Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Linda So Sour


CUNY is standing by its decision to honor pro-terror, sharia activist Linda Sarour. The norming of evil.

They disinvited Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Ann Coulter, Milos, legions of conservative thinkers and voices in defense of freedom, but a vicious, pro-sharia, Jew hater they will defend to the death and that is it right there. They fear jihad. They fear Islamic supremacists. They know no harm with come to them if they smear, defame, libel or cancel us. They know we don’t destroy, maim, behead like Sarsour supporters and their violent running dogs on the left.

Such sanction is so malignant and so evil, it cannot be ignored. There is a responsibility for the time we are living in. Ayn Rand said, "evil is made possible by the sanction youn give it. Withdraw your sanction."

We will be there. We will protest — this will not stand. Be there —
Let’s call upon President Trump to stop taxpayer funding of terror supporting universities.
Here is Sarsour's twitter feed:
The left’s chokehold on the nation’s most powerful institutions continues despite a Trump presidency and a Republican Congress, but this is a step too far. My colleagues and I are blacklisted from speaking at almost everywhere because we stand in defense of freedom and oppose jihad terror and sharia. Anytime we are scheduled to speak, terror-tied Islamic groups and their supremacist leaders demand we be cancelled. But this annihilationist is being given the honor of commencement speaker?

 The mainstreaming of evil leads to an unimaginable end. My colleagues and I have been demonized, marginalized and defamed by the enemedia and the cultural elites, while terrorists and their promoters enjoy promotion by these same quislings. Anyone who doesn’t think academia is aligned with the jihad force is deluded. Stop taxpayer funding of these hotbeds of radical inculcation.
Adolf Hitler and his violent, antisemitic political party the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei – DAP (German Socialist Workers’ Party) — were on the outer fringe of German society until he was invited to join mainstream parties in opposition to the Versailles Treaty. Inviting Hitler to join mainstream political parties in supporting the German referendum of 1929 was key, as it gained the Nazi Party recognition and credibility it could never have hoped to have gained on its own. Influential German businessman and politician Alfred Hugenberg made a coalition with Hitler, which gave Hitler huge legitimacy. After failing at the ballot box, Hitler, like Islamic supremacists in the West, came to understand that that power was to be achieved not through revolution outside of the government, but rather through legal means, within the confines of the democratic system.
How appropriate that she be a darling of the left now.
An outspoken critic of Israel, Sarsour avidly supports the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) movement, a Hamas-inspired initiative that uses various forms of public protest, economic pressure, and lawsuits to advance the Hamas agenda of permanently destroying Israel as a Jewish nation-state.
Vis-a-vis the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict, Sarsour favors a one-statesolution where an Arab majority and a Jewish minority would live together within the borders of a single country. She made clear her opposition to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state when she tweeted in October 2012 that “nothing is creepier than Zionism.”
In 2004, Sarsour acknowledged that a friend of hers as well as a cousin were both serving long sentences in Israeli jails because of their efforts to recruit jihadists to murder Jews. Moreover, she revealed that her brother-in-law was serving a 12-year prison term because of his affiliation with Hamas.
Speaking of creepy realtives, Sarsour’s husband, Maher Judeh, mourned the 1998 death of the Hamas “master terrorists” Adel and Imad Awadallah; hepraised the heroism of a Palestinian Authority police officer who had carried out a shooting attack at a checkpoint in Israel; he has expressed support for the terrorist organization Fatah; and he has lauded the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a Marxist-Leninist revolutionary organization.
In October 2011, Linda Sarsour, who holds free-market economics in low regard, expressed, on behalf of “Muslim New Yorkers,” “solidarity and support” for the pro-communist Occupy Wall Street movement. In 2011 as well, the Obama Administration honored Sarsour as a “champion of change.” Not surprisingly, Sarsour visited the White House on at least seven different occasions during her beloved president’s tenure.
In May 2012 Sarsour tweeted that the so-called “underwear bomber,” an Al-Qaeda operative who in 2009 had tried to blow up a Detroit-bound passenger jet in mid-flight, was actually a CIA agent participating in America’s “war on Islam.”
In November 2012 in Baltimore, Sarsour—ever eager to peddle her woeful tale of Islamic victimhood—spoke at a Muslim Public Affairs Councilconference titled “Facing Race: Xenophobic Hate Crimes.” This is the same Council that views the murderous Jew-haters of Hezbollah as members of “a liberation movement” that is “fighting for freedom.”
Sarsour was outraged when a police officer and an FBI agent shot and killed a young black Muslim named Usaama Rahim in Boston on June 2, 2015, when Rahim lunged at them with a military-style knife as they attempted to question him about suspected terrorism-related activities. Naturally, Sarsour’s assessment of the incident confidently traced everything back to race: “At the end of the day, a Black man was shot on a bus stop on his way to work and we should treat this like any other case of police violence.” Period. End of story.
In August 2015 Sarsour spoke out in support of the incarcerated Palestinian Islamic Jihad member Muhammad Allan, a known recruiter of suicide bombers.
According to, Sarsour has attended and spoken at numerous rallies sponsored by Al-Awda, a group that views Israel as a terrorist, genocidal state whose very creation was a “catastrophe” for Arab peoples.
Sarsour has also solicited donations for the Hamas-affiliated Palestine Children’s Relief Fund.
There’s more.
She lied and wrongly portrayed the honor killing  of Shaima Alawadi by her husband as a racist-islamophobic-anti-Muslim killing.
She faked a hate crime against herself, scoring political points nationally by portraying a mentally ill black homeless man as a violent racist.

CUNY Defends Decision to Host Anti-Israel Activist as Commencement Honoree

Linda Sarsour will deliver commencement at taxpayer-funded school

By Adam Kredo, Free Beacon, April 26, 2017:
The City University of New York (CUNY), a taxpayer-funded institution, is doubling down on its decision to host a leading anti-Israel activist who has been accused of anti-Semitism as its honored commencement speaker next month, a move that has generated calls for New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo to step in and cancel the address.
CUNY is set to host Linda Sarsour, a leading voice in the anti-Israel movement who has been condemned by human rights groups for her rhetoric and promotion of terrorism against the Jewish state.
Sarsour, a Palestinian American and executive director of the Arab American Association of New York, is scheduled to give the commencement speech for CUNY’s Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy.
Local lawmakers and pro-Israel activists have expressed outrage over the decision, calling on CUNY to cancel Sarsour’s appearance. CUNY leaders have continued to praise Sarsour and maintain the speech will take place as scheduled.
Sarsour has earned a reputation as one of the country’s most virulent anti-Israel activists. She has attacked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “bigot” and routinely condemns the Jewish state as racist. Sarsour attracted outrage in 2015 when she tweeted out a picture of a Palestinian child with a rock in his hand accompanied by the caption, “the definition of courage.”
Sarsour became a darling of the activist left as a participant in the Women’s March against President Donald Trump and other demonstrations. She also has embraced and partnered with Rasmea Odeh, an anti-Israel activist and convicted terrorist who was recently found guilty of immigration fraud in the United States for failing to disclose her ties to terrorism.
Dov Hikind, a New York City assemblyman and pro-Israel advocate, told the Washington Free Beacon that Americans across the country should be outraged that a taxpayer-funded school is celebrating an individual who once praised child terrorism.
“This is a woman who not so long ago put out a tweet with a picture of a young child holding rocks in his hand and Linda Sarsour put in that message, ‘the definition of courage,'” Hikind said in an interview with the Free Beacon.
“The idea this woman would get this honor at a CUNY commencement, a place my tax dollars pay for, is unbelievable audacity.”
Sarsour “is someone who is an apologist for terrorists, and that’s who we need to be an example for graduate students at a tax-funded university here in New York?” Hikind asked. “How do you justify in any way [these views]? People should speak out everywhere. This should be a no brainer.”
While Hikind and other pro-Israel voices have spoken out against Sarsour’s appearance at CUNY, Cuomo and activist voices such as the Anti-Defamation League have remained silent.
“The ADL speaks out 24/7 on defamation of the Jewish people and nothing can be more defamatory than Linda Sarsour’s statements about Jews and her glorification of Arabs throwing rocks at Israelis,” Hikind said in a statement. “But following the invitation from CUNY for Sarsour to address their graduates, the ADL’s silence has been deafening and shameful.”
One senior official at a national Jewish organization told the Free Beacon that Sarsour’s appearance at CUNY demonstrates that anti-Israel activism is still being mainstreamed.
“Linda Sarsour advocates a version of feminist intersectionality that, by design, excludes liberal Jews who support Israel but welcomes radical Muslims who deny women’s rights,” said the official, who was not authorized to speak on record. “In that sense she’s perfect for today’s upside-down academy. That doesn’t make what she says or what CUNY’s doing any less disgraceful. It makes the whole thing more disgraceful.”
CUNY has defended its decision to host Sarsour, telling students in a community message it is committed to all types of free speech.
Ayman El-Mohandes, the dean of CUNY’s Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, said in a statement that CUNY is committed to academic freedom.
“I hope you all join me in my firm view that a diversity of viewpoints and an open exchange of ideas is at the heart of our country’s strength, and our university’s strength,” El-Mohandes said in a statement. “It is why we at CUNY are so committed to academic freedom, a bedrock principle of our university.”
“This will be a very special and meaningful commencement for all of us,” El-Mohandes added. “I hope to see you all there to celebrate women in leadership.”

Please consider supporting this valuable program and our other work at AFDI. We are only just beginning to produce videos that will change the national conversation at the best possible time: when real change can be made.

As you can see from the furious attacks on Trump, the Left is in panic and meltdown mode, and is lashing out ever more desperately and fiercely. We must be more active and determined than ever now, or defeat could be snatched from the jaws of victory. That’s why our video series is so much needed: to help ensure that the swamp is indeed drained, now when it is possible.

Please help us in this all-important work, now more than ever.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Ontario Gov Wants To Make All Black Crime Whitey's Fault!

From the National Post/Ottawa Citizen, Tuesday, April 25,. 2017, P#NP3, and from online here:

'Cultural lens' use urged when sentencing black offenders

Consider impact of systemic racism before sentencing black offenders, Canadian judges urged

ONTARIO LAWYERS Say judges should consider systemic racism

Canadian judges are being urged to take systemic racism into account before sentencing black criminals, similar to the special consideration often given to aboriginals who break the law.

Defence lawyers behind the push say asking judges to consider how historic discrimination and marginalization may have influenced their clients’ behaviour is not meant to be a “get-out-of-jail-free” card; it simply gives judges a fuller picture of their clients before their fates are decided.

Sure it doesn't! Systemic historic discrimination and marginalization means "Always Blame Whitey!"

Representatives for Legal Aid Ontario say they plan to start nudging Ontario judges to use so-called “cultural assessments” in the near future and will set aside some money for test cases.

So why should anyone's crime-culture trump our LAWS?! ("I was raised a criminal! Case dismissed")!

“In Ontario, for decades, courts have recognized that black people … face systemic racism, but there hasn’t been a well-developed mechanism to deal with that,” said Wayne van der Meide, regional manager of case management and litigation. "Courts have recognized" based on ZERO evidence!

Legal Aid Ontario is a tax-paid branch of the Ontario government: uses your taxes to support racism!

“A cultural assessment report is the best mechanism to support judges to really understand the circumstances of the offender and how systemic racism has contributed to that person coming before the court.” Ah, so these poor feeble-minded White judges need your "support" to coddle the "victims!"

And I always wonder how cops could supposedly tell anyone's race by looking at the back of the car.

Van der Meide said he is taking cues from Nova Scotia, which has been home to an indigenous black community for 400 years and whose courts have used cultural assessments in a handful of cases.
In one 2014 provincial court case, the Crown sought an adult sentence for a 16-year-old black youth who was found guilty of attempted murder. After reviewing a cultural assessment prepared by the defence, the judge declined the request, noting that the assessment provided a “multi-dimensional framework for understanding (the offender), his background and his behaviours.”

So if you're black, your choice to commit your specific crimes was always generally Whitey's fault!

Advocates say cultural assessments could help address the over-representation of black people in federal prisons. Currently, they make up three per cent of the general population but nine per cent of federal inmates.

Maybe that's because a) a genetic predisposition to impulsive laziness, promiscuity and crime, and b) liberals always coddling them as perpetual "victims" so they have less incentive to stop committing them? "Naaaah! That couldn't be it - because then we libs would admit we're racists!"

But Canada’s federal prison ombudsman, Ivan Zinger, says he’s not convinced cultural assessments will change that. Similar assessments, known as Gladue reports, have been used in aboriginal cases for years, he said. Yet indigenous people still account for 26 per cent of the prison population, even though they make up less than five per cent of the general population.

That's either because they're coddled by liberals, and so know they wont' be punished, and so have no incentive to stop, or because despite really being only displaced backwoods hillbilly Asians, they're inbred. Asians aren't known to commit many crimes, but the liberal's class of "indigenous" ones are!

“Adopting the same Gladue approach for Canadians of African descent may also not yield the desired outcome,” he said. “Investments in improving socioeconomic, cultural and political rights of vulnerable segments of the Canadian population may be a better approach.”

Wait - their "cultural" problem isn't a lack of "rights," it's a lack of taking personal responsibility!

The family of one Nova Scotia murder victim has expressed concerns that cultural assessments diminish individual responsibility. Wow! Ya think? And it only took a family member's murder!

Last year, a Halifax jury found Kale Leonard Gabriel, 28, guilty of  second-degree murder in the shooting death of Ryan White during a drug-turf dispute. The conviction brought an automatic life sentence, but a judge still had to decide Gabriel’s parole eligibility.

The defence asked the judge to hold off until a cultural assessment could be prepared and he agreed.

At the time, White’s mother told local media an offender’s racial background shouldn’t matter.

“I think that a crime is a crime, and colour shouldn’t matter whatsoever,” Theresa White said. “It’s very difficult to try to forward your life when you’re being called back to that same sadness over and over.”

The assessment, written by clinical social worker Lana MacLean, noted gun violence had become normalized within a subsection of the African Nova Scotian community and death was “regarded as an expected outcome in settling disputes.”

SO FUCKING WHAT?! "Oh, since the criminals think crime is normal, we shouldn't punish them!"?

Within this subgroup, one problem compounded upon another: chronic exposure to gun violence; systemic racism; limited job and social opportunities; difficult childhoods; and a lack of culturally relevant mental-health services.

"Culturally relevant mental-health services!"? So mental health is different for different 'cultures'?!

The lives of some black youth are defined by a “constant alertness and guardedness” and the way they cope with despair is to turn to drugs or gangs. In this context, Gabriel might “hold the position of both victim and perpetrator,” MacLean suggested.

Exactly what I thought she was leading up to: "There are no real crimes or criminals because we're all really ever only victims anyway! Whee!" Why is a "social worker" allowed to influence a JUDGE?!

In his sentencing decision last month, Supreme Court Justice Jamie Campbell said he appreciated MacLean’s assessment, noting that an individual judge’s “common sense and understanding of human nature may offer little insight into the actions of a young African Nova Scotian male.”

Right. Because privileged white judges can never understand people raised as criminal gangsters. I'd have to call "Tough Shit!" on this one, and note that Parliament, not judges, make equal laws for all!
Adopting the same Gladue approach for Canadians of African descent may also not yield the desired outcome
It is “historical fact and present reality” that African Nova Scotians were and continue to be discriminated against, the judge said.

Prove it! With, you know, evidence! Not "We catch them committing more crimes, so we're racists!"

But while racial background may help understand the broader circumstances that acted upon an offender, it does not necessarily establish a lower standard of moral culpability. But you sure want it to!

The judge also pointed out that MacLean had spoken to Gabriel for four hours, so her observations of the experience of young African Nova Scotia men “may not apply to him individually.”

To counter crime-gang "cultures" we must disband them, not always free the poor criminal "victims!"
Your backwards approach would only enshrine the criminals' gang-might-made "rights" into our law!

The judge declared Gabriel ineligible for parole for 13 years, going against the defence team’s wish for the minimum 10 years.

Nova Scotia Legal Aid lawyer Brandon Rolle said even though it wasn’t the outcome they wanted, the judge gave meaningful consideration to Gabriel’s African Nova Scotian background.

“I take the view that every African-Canadian offender should have the ability to present evidence pertaining to their cultural background to assist the trier of fact at sentencing,” Rolle said.

"Assist" the judge in "understanding" that there are no real crimes nor criminals because victimology!

“Applying a cultural lens adds tremendous value because it allows the judge or jury to have a better appreciation for the lived experience of an African-Canadian individual that they might otherwise not consider.”

"Lived experience" = anecdotal subjectivity: "He's not a criminal because he doesn't feel like one!"

Rick Woodburn, president of the Canadian Association of Crown Counsel, declined to comment on the growing call for assessments, saying members had not been surveyed on the issue.

Who gives a flying fuck what a members' survey would say? You don't get to vote for unequal rights!


I've said it before and now I find I have to say it again:

Liberals are racists: they always assume that ONLY White Western people (including, of course, the Jews in Israel,) are INTELLIGENT enough to be guilty of being truly evil, while all their pet "People Of Colour" (including the "swarthy palestinians") being mentally inferior and all, just can't help being enslaved by their instincts and emotions into acting as violent animals when frustrated, the poor oppressed little dears, so the liberals will always indulge their crimes, much as one ignores the new puppy as it pees on the rugs.

So here's their interminably ongoing "narrative" (story):


Saturday, April 22, 2017

Support The Palestinian Underdogs!

Wow! Lookit that!
Them Evil Jooz has all them innocent Arabs SURROUNDED!


President Hussein refused to pardon an innocent U.S. soldier before he left office

President Hussein refused to pardon an innocent U.S. soldier before he left office.
In July, 2012, 1LT Clint Lorance was sent to Afghanistan to replace a platoon leader who was seriously wounded in a Taliban attack. On his third day on the job, Clint and his men were on patrol when a U.S. helicopter radioed that a motorcycle was sitting outside of the village near a road only used by the Taliban. When the motorcycle started gunning toward the platoon, 1LT Lorance ordered his marksman to fire.
Two of the riders were killed. The other was captured in the village, where days earlier a U.S. soldier was shot in the neck.
Those who have been stationed in Afghanistan know the tactics and actions of the enemy.
Without a doubt, these men posed a threat to Clint's platoon. And as the commanding officer, Clint knew he was responsible for getting every single one of his soldiers back to base alive.
Yet the American government didn't agree. And in fact, recent evidence has come to light that the Army intentionally withheld information regarding the identities of the Afghani (jihadi) motorcyclists killed in the attack.
1LT Lorance was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth.
It is customary for U.S. Presidents to grant high-profile pardons just before leaving office. However, when president Hussein's term came to an end on January 20, 2017, he refused to commute Clint's sentence.
Instead, Hussein did commute the sentence of traitor Bradley Manning, who leaked sensitive national security information and put our troops at risk.
He did commute the sentence of Puerto Rican nationalist Oscar Lopez Rivera, who was serving 50 years in prison for plotting to overthrow the U.S. government and whose group killed four Americans in a New York City bombing in 1975.
And of course he pardoned and commuted the sentences of hundreds of criminal cocaine and heroin dealers.
As a combat veteran, I'm disgusted that Obama let traitors, drug dealers and murderers out of prison early – while 1LT Lorance is left to serve a 20-year sentence for protecting his men on the battlefield!
But now that Donald Trump has taken office, we have a new chance to finally free 1LT Lorance.
Clint Lorance signed up to serve his country and risked his life on the battlefield to protect your freedom. When his men were threatened, he did exactly what our military trained him to do.
Please sign the petition to get President Trump on board to review the case and pardon him!

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Subjectivist Hypocrisy IS Crime!

"In the 1960s, being a 'free spirit' was actually a set up for being a socialist/communist because it implied subjectivism.

That is, the belief that 'there are no values. Everything is a matter of opinion. So let's have fun without giving a damn.'

 With subjectivism in place, multiculturalism ('Western culture with it traditions of freedom and individual rights is not vastly morally superior to decadent European socialism and the primitive savage belief systems of third world countries, particularly Islam.') and political correctness ("Since if anyone speaks their mind, they may hurt someone else's feelings, so the government must regulate, or abolish entirely, freedom of speech.') both came right long behind."

 - Douglas Mayfield -

 Criminals are all about forcing equality of outcome!

 Evil only poses as stupidity.

 Subjectivism IS a criminal attack, as it is a stance indicating disagreement with the Golden Rule.

 It is a refusal to abide by the agreement to not attack first, and thus it is a first-attack threat.

Nannystaters' telling of people they have no right to defend themselves IS also attacking them first. 

Subjectivity is all about double-standards, so it cannot make sense from an objective principle POV. 

All criminals (i.e: libertine "liberals") are hypocrites (they call it "cognitive dissonance," and doctors pretend it's called "schizophrenia")!

 Libs are subjectivists, all about the double standards: only they have rights, while everyone else only has responsibilities, enslaved to them.

 "Morally Relative Subjectivism" = more commonly known as "hypocrisy."

Libtarded virtue-signalling immoral relativism/subjectivism/hypocrisy is really a criminally (i.e: intentionally) negligent THREAT - you can't pretend to split the difference between good and evil, and even the attempt outs you as being part of that evil. Libs can claim to be non-compus-mentis all they want ("all facts are really only opinions! Whee!") but either way, since they deny they have any real responsibilities to others to obey the Golden Rule of Law and not attack first, they ARE attacking first! Just lock them all up!

 All double-standard subjectivists are hypocrites. All hypocrites are criminals.

 Criminals are all about forcing equality of outcome!


 Which is why they are inconsistent all the time.

 If and when one's criminal stance is all about subjective double-standards, and against objectively equal universal rights and responsibilities for everyone, where one asserts that only one's own "better" faction has rights, while all others have only responsibilities to one's self and one's faction, then of course pretty-much each and every issue one addresses will be inconsistent and libtarded!

Criminals always advise insane things to their potential victims - like that they should embrace suicidal masochism and refuse to defend them selves, and that the ultimate crime is to cause offense in hurting the criminal's feelings by accusing them of their crimes - which makes them look stupid or insane to sane folks, and look crafty and 'realistic' to other criminals.

 Criminals always want subjectivism - double standards - to apply, never universal objective principles. They want rights - especially the false right to remain irresponsible - to apply for themselves, while they also only want their victims to be responsible to them. Sharia "law" follows this crime-model to a T.

 Libertine "liberal" criminals insist they be allowed to "progress" to always extort others to have ever-more rights to be delinquent - and in fact to remain irresponsibly wrong, with ever-less responsibilities - because, as all humans choices were really ever only 'caused' by a complexity of historically predetermined, predestined and inevitable previous causes and effects, (far beyond our knowledge or capacity to ever understand them, such that we will forever all remain fallible and potentially dangerous victims), then their hypocritical subjective and emotive rejection of all objectively universal facts beyond 'this one true fact,' (that chaos is predictably inevitable LOL) proves them wrong:

 For if and when they alone are granted endless rights with no responsibilities, then from whom do these rights proceed?

 Well, from their own chosen victims, or course: from those deluded and so mentally inferior 'conservative' humans who, foolishly believing in objectively universal facts and free-will choices, are dumb enough to have enough hope for the future to become makers, from which the much smarter liberal takers (aka worthless parasite) can derive their lucrative subsistence, by forever spinning merely temporary and easily-solved problems with obvious and easy, permanent solutions, into eternal crises for which there are only at best temporary band-aid 'palliative therapies' available, and even then only by submitting to the expert authority leadership of the obviously much-smarter, far more shrewd, realpolitikingly decisive liberals.

 Deciding there is no solution, and so that in fact the only real solution is to try to instantly become a part of any given problem, works out great for them!

 Well, so far, anyway....!

Subjectivist hypocrites actually endorse objectivity to legitimize their claims: because they claim that "inevitable" (predictably, universally objective) albeit otherwise unknown and unknowable, predestined and predetermined forces are always behind every "false illusion" of human free-will intent and choice.

So we get these two, permanently opposed philosophical poles:

Law-abiding Conservatives: "Criminal behavior is an effect of free-will choice!" 

Criminal libertines: "But what CAUSED that choice? There's always a cause!" 

Their implication is that there are no crimes nor criminals because we're all "victims."

In this way, they proudly enslave themselves to the crime-excusing 'inevitable force' alibi! 


 Further, there is no cause-and-effect morality: Since predation CAN happen, "Therefore" it WILL always happen; "So" we MUST form ever-larger gangs to pre-emptively, defensively extort & deter enemies in order to safely accuse and punish them for their potential crimes BEFORE they can commit them!

ALL of the so-called “soft” sciences are VICTIMOLOGIES – sociology, psychology, and even criminology – because they all begin by looking at symptoms of human behavior, but quickly “progress” to the false premise that they must look for CAUSES of those behaviors – and said causes must always be inevitable, predetermined predestined mysterious magical forces beyond anyone’s control! (The implication being that we are all really ever only helpless victims – of “society” / mere products of our environments, or as Marx put it, of “Historical Predeterminism” and as Muhammad put it, as proudly Submissive “slaves of allah”)!

Simple human free-will choice is the ONLY answer they will NEVER accept!


SO: What is this "hate-speech" notion, of which the leftopaths are so fond, and why should it be considered a crime if it's NOT already: a) a threat; and b) slander (fraud)?

If it's not either PHYSICALLY threatening speech - or emotionally threatening BECAUSE it could physically impact one's life, like how fraudulent slander causes other people to react to one as if one were a criminal in need of hating and beating - then it's THE TRUTH: and so it SHOULD cause one the emotional distress of 'hurt feelings!' So it isn't objectively "offensive," but is, in fact, socially beneficial in that it helps defend society from criminals, whether or not said predictably victim-blaming criminal is subjectively "offended" by their victims being notified about THEIR offenses!

Having no facts to justify their aggressive hypocrisy, all criminals will resort to using emotive 'arguments' to justify their crimes by playing the victims. So they (liberals, muslims) can be relied on to try to criminalize hurt feelings and to make offending people, (criminals by accusing them of their crimes) illegal, too!

Sunday, April 16, 2017

"Totalitarian Thinking:" Total Control of Others = Slavery

See also part 1, here:

Everyone loves to be wanted, at least temporarily, but rarely do people want to be needed, (chained to others' needs) except the most fearfully insecure people.

And, naturally, almost nobody wants to need others, to be enslaved to their whims.

But insecure, cowardly slavers try to reverse those natural inclinations and assessments, to trick other potentially dangerous and fallible people (their intended victims) by pretending to the opposite: that we are all in fact, such helpless victims as individuals, that we need other people just to survive, much less to thrive.

Whereas in reality, we have the natural right to make circumstantial, situational assessments and choices based on our individual discriminations of our own wants and needs, fears and hopes, and on other peoples' trustworthiness - whether only subjectively presumed, or objectively proven - as to whether or not we should act in a more 'positivist' manner, to try to defuse their needy fears by working to make them feel safe, and/or to assuage their potential greedy wants by making them feel happy, respectively ... those same insecure, cowardly criminal gangster extortionists will try to use their threats of group-might-made "right" violence to force us to go along (with their criminal lies) to get along (with all the other lying criminal slavers).

This slavish creed of forced, false "altruism" has historically been known as 'Fascism,' 'Islam,' and 'Communism.'

Today it's most commonly known as "Social Justice."

PS: Unfortunately, this enforced (or at least, threatened) enslaving creed of forced false altruism is also embodied in Christianity, by way of the 'positivist' ("Do Unto Others") slant of Jesus' creed.

The correct, albeit more 'secular' version of The Golden Rule is Confucius' "Do Not Do Unto Others!"

But at least the free-will choice is emphasized, and the threat delayed to after death, and the force reserved to God alone, not man.

Bottom line? Everyone wants to be wanted on occasion, but only insecure hypocrites pretend they (and everyone else) need to be needed,and so it's their right to tell others they should embrace suicidal masochism and slavery because they are helpless victims in need of an expert authority leader! The best way for a criminal to disarm his intended victims is to tell them they were always victims anyway, and further that he is not an oppressor but really only a concerned fellow victim!