Dont get any worst than this!

White Privilege is a common cry now from Black groups that propagate in many Universities. The notion that whites are somehow more privileged than our counterparts in the black communities.

In order to facilitate this re writing of history, (where African blacks were the first to have slaves or indentured people) it was first necessary to blame all slavery on to whites.

From the ancient Egyptians at least, people were faced with being born and indeed dying at a site that would house a future dead leader was common, if not, a social acceptance. All these people were Black!

Perhaps if we now fast forward a few hundred years and we get to the issue of African American slaves who were loaded on to white vessels by….. African Americans.  They were sold by their own who actively went to populated African areas to capture and then sell to the white slavers.

A downside to this arrangement was when they had exhausted all local victims, they too became the victims, being promptly chained to the boat as the last of possible supply in that area. It must have seemed poetic justice.

This is not to justify slavery at all, just to identify those that are complacent in this very bad period of human atrocities!

It is interesting to note that the term ‘Slave’ is taken from Slav and is indicative of the slavery of whites in places other than Africa, such as Ireland where slavery (of whites) continued well into the 19th century.

This brief account of the fundamentals of Slavery is necessary when considered in the context that black activists would put the blame for all slavery firmly on the shoulders of whites. In doing so, allows them to also blame whites for any future upheaval in their lives as this next article clearly demonstrates.

Medusa Magazine 27/6/2017

****************************************************

Beyond Pro-Choice: The Solution to White Supremacy is White Abortion

In a progressive society, it is often white families that stand in the way of equality and justice. Systemic white supremacy depends, first and foremost, on the white family unit. When white conquerors forcefully penetrated the indigenous, egalitarian homeland of the Native peoples of America, they were quick to replicate their white societies, initiating their parasitism by establishing white plantations, headed by white fathers, submissive white mothers, and, most critically, white children, with full dominion over the enslaved and oppressed people of color that were forced to uphold these micro-fiefdoms.

It is no surprise, then, that America’s fascination with the white family unit has gone hand-in-hand with the historical proliferation of white supremacy. After Bacon’s Rebellion, white micro-fieftans thought it necessary to expand the definition of white family to encompass the entirety of white society, so as to coerce the working class to fight amongst itself based on racial lines. Whites are embedded from birth with the sense of common white identity, and this identity conditions them to replicate the white family unit, thus furthering the cycle of white supremacy in America. That is why the white family unit must be destroyed.

In 1973, the Supreme Court, consisting entirely of men, eight of whom were white, ruled that the termination of pregnancy was constitutional up until the third trimester. For decades, progressives have championed this decision as a victory for the cause of women’s rights. However, it is time we challenge this problematic notion.

First of all, it is critical to understand that the appeal to abortions being “Constitutional” reinforces white supremacy. There is no way around it. The Constitution was drafted and signed by white men, for white men. Slavery was Constitutional. The “right” to terrorize citizens through the bearing of arms is Constitutional. So-called “due process,” in which white juries condone the murder of innocent black men, is a Constitutional process. Being Constitutional does not make something progressive or innately valuable. In fact, Constitutionality is often synonymous with “exclusively beneficial to the white race.”

Second, the notion of “choice” in abortion is inherently white supremacist and ableist. Women of color do not often have the same privilege to choose termination as do white women. For social, religious, economic, and ethical reasons, women of color may experience roadblocks on the path to body autonomy that white women would never be forced to confront due to their privilege of being born in a white supremacist society that continually looks out for their needs. Under present circumstances, women of color simply do not have the absolute choice when it comes to their bodies. It is time to stop pretending that they stand on equal footing with white women, when it has been proven that the embedded systems of white supremacy do not act impartially to all women. Because white supremacy prevents women of color from their freedom to choose, we must level the playing field by other means.

White women: it is time to do your part! Your white children reinforce the white supremacist society that benefits you. If you claim to be progressive, and yet willingly birth white children by your own choice, you are a hypocrite. White women should be encouraged to abort their white children, and to use their freed-up time and resources to assist women of color who have no other choice but to raise their children. Women of color are in need of financial and humanitarian resources. As this white supremacist society continues to imprison black fathers, women of color are forced to stand alone in their plight to raise the next generation of Americans. White women: instead of devoting your time and energy to white children who will reinforce the struggles of women of color, how about asking women of color in what ways you can assist them in their self-liberation? How about adopting children of color who have lost their parents to the destructive white supremacist society that you have enabled and encouraged?

Of course, the best choice is to act preventatively to ensure that white children are not at risk of being born. But in circumstances in which termination and generation are the options, it is best to take advantage of your right to choose, and abort in favor of assisting women of color.

**************************************

I have never in my whole life read anything quite as bad as this suggestion from the incredibly racist blacks.

The strides that have been made toward equality are shadowed in the false narrative of so called white slavery and being exploited to a huge extent by even left wing liberal whites that, if doing just a little research, can nullify such extreme claims.

I personally feel incredibly fearful for a world that not only tolerates this type of rhetoric in a publication, but actually enforces it through political propaganda and selective teaching in Universities, and fully supported by many young whites.

Our collective future does not look good!

Link: Here

Fake News?

There is a legal obligation of everyone (including publications) not to say that which is false. However ALL publications can quote ‘another’ publications comments without penalty.

We have recently seen publications plead ignorance as they quote ‘other sources’ or  sources that do not wish to be identified’

The traditional way of doing investigation by reporters forced them to legitimize their claims, yet today, ‘anonymous sources’ are extremely prevalent. here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/06/26/three-cnn-employees-resign-over-retracted-story-on-russia-ties/?utm_term=.a45d20f1a16d

The point is when should a publication as being accountable….IE Am I responsible if I print something that someone else has reported?

My view is that ANY claim from ANY publication whether quoting another source or not, have to be held accountable….. That is if you print it…(if challenged)…. need to be able to prove it or you should be held accountable for their actions.

The problem is that there are a lynching party out there that act on what publications say. “Hands up don’t shoot’ has been proved to be what caused a riot, and is STILL being used even though demonstrably false.

Additionally those accused of rape etc…. get their justice VERY quickly and the problem is that the justice is meted out by by a public forum instead of a judge.

Teachers that are accused are evicted from their job …regardless.

If you do not force an obligation by publications to report correctly on an issue the repercussions are so much greater than the report itself. For this, they need to be held accountable if the focus of the report is later found to be wrong……. the rule of law should be exercised.

If we believe in fair play…. we should also believe in just reporting!

Poetic justice?

New Jersey college professor fired in wake of heated Fox News interview where she made racially insensitive comments

I watched not believing what I was hearing when my favorite talk show host Tucker Carlson had a really offensive woman by the name of Durden on his show.
This guy has a unique knack for calling people out using my favorite tactic, which is THEIR own argument to defeat themselves.
On the other hand I could be biased…. see what YOU think? Here

Durden, who is black, discussed a Memorial Day event held exclusively for black people hosted by a Black Lives Matter group in New York.

When Carlson asked her her thoughts, Durden interrupted the host, saying: ‘Boo hoo hoo. You white people are angry because you couldn’t use your white privilege card’ to attend the event.’

This woman is (so they say) a college professor, her field is Essex County College adjunct communications, and it seems she has communicated very well. So much so that they have fired her for what her and the likes of Black Lives Matter have been getting so many others fired for. Specifically for this interview.

Durden said the school ‘publicly lynched’ her. The school on Friday said ‘racism cannot be fought with more racism.’

Again we see the victim tactic, when if the situation had been reversed and any white person had something even remotely similar would have been Physically lynched.

My own view is that this shows a MAJOR shift in the position of Universities, who (before the election of Trump) would not have dared in a million years to get rid of this crazy women that teaches kids…… It would have upset the liberal white BLM ……snowflakes too.

“Carlson called her comments during the roughly six-minute interview ‘hostile, separatist and crazy.”  Which just about sums up the whole truth.

Political agendas have entered our teaching spaces where more and more irrational views are forced on children and they are blackmailed into agreeing based on the scores they will receive from people such as this.
The agenda is not teaching but rather brainwashing to achieve their political ends.
I could not have explained it better than this :- Here
I have no white privilege, and if you think you have, the chances are you were taught by Durden or someone very similar. \
You do however have to forgive me for relishing this moment that is long, so very long overdue! Your FIRED!

Benevolent Governments

It seems that Theresa May believes that a $5500 payment to all tenants of Grenfell Tower  is the way forward.

Apparently this payment is made in most cases where the tenant has to move from council provided accommodations to some other alternative.

I would question these payments on the basis of :- 1. The accommodations should be insured by the tenant. 2. Since when does the government have the right to be benevolent.

In the first case, imagine for one minute you are the owner of a private accommodation that gets burned to the ground. Have you ever heard of an instance where the government comes to your door and hands out money? What they would say is you should be insured.

The second case is by far more important, of which I would be happy to put in one weeks salary to this cause, if every politician puts in a weeks salary.

The reason for this is that we do not pay government to collect taxes to draw on it as if a private bank account to dish out to whomever they decide needs a handout. The only amount sanctioned by the people is enough to keep the government functional and no more.

The notion that you can create a bottomless pit to throw money that is all too apparent in every phase of government , leaving the legacy to be paid by our children in the future.

Additionally history shows us, that to the permanently unemployed classes, they will vote ONLY for those that create the most personal benefit for them. In other words under the guise of being benevolent, they are really obtaining votes simply on the basis of freebee’s they can accumulate.

This can also be said for refugees and others that take advantage of a free social care system. At some point the takers will outnumber the providers by a long way, and make the burden so horrendous that the system will collapse…. it MUST collapse!

So to return to my offer of one weeks salary I would be more than happy to help those in need…….. If all members of government would do the same….. and would vouch right now that not a single one would do so!

Are Liberals really Liberal?

Definition:

“Open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.”

I have tried to define what political affiliation I have for some years now, mostly without real success, leading me to the conclusion I don’t really have one.

I mean, when it comes to social issues, I agree with many of the Democratic/labour points of view. On the issues of economics I align with the Conservative/Republican view of the world.

The fringe groups in between these I hardly ever pay much attention to, as, all my thoughts are very definitely right or left of the pack, and not very often sitting on the fence. Depending on the issue.

I fail to see how we can move forward without a social justice. I fail how we can be upstanding members of the community unless we are productive.

So I suppose the definition of a Liberal could also partially apply to my thinking….          Open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values, even so, do not regard myself as remotely being a Liberal!

What strikes me as being odd is the intolerance that those that label themselves as ‘liberal’ have toward others that disagree with their views.

Where the most recent norm seems to be at Universities, to shout down or exercise obstruction to stop people they do not agree with……. taking the floor! thereby stifling the free speech that they profess to hold dear!

What is easily noticeable is the tack of groups that would otherwise by implication be termed as aggressive. They use a intelligent attack, forcing the frustration of their antagonist Liberals to become violent instead, IE…. no contact at all!

Those groups do not seem to argue with police, stick to the agreed demarcation lines, and do not invoke the wrath of the establishment by challenging police authority.

Nationalistic parties are getting very smart in all countries as well as popular. Just a few years back they were ostracized because of their aggressive behavior and today they are getting respectability.

Take Le pen in France, National Front in the UK, American Front. Once each were labelled with force to get their way, but now seem more approachable to the ideas of democracy, and in every case they are getting more votes.

That’s not of course an assumption that they are more reasonable, but as in all politics, they are putting across their view in the only way you can…… by appearing reasonable, as indeed…..is the only way you can become popular.

By contrast the ‘Liberals’ shout down the oppositions 1st amendment and in so many cases adopt passive obstruction.

This of course is a technique that major politicians practice in Filibustering a motion in the US that, where they have no chance of winning a debate can simply run the available time out on the clock for debate.

In an unsuccessful attempt to derail passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, Thurmond made the longest filibuster ever conducted by a single senator, speaking for a total of 24 hours and 18 minutes. (He was at this time a democrat)

Typically these filibusters could be talking about watching plants grow, or looking at paint dry. Some read the phone book, cite recipes for fried oysters, or read the Declaration of Independence.

Passive obstruction to move their case forward, or rather, not to move the case forward, and, as long as they stay conscious, and do not leave the floor they can keep on going, where only the length of time they can hold their bladder is their only limit.

The new liberal takes on a new extreme. For instance, in law you have to actually touch someone to commit assault, and yet finger pointing or getting in someones face, can be as close as you wish…….. as long as you do not actually touch.

If you were to apply this to your resident film star, politician, or a police officer…..go straight to jail, do not pass go, and do not collect 200! but to ordinary people in the street the Ultra Liberal can go to the limit of actual a minuscule distance from your face, and still claim they did not touch!

The provocation will go to any length such as spitting, tearing down legitimate signage etc to make you lose your cool and should you?….indeed you will go to jail!

As a young lad I learned this from first hand experience. I was at an English pub with my wife and was accused by a strange landlord of molesting her. (I had my hand around her waist) I drank up and left the establishment, swearing to myself that tomorrow….. I will fix this guy.

I spoke of the event to our local Confucius guy who was all wise and logical that I used to work with. He said what are you going to do to him when you go back. I told him that I was gonna thump him for embarrassing my wife so much.

He said just ask him WHY. Don’t touch him at all.

When I walked in the pub it was packed. “I wonder if I could just have a quiet word with you…….”… immediately the landlord went into a tirade where his face was turning blue and yelling at the top of his voice.

The event culminated in his own regulars berating him for being so nasty. I came out (if the truth were told I was asked to leave by him, or he was going to beat me up) feeling on top of the world…….. I was on top and won the event easily , with him looking foolish in front of all and sundry.

Passive resistance works, I would just question whether using it to obstruct the view of the other guy, is something that should be used by free thinking liberals who believe in everyone’s right to opinion.

 

 

Muslim or Not?

The current wave of atrocities done in the name of the Muslim faith are spanning the whole globe.

From London to Russia, the USA to the Philippines. It seems that the Muslim faith drags in many believers and a certain element of extreme people, that believe in taking their writings to the extreme.

The left wing, bless em! in their very brave attempt to De-stigmatize and make all peoples neutral with equal say and balance for all, is demonstrated in so many circles and on so many levels its hard to shrug this off as a fad.

The extreme leftists like Corbyn and the ‘New Labour Party’ with snowflake liberals that continually fight all aspects of the system to enhance a populist belief in full integration.

US universities attempt to alleviate any concerns by pushing their system farther to left and consequentially more extreme.

One School took it upon themselves to give Christian children lessons in Islam taken to the extreme of actually praying.

As you notice in the film, many parents are upset and yet the board are eager to cut all people off after just being allowed two minutes to state their case, seemingly oblivious to these concerns of parents.

I am not anti Islam, or anti any religion, but if any religion preaches the opposite of what they are being allowed when welcomed to other countries then assimilation will be impossible for future generations.

Anjem Choudary makes absolutely no secret of his aspirations for the future, and is never apologetic for the violence, using tactics of aversion, or denial to put his message across.

Even to the extent of claiming Sharia Law will be the law of the UK one day, yet still left-wing politicians do nothing at all to attempt to stop this hatred at its core level being propagated.

True Choudary was jailed, but for the wrong reasons and it does little to stem the flow of laws that are incompatible with most western societies.

Perhaps that flow can never be stopped if our leaders have a fundamentally different agenda to the people that elect them. A fairly good analogy could be demonstrated in this video…..

It seems that there is actually no problem with radical Muslims at all. They are not actually part of the faith and instead are a separate series of individuals acting on their own independently their holy leaders like Choudary.

As such, according to politicians, you cannot tar a whole faith with the same brush!

Beheaded

This man is not a Muslim Terrorist it would seem. His belief however is that any infidel deserves this treatment and is one of seven billion that are happy to hand out the same punishment to all, from Coptic Christians to British troops on our streets.

It would seem that peoples that have escaped countries that practice Sharia Law are intent on bringing it back for themselves in future generations in their new found homelands.

C6bsia4XEAA3KPM

Even when they still suffer the same extreme penalties of an antiquated religion.

Sharia law_001

This falls nothing short of an erosion of the western society with an active target of spreading their faith with total eradication of any that specifically do not subscribe to their faith.

For instance if I deny Allah and take a stance of say…. an atheist……. this religion believes that anyone that kills me is not guilty of any offense!

That cannot be compatible with any western sort of thinking!

Mikhail Gorbachev: ‘It All Looks as if the World Is Preparing for War’

Words of wisdom from a expert. The idea that we can win a war by using nuclear missiles  is a long outdated idea that only fools and the deranged could consider.

As the Doomsday clock moved closer to midnight yesterday many are totally oblivious of its implications.

Obama ordered troops to every single country that borders Russia. Not only tactical weapons such as tanks and rocket launchers, but nuclear weapons too.

So close in fact that should a mistake occur there is virtually no chance to either self destruct or recall the weapon, making war inevitable.

Gorbachev is clear in what he sees as an introduction to war ……

“While state budgets are struggling to fund people’s essential social needs, military spending is growing. Money is easily found for sophisticated weapons whose destructive power is comparable to that of the weapons of mass destruction; for submarines whose single salvo is capable of devastating half a continent; for missile defense systems that undermine strategic stability.”

Which is all too true. The countries that fair the best are new Zealand Canada Australia Germany and those that have huge armies have the worst standard of living.

China is the only one that seems to have a balance but even so because of threats of the US they have now installed nuclear weapons on islands that were in dispute with some of its neighbors, simply because the US threatened to intervene.

The Chinese gave a stern warning just a couple of weeks ago letting the US in no uncertain terms that they have the firepower and capability to be more than a match for the US.

They would be of course…but not in the way so many may believe. Their men are better disciplined. Are capable of carrying out absolute instructions with precision.

They have recently commissioned a new aircraft carrier, but their main attack force are subs. Moving by stealth and carrying multiple nuclear missiles that could right now be sitting outside NY City.

Pilot-less drones being manufactured by the hundreds and some nuclear capable.

The only ray of sunshine is Trump, who is very critical of war, and has been reaching out (at least to Russia) to alleviate concerns. That may not be enough and a gesture of sensibility and his commitment may be to get all weapons off the Russian borders as soon as possible.

Warnings from the so called enemy of the west can be read here

Twitter Ban?

OK… I cannot lie…. Twitter have suspended my account again.

The last time I had to give a new email addy to get back on line. This time I am not going to bother….

Its seems I am too outspoken for the Silly Juvenile Wombats (SJW’s) that presumably have complained , to the equally juvenile Twitter bots …..that I was nasty to them.

Perhaps I was as I am not really absolutely sure…..

In any event….Mark… your social site is wonderful at the moment , but if your gonna suspend guys like me …. it wont last long!

Oh…what did I do for this suspension????

Here is the Tweet………..

fat-women

This woman thinks she is fat.

Either call her fat or stop calling Bruce Jenner and Bradley Manning “women”.

Thanks Mark!