Monday, August 20, 2018

Mollie Tibbetts: the Possibilities

Everything about Mollie Tibbetts (vanished college student in Iowa) is just conjecture at this point.  Here's what I think, for what it's worth (not much probably):

1.  Who would abduct Mollie?

The possibilities are these:
  • Someone she knew
  • A complete stranger
There is no evidence of a struggle, and police believe she probably got into a car with someone she knew.  However, if Mollie was taken while jogging, it could have been by a complete stranger with a gun to coerce her into a car.

2.  Why would anyone harm Mollie?

Mollie is or was a very pretty young woman.

These are some possibilities:
  • Rape:  Evil people like Ted Bundy do exist and need no provocation.  They see what they want and just take it.  It might have been a crime of opportunity.
  • Rage:  If her abductor made sexual advances and was rebuffed, he may have struck or choked Mollie to shut up her screaming or because he felt humiliated and wanted revenge.  Or both.
3.  Why can't police find a body?

These are some possibilities:
  • If Mollie was murdered, her body may have been dumped in some out of the way location, or even buried.  So far extensive searches have not found a body.
  • If Mollie is still alive, she may be held against her will by threat of force.
4.  Questions:
  • Have police used cadaver dogs to search for a body?
  • Have police determined who knew Mollie would be dog sitting all alone in a house?
  • Have police released a psychological profile of the kind of person who would abduct a young woman?
  • Have police considered using psychic detectives?  These are people with a strong intuition and sometimes can provide clues as to the victim's whereabouts.
5.  What do you think?

Personally, I think Mollie is dead, a victim of rape and murder.  I would guess it is the first crime of the perpetrator, someone who is a bit off, mentally.  He would be young, 22 - 25, someone with low impulse control.   

There are various wooded areas in and around Brooklyn, Iowa.  If someone wanted to hide a body, he would no doubt do so where he couldn't be easily observed in the act.  However, the perpetrator may have transported the body elsewhere, out of town, out of county, or even out of state.

This kind of crime happens way too often.  If a girl is abducted, it would be good to have a way of signaling her predicament, a way of finding her, perhaps with an RF device.  Maybe with something worn around the neck, like a pendant.  Come on, capitalists out there, come up with some solutions!

View Brooklyn, Iowa from satellite image here.

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

THE DEMOCRAT FREAK SHOW: Trans Man-to-Woman Wins Governor Primary in Vermont

"Vermont Democrats made history Tuesday by nominating Christine Hallquist as the first transgender individual to be a major party candidate for governor."  (Link)

Another "making history" moment for Democrats, as they select a man dressed up like a woman to be their candidate for governor of Vermont.

It always amazes me how Democrats celebrate perversion and abnormality in their candidates.  What's next?  A flasher in a raincoat?  A "furry," i.e. someone who likes to dress up as an animal?  Maybe in a chicken suit?  How about the first masochist lady in leathers, supporting chains and whips?  Or someone who likes to dress up as a scary clown?

Oh yes, ain't "making history" wonderful?

Tuesday, August 07, 2018

Current Leftist Themes on Twitter

Alex Jones of Infowars

I like arguing with liberals, leftists and Democrats on Twitter.  It's good practice for condensing your arguments to a few potent phrases, since you are limited in space.

Twitter also makes it clear what propaganda the left is pushing on a daily basis.  Right now the themes seem to run along these lines:

1.  Trump has started a "Deportation Task Force" to revoke the citizenship of those he deems undesirable.  One immediately gets the impression that ole "RAAACIST" Trump is plotting to send all those legal Mexican immigrants packing, because let's face it, if you are against illegal immigration from Mexico, it means you are against legal immigration as well.  That's because, in the minds of the left, only "racism" can be the reason for opposing illegals.

It isn't true, of course.  What is true is that the Department of Homeland Security has become aware that some foreigners have lied on the applications for citizenship, and some have even used fake identities, to gain entrance after being deported a first time.  Material misrepresentations on a citizenship application can allow citizenship to unsavory characters who would never have been approved if the facts were known.  No one can be deported without a court hearing, and Trump cannot deport anyone on his own.

2.  ICE is now even reaching into the Army to nab illegals and deport them.   This fable was debunked a couple of months ago, but still persists among those who avoid real news.  The Army was enlisting foreigners for military service and eventual citizenship, but some of the applicants didn't pass the background check.  So they were not allowed to enlist, and were sent packing.  No serving army soldiers were nabbed and deported.  However, the liberal big lie continues among the sheep.

3.  Censorship of Conservatives has reached a fever pitch.  It appears the big tech firms, Spotify, FaceBook, iTunes and YouTube have colluded to shut down and Alex Jones.  All of his accounts were shut down on the same day, for "hate speech" and violation of the Terms of Service.  It is pretty clear that the leftists in media have declared war on conservative thought and speech.

I am not a huge fan of Alex Jones, because of his conspiracy theories (he was one of the first to claim that 911 was "an inside job").  So I take him with a grain of salt.  However, I have never thought of him as a monger of hatred or anyone preaching violence.  We fear that Alex Jones is the canary in the coal mine, and that he is just the start of a purge.  Will the Drudge Report be next?

Commenting on Saber Point

Due to malfunctioning of my Disqus commenting system, I deleted and then reinstalled it.

It seems to be working for the moment.

IF YOU DON'T SEE A COMMENT BOX, just click on the title of the post.  That will bring up the commenting section.

Wednesday, August 01, 2018

What Happened to Mollie Tibbetts?

Two weeks ago, pretty college student Mollie Tibbetts disappeared. She lived in Brooklyn, Iowa and was a student at the University of Iowa. It was late in the day of July 18 when she announced she was going for a run. She hasn't been seen since.
Pretty young women are often taken by the lowest scum in the human race, monsters who abduct, rape and then murder their victims.  Sometimes not even the body is found, causing the family years of grief and torment, wondering what happened and whether their loved one could still be alive.

There is always the chance that Mollie was taken prisoner, like the three women held as sex slaves in Detroit, who were finally freed in 2016.  There is always hope.

However, I feel that the chances are greater that Mollie Tibbetts is dead.  That's the usual ending to sad stories like this.  The best that we can probably hope for is that the perpetrator will be found and the body recovered, to give closure to her family.

Read about it here.

Is "Collusion" Illegal?

I read that lefty Jimmy Fallon ridiculed Rudy Giuliani for saying that "collusion is not a crime."  Fallon was incredulous, or feigning so, claiming that Trump must be thinking "why can't this guy just shut up?'

The meaning of collusion is "a secret agreement or cooperation."

Well is collusion illegal?  Not according to attorney Gregg Jarrett.  Writing in his recently released book "The Russian Hoax," Jarrett writes:
"Collusion" is not a crime, except in anti-trust law. Reporters and anchors never bothered to cite a specific statute because none could be found in the criminal codes.  Not that they ever bothered to look.  They were satisfied, indeed anxious, to level the accusation because their bias against Trump was so impassioned and pervasive that it became impervious to the facts.
I am reading Jarrett's book now.  It recounts the crimes of Hillary and the steps to improperly exonerate her in detail, naming names, dates and places.  I recommend this book.

Note:  Collusion itself isn't illegal, but leads to illegality when its object is to commit a crime.  If you collude with your neighbor to throw a surprise party for your wife, that isn't illegal.  If Democrat media colludes with others to launch an "October surprise" in order to damage a Republican candidate's chance for election, that too is not a crime (dirty pool, maybe).

No description of any collusion of Trump with Russian agents to somehow skewer Hillary's chances has ever been made or alleged.  No description of any crime such collusion entailed has ever been made. So what exactly is Mueller investigating?

Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Google's Blogger Enforces Sharia Law?

Lately I have had Blogger take down (i.e. they censored) a couple of my older posts that were critical of Muhammad or of his fake religion, Islam.  They featured Photoshops of Muhammad and the Quran.  The first showed Muhammad as Cyrano de Bergerac, as part of "everyone draw Muhammad" day.

The second showed a young boy peeing on a Quran.  This was a response to an Islamic cartoon showing a young boy peeing on the Statue of Liberty.

The problem, per Google, was that these depictions were a violation of Pakistani law.  So now we have a major US corporation enforcing the laws of a Muslim hell-hole over the Constitution of the United States.

Friday, July 27, 2018

Time to Shed Bad Old Habits: Football and Hollywood

The National Football League
News media report that the athletes of the National Football League are still insisting on the right to "take a knee" during the national anthem before games.  Last season the public boycotted football games because of this, reducing audience size by 8% in 2016 and 9.7% in 2017 (see here for details).  The players don't seem to care, they want to protest again for the 2018 season.

The players can protest until they are blue in the face, it's their right.  I will exercise my right not to watch or even care about professional football.

If ever there were a venue or culture that is 180 degrees opposite my personal values, it is Hollywood.  Their movies are leftist propaganda, for the most part, preachy sermons to us ignorant and unenlightened masses about the most current perversions, myths and falsehoods.  It seems 99% of all actors, producers and directors are far-out leftwingers with green hair, tattoos, nose rings and a Marxist mentality.  And they hate with a burning fury like no other, hate President Trump, hate normal people, that is, those of us who are not gay, illegal, atheistic or anti-American.

Their latest idiocy is to promote "transgenderism," where it is considered highly desirable to identify with the gender that you are not, to dress the part, and to invade public restrooms, showers and dressing rooms of the opposite sex; not to mention competing in women's sports with pecker attached, and winning racing and wrestling events because such "transgenders" are really men with more muscle mass and testosterone.

Even more sick is their latest support of pedophilia -- supporting those who want to have sex with children.  Hollyweird supports depravity and revels in it.

So I rarely, if ever, go to the movies anymore.

A Southern Dilemma: How Not to Antagonize New Black Conservatives; Dealing With Dinesh D'Souza

Over at Twitter I am very pleased to see the number of black conservatives who have joined the MAGA ("Make America Great Again") movement.  I link to every black conservative I find.  However, I see many of them buying into Dinesh D'Souza's interpretations of American history, which I believe are flawed and downright dishonest.  I say that as a well-read Confederate descendant who regularly disputes the Northern Myth, that the North and the 19th Century Republicans fought the Civil War to free the slaves and make black people full equals in the American dream.

I generally avoid arguments with fellow conservatives on Twitter about this history, to avoid disunity in our support for Donald Trump, and to avoid hard feelings between us.  The here and now is more important than what happened 150 years ago; nevertheless, wholescale distortion of that history by D'Souza does grate on me.  He is insulting my ancestors, my family, and indirectly, me.  And he is not the only culprit:  recently Rush Limbaugh spouted some ahistorical nonsense, comparing modern Democrats to the Confederates of the 1860s.

Yesterday a prominent conservative listed all the sins of the Democratic Party.  I found his interpretation superficial.  Among other claims he made was that "Democrats started the Civil War."  No, Democrats did not.  They exercised their Constitutional and natural right to secede from a political union, much as the U.K. recently did from the European Union.  It was Lincoln and Lincoln alone who decided to go to war to prevent the South from leaving, and even plotted with his generals to push the South into firing the first shot at Fort Sumter, for propaganda purposes, as recommended by his Secretary of the Navy, Gideon Wells.

Some Republicans (like D'Souza) hate to hear it and even deny it, but yes, the two political parties have indeed changed sides since the 19th Century.  Lincoln's GOP was authoritarian, anti-Constitutional, believed the Federal government to be superior to the states, supported corporate welfare for Northern businesses, high taxes, and all sorts of political shenanigans to ensure the GOP's hold on power -- like illegally forming a new state, West Virginia, to give Lincoln more electoral votes, marching the army to the polls with orders to vote for Lincoln, shutting down opposition newspapers and jailing the editors, arresting and imprisoning thousands of people on suspicion alone, illegally suspending habeas corpus, and the list goes on.  Lincoln was the biggest tyrant in U.S. history, and he didn't care much for black people.

The Democrats of that time period resented and opposed the high taxes that fell mainly on the South, believed in a small and limited federal government that was the servant, not the master, of the states.

I am a Republican today because it is NOT the same party of 1860.  Race relations has little to do with it.  However, I am happy that black people are progressing in modern society, making more money, enjoying a better lifestyle, and more and more of them are becoming my allies and friends.