Wednesday, 16 May 2012

  • Trayvon Martin Insanity and Yellow Journalism

     Is there anyone out there who wants to be white that isn't?  Who want's to be white?  If your whiteness is rather dubious or completely non-existent then there is only one thing you have to do to be white.  You want to know what it is?  All you have to do is get into some kind of altercation with a black person.  It doesn't matter if they (the black person) start it, or if you start it.  It doesn't matter if you are just defending yourself or if you are a mad lunatic on a murder spree.  It's all the same.  Whatever happened and whoever started it does not matter.  Motivations and circumstances do not matter, except that it was you vs. a black person.  They can't engage in hate crimes, cannot be racist, and cannot be the ones who provoked the incident even if all the evidence indicates they did.  If you are a Native American with blatantly Amerindian features you are white.  So to sum it up, there are only two requirements for being white:

    1) Make sure you are not black.  This is important because if you're black then you are a victim, and that is all you can ever be.  Just ask the liberal media and any college professor at a state school.

    2) Make sure your "victim" or the person who attacks you is black.  Even if they attack you and in the real world you are the victim, in the PC world they are still the victim because they are black and all black people are victims (except for Kony).

    But in all seriousness, the way the liberal media handled the Zimmerman case is a disgusting shame.  The way that so many in the black community reacted is also a disgusting shame.  First of all, the LM treated Zimmerman as if he was guilty from the beginning, and tried to play him up as some kind of racist psychopath who shot an innocent black kid for no reason.  Of course, even with the few facts they let slip through (like the police reports and testimonies) it was evident to anyone with half a brain that Zimmerman was not at fault.  I knew that the theory the pro-Trayvon crowd was putting forth made no sense form the beginning.  So Zimmerman woke up one day and said "I think I will pick on a black guy today even though I am mentoring black kids to cover my hidden racism.  Then he finds this black guy, follows him, and holds a gun on him just because.  So Trayvon screams for help while Zimmerman bashes his own head into a curb, and when Zimmerman gets tired of hearing Trayvon scream he shoots him.  Right, it makes perfect sense.  But seriously, the LM slandered this guy and treated him as if he were guilty just because the other guy was black.  They tried to make the evidence fit the theory rather than the theory fit the evidence.  They also put this man's life in danger because now, regardless of what evidence comes out, there are a lot of black people who are out for his blood who are too dumb to think analytically about the evidence.  To many in the black community Zimmerman is guilty for the same reason that OJ was innocent.  Because in their minds black people can only be victims.

    If Zimmerman wanted to he has more than enough evidence in his favor to sue some major newsgroups for LIBEL and SLANDER.  I would do it if I were him as soon as I was acquited.  His life is going to be very hard now after this because of all the black people who want to kill him.  They have done this man some very real damage. 

    Also, how could anyone who sees a photo of Zimmerman ever mistake him for being white?  He has blatantly Amerindian features.  How could anyone look at this man and think he is white?

    Zimmerman

    I don't care if he's part white or part Jewish.  Obama is also part white and no one considers him to be white.  The only reason the LM called his man white is because they wanted to start a racial conflict and drag white people into it, even though white people had jack all to do with it. 

    Here are some examples of actual white men in case anyone is confused on the matter:

    picard thumbnailCAGWR045

    IF you look at the pictures you will notice that there is very little resemblance to Zimmerman.  Zimmerman looks about as white as David Midthunder or Jackie Chan.  The liberal media needs to get their head on straight, not everyone is white.  No intelligent person could honestly mistake a guy like Zimmerman for being white.  But even if he were white that would not change the facts of the case.  Zimmerman did nothing wrong.  He was only defending himself.  Even if Zimmerman had been white, and a racist nutter who killed a black guy for no reason like the Trayvon Martin crowd thinks, and like the LM wanted them to think, that would still not involve all white people.  The LM labeled him as white in order to incite hatred towards white people.  Just like they labeled both of the idiots involved in the Oklohoma killing spree as white.  One of those men was indeed white, but the other was blatantly Native American.  They even posted pictures of both men, including the blatantly Native American guy along with the articles calling them both "white men." 

    s-OKLAHOMA-SHOOTING-SPREE-large

    Seriously?  White men?  So again, the only criterion for being white according to the LM is to be non-black and get into an altercation with black people.  The LM is desperate to pigeonhole the white race as criminals and victimizers even though we are the victims more often than not.  Of course later on they came out and admitted that Jake England was Cherokee, but even before that was disclosed they surely saw the pictures of him when they wrote the article, or at least when they published.  Where was the editor? 

    facepalms

    Why are there not more people calling them out on yellow journalism?

    The fact is there is only one race in the US that has no advocacy groups, and there is only one race that is not allowed to be proud of their heritage.  It is also the same race that composes the majority, and which was also responsible for creating and building the US.  How messed up is that?

    To some people it may seem like I am overly occupied with race, but really all I am doing is addressing issues that other people have created.  There are people who are intent on lumping all white people together and smearing and pigeonholing us as much as they can.  I am this way because I have to be. 

    I have seen lots of Trayvon Martin nutters saying "you only side with Zimmerman because he's white."  No he is not white, and even if he were that is not why I side with him.  I side with him because he is not guilty, and if a non-guilty man gets charged as guilty then everyone is harmed by that. 

    They condemned Zimmerman before all the evidence was in, and continue to do so after a good deal of evidence indicating his innocence has come to light just because Trayvon is black.  Obama himself got involved just because Trayvon is black.  Eric Holder said he was going to get involved because Trayvon is black.  White people have been attacked by flash mobs of angry blacks because of Trayvon Martin.  People shouting "justice for Trayvon" while they attacked people who had jack all to do with the Trayvon incident just because they were white (even though Zimmerman is clearly not white).  So where does the insanity end?

    I am tired of the liberal media and academia trying to label us all as racists and oppressors.  We have done more good for this world than anyone else, except for maybe the Jews.  In spite of all the work the left puts into building negative stereotypes about white people the fact remains that on average we are the least racist and least race consciouse of all peoples in the US, and perhaps the world as a whole. 

    The sad thing is that I have seen Trayvon Martin nutters saying "if Trayvon were white you would be defending him."  To which I have said, "No, absolutely not."  The only reason the Trayvon nutters think Trayvon is a victim is because he's black, and the majority of black people will side with one of their own regardless of the circumstances.  The last time white people were as race consciouse and racially collectivistic as the average black person was in Germany during WWII, and it took nearly the entire free world to stop them.  There is almost no need to say anything beyond that, but I will anyways. 

    White people cannot get away with saying or doing half the things that black people can.  People are accusing us of being racial collectivists, race minded oppressors, etc., while the majority of white people are non-racist and terrified of speaking up because they don't want to even be accused of being racist.  It would not hurt us to become more race minded, because if we don't do anything this is only going to get worse, especially as our numbers continue to dwindle.  I'm not saying that we should be white supremacists, because I don't like those people any more than I like the Trayvon Martin nutters.  Any kind of supremacist is not good.  But we do need to be aware of what people are doing to us and we need to START doing something about it. 

    That is all.

Monday, 14 May 2012

  • India

    In case anyone is wondering where I have been, I will tell everyone right now.  I have been in India.  Normally I would not talk about things of a personal nature here, except that this particular item has socio-cultural implications which are worth discussing.  I went to India meet see a girl who I met online and formed a romantic relationship with.

    Why India?  Those who have been following my blog know that I have been interested in Indian women for some time and should be aware of my reasons.  I had some people give me some grief over my intentions.  Not any friends or family, buy some coworkers and casual acquaintences.  I had a coworker say "you should be loyal to American women," and I have had other people try to tell me that I should not be race mixing since white people are going extinct and the race needs my DNA to survive.   

    The coworker who said that I should "be loyal to American woman" was a middle aged black guy.  I don't really know what he was trying to imply with his comment.  I don't know if he was against immigration in general, or if he was against race mixing, or what.  In any case my ancestors were all immigrants (and relatively recent) so I don't see why it makes a difference to anyone if I bring in another.  As for the race mixing, I agree that white decline is a problem but race mixers are unfairly used as the poster boy or whipping boy for that.  There is no short supply of white couples or white singles who either delay in marrying or refuse to do so for personal/selfish reasons.  They make up the majority and the problem is that they either delay having children or refuse to do so.  They are the major cultprit for white decline.  Race mixers are a small fraction compared with that.

    Choice 2

    If international marriage or interracial marriage is so offensive, then the people who are offended ought to do some serious research to find out why it is happening, because there is a reason for it.  For the record, I don't consider what I'm doing at present to be an interracial relationship, and whether it qualifies as one is objectively dubious, but I have dated interracially before and have no problem with it.  I just follow God's laws and beyond that I do whatever I want.  If the Bible does not say I can't do something then that means that I can, and if I want to then I will. End of story.  That also goes for people who have tried to tell me that I cannot play violent video games or burn copies of CD's to give to my friends.   

    But I digress, I am neither anti-American nor anti-white, and being called such either openly or through implication is offensive to me.  I am just a guy who got fed up with the nonsense of women here and could not take it any more.  I want to encourage other men who are struggling with the women here to consider my story, and consider doing what I done.

    I talked with my girl for a few months before going over to see her.  The women in India are on average vastly superior to the women here.  It is possilble to find women in India, who have looks, virtue, and intelligence.  In the US you are doing good if you can find a woman with two of those.  By virtue I am talking about having a good attitude as well as having never engaged in sexual intercourse.

    Which

    The contrast between my current relationship and my previous relationships is vast, and difficult to explain without a common frame of reference.  If you have not been with an Indian woman, and have only known the women here then there is no common frame of reference.  The best way I can describe it is as follows.  My previous relationships and experiences with women were like being in pain.  It was like living with continual constant pain for so long that you forget what it is like to not be in pain.  You come to accept the pain as normal and even learn to live with it to a certain degree.  Then all of a sudden the pain is gone.  It is also like having been outside all day in a hot Texas summer, doing manual labor with nothing to drink, and all of a sudden you get to go into an air conditioned building, sit down, and have a tall cold glass of water.

    choice

    There are no longer any continual power struggles.  Power struggles over small things, power struggles over big things, defiance for the sake of defiance.  Our culture here has become so saturated with male-female power struggles that relationships become like battles, or unending chess games, or constant negotiations.  There is even a song out about how love is like a battlefield.  Just for the record, that is not real love, but it is the only thing available to most of us in the US and in western countries in general.

    There is no more constant disrespect.  Indian women respect you unconditionally, and from the very beginning of the relationship, while women in the US view respect as conditional and duration based.  Women in the US expect us to constantly fight, work, buy, and beg for what they should automatically give us by default.  It is such a contrast.

    There is fiscal responsibility.  Indian women are frugal with money.  They do not typically like to spend money, and if they have to buy something then they like to hunt for bargains.  They typically do not spend money on frivolous things.  They don't go to hair salons, nail salons, or tan.  Women in the US like to carry around huge purses full of junk which is largely useless, but the majority of women in India DO NOT even carry purses.  Before I left the US I asked my girl if she wanted me to bring her anything from the US.  She said, "I don't want anything, just bring yourself."  When I was there I went shopping for some Indian outfits that I can't get in the US.  I asked her if she wanted me to get her anything and she said, "I don't want anything, I just want you."  You guys who have only known US women (of any race), cannot imagine what this is like.

    Of course I did bring her some stuff from the US anyways, and she didn't say "That's cheap stuff," or "I don't like that brand," or "why didn't you get ______ instead?"  No snarky comments or sarcasm, just gratitude and appreciation.

    It is also worth noting that the women there are barely touched by feminism.  If I leave my plate on the table at home then my mom fusses at me.  But when I was in India I was told that I was not supposed to pick up my dishes because that was her job.  My girlfriend and her father both told me that.  They also told me that she was supposed to serve my food.  I was not supposed to serve it myself.  Indian women are traditional/proper women, and do not resist doing womanish things just because they are womanish things.  I realize that any femanists who are reading this are probably screaming at this point, but that's fine, because I don't have to deal with it anymore.  I'm sure some femanist is thinking "Well you just can't handle a real/"liberated"/whatever woman so you have to go get some 3rd world woman."  If by "real," "western," or "liberated" you mean corrupt and rebellious then yes, I can't handle it.  Of course the fact that you would try to paint my being unable to tolerate your ridiculous behavior as a negative thing is absurd.  The fact that I cannot handle it says more about you than me, since you are the one who drove me away and I have found an alternative solution.  What is your alternative solution to me? All you femanizis can continue to enjoy your one night stands, which supposedly make you feel emancipated, while I will enjoy my marriage and family independant of you and your seething, unmitigated disdain. 

    Femanists

    So guys, if you are tired of putting up with all the garbage then Indian women are there.  I'm not going to lie and say it is easy.  For one plane tickets to India are quite costly.  It costs over $1000 for a round trip ticket.  My ticket was nearly $2000, and that is just the ticket to India.  If your target destination is not a city with an international airport then you have a connecting flight to take, or a taxi or train.  Also, India is a labyrinth.  It is crowded and dangerous.  There little or no regulation of traffic and crossing a street or walking near one is risky.  Depending on where you go there is a risk of being kidnapped, and merchants will certainly attempt to rip you off.  You cannot under any circumstance drink the water or eat any food from street vendors, unless you want to be spending some special time in the bathroom.  I was very careful when I went but I still got seriously ill when I was there.  If you want to marry the woman there are two ways to bring her into the US.  One way is to get a fiance visa, which requires proof that you have met in person and takes 8 months to process.  After that period the woman can come to the US, but you then have 90 days in which to get married or they will deport her.  The other way is to get married in India and bring her to the US on a marriage visa.  It takes one year to process the marriage visa.  I don't know why.  But there is no way that your girlfriend can visit you in the US prior to either of those scenarios unless she either has work here, or family which is already here.  Our wonderful government does not grant tourist visas to Indians under any circumstance.  HOWEVER, even with all of these difficulties it is 100% worth it.  What are a year or two of administrative difficulties against a life time of happiness?  To me it's nothing. 

Saturday, 12 May 2012

  • What is Wrong with the Majority of Black Americans?

    I saw this article "Many Blacks Shrug off Obama New View on Gays," on yahoo.com today. Am I surprised? Yes and no. For some time I knew that the majority of blacks voted for Obama "just because." No ideological reasons were given, they wanted him because he was black, Democrat, or both. It seems that a lot of them insulate themselves from what the Democrats stand for, but at the same time, out of all the races and sub-cultures in the US they are the most overtly anti-gay (except when in prison). So I am immensely disappointed by this, and I now believe that Obama could sacrifice a baby to Satan and eat it on public TV, and still manage to keep the majority of the black vote.

    So they shrug it off? Which means that they don't care about his stances or policies on anything. Also, how can anyone be genuinely surprised by Obungle coming out and saying he supports "gay marriage"? Of course he does! He is a political leftist. It's not a "new stance" or a "change of heart." The only change here is that he is being more honest about his views. It's not a political ploy to win the election, because this will hurt him. If anything his handlers goofed by not watching him closely enough.

    So if it is not his stances they support then what is it that black voters want Obama for?

    ""If Obama needs to endorse same-sex marriage to be re-elected, said Jackson, so be it: "Look, man — by any means necessary.""

    ...

    ""Obama is human," said Leon Givens of Charlotte, N.C. "I don't have him on a pedestal."
    On Tuesday, Givens voted in favor of banning gay marriage in North Carolina. Many black precincts voted 2-1 for the ballot measure, which passed easily.
    The next day, Givens heard Obama tell the nation in a TV interview: "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married."
    But this fall, Givens plans to register Obama voters and drive senior citizens to the polls. A retired human resources manager, he suspects the president's pronouncement was "more a political thing than his true feelings." But he's not dwelling on it.
    "We can agree to disagree on gay marriage," Givens said, "and then I leave him alone.""


    Source: http://news.yahoo.com/many-blacks-shrug-off-obamas-view-gays-221003333.html

    That is so stupid. If there are any visual learners out there who need pictures in order to remember words, we might consider putting pictures of these men in the dictionary along with the definition of stupid. What they are saying amounts to "Well I don't agree with him but I still support him." I want to hear these idiots tell me in plain English why they support Obama. Which of his positions is it that they like? Someone tell me clearly what it is. I can probably guess what it is, and if it is what I'm thinking then that is a really stupid reason to vote for or support anyone.

    The black community is going to have to decide if they are going to change their views on homosexuality to match Obama's, or continue to support Obama "just because," in spite of the fact that he does not share their values or beliefs. The logical thing to do would be to denounce Obama but it looks like that will not happen.

    I found it amusing how the article speculates that Obama is reflecting the alleged changing views of black Americans rather than leading them:

    ""Presidencies tend to follow the culture, as opposed to being ahead of it," he said. "What this says is that the culture has gotten to a place where the executive branch feels like it can embrace this and not be so far ahead of the curve that they'll suffer really serious political damage for it.""

    Of course he is not reflecting their culture. He cannot reflect it because he does not share it. The black Americans have been in the US for hundreds of years. Obama is a black African who is new to the US, technically he is half black. His views and values come from the liberal elites who groomed him for that position. Everything he has done has been to change the culture and values here.

    I am getting really sick of this. I believe that the same crowd who unconditionally supports Obama is also the same crowd as those Trayvon Martin nutters, and Afrocentrist clowns. I am starting to think that this guy is correct:

Thursday, 26 April 2012

  • "Pregnant Man"

    I meant to discuss this earlier but was delayed.  I saw another piece on the news about the so called "pregnant man."  I have seen it in the news a few times on the internet, and now on TV.  The first time I saw an article about the "pregnant man," I was very tired and sleep deprived, and my sci-fi loaded brain for a split second was thinking "labratory experiment" or something.  But no, it is nothing of the sort.  It is a woman who wants to be a man, and has externally altered her looks but has not had her reproductive organs removed.  The woman certainly looks like a man, has a deep voice, a beard, and wide shoulders (most likely due to hormone treatments), but does that make her a man?

    So if I grow my hair out and cut off my giggle stick does that make me a woman?  If I want to be a woman SO bad (I don't BTW) does that make me one?  If I get surgery does that make me one?  If I think I'm "really" a woman does that make me one?  What if I think I'm a Klingon and I get surgury to look like one.  Am I a Klingon then?  What about people who seriously think they are animals?

    Alright, if a woman cuts off her breasts, hair, and receives hormone injections that does not make her a man.  Everyone with sense knows that a "pregnant woman" is an oxymoron.  That's stupid, and disgusting.  There is no such thing as a pregnant man, except in sci-fi when aliens or mad scientists are involved.  The only reason why the media is trying to label this person as a man is because they are intent on trying to erase the concept of gender.  That is a major plank in the liberal/cultural Marxist platform, perpetuating the idea that gender is not a real thing and that gender disctinctions are a product of psychology not biology.  I even had college professors got up in front of the class and stated that gender is a social construction.  The attack on gender is part of the larger attack on family.

    What kind of insane world is this that we are living in?  These things would have been unthinkable throughout most of the world and most of history up until the last century.  Gender is not imaginary.  You are born with one set of parts of the other.  On very rare occasions some people have both parts but in those circumstances you can still determine gender based on the presence or absence of a Y chromosome. 

Thursday, 19 April 2012

  • The Empty Skirt

    I have to say, I am so tired of hearing about Kim Kardashian. I really don't understand why she is famous. Does anyone know why she is famous? She is good looking, and she does have great hair, but the same could be said about many other women, and the majority of them do not get famous.

    Look at her expression:

    KK

    That face says it all. The vacant, shallow, clueless look of an empty shell who is getting too much attention. What has KK done to get famous? What are her talents? What has she done to merit attention. Why is her life significant? What has she accomplished? It seems like she just showed up all of a sudden and instantly became a negative role model for young women and girls. Yes girls, as long as you're good looking you can be as empty headed, immoral, unrefined, and untalented as you want.

    Someone needs to tell me why they keep putting this woman in the news. She has not done anything noteworthy, she's an empty skirt, and the articles I have seen about her are about as newsworthy as what my little sisters stupid dog ate for breakfast. I don't care if KK got flower tossed on her in England, I don't care if KK wants to run for mayor, I don't care if KK got a divorce. All that divorce means is that she is a disgusting, shallow, stupid, and empty headed person. Just for that she ought to be swept under the rug so that her indiscretion will not be a bad influence on the younger generation.

    It's like someone just picked up KK, and since then they have been trying to make her into a story and build her up as a person of importance. But there is no substance to her, she's just an emtpy skirt, and a slut.

    That is all.

Multimedia

INTP - "Architect". Greatest precision in thought and language. Can readily discern contradictions and inconsistencies. The world exists primarily to be understood. 3.3% of total population.
Free Jung Personality Test (similar to Myers-Briggs/MBTI)

Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex

  • Visit Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex's Xanga Site
    • Name: Ambrosius Augustus Rex
    • Birthday: 7/4/1981
    • Gender: Male
    • Member Since: 12/21/2003
    • Lifetime