Fidel Castro

So in the week that passed after Castro's death I was once again reminded of my own precarious position on the political spectrum. To my left were those for whom Castro could have done no wrong and to my right were those who saw Castro as the devil incarnate. Unfortunately this broke down largely along racial lines. My own view of Castro is far more complex, so here goes.

As a Pan-Africanist of the Garveyite strain Castro was a hero of mine. It is simply impossible to be a conscious black person, against colonialism and it's attendant evils and be completely down on Castro. Unless you are or were pro Apartheid you have to thank Castro for aiding those Africans who fought against that regime. Similarly I cannot fault Cuba and Castro for taking in Assata.

I've written on Assata in the past. You can find those writings here:

http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2013/05/hands-off-assataagain.html

and here:

http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2009/04/hands-off-assata.html

I'm sure this has already pissed off a few people, particularly those of right leanings. Don't care. Anyone familiar with the actions of government (on all levels) against black people fighting for their civil rights as citizens knows about COINTELPRO. That program specifically targeted "radical" black people and organizations for neutralization. One of the means of doing this was to infiltrate these organizations and sometimes commit criminal acts (or get members to conspire to do so) in order to bring down the organization. I have seen interviews with persons who have done these things. I honestly believe that Assata was, in fact, set up and that Foerster would be alive today had the racist COINTELPRO not been in effect.

Of course I disagree with many right leaning people on the subject of Trayvon Martin as well.

One of the oft cited proof of the failure of the Castro regime was the poverty on the island. I think such arguments are silly. Cuba's asinine decision to allow the placement of nuclear missiles on it's island aside, the fact that Cuba could not trade with what would be it's largest partner has a lot to do with the "failure" of the regime. Look at it this way. over 60% of the US is involved in trade with Canada. Imagine if the US was unable to trade with Canada? Between Mexico and Canada, we have 80% of the economic activity of various states. Again. If the US could not trade with these countries (just two), the US would be a basket case.

Sure it could be said that the economics were a consequence of the decisions of the regime but the fact still stands that we did not and will not see what kind of economic success (if any) a Cuba free to trade with the largest economy could have been.

And it's not like the US wouldn't do business with communists. They just prefer their communists to be non-hostile. Now having noted all that, it is a shame that much like the revolutionaries in Africa, after the revolution came the devolution. The resort to violence to maintain power. The control of media to maintain power. Elimination of opposition all underscores how limited the "revolutions" were. If these "people revolutions" were so powerful then wouldn't The People vote out or not vote FOR those who threatened it? If the press is lying don't you have libel laws? Wouldn't other press check them? If your "revolution" requires the silencing of opposition then your revolution is faulty. But if it's power you want then I suppose anything goes.

So I was happy when Obama decided to change the US posture to Cuba. I don't think it's the business of the US to tell other countries what form of government they should have. I don't like such "bringing democracy" bullshit in Syria, Egypt or Iraq either. A lot of the reasoning for the human rights abuses (disappearances, etc.) were born out of the meddling by the US, including attempted coups. Removing hostility removes the excuse for these acts. There are a lot of dead people in a lot of countries simply because the US has hostile policies towards the governments in those countries.

That said, some of what went on in Cuba was simply the use of "justice" as an excuse for murder. Can't hide from that fact either. Reading some of Che's thoughts makes that very clear. It also shows where the American left is headed...slowly but surely.

Back in December

No, the blog is not dead. Be back on Dec. 1.

High Priority Items for Trump in 2017

Sorry folks but I had other things I had to do (including a half marathon) so I couldn't post in the run-up to the election. This post is about what Trump should be doing in the first year in office.

Restore Law and Order in Government!

Pretty sad that this even needs to be said but the reason there are more than 11 million persons residing illegally in the United States is because the government is no longer enforcing the law (unless you are a citizen...a "nobody" citizen). This needs to be turned around pronto. Here's what I think a Trump administration needs to handle this:

1) Announce, very publicly a meeting with INS, Border Patrol and related bodies. Just announce the meeting is happening. This is the warning shot to those persons who should not be here, that time is up.

2) Announce that any municipality, city or state with "sanctuary policies" are in direct violation if immigration law and that:
a) Will have all federal funds frozen until such policies are reminded.
b) Charges will be brought against any and all officials responsible for enacting such illegal policies. These charges will include accessory to murder or negligent homicide if any illegal resident that was given sanctuary committed a homicide.

3) Have the INS and whatever related body subpoena all ID records of states with sanctuary policies. This includes any state that hands out driver's licenses and other non-driver ID's (which serve as a means of facilitating illegal immigration). Have lawyers on standby for the inevitable lawsuits. Remember that the Arizona ruling that the Federal Government is responsible for immigration matters has already gutted any state objection to such subpoenas.

Anyone on this lists who "fit the profile" of someone not in the country legally will be asked to report to INS. those who comply get 3 months to get their affairs in order and leave the country. Those who do NOT get a visit from INS and if determined to be in the country illegally are immediately removed.

The point here is to show that the state is not fucking around anymore. Those who object should know that it was the fault of the Democrats and Republicans who failed to enforce the law that they swore to uphold and who flouted the law for their own personal reasons.

2) Deal with BLM and Soros' Open Society organization. BLM that Soros funded uprising against police and law in general needs out be dealt with firmly. There are dead police out there. Investigations should be done into any organization that the BLM murderers were involved with. Soros's Open Society organization should be held criminally and financially responsible for any deaths that are connected to their activities. While criminal prosecution may not be successful, it will send the same message: The government is not fucking around now.

In particular we need prosecution of those DNC/Hillary support organization that broke election law by coordinating as well as by inciting actual violence at Trump rallies. They need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 3) Time to deal with Academy.

While it is not possible (and shouldn't be) to police private schools, those run by the state should be held to account for their liberal bias. The skewed representation of liberal to conservative (and whatever else) academics is evidence of employment discrimination. a Trump DOJ should open investigations for state run universities.

The absolutely overhyped "rape culture" bullshit needs to be dealt with head on. State universities should be held accountable for railroading those accused of sexual assault. Heads need to roll where such gender discrimination is being done. In my opinion all sexual assault claims should go through the police. No police report, no action by university. Period. Time to treat women as grown ups. If they cannot be bothered to report (for whatever reason) then we're not going to assume guilt.

These are things that certainly can be done to great effect within the first year.

Mr Obama, You are Full Of Shit

Real quick. this AM I see on Breitbart that Obama is playing the pussy card for Clinton:

“To the guys out there, I want to be honest, you know there’s a reason why there hasn’t been a woman president before,” he said. “And I think that sometimes, you know, we’re trying to get over the hump.”

There are a lot of reasons why women have not been president before, including not being able to participate in the political process, but generally speaking it has been down to two things:

1) Women not running. When women run for office they are more likely to be voted in. Emphasis on when. If you don't participate no one is going to vote for you.

2)Playing the pussy card. If you tell me I have to vote for you because you are a woman then I won't vote for you. Simple. Having a vagina is not a qualification for me. Having ideas I agree with is. I personally have already supported female candidates for office including president.

But to show the level of cuckness that Obama has, which has been evident to anyone who has watched him and Michelle, he says this:

Obama made his remarks during a campaign rally in Ohio for Hillary Clinton. He added that his wife Michelle Obama was better than he was.

“I know that my wife is not just my equal but my superior,” he said.

And this is why so many men are attracted to Trump. The above statement is offensive to me and other men. Worse it shows once again that the left is not in it for equality of women but for women to be seen as superior to men. Fuck that and fuck that. I tell this to men all the time: Stop calling your wife or girlfriend your "better half". She is your other half, your partner with strengths to match your weaknesses and vice versa. She is not superior or better than you in any way, shape or form. And to underscore how bad it is out there, most men I tell this to say something to the effect of "happy wife, happy life." This shows that many of these men are simply afraid of their significant others. That is total bullshit. What we see with Trump is a man who does not defer to his wife. He respects his wife and she respects him, as is clear by their interactions, but it is clear who "the man" is in that relationship.

Lastly let me point out that Obama is a beneficiary of the "sexism" he claims men have (if we ignore how unpopular Clinton is). Clinton, with her government service [sic] was way more qualified for office than Obama was, yet Obama won the election largely because he was the popular black guy that people thought would wipe away the sin of racism and launch the era of equality.

Joke's on you.

So just like Obama speaking on rates of sexual assault and rape culture, he just doesn't know of what he speaks.

All The Way To The Top

White Supremacy Is So Bad....

Black folks risk crossing the Sahara. Risk drowning on rickety boats all to sleep on the streets of Paris

Let that shit sink in.

So when next you hear some black person complaining about all that racism that is holding him or her down. Or how "white supremacy" is the cause of all that ills black people, you watch this video and think again.

Pussy Galore

If only I was talking about a Bond movie.

Apparently the October Surprise is not the mountains of leaks showing that Clinton is an admitted two face liar who would like to change the rules of the Senate (and executive) in order to allow Democrats to do whatever it is that peaks their fancy. Nor is it that her foundation accepted money from Saudi Arabia even though they knew it was funding ISIS organizations. The million dollar birthday gift to Bill Clinton for an hour long meeting about who knows what.

Never mind that after the attacks on Sanders by the DNC because he is a non practicing Jew, something that would put them in league with orgs like Stormfront, But who also assailed the Catholic church (for purposes of disclosure I'm not a fan of either) and Catholics for being backwards. Never mind that Clinton's folks called Muslims and Blacks and Democratic voters in general, low information, low achievers and easy to manipulate. No, the most important thing, if you watch the rigged election, is whether Trump is down with pussy galore.

Which brings us to the actual topic of this post: The election is rigged.

Most of us understand "rigged' elections as someone hacking voting machines. Miscounts of ballots. Disappearing ballots. Purposely mismanaging voting locations to limit voting. But that is not what Trump means and it is not how this election is being rigged.

Again, we know from various leaks that various "news" organizations and internet giants are down with the DNC and with Clinton in particular. Since these outlets have an outsize influence on what people see, they are able to manipulate opinion and information and therefore have an outsize influence on the election (or anything else).

Let's give an example. When gay marriage was something that the media wanted you to get behind they changed the phrasing to "marriage equality". They knew that the public by and large associates very strongly with "equality". Thus if you were against "equality" you were for discrimination. Discrimination is bad to therefore opposition to gay marriage is bad. next thing you know, gay marriage sweeps America and Christians who actually follow the Bible get sued, something that could have never happened even 20 years ago.

Hence we see the media can stack the deck in favour of or against a topic. Which brings us to Trump. The media has been very willing to allow people to make unsubstantiated allegation against Trump. In decades past no news organization would dare risk their reputation, let alone lawyer and verdicts that could be in the millions by allowing their organzations to be used for libelous speech. Now if a woman says she was "assaulted" by a man, its put out as if it is fact. Reputations are damaged and there is no recourse. Why? Because 9 times out of 10, there is no official report to anyone. How can you defend yourself against a charge that only exists, legally, in the mind of the accuser?

I don't know if these allegations are true. Neither does any of the news outlets who are running with these stories. The responsible thing would be to not report until they are confirmed or at least some kind of verification process, other than the word of the accuser is done. But that's not what we're seeing here. So this is the rigging. Get the media to influence the people. Make them fearful of a candidate. Minimize the coverage and questioning of the preferred candidate and blow up or fabricate reports on the "out" candidate. Use key fear triggering words like "terrifying", "crazy", "unstable", etc. Those of us familiar with NLP know that these are trigger words and by associating them with a candidate will trigger a fear response (or worse) when confronted with anything associated with the candidate.

To make things worse, the media, in collusion with elected officials have allowed physical violence against supporters of a candidate to go unpunished. When reported on, these criminal and IMO treasonous acts are said to be "lively" and "peaceful' protests or the violence is blamed on the rhetoric of the candidate who the victims support. It defies logic but is repeated often.

So again, this rigged election is not about hacked machines and all that. No, it is a huge psy-op against the public. It is the use of economic blackmail against those who support a particular candidate. But most revealing it is the apparent triumph of Vagina Politics.

Pussy Galore indeed.

Why Is There So Much Concern About Russia?

So we have been treated to the Great Russian Conspiracy" in regards to the US election. Democrats who used to be against chicken hawk type behavior are fanning the flames of the Evil Empire for the purposes of scaring the shit out of the electorate and raising the spectre of "rigged elections" on the off chance they lose this one. The lynch pin (are you triggered?) of this plan is the notoriously short memory of the electorate, assuming the voters in question even paid attention the first time around. What has been forgotten? Ukraine.

See, not too long ago the US along with allies in the EU meddled and interfered with the elections of and government operations of Ukraine. This forced a complete breakdown of the Ukrainian government and a low intensity civil war within that country for the purposes of pulling it away from Russian sphere of influence and allowing NATO to edge that much closer to Moscow.

Therefore anyone in camp Hillary or camp Democrat who is flapping their gums and their hands about Russian influence on US elections either thinks you are a fool (and apparently there are a LOT of fools out there), or boldly believes that the US has carte blanche to mess with the elections of other countries but that rooster can't settle down on domestic fences.

Lastly it is of great irony that a party that houses a good number of actual communists is making noise about an ex-KGB agent who runs an ex-communist country.

Friday Morning Class

Newark. 8AM. If you're 12, 13 or 15 years old what should you be doing? Normal people would say, at or on my way to school. Others, not so much

"Give me, give me, give me," the teen reportedly told the woman while he pointed a gun at her as she walked to her house from her driveway around 8 a.m. Friday, police said. The teen took her car keys and fled in the woman's SUV.

And what did this school age teen do after grabbing someone's property?

Two Newark boys, 13 and 14 years old, were also in the stolen Toyota Highlander when it crashed, Ricciardi said. The driver apparently picked up the others after the carjacking.

Oh yeah, pick up your younger boys and joy ride. Now, I suppose he just wanted to give the youngstas a ride to school and they were averse to cheese busses. But really. 8AM. Eight. A. M. All of these children should have been on their way to school. Instead they are packing heat, running up on hard working people in their driveways and saying "gimmie, gimmie, gimmie" while waving guns in their victim's faces.

And this of course is not only the fault of white folks, but the police too.

I suppose we should also blame the 'failing school" and the "bad teachers" for not making education more attractive than car jacking.

No Constitution

There is only ONE thing you need to take from tonight's "debate". Hillary Clinton failed to mention as a requirement of her SCOTUS picks, adherence to the Constitution. She mentioned many things but not once did she mention the Constitution. This epic failure on the part of a person seeking the executive office should be a disqualifying event. It doesn't matter if you are conservative or liberal, as a citizen your rights and privileges are defined by the supreme legal document. The fact that Clinton does not deem it important enough to even MENTION in her qualifications for SCOTUS pick should bother you more than any kind of pussy talk, fat talk, tax talk, e-mail talk, any of it.

War on Heterosexual Males Hits a New Peak

I'm going to keep this brief. This presidential election cycle has bared it's true face. I have been saying that we are being treated to a dish of Vagina Politics but this recent "tape" is bare misandry of the base form.

Let us be clear here. Men and women speak of each other, when in private with people whom they trust (and sometimes not but usually) in terms that are sometimes not child friendly. Men talk about women's looks, including tits, ass, legs and cameltoe if visible (yay Yoga pants). Women discuss male "packages" and often his social status as reflected by his ownership or at least possession of material things. Whatever you think of these types of conversation, they happen and there is nothing wrong with them. It is simply how human sexuality operates. The problem here is that men are increasingly under attack for being straight men while women are allowed to maintain their straightness and their privacy and now can publicly say sexist things about men without reprimand or consequences. But even that is not important here. What is important here are two very stark facts:

1) Trump discussed grabbing a woman by the pussy, which as far as we know he has not done to anyone....physically.

2) Bill Clinton had an intern suck his dick in the Oval Office. Committed perjury when under oath and has multiple rape accusers. Yet Democrats rallied around this man. Hillary defended this man by going after Bill's victims (some alleged, some verified). There is only ONE person who is in league with an actual sexual predator: Hillary Clinton. Full stop.

If you have no problem with the facts laid out and wish to not vote for Trump because he commented, but not committed sexual assault. then YOU are a hypocrite of the highest order and you too are fighting a war against straight men.

The American Tax System: A Brief Explainer

Since someone leaked one of Donald Trump's income taxes (or that of his organization), I've seen a lot of shit reporting on the matter. Of course most of that MSM "journalism" is really an extension of the Clinton campaign and so they benefit from further misleading the public. So in the interest of education this post will explain how the US tax system works in it's most general form.

I used to have a business. It fails. Most businesses fail. Most fail shortly after starting. While I had it I learned eye opening things about this corporation called The United States.

1) Individuals pay taxes on income BEFORE expenses. Businesses pay taxes on income AFTER expenses.

This one difference explains the vast majority of why Trump (or his organization) did not pay taxes in that year (and others) that the nearly $1 billion was lost. You see, if Trump was simply an individual who messed around and got himself into $1 billion in debt, the IRS would say "well sucks to be you but you made 30K and you owe us 12% of that."

I just threw that 12% out there. The point is that Trump would have had to pay taxes on any income he made while he was piling up that debt because individuals pay taxes BEFORE expenses. However; since Trump Inc. is a business. Trump gets to tell the IRS: "Yeah I had 200 million in income this year, but since I lost the Casino, Airline and the cost of getting the Hotel, I'm actually 900 million in the hole. Sorry."

The IRS would have no choice but to say:"Oh damn, that sucks. See you next year."

And don't get it twisted, This applies to EVERY business regardless of size. You have a loss that is greater than your income? You don't pay taxes. This is one reason why entrepreneurship is a positive.

2) If you have a corp. IT makes money not YOU.

This is another item that many people fail to understand. WHen you have a business your clients don't pay YOU they pay your business. At it's extreme if you never took a paycheck from your business and your business made $100,000. It is your BUSINESS that owes taxes, not you. Many smart business people use this fact and pay themselves a small fraction of their businesses income. They keep their income low to avoid relatively high personal tax liabilities. You as an individual cannot do this. Well actually if you have a 401K or related investment you are doing the exact same thing. Sheltering income and avoiding tax payment.

The next thing you do is you put anything you have to pay for in the business name. YOU don't buy a car, the BUSINESS buys a car. YOU don't buy a suit, your BUSINESS buys a suit. Etc. Etc. if you work it legally a lot of items you would be using for personal use becomes a business expense and therefore a tax write off.

I know people who go out to dinner with friends and they take about 5-10 minutes of the 2 hour dinner to discuss "business" and due to tax rules THAT dinner has now become a business dinner and therefore a tax deduction. This is one reason why business people like to "do lunch" and the like. All perfectly legal. You may not like it, but I always say why are you hating the player? Why not play the game?

Lastly, people need to understand that just because a particular business doesn't pay any income taxes, it doesn't mean that the state doesn't benefit from the existence of that company. There is a reason why many stats give companies multi-year "no taxes" guarantees (which I personally don't care for but that's another topic for another time). Companies that are not sole proprietorships tend to employ people. And what was the number one point made above? Individuals pay taxes before expenses. Employees are "expenses" of a business (cost of labour). The state makes money of the money businesses pay to employees (which is also why automation is also a large threat to state and federal tax revenue).

I'm not saying the tax code is perfect, but the media frenzy about Trump "avoiding taxes" as if he wouldn't have preferred to have $1 billion more in revenue makes no sense. So the fact is Trump paid what he owed: Nothing. And if YOU even had the assets to have that kind of loss you'd do the same thing. Don't be mad 'cause you're relatively broke. 'Cause it's not his fault.

This Is How Stupid and Emotional The MSM Thinks You Are

For the second straight day the media and Hillary campaign (I repeat myself) has been putting Alicia Machado in our faces. The premise being that we should all be upset because Trump called her Miss Piggy. This is how stupid and emotional the press thinks you are. Think about this for a moment.

Miss Machado, of her own volition, entered a BEAUTY CONTEST. The entire POINT of a BEAUTY CONTEST is to be judged on your looks (which includes your weight). You WIN a BEAUTY CONTEST by having people (judges) PASS JUDGEMENT on your looks. You then have a job for a year. The entire purpose of that job is to look exactly like you did when you WON the BEAUTY CONTEST as a representative of said contest. FAILURE to do so, is a breech of contract. Not only that but in order to even make it to the Miss Universe contest you had to beat out other women in previous LOOKS JUDGING CONTESTS. Not only that, not a single woman in ANY Of those contests could be described as even remotely "plus size".

How the hell do you get upset for a woman who volunteered for the above? If you do YOU ARE STUPID.

The second thing, not getting as much press now, because "hoes before dead black people in the streets killed by other black people", is how lester and other MSM black folks pestered Trump about the "birther" issue to the complete burial of the point that thousands of black bodies are piling up in Chicago (and other places) at rates unseen since the 90's.

We had a negro on ABCNews after the debate tell us that Black people are "upset" due to the birther issue and therefore Trump is bad for black folks. Seriously. If your dumb ass is more concerned with a birth certificate sideshow than with the continued killing of black folks (mostly men) by other black folks (mostly men), then you DESERVE more dead black men in the street.

This is how STUPID the MSM thinks you are. The only question is whether you confirm this thought.

Because Police Are THE Problem

From CNN

Tavon lay wounded on the floor as his family looked on in horror...

Chicago Police Sgt. Bryan Topczewski, who was leaving another homicide scene, heard the call -- "child's been shot" -- and raced toward their house.

This was at least the fourth shooting that day, Topczewski said. [My underlines]

Trust me. NO BLM was present and will not contribute to the medical bills. Secondly We won't hear from [enter athlete type] about any of this. There will be no national news media interviewing [enter athlete's name] on the kind of "conversation" we need to be having.

This is why BLM is a Soros funded scam and assault on decent black people.

BLM Skittles

Anyone who's read this blog long enough knows I have zero respect for the BLM movement and the liberal whites who enable them. Here we have another example of why.

This is a clear response to Trump Jr's Skittle's commentary. What this response shows is just how stupid the BLM people are. They failed to understand the original point and were dumb enough to respond as if the circumstances were comparable. Let me explain. Trump's comment was that you have a bowl of Skittles or a bunch of people. You don't know which one is the poison candy (or the one who will up and blow him/herself up other terrorist act). Your best recourse in such a situation is to eat none of them because you can avoid being poisoned by your actions.

I've made a similar argument in regards to sexual assault. If you were to use the statistics that 97% of men have not and will not rape a woman...ever. then if you were in a bar/club with 100 men, there are 3 of them who has or will rape. You have two choices here. You can either avoid all bars or you can engage in risk mitigation. You can for example not leave your drink when you go to the bathroom. Don't take drinks that you didn't see poured and passed to you. You can not get fall out/pass out drunk. etc.

This is called risk assessment. It is what sane people do. Liberals are not sane people so they think that there is nothing a person can (or should!) do to manage risks that they come across. Hence the above picture. Now lets show why the above picture is out of order.

First and foremost we know that the percentages of cops involved in killing black people is, in the example of Chicago on the order of half a percent. So the poster inflates the occurrence of suicide by cop by 6x. But again this is common of liberals: Exaggerate the claim and hope nobody is around to check 'em on it. So you notice that they don't tell you how many skittles are in this bowl AND show you a very small bowl. All of this to get you to think that the suicide by cop statistics are larger than they actually are.

But more to the point the BLM poster here makes the implication that the behavior of black persons are not a part of the problem. Again you cannot compare a terrorist with a person who decides to not follow directions. What BLM wants you to think is that police generally just pop up and shoot niggaz just for sport. Those black men killed just happened to be random victims like Amadou Diallo of Jamaica Queens was yesterday. No, the fact is that with one exception I can think of, each person shot by a police officer since BLM (and really before but lets stick with this) has been getting people killed, had failed to follow directions. They either tried to drive away. Failed to raise hands. Failed to stop walking or running. It's almost like liberals don't think black people should be expected to follow directions. Not almost, it is. A judge, on a bench. Actually said that black suspects have a right to run away from police because racism.

"Such an individual, when approached by the police, might just as easily be motivated by the desire to avoid the recurring indignity of being racially profiled as by the desire to hide criminal activity. Given this reality for black males in the city of Boston, a judge should, in appropriate cases, consider the report's findings in weighing flight as a factor in the reasonable suspicion calculus."

Black people who are not engaged in crime, who never have or will do so, don't run from police upon making eye contact. Most of us know when we have been legitimately contacted and when we are profiled. Unfortunately too many of us feel entitled and want to make everything racial.

If black men are tired of being profiled, then they should get their peers to commit less crimes. Almost if by magic, police presences will be reduced dramatically because as people in small, low crime areas know, less crime means less cops to employ. But BLM doesn't want this simple formula to be put out there because it would mean black people taking responsibility for our [in]actions. Under liberal America, black people are not to be held responsible for anything negative. There are white people for that.

American Greatness

Sorry for the lack of posts, working on alternative income streams that has taken time away from this. What? You thought I made money on this?

Anyway, this is not my writing but rather a link that I think hits the nail on the head as to where the US two party state is headed in this and forthcoming elections. Way too many items I could quote so I'm just linking to the piece. http://amgreatness.com/2016/09/12/decius-responds/

Ok. One quote:

My use (once each) the terms thymos and virtù was taken as evidence that I am advocating a politics of “great daring” or some such. I’d like to be generous here and just presume this is a misunderstanding. I suggest to anyone who holds this interpretation to look at the specific contexts in which those words were used. The former referred to go-along, get-along conservative intellectuals, who could do with a double dose of thymos. Several writers on the Left obligingly made the point. Good conservatism adheres to the parameters we set for you. You may say this, but not this. If you do and say what we tell you to, your reward will be that we will call you racist Nazis a little less. Also, what we allow as “good conservatism” will drift ever leftward, so that something we permitted a year or two ago is subject to revocation without notice and you better get on board immediately or the deal is off. [my underlines]

A good example would be to compare Obama of 2008 election season and Obama now on a bunch of issues. Similarly Hillary Clinton had positions then that would get her in deep shit now. This moving goalpost is a huge stumbling block for those who are left of well the left. Once you give in on some, they just move it further. You simply have to stop playing the game. Mind you there are costs to this. A man is looking at losing his job for simply refusing to play the game at his place of employment. I say bravo to him and he has a larger set of balls than most. Most of us would watch the video, shut up, put our heads down and be thankful we've been deemed worthy of a paycheck. This is the future people. You cannot even object. You have no free speech. The government cannot abridge your speech (or lack thereof), yet an arm of the government is doing just that. As the above link explains, Constitutional government is on it's deathwatch. Stakes is High

Left Unsaid

RT blares the news:

Chicago cops shoot at someone every 5 days

Really?

Over the last six years, police in Chicago, Illinois have fired 2,623 bullets at citizens, killing 92 people and injuring 170 others, according to a new database by the Chicago Tribune. The department has drawn intense criticism for its brutality.

Between 2010 and 2015, the Chicago Police Department was involved with 435 shootings, many of which never caught the public’s attention. In those officer-involved shootings, police fired at least 2,623 bullets. At least one person was struck in 235 shootings, while officers missed hitting anyone in 200 instances, the Chicago Tribune found.

You don't say.

Quick question: How many of these "citizens" were armed? How many were in the process of committing a crime? Aren't such questions relevant to such a headline?

If you read the linked Chicago Tribune piece you don't get a SINGLE mention of the crime rates in Chicago. It's almost like these people think that the crime rate is irrelevant to all that police activity. Well here's the count:

2010:456
2011:455
2012: 523
2013: 442
2014: 436

They stopped counting in 2015. To get current year info you go here: http://crime.chicagotribune.com. Continuing from that site:

2015: 490
2016: 464 so far.

So a total of 3266 dead. Not total shot. Not total assaulted. Just the dead in 6 years. The police SHOT 435 people, or 13% of the total homicides and we know that most of those were justifiable homicides.

Why would the Chicago Tribune spend time acting as if the shootings by police there are a big problem or even the biggest problem? Seems to me that the Chicago PD are not shooting enough people to put a dent in the homicide rate in that city.

Open Letter To Dwayne Wade

Dear Dwayne Wade; I woke up this morning to the news that you had lost your cousin Nykea Aldridge to crime in Chicago. I want to extend my condolences and hope that you and your extended family get through this as a strong(er) unit. However; this is not all I have to say on the subject.

I recall that recently during the Espys, you and fellow NBA ball players made a very public show of support for the Black Lives Matter "movement". You said in part:

Wade picked up where the Clippers point guard left off: “The racial profiling has to stop. The shoot-to-kill mentality has to stop. … Enough is enough. Now, as athletes, it’s on us to challenge each other to do even more than what we already do in our own communities.”

You are now no doubt uncomfortable close to the reality of violence in black communities. No doubt you know that the person who killed your cousin was not not a police officer. No doubt that the person who shot your cousin was a black person and most likely a male. You called this "profiling" yet, it is a statistical fact that in Chicago 90+ percent of homicides are committed by black people (mostly males).

I hope that as you work through your grief that you reflect on the reality that this Black Lives Matter movement is a total fraud. They are more concerned with the very few people who are wrongly abused by a small cadre of police officers than with the lives of you and your family who are obeying the law and living a clean life.

Understand that as a group the Black Lives Matter movement has denied(1,2) the very existence of black on black violence. The actions of this movement has caused homicides to increase in many urban areas, including Chicago which has seen the most homicide rate since the 1990s. Where were the BLM people when your cousin got shot? Are they going to solve the crime? Pay for the funeral? Are they going to raise the child that is now motherless? The answer is "no" on all counts.

The Black Lives Matter movement wanted attention, it is funded by white philanthropists like George Soros and the Ford Foundation. People who never lived in and will never live in the communities like the one your cousin lived in. They live in gated communities with personal body guards and high tech security systems. They will never ever have to walk the streets with killers. And these people would make you think YOU are a sellout for calling the BLM what they are: A Democratic Party front group.

Hopefully I haven't come off too strongly. I just hate to see young black men who are sincerely trying to do what is best for the black community, get used for nefarious ends. I hope that out of this tragedy you are able to see BLM for what they are and the real problems in our communities for what they are.

Sincerely;

SKO

Who's Missing? Why?

As I prepare an "epic" post (if I say so myself) on Liberal Pseudoscience(tm), I'll point the reader to a recent article on Apple's Machine Learning team. Firstly, as usual, I will point out the "complexion" of Apple's technology leadership, even as it crows about "diversity".

Look who's missing.

Now lets look at what the general requirements are for doing machine learning at Apple (and presumably other companies doing similar AI work):

What’s interesting is that Apple’s ML is produced by many people who weren’t necessarily trained in the field before they joined the company. “We hire people who are very smart in fundamental domains of mathematics, statistics, programming languages, cryptography,” says Federighi. “It turns out a lot of these kinds of core talents translate beautifully to machine learning. Though today we certainly hire many machine learning people, we also look for people with the right core aptitudes and talents.” [my underlines]

As I pointed out in an earlier blog entry, Liberal Pseudoscience tells black people and liberal whites that:

“The racial narrative of White tends to be like this: Rugged individual, honest, hard-working, disciplined, rigorous, successful,” she said. “And so then, the narrative of U.S. public education: Individual assessments, competition, outcome over process (I care more about your grades than how you’re doing), ‘discipline’ where we care more about your attendance and making sure you’re not tardy than we care about your relationships … proper English must be spoken (which is just assimilation into standard U.S. dialect), hierarchical power structure, and heavy goal orientation.”

If "white" is "discipline, "rigorous" and "hardworking", then by direct inference black is "lazy", "lackadaisical", etc. Thus the liberal narrative for black education is in direct opposition to the very skills that are needed in the technology arena. Liberals are literally setting up black students to fail.

You cannot do statistics, programming and cryptology without being rigorous and disciplined. Liberals are saying that white people are inherently capable of these things and blacks are not. To quote Donald Trump: Liberals are bigots. But we knew this already.

It takes a high IQ to do mathematics and related fields. in the US blacks are 13% of the population. Even if we assumed that blacks and whites have identical IQ distributions (they do not), the availability of black folks with the required IQ's to engage in the kind of work Apple does in machine learning would be extremely limited.

So when we see pictures like the one above, with a total lack of black folks it should not strike us as odd. And if liberals continue to dominate education with the ideologies quoted above, we will see less blacks as they are not held up to the high standards required to succeed in STEM fields.

Unilever Plays in SJW Water and Fails

So I'm on Road and Track's website doing my automobile thing when the following advert shows up:

Firstly, I'm sending a note to Road and Track telling them I don't appreciate SJW bullshit on a automobile website.

Secondly to Unilever, I don't know what recent school of feminism grad you hired in your marketing department, but insulting the intelligence of men is NOT going to win you customers and this one will be actively seeking replacements for any of the products you produce that I use.

I, and all man can, in fact, observe the beauty of a woman as ONE of the things about her. I LOVE watching women track athletes run around in the little shorts. Did I mention I love that? And still I appreciate the training and other hard work that comes with being an athlete at that level. I cheered for the US women's 4x100 regardless of what they were wearing. Shame on YOU, Unilever for attempting to shame me for being a heterosexual man who appreciates the female bodies as part of what makes them who they are.

Fire the marketing company and any person who thought that such an advertisement was a good idea. Meanwhile "Tonga Man" was being groped by the members of the NBC staff without a peep:

China Enters Syria Arena

Shit just got a WHOLE LOT realer.

China, Russia and Iran have come together in a tripartite alliance supporting the Syrian government in the war against radical fundamentalist insurgents. The main targets of this alliance are Islamic State and Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, formerly al-Qaeda’s affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, and its partners. Until last week Russia and Iran were the military mainstays of the overstretched and undermanned Syrian army.

By opposing Assad, the US is now militarily against two nuclear powers.

Moscow, Tehran and Beijing fear the fall of secular Damascus would lead to the establishment of jihadi fiefdoms in Syria from which radicals would mount attacks into southern Russia and Iran and promote Muslim dissidence in China.

If China did not have the attention of ISIS before, it does now. Understanding that China has a far different (saner?) immigration policy than Europe or the US, it will be interesting to see if there is an uptick in "activities" by Muslims in that country or by those who manage to get in.

The Very Definition Of Slave Mentality

So yesterday I was crossing the Tappan Zee Bridge and observing the construction of it's replacement. I am always awed by the construction of such objects. It takes the cumulative efforts of many generations to get the technical knowhow to build such things. It takes precision and attention to detail. If construction is not done properly lives are literally at stake.

When I was in Tuskegee a professor Fluker used to tell us that Africans will only be respected when we:

build a plane that can go 3x the speed of light.

Now warp 3 may be a rather high goal but I think that his point was that Africans would need to develop among themselves the abilities necessary to create and maintain a [future] modern society. You can call for reparations and the like all you want, but if you cannot produce, eventually you are surpassed and bypassed by those who do.

The other thing that he used to ask is whether a student had an inferiority complex due to race, gender, economic status, etc. This was usually brought on by self-deprecating comments or behavior said or done by a student. He recognized, as I recognize now, that those who have inferiority complexes are already defeated and are not motivated. As Carter G. Woodson said (more or less, not a direct quote):

A man who believes himself inferior does not have to be barred from entering the front door, he will find the backdoor himself and if there isn't one he'll create one for himself.

Persons with inferiority complexes not only position themselves in inferior positions, they become resentful of those they see as superior to themselves. That resentfulness can often lead to violence. If they cannot directly lash out at the object of their resentment they will lash out at that which they deem to be symbols of their superior. Therefore when we see black folks rioting in burning "their own communities" it is because they, as James Baldwin pointed out, do not see it as "their community". Rather it is simply someplace they live. They know they didn't build any of it. They know that if anything breaks, that the people actually capable of building and maintaining it, will have to be called. For these individuals their whole entire life is essentially a wonderment like the new bridge crossing the Hudson.

How is this much different from when the African came into contact with the European "Ju-ju"? The smarter African leadership recognized that in the European they had met their technical superior and sent their sons and other higher ups to learn from the European. The smart Africans, when they saw the power of the "fire stick" didn't turn to the witch doctor, but they got their best smiths to try to recreate gunpowder (failed). But the rest, transported across the Atlantic found themselves in an inferior position where they essentially lived and died at the whim of the white population. In essence black employment in America has been the result of white employers. Where black people are unemployable, the government steps in with various programs. But dependency is dependency. Many black people know it, resent it, and will lash out in various forms if able. Which leads us to this fellow below:

Do not think for a minute that he's the only person who thinks this way. Do not think for a moment that he doesn't represent the mainstream of "mainstream" blacks.

This what happen because they not helping the black community

They? They who?

Like you know, the rich people got all this money. They like, you know, not trying to give us none

"Give"? This is the central problem. "Give". Other than those who were born into the top wealth, those who are "rich" worked for it. And even among those who inherited wealth, they got it because their parents did the work. Does this guy think that if he won a $500 million lottery and died that his kids ought to get nothing at all? I doubt that.

But more than that it shows the slave mentality. Once again, the slave depends upon his superior for his living because he cannot provide it for himself. Those who ask for a handout have already admitted his inferiority. Had this fellow had the mentality that he was equal in ability to those "rich" persons, he would have said 'we have been denied the opportunity..."

Lastly, I like to point out to folks, particularly those in the US. that generally speaking, this country was built from nothing. Europeans may have exploited enslaved African labour but they still built it. Most of us alive now, black or other, have little to nothing in the way of economic hands up via slave labour finances. Most of the companies we depend on and live with weren't in existence at any proximity to slavery or Jim Crow. Continuing to use JC and slavery as the explain all for black issues shows a level of desperation and yes, inferiority complexes that no amount of yelling and protesting can hide. It is only because white people in general are but a shadow of themselves and having a civil war among themselves have black folks been even able to get away with the juvenile antics.

How Low Will England Go?

It is fascinating to watch the British who at one point could claim to run at least half the known world, become one of the most self hating set of people next to Germans. If I had no idea about what the British had done in the past and someone told me they could have colonized and controlled as much of the world that they did, I would call you a damn fool and to stop taking whatever drugs you were on.

Today's example of British loss of basic self-respect is as follows:

A spokesman of the police force told Huffington Post UK: “We are continuing to seek a full injunction banning Britain First organisers Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen from entering Luton town centre and Bury Park for three years.”

Understand what is happening here. The British government is seeking to ban the free movement of native British persons in their own country. That's pretty low. Not only that but:

Earlier this year, Mr Golding and Ms Fransen led a group of activists through the town of Luton – which they call an “Islamist hotspot” – confronting local Muslims and handing out newspapers.

Police arrested Mr Golding and charged him with “wearing a uniform with political objectives” under the 1936 Public Order Act – an obscure regulation originally passed to prevent the rise of fascist groups before the Second World War. He was fined £450.

Ms Fransen was charged with religiously aggravated harassment – a case that is still ongoing.

Arrested for wearing a uniform?

All to appease non-native peoples who, generally speaking despise the British people? How is it that any of the leadership in Britain is actually still in power when they act in such a manner? It is pretty clear that the British have no sense of self-respect, no wonder then that the foreigners they insist on importing don't respect them either.

Trump Trolls Media. Media Takes Bait

So yesterday I was told that Trump said Obama founded ISIS. It was later that I saw the report about that statement. It was funny because the fact that I was told about it with the expectation that I would be upset, showed just how effective Trump's trolling was. Now we know full well that Obama didn't found ISIS in the manner we think of founding. But this excellent example of trolling forced those who were offended to show how stupid Trump is. In doing that they run across pieces like this one where the truth is even worse than the original statement.

Let us be clear. If we are going to be strict we have to credit the rise of ISIS with the entire cold war against Russia in Afghanistan. No Mujahideen, no Taliban. No Taliban no Al-Qaeda. No Al-Qaeda no ISIS. Straight line. Now presidents and other "higher ups" knew that the way to keep these Jihadis in line was to have strong, often brutal leadership. GW Bush apparently didn't get the memo and created a power vacuum in Iraq which would be the current founding event of ISIS. No Iraq war, no ISIS.

So in brilliant fashion not only did Trump troll Obama and Democrats, he also trolled establishment Republicans, all of whom are against Trump. Those establishment Republicans started the Iraq war and they don't want the public to realize that THEY are the ones responsible for ISIS. Now lets get to Obama and Hillary.

Having established that it was mainstream Republican establishment types that are actually responsible for the Iraq war and therefore the rise of ISIS can we put any responsibility for the spread and growth of ISIS on Obama? Certainly.

It was president Obama who involved the United States to be involved in the deposition and assassination of a sitting head of state who was a partner against ISIS and Al-Qaeda. This cannot be understated. Ghadaffi with all his faults, had emerged as a force against Al-Qaeda AND as a check against massive cross meditterean immigration to Europe. The US, under Obama provided air cover for "rebel groups" some of whom later pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda. As if THAT wasn't enough, Hillary and other Obama staffers knowingly LIED about the cause of the deaths of American servicemen and an ambassador. Deaths that were the direct result of the US involvement in Libya. So we have one count of Obama enabling the rise of ISIS in an area of the world where ISIS did not exist.

Secondly, Obama, still not understanding the crucial role of certain types of leadership in the Muslim world, sided with "rebel groups" in Syria to depose Assad. As a result of funding and providing arms (and logistical support) to "approved rebel groups" ISIS established itself in Syria (which is partially how we get the name ISIS). As a matter of fact, some of those "moderate rebel groups" not only aligned themselves with ISIS but gave them the arms the US "covertly" supplied to them. You can't make this shit up.

Currently the only country in Syria that has actually not supported or supplied terrorists is Russia! Think about it!

So we have a second count where Obama has in fact enabled the establishment of ISIS in a place that had no ISIS.

So while it may be total sarcasm to say that Obama "founded" ISIS, it is entirely correct to say that in at least two cases, Obama enabled the creation of ISIS camps/strongholds where they did not exist. The more the media reports on Trump's comments the more those of the public who seek to "verify" information will learn the truth. It may not be exactly what Trump says, but that is not the point.

Grammar Police Mangle Trump's Statement, Alarm Ensues

While ignoring actual factual violence against persons who at a minimum appear to be Trump supporters, the MSM and just about every Democrat leaning talking head has made the claim that Trump made a threat against Hillary Clinton when he said the following:

"Hillary wants to abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

Had this been a prepared speech, delivered to the letter rather than the usual Trump speaking extemporaneously as he habitually does, one could understand some level of concern. I say some level because we should take any apparent call for political violence very seriously. However since there is a concerted effort by Republicrats and their water carrying boys and girls in the MSM to smear trump as badly and as often as possible, level headed thinking is nigh impossible. Let me explain how this statement is truly supposed to be taken given who gave it and the usual way that he speaks:

Hillary wants to abolish the Second Amendment.

This is an assertion. It is the assertion that is the theme of the statements.

By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks

This is the "mechanics" of how his assertion would get done. The claim here is that if Clinton gets her judges on the bench, supposedly those that agree with getting rid of the Second Amendment, then there is nothing you can do, folks. Now in order to actually "abolish" the Second Amendment, there would need to be an act of Congress as required by the constitution, but the implication here is that abolition would occur by means of increasingly restrictive laws that would make ownership too onerous to exercise.

But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know

The "But" here implies that he's returning to the original assertion of Hillary Clinton wanting to abolish the Second Amendment. The statement between these, the "by the way" was an aside from his main point of abolition.

So what he's actually saying here is: "But back to the Second Amendment, people, maybe there is [something you can do] but I don't know [it looks bad]." Note that I put a comma after "Amendment". This is important because it separates the "people" from the "Second Amendment". "People is used like "folks"

What the media has willfully injected a "you could kill her" as the "something you can do". But that speaks more to the actual mindset of those opposed to Trump than to Trump's own mindset. Again, 99% of the political violence that has occurred this election season has been directed at Trump's supporters by Hillary and Sanders supporters, some of whom are not even legal residents of the US.

Now I know that the spokespersons are trying to say that Trump meant that the "second amendment people" as in "NRA types" can "maybe do something" like vote in a block. I think they are mistaken in this "interpretation" and are doing so because it's an easy thing to explain to the public, than explaining the grammatical issue of the quote and how you deal with a person making extemporaneous commentary.

Political Violence America

Two days ago I saw a news report where a person with a large "T" in front of his home representing his support of Trump for president found it alight from someone who clearly did not approve.

Today I read that a man wearing a Trump t-shirt was attacked by a passing motorist who used a crowbar.

The man was walking on West Passaic Avenue at about 5:41 p.m. last Wednesday when a man he did not know pulled up in an older gray compact car, Bloomfield police said.

The driver questioned the 62-year-old about the Donald Trump shirt he was wearing, and then followed him into the parking lot of the Friendly's restaurant on Broad Street, police said.

"The motorist inquired why (the man) was wearing the shirt, directing profanities at him," Bloomfield Police spokesman Ralph Marotti said. "The (victim) continued to walk away as (the) motorist followed him."

The man then got out of his car with a crowbar, and during an altercation, struck the older man several times, authorities said.

A person in the comments section asked what the shirt said as if that was of any excuse or valid explanation for the political violence meted out to the 62 year old man.

Once again we will find our sitting president absent in condemning the rising political violence that has marked this election. I have seen cases where signs supporting Trump have gone from lawns to windows because of property destruction that followed the placement of yard signs. This is unacceptable. It is unacceptable that both major political parties will not make a forceful public statement condemning the violence and for the federal government to fail to fully prosecute those individuals and groups who are engaging in domestic terrorism.

No US citizen should face violence, be it physical or economic for choosing to support or not support any candidate for office. Political thuggery is a deadly disease to any democratic system. Where citizens cannot feel secure to exercise their rights, society falls.

Trump's 24 Hours of Trouble

This AM on GMA I got to watch a headline in which it was proclaimed that Trump was having a 24 hours of trouble. Here's what they said and why it shows just how silly the MSM is and how much Republicans are not the opposition [to Democrats].

1) Trump told a woman with a crying baby to leave the room: When I saw the clip I could only shake my head in disbelief that this was "news". Of course the campaign experts say that one should be nice to women with/and babies. Pictures of politicians with women with babies or holding the babies themselves is a staple of campaigning. Trump is not the normal candidate and apparently the MSM has not managed to realize that these silly ass "rules" simply do not apply.

First of all, all but the permanently aggrieved could tell that Trump was having a fun time with crying baby. I you read body language and can smell the faintest whiff of sarcasm you know that his "it's OK" was clearly not "real". Nobody giving a speech likes or wants to hear a baby crying. It's a distraction. It is a distraction to the speaker AND to those who are trying to listen. Any mother with an ounce of respect would know this and would remove herself and her crying baby from the situation until the reason for the baby's outburst could be rectified. But the MSM is SHOCKED, SHOCKED I tell you, that a candidate would tell a woman with a crying baby to "get out". In the real world where we are not perpetually aggrieved we know the deal. It was humor, it was good natured rib poking and making light of a situation. To the MSM it is "misogyny". 2) Trump refuses to endorse Ryan or McCain: My response to the latter? So what? Mr "Bomb Iran" is a loser of presidential campaigns like Romney. Neither one of them should be given a microphone to give anyone advice about how to win a presidential campaign or what a candidate should or should not do. If they knew that shit they would have won. This would be like watching the olympics watching the 100 meter sprint and having people who lost in the first heat commentary on how Usain Bolt shows off too much. Um, when you BEAT Usain then you can talk. In fact, until you make it to the podium, STFU.

As for Ryan, He was elected to his current position in a wave of popular discontent about sanctuary cities, "refugees" and the like. No sooner had he gotten his position he sold out. He is the very embodiment of what is wrong with the Republican party. Why should Trump endorse this puppet of globalists and the DNC? Should Ryan be successfully primaried it will be icing on Trump's cake.

3) Obama tells Republicans to repudiate Trump: Not surprised at this. Republicans have been dancing to the DNC tune for many years now so why not directly tell them what to do? Obama says to do x,y or z, and the Republican response has been "how often sir?" 4) Wrath of Khan: The DNC convention which featured speeches by the parents of persons who committed crimes and were killed as a result of their behavior. Which featured a nomination of a candidate who's own decisions resulted in the deaths of US citizens and who then lied to cover it up. Which supports a group that has not only incited murder of police officers but who's claims of black lives matter are discredited by the very criminals they support as well as the climbing numbers of black dead in various cities as a direct result of their behavior. This organization which is full of so called "anti-war", "anti-imperialism", "anti-big money in politics" groups put up the Muslim parents of a fallen US soldier. This soldier was killed by an IED fighting in the Iraq war which was supported by the DNC presidential nominee!!

This supporter of Sharia made a direct attack on Trump claiming he had sacrificed nothing. Now Trump could have responded with "thanks for your sacrifice" and ended it there, but that's not Trump's style. Trump is very much the "you mess with me, I'm gonna mess with you" type of person. Khan was bait and Trump took it. Of course the MSM missed the part where Clinton supported the very war that got Khan's son dead.

5) Purple Heart-gate: Soldier/citizen gives Trump a replica purple heart, which is a signifier of someone wounded or killed in a US commissioned conflict. Not sure why, since Trump is neither wounded or dead but in any case, the press made a fuss because Trump said he always wanted one of those and that it was surely the easiest way to get one. Supposedly this was an affront to soldiers and those who received such an honor. Why? I have no idea. This is a country where people who lose get trophy's simply for having participated. I would suppose that Trump should have been given something like a medal of valor for going against the establishment.

6) Republican party considering a Trump dropout: Really? I'm not seeing Trump dropping out. But the fact that the RNC is seriously considering replacement strategies shows just how much the RNC is really alt-DNC. There are literally millions of Republicans who would bolt from the party if they offed their candidate. Worse than that, there is no upside to such a plan. Does the RNC really think that having purged Trump that suddenly they are going to capture a majority or even plurality of black votes to make up for their losses? Hispanic votes? The fact is that there are a great number of black and hispanic "conservatives" who are really liberals hiding out in the RNC who's only suggestion to the RNC is: "less white". Those paying attention know that this is exactly the message (and reality) of the DNC.

Anyway, this RNC scheming isn't bad news for Trump. This is great news for Trump. Trump has been exposing the RNC for what it really is: a bunch of people playing "conservative" for donor money and moral approval of the left. Someone has to be labelled the "opposition" so why not get paid to do that? Trump is hated by these people because he signals that the gig is up. I'd love to see the RNC dismantled and a major third party emerge from it's rubble. The two party shell game needs to end.

Man In Miami Shot by Police: Two Points

Saw this on NY Daily News

Police in North Miami, Fla., told WSVN-TV officers responded Monday to a 911 call reporting a man with a gun threatening to commit suicide. Yet Charles Kinsey, a behavioral therapist, told the TV station the witness and later the police may have mistook the autistic man’s toy truck for a gun.

Hold that thought for a minute.

“I’m going to the ground, just like this with my hands up. And I’m laying down here just like this. And I’m telling him again, 'Sir, there’s no need for firearms. I’m unarmed, this is an autistic guy. He has a toy truck in his hand,’” Kinsey

First and foremost as you can see in the image this guy is posing no threat at all. That, in combination with his declaration makes for a no reason to shoot. That officer should be seeing felony assault charges. Why not attempted murder? because he shot Kinsey in the leg.

Now my second point is, this is yet another example of "random" people calling police about a [black] man with a gun. I've said it before and I'll say it again, in a country with a right to carry, calling the police about a man walking with a gun should get a "and?" response. Also I strongly believe that some of these calls are actually citizens trying to get someone killed. It's like swatting without the video games.

One last point: I fully expect there to be a more blatant example of police shooting an innocent person due to the targeting of police by certain people. This may be an example of such an event.

The End Game of Feminism: The Total Control Of Men

back when I was young and naive I thought feminism was about equality for women. I had women who in their early lives could not have their own credit cards. Women who could not own property by themselves. Today such a thing would strike me as odd. Indeed for a couple of generations now, such a thing cannot even be imagined. Yet these kinds of things happened and I was glad to support putting such rules into the dustbin of history. But as I grew older I realized that what passes for feminism now has nothing at all to do with equality and everything to do with control of [heterosexual] men often accompanied by the criminalization of male masculine behavior. Today I saw an article in the Daily Mail that gives us indisputable evidence of this:

A police force revealed today it has become Britain’s first to recognise misogyny as a hate crime. Nottinghamshire Police is recording incidents such as street harassment, verbal abuse, unwanted physical approaches and taking photographs without consent within the hate crime definition.

It also includes using mobile phones to send unwanted messages, unwanted sexual advances and ‘unwanted or uninvited physical or verbal contact or engagement’, possibly including wolf whistling. [my underlines]

Physically approaching a woman is a crime? Do these idiots not know that "uninvited" verbal and physical contact is how people make new friends?

The force’s chief constable Sue Fish said: ‘I’m delighted that we are leading the way towards tackling misogyny in all its forms.

‘It’s a very important aspect of the overall hate crime work being conducted and one that will make Nottinghamshire a safer place for all women.

Firstly. Sue Fish should be removed from office and barred from any government policy making body. Secondly, since when are men second class citizens in the UK? Since she has declared this to be a about the "safer space" for women, it is clear that the "law" is not about equal protection and equal applicability but about conferring special and preferred status to women simply because they are women. This action by the police shows feminism as the farce that it is. Those that approve of this do not think women and men are equal, they think women are weak and in need of special protections from society. This attitude was the exact same reasoning given for denying credit cards and property ownership. Women were too mentally weak to control themselves and property and therefore had to be under the guidance and control of men.

A force spokesman said: ‘Unwanted physical or verbal contact or engagement is defined as exactly that and so can cover wolf whistling and other similar types of contact. If the victim feels that this has happened because they are a woman then we will record it as a hate crime.

‘This doesn’t necessarily mean that a criminal offence has been committed, but means we will carry out risk assessments and offer support as we would to any victim of a hate crime.

About this whistling thing. Personally I find such behavior to be low class. That said though, nobody is harmed by whistling. As a matter of fact such behavior is considered complimentary by those doing the whistling therefore making the designation "hate crime" even that more untenable.

Lets consider the example given by the police:

‘I was eating in a takeaway when a man asked for some of my food. I said no. He started shouting at me, calling me a ‘fat f***ing bitch’ and getting more and more angry. He then threatened to assault me. I felt really scared and had to get a taxi home.’

Apparently this was a homeless man. There are laws against threatening violence against anyone so there is no need for "hate crime" bullshit.

‘A builder near a school shouts vile abuse to every woman, including pregnant women or women with their children. Women are scared to walk past him and go out of their way to walk down other streets in the area.’

Question: WHAT exactly did these men say? Second question: Describe these men.

‘A man stepped into my path and said “Hello” and he then followed me... He came up to me and said “I like you” and tried to put his arms around me, completely invading my personal space. I pushed him away and told him firmly to get away from me and leave me alone. I then witnessed him try the same behaviour to another woman... another man stepped in and challenged his behavior.’

As above; Describe the man. Secondly as said before, once he tried to "put his arm around men" we have a law for that It's called assault.

‘As I child I had men shout comments such as “are you legal yet” at me.’

Again, IMO, low class behavior. But two things: First: It shows the men in question did not want to engage in pedophilia which is a good thing. Secondly had that question been asked by a man this particular woman liked we wouldn't have heard about it. Indeed this author has had women who were of questionable age volunteer their legal status.

‘I have been followed home, chased through the streets by two men, and asked for sexual favours from a taxi driver. I believe the abusers targeted my vulnerability as a young woman or child who would not be able to fight back.’

First and second examples are called stalking. It's illegal. Follow the law. The third example is likely a fireable offense. And no the women aren't targeted because they are young, they are "targets" because they are considered attractive. Heterosexual men make advances on women they find attractive. This is how it works in the natural world.

‘I have been repeated shouted at in the street since 13 years of age. The shouts at times have been very sexually explicit and have caused me to fear for my personal safety, to take a different route, quicken pace, telephone for help etc. I have been followed by strangers and had to take a different more public route to avoid risk of assault I feared may otherwise occur.’

13 years of age meaning: showing secondary sexual characteristics typical of a female having entered mid-late stage puberty. Again I think it's low class to shout at a woman one doesn't know, particularly words of a sexual nature. I would ask again, citing the recent events in places like Rotherham what these men looked like. When we were shown the video of "walking through manhattan" we saw something quite peculiar about the people who were approaching the woman featured in the video. I don't doubt that men are following some women, I'd just like to know if they are importing the problem.

The unfortunate thing about this, aside from confirming that feminists actually believe women to be not equal in capacity is that the "rules" are so broad as to invite abuse by those who wish to mess with a man who has pissed them off somehow.

Drone Warfare Comes Home To Roost

Somewhat lost in the reporting on the Dallas shooting was the use of drones to kill US citizens on US soil. Previously we have had drones kill US citizens abroad such as Anwar Al Awlaki. The reasoning given there that he was an enemy combatant having declared war or joined a group that had declared war on the US.

What is new is that a drone (they need not fly) was used to kill a citizen who at the time he was blown up posed no danger to any civilian. He was holed up. The drone could easily determine whether he had explosives on his person. The drone could have been used to "flash bang" the suspect or used a low yield explosive that would have injured but not killed him.

I have said in the past that the use of drones will negatively impact warfare as the usual inherent risk of man-to-man combat is taken away and killing becomes a cool and easy endeavor. We should be extremely concerned with the use of drones to kill suspects no matter how guilty they seem to be by circumstances.

This Is The Real BLM

I don't like Deray Mckesson. I don't like that institutions that should know better paid him to "teach". I don't like the fact that someone thought it was a good idea to pay the man $165k to do "HR" work. Many members of the BLM crew are unintelligent frauds who have and will continue to get people killed in their pursuit of blowing up their egos (and bank accounts). But in case you think I'm simply "hating" let me present the following:

Note what Deray wants:

Keep disrupting Trump all summer so that martial law can be declared before the election

Deray wants martial law imposed. For what end?

Get martial law imposed so that Obama can stay in office.

Deray wants to stop the proper electing of the president of the US in order to keep Obama in office so that Deray's preferred policies can remain in effect where they exist and implemented where they do not.

Who is the Nazi? Who is the fascist?

The Philando Castile Case Starts to Unravel

On yesterday's post I noted the following:

This seems to me to be a "perfect storm" of events, assuming this narrative to be correct. If it is correct that Philando was reaching for his identification prior to informing the cop that he had a gun, then I think a jury would find reasonable doubt to acquit. An officer seeing a gun and the person in possession of that gun reaching in that direction, can reasonably infer that his life is in danger and generally doesn't have to wait to be shot in the face to shoot that individual. And to be clear, officers have been shot by people in their cars with wives/girlfriends and whomever else in the car. [inserted underlines]

I also noted that it was odd that the officer was so nervous and had his weapon drawn for a traffic stop. Well now evidence has come out to explain a few things:

The Falcon Heights, Minnesota police shooting of Philando Castile is based around an entirely false narrative. Castile and Ms. Diamond Reynolds (Facebook video uploader) were pulled over by police because Castile matched a BOLO Alert for an armed robbery suspect from four days prior.

Yes. I know "fit the description" is a common excuse for harassment but in this case the fellow does look like the person in the robbery.

From the radio dispatch of Officer Jeronimo Yanez: “I’m going to stop a car. I’m going to check IDs. I have reason to pull it over.” “The two occupants just look like people that were involved in a robbery. The driver looks more like one of our suspects, just ‘cause of the wide set nose.”

I had to chuckle at the "wide set nose" because that was NOT what jumped out at me about the similarities.

I'm not going to grab all the information from the other site. Go there and see it for yourself.

If this information holds up to scrutiny it is HIGHLY likely the officer will be exonerated and would unlikely face a trial. But even worse BLM members and sympathizers who stoked emotion rather than even headed thinking will have been responsible for incitement to murder and attempted murder and in all honesty the Race War of 2016.

Philando Castile

So this morning the news shows that an officer shot a man in a car during a traffic stop. Report was that there was live streamed Facebook video footage. Thus far the footage does not show the traffic stop from beginning to end. We only see what happens after Philando is shot.

Reportedly the couple and their child were stopped for having a broken taillight. The NY Times reports the following:

Falcon Heights is a small, predominantly white and middle-class city of about 5,500 residents, bordering St. Paul on the northwest. The two officers who stopped them were from the nearby city of St. Anthony, which provides police services under contract to Falcon Heights, and one officer approached Mr. Castile, who was driving, and said he had a broken taillight, Ms. Reynolds, who is also black, said.

“He tells us to put our hands in the air, we have our hands in the air,” she said. “At the time as our hands is in the air, he asked for license and registration.

“My boyfriend carries all his information in a thick wallet in his right side back pocket. As he’s reaching for his back pocket wallet, he lets the officer know, ‘Officer, I have a firearm on me.’ I began to yell, ‘But he’s licensed to carry.’ After that, he began to take off shots – bah, bah, bah, bah, ‘Don’t move! Don’t move!’ But how can you not move when you’re asking for license and registration? It’s either you want my hands in the air or you want my identification.” [my underlines]

This seems to me to be a "perfect storm" of events, assuming this narrative to be correct. If it is correct that Philando was reaching for his identification prior to informing the cop that he had a gun, then I think a jury would find reasonable doubt to acquit. An officer seeing a gun and the person in possession of that gun reaching in that direction, can reasonably infer that his life is in danger and generally doesn't have to wait to be shot in the face to shoot that individual. And to be clear, officers have been shot by people in their cars with wives/girlfriends and whomever else in the car.

In addition at that point it was too late for the "he's licensed to carry" because the "reaching" has already occurred. That is, the perceived threat is already in action. That she yelled could have increased the officer's fear.

Since I do not own a firearm, nor am I licensed to carry one concealed, I would have to ask those who instruct gun owners whether they are told to inform the officer of the gun on their person PRIOR to reaching for anything or not. It seems to me that if a person has a firearm on their person, legally, they would announce it and ask the officer how they want to proceed.

With all this said, unlike Mr. I Don't Follow Directions from yesterday, I think there is a strong wrongful death case here in the minimum. Better communication would likely have prevented this death and if Mr. Castile is in fact licensed to carry then he was breaking no law and he was following the directions given to him by the officer. If there were no warrants pending, then the officer had little reason to be so prepared to shoot which makes for an inquiry about his mental state.

Heather Mac Donald on Chicago Crime

The following two paragraphs sums it up pretty well:

Sometimes support for the cops comes from unexpected places. In May 2016, a 38-year-old drug trafficker named Toby Jones received a 40-year federal prison sentence for repeatedly trying to gun down a federal informant, in the process shooting three people. He told the judge: “Even with all the latest police shootings on minorities in Chicago, I don’t blame these cops one bit for most of their decisions in the field. And the black community has to first come to grips with why these cops are so afraid,” the Chicago Sun-Times reported. Stories of heroic cops go untold, Jones said, “but as soon as a black kid gets shot, everyone is in an uproar.”

Activists and politicians are proposing the usual “root causes” solution to the current crime wave—more government programs—as well as less usual ones, such as abolishing the police department. The mayor’s Police Accountability Task Force wants the mayor and Cook County to “implement programs that address socioeconomic justice and equality, housing segregation, systemic racism, poverty, education, health and safety.” Such top-down spending ignores the normative breakdown that renders government social services largely futile. The bakery where Fisher works has been hiring for the last five years; he tells the “young brothers” about the jobs. “Half of them don’t show up; the others have drugs in their system. Half want to hang out and make the fast money that can get you in jail,” Fisher observes. [my underlines]

Chicago, Alton Sterling and The True Face of BLM

If you are a lover or hater of black people, you don't look forward to the newspaper reports on the first workday after a summer holiday. For lovers of black people this is because we know that in cities like Chicago and Baltimore there will be a not unusual high body count of mostly black men who have been shot or stabbed, but mostly shot, by other black men. We will be further saddened by the fact that white liberals with their pet negroes will do everything in their power to excuse this behavior by placing the blame on anything ranging from inanimate objects to television advertisements featuring "rich" white people. They will lie to our faces as they try to claim that black on black crime "isn't a thing" and that other races have similar levels of crime (they do not).

Unfortunately this July 4th weekend did not fail to deliver.

Yes, even Google's autocomplete knows the deal. 60 people shot in Chicago:

he homicide victims included a man in his 30s who police found shot in his abdomen, another man who was found shot dead in a lot across the street from an elementary school and a 31-year-old man who was killed outside his father’s auto shop. The wounded included a 5-year-old girl and her 8-year-old cousin, who were each shot in the leg as they played with sparklers Monday night, the Chicago Tribune reported.

The city tallied 72 homicides for June, and homicides were up nearly 50% for the first half of 2016 compared to the same period last year. The city is on pace to record well over 600 homicides for the year, a bleak yardstick that Chicago last surpassed in 2003.

Johnson and Mayor Rahm Emanuel have blamed lax laws that allow gang members, who are responsible for the bulk of the gun violence, to return to the streets relatively quickly.

You'd be forgiven if you had no idea that 60 mostly or ALL black people were shot with 7 dead in Chicago because over in Louisiana one Alton Sterling was shot by a police officer.

Yes, While there was nary a peep out of BLM quarters about the usual bloodshed in Chicago (which currently has had more shootings that NY and LA combined), There were massive protests and online signifying from the usual quarters about Alton Sterling.

As I have learned from the recent hoaxes and misrepresentation of BLM persons, I waited to see the evidence for myself and I had one question:

Were directions given and were those directions followed?

See, if you look at Ferguson, Garner, Grey and others the one thing they all had in common was that the victim refused to follow directions. I don't know what kind of self-preservation motives these people have but you follow directions first and get the lawyer after. And these days lawyers will work your case for free if you have a legit claim. So I went in search of the video.

Right there in the beginning of this video: "Get on the ground! Get on the ground!" Did Alton get on the ground? No. So we can seriously argue that had Alton followed directions that he would be alive today.

Now I also thought this may have been an Oscar Grant situation because I thought Alton was on his chest (face down). After reviewing a second video:

I realized this was NOT the case. Sterling was face up which means that the officers can reasonably argue that they thought Alton was reaching for a gun given that he had not followed earlier instructions (more on this later). Now I'm not making the case for the officer but the evidence is not on Sterling's side. But if you looked at twitter commentary you wouldn't know this.

Then we have to deal with why the officers were there. We know that an "anonymous" caller said that there was a man outside the store who pointed a gun at someone. After all the things that has gone on recently with shooters, anyone with half a brain knows that calling the police about a man with a gun is going to get a very aggressive response. Was this caller trying to get Alton killed?

On a side note, this is also a possible argument as to why, in a country where one has the right to possess a firearm, calling the police about a man with a gun, warrants any response at all. You'd think that in a country with a second amendment, the police would respond with:

"And?"

But back to the main point. As a civilian you have to understand that a police officer is generally not going to be passive when it comes to certain crimes. Since you don't know why an officer is approaching you it would be in everyone's best interest to put the officer at ease by making it clear you are not a threat. After that is established you can argue about why you have been detained. Before I close let me address the point made by the black woman in the second video. She made the claim that because Alton was "subdued" that the officer did not have grounds to pull his gun or shoot. This is what happens when you get people who don't know what they are talking about, but have the "right" politics to speak on your program. If this chick had a clue she would recall that Trayvon Martin had one George Zimmerman similarly situated. Martin was allegedly hitting Zimmerman's head against the ground and yet Zimmerman was able to get his gun and shoot Martin point dead. Therefore any claim that just because Alton was down that we was subdued is false. As Trayvon Martin found out, until or unless you have total control of your opponents hands, you are still in danger.

So there we have it. Black Lives Matter only cares if the black life in question is assaulted by some white person (preferably police), but doesn't matter in the least bit if its a part of the day in and day out killings in our communities by our own community members. Black Lives Matters exists to get it's leaders paid ($165k for one of them) and to ease the guilt-suicide complex of white liberals who enable BLM members by giving them access to media outlets. BLM doesn't care about you or your dead in Any-hood USA. If this doesn't prove it to you then you are probably beyond help.

Brexit as Explained By Star Trek TNG