Advertisements

Category Archives: justice

Filthy Antifa Whore Lies

Normally, I wouldn’t call someone a Filthy Antifa Whore (FAW). However, since Moldylocks, who was shown getting punched out at this weekend’s Berkeley protests by some dude everyone claims is a fascist/racist/neo-nazi/somethingorother, is a nasty, unwashed, slovenly sow, and since she did, in fact, demonstrate riot, throw bottles, and assault people at a rally for a President whom she apparently does not like, and since there are photos of said skank on the Internet baring her unshaven, unwashed, beaver and sprocket, that probably reek of week-old garbage and decaying pork, wide for the world – and presumably her parents – to see, I think FAW is appropriate.

No, I’m not giving you a link, pervs. When I ran across it while doing an image search on the protests the other day, I’m pretty sure I developed a severe case of post-traumatic stress, and I may or may not have gone blind for an unspecified period of time, while desperately stumbling around my house trying to find enough brain bleach to erase that image from my mind forever. Suffice it to say that cum-gurgling sausage junkie gives the term “bearded clam” an entire new meaning.

Her mommy and daddy must be so proud!

The FAW decided to speak out to the uber-friendly media – journowhores who will take any opportunity to make Trump supporters or anyone who didn’t worship at the cankles of Queen Pantsuit – look like a horde of fascist monkeys.

She was just a peaceable protester, you see.

She was just there to show her support, you see.

They were “rushed” by the counter-demonstrators, you see.

Her boyfriend disappeared, you see (oh-so-brave soul, who probably saw some pissed off demonstrators, who decided they’d had just about enough bullshit from the black-clad fascist crowd, and decided to hide, while his filthy hippie whore decided to engage in some assault) and she was just trying to protect herself.

“There was no time for emotion,” she said. “I was just terrified. I didn’t have time to process what was happening to me. All I knew was I was trying to find my boyfriend and not get hit…When it was happening I realized they were trying to crack my skull on the curb and on the rocks in the planter.”

During the entire attack, Rosealma said she never saw any Berkeley police officers. She also said the attack was unprovoked.

“I didn’t exchange words with anyone,” she said. “I was just standing there.”

Funny how the journaljizzer reporting on this story didn’t include photos that clearly show the FAW is lying.

Like this.

Oh, whoops! Who would that be holding a bottle with the all-telling dreadlocks snaking out from under her hat?

And who would this be, viciously attacking that guy before getting “equal treatment” at the hands of her would-be victim?

Oh, did you want a clearer photo of the FAW getting her ass handed to her as she holds said bottle?

What’s that red arrow pointing to? Would that be a bottle? Gee, but she was just an innocent protester, lending her support, right? She only accidentally ran into that guy’s fist!

And she didn’t plan on violence, right?

Except that she did. Publicly. On Facebook. With her barely literate minions encouraging her “beat they ass.” Of course, now her account has been locked tight, but the Internet is forever, you noxious cum dumpster, and there are plenty of screen shots out there.

None of the “news” outlets covering this story mention this awkwardly inconvenient visual evidence. None of them even tried to appear balanced in any way! They’re simply all falling all over themselves to paint this hairy, walking septic tank of spectacular FAIL as a victim.

I’m used to the media being a completely biased, cocked up horde of communist-fellating fucknozzles. But to pretend to be objective, when there’s so much visual evidence available that contradicts the FAW’s claim of innocent victimhood? Come on!

She was not a victim. She was not innocent. She came to that protest fully prepared to attack those who dared to hold different political views than she did. What she didn’t expect is for the targets of her rage boner to fight back.

Recall when I said to prepare for civil war?

Just remember how that fucking fist felt cracking into your face, you miserable, lying sack of cunt. I’m pretty sure no one is going to play nice with you any longer.

Karma is a bitch.

Advertisements

Detroit Doctor’s Defense About as Convincing as ISIS Promising Women’s Suffrage

A Detroit doctor was arrested recently for performing female genital mutilation (FGM) on little girls as young as six years old! I had to step back a bit and take deep breaths before writing about this, because every time I looked at her foul face, I wanted to rip it off and feed it to swine. How anyone could do something like this – a doctor, who has sworn to do no harm – to an innocent little kid in order to ensure these little girls never enjoy sex and never become intimate with their loved one without mass amounts of pain, all in the name of chastity!

The story is sickening. Little children forced by their mothers to spread for this the Johns Hopkins-educated “physician,” and be mutilated after what appears to have been an anesthetic shot. Yeah, they were fully awake.

The girl said she took off her pants and underwear and laid on an examining table with her knees spread apart and that the doctor “pinched” her on the place she goes “pee.”

Also on April 10, the second girl told investigators she came to Detroit and went to a doctor’s office.

The girl also identified Dr. Nagarwala as the doctor she saw in Detroit and that the doctor took off her pants and underwear and put her on a table. The girl told investigators she “got a shot” on her upper right thigh and that it hurt and she screamed.

This twisted, sick sow mutilated little girls for her warped religious faith, and the mothers who dragged their kids to undergo this procedure, lying to them about what they were about to undergo, need to be prosecuted as well. This is believed to be the first criminal case that’s brought under the law that criminalizes FGM in the United States. Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Blanco said, “According to the complaint, despite her oath to care for her patients, Dr. Nagarwala is alleged to have performed horrifying acts of brutality on the most vulnerable victims.” Good for Mr. Blanco and good for the DOJ for having the balls to bring this odious gargoyle to justice.

And no, this certainly is not the same as circumcision, that’s performed widely not just for religious purposes, but also for health and hygiene. There are people who argue about the health benefits and some frothing adult douche freaks who actually affix weights to their junk in order to stretch the skin back over the head of their penis, after being circumcised as infants, but ultimately, it’s a relatively safe choice that has no impact on sexual pleasure and is certainly not performed to ensure sexual activity is so unpleasant and painful that the patient shies away from sexual activity until absolutely necessary for procreation!

While parents may make the decision for their infant – and in some cases, more grown male individuals make that decision for themselves – there’s a lack of overwhelming medical evidence that the child experiences long term harm from the procedure.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization says there is no health benefit to FGM, but there’s certainly a lot of harm.

  • Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
  • The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
  • Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths.

While little girls in backwater shitholes are getting mutilated with dirty implements, rusty blades, and even broken glass by untrained hags who apparently enjoy ensuring that little girls grow up just as miserable and deformed as they were, incidents of harm and injury in male circumcision are rather rare, depending on age and implements used, according to the WHO.

Neonatal circumcision is a simpler procedure than adult circumcision and very low rates of complications (0.2–0.4%) have been consistently reported in large series of neonatal circumcisions in the United States of America and Israel (143, 154– 157). Most of these are relatively minor (bleeding and excess skin) but definition of “complication” varies – for example in one of these studies (157), the rate of “significant” complications (systemic infections, haemorrhage in a patient with factor VII deficiency, circumcisions of infants with hypospadias, denudation of the penile shaft) was 0.2%, but 2% of patients had some complication (mainly bleeding or infection).

The purpose differs. The procedure differs. The outcome differs.

One can oppose male circumcision and make that choice accordingly for their offspring, but you’d have to be an ignoramus not to see the difference between a procedure designed to keep girls chaste and pure until the husband decides it’s time to play by taking away her desire to be physically close with someone she loves and a procedure that for the most part has no lasting deleterious effects and has some documented health benefits.

For her part Nagarwala claimed in court that she merely removed “a mucus membrane from the genitals” for religious reasons, which was wrapped up and given to the parents to bury — a practice the defense claims is performed by a small sect of Indian-based Islam called Dawoodi Bohra. Of course, the women of Dawoodi Bohra would beg to differ. A total of 98 percent of respondents in a recent online survey said they were subjected to the practice known as khatna or khafd, which involves cutting the tip of the clitoris, and 81 percent of them said they were not okay with the procedure.

Nagarwala’s defense doesn’t hold water. She mutilated these children – while they were fully conscious – for her skewed religious ideals. This wasn’t harmless and it wasn’t a membrane. She scarred these children, and she should rot in prison.

If there’s any justice in this world, she’ll get “circumcised.” With a rusty shiv.

Entitlement Mentality

Recently Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor sat down with Aspen Institute’s Latinos and Society Program Executive Director Abigail Golden-Vazquez for a chat about civic engagement, Latinos, and opportunities. I will say I agree with her on the importance of education and civic engagement – not just for Latinos, but for everyone! The issues she discussed aren’t endemic to just Latinos. When she says, “None of us can afford to be bystanders in life. We create our community, and we create it by being active participants in our community,” it shouldn’t be limited to Latinos, or to anyone of a particular ethnicity, religious affiliation or lack thereof.

A lot of the challenges with a lack of civic participation are not limited to Latinos. When Sotomayor says, “If you’re working 14 hours a day at your job, it is hard to make time for civic participation. And for many Latinos, that’s the quality of their life. We have to engage with that reality,” this is not an insurmountable problem faced only by Latinos. It’s one that plagues much of the working class. Latinos aren’t the only ones working multiple jobs more than 14 hours per day and the weekends. But we make time, and we do what we can. And sometimes we don’t get a lot of sleep. And many times we don’t have free time on the weekends. That’s just the way it is, but we sacrifice for the things that are important. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that.

And no, it’s not fair that some people inherit immense wealth, giving them opportunities to attend the best schools without accruing massive debt.

And no, it’s not fair that some kids get to grow up without ever worrying about how much something costs, while others – that’s their first concern.

And no, it’s not fair that some kids grow up in cramped apartments, while others live in opulent mansions.

There are a lot of things that aren’t fair. Life isn’t fair. And yet, we all work to make our own opportunities.

Which is why this bit from Sotomayor’s conversation galled me.

“There’s a continuing tension in America between the image of the person who pulls themselves up by the bootstraps, and the person who believes that you need a lift to get up sometimes,” Sotomayor told the program’s executive director, Abigail Golden-Vazquez. “Those people who believe that everyone must pull themselves up ― they don’t believe that people are entitled to help.”

“For those of us who understand that sometimes no matter how tall the heel on your boot is, the barrier is so high that you need a small lift to help you get over it ― they will understand that the inequalities in society build that barrier so high,” she continued. “Unless you do something to knock it down or help that person up, they will never have a chance. I had those things. I had a unique mother who was able to understand the benefits of education and encouraged me to use education as my liftoff. But not everyone knows that.”

For a jurist on the nation’s highest court, perhaps she needs a lesson in English.

It’s not that we don’t believe in help. I’m more than happy to help – whether it’s by donating time or money – those who are in need. But there’s a difference between asking for help and being entitled to it.

The definition of “entitled” is: believing oneself to be inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.

Sorry, but this is where she lost me.

No one is ENTITLED to my help.

No one is ENTITLED to the fruits of my labor.

No one is ENTITLED to what I earn – to assets that should be going, first and foremost, to help me and my family – simply because they consider themselves deserving of said assets.

Need is not a claim check.

It’s not a claim check to my work. It’s not a claim check to the fruits of my efforts. It’s not a claim check to my sympathies.

No one is entitled to anything produced by another person without that person’s willingness to give it. The value people get in exchange for helping others is determined by that person alone – whether it’s the satisfaction of helping a fellow human being, or a promise of repayment or work – and not by politicians in power who think that forcing people to give up their earnings to “help,” which usually comes in the form of a handout that keeps people dependent or a bureaucracy that does squat, is the way to get those greedy rich people to contribute.

Everyone understands that sometimes people need a hand. It’s just that we also understand that undermining others to level the playing field is not really leveling the playing field, but crippling others so everyone exists on the same field of misery. That’s not helping those who need help. It’s merely crippling the competition, and negating the need for the person to put forth effort to help themselves.

That’s what I think about when I see this graphic.

It’s not just taking away two boxes from the tall person, who can see over the fence. What Sotomayor and other statist politicians want is to cripple the tall person, so they can’t stand to see at all. They want equality of outcome at any cost – even at the cost of crippling those they consider privileged.

Equality of opportunity is equality before the law. It’s the understanding that you will not be prevented by those in power from pursuing your goals, whether they’re educational, professional, or personal.

The graphic depicts equality of outcome, which looks really good in that little picture, but assumes silliness, such as 1) the tall person needs the box to see in the first place 2) there exists an equal number of boxes 3) the tall person wouldn’t willingly give up the box they don’t need to help out the short person, and 4) the means to sustain your family, the fruits of your labor, the value of your work, the results of your achievements are somehow identical to a fucking box!

You take away a box from the tall guy in that graphic, the worst that will happen is he won’t see a baseball game.

You disadvantage a kid because you feel he’s too privileged by giving away an educational opportunity to someone you consider underprivileged, but who may not have earned it, and you have just figuratively crippled him.

You reject a college applicant, who may have higher grades, who may have worked harder, and who may have participated in more extracurricular activities in favor of a poor kid, who may have had to work after school to help support his family, or just didn’t have the talent or the drive to get the grades, and all you’ve done is taken away an opportunity from one human being and handed it to another, with the government as the arbiter of who is more deserving, rather than objective achievement.

You deny a job to an applicant with superior skills, because said applicant happens to be white/cis/male/*insert privilege here*, and you’ve just screwed a superior applicant AND your company, or worse yet, you’ve allowed the government to do it for you – to pick a winner and loser based on arbitrary politicians’ whims.

You take earnings away from one family to feed/clothe/educate another – even though may be a noble goal – and that’s that much less that family has to spend on their own food, on their own sick kids, on their ailing parents, on their leaking roof, or their car repairs.

Helping a person up does not and should not mean, crippling another to “level the playing field.”

And yes, sometimes life is unfair. Yes, some people are more fortunate than others. But to people like Sotomayor, “pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps” is somehow a negative thing, because we won’t always be successful, and because we have to work harder than some others to succeed. She assumes that certain demographics simply CAN’T succeed and achieve without government force giving them an advantage.

I find that to be an abhorrent prejudice against said demographics. Fact is they can and do succeed. You can’t tell me that Do Won Chang, who started Forever 21 after immigrating to the United States from South Korea, in 1981 and worked three jobs simultaneously, as a gas station clerk, a janitor and a coffee shop employee had a level playing field. No, he simply worked harder, even though he started out penniless, without much English, and without a college degree.

My own parents came to this country without English, and with $300 in their pockets, and they are now comfortably retired – without ever having asked the government for a hand up, because they didn’t feel they were entitled to it.

People can and do succeed, even without the advantage of starting out rich. To claim they cannot, because they have brown or black skin, and therefore are in more need of help than others, is a pernicious, racist lie.

Monsters Among Us

If you haven’t heard the story of the man who repeatedly raped his 12-year-old daughter, you should go read it. A Montana man raped his daughter. A judge handed down what basically is a 43-day sentence, when all was said and done. The man’s wife saw the rape and not only did nothing about it, but wrote to the judge asking for a light sentence, claiming she wanted his “children [to] have an opportunity to heal the relationship with their father.”

The victim’s grandmother echoed this, calling the man’s behavior “horrible” but stating that the man’s children, “especially his sons, will be devastated if their Dad is no longer part of their lives.”

No one spoke for the victim. No one. 

It’s not often that I find myself speechless, but there are no words to describe these monsters. 

The monster who raped his own child. 

The monster who did nothing to protect her daughter and who wanted her husband released back into society to possibly rape children again, and who used her sons as tools to accomplish that end, and who would expose those boys to the twisted fiend who raped their sister. 

The monster who echoed those sentiments and would expose her grandchildren to this bag of rancid shit. 

And the monster who handed down this absurd sentence, who failed to protect the children from this repugnant threat, who refused to protect society by allowing him to exist in it, and not in prison, where the criminals would tear his asshole so hard, you could drive a VW bus filled with illegals through it, and who would not attain justice for one traumatized little girl. This monster will be allowed to retire with full benefits. 

The judge, in response to nationwide outrage, wrote that this was his attempt “to encourage and provide opportunities for an offender’s self-improvement, rehabilitation and reintegration back into a community.”

Let’s get this straight. There’s no rehabilitation for someone who rapes – RAPES – his 12 year old child! 

None. 

This is someone you either lock away in a dank dungeon forever, or put down line a rabid animal so that he never walks among people again! 

This is not a mistake. This is not illness. This is evil. Pure, unmitigated evil. And it I had my way, this evil would be eradicated from this world, along with the rancid cunts who supported it and did nothing to protect this innocent child!

My friend Patrick Richardson, the managing editor of the Pittsburg Morning Sun, quoted author S.M. Stirling in his column yesterday, “Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.”

And he, like the rest of us, is sick and tired of society allowing acts of sheer evil to go unpunished. 

Say a kid catches a shoplifting beef. First time around he gets probation. Probably unsupervised or pretty minimal supervision. Now let’s say he doesn’t have the best parents. So at most he catches hell for the fine, but they’ve caught their own share of cases so they don’t do much — not that they would anyway.

He’ll catch a few more minor misdemeanors while a juvenile, each a little more serious than the last, but still, no real teeth to anything.

Then he turns 18 and that juvie record goes away.

But no one has ever told him “no,” he’s never had any real discipline and has the usual attitude of the habitually criminal “You can’t make me do nothin’!”

So as an adult he catches a few more misdemeanors, at most a few days in the county lockup, fines he won’t pay, and probation.

First felony is probably drugs or minor theft, maybe burglary. Presumptive probation cases and he’s been on probation on and off since he was 13, so who cares?
He’ll catch four or five more of those before he finally commits ENOUGH crimes, or one serious enough that he’s going to prison.

By this time he’s probably in his early 30s. Never held a job that didn’t involve a hair net and saying “would you like fries with that?” and never held one of those for more than a few months, maybe a year, before his boss talked to him in a way he didn’t like and he either quit or got fired because “you can’t make me do nothin’!”

By the time he catches a sanction with any real teeth in it, he’s a lost cause. A habitual criminal, no education, dumb as a post, but with a certain animal cunning, good at manipulating people and the system and no more between him and his will than a wolf has.

Make no mistake – this is very relevant to the situation. 

If we, as a society, continue to make excuses for criminal acts, and don’t hold those among us accountable for their actions, we are sending a message to the youngest and most impressionable among us that intentional criminal acts – from simple theft, to rape, to murder – will be forgiven with little to no consequences. 

If we allow a man who has violated his own child in the most despicable and morally repugnant way, to walk free and go home to play with his boys, and probably rape again, the boys will learn that even an act as odious as the rape of a little child, goes unpunished by society, and is therefore OK. 

If we don’t slap them on the hand as kids, and tell them “NO!” in no uncertain terms, and then show them that every act has a consequence – from small to huge – we will have many more monsters walking among us!

Feral Kids

I was abused when I was a kid in the Soviet Union. I have written about it in the past. Gangs of kids would team up to beat on me, or worse ignore me, leaving me out of playground games, forcing me to watch wistfully from a swing while they built forts and played together.

When Danny was born, I promised myself I would raise him to be a kind individual. I taught him to take care of animals. He was gentle and beautiful. He loved everyone. We would discuss various situations, ostracized kids, making friends, etc. He was pretty lonely when he first started high school, and it broke my heart when he told me on one of his first days, “maybe tomorrow someone will talk to the short, redheaded kid” with such complete innocence and earnestness!

And I was so proud when I read the following on his Twitter feed a couple of years ago!


Kids can be pretty horrible. They’re feral. They travel in packs, because they feel more powerful that way. When you think about it, they don’t have a whole lot control. Adults tell them what to do – many times without giving them reasons they can understand. So they compensate by exerting what control they can over others.

Kids are like sharks. They can smell weakness, and they exploit it, because it gives them the sense of power they lack in their lives. And unless taught otherwise, they’re mean, awful bastards.

Sometimes the awfulness is extreme.

A little boy, who has trouble communicating and hearing, was set in fire by another kid.

Set. On. Fire.

More than 20 percent of Kayden’s body was burned, from his ears to his belly button.

[The victim’s aunt Kelly] Mack said the 10-year-old was playing in a field with two other children when one boy doused him with gasoline and another set him on fire off Wallace Street in Kerrville on Sunday afternoon. The floor of a shed also burned.

When I read this, I felt physically ill.

What kind of parents raise such a monster? A sociopath who sets another child – a child with special needs – a child who is different and weaker – on fire!

A monster who tries to destroy someone different to assert its power and control!

I realize bad seeds do happen. I realize that despite parents’ best efforts, sometimes badly wired beasts appear.

But I would submit that’s rare. Most of the time parents just don’t raise their kids. They toss them into the system and think that schools, teachers, nannies, whatever will take care of them. They abdicate their parental responsibility, because they have lives, or they have careers, or they feel the kids have enough guidance in school.

Look, I know in this economy many times both parents have to work. I was a single parent for several years after my divorce. I worked two jobs. I get it.

But never – NOT ONCE – did I not insist on dinner together, on conversations with my kids, on teachable moments! Not once did I not supplement what they learned in school with different views or alternate information!

Yeah, it was hard. I averaged maybe 4-5 hours of sleep in those days. I worked my second job on the weekends. But I knew that involvement in my kids’ lives meant they would grow to be decent human beings, and there was no way I would abdicate that responsibility! I owed them that much.

What kind of neglect… what kind of complete lack of involvement and discipline… what kind of lack of awareness of the child who is growing up in your own home could cause them to set another human being on fire merely for being different, or perceived weaker? What kind of environment allows this “Lord of the Flies” miscreant to flourish?

A couple of seasons ago, “The Walking Dead” aired an episode in which one of the characters had to kill a young girl who had killed her own sister and was about to murder a baby – not because she was evil, but because she didn’t understand death and what it meant.

Some people went apeshit, claiming that the show had gone too far in its disturbing brutality – that killing a child in what essentially was capital punishment was too much.

But you know what? I wrote then, as I do now, that sometimes neutralizing the threat is necessary – regardless of what kind of package that threat comes in. That’s reality, boys and girls. Sometimes those threats come in cute little packages – PACKAGES THAT SET OTHER CHILDREN ON FIRE!

Sometimes these bad seeds need to be taken out of society, because it’s too risky to allow them to live among us.

Go ahead, and be upset at my advocating the killing of a child. Mommy and daddy should have thought about perhaps ingraining in their spawn a respect for life, a kindness toward others, a sympathy for others’ pain, and an acknowledgment that abusing and harming those who are different and who are weaker than they are is the height of evil. They should have taught that little troglodyte human decency.

But they failed, and now society has to deal with the monster they created.

Neutralize the sociopath. Get rid of it so it can never harm another child again! It wouldn’t be murder. Protecting society against murderous sociopaths such as this is our duty.

%d bloggers like this: