometimes my only friend and companion. Like many Americans, I was a wounded and isolated soul needing compassion and love, but finding it hard to connect with other people. I began to heal, and my self-awareness increased along with the awareness of society's wounds. I allowed myself to feel, and in "feeling" my compassion for other Beings grew. When my cat was young, I had her spayed and de-clawed. Much later I began to grieve this decision; feeling terrible for taking away her ability to defend herself and to climb trees I asked my cat for forgiveness as I shed many tears. Through my process of personal growth I discovered a connection between repression of our emotions and how we treat and interact with people and animals. Two weeks after my cat died of old age I had a dream; her Spirit was free and she was climbing a tree!

It has taken many years for me to openly question and confront the common American practice of owning animals as "pets". I too have been brainwashed by this culture, like so many others. When I am honest, my heart has been telling me all along that "something is wrong, very wrong!" Animals' basic rights are being violated daily by millions of Americans, and it is perfectly legal and condoned.

We hold them prisoners, and call them "pets". We separate them from their own species, families, and from the Earth, to provide companionship and entertainment for our children. Cats, dogs, and horses are now routinely sterilized which causes them to be more docile (and easier to tame). Many animals, (as pets), are treated like property; they are bought and sold, bred for pet shows, their wings are clipped, their tails are docked, they are chained up and exploited. We cause great suffering to other creatures, and in the end we suffer too.

But there is hope. Human slavery was once legal , condoned, and widely practiced in America. A few brave individuals spoke out against this injustice and a war was fought over this moral issue. The ideal of "liberty and justice for all" prevailed, and we are a better people and country because of it.

It is time NOW to expand this ideal of "liberty and justice" to include All Our Relations. As we release our hearts from the shackles of human repression, we are free to liberate animals from human oppression.

Together we can live in harmony again on Mother Earth, respecting the natural ways as the Creator intended.

Unknown #conspiracy dataasylum.com

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

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


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

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

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


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

Source

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

Chick Publications #fundie chick.com

Biblical Marriage the Casualty of the "Sexual Revolution"

With Biblical marriage reeling under the attack by the virulent gay rights activists, we should have seen it coming. For fifty years, one court case after another has jackhammered away at the foundations of the family.

In most of history, “recreational sex” has replaced God’s plan for “one flesh” bonding of husband and wife when God’s laws are ignored.

Contraceptives were the first issue. In 1965, in a Connecticut case (Griswold v. Connecticut) involving the sale of contraceptives to married couples, an ominous seed was planted. Here the court "discovered" a right to privacy in the Bill of Rights for individuals instead of just in the sanctity of marriage.

By this time, godless Humanism had grown strong roots in our schools and legislatures. If man was truly the spearhead of evolution's progress, then whatever man wanted to do must be good, and whatever he did in private was nobody's business.

No unwanted blob of tissue growing in a womb could be allowed to hinder the enjoyment of those involved. So, in 1973, the court gave the owner of that womb permission to medically eliminate that inconvenience (Roe v. Wade).

More arrows in the heart of marriage followed rapidly. A Missouri case cut fathers out of the picture by voiding a law requiring spousal and parental consent to an abortion (Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth).

Parents of children were next. A New York law barring sale of contraceptives to 15-year-olds and younger was voided (Carey v. Population Services International). Parents no longer had the right to know if their child was planning premarital sex.In 1979, a Massachusetts law requiring parental consent for a minor’s abortion was struck down in Bellotti v. Baird.

Along the way, Texas’ anti-sodomy law was considered a violation of man’s “right to privacy” and was struck down in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas.

With the foundations of marriage thus weakened, marriage itself came under fire. In 1993, Hawaii’s Supreme Court decided that the state’s marriage law violated the equal protection provision of the state constitution by not considering “sexual orientation.”

This direct attack on man-woman marriage alerted many, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) passed congress by a wide margin and many state legislatures passed similar bills.

However, gay rights activists, having succeeded in changing the discussion from “sexual preference” to “sexual orientation,” began attacking marriage in earnest.

If the evolving human animal now included a newly discovered sexual “orientation,” then it was “discrimination” to forbid any of the expressions of that sexuality. Anyone confused over his sexuality could claim victimhood when forbidden to explore new sexual experiments.

Federal and state governments rushed to add legal protection for these “victims,” adding “sexual orientation” to the long list of protected categories along with race, age, and disabilities discrimination.

In 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the DOMA (Windsor v. United States) after the president and the Justice Dept. refused to enforce it. The battle then moved to the States where bills were passed by popular vote to protect marriage. Powerful gay activists, many made rich by blossoming tech companies, poured millions into a blistering campaign against these votes. Across the country, homosexual judges or those sympathetic to the cause invalidated the laws put in place by the people, using anti-discrimination and personal privacy arguments.

Now, the drive is to eliminate any tattered remnant of normal marriage and put the bull’s eye squarely on the back of those who follow a biblical God.

Since marriage is the central issue, anyone who refuses to bake a wedding cake or design flowers for a same-sex wedding must be made an example of. And the complaints are lodged and fines imposed and everyone wonders what happened.

But this locomotive has been coming out of the dark tunnel for a long time. Only courageous soul winners can stop it. In past revivals no-nonsense gospel literature has played a vital role. We need to plant God’s truth about marriage far and wide.

Here are some helpful resources that you can use to saturate our communities with the Truth:

[List of Chick tracts about abortion and homosexuality, plus a video titled "Could same-sex marriage be connected with abandoning the KJV?"]

Anonymous #conspiracy dataasylum.com

What is the Purpose of Chemtrails

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nano-fiber Basics

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

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

Why?

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

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

Who?

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

BioAPI Phases

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nano-Fiber and BioAPI Side Effects

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chemtrail nano-Fiber Examples and Evidence

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

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

Steven Furtick is the MOST DANGEROUS kind of false prophet, because he masquerades as a preacher of righteousness. Satan fully knows that the BEST PLACE to hide a LIE is between TWO TRUTHS! Steven walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but he is a wolf!

The Elevation Church allows dogs into the church service! I'm not talking about SEEING-EYE DOGS for blind people, I mean you can bring Charlie your pet dog! One woman at Elevation Church brought her pet bird to church!

Mega Church Money (demonic con artists!)

Steven Furtick Elevation Church False Teacher

Elevation church women attend church in yoga pants, jeans with the knees ripped out, with Rock music blasting in the background. Literally, EVALUATION CHURCH is a religious nightclub transformed into an apostate DAY CLUB for apostates!!! This is today's ungodly youth!

When's the last (or first) time that Steven Furtick warned his church congregation about HELL? Mr. Furtick is a WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING!

All Forms of Worldliness Exist in Fake 'Elevation Church'

Even reprobate Oprah Winfrey approves of Steven Furtick! Furtick sinfully supports heretics' Joyce Meyer, T.D. Jakes and Todd Bentley! Birds of a feather flock together! ELEVATION CHURCH is Satan's church!!! They have an IMITATION of the Holy Spirit—an imitation which allows worldliness (worldly music, worldly attire, worldly relationships, worldly philosophies, worldly behavior, et cetera). Furtick's “feel good” shallow message is demonic!