Saturday, August 31, 2013

In America, Free Speech Isn't Free

Canada Free Press is a media outlet that well serves the cause of liberty.  They have a must-read article today about our American "right of free speech," and how it has been badly compromised by left/liberal/progressive "thought."  As I have written many times in this blog, our freedom of speech and thought has been badly compromised by the left's control of the culture.  If you hold controversial opinions, you will be socially ostracized and lose your job.

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh is an author and former citizen of a communist dictatorship, who knows quite well what free speech is and is not.  And in the United States of America today, our speech is no longer free. She writes:
As soon as I came in contact with educators, I realized, there was a problem with freedom of speech. The freedom to speak was not really free. You could speak your mind but you were ostracized, ignored, marginalized, or fired.

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and the Chamber of Horrors

Below is a reprint of a "Ground Report" article that describes the continuing depravity of Italian "justice," and how Italy's court system has become a bad joke among the nations of the west. The original article can be viewed here.

Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and the Chamber of Horrors

How and why the Italian Supreme Court got it wrong
“It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices.” – J K Rowling 

Trial of the century
On September 30th the eyes of the world will be on Florence for round four of the trial of the century following the March 25th decision by the Italian Supreme Court to overturn the acquittal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. They were accused of the murder of Croydon student Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy in 2007 and had been declared, ‘not guilty’ in a second trial overseen by Judge Pratillo Hellmann in 2011 after being convicted in an earlier trial in 2009. Are you with me so far?

The Supreme Court has now made public the reasoning behind the reversal and it makes for surprising reading. This ‘motivation report’ will be used by the judge at a new trial in Florence, where the reinstated charges will be heard. Because Amanda’s calunnia (criminal slander) conviction has been confirmed by the Supreme Court, her defence lawyers will not be able to argue that she is innocent of this charge as well as the others so they will have the additional burden of defending her as a convicted criminal, while arguing for her innocence on the substantive charges. Meanwhile, the calunnia conviction may be appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, domestic avenues having been exhausted.

The continuing saga underlines the status of the Meredith Kercher murder as the most controversial, mishandled and misunderstood crime of the twenty first century. There are several reasons for this, but at its core, the problem lies with the dysfunctional Italian justice system which has the characteristics of both a lottery and a quagmire. It is perhaps gruesomely appropriate, that Harry Potter fans Knox and Sollecito should have had to face a genuine Chamber of Horrors on the path to their ultimate redemption that will now take many more years to achieve.

Justice, Italian style
Italian jurisprudence is dangerous territory. The country is littered with the remains of the lives of innocent people who have had the misfortune to become entangled in its legal processes. It has the dubious distinction of being the Western European country with the highest number of negative judgements made against it by the European Court of Human Rights – and by a considerable margin. This means that many of its citizens have been bankrupted and have only achieved redress years later and thousands of pounds poorer after judges outside Italy have overturned unjust decisions.
Although reformed in recent years, with the intention of making trials adversarial, the Italian system is historically inquisitorial and many of its practitioners behave as if it still is. The examining magistrate takes on the role of chief investigator as well as district attorney. The judge sits with a citizen jury but calls the shots. Once charged, the accused is effectively required to prove innocence, rather than the prosecution prove guilt. Trials progress through three levels, ending with Cassation or Supreme Court. Verdicts at each level can be appealed by both sides and the Supreme Court can reverse a verdict and begin the process again, as we have seen recently with the Kercher case.

A 2012 report said that mechanisms put in place to fight corruption in Italy are easily circumvented, while the country’s legal framework is often complex, contradictory and at times “controversially implemented.” Italy falls short on many counts, said Lorenzo Segato, director of the Research Centre on Security and Crime, based in Torri di Quartesolo, which carried out the study for global anti-corruption agency Transparency International. Problems include questionable institutional integrity, weak control mechanisms, biased news media and a social code that condones certain illegalities.

Currently Italy has a backlog of around nine million legal cases, 5.5 million civil and 3.4 million criminal. The state paid 84 million euros in compensation for miscarriages of justice and legal delays in 2011 when there were nearly 50,000 such claims compared to 3,500 in 2003. Another 46 million euros was paid out to people unjustly thrown in jail. Some 42 percent of those in jail or 28,000 people, are awaiting trial and the prison population is 68,000 housed in institutions intended for 45,000. There are 1.39 Italian Judges for every ten thousand inhabitants, compared with the average of 0.91 in other European countries. Italy ranks 155th out of 178 countries surveyed for the Efficiency of Justice (2007 Annual Report, the World Bank). Court processes last on average 116 months in Italy, against 34 months in Austria and delays are increasing year on year. Between 1975 and 2004, the duration of civil cases has increased by 90%.

Between 1999 and 2007 the European Court ruled against Italy 948 times for failing to meet the timing of a fair trial. It is estimated that in each case at least two defendants are involved, so 16 million Italians, or one in four of the population, have pending cases. Less than one per cent of corrupt or incompetent judges lose their jobs. Between 1999 and 2006, 1,010 disciplinary proceedings have been carried out but only six judges have been sacked.

This is the backdrop to the Kercher case, so in many ways it is not unusual for Italy. What is unusual is the international spotlight that has been shone on the country’s judicial shortcomings because of it.

Meredith Kercher and a rush to justice
In the early afternoon of Friday November 2nd 2007, Meredith Kercher’s lifeless body was discovered behind the locked door of her room in the flat she shared with American Amanda Knox and two Italian women. She had been stabbed three times in the neck. Four days, or 96 hours later, local police declared ‘case closed’ and three suspects were driven to prison. One, local bar owner Patrick Lumumba, was released without charge two weeks later. The other two, Knox and her then boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, were to spend the next four years in jail before being acquitted in 2011.

Controversial prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and his police accomplices had decided almost as soon as Meredith’s cold body was found that Amanda Knox was probably the murderer, so she became a suspect on day one. The reason for this has never been satisfactorily explained. There was no analysed forensic evidence at the time and there was nothing in the behaviour of either Knox or her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito that would have led a competent investigator to assume that they were involved.

The case has been plagued by post-hoc rationalisation and the nature of the crime and the degree of media interest in the case has fostered this. Much was made of a comforting kiss between Sollecito and Knox outside the villa because it was filmed and subsequently repeated on television endlessly. Knox was said not to have been emotional enough (not true), an accusation that similarly haunted Australian mother Lindy Chamberlain who was unjustly accused of murdering her baby near Ayres Rock, Australia, thirty years ago. A yoga stretch carried out by Knox while she was waiting in the questura was commented on, but none of these things had anything to do with innocence or guilt and in any case, guilty people are unlikely to draw attention to themselves, so these actions actually imply innocence.

The investigation was carried out by the local police instead of the more competent Carabinieri and ‘instinct’ and ‘intuition’ were claimed as virtues that enabled them to by-pass more conventional and reliable evidence gathering techniques. Investigator Fabio Giobbi, a department head at the Via Tuscolana offices of the forensic police is even reported as stating, “We knew they (Knox and Sollecito) were guilty because they were eating pizza”.

By the time that Knox and Sollecito were arrested, 96 hours after Meredith’s body was discovered, they had already been in the presence of the police and answering questions for 43 hours. Meanwhile, the press was being briefed daily. Stories appeared that implied that an arrest was imminent and that one of the suspects was a woman who was close to the victim. This news appeared in London newspapers on Sunday November 4th so a briefing to this effect must have taken place a mere 24 hours after Meredith’s body was found. One Italian internet forum poster, the aptly named, ‘Machiavelli’ who claims to be close to the prosecution, recently confirmed that the police targeted Knox and Sollecito from the word ‘go’.

Of course Knox and Sollecito had no idea that they were suspects and had not even availed themselves of legal representation, unlike Knox’s Italian flat mates who were less naïve about the workings of local justice. Meanwhile, all Meredith’s English friends had departed home as quickly as they could.

Some members of the police were clearly unhappy about the way the students were being set up and one gave a lawyer’s business card to Sollecito. Meanwhile Knox’s mother had told her to contact the American Embassy and her German aunt had told her to leave for Germany.  She had refused because she wanted to help the police to find the killer.

The interrogation
Knox and Sollecito both had alibis for the night of the murder – they were with each other. Therefore, they both had to be charged or the one who remained free – Sollecito – would testify for the defence. This had to be avoided at all costs if the plan to convict Knox was to succeed. Ideally, Sollecito – ‘the forgotten man’ of the case, could be persuaded to turn on Knox and drop the alibi. He was put in solitary confinement for six months in an attempt to achieve this and he records in his book that the prosecution was still pursuing a secret deal in 2010, before the second trial when he was offered (through intermediaries) a more lenient sentence if he dropped his defence of Knox and instead accused her of murder.

It can be confidently assumed neither of the suspects made any incriminating phone calls in the days after the murder because the police were listening in, though all recordings and transcripts have been conveniently lost. What Mignini’s phone tap operation did tell him was that Knox’s mother was due in town on Tuesday the 6th and her presence would ensure that her daughter was properly represented from then on. It was vital to strike in advance of this and a team of interrogators from Rome was shipped in with the intention of securing confessions from the pair.

The scene was set for the infamous all-night interrogation of November 5th/6th which led to three arrests. Many commentators such as FBI veteran Steve Moore have condemned this event because it was clearly set up to create spurious grounds for arrest in advance of forensic test results from the crime scene. Moore said, “If you’re trying to determine facts and truth, you want your suspect clear, lucid and awake. If you want to coerce your suspect into saying what you want them to say, you want them disoriented, groggy and confused.”

“Amanda Knox was interrogated for 8 hours. Overnight. Without food or water. In a police station. In a foreign country. In a foreign language. By a dozen different officers. Without being allowed a lawyer. The reason they interrogated Amanda all night was to break her. Not get the truth, not get answers, not make Perugia safer; but to break her so that she would say what they wanted her to say.”
“They used a technique that I unfortunately became aware of while serving overseas in counter-terrorism. We used to call it “tag-teaming”. It takes dozens of operatives/officers to make it work. Two officers are assigned for approximately an hour at a time to the suspect. Their prime responsibility is simply to keep the person awake and agitated. They do this for only an hour, because it takes a lot out of the detectives. After an hour, a fresh pair of “interrogators” comes in. Again, the questions they ask are secondary to their main task—keep the person awake and afraid. By tag-teaming every hour, the interrogators remain fresh, energetic and on-task. The suspect, however, becomes increasingly exhausted, confused by different questions from dozens of different interrogators, and prays for the interrogation to end. In extreme cases, people can become so disoriented that they forget where they are.”

This was the technique that was used on Knox but it failed to secure a ‘confession’. However, it did provide her interrogators with a confused, signed statement that they used as a pretext to arrest her and Sollecito as well as her boss Lumumba and keep them in prison.

Moore again: “This is an innocent college girl subjected to the most aggressive and heinous interrogation techniques the police could utilize (yet not leave marks.) She became confused, she empathized with her captors, she doubted herself in some ways, but in the end her strength of character and her unshakable knowledge of her innocence carried her through. It’s time that the real criminals were prosecuted.”

Amanda Knox: criminal genius or fall guy?
The story Knox signed was a piece of fiction written for her by the police and it started a legal process that shows no sign of being close to conclusion. One commentator parodied the interrogation thus:
‘We know you’re protecting somebody. No you can’t have a lawyer. Take that! You will go to prison for 30 years. See here, you agreed to meet somebody’. (Etc. ad nauseam for hours.)
‘OK – it was Patrick’

‘Great, thanks. That will be three years in prison. Have a cup of tea. And don’t accuse us of doing anything wrong or we sue for slander at the taxpayer’s expense and you can defend yourself out of your own pocket.’

An internet search brings up a wealth of information on the subject of false confessions and they have played a part in many notorious injustices. The confused statement that was coerced from Knox, together with further statements she wrote later on the 6th, have blinded many to the monstrous nature of what was done to her. The arrest of Knox and Sollecito derailed the case irrevocably. Their defence lawyers, families and friends have been struggling to overcome this ever since.

The question of why Knox was eventually convicted has nothing to do with evidence or her courtroom behaviour or her attire. She was doomed from the moment the police announced ‘case closed’ the day of her arrest. From that moment on only two outcomes were possible:

1. She is ‘not guilty’, therefore police behaviour must have been criminal. Police actions were recorded by Knox in a note after she was arrested and in a letter to her lawyers. This means that prosecutor Mignini and the police knowingly coerced a statement from her so that they could arrest her, Sollecito and Lumumba. All their actions flow from the statement that they created and Knox was forced to sign.

2. She is guilty so she must be a devious criminal who succeeded in manipulating heroic policemen into arresting an innocent man. Furthermore, she keeps lying about being beaten and abused during her interrogation.

Even if she had acted perfectly properly, uttered only the expected pleas of innocence, there is no way that the Perugian judicial clique would have let the flying squad heroes and a popular prosecutor go down for her.

If the prosecution is so sure that Knox spontaneously accused her boss Lumumba during her ‘interview’ and was not hit on the head, why don’t they simply release the recordings and prove their case? Easy! Well, they claim that there was no recording and at various times, prosecutor Mignini has blamed broken equipment, forgetfulness and budget constraints. This is surprising, as this was the highest profile crime in Perugia for years and Mignini’s budget was already being used to tap the phones of the suspects and he continued to monitor the phones of Sollecito’s family for years afterwards – to the tune of an astonishing 39,000 calls.

The mystery of the disappearing tapes
In fact there is good evidence that the interrogation was recorded but the tapes have ‘disappeared’. Sunday Times journalist John Follain has been close to the prosecution from the start. His book, ‘Death in Perugia’ is slanted to favour the prosecution’s view of the case. Follain’s feature interview with Knox’s parents and sister, Deanna, published in June 2008 included the claim that Knox had been hit while being interrogated and led directly to her parents Edda Mellas and Curt Knox being charged with criminal slander themselves.

But Follain’s interview included another tantalising phrase: “Only a small part of Knox’s taped statement has been leaked to the media; the full transcript hasn’t surfaced”. Did Follain make this up? This is unlikely. Did he know that the interrogation had been recorded? He probably did. It would not be a stretch to call him a friend of the prosecutor. The subsequent disappearance of the recording can only mean that Knox was telling the truth all along but her truth cannot be allowed out in Italy.

Acres of newsprint and thousands of blogs and articles have been written about the case since 2007 but in the end the perspective of every writer comes back to his or her take on the interrogation. All the reliable evidence that has emerged since then points to Rudy Guede as the murderer and him alone. Evidence against Knox and Sollecito is purely circumstantial. So-called DNA evidence and witness testimony has all been discredited.

What caused Mignini to suspect Knox?
We may never know why the investigation was derailed from the start but disturbing clues have come to light. Rudy Guede had been abandoned by his father and adopted by a wealthy local family whose company makes drinks vending machines and whose patriarch is influential in the town. In the weeks before the murder Guede had been caught after breaking and entering into several premises and stealing valuables including at least one lap top computer belonging to a lawyer. Knox and Kercher’s flat mates were trainee lawyers and one, Filomena Romanelli wandered into the flat after the murder and removed her own computer from the crime scene. Guede had been arrested in Milan in the week before the murder but was released on instructions from the police in Perugia.

These acts inevitably give rise to unanswered questions. Was Guede stealing computers from lawyers on the instructions of other criminals or persons close to law enforcement? Did someone in authority know of Guede’s involvement and immediately seek to minimise it? If this is true, Knox and Sollecito, both being foreign to the town (Sollecito is from Bari in southern Italy) and both being without lawyers, were the best people to frame and were setting themselves up because of their naivety. The scale of the vilification of Knox and Sollecito, both in court and online combined with the astonishingly light sentence meted out to Guede has led many observers to conclude that he has powerful defenders in Perugia. We may never know if a conspiracy exists, but all the pieces are in place.

An early indication that the investigation was going awry was when prosecutor Mignini instructed pathologist Luca Lalli not to take the body temperature at the earliest opportunity. This omission would help to prevent the time of death from being accurately determined and so allow maximum flexibility to fit suspects to the crime. Lalli was subsequently dismissed from the investigation after talking to the media, a sanction that has never been applied to anyone who agrees with Mignini.
The other major early mistake, or deliberately wrong decision made by the investigators was to declare that the broken window in Filomena’s room caused by a thrown rock was not evidence of a break-in but of a cover up. Detectives must have known that this method of entry was already Guede’s preferred choice. The only plausible reason for them to claim that the break-in was faked, was to divert attention away from Guede who had not been named as a suspect at this point.

Numerous other smears were used by the police and prosecution, such as claiming that Sollecito had called the Carabinieri after the local police had already arrived. Phone records and evidence that a CCTV camera timer was wrong easily proved that this was not the case. There is a catalogue of misunderstandings that were twisted. Did Meredith always lock her door or not, why did Knox mention Guede’s unflushed faeces in the second bathroom (because it proved that there had been an intruder, maybe?), did Knox know things that only the murderer would have known? (er, no). The key question that the investigators seemingly failed to ask was why did Knox and Sollecito go to the cottage and call the police to report the burglary? They had planned a trip to Gubbio that day. Surely if they were guilty they would have gone straight from Sollecito’s apartment to Gubbio, Knox would not have returned to her flat for a shower and somebody else would have raised the alarm. And you can bet that they would have found lawyers as well.

Two trials and the Supreme Court
On March 25th the acquittal of Knox and Sollecito was overturned and Knox’s guilty verdict for criminal slander for accusing Lumumba during her illegal interrogation was confirmed. The reasoning behind the court’s decisions has now been translated.

Chillingly, the first thing that strikes home is the front page which states that the appeal is proposed by, “The Procuratore Generale for the Appeal Court of Perugia” and five individually named members of the Kercher family: Meredith’s parents, sister and two brothers. If Meredith Kercher had been murdered in Britain or the USA, persons accused of the crime would be prosecuted by the state alone. The victim’s family would observe the proceedings, would be kept informed, but would take no direct part in the prosecution. They would sit at the side and hope to see justice done. In Italy things are different. The Kercher family was advised to employ their own lawyer, Francesco Maresca. On their instructions he is prosecuting Knox and Sollecito alongside the state. In many ways he is more outspoken and even more vicious than Mignini has been.

The Kerchers have been praised for their dignity since the death of Meredith and no one should ever forget their loss. But they are not sitting on the sidelines watching the process and hoping it reaches a just conclusion. They have already decided what the conclusion should be and they have instructing a lawyer to fight for it. Doubtless they have been ill advised and they must be sincere in their views, but when they say they are still seeking the answer to the question of who killed Meredith, there can be no doubt of the answer they seek. It is nothing less than the further incarceration of Knox and Sollecito – two innocent people. For many observers, that is a step too far.

The Supreme Court has ruled on matters of evidence and detail and has not restricted itself to considering whether the appeal process was correctly administered. This shocking judgment infuriated Judge Hellmann who presided over the acquittal. He said, “The judges of the Supreme Court incorrectly ruled on matters of substance” and added, “They handed down a ready-made judgment to the Court of Assizes of Florence, telling them what they must do in order to convict the two defendants.”

Hellmann firmly defended his court’s judgment: “In the small bedroom where there was supposed to have been a struggle, an erotic game that escalated into an orgy and finally the stabbing of Meredith, there was not one single biological trace of Knox and Sollecito, while there were abundant traces of Guede: it is impossible that the two students were able to erase their tracks and leave behind only those of Rudy”.

The reasoning of the Supreme Court is clear. It had already ruled that Guede, who had his own fast track trial, had acted with others, so it reduced his sentence, in two stages, from 30 to a mere 16 years. The Knox and Sollecito acquittal is therefore inconsistent with its ruling on Guede. So Knox and Sollecito have to be guilty, regardless of the evidence. The Supreme Court has delved into the evidence that was carefully considered by Hellmann’s court and has dismissed everything that demolished the prosecution case.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has rehabilitated all the discredited witnesses and faulty forensics that have characterised this charade of a case. What does this mean? Careful consideration of evidence is not required; reason and logic are not to play a part in this process. The fact that Guede has a sentence of a mere 16 years shows in and of itself that Sollecito and Knox must be guilty. Case closed.

The Supreme Court also confirmed the guilty verdict against Knox for the slander charge. One strand of Italian logic says that because Knox is guilty of accusing the wrong man, Lumumba (even if under duress), this must mean that she has knowledge of the crime and therefore must have been one of the perpetrators.

Italian justice triumphs again
The Italian system has succeeded in financially destroying two families. The money from Knox’s book deal has already been used to pay her legal team for defending her through two trials and a Supreme Court appeal. Sollecito’s previously wealthy family has been impoverished and he has launched a ‘gofundme’ website. The length of the process itself adds psychological torture. Meanwhile, Guede will be out of prison and free to murder and rob again in less than two years.

The court now wants Knox and Sollecito to prove that they were not part of a multiple attack, when there is no evidence to show that they were even in the room when the murder occurred. The prosecution theory of multiple attackers has never looked credible since no forensic evidence implicating any other party has ever been produced. In essence, Knox and Sollecito are being required to identify the “real” accomplices of Guede before they can be acquitted. When they fail to find these fictitious people, then they must themselves be the accomplices – because the court has decided that there were accomplices. This is circular logic unworthy of a five year old, much less justices of the highest court in Italy.

Everything is reversed in this case, the innocent are persecuted, the guilty are protected, the burden of proof is on the defendant not the prosecution and a decision at a separate trial to which Knox and Sollecito were not party is being used to trump a verdict in their own trial.

Raffaele Sollecito has issued a statement that talks of numerous errors, or ‘horrors’ in the Supreme Court judgment and has complained that all the work of his defence team and their specialist consultants, in demolishing the prosecution case that was accepted by Hellmann, has been swept aside. He has published a detailed rebuttal of the Supreme Court points on his website.
Retired Seattle Judge Michael Heavey, knows Knox. His daughter car pooled with her when they were both at high school. He now tours Rotary Clubs and talks about the case. When he learned of the Supreme Court decision he said, “In an effort to save face, The Italian Supreme court joined the prosecution and police in Perugia who perpetuated these false accusations. The Italian Supreme Court (judges) have become criminals themselves. They continued the abuse of two good young people . . . in my opinion they have disgraced themselves as jurists. They continue the disgrace of their country.”

An appeal to the European Court of Human Rights is beginning to look like a racing certainty and with Knox’s slander conviction confirmed by the Supreme Court, an appeal against this verdict could be lodged immediately.

On June 27th a reporter on Italian news magazine Oggi wrote, “I’m not a lawyer, but I can make a simple prediction. Since at present there is no new evidence or new witnesses, the judges of Florence will announce a guilty verdict and will go straight to sentencing. If they do not do this and find the defendants ‘not guilty’ the Supreme Court will annul the acquittal again. . . The extraordinary thing is that the chief suspect, Amanda, is living in the U.S.A. while the defendant against whom there is minimal, highly fragile evidence, Raffaele, would return to prison. Meanwhile the only definitively guilty murderer, Rudy Guede, who chose an expedited trial, will be released in a few years – a true masterpiece of the (usual) Italian justice.”

July 9th 2013 was Amanda Knox’s 26th birthday. It was also the day when the start date of her and Sollecito’s next trial was announced: September 30th. The Italians have their own peculiar brand of humour.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Digital Revenge: Major Nidal Hasan, Muslim Barbarian & Mass Murderer Sentenced to Martyrdom

The Army blew it.  Of course they found Major Nidal Hasan guilty of murdering 13 people and injuring 30 more at Fort Hood back in 2009.  He murdered 12 soldiers and one civilian, as commanded by his False Prophet, the megalomaniac known as Muhammad, and dictated by the trashy fraud known as the Koran.  Hasan believes that if he is executed, he will die a martyr for Allah, and thereby be admitted to the Big Bordello in the Sky where he will bang his 72 virgins all day.  The Army complied with his request, sentencing him to death and to martyrdom.  A better sentence would have been life in prison, without any access to the Koran or the Islamic religion, and fed a steady diet of pork (because it is forbidden by Islam), and given nothing to read but pornography.

I have nothing but the deepest contempt for Islam and for anyone who defends it.  It is a mass-murdering ideology that is devoid of anything good or beneficial to mankind.

I can't do much to Nidal Hasan, but I can exact digital revenge in a Photoshop that illustrates my contempt for this barbarian and the foul religion that led him to commit his horrible crime.

Screw you Nidal Hasan -- and the camel you rode in on.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Miley Cyrus, Not Exactly the Girl Next Door

Miley Cyrus, just the girl you want your son to bring home to mother.

The face of American femininity.  What a doll.


Monday, August 26, 2013

Idiotic Black Supremacist Website Promises Race War With Whites

Ayo Kimathi's Death Wish
A black employee of the Department of Homeland Security is a vicious racist who runs a website that promises war on white people.  The Black Bozo is Ayo Kimathi, an acquisitions officer for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.  His website is "War on the Horizon."  Here's a sample of what WOH is putting out:
Welcome to War on the Horizon (WOH)

War on the Horizon (WOH) is a Haitianist organization created for the purpose of preparing Black people worldwide for an unavoidable, inevitable clash with the white race. whites around the world are absolutely determined to exterminate Afrikan people in all corners of the Earth.

As a result of this reality, WOH has dedicated our time and expertise to properly educating Black people to prepare for Racial Warfare. This includes intellectual, spiritual, psychological, and physical preparation for a global clash that will mean the end of white rule on this planet or the end of the Black Race as we know it.

Please review the information on our site to understand the threat our people are facing so that you may make the right decisions in preparation for this reality.

We’ll See You on the Battlefield!
Oboy, when the Great Black Revolution has succeeded and Black Rule installed worldwide, the whole planet will look like Detroit!

It's really difficult to take an idiot like Ayo Kimathi seriously, especially since underclass blacks have been making war on whites for decades, in the form of black-on-white violence, robbery, rape and random murders, many just for sport (see the murder of a white Australian baseball player last week, shot in the back while jogging because the two black perps were "bored.")

Friday, August 16, 2013

Thursday, August 15, 2013

The Fort Hood Unindicted Co-Conspirator (Ramirez Cartoon)

Michael Ramirez is an excellent conservative cartoonist, and his cartoon below is spot-on: the Fort Hood massacre, in which a devout Muslim army officer shot and killed 13 soldiers and wounded many more, was largely the result of liberal idiocy. That idiocy is predicated on the absurd notion that we are somehow stronger by incorporating among us people who think differently, have different values, and who in fact, hate our guts and follow a barbaric religion committed to murdering as many of us as possible.

At the time that Major Nidal Hassan (self-described "slave of Allah") completed his murderous rampage, General George Casey, Army Chief of Staff, voiced his dogmatic adherence to an asinine platitude that he believes is preferable to safeguarding the lives of American soldiers.

He had the audacity to say "What happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy, but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here."  Which only goes to prove that even a jackass can become a general in the U.S. Army.

Monday, August 12, 2013

Malicious Painting of the Shooting of Trayvon Martin Displayed at Florida State Capitol

Artist Sits In Front Of Her Propaganda Poster 
Can We Send Her Back to Vietnam?
Everything about liberalism is a lie. Everything. Everything about liberalism is malicious, vicious, anti-human and anti-freedom. Take the case of the new painting of the Trayvon Martin shooting that was displayed this week at the Florida State Capitol. It shows George Zimmerman standing up, totally unmolested, firing a shot into Martin's head from behind, effectively executing Martin without rhyme or reason.
From NY Daily News: - Via Reagan Coalition:
George Zimmerman blasts Trayvon Martin while Martin Luther King Jr. bleeds in the background of a new mural unveiled at the state Capitol in Florida in Tallahassee.
The 100-foot painting substitutes a mirror for Florida teen's face, framed by a hoodie.
Miami artist Huong's not-so-subtle message is spelled out in the title: "We are all Trayvon Martin."
Huong, a Vietnam War refugee and peace activist, has joined a group of protesters called the Dream Defenders camped at the capital hoping to persuade Gov. Rick Scott to change the Stand Your Ground law highlighted by the Martin case.
So the artist Huong is a "Vietnam war refugee," and now she is making communist-style propaganda of her own. Only in America.

It is unconscionable for a State government to publicly support a vicious lie like this painting represents, in effect slandering an innocent man who was acquitted of any wrong doing in defending himself from a violent thug was sitting on him and pounding his head into the cement.  The "Stand Your Ground" law was not even applicable to this case, as falsely claimed by the NY Daily News.  This piece of propaganda will further endanger Zimmerman's life and further inflame the ignorant passions of our most violent racial segment:  blacks -- yet it was painted by a "peace activist."  Peace activist my ass.

To Propaganda Artist Huong I would say this:  No, bitch, we are not all worthless thugs like Trayvon Martin.  We non-blacks are all George Zimmerman -- totally expendable to our far-left governments as they move us closer and closer to either a race war or a civil war.  And like George Zimmermn, we are packing.

Fourteen States Preparing For Secession or Rebellion Against Federal Tyranny - Maybe #Secession

A site called "Before It's News" is reporting that fourteen states have begun reestablishing autonomous "State Defense Forces," i.e. state-run militaries that take their orders, not from the United States, but from their respective state governors.  Reportedly, Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces because he does not control them.  Also, the article reports, Obama has sent warning notices to these fourteen governors to halt such actions immediately or face arrest for "treason."

Allegedly, the two governors leading this State Defense Force initiative are Rick Perry of Texas and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota.  Ken Larive of "Before It's News" reports:
The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.” Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.”
If there is any truth to this report, it would appear that we are moving in the direction of another Civil War.  However, I am taking this report with a large grain of salt -- but I do hope that it's true!

Read the article here.

The Fascist Thought Police and the Embarrassing Question of Racial Differences In I.Q. #Race #AmericanRenaissance

American Renaissance has reprinted an article from Politico by Jason Richwine, about how politics and social pressure pervert the objective study of I.Q. and how it differs by race.

Richwine holds a PhD from Harvard, and has written about I.Q. and race, and faced the consequences:  liberal rage and media frenzy for telling truths that the left wants hidden.  He writes:
There is a large discrepancy between what educated laypeople believe about cognitive science and what experts actually know. Journalists are steeped in the lay wisdom, so they are repeatedly surprised when someone forthrightly discusses the real science of mental ability.

If that science happens to deal with group differences in average IQ, the journalists’ surprise turns into shock and disdain. Experts who speak publicly about IQ differences end up portrayed as weird contrarians at best, and peddlers of racist pseudoscience at worst.
 So many disciplines are corrupted and usurped by politics today that it is almost impossible to trust the popular media on any of them.  That corruption mainly includes science and history, where both are manipulated (or suppressed) to support modern political goals.  I.Q. as it differs by race is a glaring example.

Read it all here.

Sunday, August 11, 2013

The Feminist Conundrum: Or Why Men Can Never Win; The Hypocrisy of #Slutwalk

Robert Stacy McCain Covering the Slutwalk Phenomenon
The Other McCain has some interesting posts on the "Slutwalk" phenomenon.  Slutwalk is where a bunch of young (leftwing of course) women strip to their skivvies and/or bare their breasts, and march to protest rape.  But it's not only rape they are protesting, according to one leftist troll commenter, they are protesting because they are "tired of being shamed for their sexuality, tired of being abused and objectified" as women, and especially they march in opposition to rape.

So in order to suppress rape, they march semi-nude?  Sure that'll work.  The criminals who rape will see these naked babes and feel so ashamed that they will have themselves castrated and then join a monastery with a pledge of celibacy. And what better way to discourage being "objectified" as a sex object than by going naked in public? /sarcasm off

Most men are not rapists (except in the minds of the most ardent feminists, many of whom are man-hating lesbians).  So while most (non-rapist) men may enjoy the view of the semi-naked marchers, the display of girl-flesh will have no discernible effect.  However, for the actual rapists in the crowd, the display may only fuel their desire to commit more rapes.  Therefore I am compelled to state unequivocally that the Slutwalk protesters are flaming hypocrites who are want contradictory goals:  the right to inflame passions while being completely free from the potential consequences thereof.

I suspect that many of these feminist  idiots are really exhibitionists looking for a semi-plausible excuse for displaying their butts and boobs in public; or they are man-hating feminists with penis envy who want to make men suffer by showing them what they cannot have:  booty.  They may not have penises, but they can make mens' penises ache, and that's power, baby.  Maybe so, but as a rape deterrent, its efficacy is questionable.

However, as David Horowitz once noted of leftist political movements, no matter what the stated objective, the real objective is the [communist] revolution.  These dumb broads (most of them, anyway) are not marching to protest rape, they are marching for attention.  With unheard voices their actions cry out:  "Objectify me, goddammit!  Notice me!  Desire me!"  And so they unwittingly assist the left in further eroding whatever civilizational constraints remain to us, like not being subjected to nudity in public places.

Now if the marchers were really interested in deterring rape, they might be marching in support of concealed carry laws, more modest clothing for young women, giving advice on how to avoid dangerous situations, advocating against violence and sex on television, educating young men about proper protocol in dating and relating to women in the workplace, and the legal consequences of date rape, sexual harassment and other sex-related crimes.  However, for those who just want to show off their butts and boobies, these strategies hold little appeal.

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

Oprah Winfrey Says #Trayvon Martin's Demise "Same Thing" as Emmett Till.

Emmett Till was a 14 year old black teenager who was brutally murdered in Mississippi in 1955.  The two white men who did it were acquitted, but later admitted the crime.  In those days, in certain places, black people could not get justice with any regularity.  The two perpetrators should have gone to the electric chair, but instead they walked.

This is racism in its original meaning -- an irrational hatred for any and all members of a particular race, to the point of torturing and murdering one of them.  It is not the moral equivalent of shooting a member of that race while they are physically attacking you with the intent of doing great bodily harm -- as in the George Zimmerman - Trayvon Martin case.

However, some people cannot make the distinction -- and I would surmise that "some people" includes the majority of black Americans.  Take fabulously wealthy and successful Oprah Winfrey, for example.  She can't see any difference between the murder of Emmett Till and the regrettable but justifiable homicide of Trayvon Martin.  She said yesterday:
"Trayvon Martin parallel to Emmett Till. Let me just tell you: In my mind, [they’re] same thing," she said. "But you can get stuck in that and not allow yourself to move forward and to see how far we’ve come."
Oprah, dear, if in your mind the two cases are identical, then you don't have a mind -- or much of one, anyway.

Monday, August 05, 2013

This Day In Black History: Al Sharpton Defends Tawana Brawley #tawanabrawley #alsharpton

Tawana Brawley finally starts to pay off her legal judgment for defamation of Prosecutor Steven Pagones, but it took a payroll attachment to make her do it. Read story here.

Later on, Al Sharpton was asked to stop portraying Oprah Winfrey with a mustache, but this did little to spoil his song and dance routine.

The Forgotten Man: an 1883 Essay That Speaks to Today

William Graham Sumner
1840 - 1910
by William Graham Sumner
This 1883 essay dissects the injustice and stupidity of progressivism.  It is as valid for 2013 as it was when written, 130 years ago.  (Via the Ludwig von Mises Institute)

William Graham Sumner (October 30, 1840 – April 12, 1910) was an American academic and "held the first professorship in sociology" at Yale College.  For many years he had a reputation as one of the most influential teachers there. He was a polymath with numerous books and essays on American history, economic history, political theory, sociology, and anthropology. He is credited with introducing the term "ethnocentrism," a term intended to identify imperialists' chief means of justification, in his book Folkways (1906). Sumner is often seen as a proto-libertarian. He was also the first to teach a course entitled "Sociology". (Wikipedia)

The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.

For once let us look him up and consider his case, for the characteristic of all social doctors is that they fix their minds on some man or group of men whose case appeals to the sympathies and the imagination, and they plan remedies addressed to the particular trouble; they do not understand that all the parts of society hold together, and that forces which are set in action act and react throughout the whole organism, until an equilibrium is produced by a readjustment of all interests and rights.

They therefore ignore entirely the source from which they must draw all the energy which they employ in their remedies, and they ignore all the effects on other members of society than the ones they have in view. They are always under the dominion of the superstition of government, and, forgetting that a government produces nothing at all, they leave out of sight the first fact to be remembered in all social discussion — that the state cannot get a cent for any man without taking it from some other man, and this latter must be a man who has produced and saved it. This latter is the Forgotten Man.

The friends of humanity start out with certain benevolent feelings toward "the poor," "the weak," "the laborers," and others of whom they make pets. They generalize these classes, and render them impersonal, and so constitute the classes into social pets. They turn to other classes and appeal to sympathy and generosity, and to all the other noble sentiments of the human heart. Action in the line proposed consists in a transfer of capital from the better off to the worse off.

Capital, however, as we have seen, is the force by which civilization is maintained and carried on. The same piece of capital cannot be used in two ways. Every bit of capital, therefore, which is given to a shiftless and inefficient member of society, who makes no return for it, is diverted from a reproductive use; but if it was put into reproductive use, it would have to be granted in wages to an efficient and productive laborer. Hence the real sufferer by that kind of benevolence which consists in an expenditure of capital to protect the good-for-nothing is the industrious laborer. The latter, however, is never thought of in this connection. It is assumed that he is provided for and out of the account. Such a notion only shows how little true notions of political economy have as yet become popularized.

There is an almost invincible prejudice that a man who gives a dollar to a beggar is generous and kind-hearted, but that a man who refuses the beggar and puts the dollar in a savings bank is stingy and mean. The former is putting capital where it is very sure to be wasted, and where it will be a kind of seed for a long succession of future dollars, which must be wasted to ward off a greater strain on the sympathies than would have been occasioned by a refusal in the first place. Inasmuch as the dollar might have been turned into capital and given to a laborer who, while earning it, would have reproduced it, it must be regarded as taken from the latter.

When a millionaire gives a dollar to a beggar the gain of utility to the beggar is enormous, and the loss of utility to the millionaire is insignificant. Generally the discussion is allowed to rest there. But if the millionaire makes capital of the dollar, it must go upon the labor market, as a demand for productive services. Hence there is another party in interest — the person who supplies productive services.

There always are two parties. The second one is always the Forgotten Man, and any one who wants to truly understand the matter in question must go and search for the Forgotten Man. He will be found to be worthy, industrious, independent, and self-supporting. He is not, technically, "poor" or "weak"; he minds his own business, and makes no complaint. Consequently the philanthropists never think of him, and trample on him.

We hear a great deal of schemes for "improving the condition of the working-man." In the United States the farther down we go in the grade of labor, the greater is the advantage which the laborer has over the higher classes. A hod-carrier or digger here can, by one day's labor, command many times more days' labor of a carpenter, surveyor, book-keeper, or doctor than an unskilled laborer in Europe could command by one day's labor. The same is true, in a less degree, of the carpenter, as compared with the bookkeeper, surveyor, and doctor. This is why the United States is the great country for the unskilled laborer. The economic conditions all favor that class. There is a great continent to be subdued, and there is a fertile soil available to labor, with scarcely any need of capital. Hence the people who have the strong arms have what is most needed, and, if it were not for social consideration, higher education would not pay. Such being the case, the working-man needs no improvement in his condition except to be freed from the parasites who are living on him.

All schemes for patronizing "the working classes" savor of condescension. They are impertinent and out of place in this free democracy. There is not, in fact, any such state of things or any such relation as would make projects of this kind appropriate. Such projects demoralize both parties, flattering the vanity of one and undermining the self-respect of the other.

For our present purpose it is most important to notice that if we lift any man up we must have a fulcrum, or point of reaction. In society that means that to lift one man up we push another down. The schemes for improving the condition of the working classes interfere in the competition of workmen with each other. The beneficiaries are selected by favoritism, and are apt to be those who have recommended themselves to the friends of humanity by language or conduct which does not betoken independence and energy. Those who suffer a corresponding depression by the interference are the independent and self-reliant, who once more are forgotten or passed over; and the friends of humanity once more appear, in their zeal to help somebody, to be trampling on those who are trying to help themselves.

Trade unions adopt various devices for raising wages, and those who give their time to philanthropy are interested in these devices, and wish them success. They fix their minds entirely on the workmen for the time being in the trade, and do not take note of any other workmen as interested in the matter. It is supposed that the fight is between the workmen and their employers, and it is believed that one can give sympathy in that contest to the workmen without feeling responsibility for anything farther.

It is soon seen, however, that the employer adds the trade union and strike risk to the other risks of his business, and settles down to it philosophically. If, now, we go farther, we see that he takes it philosophically because he has passed the loss along on the public. It then appears that the public wealth has been diminished, and that the danger of a trade war, like the danger of a revolution, is a constant reduction of the well-being of all. So far, however, we have seen only things which could lower wages — nothing which could raise them. The employer is worried, but that does not raise wages. The public loses, but the loss goes to cover extra risk, and that does not raise wages.

A trade union raises wages by restricting the number of apprentices who may be taken into the trade. This device acts directly on the supply of laborers, and that produces effects on wages. If, however, the number of apprentices is limited, some are kept out who want to get in. Those who are in have, therefore, made a monopoly, and constituted themselves a privileged class on a basis exactly analogous to that of the old privileged aristocracies. But whatever is gained by this arrangement for those who are in is won at a greater loss to those who are kept out. Hence it is not upon the masters nor upon the public that trade unions exert the pressure by which they raise wages; it is upon other persons of the labor class who want to get into the trades, but, not being able to do so, are pushed down into the unskilled labor class. These persons, however, are passed by entirely without notice in all the discussions about trade unions. They are the Forgotten Men. But, since they want to get into the trade and win their living in it, it is fair to suppose that they are fit for it, would succeed at it, would do well for themselves and society in it; that is to say, that, of all persons interested or concerned, they most deserve our sympathy and attention.

The cases already mentioned involve no legislation. Society, however, maintains police, sheriffs, and various institutions, the object of which is to protect people against themselves — that is, against their own vices. Almost all legislative effort to prevent vice is really protective of vice, because all such legislation saves the vicious man from the penalty of his vice. Nature's remedies against vice are terrible. She removes the victims without pity. A drunkard in the gutter is just where he ought to be, according to the fitness and tendency of things. Nature has set up on him the process of decline and dissolution by which she removes things which have survived their usefulness. Gambling and other less mentionable vices carry their own penalties with them.

Now, we never can annihilate a penalty. We can only divert it from the head of the man who has incurred it to the heads of others who have not incurred it. A vast amount of "social reform" consists in just this operation. The consequence is that those who have gone astray, being relieved from Nature's fierce discipline, go on to worse, and that there is a constantly heavier burden for the others to bear.Who are the others? When we see a drunkard in the gutter we pity him. If a policeman picks him up, we say that society has interfered to save him from perishing.

"Society" is a fine word, and it saves us the trouble of thinking.

The industrious and sober workman, who is mulcted of a percentage of his day's wages to pay the policeman, is the one who bears the penalty. But he is the Forgotten Man. He passes by and is never noticed, because he has behaved himself, fulfilled his contracts, and asked for nothing.

The fallacy of all prohibitory, sumptuary, and moral legislation is the same. A and B determine to be teetotalers, which is often a wise determination, and sometimes a necessary one. If A and B are moved by considerations which seem to them good, that is enough. But A and B put their heads together to get a law passed which shall force C to be a teetotaler for the sake of D, who is in danger of drinking too much. There is no pressure on A and B. They are having their own way, and they like it. There is rarely any pressure on D. He does not like it, and evades it. The pressure all comes on C.

The question then arises, Who is C? He is the man who wants alcoholic liquors for any honest purpose whatsoever, who would use his liberty without abusing it, who would occasion no public question, and trouble nobody at all. He is the Forgotten Man again, and as soon as he is drawn from his obscurity we see that he is just what each one of us ought to be.

William Graham Sumner (1840–1910) was a hero of classical liberalism. He taught sociology for many years at Yale College where he had a reputation among students as one of the most influential teachers. His popular essays gave him a wide audience for his laissez-faire advocacy of free markets, anti-imperialism, and the gold standard. Comment on the blog.

Originally entitled "On the Case of a Certain Man Who Is Never Thought Of," this essay was originally published in 1883, as part of the book What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other.

See "Sumner's Forgotten Classic," by Christopher Mayer.

Sunday, August 04, 2013

American Society Inundated With Racial Extremism

Ever since Barack Obama was elected president, racial divisions in this country have grown to absurd proportions.  For those who imagined that electing "the first black president" would move us into a "post-racial" era of good feelings and unity, this is a shock.  It is the exact opposite of what they expected.

Now more than ever, we hear blacks and the kooky-left spinning tales of Klansmen and Nazis emerging everywhere; Tea Partiers are publicly described as "racists" by such pond scum as Rep Charlie Rangel of New York:
In an interview with the Daily Beast published Friday, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) suggested Tea Partiers are the “same group” who fought for segregation during the Civil Rights movement.

“It is the same group we faced in the South with those white crackers and the dogs and the police. They didn’t care about how they looked,” Rangel said.

Because of this, Rangel said the Tea Party could be defeated using the same tactics employed against Jim Crow.
(Hat tip:  Gateway Pundit via Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

Meanwhile, The Other McCain describes a movie review by a Salon writer named Andrew O'Hehir, in which O'Hehir reviews the feel-good, true tale of the famous racehorse Secretariat.  O'Hehir sees Nazi references and white supremacy in every inch of the celluloid, including the "lambent lighting" of the film, which is no doubt similar to the light cast off by a burning cross.  McCain quotes O'Hehir:
the welcoming glow that imbues every corner of this nostalgic horse-racing yarn with rich, lambent color comes from within, as if the movie itself is ablaze with its own crazy sense of purpose. (Or as if someone just off-screen were burning a cross on the lawn.) I enjoyed it immensely, flat-footed dialogue and implausible situations and all. Which doesn’t stop me from believing that in its totality “Secretariat” is a work of creepy, half-hilarious master-race propaganda almost worthy of Leni Riefenstahl, and all the more effective because it presents as a family-friendly yarn about a nice lady and her horse.
There is no question that Andrew O'Hehir is nuts.  However, only 99.6% of leftists are completely insane, and yet they make a bad name for the whole group.

Friday, August 02, 2013

The New Mind Control: Use the Word "Nigger" and Your Life Is Ruined

Actor Tim Allen has a point.  The use of the term "N-Word" is just as offensive as the term it represents, the word "nigger."

The word "nigger" is at least 200 years old (probably more), and didn't start out as an ethnic slur or insult.  Blacks themselves invented the word.  It is derived from the word "Niger," meaning black.  There is an African nation by that name, and also one named Nigeria.  Mark Twain used the word repeatedly in his fictional tales of blacks and whites in the antebellum South.  Although his fiction subtly advocated racial equality, it has been condemned by modern blacks for the use of a word that was not at all offensive at the time that Twain used it.

"Nigger" is only a hateful word by context.  It is not inherently hateful in and of itself.  However, the left has instituted unofficial speech codes into our society, so that if you use the word "nigger" in any context, be it semantical, historical or literary, you have broken an unofficial rule that carries great consequences.

Those consequences are social and professional ostracism.  Paula Deen is only the latest example in a long line of wrecked careers and lives.  She admitted she used the word thirty years ago after being assaulted by a criminal black man.  Her publisher and various department store chains immediately dropped her cookbooks and her television cooking show was canceled.  Ridiculous.

Note:  I do not advocate the careless use of the word "nigger," especially as a racial insult.  If you google the word and select "images," a ton of really offensive images are displayed.  However, use of the word does not turn any black into a pillar of salt.  So why are we so racially hypersensitive to the biggest group of screw-ups in human history?  (If you doubt me, look up crime statistics by race, illegitimacy by race and percentage of prison inmates by race.)

What blacks need is the unvarnished truth about themselves, and a great deal of societal pressure to clean up their act.  Instead, we have been programmed to do double back flips in order to never, ever offend any black, anywhere, for any reason.  They are the "sacred other," the Tribe of Dali Lamas among us, and anything less is sacrilegious, an apostasy that can never be overlooked or forgiven.

This semantical tyranny must stop.  I'm with you, Tim Allen.

Thursday, August 01, 2013

British Man Jailed For Displaying a Tattoo #Islam

Hat Tip:  Moonbattery
Via Moonbattery, a British man has been jailed in the U.K. for "inciting racial hatred" by displaying a tattoo.  The tattoo depicts a mosque blowing up.

Great Britain has become the most extreme "progressive" nation in the Western world.  Freedom of speech, freedom of inquiry are not permitted unless approved by the British government.  The U.K. leaders, as Moonbattery points out, are hypocrites.  They never arrested a single Muslim that displayed signs in London that advocated murder of those who oppose Islam.

The Stogiemeister would not fare well in the land of his ancestors.  I have long advocated the destruction of Islamic holy sites but only in response to terrorist attacks on the west.  Since Muslims believe that dying for their barbaric religion is a sure ticket to the Big Bordello in the Sky, killing them will not deter others.  However, the destruction of prize Islamic holy sites might provide the necessary disincentive to Islamic violence.  The mosque on the dome of the rock could be reduced to rubble, or the pink mosque, the Taj Mahal, or even Mecca and Medina obliterated, if need be.  Future Islamic pilgrims could do their hajj in a smoking, radioactive hole where the Grand Mosque and Kaaba used to be.

This Brit is not the first to advocate destruction of mosques.  I did so some time back with this Photoshop in a post titled "How to Punish the Jihadis."  I wrote:
...the victimized country (like India) could select a sacred Islamic shrine for utter destruction, e.g. an ancient Mosque. Announce its destruction as reparation for the terrorist attack. Then take a wrecking ball to the structure, reducing it to rubble. Or, if the Mosque is behind enemy lines (the enemy being the Islamic world), use a smart bomb or guided missile to destroy the structure. In other words, target the symbols and hateful institutions of Islam. This tactic recognizes the fact that it is Islam itself that is responsible for terrorism, as it is a terrorist ideology as is well documented in its holy texts and traditions. We must rid ourselves of the short-sighted view that terrorist-jihadis are individual criminals; they are in fact agents of Islam and it is Islam itself that must be punished for the deeds of its believers.
However, I want this to be absolutely clear:  this form of retaliation should be carried out by western governments as wartime measures, NOT by individuals acting on their own.  

As for Great Britain, it has become a sorry excuse for a representative of Western Civilization.  The Brits not only fail miserably to protect their citizens from violent Islam, they go out of their way to protect violent Islam from their own citizens.  U.K. government, you disgust me.

The Norks New Nukes: North Korea Claims They Have Backpack Nukes! #Norks #NorthKorea

It has been reported that North Korean leaders are claiming they now have backpack nukes, and proved it by having a company of soldiers march around with their backpacks on.  Western analysts have expressed doubt that the Norks have the technology to make nuclear devices small enough to fit into a backpack.  The Norks demonstrated the reality of this by having a squadron of soldiers carry backpacks with a big yellow Nuclear symbol pasted thereon.

One analyst said, presumably in jest, that the North Koreans may have "Hello Kitty" backpacks that they stole from Japan, but the only thing they are likely to hold is their lunch.   He said:
We don’t take that seriously because they probably painted the radiation symbol over some Hello Kitty backpacks they stole from Japan,” the official said. “No one believes that North Korea has the technology to make a miniature nuclear bomb like that."
Meanwhile, the North Korean soldiers have DARED others to try and take away their backpacks, and have assumed a fighting stance to demonstrate their ferocity.

Cheerful People Annoy Us Grouches #cartoons

Sometimes enthusiastic, cheerful people are very annoying to us grouches.  This little dog expresses my feelings exactly.  (Found on Facebook)