alonmg:

palestinian Human Shield Policy

All the images shown here were taken from the MASS MEDIA (international/arab). No fictions, no lies.

rhettshutup:

vondell-swain:

mehreenkasana:

verbalresistance:

anticapitalist:

According to a diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks, U.S. troops willfully massacred an Iraqi family in the town of Ishaqi in 2006, handcuffing and then shooting 11 people in the head including a woman in her 70′s and five children ages five and under.

McClatchy is reporting that the soldiers then called in an air strike on the house to cover up evidence of the killings.

This account differs sharply from an official version of the 2006 incident, which indicated that coalition forces captured an al Qaeda in Iraq operative in the house, which was destroyed in a firefight. The WikiLeaks cable, however, corroborates accounts by Ishaqi townspeople and includes questions about the incident by Philip Alston, the U.N.’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

The cable is dated twelve days after the incident, which took place March 15, 2006. In it, Alston says that autopsies performed in Tikrit on bodies pulled from the wreckage of the farmhouse indicated that all of the dead had been handcuffed and shot in the head.

If true, this action, although not as egregious as the My Lai massacre of March 16, 1968, wherein 347-504 unarmed civilians were shot to death by U.S. forces during the Vietnam conflict, still speaks volumes about war and the atrocities committed for war’s sake.

Read the original article (Warning: Graphic Images)

I guess war crimes and crimes against humanity, cease to be of importance when you’re the USA (and when Obama’s got your back, ensuring your immunity).

Nearly any other developed country in the world - Bush (and Blair) would be at the International Criminal Court right now.

But hey, I guess ‘democracy’ has it’s perks.

This and many more human rights violations by USA. 

ah man

okay, yes, these are terrible, please don’t think I’m trying to diminish the severity of these happenings.

But for this specific act (and many other civilian-based violent acts, those are all i will talk about) you have to ask — was it a government order?

People get messed up in war. People who kill other people will always end up messed up because if they don’t they aren’t right in the head to begin with.

But what I want to know from this article is: was this an order form the government, or was it soldiers acting violently of their own accord or due to the orders of an unstable officer?

If it was a government order, then yes, the US should be held responsible for this violent act against innocent civilians, but if it wasn’t, then those who are responsible, as free-thinking individuals should be held responsible.

Of course, the US as a country in either case would still be at fault. There should be mental health screenings regularly for any soldier, but even with that people will fall through the cracks.

This should not have happened. I will not say that it was just, because it wasn’t.

I just want to know if it was an agreed-upon order from the leaders at the top or was it the violent result of an unstable officer/soldiers

Finally, someone with sense!

Most of the more brutal attacks are the result of soldiers-gone-haywire. Thought I do have to say is that a lot of this shit is being covered-up by the US gov’t, which they don’t need to be doing.

However, this could be because people would automatically think that “OMFG ALL THE US TROOPS ARE SO BAD” like you see in the notes. Which is understandable to a degree, but again, they need to confront the issue head-on and not keep putting it asside.

As for all of the assassinations and other ordered stuff: I’m fine with it as long as there are no civilian casualties or other collateral. They need to be more precise and clean. However, they need to check their data twice-over to make sure their target is for a fact a fucking terrorist or something, and not just wing-it for the sake of possibility. That’s fukken retarded. Sometimes the best way to get them is to lure them out.

If the US wants to make any headway over there, we need to start treating the citizens in the crossfire better. There is no better way to remove terrorists and other tyrannies from power than to make allies with the population they seek to control, and we are doing a shit job of it.

Wars are won through slaughter and maneuver. The more you give in maneuver, the less you demand in slaughter.

We need to wait for the danger to come to us, and not go looking for the danger, which is why we really shouldn’t be there in the first place (unless there is something MUCH bigger here that I am missing). Maybe let the civilians decide if they want our help or not :/.
If it came down to it, and these groups of people wanna kill each other and don’t want us involved (this includes humanitarian missions, military OR civilian), I say we let ‘em do so and then proceed break out the popcorn, drinks, and the betting money, until they say otherwise.

But of course, I wouldn’t accept that from the “majority.” What about the people who need help but cannot ask for it because of the screaming meemies? Uhhg. I think there is much more to this than the usually schiticks that everyone talks about.
Then again, if they really wanted people like the Taliban out, they’d be arming themselves and taking the fight to the enemy. At that point, if they really wanted US intervention, I’d gladly lend our strength, hence my earlier statement :/.

Other than that, I am otherwise completely confus. I honestly don’t know what to believe. My mind is swarming with information, and I am unable to sift the shit from the jewels.

simply-right:

In Short- You can find countless examples of crimes against ‘whites’ where justice or the media attention to the justice is non existent. When looked compared to that of blacks, or just in the case of Trayvon, it is quite startling..  Kane details below the crime of a young black male who shot dead a white man and woman in cold blood.. 

The story goes, after the shooting, based on a tip a police officer stopped the young black male. He then proceeded to check the young man’s phone. There was a text message that he had recently sent confessing to the murder of the white male and female.. later he was let go because the officer illegally searched the young black man’s phone without consent..

Still to this day - ‘Justice’ has not been served.

Where is the outcry for justice here? Where are your demands for retribution over this injustice ‘Black Panthers’?

Simply reverse racism in many ways..

Gregory Kane

Read More

Yup :/.

talkstraight:

It’s long but worth the time to read.

alonmg:

• Drug dealer, alleged child molester, and convicted perjurer, forger and Indiana Speedway Bomber (who is also believed to have played a role in the assassination of a grandmother), Brett Kimberlin spent 17 years in prison before his ultimate re-absorption into American society
• He started a non-profit dubbed “Justice Through Music (JTM)” that has, since at least 2005, been funded by George Soros’ Tides Foundation and Barbara Streisand among other leftists
• Along with his associate, Kimberlin also started an organization called “Velvet Revolution” that supports the Occupy movement 
• JTM’s goal is to use music to foster “social justice” and fight Republican “voter fraud” (like the kind George Bush allegedly used to “steal” the Florida election)
• Any blogger — conservative and liberal alike — who has written the truth about Kimberlin has come under vicious attack by either Kimberlin or his minions, suffering death threats (veiled and unveiled), multiple lawsuits, loss of jobs and worse
• He has filed over 100 frivolous lawsuits against anything that isn’t nailed down and somehow is being allowed to continue unchecked 
• This story has never been reported on in the mainstream media

Be prepared to enter an alternate universe bizarre beyond any stretch of what you thought even possible.  And then keep reading, because this may be one of the most important exposes published on The Blaze to date. It will explain in frightening detail what it means to speak the truth at the expense of losing all you hold dear. And will reveal how easy it has been for one convicted domestic terrorist — backed by George Soros and Barbara Streisand alike — to use the U.S. legal system, as well as less desirable channels, to silence those who have dared tell the story of one Brett Kimberlin, a.k.a. the “Speedway Bomber.”

How immutable are our First Amendment rights? Would they remain so even under the most dire conditions? There are about half a dozen bloggers who, at this very moment in time, are finding out just that after having been subject to: death threats, blackmail, extorsion, numerous erroneous lawsuits, cyber-attacks of phone, email and social networking accounts and become the target of smear campaigns that have lead to their firing until ultimately discovering that some others who came before them, have turned up dead.

Move over Ayers, there’s a not-so-new domestic terrorist in town

What follows is the unbelievable yet non-fictional tale of a left-wing ex-con with an extensive rap-sheet who, since his release from prison, has led the crusade against Republican “voter fraud” while simultaneously making it his life’s mission to threaten, brutalize, shakedown, sue, slander and generally terrorize any writer — conservative and liberal alike — who dares speak plainly about his checkered past.

For reasons unknown, the far-left seems to have a penchant for throwing their full-fledged support — emotional, political and financial — behind domestic terrorists (see: Bill Ayers) and their latest protege is no exception. Also known as the “Speedway Bomber,” Kimberlin set an Indiana town ablaze with a series of coordinated bombings in 1978, ultimately resulting in one man’s suicide (this was proven in a subsequent court case) after his limbs were irreparably damaged in the explosion.

Kimberlin v. White, 7 F.3d 527 (6^th Cir. 1993) relates what happened to the man during the six-day bombing spree:

In the worst incident, Kimberlin placed one of his bombs in a gym bag, and left it in a parking lot outside Speedway High School. CarlDeLong was leaving the high school football game with his wife when he attempted to pick up the bag and it exploded. The blast tore off his lower right leg and two fingers, and embedded bomb fragments in his wife’s leg. He was hospitalized for six weeks, during which he was forced to undergo nine operations to complete the amputation of his leg, reattach two fingers, repair damage to his inner ear, and remove bomb fragments from his stomach, chest, and arm. In February 1983, he committed suicide.

Kimberlin was convicted of thirty three including illegal use of a Department of Defense insignia, and the Presidential Seal, both of which were used to procure the hard-to-come-by explosives used in the bombings.

While he went on to serve seventeen years in prison, Kimberlin’s time behind bars only helped him hone his skills of “persuasion” by earning a law degree, which he appears to use routinely. The suicide victim’s widow ultimately sued Kimberlin several years later, winning a civil judgement in which she was awarded $1.6 million. He absconded from the debt, however, landing him back in prison for a spell.

But what was the motivation behind Kimberlin’s rampage? Was he railing against war, or the rich, or the evil Western empire? The answer is more twisted than one can even imagine — and oddly, isn’t political at all.

Suspected motivation 

In what ultimately became the biography of a conman — “Citizen K” — respected journalist and author Mark Singer shared the details of his bewildering journey with Kimberlin, who had actually signed on to the book thinking Singer would portray him in a favorable light. What the author discovered, however, was the twisted web of deceit in which Kimberlin dwelled. Ultimately, Singer was able to piece together much about the likely catalyst for Kimberlin’s bombing-spree.  A description of the book provides background:

This book relates a journalist’s worst nightmare: of getting deeply involved in a “big story” based on information from a single source who turns out to be a world-class liar. During the 1992 Presidential campaign Singer wrote a story for the New Yorker about the allegations by Brett Kimberlin, a former marijuana dealer then in prison for a series of bombings, that he had once sold marijuana to Vice President Dan Quayle. […] After signing a book contract to expand the story, Singer invested more and more time, and became frustrated by holes, inconsistencies and dead ends in Kimberlin’s tale. Embroiled in a Kafkaesque mystery, Singer recounts his painstaking journalistic detective work, and his growing sense that this would be the story that got away.

Based on this detective work — supported by historical record — Singer concluded that the Speedway bombings were not politically motivated at all, but were rather meant to serve as a distraction from yet another crime that had taken place shortly beforehand.

The Indy Star reported that on July 29, 1978, Speedway resident Julia Scyphers, 65, answered a knock at her door only to find a strange man who claimed he was interested in purchasing items she had recently tried to sell at a yard sale. Scyphers let the man into her garage to show him the items and he “shot her in the head.” Her husband came out in time to see the perpetrator’s car and catch a glimpse of the man himself.

When police began looking for a motive in the Scyphers slaying, they found there’d been a recent family clash. Julia Scyphers’ daughter, Sandra Barton, had become involved with a man who seemed to Mrs. Scyphers to be inordinately close to one of Barton’s young daughters. Mrs. Scyphers told friends she was so concerned that she’d arranged for both of her granddaughters to come live with her. Whether or not Mrs. Scyphers’ fears were correct (no charges were ever filed to that effect), this incident led investigators to start looking at Brett C. Kimberlin.

Through pieces of information gathered from news reports, police records and descriptions from Singer’s book, it is suspected that Kimberlin had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with Sandra Barton’s daughter, Jessica, who was only 10-years-old at the time. Her grandmother, Julia Scyphers, had attempted to thwart the relationship in any way she could, even by allegedly sending a handyman to change the locks on her daughter’s front door. When Kimberlin discovered Scyphers’ interference, he complained to the building management that he was being “harassed” (a meme that would later become all-too familiar to Kimberlin) and it is believed by some that he, or an associate, murdered her.

As the heat against Kimberlin began to mount in the Scyphers’-slaying, he arranged a series of bombings that would take police attention away from the case at hand. Ironically, Singer’s book also describes how Kimberlin, after being apprehended for the Speedway bombings, plotted foranother person to plant identical bombs around the town in order to give the appearance that the suspect was still at large.

With a rap-sheet that includes forgery, perjury, drug dealing, domestic terrorism and possible murder and child molestation, the future actions of the man many consider a “sociopath” and pathological liar become less-surprising.

Justice Through Music and Velvet Revolution

Ironically, the man whose credibility is in question now makes a “living” by calling into question, the credibility of others Today, Kimberlin is the director and founder of “Justice Through Music (JTM),” a non-profit organization that “uses famous musicians and bands to organize, educate and activate young people about the importance of civil rights, human rights and voting.” Since 2005, JTM collected $1.8 million in contributions from an illustrious list of donors including the George Soros-funded Tides Foundation, liberal songstress Barbara Streisand and John Kerry’s wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

JTM claims that it has registered countless people to vote using “cutting edge technology in order to effect change through the ballot box.”

“We support the aspirations of youth worldwide to be free to express themselves, and we take a stand against oppressive regimes that suppress freedom and deprive citizens of basic human rights,” Kimberlin’s website continues.

Really?

In an article detailing Kimberlin’s “thinly veiled” tax documents, Ed Barnes expained how the 58-year-old Bethesda, Md., resident is raising a steady stream of money from the left in return for promising to put conservative bloggers out of business.

Kimberlin had, as of 2010, called for the arrest of Karl Rove, Andrew Breitbart, Chamber of Commerce head Tom Donohue, Massey Energy Chairman Don Blankenship and now, conservative bloggers Patrick Frey, Aaron Walker and others. Barnes asks if a review of tax filings for Kimberlin’s “Velvet Revolution” and “Justice Through Music” raises “troubling questions” about whether his ‘nonprofit’ operation is dedicated to public activism or is “just a new facade for a longtime con artist.”

Though neither website publicly reveals Kimberlin’s role, tax and corporate documents show that he is one of four directors who incorporated the Velvet Revolution, and that he is the registered agent for the tax-exempt, non-stock company, which is registered at his mother’s house in Bethesda.

Velvet Revolution is Kimberlin’s other enterprise dedicated to furthering a leftwing agenda. What is perhaps most galling, however, is the description on its website:

Velvet Revolution is a term coined to describe the peaceful road to change in countries where governments ignored the inalienable rights of the people.  A few inspiring Velvet Revolutions occurred in the former Soviet Union, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, South Africa, Ukraine, Egypt, Tunisia and other countries.

It is interesting that Kimberlin mentions the Soviet Union. Is that because he is seeking to emulate its policies on free speech?

Indeed, anyone who has dared to question why a reputed terrorist is given legitimacy, a steady stream of money, and a platform with which he can influence young, impressionable voters, is repaid in spades by Kimberlin and his minions.

The shakedown  

While all of the above information provides background, the heart of this story lies with those who have become the target of Kimberlin’s scorn — that is to say, any blogger who has mentioned truthful elements about the ex-con’s past.

Los Angeles County Assistant District Attorney Patrick Frey who blogs under the moniker “Patterico,” started writing about Kimberlin in October of 2010 after the late conservative pundit Andrew Breitbart noted the hypocrisy of Kimberlin’s business partner, Brad Friedman, in scorning the “tactics” of James O’Keefe when he went undercover to expose ACORN voter fraud. Shortly thereafter, Frey received an email from Kimberlin threatening to sue if he did not retract his story. Since the Speedway Bomber was unable to prove why any of Frey’s entries were untrue, he decided to escalate the situation to unthinkable heights.

According to the account, Kimberlin proceeded to call Frey’s secretaries, telling them that the assistant district attorney was a “racist, a homophobe, and a stalker” and that he would be filing a restraining order against him. The convicted perjurer subsequently filed complaint with state bar association as well, a move that was heavily publicized by Kimberlin-accomplice and Democratic consultant Neal Raushauser.

To illustrate just how sue-happy Kimberlin is, he once sued a pornographer for selling him pornography that was not provocative enough. Yes, we forgot to mention that Kimberlin was in that business to. 

That is not where it ended for Frey, however, not by a long shot. Soon, his home address, along with Google earth and satellite images of it were published on Kimberlin’s other website Occupy for Accountability.   As it turns out, a favorite tactic of the Speedway Bomber, according to those who have felt his wrath, is to stalk his “rivals,” particularly their wives, children and parents and post personal information about them, including their home address, online.  He allegedly follows the move on occasion with blog posts detailing how he fears for their lives.

While it is difficult to imagine, the situation gets worse.

The SWAT Team at your door 

While the evidence is thus far only circumstantial, Frey believes that based on key elements and the Kimberlin-disciples involved, it is more than likely that the Speedway Bomber was behind yet another unspeakable attack — this one far worse that those that preceded it.

Essentially, a yet-to-be identified man (but one who sounds much like a Kimberlin associate, according to Frey) placed a call to law enforcement the evening of July 1, 2011, to announce that he had just shot his wife. The man then proceeded to give the operator Frey’s home address. Of course, the call was intended to make it look like Fey had just confessed to murdering his wife at his home. Just after midnight, a SWAT team descended on Frey’s doorstep, screaming at the top of their lungs for the attorney to place his hands behind his head. They arrested him and dragged him to the patrol car while simultaneously dragging his wife out of bed.

“I could have been killed,” Frey told The Blaze in an interview as he recalled the disturbing story. He explained that he was only “99% in shock” because a similar incident had happened to someone else just one week prior, and likely for similar reasons.

Three days later Frey told me that Raushauser penned a piece in the Daily Kos (from which he has since been ousted) detailing how he was engaged in a “cyber-stalking” campaign against Kimberlin.

Ultimately, Frey admitted that he is disappointed with the way the investigation unfolded as it took nearly seven months for officials to obtain copies of the phone records that would exonerate him. In the end the case was closed rather unceremoniously.

In terms of legal recourse, the assistant D.A. said that while he could sue for defamation, he observes the failures of law enforcement and believes that the justice system — civil or criminal — will not do anything about this unless he [Kimberlin] hurts or kills someone.”

At the end of the day, what is most important to Frey is that Americans around the country discover what one terrorist is doing to silence free speech and to realize that this is a “not a partisan issue.” While Kimberlin may use leftist politics to secure his cash-flow, Frey believes the bomber is apolitical, and is engaged in this behavior simply out of monetary greed and his own self-interest.

“This is a story about how someone can use this brass-knuckles reputation management by going after anyone who criticizes him.” And that should be a concern for everyone, regardless of their political bent.

Battling perpetual lawsuits  

Aaron Walker, who sometimes blogs as “Aaron Worthing,” is another attorney and also one of Kimberlin’s latest victims. After being tormented since last December Walker and his family only seek justice.

After providing legal advice to Seth Allen, a staunch liberal who also drew Kimberlin’s ire after writing truthfully about him, Kimberlin wrote to Walker, asking him to essentially break attorney-client privilege and testify against Allen. When Walker, who was blogging anonymously at the time refused, that was when Kimberlin’s vendetta began.

Inevitably, Kimberlin won by default a judgement against Allen but that was not enough. “The next thing I know, he places a motion to reveal my identity,” Walker told The Blaze.

“All he wanted was my identity,” he added. In the end, Kimberlin got it and made certain that Walker’s full name, address, high school, Yale attendance, name and address of employer as well as family information was in black and white for the world to see. Walker attempted to seal the record, but each time, Kimberlin would file a motion to unseal the record.

When the two finally encountered one another after court, Kimberlin boasted that he had been successful in his goal to expose the identity of Aaron Walker and then held up an iPad. Not knowing if it was another bomb, or intended to be used as a weapon, Walker snatched the iPad out of Kimberlin’s hand. That is when the bomber concocted the claim that Walker savagely “decked” him and that the skirmish was so bad, it had to be broken up by bystanders. He then filed second-degree assault charges against Walker that carry a sentence of up to ten years. Eventually video of the incident proved that the attorney never laid a finger on Kimberlin but it did not stop the Walkers from paying thousands of dollars in legal costs to prepare.

Thus far, the State’s Attorney, while he was encouraged to do so, has not filed charges against Kimberlin for having lied to him about the assault.

All the while, Kimberlin has kept filing responses to unseal Walker’s records and has even published the fact that the attorney lives in a townhouse.  Eerily, the Internet-terrorist has reportedly blogged about his “fear” that Walker or his neighbors might get killed.

As a result, Walker and his wife both lost their jobs. While Walker’s former employer never divulged the real reason for the termination, he believes the move was made out of fear.

“They are terrified of this guy,” Walker told me. So afraid in fact, that when Walker came back to work to collect his belongings major police presence was standing by just in case.  ”They wouldn’t even let us back in to get my books.”

He said that while he understands their fear, the company’s move to let him go and not stand by an innocent person who had been through such an ordeal “was disheartening.”

Since then, Kimberlin has filed yet another harassment lawsuit, or series of suits against Walker, based on half-truths and distortions from comments taken out of context. Somehow, the court system is  ”surprisingly [allowing Kimberlin] to get away with it.”

Still, Walker vowed to push forward, and says he‘d even go to prison if he had to in his effort to stand his ground and not succumb to the slander and intimidation of someone who has made his life’s work an act, and art, of terror.

“I will take it to the Supreme Court if I have to,” the attorney said firmly.

Kimberlin, who Walker labels a clear sociopath, once threateningly warned the attorney: “I would suggest, Mr. Walker, that you just leave me alone.”

To which Walker replied, “I’ll continue to tell the truth about you.”

It is important to note that given the background and tactics involved, Frey, Walker, and other bloggers likeRobert Stacy McCain are legitimately fearful for their safety and the safety of their family members. Thus far, Kimberlin has been allowed to terrorize members of the blogosphere as there has been little push-back from mainstream media or even free speech advocates. Perhaps with greater media exposure, this brazen assault on free speech indeed. For more detailed accounts of Walker’s experience, please visit his blog here.

Stay tuned

Friday, May 25th, has officially been dubbed: “blog about Brett Kimberlin day.”  With this in mind I will continue my coverage throughout the day, as Walker and Frey are only two of the domestic terrorists’ victims, and there is more to Kimberlin’s outfits, associates, and benefactors than meets the eye.

lolingatliberals:

 Ready to start another shitstorm, ladies and gents – If only because the death threats are less vicious as they used to be. Today I will try to tackle 3 well-known, and extremely inaccurate, myths about homosexuality and homosexual relationships. All sources will be provided so that Liberals don’t complain.

LIBERALS! If you want to debate civilly, please send me an ask, whether anonymous or not – If you feel you somehow have better information then me, it shouldn’t be impossible for you to talk about it like a sane-minded human being.

~*~*~*~

Homosexuals and AIDS:

Putting this first as it’s something that was brought up today in class. I have heard it before… Here in Canada, Homosexuals are barred, for the most part, from giving blood. This is for the obvious reasons that, as the Canadian Blood Bank is a public service, and it’s funds are extremely limited, it ha s to use it’s discretion in narrowing down the ‘good blood’ pool to reduce costs. Homosexuals and persons who have new tattoos/piercings are part of the pool of people who are high risk to have ‘bad blood’. Thus, the CBB simply can not afford to put potentially unclean blood through the process of testing if they know that the blood has a higher risk of having AIDS or Hepatitis C. Testing blood is a time consuming process, and puts the lab workers at risk – Why would the CBB want to take blood that has a high risk of being unusable?

However! Liberals have long since attempted to contest this, claiming it is discriminatory practice, and citing that heterosexuals are also able to contract AIDS. But they refuse to acknowledge that the rate of STDs, including Hepatitis C and HIV/AIDS is disproportionately high in the Homosexual community.

73% of all diagnoses of HIV/AIDS, and 65% of all Hep.C, are on homosexual males. Homosexual females have a much lower rate of disease, but it is still higher then heterosexual males or females.

~*~*~

Homosexuals and Children/Child Custody:

It’s been long since appreciated in the 20^th century that Homosexuals are just as competent as straight couples in raising children.. Often, the approach taken to support these claims is that children do not need a male and a female parent to be raised healthily and happily – Pointing in the direction of single parents, often to the exclusion of the demographics relating to the poor success rate of children growing up in single parent households. There are also such fantastic claims that children raised in homosexual families are more stable then children raised in heterosexual families.

But is all of this true? Are homosexual couples really just as good, if not better, parents then heterosexual ones? Or is this another Liberal scheme to continue to erode the traditional structure of society?

According to Dr. Walter Schumm, professor of child and family service at Kansas State University, suggests that there has been an inherent bias in the information released regarding homosexual parents. Since 1982, the amount of positive to negative reports released on homosexual parenting is about 65:2. This is important because it does not give the time and comparison ability to the public who need both sides of the debate in order to form an educated opinion. [NOTE: The ratio is based off of information released from pro-homosexual groups/advocacy agents. Not simply the amount of ‘positive’ reviews of homosexual relationships that exist.]

Probably the biggest flaw in the information recited regarding homosexual parents is the utter lack of details. We hear grand, sweeping statements regarding the children and methods of parenting homosexuals include – But never details on the parent’s relationship itself.

For example, most people would agree that divorce has a negative effect on children. In fact, even in my own psychology textbook (Forensic Psychology, Wrightsman et al.) [which you know I am not in love with] it states that “about half of all children from divorced families will grow to become underachieving, self-depreciating, sometimes angry adults”. Further, it states that only about 10% of youth are relieved by the separation of their parents, and this is often due to physical or emotional abuse they may have witnessed or suffered during their parents divorce. Taking that into consideration, we can then look at statistics of separation in homosexual couples… Dr. Shumm offers that 56% of Lesbian couples, and 60% of Gay couples with children generally seperate by the time that child is 17 years old. This is compared to a varying rate of 3-28% in heterosexual couples.

This also ties in with the fact that youth have been found to fare poorly in relationships with high rates of infidelity, mainly because it models instability. While heterosexual couples have an infidelity rate of about 20%, homosexual couples not only admit to higher rates of cheating, 40% of homosexuals stated that they have ‘open’ relationships, or openly non-monogamous ones.

This is two strikes against the homosexual ability to parent that can not be refuted by any crony statistics offered without balance in pro-gay organizations… But there are even larger connotations that has been generally agreed upon in the psychological community. Having opposite sex parents in a stable, well-caring relationship promotes a duality of emotional balance that is not offered by homosexual couples. This duality is a natural human response to the roles of the male and the female in raising children.. They have existed since time began, and without any general guidelines of which they were imposed or taught to society. Otherwise, they were completely natural in their existence, and not a result of any religious or conservative fanaticism.

Males and females offer children different things, and the way a male and female perceive and react to children is entirely different. While both roles can be taught to the different sexes, the fact that they do not occur naturally speaks volumes to me. And when it comes to children, I’d like to think one should stay as close to nature as possible.

The fact that both roles are not normally filled in most homosexual couples is reflecting on the behavior of the children as they grow older. The American Psychological Association has observed that daughters of homosexual male couples generally experience Attachment Syndrome and higher rates of drug abuse… While the sons of Lesbian couples have been found to associate, in Implicit Association Tests, more negative connotations with males and explicit masculinity then average.

As this is only a brief, superficial paper, I am not going to go into anymore detail then I already have — I may return to this topic later.

~*~*~*~

Homosexuals and Biology:

How does that Lady GaGa song go? “I’m on the right track baby, I was born this way!”. Well, GaGa, you’re right there.. Homosexuals are indeed born that way. But why? If it were a naturally occurring phenomenon, there would be no identifiable difference between straight and homosexual development, unfortunately that is not the case.

For too long we were looking at Homosexual adults and children for the answers of why they were the way they were. We thought that there had to be a brain development issue, or perhaps a genetic mutation or hormone inbalance.. Luckily science grows and progresses as does our theories. It seems that 3 times is indeed a charm for the scientific community.

Genetisists got involved in mid-2000 to the Homosexuality debate, and after years of tireless studies, they turned their attention towards fetal development. With 96% accuracy, geneticists were able to predict the sexuality of a fetus developing in utero via the hormones they are exposed to during invagination. This theory is now widely accepted in the neuro-genetic-physiological community, though there is still some debate as to the ratio of genetics to environment that influence homosexual development.

Regardless — We found it! We know now! Homosexuals are no longer these mystical beings that encompass our respect simply for existing the way they do. We know now. Yo’ mamma uterus did it. And, according to these same studies, stress and depression were huge influences in the imbalance in hormone secretion during pregnancy. This was something speculated earlier after the Dresden Study. For those of you who don’t know what this is, the Dresden Study was an observation of Pregnant German women that survived the bombing of Dresden — Extremely high stress and depression levels… And, guess what? Abnormally high homosexual births.

This would correspond with the skyrocketing levels mental illness in society today — In fact, 85% of us will experience mental trauma, or a mental illness in their lives… To this, I can only speculate that societal erosion has something to do with it, but I digress for now.

Very interesting.

blondhousewife:

Mr. Hanson knocks it out of the park in this piece for National Review.

Article:

When Barack Obama two years ago joked at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner that potential suitors of his two daughters might have to deal with Predator drones (“But boys, don’t get any ideas. Two words for you: Predator drones. You will never see it coming.”), the liberal crowd roared. That failed macabre joke would have earned George W. Bush a week of headline condemnation from the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Obama, in fact, has increased those judge/jury/executioner targeted assassinations tenfold during his tenure. But apparently, the combination of Obama’s postracial “cool” and the video-game nature of such airborne death — no CNN clips of charred torsos and smoldering legs, no prisoners with their ACLU lawyers in Guantanamo, no Seymour Hersh exposé on a Waziristan granny who was vaporized for being too near her terrorist-suspect grandson, no American losses for Code Pink and Moveon.org to demonstrate against — earned general exemption for that new liberal way of war. What bothered us about the Predator strikes in 2006–2008 was not the kills per se but the uncool nature of twangy Texan George Bush, who ordered them.

Last week 28-year-old, $17 billion–rich, jeans-clad Mark Zuckerberg took Wall Street for a multibillion-dollar ride, making his original buddies instant billionaires and his loyal larger circle millionaires. Note that there is no Occupy Wall Street protest at Facebook headquarters. Just as there are none at Oprah’s house or the residence of Leonardo DiCaprio, despite their take each year of between $50 and $100 million.

No one has suggested that Hollywood lower movie-ticket prices by asking Johnny Depp or Jennifer Lopez to walk away with $10 or $20 million less a year. Steve Jobs found ways to dodge taxes comparable to those deployed by any Wall Street fatcat, but he was iPad cool, and so his iPhone billions were exempt from the Occupy nonsense. Cool capitalists are immune from the neo-Marxist critique of capitalism — a racket that $40 billion–rich Warren Buffett learned late in life, but well enough, with the “Buffett Rule.”

We simply don’t mind that Google and Amazon rake in billions, but we despise Exxon and Archer Daniels Midland for doing the same. It is not that we need social networking and Internet searches more than food and fuel, but rather that we have the impression that cool zillionaires in flipflops are good while uncool ones in wingtips are quite bad.

I am sure that the tax lawyers who help Richard Branson and Mick Jagger are no less skilled at shorting the Treasury than those who work for Rush Limbaugh, but the profits of the former are okay while the latter’s are obscene. Limbaugh is a misogynist for using the word “slut” and apologizing for it; Bill Maher is a feminist for using slurs we cannot print and for which he did not apologize. One is uncool, the other very cool — as was a cynical and sarcastic David Letterman, who implied that the 14-year-old daughter of Sarah Palin had snuck into the Yankees’ dugout for quick sex with Alex Rodriquez.

The power of cool is evident also in politics. State quite correctly that you can see Russia from parts of Alaska, and you are ditzy white-trash Sarah from Wasilla; state falsely that Franklin Roosevelt addressed the nation on television in 1929, and you are just “good ol’ Joe Biden.”

John Kerry’s second married-into fortune probably dwarfs the one that Mitt Romney made himself, perhaps by a factor of ten. While we heard in 2012 that Romney wanted a car elevator in one of his many houses, we never heard much in 2004 of presidential candidate Kerry’s various mansions, boats, or assorted playthings, or how he proved to be a keen investor as a senator helping to set U.S. financial policy.

Kerry, you see, was cool. He windsurfed and wore spandex as he cycled, and found his exemption by championing the poor he rarely saw. The same was true of John Edwards of “Two Americas” fame. Do we now recall how he ran to the left of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, despite the $500 haircuts and the self-indulgent mansion, replete with “John’s room,” a hideaway with all sorts of adolescent toys? Edwards, remember, earned those spoils by charming juries in his smarmy style, and nearly destroyed the practice of obstetrics in North Carolina through his flurry of malpractice suits. No matter, Edwards was liberal, Kennedyesque, and cool — and he earned prophylaxis in the manner of JFK himself, of whose White House orgies we did not learn until a half-century later. Likewise we have been taught that there is no “power imbalance” or “insidious asymmetry” when a “mentor” has sexual relations with his young intern — as long as he is a feminist like Bill Clinton.

What, then, exactly, is this cool that allows you to earn whatever you like without censure, and then to spend it as you please without fear of public scorn?

It would seem that the disconnect is liberal politics, the coin by which one buys a sort of medieval indulgence from liberal gatekeepers in the media, academia, the arts, and the foundations that permits one to continue the pursuit and enjoyment of lucre and to indulge the baser appetites without harassment — in the manner that the medieval moneylender or sexual zealot still got to heaven by buying marble for the cash-strapped cathedral. That $20 billion–rich George Soros was a money speculator who almost destroyed the small depositors of the Bank of England and was convicted in France of insider trading matters not at all: Without his roulette-wheel billions we would not have Media Matters. Jon Corzine of MF Global cannot explain what he did with $1.2 billion of other people’s money. But there will never be a “Corzine Law.”

Who cares what George Clooney makes an hour, or how exactly his close friends can afford to pony up for a $40,000-a-plate dinner — when the takings will help Barack Obama feed the children? If Halliburton were wise, it would buy the shut-down Solyndra plant, make solar panels at a loss, and write the cost off as a lobbying and public-relations expense.

So cool is not obtained just through liberal politics. Images and intent are critical too. The stuffy tea-party crowd looks like the plain suburban guys and gals who sell us houses, cars, and insurance. And so, of course, they must be racist, even though their demonstrations give no proof of any such fetish. Their only oddity would seem to be a certain desire to ensure that they leave no litter in their wake for poorer custodians to clean up.

But Occupy Wall Street? That movement has produced thugs, thieves, rapists, would-be bombers, rioters, and street urchins who pollute their surroundings and cause mayhem. They act pre-modern but earn no scorn because they are cool – they sport a sort of elite grunge that suggests that the environmental-studies major at Brown empathizes with those poor for whom grime is not makeup.

Identity is key here. In general, to win exemption from the left-wing critique of America, the affluent must construct cool identities as far distant as possible from the white Christian heterosexual male, who is most culpable for creating our present affluence from ill-gotten gains. The multimillionaire Elizabeth Warren and her husband make nearly $1 million a year. They live in a home beyond the reach of 99 percent of America. And she may well have plagiarized and been dishonest about her own heritage. No matter — Warren washed away both her privilege and her sins by reinventing herself as a “Cherokee” who fights Wall Street oppressors.

So too Barack Obama. It was Obama himself, not the fringe Birthers, who first made the case that the president was born in Kenya — not because he was, but because to say now and then that he was added an exotic touch of cool to Barack Hussein Obama — a cool that a Barry Dunham born in Honolulu and prepped at Punahou would have lacked. Poor George Zimmerman — had he only called himself Jorge Zimmerman he might not have been written off as a “white Hispanic” vigilante.

Network news anchors anguished over whether George W. Bush had tried coke while thousands of African-Americans languished in jail for doing the same — but they snored when Barack Obama boasted that he had done that and much more. Push down a gay student fifty years ago as a teen, and if you are straitlaced Mitt Romney then you always were a homophobe; push away a little girl decades ago, and if you are Barack Hussein Obama, then you were struggling with identity and coming of age.

In short, millions of well-off Americans, from the entering college student to the full professor of law, from the billionaire thief to the president of the United States himself, endlessly chase cool.

And why would they not? Cool is now America’s holy grail that allows the elite and the rich not just to pursue and enjoy nice things, but to damn others who do the same.

Omg, ^this^.

peanutbutterandjamzee:

thatguywiththegoats:

This is correct.

I could direct this to a few people.

Somebody give OP a medal.

lolingatliberals:

Currently, in my college, we are operating from a textbook called “Forensic Psychology” by Lawrence Wrightsman and Stephen Porter. It is a Canada-specific text, but covers a lot of international topics, especially in subjects where there is not enough research that has been done in Canada.

While the majority of the book has been quite jaded — And most certainly takes a superficial, liberal slant to most social issues.. I found I couldn’t stop myself from addressing a specific chapter in the book whose ignorance and inaccuracy nearly blew me away.

Chapter 14 [279] deals with discrimination — More specifically, it deals with social attitudes towards minorities, and why white men are inherently racist. The entire chapter only used about 7 references, each one worse then the last [and the majority being from the late 60s to early 80s]. I wanted to run through the chapter to show you, my [mostly] American readers, what it is we learn here in Canada on a daily basis.

The chapter starts by commending Canada’s ethnically diverse heritage, and attesting to the fact that Canada has no identity, but we are only a ‘boiling pot’ of different races and cultures. This is a sentiment shared by many Canadians who refuse to acknowledge the fact that Canada does indeed have an identity — And it is under extreme strain right now.

The chapter touches on sexism, but it is clear that the majority of it is directed at white-on-black racism. At one point in the chapter, a column is directed at Hate Crimes, and not a single non-white perpetrated crime is mentioned amongst the plethora of KKK and Neo-Nazi references. We know Black-On-White crime is prominent, and we know that it makes up the majority of violent assaults and murders in interracial criminal activity. We also know that B-O-W hate crimes are extremely prominent, and that they are often completely ignored in the MSM to the point of almost desecrating the memories of the men and women who have been brutally murdered by racist minorities.

Here’s one of the more recent ones — A 13 year old boy named Michael Coon from Kansas City. Coon was doused in gasoline and set ablaze by a group of black teens shouting, “You’ll get what you deserve, Whitey!”… Note that this crime was amongst the scuffle of the MSM to sop up their tears for their precious Trayvon Martin, who, we are finding out now, did in fact perpetrate the crime against George Zimmerman.

But Micheal’s suffering is not uncommon — In fact, B-O-W crime is disporportionately more common then W-O-B.. Almost to the point of W-O-B being insignificant in comparison. It has only risen sharply since these studies were done, the only thing that has changed is the fact that Blacks are now being protected by laws in which they commit violence against whites, as eyes have now been shifted from the rate of which B-O-W crime has risen, to that Blacks are being ‘unfairly’ targeted by police as perpetrators of crimes that we know they are committing. Apparently now it is more upsetting to be called a racist then to simply speak the truth about the state of social violence in this country! And thus the Liberal-guilt culture beats on. [I should note here that I am perfectly aware that not all blacks are criminals. In fact, I advocate the rights and acknowledgement of the many minorities that are self-sustaining, and not victims of the new welfare state. But reality is reality, and when you have more crimes being committed by one group, it is not racist to point to this truth. Period.]

This blatant ignorance about statistical evidence and racial reality continued on from that relatively short blurb — As whites were targeted yet again in ‘Contemporary Racism’ a box intended to illuminate the reader on the different forms and descriptions of racist tendencies… Every single one included the disposition that one must need to be white in order to be racist. In other words, most of them spoke to white society’s desire to ‘keep their status and priviledge’… A sentiment that is not only racist in and of itself, but that is completely inaccurate.

As readers of my blog, and any educated person with a brain will know, white status has long been something nonexistent in contemporary western culture… Despite the fact that it is perfectly reasonable to expect any race in control of an area to exert it’s influence in that country’s ruling. [IE: The Chinese run China, the Russians run Russia, the Africans run Africa — White societies should not be allowed to run white societies. This is an ideology that is generally supplimented with the: ‘We are just a boiling pot’ thing].  

Affirmative Action, which the chapter also touches on while heralding it as a ‘measure to promote equality, is just one of the ways that minorities are being given preference in both Canada and the USA. Many Liberals claim that Affirmative Action is just another way to ‘level the playing field’, most don’t take into consideration the fact that it promotes racial inequality, and does not a thing to fix it.

Affirmative Action encourages racial inequality because it sets the bar lower for other races in order to ensure that they succeed, instead of simply expecting them to.  Good examples of this would be the US school system.. Where it used to be that Universities and Colleges accepted substantially lower SATs for minorities then it did for Asians and Whites, this desolation culture has extended to primary education.

School Districts in areas with higher minority concentrations have dropped the bar, too. High Schools and Primary Schools are being told to push the students through, even with failing grades.

In the text, it attributes minority hardships in western educational institutions due to racist biases and not towards intelligence or incompatible cultures [that some races simply do not put emphasis on formal education, and these races are the ones that are failing in western education as opposed to European and Asian Cultures, both of which put major emphasis on formal education, and both of which have been successful in their alternating systems.].

I disagree, as usual… As the New York Times published, even with controlled socioeconomic factors, Black and Latino students still did poorly in school and had a lower IQ compared even to White students with a lower SES.

I would chalk it all up to culture, once again. As I mentioned above in italics, Asians and Europeans are races that generally put significant stress on formal education and employment success. Latino and African cultures simply do not.. They never have, even when their societies were in tact. This is not racism, this is simply reality. Africans and Latinos come from primitive strains — IE: Their people are older, and their societies have generally been interdependent ones. This is not so in the Asian and European societies, where independence and individualism were heavily valued. This has predisposed them towards success in western-style education systems, which are also the kinds of ones implemented in Japan, Korea and China/Hong Kong. It’s why Asian students have been so successful here in Canada in the US, while not receiving any government support or the need to have the bar lowered to accommodate them [It’s also why we love them so much :)].. This is why in Affirmative-Action style programs, Asians are almost never included in grade exemptions.

[Note: Though the SAT’s for Blacks and Latinos to get into American Colleges and Universities is on average about 300-500 points lower then Whites and Asians, prominent black rights groups in the US are calling for a removal of the SAT completely, calling it racist and culturally biased. It seems that whenever minorities fail at something that looks badly upon them, instead of taking incentive to rectify the situation to better their people, they would rather call it racist or blame whites. How does this serve the black or Latino community? How does this help them succeed? How does letting the threat of racism permeate white society so deeply that we lower the bar for minorities give society an advantage?]

But Affirmative Action is more then just lowering passing grades for minorities — It’s also for the employment field, too. My textbook takes a moment to ensure the reader knows that, despite the fact that minorities receive generally lower grades in school, they still do well in the job market.

Well no shit, stupid. That’s what Affirmative Action is.

Once minorities are pushed through school, scoring in the same percentile as whites despite getting significantly lower grades — They are tossed into the job market where employers are given quotas and benefits for hiring them over their white counterparts. Quotas being actual requirements for schools and certain fields of work to have so many minorities on staff, racial minimums, as it were. [Thus, even despite grades and competency, they absolutely must get the job or acceptance into schools. This is something we have monitored the effects of in such places as South Africa, where whites have almost been barred from medical schools with the requirement that they must have a minimum of 92% in their  exams to graduate, whereas black South Africans only need around 62%… Imagine.. Doctors graduating who scored less then 65% being allowed to practice on human beings… This has caused so many medical problems in South Africa that charity organizations like the Red Cross are refusing to treat patients of black surgeons and doctors because the work is so poorly done that it will come back on the organization’s insurance.]

The white and black students present the same piece of paper indicating they had the same percentile, and thus, the employer can no longer use education as a reason to not hire the non-white student. Employers then have a plethora of benefits the government is offering for them to hire the non-white applicant over the white one. These benefits include tax exemptions, cash incentives and recognition in their community.

Beyond the benefits, however, there is greater reason to hire the non-white applicant… You are, clearly, a racist if you don’t.

This was one of the most staggering examples of ‘racism’ in my textbook.. Verbetum:

Two men apply for a position in an engineering firm. They both have similar credentials and ages. The white applicant gets hired. The Aboriginal one does not.

To me, this example suggested that the employer is inherently racist simply for picking the non-aboriginal applicant. I would say that it’s more racist to imply that the white applicant is less-able then the Aboriginal one simply based on the color of his skin.. After all, they have similar credentials and ages, right? Why is the employer not allowed to choose the white applicant? What makes the aboriginal applicant more able then the white one if their credentials are the same? Why should it matter who he picks?

Because by picking the white one, he is a racist. That’s why. But that is discrediting so many realist factors:

1) People of a certain race interact better with each other then they do with others. This would assist the employer in predicting his employee’s behavior and thought patterns better then with someone who is not of his race.

2) People of a certain race feel more comfortable around those of their same race. This is a biological reality that will never change. It is behavior that exists within all races.

3) Once you hire a minority, you simply can not get rid of them. Studies in the US and Canada show that employers are afraid to fire minority employees for fear of charges of racism.

4) They just want to. Oh yes. This is a possibility too.. Maybe the employer hit it off better with the white gentlemen then he did with the black one. Maybe he liked a certain quality the white man had that the black man didn’t. The reasons are endless — And none of them include racism or inherent racial hatred of the black man. But it is assumed, immediately, that the choice was made based solely off of the fact that the employer was a racist.

This is another problem I find prominent in white society nowadays.. In essence, that whites can not, and should not, relate better to their own race then they do to others. Whites need to be stripped of all natural biological tendencies to group together and protect themselves as a racial entity before we will cease to be considered ‘racist’.

And, unfortunately, it’s happening.

This was demonstrated recently in a study that scanned the brains of Black and White subjects viewing Black and White victims of Hurricane Katrina (Race and Empathy Matter on Neural Level, Science Daily). Everyone reported empathy for the victims. This is a verbal judgment that reflects nothing more than conventional morality. People certainly would not want to tell the experimenter that they have callous disregard for suffering.

But the brain’s emotion centers told a different story. Black subjects had empathic responses to Black victims, and the more ethnocentric Blacks had stronger emotional responses. Whites on the other hand, did not show any empathic responses to people of either race.

This is the effect of 45 years of multiculturalism lobbying in the media and government to the point where it has effected caucasians on a neurological level.

This is what emotional and cultural genocide looks like.

Enough is enough.

Holy shit :U.

kimpriestap:

Who is Brett Kimberlin? Watch and learn.

talkstraight:

Mitt Romney is an awful person and should never be president because:

He cut some kid’s hair over 40 years ago.

Barack Obama:

Drove drunk

Did drugs

Split some kid’s lip

Shoved a ‘fat nerdy black girl” to the ground

Went to a church for 20 years that blamed 9/11 on the US and wanted to “God Damn America”

Hung out with Marxists and communists

Lied in his autobiography

Was friends with domestic terrorists

Attended and gave a speech at a Nation of Islam function where New Black Panther speakers called for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews and white people.

Refuses to let anyone see his college records

Called police ‘stupid’

Supports violent and criminal protests

And a cornucopia of other questionable activities….yet he is the best thing to happen to the White House since George Washington.

Anyone else see a problem with this?