Sunday, March 6, 2011

We have BECOME the Philistines...

Please read this article about the insider trading trial of Raj Rajaratnam.  Notice anything?  He is spending $20 million + on his legal defense.  Think about that for a minute.  That means that no one, except the top 1/100 of 1% can afford to defend themselves against a criminal accusation by the U.S. Federal Government. So what's the difference between the U.S. or China or the Former U.S.S.R.? The charade of a trial?

Our government has run amok. Look at our expenditures. Look at our deficits.  Look at our prison population. Look at the number of foreign civilians and conscripts we kill in military conflicts.

Now read this. The government has really outdone itself here.  The U.S. Federal Government has indicted an American citizen for distributing reading material on jury nullification near the New York Federal Court House.

Now have a gander at this. The U.S. Federal Government is providing what are essentially military TANKS to local police departments. I can't be the only American that finds this disconcerting....


If you were to look up Borderline Personality Disorder in the proverbial dictionary, you would find the picture of one Ms. Rahna Reiko Rizzuto, she of "Hiroshima in the Morning" fame and a conscript of Feminist Publishing, Inc. (that's the real name of her publisher).

I gotta tell  you, we have crossed some strange f*&^ing boundary with this attempt by the FemiNazi goon squad to do I'm not really sure what.

A friend of mine from my childhood that I have become reacquainted with on FaceBook posted this youtube piece ostensibly about how advertising is committing violence against women.

As I watched I realized that I was viewing a recruiting video for a fringe religion/cult and their call for Jihad.  I look at those young, impressionable women in the viewing audience.... I see bright 18 to 22 year old undergrads being drawn into a life of misery, loneliness, anger... even rage. Granted, Jean Kilbourne's contribution to the discussion about addiction, alcoholism, and smoking is commendable.  Her thinly veiled hatred of men is not.


PioneerPreppy said...

What I find funny about the whole preview lecture is that these women have no one to blame except their own feminist ideology. They removed the rules, men never had social rules for women's actions. The feminazi's scream patriarchy and oppression but it wasn't men who told these women to ride side saddle, to not go out drinking with the guys or whatever silly rule they want to mention it was the older females who kept the young ones in line. I am sure every father was recruited into this as the enforcer but socially men always wanted women to violate the social rules laid down by the matriarchy.

Now they have removed all female pressure for social acceptance and this is what they get. These women are not making porn or posing for sexy ads, or creating their attractive looks because of forceful men they are doing it to compete with each other. Modern Western women have banished their chaperones and sneaked out for a night on the town to enjoy their own form of polyandry and exhibitionism.

Greg T. Jeffers said...


Yes... and look where it has left us. Nearly half American children born to out of wed lock - and what a passe term that is in a culture that promotes divorce more than it does marriage - 70% of African American children born to single mothers and 90% of African American kids will need food assistance from the government! WTF!!?? Who takes responsibility for this?

Now this publishing group is trying to make motherhood abandonment acceptable... I gotta go take a baby aspirin before I pop a freaking blood vessel...

PioneerPreppy said...

Marriage in the Christian European sense is not something that Africans followed anyway. At least prior to being colonized or enslaved, nor is it necessarily the cultural norm of choice since time began. I believe an argument could be made that polygamy has been the standard more often throughout history than what we had in European communities.

Many African tribes practiced a family structure not much different than what we see today with a mother providing and multiple children by different fathers. We see this today not only in the black community but increasingly in whites as well. I am not making some racial statement as much as I am pointing out that resource management caused the Northern European institutions of Christianity, family and marriage to develop due to the temperate climate.

Since we no longer have need of the harvest or storing food, family teamwork etc. these institutions begin to fall off one by one.

None of it would be possible without cheap energy and after cheap energy is gone things will balance out again. Until then we have to try and fight back against feminist and the like as only a return to the old institutions will save us.

Just my theory anyway.

Anonymous said...

Rahna Reiko Rizzuto is just another self-centered, self-indulgent human being that is in the midst of a mid-life crisis and is ditching her family in the process. There are plenty of men and women that have done this. She has had four, count 'em, four children spread over nearly 20 years. She seems smart enough to figure out what causes children. If she never wanted any, just what the hell happened? What crock o' S#!t! How does that make her a feminist role model? The acceptability and process of spinning that fiction into a feminist rant is just another fine example of what modern feminism really is. Self-indulgence institutionalized.

This is not new. I read an article in a feminist rag 30 years ago that insisted children and husbands were genetically programmed to abuse and oppress the mother. In the author's mind, all illness was feigned as a plot to get attention. Further, the mother should not contribute anything at all to raising children after the age of 2. After the second birthday, children are fully capable to take care of themselves, and all cries for help are just part of the plot to oppress mom. And that irresponsible b!tc# had children. I feel sorry for them. Nothing new.

Men that desert their children are villainized, and rightly so, by the same people that want to turn this selfish POS into a folk-hero. Disgusting.


Coal Guy

Greg T. Jeffers said...

Coal Guy:

This TRULY is an outrage... one can only hope that it boomerangs on these miscreants.

Greg T. Jeffers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

This idea of self indulgence is the corner stone of this society. It should surprise no one that it now extends to feminists and mothers.

Me, me, me, me is the moral of our society. Its effects are becoming increasingly obvious.

Anonymous said...

On another topic, I'm absolutely sure that the founding fathers had jury nullification in mind when the Constitution was written. The jury is the ultimate arbiter of whether or not a crime has been committed and a last line of defense against oppressive government. The jury decides the justness of the law as well as whether the defendant broke the law.


Coal Guy

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:04AM

Men still take heat for their irresponsibility. Women, not so much.


Coal Guy

Donal Lang said...

Taking the long view, I presume those women genetically inclined towards feminism will die out! :-)

Greg T. Jeffers said...


That is precisely my argument in one of my posts a couple weeks back...

It is IMPOSSIBLE to win a multi-generational political battle by breeding significantly less than the opposition - unless you are a nuclear armed state... and even then it just prolongs the inevitable...

Donal Lang said...

Greg; as someone who comes from a country whose indigenous population (Brits) have a declining population, to another in the same genetic dead end, perhaps we need to promote a new religion whose main tenet is to get out there right now and love thy neighbour!! ;-)

Stephen B. said...

It's a sick question, but still, if Peak People means that we not only reproduce slower, but have actual die offs due to massive and rather sudden food shortages, say from an ugly revolution nearly completely shutting Saudi Arabian oil off, I wonder how the die off is distributed throughout the world?

Does the die off hit the undeveloped world the hardest because they're already living the most on margin or does it hit places like the US, with it's even greater dependence on energy inputs for food? And if we see a major die off in nations that had been growing fastest, do those populations then head for places like the US that still have food and good land or are they suffering too much famine and poverty to even attempt the migration?

Up until recently, I always discounted the idea of a fairly steep die off, but events of late have tweaked my thinking.

Donal Lang said...

SB; I'd say the most vulnerable places are the megacities (over 10 million population) in developing countries, places like Lagos and Cairo and Mexico City. These are up to 50% squatter camps where typically 80% of any income goes on food. That means if you don't earn today, then you don't eat tomorrow.

For us, if basic foods go up 50% we just eat something else. For them a 50% hike means starvation.

Governments have encouraged this primarily because self sufficiency doesn't pay taxes, and doesn't grow export crops for foreign exchange.

Downside is there's no fallback.

Result will be mass migration to southern USA and southern Europe, mostly young males.Those left behind? Well .......

Greg T. Jeffers said...


I am doing my part

Anonymous said...


I would say compare a map compare a population density map with a precipitation map to get an idea of where is over carrying capacity. Also, consider the degree of industrialization because people that are less dependent on industrialization don’t have as far to fall. For instance the Sahara is arid and little grows there however unlike say phoenix the population density is low and the inhabitants are used to living on the meager existence it provides. On the other hand the Eastern US gets plenty of rain, well generally gets plenty of rain, however, if there isn’t food on the grocer’s shelves there will be trouble.

I don’t think you can make many broad generalizations either. For instance the poor in the city will probably suffer mightily however a peasant farmer will probably eat just fine. However I do think if there is a problem the population density is the key metric, because I think the real danger is disease.

1 of 2

Anonymous said...

2 of 2
Antibodies are made at a site that for illustration we can think of as C shaped with a small opening. In order to make antibodies we need the right molecules to bounce into the site while not having the wrong molecules also occupying the site. It is not an efferent process however as the body temperature rises the C opens up to more of a U shape. Now the right molecules bounce in much faster and the wrong molecules bounce out much faster as well as just bouncing around faster and having more energy available to overcome the activation energy. It doesn’t just increase the rate that antibodies are produced it increases it 10^8 to 10^20 times. However to do that you have to have the calories to burn; so a population that normally wouldn’t have much problem with a particular pathogen, will be devastated without sufficient food.

Look at it this way WWII killed 60 million out of a global population of 2 billion today that translates to 210 million out of a global population of 7 billion. However, after a series of famines the Black Death cut the population of Europe in half. In such a situation you can forget about modern medicine. Only isolation will help.