The Gift That Keeps On Giving: Florida Man!

This one’s a quickie while I wait for family to arrive.

Trimming the ‘Trees’: Florida Man Hands Out Marijuana for Christmas

https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2019/12/25/trimming-the-trees-florida-man-hands-out-marijuana-for-christmas/

By Nate Church, 25 December 2019

A St. Petersburg, Florida, man was arrested on Saturday for handing out weed to passers-by for Christmas.

“Let’s party like it’s 4-20-19-99!”

Richard Ellis Spurrier, 67, was taken into custody with 45 grams of marijuana on his person. Spurrier was standing on 16 2nd Street North, handing out ganja to anyone who might need fuel for a gingerbread binge. According to the Pinellas County arrest report, Spurrier freely admitted his act of charity was “because it was Christmas.”

So, is that a “naughty” gift or a “nice” gift? Neither, because this ain’t Santa:

Spurrier was arrested for possession with intent to sell, though it seems unlikely that his 1.6 ounces would have gotten very far even if he had charged. After he was taken into custody, police also found a sword — yes, a sword — inside a cane in his car. Spurrier did not specify whether that was because it was Christmas, or just because this is Florida.

I’ve never understood the appeal of a sword cane. The cane itself is a perfectly reasonable club, especially if you weight the top with a bit of lead. But by that logic, you should simply use a golf club. The pre-bent ones are cheap.

He was released from Pinellas County Jail on Sunday.

Because even the jailer didn’t think he was worth working Christmas for.

 

What Is the Opposite Of Feminism?

I wish I was a better evangelist. Some unbelievers get so close to the truth of Christ that life just isn’t fair, and one wishes he could help them over that last tiny hump. Today, the Z-man is one synapse away from independently confirming Original Sin.

Right-Wing Feminism

Right-Wing Feminism

Posted on December 15, 2019

Feminism is a term that is exclusively associated with left-wing activism and generally associated with the more radical elements of the culture war. Modern feminists are the emotionally disturbed old maids in the human resource department, stalking about, looking for unapproved words and thoughts. These are the people purging social media of anything funny or interesting. While true, it disguises the fact that feminism is as much a part of the conventional Right as it is the Left.

Correct. Feminism started on the Left because Socialism is the ideology of female envy and Sisterhood. This does not make masculine ideologies immune to infiltration and subversion.

At its core, feminism is the product of egalitarianism. If all men are created equal, in the moral sense, then surely all women are equal. Further, if all men are equal and all women are equal, in a moral sense, then men and women must also be equal and should therefore be treated as equals. It is this sense of moral equality that drove first wave feminism to demand equal contract, marriage, parenting, and property rights for women. Morally equal people should be legally equal.

That old canard? Notice it was written in the Declaration of Independence and is not an actual law to be obeyed. The idea is that no man has a divine right to rule over another, very relevant in a declaration to George that he ain’t the boss of us no mo’. Who said anything about women? Women aren’t men.

It is preposterous, knowing what we Red-Pilled do about female nature, that the early feminists were motivated by an 18th-century statement of equality. “We want to upset the entire social order because this one clause in an old legal document is not being implemented as completely as it should be.” No, women do not make that kind of principled, ideological stand. Certainly not against inconsistencies in logic!

So, what were the early feminists’ REAL motivations?

From there, of course, feminism was transformed into a weapon to undermine the mores of white society. Second wave feminism focused on destroying family life through the promotion of divorce and sexual degeneracy. Third wave feminism focused on destroying the very notion of womanhood with the promotion of bizarre sexual fetishes and homosexuality. Fourth wave feminism focuses on the promotion of emotionally unstable women making a nuisance of themselves on-line.

Their motivations were resource collection and envy of “male privilege”. The servant wanted to rebel against her master with the resources of government. Why else would the Nanny State despise lifetime monogamy so much? It’s only the most successful, provably healthy social construct in human history.

Don’t look at what women say. (“Equality!”) Look at what they do. (Shack up with one exotic boyfriend after another while hanging out with homosexuals until she reaches menopause and has her last egg fertilized by a laboratory, while the government absolves her of consequences and arrests all creeps on her say-so. What’s missing in that picture? A husband restraining her behavior.)

Just as Eve rebelled against Adam & God by obeying a new master, America’s women rebelled by allying with gov’t (suitably modified) so they wouldn’t have to submit to a husband.

The lurch into what amounts to the promotion of female psychosis obscures the fact that feminism in a stock part of conventional conservatism. It’s not at the point of pushing weird sexual practices and physical mutilation, but so-called conservatism fully embraces the egalitarianism of first wave feminism and the moral license of second wave feminism.

Here’s the synapse that misfired. Conservatism (whatever that is) is not feminism. Rather, it is sabotaged by feminism in the form of conservative men being congenitally unable to tell a woman no. Z provides a helpful example:

You see that in social media characters targeting conservative women, like this one that has 165,000 followers on twitter.

Mindy Robinson

Hmm, does that look like a Skrillex to you?

Yep, Skrillex, but plenty enough glamour shots show her with intact hair so I don’t know if she grew it back after she went into politics.

Even a blonde like Mindy knew to conceal her damaged hair when appealing to men… conservative or otherwise (excluding the feminized, of course).

Note that her act is a blend of pinup girl bimbo, outrageous gun advocacy and, of course, lots of red, white and blue. That’s the core of conservative feminism. It is a blend of mostly male habits like shooting guns and riding motorcycles, frosted with the vulgar sex appeal of Hollywood and over-the-top patriotism. Go through that twitter feed and it is basically just 1990’s Conservative Inc. packaged for what the people behind it assume is the target audience, people they generally detest.

That first pic is a postcard of entryism. A solid 9 on the hot-crazy-with-some-crazy-on-the-side Matrix, visibly infected with hatred for men… why else shave off a third of her otherwise carefully maintained hair?… yet she tilts her head to hide the damage and waves a gun to distract from her thousand-cock stare…

…So that men can play their role in Original Sin and desire her even after she’s rebelled. Z-man correctly notices that she’s still playing to play the leader instead of getting busy in the kitchen.

Her gun is itself is a symbol of rebellion. Why do American men value the Second Amendment? Because it allows us to rebel against authority when we need to. Yet another good reason to not arm women, whom God Himself wants in submission to authority. But I digress to my don’t-arm-women beliefs. The important thing here is that she’s Team Feminist snaking into the warm sentiments of Conservatism, Inc. That wouldn’t be necessary if feminism was a belief of Conservatism.

That’s the important part of it. The people behind these accounts are often nothing like the marketing. The Reagan Battalion, for example, were left-wing Orthodox Jews, buddies of Ben Shapiro, by the way. One guy was Benny Polatseck, public relations consultant, and the other was Yossi Gestetner, a marketing guy. They were also tied to the NeverTrump operation. The point being is that Mindy Robinson probably looks more like Harvey Weinstein than the pictures on that twitter account.

This is inconsistent with Trump recently enjoying 93% approval from Orthodox Jews but let’s skip that digression.

Even so, what is sold to conservative women is really just feminism with lots of conventional conservative decorations. The “strong conservative women” is independent, patriotic, shoots guns and so on. The idealized conservative women is now 1970’s Clinton Eastwood with a vagina and some tasteful nudes on her social media profile. Conservative women are supposed to display all of the aggressive male attributes one used to associate with action heroes.

Again, this is better described as what women are selling to conservative men. This wouldn’t be a problem except men are tempted to enable that kind of rebellion regardless of political beliefs. That’s very strange when you think about it. Men have loved dogs and horses without fantasizing about them becoming our equals.We get married fantasizing about how much wifey will make our lives happier and easier. Said fantasy rarely involving a whip and no nookie.

And yet, there’s a part of the male soul that wants to not notice her Skrillex, not remember that God created woman for man’s service and eagerly accept her as a peer and not a servant. Why? I don’t fantasize about having sex with somebody stronger than me and hope that my fellow man doesn’t, either. She’s not a sex symbol, not really. She’s a symbol of… rebellion… and why are so many men okay with that? It is not a rational position.

Z-Man even agrees:

More important, it is every bit as socially destructive as the left-wing variant of feminism, because it denies the very essence of the sexes. Men and women are complimentary not just biologically, but socially. What makes settled society possible is a division of labor that goes beyond the physical. What distinguishes West from East is that in the West, this division of labor maximizes the utility of both sexes. Women are not just baby makers, but the glue that holds together local community.

Hmm, a second synapse misfired. Women are just baby makers, not the glue holding a community together. It’s men that build community, as is demonstrated today by society falling apart while women bring in ‘noble savages’ by the boatload.

It’s okay to ‘just make babies’. It’s an honorable job that needs doing, women find it a very rewarding experience, and men have a lot of fun getting the process going. But women always envy men our ‘male privilege’ then find out that managing a society is too much for them. You see this in the women that go through college, get licensed as a doctor or something and then quit to ‘just make babies’.

Mud-hut civilizations are matriarchies practically by definition.

The promotion of women and men as equal in all things has had the devastating effect of destroying the traditional role of women. With it has gone the social capital that made western societies so resilient. Promoting right-wing women with guns is every bit as damaging as portraying them as a butch lesbians playing the traditional male roles in television and film. It is a discrediting of the tradition in favor of the novel, which is useless and unwanted.

Yes! Exactly, Z-Man! But their motivation is not some theoretical construct like “equality”. It’s female rebellion against men and the men who feel a strange excitement at facilitating that rebellion.

Which is exactly what Christianity describes as the fatal flaw in the human soul.

You’ll note that fertility rates on the Left in America collapsed before they did on the right side of the political spectrum. Into the 1980’s, conservatives were getting married and having families. This was often mocked by the Left as being backward. As right-wing feminism began to take hold, the same drop in fertility has happened in the more conservative parts of society. The fact is, even assuming Mindy Robinson looks anything like her pictures, no man would want to put up with that.

Thus disproving evolution once again. How can a TENS-created species voluntarily choose to not breed? That’s not an ability it would have acquired at any point in the process, not if breeding is the literal definition of a successful organism.

The promotion of right-wing feminism has not just perverted the females. It has warped the minds of males now too. That cartoon version of a woman you see pushed by the so-called conservatives is not a compliment to a normal male. That’s the sort of girl you drink with at the pub. If you’re in a dry spell, well, maybe you take her for a spin, but you will not be taking her home to mom. The adventuress has crowded out the market for the sorts of female roles that make society possible.

This is the religious war in which we burn. One faction maintains loyalty to the Father… men directly and women by proxy… while the other faction wants to follow the Rebel. That’s not just a portrait of Christianity, that IS Christianity.

An authentic alternative to the prevailing orthodoxy will have to redefine the female role in society as something useful and appealing. The response to Mindy Robinson posing with a gun should be demand she pose with a sandwich or ironing a shirt. A bimbo on a Harley must first be treated as grotesque, before there can be room for an authentic alternative to right-wing feminism.

Preach, brother!

Of course, women have to be the lead in such efforts, as wherever women go, men must follow.

Aww, there goes a third fuse right at the end. Women aren’t leaders. Never have been. But the picture of Original Sin is not yet complete. Just as Z blew a third fuse, so there is a third piece to Original Sin: the devil.

This is a war for men to fight, good against evil. Evil men want to steal all that we have, destroy all that we have built and kill us off. Women just want to follow evil men for the easy pickings and Bay Boy vibes.

What’s it take to sell Christ? Z is seeing for himself that the feminists and their handlers are persisting in behaviors that will, beyond all doubt, completely ruin civilization. Why would they do that except to steal, kill and destroy?

Which Christ described as the works of the devil. Evil is Real. They don’t want solutions. They don’t want civilization. They want everything and everybody to burn.

Make whatever evo-psych excuses you wish. Argue every argument you can imagine. At the end of it all, you will see that humanity is locked in a power struggle between the Father and the Liar.

Lord Jesus, loyal Son of the Father, happy birthday a little early! May all humanity worship You by imitation.

 

Jody Armour Connects BLM to Soros

A Soros toady named Jody Armour made the mistake of spiking the football where I was watching. Jody is a professor of law at the University of Spoiled Children (aka Southern California), a Soros Justice Senior Fellow of The Open Society Institute’s Center on Crime, Communities and Culture, and an apologist for Black Lives Matter. His mere existence is circumstantial proof that Burn Loot Maim is a terrorist front operated by Palpatine but I got better evidence coming.

He’s awfully cracker to be rocking a ‘fro. *checks* mixed-race parentage. We’ll be discussing his father at length soon.

How being ‘tough on crime’ became a political liability

https://theconversation.com/how-being-tough-on-crime-became-a-political-liability-128515

Kamala Harris recently dropped out of the presidential race after months of attacks from the left for her “tough-on-crime” record as San Francisco’s district attorney and as California’s attorney general.

Her liberal supporters were understandably upset that Kamala was smoking dope at the exact time she was handing out harsh sentences for smoking dope. Hypocrisy brought her down, not her harsh sentencing… although how any liberal can get upset about hypocrisy is beyond me.

Oh, right. They’re hypocrites.

A few years ago, the idea that being tough on crime would be a liability – not an asset – was unthinkable for both Democrats and Republicans.

Bill Clinton, during the 1992 presidential race, interrupted his campaign so he could return to Arkansas to witness the execution of a mentally disabled man. During Harris’ 2014 reelection campaign for attorney general, she actively sought – and won – the endorsements of more than 50 law enforcement groups en route to a landslide victory.

The ‘mentally disabled’ should be preferentially put to death. Why force them to live like that? In addition to their inability to improve their behavior.

But something has changed in recent years. Harris’ failure to gain traction as a presidential candidate has coincided with a growing number of “progressive prosecutors.”

In the past, I would have scoffed at the notion of a progressive prosecutor. It would have seemed like a ridiculous oxymoron.

In the past, Armour were determined to become a progressive prosecutor… and a little devil settled on his shoulder to make it happen.

But in one of the most stunning shifts in American politics in recent memory, a wave of elected prosecutors have bucked a decadeslong tough-on-crime approach adopted by both major parties. These prosecutors are refusing to send low-level, non-violent offenders to prison, diverting defendants into treatment programs, working to eradicate the death penalty and reversing wrongful convictions.

A little devil named Soros, who has that exact agenda, who invited Jody to join a League of Extraordinary toads Gentlemen yeah, toads.

In 1968, when I was 8 years old, my father was sentenced to 22 to 55 years in the Ohio State Penitentiary for the possession and sale of marijuana. During the trial, the district attorney had repeatedly assured the jurors that he hadn’t promised the state’s principal witness – then serving a long sentence – leniency in return for testifying against my father.

In truth, they had struck that very bargain. After studying the warden’s own law books, my father appealed the conviction, representing himself. He was ultimately vindicated by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after proving that the district attorney had deliberately lied to the jury.

Had. Deliberately. Lied. To. The. Jury. About. Promising. Leniency.

Segue THAT, oh hell yeah.

Fred Armour v. W. D. Salisbury, Superintendent, 492 F.2d 1032 (6th Cir. 1974)

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/317279/fred-armour-v-w-d-salisbury-superintendent/

Filed 20 February 1974

1 In May of 1968 the appellee [Jody Armour’s father, Fred] was convicted in an Ohio state court on counts II and IV of a four-count indictment charging various narcotics violations. He was given an indeterminate sentence under count II, charging illegal possession of marijuana, of 2-15 years, and a sentence under count IV, charging an illegal sale of the same drug, of 20-40 years. The sentences were to run consecutively. After exhausting state remedies, appellee petitioned the United States District Court for a writ of habeas corpus. The present appeal is from the grant of that writ.

That confirms the 22-55 year sentencing. Nearly all of it was for drug dealing, not drug possession. It was a troubled prosecution, seeing as Fred skated on at least two counts.

Jody, you grew up in a drug house. Thanks for telling us and how could you be surprised that police eventually raided it?

2 In May of 1967 Richard Lee Sees was contacted by an undercover agent of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs who asked him to purchase marijuana for him. On July 15 Sees and the agent drove to the vicinity of the apartment building in which appellee lived. Later, Sees testified at appellee’s trial that he had gone inside the building and purchased from appellee seven or eight ounces of marijuana– five ounces of which he sold to the agent. Although appellee was indicted for this alleged sale, the jury found him not guilty.

In 1973, the BNDD was merged into the newly formed Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

Now that’s interesting. Per wikipedia, in December 1970 the BNDD’s director was so convinced that his department was corrupt that he sought help from… the Central Intelligence Agency?!? Which might have already been running covert operations within the BNDD?

Deep State fingerprints EVERYWHERE. I might have to look into that while on vacation.

3 Sees also testified that on July 26, 1967 he again purchased marijuana from appellee and again sold it to the agent. Sees, himself, was arrested and charged on this transaction. His testimony led to the conviction of appellee for the sale of marijuana on that date.

So he wasn’t yet an informant.

4 One Glenn Allen Vance was arrested on September 2, 1967 on charges of publishing a forged instrument and possession of marijuana. He was repeatedly interrogated by police officers between September 2 and September 5. At the conclusion of the questioning, he was given a twenty dollar bill, the serial number of which was recorded, and was told to go to appellee’s residence and purchase marijuana. Vance followed a part of his instructions: he went to appellee’s apartment and brought marijuana, but he did not return to the police station.

A forger was caught and the (I presume local) police used him to catch his dealer.

5 As a result of the information which the police now had, a raid was planned on appellee’s apartment building. Shortly before midnight on September 5, Detective Newman and the prosecutor prepared the following affidavit for a search warrant:

6 Ray Newman, being first duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he believes and has good cause to believe that unknown quantities of cannabis sativa (marijuana) or other narcotic drugs are being concealed in or about the building and individual apartments numbered 1, the office, 2, 3 and 4 and other vacant apartments under the custody and control of Fred Armour and located at 279 Park Street, Akron, Ohio, also known as the Armour Apartments.

Fred was the landlord of his drug house.

7 The affidavit further says that he believes and has good cause to believe that the said cannabis sativa is in the possession and control of Fred Armour, the manager and custodian of the building located at 279 Park Street, Akron, Ohio, and the above named articles should be seized along with Fred Armour who will be charged with violation of 3719.20(A) Revised Code of Ohio.

8 This knowledge is based on the following facts:

9 Information from a reliable informant whose name the affiant has and will reveal to this court if requested and whose information in the past has proved reliable, that:

10 1. He, the said informant, purchased a quantity of cannabis sativa from the above named Fred Armour at 279 Park Street, Akron, Ohio, on or about 3:00 a.m., September 2, 1967.

11 2. Fred Armour is the manager and custodian of the apartment building located at 279 Park Street, Akron, Ohio, and known as the Armour Apartments.

12 3. The informant has personally observed Fred Armour in apartment number 1, the office of the said Armour Apartments; apartment number 2, the residence of Fred Armour and his wife, Addie Armour; apartment number 3, wherein the informant negotiated the purchase of the cannabis sativa from Fred Armour; apartment number 4, the room through which Fred Armour passed to gain access to the other vacant apartments, over which Fred Armour has custody and control, wherein the cannabis sativa is stored.

13 4. The informant has purchased quantities of cannabis sativa at 279 Park Street, Akron, Ohio, on several occasions, and on each occasion Fred Armour has left the informant isolated in one apartment and entered another apartment for the purpose of obtaining the cannabis sativa.

14 The reliable informant referred to in the affidavit was Glenn Vance.

15 Based on this affidavit a warrant was obtained and executed in the early morning hours of September 6, 1967. Seized in the search were a bag of marijuana and the twenty dollar bill that had been given to Vance by the prosecutor, evidence used to convict appellee on the possession charge. The police found Vance at the residence in a stupor, apparently caused by his use of some the marijuana he had bought.

Not just a spokesman, Fred was also a customer! Jody didn’t mention that his dad was stoned when the cops came.

16 On September 8, 1967, Vance signed a written confession that he had purchased marijuana from appellee on or about September 1. However, at appellee’s trial, Vance said that the September 1 purchase was not from appellee but from another person. Furthermore, he stated that he had never bought marijuana from appellee. Consequently, the charge against appellee for the sale to Vance was dismissed for lack of evidence, but appellee was convicted for possession of the marijuana seized in the raid.

Changing his story like that was a crime in itself, so one suspects that Vance was afraid of Fred Armour. He wouldn’t have been the first drug house operator to carry a few grudges.

17 Appellee’s conviction was affirmed by an Ohio appellate court, and the Ohio Supreme Court denied review.

Appellate court section omitted for brevity, concerning the validity of the search warrant that was based on Vance’s written confession. TL;DR The warrant was valid because the police acted in good faith with the information they had at the time.

23 Appellee was also convicted for a sale of marijuana on July 26, 1967 to Richard Sees. At trial Sees gave crucial testimony against appellee. Commenting on this testimony, the prosecutor, in his closing argument, made the following statements:

There were parallel local and Federal investigations into Fred Armour. Feds let the locals handle it until a couple charges were tossed because the informant changed his story, then they stepped in to ensure he wouldn’t be back in circulation soon. Law enforcement realpolitik; if he’s already going away for 20-50 years then the expense of further prosecution is hard to justify. But when said convictions are unexpectedly dropped…

25 Sees had been convicted and was sentenced in the fall of 1967 to a term of ten to twenty years in the Mansfield, Ohio, Reformatory. The prosecutor visited him in the reformatory and solicited his testimony against appellee. During the meeting the prosecutor told Sees that while testifying he might be asked whether any promises were made to him in return for his testimony. He further stated that while no promises could be made specifically in consideration for Sees’ testimony, he would help Sees receive probation whether or not he testified. Shortly before the trial Sees was transferred to the county jail and never returned to Mansfield. Five months after trial he was released from jail pursuant to Ohio’s shock probation statute. Ohio Revised Code 2947.061. As a consequence he served less than one year out of a sentence of ten to twenty years.

So in fact, no promises were made; the fact of his helping a prosecution would be considered by the parole board, is all. And only one of Fred’s two convictions hinged upon this.

26 The district court found that, contrary to the statements of the prosecutor, Sees did have something to gain from his testimony. He was awaiting a decision on his petition for probation, and he had a sentence of up to twenty years hanging over his head. Although the prosecutor told Sees that he would help him either way, the prior statements of the prosecutor about the questions that would be asked at trial and also the motivation for the visit– to discuss the possible testimony– could, according to the district court, reasonably have caused Sees to conclude that the vigor of the prosecutor’s efforts for probation would be determined by whether Sees testified. Upon this basis the district court held that the prosecutor’s statement to the jury was deliberately misleading and that appellee in consequence was denied due process of law.

Of course he had something to gain! But not guaranteed payment. This is the kind of procedural thwarting of justice that gives progressive lawyers their well-deserved reputation as lying dipshit traitors against God and Country. To wit:

27 In Giglio v. United States, [citations of judicial precedents omitted for brevity.]

29. It is true that there is a factual distinction between the situation in Giglio and that now before us. Sees was not asked at trial whether promises had been made to him to testify.

THANK YOU! Remember Jody’s above statement? “[Daddy] was ultimately vindicated by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after proving that the district attorney had deliberately lied to the jury.” You’re the lying dipshit, Jody, not the prosecutor… treason still to come!

But the basic tenent of Giglio does not depend on whether misleading information was given to the jury in the form of a closing argument by a prosecutor rather than through the testimony of a witness.

30 We need not decide whether the prosecutor on the particular facts presented here had an affirmative duty to disclose what he had told Sees about helping him.

TL;DR We’re tossing his conviction because the jury wasn’t specifically told the currently-incarcerated witness had a personal reason for cooperating with the prosecution. If the defense lawyer couldn’t be bothered to mention that blatantly obvious fact then the prosecutor should have questioned the reliability of his own witness for the jury’s consideration.

END SEGUE

Whew! But worth it.

That was in 1974. I went on to become a lawyer and law professor. During the years I spent teaching and studying the relationship between race and the law, the prison population exploded, and my distrust toward government prosecutors only deepened. Too often, it seemed like they were bringing excessively punitive charges in order to force defendants into plea deals. Too often, their approach seemed to reflect a longing for retribution and revenge rather than rehabilitation.

Face it, Jody, your father was a drug addict and drug dealer who had earned his prison cell. Please tell me you eventually outgrew your 8-year-old crying spell over the strange men who took your daddy away.

In 2017, law professor John Pfaff was able to show that mass incarceration was due, first and foremost, to the nearly unchecked power of district attorneys.

As Fred’s case DIDN’T prove.

With reported crimes and arrests steadily declining in the 1990s and 2000s, you might have expected incarceration rates to also fall. Instead, they soared. Pfaff traces this perplexing trend to one key statistic: Between 1994 and 2008, the probability that a district attorney would file a felony charge against someone who’s been arrested roughly doubled, from about 1 in 3 to nearly 2 in 3.

Yeah, that happens when you traitors succeed in “diverting” petty crime. Most of the convictions start to be felonies.

This is “broken window” policing in reverse. If you punish criminals early for the little stuff then they generally don’t graduate to the nasty stuff. Here, Jody & Cronies are preventing prosecutions for the little stuff and then wondering why the big stuff is now a worse problem.

Welcome to the world you wanted, Komrade. Was it worth selling your soul for?

More than stiff drug laws, punitive judges, overzealous cops or private prisons, prosecutors had been the main drivers of a prison population that had quadrupled since the mid-1980s.

Meanwhile, black Americans continued to be disproportionately incarcerated. In 2017, there were 1,549 black prisoners for every 100,000 black adults – nearly six times the incarceration rate for whites and nearly double the rate for Hispanics.

Either the system is still prejudiced against blacks after it was openly prejudiced in favor of blacks, or you blacks simply don’t belong in a First World country. Don’t blame me for noticing; blame yourselves for not behaving.

This prosecutorial approach wasn’t punished at the ballot box; instead, racking up convictions and plea deals seemed to bolster the political careers of district attorneys.

That’s their job.

No longer.

Since 2013, roughly 30 reform-minded prosecutors have been elected. A few now preside over prosecutorial staffs in some of the nation’s biggest cities, like Philadelphia’s Larry Krasner and Boston’s Rachael Rollins. But they also include chief prosecutors of smaller municipalities, like Satana Deberry, who was elected district attorney of Durham County, North Carolina, in 2018, and Parisa Dehghani-Tafti, the commonwealth’s attorney of Arlington County, Virginia, who won on a platform of ending mass incarceration in 2019.

Segue #1:

https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/politics/Soros-145-million-investment-in-DAs-race-draws-heat-for-Krasner.html

In a traditional race for district attorney in Philadelphia, Michael Untermeyer and Joe Khan would be at the head of the pack while the other five candidates in the May 16 Democratic primary election would be trying to catch them.

Untermeyer, a former city and state prosecutor, would have been big news. Finance reports filed Friday show he loaned his campaign $400,000 in late April, bringing his overall investment since December to $950,000. And Khan, a former city and federal prosecutor who has led in fund-raising from individual donors, reported $435,955 in his campaign account as of last Monday.

That all was overwhelmed by a $1.45 million check, written by billionaire George Soros on April 28 and reported Friday, to fund an independent political action committee backing Larry Krasner.

Segue #2:

Boston: Newly-Elected DA, Funded by Soros, Vows to Stop Prosecuting Those Who Resist Arrest and 15 Other Crimes

Rachel Rollins, who received campaign funding from Soros-funded PACs, will take office as the district attorney for Suffolk County [Massachusetts] in January. She is planning to decline prosecution of crimes that include resisting arrest, drug possession with intent to distribute, threats, wanton or malicious destruction of property, breaking and entering vacant properties, receiving stolen property, larceny under $250, shoplifting and more. Retailers are worried their businesses will be looted and police are concerned about more violence as there will be a rise in resisting arrest. She also plans to eliminate cash bail and to stop racial disparity in who does and doesn’t go to jail.

Segue #3:

https://paradigmsanddemographics.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-soros-da-pulled-off-biggest.html

Four years ago, Craig Stephen Hicks, a mentally unstable man prone to terrorizing his neighbors in a Chapel Hill condo, regardless of race and creed, shot three of his neighbors.

The three neighbors whom he shot over a parking dispute were Muslim.

Hicks, a mentally unstable leftist, was a militant atheist, but no hater of Muslims. In a post about the Ground Zero Mosque, he wrote, “I’d prefer them to most Christians as I was never coerced in any way by the Muslims to follow their religion, which I cannot say about many Christians.”

Hicks had confessed to the murder. And the killings had been caught on video. Nor did he try to put up much of a defense. There was no chance that he might escape justice and no need for the feds. But Islamist pressure groups had been lobbying aggressively to treat the murders as a hate crime or, even, as an act of terrorism, despite the absence of a single piece of supporting evidence for such a charge.

The only two pieces of evidence that Hicks had been acting out of hatred for Muslims when he shot his neighbors over a parking dispute was that he was a militant atheist and that they were Muslim. …

[Chapel Hill Police Chief Chris Blue tried] to appease Islamist groups without deviating too much from the facts, by imputing Islamophobia.

But the trial became a circus when Satana Deberry, a leftist pro-crime candidate allegedly backed by George Soros, defeated her credible predecessor to become the DA of Durham County.

District Attorney Roger Echols had wanted the death penalty. Satana ruled out the death penalty. The new radical DA had a very political agenda in mind. Not to punish Hicks, but to prove he’s a bigot.

“It is about cold-hearted malice and murder,” Satana Deberry insisted. “It is not about parking.”

Segue #4:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/george-soros-scores-wins-in-virginia

Liberal billionaire George Soros picked up two wins in Virginia this week when two prosecutor candidates he backed ousted incumbents in local Democratic primaries — after he poured nearly a million dollars into their campaigns.

Soros, known for backing left-wing causes across the globe, used his Justice and Public Safety PAC to boost two liberal candidates against incumbent Democrats.

He backed Parisa Dehghani-Tafti to beat Arlington County Commonwealth’s Attorney Theo Stamos, and supported former Justice Department employee Steve Descano in his race against Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond Morrogh. Campaign finance reports show Dehghani-Tafti received $583,000 and Descano received $392,000 just from that PAC. Meanwhile, Stamos and Morrogh raised $162,000 and $242,000, respectively, for their entire campaigns.

Jody Armour is celebrating George Soros’ acts of treason against the United States Constitution… committed with his assistance.

Progressive prosecutors, according to U.S. Attorney General William Barr, are “undercutting the police, letting criminals off the hook, and refusing to enforce the law.” In a December rally, President Trump singled out Krasner, calling him “the worst district attorney,” one who “lets killers out almost immediately.”

The experience of Aramis Ayala, the state attorney for the 9th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, is a classic example of the obstacles these new prosecutors can face. After being elected in 2016, she announced that she would no longer seek the death penalty for any defendants tried by her office. Florida Gov. Rick Scott responded by reassigning 24 aggravated murder cases to another state attorney who was amenable to the death penalty.

Ayala sued to have the cases returned to her jurisdiction. She lost.

Did you hear about the prosecutor who decided to put the death penalty on all crimes? The governor quietly reassigned some of his cases to other prosecutors instead of kicking his ass to the curb for insubordination and refusal to obey the law.

That there’s a postcard of why Republicans are worse than totalitarian Marxist guerrillas.

What changed?

George Soros bought his favorite flavor of justice, like ice cream.

Progressive prosecutors would have never attained power in the first place if their views didn’t resonate with voters.

Yeah, about that:

Michelle Alexander’s 2010 book, “The New Jim Crow,” deserves some credit for changing the way activists thought about crime and punishment. Alexander cast mass incarceration as a civil rights crisis by showing that people didn’t simply end up in jail because they were bad people who made poor choices. Nor did prison populations explode simply because there were more crimes being committed. Instead, mass incarceration was closely intertwined with race, poverty and government policy.

Segue #5

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/soros_the_nyt_and_antiisrael_propaganda.html

Using the pretext of commemorating Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, the New York Times Sunday Review published what Alan Dershowitz fittingly described as “one of the most biased, one-sided, historically inaccurate, ignorant and bigoted articles ever published by that venerable newspaper.” The article, “Time to Break the Silence on Palestine,” is an unhinged anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, pro-Palestinian rant.

Ooh, this one is saucy!

The essay’s author, Michelle Alexander, served as “a Soros Justice Fellow” in 2005. She was among the first recipients of the Soros Justice Program, with a stipend of $35,000 to $97,000, “to complete a book called The New Jim Crow … about the so-called war on drugs and mass incarceration as the defining racial justice issues of our time.”

Since then, Alexander has been affiliated with numerous Soros-funded organizations, such as The Ella Baker Center for Hunan Rights, which promote “color justice” and “nationally organize[s] and coordinate[s] demonstrations for illegal-alien amnesty and manage[s] voter-registration campaigns for Democratic candidates.”

She was hired by the NYT in the fall of 2018, shortly after Soros invested more than $3 million in the paper.

End segue.

Among civil rights activists, issues like affirmative action in higher education had been consuming a lot of time, energy and resources. Alexander’s book helped redirect attention to racialized mass incarceration as a main battlefront in U.S. race relations.

Since its formation in 2013, the Black Lives Matter movement has made criminal justice reform a centerpiece of their activism. In Los Angeles, for example, the local chapter has led weekly demonstrations for over two years in front of the Hall of Justice. They’re protesting Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey for failing to adequately address police misconduct.

Blacks Love Misery is a political quasi-terrorist front for Soros. The author of their ideology is a literal Soros Fellow and his funded prosecutors work to keep them out of jail.

Lacey, who is up for reelection, faces two opponents. Both of them – former San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón and former public defender Rachel Rossi – are running on progressive platforms.

In March, we’ll see if the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office – the nation’s largest county-wide prosecutorial agency – will be the latest to join the progressive prosecutor movement.

Segue #6:

Prosecutors-union chief warns of Soros influence on election

San Francisco DA George Gascon, backed by Soros and “considered one of the most progressive law enforcement officials in the nation,” said he’s going to leave San Francisco and move to Los Angeles to run for DA.

The incumbent is Jackie Lacey, the first African-American and woman elected to that office. She said she welcomed debate and discussion.

But the Globe said Hanisee “wrote that those backed by Soros aren’t interested in having an open debate about the criminal justice system; they yearn to circumvent the entire process and elect candidates that will refuse to enforce laws already in place.”

Hanisee described it as an “odd approach” for Soros, whose Open Society Foundations purportedly want vibrant and inclusive democracies with governments are accountable to their citizens.

The report said Soros long has meddled in governments around the world, triggering a number of bans on him and his operations. One Macedonia official described his efforts as the “hijacking of civil society.”

End segue.

Jody Armour claims America is moving beyond “tough on crime” but in fact, is selling out his own people to the George Soros plantation.

[Edit: revised this post to be slightly less inflammatory than originally intended. Must be Christmastime]

 

Principal Thomas Hoffman Bans Merit-Based Pizza

Ever notice that American life is beginning to resemble the movie “Red Dawn”, except backwards? With the Russians flying in to save us from our Commie leadership?

Middle school teacher is ‘left in tears’ after principal CONFISCATED pizzas she’d bought as a reward for her hard-working students because it ‘wasn’t fair to other classes’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7814777/Parents-blast-middle-school-principal-cancels-student-pizza-party.html

20 December 2019

Oi! Look at that title! Never mind that this is literal, Soviet-style Communism. It’s Communism that HURT A WOMAN’S FEELINGS! That’s why this was originally reported as news?

Parents have hit out at an Iowa middle school principal after he abruptly cancelled a pizza party organized for a class of hard-working students.

Principal Thomas Hoffman reportedly left one of his teachers ‘in tears’ after he called off the celebration at Brody Middle School in Des Moines on Thursday, which the educator paid for herself and had been promising her students for three months.

KCCI reports that one irate parent, Neil Erickson, took to Facebook to vent his frustrations, penning a post which has now been shared thousands of times.

One man had the balls to call out this blatant act of evil. Maybe he’s the only father left in Iowa.

Erickson wrote: ‘My son attends Brody Middle School here in Des Moines. His class earned a pizza party that I believe the teacher paid for. He has been excited for this for days…telling me about it and how they earned it.

‘Well today was the day. The pizzas were delivered to the class…the teacher paid and signed the receipt. Principal walks into the classroom and says ‘I never approve pizza parties’ or something to that affect.’

For a male principal, that’s completely inexcusable behavior. Women at least have the excuse of being natural socialists until they’re raised/trained better.

Erickson. He looks like your typical, corn-fed Midwesterner. Shouldn’t that be a NASCAR hat? Maybe NASCAR isn’t big in Iowa.

He continued: ‘He took the pizzas from the kids and let them sit in the office for the teacher to pick up after school. Now my son and his classmates lost the party they worked hard to earn and the pizza I’m sure is wasted now…and the teacher was left in tears. I just cant believe it!’

Dozens of people responded to the post, criticizing Principal Hoffman, with one even comparing him to the Grinch for calling the party so close to Christmas.

No, the Grinch is green. Hoffman’s color is pink; that’s him on the right:

He has a similar face to Erickson, although even from a distance he has baggy lower eyelids. What’s up with her? That’s some disturbing hair for a presumable expert in hair style.

However, there were others who appeared to defend the head of the school for calling off the celebration.

Really? REALLY?!

‘Maybe the teacher should have gotten permission before she did it, that would have made sense to me,’ one wrote.

Bullshit. A good administrator doesn’t rule with an iron fist. If a teacher wants to buy pizza for her class at her expense, particularly as a reward for whatever good work they’d been doing, then management should not interfere. She’s doing the job you’re paying her to do. Let it happen. It’s called delegation and it makes your life easier.

On Thursday evening, Hoffman released a statement obtained by KCCI apologizing for the party’s cancellation, claiming that he believed he was acting in the best interest of all students.

On THAT note, this note:

‘I know that many of you are upset about reports of a classroom pizza party, and the pizzas being taken away. I fully understand.

‘As principal, one of my top priorities is fairness and equal opportunity for our students at Brody Middle School. That applies to everything from the chances they have to learn in the classroom to rewards and recognitions by our teachers and staff. We have discussed this from time to time as a school, and have agreed that fairness is a criteria we want to follow in how we treat all Brody students.

‘However, I do want to apologize for being overly strict in applying that standard today when it came to one of our classrooms. Most of all, I want to apologize for disappointing any of our students, and punishing them.

‘I understand that many people have been talking about having pizzas delivered to Brody tomorrow. If that’s the case, we’ll gladly welcome any donations, and arrange for a nice sendoff for our 700 students on the last day before Winter break.’

You heard it from the horse’s mouth, folks. Hoffman confiscated the pizza IN THE NAME OF FAIRNESS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. See, those students earned that pizza, which is why they didn’t deserve it.

But hey, if people want to give pizza to ALL of the students, including the ones who did nothing to deserve it, then he’s perfectly fine with that. Repentance would have HIM purchase the pizzas instead but it’s Christmastime, yo! Forgiveness and freebies!

While his physiognomy was hardly diabolical, it’s a safe bet this guy is a male feminist. This article turned up while I was searching for his mug.

Valentine’s Day at Brody Takes on a New Purpose

https://www.dmschools.org/2014/02/valentines-day-at-brody-takes-on-a-new-purpose/

Samson was said to have lost all of his prodigious strength when he got a haircut but that’s not the way it always works. Events this morning at Brody Middle School used haircuts to demonstrate the old axiom about strength in numbers.

An anti-Christian opener. Lovely. Unlike the girls who stupidly cut their hair just in time for the Valentine’s Day dance.

The Brody community seems recently to have gotten more than its share of bad news in the form of cancer diagnoses. The reaction? Well, somebody walking into the middle of this morning’s event in the packed gym might have thought they were crashing an assembly in celebration of a championship.

I was curious if cancer rates in Iowa had been spiking at this article suggests. It’s true! Sort of.

Segue:

https://www.iowapublicradio.org/post/cancer-rates-steady-2019-one-exception#stream/0

The Iowa Cancer Registry’s 2019 report shows new cases of most types of cancer are holding steady. Investigator Mary Charlton says the exception is cancers caused by the human papillomavirus or HPV.

Love causes cancer!

End segue.

Teachers, office staff, food servers, students – one after another they told their personal stories of struggles against the dread disease in its all too many forms. But to a person their remarks were triumphant and upbeat.

Collectively the speakers got their message across: it’s not just some of us that have cancer; truly, we all have it. Some of us have been slugged and some of us only tapped (so far), but it’s touched all of us somehow, through someone.

No, we don’t all have cancer. In a matriarchy, strength comes via solidarity and victimhood. That is what’s happening here.

The theme was “Through This Together,” and there’s even a spirited tune by that name that was composed by Brody’s own Branden Oliver, a band instructor at the school. When it cued up any hands that were wiping away tears started clapping midway through in a spontaneous unison that spread through the united crowd like a cheerful, healthy contagion.

Then the shearing began.

Ominous.

There was more hair cut than you’d see at a military induction depot. The idea was for men to get their heads shaved to show solidarity with patients who lose their hair while undergoing cancer treatments. And women whose ponytails were shorn donated them to Locks of Love, a public non-profit organization that provides hairpieces to financially disadvantaged children in the United States and Canada under age 21 suffering from long-term medical hair loss from any diagnosis.

That’s disgusting. Why wait to have cancer when you can look diseased now? We must not ignore the feelings of chronically sick people!

Seriously, think about this scene. You shave your head to look like a chemo patient, then “Locks of Love” turns your lost hair into wigs to help chemo patients look normal. That’s whack. That’s like

Meme shamelessly stolen from Spawneyspace.wordpress.com.

Women, don’t cut your damn hair. Don’t do it for charity. Don’t do it for style. And God help your wayward souls, don’t cut your hair specifically to look like a literally sick person. Maybe instead of “joining ranks” with the cancerous, you could shut your legs and not get the HPV that causes many cancers in the first place.

Principal Tom Hoffman gave it up for the cause, among many others. So did DMPS School Board member Bill Howard whose wife, Cathy, is the chief custodian at Brody. And so did Oliver, though his tresses were hard to categorize. Too bushy to be ponytailed, but he wasn’t gonna go with the bald look. The student- stylists from La’ James College who donated their time and talents just whacked off a good bit of his extra and bagged it for LOL.

The annual Valentine’s Day dance at Brody tomorrow night will just continue today’s theme and mood and raise funds for donation to the John Stoddard Cancer Center and Blank Children’s Hospital.

Getting shaved bald just in time for a holiday social event, that’s even more whack. Why not do the shearing after the big party, if you’re going to do it at all? Are we not teaching the girls to look pretty for the boys?

So the assembly was designed to be part motivational; part fundraiser, but there may have been some future career decisions made in the stands this morning. It’s not hard to imagine that it might also pay indirect dividends down the road in terms of more oncologists, assuming discovery of cures doesn’t render that specialty obsolete. In that long-awaited event, the would-have-been docs can always become barbers instead.

“Why do you want to become a doctor?”

“Because my school principal convinced me to shave my hair off the day before a big Valentine dance.”

The first step in teaching degeneracy is to normalize it, which this hair-cutting assembly accomplished. The second step is to punish normalcy… for example, revoking rewards for achievement.

 

Lipstick On A Church Pig

Have you ever wanted to hear a “Christian feminist” confront Ephesians 5 head-on? Then you’re in for a treat!

What If I’m Not the ‘Submissive’ Type?

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/january-february/confronting-christianity-rebecca-mclaughlin-submission.html

By Rebecca McLaighlin, 10 December 2019

Holy manjaw, Batman! She’s got you beat!

I was an undergraduate at Cambridge when I first wrestled with Paul’s instruction, in Ephesians, for wives to “submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord” (5:22, ESV). I came from an academically driven, equality-oriented, all-female high school. I was now studying in a majority-male college. And I was repulsed.

She doesn’t identify the object of her repulsion. Best guess, she didn’t care about female submission to men when there weren’t any men around. The concept of having to give a care about what HE thinks is a postcard of male privilege, now isn’t it?

I had three problems with this passage. The first was that wives should submit. I knew women were just as competent as men.

Hahaha! Learn to code, Barbie!

My second problem was with the idea that wives should submit to their husbands as to the Lord. It is one thing to submit to Jesus Christ, the self-sacrificing King of the universe. It is quite another to offer that kind of submission to a fallible, sinful man.

Her first mistake was presuming equality with men. Her second was presuming Jesus is like Adam, willing to give up all to enable Eve’s rebellion. Her third was fish-bicycle.

Three strikes and she’s out. Check that, she’s a spinster. Check THAT; she’s just getting started!

My third problem was the idea that the husband was the “head” of the wife. This seemed to imply a hierarchy at odds with men and women’s equal status as image bearers of God. Jesus, in countercultural gospel fashion, had elevated women. Paul, it seemed, had pushed them down.

At first, I tried to explain the shock away. I tried, for instance, to argue that in the Greek, the word translated “submit” appears only in the previous verse, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph. 5:21), so the rest of the passage must imply mutual submission. But the command for wives to submit occurs three times in the New Testament (see also Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:1).

That’s rather impressive. Most wimminz stop at verse 21. Does she translate reading into doing?

But when I trained my lens on the command to husbands, the Ephesians passage came into focus. “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). How did Christ love the church? By dying on a cross; by giving himself, naked and bleeding, to suffer for her; by putting her needs above his own; by sacrificing everything for her. I asked myself how I would feel if this were the command to wives. Ephesians 5:22 is sometimes critiqued as a mandate for spousal abuse. Tragically, it has been misused that way. But the command to husbands makes that reading impossible. How much more easily could an abuser twist a verse calling his wife to suffer for him, to give herself up for him, to die for him?

She’s “fipping the genders”, a frequently useful rhetoric among us Red-Pilled. But this is not impressive. She started out believing that the duty of men is to suffer for her personal benefit, so of course she doesn’t want to BE a man. She just wants to be EQUAL TO a man.

In addition to self-sacrifice, Christ also loves the Church by disciplining it and giving commands that must be obeyed. Commands like “obey your husband as if he was Me”.

When I realized the lens for this teaching was the lens of the gospel itself, it started making sense. If the message of Jesus is true, no one comes to the table with rights. The only way to enter is flat on your face. Male or female, if we grasp at our right to self-determination, we must reject Jesus, because he calls us to submit to him completely.

Both spouses have the right to sex. Husbands have the right to wifely obedience. Wives have the right to not be shot dead by Hubby when he’s frustrated with her.

With this lens in place, I saw that God created sex and marriage as a telescope to give us a glimpse of his star-sized desire for intimacy with us. Our roles in this great marriage are not interchangeable: Jesus gives himself for us, Christians (male or female) follow his lead. Ultimately, my marriage is not about me and my husband any more than Romeo and Juliet is about the actors playing the title roles.

Standard Churchian Chick fare. “I’m married to Jesus first and you second, Hubby. Don’t you do anything that ‘Jesus’ wouldn’t like.”

Recognizing that marriage (at its best) points to a much greater reality relieves the pressure on all concerned. First, it depressurizes single people. We live in a world where sexual and romantic fulfillment are paraded as ultimate goods. But within a Christian framework, missing marriage and gaining Christ is like missing out on playing with dolls as a child, but growing up to have a real baby. When we are fully enjoying the ultimate relationship, no one will lament for the loss of the scale model.

Coming from a man, I might have taken that at face value, but coming from a woman it’s toxic empowerment. The key phrase is “it depressurizes single people. We live in a world where sexual and romantic fulfillment are paraded as ultimate goods”.

Women need marriage and are hardwired for kids. The pressure to get married is the pressure to live a chaste, submissive, NORMAL life. “God is calling me to a season of singleness” is a synonym for “I’m getting too much cock and male attention to settle down. I’ll be called to marriage at age 39.9 or thereabouts. That reminds me, I should freeze my eggs.”

Becky, if you miss marriage in order to gain Boyfriend Jesus then you’ll miss on on a real baby and grow up to play with dolls. Or cats, more likely.

What’s the perfect Christmas gift for the woman who has everything? A gift certificate to the SPCA.

It also takes the pressure off married people. Of course, we have the challenge of playing our roles in the drama. But we need not worry about whether we married the right person, or why our marriages are not flinging us to a constant state of Nirvana. In one sense, human marriage is designed to disappoint. It leaves us longing for more, and that longing points us to the ultimate reality of which the best marriage is a scale model.

Oh, her poor husband.

Ephesians 5 used to repulse me. Now it convicts me and calls me toward Jesus: the true husband who satisfies my needs, the one man who truly deserves my submission.

Dayumn, her poor husband! …I can’t find a pic of him.

Desiring to justify God’s commands, Christians sometimes try to ground this picture of marriage in gendered psychology. Some suggest that women are natural followers, while men are natural leaders. But the primary command to men is to love, not to lead, and I have never heard anyone argue that men are naturally better at loving.

But but but I thought men and women were equal? Then how can men be WORSE at loving? Doesn’t this imply a need for “gendered psychology”?

Some claim that men need respect while women need love…

Yo!

…or that we are given commands corresponding to natural deficiencies: Women are better at love; men are better at respect. But to look at human history and say that men naturally respect women is to stick your head in the sand with a blindfold on!

SOMEBODY isn’t respecting her husband! Men do not need respect because they’re good at giving it. Men need respect because we deserve it from the people who benefit from our work. That means you, wifey.

At best, these claims about male and female psychology are generalizations. At worst, they cause needless offense and give way to exceptions: If these commands are given because wives are naturally more submissive, and I find that I am a more natural leader than my husband, does that mean we can switch roles? Ephesians 5 grounds our roles in marriage not in gendered psychology but Christ-centered theology.

This must be why lesbianism is a thing. Some husbands have boobies! And some bitches… don’t?

I have been married for a decade, and I am not naturally submissive. I am naturally leadership-oriented. I hold a PhD and a seminary degree, and I am the trained debater of the family. Thank God, I married a man who celebrates this!

Yet it is a daily challenge to remember my role in this drama and notice opportunities to submit to my husband as to the Lord, not because I am naturally more or less submissive or because he is more or less naturally loving, but because Jesus went to the cross for me.

Or… because Jesus told you to?

Ephesians 5 sticks like a burr in our 21st-century ears because centuries of “traditional” gender roles have often meant wives contorting around the needs of their husbands, while husbands assert their dominance.

Traditional gender roles don’t work because they’ve been used for thousands of years… and Socialism works but has never been tried.

But Paul does not say that the husband’s needs come first, or that women are less gifted in leadership than men, or that women should not work outside the home. At least one of Paul’s key ministry partners was a woman who did just that (Acts 16:14), as did the idealized wife described in Proverbs 31. Paul does not specify that wives should earn less than their husbands, or that families should privilege the husband’s career over their wife’s.

Don’t step in the hamsterbation. “Nowhere does the Bible say that women can’t be husbands!”

Paul is clear elsewhere that men cannot abdicate their responsibility to ensure that their families are provided for. But this does not mean the husband must be the primary breadwinner.

Becky, one thing you can do to make your twisted, Original-Sin marriage more Godly is to give 100% of your paycheck to your husband and then live off however much of it he gives back. See, if he has the RESPONSIBILITY to provide for you then he must CONTROL THE FAMILY INCOME. Otherwise, this is responsibility without authority.

Paul did not say that the husband cannot pimp his wife out for a paycheck while he stays home drinking to the ball game.

Another thing you can do that your “real husband, Jesus” would like is to stop teaching Christianity because He doesn’t want women teaching Christianity.

In biblical terms, the value of work is measured not in dollars but in service. Indeed, Jesus himself, the archetypal leader, did not earn money, and he was financially dependent on some of his female followers (Luke 8:2–3).

*cough* carpenter *cough* And speaking of the Carpenter, Jesus was the archetypal follower, not leader. God the Father was the leader.

Viewed closely, Ephesians 5 is a withering critique of common conceptions of “traditional” gender roles that have often amounted to privileging men and patronizing women. In the drama of marriage, the wife’s needs come first, and the husband’s drive to prioritize himself is cut down with the brutal ax of the gospel. This is no return to Victorian values. Rather, it is a call to pay attention to the character of Christ.

She means the character of Adam, not Christ. Them feminists sure do love the image of Jesus dying under her stiletto heel on a Cross to make all her bad consequences go away.

Wait, weren’t we talking about Wives, obey your husbands?

 

Physiognomy: Bankster!

I understand the critics of physiognomy. Correlation is not causation, etc. At the same time, unwillingness to look for red flags can backfire badly, dangerously and hilariously.

Let’s talk about banksters. Here’s Lando Calrissian:

And here’s Arlando Henderson, trusted vault manager for Wells Fargo until he posed with their money on Facebook:

Which one should you hire to work at your bank? Neither? Correct, but one could be forgiven for trusting the smooth con artist.

Somebody should be fired for hiring Arlando.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/12/arlando-henderson/

Arlando Henderson began working at a Wells Fargo location in Charlotte in April of 2019, according to the unsealed criminal indictment. Henderson had the keys to the bank vault and within two months of being hired, allegedly began stealing.

Federal prosecutors say that Henderson is accused of pocketing money from the vault on at least 18 separate occasions. The money he allegedly stole came from deposits made by bank customers.

Arlando Henderson posted about having access to large amounts of money on his social media accounts. In July and August of 2019, he shared several photos of himself holding stacks of cash. One caption read, “I make it look easy but this shyt really a PROCESS.”

Around July 16, 2019, Henderson attracted attention when he used $20,000 in cash to make a down payment on a Mercedes-Benz. He shared photos of the vehicle on social media as well. The indictment adds that Henderson also used falsified bank statements to acquire a loan from Ally Financial to pay for the vehicle.

Large cash purchases must be reported to the Feds. This law was first enacted to thwart drug money laundering and kept on the books because, as we see here, it detects other forms of money laundering, too.

Thus, Arlando’s bragging about the thefts in amateur rap videos on social media was helpful but unnecessary.

Arlando Henderson uses the nickname “AceeyFoez” on social media and appears to be an aspiring rapper. A link on his Instagram account leads to a Youtube music video.

His trademark phrase appears to be “Aint Wit Being Broke.” In the Facebook photo where he posed with the Mercedes Benz, he was wearing a T-shirt with the initials AWBB. His Instagram bio also includes the phrase.

Some sources say he claimed to be a military veteran but if so, probably only technically so. “Your country thanks you for the thirty seconds of service it took you to fail your first drug test.”

Federal court records show that an Arlando Mautrell Henderson filed for bankruptcy in Cumberland County, North Carolina, in June of 2013. Documents suggest that he owed more than $26,000 to various entities. Henderson appears to have agreed to pay $447 per month for 60 months.

Management didn’t trust the visual red flags OR do a background check before giving him vault keys!

[He] was arrested in San Diego on December 4, 2019.

Authorities probably feared he would flee the country. He probably was just making another rap video.

Henderson faces charges including financial institution fraud; 19 counts of theft, embezzlement, and misapplication; and twelve counts of making false entries. He was being held at a federal detention center in San Diego, according to inmate records.

The bank manager faces one charge of being a dumbass.

 

All Your Sidewalk Are Belong To Us

If your women vote then you’re next. Or even worse, if your women are your judges. Today’s example:

Homeless’ right to sleep on sidewalk remains, Supreme Court won’t hear case

Homeless’ right to sleep on sidewalk remains, Supreme Court won’t hear case

By Marisa Kendall, 16 December 2019

In a move that could impact how Bay Area cities can respond to their homelessness crises, the U.S. Supreme Court is leaving intact a major ruling that found cities cannot punish the homeless for sleeping outdoors if there is no other option available.

Frigging Sodom Francis-Is-A-Sicko.

A Sept. 4, 2018 ruling from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that penalizing homeless residents for sleeping outdoors on public property — if there is no other shelter available to them — violates the Eight Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishments clause. On Monday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case, meaning the Ninth Circuit ruling stands.

Frigging Ninth Circle of Hell.

The development is a win for advocates of the homeless in the Bay Area and beyond, who have used the Ninth Circuit ruling to argue that police cannot force residents out of encampments on sidewalks and in city parks and impose camping bans in the areas. At the same time, it could tie city officials’ hands as they struggle to help the region’s homeless while also addressing residents’ concerns that sprawling encampments have gotten out of control.

Frigging entitled homeless bums crapping on my doorstep.

The ruling stemmed from a case in Boise, Idaho, that challenged city ordinances that banned camping on streets, sidewalks, parks and other public places. In that case, six homeless residents who were cited by police sued the city. The district court ruled in favor of the city — a judgment that was partly overturned by the Ninth Circuit.

Frigging… whoa, Boise? IDAHO? This ain’t the Gay Area we’re talking about?

And how the heck did six guys who couldn’t rent a motel room find the cash to appeal their case all the way to the top of the judicial system? That mutha is pay-to-play at every step.

We must know more!

It’s cruel and unusual for Boise to ban sleeping on the streets, appeals court rules

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/community/boise/article217815780.html

By Rebecca Boone, 4 September 2018

Cities can’t prosecute people for sleeping on the streets if they have nowhere else to go because it amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, which is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

Nobody ever talks about how lawbreakers are cruel and unusual to their victims. Boo hoo, I’m a meth head who can’t go camping in the Hamptons! This is an urgent civil rights issue!

Hmm, the way this is worded, it sounds like private enclaves will remain free of urban blighters..?

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with six homeless people from Boise, who sued the city in 2009 over a local ordinance that banned sleeping in public spaces. The ruling could affect several other cities across the U.S. West that have similar laws.

It comes as many places across the West Coast are struggling with homelessness brought on by rising housing costs and income inequality.

Said costs and inequalities brought to you by the champions of homeless bums.

When the Boise lawsuit was filed, attorneys for the homeless residents said as many as 4,500 people didn’t have a place to sleep in Idaho’s capital city and homeless shelters only had about 700 available beds or mats. The case bounced back and forth in the courts for years, and Boise modified its rules in 2014 to say homeless people couldn’t be prosecuted for sleeping outside when shelters were full.

But that’s what the journalists said the 9th Circus ruled??? What’s the real story?

But that didn’t solve the problem, the attorneys said, because Boise’s shelters limit the number of days that homeless residents can stay. Two of the city’s three shelters also require some form of religious participation for some programs, making those shelters unsuitable for people with different beliefs, the homeless residents said.

There it is. Boise is unfriendly to CHRIST-HATING homeless bums who get taught moral conduct in return for a hot meal!

The three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit found that the shelter rules meant homeless people would still be at risk of prosecution even on days when beds were open. The judges also said the religious programming woven into some shelter programs was a problem.

“A city cannot, via the threat of prosecution, coerce an individual to attend religion-based treatment programs consistently with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment,” Judge Marsha Berzon wrote.

This picture is taken from her youTube acceptance speech for the 2007 Margaret Brent Award. Per the American Bar Association, “Margaret Brent was the first woman lawyer in America, arriving in the colonies in 1638. The Margaret Brent Women Lawyers of Achievement Award, established by the Commission in 1991, recognizes and celebrates the accomplishments of women lawyers who have excelled in their field and have paved the way to success for other women lawyers.”

This is a direct assault upon Christianity. We do good works in order to honor Christ and teach His morality, not to “perform our social responsibility” or some such dreck. How is it that Christianity cannot be extolled in public but secular humanism can? We get sued all the way to SCOTUS if we tell a fag to take his business elsewhere.

If Boise gov’t doesn’t push back hard on this then they’ll be revealed as naturally, deliberately Godless as every Commiefornia shithole.

The biggest issue was that the city’s rule violated the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment, the court found. The amendment limits what the government can criminalize, it said.

Women consider “cruel and unusual” to be whatever men consider “public decency”. Heck, they think it’s cruel and unusual to check IDs to prevent vote fraud, which tells you everything you need to know about them.

“As a result, just as the state may not criminalize the state of being ‘homeless in public places,’ the state may not ‘criminalize conduct that is an unavoidable consequence of being homeless — namely sitting, lying, or sleeping on the streets,’” Berzon wrote.

They didn’t as of five years ago. But Christ stayed on the books so the lawsuit did, too.

The ruling shows it’s time for Boise officials to start proposing “real solutions,” said Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, whose attorneys were among those representing the homeless residents.

A Greek immigrant to NYC, graduated Columbia Law, a boilerplate feminist who thinks poverty exists because government hasn’t redistributed enough wealth yet.

“Criminally punishing homeless people for sleeping on the street when they have nowhere else to go is inhumane, and we applaud the court for holding that it is also unconstitutional,” Foscarinis said in a statement.

They could, maybe, sleep somewhere besides the streets of downtown? Perhaps on Foscarinis’ front lawn?

Boise spokesman Mike Journee said city attorneys were considering their next steps, which could include asking the full 9th Circuit to reconsider the ruling or appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Better idea, send them to Columbia Law School en masse. They can be as homeless there as anywhere else. Alinskyites aren’t the only people who can Crash the System. I’m sure the law students there will appreciate early exposure to the Brave New World they’re being taught to build.

I almost said “send ’em to San Francisco” but that really would be cruel.

But city officials also believe the ruling validates the approach Boise officers have taken since 2014 — not ticketing homeless people when shelters are full, he said.

“If there are, as a result of the ruling, adjustments that need to be made, we’ll consider those when the time comes,” Journee said.

Other cities have faced similar lawsuits, with varying results.

In 2007, the 9th Circuit ruled in favor of homeless residents of Los Angeles, finding that as long as there are more homeless residents than there are shelter beds, a law outlawing sleeping outside was unconstitutional. Both sides later reached an agreement and the entire case was eventually thrown out.

In 2009, a federal judge said a Portland, Oregon, policy designed to prevent people from sitting or lying on public sidewalks was unconstitutional. Portland officials now must also give campers at least 24 hours’ notice before cleaning up or moving unsanctioned camps.

A state judge rejected a similar anti-camping law in Everett, Washington.

The usual suspects. The problem here is obvious, of course. No matter how much free, permanent shelter the government builds, demand will always exceed supply. It’s impossible to accommodate the Gimmiedats to the point of having no unsatisfied Gimmiedats left on the planet.

Sara Rankin, a professor at the Seattle University School of Law and director of its Homeless Rights Advocacy Project, said the ruling will serve as a wake-up call to local governments, forcing them to invest in adequate supportive housing for the chronically homeless.

“I think it’s finally common sense,” Rankin said of the ruling. “There are certain life-sustaining activities that people can’t survive without doing. It’s a really important recognition that people have to be able to legally exist and survive somewhere.”

What a battleaxe. Angled eyebrows for conflict, raised cheeks for dominance and manjaw. Middle third of the face is the largest, signaling ambition/status orientation. Also, notice her lips. The lower is considerably thicker than the upper. Men usually have a thicker lower lip, women a thicker upper. Top it off with slight hooding of the eyes and I bet her personality is toxic even by feminist standards.

The earrings are a hopelessly inadequate effort to appear feminine.

I found an article profiling the six “plaintiffs” while looking for who actually prosecuted the lawsuit. Appears to be Boise-local trial lawyers rather than a national outfit such as the ACLU, although funding remains unknown. This is a shameless piece of journalistic drama but not devoid of interest:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/punished-for-sleeping-on-the-streets-they-prevailed-in-court/ar-AAKarUr?li=AA6ps9U

[Pamela] Hawkes had moved with a boyfriend to Boise, Idaho, from Spokane, Wash., looking for a fresh start after becoming homeless in 2005. Instead of finding a city where they could get their lives back on track, Ms. Hawkes said, she faced repeated jailings that caused her emotional and mental health to deteriorate.

Where’s the boyfriend? Did he kick her out and why? Most people don’t change cities (although Spokane to Boise isn’t far) without having something or someone waiting for them on the other end.

Officers would go on to cite her on 11 more occasions in 2006 and 2007, including times when Ms. Hawkes said there was no available shelter space, forcing her onto the streets.

Including, but not always? Were there times she refused to go to the shelter?

“Even though we did our best to stay hidden and out of view, we were still being found,” Ms. Hawkes said from Spokane, where she recently secured housing and learned this week that she would have a part-time job at a laundromat.

Most people working part-time at menial labor in middle age are either drug addicts or crazies. Spokane is not a poverty-stricken region.

Robert Martin could not stay in any of the shelters in Boise in 2009, his lawyers said, so he slept in the bushes near Interstate 84, near a shelter where his wife and son were sleeping. He was cited for camping. Mr. Martin is now living out of a vehicle in northern Idaho and working dishwashing jobs, according to Howard Belodoff, a lawyer who has worked on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Not with his wife & son? What’s that story? Did the shelter discriminate against men? I already know one church-sponsored shelter in Los Angeles that rejects men. It’s probably not unique.

Lawrence Lee Smith had become chronically homeless after a career in construction, at times living in a camper van or in shelters. Mr. Belodoff said that on one occasion, Mr. Smith lost the vehicle he had been sleeping in, along with his belongings. Mr. Belodoff said the last time the two spoke, Mr. Smith had qualified for Social Security benefits and found a place to live outside Boise.

Sounds like a typical bum. Why did that construction career end?

Robert Anderson had been staying at the Boise Rescue Mission, but his lawyers said in court filings that he was forced to leave because of a rule at the shelter limiting how long he could remain without enrolling in religious programming. Mr. Belodoff said Mr. Anderson is still in Boise and still mostly homeless, but is currently staying with someone.

Fuck him. He’d rather be homeless than learn about Christ? Done deal, parasite!

Basil E. Humphrey’s difficulties staying sober resulted in him being kicked out of a program at the Boise Rescue Mission, according to his lawyers. With no place to go, he began sleeping outside. Mr. Belodoff said the lawyers lost contact with Mr. Humphrey in recent years.

Presumably not a happy kind of drunk.

Janet F. Bell received repeated citations or threats from Boise police that prompted her to go outside the city limits and sleep in the bed of a pickup truck, according to filings by her lawyers. She has disability and mental health issues that have made it impossible for her to work, Mr. Belodoff said, but she now receives Social Security support and has qualified for city-supported housing in Boise.

So out of these six, two are already on the dole, three are unstable (drugs/psycho) and not safe to allow on the streets, one “just quit” his career, one chose homelessness over Christ and one guy reads like a VAWA victim. The latter has my sympathy. The others can go to Hell Mexico. Much warmer there than Boise and all the murders and vacated homes make housing cheap!

Had there been any working homeless, I would have had sympathy for them also. Will probably be there myself in a few years. Heck, Sacramento is making the RV life look like the easy way out.

Make insane asylums, not homeless shelters. And learn to tell feminists “No”. It is completely unacceptable for a judge to overrule a city’s ordinances in support of a political agenda.

 

Red Flags Cut Both Ways

A bipatrisan consensus among America’s legislators has been reached that Red Flag legislation has gone too far. Your cranky correspondent is here to provide helpful examples!

Several guns seized from Redmond man after ‘concerning Twitter posts’ for ‘Joker’ movie

https://komonews.com/news/local/several-guns-removed-from-redmond-man-after-concerning-twitter-posts-for-joker-movie

By Staff, 8 October 2019

REDMOND, Wash. — A 23-year-old Redmond man who police say made “concerning Twitter posts posing with weapons and referencing the Joker movie” has had several guns — including two assault weapons — removed from his home as part of an “Extreme Protection Order,” Redmond police said.

Investigators became aware of the posts last week, including one dated Sept. 26 showing [Charles Donnelly] holding two AK-47 guns — one in each hand, pointing skyward, fingers on triggers. The caption on the photo read: “One ticket for joker please,” according to Redmond police.

A popular meme for the Joker movie’s opening weekend.

It took police five days to notice this “extreme risk”. I know movie lines can be long but the fact that nothing had happened by then was prima facie evidence for cops to finish their crossword puzzle instead of caring.

It’s fun to bait Leftoids, Chuck, but there is a danger that the joke will break their already-fragile grasp upon reality. Next time, use Photoshop for deniability… by pasting Bill Clinton’s face over yours… and sending an anonymous tip to Hillary.

The post comes as U.S. officials had issued warnings about the potential for mass shootings at the movie, which opened on Thursday to increased security around the Seattle-area movie theaters. FBI intelligence officials had uncovered social media posts related to extremists classified as ‘incels’ — short for “involuntary celibate” — and the man had been claiming to be one of them.

“We need red flag laws to protect women from abusive husbands!”

*Cops disarm a law-abiding citizen because he owns guns without a girlfriend.*

Investigators learned that the man had previous disturbing and threatening social media posts toward women in 2017, according to Redmond police’s petition for being granted an Extreme Protection Order.

Preposterous! Lots of us white men make social media posts that are disturbing and threatening only to… lawbreaking psychos who want us disarmed… oh. Uh-oh. My New Year’s Resolution is now to hide a couple family valuables in a completely legal manner.

More recent posts last month show the man with several guns in his home, tucked into his waistband or displayed in wooded areas, police said. In addition, he showed photos of high capacity magazines filled with rifle rounds and indicated he uses gun kits to make “ghost guns” — guns without serial numbers, according to police.

Take a memo, kids. The world does NOT need to know everything about your hobbies, especially if a lot of people are actively trying to ban them.

The man has not been charged with a crime but is expected to have a court hearing on Oct. 15. The man does not have a prior criminal history nor have police had contact with him before, according to Andrea Wolf-Buck with Redmond Police.

As usual for professional journalists, no closure was given for the story. The accuser’s name is also missing; we don’t need no stinkin’ due process! Fortunately for the Manosphere,

Judge rules posting Joker memes and satirical jokes are not enough to invoke Red Flag laws and confiscate guns

Judge rules posting Joker memes and satirical jokes are not enough to invoke Red Flag laws and confiscate guns

by Naga Pramod, 27 November 2019

23-year-old Charles Donnelly from Washington fell prey to the controversial Red Flag laws pertaining to firearms after he posted satirical jokes online. However, his gun rights were restored after his order to the state to return his firearms was ruled in his favor by the King County Judge Averil Rothrock.

The court stated that posting a few jokes were not enough to have the 23-year-old disarmed.

Whew! A rare display of judicial sanity.

[Prosecutor] Kim Wyatt who led the petition against Donnelly referred to his previous posts dating back to 2017 that read, “shoot any woman any time for any reason” and “kill all woman”.

“I’m not misogynist I just hate women,” was another of Donnelly’s jokes.

Based on these posts, Wyatt argued that Donnelly’s posts “implied threat of a mass shooting” and that the court must “balance the community safety needs versus the temporary deprivation of Mr Donnelly’s rights to possess firearms.”

It is worth noting that the hashtag “#killallmen” was, in the same year, a Twitter meme when deputy editor of Huff Post Personal, Emily Coombs, satirically added “Band together to kill all men” as part of her new year resolutions.

https://gunnerq.androsphere.net/2018/08/21/a-manifesto-of-scum/

Now then, who is this Prosecutor Wyatt?

Panel educates public on Washington state ERPO law

Panel educates public on Washington state ERPO law

By Blake Peterson, 3 September 2019

Wyatt on the left. Best pic I can get.

The panel featured Kimberly Wyatt, a deputy prosecuting attorney who helped write the state’s current ERPO law, Melissa Chin, a legal advisor with the Bellevue Police Department [pictured above at right], and three police officers from the Bellevue, Issaquah and Redmond departments.

The seminar came about, in part, to both explain ERPO law in Washington state and clarify any questions the public might have about it. Because the law took effect in the state in Dec. 2016, many people living in Washington, as noted by the panel, still might not know much about it and what it can do.

Wyatt acknowledged that the initiative was passed without education about ERPO law being immediately accessible to the public.

Now who’s making “ghost guns”, Barbie?

“‘How do you get the word out in a systematic way?’” Wyatt said she and her colleagues have asked themselves.

A better question, you feckless bitch, is how do you get the word out BEFORE the law is enacted so the people you “protect” can be part of the process instead of unwitting recipients?

The goal of an ERPO, according to Wyatt, is to prevent or reduce harm.

“This tool is really designed for before the crime has occurred,” she said. Chin added that an ERPO aims to “keep guns out of the hands of someone in crisis.”

And give feminists like Wyatt the ability to persecute unsexy men when they, in her personal opinion, step out of line.

There are consequences for those who violate the ERPO process.

If someone files an ERPO petition knowing that the information they have provided is inaccurate, or if they have done so with the intent of harming the respondent, they will be found guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

That is something Washington residents should look into. I doubt Chuck will be Prosecutor Wyatt’s last target.

Last year, there were 71 ERPOs filed in Washington state, with 211 firearms recovered.

How many of those disarmed men were later charged with violent crimes?

Wyatt added that there have only been a handful of ERPO cases in Washington state in conjunction with a criminal case.

Yeah, I thought so. Red Flag is gun confiscation, pure and simple.

And now, let’s see how the other half lives!

Democrats Want Red Flag Laws for Everyone Except Gang Members

Democrats Want Red Flag Laws for Everyone Except Gang Members

By Jack Hadfield, 15 September 2019

House Democrats on Wednesday refused to include gang members in a list of who should have their guns removed via red flag laws.

Democrats were advancing a measure in the House Judiciary Committee that would encourage states to pass extreme protection orders, also known as red flag laws, when an amendment was proposed that anyone who was put on a police gang database should automatically be targeted under the orders.

Representative Ken Buck, a Republican member of the House for Colorado, sponsored the amendment, and told the House just why the gangs should be included:

“The majority of violent crime, including gun violence, in the United States is linked to gangs… My amendment is quite simple. It would allow the issuance of a red flag order against anyone whose name appears in a gang database if there was probable cause to include that individual in the database.”

That’s more due process than most ERPO targets get.

Of course, the Democrats were opposed to this amendment to the red flag motion.

Well played, Ken, well played!

Representative Zoe Lofgren of California said that only “some of [the databases] are reliable, a lot of them are not.”

HAHAHAAAA!

SizePrecedent

Judiciary Committe Chairman, Jerry Nadler of New York, was concerned that anyone who wrote “13” on a piece of paper would be wrongly accused of being a member of MS-13. “Maybe you are just doodling because it is the 13th of June,” Nadler said.

Representative Eric Swalwell, also of California, wanted “individuals affiliated with white nationalism,” to also be targeted under the red flag laws.

W00T! Troll 10/10 to Rep. Ken Buck! Not only did he reveal their hypocrisy but Swalwell admitted straight-up and on the record that he wanted Red Flag laws to target his political opponents!

The spectacle! A Congressman who gives a damn and does his job well!

Representative Doug Collins, of Georgia, was swift to call out the hypocrisy of the Democrats, for previously supporting the “No Fly, No Buy,” motion, which would stopped anyone on the federal “no fly” list from buying guns.

This is despite the list having misidentified many individuals as potential terrorists, such as the late Senator Ted Kennedy. “It’s amazing to me,” Collins said:

“We had a large blow-up on the floor of this House just a couple years ago about the “No Fly, No Buy” list, which was shown to have issues, but at that point, nobody from the other side brought this is as a concern, and now we are bringing it as a concern… If we can’t bring this list up, even with due process put in, then don’t ever bring the “No Fly, No Buy” list up again… Don’t ever bring it up again because there is no due process on that list.”

Demonrats got PUNKED! YES! TWO POLITICIANS *BOTH* DECIDED TO DO THEIR JOBS IN THE SAME PLACE AT THE SAME TIME! Making America Great Again!

This is not the first time that Democrats have opposed policies that may genuinely crack down on gun violence, without infringing the rights of ordinary citizens.

Project Exile was one of those. Under this program, any convicted felons who were caught in possession of a firearm were instantly sentenced to 5 years in jail. The second offense was an automatic 10 year sentence.

It was first tried in Richmond, Virginia, in the late 90s, and gun crime dropped by 40% after 1 year.

Of course, the Congressional Black Caucus opposed it, claiming that it was a racist program that targeted minorities.

Of course, the hypocrisy of the Congressional Black Caucus calling somebody else racist was lost on them.

National File.com, eh? I like their style.

Teach the Children… Espionage? WebCamGate

I recommend the movie “Minority Report” because its plot is relevant and prescient to modern life, even to the extent of the system being driven by witches in an age of technology. In the movie, pre-crime was limited to murder; in real life, pre-crime is used by bureaucrats to thwart the consequence of soul-crushing bureaucracy. And as a plausibly deniable source of child pornography.

Schools Spy on Kids to Prevent Shootings, But There’s No Evidence It Works

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8xwze4/schools-are-using-spyware-to-prevent-shootingsbut-theres-no-evidence-it-works

By Todd Feathers, 4 December 2019

TL;DR different people have different definitions of “it works”.

It was another sleepy board of education meeting in Woodbridge, N.J. The board gave out student commendations and presented budget requests. Parents complained about mold in classrooms. Then, a pair of high schoolers stepped up to the podium with a concern that took the district officials completely off guard.

“We have students so concerned about their privacy that they’re resorting to covering their [laptop] cameras and microphones with tape,” a junior said at the October 18, 2018 meeting.

Kids grow up so fast! I still don’t have a smartphone for exactly this reason. It’s not a question of whether the Cloud People will spy on me, it’s a question of how much profit they’ll make in the process.

Woodbridge had recently joined hundreds of other school districts across the country in subscribing to GoGuardian, one of a growing number of school-focused surveillance companies. Promising to promote school safety and stop mass shootings, these companies sell tools that give administrators, teachers, and in some cases parents, the ability to snoop on every action students take on school-issued devices.

No need to involve the parents! It’s not Soccer Mom doing the spying, it’s the Socialist administrators who have had they way unopposed in public education for over half a century. And now they practically incarcerate kids in fear of uprisings!

It continually astonishes me how little the Elites trust their own people. School bureaucrats have turned their “institutions of learning” into literal prison-indoctrination camps, from locker searches and metal detectors to uniforms and panopticon surveillance, to replacing deans with security guards and then with sworn law enforcers, and the only official reason they give is “we don’t want the children to lash out and hurt anybody”.

The Woodbridge students were not pleased.

“We just want to ask again: How are you going to assure our right to privacy when we have been having these problems and we have so many fears because of GoGuardian, and the fact that they can monitor everything that we see and we do?” the student asked the school board.

Good question, son. A damn good question. An even better question is what’s the real reason they’re spying on you.

Answer, they are deceitful bureaucrats playing God whose only concept of heaven is a taxpayer-funded pension.

After a pause, board president Jonathan Triebwasser responded: “A very fair question. I don’t know enough about GoGuardian to give you a fair answer.” He asked the district’s superintendent to look into it.

Deceitful, check.

The capabilities of software programs like GoGuardian vary, but most can monitor the user’s browsing history, social media activity, and location, and some even log keystrokes. That surveillance doesn’t stop at the school doors, but continues everywhere children carry their school-issued computers and whenever they log into school accounts.

Playing God, check.

The companies that make this software—popular brands include Securly, Gaggle, and Bark—say that their machine learning detection systems keep students safe from themselves and away from harmful online content. Some vendors claim to have prevented school shootings and intervened to save thousands of suicidal children.

Preventing threats to one’s retirement, check. Trifecta!

This is the founder and COO of GoGuardian, Todd Mackey. Why am I not surprised to find a pedoface running a company whose mission statement is spying on children?

The CEO is a dot Indian.

There is, however, no independent research that backs up these claims.

The few published studies looking into the impacts of these tools indicate that they may have the opposite effect, breaking down trust relationships within schools and discouraging adolescents from reaching out for help—particularly those in minority and LGBTQ communities, who are far more likely to seek help online.

Holey ignorance, Batman! How could that have surprised you? They needed to invoke victimhood just to cogitate the idea that NOT TRUSTING THE PEOPLE UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY GIVES THE PEOPLE GOOD REASON TO NOT TRUST AUTHORITY.

“I’m sure there are some instances in which these tools might have worked, but I haven’t seen the data and I can’t verify in any way that what they’re saying is correct, or that there weren’t other ways available to get that information without subjecting the entire school to that surveillance,” said Faiza Patel, director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s liberty and national security program, who researches surveillance software.

School spying software has spread quickly as districts have increasingly put personal laptops and tablets in the hands of students. Meanwhile, school officials are under intense pressure to protect their wards from explicit online content and, even more urgently, detect early signs of potential school shootings.

I always wondered why schools were eager to spend megabucks on computers for everybody back in the Nineties. At the time, I ruled out “Big Brother” as a far-fetched conspiracy theory and decided that the going-extinct middle management class wanted the next generation to avoid their fate.

Such naive optimism.

Bark says that its free monitoring software for schools protects more than 4 million children.

It’s not free. Who is writing that check, Bark?

*checks* Mormons.

Segue

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180829005211/en/Bark-Raises-9M-Series-Funding-Kids-Safer

Bark, the award-winning product that helps keep children safer online and in real life, today announced its $9 million Series A investment. The round was led by Signal Peak Ventures, with participation from Two Sigma Ventures and existing investors including Symmetrical Ventures, Fuel Capital, Hallett Capital, and Atlanta Seed Company.

Signal Peak Ventures is based in Salt Lake City and was owned until around 2000 by Ray Noorda, Mormon and onetime CEO of Novell. He had a reputation for fighting against Microsoft’s growing monopoly in the Nineties.

The others are venture capitalist firms.

“We’re thrilled to work with Bark on their mission to keep children safer,” said Signal Peak Ventures Managing Director Brandon Tidwell. “As children’s usage of technology continues to increase, there is clearly an incredible need for Bark’s solution, and we believe Bark is uniquely positioned to build a great company in an exciting category.”

Created in collaboration with child psychologists, youth advisors, digital media experts, and law enforcement professionals, Bark delivers a research-backed, kid-friendly solution for safeguarding families in the rapidly changing world of technology. Bark uses advanced machine learning to contextually identify and alert parents to potential threats such as cyberbullying, internet predators, depression, suicidal thoughts, and sexting in their children’s text messages, social media accounts, and email.

“We’re dedicated to partnering with extraordinary founders who are pushing the boundaries of machine learning to build intelligent consumer technology systems; as such, we could not be more excited to work with Brian and the Bark team,” said Dan Abelon, partner at Two Sigma Ventures.

Sucks to be you, Dan. Bark is just a keyword-search algorithm that can work across platform boundaries. Here’s a tip, machines don’t learn. They process data.

Bark has experienced rapid growth since being founded in 2015, helping to protect over 2 million children across the nation. Bark will use this round of funding to broaden its product offering and establish a presence in new markets.

Protecting children from themselves. The job once done by loving fathers is now done by Javascript. That’s why kids are killing themselves, right there.

“We are very excited to welcome Signal Peak and Two Sigma as new investors, and look forward to working closely with them both to accelerate our growth and positive impact on children’s lives,” said CEO and founder Brian Bason.

Following the tragic high school shooting in Parkland in February 2018, Bark announced it was offering its platform for free to any school using Google’s G Suite for Education. In August, Bark rolled out the same functionality for schools using Microsoft Office 365 Education. This powerful offering proactively alerts school administrators to issues detected in school-issued student email, chat, documents, and cloud storage.

I truly despise last post’s Makan Delrahim for enabling tech monopolies to the point where kids can’t avoid the Panopticon by purchasing from a less-popular manufacturer. Helicopter parents are bad, helicopter bureaucrats are worse.

When I was in high school, we called Microsoft Outlook the Virus Transfer Protocol because all the e-mail viruses of the day were written (by other teens, not me) to exploit that specific program. No need to bother with other e-mail programs because market share.

Ah, those were the days. The days when it-wasn’t-me could set fire to the computer lab with a science project and not end up in juvenile hall.

End segue.

[Bark’s] tools have “prevented” 16 school shootings and detected more than 20,000 “severe self-harm” threats, according to the company’s homepage. From January through August 2018 alone, Bark claims, it identified five bomb and shooting threats, nine instances of online predators contacting children, 135,984 instances of cyberbullying, 309,299 instances of students using school accounts to talk about or buy drugs, 11,548 instances of children expressing desires to harm themselves or commit suicide, and 199,236 instances of children sharing explicit content.

So much bullshit. Let us count the cow patties.

1. 16 School shootings discussed online is either too high or too low. Remember they’re all “disturbed white male loners”? Loners don’t talk about their plans. But kids talk about school shootings a lot, Heck, their schools probably have mandatory “all-hands” staff & student meetings to discuss school shootings every time a headline pops. They even simulate shootings with on-campus drills.

Look, gov’t, if your ‘education system’ have become so unsafe that Middleton Middle School now stocks more firepower than Pensacola Naval Air Station then it’s time to shut down public education and start trusting redneck Southerners with rifles.

2. 20k self-harm is WAY too high. Notice they qualified it with self-harm “threats” to bump their numbers. Generally speaking, it’s not a threat if you need Echelon IV to detect it.

3. Five bomb/shooting “threats”, again, threats are by definition visible.

4. Only nine predators contacting children? Somebody prejudiced Bark to ignore clergy and schoolteachers.

5. 136k instances of cyberbullying, way too low.

6. 309k incidents of talking about drugs, WAY too low. Trust me, Homes, I did high school in Los Angeles. 309k per day talking about drugs sounds about right… this before Ritalin went to market.

7. 11,500 instances of suicidal behavior. The total number of reported suicides for USA in 2017 was 47,000, so no way is that statistic “deaths prevented”. Not even close.

8. 199,236 instances of children sharing explicit content… among 4 million kids over a year? That is at least three orders of magnitude too low! Looks like that keyword search has trouble detecting naughty pictures.

So yeah, Bark is just a keyword searcher. I cannot help but wonder, Minority Report style, how many of those were false positives by one kid to get another kid in trouble.

Hell, I probably triggered somebody’s suicide detector just by querying suicide rates a moment ago.

Numbers like that are understandably convincing to district administrators and parents, especially when companies offer their products to schools for free. Bark spokeswoman Janelle Dickerson said Bark makes its money from the $9-per-month version of its tool that it sells to families. The paid version currently covers 200,000 children, a small fraction of the 4 million children watched by the free version in schools.” Securly offers a paid premium product with more features than its free tool. Both companies categorically denied profiting from the data they collect on millions of students through their free offerings.

That’s just insulting. Which is it, “our product is free” or “we don’t pimp your data”?

Upon closer inspection, the numbers Bark touts for its school software appear much more like marketing copy than legitimate data.

Now it’s Vice’s turn to call out the bullshit! *popcorn*

For one thing, the company’s numbers don’t always appear to be consistent. Earlier this year, Bark told TV stations in North Carolina and South Carolina that from May 2018 to May 2019, it had identified 14,671 instances of students expressing desires to harm themselves or commit suicide in those states alone.

When compared to the national statistics on its website, that would mean that the two states—which include just 50 of the more than 1,200 K-12 districts Bark claims as customers—produced a huge proportion of the incidents Bark flags across all 50 states.

The numbers suggest that during a 12-month period the company identified significantly more instances of kids contemplating self harm in the Carolinas (14,671) than it did nationwide during an overlapping nine-month period (11,548). Similarly, the 50 districts in the Carolinas apparently produced 88,827 instances of cyberbullying during that year, equivalent to 65 percent of the 135,984 cyberbullying cases detected in all 1,200 Bark districts across the country during that same period. The rest of the data shared with the Carolina TV stations is similarly disproportionate.

Statistics like these have prompted academics and school policy officials to question the integrity and consistency of digital surveillance companies’ data.

“What is particularly challenging about this issue is the tremendous urgency school districts are being faced with to do something and do something now [about suicide and school shootings] … combined with a tremendous lack of evidence that these tools do what they say they do,” said Elizabeth Laird, the senior fellow for student privacy at the Center for Democracy & Technology. …

She added that Bark has never participated in an independent study of its services because “We do not retain data nor would we share user data with a third party.” However, the company does retain data for the purpose of publishing aggregate marketing statistics.

“Which is it”, indeed!

“Wow, you guys are much less trusting than the venture capitalists were. What’s wrong with you?”

Slightly humorous miscategorizations … may be warnings of more significant issues with algorithms designed to detect violent or worrying behavior.

Natural language processing algorithms have been shown to be worse at recognizing and categorizing African American dialects of English. And popular tools used to screen online comments for hate speech and cyberbullying tend to disproportionately flag posts from African Americans.

Dem po’ Niggers, even tha algorithms is keepin’ da Black Man down! *beep* hate speech *beep* cyberbullying *beep* cultural appropriation *beep* white privilege *beep* terrorist threat *beep* redneck *beep* MAGA *beep* This is an automated message from the Facebook Ministry of Trust and Safety. Your account has been frozen. An account has been created for you just so we could freeze it. You asshole.

“One of the things to kind of understand about surveillance software is that it’s going to have a huge number of false positives,” Patel said. “The question becomes: Well, what do you do when kids are flagged and how does the school react to that? We know that school discipline disproportionately targets African American and Latino youth, regardless of the offense.”

Just like the criminal justice system and race pimp Jesse Jackson.

Several school surveillance software companies claim that their algorithms go beyond simple keyword identification—such as flagging when a student writes “bomb” or “gun”—and analyze the context of the message along with recent web activity. How they do that, though, is considered a proprietary secret.

Cheap overseas labor.

“With sentiment analysis, a student can say ‘I can’t take this anymore, I want to end it all’ … something that’s just looking for keywords may not catch that,” said Jolley, the Securly director of K-12 security.

This is exactly why ordinary people in Communist nations end up paranoid and distrustful.

There is no definitive study proving students perform worse when schools monitor their web activity and personal messages—nor are there any that show monitoring makes them safer, according to experts.

But there are real incidents that justify students’ fears—like the ones that prompted Woodbridge high schoolers to stick tape over their webcams. Woodbridge Superintendent Robert Zega initially agreed to an interview for this article, but did not speak to Motherboard before publication.

Nine years before the Woodbridge students spoke at their local board of education meeting, sophomore Blake Robbins was called into an assistant principal’s office in nearby Lower Merion, Pennsylvania. She accused him of dealing drugs. The evidence: a photo of Robbins sitting in his room with brightly colored pill-like objects that was taken when the district remotely activated his school-issued laptop’s webcam using device monitoring software called LANrev.

Vice Principal Lindy Matsko. That’s quite a face, to be accusing other people of using hard drugs.

The picture was part of a cache of 56,000 photographs that the district took of students without their knowledge. It included sensitive material like Robbins standing shirtless in his room.

The “drugs” in the picture turned out to be candy. Following a federal class action lawsuit, the Lower Merion School District settled for $610,000. Robbins received $175,000 and a second student who joined the case received $10,000. The rest of the settlement covered their lawyers’ fees.

Holy shit, a school district ACTUALLY DID SPY ON KIDS VIA SCHOOL-ISSUED LAPTOPS?

Segue to WebCamGate, circa 2010:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District

At the beginning of the 2009–10 school year, the school district issued individual Apple MacBook laptop computers to each of its 2,306 high school students. The laptops were for both in-school and at-home use.

It was part of the school district’s One-to-One initiative. The program was piloted in September 2008 at Harriton High School and expanded in September 2009 to Lower Merion High School. It cost $2.6 million, less than a third of which was covered by grants.

The school loaded each student’s computer with LANrev’s remote activation and tracking software. This included the now-discontinued “TheftTrack”…

The school elected to enable TheftTrack to allow school district employees to secretly and remotely activate the standard webcam featured in all Apple laptops since 2006. That allowed school officials to secretly take photographs through the webcam, of whatever was in front of it and in its line of sight, and send the photographs to the school’s server. The system took and sent a new photograph every 15 minutes when the laptop was on, and TheftTrack was activated, though school employees could adjust the timeframe to as low as one-minute intervals. LANrev disabled the webcams for all other uses (e.g., students were unable to use Photo Booth or video chat), so most students mistakenly believed that their webcams did not work at all.

That’s not an invasion of privacy, that’s kiddie porn collection. Not funny. The scam was invented by Carol Cafiero, school district Information Systems Coordinator, and district Network Technician Mike Perbix, although many other officials were involved.

I think this is Carol; wow, this story has been scrubbed off the Internet in a serious way. Lots of dead links and missing videos, even from the NBC affiliates that first covered the story. She looks like a typical angry feminist.

The only surviving picture of Mike Perbix. He did no time for taking lots of pictures of kids who thought nobody was looking. Nobody did time but the innocent taxpayers lost >$600k in the settlement.

End segue.

Egregious invasions of students’ privacy, like in the Lower Merion case, will grab headlines. But school communities should be equally worried about the long-term effects of using surveillance software on children, said Andrew Hope, a sociologist at Federation University, in Australia, who studies youth surveillance.

“Our contemporary surveillance technologies indoctrinate our students, our citizens … into a culture of observation in which they learn to be watched and are accepting of unremitting surveillance as a norm,” he said. “There is a behavioral modification that happens, but we’re not entirely sure what the outcomes of such a modification might be.

Bullshit we don’t know. Do your job, sociologist, or move over and let a historian do your job.

Are we teaching them to be surveilled? To be producers of data in a surveillance economy?”

Yes. Exactly. Socialists didn’t seize power because they wanted a turn calling the shots or to try some new ideas. They seized it to play God, to manage their BPD insecurities by projecting them onto society then punishing society for it, and the worst, most malignant evildoers seized power in order to enjoy the greatest pleasure in Hell: getting away with evil in broad daylight.

And the younger the victims are corrupted, the harder it will be for them to ever find a way out of the lies.

How long until a school shooting turns out to be justified by the misconduct of school admin?

 

The Devilmouse’s Man On the Inside

You know what the problem is with the movie industry these days? It’s hamstrung by obsolete anti-monopoly legislation.

DoJ Moves to End Antitrust Rules Regulating How Movie Studios Distribute Films to Theaters

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/18/doj-moves-to-end-antitrust-rules-regulating-how-movie-studios-distribute-films-to-theaters/

The US Justice Department signaled Monday that it plans to end a 71-year-old antitrust enforcement program on movie distribution, saying it is no longer needed to protect consumers.

Epstein didn’t kill himself and another government watchdog took a bribe!

Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim announced that the Department of Justice would move this week to terminate the Paramount Consent Decrees, which went into force in 1948.

NOT ANOTHER JEW! I swear I don’t look for them!

Forget physiognomy, let’s do background per Wikipedia. Delrahim is an Iranian Jew who immigrated to Los Angeles, got his citizenship while in law school and went almost straight into senior Federal office, working for the Senate Judiciary Committee under Senator Orrin Hatch.

1991 Graduated University of California, Los Angeles with a Bachelor of Science in kinesiology. He also received a Specialization in Business/Economics.

Not a promising background for where he ended up.

1995 Graduated George Washington University Law School with a Juris Doctor with high honors.

One wonders if he was just screwing around with his undergrad work. Attending GWU means Delrahim is connected with the Jesuits.

While in law school, Delrahim worked at the Office of Technology Transfer at the National Institutes of Health, and on intellectual property issues at the Office of the United States Trade Representative, Executive Office of the President.

This kind of thing makes me want to spit. As a LAW STUDENT, Delrahim was already connected at high levels of government. Looks like all those nepotism and diversity regulations don’t apply to Jews.

After law school, Delrahim joined the Washington, D.C. law firm Patton Boggs.

In 1998, Delrahim became a counsel to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, working under the chairman, Senator Orrin G. Hatch. Delrahim worked on intellectual property and antitrust issues, including patent reform and the investigation into Microsoft.

That was a shitshow that I’m still angry about. Microsoft was, and is, a blatantly obvious and powerful monopoly dominating roughly 85-90% of the operating system market. The antitrust investigation found them guilty… the guilt was undeniable… but Microsoft’s punishment was a TEMPORARY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.

That is not how you break up a monopoly. It was so bad, in fact, that nine state governments including California refused to accept it.

I knew there had been a Faustian backroom deal, that somebody high in government had decided to plant its hooks into GatesCorp instead of doing his job of breaking it up as the original judge had decided, but of course the details never emerged.

It is a pleasure to finally meet you, Makan Delrahim.

Delrahim later became the Chief of Staff and Chief Counsel of the Senate Judiciary Committee, until his appointment at the Department of Justice in 2003. Jon Leibowitz, President Obama’s Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, who was previously a Democratic Senate Judiciary Committee aide and worked with Delrahim, remembered him as being creative and a pragmatist.

Pragmatist? You need an idealist for an anti-monopoly czar… that rare kind of crazy that can refuse a ten-million-dollar bribe with enthusiasm.

Delrahim became U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chief of Staff 3-8 years out of law school. Must be nice having (((friends))).

From 2003 through 2005, Delrahim served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division in the administration of President George W. Bush. While there, he oversaw the Division’s International, Appellate and Policy sections and was the Chairman of the Merger Working Group of the International Competition Network.

Delrahim also served as a commissioner on the bi-partisan blue ribbon Antitrust Modernization Commission, serving with former Chiefs of the Antitrust Division, Sanford Litvack and John Shenefield, and ABA Antitrust Section Chair, Jon Jacobson.

After leaving the Department of Justice, Delrahim joined the law firm of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, in Los Angeles, California, where he focused his work on antitrust, intellectual property and appellate matters. His clients included Google, Apple, Anthem Inc., Qualcomm, and Zuffa.

Like I said, an antitrust czar must be a headstrong idealist. Delrahim worked for GloboCorp BEFORE BEING APPOINTED TO THE ANTITRUST POSITION. How the hell did Trump miss that multi-trillion-dollar conflict of interest?

After Trump’s victory in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Delrahim was active in Trump’s presidential transition. After the inauguration of Donald Trump, Delrahim became Deputy White House Counsel and assisted in shepherding United States Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch through the United States Senate confirmation process.

Answer, it never hurts to suck up to the boss, I guess. You know what, I don’t even care. Christ will die a second time before a single one of my “leaders” appoints somebody who didn’t attend Harvard. The only happy answer to the question “why did you pick such an obviously corrupt bureaucrat?” is “the microchips in my prefrontal cortex” because in that case, stupidity could be cured by sticking Mister Politician’s head in the breakroom microwave for three seconds.

Maybe it would work anyway at thirty seconds. Hmm.

In March 2017, Trump announced his nomination of Delrahim as Assistant Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division. This role, which required U.S. Senate confirmation, entails overseeing criminal cartel enforcement as well as corporate mergers and acquisitions.

Why, Trump? Why did you let the mice bell the cat? You’re a better businessman than this!

In September 2017, he was approved 73–21 by the U.S. Senate. When he arrived on the job he was reportedly gifted a hat with “Make Antitrust Great Again” written upon it, by the staff of the Justice Department.

When interviewed, Delrahim emphasized that under U.S. law, a monopoly is legal as long as it does not abuse its monopoly power.

That’s just Delrahim’s history. What is Mister Monopoly Watchdog doing today?

The decrees — which smaller movie chains and drive-in theaters still champion — barred major film studios from owning movie theaters, a system that had existed in the early part of the twentieth century and largely blocked independent venues from being able to show hot films.

The decrees also restricted studios from certain distribution practices, such as requiring cinemas to accept a group of films as a condition of getting a much-sought blockbuster, a practice known as “block booking.”

It’s generally considered monopolistic practice to control both production and distribution like that. This will be the death knell for independent movie theaters. Yes, theaters are already the bitches to Hollyweird’s pimps but even so, they have standards. Movies that are hot, Woke garbage… excuse me, movies that inexplicably underperform… still get discarded in favor of movies that people actually want to see, because you can’t turn a profit off an empty theater.

Smaller theaters will not be able to afford to screen unprofitable movies in order to be allowed to show profitable movies. Disney-owned (or at least -friendly) theaters will soon have 100% of market share, even if the devilmouse doesn’t move on to other monopolistic strategies such as price gouging while they have an Amenable Authority guarding the henhouse.

Said authority explains why we don’t need to defend society from media monopolies in Current Year:

Delrahim said a review concluded that the decrees “no longer service the public interest” because the horizontal conspiracy of studios owning theaters no longer exists.

Since the decrees were enacted, the movie industry has become more competitive, with major metropolitan areas served by multiple theaters and video streaming services dramatically altering the landscape for consumers, Delrahim said in a speech at a Washington legal conference.

“These changes illustrate that markets can evolve, and no one can predict with certainty from where and in what form innovation will appear,” he said.

He’s conflating mergers intended to create monopolies with “innovation”.

“Once innovation has occurred, however, it would be a mistake for antitrust enforcers to limit the potential for consumer-enhancing innovation.”

Nothing would innovate the devilmouse like cutting off his competitors’ media distribution outlets!

The shift is likely to upset small and medium-sized theater chains and drive-ins, which balked at a potential change when the DOJ launched a review of the decrees in 2018.

The National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) argued in October 2018 public comments that the restriction on block booking remained essential to protect smaller theaters, which may otherwise be forced to accept films that won’t play well in their communities.

As I described above.

“Exhibitors require a variety of content in order to appeal to the varied tastes of their of their consumers. The prohibition on block booking has allowed exhibitors to use their screens to program both major studio content and other, more targeted fare,” NATO said in the 2018 comments.

“If distributors are permitted to block book, they could demand exhibitors book an entire slate on multiple screens, leaving little room for the independent and smaller distributors to finance and distribute films that consumers demand.”

A spokesman for the theater group said the organization stood by the October 2018 comments and would await formal DOJ legal filings before commenting further.

Star Whores may be going down in flames like a woman-driven Death Star, but if the moviegoer can be forced to pay for it anyway then it’ll be a ‘success’. They’re mostly doing this with subscription services already.

Services such as… Disney Plus… which debuted in November at the same time Delrahim made this announcement.

Aha! This isn’t just about brick-and-mortar theaters. Delrahim is dropping the law so Disney can make like Netflix. Goodbye, Netflix! Monopolies are like Highlanders, there can be only one… and now there’s two of you in the room.

Let’s learn more about this traitor to America.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/09/media/antitrust-trump-makan-delrahim/index.html

Makan Delrahim, 48, is an Iranian immigrant who moved to the United States when he was about 10 years old. He is a self-described conservative. …

Delrahim was involved in one of the most contentious antitrust fights in the media industry. Public filings show that in 2009 and 2010 he lobbied on behalf of Comcast, which was acquiring NBC Universal.

Reminder, he became the FTC’s anti-monopoly czar in 2017.

Critics were wary of allowing a distribution company (Comcast) to control a content and programming company (NBC). Among their fears was that Comcast (CCV) would thwart competition among online streaming services by refusing to offer NBC content to other online platforms, such as Hulu or Netflix (NFLX).

The Federal Communications Commission and the DOJ ultimately approved the deal — with stipulations.

Delrahim also worked as a lobbyist on behalf of Anthem (ANTX) during its takeover bid for Cigna (CI), Pfizer (PFE) during its acquisition of Allegra, and T-Mobile (TMUS) during its MetroPCS merger.

Excellent, blatantly obvious reasons to not trust this man as a corporate watchdog for his second career.

Delrahim’s October 2016 interview about the AT&T deal — in which he said “I don’t see this as a major antitrust problem” — was with the Canadian network BNN.

During the conversation, he even suggested he did not think the AT&T-Time Warner deal should be more troublesome than the Comcast deal he fought for.

“It doesn’t raise the same challenges as some of those other transactions.,” he said.

Politico and the FT, citing anonymous sources, have reported that Delrahim has changed his view since taking office. Critics have said it raises the prospect of White House influence.

Funny, I was just thinking the influence was running the other way.

“Maybe he has had a legitimate change of heart about the arrangement since inspecting the deal more closely from his perch at the Justice Department. But his new boss has left him with some troubling appearances,” New York Times media columnist Jim Rutenberg wrote in Thursday’s Times.

Delrahim promised at his Senate confirmation hearing in May that “politics will have no role” in deal reviews under his leadership.

“The independence of the decision — in prosecuting and reviewing mergers as well as other conduct — is a serious one that should be free from any political influence,” he said.

Translation, he reassured his fellow, Democrat Jews that he wasn’t a race traitor. In fact, there’s now a formal movement of Jews jumping ship from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party, now that the Dems are full of their ancestral enemies and China isn’t opening its doors. Look up the term “Jexodus” for more… I may do a post on it, also, but I don’t want a reputation as yet another (((obsessed))) blogger. I really do just go where the headlines and curiosity take me.

During a meeting earlier this year, Delrahim promised Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal that he would alert him “any time the White House initiates an inappropriate communication with you or anybody in the Antitrust Division,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

That is open treachery against his boss… and he still has a job? For all his business and negotiating smarts, Trump can’t pick a political adviser to save his life.

Sources also reportedly told the Journal that Delrahim assured Blumenthal that the White House had not attempted to influence his view of the AT&T-Time Warner deal.

A long time colleague of Delrahim’s who says he is a liberal told CNNMoney that he can’t imagine that Delrahim “would engage in any type of vigilante justice to help the president in the deal…That’s just unfathomable to me.”

The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, added that Delrahim likely changed his mind after more closely inspecting the AT&T-Time Warner deal.

Anonymous, yet the smart money is the source is Jewish, liberal, a Harvard Law graduate and showing Trump Derangement Syndrome… nope, that’s still half the State Department.

The source explained that the conservative approach to antitrust enforcement prefers requiring companies to spinoff certain chunks of their businesses, rather than putting in place “behavior requirements” that the government would have to police indefinitely.

That’s actually sensible, although the phrase ‘insider trading’ is bouncing around in my head like an ad jingle.

 

The Perfect Cop Video

This one has it all. It’s the Principia Summa Red Pillica of the Manosphere. Have you ever fantasized about how, if some ninety-pound female cop decided to arrest you, you’d just plant your feet, hold still and see how long it takes her to call in a man to do a man’s job? It’s not a fantasy anymore. H/T Donut Operator, of course.

The good stuff starts at 7:30 but watch the whole thing for how utterly useless Barbie was as a law enforcement officer. Another diversity hire is going to cost the local government a fortune and the mother was not even a Dindu chimp.

A solo female officer identifies a shoplifting suspect. He passively refuses arrest and rebuffs her effort to arrest him with ease despite his obvious mental retardation and lack of fitness. He even says verbatim, “we can do this mean or we can do this nice. I’m asking you do this nice” and grabs both her wrists at the same time.

Barbie calms down, radios for backup, then suddenly wigs out, draws her firearm, begins screaming, shoots his mother instead of him, then tries to shoot him again when he becomes violent in defense of Mom. You can hear Barbie hyperventilating and it can’t possibly be because she was exhausted. She also makes no effort to aim her pistol, I mean NO EFFORT AT ALL TO AIM, like she’s forgotten that she’s even holding it. A dramatic example of what happens when a woman runs out of testosterone and her glands switch to adrenaline.

The shoplifter wrestles armed Barbie to the ground, pins her, orders her to stop hurting Mom then steps back and sits down while she whimpers in the fright reaction.

That’s when her backup arrives… 250lb Deputy Leonidas, who never used a gun when he could kick their ass instead…

…who in under fifteen seconds, walks in the door, punts the shoplifter’s head into outer space, pins him to the ground until he stops twitching and begins de-escalating Barbie. “Secure your gun… are you okay?… *she picks her pistol up by the barrel so it’s pointing at her*… look down at your holster… good.”

“Look down at your holster”, sheesh. Barbie must have been tunnel-visioned down to a pinprick. Adrenaline, I tell you.

What a contrast. She couldn’t control a nonviolent situation even with lethal force. He drew but didn’t bother to shoot, just face-kicked the perp so hard his boot came off. And all she had to do to contain the situation was wait THIRTY MORE SECONDS.

Women are not men. Women are never going to control unwilling men without either a man helping her or a literal killswitch. And even the latter is not reliable because when women get that adrenaline rush, the result will be fight, flight or fright… not “default to your training”.

I close with a salute to Deputy Leonidas:

Edit, I don’t think this cop is that same Leonidas as that cop, but they both have the right idea about how to fight crime.

 

Calvinist Wayne Grudem Listens And Believes!

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has begun to offer its Satanic, family-killing fruit. As Pastor Grudem recently explained, the trick to learning that Scripture permits frivorce is hearing wives complain about their husbands instead of just reading Scripture. I archived his explanation and will fisk it at the end:

https://gunnerqcom.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/grounds-for-divorce-paper.08.docx

But first, a more approachable explanation of his lies.

Wayne Grudem Changes Mind About Divorce in Cases of Abuse

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2019/november/complementarian-wayne-grudem-ets-divorce-after-abuse.html

By Rebecca Randall, 26 November 2019

Wayne Grudem, a leading Calvinist theologian and prominent complementarian, has changed his position to affirm a scriptural basis for divorce in cases of abuse and shared his new stance at a major gathering of evangelical scholars last week.

After hearing examples of real-life couples whose Christian beliefs led them to endure abuse rather than separate, Grudem said he looked closer at Scripture to conclude that abuse may be grounds for divorce, provided pastors and elders seek discernment from God in leading a couple to this outcome.

This revises his long-held view, published as recently as 2018 in his textbook Christian Ethics: An Introduction to Biblical Moral Reasoning. The historical view of most evangelicals provides two reasons for divorce: adultery (Matt. 19:9) or desertion by an unbeliever (1 Cor. 7:15).

That’s how it’s been for two millennia. Note that #2 is not applicable to believers, which is the why the reader may have been taught there’s only the divorce reason.

My wife Margaret and I became aware of some heartbreaking examples of such things as severe sexual humiliation and degradation that had continued for decades, and another case of physical battering that had gone on for decades,” he told CT. “In all these situations the abused spouse had kept silent, believing that a Christian’s duty was to preserve the marriage unless there was adultery or desertion, which had not happened.”

His wife is helping him discover new reasons to Biblically justify divorce? That can’t go wrong.

Grudem, a co-founder of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, presented his new work on the topic at the Evangelical Theological Society annual meeting last week, in a talk entitled “Grounds for Divorce: Why I Now Believe There Are More than Two.”

Earlier proponents of accepting abuse as grounds for divorce have pointed to Paul’s use of the verb “separate” in 1 Corinthians 7:15, arguing that the verse applies to a spouse fleeing the home for protection. But Grudem previously was not convinced.

The verse reads: “But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace” (1 Cor. 7:15 ESV, italics added).

TL;DR Grudem claims that the verse should be read as “In cases of abuse, of which an unbeliever leaving is only one example and not a representative one, either, the sister is not enslaved if the divorce is approved by the clergy.”

WHAT THE FUCK!

The Protestant world isn’t just dying, it’s going Catholic. Grudem is laying tracks for the clergy to grant divorces “as directed by God”. That sounds SO VERY familiar.

“Most commentaries assume that ‘in such cases’ refers only to cases of desertion by an unbeliever,” said Grudem. But upon further examination, he realized that the phrase appears nowhere else in the Bible. Grudem looked at 52 uses of the phrase in ancient Greek literature and found that “in such cases” usually does not just refer to the one scenario the writer already mentioned (i.e. an unbelieving partner) but to scenarios similar to that one.

The first rule of hermeneutics (“how to correctly interpret Scripture”) is that the Bible is the best interpreter of the Bible. For example, if we want clarification of whether that phrase in 1 Cor. 7:15 contains additional yet unmentioned reasons for legitimate divorce, we should look at the rest of Scripture for inspiration and guidance before resorting to fictitious characters in Greek tragedies written by fags worshiping Zeus. We might consider “I [God] hate divorce” in Malachi 2:16 or Jesus saying “Moses permitted divorce because your hearts were hard, but it was not so in the beginning” in Matthew 19:8. We could then go to that said beginning and read Genesis 2:24 about a man and woman becoming “one flesh”.

That sounds… permanent. If we would not treat a broken bone by amputating the arm then maybe we shouldn’t tear apart a marriage because the spouses are going through a hard spot, either, because GOD HATES DIVORCE.

You see, Wayne? I can play the “me so smart” game, too. The only differences between us are that I don’t get paid, I don’t speak Squiggle, I want to be understood by my readers and I fear what God will do to me if I mishandle Scripture. You? You take one clause, note that the original Greek phrasing isn’t used elsewhere and proceed to invent a completely new theology of divorce that has magically gone undiscovered for millennia… a theology that just happens to perfectly fit the modern feminist agenda.

Do you think God will be amused by your wordplay? Do you think God will nod approvingly and congratulate you on outwitting Him? On discovering the hidden truth of God’s Will for marriage that He wanted us to know for centuries but was too secret-squirrel to just tell us about? Can you really be that stupid? The evidence says:

“These examples led me to conclude that in 1 Cor. 7:15, the phrase “in such cases” should be understood to include any cases that similarly destroy a marriage,” said Grudem. Therefore, he concluded that abuse is such a case.

The evidence says Yes. Note Grudem’s fatal error in claiming that abuse destroys a marriage.

However, he clarified that restoration is still the first goal when the question of divorce comes up. If the abusing spouse is a Christian, then counseling and church discipline should be pursued, but if abuse doesn’t stop then a church leader should consider that this may be a case where the victim is free to seek a divorce.

Divorce should be safe, legal and rare. Just like abortion!

Just over half of evangelical pastors (55%) believe divorce may be the best option in cases of domestic violence, while only 4 percent say a couple should never divorce, even when violence is present, according to a LifeWay Reseach survey.

Over half of the clergy waiting to sit in judgment of your husband already believe that divorce is the best option. Barbie, you are pre-approved!

The response from the ETS audience was “overwhelmingly positive and appreciative,” Grudem said, and he received few objections. “One woman afterward told me she counsels abused women, and she wept with tears when she read my outline. More than one person said to me afterward, ‘I came prepared to disagree with you, but you persuaded me.’”

Ariel Bovat, a clinical counselor working in domestic violence rehab, tweeted that Grudem was the MVP of ETS for his presentation. “This information will give so many women freedom from their abusers!” she wrote.

The issue of divorce in the case of abuse has been a subject of conversation among evangelicals in the #MeToo and #ChurchToo era.

The 2018 controversy around Southern Baptist leader Paige Patterson began when a recording of him advising a woman to submit to her abusive husband recirculated online. CT reported at the time that Patterson said he had advised and helped women leave abusive husbands, but stood by his commitment to never recommend divorce: “How could I as a minister of the gospel? The Bible makes clear the way in which God views divorce.”

Patterson fought the good fight and the proof of it is his effortless ability to live rent-free in the minds of SBC’s new leadership, like a journalist ranting about GamerGate.

A few years before, Grudem and other complementarian theologians took part in a theological debate around the nature of the Trinity, which had implications for their teachings on gender roles and female submission. Female complementarians in particular have spoken out against an over-emphasis on submission that would lead wives to believe they must submit to abusive husbands.

On THAT note, the article ends.

 

I proceed to fisk some of Grudem’s linked justification.

Grounds for Divorce: Why I Now Believe There Are More Than Two
An Argument for Including Abuse in the Phrase “In Such Cases” in 1 Corinthians 7:15
Wayne Grudem
For ETS meeting in San Diego, 11-21-19

A. The position of my 2018 book Christian Ethics: only two biblically-sanctioned grounds for divorce (adultery and desertion by unbeliever, based on Matt. 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:15)

1. This has been the most common Protestant position since the Reformation
Westminster Conf. of Faith, Chapter 24, para. 6: nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage:

So far, so good. He proceeds to list many founders of Calvinism in support of this position.

B. But during 2018-2019, I had an increasing conviction of need for re-examination of divorce for self-protection from abuse
1. My awareness of several horrible real-life situations, and thinking, “This cannot be the kind of life that God intends for his children when there is an alternative available.”
Examples:
a. – arguments, disagreement repeated rape
b. – battered – no help when abused spouse went to pastor
c. — repeated threats of physical harm or even murder

Grudem became aware that Scriptural teaching was insufficient because women were unhaaapy. He needs to read about Original Sin again, and once again every time Eve complains that Adam never lets her eat ANYTHING.

And no, Grima Wormtongue Grudem, there is no such thing as marital rape.

C. Still, I was never quite persuaded by the “abuse is a kind of desertion” argument.
I did not think it right to say that “abuse is another kind of desertion” because I could not see it as something Paul intended to mean when he spoke of the abuser as the subject of the verb χωρίζω (the abuser is the one who leaves) in 1 Corinthians 7:15:
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so [literally, “let him separate”]. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace.

Does this sound like the Hegelian dialetic to you?

It’s always a red flag when a high-level theologian begins to talk Squiggle to you. He knows the layman doesn’t have a clue what χωρί means… so he’s obviously taking advantage of the fact by diving deep into that dead language.

D. A new and more promising kind of argument: The uninvestigated phrase “in such cases” (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις) in 1 Cor. 7:15
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. (ESV)
BGT 1 Corinthians 7:15 εἰ δὲ ὁ ἄπιστος χωρίζεται, χωριζέσθω· οὐ δεδούλωται ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἢ ἡ ἀδελφὴ ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις· ἐν δὲ εἰρήνῃ κέκληκεν ὑμᾶς ὁ θεός.

1. Does it mean:
a. in only this case: desertion by unbeliever, or
b. in any cases that have similarly destroyed a marriage?
c. ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις does not appear elsewhere in the New Testament or LXX
d. I (and my teaching assistant Brett Gray) could find no commentator who ever searched for this phrase in Greek literature outside the Bible
2. I found that several examples from extra-biblical literature show that Greek ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις (“in such cases”) often includes more kinds of situations than the original example

Q.E.D.

Extra-Biblical literature is so vast that one can use it to prove ἐν δὲ εἰρήνῃ actually means ἀδελφὸς. If you don’t believe me then just ask… EURIPIDES???

PHILO JUDAEUS Phil. De vita Mosis 1.38, line 1 (lib. i-ii) {0018.022} (1 B.C.-A.D. 1)

[When the Egyptians discovered that their all their firstborn sons and firstborn cattle had been killed:] And, as so often happens in such circumstances (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ), they thought that their present condition was but the beginning of greater evils, and were filled with fear of the destruction of those who still lived.

Specific example: 10th plague on Egypt and death of the firstborn sons.
“in such cases”: any kind of sudden tragic event. (clearly broader than the specific example named)

EURIPIDES Trag. Troiades [The Trojan Women] {0006.011} Line 303 c. 480-c. 406 BC

What are they doing? Are they firing the chambers, [300] because they must leave this land and be carried away to Argos? Are they setting themselves aflame in their longing for death? Truly the free bear their troubles in cases like this (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ), with a stiff neck.

Specific example: captured people who are about to be carried into exile
“in such cases”: any case where someone faces a sudden loss of freedom or even loss of life

EURIPIDES Trag. Electra {0006.012} Line 426 c. 480-c. 406 BC

But go inside the house at once and make things ready there. Surely a woman, if she wants to, can find many additions to a meal. Really there is still enough in the house to cram them with food for one day at least. It is in such cases, . . . that I see how wealth has great power, to give to strangers, and to expend in curing the body when it falls sick

Specific example: needing food to feed to unexpected guests
“in such cases”: any case in which wealth provides the ability to meet unexpected needs

Yes, Euripides was quite the Bible commentator while writing his tragedies… when not worshiping his patron deity Zeus…. five hundred years before the Bible was written… in a different culture than the Israeli one that Jesus and the Apostles grew up in.

Oh for the love of scholarship, my brain is bleeding!

SOPHOCLES Trag. Electra {0011.005} Line 990 c. 497-406 BC

Chorus
[990] In a crisis such as this (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ), forethought is an ally both to those who speak and those who listen.

Specific example: two sisters (Electra and Chrysothemus) considering whether to kill Aegisthus in revenge for their father’s death
“in such cases”: any plans that involve life-and-death risks

SOPHOCLES Trag. Electra {0011.005} Line 1338 c. 497-406 BC

Paedagogus
Utterly foolish and senseless children! …. Be done now with your long speeches and this insatiable shouting for joy, and go inside. In dealings of this sort (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ), delay is harmful, but the time is ripe for being done.

Specific example: Orestes and Pylades, two friends who are plotting a double murder, are in danger of being killed unless they act quickly
“in such cases”: any time someone is carrying out a murder plan

Sophocles is the only other name (out of six) that my readers are likely to recognize. One wonders if Grudem ever did a thesis on the story of Electra.

10. In contrast to the plural phrase in 1 Corinthians 7:15, New Testament authors elsewhere used singular of τοιοῦτος when the reference was limited to one specific example (“in such a case” or “in this case”):

This is EXACTLY why I never trust squiggle-speakers. Remember reading above, how Grudem claimed the phrase for “in such cases” never occurred in Scripture? That that was why he tapped nonreligious writers living centuries apart from the young Church in the first place? Here, Grudem just admitted that the singular form of the phrase IS used in Scripture. Only the plural form isn’t.

Grudem had obviously gone on a jihad to find something, ANYTHING he could twist into justifying modern feminist beliefs.

b. If Paul had meant to refer only to desertion, another option would be to use ἐν τούτῳ (singular) “in this case”

And that’s “divorce by an unbeliever”, Wayne. Not “desertion by a believing husband”.

F. Additional reasons why abuse should be included in “such cases” in 1 Cor. 7:15 and considered a legitimate ground for divorce

But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. (1 Cor. 7:15)
εἰ δὲ ὁ ἄπιστος χωρίζεται, χωριζέσθω· οὐ δεδούλωται ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἢ ἡ ἀδελφὴ ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις· ἐν δὲ εἰρήνῃ κέκληκεν ὑμᾶς ὁ θεός.

1. If abuse by an unbelieving spouse forces the abused spouse to flee the home for self protection, the abuser has caused the separation just as much as if he or she had deserted the marriage
a. The result would be the same as desertion (no longer living together)
b. “in such cases” (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις) would seem certainly to apply to this situation (very similar!)
[see this argument in Frame, Jones, PCA 1992 report, Chrysostom]:

I was too slow. Wayne’s already equating “desertion by an unbeliever” with “no longer living together”.

Priest: “Why should I grant you a divorce?”

Wifey: “I kicked him out of the house while he was at work.”

Priest: “Ah, you are no longer living together! Desertion has happened. Here’s your certificate of divorce but you should pay the fee before you sign, if you want to use a credit card in his name.”

G. Conclusion on 1 Cor. 7:15: “in such cases” should be understood to include any cases that similarly destroy a marriage
We could paraphrase,
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In this and other similarly destructive cases (ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ) the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. (ESV)

Now Grudem is equating “no divorce” to slavery. That’s not how Scripture describes marriage.

1. This reasoning also explains why Paul felt freedom to add desertion as another ground for divorce in addition to adultery, which Jesus had specified. In both cases, the marriage has been very substantially, or even fatally, harmed.

His forktongue is working hard here. AGAIN, that is “desertion by an unbelieving spouse” not just “desertion”. The reason Scripture allows that is because God doesn’t hold unbelievers to the same standards as believers. He respects both the honest believer and the honest unbeliever.

2. Abuse is in some ways more harmful than desertion, because abuse includes repeated demonstrations of actual malice, not simply indifference. Abuse is actively and repeatedly malevolent.

In Malachi 2, God equates divorce with wife battery. Grudem’s little loophole doesn’t stretch this far so he’s completely without justification for believing this.

3. Other specific kinds of behavior that in some cases might be so severe that they would belong in the category of “in such cases” (1 Cor. 7:15), because they have similarly destructive effects in the marriage:

a. Extreme, prolonged, verbal and relational cruelty that is destroying the spouse’s mental and emotional stability

In cases of mental/emotional abuse, the determination of “substantial harm” is more difficult and more subjective, but not impossible

b. Credible threats of physical harm or murder of spouse or children

c. Incorrigible (or recalcitrant, or inveterate, or incurable) drug or alcohol addiction accompanied by regular lies, deceptions, thefts, and/or violence

d. Incorrigible gambling addiction that has led to massive, overwhelming indebtedness

e. Pornography addiction would also fit here, but it would also be included under meaning of “sexual immorality” (Gk. porneia) in Matthew 19:9

Boldfaces mine. So, in his quest to protect women whose bodies have been shattered in hubby’s drunken rages, Grudem has… oh, so accidentally… declared that a husband using porn is legitimate grounds for divorce. Unsaid: that a wife refusing her husband sex, which is the very definition of sexual desertion, is grounds for divorce.

At long last, after two thousand years, we may now properly state 1 Corinthians 7:15:

“But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. Also, if a spouse–believer or not–has a foul tongue or gambling addiction, threatens any form of violence, uses recreational drugs to excess or if he looks at porn, then in such cases the spouse is not enslaved to the marriage. God has called you to empowerment.”

H. Suggested guideline on grounds for divorce:
1. Divorce for self-protection is morally permissible in situations where one spouse is repeatedly inflicting substantial harm on the other spouse, such that the abused spouse must leave the home for self protection, and also in other situations that are similarly destructive to a marriage.
2. This “substantial harm” could be physical or mental/emotional (from verbal and relational cruelty)

Exactly what the Godless feminists want. By their results ye shall know them.

 

DIY Communion

I try to keep my expectations low when courtesy requires going to a modern church. (Minimum standard for attendance: the church must publicly display at least one crucifix of any size.) Even so, I rarely escape without a new horror story. New for Turkey Sunday 2019: do-it-yourself Communion!

The pastor of a small, Baptist-esque church set out wine and bread for Communion but instead of taking it corporately, as has been done in every church I’ve been at in a world-weary life, the pastor said we could help ourselves while the band played songs and added that he encouraged us to do it by family.

Absolute zero ritual. No “take this bread in remembrance of Me” or “this wine is His blood, shed for us”, nope, just come on up and chew your groove and back to the pew. Not even attendants at the ‘table’.

That’s not laziness. Lazy is the pastor telling a deacon to lead Communion so he can check his Twitter feed. DIY Communion is open disrespect for both God and one of the very few mandatory rituals that Our Savior left us to follow.

I did the ritual for myself by memory and regret taking part at all, but as rarely as I go to Church it had been the first opportunity this year to practice Communion. The entire reason I don’t go to church just for Communion is because it’s supposed to be a corporate experience. Attending a church once a month to gobble the bread & wine then sneak out the side door just ain’t right with what Communion is about: remembering as a Church, not as isolated individuals, Christ’s sacrifice and promise of rescue. I can’t square that with nobody knowing my name while I “do it with them”. To preserve the intent of Communion, therefore, I only do it when I go to church with family or friends.

Evil, treacherous, quisling pastors! I could do Communion for myself with my breakfast Cheerios if the point was just a quick snack. Bitter and cynical as I am, I’m not hard to please. A basic Communion service, give thanks for whatever because Turkey Weekend, tell a joke about a football game then sing a couple songs that double as advertisements for the upcoming children’s Christmas play. How can a clergyman possibly screw that up?

By displaying open contempt for Christ’s blood and body, broken for us.

 

The Tears Of Network Investigative Journalists

Continuing my thanks-giving, do you know what Dan Rather and pink slime have in common? Neither is investigative journalism! which I discovered after boredom over the holiday forced me to read the LA Times snail mail edition. They buried this pity party in the Calendar/comics section, where it was found by my idle hands.

TV News grows more risk-averse

LA Times dead tree edition, page E1

By Stephen Battaglio, 29 November 2019

This has been the autumn of discontent for investigative TV journalists.

Ronan Farrow’s bestselling book “Catch and Kill” detailed his frustration with former bosses at NBC News over his failed attempt to break the story on the sexual assault and harassment allegations against movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. A month later, leaked video showed ABC’s “20/20” co-anchor Amy Robach grousing over how the network would not run a 2015 interview with a victim of billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein that implicated Prince Andrew and former President Bill Clinton.

Discontent? That should be vindication! I’m (not) shocked that investigative journalists haven’t yet figured out that the Conspiracy of the Century is signing their very paychecks.

In both cases the networks said the stories never reached the editorial standard they believed was necessary to put it on the air.

Those editors would have swan-dived out their corner-office window had those investigative journalists gone just one step further.

Robach even publicly packed up ABC’s assertion, saying her private remarks on an open mike were made “in a moment of frustration”.

So she DID go just one step further. And closed ranks instead of going public. Hence this veiled “please don’t fire me, I didn’t mean for my complaint to go public.”

But the dissatisfaction Farrow and Robach expressed reflects a deepening concern by some veteran journalists and producers that network TV news divisions are avoiding controversial enterprise stories that could pose financial risks from litigation and create aggravation for their corporate owners. Declining ratings, public distrust of the media and the surfeit of news from the Trump White House have added to those pressures.

Haha! They said it! Now if they’re smart, those investigative journalists will start blackmailing their megacorporate employers by using the access they have as megacorporate investigative journalists.

“I had the scoop, then my boss said it ‘hit too close’, then Trump declassified it anyway over the rulings of the judge protecting us. I thought we were the good guys! We ARE the good guys! So why is everything going wrong? And why did my boss suddenly retire to a country without extradition before his stock options vested? How DID Epstein manage to break his own neck with rope he didn’t have in maximum security, anyway?”

“I would way that you don’t go to broadcast television to see investigative reporting these days,” said Lowell (((Bergman))), a veteran investigative news producer and emeritus professor at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. “There’s much less of it because it’s a bigger hassle than other kinds of reporting.”

True dat. And take one reason (((why)))? Your clue is this article started out with investigative reporters complaining that their scoops on infamous Jews were trash-binned by their heavily Jewish corporate handlers.

“And network television has always been concerned not just with ratings but with profits.”

A provable lie. The news used to be seen as a loss leader, a public service provided by entertainment companies. Then Communists saw the value of news as propaganda. Which is still not a profit thing.

And even today, the Weinstein and Epstein scoops were not canceled because they WOULDN’T bring eyeballs to the advertisements.

Chris Hansen, whose undercover and hidden-camera investigations were a staple of NBC News for more than a decade until he left the network in 2013, said enterprise reporting has become less attractive as news magazines such as NBC’s “Dateline” and ABC’s “20/20” are seeing higher profits with true-crime stories that can play – and be replayed – like scripted dramas.

“I think a lot of time network executives go, ‘OK, how much can we spend for an Overseas Press Club Award or a Peabody for an investigation? What is that worth worth our time versus a less expensive crime narrative that people will watch and people will learn something from?” Hansen said. “It’s good stuff, but it’s not traditional investigative reporting.”

Hansen is trying very hard to not see the pink elephant in the room. I don’t watch TV so correct me if I’m wrong, but nobody watches Dateline and 20/20 reruns. Nobody learns anything from true-crime dramas unless they crack a book afterwards or remember the shows long enough to see the patterns.

The pink elephant has a name: the Associated Press. Every media outlet purchases a majority of its stories from the AP now. Smaller papers buy almost everything that’s not local. They don’t do that to save money. As every survey of journalists shows, the news media is obsessed with choir practice. Everybody must sing the exact same note, and having your own reporter do your own reporting created the deadly risk of reaching a different Narrative.

One in which, for example, Epstein didn’t kill himself.

It’s hard to make a profit in a cutthroat market if you believe the key to survival is blending in with the herd. You’ll be bankrupted regardless if you don’t do anything different from the next guy who’s a tenth of a cent cheaper. Fox News is (was) a great example of how a news organization can succeed simply by abandoning the official, cost-effective, AP-provided narrative.

As networks have become part of sprawling, publicly held media conglomerates–ABC parent the Walt Disney Co and NBC parent Comcast have grown significantly in recent years–

I will have THAT story coming as soon as I get back home. TL;DR Trump must stop listening to Jared Kushner.

–risk management is now a major element of running a news division.

“There is no question lawyers are more careful now,” says Rick Kaplan, a veteran TV producer who has worked at ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN.

ABCBSNBCNN. Aka Associated Press and maybe Reuters.

“Why are they careful? The finance people are telling them, ‘If you lose, and we owe millions of dollars on a legal suit, you’re toast.’”

I can’t recall erroneous reporting that caused a severe lawsuit offhand. Most such accidents are fixed with a simple mea culpa. Or does finance people mean (((finance people)))?

[Chris Vlato, senior producer at ABC News says] “We’re now in a world of fake videos and easily faked documents, and I wake up every night scared about that,” Vlasto said. “I think our lawyers do and I think standards [and practices] does. That’s what makes it a scarier time now for every journalism organization. We have to be on our guard because people want to get us.”

Sucks to have competition, doesn’t it? Sucks even more to be scooped by nameless amateurs, doesn’t it?

So, Vlato “thinks” fake documents are a problem? He didn’t check if it’s actually a problem? Isn’t the potential for fake evidence a good reason to continue funding in-house investigative reporting?

But that can backfire, you see. Remember Obama’s birth certificate? It’s a known forgery but Obama had been in the White House too long for its exposure to have done any good. There are some things that mainstream news media DON’T want their viewers to know, which is the real complaint underneath all this liability smoke.

You already knew that but today, you can savor it.

The price for getting a narrative wrong can be high. A phony document that CBS used in a 2004 report on former President George W. Bush’s military service effectively ended the career of longtime anchor Dan Rather and two of the network’s producers.

Hey, that’s a great example! That wasn’t a false document mistakenly aired, that was an obsession that Dan Rather kept doubling down on until the backdraft put W. Bush in the White House.

Segue!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

The Killian documents controversy (also referred to as Memogate or Rathergate) involved six documents that are critical of President George W. Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard in 1972–73, allegedly typed in 1973. Dan Rather presented four of these documents as authentic in a 60 Minutes II broadcast…

So much for the complaint of Dateline-style shows taking the place of investigative journalism.

…aired by CBS on September 8, 2004, less than two months before the 2004 presidential election, but it was later found that CBS had failed to authenticate them.

Elsewhere in this link, CBS’ inhouse researchers demonstrated they were fraudulent before they were aired. But Dan Rather pushed ahead in order to torpedo Dubya’s election chances.

Several typewriter and typography experts soon concluded that they were forgeries. Proportional-print typewriters were in use in the early 1970s which could have produced the documents, such as the IBM Selectric typewriter, but no forensic examiners or typography experts have authenticated them and it may not be technically possible without the originals. Lt. Col. Bill Burkett provided the documents to CBS, but he claims to have burned the originals after faxing them copies.

CBS News producer Mary Mapes obtained the copied documents from Burkett, a former officer in the Texas Army National Guard, while pursuing a story about the George W. Bush military service controversy. Burkett claimed that Bush’s commander Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian wrote them, which included criticisms of Bush’s service in the Guard during the 1970s. In the 60 Minutes segment, Rather stated that the documents “were taken from Lieutenant Colonel Killian’s personal files”, and he falsely asserted that they had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS.

They can’t blame their investigative journalists for that, but getting rid of them in an age where facts are less important than results would still be sensible.

The authenticity of the documents was challenged within hours on Internet forums and blogs, with questions initially focused on anachronisms in the typography, and the scandal quickly spread to the mass media.

Image result for i drink journalist tears

CBS and Rather defended the authenticity and usage of the documents for two-weeks, but other news organizations continued to scrutinize the evidence, and USA Today obtained an independent analysis from outside experts. CBS finally repudiated the forgeries on September 20, 2004. Rather stated, “if I knew then what I know now – I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question”…

Dan Rather couldn’t stop doubling down even after his allies abandoned him for their own safety.

…and CBS News President Andrew Heyward said, “Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret.”

Several months later, a CBS-appointed panel led by Dick Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi criticized both the initial CBS news segment and CBS’s “strident defense” during the aftermath. CBS fired producer Mapes, requested resignations from several senior news executives, and apologized to viewers by saying only that there were “substantial questions regarding the authenticity of the Killian documents”.

Image result for mary mapes killian

Mapes.

The story of the controversy was dramatized in the 2015 film Truth starring Robert Redford as Dan Rather and Cate Blanchett as Mary Mapes, directed by James Vanderbilt. It is based on Mapes’ memoir Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power. Former CBS President and CEO Leslie Moonves refused to approve the film, and CBS refused to air advertisements for it. A CBS spokesman stated that it contained “too many distortions, evasions, and baseless conspiracy theories”.

Oh look, money isn’t everything after all!

End segue.

The divisive political climate has added tension. For several years, viewers have been subjected to Trump’s relentless assault on what he calls the fake news media and descriptions of the press as the enemy of the people.

AND an enemy of their own investigative journalists, apparently. Sex sells, truth doesn’t.

The erosion of public trust in the media also has created more caution. ABC news parent Walt Disney Co. paid more than $177M in 2017 to settle a defamation lawsuit filed by Beef Products Inc. over the network’s 2012 story on processed beef trimmings, known as “pink slime” which are used as low-cost filler. The network never retracted or apologized for the story and has gone to trial to defend it.

Segue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

Finely textured meat is produced by heating boneless beef trimmings to 107–109 °F (42–43 °C), removing the melted fat by centrifugal force using a centrifuge, and flash freezing the remaining product to 15 °F (−9 °C) in 90 seconds in a roller press freezer. The roller press freezer is a type of freezer that was invented in 1971 by BPI CEO Eldon Roth that can “freeze packages of meat in two minutes” and began to be used at Beef Products Inc. in 1981. The lean finely textured beef is added to ground beef as a filler or to reduce the overall fat content of ground beef. In March 2012 about 70% of ground beef sold in US supermarkets contained the product.

The recovered beef material is extruded through long tubes that are thinner than a pencil, during which time at the Beef Products, Inc. (BPI) processing plant, the meat is exposed to gaseous ammonia. … Gaseous ammonia in contact with the water in the meat produces ammonium hydroxide. The ammonia sharply increases the pH and damages microscopic organisms, the freezing causes ice crystals to form and puncture the organisms’ weakened cell walls, and the mechanical stress destroys the organisms altogether. The product is finely ground, compressed into pellets or blocks, flash frozen and then shipped for use as an additive.

As of March 2012 there was no labeling of the product, and only a USDA Organic label would have indicated that beef contained no “pink slime”. Per BPI, the finished product is 94% to 97% lean beef (with a fat content of 3% to 6%) has a nutritional value comparable to 90% lean ground beef, is very high in protein, low in fat, and contains iron, zinc and B vitamins.

…In 2001, the [USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service] approved the gaseous disinfection system as an intermediate step before the roller press freezer, and approved the disinfected product for human consumption, as an additive. The FSIS agreed with BPI’s suggestion that ammonia was a “processing agent” which did not need to be listed on labels as an ingredient. FSIS microbiologists Carl Custer and Gerald Zirnstein stated that they argued against the product’s approval for human consumption, saying that it was not “meat” but actually “salvage”, and that the USDA should seek independent verification of its safety, but they were overruled. In 2003, BPI commissioned a study of the effectiveness and safety of the disinfection process; the Iowa State University researchers found no safety concern in the product or in ground beef containing it.

The term “pink slime”, a reference to the product’s “distinctive look”, was coined in 2002 by Zirnstein in an internal FSIS e-mail.

Image result for Gerald Zirnstein

Gerald Zirnstein. I couldn’t find out what his beef with the process was but he not only coined the intentionally pejorative phrase “pink slime” but also crusaded for its destruction for over a decade on the strength of various arguments that were either easily falsifiable or knowingly accepted industry practice.

Expressing concern that ammonia should be mentioned on the labels of packaged ground beef to which the treated trimmings are added, Zirnstein stated “I do not consider the stuff to be ground beef, and I consider allowing it in ground beef to be a form of fraudulent labeling”. He later stated that his main concern was that connective tissue is not “meat”, and that ground beef to which the product had been added should not be called ground beef, since it is not nutritionally equivalent to regular ground beef.

In 2007, the USDA determined the disinfection process was so effective that it would be exempt from “routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public”.

A December 2009 investigative piece published by The New York Times questioned the safety of the meat treated by this process, pointing to occasions in which process adjustments were not effective. This article included the first public use of the term “pink slime” as a pejorative. In January 2010, The New York Times published an editorial reiterating the concerns posed in the news article while noting that no meat produced by BPI had been linked to any illnesses or outbreaks.

An 11-segment series of reports in March 2012 from ABC News brought widespread public attention to and raised consumer concerns about the product.

That was not investigative reporting. That was one man’s pogrom being weaponized against an entire industry. In light of CNN’s current campaigning for the replacement of beef with insect “meats”, this was a first salvo at destroying a staple of America’s healthy diet.

On March 25, 2012, BPI announced it would suspend operations at three of its four plants, being in “crisis planning”. The three plants produced a total of about 900,000 pounds of the product per day. BPI said it lost contracts with 72 customers, many over the course of one weekend, and production decreased from 5 million pounds of LFTB per week to below one million pounds a week at the nadir (lowest point of production).

Those God-damned, over-credulous Baby Boomers!

Effective May 25, 2012, BPI closed three of its four plants, including one in Garden City, Kansas, lost more than $400 million in sales, and laid off 700 workers. Production decreased to less than 2 million pounds in 2013. Cargill also significantly cut production of finely textured beef and in April 2012 “warned [that] the public’s resistance to the filler could lead to higher hamburger prices this barbecue season”. About 80% of sales of the product evaporated “overnight” in 2012, per the president of Cargill Beef. Cargill stopped production in Vernon, California, and laid off about 50 workers as well as slowing production at other plants including a beef-processing plant in Plainview, Texas, where about 2,000 people were laid off.

It’s incredible how much power the network media had for many years.

On September 13, 2012, BPI announced that it filed a $1.2 billion lawsuit, Beef Products, Inc. v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., against ABC News; three reporters (Diane Sawyer, Jim Avila and David Kerley) and others, claiming ABC News made nearly “200 false, misleading and defamatory statements, repeated continuously during a month-long disinformation campaign”, engaged in “product and food disparagement, and tortious interference with business relationships”. BPI called the ABC News series a “concerted disinformation campaign” against LFTB.

On June 28, 2017, ABC and BPI reached a settlement, ending the suit. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. A Walt Disney earnings report indicated that the amount paid was at least $177 million.

Some consumer advocacy groups pressed for pink slime’s elimination or for mandatory disclosure of additives in beef, but a spokesperson from Beef Products Inc. at the time said there was no need for any additional labeling, asking “What should we label it? It’s 100 percent beef, what do you want us to label it? I’m not prepared to say it’s anything other than beef, because it’s 100 percent beef”.

End segue.

Much of the investigative reporting efforts in recent years have been focused on Washington and the nonstop news frenzy created by the Trump White House.

It’s time to face the music, investigative journalists. You were never defenders of the public interest. You were always puppets of America-hating forces. Now that those forces face an existential threat in Donald Trump exposing their wicked, wicked deeds, you job is no longer to discover the truth.

It’s to bury the truth.

Choose your side: either us amateurs on the Internet or the monsters offering you money to follow the Narrative. Money, that is, until the Wokes go Broke.

You might investigate THAT story someday.

 

Let Us Give Thanks For Enemies Of Such Quality

We have much to be thankful for. Christ is on the Throne, Trump is in the White House and our 21st-Century enemies resemble clowns more than genetically engineered supersoldiers. By way of example:

You’re doing open concept all wrong: ‘This is the type of toilet I see in my nightmares’

You’re doing open concept all wrong: ‘This is the type of toilet I see in my nightmares’

By Elizabeth Hames, 13 November 2019

A real estate ad is garnering negative attention online for its unusual take on open-concept design.

The Philadelphia master suite comes with a walk-in closet, space for a bed and sitting area, and a bathroom. The catch: There are no walls separating the toilet and shower from the rest of the suite.

So, anyone sitting next to the fireplace or on the bed would be in full view of someone using the toilet.

That’s raising eyebrows on Twitter… with users expressing discomfort at the thought of using the facilities in front of guests or a partner.

Image result for Kamara Abdur-Rahim

One reviewes, “the bat man”: Philly is WILD this bathroom has NO DOORS and they’re calling it open concept… only the brave will poop while their friends are over and can see them.

melissa @ digitalemo: this is the type of toilet I see in my nightmares

Kamara Abdur-Rahim, the developer who posted the ad: “It’s not for everyone. It’s only for that person who feels comfortable with it.”

You now know way more than you want to about Kamara.

She added that it’s not for “the person who isn’t open to getting dressed and doing other stuff in front of their partner.”

WAAAY more. What do you think, African or Arab?

Abdur-Rahim says she likes to experiment with design and the open-concept bathroom gives the room “a bigger feel.”

It’s not the first time a bathroom-bedroom mashup has made headlines. … But Amanda Pendleton, lifestyle expert with Zillow, says she can’t see the trend catching on.

“While I could see this design in a modern loft-type space, it loses its appeal if you enjoy entertaining or value your privacy,” she says.

I could see this design in a modern RV-type space… with a curtain for privacy.

However, not everyone online hates the privacy-free bathroom… they take issue more with the shower than the toilet, fearing that pooling water could damage the floors.

Disgusting AND dysfunctional! She must be African. But no pic for confirmation. That’s okay, because we’ll get to her work history on Linkedin which must be nearly as entertaining.

But Abdur-Rahim says she has plans to add frosted glass around the shower.

“I’m pretty proud of how it came out,” she says.

Here’s how she came out. Misspellings will be in boldface.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/kamara-abdur-rahim-45831340

Being a confident Gurl consists of being sure of oneself and it is revealing through one’s image, action, and Diet. Everything is taken into consideration, inside and out of the body. One can look glamorous on the outside but still not have confidence which would show through other significant aspect such as her actions or diet. Our company helps with these issues; we target the woman whose head is down and help to lift it up. In addition, we target the woman whose head is up and help her keep it up. …

Our oganization’s number one goal is to instill confidence in women and give an opportunity for all to come together as one and help the community. We know we will touch each woman in a different way, and every individual would gain or restore confidence in herself. We want every women to become a CONFIDENT GURL!

Co Owner/ Costruction Project Manager
Hewitt Realty LLC
Jan 2017 – Present 2 years 11 months

Her current job building bathrooms without doors or curtains.

Sales Manager/Event Coordinator
African Cultural Art Forum LLC
Jun 2015 – Jan 2017 1 year 8 months

Black Power! Not to be confused with Black Grammar!

City of Philadelphia
Health Inspector
City of Philadelphia
Feb 2014 – Jun 20151 year 5 months

● Responsible for performing routine inspections and enforcing health codes in various food establishments (i.e. restaurants, retailers, manufacturers, packing factories) and associated equipment used within assigned geographical area

None of her bullet points make reference to sanitation or water damage.

Quality Assurance Inspector/ Lab Technician
Westward Pharmaceutical
Jun 2013 – Feb 2014 9 months

United Way /Habitat for Humanity
Volunteer
United Way /Habitat for Humanity
Mar 2011 – Mar 2011 1 month

Helped build homes for low income families that were affected by Hurricane Katrina and also building literacy kits for low income daycare and schools. Duties included using scaffolding for support while adding additional material to homes to enhance the appearance and help avoid losing moisture.

She didn’t learn that doors on the bathrooms enhance the appearance? Or that shower curtains contain moisture?

Research Experience for Undergraduate
Intern
Jun 2010 – Aug 2010 3 months

Delaware State Univesity

Investigated the role of estrogen on Amypliod precursor protein levels followed by presentation to faculty and peers.

It’s a bad sign when your first job out of university is interning on the effects of estrogen.

You can put the savage in the college but you can’t put the college in the savage. More than anything, that unfortunate fact will guarantee the supremacy of White Men for generations to come.

 

Three Un-Hanged Men

After being exonerated of everything but a selfie, Eddie Gallagher should have been home free. Turns out that wasn’t the case and he was about to get drummed out of the military for “having a conviction”. And then, Trump stepped in and reinstated Gallagher in full, and also pardoned two other soldiers whose stories I’d never heard of. I’ll cover the other two first because Gallagher’s case goes all the way up to the Secretary of the Navy.

Donald Trump Grants Clemency to Army Major Matt Golsteyn and 1st Lt. Clint Lorance

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/16/donald-trump-grants-clemency-to-army-major-matt-golsteyn-and-1st-lt-clint-lorance/

President Donald Trump granted clemency to Army Maj. Matt Golsteyn and 1st Lt. Clint Lorance on Friday, who were accused of war crimes.

Lorance served more than six years of a 19-year sentence he received after he was found guilty for ordering his men in Afghanistan to engage a motorcycle with three men on it.

He capped either Cirque du Soleil or two goons riding shotgun.

“Many Americans have sought executive clemency for Lorance, including 124,000 people who have signed a petition to the White House, as well as several members of Congress,” White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

Lorance was released from prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, on Friday night.

Golsteyn was scheduled for a trial after killing a terrorist bomb-maker after he was released from detention.

Translation, he took a known terrorist behind a dumpster in a war zone and came back alone. How is THAT a crime? Oh right, the terrorist didn’t get a taxpayer-funded legal defense and lifetime free room & board.

“After nearly a decade-long inquiry and multiple investigations, a swift resolution to the case of Major Golsteyn is in the interests of justice,” the White House statement from Grisham said.

Several members of Congress advocated for Golsteyn’s clemency as well as Clay Higgins, American author and Marine combat veteran, Bing West, and Army combat veteran Pete Hegseth of Fox News.

The president also restored the rank and honors of Special Warfare Operator First Class Edward Gallagher.

Sounds like…

(Segue for those suffering low blood pressure:)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cheerleaders-put-on-probation-for-trump-2020-sign-during-north-stanly-high-school-football-game-north-carolina/

(End segue.)

Gallagher was found not guilty of murdering an ISIS fighter in Iraq in 2017 but was convicted for posing in a photo with a dead ISIS fighter.

“For more than two hundred years, presidents have used their authority to offer second chances to deserving individuals, including those in uniform who have served our country,” Grisham said. “These actions are in keeping with this long history.”

We begin with Major Golsteyn.

Former decorated Green Beret, after years of investigations, charged in death of suspected Taliban bomb maker

https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-decorated-green-beret-after-years-of-investigations-charged-in-2010-killing-of-suspect-taliban-bomb-maker

By: Greg Norman, 14 December 2018

Just the title tells you this is bullshit.

A former Green Beret who told Fox News in 2016 that he killed a suspected Taliban bomb maker nearly a decade ago during combat operations in Afghanistan is now being charged in the man’s death — a move his lawyer says is an act of betrayal by the Army.

The murder charge facing Maj. Mathew Golsteyn comes after years of on-and-off investigations by the Army following an incident said to have taken place during his 2010 deployment. A military tribunal that probed the killing years ago initially cleared Golsteyn — but the investigation into him was re-opened after he spoke to Fox News’ Bret Baier.

“I think he’s been betrayed,” his attorney, Phillip Stackhouse, told Fox News on Friday when asked how the Army has treated Golsteyn.

Repeat, Golsteyn was cleared of charges (but lost a Silver Star for conduct unbecoming) then was charged anew after admitting to killing him during a Fox News interview.

Do. Not. Talk. To. The. Media.

The once-decorated soldier, who had been on voluntary excess leave amid the latest investigation, has been living in a newly bought home with his wife and a 2-month-old baby in Virginia, working for the International Association of Firefighters, Stackhouse said.

Golsteyn was informed of the murder charge earlier this week after being ordered back into active duty.

“They have insinuated to me that they have new evidence,” Stackhouse told Fox News. “I don’t believe there is any new evidence at all.”

Golsteyn, in 2010, had been deployed to Afghanistan with the 3rd Special Forces Group. Two Marines in his unit during that time in the Battle of Marja ended up getting killed by booby-trapped explosives hidden in the area.

Did those bombs stop after the “murder”, one wonders.

Golsteyn and his men later found a suspected Taliban bomb maker nearby — though he was not on a list of targets U.S. forces were cleared to kill, Fox News previously has reported. After he was detained, Golsteyn said the man refused to talk to investigators.

Under the rules of engagement, Golsteyn was ordered to release him.

However, Golsteyn was concerned that if he did so, the suspect would have in turn targeted Afghans who were helping U.S. soldiers.

More specifically, according to other sources, his indigenous allies knew he was the bomb-maker but didn’t have court-admissible evidence. They told Golsteyn that they feared reprisal for fingering him. Very plausible, and it put the Major in a bind. Legally, the perp had to be released but doing so would cost him supporters among the locals… perhaps by dismemberment.

How should a soldier handle that, in the context of facing an enemy that refuses to wear uniforms? The way the good Major did. Officially release him and unofficially walk him to the dumpster. In the unlikely event the man was innocent, welcome to the war party, pal. Soldiers are not lawyers. They do not presume innocence. They make use of premeditated murder the way security guards make use of trespass and loitering laws. If the price of a continued alliance is capping one probable terrorist then a soldier shouldn’t think twice.

If you don’t like that then good. War should not be waged lightly for exactly such reasons. But if you DO wage war then don’t cry when intentional killings happen outside of “due process”.

It boggles the mind, that Golsteyn was only allowed to kill HQ-approved targets in a conflict against irregular forces. Go to Hell, backseat chickenhawk war drivers. Better yet, Get in Front!

“There’s limits on how long you can hold guys,” he told Fox News’ Bret Baier in 2016. “You realize quickly that you make things worse. It is an inevitable outcome that people who are cooperating with coalition forces, when identified, will suffer some terrible torture or be killed.”

Golsteyn told Fox News he killed him. Two years later, he is facing the murder charge.

Whatever SJW did this waited until he was recalled to active service.

“Major Matthew Golsteyn’s immediate commander has determined that sufficient evidence exists to warrant the preferral of charges against him,” U.S. Army Special Operations Command spokesman Lt. Col. Loren Bymer told Fox News in a statement Friday. “Major Golsteyn has been charged with the murder of an Afghan male during his 2010 deployment to Afghanistan.”

The first Army investigation was undertaken after Golsteyn disclosed details of the incident during a polygraph test when he was interviewing for a job with the CIA in 2011.

Golsteyn, according to Army documents obtained by the Washington Post, reportedly told the CIA something that Stackhouse disputes – that he took the suspected bomb maker off base, shot him and buried his remains in a shallow grave before returning to the site to dig up the remains and burn them in a pit used to dispose of trash.

Stackhouse told Fox News the suspected bomb maker was released and later killed during combat operations in Marja.

It’s possible that Golsteyn didn’t even admit to killing in the interview and this is pure point & shriek. I don’t have his exact words.

Golsteyn, who had been awarded the Silver Star, the military’s third-highest award for combat valor, was initially accused of murder and conspiracy. But following the lengthy initial investigation by a military tribunal, no formal charges were filed.

Double jeopardy.

Instead, Golsteyn was removed from the Special Forces and had his Silver Star taken away.

As for the latest case, Stackhouse says: “we will be relentless in defending him.”

No need, Stackhouse. Trump has Golsteyn’s back.

Now for Clint Lorance.

This is an obviously partisan source, which means it’s as trustworthy as CNN itself. Good enough for me! (Because I’ll fisk CNN like a proctologist in the third act.)

Case

In July 2012, while serving as a Rifle Platoon leader in a remote sector of Kandahar Province Afghanistan, First Lieutenant Clint Lorance’s platoon embarked on what was seemingly a normal combat patrol. Clint’s patrol, consisting of 16 US Infantrymen, 5 Afghan National Army Soldiers, and 1 US Interpreter, left their Strong Point early in the morning on July 02, 2012 to a neighboring village. The platoon knew this village all too well, as only days before, one of their brothers, a US Soldier, had been shot in the neck in this very village.

Having constant contact with overhead US Army helicopters, it would soon become apparent to Clint that the platoon was headed into enemy held territory. Army pilots warned Clint over the radio of enemy presence to the North, East and West of the Platoon’s position on the ground. Clint confirmed with the pilots a good description of the enemy, and pilots continued to track and provide overhead surveillance for Clint’s Infantry platoon who was traveling on foot in the mine-riddled Afghan terrain. The Soldiers were operating in a terrain that leaders had deemed too dangerous to drive vehicles due to the expensive damage to vehicles as a result of mine explosions. In an effort to preserve their vehicles, the Infantrymen walked everywhere on foot, behind hand-held mine-detectors and explosive-detective dogs.

A dirt road was situated between the small base and the village, which had been restricted to military and police use only. This road had been lined with concertina wire, so as to reduce the Taliban’s freedom of maneuver. This restriction had been in place for several months prior to Clint’s arrival. It was a common Taliban tactic to run from US Forces on their motorcycles to the river to the South of the base, out of Clint’s platoon’s area of operations (sort of like a jurisdiction, keeping military units properly aligned on the battlefield).

As the platoon made their way across the road and through the concertina wire, a two wheeled motorcycle bearing three military-aged males came down the road at a higher-than-normal rate of speed. As the motorcycle approached, the men were pointing at the Soldiers’ positions. Trial testimony proved that back at Headquarters and simultaneously, radio signals were being intercepted by US intelligence Soldiers which clearly indicated that someone was pointing out via radio the positions of the US Troops on the ground. These radio intercepts were being translated into English and relayed via secure military radio to Clint on the ground. These Taliban were clearly setting up for an ambush.

As the motorcycle approached the patrol, one of Clint Lorance army Soldiers, a former policeman, yelled back to the him and said the motorcycle was coming at a faster-than-normal rate of speed and ASKED FOR PERMISSION TO FIRE. The Taliban showed no indication of slowing down and ignored the Afghan Soldiers’ verbal and visual warnings to stop. Clint had 3-5 seconds to react to this threat before the bike reached his men, who were tactically vulnerable because the patrol was in the middle of crossing the road, Clint granted his Soldier permission to fire. The Soldier fired, and missed.

The motorcycle came to a stop under a tree a few hundred meters from Clint’s position. The Taliban dismounted and began approaching the patrol. The Afghan Soldiers who were in front of Clint’s men, instinctively raised their weapons and prepared to fire, shouting at the men to stop. The men ignored the Afghan Army’s commands. This is all happening in seconds. Clint gave permission to fire , killing two of the men, one ran away.

Minutes later, the Soldiers detained that man who had ran away, he later tested positive for homemade explosives residue on his hands. During this patrol, a separate element of Clint’s platoon on the other end of the village engaged and killed two Taliban who were visually observing and communicating that they saw the Soldiers’ position on the rooftop. A second man was captured while attempting to flee the village by another element of Clint’s platoon. This man also tested positive for homemade explosives residue.

It is important to consider that, though the men Clint ordered killed did not have any weapons on them; however, their motorcycle was taken away by another Afghan a few minutes after the engagement and the third man did run away. Was the third man carrying a weapon? Did the motorcycle contain an explosive device? See News reports by motorcycles used by terrorists.

That’s the crux of the case against Lorance: he ordered his men to fire at unarmed persons acting suspiciously and against his orders on a restricted-use road in an environment of IEDs and ambush killings. Once again, soldiers are not lawyers. They aren’t even police, and what’s the Number One cause of police shootings? Say it with me:

FAILURE TO COMPLY.

Never give a man pointing a gun at you a reason to shoot. Innocence and misunderstandings do not stop bullets, to say nothing of motorcycles known to be used for bomb delivery.

Intelligence reports for the area identified any personnel owning or operating a motorcycle as Taliban, as there were no local population living there. The local population had long since moved out of the area because it had been taken over by the Taliban. Essentially, if they were in this area, they were up to no good. The only other non-Taliban actors in this area were farmers who commuted from their homes south of the river to farm the land that had been left abandoned.

Upon return to base, Clint ordered both of the captured men be tested for explosives residue on their hands. Both men tested positive, confirming Clint’s suspicions that the men had handled explosives recently. Clint also ordered the men entered bio metrically into the platoon’s computer to check for past criminal history. Then men both gave a “John Doe” name when asked, negating the computer check.

Clint then ordered that both men be physically separated, put into a shaded area, and be given food and water. Both men refused food, but drank water. When the Afghan Police arrived and asked Clint for permission to interrogate the prisoners, Clint denied the Police access to the prisoners and declared them under US custody, as such, they would be treated in accordance with US Army laws for treatment of prisoners. These laws mandate that the US personnel must protect anyone in their custody from interrogation or unjust treatment. Clint instructed his men to guard the prisoners and not talk to them. 2-3 hours later, the prisoners were transported to the detainee processing facility at the Brigade Headquarters.

Sounds like Lorance followed procedure at every step. There was nothing he could have done differently except to wait for the suspicious trio to arrive and see if they wanted an autograph.

Even though both men tested positive for explosive residue and were acting suspiciously and acted exactly as all other Taliban do in the area, Clint’s higher HQ assumed they were innocent due to political reasons.

Generally an unacceptable presumption, but:

The Army assumed Clint guilty of random acts of murder, fired him from being a platoon leader, took his weapon away–in a combat zone– and moved him to headquarters to assume administrative duties while awaiting the investigation. …

The members of Clint Lorance’s platoon have since made efforts to protect themselves by testifying against him in exchange for immunity. Clint is the only person in this incident to face any criminal charges.

Clint stood in court and said, “I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACTIONS OF MY MEN”.

Each of the above circumstances were validated by witness testimony, while under oath, during the court martial.

Nine of the ten men being considered of committing murder were granted immunity by then -MG John Nicholson in exchange for their testimony against the remaining one, 1 LT Clint Lorance.

Something to think about: July 2012 was an important time for senior US officials in Afghanistan. Civilian casualty allegations across the battlefield were beginning to complicate the end-of-war transition negotiations to include a similar incident that happened only weeks before in the same area by a different infantry unit as well as a mass killing of Afghans by a US Soldier that made international news. Sufficed to say, Army officials needed someone to harshly punish in order to show the Afghan government we will take care of our own. Keep in mind that this is all happening as the US and Afghan governments are discussing a status of forces agreement between the two nations. That is, the US guarantees that if Americans commit crimes, they will be dealt with swiftly by US justice system. The US officials needed an example to drive this point home at this pivotal time in transition. Enter 1LT Clint Lorance.

Clint’s words today, ” I NEVER LEFT MY SOLDIER’S BEHIND”

And Trump didn’t leave him behind, either. If he doesn’t win 2020, it’ll only be because California voted twice.

My readers have already met Eddie Gallagher.

https://gunnerq.androsphere.net/2019/07/29/seal-eddie-gallaghers-accusers-the-sewing-circle/

Now meet the scalp Trump took in his name!

Former SECNAV Richard Spencer. This pic is good enough you can see the horizontal lines on his forehead indicating good concentration/intelligence. When the lines are staggered horizontal, they indicate many intellectual interests.

Navy Secretary forced out after Trump’s war crimes intervention causes division and chaos in military

ht tps://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/pentagon-mark-esper-richard-spencer/index.html

By Barbara Starr and Nicole Gaouette, 24 November 2019

In an extraordinary move, the Pentagon chief “fired” the Navy secretary Sunday for going outside his chain of command by proposing a “secret agreement with the White House,” according to a senior defense official.

No no, Barbies, no quotations around “fired”. The door hit SECNAV in the ass on his way out. Then he cried like a bitch.

The agreement that led to Navy Secretary Richard Spencer’s forced resignation involved the case of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher, one of three service members facing war crimes allegations whose cases have caused unprecedented tension between the Pentagon and President Donald Trump.

Spencer had appeared to be seeking a way to resolve a standoff between the Pentagon and White House over Gallagher’s case, but competing narratives that emerged in the chaotic hours after Spencer’s dismissal suggest the depth of the upheaval, disconnection and discord that remains.

Resolve a standoff, yeah right. The Deep State is trying to wrest control of the United States military away from the Commander in Chief. As we’re about to see.

Trump suggested on Twitter that Spencer’s dismissal had to do with cost overruns and the way Gallagher had been treated by the Navy. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said he asked Spencer to resign because he had lost “trust and confidence in him regarding his lack of candor,” according to a Pentagon spokesman.

That tweet had nothing to do with this incident. The Navy wouldn’t have anybody ranked higher than O-2 if cost overruns were punished by dismissal.

“Can you sign for delivery on these USS Ford replacement part part replacements?”

“NOOOOO why me, O God? I have kids to feed!”

And Spencer pointed squarely to the President, suggesting that Trump was undermining the “key principle of good order and discipline” of the US military by intervening in Gallagher’s case.

“I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” Spencer wrote in his letter to the President acknowledging his termination.

CNN is putting the cart before the horse. Spencer broke chain of command to pressure Trump to let him destroy Gallagher’s career; some news reports claim he even made threats to resign if Trump did not accept his decision. Trump made no public reply but Secretary of Defense Esper demanded his resignation for breach of military protocol.

AFTERWARDS, Spencer blamed Trump for undermining “good order and discipline” in his resignation letter.

Segue:

ht tps://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/read-navy-secretary-richard-spencer-resignation-letter/index.html

Dear Mr. President: It has been the extreme honor of a lifetime…

skip

As Secretary of the Navy. one the most important responsibilities I have to our people is to maintain good order and discipline throughout the ranks. I regard this as deadly serious business. The lives of our Sailors. Marines and civilian teammates quite literally depend on the professional execution of our many missions. and they also depend on the ongoing faith and support of the people we serve and the allies we serve alongside.

The rule of law is what sets us apart from our adversaries. Good order and discipline is what has enabled our victory against foreign tyranny time and again, from Captain Lawrence’s famous order “Don’t Give up the Ship”, to the discipline and determination that propelled our flag to the highest point on lwo ima.

The Constitution. and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, are the shields that set us apart. and the beacons that protect us all. Through my Title Ten Authority, I have strived to ensure our proceedings are fair, transparent and consistent, from the newest recruit to the Flag and General Officer level.

Unfortunately it has become apparent that in this respect. I no longer share the same understanding with the Commander in Chief who appointed me. in regards to the key principle of good order and discipline. I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Cry, you whiny Admiral bitch. What order is that? Nobody is talking about an order. You didn’t even mention an order when you had the chance.

You didn’t quit, SECNAV Richard V. Spencer. Your ass was shoved out the door by SECDEF for lapses in discipline that would have shamed a Second Lieutenant.

The President deserves and should expect a Secretary of the Navy who is aligned with his vision for the future of our force generation and sustainment.

We can agree that that ain’t you.

End segue.

Gallagher had been convicted of bringing discredit to the armed services after posing next to a dead ISIS fighter’s body, which is against regulations.

No, Gallagher was not charged with conduct unbecoming.

He was demoted for that offense and acquitted of a separate murder charge.

Also acquitted of willfully discharging a firearm to endanger human life, retaliation against members of his platoon for reporting his alleged actions, obstruction of justice and the attempted murders of two noncombatants. That’s a lot of innocence.

After Trump reversed Gallagher’s demotion a week ago, military officials launched a formal review to determine if Gallagher was fit to serve, which is protocol after a conviction. That review was expected to lead to his expulsion.

Those poor, sore losers couldn’t take a hint. Trump forcibly reinstating Gallagher should have preempted any such review. Looks like the opportunity to Punch A Nazi while simultaneously disrespecting Orange Man the C-in-C was too much temptation for these Wokes.

Trump was too kind. He should have cut orders for Spencer to take a helicopter ride. For training purposes, of course. With SEAL Team 7.

Nah. Eddie got in trouble once already for posing with a dead man.

Gallagher issued a statement on Sunday evening thanking his family, legal team and supporters that ended by heaping praise on Trump.

“President Donald Trump you have my deepest gratitude and thanks. You stepped in numerous times and showed true moral fiber by correcting all the wrongs that were being done to me. You are a true leader and exactly what the military and this nation needs,” Gallagher said.

I remember watching Obama shove his mentors under a bus. What a difference!

Spencer’s departure is the latest shocking twist in an ongoing standoff between the Pentagon and Trump over Gallagher and the two other service members — a standoff that looks set to aggravate tensions between the President and Democrats in Congress.

For once, I believe the Clinton Narrative Network.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement Sunday night saying he had spoken with Spencer and offered support.

Wow. Spencer just got scalped for trying to bait Trump into abandoning an innocent serviceman and Schumer wants to be the first name associated with him? Does he want to throw his hat into the Democrat 2020 race, too? It’s not too late. [This just in, (((Bloomberg))) announced his Presidential candidacy in frustration that all his useful idiots are either dying of old age while live on national TV or boycotting Israel for the migrant vote.]

“Secretary Spencer did the right thing and he should be proud of standing up to President Trump when he was wrong, something too many in this administration and the Republican Party are scared to do,” Schumer said. “Good order, discipline, and morale among the Armed Services must transcend politics, and Secretary Spencer’s commitment to these principles will not be forgotten.”

Admirals who see nothing wrong with women on Navy ships do not know the FIRST GAWDDAMN THING about good order and discipline.

Trump intervened to reverse sentences against all three service members, ignoring Pentagon leaders who had told him such a move could damage the integrity of the military judicial system, the ability of military commanders to ensure good order and discipline, and the confidence of US allies and partners who host US troops.

Allies such as the Ukraine? CNN, if you have their names then Texas has rope.

Trump made the intervention on the day the House launched its public impeachment trial.

Hehheh.

In the days afterward, the tensions between the Pentagon and the White House became concentrated on Gallagher, whose cause had been taken up by Fox News’ personalities.

After military officials started Gallagher’s review, Trump vowed on Twitter that he would never permit the Navy to revoke the Gallagher’s membership of the elite group.
Spencer had indicated publicly that he felt the review should proceed, telling the audience at the Halifax Security Forum in Nova Scotia, Canada, that “the process matters for good order and discipline.”

Behind the scenes, he proposed to the White House that Gallagher’s review go ahead, but offered a secret guarantee that Gallagher would be allowed to keep his status as a Navy SEAL, according to the senior defense official.

The Deep State wants Gallagher gone in a really bad way. I begin to wonder if liberals want to fast-track the convergence of American special forces in order to have alternative “cleanup crews” to the Clinton Machine. Competition lowers prices! Or as the next contingency plan against a “flawed” Presidential election.

The move prompted Esper’s decision to ask for Spencer’s resignation, according to Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman. The defense official said that Spencer’s decision to circumvent his chain of command — namely Esper — and go straight to the White House was a violation of military policy.

Moreover, Spencer’s private request to restore Gallagher’s rank and allow him to retire with his Trident pin contradicted his public position, according to the statement. The Trident Pin, which is worn by Navy SEALs, is awarded following their completion of an intense qualification course and symbolizes membership of the elite military community.

“I am deeply troubled by this conduct shown by a senior DOD official,” Esper said in the statement. “Unfortunately, as a result I have determined that Secretary Spencer no longer has my confidence to continue in his position. I wish Richard well.”

And the horse he rode in on.

Pocket Punch Misses the Point

One of my more controversial beliefs is that women shouldn’t be trained or expected to wield weapons. By way of example, some U of Texas students have invented a new self-defense weapon for women: plastic knuckles! Like brass knuckles but with designer colors and a keychain.

This puts the Purse in Personal Defense!

UT students create device that packs a punch in tackling campus safety

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/ut-students-create-device-that-packs-a-punch-in-tackling-campus-safety

by Gabriela VidalThursday, November 14th 2019

Five University of Texas at Austin students are channeling their safety concerns on campus into a powerful new self-defense tool.

“Personally, I have felt unsafe walking home from campus, especially at night,” said Senior and engineering student Sydney Marvin.

It is a feeling these students say crept up on them following the murder of a UT student in 2016. Haruka Weiser, 18, was walking at night when she was killed by Meechaiel Criner.

Segue

Haruka Weiser: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

A theater and dance freshman at the University of Texas was found dead on campus in mysterious circumstances on April 5. On April 7, a statement from the school’s president, Gregory L. Fenves, confirmed the identity of the victim as 18-year-old Haruka Weiser who was originally from Portland.

Per a nationwide survey, the virginity rate of theater students is 0%. She was headhunted to UT-Austin so had some legit dance skills.

The Austin Statesman reports that Weiser’s family still live in Oregon. The newspaper adds that the family were all together during a trip to Mexico over spring break.

On her Facebook page, it’s clear that Weiser enjoyed traveling. There are photos from 2013 and 2014 showing her in Europe with her family. While pictures from earlier in 2016 show her in Asia and in a statement her family said Weiser planned to travel to Japan in the summer of 2016 to visit family.

Weiser had ridden dick on three continents. That’s how you end up dead, ladies, by being stupid. Not because you weren’t packing heat while being stupid.

A family member told the Austin Statesman that Weiser also had dreams of going into some kind of medical field and planned to eventually double major in medicine.

That would have meant she was following in the footsteps of her father, Dr. Thomas Weiser. According to his Facebook page, he’s a graduate of UC Davis School of Medicine.

She wanted to please her father… eh, after riding the carousel into the ground.

Weiser wrote, “My favorite styles of dance are ballet and hip-hop. I love the precision and grace of ballet, but at the same time, I enjoy the freedom and challenges I find in hip-hop.”

Soooo not a virgin.

This is the first time that there has been an on-campus murder investigation at the University of Texas since 1966.

She was last seen leaving the drama building at around 9:30 p.m. on [Sunday] April 3. Her room mates called police later that night when they never heard from her.

Haruka Weiser University of Texas Waller Creek Dead Killed Murder

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3537649/Murdered-Texas-ed-18-sexually-assaulted-strangled-troubled-homeless-teen-17-dumped-body-creek.html

Law enforcement officials, who aren’t authorized to speak publicly about the investigation, told the Austin American-Statesman that 18-year-old Haruka Weiser was sexually assaulted shortly before her death on Sunday, April 3.

Homeless teen Meechaeiel Khalil Criner, 17, was seen stalking the UT student from a dance class that night and then emerging from the creek area about two hours later with Weiser’s bike and duffel bag.

Meechaiel Khalili Criner (pictured) was arrested on April 7 on charges of first-degree murder in the death of University of Texas freshman Haruka Weiser

Surveillance [showed] a black male dressed in a black jacket, orange shirt and grey pants. He was around 6 ft tall and of athletic build.

The surveillance shows him arriving on campus at 9.20 pm, where he is seen looking round and then leaves. He then returns to where a van was parked at 9.38 pm.

As he returns to his bike, a female dressed in all black and looking at her cell phone is then seen walking towards the alumni center.

Weapons can’t compensate for zero situational awareness.

The figure passes the suspect and then continues towards the bridge, the suspect appears to watch her and puts the kickstand of the bike down.

He then reaches into his pants with his left hand and pulls out what appears to be a shiny ridged object.

The suspect then follows the female across the bridge and onto the sidewalk that extends behind the Alumni center and runs along west bank of Waller Creek.

Then, at 11.47 pm the suspect is seen walking along the side of the same bike, but now has some type of injury to his left leg and is carrying a bag.

End segue.

“And that was when we were applying to UT,” said senior Margy McCallum, “And I remember coming into UT and you know, just feeling that fear.”

Margy, you went to a college knowing you would be afraid of getting stabbed there? It’s like that “25% of college women get raped” statistic. If you thought that was true then why would you go? Even unlit crack alleys don’t have a 25% rape rate but you wimminz will go into debt for the opportunity to not be loyal wives.

Just a year later, in 2017, 19-year-old Harrison Brown was fatally stabbed.

Segue again.

https://patch.com/texas/downtownaustin/4-reportedly-stabbed-ut-austin-campus

AUSTIN, TX — A male student was killed and three others injured Monday when a fellow student, reportedly armed with a hunting knife, walked around the Gregory Gym area of campus and attacked the four students, UT Austin Police Chief David Carter said at a press conference Monday.

Carter said police received a call around 1:45 p.m. about an individual who assaulted someone outside the Gregory Gym. An officer was on the scene in less than two minutes and saw a person walking away from a student who was lying on the ground, Carter said. Police were immediately able to take the suspect, identified as Kendrex J. White, 21, into custody.

Authorities found that within a block of where the student had been attacked, there were three more victims, all male students, who had been stabbed. One of the students died from his injuries, and the rest were taken to Brackenridge Hospital for treatment.

Not a sex crime. Happened in broad daylight.

In a press conference following the attack, Carter said the suspect “calmly walked around the plaza,” attacking the four students.

https://patch.com/texas/downtownaustin/ut-austin-students-killer-ruled-not-guilty-reason-insanity

AUSTIN, TEXAS — The man charged in the fatal stabbing attack that led to the death of a University of Texas at Austin freshman last year was found not guilty by reason of insanity on Tuesday, according to reports.

The ruling means Kendrex White will not spend any time in prison for the May 2017 killing of Harrison Brown but instead be sent to a maximum security mental health facility. State District Judge Tamara Needles made the ruling after White was indicted in July 2017 on a first-degree murder charge and three counts of aggravated assault for the stabbing spree that left others injured outside the campus gymnasium.

In issuing her ruling, State District Judge Tamara Needles agreed with a doctor’s assessment that White was in the throes of severe mental illness and unable to distinguish between right and wrong when he stabbed Brown.

Kendrex White: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

End segue.

“You’re skeptical all the time now, like what if something like that were to happen again,” said Megan Doyle.

In the former murder, the victim was begging for it with her bad choices. In the latter, there wasn’t a CCW or ninja around when one was needed. A problem for men to handle, as that situation demonstrated.

So when Marvin, McCallum, Doyle, Ashley Raymond and Danna Tao joined forces for a class business project, they decided to create a device that put power and confidence in the hands of students.

Notably lacking in that list is skill, upper-body strength and a dominant/aggressive personality.

That project became “Pocket Punch.” It is a four-in-one tool that includes a flashlight, alarm, pepper spray and durable plastic knuckles all in one. They are now working on making that product available for students to buy.

Smartphones have an app for two of those already. Me being a street veteran who has used pepper spray in a dogfight, let’s take a look at the device.

I know plastic bludgeoning weapons can be useful… got me a plastic tonfa for training… but this plastic doesn’t look adequate for repeated use. There are ridges on the fingerholes to increase strike pressure but their small size suggests they were limited in order to avoid serious harm to the attacker, which is unacceptable outside the dojo.

The concept of integrating pepper spray into brass knuckles sounds gimmicky–I think pepper spray in general is gimmicky–but there is one good point here, that it’ll be pointed in the right direction once the knuckles are on correctly. And that’s the problem, “on correctly” will take more time than a self-defense situation allows. If you’re going to rock the oleo capsicum then choose a can & holster such that it’ll be aimed correctly the instant you draw it.

The bottom of your purse/pocket/belt bag is not a holster. Neither is the plastic knuckles. That nozzle is asking to get clogged with pocket lint.

The keychain is just stupid, like wrapping your grocery list around your rifle scope. Can you say “brandishing a weapon in public”?

“We just felt that there was a need for it, and most people we know face that need, but kind of use their car keys as a fix all solution,” said McCallum. “A lot of competitors that we’ve looked into have less functions than us, and even their products are more expensive.”

“Fewer” functions, college girl, and simplicity is a benefit not a drawback. They cost more because they aren’t literally made of recycled ocean garbage.

They say the device will cost $29.99 and feature the option to buy a retractable keychain for students to have quicker access to the pocket punch.

My plastic tonfa cost half that and it’s a real weapon, at least until I forget the skull isn’t a valid strike zone and break it on some asshole.

“We wanted to come up with a solution that would work as an intimidation factor and keep the device securely in their hand,” said Danna Tao.

Intimidation means open carry, not concealed carry, and brass knuckles on short, twiggy arms is not intimidating regardless.

“Our pepper spray will have a lock on the firing mechanism so it doesn’t accidentally spray at some point, and then also our alarm will have a safety mechanism to not sound off in class,” said Marvin.

Why not just scream like a little girl? Seeing as you’re a little girl.

While these students have been working on the device for a couple of semesters, legally, they had to wait until after September 1 to start building a model they could sell. The state of Texas legalized the use of “knuckles” as a safety device in the last legislative session.

“We kind of had to put a pause on our project until it was legalized because we couldn’t print 3D knuckles or anything of that sort,” said Raymond.

Even in Texas, you now need government permission to defend yourself?

They have even consulted with UT Police about launching their product.

“I just think it gives them that extra empowerment, and it also gives them that chance to think about their surroundings and what’s going on,” said Captain Laura Davis, “And [it] put[s] them in the mindset to be able to defend themselves if that had to happen.”

Couldn’t find a pic. But college girls AREN’T going to defend herself with this gadget. Men are not women. Knuckles don’t kill people; the testosterone-fueled muscles behind them kill people.

These young entrepreneurs say securing funding has been a learning experience.

“Unfortunately, on some of those big crowdfunding websites, our product falls under the category of weapon replica,” said Tao.

Maybe hot pink isn’t the intimidation factor you’re looking for.

Still, they are moving forward and hoping to secure funds for the project through their GoFundMe campaign. Since launching their website last week, more than 100 people are on a waitlist to buy a “Pocket Punch.” The students are also in talks with potential investors.

They hope to have it available to students on UT’s campus by early 2020 and eventually expand their sales to other college campuses.

“Primarily we want to start with students here on campus and their parents, to make those connections,” said Doyle.

I can’t wait to report on the dead female wearing Pocket Punches in a year or two.

The Sandman Heralds the Apocalypse

Do you know what the joke is?

Question: what happens if the Communists take over the Sahara Desert? Answer: in ten years, a shortage of sand!

Do you know what the joke isn’t?

It isn’t funny anymore.

Why the world is running out of sand

htt ps://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191108-why-the-world-is-running-out-of-sand

South African entrepreneur shot dead in September. Two Indian villagers killed in a gun battle in August. A Mexican environmental activist murdered in June.

Though separated by thousands of miles, these killings share an unlikely cause. They are some of the latest casualties in a growing wave of violence sparked by the struggle for one of the 21st Century’s most important, but least appreciated, commodities: ordinary sand.

Trivial though it may seem, sand is a critical ingredient of our lives. It is the primary raw material that modern cities are made from. The concrete used to construct shopping malls, offices, and apartment blocks, along with the asphalt we use to build roads connecting them, are largely just sand and gravel glued together. The glass in every window, windshield, and smart phone screen is made of melted-down sand. And even the silicon chips inside our phones and computers – along with virtually every other piece of electronic equipment in your home – are made from sand.

And where is the problem with that, you might ask? Our planet is covered in it. Huge deserts from the Sahara to Arizona have billowing dunes of the stuff. Beaches on coastlines around the world are lined with sand. We can even buy bags of it at our local hardware shop for a fistful of small change.

But believe it or not, the world is facing a shortage of sand. How can we possibly be running low on a substance found in virtually every country on earth and that seems essentially limitless?

Sand, however, is the most-consumed natural resource on the planet besides water. People use some 50 billion tonnes of “aggregate” – the industry term for sand and gravel, which tend to be found together – every year. That’s more than enough to blanket the entire United Kingdom.

The problem lies in the type of sand we are using. Desert sand is largely useless to us. The overwhelming bulk of the sand we harvest goes to make concrete, and for that purpose, desert sand grains are the wrong shape. Eroded by wind rather than water, they are too smooth and rounded to lock together to form stable concrete.

Seems there’d be an easy way to alter that sand, once the natural sources become inadequate. Nothing capitalist market forces can’t handle.

The sand we need is the more angular stuff found in the beds, banks, and floodplains of rivers, as well as in lakes and on the seashore. The demand for that material is so intense that around the world, riverbeds and beaches are being stripped bare, and farmlands and forests torn up to get at the precious grains. And in a growing number of countries, criminal gangs have moved in to the trade, spawning an often lethal black market in sand.

“Take a memo, Tony. No more dirt naps. That stuff’s the new dope!”

The main driver of this crisis is breakneck urbanisation. Every year there are more and more people on the planet, with an ever growing number of them moving from the rural countryside into cities, especially in the developing world. Across Asia, Africa, and Latin America, cities are expanding at a pace and on a scale far greater than any time in human history.

The number of people living in urban areas has more than quadrupled since 1950 to some 4.2 billion today, and the United Nations predicts another 2.5 billion will join them in the next three decades. That’s the equivalent of adding eight cities the size of New York every single year.

UN predictions aren’t worth dirt… which can be valuable… but I hadn’t realized industrialization had been occurring at such a furious pace outside the West. It isn’t a good trend when mixed with the rise of international socialism because cities require infrastructure maintenance and a minimal level of social discipline, particularly on the part of leaders. Socialism plus urbanization is a recipe for slavery, if not the apocalypse.

Applying the alt-Right meme of Diversity + Proximity = War, the world stage is being set for some serious ugliness.

The rest of the article is typical, hypocritical environmentalist whining, but I was curious about the abovementioned crimes.

José Luis Álvarez Flores, an environmental activist in the southern Mexican state of Chiapas who campaigned against illegal sand mining in a local river, was shot dead in June. A note threatening his family and other activists was reportedly found with his body. Two months later, police in Rajasthan, India, were shot at when they tried to stop a convoy of tractors carrying illegally mined sand. The ensuing gun battle left two miners dead and two police officers hospitalised. And early this year, a sand miner in South Africa was shot seven times in a dispute with another group of miners.

The Marxist globalists are taking over the entire planet, and the shortage of building materials demonstrates how determined they are to centralize humanity for ease of control. The first horseman of the Apocalypse?