Friday, December 25, 2015
Thursday, December 24, 2015
Monday, December 21, 2015
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Monday, October 12, 2015
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
Thursday, September 10, 2015
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Friday, August 14, 2015
Mental Health avenue for Gun Control? Be careful what you wish for...
Universal background checks are Federal gun registration..
Mental health is the avenue to gun control..
It was used to confiscate guns in Eastern Europe prior to WWII..
American Psychiatric Asso: Half of Americans are mentally ill..
After crafting by politicians and Media all will be crazy except for them..
300 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs were written in 2009 alone..
Your children on medication for ADHD?
Single woman with children diagnosed with depression?
Be careful what you ask for…….
It was used to confiscate guns in Eastern Europe prior to WWII..
American Psychiatric Asso: Half of Americans are mentally ill..
After crafting by politicians and Media all will be crazy except for them..
300 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs were written in 2009 alone..
Your children on medication for ADHD?
Single woman with children diagnosed with depression?
Be careful what you ask for…….
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Wednesday, August 5, 2015
Monday, August 3, 2015
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Kurt on Gun-control's bad faith...
Gun Rights Advocates Have A Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control. Here It Is.
Written by Kurt Schlichter
x
The Journal by IJReview is an opinion platform and any opinions or information put forth by contributors are exclusive to them and do not represent IJReview.
American gun owners are beginning to respond with a fresh, powerful argument when facing anti-gun liberals. Here it is, in its entirety. Ready?
“Screw you.” That’s it. Except the first word isn’t “Screw.”
It’s not exactly a traditional argument, but it’s certainly appropriate here. The fact is that there is no point in arguing with liberal gun-control advocates because their argument is never in good faith. They slander gun owners as murderers. They lie about their ultimate aim, which is to ban and confiscate all privately owned weapons. And they adopt a pose of reasonability, yet their position is not susceptible to change because of evidence, facts or law. None of those matter – they already have their conclusion. This has to do with power – their power.
You can’t argue with someone who is lying about his position or whose position is not based upon reason. You can talk all day about how crime has diminished where concealed carry is allowed, while it flourishes in Democrat blue cities where gun control is tightest. You can point to statistics showing that law-abiding citizens who carry legally are exponentially less likely to commit gun crimes than other people. You can cite examples of armed citizens protecting themselves and their communities with guns. You can offer government statistics showing how the typical American is at many times greater risk of death from an automobile crash, a fall, or poisoning than from murder by gun.
But none of that matters, because this debate is not about facts. It’s about power. The liberal anti-gun narrative is not aimed at creating the best public policy but at disarming citizens the liberal elite looks down upon – and for whom weapons represent their last-ditch ability to respond to liberal overreach.
Put simply, liberal elitists don’t like the fact that, at the end of the day, an armed citizenry can tell them, “No.”
So they argue in bad faith, shamelessly lying, libeling their opponents, and hiding their real endgame. Sure, sometimes the mask slips and a liberal politician like Mike Bloomberg or Diane Feinstein reveals their true agenda, but mostly they stay on-message.
For example, Barack Obama, who always tries to reassure us bitter clingers that he doesn’t want to take our guns, speaks longingly about the Australian plan – which was confiscation of most viable defensive weapons from the civilian population.
Obama is lying – about gay marriage, about your doctor – and he is likewise lying about guns. The minute he could disarm every American civilian he would, something particularly alarming in light of his pal Bill Ayers’ infamous observation that ‘fundamentally transforming’ America would require killing at least 25 million citizens.
No wonder free Americans are done pretending the gun argument is a rational debate and are responding with an extended middle finger – and the challenge to come and take their arms. The fact remains that any outright attempt to take the arms from tens of millions of American gun owners would almost certainly result in a second Civil War. And we all know how the first Civil War went for the Democrats.
So, through a campaign of shaming, dissembling, and outright slander, liberals are trying to talk Americans into giving up their weapons voluntarily. There’s always another “common sense” restriction to enact, spurred on by a tragedy that the last “common sense” restriction didn’t prevent and that the proposed new “common sense” restriction would not have prevented. They want to do it in baby steps, and with our cooperation, since they cannot do it by force.
There are a few people arguing in good faith, but it’s too late. Liberal writer Kurt Eichenwald recently wrote a “compromise” proposal to settle the gun issue that was notable because he actually analyzed gun freedom arguments and agreed with some of them. He cited the silliness of the “assault weapons” and “cop killer” bullet lies. While he still rejects 30 round capacity magazines, he began with opposition to silencers and then, after hearing facts and evidence from knowledgeable gun owners, changed his position. That’s good faith, the threshold requirement for a real debate, but Eichenwald mistakenly assumes this is a debate based upon reason between good faith opponents. It’s not. It’s based upon the desire of liberals for total supremacy.
So until the gun control argument becomes a real argument instead of a transparent power grab, there’s only one appropriate response to liberal gun banners. And it’s similar to “Screw you.”
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Planned Parenthood Video Shocks the moral conscience of the Nation
Write your Rep's. Here is what I wrote:
A recent video has emerged of Planned Parenthood medical director Deborah Nucatola at a lunch with members of a group posing as representatives of a biotech firm.
This video suggests, minimally, a disturbing and deeply troubling lapse in the bioethics of so-called "tissue harvesting" by the Planned Parenthood (plannedparenthood.org) organization. The callousness of Ms. Nucatola's attitude and language in said video reveals a grotesque and troubling portrait not only of Ms. Nucatola as an individual, but also casts aspersion upon the entire Planned Parenthood apparatus.
An official inquiry should be made into whether or not Planned Parenthood is conducting its operations in a manner that is contrary to the laws of the United States. If Planned Parenthood as an organization is guilty of criminal activity they should be sanctioned, fined, or disbanded and the guilty parties tried in a court of law.
Sincerely,
Saturday, July 4, 2015
When you are wrong will you admit you are wrong?
When you have finally turned the United States into Mexico - with lots of "Social Justice" and "gun control" and the murder rate vastly increases (check towns on the Mexican-Texas border - Hispanic on both sides, but with rather different murder rates), will you admit that you were wrong?
Of course you will not admit that you were wrong - you will just go on to some other "liberal" crusade.
Perhaps "assisting" people to die ("their lives were not worth living", "they wanted to die really - the screaming and struggling was just a reflex").
This is why people do not trust "liberals" (whether they are Democrats or RINOs) - because your "liberalism" is actually a form of religion.
You sneer at people who believe in God - but you have a God of your own, the government. As long as it is controlled by "Progressive" "Enlightened" people who have been to the correct universities - people like you.
You believe that government can (by magic spells) prevent bad people from having firearms, whereas in fact "gun control" just keeps honest people from having fire arms, leaving a monopoly of firearms in the hands of criminals (and the "official bandits" - government itself).
But argument does not interest you, and examples (such as Mexico - or Chicago) do not interest you either. Because you have your religious faith - your faith in "Progressive" government.
Economists Anti-gun talking points shot down...
It's too bad that the Economist quotes so many flawed talking points in this article. The U.S. has a high rate of gun-related [insert event here]. Yes, of course we do, because we have more guns. This is like saying that Saudi Arabia has a low DUI occurrence because they don't drink alcohol. Yet we don't see many articles in Economist calling for the prohibition of alcohol in the U.S., do we?
To put some of the anti-gun talking points in context, let's consider VT. This state has the most permissive gun laws in the U.S. They also have the lowest gun homicide rate in the U.S. Compare this troubling data point with cities such as Washington D.C. and Chicago, with the most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. and also the highest gun homicide rates in the U.S. These observations shoot big holes in that talking point (pun intended). (source: FBI stats)
Despite several recent record-breaking years in gun sales, the gun homicide rate in the U.S. is down 49% since 1993 (source: Pew Research). Those talking points aren't sounding so good anymore, are they?
Most gun homicides are concentrated among black males and urban populations in the U.S. where, in general, gun ownership rates are lower than rural areas with less diversity. Uncomfortable as these trends are, they are real and backed up by decades of FBI statistics, not to mention real life experiences by people like me who live in an American city. The message here is that gun violence is not a product of permissive gun ownership laws. They are a product of urban living factors and such trends as children born into poor, broken families with no positive adult role models. If you want to turn the tide on this, we need more mentors and more programs that encourage responsible child-rearing and lead to stable, two-parent families where education is emphasized to children as they grow up.
Gun homicide and suicide rates are higher in the U.S. than most of Europe? Really? Well, please tell me about the part of Europe that Economist excluded in their analysis? Right there you have an admission by Economist that they cherry-picked the data to get the result they wanted. Anyone trained in econometrics and quantitative methods will be disgusted before they get 3 paragraphs into this article. Distributing such faulty analysis and misleading information is not helpful to anyone and shows the naivety and ignorance of the author.
If any of the anti-gun talking points were true, the life span of a gun owner in the U.S. would be very short. Yet one can visit a gun range and find hundreds of responsible gun owners, none of which know anyone personally who was the victim of gun violence. That's because of the non-uniformity of gun violence I described above. If you want to solve a problem, you need to get to the root cause, and none of the ideas peddled by Economist or the anti-gun movement in general come even close.
To put some of the anti-gun talking points in context, let's consider VT. This state has the most permissive gun laws in the U.S. They also have the lowest gun homicide rate in the U.S. Compare this troubling data point with cities such as Washington D.C. and Chicago, with the most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. and also the highest gun homicide rates in the U.S. These observations shoot big holes in that talking point (pun intended). (source: FBI stats)
Despite several recent record-breaking years in gun sales, the gun homicide rate in the U.S. is down 49% since 1993 (source: Pew Research). Those talking points aren't sounding so good anymore, are they?
Most gun homicides are concentrated among black males and urban populations in the U.S. where, in general, gun ownership rates are lower than rural areas with less diversity. Uncomfortable as these trends are, they are real and backed up by decades of FBI statistics, not to mention real life experiences by people like me who live in an American city. The message here is that gun violence is not a product of permissive gun ownership laws. They are a product of urban living factors and such trends as children born into poor, broken families with no positive adult role models. If you want to turn the tide on this, we need more mentors and more programs that encourage responsible child-rearing and lead to stable, two-parent families where education is emphasized to children as they grow up.
Gun homicide and suicide rates are higher in the U.S. than most of Europe? Really? Well, please tell me about the part of Europe that Economist excluded in their analysis? Right there you have an admission by Economist that they cherry-picked the data to get the result they wanted. Anyone trained in econometrics and quantitative methods will be disgusted before they get 3 paragraphs into this article. Distributing such faulty analysis and misleading information is not helpful to anyone and shows the naivety and ignorance of the author.
If any of the anti-gun talking points were true, the life span of a gun owner in the U.S. would be very short. Yet one can visit a gun range and find hundreds of responsible gun owners, none of which know anyone personally who was the victim of gun violence. That's because of the non-uniformity of gun violence I described above. If you want to solve a problem, you need to get to the root cause, and none of the ideas peddled by Economist or the anti-gun movement in general come even close.
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Sunday, June 21, 2015
Friday, May 29, 2015
Going still further...
no mention of the right wing coup carried out by Washington? no mention of the collaboration between the US government, neo-Nazis and fascists? Come on!
NYT Still Pretends No Coup in Ukraine
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/06/nyt-still-pretends-no-coup-in-ukraine/
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/06/nyt-still-pretends-no-coup-in-ukraine/
or US-NATO expansionism and aggression, and how the situation in Ukraine relates to globalized capitalism?
voltairenet.org/article183470.html
voltairenet.org/article183470.html
A Family Business of Perpetual War
consortiumnews.com/2015/03/20/a-family-business-of-perpetual-war/
consortiumnews.com/2015/03/20/a-family-business-of-perpetual-war/
Leaked phone call on Ukraine lays bare Washington’s gangsterism
wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/10/pers-f10.html
wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/10/pers-f10.html
“Russians sympathetic to Ukraine hacked Beseda’s email, according to Jeffrey Carr, the founder and president of Taia Global, a four-year-old consulting firm. Taia has provided advice to multinational corporations and to the U.S. government, which has been critical of Russia’s actions in Ukraine.”
Who are these “Russians sympathetic to Ukraine”? My guess would be CIA. What is the background of Taia Global? I suggest a CIA front.
In any case I would be very cautious of and would wish to independently verify any information I received from a company which has clients that are transnational corporations and/or the US Imperial government. They are most unlikely to say or do anything to offend their customers and in fact are paid to help their customers. I presume aiding their clients and providing shareholder value is their sole purpose.
This article has a faint whiff of planted propaganda. Sure, the emails are probably authentic wrapping the propagandist message in true statements is how propaganda works. Russia tries to get around US Imperial sanctions and relentless Imperial attempts at containment, it even does so on the internet and in secret – Russia is bad.
TPP confirms what we’ve always known: Politicians are whores.
This Grauniad article demonstrates a deeper point.
The politicians are not just whores, they are ten dollar crack whores.
They sell their constituents jobs and US sovereignty for a mere few grand.
Sharon Weinberger, State Dept. Stooge: Hating Russia is an official stamp...
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/05/28/u-s-cyber-firm-alleges-hacked-emails-reveal-russian-front-operation/
So, I’ve been reading around a bit, as we all should do, to see where Sharon Weinberger is ‘coming from’. I recommend, as it might complement your perspective of The Intercept.
The bio page on the TI website mentions her history at Wired magazine, her writing at Slate, her contributions to the BBC, ‘Nature’ journal and her work on a history of DARPA. Quite groovy for a defense tech writer.
However, it doesn’t mention that she has come to The Intercept having been flung out centrifugally from the revolving door between the State Dept Foreign Service; a defense industry corporation who work under the DARPA umbrella called System Planning Corporation; writing and editing warmongerer’s wank mags like Defense Daily and Defense Technology International; and a dominant pro-military ‘think tank’ The Center for Strategic and International Studies. [This last one is interesting for anyone who has followed Dov Zakheim in his contribution to the PNAC document ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses’ and his role as comptroller for Bush junior at the Pentagon (2.3 trillion missing?). Weinberger co-wrote a paper with Zakheim titled ‘Fortress Europe’ (2000) that suggests in its conclusions (amongst other things) the push for closer relationship between the EU and NATO – the like of which we see today supporting a neo-fascist regime in Ukraine.]
I guess there is no evidence in any of that to prove that Sharon Weinberger is compromised in her reporting here, but I think that it is good to know someone’s bio when they write pieces like this , and for a publication (TI) with statements like the following in their ‘about’ section:
The bio page on the TI website mentions her history at Wired magazine, her writing at Slate, her contributions to the BBC, ‘Nature’ journal and her work on a history of DARPA. Quite groovy for a defense tech writer.
However, it doesn’t mention that she has come to The Intercept having been flung out centrifugally from the revolving door between the State Dept Foreign Service; a defense industry corporation who work under the DARPA umbrella called System Planning Corporation; writing and editing warmongerer’s wank mags like Defense Daily and Defense Technology International; and a dominant pro-military ‘think tank’ The Center for Strategic and International Studies. [This last one is interesting for anyone who has followed Dov Zakheim in his contribution to the PNAC document ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses’ and his role as comptroller for Bush junior at the Pentagon (2.3 trillion missing?). Weinberger co-wrote a paper with Zakheim titled ‘Fortress Europe’ (2000) that suggests in its conclusions (amongst other things) the push for closer relationship between the EU and NATO – the like of which we see today supporting a neo-fascist regime in Ukraine.]
I guess there is no evidence in any of that to prove that Sharon Weinberger is compromised in her reporting here, but I think that it is good to know someone’s bio when they write pieces like this , and for a publication (TI) with statements like the following in their ‘about’ section:
Our long-term mission is to produce fearless, adversarial journalism across a wide range of issues. The editorial independence of our journalists will be guaranteed. They will be encouraged to pursue their passions, cultivate a unique voice, and publish stories without regard to whom they might anger or alienate. We believe the prime value of journalism is its power to impose transparency, and thus accountability, on the most powerful governmental and corporate bodies, and our journalists will be provided the full resources and support required to do this.
Monday, May 11, 2015
We already live in a Police state...
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/db150e22-f594-11e4-a018-00144feab7de.html#ixzz3ZqPp0jZ2
Johnny Kay
Any military preparedness drill based upon an alleged threat from “terrorists” is a fraud because there is no terrorist threat, foreign or domestic, to the United States. The “terrorists” are created and funded by our own government and its allies. 9/11 was an inside job, as was Oklahoma City; the Boston Marathon “bombing” by “Chechen terrorists” was a hoax, as was the Sandy Hook shooting. Our own government -- and the international corporate elite that controls it -- is the real enemy.
The only threat to our southern border is the continued mass immigration of Mexicans, and they are being invited into the United States by the government as part of the plan -- in the works for decades -- to form a union between Mexico and the United States.
On a deeper level, we must ask ourselves this: Why is formal martial law even necessary? We already live in a police state, the United States military continues to have a steady supply of directionless and desperate adolescents anxious to join the team and become cannon fodder, mass immigration and the union with Mexico is proceeding on schedule, and everything presented to us by the corporate media is scripted.
While more and more of us are awakening to the disturbing reality of events, the vast majority of Americans are dumbed-down and drugged-up, sickly and stupid; “soft-kill” is working. Most Americans are unwilling to acknowledge or even consider that they are nothing more than slaves on a vast tax plantation, and many of those who are awakened still see things according to the diversionary Democrat-Republican, Liberal–Conservative paradigm fed to them by their masters. The reality is that this country is exactly where the international corporate elite want it to be.
Perhaps Jade Helm is just a variation of the “Watch out, there’s going to be another 9/11!!!” psy-op that occurs every year and peaks in September -- as Jade Helm is scheduled to do. Author Lenon Honor, in his book The 911 Fear-Based Mind Control Program, details how such fear-based programming is intended to produce a state of perpetual anxiety and powerlessness to keep us traumatized, passive, and compliant.
The people at the top are masters of propaganda, masters of manipulation. They know that the easiest slaves to control are those who are not aware that they are slaves. That strategy has worked for them in the past, and continues to work for them today.If there is any purpose to Jade Helm other than as a psy-op, it will be to prepare one or more false-flag or hoax attacks to keep us on edge and encourage us to embrace even more regulation, centralization, and self-harm -- perhaps a hoax “biological attack” that will have us begging for mandatory vaccinations. . .
As for John Stewart (real name: Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz), he is a well-connected gatekeeper -- his brother, Larry Liebowitz, was the managing director of UBS and later the Chief Operating Officer of the New York Stock Exchange.
John Stewart’s job is to A) promote harmless, generic criticism that does not threaten the control of the corporate elite; B) ridicule those who question the official narrative of events; C) ridicule those who question the validity of the system underlying those events; and D) ridicule those who suggest that the international corporate elite controls things behind the scenes.
Friday, April 17, 2015
AMD still the one...
Re:Sadly, I don't see an "out" for AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Friday April 17, 2015 @06:41AM (#49491993) Journal
If you are like sadly many others going by the benchmarks please note that even Intel admits they rigged the benchmarks [youtube.com] and when you use actual programs instead of the rigged benchmarks? You'll find that AMD chips are trading blows with chips that cost 3 times as much [youtube.com] while the actual power they use is low enough it would take 18 years [youtube.com] for you to come out ahead on power savings. Sorry for two of the links being from one site but Tek Syndicate is one of the few hardware sites that isn't getting the majority of their ad revenue from Intel.
If anybody still doubts that the US DoJ is nothing but a toothless joke? Intel should be all the proof you need. Here you have a company that admits flat out they are rigging the tests every major website uses to judge performance, was allowed to pay off its rival after several CEOs got on the stand and admitted Intel was bribing their companies, used their leverage in one market (CPUs) to wipe out a competitor in another market (chipsets) while memo were leaked talking about how they were gonna "cut their throats" and they STILL didn't get fucking busted? If the MSFT antitrust were to happen today I have no doubt Gates could walk right into the deposition room and take a big dump on the table as his response and the DoJ would be lining up to offer him TP!
So don't buy the bullshit, or "tests" done by sites where the majority of their advertising budget is filled by Intel, get an AMD and see for yourself. Here in the shop I've had just about every Intel and AMD chip come through the door and on everything but the over $600 chips? You are seeing MAYBE mid single digits difference, with everything under $400 a chip trading blows back and forth....except of course on price, where it will cost on average double to trade blows with the AMD chip. Sadly the rigging doesn't just extend to benches though, you go to sites like Tom's and Anand's and you'll see writer admit that most of the new games coming down the pipe require quad cores to even play....and then push an Intel Pentium dual core over even a hexacore in the same price bracket. Of course when you turn off adblock you'll see why, as the page is covered with ads for Intel boards and chips. Never in all my years in computing have I ever seen one company be so damned blatant in their market manipulation and not even get so much as a slap on the wrist for it, I only hope the EU investigation has more teeth and hits them with enough fines that Intel will finally have to play on a level field which they have not done since the day the P4 was released!
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Only...indoor militias...
The US Supreme Court undertook an exhausting historical and linguistic investigation in the 2008 landmark case: Heller versus DC. The country's best historians and linguistics experts found that the prefatory phrase of the Second Amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, … " was in no way a limitation on the operative phrase: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The first clause merely announces a purpose, not every purpose, just a purpose. The second clause mirrors language found in other amendments where the rights are unquestionably individual rights. The court found the strained contention of anti-gun-rights proponents that the Second Amendment conferred only a collective right to arm militias to be nonsense. Those same anti-gun groups now contend the right is limited to the home. Combined with their previous arguments I suppose the Second Amendment would only protect the right to collectively arm indoor militias.
Congrats, You fit the profile!
In your last line you admit fear is meant to smother rational debate.
Congratulations, you fit the profile, you are part of the problem you set out to attack in your article. The answer to your last question how can so many Americans be behind both more guns and more background checks is simple. We know guns are dangerous, we don't want to get rid of them but we would like to make sure they're staying out of the hands of people who again and again we find out should never have had access.
You cannot open a rational debate with a school massacre of small children by an outsider, conflate every school shooting with that level of violence, and then say "but I'm the rational one." 99% of school shootings are an extension of violence in already happening in the neighborhood. They are crime related. That's not to say we should write them off, but the way to handle them is entirely different from the way we should handle things like Newtown. One is about someone who has gone off their rocker, and should have been in a mental institution and the other is about day to day policing and efforts to keep our youth from participating in crime at all.
Not happy there you blithely sensationalize the green tip 5.56 round the ATF wanted to ban under a handgun law. The problem here is no rational person would call it a handgun round. It is a rifle round with a few very expensive custom made pistols for it. It really isn't anything more than a regular 22 caliber round with more oomph in the cartridge. The same caliber as the popular plinking round kids learn on. It has no special armor piercing properties other than its speed. That would be the black tip round which is both rare and already restricted to military use only. Furthermore under this argument you'd have to ban all rifles and all rifle ammunition as they all have the same or better characteristics where body armor is involved. To make this even more insane, body armor has advanced since the bill was passed in the 1980's and can now stop rounds like the 5.56 green tip.
I know it all seems like low hanging fruit, but one of the perks of having so many bad black rifle thingys floating around your society is that the society tends to understand how they work much better.
As to talking to stupid people about what women need for protection, why not try talking to the survivors, while they aren't all together on whether they should carry, I am sure they will object to being called "young, hot little girls" and I am just as sure you could have found a less sensational quote that didn't paint every gun owner as a mental loon.
You know who else won't rest no matter how far they go with guns the Brady Campaign, they won't rest until guns are outright banned or legislated so badly that they are effectively banned. Interestingly enough you have pretty much stolen their arguments and printed them as your own.
Congratulations, you fit the profile, you are part of the problem you set out to attack in your article. The answer to your last question how can so many Americans be behind both more guns and more background checks is simple. We know guns are dangerous, we don't want to get rid of them but we would like to make sure they're staying out of the hands of people who again and again we find out should never have had access.
You cannot open a rational debate with a school massacre of small children by an outsider, conflate every school shooting with that level of violence, and then say "but I'm the rational one." 99% of school shootings are an extension of violence in already happening in the neighborhood. They are crime related. That's not to say we should write them off, but the way to handle them is entirely different from the way we should handle things like Newtown. One is about someone who has gone off their rocker, and should have been in a mental institution and the other is about day to day policing and efforts to keep our youth from participating in crime at all.
Not happy there you blithely sensationalize the green tip 5.56 round the ATF wanted to ban under a handgun law. The problem here is no rational person would call it a handgun round. It is a rifle round with a few very expensive custom made pistols for it. It really isn't anything more than a regular 22 caliber round with more oomph in the cartridge. The same caliber as the popular plinking round kids learn on. It has no special armor piercing properties other than its speed. That would be the black tip round which is both rare and already restricted to military use only. Furthermore under this argument you'd have to ban all rifles and all rifle ammunition as they all have the same or better characteristics where body armor is involved. To make this even more insane, body armor has advanced since the bill was passed in the 1980's and can now stop rounds like the 5.56 green tip.
I know it all seems like low hanging fruit, but one of the perks of having so many bad black rifle thingys floating around your society is that the society tends to understand how they work much better.
As to talking to stupid people about what women need for protection, why not try talking to the survivors, while they aren't all together on whether they should carry, I am sure they will object to being called "young, hot little girls" and I am just as sure you could have found a less sensational quote that didn't paint every gun owner as a mental loon.
You know who else won't rest no matter how far they go with guns the Brady Campaign, they won't rest until guns are outright banned or legislated so badly that they are effectively banned. Interestingly enough you have pretty much stolen their arguments and printed them as your own.
Sunday, March 29, 2015
Comparative suffering
On August 15, 2014 at 12:56 am, Paul Nathanson said:
Excellent article. Too bad the author needed to explain (and implicitly apologize for) even mentioning the problems of men. Nothing will improve in relations between the sexes until we succeed in undermining identity politics, which relies on the pervasive belief in what I call “comparative suffering.” I say this for two reasons. First, there’s no reliable way to measure human suffering. Because suffering has many causes, not one, people can suffer in very different ways. Moreover, suffering is highly subjective and highly influenced by cultural expectations; it’s not quantifiable. Second, comparative suffering is inherently dehumanizing, because it allows one group to trivialize other groups and to exploit those other groups in order to score political points (that is, claiming the coveted prize of victim status). Men and women need to respect each other, not to compete with each other–and certainly not to trivialize or attack each other.
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Jade Helm
Imagine if instead 300 lawyers from the military were to infiltrate Washington DC including Congressional offices , using social media to help gain influence and knowledge of how things work. It would sound like 100,000 squealing piglets
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3013900/Fears-martial-law-special-ops-set-swarm-Southwest-operate-undetected-civilians-ve-deemed-HOSTILE-massive-military-exercise.html#ixzz3ViCzcLYT
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Reverse the flow of life.
Lol. You small mind hoarding the useless treasures that weigh you down. You simple fool. That I exist at all, that I raise the Bonny Blue flag, that I say I am other than you and that when this state goes that you should be shackled and made to work like a horse until you drop dead, that I have a historical memory should be your undoing and proof that your decaying media has not erased history, but history is coming to visit you and smash this cursed union. We will say to the Northern men that to destroy you is no loss, and their women will be re-educated as biological factories to produce our offspring. We will reverse the flow of life and you will gnash your teeth.
The "expediency" of terrorism ...
The "expediency" of terrorism is still highly contentious today, but it is safe to say that who is or is not a "terrorist" seems to be determined by which side of the barricades the one making the judgement is standing. I will make no mention of the phony "War on Terrorism" being waged by the "bourgeoisie of the whole world" against the workers and peasants of the non-industrialized world by means of drones, air raids, mercenaries, apartheid walls, and military intervention and occupation.
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/lenin-on-anarchism-and-opportunism-by-thomas-riggins/
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/lenin-on-anarchism-and-opportunism-by-thomas-riggins/
Monday, March 9, 2015
Tastemakers
Homo on March 8, 2015 at 8:32 pm
Speaking of the “call of the wild,” I don’t think there’s anything as natural as a man and a woman raising children together. I’m gay but I have the self awareness to realize that. Furthermore, I don’t carry the childish resentment that many feminists and lesbians have against “the patriarchy” – I think at their core most gay men are with me on that. As Camille Paglia said “Heterosexual love is in sync with cosmic forces. Not everyone has the stomach for daily war with nature.”
Your fantasy about “opening your wings” is rightly tempered by your understanding that it is “fucking lonely.” There’s many a night when I drive home from work and wish I had a wife to great me with a hot meal or one of my kids run up to the door to show me his report card. Men being men, once the sexual sizzle dies out of a relationship there’s not a whole lot to sustain it… that’s where the sustenance of filial love comes in to create a full and meaningful life through your progeny.
That said I do believe the natural eccentricity of gay men and the attendant loneliness does foster the distinct and very potent creativity you see in this population. Acceptance of homosexuality goes hand and hand with decadence; as negative as the connotation of that mode of cultural expression is I’d take it any day over a dour, repressive and overly serious theocracy… I mean Islam … the boring geometric non-representational art, the total disregard for fashion (those burqas, ugh!). Same goes for the tacky Jesus iconography and drippy sentimentalism of what passes for much mainline protestant Christianity.
America’s #1 export is its pop culture and gay men have proven to be most exquisite tastemakers in that regard… I guess I’m just saying America is successful because it does embrace it’s misfits to a degree.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Convicted Felon don't mean shit...
Global 6 hours ago 1 49
It should be very complicated for any government entity to tell an American citizen he/she cannot sell their own personal property.
"CONVICTED FELON" sounds armed and dangerous however one should investigate what is now a state jail felony. Just about anybody can be a felon from simple possession of a controlled substance, trespass (Once a tort), then there is a financial problem and a father or ex husband cannot pay court ordered support to name a few.
Prison for profit and the so called "Family Code" reform of 1996 have done a lot to disarm America and of course the media beats the freedom drum always mentioning "CONVICTED FELON."
We the people are manipulated, lied to, spied on, our rights are being restricted and called privileges while our ruling elite routinely commit fraud, lie, abuse power, misuse government funds and resources and nobody says a word.
The voters even go so far as to re-elect these self serving egotists.
The words, convicted felon, do not signify a murderer, rapist or child molester anymore.
No, nowadays your convicted felons are mostly DUI, controlled substances, check fraud, criminal nonsupport, easy convictions as the offenders usually have no defense money so, guess what.
Guilty.
The convicted felon who should be feared will have an arm even inside the prison but the SCOTUS does not care about that because the real criminals never followed the law in the first place.
It should be very complicated for any government entity to tell an American citizen he/she cannot sell their own personal property.
"CONVICTED FELON" sounds armed and dangerous however one should investigate what is now a state jail felony. Just about anybody can be a felon from simple possession of a controlled substance, trespass (Once a tort), then there is a financial problem and a father or ex husband cannot pay court ordered support to name a few.
Prison for profit and the so called "Family Code" reform of 1996 have done a lot to disarm America and of course the media beats the freedom drum always mentioning "CONVICTED FELON."
We the people are manipulated, lied to, spied on, our rights are being restricted and called privileges while our ruling elite routinely commit fraud, lie, abuse power, misuse government funds and resources and nobody says a word.
The voters even go so far as to re-elect these self serving egotists.
The words, convicted felon, do not signify a murderer, rapist or child molester anymore.
No, nowadays your convicted felons are mostly DUI, controlled substances, check fraud, criminal nonsupport, easy convictions as the offenders usually have no defense money so, guess what.
Guilty.
The convicted felon who should be feared will have an arm even inside the prison but the SCOTUS does not care about that because the real criminals never followed the law in the first place.
Prison for profit and the so called "Family Code" reform of 1996 have done a lot to disarm America and of course the media beats the freedom drum always mentioning "CONVICTED FELON."
We the people are manipulated, lied to, spied on, our rights are being restricted and called privileges while our ruling elite routinely commit fraud, lie, abuse power, misuse government funds and resources and nobody says a word.
The voters even go so far as to re-elect these self serving egotists.
The words, convicted felon, do not signify a murderer, rapist or child molester anymore.
No, nowadays your convicted felons are mostly DUI, controlled substances, check fraud, criminal nonsupport, easy convictions as the offenders usually have no defense money so, guess what.
Guilty.
The convicted felon who should be feared will have an arm even inside the prison but the SCOTUS does not care about that because the real criminals never followed the law in the first place.
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Feminist writers are so besieged by online abuse that some have begun to retire?
Jasonhm
2/20/2015 11:28 PM CST
So let me clarify. Some people, men, white men that have every advantage are in reality complete failures and the lowest of the low, losers of the lowest order,bottom dwellers are somehow threatening and oppressing other people, professional feminist, ideologues many of which make a lucrative living pontificating on gender politics in well funded media outlets?
Well thankfully for these feminist have brave selfless online personae such as yourself that seek to save these damsels in distress from the grime fate of being subjected to criticisms and dissenting words of disagreement and even "shock" anger bellowed out by the nasty hobgoblins, evil inhabitants the bowls of the internet... Is this synopsis about right?
Now please who again is suffering from privilege and a sense of entitlement? Because I can pretty much guarantee that the fantastical neck bearded basement dwelling demons of whom you fantasize about slaying are projections of your own need to be seen as a useful protector and defender. Think a little about an article that in function encourages the behavior is asserts to be condemning? Who publishes a piece that essential says our ideological enemy is winning, that their tactics of intimidation are working? I oppose almost everything sensationalistic feminist are doing but I'm unable to view them with such utter disdain as so foolish and utterly stupid. Although I oppose them in nearly everything but I respect their intelligence enough not to see them as victims in a media format in which they are so clearly masters.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
On the Sandbagging of Ross Ulbricht...
Travesty of Justice (Score:3, Insightful)
by Guy From V (1453391) on Wednesday February 04, 2015 @05:01PM (#48984033) Homepage
I've been following this trial for the last few weeks reading Ars, Wired, TechDirt and listening to Free Talk Live. The Judge basically hamstringed the defense ruling that they should only receive the prosecution's evidence against him...the weekend before the trial began. That right there is such a fundamental insult to the basic rights of any accused that should horrify and enrage anyone who believed in our justice system's impartiality. Add that to the fact that the judge allowed the the prosecution to use the accusations that Ulbricht hired assassins to be considered by the jury even though none of that has been proven or even competently investigated, that is a massive miscarriage of justice on stupendous levels that should frighten anyone living in the US. Evidence such as screenshots implicating his guilt that could have easily been forged were accepted without question....the list goes on. They also disallowed Andreas Antonopoulos, an expert witness on understanding how BitCoin and it's blockchain works to help the jury understand what they were hearing so to form a basis on how to poke holes in the Fed's story....this is almost a blatant showing of the corruption of our justice system and it's subservience to US intelligence services as the Snowden revelations. I'm not saying Ulbricht was innocent...I don't know that...but what happened in this trial was in no way anything but a kangaroo court on display in full form. Ulbricht's guilt is still up in the air, but our government was guilty of far worse crimes merely in that Manhattan courtroom the last 4 weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)