Dharun Ravi

Is it just me or has there been a good deal of media coverage on “bullying” lately?  Probably the most famous case recently is that of Dharun Ravi and Tyler Clementi.  It was the first time I ever saw anyone getting charged with a hate crime for doing something to a white person, and a white male no less.  So if there is some crime against a white person it can be counted as a hate crime if the person is gay, but other than that you can forget about it.  For anyone who does not know, Dharun Ravi (an Indian national) was stuck rooming with this gay guy Tyler Clementi.  While there, he set up his webcam to record his roommate in an act of homosexuality and broadcast it online.  When Tyler found out about it he killed himself, and Dharun Ravi got blamed for his death.  Just for the record, and for those who are challenged in the area of dictionary utilization, suicide refers to a situation where someone deliberately takes their own life.  If you deliberately kill yourself then it is your own fault you are dead.  Just like if you randomly decide to stick your hand in a fire it is your fault that you get burned, or if you eat at McDonalds every day it is your fault that you got fat. 

I know, it’s a difficult concept for a lot of people these days, but if you do something to yourself then whatever consequences follow are your fault.  So blaming other people for someone committing suicide is retarded.  If a murderer was in court and he said “well it wasn’t my fault that I killed person X because person Y was saying bad things about person X.  Therefore, I thought that person X should die but really person Y is responsible.”  Whoever does the killing bears the responsibility.  This is all a part of the left’s campaign against personal responsibility. 

So all sorts of people rush to blame Dharun Ravi, and they talk about giving him 10 years of prison and deporting him to India for this.  They all start speculating on why Dharun Ravi was so twisted and how it was a brutal hate crime, and how Tyler Clementi was so sensitive and so innocent.  Of course he’s sensitive, he’s gay. There is something wrong with his mind that causes him to act like a female when he should be acting like a man.  But no one tries to understand Dharun Ravi, instead they try to fit him and his motives into their warped left paradigm and frame his motives in terms of their preconceptions.  The left does not care about justice, it only cares about perpetuating it’s agenda.  The left is pro-gay, and they want to make it look like homosexuals are persecuted so that they can step up their control of society, mitigate freedom of speech, and launch some additional attacks on the traditional family unit.  So when they find out about Dharun Ravi they trump him up as an icon for evil.  Whatever happened to multiculturalism and the cultural sensitivity that the left is always claiming they have?

Well I happen to know a bit about Indian culture (which to me is far more relatable than this emasculated gender bending left wing lunacy), so I will try to explain Ravi’s reaction.  First of all, in India the concept of “hate crime” does not exist.  I realize this revelation may be shocking to the left, but not everyone in the world is the same (SHOCKING!).  The sooner you liberals divorce yourself from that notion, the sooner you will maybe actually start to understand people in a realistic way.  If you ask the average Indian person what a hate crime is they are likely to shrug and say something along the lines of “what is this ‘hate crime’”?  I kid you not, you liberals need to stop listening to your college professors and get out in the real world. 

Next, in Indian culture homosexuality is still viewed as a form of mental illness and sexual perversion.  Not everyone in the world shares the moral standards of self righteous liberals (or the lack thereof).  And guess what white liberals, since you believe that morality is subjective you have no basis for claiming that your morality is any more objectively valid or authoritative than what they have in India.  Yes I know, this isn’t India but you liberals are always talking about how we need more cultural and racial diversity, and that means you are going to have people with different views and values.  So what do you want?  Do you want diversity or do you want everyone to be the same?  You can’t have it both ways.  I know, I know, so many reality checks in this journal it must be agonizingly painful for the liberals.  But I digress, in India homosexuals either keep down or they get beat down.

So why did Ravi videotape this guy?  Well, suppose that you white liberals are suddenly stuck rooming with someone from a different culture who engages in a behavior that you find revolting or disturbing… Well… that’s hard since liberals don’t get revolted by things which normal human beings do, but suppose you do.  How do you react?  Suppose you get stuck rooming with some guy who sleeps on a bed of spikes every night.  Suppose that in the morning when this guy gets up he sets a fire inside of a large metal tray, paints his body, and jumps up and down on it shouting “ooga laaga booga booga.”  In some parts of the world people really do these things.  But suppose you don’t know that.  What do you do?  You find it both curious and disturbing, maybe even a little revolting.  You don’t know how to react or relate to that behavior because it doesn’t occur in your culture, but you do know it disturbs and annoys you.  How anyone reacts to a situation like that is going to depend on the person, but it is entirely possible that you might record that behavior to show your friends.  Maybe you want to get advice on how to deal with that behavior, or maybe you want to see how others react to it.

I’m sure Dhuran was not comfortable living with his gay roommate.  The appropriate thing for him to do would have been to request a different room assignment.  In India he would have severely beaten his roommate for being gay and the roommate probably would have been expelled from the school or would withdraw on his own out of shame.  Different culture, different values, different contex. 

I’m not saying that what Dhuran did was good or right, but holding him responsible for someone’s suicide is thoroughly asinine, and so is the concept of a hate crime.  The concept of a hate crime is thoroughly idiotic.  A crime is not made more bad if there is a possibility that someone hated the victim.  Who cares if the perp hated the victim?  All that matters is was the crime accidental or purposeful?  If it’s purposeful it should result in a heavier sentence, end of story.  The whole concept of “hate crime” exists simply to put down particular people groups, and portray others as victims (facilitating the victim mentality), and there is way too much subjectivity in determining what constitutes a hate crime.  It’s a stupid idea, and a dangerous one.

If anything Dhuran should be charged with invasion of privacy.  I don’t know how I would react if someone video recorded me having a steamy make-out with my girlfriend.  I don’t think I would care.  Now if someone video recorded me having sex with my wife then I would care, but I don’t know how ashamed I would be of that since sex after marriage is a morally sound act.  I think the person who recorded me against my will would be more damaged socially than me.  I’m not saying that I want to have my privacy invaded but I would certainly not kill myself over it.  People should either avoid doing things they are ashamed of or learn to be less sensitive. 

Bullying in General:

So back to all this outcry over bullying.  I don’t understand what it is all about.  There have been some incidences of teenage and even pre-teen kids killing themselves because they were mistreated by their peers.  The left and the liberal media is all up in arms and talking about how they need to “do something.” 

Well liberals, what are you going to do?  Do you want to put more cops in the schools?  Maybe a cop in every class?  So do we want to have a police state where the cops are bullying the citizens?  Do you want to give the teachers the authority to hit the children again?  Do you want to deputize some of the “good students” to act as campus cops and maybe rough up the bad kids a little?  Do you want to take the kids who are allegedly bullying others from their parents and put them in a left wing foster home or under government care-givers like Karl Marx called for?  Do you want to drug the kids?  Do you want to lobotomize the kids?  What is it you want to do?  I honestly do not understand what you expect to accomplish.  Maybe you just want to put all the children into mandatory sensitivity training, because of course making people more sensitive equips them to better deal with adverse situations (that was a NOT joke).

Listen, you liberals need to understand that you cannot change human nature.  I will repeat, you cannot change human nature.  You also need to understand that not everyone is the same.  Not everyone is nice, not everyone will care about your feelings, not everyone is intelligent.  Fear and hate are just as much a part of human nature as empathy.  Actually probably moreso, because everyone is capable of fear and hate but not everyone is capable of empathy.  You need to understand that not everyone can do anything that they set their mind to, that not everyone is capable of the same level of achievement, that not everyone shares your values.  Everyone is not the same, and there is no reason why everyone should be.

Real Solutions:

Now that I have discussed how stupid the liberal ideas are, it is time to discuss some practical real world solutions on how to deal with bullying.  I myself was bullied through almost my entire childhood.  I managed to grow up without killing myself or becoming a sensitive milksop.  Kids are going to pick on other kids that they percieve as being different on some level, and provocation is not required. Here are some things that can set off other kids and cause them to persecute your kid(s):

* Being too tall.

* Being too short.

* Being too fat.

* Being too thin.

* Having different clothes–this is something parents can easily prevent. 

* Having different hair–it should noted that in many occasions having different hair could win favor and admiration from other kids, while sometimes it can inspire disdain, hatred, and violence in others.

* Having different mannerisms–this can include anything from stuttering, to laughing too much, to not reacting positively to things that the other children value.

* Having different beliefs and/or opinions

* Having an unusual smell

* Having an unusual medical condition

* Being a minority–And no, I’m not talking specifically about the evil white kids picking on a non-white kid, although that certainly is included in this and does happen.  I am talking about any time a kid is racially different from the majority of the students at his school.  A white kid in a predominantly black school is just as jacked as the reverse, at the very least. 

* Having interests that differ from that of the majority.

* Having ignorance of popular music.

* Having an unusual accent.

* Reacting with strong emotion to a variety of situations.

* Being more intelligent than the majority of students.

Paranoia and conformity are components of human nature, and they are the very wellspring from which bullying flows.  What are you going to do?  As one who was often bullied here are some solutions children can try:

* Don’t give them an emotional reaction.  Sun Tsu said never to let your enemies see your emotions, and if someone is picking on you they are your enemy.  I know this is hard for children to understand, because when you are continually picked on it can be just as irritating as any physical sickness you may have experienced.  There is never a moment of peace, except in solitude.  But one of the reasons why they pick on you is because they want to watch your emotional reaction.  They get a thrill out of knowing that they have upset you, and if you get in trouble for your reaction then that is just icing on the cake for them.  So do not get emotional, do not yell, do not let them see your emotions.

* Don’t concern yourself with being accepted.  Not everyone is going to accept you, and the harder you try the more opportunities you will give them for ridicule.  Let them be themselves, and you be yourself.  In the adult world none of your elementary, middle school, or high school relationships are going to matter one wit.  Odds are you will never see any of those people again.

* If you are in a new setting, keep quiet and watch the other kids.  Observe them and see how they act, and how they react to different situations.  Do not reveal too much about yourself or involve yourself emotionally in any situation until you have determined with reasonable certainty who it is safe to talk to and who it is best to avoid.  This will take some time to determine.

* If you have been going to one school for a long time where everyone knows you and has been harrassing you for years, then ask your parents for a change of setting.  If you are going to a private school (as I was), then tell your parents you would like to go to a public school.  They will probably be willing to oblige you as sending you to a public school will save a good deal of money for them.  The larger the student body, the less likely you are to get picked on.  Once there you have a fresh chance to start over, and you can have a better experience if you implement the previous steps. 

* If somone physically harms you, then consider responding with force.  Do not respond with threats or attempt to intimidate your opponent.  Make your response swift and painful, and do not talk about it with anyone else afterwords or follow it up with taunts and threats.  An abrupt physical response to physical aggression sends a message to the other child that when they mess with you there will be consequences. But if you go around bragging about what you did or taunting the other child then they are likely to resume their physical aggression against you just to prove that they are not weak or a pushover, because they do not wish to be bullied themselves. I have seen bigger dogs back off from smaller dogs after receiving an abrupt and painful response from the other dog.  Do not respond to verbal provocation with physical violence.  In general it is best to avoid violent situations.

* Get yourself in shape physically.  If you are still growing then you are too young to lift weights.  To do so would be to risk damaging your growth plates.  What you can do is run, and do pushups, pullups, and situps.  The stronger you are the less likely you are to be a victim.  Once you become physically strong it does not hurt to show your physical strength.  Don’t do it in a way that comes across as flaunting, but help other children from time to time with tasks that require physical strength.  If you do that then the word will get around that you are strong and children will be less likely to mess with you for fear of physical harm.

* Learn to control your emotions.  This is a technique I used when I was in my mid teens.  Imagine that your emotions are a sea.  Take yourself out of that sea and sit above it, and look out over it.  I’m not saying that you need to live completely without emotions, but reserve your emotions for things that are worth something.  Put your emotions into things that you enjoy doing, and things which interest you specifically, and enjoy those things privately to yourself.  Eventually your peers will mature and some of them will become enlightened and/or open minded enough to share your interests.  When that occurs, seek out friendships with those sorts of people and ignore everyone else.  Why put yourself in a stressful situation if you don’t have to?

That is the best advice I can give.  Follow it, and your middle school experience will be a good deal less stressful and hazardous.  When I first went into middle school I did everything wrong, and I had to learn all of these things the hard way.  But then my high school experience was smooth sailing.  I didn’t get in trouble once in high school (except for being late for class one time), and I even made a few friends.

Now here are some ideas for parents:

* Make your children get in good physical shape.

* Teach them how to defend themselves.

* Pay attention to what is going on in school as best you can. 

* Teach your kid good values, such as self control, self ownership, and how to prioritize.  Teach them that suicide is not an option, and that there will be consequences in the next life.  I never killed myself because I was afraid to go to hell when I died. 

* Be aware of what sort of school you are sending your child to.  If your child is going to be a consipicuous racial minority then he or she is probably going to be in trouble there.  Yes I know, everyone should learn to be civilized and get along, and not to judge others based on race but this is real life.    In real life being different is more likely to generate negative attention than positive.  Especially in the child world. In real life people are racist, and not just white people, I mean most people, as in the gross majority of humanity.  Also check that school to see if it has a history of violence.  If it does then don’t put your non-violent child there.  If you have a smart child check to see what sort of scores the school has.  If most of the children there are stupid then your child is likely to be harrassed by them for being smart. 

* Also watch what your kids are wearing.  I’m not saying that they need to have the most expensive clothes, or the most current fashions regardless of how ridiculous they are, but don’t be oblivious to what is going on either.  For example, giving them hand-me-down clothes that are from the previous decade or too small for them is asking for trouble.

Now for the administrative solutions.  These are some solutions which would make a real appreciable difference and give children a much better academic experience.  Of course they will probably never be implemented here because of the ass witted PC crowd, but here they are:

* Segregate the children based on intelligence.  One of my best friends is from the Netherlands.  We are 90% similar in terms of personality, and by that I mean likes, dislikes, and behavior patterns.  We have very similar tastes in entertainment, both indoors and outdoors, and similar interests.  That being said, his experience in middle school was pleasant and peaceful whereas mine was one of continual persecution, trouble, and frequent violence.  What made the difference?  Well, in the Netherlands they segregate the children based on intelligence.  The high performing students go to one school, while the idiots go to another.  Guess which school contains most of the violent reaciontionary children?  The idiot school of course.  Each year kids in both schools are tested for placement.  If one of the children in the smart school does poorly he goes to the idiot school the next year.  If one of the children in the idiot school does well on his test he gets moved up to the smart school.  Imagine how much more pleasant middle and elementary school would be without the dross?  No more persecution for being more intelligent or original than other students.

* Segregate the children based on culture.  Everyone has some sense of cultural identity.  If the public school system were abolished then students the new wave of private schools which emerge would be based primarily on religion and/or culture.  Since they would be privately funded they could choose who they wanted to let in, and some of the schools could establish a high tuition to ensure that only their own group came into the schools.  Having schools based on culture would eliminate bullying based on cultural differences, and it would probably eliminate bullying for academic reasons as well as most of the children would probably be peforming around the same level.

* Segregate the children based on race.  This idea would probably have liberals screaming but it’s actually not a bad idea.  That would eliminate racial bullying as well as a good deal of cultural and academic bullying.  Again, establishing schools based on race would also eliminate a lot of performance gap issues as different races tend to perform at different levels, on average.  Yes I know that someone is going to scream racist because I even suggested this, but I’m not being racist I’m just being real.  Anyone who has seen the statistics knows that some groups score higher on average while others score lower.  Pretending that facts do not exist does not make them go away.  If you feel that the third option is racist then go with one of the first two.  Any of them would help. 

Out of the three choices I think the first one is the best, but the other two would also improve conditions for victims of bullying.  Any of the three administrative options I mentioned is better than the left wing solution of sensitivity training combined with a police state.  Sensitivity training + police state = trouble compounded.

That is all I have to say on this.  I hope it was both informative and useful.

So apparently four witnesses in the Trayvon Martin case have changed their stories.  This is a dangerous situation, as well as suspicious.  If this trial goes bad for Zimmerman then it will have broad sweeping adverse ramifications for self defense in this country.  How is someone going to change their story this far into the trial, and how can anyone not be suspicious of that?

Four days after the shooting, one woman told police she “saw two guys running” and then “a fistfight–just fists, I don’t know who was hitting who.” But on March 20, she told investigators she saw just one person.

“I couldn’t tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white,” the woman, “Witness 2,” said. “I couldn’t tell you because it was dark and because I didn’t have my contacts on or glasses. I just know I saw a person out there.”

Well which is it?  Were you lying the first time or the second time?  That is quite a huge difference, and the fact that someone would change their story that much ought to discount that person as a reliable witness.  The witness is either a huge liar, or really has no idea what happened.  The witness should be dismissed.

Another witness, who was initially interviewed on March 20, said she saw two people on the ground immediately after the shooting, but was not sure who was on top.

But in another interview with investigators six days later, the paper reported, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top.

“I know after seeing the TV of what’s happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size,” the woman, “Witness 12,” said.

So on which occasion was she lying?  Or was she just making up a story on both occasions? So after she saw all the biased reporting she was sure that Zimmerman was on top?  The reporters were not there.  Let’s say that two guys are fighting, and I see it.  Guy A punches Guy B in the face, and that is how the physical altercation begins.  If I happen to be close to the incident and looking in that direction then I can know for certain that Guy A punched Guy B.  If I am at a great distance, so great a distance, that I can just make out two guys but cannot tell which is A or B then even if I see Guy A punch first, there is no way I can be certain it was Guy A because the distance made it impossible for me to tell which was which.  It doesn’t matter if the media comes out and talks smack/launches character attacks on one of the guys, or if I have a racial bias towards one of the parties involved.  I still do not have the necessary empirical data to be sure which of the individuals was Guy A or Guy B, so if I say that I’m sure even though I’m not, then that would make me a liar and there would have to be a reason why I was lying and attempting to doctor the story.  I would have the witness either thrown out entirely as unreliable or dismiss the second story she told.

A third witness, “Witness 6,” told police on the night of the shooting he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man “just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style.” He said the light-skinned man was calling for help. Interviewed later by investigators, he said he was not sure who was calling for help, and is not sure any punches were thrown.

What?!  You gave a detailed and specific testimony and now you’re not sure?  Is this how you behave in other areas of your life as well?  How long would you last acting like this in the work place?

Boss: Thanks for sending documents A, B, and Z to legal today.  If you had not done that in a timely fashion we would be in severe trouble by now, especially since the day is over and the case closes tomorrow morning.  Now we can all go home and rest easy.

Witness 6:  Well actually, I know I said that I did it earlier when you asked me, but at this point I’m not really sure if I sent documents A, B, and Z, or if I even sent any documents at all.

Boss: What?!

What is wrong with these people, and how is this not suspicious?  How can a witness change their testimony that drastically and not be thrown out as unreliable. 

A fourth witness also interviewed on the night of the shooting said he heard the shooting, ran outside, and saw Zimmerman standing with “blood on the back of his head.” According to “Witness 13,” Zimmerman told him that Martin “was beating up on me, so I had to shoot him.”

A month later, the same witness described Zimmerman’s demeanor: “[It was] not like ‘I can’t believe I just shot someone!’ It was more like, ‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody,’ like it was nothing.”

In this case the witness just waited one month to add some irrelevant commentary.  I say it is irrelevant because it’s just a subjective and personal opinion.  It is about as meaningful as if the witness said, “Well I don’t like this guy Zimmerman’s haircut, it really just rubs me the wrong way so I think he’s a punk with a bad attitude.”  But as irrelevant as it is, why did this person feel the need to add some additional commentary (which is really just an opinion) a whole month later?  What changed?

This is all very suspicious.  Honestly, if Trayvon  had been white or if he had been a mestizo like Zimmerman, then this would not even have made the news.  It made the news because someone is trying to fuel an agenda.  The fact that Eric Holder and Obama involved themselves indicates that there is a political impetus behind this.  The fact that the witnesses are changing their testimony this late in the trial indicates that they are being influenced externally.  Either they are succombing to the media bias, the angry racist black protestors, or there is pressure being put on them to alter their stories.  Maybe they were threatened or bribed?  It is hard to say for certain, but what is certain is that if Zimmerman is convicted as a murderer for defending himself there will be negative ramifications for self defense, gun ownership, due process, and race relations in this country. 

 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?

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:

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.” 

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? 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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. 

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:

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. 

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:

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.

There is one thing that has irritated me on a consistant basis since I was very young (3 or 4) and that is anti-Jewish hate.  Anti-Jewish hate makes me mad every time I see it.  Anti-Jewish hate is the one thing that liberals, white supremacists, and Muslims can all agree on.  I get a lot of my news from Yahoo, which draws from Associated Press, NBC, Reuters, New York Times, and a few others plus their own news team.  Although the articles tend to be very liberal, one thing I have always enjoyed is the comment section below, where yahoo users can leave their own statements.  Most of the comments are on the conservative side, which just goes to show how out of touch the liberal media and the government is with the common people.  BUT, when it comes to articles about Israel it seems that the majority of commenters are Muslims, liberals, and white supremacists.  So I am just going to let loose right here:

First of all, it absolutely blows my mind why anyone would want to side with Muslims over Jews.  People complain against the Jews for human rights violations, accuse them of racism, and actually seriously compare them with Nazis.  They also accuse Israel of wanton expansionism.  Alright, first of all, no one has the Muslims beat when it comes to human rights violations. 

Let’s look at how the wonderful religion of peace, Islam, spread in the first place.  Historically Islam was confined to the Arabian penninsula.  Even after having forcibly converted most of the Arab tribes they still could not break out of the penninsula because they were hemmed in by the Persians and Byzantines.  Following a devestating war between the Persian and Byzantine Empires the Muslim Arabs burst out and took all of the Persian Empire and most of the Byzantine.  Through forced conversions, persecution (both adiminstrative and private) they gradually converted most of the people to Islam.  Later they also went into Spain and India.  They pushed south into the area of Nubia all the way to Ethiopia where they encountered staunch resistance.  Later on they pushed their way into Eastern Europe and ate up the Balkan Penninsula.  Why did they do this?  Did anyone invite them to come into those areas?  With the possible exception of Spain, NO.  How did they rule?  Forced conversions, slavery, rape.  So who is expansionist here?  How many parts of the world converted to Islam through invasion vs. missionary efforts?

 

Just compare the territory of what the Jews have vs. what the Arabs have.  Who has more and who is constantly working to grab more?  Muslims are at war with infidels wherever they go, which is what their religion commands them to do.  Muslims divide the world into two parts: “the abode of Islam” and “the abode of war.”  Now alright, I also believe that my religion is right and everyone else is wrong, but my religion does not say that I am to make war on all disbelievers.  No one’s religion says that except for Islam.  No other religion in the world says that.

“Oh well the Jewish holy text tells them to take land also.”–Yes, but it spells out very carefully which land they are entitled to and it’s only about the size of Massachussetts.  The Muslim holy text tells them to wage war on the entire world.  There is a huge difference.  I don’t understand why people are concerned about the Jews, look at a map.

As for the human rights violations, there is no way Israel could even begin to catch up with Islam:

Did the Jews destroy the Persian and Byzantine Empires?  No.

Did the Jews force anyone to convert?  No.

Do the Jews have any laws forbidding the sale of land to infidels?  No.

Have the Jews ever destroyed a church or holy site belonging to another religion?  NO.

Has anyone heard of the Jews pouring acid on women?  NO.

Do the Jews force 9 year old girls to marry adults?  NO.

Do the Jews cut the noses and ears off of teenage girls when they run away from their husbands?  NO

Do the Jews beat and abuse their wives more than any other group in the world?  NO.

Has anyone heard of Jewish suicide bombers?  NO

Did the Jews initiate the Jannisary program?  NO

Who imported more black slaves and castrated them as a matter of course than any European superpower?  Was it the Jews?  I’ll give you a hint.  It begins with a Moo and ends with a slim.

My point is that the Jews do not even come close to the mountain of atrocities that the Muslims are guilty of.  Even if one leaves out all the past evils of Islam the current pile of crap is still bigger than Olympus Mons.

I don’t want to hear about Jews being racist against Arabs either.  Jews and Arabs are the same race.  I know, most Arabs and Jews don’t think so, and some take huge offense to that statement, but it’s 100% true.  They are the same race but they are different ethnic groups.  If an Englishman hates an Irishman does that make him racist?  No, they’re the same.  Both are white and European, they just have different cultures, and actually, in terms of language Hebrew and Arabic are a good deal more similar than English and Gaelic.  Originally there were many other Semitic cultures in the Middle East besides Jews and Arabs.  Just to name a few, there were the Akkadians, Chaldeans, Arameans, and Sabeans/Sheba.  The Habesha people of Ethiopia were originally Semitic Middle Easterners who moved to Africa and married black women over time.  The Jews survived as a people while most other Semitic cultures did not because the Jewish religion gave them the strength to resist converting to Islam.

But I digress, they are the same race, so it cannot be about racism.  Afghans and Europeans are also the same race, and Muslim Afghans are a good deal more savage than Muslim Arabs, so I am not in any way trying to be insulting to Jews, just being realistic.  But since we are on the topic of race, let’s talk about IQ as well.

 

The average IQ for “Arab” Islamic countries is about 80, while the average IQ for Israel is 100. The average IQ for Iran and Afghanistan is equally abysmal at about 80, while the average IQ for Europe is 100 in most places. Why is this? Iranians and Afghans are white. They are part of the Indo-European group, have light skin, different colored eyes, caucasoid features, ancient cultural connections with Europeans, so what is the problem here?

When the world IQ map and the religion map are placed next to one another one can see a correlation.




Islam makes people less intelligent. Anyone who has debated with a Muslim will be aware of this on at least some level. In the US an IQ of 70 or less is considered retarded. The average Muslim is a stones throw away from retarded. I would venture to say that dumbing oneself down is a necessary component for belief in Islam. If anyone seriously accepts the argument behind Islam: “Allah is really God, wherever the Jews wrote YHWH they really meant Allah. Allah is all powerful but he couldn’t keep the Bible from getting corrupted so he sent a new prophet to set everyone straight. Any time what the new prophet says contradicts the old prophets then the old prophets are wrong. Satan sleeps in the upper part of the nose, a non-Muslim has seven intestines, Muhammad split the moon, etc.” The entire premise behind Islam is faulty, and therefore anyone who is a critical thinker will either be unable to accept it or will be obligated to reject it later on. Islam is antithetical to critical thinking, which is why we see no innovations coming from that part of the world, except for Israel.

As for why Muslims hate Jews, it’s simple. Their religion tells them to hate Jews, therefore they do. One of the articles I read stated that the Palestinian authorities have banned the selling of property to Jews. The reason was supposedly to prevent Jewish encroachment. Well, the fact is Muslims are forbidden to sell land to all infidels. That is why the Coptic community in Egypt was not allowed to build or repair churches since the Islamic conquest. Muslims can buy property from infidels but not sell it to them. Islam is a fascist conquest machine which seeks to devour the world. Selling property to infidels would be a step back for Dar al Islam.

Liberals hate Jews because… I don’t really know. I know that liberals hate western civilization, and Islam is out to destroy western civilization, so MAYBE they hate Jews because they are closer to western civilization than the Muslims? Maybe they hate Jews because they like Muslims? Maybe they like Muslims because Muslims hate Christians and western civilization? I don’t know.

The white supremacists I cannot understand either. There are two items that I actually agree with white supremacists on. The first item is that we both recognize that white decline is a problem, and it really is. In fact it is a problem that will adversely affect more than just white people. The second item I agree with them on is that white people have the right to be proud of their history. In the generally accepted PC view white people are the only group not allowed to take pride in their past. Everyone else can but not us, and that is total crap. If it’s not wrong for someone else then it’s not wrong for us. Either something is right or wrong objectively or it is not a moral issue. But I digress. I know that white supremacists dislike non-white people in general (which I think is OCD), but I never understood why they have a special hatred for the Jews. Why hate Jews more than say, Native Americans? Yes, yes, I have heard the conspiracy theories. They are the same conspiracy theories that the Muslims believe in. The Jews are secretly controlling the world, falsely portraying the Muslims as savages, and working to destroy the white race and civilization through manipulation of the entertainment industry and banks. They blow a lot of wind but have no evidence for it, and there are lots of white people involved in the destruction of our own culture and economy. What does that mean? So I am baffled when I see white supremacists choosing to side with Muslims over Jews. Islam has done more to hurt white people throughout history than anything and anyone else (and to civilization and culture in general). They destroyed our two greatest civilizations ever, which was the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Empire. Perhaps I will write a separate entry later about why that was such a travesty and why we should be upset over that. It makes me sick when liberals and white supremacists dismiss their heinous acts with a hand wave, and then turn around and accuse Israel of human rights violations and compare them to the Nazis. The Nazis were people who tolerated no other culture or ideology but their own. Who does that sound like?

When I see people hating on Jews I immediately put them in the category of “quacks” and/or menaces in my mind. I cannot be friends with anyone who hates Jews. I cannot respect anyone who hates Jews. Hating specific people who also happen to be Jews is one thing. But hating Jews in general is disgusting, especially when people give Nazis a free pass. I do not consider myself to be a sensitive individual, but when I get 20 thumbs down for saying “God bless Israel” in a comment on a yahoo news article, I am both severely offended and disturbed. The world is becoming progressively more disgusting. America is going down the drain.

If you ever wondered what side of the fence you prefer, this is a great test!

If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced,
(Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!).

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he’s “offended”.

Well, I forwarded it to you……….

(this comes from a yahoo post)

I have been following the stories on the Trayvon Martin shooting, and I have come to the conclusion that this is nothing more than a disgusting propaganda attempt to stir up a race war.

For those who may not, for whatever reason, be familiar with the Trayvon Martin story I will recap what has happened so far. Trayvon Martin was a 17 year old black male walking through a gated community where he was spotted by neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman, who was a 28 year old mestizo. Zimmerman called 911 to describe a suspicious looking character who he believed was up to no good. He was suspicious of Trayvon because Trayvon was wearing a hoodie and there had already been multiple break ins in their neighborhood. The police responded saying that they would send officers and told Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon, but he did anyways. At some point after the call ended, Zimmerman and Trayvon got into a scuffle, during which Trayvon was shot by Zimmerman’s gun. However, Trayvon managed to get in a few hits on Zimmerman before he was shot.

After the shooting there has been a great deal of propaganda, and an attempt to portray Zimmerman as a white racist who shot Trayvon Martin for no reason other than that he was black. There is so much here I don’t even know where to start. I am going to do my best to take it one step at a time.

The first article I saw about this incident described Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic.” First of all why is it important to label Zimmerman as white and what is the basis for calling him white? My guess is that it is important to label him as white because according to the leftist elite ONLY white people can be racist. Therefore, if Zimmerman is going to be portrayed as racist he has to be portrayed as white also. Second, white people are the group that liberals like to bash and stir up hatred against, so it would not do to state that Zimmerman was anything else. Honestly, I am surprised they even chose to show a photo of Zimmerman, because no one in their right mind who looks at that picture would conclude that Zimmerman is white.

The man has overt Mesoamerican features. Look at the shape of his eyes, eyebrows, nose, hairline, and the width of his face. If someone like that gets counted as white then Obama should also be counted as white. Of course an idiot might still think he is white just because he is not black. Maybe this guy is also white:

Why not just count anyone who is not black as white? That way it will be even easier to keep pushing all these false dichotomies that the left likes to push. Oh wait, I forgot something important. We can’t have innocent illegal aliens and the peace loving Muslims classified as white because those people are victim groups and white people are pure evil.

That’s right, the evil white man has to be stopped/killed, even at the expense of everything else, whether that be due process (New Black Panthers & Spike Lee), sanity (Al Sharpton), justice, or just plain logic.

White people are evil, because they just are. Especially the men.

But I digress. There is a 911 call where one can hear the fight between Zimmerman and Trayvon, including the gunshot. The liberals and angry black racists are trying to argue that it is Trayvon crying out for help in the background while Zimmerman was shooting at him. First of all, the police who picked up Zimmerman found that he had taken a few knocks. He had a bloody nose and lacerations on the back of his head. In the 911 call there is only one gunshot heard. Prior to the gunshot the screaming for help can be clearly heard, but it stops immediately after the gunshot. Zimmerman had the gun. Anyone who thinks that Trayvon was screaming for help is idiot and/or a delusional race baiter. Only one gunshot was fired. So what, Zimmerman decided to beat him up for a little bit and then realized “Oh yes, I have a gun, I can just shoot him”? If so then explain the lacerations that Zimmerman had. The police recorded that Zimmerman had injuries to his face and the back of his head.

The only argument which I have heard, and I have heard this one repeatedly, is that the police are lying. Alright, by accusing everyone of lying you can invalidate any evidence which goes against your particular fantasy, in your head, but not in a court of law. But of course, the racist black contingent only cares about the law when it works in their favor, as evidenced by the fact that the New Black Panthers (a black racist group) have put out a bounty on Zimmerman, and the fact that Spike Lee tried to give away Zimmerman’s address. “Tried” being the operative word, as the address he gave away was actually wrong. Blatant attempts to buck the legal system and kill this man have been made, and what is anyone doing about it?

It also seems highly important to racist blacks to accuse Zimmerman of racism. There is no evidence of racist attitudes in his 911 call or in his past. If there was anything the liberal media would surely have trumpeted it from every outlet. The man was mentoring black children before this incident. Maybe he will become racist later as a result of this persecution he is receiving, but there is no evidence indicating that he had any particular racial bias.

It is also worth noting that the media and those “I am Trayvon Martin” idiots never show any recent pictures of Trayvon. There are recent photos taken from his twitter page on “The Daily Caller,” but for the sake of convenience see below:

He already has gold teeth and tattoos, clearly following the gangster models that so many of the black youth today seem to idolize. That being said, here is my analysis of what happened based on the evidence.

Zimmerman was patrolling his neighborhood, visibility was poor, and he saw this suspicious looking thug walking through his neighborhood, probably swaggering. Given that it is a gated community and that visibility was poor, he assumed, quite logically, that this individual was up to no good. He called it into the police, but given that he had friends and family in the neighborhood he chose to keep an eye on Trayvon just to make certain that nothing happened before the cops got there. Trayvon, who was on the phone with his girlfriend, turned around to confront Zimmerman. When confronted by Zimmerman he attacked him and tried to take Zimmerman’s gun. Zimmerman panicked as he was getting beat up and screamed for help. They fought for the gun and Zimmerman shot Trayvon.

When you act like a thug, you run the risk of getting shot. Trayvon was no saint. He was expelled from school multiple times, and was certainly either a drug user and/or drug dealer. They found evidence of that on his person which was why he was not in school at the time of the shooting. A lot of black kids grow up to be thugs and gangsters, or gangster wannabes, because of the garbage music they listen to, and because of negligent parenting. It seems to me that a lot of black parents will let their children engage in whatever ridiculous behaviors they want, but then immediately take their side when they get in trouble for it. Listen, if you don’t teach your children that they cannot just do anything that they want at any time, then someone else will teach them and they may not survive that lesson. Of course, this is a wider problem than just the black Americans. A lot of white parents are also not doing their job as parents, just letting their kids act like brats and buying them expensive toys so that they will entertain themselves and leave the parents alone. The style of parenting all across the board needs to be looked at and reevaluated. The only people who seem to be doing it right are Asians and Indians who are FOB.

The only bit of criticism anyone can level against Zimmerman was that he followed Trayvon even after the cops told him not to. But I do not criticize him for that because if my wife, or fiance, or family were in the neighborhood I would have followed him as well in order to find out what he was about. A lot can happen between a 911 call and when the cops actually arrive.

Here are some common arguments I have seen along with my answers to them:

“Well what if Trayvon were white?”–If Trayvon had been white then this would probably not have made the news. Black on white crime is grossly disproportionate to anything else in this country, and no one is doing a thing about it. I don’t want to hear any garbage about how “it’s just because there are more white people around” when it’s a well known fact that black people generally live in separate neighborhoods. They have to go out of their way to rape and kill white women. The liberal media does not like stories like that because they cannot use it to further their cultural Marxist race baiting agenda. But if Trayvon had been white and the story had somehow still made the news, there would not be very many white people (if there were at all) calling out for blood. There certainly would be no organizations setting a bounty on Zimmerman. The majority of white people would have still sided with Zimmerman, and most of them would say something along the lines of “that’s what you get for bringing a knife to a gunfight, idiot.”

“Well Zimmerman had no business asking Trayvon who he was.”–Yes he does, it is his neighborhood, and if Trayvon had just answered the question instead of attacking him like an out of control maniac then he would still be alive.

“What would you do if someone stopped you?”–Do you mean, would I go crazy and attack some guy in another neighborhood? NO, because I am civilized and that’s stupid. The truth is I have been stopped in my own neighborhood and had people ask me who I was and where I lived. I did not particularly feel comfortable in all of those situations but I still answered them because a) it is better than making a scene and b) it is understandable for people to be concerned about strangers in their neighborhood. In my case, I do not really interact with my neighbors so there are only a handful of people who know who I am. If I go out running during the day, or actually walk a dog in the neighborhood then there are people who see me for the first time, and I have been stopped and interrogated by them. These things happen. People who cannot deal with those situations in an appropriate fashion are the problem, not the people who ask the questions.

Those are all the arguments I have seen so far. Aside from that there is one more issue I would like to address. All of the black racists who are trying to start a race war need to stop. Stop blaming other people for your own problems and stop letting your kids emulate thugs and gangsters. Take responsibility for yourselves and stop all those idiotic protests. Black people here have it thousands of time better than their cousins in Africa. I am not talking to ALL black Americans, just all the racist idiot protesters and whiners who like to externalize everything that is wrong in their own community. You are getting mad at people for reacting to your own insanity. I don’t know what you hope to accomplish by starting a race war, but you might want to check the numbers. Last time I checked blacks made up 12.85% of the US population while white people made up 79.96% (Courtesy of CIA World Factbook). The numbers are not in your favor.

For the most part you idiots have gotten a free pass because the white race in the US, and most of the rest of the world, has been emasculated. We have been emasculated by the left, and we just stood there and let them do it to us for reasons that I cannot understand. It will take a lot of provocation before white people in the US get violent and racist, but that does not mean it cannot happen. If it does happen then it will be an ugly conflict and a lot of innocent black people will get hurt and killed in addition to all the idiots who are trying to start a fight. I am not making a threat, just stating facts. If this happens I am not going to be part of it, I will pack my bags and move to South America or India. I don’t want to be a part of all that mess.

I have nothing else to say on this matter. Perhaps I will think of more later, but for now, that is all.

Listen Carefully: