A sad day for me - so long, WRSA

I've followed Western Rifle Shooters Association for a number of years, now. Pete (CA) is one of the good guys, and posts things that are good for those of us who value liberty to read and be aware of. Sometimes he posts articles from authors/bloggers who I disagree with, but that is fine with me. I don't expect to agree with everyone, nor do I expect everyone to agree with me.

Today though, I found WRSA had crossed a line I am unable to support. Very few people read my pathetic excuse for a blog, but nonetheless, I cannot list WRSA as a blog I follow any longer, because I don't want it assumed I go along with what I read today.

The post is titled "ASK sends" and deals with a rally supporting Israel and condemning Obama/Kerry's "deal" with Iran.

I am in favor of supporting Israel, the only country that approaches being a democracy in the Middle East, a country that deserves our support (and if I need to explain and/or justify that to you, save yourself some grief and stop reading now).

I believe Pete (CA) supports Israel, too, but in this instance, he has confused free speech with providing a forum to Neo-Nazi's, "Anti-Zionists", and the rest of the drooling, mindless, Jew-hating crowd. I never realized just how many of the Jew/Israel haters there were in the III% movement until now. Oh, sure, I knew there were some, but it seems as if every slimy, low-IQ, Zionist-conspiracy-loving drooling idiot jumped at the chance to make himself known in the comments on Pete's blog. 

It's his blog. He can do what he wants with it (not like he needs - or wants - my permission ;-) But I'll be damned if I will continue to echo his blog on my site and have anyone at all think that I am in favor of these Jew-hating drooling idiots.

Are there Jews that are scum? Of course - look no further than Soros, who made his first money turning in fellow Jews to the Nazis. Who still hates his fellow Jews and has no problem contemplating - perhaps even assisting in - their annihilation as a culture, a religion, and - in Israel - a country. Marx was a Jew, for heaven's sake, and there are many others who have caused untold harm to the world and their own people. 

But the Jewish race as a whole has done untold good for the world as well. A great deal of life-saving medical technology and other cutting-edge technology has been developed in Israel since it became a country. The Jews are more frequently representative of greatness within the human race via music, art, medicine, physics, chemistry, and so many other areas of human knowledge and accomplishment.

Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) said it so well, many years ago:

If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one percent of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also way out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvelous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmity of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind.

So, I will separate myself from supporting a blog that forgets the difference between permitting free speech and becoming a forum for the deranged fools who think the "Elders of Zion" was meant to be an instruction manual, words to live by. Pete certainly won't miss me, and I have no desire whatsoever to demean or accuse him of anything, other than - in my opinion, only - poor judgment. 

Anyone who has read much of my blog knows how I feel about the sub-human creatures who follow the death cult called "islam". If I were to allow a bunch of muslim scum to publish comments about the Jews on my blog in the interest of "freedom of speech" I would be making a monumental mistake, too. 

I guarantee that you won't see that here. And that goes now for WRSA, I am afraid. Take care, Pete. I do wish you well.

ISIS - all its members, associates, and admirers - need to be exterminated with extreme prejudice

0 7 -13 -15

ISIS Blows Up A BABY For

Demonstration

Arabic media reports say ISIS trainer taught recruits booby-trap methods by blowing up infant child of (a) man executed beforehand.

In arguably one of its cruelest acts yet, the Islamic State (ISIS) has reportedly blown up a

baby as part of a demonstration showing how to handle explosives. So reports The Clarion

Project.

The unparalleled incident took place in Diyala Province, eastern Iraq, this past Friday,

according to Sadiq el-Husseini, Security Committee Chairman of the province on behalf of

the anti-ISIS forces there. He recounted the event to the local Arabic-language A-Sumeriah

News.

"The organization booby-trapped the baby in front of dozens of armed ISIS men," el-

Husseini said, "and then detonated it from afar." He explained that the purpose of the

operation, including the rigging of the baby and the detonation of the explosives attached to it, was part of an ISIS training exercise teaching various booby-trapping techniques.

"The organization doesn't care about the most basic human values," said el-Husseini. "Their crimes are incalculable, and the blowing up of the baby is the best proof of the threat of ISIS ideology to the state."

The baby's father was apparently executed some weeks ago, after being accused of taking

part in the killing of an Islamic State member.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I've said before, ISIS is the accurate and complete expression of islam, the most perfect followers of the commands of the qu'ran, as spoken by the "prophet" (P*ss Be Onto Him), mohammed. Supposedly at the direction of his moon-god, allah.

Now, I realize any true muslim, following the qu'ran and hadith, probably wouldn't be all that upset by the death of their child (as opposed to a child bride or "beardless boy", which would deprive them of their pedophiliac sex object), especially if it was a female child (the article above does not state which gender). Nonetheless, giving the man - who might not have even been muslim - the benefit of the doubt, I am glad he was killed before seeing what became of his child.

I'll bet this was not shown on the mainstream news. I'll bet there was no mention of it on CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, or even Fox. I don't watch television, so it is quite possible I am wrong, and it was shown by some TV news source, although I doubt it.

Come on, folks. Even as screwed up as liberals are, only those who are in favor of "partial-birth" abortions, and those scum who think it is okay to kill fully delivered infants as well, would be comfortable with this. You know, like Eric Holder's wife, who I understand owns an abortion clinic in Georgia. But, hey - her clinic probably aborts mostly black babies, or maybe half-black babies. I wonder what our country would be like right now if Barry Soetero's mother had gone to her clinic?

So, let's hear it for all of those folks who want to "co-exist" with islam, and all those feminists who claim being looked at funny - or denied a cake - means they have been mind-raped, yet don't say a damned word about the abuses women all over the world suffer at the hands of muslims - who aren't "radical", they are orthodox, adhering strictly to the words of the qu'ran.

Are you seeing a pattern here? Finally? Or are you still in denial? Like Michael Z. Williamson.

July 22, 2015:

I just had to add a postscript here. Looking at the poster of Holder and his wife, I noticed they both actually look more white than black. Their features aren't what one would expect from people of the negroid race. Is Mrs. Holder even black at all? Is her hair style just an attempt to show solidarity with her (black/half-black/less-than-half-black?) husband? I'll have to poke around a bit and see what I can find out.

SCOTUS legislates from the bench

I don't watch TV - haven't since 1987 (yes, 28 years ago) when I last had cable, so that I could watch Discovery and a few other sometimes-interesting and educational shows. Between commercials, the liberal BS you had forced down your throat by National Geographic, Discovery, and others ("AGW will ruin the Earth!", "islam is the religion of peace"), and the fact that the news was leaning farther Left than the Tower of Pisa, when I moved to where it was satellite or nothing, I chose "nothing". I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. I still watch videos - although it is getting harder and harder to find movies that aren't made with actors that are so liberal they need a glass navel to be able to navigate (like Liam Neeson, who says those of us who support the Second Amendment are scum - and I use to really enjoy some of the movies he made, like Shindler's List and Taken).

So, reduced to getting my news from the Internet - where I can at least choose sources that don't originate from unicorn poop and Ted Turner's rusty sheriff's badge - I am often late reading about current events. Such as SCOTUS creating laws, instead of ruling on the Constitutionality of laws, which is what they were, IIRC, created to do.

While I am not at all surprised that they decided that Obamacare could be interpreted to mean anything they wanted it to mean, I am actually more bothered by the gay marriage ruling. Not because I care if a couple of rump-rangers or beaver-biters play house (truth be told, I've known some really nice people of both persuasions), but because it opens the rest of us up to abuse by .gov if we refuse to bend over for them.

There was once a time when many, many businesses sported a sign at their entrance informing anyone looking to enter that they reserved the right to refuse service to anyone. We have a small restaurant in the little town closest to where I live which has such a sign. They can probably get away with it for a while, for two reasons: here in the Wild West it is pretty well accepted that things are done differently from how they are in Sodom-on-the-Bay, the City of Angles, Sea-Cattle, and other hotspots of Liberal/"Progressive" culture.  You know - where the most commonly used keys on a computer keyboard are     C:  <enter>:  ###   (Think about it. Sorry. The Devil made me do it ;-)

To get serious, this decision to give gays - along with blacks, trannys, illegal aliens, and muslims - special privileges and treatment will literally come back to haunt us. You may be willing to accept the fact that you will no longer be able to live by your own religious creed, personal choices, or cultural imperatives if they include remaining separate from gays. You will find yourself sued not only for refusing service to gays in small businesses, but what if you are the pastor of a church that believes gay sex is sinful and some gays insist - simply because they CAN - that you marry them? And that you use their own vows to do so (I, Bruce, take Frederick for richer or for poorer, to have and to hold, from behind and in the mouth, with and without lubrication, for so long as my supply of Viagra and my c*ck-ring keep me hard."  Yes, that's gross, and I have an evil and dirty mind, but do you really think such could never happen? Will said pastor, his family and his brethren be pleased when he is fined, jailed, and his church is closed or condemned by .gov and the courts because he refused to participate in a marriage ceremony such as that?

This will get worse, people. For some time now (ten years that I am aware of), there has been a push by psychiatrists, psychologists, "bio-ethicists", anthropologists, "ethno-psychologists", [unicorns] and many actual pederasts in positions of authority (.gov, large corporations, bishops and cardinals, etc.) to remove pedophilia from - and to declare it normal behavior - the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for mental disorders), the manual used by those in mental health professions and the courts for determining what mental conditions are disorders, what the criteria are for judging that someone is not behaving in a normal, safe, and acceptable way.

These people, supposedly intelligent, reasoning human beings, want to decriminalize - make culturally acceptable - sex by adults with pre-pubescent children. Not only would this in reality constitute rape of children, since they would be too young to provide true consent and in most cases be true rape, but it would decriminalize intercourse by strangers, family members, teachers, priests and ministers, camp councilors, Boy and Girl Scout troop leaders, doctors, and anyone else desiring to have sex with a child. This would legitimize marriage of nine-year-old little girls for the muslim scum who want to follow in the footsteps of their child-molesting prophet, mohammed (p*ss be onto him).

Should this happen, should SCOTUS rule in the same fashion as it has with gay marriage, it would be illegal to prevent it from happening with your own children.  Considering the protections and privileges  provided to gays at this point by local, state, and Federal courts,  it could be ruled illegal for you to prevent the victimization - sexually - of your own children by their teachers, their doctors, their councilors at summer camp, by Senators and Representatives, by the AIDS-infected chickenhawk living down the street from you. Refusing to allow access to your own children could easily be ruled discriminatory.

Yes, yes, I know this sounds absurd, over the top. But it isn't. Who would have thought that a bakery owner could be fined thousands of dollars and forced out of business for refusing to bake someone a cake, or cater a gay wedding reception? Who would have thought that a church would be forced - against their deeply held beliefs and their own religious teachings - to provide contraceptive coverage for the people they employ? Why should it be that gays and sexually promiscuous people have greater rights than those provided for by the First Amendment? It says freedom of  religion, and was only written to prevent the State from establishing its own religion and requiring us to practice it.

This country was formed to a great extent by people who fled England and Europe because they were persecuted for their religious beliefs. And now it is happening again. Yet, when the beliefs of muslims interfere with or threaten the rights of Christian, Jews, and even atheists, the muslims "rights" take precedence over everyone else's. It has become a pejorative term these days to be called "Christian", in spite of the fact that this country was formed as a Christian nation, based upon the Judeo-Christian moral code. Yes, there were atheists and deists back then, some of whom were Founding Fathers. But even those individuals accepted and lived by the same moral codes as the Jews and the Christians.

The Left is doing everything it can to destroy the moral codes this country was founded upon and which kept us healthy and striving to be good, to live together in harmony. Caligula would recognize the direction the Left is moving us in - the debasement of the family, sexuality, marriage, truth and justice. He would feel quite comfortable in today's America. There is already enough debasement of women, teenage girls and boys, and even of small children in this country to drive a moral man into a towering rage at what is happening. The Left is pleased by this, and would like to see it taken even further. Nor do they complain or protest the rape of women and little girls by muslims throughout the world, the use of young boys for sex by muslims in every country where muslims live, the sexual enslavement and killing of "infidel" women and girls.

If the Left is successful, as I am very afraid they will be, at legalizing pederasty, the rape and molestation of children, female and male (look up NAMBLA - I refuse to provide a link - but be prepared to puke), then I am hoping parents and moral men and women in this country will take up arms and declare open season not just on the pederasts, molesters, but also upon the people - like Peter Singer - who helped to make it happen. Will you protect your children, your grandchildren? I hope so.