Racially integrated mobs (with no white, Asian or Hispanic members)

“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon” — Race Baiter in Chief

by Don Hank

Ever since about the time of the Trayvon Martin incident, I have been receiving regular, roughly daily, forwarded reports of unprovoked attacks by mobs of  “young people” all around the US. A visitor from another planet would certainly infer from these reports that young people are a dangerous mutant subspecies of human and need to be monitored and strictly disciplined.

That’s because the mainstream media almost never identify racially homogeneous mobs by race unless they are white. They pretend the mobs are diverse, thinking, I suppose, that if they don’t identify the problem, it will simply go away.

By this logic, Hitler was an international citizen, not a German. Mussolini was a man without a country. Al Capone was an international business man, not a member of the Italian mafia. Pablo Escobar was a successful American merchant, not a member of the Medellin cartel. Godzilla was a troubled youth who was painfully conscious of his size and was merely overcompensating. And so forth. 

Anyway, the mobs are growing and the racially homogeneous violence is escalating, despite efforts to minimize it and pretend it is diverse and non-specific. (Say, how about we stop looking for specific bacteria that cause disease? Let’s just have a campaign to wipe out all germs? Wouldn’t that be more effective? Oh, that’s right. Some commensal bacteria are needed by the body to digest food. Never mind).

But now for the good news.

Recently, President Obama issued the statement shown below clarifying his “post-racial” position. Did you catch it? Here it is again in case you missed it:

“Shortly after I was elected I proclaimed America to be in its post-racial phase, where race has become totally irrelevant and people are judged on the noble principle set forth by Dr. Martin Luther King, namely, according to the content of their character. I meant exactly what I said.

A growing number of people of my race – and party (guess that goes without saying) – weren’t listening to King or to me and they have attacked white people simply for being white, claiming “your people” hurt “our people.” Let me be clear: There is no “your people” and there is no “our people” in post-racial America. Both blacks and whites need to follow MLK’s guidelines, without exception, if we are to get along. Your asinine presumption that someone’s ancestors harmed your ancestors does not give you the right to practice violence against that person or steal their property. Before the civil war, most northern whites, guided by Christ’s teachings, thought slavery was evil and acted accordingly. They set up the Underground Railroad to help eliminate the practice. William Wilberforce, the British activist who almost single-handedly ended the institution of slavery in his country, was a white Christian. White Christians also helped end slavery here and later helped spearhead the civil rights movement. They were so successful that slavery is virtually non-existent in the West, having survived almost solely in certain Muslim countries (like Sudan) today.

E pluribus unum means out of many one (I had mistranslated that in an earlier speech. My apologies). Throughout my 3.5 years as president I have gradually come to realize we are all one people now and the name of that people is Americans, one of the most beautiful names in the English language.

I was elected by a majority of all Americans, am grateful to each and every one of you, and as long as I am president, I will stand up for the rights of all Americans, regardless of their color. There will be no race baiting, no special rights for minorities, no legal double standards and no coddling of people who violate the law. You violate the law and you hurt me, Barack Obama.

I may take some heat for saying this, but someone had to say it, and the buck stops with me.

BTW, Eric Holder, you’re fired! Get outta here!

Thank you and may God bless America.

Oh, I omitted to say that Obama made this speech in a dream I had. Guess I shouldn’t have eaten those spicy meatballs before retiring last night.

 

Of interest:

The escalation of the violence all started with this speech:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57403200-503544/obama-if-i-had-a-son-hed-look-like-trayvon/

The rest (see below) was 100% predictable. The White House resident got exactly what he wanted.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/racial-violence-explodes-in-3-states/?cat_orig=us

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/black-mobs-terrorize-1-of-whitest-big-cities/

One lady whose own neighborhood had been a victim of the violence objected to the fact that some referred to the black rioters as black. Maybe Hampton is getting what it asked for? 

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/black-mob-in-the-hamptons/?cat_orig=us

“Young people” targeting Jews:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/black-mobs-now-beating-jews-in-new-york/?cat_orig=faith

“Young people” assault pregnant white girl
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-7159518.html

Ideology bound libertarians look a lot like leftists

Ideology-bound Libertarians look suspiciously like leftists

 

Don Hank

 

Mark Thornton, writing for the libertarian Mises Daily, points out that “drug reform” is a hot issue. By drug reform, he means decriminalization or legalization of drug use.

He writes:

“Political candidates, politicians, former presidents, interest groups, and even the Global Commission on Drug Policy are all calling for drug-policy reform”

He rhetorically asks “why the interest in this reform?” and then answers his own question:

“…. the more important reason for the interest in this issue is economic sense. Drug prohibition is a burden on taxpayers. It is a burden on government budgets. It is a burden on the criminal-justice system. It is a burden on the healthcare system. The economic crisis has intensified the pain from all these burdens. Legalization reduces or eliminates all of these burdens. It should be no surprise that alcohol prohibition was repealed at the deepest depths of the Great Depression.”

 

Mark is as wrong as he can be. Firstly, alcohol does not pose the same problems as addictive narcotics and is not comparable. Secondly, drug prohibition is not the burden. Illegal drug sales and use, and the cartels that commit the crime of selling illegal drugs, are a burden — a burden that is exacerbated by an administration that refuses to stop smugglers. Mark is blaming the victims for the crime. Thirdly, he is relying on false figures released by an incompetent Portuguese government trying to cover up a flawed policy.

The economic burden he mentions is intensified exponentially by our open borders policy and tolerance of illegal immigration. Thousands of Mexicans are now crossing the border into the US with huge shipments of narcotics in vehicles, as shown here, or bales of marijuana strapped to their backs, as shown here.

Yet this same Mark Thornton who advocates legalizing illegal drugs precisely on economic grounds, also criticizes those of us who want to keep illegal aliens out and keep the borders closed for economic reasons – i.e., to protect American jobs in a time of record unemployment. Thus, through convoluted logic worthy of a mental contortionist, he wants us to believe that two of the main contributors to the Western economic malaise are in fact beneficial.

He is right when he states that one main problem with immigration is government largesse extended to them. But it is unrealistic to advocate for illegal immigrants at a time when our welfare state has never been more generous with your money and when jobs have never been more scarce. According to Milton Friedman, whom libertarians like to consider one of their own when such is convenient, “You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.”

In a perfect world, we could open the borders and legalize drugs without fear because no one would use drugs to the extent of causing anyone harm, and immigrants would not be lured by free schools and hospitals and other social assistance but rather by a drive to earn money honestly by the sweat of their brow.

But we don’t have that world – quite the opposite. So why talk about hypothetical policies that might word in a utopia that simply will never be?

But Mark is worse than just a Polyanna. He is either disingenuous or self-deceived when he refers to the Cato report showing that Portugal’s “success” with their drug decriminalization experiment. The fact that it was the libertarian Cato Institute that released the report should raise a red flag because their clientele all support drug legalization/decriminalization and have already bought into the highly suspect hypothesis that drug liberalization will automatically redound to everyone’s good. They should also raise an eyebrow at the thought that it was the nearly bankrupt Portuguese government that released the fishy-sounding facts on which it rests – a government that has a vested (financial) interest in wanting the world to believe in it now that the risk rating agencies no longer do.

This was my line of reasoning when I set about doing an online search for a web site in Portugal that would shed some light on this. Now not every American can search the foreign press in a variety of languages, and this language barrier is one of the setbacks for US scholars and journalists. But because of my translation background, non-English foreign reports are one of my specialites and a good reason to visit Laigle’s Forum, where language is not a barrier to accessing truth.

What I found in my Portuguese-language search (I would never have found it in English) went beyond my wildest dreams, and I published a preliminary article on it here.

Some of the main arguments in favor of drug legalization and/or decriminalization, followed by my analysis thereof, are found here:

http://laiglesforum.com/2634/2634.htm

Global “leaders” want felons decriminalized

Fling open the gates of the Bastille! Free them all!

by Don Hank

The title of the report linked below, and appearing on the Yahoo home page under the innocuous sounding title “Global leaders call for major shift to decriminalize drugs,” is part of a sinister propaganda campaign, relying on unbacked statements by out-of-work politicians who want to legalize criminals.

The first prong of this campaign is to promote global governance by suggesting that there are such things as “global leaders,” i.e., unelected self-anointed technocrats, who play an important role in the lives of ordinary people. Actually, there is no such thing as a “global leader” because, so far, the world does not have a sovereign global government. Nations are, so far, still free and sovereign, but are threatened by such propaganda as this, which is a subtle suggestion that a global central government (a technocracy) is acceptable. Actually, the experiments with global government have all failed or, as in the case of the latest attempt, the EU, are in the process of disintegrating (triggered by the Greek collapse) and lead inevitably to dictatorships because the people pushing global governance are not democratically minded. To understand why I say that, just read this article by UK politician Sonya Porter. They also lack technical and real-world knowledge needed to solve problems, all the while displaying exceptional persuasive skills — obviously a dismal set of circumstances for everyone whose lives they touch with their ineptitude.

The second prong of the campaign is aimed at decriminalizing criminals. Drug dealers have waged war on their own people in Mexico and Colombia and kill indiscriminately (but note: only stable, anti-terror leaders in the Middle East are condemned by Western “leaders” for doing this). The cartels have grown so much in power that the government fears them. In Mexico, they have infiltrated major sectors of the national police and armed forces. These are inhumanly cruel, savage thugs who must be caught and dealt with harshly. Yet “world leaders” want to set them free. Regarding decriminalization and its results, Holland is a prime example of the failure of this plan. Holland’s experiment, initiated under the banner of legalization as a way to reduce drug use, has actually led to increased crime and drug use. Permissive drug policies in the US, beginning under Carter, also led to increased drug use, including among young people who should be studying. The result was a crackdown in the 80s.

The third prong is support for open borders. The subtle suggestion is that the real culprit in the cartel crime and gang violence that has swept the US Southwest and threatens major US cities everywhere, is not the notoriously porous border with Mexico but rather the fact that foolish Americans continue to criminalize drugs, which in fact are perfectly harmless for us and our children.

The linked Yahoo article tells only one side of the story and includes none of the results of the drug legalization experiments alluded to above. Gullible people reading the Yahoo article will reason that Obama’s open border policies are not a factor in America’s burgeoning crime rate, blaming instead our insistence on criminalizing drug sales. Yes, if only these benighted Americans could accept these drug shipments and the consequences of drug use on their children, then everything would be fine.

What the mainstream media, as well as the elitists in “education,” the universities, professionals and, yes, the churches (not only are they not an exception, they are ringleaders in stealth propaganda) have done is not only criminal, it is an assault on independent human cognition (thought) itself.

The article linked above, omits any detail on the consequences of drug legalization, presenting instead the opinions of supposed leaders who are nowhere quoted as providing evidence of their views.

And this article is typical of today’s editorials. Westerners everywhere are being trained not to think but rather to imitate a consensus of pseudo-scientific “thought” or rather propaganda. Thus, what many “educated” professionals in the schools, colleges, pulpits, media and so on have taught you to do over the last 50 years or so is not to think but to accept without question the opinions of so-called “scientists” and “experts” who themselves only regurgitate the opinions of their bosses and the rest of their community using thinly veiled pseudo-scientific language and psycho-babble.

But note that accepting the opinions of people wearing an aura of “science” (many of whom are not scientists at all but in fact, journalists, psychologists and the like “professionals” who are trained chiefly in the art of propaganda) isn’t the only problem. The problem is the public, which still accepts this propaganda as the genuine article, without question. And they are very good at persuading the public. Or rather, I should say, they have trained the public to follow them to such an extent that the public no longer knows how to think independently of them.

And yet, like an old college pal I ran into recently, people quote these propagandists and claim that in so doing, they are using “science” to reach conclusions and make decisions. Ordinary people are duped into believing that they are intellectuals, superior beings at the top of the evolutionary chain, when in fact, they haven’t used a scintilla of independent thinking. Thus, they substitute a consensus of the “educated” for science. My pal told me he uses science to refute Christianity and suggested I was unscientific. Yet when I asked him by what cognitive mechanism he had arrived at his conclusions, and why he thought my thinking was inferior, he was stymied.

If he could have articulated his cognitive method, it would no doubt have been something like this:

Academics said it, I believe it and that settles it.

And yet, for him I was the fanatic because I believe in God.

The “experts” tell us that if we disagree with Obama’s policies, we are racists. If we don’t accept the “climate change” theory, we are polluters and enemies of the earth.

And many believe this tripe because they don’t know what independent scientific thinking (human cognition) is. They haven’t a clue.

Well, for those who don’t know, true scientific thinking, in a nutshell, is always based on the scientific method, which has been developed in some form or other since Aristotle and was perfected in the Middle Ages. Simply put, this method of thinking, consists of

1—observation,

2—deriving a hypothesis (guess) based on that observation (using inductive reasoning),

3—testing the hypothesis by further observation (in the lab, this means experimentation) under controlled conditions.

4—drawing conclusions from this testing (using deductive reasoning) to derive a working theory that can be verified independently by others.

Before this method was developed, the sophists would sit around and argue issues without ever consulting the evidence. They believed pure reason (with no supporting facts) was superior to facts. This supremely unscientific method is illustrated by the parable of wise men arguing about the number of teeth in a horse’s mouth. The debate went on for years and the participants whose reasoning power was the most brilliant vaunted their skill and patted themselves on the back for their oratory excellence.

Until one day, an humble laborer brought them the news: he had actually counted the number of teeth in a horse’s mouth.

That was the end of the erudite discussion.

In real life, you can apply this in a modified form, for example, by on-line research, personal observations, or reading results of testing or observations of unbiased reporters.

For example, to test the hypothesis that opposing Obama’s policies makes people racist, you can find writings by blacks who oppose Obama’s ideas and see what they say.

You can also choose from among your friends or famous people individuals you know not to be racist and look at what they say about Obama’s ideas and policies.

Finally, you can easily find reading matter about how socialism has failed in the past everywhere it has been tried, including in black African countries like Zimbabwe, or how welfare and affirmative action, for example, have hurt blacks in inner cities.

You can look at unemployment statistics, crime rates, school dropout rates, etc, for black people before and after the institution of welfare.

All of these methods are scientific because they depend on your skills in analyzing raw data and not on a consensus of the “educated.”

It is almost surrealistic that mankind is returning to those primitive sophist methods where brilliance of oratory is replacing actual scientific research in the most vital areas of our lives and where the most polished politicians with the greatest skills in mendacity rule over intelligent people.

As evidence of this sinister development, modern philosophers and propagandists tell us that we are in a post-modern world where traditional methods of scientific inquiry are obsolete. They further tell us that there is no such thing as objective truth.

But they fall into a trap of their own making, for if one can say with certainty that there is no such thing as objectivity, then the universities lose their raison d’être and may as well shut their doors. No statement made by anyone amounts to a hill of beans. Indeed, as universities are completely taken over by “progressives” who deny the existence of objective knowledge, it is getting harder and harder for them to find enough gullible students to pay the bills.

Without government largesse, many would no longer be standing.

I say let them close their doors until they restore the missing ingredient: independent human cognition.

Yahoo Propaganda: 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110601/ts_yblog_thelookout/global-leaders-call-for-a-major-shift-to-decriminalize-drugs

Holland experiment

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/GovPubs/solom2.htm

It’s official: Obama puts race over Constitution

DOJ official resigns over Obama’s racism

Don Hank

The below-linked is one of the most important reports I have read because it indicts Barack Obama as the racist he is and always will be. It shows what many suspect: For Obama, devotee of Black Liberation theology, there is no such thing as a criminal black man.

Remember Governor Spencer attacking Tea Party attendee Nathan Tabor? Spencer may get off and Tabor, who did not hit anyone, was also charged. The courts are in the hands of red revolutionaries of the Bolshevik type. We could be in Mao’s China or any of such brutal dictatorships now. BTW, Mao advocated using the “ruffian” class to help reach communist goals. It doesn’t get any worse than Maoism, and this is it, right now, in the USA. The psychology is dangerous and assaults our liberty at every turn. Worse, too many Americans – lacking any meaningful background in history – are ignoring these blatant symptoms of out and out tyranny.

A Department of Justice official has just quit because of Obama’s undisguised racism in dismissing a case against a criminal group of new Black Panthers.

Quote:

“Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.” J. Christian Adams

Read more here

Please help John Wayne Tucker help America

I’ve said it before: If the Tea Party only succeeds in electing Republican lap dogs of the kind we populate our Congress with, America is doomed (that is why the Arizona Senatorial elections are so important. If John McCain gets re-elected, that is the worst possible barometer reading for American conservatism).

Friends, some of you may recall that Dave Levine is a radio host who personally contacts people like myself who need to be educated about candidates. Dave goes to a lot of trouble to get to know candidates personally and is particularly sensitive to the difference between real conservatives and RINOs or weak-kneed candidates.

He has long been supporting John Wayne Tucker, a popular candidate for Congress in Missouri who is running on the GOP ticket but is being opposed by the treacherous GOP establishment. They are supporting the more malleable Ed Martin, who can be expected to compromise with the “other side of the aisle” when called upon to do so by the treacherous GOP.

This is spiritual warfare and we must win.

The GOP is why Obama won. They ran the weakest, most tarnished most leftwing candidate they could find, a man who most of us knew would keep the border open and wanted to amnesty millions of invaders.

John Wayne Tucker will definitely fight for our border. How do I know? Dave Levine said so and I trust Dave’s judgment.

In addition, he is authentically pro-life, which is a sometimes hard to find among anti-invasion candidates – probably because all “mainstream” churches officially support amnesty schemes.

If you click on the first link below and take the poll (vote for John Wayne Tucker), you will see that John has an amazing lead: 71.9% to Martin’s anemic 19.9%.

It may look like a wrap, but John needs $3,000 for yard signs and radio ads.

Don Hank

PS: Someone tell Sheriff Joe he got behind the wrong man. Schlafly is a Republican establishment hack so it won’t do any good to talk to her.

Dave’s email to me:

Don,

I know I’ve asked you this many times but unfortunately, they [my readers] haven’t come thru. I need to ask you one more time, for my friend JWT. He needs $3,000 to run radio ads and to buy yard signs to beat Martin. I spoke with Zac Bauer tonight, John’s Campaign Maganer. They have so many requests for signs but no money to buy them! The Primary is 32 days away.

Martin’s a wuss. He left Sunday’s Freedom Fights before the debate part began. While he has Sheriff Joe’s and Schlafly’s endorsements, he’s taking way too much for granted and John believes he’s beatable. That unscientific Missouri Sovereignty Project online poll was pretty amazing

http://www.missourisovereigntyproject.com/3rd-congressional-dist.html

John had a 70% to 20% District Vote advantage.

If you can send this out to your Conservative friends, perhaps some of them will send John a donation. His site is http://johnwaynetucker.com.

Thanks,

Dave

SUBSCRIBE TO LAIGLE’S FORUM:

http://laiglesforum.com/mailing/?p=subscribe&id=1

Glenn Beck and how Americans got the way we are

Glenn Beck and how Americans got this way

By Don Hank

Recently, a lot has been written about Glenn Beck and his refusal to look at the eligibility issue and his disdain for those of us who care about it.

First, let me be clear: I am a birther. By that I don’t mean that I am claiming Obama was definitely born in Kenya (where they have erected a monument at the place where he was born). I mean that I don’t know if Obama is a natural born citizen because he has never proven it. Therefore Beck is remiss to dismiss birthers’ concerns. We have a constitutional right to know, and judges who say otherwise are derelict in their duties and don’t deserve to be called judges any more than those judges who in 1973 decided that humans in the womb aren’t humans.

Ironically, though, despite Beck’s vexing unwillingness to admit what an increasing number of Americans know or sense about Obama’s eligibility to be president, no one has taught to the broad masses the sources of Marxist brainwashing – how we got to where we are – better than Glenn Beck. Others have written books that changed the way scholarly conservatives think, but Beck popularized this knowledge in ways that made scholars of ordinary people. He went into detail on the origins of “progressivism” and that is important. Without a comprehensive knowledge of how millions of ordinary decent Americans have been turned into glassy-eyed liberals, we are easy prey both to the propaganda itself and to those who accuse us watchdogs of McCarthyism.

Even if you are put off by Glenn’s histrionics, his shows have been a classroom for a long time – especially his TV show, where he has reviewed important eye-opening books night after night. He did his homework. If Patriots view Beck with a jaundiced eye today it is partly because he fails to see the importance of the eligibility issue but also in part because they have underestimated the role of propagandists in turning America leftward and they fail to see how much Beck has pulled back the curtain for millions of us, providing us a glimpse into the sordid world of Marxist disinformation in which we find ourselves.

Further, without Beck, there would not have been the Washington tea party. Like him or hate him, Beck has changed the nation.

This is as good an opportunity as any for a quick review of how we got where we are today, and we can start with a video of an interview with ex-KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov, who shows how Americans were brainwashed through KGB methods such as demoralization and manipulation of and by the media. One thing that sticks in my mind from Yuri’s talks is that people brainwashed by these methods refuse to believe the truth and are essentially dead to the truth. “These people cannot be changed by logic. The change is complete and irreversible,” as Yuri puts it.

Remember the last time you tried to debate with a “liberal” zombie? The change that zombie underwent at some time in his life was complete and irreversible, wasn’t it? Facts are irrelevant.

Only a nucleus of people who read history, keep up with talk radio and web sites like Laigle’s Forum have even a pinch of understanding of what is going on around us and why. The average American will look you in the eye and tell you with a straight face that our “liberalization” is a result of a natural evolution process. We just keep getting smarter and more sensitive to the needs of others. Praise be to Darwin!

The Soviet propaganda source laid bare in the above-linked video is only one of many. Our education system, as Yuri mentions, has undermined us almost to the point of no return. But the influence came not only from Soviet operatives. Another powerful agency was the Frankfurt School, a group of German Marxists who came to America to escape Hitler and showed their gratitude by teaching their host country to hate its founders, its traditions and its culture. Herbert Marcuse, a famous 60s radical and member of our pseudo-intelligentsia, was a scion of that group. Still another group was the more-or-less home-grown communist agents like Saul Alinsky and Cloward and Piven, who taught other leftists how to manipulate us. Then there were our early educational theorists like John Dewey and his myriad clones. Reaching way back, there were psychologists like Freud and Pavlov, and later the “sexologists” Masters and Johnson who taught that sexual promiscuity is our reason for living. Then there was Dr. Spock who taught us how to spoil kids, and Timothy Leary, who taught spoiled kids how to do drugs. Radical feminists like Andrea Dworkin, pushed for welfare and abortion and aided in breaking up families by redefining “abuse” of women, making it include things as prosaic as “giving your wife the silent treatment,” and hypocritically warned of child abuse while endorsing pedophilia. Thanks to their efforts, the institution of “no-fault divorce” was born, which converted the marriage contract into a worthless piece of paper for millions of husbands, who were often rendered penniless in “family” court in the headlong national effort to “protect women and children.” Similar agents of change were pedophiles like NAMBLA founder Allen Ginsberg, and homosexual activists who introduced and pushed for “gay” marriage to further undermine what was left of the American family. The Liberation Theologists made minorities feel oppressed and helpless and urged them to “strike back” at whites, their “oppressors,” rather than raise themselves out of poverty and ignorance through hard work and study, the only way to raise oneself out of poverty and ignorance. The net effect of these hate mongering racists, working in tandem with the educational left, was to create walls of ignorance, prejudice and hatred that will take decades to tear down. Likewise, the developers of the Delphi method, whether wittingly or unwittingly, made a significant contribution to mind control, manipulating participants to accept ideas – even dangerous ones – by “mainstreaming” them. Finally, as David Kupelian reminds us, Madison Avenue advertisers have contributed mightily to plunging us into a bottomless moral abyss where good is evil and vice-versa. (I’m sure you can think of many more such contributors to the brainwashing of America).

If you look at the sleaze surrounding Obama in his college days you get an idea of who many of the other movers and shakers were in the movement to destroy traditional America and replace it with Marxist utopian ideals.

We find that almost all of the ideas promulgated by these “agents of change” are now chillingly mainstream or close to it. Likewise you will find very few liberals who care that the White House resident has communists among his czars or his past mentors. In the ghetto, you’ll find almost no one who objects.

The Dems have them firmly in place down on their plantation.

So where does this leave Glenn Beck?

If I had Glenn Beck in front of me I would say:

You have focused bravely on monumental issues and I admire you for it. In the final analysis, every single one of these issues – from socialist health care to welfare for rich bankers – stems from the unwillingness of American politicians and judges to honor the Constitution. But the Constitution also has rules governing who can be president and who can’t.

I am therefore asking you to focus fairly on the eligibility issue. Give it its just due and please respect truth seekers whose quest has taken them down other trails than yours. They are your potential allies and you can win them back with a little extra effort.

Review of “Taken into Custody: The War against Fatherhood, Marriage and the Family”

Some of you saw my first article on Rick Warren and noticed that I focused on his wife’s involvement with domestic violence, protesting the premise of her activism as being feminist inspired and potentially causing collateral harm to men and children. Why the fuss? Shouldn’t we be protecting women? Of course we should, whenever their safety is threatened.

But the domestic violence industry has long been in the hands of the feminist Left. It is a money-making racket, and to put it as succinctly as I can, here is how it works:

— Divorce is a multibillion dollar industry rewarding mostly lawyers and divorced or divorcing women.

— Marriage law today is counter-intuitive and works backwards in relation to all other contract law: It rewards the person who is unfaithful while punishing the one who is faithful. 2/3 of all divorces are filed by women. (Olavo de Carvalho has an excellent as-yet unpublished lecture explaining the “revolutionary inversion,” of which “no-fault” divorce is a prime example. Lord willing, I will be presenting a brief column on this).

— To whitewash the person breaching the contract, a strong argument is needed: an accusation or hint of abuse.

— To make this accusation stick, while lacking any evidence of it, the divorce industry relies very heavily on the threadbare myth that males are typically abusers and unfaithful while women are almost always their victims. As I pointed out in that earlier article on Rick, this myth runs counter to almost all research on the subject, which shows that women initiate violence as frequently as men. Yet this long-debunked myth is the basis for divorce law in almost every Western country today.

— The accusation of abuse alone suffices in domestic court, so that the most of the unscrupulous, or mentally disturbed, women who contrive such accusations win. The male is not allowed to be present in many cases, and when he is he is generally instructed to be quiet throughout the proceedings. No proof is required, at variance with the Constitutional principle that the accused be able to face the accuser and that proof be required to convict.

— The reward? Custody and child support for the accuser. Why would the courts and divorce lawyers go to so much trouble to bolster up a dead myth? Without it many of these people with troubled relationships would stay maried!

Imagine how many children would be living with a father under their roofs if we could overcome this dreadful web of lies!

Donald Hank

 

The Government, Divorce, and the War on Fatherhood

by Todd M. Aglialoro

7/31/08

 

Taken into Custody: The War against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family

Stephen Baskerville, Cumberland House, 352 pages, $24.95

 

For whatever reason, social conservatives focus considerable political effort on abortion, gay rights, and obscenity, but pay scant attention to divorce. Perhaps they think that ship has sailed for good, whereas other battles still offer winnable stakes. Perhaps too few look at our “family courts” and see a culture war; or perhaps too many lack the conviction to fight it. And when conservatives do target divorce, rather than lobby for legal reform of the “no-fault” divorce system, or changes in the way courts award custody or child support, they have preferred to employ the tools of ministry, treating divorce primarily as a moral problem rather than a political one; its attendant social evils as a consequence of sin, not of bad policy.

This is a grave mistake, says Stephen Baskerville, professor of government at Patrick Henry College and president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. In his startling new book, Taken into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family, he asserts not only that reforming America’s divorce paradigm deserves a far higher priority among conservative culture warriors, but that our divorce courts today are agents of radical sexual ideology, occasions of shameless graft, and instruments for the expansion of governmental power at the expense of Constitutional rights.

Read more here

 

San Diego gay pride or pedophile pride?

In our column on LDS / FLDS, I had mentioned that the next steps in the liberals’ quest for unlimited sexual freedom will no doubt be legalized polygamy and adult-child sex, with Mormons and pedophiles portrayed as the next “victim” groups. Here are some ominous clues. Without God, folks, there is no redemption for individual souls or the souls of nations. America is headed for the exit. Each one of the dwindling number of activists left in America must now pull out all the stops in both action and prayer.

Donald Hank

 

The James Hartline Report

– On The Frontlines Of The Culture War –

July 18, 2008

 

A Pedophile’s Paradise:

The 2008 San Diego Gay Pride Events

 

Child Sex Advocate Peter Tatchell Will Be San Diego Gay Pride

Parade International Grand Marshal, Making San Diego the

Most Dangerous Place in America For Kids During July 19-20 Events 

 

     In the year 2005, San Diego, California became one of the most dangerous cities in America for children when it was discovered that a nest of pedophiles and sex offenders were working for the non-profit San Diego Gay Pride organization.  Each year, the San Diego Gay Pride festival features events for young minors interwoven with their other porn-filled and sexually explicit adult events.  With the awareness in 2005 that dangerous sex offenders were working in the sexually-charged environment of the San Diego Gay Pride parade and festival, parents, as well as law enforcement, knew that the youth of San Diego were in big trouble.

 

     In one of the most chilling defenses ever for the rights of pedophiles to participate in events involving young minors, the San Diego Gay Pride organization resisted enormous public pressure for weeks to get rid of their pedophile employees and volunteers during the 2005 sex offender scandal.  In the end, to avoid the potential loss of their porn-filled gay pride parade and festival, the organization finally capitulated and removed the known pedophile workers.  Then, of course, it was learned that the pedophile problem was even worse than had been first reported.  The scandal would soon reveal that another child molester, Marty the Clown, was being employed by the San Diego Gay Pride organization to work in the Gay Pride Children’s Garden entertaining young children at the raunchy homosexual festival in the heart of San Diego’s Balboa Park.

 

     The sex offender problem in San Diego’s homosexual pride industry has not been limited to San Diego, California.  It is a moral catastrophe that has surfaced in other cities that promote gay pride events.  According to World Net Daily, in 2007, David Bodoh, a volunteer with Milwaukee’s “PrideFest”, was charged with soliciting a 14 year-old boy over the internet.  Bodoh, whose Native American name is “Crooked Crow”, has volunteered at the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center as well as the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center.

     In the ensuing three years since the San Diego Gay Pride sex offender scandal, public calls for the ending of city support for the porn-filled parade and festival have intensified.  Public concern has been well-justified.  Two years ago, another shocking display of child endangerment was uncovered during the San Diego Gay Pride parade.  The event’s coordinators were allowing an elementary charter school to march young children in the midst of the gay parade that features pornography, nearly nude male strippers, adult escort services and a wide variety of other adult entertainment businesses.  In 2007, the same elementary charter school was once again participating in the parade despite the school being aware of the pornographic nature of the event.

       It was only a matter of time before the sexualization of minors by adults who are connected to the San Diego Gay Pride events would once again became a nightmarish reality.  The San Diego Gay Pride organization just cannot leave the kids alone.  And parents in San Diego, California should be worried — very, very worried this year.  In fact, the immoral assault on the youth of San Diego by the San Diego Gay Pride events in 2008 is coming with a vengeance against parents who are desperately trying to find ways to protect their kids from predators in today’s anti-family culture.

       Incredibly, with so many warnings about the need to protect children from the sexual assaults of adult molesters, the San Diego Gay Pride organization has booked one of Europe’s leading homosexual advocates for lowering the age of consent to 14 as their International Grand Marshal for this year’s San Diego Gay Pride parade.  Peter Tatchell, a homosexual activist from Europe is coming to San Diego to advocate his radicalized vision during the local 2008 gay pride festivities.  On his website, Tatchell states:

  “For 20 years, I have campaigned for a reduction in the age of consent to 14 for both

 gays and straights, backed up by earlier, more explicit sex education to encourage

 wiser, responsible sexual choices. My aim is to end the criminalisation of young

 people involved in consensual behaviour and remove the legal obstacles to the

 provision of condoms and safer sex to the under-16s.”

 

     During her recent speech to introduce the official city council proclamation honoring the 2008 San Diego Gay Pride events, lesbian City Councilwoman Toni Atkins honored Peter Tatchell during her comments. Other incredibly youth-assaultive ideas being promoted by Tatchell on his website include the following:

 

OutRage! advocates an age of consent of 14 for everyone, both gay and straight. PETER TATCHELL argues that young people have a right to make their own sexual choices without being victimised by the law.

 

     Here are a few of the title’s from the writings on Peter Tatchell’s own website that advocate and emphasize sex with minors:

 

1. “SEX ABUSE – CALLS FOR A BRITISH MEGAN’S LAW MISS THE POINT” 

2. “AMNESTY BID FOR GAY SEX “OFFENDERS

3. “SEX RIGHTS FOR THE UNDER-16s

4. “I’M 14, I’M GAY & I WANT A BOYFRIEND

 

     And then there is this horrific and assaultive article by Tatchell entitled: Lowering the unrealistic age of consent will help teens, that was published in March of 2008.  In his article, Tatchell reveals the depth of his depravity by stating:

 

“He claimed that I “recently” advocated sexual rights for the under-16s.  In fact, I first proposed this idea in 1996.  He writes of Myers, stating; “Myers added that I said “14-year-old boys should, if they want, be allowed to have sex with 40-year-old men”. No, I didn’t. My proposed reduction in the age of consent applied to all young people — gay and straight. It was part of a package of ideas to promote the sexual health and welfare of teenagers and to protect them against sexual exploitation.”

 

     For most common sense and decent Americans, Tatchell’s ideals are an American pedophile’s dream come true. In fact, pedophiles in San Diego will be cheering the arrival of this San Diego Gay Pride parade celebrity.  For Councilwoman Toni Atkins, who honored Tatchell during her July 15, 2008 city council speech, it is the same old gay agenda political rhetoric.  During the 2005 San Diego Gay Pride sex offender scandal, Atkins was still encouraging all San Diegans to attend the gay pride festival even though the sex offenders had not even been removed from the event at the time of her advocating attendance of the event.

 

     During the San Diego city council meeting on Tuesday, July 15, 2008, San Diego father and Christian activist Mike Farmer decried the city council when they honored the horrific ideas of Peter Tatchell.  In a stunning blow to the civic sanity and concern for the welfare of San Diego’s Children, the city council voted 7-0 to endorse and celebrate Tatchell and the rest of the San Diego Gay Pride parade, festival and other pornographic events.

 

     Peter Tatchell’s sexual deviancy really knows no boundaries and every parent in San Diego would be well served to keep their kids at home during the July 19-20th Gay Pride festival and parade.  With Tatchell and his supporters walking through the streets of San Diego, there will be no safety for the youth of this eighth largest of American cities.

 

     Tatchell’s intent is monstrously evident.  Here is how Tatchell concludes his article, “Lowering the unrealistic age of consent will help teens”:

 

“Any lowering of the age of consent needs to go hand-in-hand with candid, compulsory sex education in schools. From the age of 12, they need explicit advice on how to deal with sex pests, negotiate safer sex and sustain fulfilling relationships based on mutual consent and respect.”

 

     Peter Tatchell makes no qualms about how he detests Christians who stand in the way of his socialistic, European-style sexualization of young minors.  In a secondary article by Tatchell on his own website entitled, “SEX RIGHTS FOR THE UNDER-16s,” he declares: “Young people under 16 have sexual rights too.”  Making statements that would even make the pedophile-promoting North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) blush, Tatchell states:

 

‘Denying the under-16s the legal right to be sexual, these moralists treat teenagers

who choose to have sex prior to the age of consent as criminals. Blurring the

 differences between consensual and non-consensual sex, they insultingly categorise

 all under-age sex – even when it is consenting and between young people of similar

ages – as child abuse. Their prime concern is not the welfare of young people, but the

 imposition of their own puritan dogma.”

 

     There is a reason that the San Diego Gay Pride organization, the San Diego City Council and San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders have so blatantly slapped families in the face by idolizing and promoting Tatchell in this year’s gay pride festival.  Reading Tatchell’s concluding statement in his article, the ideology of the radicalized, child-dangerous philosophy of Tatchell’s local supporters is revealed:

 

“Isn’t it time the lesbian and gay community said, loud and clear, that the under-16s also have sexual rights? Don’t we have a responsibility to defend the right of under-age queers to make their own free, informed choices about when they are ready for sex?”

 

      It is clear that the San Diego Gay Pride organization is not going to convert the vast majority of San Diegans into accepting their dangerous plan to promote the sexualization of minors in their city.   Mike Farmer identified this dynamic in describing the motivation behind the gay pride theme this year when he made the following statement during his powerful six minute city council speech on Tuesday, July 15, 2008:

 

 

“Where do children fit into all of this? It’s simple: this is about indoctrination. 

When you can’t reproduce, you have to recruit or adopt.  And the radicals in the

 LGBT community, headed up by (Councilwoman) Ms. Atkins, know that the 

earlier you can get to the kids, the easier it is to mold their thinking.”

 

      The San Diego gay rights movement, much like its national brethren, is creating in America the equivalent of a collective dictatorship.  What Nazi Germany could not accomplish, what the Japanese leaders of WWII could not force upon the world, and what the Soviet Union fought and failed to impose for seventy years, the radical gay movement is pushing forward in America.  A forced ideology, an enemy from within America’s own borders, that seeks by government imposition, to enshrine a collective dictatorship where the will of a few sexual deviant ideologues will be enthroned against a politically-castrated populace.

 

      The San Diego Gay Pride festival this week seeks to subject San Diego’s families and children to a sexual tyranny so terrible, that in its full maturity, only an act of God will stop it.  This is exactly why God had to intrude on the forced rape that was occurring in the ancient city of Sodom.

 

      With the help of a city council that has politically prostituted itself to the political machine of the San Diego Gay Pride movement, the advocates of the gay pride festival and parade will continue to manipulate the city will false presentations of gay victimizations as a deceptive tool for garnering media and some public sympathy.  Among anti-American elites who carry the progressive gay rights banner for the liberal gay pride festivals and parades, their hate of traditional American values will continue to show up each year with city proclamations honoring people like European child sex advocate Peter Tatchell.

 

     With the intense attempts to emasculate the spineless Republican San Diego City Councilmembers who voted in support of Tatchell and the San Diego Gay Pride proclamation, Democratic Councilwomen Toni Atkins and Donna Frye have refused to stand up for the hundreds of thousands of San Diego parents with children who despise the sexual activities of the porn-filled gay pride events.

 

      Local San Diego community activist James Hartline considers this year’s San Diego Gay Pride festival and parade to be, perhaps, the most dangerous for children in the 34-year history of the event.  “Peter Tatchell being given a prominent role in the event is an incredibly dangerous assault on San Diego’s families.  To have the city council endorse Tatchell after they were informed of Tatchell’s history of promoting sex among young minors, tells me that our city council has become morally castrated and a present danger to the citizens of San Diego,” says Hartline.

 

     To break the corrupt stranglehold that the radical gay movement has on the San Diego City Council, Hartline believes that a sovereign act of God will have to occur.  “The San Diego City Council has gone too far down the path of moral darkness and I believe with the endorsement of Peter Tatchell, the city council has now become reprobate,” adds Hartline.

 

     James Hartline is calling on all Christians in San Diego and America to pray and fast on Saturday, July 19, 2008 to break the hold that sexually immorality has on San Diego and its government.

 

This has been an Exclusive James Hartline Report

Now Read Daily By Over 20,000 Concerned Citizens of Conviction!

 

I Am Making My Stand in 2008!

Have You Started Making Yours Yet?

 

You can read other major Christian Conservative news stories

at California Christian News

 

James Hartline, Publisher

The James Hartline Report

Educating The Church

Fighting For Our Generation

619-255-9378

or

619-793-9661

 

FLDS case threatens child welfare. TAKE ACTION

It’s a good thing we don’t depend on public support to continue our work here at Laigle’s. With articles like the following we’d probably lose a lot of support.

You know what? I don’t care. We are here to tell it as it is, no holds barred.

You know what worries me about this ElDorado case in Texas? I am certain, 100% sure, that it is a foot in the door for legalized polygamy and adult-child  sex! This is where the FLDS is taking my country. By themselves, they couldn’t do it. But liberals like the idea of unlimited sexual freedom, and when it comes to this issue, child protection suddenly is not very important.  They would love to add Mormons to their growing list of “victim” groups to “protect” by making you more vulnerable. Like they “protect” homosexuals by making it almost impossible for anyone to mention the extreme dangers of “gay” sex.

I don’t think you could be happy with the prospects of living in a country where your children had no legal protection from sexual predators, and I sure as heck am not. I do not want to live in a country modeled after the FLDS practices and doctrines. But wait: did you know that mainstream Mormon has not fully condemned polygamy? For their leadership, the only reason for abstaining from the practice is the fact that the authorities have banned it. What other beliefs are they hiding behind the clerical veil?

For the reasons enumerated above, I have decided to run what is probably he most controversial column ever to appear at Laigle’s Forum.

Quote:

Tell the Texas Governor in your own words how you support indictments for the criminal behaviors for the FLDS ElDorado, TX Case.  Ask him to inform of any other official office for you to voice your opinion about this, how to inform the Grand Jury process. 

See the information about the Governor’s mansion burning down two days before the children were returned to YFZ and express your concern

Texas governor Perry’s phone lines:

 

*       Citizen’s Assistance Hotline: (800) 843-5789
[for Texas callers]

*       Citizen’s Opinion Hotline: (800) 252-9600
[for Texas callers]

*       Citizen’s Assistance andOpinion Hotline: (512) 463-1782
[for Austin, Texas and out-of-state callers]

*       Office of the Governor Main Switchboard: (512) 463-2000
[office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. CST]

*       Citizen’s Assistance Telecommunications Device
If you are using a telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD), call
711 to reach Relay Texas

 

Donald Hank

 Is Mormon a cult?

By Marilyn Ann Stacy

 

The tradition of Judeo-Christian religion recognizes the Supreme Being as creating all, being ever present and continuing his creation.   Psalms 119:89, “Forever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven,”  is explained  in The Wisdom in the Hebrew Alphabet, by Rabbi Michael L. Munk:  “God’s utterance that created heaven also created everything associated with it…..God’s original Ten Utterances are repeated constantly in the sense that the Divine will of the original six days remains in force.  Otherwise, everything would revert to the nothingness of before Creation.”  We were given words to live by.  We develop a relationship with our Creator to serve our purpose in this life.  Added to that tradition is the Son of our Creator.   Relying on the words of human beings motivated by selfish desires to direct worship makes a religion a cult. 

Another mark of a cult is their challenge to revered religions through mind control techniques of the cult’s invention.  A trusted evangelical source, the Index of Cults and Religions, at Watchman Fellowship online, explains mind control of this kind.

Evidence of secular influences further separates cults from bona fide religion. Looking through the Book of Mormon (BOM), by Joseph Smith, we see evidence of secular influences. A story about Golden Plates, for example, was written at the time of Gold Rush.  Further, Mormon community Governance includes an interesting version of Communism from BOM (D&C 121:39), where a statement has similarities to those of anarchist Bakunin.  Joseph Smith includes aspects of Swedenborg’s philosophy.  Like Mohammed, Smith feigns authenticity with borrowed stories from Jewish traditions but clearly distorts them to fit his unsavory agenda (BTW, have you noticed the multiple similarities between Mormon and Islam?).   The BOM was rewritten in 1978 to eliminate references to Smith’s racism toward people of color.  If inspired from above, the BOM racism would not have been there in the first place.  Unlike the Bible, which for millennia, displayed the internal consistency expected of an authentic inspired religious canon, the famous dreams of Joseph Smith and Mohammed were not prefaced by history.  Further, their moral trend of licentious polygamy casts doubt on their authenticity as inspired writings.

The FLDS (Fundamental Latter Day Saints) court case focuses on prosecuting criminal activities set forth in D&C (Doctrines and Covenants) of the BOM (Book of Mormon) 132: 61, known as the Plurality of Wives.  The BOM for FLDS and LDS (Church of Latter Day Saints) contains D&C 132:61.  Although this doctrine is openly practiced only by FLDS today, surprisingly, mainstream LDS has never renounced polygamy.  LDS claims to refrain from practice due to government insistence but does practice sealed-forever spiritual marriages in secret or claims to wait to practice them in heaven after death.  The former Mormon kindred spirit (KS) sources explain that polygamy continues in secret via sealed spiritual celestial marriages that are consummated here or in the hereafter. As the KS also explains, Mormons teach that the authorities will have to answer to God for their “sin” of denying them the practice of their religion. Until D&C 132 is removed from the BOM, the doctrines of FLDS and LDS are substantially the same.  Yet, without section 132, there is no basis for the BOM.  To be saved in Mormon depends on the number of progeny produced.  A position paper from Concerned Citizens Growth Ministries states: “What women have to look forward to is eternal pregnancy.”  LDS is a clearly a “Christian” cult.

There is also a resemblance of perverse ideologies, style, personas, vocabularies, and Public Relations techniques between the Left and Mormon.  The sexual assault of underage girls uncovered in the ElDorado case reminds us of the teachings of NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association).  A child bride’s testimony from a previous 2006 Grand Jury reveals:  “We were taught that we would go to hell” for speaking out, she said. “After I got away from that religion, I still felt like I would be damned if I ‘spoke out’ because that’s just how I was raised.” The Mohave County Superior Court Judge Steven F. Conn, presiding over the case, summed up the issue: It is whether underage girls are going to be protected by society from engaging in sexual relationships outside of the marital relationship

On July 22, 2008, the Grand Jury for the FLDS case regarding the April 3, 2008 raid at the YFZ (Yearning for Zion) Ranch at Eldorado, Texas, has the opportunity to issue indictments to enforce the law.  There is potential to reverse the moral decline in law that started with Rowe v Wade.  The media does not advise us on religious matters, which they deem outside their purview.  Thus we do not hear about Mormons hiding behind ” religion” to avoid judgment for actual or potential criminal behavior. 

Your voice counts. The law is set up to respond, provide indictments, and to follow through with convictions.  Once the convictions are a reality, we can address our religious leaders on the issue of cults.  For now, we need to focus directly upon obtaining justice through the law, which depends in large part on public support. 

Focus should be on the prosecution of the child abuse crimes:  sexual assault of underage girls, the practice of throwing boys away because they compete with older men for child brides, and the practice of lying to authorities that FLDS calls “bleeding the beast,” which is lying to procure welfare money. 

If you agree that these abuses cannot stand, demand that the court of Texas secure the indictments.  The available briefs of this case make it apparent that Judge Barbara Walther should receive supportive input from the public.

Texas Governor Perry’s website is linked at the end of this paragraph.  Although the Governor supported the removal of the children from the YFZ,, not enough public support was shown at his website. The children had to be returned to the abusive ranch where child abuse laws are ignored.

Tell the Texas Governor in your own words how you support indictments for the criminal behaviors for the FLDS ElDorado, TX Case.  Ask him to inform of any other official office for you to voice your opinion about this, and how to inform the Grand Jury process. 

See the information about the Governor’s mansion burning down two days before the children were returned to YFZ and express your concern.  Remember to include this with your message:   If my address is revealed to any party requesting information via the Freedom of Information Act, I require notice. 

Don’t expect a group that considers child abuse as part of their religious creed to play nice!

Related links:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2002/03/22/fbi-system.htm
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/22/205017.sh4
9/11/1973 Chilean Massacre – Mormon CIA taking over the Jesuits & Catholic in South America
http://www.mormon.citymax.com/MittMormon.html

 To post a comment from the main page, click on the live-link title at the top. You will see a comment box at the bottom. Comments are moderated. Be polite and add something relevant. If you wish to rebut, focus on showing how you think the writer is wrong and provide details. Thanks!

Pedophiles one, parents zero!

IS YOUR child’s school on the GLSEN hit list?

Here is a long state-by-state list of participating schools in GLSEN’s Day of Silence:

http://www.missionamerica.com/homosexual.php?articlenum=70

If your school is listed here, there is something you can do about it. If you are too timid to do your duty, maybe you are too timid to have a child in today’s world.

Don’t make your child pay for your hesitation to follow your conscience. If you won’t fight now, imagine the world you will be bequeathing to your grandchildren!

EMPLOYEE fired for reporting crime!

We had mentioned in a recent comment at the post “Sally Kern vs gay agenda” (see comments below the column) that those who are endorsing “gay” marriage now will some day understand that gay marriage is only a step in the incremental path to enforced acceptance of much worse things, including pederasty.

I was wrong only about the time frame.

Consider this a retraction. It’s here now:

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/publish/video/542559/lindsay_librarian_fired_for_reporting_man_viewing_child_porn?wpid=1770 

Citizens who want to be like Citizen Kane had better think twice. Ordinary people like you and I may (and should) call them heroes for snitching on a potential threat to the children.

But not so the authorities, particularly in public libraries, who have a distorted view of the First Amendment and privacy rights – a view that is becoming increasingly widespread among the Left (so-called “progressives” and “liberals”). Their view is that dealing with real and present threats to children takes a back seat to the issue of privacy and freedom of “expression” for perverts. This is, of course, culturicidal. No nation can survive this limp-wristed laissez-faire approach to grotesquely twisted and potentially dangerous behavior.

Our advice to people who still have old-fashioned ideas about decency: don’t let the cultural revolutionary perverts in power positions stop you. Go ahead and do what you know is right. Then if they try to punish you for it, go for their jugular – together with a good constitutional lawyer.

This incident happened in Lindsay, CA. Imagine that! In California of all places! (dripping with sarcasm).

Public sex allowed in Dutch park

It will happen here if we don’t start to “get it” soon. We already fire public officials who inconvenience sex offenders.

Why not this next?

Holland is our crystal ball. We are only a few years behind…and catching up fast! The attitude of our religious leaders is paving the way for this. They want to make nice with the enemy of God. Woe unto them!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/13/wgay113.xml

One Liberty Guarantees the Rest: Original Sin, the Government, and the Right to Bear Arms

By Anthony Horvath

(For a spirited discussion of issues related to this topic, see this forum entry at sntjohnny.com)

With yet another school shooting, this time in NIU, along with the so-called ‘meat cleaver’ killer in New York, we can take a few minutes again to revisit the question of the nature of man. Those who read my blog or my forum know that I firmly believe that the right to bear arms is extremely important. Incidents like the NIU event don’t even surprise us anymore. However, it hit a little close to home for me because I have former students who attend there and have friends who know people there.

Naturally, pundits and candidates moved quickly to capitalize on the event. Hillary Clinton informed the nation that she once shot a duck while hunting and so “she is a supporter of the second amendment.” As if the right to bear arms meant only the right to hunt! Democrats tend to think of the 2nd Amendment in those terms while conservatives tend to think of the 2nd Amendment in terms of a right to self-defense.

In this article I wish to point out that the 2nd Amendment encompasses both of those emphases but is really concerned with something else. It is not about a right to defend ourselves against criminals but rather a right to defend ourselves if it is the government itself that is criminal.

Many states with conceal and carry laws still forbid the carrying of weapons at schools and churches and government buildings. With shootings at schools, churches, and government buildings continuing, one begins to suspect that laws do not stop madmen but only keep honest men and women from fighting back.

I didn’t use to think this way. I have come to this perspective through two twin routes that I believe that Christians in particular should reflect but should be considered by any thinking individual. Gun legislation is not the only thing affected by these twin strands.

In the first place, we need not go far to understand that the root problem is that people themselves are dangerous. Christians call this the doctrine of ‘original sin’ and it is the only doctrine that can be empirically demonstrated. If you understand that people are not intrinsically good but rather incline bad, then you will construct policies that reflect that reality. For most legislators, however, the idea that people might want to do something just because they are evil doesn’t seem to occur.

As I came to grips with the reality of ‘original sin’ I realized that many of my liberal ideas just had to go. It isn’t even that the ideas were bad or immoral. Simply put, if they had been carried out it would be a recipe for disaster. Abuse is inevitable. My ideas presume the best intentions all the time mixed with sincere, honest, and intelligent people carrying them out. This assumption is not justified.

Let us take a minute to tend to the second strand which might not be as objectionable because of its religious implications but still takes us to the same place.

One of the first things I discovered as I began grappling with the facts of history is that the biggest killer of all is not the mugger or rapist or even the serial killer. The biggest killer, hands down, is government. There is a terrific website which helps lay this out and I thoroughly recommend it: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/

At that web page you will see documented the atrocities of the last century as well as back into recorded history. Naïve atheists such as Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins worry their little heads about the dangers of religion, but it is clear as you look at the facts that religion is just one of many pretexts by which power hungry men assert themselves over other men. For example, in the Crusades, over three centuries the site says that 1,000,000 died. That figure isn’t just wholesale slaughter, but includes famine and disease, and includes also the deaths of the Crusaders themselves at the hands of their foes. By contrast, in the 20th century… so just one century, not three, China created 75,000,000 dead bodies. The USSR created 61,000,000.

That is the last century, friends. According to the Democide site, there were 262,000,000 people who died either directly or indirectly but still as the result of Government. Rwanda’s genocide occurred in recent memory and within reach of the International community to have done something about it, but it was tribal concerns that drove the slaughter, not ‘religion.’

No, we must come to grips with the fact that throughout history throughout the whole world, the biggest threat to man is not merely Man but Man in Charge.

The need for checks and balances is obvious. However, if you can’t count on the men and women in government to always act in the interest of the people and that even in many cases they will pursue their own interests, even resorting to murder if necessary, what kind of ‘check’ might possibly exist on people of power?

An armed populace is the only thing an armed government could possibly fear when ‘best intentions’ and ‘sincerity’ is lacking. We talk about having the right to defend ourselves when confronted with gunmen in our schools, malls, and councils, and certainly there is a place for that. However, no gunman is as dangerous as the institution of Government itself.

Here a common protest is that it simply is not realistic to presume that in our day and age, in our civilization, the calamities we bore witness to throughout the world could ever possibly happen here in the United States. Perhaps not today. However, the right to bear arms is the right that ensures we keep all of our other rights. It is the liberty that actualizes all other liberties. If this liberty is diminished, and the country changes in twenty years, it will be too late to reclaim it. At least, too late without first paying our own price of tens of millions dead.

We operate on the assumption that all will continue on as it has been continuing on. However, as the riots in LA show – or even as riots after the win of a professional sports team! – civilization is only skin deep. What’s more, the influx of illegal immigrants to the south is not coming ideologically neutral. Many are coming with the ideologies that expressly led to some of the atrocities of the last century. In forty years, it won’t just be the ethnic make-up of the country at risk, but potentially also the ideological one.

It is an uncomfortable thought to consider that we might want our government to be worried about its own citizens. We might think to ourselves that we don’t want our police officers, for example, to be concerned that someone might fight back. After all, we have courts, right? History shows us that there exists a thing called a mock trial. Granted, we are far off from such things in our country right now. To keep them far off for the foreseeable future, it is important that our government has a healthy fear of those it rules.

That brings us full circle. Why should power corrupt and absolute power corrupt absolutely? What is it about Man that makes this so? What is the best explanation? If it is, as I have said because man is inclined towards wickedness, then we might wonder if there is something to the claim that we need a savior. Jesus does not promise utopia. He doesn’t even encourage the pursuit of one. However, perhaps when we grapple with utopian ideals we’ll come to see that man is hopelessly sick and needs a Doctor and that Doctor cannot be Government.

Anthony Horvath is the author of Fidelis and the Executive Director of Athanatos Christian Ministries.  (For a spirited discussion of issues related to this topic, see this forum entry at sntjohnny.com)