Terrorist Alert & Good News

by Jack

A  new terrorist alert deemed too sensitive to be released to the public has just gone out to law enforcement.  The alert warns of long wolf attacks by Islamic radicals.  No further information is available.

On the brighter side, Attorney General Eric Holder has resigned.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Terrorist Alert & Good News

  1. J. Soden says:

    The performance of Holder as AG by itself could’ve been called a terrorist attack on our Constitution.

  2. Dewey says:

    There is always an terror alert. That being said I have read the police Blogs they spread around conspiracy theories fed to to them.

    STL PD was spreading one about an 100 mall attack simultaneously.

    While we always have to be on alert scaring the police has resulting in them shooting people without cause. Funny how most are Black.

    The walmart kid was holding a BB gun pointed at the ground talking on the phone in an open carry state. The call to the police was bad and wrong and the police killed the Kid.

    Also while anything is always possible and we will have to keep our eyes open You failed to also say the Security forces said the terror alert was a false report from an agent inside Iraq.

    Fearmongering is a tactic. Why would one feed into it just like the terrorists want? They laugh at stuff like this.

    Does not mean we should not be careful and we are acting, but it needed to be said.

    Fear is a weapon. We can not change this religious war but should not feed it as well.

    Also the anti Muslim stuff needs to stop just feeding the terrorists with more reason.

    You also missed the elaborate way they are working. Using the Black Flag Myth of the end of the world. Right from the Historical Islam Myth.

    The elaborate Video Game style recruitment video.

    This is fueled by some you would be shocked to know.

    Start by looking up the definition of Khoisan and the Khoisan Myth.

    Israel is now beating up Africans in the streets.

    Racism and false religions.

    That is why our founders gave us separation of Church and State my friend.

    Religious wars and History… these Terrorists are selling a Myth to their recruits.

    Never Trust media they are fed. They have also retracted now.

    Be Safe and always be on the look out.

    • Post Scripts says:

      “That is why our founders gave us separation of Church and State my friend.” Dewey

      Wrong…lol. That’s not why we have separation. It was to protect the Christian religion from state oppression. Check a few of these quotes out from our founding fathers and learn:

      Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence said. “[T]he only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be aid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments. Without religion, I believe that learning does real mischief to the morals and principles of mankind.”

      Noah Webster, author of the first American Speller and the first Dictionary said, “[T]he Christian religion, in its purity, is the basis, or rather the source of all genuine freedom in government. . . . and I am persuaded that no civil government of a republican form can exist and be durable in which the principles of that religion have not a controlling influence.”

      Gouverneur Morris, Penman and Signer of the Constitution. “[F]or avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy . . . the only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people. I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals and that morals are the only possible support of free governments. [T]herefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God.”

      Fisher Ames author of the final wording for the First Amendment wrote, “[Why] should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school book? Its morals are pure, its examples captivating and noble. The reverence for the Sacred Book that is thus early impressed lasts long; and probably if not impressed in infancy, never takes firm hold of the mind.”

      George Washington, General of the Revolutionary Army, president of the Constitutional Convention, First President of the United States of America, Father of our nation, ” Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.”

      Benjamin Franklin, Signer of the Declaration of Independence “[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”

      “Whereas true religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness . . . it is hereby earnestly recommended to the several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement thereof.” Continental Congress, 1778

      There are hundreds more similar quotes, but if you don’t get it by now it’s only because you don’t want to get it.

      • Post Scripts says:

        Dewey… one more thing, in our young nation, the Bible was used as a text book for the purpose of teaching children moral principles to live by. As time went on, the Bible was gradually replaced by other text books such as Noah Webster’s Primer. Webster’s Primer taught children to spell but was also filled with moral Bible verses. In the front of his Primer was his picture with the inscription, “Who taught millions to read but not one to sin.”

  3. Tina says:

    “Israel is now beating up Africans in the streets.”

    The above is an unacceptable inflammatory statement. I do not appreciate your putting it on this blog!

    Apparently there are plenty of Africans in South Africa who would also be offended by the specious, scurrilous charge (See video).

    Israel has been giving aid to Africa, like most free nations have, for decades!

    And may I add to your comments Jack, about the incredible generosity and brilliance of our founders in creating our secular government. The nuts who think the first amendment was created to protect them from religion don;t know much about history. Secular government was chosen to protect religious people so they could be free to worship in whatever way they chose. The wisdom comes from their religious understanding of free will AND the Kings Church of England which demanded loyalty to a particular church…tyranny.

    How did we get such non-thinkers from our school system? Progressives took over…progressives who do not appreciate freedom, free will, self-reliance, mutual respect, or the Golden Rule. God help us!

  4. Dewey says:

    Tina what is wrong with you? That happened the pictures and video went viral!

    I resent you not recognizing world events…

    What world do you live in? Israel has a race problem as well.

    Did you even google it first? It has been going on for quite some Time. I saw some live footage of it!

    Fox is not going to report it? None of the other stations are not going to report it? Why do you try to pretend like you know everything? You are wrong it is happening.

    http://www.davidsheen.com/racism/

    or any link Tina world affairs are more than Fox news I am offended you deny truth

    I watch livestreams and see it with my own eyes. everybody has a camera on their phones and tweet the live footage get with it!

    Wrong…lol. That’s not why we have separation. It was to protect the Christian religion from state oppression. Check a few of these quotes out from our founding fathers and learn: –

    No you are not correct….nor are we a Christian Country we welcome all religions, I am not reading that stuff nor debating cause I already have done extensive research…

    You just disagree and leave it at that

    The real point was the false information here…

    There was no terror threat and you are trying to deflect

    I am not biting…

    We can disagree and I will not have religious wars in this country…

    The point was made there was no terrorist threat it was propaganda to scare us and also I said there is always a threat

    No deflection…it was Iraqi propaganda and you bit
    How about all the 911 warnings GW ignored? I suppose that was OK?

    If you want to meet and debate the constution some day fine, I do not buy the Tea party twisted version and many are with me

    Separation of Church and state is here to stay whether we have to have a civil war or not Our military is not Gods army like the Middle east

    Also there is only 1 true version of the Bible and the Teavangelica version is not it

    Enough said….. Point I do not like fearmongering it plays into the terrorists hands so have fun

    I have seen this debate

    First of all religion is man made my frien and I know our countries history well including the misprinted fake history. heck Texas has removed many Thomas jefferson things in History books and

  5. Tina says:

    Dewey the state of Israel is not, “beating up Africans in the street.” There may be incidences as there can be in any nation but Israel the nation does not have a beat up Africans policy.

    Israel is a tiny nation. There are an estimated 60,000 refugees that have come to Israel. As in any nation being flooded with people, many of them without means, there is bound to be some confrontational problems in Israel as they attempt to cope with this problem.

    There are organization trying to help the refugees in Israel too. Your assertion was like a drive by fruiting, Dewey.

    I keep telling you to focus, to stick to one point at a time and to flesh out your thought…sometimes you do better and then sometimes…

    “It was to protect the Christian religion from state oppression.”

    Which is what I wrote. Duh!

    Man…this is just not worth my time.

  6. Dewey says:

    Tina nice try did I say the State of Israel although the state did try to deport them.

    Nice try

  7. John Law says:

    “A new terrorist alert deemed too sensitive to be released to the public has just gone out to law enforcement.”

    Than why are you spilling the beans here? Whose side are you on??? The terrists???

    • Post Scripts says:

      John Law, it was on Fox News tonight, also ABC News and CBS News carried this story and most of the national radio news networks did too. So now you know as much as the rest of the public. Very sorry you missed it, but that’s why we have this site. We try to pick up the slack when we can. Glad you heard about it here! Thanks for commenting, appreciate your support.

  8. Tina says:

    Nice try? How about “nice try” on your part!

    The state has the right to deport them if they are there illegally, which, being refugees, they are. There are people working to find solutions to the problems but let’s be clear…these are problems that terrorists and @$$#@&% tyrants are causing all over the place!

  9. Post Scripts says:

    (CNN) — A U.S. Department of Homeland Security joint intelligence bulletin is warning law enforcement agencies to be on heightened alert for lone-wolf terror attacks on U.S. soil in wake of the airstrikes against ISIS and others in Syria, a U.S. law enforcement official told CNN on Tuesday.

    The United States is doing what it must to “take the fight to terrorists,” leading a coalition of Arab nations in a series of airstrikes against the so-called Islamic State terror group in Syria, U.S. President Barack Obama said Tuesday.

    At the same time, the United States took action — on its own — against another terrorist organization, the Khorasan Group. Obama described its members as “seasoned al Qaeda operatives in Syria.”

    U.S. officials said the group was plotting attacks against the United States and other Western targets.

    The plots against the United States were discovered by the intelligence community in the past week, an intelligence source with knowledge of the matter told CNN. The source did not say what the target may have been, but said the plot potentially involved a bomb made of a nonmetallic device like a toothpaste container or clothes dipped in explosive material.

    A plot involving concealed bombs on airplanes “was just one option they were looking at,” a U.S. official said.

    “Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and try to do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people,” Obama said in televised remarks from the White House.

    The airstrikes in Syria began early Tuesday morning local time. Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan took part in airstrikes on ISIS targets, the U.S. military said. Qatar played a supporting role, the U.S. military said.

    Noting that he had “made clear that America would act as part of a broad coalition,” the President said: “That’s exactly what we’ve done.”

    “The strength of this coalition makes it clear to the world that this is not America’s fight alone,” Obama said at the White House. “Above all, the people and governments in the Middle East are rejecting ISIL and standing up for the peace and security that the people of the region and the world deserve.” ISIL is another acronym referring to the terrorist group, which calls itself the Islamic State.

    There is bipartisan support in Congress for the U.S. military actions, Obama said, adding that “America is always stronger when we stand united. And that unity sends a powerful message to the world that we will do what’s necessary to defend our country.”

    Strikes came in three waves

    The airstrikes “were only the beginning,” Pentagon spokesman, Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby, said. He declined to comment about future military operations.

    The airstrikes came in three waves, with coalition partners participating in the latter two, Army Lt. Gen. William Mayville Jr. said Tuesday. The first wave, which mostly targeted the Khorasan Group, started at 3:30 a.m. (8:30 p.m. ET Monday) and involved U.S. ships firing missiles into eastern and northern Syria.

    The second wave, 30 minutes later, involved planes striking northern Syria, with targets including ISIS headquarters, training camps and combat vehicles. The third wave, begun shortly after 7 a.m., involved planes targeting ISIS training camps and combat vehicles in eastern Syria, Mayville said.

    It’s too early to say what effect the U.S. strikes had against the Khorasan Group, Mayville said.

    However, the airstrikes killed the leader of al Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front, according to a statement released by the group. It identified the leader as Abu Yousef al-Turki, also known as “the Turk.”

    The al-Nusra statement posted on Twitter was accompanied by a so-called proof-of-death — a photograph — of the former fighter. CNN cannot independently verify al-Nusra’s claims, but the monitoring group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported the terror group was among those targeted during the airstrikes.

    The strikes marked the first time the United States used F-22 Raptor stealth aircraft in a combat role. The military has previously run into problems with the aircraft.

    Monitor group estimates at least 70 ISIS militants killed

    The airstrikes against ISIS focused primarily on the city of Raqqa, the declared capital of ISIS’ self-proclaimed Islamic State.

  10. Libby says:

    “Wrong…lol. That’s not why we have separation. It was to protect the Christian religion from state oppression.”

    Good God in Heaven, Jack. Do you really believe that? Or are you a little to heavily into the Oxycodone, again?

    Back then … if you can summon some recollection of your history … there were several factions of Christianity … all persecuting each other.

    Our separation of church an state is to protect any one of them … or of any other sect … from state persecution.

    Yoga … heating pad … exercise … dump the drugs … you are sounding irrational.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby, my bad, I should have been more specific. I was referring to our AMERICAN history re separation of church and state. Apparently you were talking about some other country or planet?

  11. Peggy says:

    Hey Jack you were right the Bible was used in our schools to teach, and our government even printed and distributed it. This is from one of if not the largest collection of American historical documents.

    The Aitken Bible and Congress:

    “Congress gave Aitken a ringing endorsement in the form of a congressional resolution to “publish this Recommendation in the manner he shall think proper” 11 to help sell and circulate the Bible. The complete text of this Congressional resolution is:

    Whereupon, RESOLVED, THAT the United States in Congress assembled highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken, as subservient to the interest of religion, as well as an instance of the progress of arts in this country, and being satisfied from the above report of his care and accuracy in the execution of the work, they recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize him to publish this Recommendation in the manner he shall think proper. 12

    Robert Aitken then proceeded to print his Bible, now known as the Aitken Bible or the Bible of the Revolution. That Bible – approved by the Founding Fathers in Congress – was the first English-language Bible to be printed in America. 13 Records show that of the 10,000 originally printed by Aitken, 30-40 total copies still exist (5-10 of which are in private hands); one of these existing Bibles is at WallBuilders.

    (Incidentally, on May 30, 1783, the Rev. John Rodgers, a military chaplain and close friend of George Washington, suggested to his Commander-in-Chief that one of these congressionally approved Bibles be given to every member of the Continental Army. Washington was highly pleased with the suggestion but regretfully noted that Roger’s proposal had arrived too late – Congress had just disbanded the Continental Army, retaining only a skeleton force. Washington lamented:

    Your proposition respecting Mr. Aitkin’s Bibles would have been particularly noticed by me – had it been suggested in season… It would have pleased me if Congress should have made such an important present to the brave fellows who have done so much for the security of their country’s rights and establishment. 14)

    Of this Bible, and of Congress’ direct role in its creation and distribution, one early historian observed:

    Who, in view of this fact, will call in question the assertion that this is a Bible nation? Who will charge the government with indifference to religion when the first Congress of the states assumed all the rights and performed all the duties of a Bible Society long before such an institution had an existence in the world! 15

    You can view the Congressional actions concerning the Aitken Bible in the WallBuilders “Library” section here.”

    http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=112866

  12. Tina says:

    LOL indeed! Modern (radical feminist inspired) American history excludes anything that doesn’t fit the narrative. The founders were all racists and misogynists that deserve only derision. Male dominated religion existed for the sole purpose of oppressing women. Male dominated history had to be altered! Throw in a few rabid atheists and you have a bunch of revisionists spouting the idea that our founding fathers were crazy old men with stupid ideas.

    While I understand modern aversions to some of the traditions of yesteryear it’s NUTS to dismiss or deny entire portions of our history as a means of promoting leftist ideology. Our founders were men of faith, as was our nation. We can be thankful that they had the wisdom and guidance of the Bible. They were secure in the reality of God’s intention for us, that we have free will. This, freedom, became the base upon which our Constitution formed our secular government and protections of inalienable rights.

    To the degree that we are a nation with power vested in the people we are also still a (Judeo) Christian nation. 3/4 of the American people identify as Christian and only 5% of religious Americans are other than Christian.

    The Bible would be a text that could be used in the classroom as a tool for teaching morality and wisdom. It would make a good companion to other sources. School districts should at least have the choice to include it if the local people want it included.

  13. Tina says:

    Glad to hear local law enforcement is stepping up its readiness. We’ve been hearing for weeks now that lone wolf attackers are plotting attacks. Citizens in high population areas need to step up their awareness; better to be aware than sorry and sad (or dead).

  14. Chris says:

    Of course (most of) the Founders (mostly) intended religious freedom to apply (mostly) to Christians. Just as (most of) them intended voting rights to apply only to land-owning white males. What exactly is the point of this discussion? Certainly no one here is suggesting that only Christians should have religious freedom today, right? “The Founders’ intention” is not a good enough reason to continue doing anything. They were geniuses ahead of their time in many ways, but in other ways they were ahead of their time.

    Tina: “The founders were all racists and misogynists that deserve only derision. Male dominated religion existed for the sole purpose of oppressing women.”

    These sound an awful lot like strawman arguments. Can you provide any sources indicating that these are widespread beliefs among liberals?

  15. Chris says:

    That should have said, “in other ways they were men of their time.”

  16. Tina says:

    The men that you deride, the founders, had the wisdom to write a document that protects individual rights regardless of faith or lack thereof and regardless of gender, as it turns out. That was an extraordinary thing to accomplish given the traditions of the times. William Gladstone described our Constitution as “the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.”

    How often today when a new leader arises in a nation is a document such as ours the result? More often the wisdom of our founders is nowhere to be found; tyrants rise on promises of fairness or some new iteration of power to the people.

    The rule of law, the amendment process, the balance of powers codified in that document ensured that the people could alter public policy and law WITHOUT eliminating recognized God given rights.

    During the election in 2008 when the subject of the the rights admiration for the Constitution came up it was common for the democrat faithful to cheer, clap and laugh when the framers were called “old white men.” When Bill Clinton first ran for President it was common during rallies to deride Republicans for “family values”…Bill Clinton snidely remarked that he was getting tired of hearing about family values. The values of those tired old men were once again mocked.

    The party you support is filled with and in many ways run by the radical feminists of the seventies. It was inspired by the same women that created feminist studies, women that have said things like:

    “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

    “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” -– Valerie Solanas

    “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin

    “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” — Susan Brownmiller

    “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone

    “In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

    “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins

    “All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French

    “Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer.

    I highlighted a couple that are of particularly interest since women continue to have a strong hand in raising the nations children. The ideas of seventies feminists have influenced our society greatly over the last thirty or forty years.

    During this period some women have managed to become better educated and climbed the ladder of success. In general the quality of life for women, for men and for their children has suffered greatly…as has the quality and stability of our society.

    My arguments are dead serious; as serious as a heart attack. In January of this year Time Magazine ran an article with the provocative headline, “Men Are Obsolete.”

    The Weekly Standard notices, “1 in 6 American Men Between Ages 25-54 Are Not Working”

    Another startling statistic: 1 Out Of 32 Americans (are) Under Correctional Supervision.

    The plight for black men is even worse.

    An article in Slate points to troubling statistics for kids without fathers:

    Specifically, McLanahan and a colleague found that boys raised in a single-parent household were more than twice as likely to be incarcerated, compared with boys raised in an intact, married home, even after controlling for differences in parental income, education, race, and ethnicity. Research on young men suggests they are less likely to engage in delinquent or illegal behavior when they have the affection, attention, and monitoring of their own mother and father.

    But daughters depend on dads as well. One study by Bruce Ellis of the University of Arizona found that about one-third of girls whose fathers left the home before they turned 6 ended up pregnant as teenagers, compared with just 5 percent of girls whose fathers were there throughout their childhood.

    It’s one thing to teach that the traditions of the era made life much different than what we experience today and quite another to go out of the way to make our founders, and men generally, appear to be thoughtless, heartless, tyrannical monsters who belong in prison so that the superior sex, women, can rule the world. This isn’t education; it is indoctrination.

    I am happy to see that younger people are rejecting the radical ideas of the seventies feminists:

    “fringe feminist theory” isn’t fringe anymore. Remember this?

    Ms. magazine found that over 900 programs in the women’s studies field were functioning in the US in 2009. That meant 10,000 courses teaching over 90,000 students at 700 colleges and universities across the nation . . . That included 31 Master’s programs and 13 Ph.D. programs . . .
    [T]he American Association of University Women has started advocating to implement “gender studies” programs in public high schools, and the Feminist Majority Foundation is enthusiastic about the prospect of teaching 10-year-olds about “sexuality and gender identity” with a focus on “gender equity” while girls “are still malleable and relatively free of . . . gender role bias.”

    If you research the faculty and curricula of Women’s Studies programs, and examine the content of their output in journals of academic feminism, you find yourself in a swamp of radicalism. Research a little more, and you find that Women’s Studies is “interdisciplinary,” which means that radical gender theory seeps into history, political science, psychology and other fields. The field of sociology, for example, appears to have been swallowed whole by radical feminists. At many schools, Women’s Studies is most commonly a minor, rather than a major, so you have students majoring in psychology, history or English with a Women’s Studies minor, and feminist doctrines thereby become part of the academic discourse far beyond the Women’s Studies classrooms, as these students go onto graduate school in their major field.

    The extreme doctrines taught in Women’s Studies are not cordoned off from the rest of academia, and the fear of being accused of sexism — discrimination is a violation of civil rights, which could mean getting dragged into an ugly federal lawsuit — is so overwhelming within higher education that no member of the faculty or administration will criticize the radical feminist agenda. Unhindered by any opposition, then, the high priestesses of radical feminism have an influence on campus far greater than their numbers might suggest. The 90,000 students enrolled annually in Women’s Studies programs are less than 3% of total enrollment in U.S. colleges and universities; however, these numbers add up cumulatively year after year, so that it’s likely there are more than 500,000 American women under 30 who have taken at least one Women’s Studies class. Having scoured the Internet for online syllabi, I can assure you that even the basic “Intro to Women’s Studies” class is likely to be crammed full of radicalism.

    The point is that it will take many decades, and a lot of effort, to eradicate radical propaganda. One place to confront the damage done to our nation is the principles of our founding.

    The widespread influence of radical feminism permeates our society…look around, the “proof” is everywhere you look. Radical feminists are, like it or don;t, part of the Democrat party and the progressive (liberal) left.

  17. Peggy says:

    Tina, also schools didn’t have textbooks back then, but just about everyone had a bible. So kids would have been taught morality in school as well as the home.

    It’s sad to hear about young people turning to these terrorist groups because their looking for spiritual guidance they didn’t get growing up. We used to be a nation full of families who went to church on Sundays and said grace before every meal. Now we’re a nation who ridicules people of faith like Tim Tebow and a DNC that tried to remove “God” from it platform.

    Is anyone really surprised we’re in the mess we’re in after raising a whole generation to believe they didn’t need spiritual guidance? They could learn on the streets what was acceptable and not acceptable behavior, because it wasn’t being taught in a lot of homes any more and completely banned from schools.

    One of my son’s teachers once said, “It’s impossible to teach kids what silence is when they can’t hear it.” It’s also impossible for children to know the difference from good and evil if they’ve never been taught it.

  18. Chris says:

    Tina: “The men that you deride, the founders,”

    ENOUGH with the strawman arguments. I did not “deride” the founders, unless you believe that calling them “geniuses” who were ahead of their time–while also acknowledging the fact that they weren’t flawless–counts as “derision.” I cannot possibly believe that you are that stupid, so my only conclusion is that you are being deliberately dishonest. To what end? Who are you trying to fool? Everyone visiting your blog can clearly read, meaning they all know I never derided the Founders…so what do you gain by lying about what I said?

    “had the wisdom to write a document that protects individual rights regardless of faith or lack thereof and regardless of gender, as it turns out. That was an extraordinary thing to accomplish given the traditions of the times.”

    Yes, that would be exactly what I just said.

    “During the election in 2008 when the subject of the the rights admiration for the Constitution came up it was common for the democrat faithful to cheer, clap and laugh when the framers were called “old white men.””

    If this was so common, certainly you can show some examples of it.

    Your list of feminist quotes–for which you did not cite a source–is complete bullshit.

    Catherine Mackinnon never said that “all sex is rape:”

    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/mackinnon.asp

    Half the women you cited are either dead, elderly, or otherwise not at all influential in feminist circles (for God’s sake, you think Sharon Stone is a representative of “70s radical feminism?” And that her making a joke on a late night show has anything to do with feminism? What is wrong with you?). The Dworkin and Marilyn French quotes are both taken from works of fiction, and thus it is dishonest to claim that they represent their actual views. Valerie Solanas was a paranoid schizophrenic who tried to murder Andy Warhol–hardly a good representative for any movement.

    I’m not even going to bother fact-checking the rest of those quotes.

    You defended a man this week who flat-out encouraged boys to keep trying to have sex with girls even AFTER the girl has said no…and you have the audacity to sit there and condemn feminists? Are you broken inside?

    “It’s one thing to teach that the traditions of the era made life much different than what we experience today and quite another to go out of the way to make our founders, and men generally, appear to be thoughtless, heartless, tyrannical monsters who belong in prison so that the superior sex, women, can rule the world. This isn’t education; it is indoctrination.”

    Agreed. Thank god it’s only happening in your fevered, hateful imagination, not in real life.

  19. Chris says:

    Peggy: “It’s sad to hear about young people turning to these terrorist groups because their looking for spiritual guidance they didn’t get growing up. We used to be a nation full of families who went to church on Sundays and said grace before every meal. Now we’re a nation who ridicules people of faith like Tim Tebow and a DNC that tried to remove “God” from it platform.”

    Yes, clearly the problem with kids who turn to radical Islamist terrorism is that they aren’t religious enough.

    Really?

  20. Tina says:

    Chris: ” I did not “deride” the founders”

    My apologies. You have in the past made remarks about them from the feminist viewpoint…critical of them being typical men of the era as if we should judge them based on today’s standards. I was likely injecting those past comments as I read the above.

    I realize you don’t agree with me that radical feminism has shaped modern society but you are hardly in a position to know since you didn’t live through the changes or witness first hand the activist women that were bashing men and negatively influencing and impacting society while they scratched and clawed their way to prominence. I read their ideas in publications like Cosmo and watched our society become more dysfunctional and broken through the years. They based their positions on their own broken lives and experiences rather than any real conditions that couldn’t have been overcome with effort and perseverance. Girls of my generation were already being encouraged to attend college, follow their dreams, and achieve big things. The “movement” was largely manufactured in the “fevered, hateful” imaginations of the dysfunctional women who revived the feminist movement in the seventies..

    Chris you wrote: “Half the women you cited are either dead, elderly, or otherwise not at all influential in feminist circles…”

    That would make sense since I was not talking about you and your little circle of friends but about the influence of radical feminists from the seventies and the negative influence they’ve had on men, women, children, education and society since then.

    If a couple of the quotes are wrong I apologize. I am not the first, apparently to make the mistake. They are not all wrong, however, and they certainly do all reflect the sentiment I read for years in the pages of magazines like Cosmo. (A single link was provided for the quotes by the way.)

    Chris: “You defended a man this week who flat-out encouraged boys to keep trying to have sex with girls even AFTER the girl has said no”

    THAT IS A LIE! That is not what he was communicating and it is a $#!**% to suggest it.

    Just because you can’t relate to what was said doesn’t mean what was said was a lie.

  21. Chris says:

    Tina, every time you talk about feminism you reveal even more cluelessness about it. The fact that you’re using Cosmo, of all sources, as a representative of feminism is simply hilarious.

    “That would make sense since I was not talking about you and your little circle of friends”

    Neither am I. I am talking about the actual feminist movement, and you are talking about a strawman that you got from dishonest sources which fabricated quotes.

    What feminist blogs do you visit, Tina? What prominent feminists have you read? (I mean actually read, not taken quotes out of context from.) You simply do not know what you are talking about when you talk about feminism.

    Some first and second wave feminists did speak badly of men. Given the time period and the way women were marginalized in society, that is not exactly a surprise, nor is it reason to condemn the whole movement. Anger is a huge part of any legitimate civil rights movement, and sometimes it is expressed in less than constructive ways.

    What I don’t get is why people fighting against oppression are always held to a higher standard of politeness and civility than the people actually engaging in the oppression. This has also been true of every civil rights movement. You call out “angry gays” a lot, but you have nothing to say about the so-called “family” groups that routinely compare gay relationships to pedophilia and bestiality, blame them for the decline of society, call them unfit parents, and, oh yeah, fight to actually deny them rights. The oppressed have always been held to a higher standard than the oppressors.

    You do the same with feminists. Feminists today are evil because feminists in the 70s said mean things about men, but Rush Limbaugh engages in sexist attacks on women nearly every week and you say nothing.

    “THAT IS A LIE! That is not what he was communicating and it is a $#!**% to suggest it.”

    That is EXACTLY what he said, and you acknowledged it at the time.

    Rush: “How many of you guys, in your own experience with women, have learned that “no” means “yes” if you know how to spot it? Let me tell you something. In this modern world, that is simply not tolerated. People aren’t even gonna try to understand that one. I mean, it used to be said it was a cliche. It used to be part of the advice young boys were given. See, that’s what we gotta change. We have got to reprogram the way we raise men. Why do you think permission every step of the way, clearly spelling out “why”… are all of these not lawsuits just waiting to happen if even one of these steps is not taken?”

    There is no plausible interpretation of this statement that is NOT an endorsement of the way things used to be, when boys were taught that “‘no’ means ‘yes’ if you know how to spot it.” You even defended this interpretation yourself, and criticized the stance that “No always means no”:

    “Well sure Darlin because you live in the feminist PC bubble in which girls are free to do as they like and boys are taught that women are their own boss so you need special permisso for every move…course, you’re screwed if she happens to be a B.

    Rush Limbaugh was raised to be a gentleman, to assume nothing, to treat women with respect, and never make a move unless it was clear that the woman was interested and both would follow the natural signals of respectful people in love…which at times might include, “Don’t“…”stop”…”don’t“…”stop”…don’t stop!!!”

    http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/09/23/anti-free-speech-dnc-get-rid-rush-limbaugh/

    So I stand by my statement: Rush was clearly saying that “no means no” is a wrong-headed and unfair rule, and that things were better off when boys were taught that “no” doesn’t always mean “no.” You then agreed with him.

    I asked you if you understood how dangerous it was to teach boys that no doesn’t always mean no, and that they should keep making moves on women who have already rejected them, and you did not respond.

    You are unable to process the very clear meaning of Rush’s words because you have a mental filter which causes you to assume the worst possible interpretation of your opponents words, while also assuming the most charitable possible interpretation of your tribal kindred’s words, even if those interpretations are completely illogical and removed from what the individual in question actually said.

    You also ignored that these words come in the context of Rush’s long history of sexist remarks toward women. You ignored his frequent, nonsensical attacks on the first lady’s weight, despite the fact that she is one of the most fit and athletic first ladies ever. You ignored his dismissal of Danica Patrick’s opinion because she is just a “woman driver.” You ignored his lying about Sandra Fluke’s testimony, revealing he has no idea about how hormonal birth control works, calling her a slut, and then asking her to post her sex tapes on the Internet for his enjoyment; you ignored him calling NOW “whores for liberalism,” even though you just condemned HuffPo for publishing an article calling Michele Malkin a “whore for the far right,” which I conceded was sexist and wrong; you ignored his calling Chelsea Clinton the “White House dog;” and the list goes on and on and one.

    If you can’t see how hateful and bigoted Rush Limbaugh is, the only explanation is because you’re just as hateful and bigoted.

  22. Tina says:

    I guess the word radical, stated, emphasized, and highlighted over and over again doesn’t compute. Nor does the clear indication that was talking about an effect I have witnessed over decades.

    You intend to make my words an indictment of YOUR experience and worldview when it isn’t. It is about my experience and worldview of a period about which you know very little…since you were not on the planet for most of it

    Do not kid yourself. In terms of the every woman experience and the dissemination of the latest in feminist dogma Cosmo was the publication of record…the internet didn’t exist, libraries were old and stogy…we only had three channels of television controlled by the establishment (Our grandparents)

    Your understanding of Rush comment is retarded because of your youth and pigheaded bigotry. Please hate away and remain stuck in that silly bubble of modern liberal thought. A bubble in which rules from the office (At college!!!) are necessary because even after forty years of feminist instruction girls and boys have reached the age of consent but are too out of control and thoughtless and require kindergarten hand holding over every single intimate move they make.

    You cannot see the comic tragedy in that!

    You cannot see it because you take greater pleasure or see more value in trying to make me or Rush Limbaugh look like fools than in learning something that might be valuable or interesting.

    Rush has nearly 30 years on the radio three hours a day five days a week. The number of so-called sexist remarks you could find in all of those transcripts that could actually be attributed to him wouldn’t fill a thimble. Bill Clinton’s record of accused rape and abuse of women is long and has never been treated with the same disdain by anyone of note on the left. You are all a bunch hypocrites on women’s issues and your policies in general have been disastrous for women.

    Your list that “goes on and on” is flawed. There is no way to respond to unreasonable and erroneous assumptions, bigoted hatred, and agenda driven attitudes and crap.

    Generally speaking, women, children, boys, families, men…black men are not doing better since the seventies.

    The real war is not on women but has been waged by radical women. It is a war on marriage and shared reliance within the family structure. It is a war on traditions that preserve, respect and honor life. It is a war in which radicals in the feminist movement have sought to tear down and destroy anything they decided was male dominated and exclusive. It didn’t occur to these women to build. The damage they have done needs to be recognized. It’s tough beans if you don’t want to face it; there are plenty of people who do.

    You have a nice night Chris.

  23. Chris says:

    Tina: “Bill Clinton’s record of accused rape and abuse of women is long and has never been treated with the same disdain by anyone of note on the left.”

    The fact that none of these accusations have been proven doesn’t mean shit to you, does it?

  24. Chris says:

    Tina: “There is no way to respond to unreasonable and erroneous assumptions, bigoted hatred, and agenda driven attitudes and crap.”

    There is, however, a way to respond to Rush Limbaugh’s fat jokes about Michelle Obama, and his various other sexist attacks, which have been well documented. And that is with condemnation. It’s actually really easy; the fact that you can’t do it says more about your weird, incomprehensible need to hold this woman-hating bigot on some kind of pedestal where he can do no wrong.

    I really don’t see what you’re getting out of that relationship.

  25. Dewey says:

    Bottom Line Rush’s ratings are in the toilet……

    He went to far. Women from all parties went after him…men joined in….free speech is for everybody

    No one wants to listen to anti women stuff from the middle east or rush

    Tina where can I meet you ? You do not speak like any female I have ever met. Coffee someday? very peaceful cup of Joe?

  26. Tina says:

    Left wing radio’s bright lights never really got off the ground…how’s that for ratings?

    Left wing TV news is dropping like a rock, they are laying off workers and the big stars are losing their jobs or “moving on.”

    Dewey has been reading left wing crap again.

    The editors of Talkers Magazine put out a list of “The Most Important Talk Show Hosts in America” for 2014.

    Guess who is in the #1 slot?

    That’s right, Rush Limbaugh!

    Sean Hannity is #2

    Five of the top six are conservative political talkers. The sixth is a financial guy that advises helps people how to get themselves out of debt.

    See the full list at Talkers.com.

  27. Tina says:

    Very nice of you to offer but no thank you, Dewey.

    I don’t “talk about women.” I talk about the negative effect that radical feminism of the seventies has had on our society…particularly men.

    People on the left are afraid to take an honest look at high drop out rates, high crime, fewer men graduating college, failed schools, the rise of gangs, higher rates of single motherhood, an obscene number of abortion performed, drug and alcohol abuse, sex addiction, higher instances of rape…dysfunctional society.

    I think its a subject that deserves consideration. If we cannot correct mistakes of the past, and shoving men into a corner ad deeming them irrelevant IS a mistake, how can we ever expect to progress as a society?

  28. Dewey says:

    Oh well it could have been fun. I am not an aggressive nor evil person.

    I look at all issues.

    The 20th century is gone. Look at the difference between 1800 and 1900. Young kids today do not have the same views as you or even I, nor are most racist or see a difference in gender rights.

    I am saddened by how propaganda and lies are controlling media as JFK warned.

    I am sad that the military industrial complex putting profit over the diff between necessary war and profit war as Eisenhower warned us.

    Worse yet is the Tea party having one mission stated to their people while their Politicians are on a different mission.

    Many Occupy members have been captured by the FBI into believing Alex Jones conspiracy theories.

    In the end we have had a fake democracy but still have more rights than many countries.

    The students in Hong Kong were told they could have an election but the Chinese Gov would pick the candidates. They are standing strong for the right to choose and vote!

    So why not protect this country, allow people to disagree and vote.

    Stop suppressing the vote to win as well.

    Just because the supreme court is ruling for things you like, does not mean when they have it so only conservatives ever win elections and rule we will
    not be like Russia and China.

    Historical documents are fascinating try reading the 70’s and 80’s instead of 1700’s. Our problems started there.

    SCOTUS is corrupt now it is sad.

    Both movements had a point but the Politicians are a force for the oligarchs due to the necessity to campaign 24/7 for donors or be removed by donors in next election.

    Citizens Untied money from the Oligarchy runs this country and Politicians do nothing but work for them.

  29. Dewey says:

    ANd again Tina

    I watch the politicians. I watch Congress.

    Left wing TV? The Left wing is boycotting them as they are pressured to repeat lies by Comcast and others.

    get out of the Media Box!

    If you call Andrea Greenspan Mitchell and Chuck RW Todd the left you have not a clue. There is no liberal TV anymore.

    Independent Media on the internet who tell truth, film scenes live as they happen took 35% market share.

    Independents are leaving both the left and the right for truth.

    Stop repeating the tea Party Propaganda on who the people with facts are.

    I am down to one TV news show as they are crafty, stay withing company suppression guidelines and still get info out.

    Tina stand up for TRUTH! Hate for those who want freedom for everybody is not American

Comments are closed.