An apology to men

The only valuable apology us women can make to men is not one of empty words, a pretty “sorry” or an easy “thank you”. The real apology that we can make is action.

Action translates into:

  1. Responsibility. Women need to take responsibility for their actions. Enough running to the State when things go bad. Enough blaming anything and anybody but ourselves for the bad decisions we make. We need to grow up and take responsibility for our choices: bad sex, a failed marriage, single motherhood, even abortion, all these outcomes don’t fall on us from the sky, we contribute to them if not actually cause them. We need to categorically say no to victimhood.
  2. Individualism. We have to refuse the collectivist mindset of the female-run beehive society and return to individualism and meritocracy. We have to single out, isolate and when necessary, even shame those women who, for instance, falsely accuse someone of rape or use the State and the court system to destroy their husband. “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other“. This in-group mentality may be valid if there is a threat coming form outsiders, but in civilized Western countries, (white, especially) men are not our enemy nor a threat to us. We need to use reason and logic to analyze each case instead of simply “listen and believe”. Those who commit despicable actions, commit despicable actions irrespective of their gender. If you’re a woman and falsely accuse someone, or make other terrible choices, you will not get a free pass from me just because I’m a woman too. I will actually feel ashamed of being a woman like you and will want to have nothing to do with you.
  3. Virtue. The values of honesty, honor, commitment, self-sacrifice, courage and loyalty are gone, because they are associated with religion, which atheists despise. “Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist.” (J.P.Sartre) Religion tells us what we don’t like to hear, whereas the religion of atheism tells us what we like to hear, that being unfaithful/irresponsible/selfish/etc. is OK. We have to restore virtue and values, not based on religion, but on Reason. As a woman, I choose to be a person of values (integrity, honor, commitment) – which in y eyes leads to being a person of value – and pursue a man who is also a virtuous person and work hard to raise our children in the light of these values.

A mere “sorry” is not enough.

Advertisements

Women are…. Muslims.

 

When Dave Rubin asked Milo Yannopoulos whether he made the distinction between the Islamist terrorists and the nominal Muslims who don’t take their religion literally and are the “normal”, peaceful ones, Milo answered clearly that he does not make and does not care for that distinction (3:29):

“No, I don’t care too much for that distinction. It is not extremists, it’s not radical Islamists that the Security Service are worried about that are the problem. The problem is the silent majority of Muslims who do nothing in this situation, who have no peace movement, no resistance to their own extremist elements.”

 

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but those who are, are defended and protected by other Muslims. Their acts are never condemned, they’re actually encouraged, promoted and praised by their religion/culture. And even if there were only a few who commit horrible crimes, it’s impossible to tell them apart from those who don’t. We’ve seen it before, the “normal” ones becoming radicalized – even if they had been welcomed by the West generations before  – and eventually turned out deadly. Even if there are only a few terrorists, the damage they inflict is huge and since you can’t tell them apart from the alleged peaceful ones, are we going to keep taking the risk? If you had a bag of M&Ms and a few of them were poisonous, would you eat them?

There is a distinction between peaceful Muslims and terrorist Muslims, but a time may come when such distinction may no longer matter. For some, that time has already arrived. I know it has for me. But at the same time, I have found myself making the same distinction when it comes to “normal” women and the dangerous/evil ones. I know that not all women are feminists or monsters, just like I know not all Muslims are killers. But I think in both cases, the distinction is starting to become obsolete and irrelevant, and too dangerous to be carried on. Women don’t blow things up, but they are dangerous, both to others and themselves: they can falsely accuse you, take your kids/money/reputation/career away, they can use the law/courts system to their advantage and are never expected to take responsibility for their actions, not to mention that they are ones who are most in favor of bringing in these huge masses of migrants, at least in Europe. Not all women do these things, but they carry on, support and spread the ideology that led to them getting more rights than men: they are the ones who educate (indoctrinate) the children, both at home and at school, they’re the ones who are getting most of the degrees and getting the higher jobs and are in the media and in politics, changing laws and the perception of the public. You can see an example of this situation in the Gomeshi case and how it was handled by the media.

So what can I do, when even I, who am not one of those women have to come to the conclusion that the distinction no longer matters or soon it will no longer matter? Milo comes to mind, once again, when today he tweeted:

 

Milo Yiannopoulos ✘@Nero 

I’m sorry, North Carolina. I promise not all gays are such faggots. Happy Easter.

That’s what I too have to do and I think all of those women who are not monsters need to do: we need to openly condemn and distance ourselves from the harpees (and by them I don’t only mean feminists) and their ideology that constantly puts feelings before facts, shows contempt for the law and absolute lack of morality, despises free speech, due process, objectivity and meritocracy.  We need to stop lying and making excuses for the women who lie. We basically need to say: “Sorry, humanity. Not all women are cunts and we’re determined to prove it.” We need to forget the beehive mentality and say out loud that we do not agree with women who say things like this:
Lyndsay Kirkham@Lyndsay_Kirkham

And welp, so much internalized misogyny. Women: stand with each other. Support each other.

Lyndsay Kirkham@Lyndsay_Kirkham Mar 26

When you celebrate the Ghomeshi “acquittal” as “innocence”, you’re rape culture.

 

 

We need to start fighting and show our support for men and the Western values, which have allowed us to have rights and thrive, just like the peaceful Muslims need to stand up against Muslim terrorists, especially the Muslims who have been welcomed by the West generations ago and allowed them to thrive.

Abortion is a totally joyful experience…

Nowadays women think it’s OK for them to lie, even under oath (see the Gomeshi trial).  They think it’s OK for them to be uncivilized. And that killing people is empowering and “joyful” and not taking responsibility for their actions is totally OK.

 

I had an abortion and it was a totally joyful experience

 

Well, at least she didn’t falsely accuse her partner of rape after the “regrettable night”…

by Irene Ogrizek, “Competing for Jian Gomeshi”

 

“After years of observing my parents and reading up on domestic abuse, I knew the dominant narrative we have of it in Canada is hopelessly skewed. Most of it is not misogynistic; most of it involves substance abuse and is mutual in some way. The story of a vulnerable, abused woman, regularly beaten by her husband, is a distortion of another story, a story that for many children comes with a cultural dictum that forbids them from admitting–even to themselves–that their mother may be just as bad.*Needless to say, this isn’t a popular perspective. But acknowledging its existence is necessary to counteract the pervasive belief that only women can be victims of domestic violence. Given all my research and experience, I find it curious that the male-on-female variation dominates in our culture to the extent that it does, overshadowing even parent-on-child violence, which is far more damaging. For example, when we do hear about child abuse, the default position is that the perpetrator is male and sex is involved. But by now we know women–mothers included–can be abusive and neglectful too. So why can’t we just say it?

The omission raises other important questions. With these cultural biases built into our social services, what are the children of those women supposed to think? That daddy is the bad guy, despite the fact that it’s mom who gets drunk first and starts fighting? That mom is right to keep the fridge stocked with beer because—nudge, nudge, wink, wink–controlling a drunk man who passes out every night is easier than controlling a sober one who doesn’t? What goes through children’s minds when they arrive at a shelter where the guiding narrative is ‘We have to hide from daddy because he’s bad,’ when what they’ve seen tells them mom isn’t much better? What does that distortion do to children?”

Letter to an every day woman

Dear every day woman,
I would like to talk to you about our sons, our husbands, all the men in our lives. I want to talk about males.

As women, we don’t always understand men, their sexuality, their practicality; they don’t love talking about their feelings, they are independent and used to rely only on themselves, they are silent, hardworking giants who love to protect their families and are proud to take care of them. They are risk-takers, passionate and resilient, they have invented and built everything we have today, from the chair you are sitting on to the computer I am typing on. Our fathers have dedicated their lives to defend and sustain our family, our husbands are doing the same with us, they give our children the type of care and the unique qualities that honorable manhood has blessed humanity with. Our men are dedicated to their women (and children) and trust and admire us deeply.

Yet, we are failing them. Every day, mainstream media tell us that men hate us, harass us and exploit us. We are constantly told that women don’t need men, women are stronger and better, manhood is toxic and men don’t care for their children and are dangerous to society. Boys will be boys. Men are all the same. They are all cheaters and all rapists and all domestic abusers. The mere fact that they are biologically attracted to women, look at them or talk to them is sick. They are accused of mansplaining, manspreading, and some women even wish that all men were put in a lager, just for being males. The underlying, sexist idea is that men are always the aggressors, and women always the victims and they are always right and not capable of lying and just need to be blindly believed because they are women. Nowadays a woman can walk away from a marriage at any time, file for divorce and automatically be given sole custody of the children and ruin the life of her husband, take everything away from him, everything he had built, and even take his children away. Ever heard of Parental Alienation? Divorce rates are very high and usually initiated by women due to “unhappiness” in the marriage. Families are destroyed.  The court system is also trying to take away the rights that come to us from our glorious tradition of Constitutional values, such as due process, which allows us to defend ourselves in court and give us the fundamental right to a free trial. If a girl at university nowadays has sex (so many of them are very promiscuous and indulge in dangerous habits such as alcohol) and regrets it the day after, she can accuse the boy, have him expelled and ruin his career, even if he was just as intoxicated as she was and therefore unable to consent. If it then turns out, like it often does, that she lied, she will have no legal consequences, her name will not be disclosed, whereas the accused boy’s reputation will be forever stained, regardless of his innocence. Your son could be next.

The courts are just one example of how our society is currently stacked against males. Schools are too. The vast majority of teachers are females and simply can’t handle boys, they either treat them like non-girls or ignore them, or even consider them evil. At an elementary school here in Canada last year, 18 boys were registered for kindergarten and instead of being welcomed, they were considered a problem, an issue and were split into 3 different classes so it would be easier to handle them. Back in the day, when I was in school, we had 1 teacher for a class of 30 kids, of which many were boys, and guess what, she could handle everybody just fine and girls could be in the same class as boys. Our boys are suffering in school, the troubled ones are sent to psychiatrists that put them on antidepressants from the age of TWO! Since they are considered a danger to society and women are considered incapable of defending themselves or even taking responsibility for their own decisions, they want to make sexual education courses mandatory for children, again, as young as 2! And our boys fall behind, their grades drop, fewer and fewer of them graduate. Which means less scientists, doctors, engineers, and so on, which means less progress for all of us. Who wants to see their boy grow up to become a janitor, a sewers worker, a delivery driver (with all due respect to those who work in such fundamental fields)? These are not just low-paid jobs but the most dangerous ones and are mostly done by males. But you don’t hear that on the media. The media tells us that women are paid less then men. They are not paid less. If the system allowed that, employers would only hire women! Instead, it’s called free market and personal choice: women tend to work less hours because of their family commitments and major in fields that lead to less dangerous and therefore less paid jobs, such as gender studies, teaching, etc. Less intelligent, skilled, men and men with low social status are not advantageous for our daughters either: who, how and when will they marry and have children with, in the future? Women are already complaining that today it’s hard to find a man, many are afraid to even approach women, who seem very aggressive and from a much higher social status than they are. Our daughters will be unhappy too in the moment in which they realize there is nobody they can build a family with.

Despite what mainstream media want us to believe, nowadays women enjoy many more legal rights than men: women have the right to genital integrity, to vote without agreeing to die (“conscription immunity”), the right to choose parenthood (they can choose between many forms of contraception and can decide, alone, whether to have or not to have an abortion and force the dad to be financially responsible – he has no choice in the matter, only duties), women have the right to be assumed (competent) caregivers for children, the right to call unwanted, coerced sex rape, the right to lower jail sentences for the same crime, the right to not be assumed sexual predators,  the right to government departments that solely serve their interests (Ministry for women, Office on violence against women, etc. ), the right to government-enforced gender quotas, the right to domestic violence  shelters, the right to not be assumed the primary aggressor in a domestic dispute (yes, female abusers do exist and more than you think). We are constantly told that women are in danger, whereas violence on males is much, much higher than violence on women. The government constantly gives funds to promote women, women in schools, tech, politics, sports, whereas our males are left behind because they are boys. We are always told that there are more men in politics than women, but not that the majority of voters are females and they tend to vote for males. Just a small example of the degree of disinformation and manipulation we receive from the media.

And now one of the saddest aspects of the war on males: suicide rates. Our men are killing themselves at an appallingly high rate, much, much, much higher than women. They are silently going away and we are doing nothing to help them. After centuries and centuries of men taking care of us, we are able to forget our fathers and grandfathers, brothers and husbands and believe those who constantly belittle them and want to take them away from us.

Please don’t let this happen to you. Make sure the males in your life know how much you love and appreciate them. We are all flawed, nobody’s perfect, but together we complete each other and we make our lives better and greater. Don’t take your males for granted, just because they’re humble, contained or discreet with their feelings and sometimes flawed (we are too). Make sure they know that we might be different, but we cherish our differences and love their qualities and don’t let anybody, from the media to our Prime Minister, consider men as second class citizens. Let’s stand up for our men. Let’s stop the war on boys.

(Please note: the fact that I am advocating for males does not mean that I hate women or don’t care about them. It’s quite the opposite. I value both males and females and firmly believe that together they can thrive and that both deserve equal rights. I am aware that not all women are responsible for the war on males, but the ones who do, are the ones who are in power and have power over those who make laws. They are the vocal ones, that’s why it’s so important that if we care about our dads, husbands and sons, we make our voices heard and draw a clear line between those women and us.)

I have evidence for every single thing I wrote, in case you are interested in seeing it I would be happy to provide you with some links. For more on this topic:

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter.
Yours,
Mom4Dads.

Salem, 1692. Canada, 2016.

 In January 1692, 9-year-old Elizabeth (Betty) Parris and 11-year-old Abigail Williams (the daughter and niece of Samuel Parris, minister of Salem Village) began having fits, including violent contortions and uncontrollable outbursts of screaming. After a local doctor, William Griggs, diagnosed bewitchment, other young girls in the community began to exhibit similar symptoms.
In late February, arrest warrants were issued for the Parris’ Caribbean slave, Tituba, along with two other women–the homeless beggar Sarah Good and the poor, elderly Sarah Osborn–whom the girls accused of bewitching them.

The three accused witches were brought before the magistrates Jonathan Corwin and John Hathorne and questioned, even as their accusers appeared in the courtroom in a grand display of spasms, contortions, screaming and writhing.

Though Good and Osborn denied their guilt, Tituba confessed. Likely seeking to save herself from certain conviction by acting as an informer, she claimed there were other witches acting alongside her in service of the devil against the Puritans. As hysteria spread through the community and beyond into the rest of Massachusetts, a number of others were accused, including Martha Corey and Rebecca Nurse–both regarded as upstanding members of church and community–and the four-year-old daughter of Sarah Good.

Like Tituba, several accused “witches” confessed and named still others, and the trials soon began to overwhelm the local justice system. In May 1692, the newly appointed governor of Massachusetts, William Phips, ordered the establishment of a special Court of Oyer (to hear) and Terminer (to decide) on witchcraft cases for Suffolk, Essex and Middlesex counties. Presided over by judges including Hathorne, Samuel Sewall and William Stoughton, the court handed down its first conviction, against Bridget Bishop, on June 2; she was hanged eight days later on what would become known as Gallows Hill in Salem Town. Five more people were hanged that July; five in August and eight more in September. In addition, seven other accused witches died in jail, while the elderly Giles Corey (Martha’s husband) was pressed to death by stones after he refused to enter a plea at his arraignment

All this happened in Salem, 1692.

Women lying in court led to many people, men and women, being imprisoned and sentenced to death. All this happened because at that time there were no due process guarantees.
During the Salem Witch Trials people were questioned by a jury that already
thought they were guilty and asked questions that would make them seem guilty.
Thanks to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, today we have rights that protect us from false accusations and unfair trials.

In the Constitution we can see rights that were affected by the Salem Witch
Trials, evidence for the fact that the drafters of the Constitution were
perfectly aware of what would happen if people did not have certain legal
rights.  Most of the rights that are related to the Salem Witch Trials deal
with in the fifth and sixth amendment.  The Fifth Amendment gives us rights such
as, grand jury, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and due process, while the
sixth amendment gives us rights like jury trial, right to confront and to
counsel.  (“Bill of Rights”)

In those two amendments there are some important points that were influenced  by the Salem Witch Trials.  One of the things the Fifth Amendment tells us
is, “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against
himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,” This is on the premise
with the right that nobody has to provide a self-incriminating testimony against
himself.  In the witch trials self-incriminating questions were asked and they
had to be answered.  Also during the witch trials they had no defense, but as
specified by the Bill of Rights, “and to have the assistance of counsel for his
defense.” This specifies that everybody must have a right to defend themselves;
however, this right was denied during the witch trials. (“Bill of Rights”)

             During the Salem Witch Trials people were questioned by a jury that already
thought they were guilty and asked questions that would make them seem guilty.
This is dealt with in the Bill of rights too where it says, “In all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by
an impartial jury.”  (“Bill of Rights”)

Salem, 1692 is how far back in time some women in Canada want to take us.
By exploiting a high-profile case like Mr. Gomeshi’s trial, and the help of corrupt, tax-based mainstream media, some women are trying to remove due process and send us straight back to the Middle Ages.
It doesn’t really matter if Mr.Gomeshi is guilty or not, nor does it matter to women that the accusers have lied under oath. They will not face any consequences, what they did will barely make it in the news and it will be justified and erased by a simple “yes, but that doesn’t mean anything”. All that matters is that they want to remove our rights to defend ourselves, to question the accusers and force us to blindly listen and believe. They want to start by removing due process in cases of sexual harassment. How long will it take until it is removed altogether?

In conclusion the Salem Witch Trials influenced America for centuries after
the event. The Salem witch trials helped us to make the transition between supernatural
and rational thought. The events that occured during the salem witch trials aslo affeced our constitution, which allows certain rights that were seriously lacking in the trials, including the right to a speedy and public trial, to defend oneself against accusations, and to not be forced to provide a self-incriminating testimony
.

We have been brought up to believe that religion is the enemy and atheism is the cure. Religion does not only come under the name of Islam or Christianity. Replace the word “religion” with feminism, communism, and so on. Religion is any type of totalitarian belief system based on dogmas, censorship, propaganda and indoctrination of children. It is directly opposed to individual freedom. It is collectivist in nature and manifests itself with the alteration of the meaning of words and ends up with the complete removal of human rights. We are marching at a frightening speed towards slavery. And the worst thing is that it’s happening right before our eyes, but since we are blinded by the media and years of indoctrination in public schools, we don’t realize it and most of us even welcome the loss of our freedom.

What can I do to stop this?

Please read the verbatim conversation between Giles Corey and his accusers during the trial in 1692 (He ended up pressed to death for refusing to admit he was guilty). This is what we are seeing today. This is where we’re headed.


The Deposistion of Mercy lewes agged about 19 years who testi-
fieth and saith that on the 14’th April 1692 I saw the Apperishtion
of Giles Cory com and afflect me urging me to writ in his book and
so he contineued most dreadfully to hurt me by times beating me
& almost braking my back tell the day of his examination being the
19th April and then allso dureing the time of his examination he did
afflect and tortor me most greviously: and also several times sence
urging me vehemently to writ in his book and I veryly beleve in my
heart that Giles Cory is a dreadfull wizzard for sence he had ben in
prison he or his Apperance has com and most greviously tormented
me.

(The Examination of Giles Cory)

The examination of GILES CORY, at a Court at Salem
Village, held by John Hathorn and Jona. Curwin, Esqrs.
April 19, 1692.

Giles Cory, you are brought before authority upon high
suspicion of sundry acts of witchcraft; now tell us the
truth in this matter.

I hope through the goodness of God I shall, for that
matter I never had no hand in, in my life.
Which of you have seen this man hurt you?
Mary Wolcott, Mercy Lewis, Ann Putnam, jr. and Abi- gail Williams affirmed he had hurt them

Hath he hurt you too? speaking to Elizabeth Hubbard.
She going to answer was prevented by a fit.
Benjamin Gold, hath he hurt you?
I have seen him several times, and been hurt after it,
but cannot affirm that it was he.
Hath he brought the book to any of you?
Mary Wolcott and Abigail Williams and others affirmed
he had brought the book to them.

Giles Cory, they accuse you, or your appearance, of
hurting them, and bringing the book to them. What do
you say? Why do you hurt them? Tell us the truth.
I never did hurt them.
It is your appearance hurts them, they charge you; tell
us what you have done.
I have done nothing to damage them.

Have you ever entered into contract with the devil?
I never did.
What temptations have you had?
I never had temptations in my life.
What, have you done it without temptations?

What was the reason (said goodwife Bibber) that you
were frighted in the cow-house? and then the questionist
was suddenly seized with a violent fit.

Samuel Braybrook, goodman Bibber, and his daughter,
testified that he had told them this morning that he was
frighted in the cow-house.
Cory denied it.
This was not your appearance but your person, and you
told them so this morning: why do you deny it?
What did you see in the cow-house?
I never saw nothing but my cattle.
Divers witnessed that he told them he was frighted.
Well, what do you say to these witnesses? What was
it frighted you?
I do not know that ever I spoke the word in my life.
Tell the truth, what was it frighted you?
I do not know any thing that frighted me.

All the afflicted were seized now with fits, and troubled
with pinches. Then the court ordered his hands to be tied.
What, is it not enough to act witchcraft at other times,
but must you do it now in the face of authority?
I am a poor creature, and cannot help it.
Upon the motion of his head again, they had their heads
and necks afflicted.

Why do you tell such wicked lies against witnesses, that
heard you speak after this manner, this very morning?
I never saw any thing but a black hog.
You said that you were stopt once in prayer; what
stopt you?
I cannot tell; my wife came towards me and found fault
with me for saying living to God and dying to sin.

What was it frighted you in the barn?
I know nothing frighted me there.
Why here are three witnesses that heard you say so
to-day.
I do not remember it.

Thomas Gold testified that he heard him say, that he
knew enough against his wife, that would do her business.
What was it that you knew against your wife?
Why that of living to God, and dying to sin.
The Marshal and Bibber’s daughter confirmed the same,
that he said he could say that that would do his wife’s
business.

I have said what I can say to that.
What was that about your ox?
I thought he was hipt.

What ointment was that your wife had when she was
seized? You said it was ointment she made by major Gidney’s direction.
He denied it, and said she had it of goody Bibber, or
from her direction.
Goody Bibber said it is not like that ointment.
You said you knew, upon your own knowledge, that she
had it of major Gidney.
He denied it.

Did not you say, when you went to the ferry with your
wife, you would not go over to Boston now, for you should
come yourself the next week?
I would not go over, because I had not money.
The Marshal testified he said as before.

One of his hands was let go, and several were afflicted.
He held his head on one side, and then the heads of seve-
ral of the afflicted were held on one side. He drew in
his cheeks, and the cheeks of some of the afflicted were
suckt in.

John Bibber and his wife gave testimony concerning
some temptations he had to make away with himself.
How doth this agree with what you said, that you had
no temptations?
I meant temptation to witchcraft.
If you can give away to self murther, that will make way
to temptation to witchcraft.

Note. There was witness by several, that he said he
would make away with himself, and charge his death up-
on his son.
Goody Bibber testified that the said Cory called said
Bibber’s husband, damn’d, devilish rogue.
Other vile expressions testified in open court by several
others.

Salem Village, April 19, 1692.
Mr. Samuel Parris being desired to take in writing the
examination of Giles Cory, delivered it in; and upon hear-
ing the same, and seeing what we did see at the time of his
examination, together with the charge of the afflicted persons
against him, we committed him to their majesties’ gaol.
John Hathorn.

Robert Calef, More Wonders of the Invisible World…, London (1700), reprinted in (Salem: John D. & T.C. Cushing, Jr. Cushing & Appleton, 1823): 310-312.

CBC never misses a chance to show journalism is dead and it’s just about propaganda. They won’t be happy until his life is completely destroyed, even if he’s found not guilty. The defense has the right to do anything possible to help him. It’s up to the accusers to prove that he’s guilty. Sorry if it bothers other victims, if he’s innocent he should not pay, a person’s life is more important than your hurt feelings. (And by the way, if they truly cared about real victims like they say they do, they wouldn’t try all they can to keep them being so fragile that anything can “hurt” them. Victimhood is a state of mind. Real victims survived much more than “fear of public scrutiny”.)

Of course, the overall effect of the Ghomeshi trial won’t be known until it’s over. The judge’s decision could become a major factor in whether complainants in other cases come forward.

How does this sentence belong in a news article?? How is this not considered an attempt to affect the judge’s decision???

And what about Ghomeshi’s public scrutiny? He immediately lost his job, everybody knows what’s happening to him even if the trial is still on and instead the “victim’s” identity is protected? Even if the judge finds him not guilty, his career ad what he had built throughout the years have been severely damaged and he won’t get back the time he lost.

 

 

 

Women and Treason

From “Treason – Liberal treachery from the Cold war to the war on terrorism” – by Ann Coulter

“While undermining victory in the Cold War, liberals dedicated themselves to mainstreaming Communist ideals at home. Soviet stooge Henry wallace wrote in his diary that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for America would “inevitably come”. It has come, and in a manner Americans never expected. Betraying the manifest national defense objectives of the country is only part of the left’s treasonous scheme. They aim to destroy America from the inside with their relentless attacks on morality and the truth.

The immediate consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a wholesale abandonment of morals. Laws against divorce were loosened, promiscuity was encouraged, and marriage was demeaned as a “bourgeois institution”. Providing a battle cry for the sexual anarchists. Vladimir Lenin had famously said that the act of sex should “be as simple and unimportant as drinking a glass of water.” Americans liberals have used their hegemonic control of television, movies, glossy magazines and newspapers to create a charming world in which women apparently cannot bear to keep their shirts on. Promoting the feminist version of Howard Stern sexuality, liberals champion joyless sex. As Irving Kristol said, a liberal is a person who sees a fourteen-year-old girl performing live sex acts onstage and wonders if she’s being paid the minimum wage. All media outlets keep up the drumbeat for lesbianism, abortion on demand, and pornography. It’s Jerry Springer’s world. We just live in it.

Feminists led the way. In 1998, CBS This Morning co-host Jane Robelot cheerfully reported on the wonderful world feminists had wrought: “The women’s movement brought change and power to millions of American females. Virginal brides surrendered to the sexual revolution. Modern fashions exposed body parts previously reserved for the bedroom. Entering the workforce meant the old ways that women met men were ancient history (video clip of a milkman). And a new breed of superwoman said “I can have it all.”… The search for pleasure leads some women to shop (video clip of sex toys) and some to stray… And experts say many husbands and wives can become stronger individuals, and on rare occasions, might even find that cheating recharges their marriage.” Exhibitionism, promiscuity, sex toys, and adultery. This us women’s liberation.

Interestingly, de Toqueville attributed the strength and character of America to its women. While European women were fainting in the parlor with the vapors, in the New World women joined their husbands in conquering the American frontier. The strength and independence of American independence are legendary. Most important, de Toqueville said, women were the keepers of religious faith. “No free communities ever existed without morals,” he said, “and morals are the work of women.” Not anymore. A large segment of American women have traded faith in the Supreme Being for faith in gun control laws and day care centers… We live in an America in which soccer moms swoon over Bill Clinton, and Larry Flint is a cultural icon. Feminists get enthusiastic about the war on terrorism only when they think they are fighting to redeem Western licentiousness. Our men are up to the job of protecting us from foreign enemies, but our women are losing the war at home.

It is not an accident that the relentless attacks on morality spring from America’s women. “The aim of the party,”, George Orwell wrote in 1984, “was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. Its real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act….The party was trying to kill the sex instinct, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it.” The Party triumphed because “so far as the women were concerned, the Party’s efforts were largely successful.”

Obligations to family, children, and God mean nothing. Aborting children is a “constitutional right.” Sex is just another activity, distinct from other activities only in that “everybody” lies about it. A marriage contract is superfluous and may be broken with impunity.. Disloyalty is a matter of principle. “Trophy wives” are cheerfully written up in The New York Times, where four marriages are de rigueur.  Unmarried biological fathers are given legal rights to their offspring, and unmarried mothers are given legal rights to the biological father’s paycheck.

Marriage can’t be trusted, parents can’t be trusted, honor can’t be trusted. The only institution that can be trusted is the government.”