George Zimmerman Looking Like a Winner in Zimmerman-Martin Case

Introduction:
There's no doubt in my mind that 90% of black Americans believe Trayvon Martin was cruelly and unjustly murdered by George Zimmerman.  After all, Martin is black and Zimmerman is Hispanic.  Not white, but close enough to justify racial biases.

A Neighborhood Watch volunteer, George Zimmerman, shot and killed an unarmed, black 17-year-old, Trayvon Martin in February 2012.  Zimmerman claimed it was in self-defense and was released as police said there was no evidence to dispute this.  Indeed, Zimmerman's bloodied face and head clearly supported Zimmerman's claim of self defense.

My Opinion and My Concern:

In America, you get special consideration if you are black.  Blacks are a "protected class," and that protection means that any confrontation, fight or disagreement by a non-black is presumed to be "racism," and the non-black individual guilty until proven innocent.  We all know this, though many will never admit it in public.  After Martin's death, the race-grievance industry went into overtime, insisting that Zimmerman must have shot Martin simply because the dear boy was black, wearing a hoodie and eating Skittles.  Zimmerman was eventually arrested and charged with second degree murder, not on the basis of any credible evidence, but because he had sinned against our sacred tribe of Dalai-Lama black folks, and because white liberal politicians can never pass up a photo-op proving that they are the incarnation of Atticus Finch.  My concern is that Zimmerman has been denied equal treatment under the law simply because of race.

HOWEVER:

The above has been my concern over this trial from day one.  However, I do not know what happened on the grounds of that Florida homeowners association back in February of 2012.  Also, I wouldn't want my 17 year old son shot dead either.  Maybe Zimmerman provoked the confrontation by following Martin too closely, by insinuating that Martin was a criminal about to perpetrate a crime, based on nothing but racial considerations.  I can understand how that would totally piss off Martin and provoke a fight.  So what really happened?  I was content to leave it to the jury to sort it all out, and not prejudge the case (like 90% of blacks have already done).

Witness Testimony So Far:

A defense attorney, Andrew Branca, at Legal Insurrection has been describing the testimony and trial over the past few days, and most of the witnesses, including those called by the prosecution, convincingly uphold Zimmerman's description of events:  Martin attacked Zimmerman, got on top of Zimmerman and began punching him in the face in a mixed, martial arts style; Zimmerman screamed for help; and Zimmerman shot Martin out of fear for his life.  (Zimmerman claims that Martin went for Zimmerman's gun and threatened to kill Zimmerman.)  Photos of Zimmerman's wounds after the altercation confirm that Martin had done serious physical damage to Zimmerman's face and head.

The prosecution's primary witnesses were either destroyed in cross-examination by the defense, or gave testimony supporting the defense positions.  Andrew Branca described it yesterday:

Once again, it was simply not a very good day at all for the prosecution. The primary State witnesses today were Rachel Jeantel, Jenna Lauer, and Selma Mora. The first had her credibility substantively destroyed, the second was powerfully–almost humiliatingly–co-opted by the defense, and the third provided testimony entirely consistent with the defense’s theory of lawful self-defense.

My Conclusions:
Based on testimony and evidence so far, George Zimmerman is proved innocent of murder, as he clearly acted in self-defense and in fear for his life.  Martin's death was a tragedy, though largely self-inflicted by his own uncontrolled rage.  It most certainly was not second degree murder.

However, will the jury agree?  Who knows.

Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer Are Banned From Britain

Muslim Protest in London, 2006.  Britain Protects 
and Welcomes Hateful Muslims But Bans Those 
Who Are Critical of Muslim Intolerance and Violence

Via American Power: Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have been officially banned from entering [formerly] Great Britain due to their opposition to Islamization of the West. This makes no sense -- if you oppose hatred, mass murder, violence and intolerance -- all of which is Islam on steroids -- you are banned from Britain. If you are a hateful, Jew-hating, terrorist supporting radical Imam, you are welcome.

See photos below of folks who live in Britain and have NOT been banned.  In fact, British police surrounded these protesters to protect them from regular Brits who were outraged at the signs advocating violence and murder.  One Brit was threatened with arrest for attempting to counter demonstrate.

If you speak the truth about Islam, you will be banned.  Freedom of speech is not allowed in Great Britain anymore.  Truth is not a defense.  What kind of insanity is the British government pushing, and why?

If you want to visit Great Britain, you cannot voice opposition to Islam.  Why?  Because Great Britain, home of the West's biggest fools and cowards, is busily Islamisizing itself, in an attempt to de-westernize itself into yet another barbaric backwater.  Long live dhimmitude!

My feeling for the leaders and government of Great Britain is one of abject contempt and disgust.

Muslim Threatens Mass Murder

Muslim Threatens Mass Murder While
Enjoying Protection of London Police

The True Nature of Islam

Scientists Who Dispute Man-Made Climate Change

Climate Depot is a climate related blog that I have linked to for a couple of years, but rarely read.  That's because the "global warming" controversy just isn't as sexy or as immediate as other current events.  Also, the climate controversy requires one to read graphs, study technical terms, and follow meandering scientific claims and counterclaims.  Since Barack Obama is now using the global warming fraud to once again undermine the economy, reading Climate Depot and related blogs (like Real Science) is now a priority.

If you read Wikipedia, a liberal biased site, you will see that "science" is 90% sure that human activity is driving global warming.  However, there is a growing number of qualified scientists who dispute this.  It is educational to read what some of the most prominent say about the "science" of global warming.  Read this article at Climate Depot: SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims – Challenge UN IPCC & Gore.

What is a "Climatologist"? Answer: a Recently Invented Job Title and Degree, Not a Science

In the ever evolving scam of anthropogenic global warming (now called "climate change" due to an absence of global warming), alarmists attack the opinions of any scientist who is not specifically a "climatologist."  This is a recurrent theme in alarmist propaganda as to why any dissenting scientist has no credibility.

So the Petition Project, which documents the dissent of over 30,000 scientists (over 9,000 of whom are PhD's), is meaningless...because physics, biology, chemistry, and even meteorology are not "climate change science" and therefore these scientists' opinions hold no weight.

This is undoubtedly the chief logical fallacy pushed by the warmists, i.e. an appeal to authority.  If some guy with a degree in "climatology" says man made global warming is happening on a large scale, than by god, it is and you can't possibly disagree.  Here's why that is B.S.:  if someone has a higher degree in math, and they say "2 + 2 = 5", you must accept what they say, because they have the degree and you don't.  This is especially true where the mathematician's conclusions are "peer reviewed."  That means another mathematician,  who is also receiving big bucks from the government to arrive at the desired conclusion, has reviewed your work.  Bingo!  2 + 2 = 5.

A climatologist is basically anyone with a degree in any number of sciences, who has used computer modeling to predict the weather or who has studied past weather patterns.  Big whoopee.  Here is an article from the Examiner.  Note:  it is four years old and since it was published, a number of "climatology" degree programs have been cobbled together by various universities.  However, it is still of value in spiking the warmist logical fallacy of "appeal to authority."

The Brazen Dishonesty of Global Warming Advocates

We are always hearing stories of how every climate scientist in the world is a passionate believer in man-made global warming, and how we are doomed, dooomed, doooooooomed unless we institute a form of totalitarianism to deal with it.

Okay, so I exaggerated, but not by much.  The latest massive B.S. broadside by the neo-Bolsheviks is that a full 97% of climate scientists believe in man made global warming.  For example, here is the Washington Post's claim:

97 percent of scientific studies agree on manmade global warming, so what now?  A new study confirms there is strong scientific consensus that human activities are causing the planet to warm. 97 percent of scientific papers (that take a stance on the issue) agree, the study finds.

However, the Post's statement above is total B.S.  The survey, taken by a biased warmist website, consisted of a question allegedly put to approximately 12,000 climate scientists who had written scientific papers on the subject.  James M. Taylor, managing editor of Environment & Climate News, writes:

As is the case with other ‘surveys’ alleging an overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming, the question surveyed did not address the issues of contention between global warming alarmists and skeptics. The question Cook and his colleagues surveyed was simply whether humans have caused some global warming. Most skeptics, like most alarmists, believe humans have caused some global warming. The issue dividing the two is whether humans are causing a global warming crisis demanding concerted action.

In other words, the study misclassified as warming-alarmists those who believe man's contribution to global warming, though real, is negligible and nothing to worry about.

Cook and colleagues further skewed the results of the study by falsely classifying skeptic papers as "taking no position" on AGW.  For example:

Morner, a sea level scientist, told Popular Technology Cook classifying one of his papers as “no position” was “Certainly not correct and certainly misleading. The paper is strongly against AGW [anthropogenic global warming], and documents its absence in the sea level observational facts. Also, it invalidates the mode of sea level handling by the IPCC.”

With such biased polling and classifying, it is no wonder that the Cook survey concluded that "97% of climate scientists believe that humans are causing global warming," a ridiculous, unsupported conclusion indeed.

Remembering San Francisco's "Playland at the Beach"

Playland (also known as Playland at the Beach and Whitney's Playland beginning in 1928) was a 10-acre seaside amusement park located next to Ocean Beach, in the Richmond District at the western edge of San Francisco, California along Great Highway where Cabrillo and Balboa streets are now.

It began as a collection of amusement rides and concessions in the late 19th century and was known as 'Chutes At The Beach' as early as 1913. It closed Labor Day weekend in 1972.

I remember going there many times as a youngster. My younger brother and I were always creeped out by the ugly head of a lady mannequin at the entrance to the park. She had chubby cheeks and a frozen smile, and her head bobbed up and down, with a scratchy recording of her laughing. It went “HA HA HA HA HA….scratch….scratch….scratch….scratch…..HA HA HA HA HA….scratch….scratch….scratch….scratch….." over and over again. I suppose the laughing lady was meant to put you into a cheerful, fun-filled mood, but it only terrified me and little bro.  She was known as laughing Sal and has been preserved in the Musee Mecanique in San Francisco's Fisherman's Wharf, where she is still laughing and creeping out little kids (go to this link to see and hear her).

Here are some pictures of Playland at the Beach, taken over the many years of its existence.

Get a load of the depiction of black servers on the right.  RAAAAACISM!

Ah, here is the beautiful, talented and sexy Grace Slick, with guitar player Jorma Kaukonen of the
Jefferson Airplane.  I knew Jorma as he was a customer of my father's music store in San Jose, CA.

People Will Believe Anything...And Do

Shapeshifting Reptilian Humanoid
In An Unguarded Moment

The human mind is a fascinating thing, capable of great creativity, discovery and achievement.  It is also capable of great destruction, of inhumanity to man, of mindless hatred and prejudice.  It is also capable of great self-delusion.

People generally believe what they want to believe, regardless of facts or logic.  Weird religions, like Mormonism, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology are all good examples.  However, the human mind's propensity for self delusion doesn't stop at religion.  Politics is also a fertile field for various forms of insanity.  Alex Jones and his followers are an extreme case in point, where every happenstance event in the world is a precisely planned and manipulated by the Illuminati, a high cabal of conspirators manipulating daily events for unexplained but nefarious reasons.  Slightly (very slightly) less obvious is MSNBC, where radicals like Rachel Maddow interpret the news, or simply ignore it when events that are damaging to their bias can't be explained away.

Then there's the justice system.  Italy's continuing obsession with framing Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for a crime they didn't commit, is a case in point.  There is absolutely no evidence that the two participated in a "sex game gone wrong" that killed Knox's housemate, Meredith Kercher, but the Italian Supreme Court believes in the fantasy scenario in spite of a complete lack of evidence or witnesses, and in spite of the Perugian police's wholescale destruction of exculpating evidence (failing to affix the time of death of the victim, contaminating the crime scene, wiping the hard disks of three computers belonging to the housemates, "losing" the videotape of the abusive interrogation of Knox, refusing to DNA test semen found on Kercher's body).

Then there are the shape-shifting succubi, the alien lizardoids in the media.  Recently on YouTube I noticed there is a whole slew of amateur videos "documenting" the alien shape-shifters among us.  These videos show television announcers or other speakers in a state of depixilation due to bad reception or malfunctioning hardware, and present it as evidence that these TV folks are shape-shifting reptilians among us, momentarily losing control of their carefully crafted disguises as human beings.

I rest my case.  People will believe anything.  And do.  There is little we can do to change minds, because the delusional are comfortable in their self-deception, which forms a shield between them and an unpleasant reality.

Taking Stock of the New Fascist America

I haven't blogged for an entire week.  To be honest, I have had a feeling of futility in the fight to preserve our freedoms.  We have lost major battles recently, if not the war.  Leftist "progressivism" is ascendant and Obama's goal to "transform America" into a socialist nation appears well on the way to success.

Americans are under heavy surveillance by our new fascist masters (and I use the term "fascist" as an actual and accurate description of Obama and the Democrats, and not as a gratuitous insult).  The "progressives" (the new and modern word for fascist) think they know better than the rest of us what is good for us, what should be legal or illegal, what should be mandatory and what should be allowed.  We, the rest of society, are merely a huge lump of clay for these progressive "artistes" to fashion as they may, sculpting us into a new regimented, indoctrinated and submissive peonage that lives only to support the new "utopia."  You know, the utopia of Chicago and Detroit, or of western Europe, which is busily committing ritual hara kiri with an Islamic scimitar.

As for the surveillance, I have to wonder at the websites that have been scouring every post on this blog since the beginning -- what are they looking for?  I find myself suspicious of every email from a stranger.

Meanwhile, I am sick to death of the left's many "isms" that they use as whips to control aberrant thought,  racism and sexism being the foremost.  Those who have drank deeply of the fascist Kool-aid are becoming increasingly impatient with those of us who refuse the cup, furious at our political apostasy for denying the new secular religion.

Can America be saved from its "progressive" transformation?  With the Republican Party now acting like a spanked lap dog of the left, acquiescing in "immigration reform" that will add millions of new voters to Democrat rolls, I am not optimistic.  Again, secession seems to be the only viable solution.  We can only hope that Texas, great Texas, will show us the way.

Grade School Fascism and Anti-Gun Hysteria

Yosemite Sam

Fascism is force.  Fascism is indoctrination.  Fascism is ostracism, punishment and intimidation of those who violate its tenets, however far-fetched the crime, however young and unwitting the perpetrators.

For several years I have watched in increasing anger and dismay at the severe indoctrination and intimidation of grade school children by progressive fascists, mainly over guns and knives.  The latest example is here, where a 7 year old was suspended for allegedly eating his pop tart into the shape of a gun.

The extremism of local school boards has reached unprecedented levels of absurdity, but it is not without purpose or design.  The current generation of grammar school children will someday grow up to be the adults who vote.  By then these new adults will be so terrified of guns that they will vote away the Second Amendment in a heartbeat.  To create the new docile and manageable American adult, any and all discussion or depiction of guns must be ruthlessly suppressed.

One must never be allowed to think about guns, mention guns, depict guns in any way, either by toy replicas, or by drawing guns, or by pointing one's fingers to simulate a gun, or by eating pastry into a gun-like shape.  Those who do will be severely punished, not for actual deeds, but for thought crimes.

"Come and Take It!"

It is time to counter such insanity with strong measures.  If it were up to me, the Maryland community that is served by this school would picket the school, hoisting signs and placards that depict real guns in photographs and drawings.  Informational pamphlets would be handed out to passers-by with pertinent facts, such as "this is a picture of a real gun.  It does not shoot.  It cannot harm anyone.  Depictions of guns harm no one!  Know the difference.  End anti-gun fascism now!"

They could hand out toy guns to school kids outside of school grounds, offer free pastries baked into gun shapes, post pictures of cartoon guns on telephone poles, patrol the school perimeter armed with super-shooter squirt guns, bubble guns and toy guns with barrel flags that say "BANG!"  Candy makers could make bubble gum in the shape of tiny handguns;  women could wear handgun earrings and (fake) bullet necklaces, men could wear gun-shaped lapel pins.  Informational pamphlets depicting real guns, and how they differ from imaginary guns, could be mailed to every member of the school board and teachers' union.  Planes could be hired to drop leaflets depicting comic guns with "bang" flags over all local school grounds.  T shirts with Yosemite Sam brandishing cartoon six-shooters could be worn by all protesters.  (What are they gonna do, arrest Walt Disney?)

In other words, absurdity should be fought with counter-absurdity.  Everywhere the grade school fascists turn, they should see the comical depiction of a gun.  I say comical so they can't claim intimidation or interpret the depictions as any kind of implied threat.  The goal is to rub the fascist nose in the asininity of progressive paranoia while deliberately flouting its program.

Obama Listens (to Your Phone Calls) -- Cartoon

Found on Facebook.

Obama and Fascism

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about fascism, debunking a liberal's phony article about the "14 attributes of fascism."  The liberal's article was really a disguised attempt to link conservative traits to fascism; in other words, it was propaganda, not an honest discussion.

I have been studying fascism and have become convinced that Obama's administration shows some real traits of this form of government.  However, there are some differences as well.

There is no precise definition of fascism.  Neither Mussolini nor Franco sat down and made a list for what fascism must include.  (Hitler, by the way, was more than a fascist, he was a genocidal meglomaniac, and not the best example of fascism.)

From my readings, here is a loose list of fascist traits:

1.  Fascism is a near-worship of the State, a kind of secular religion where God is replaced by the State.
2.  Every aspect of life is within the purview of the State and nothing is outside of it.  Fascism is totalitarian.
3.  The State knows best and can regulate all aspects of the lives of its citizens, relying on committees of experts for policy decisions rather than democratic elections.  The State is not limited by a Constitution or Bill of Rights.  Individualism is suppressed, and all personal ambition and individual interests are subordinated to the State.  The purpose of the individual is to serve the State, and anything that he does or accomplishes must be judged by this one criterion.
4.  The citizenry are kept in a constant state of mobilization and militarization, similar to wartime conditions.  The State's goals are best carried out by a motivated citizenry who strongly believe in State goals and have a sense of urgency in their achievement.  Fascist leaders (and their progeny) are constantly looking for a new crisis to keep this motivation going, to find what has been called "the moral equivalent of war."  This motivating force may be from either an internal or external threat, real or imagined.
5. Fascist states are socialist, but this does not imply that all socialist states are fascist.  Fascist states generally direct the economy through both force and economic incentives, forcing government, corporations and labor unions to work together under terms dictated by the State.  Labor unions cannot strike.
6.  Fascist states are nationalistic rather than internationalist, and this is a key difference between fascism and Soviet communism.  (This is also, in my opinion, a point of departure for the Obama Administration, which tends to be internationalist or globalist.)
7.  Fascist states seek to change human nature so it is more amenable to the dictates of the State.  This is accomplished through indoctrination, particularly of children and young people through education early on, and by weakening the bonds of the nuclear family so that old beliefs will not be passed to new generations through the parent.  Indoctrination is also widely achieved by mass media that are loyal to the State.  Competing views are suppressed or prohibited altogether.
8.  Citizens who refuse to cooperate in the goals and programs of the State are ostracized and punished, and this punishment may be extreme.  This ostracism and punishment are carried out by agencies of the State, not limited to police and military agencies (e.g. during the fascistic Wilson Administration, the Post Office would refuse to deliver newsletters and magazines that opposed Administration policies).  Obama's recent flap, with the IRS denying equal service to citizens based on their political support or opposition, was entirely fascist in nature.
9.  Fascist states tend to oppose religion because religious beliefs often contradict state policies and offer a competing view of reality, morals and behavior, all of which may weaken loyalty to the State and to State dogmas.  Religion is hated simply because it is a form of competition for the loyalties of the citizenry.

Note:  Fascism does not require ethnic hatreds like those of the Nazis.  Hitler's antisemitism was peculiar to German fascism and not followed by either Mussolini or Franco.  However, in the search for the "moral equivalent of war," ethnic hatred may be a useful tool for motivating the masses, and therefore always a possible tactic in the Fascist lexicon.

Fascist states may or may not be expansionist.  Both the German and Japanese governments of the 1930's and 1940's were motivated by conquest, i.e. the desire to obtain additional territory and resources by force, which included using conquered peoples as slaves.  Sometimes the greatest "moral equivalent of war" is war itself -- Mussolini invaded Ethiopia as a tactic to strengthen his political power when Italians began to tire of fascism.

D-Day + 69 Years

This week, Rush Limbaugh visited Normandy, France and toured the scenes of D-Day, the allied invasion of Nazi-held France, 69 years ago today.

No matter how much time passes, that day in history will always be foremost in my mind, when I think of valor and courage and victory over evil.  I hope to visit Normandy, and Omaha Beach, before I die.  I would like to pay my respects to the American dead, thousands of whom are buried there under white marble crosses and green grass.

Rush describes his impressions and emotions of the visit here.

On the 40th anniversary of D-Day, President Ronald Reagan gave one of his most inspiring speeches at the scene, "The Boys of Pointe Du Hoc."  Here it is.

Bro and Stogie Jam Out to "Black Magic Woman" (Video)

Over the weekend I visited my older brother (Bro) in Fallon, Nevada. We jammed for two days straight! In a jam, you play many songs that you may not have played before. Bro and I haven't played music together for three and a half years, but had a great time and were pleased with the results. Because it's a jam, the renditions will not be as polished like they would be if previously rehearsed. That adds a bit of fun to the efforts, because improvization is required. In the vid below, Bro is playing a black Fender Stratocaster guitar, but you can't see it behind his keyboard. Too bad, it's a beautiful guitar -- but you can certainly hear it well. I am in the fedora playing my new Fender Jazz Bass. Bro does the singing.  (I am not coordinated enough to play bass and sing at the same time.) Have a listen.

 

Here's the guitar Bro is playing:

Black Fender Stratocaster