I want to talk about the fact some people insist that homosexuality is a sexual orientation instead of a mental illness. I just want to say that whether something is a mental illness, is a matter of definition, not a matter of facts or science. For example, the statement "All humans have a Y chromosome" is a matter of facts. We can go out there and see if it's true that indeed all humans have a Y chromosome. And if we find one human who doesn't, then the statement all humans have a Y chromosome is false. Yet, if we say, "A man is a human who has a Y chromosome" then it's a matter of definition. We are defining what is a man. It's not a matter of facts anymore. And the fact there are fierce debates about what a man is, proves my point. If it was a matter of facts, then it would be settled very easily. But it isn't. Similarly, "homosexuality is a mental illness", as well as "homosexuality is a sexual orientation, it is not a mental illness" are both statements of definition. Someone from one camp might say to the other camp that they are wrong, when what she really means is that she strongly disagrees with their definition. She can't prove them wrong, because definitions are by nature subjective and as a result of this subjectiveness, cannot be proven wrong. The only reason we as a society are starting to believe that homosexuality is not a mental illness, is because there are more and more people who insist that homosexuality is not a mental illness. This is entirely political and has nothing to do with either science and facts. In fact, all I need to do is to gather up a bunch of people who believe homosexuality is a mental illness, and we act really aggressive, loud and pushy, and we cow other people into silence, then guess what? Society would start to change, and start to accept once again that homosexuality is a mental illness. Like I said, nothing to do with science. It has everything to do with politics. In fact, next time you see a strident lefty loudly proclaiming that homosexuality is a sexual orientation instead of a mental illness, say to her, "Prove it". It will shut her right up.

Read all ty

I remember something I read with respect to the CIA. I think it was a POTUS or some other high-ranking official, who was proposing to either cut funding to the organization, or even to shut it down completely. And apparently some agents threatened with revolt if that came to pass. This made me think. Does the CIA not resemble a tumor? A normal cell, when it receives a chemical message for it to die, dies. It doesn't go on living forever, that's what a cancerous cell does. Yet, look at the CIA refusing to figuratively die despite message from higher authority. The CIA behaves exactly like a cancer cell.

I have heard about the numerous wrongdoings of the CIA. In addition to fear, I feel strong disgust towards the CIA. I want to declare to the whole world that: Murder is wrong. Torture is wrong. Assassinating the leaders of counties we are not at war with, is wrong. Destabilizing a country is wrong. Toppling democratically elected governments, is wrong. Terrorism is wrong. Increasing human suffering is wrong. And if the CIA has indeed been smuggling weapons out of the country as well as smuggling cocaine into it, then both are not only wrong, they are possibly also acts of high treason. I will investigate into all CIA activities, even if it means I will be murdered. Any agent who is found involved in these things will automatically be jailed for a minimum of 20 years. He will have all his assets stripped of him, and he will be subjected to public disgrace, so that his family will suffer, too. But of course, I know that sometimes agents are just following orders. So, if an agent comes forward, and tells us who the boss it was that gave him those orders, he will be pardoned. He will not be subjected to any of those things plus he will get to keep his job. I will have similar investigations into the FBI, and the CSIS of my country. I am shaking as I type this, because I am just as afraid of the CIA as the next person. But my sense of what's right and wrong compels me to do this.

Now, while we are on the CIA, I want to talk about eminence grise, a phenomenon that is relevant to the CIA and various other high-level government agencies. Basically what eminence grise is, is people who are powerful behind the throne. They don't occupy any actual positions within the organization, they are not officially on the payroll, but they have power and influence over the organization. I want to ban this. The reason? I expect accountability. A government institution like, say, the CIA, should be able to tell us who made any particular decision and if there are any negative consequences, the person involved in the decision making needs to be held accountable for it. Eminence grise prevents this. Also, another thing about this phenomenon is that, these behind-the-throne, powerful people remain nameless and un-reachable. So, essentially, it means you don't find them, they will come find you. They will come and tell you what they want you to do, then disappear. You will not have their phone number, you don't know where they live, you don't even know their real name. I believe they do this so that if things ever heat up, in other words there is an investigation going on, things will not be traceable to them. If this is true then it's one more reason to ban eminence grise. We don't want shadowy people like that anywhere in our government. In fact, the fact they keep themselves un-traceable like that is pretty much a guarantee that they are up to no good. Otherwise why fear revealing their true identity and contact info? They must be hiding something. These people need to be purged from the government.

By now, it's been widely known among us that our online spaces contain many fed infiltrators. While this is certainly galling, I say we should see it as an opportunity to learn about how feds work. For example, I remember this poster who was very likely a fed. He knew a lot of facts, dates and information in general. So, this suggests to me that feds likely look highly upon having a large amount of knowledge memorized in one's head and being able to recall it at will. And then there was another person who I suspected of being a fed. He had a very good, almost photographic memory. This suggests to me that feds probably also place importance on having a very good memory. Of course, this isn't very scientific. We have no way of knowing whether these men were indeed feds, neither are we sure that feds value these things. But we will never have proof, so in the mean time we make do and go by our gut feelings and suspicions. What I am trying to say is, when we make contact with a possible fed, don't dread, don't sweat, and don't get angry. See it as an opportunity to learn about feds.

Furthermore: even though I have never been officially privy to the inner workings of fed institutions, nevertheless I manage to have made a rough sketch of them. The key is to fill up the holes in your understanding with imagination. For example, I imagine that in a job interview for the FBI, the interviewing fed would give a piece of writing that contains a lot of information for the interviewees to read. Then he looks at who can memorize it the fastest as well as repeat it back the most accurately. I have never been to such an interview and have zero proof of it, I nevertheless imagine it to be this way, because of what I have read about Jewish rabbinic studies. This is how learned, older Jews assessed intelligence in young Jews. Since I know that the people occupying top positions in the FBI (and other similar institutions) are all Jews, they likely employ the same method. And these top brass FBI Jews' method has trickled down from the top into many universities. We can actually see it for ourselves. I have been to many settings where an academic, usually a psychologist, tries to measure people's intelligence. There is one test that really stood out to me: she would say a string of letters mixed with numbers, and then ask people to repeat it backwards to her after hearing it once. I always do very poorly on this test. And naturally the psychologist forms some kind of judgment about my level of intelligence. I have always thought that this exercise was very difficult, but also meaningless. The ability to memorize letters and numbers backwards does not have any practical use. Yes it's hard to get it right, but just because you get it right, it does not mean you are smart. I am reminded of the movie Rain man, where the supposed genius could tell how many match sticks are on the ground just by glancing at them once. Is this hard to do? Yes. But is it useful? No. It does not have any real-world application or benefits, it won't enable one to do anything truly worthwhile. It's very similar to another stupid ability, which is the ability to recite the value of pi to a million digits. The Jews in Jew Hollywood act like abilities like these are so amazing. This tells me a lot about how the Jewish mind works. They don't recognize true genius. They have their little notion of what it is, however it always turns out wrong.

I was reading up on the iconic crime drama movie, Scarface. Basically it follows the story of a Cuban who came to the US and eventually became a big-time drug lord. The story says that when he first got here, he worked as a dishwasher. But he felt that he was meant for bigger things, so he struck out on his own and got into the murky world of drugs, and eventually became what he was known for.

I find this interesting, because it is a similar story for many immigrants, especially non-white ones, who came to the US. They see that there are so many nice things one can buy, they want all of those things. They want the American Dream for themselves, they want a house, a wife, and kids. All of these things cost money, however the kinds of jobs that immigrants can typically get are usually menial and low-paying, just like the dishwashing job that Scarface got in the movie. Most recent immigrants and refugees lack what it takes to land good jobs. They have no credentials, little training, few have entrepreneurial spirits. Some don't speak the language. They only have one thing in common--they want to make money and to enjoy the sort of life that they see white people enjoy. So what usually happens is that some of them turn to crimes in the hopes of striking it rich. As a non-white immigrant myself, I understand these immigrants' struggles all too well. We are told that we need to be a cut above, just so that we can compete with white Americans. We need to be better, more capable, more talented, and smarter, in order to compete on an equal footing. However, we can't just will talents into existence just because we know we need them. In fact, very often, we find that we tend to have fewer talents and capabilities, compared to white people, who tend to be more inventive, capable, and intelligent. Personally I did not turn to crime in order to make lots of money, and I know that a lot of immigrants don't, either. However, I can really understand the pressure to. The principle stands that non-white immigrants are on unequal footing and they face competition from the local white population and as a result they need to compensate for their short-comings. One way to do so is through turning to a life of crimes. Crimes pay easy money and all you need is a lack of conscience and the willingness to break laws, and these are not hard to come by when you are a non-white.

And now, to make things worse, we often become attracted to white people. The movie mentioned that Scarface fell in love with a mob boss' wife, who is beautiful, white, and blond. So now, not only does the protagonist lack money and a good job, he is also physically not as attractive compared to a white American man. This gives him an even greater incentive to want to succeed financially. He hopes, just like so many immigrants do, that by having lots of money, he will be able to win the affection of his love, usually a white blond woman. This results in an even stronger push into a life of crimes, because when you have money, people don't tend to ask you how you came by your wealth. They don't ask if it's honest money, they just see that you drive a nice car and can afford to give a girl diamond rings. So a non-white immigrant, having no career prosects and also lacking in good looks, have no choice but turn to illegal ways of making money. This is the only they can succeed financially and compete against an American, for money, and for access to beautiful women.

(Continues)

im calling bullshit on this.

Already read the next two
Was ez

(Continued)


Now, with the movie, this happened for one person. So it's roughly one generation. But we can apply the principle we learned, to a group of immigrants that have been living among white people for thousands of years, namely Jews, the granddaddy of all non-white immigrants. Whatever pressure Scarface faced, it happened to Jews, and for many many generations. Enough generations for evolution to work and to shape the Jews' gene pool permanently. This means that, Jews' ancestors very often had to resort to unsavory, if not downright illegal, ways of making money, just to compete against the local white population and survive. Those Jews who had too much integrity and would not commit crimes, were weeded out of the Jews gene pool. Those who were relatively good-looking, might get absorbed into the white gene pool, through inter-marriage. Jews who were too soft-hearted to harm and swindle just to survive, also failed to pass on their genes. So basically what this means is that when you put together two races that already started out unequal, the differences between them will amplify as time goes on. The race that already started out as weasel-like (remember, Jews are semitic, which is non-white, so they are unsavory to begin with), will become even more of a weasel.

A word about physical attractiveness, not of women, but rather, of men. White men, who can potentially have blond/red hair and blue/green eyes, and who tend to be taller and have fair skin, can be said to be better-looking than Jewish men, who tend to have swarthy complexion, raven black hair, big nose, beady little eyes, and unattractive faces. We need to understand how these Jews were able to pass on their genes for thousands of years when they faced intense sexual competition from men who were better looking. I mean, imagine that you are a woman, which man would you go for? I am sure you would go for the better looking man, which is usually a white man. In Jews' bid to increase their reproductive fitness, there is tremendous pressure on them to evolve. They needed to give themselves an edge over white men. I mentioned talents above, and indeed, this trait could in theory make up for ugliness. However, it's like I said, one cannot simply become talented just because one wishes to. You can't just call down talents from the sky any time you need it. Same thing goes for intelligence. Just because you need to be smart, it doesn't mean you are or will be. It is totally possible to be both ugly and untalented. And as it happened, this was the situation Jews found themselves in. So, what was a Jew to do?

I don't want to talk about how Jews band together to swindle, cheat, and harm white men, because we know that already. I have already talked about it before. But rather, the take-home is that a non-white population that existed among white people for many many generations will evolve in such a way that any negative, unsavory traits (both behavioral and physical) they started out with will intensify over time and will come to dominate their gene pool. We saw what happened to Scarface. Now imagine the same thing, except it has gone on for literal thousands of years. This is what happened to Jews in the West.

Another point I wish to make: when you put two groups of men side by side over many generations, evolution will work its magic, and the gene pool of the ugly group will spiral downward, and its men will become increasingly conniving, manipulative, cabalistic, and a whole host of very unpleasant personality traits, because that is about the only way they can compete sexually to pass on their genes. So basically, there will be a race to the bottom sort of thing going on, for the ugly group of men. In contrast, the group of more attractive men will not experience such a deterioration, because they can get by on their good looks to find mates, so they don't face an evolutionary pressure to connive in order to pass on their genes. By the way, this doesn't only happen between races; it happens within the same race too. Think the Casanova type; basically men who try to be masters at seducing women. The modern equivalent is the Pickup Artist. These men are all physically unattractive; many are short. Now they are sneaky, manipulative to boot. And this is because being this way is about the only way they can pass on their sorry genes. In fact, do a little experiment. Think about all the tall, fair, attractive men you know, then compare them to the short, ugly men. I bet you will see that the second group have more unbearable people.

Some people like to criticize the Bible as being primitive writing. And the Bible does mention practices and beliefs that seem ignorant to us in the modern time. However, I just want to point out that this is not a fair way of looking at it. The Bible is not meant to be a manual. It's about teaching people about matters that are of a spiritual nature, faith, that which is unseen, what it means to believe, and such. Let me put it this way: science, and knowledge, are about not believing anything by faith; whereas the Bible, is all about believing by faith. Now, I am not saying one is better than the other. But rather, they are totally different things. True, you will not be able to find out from the Bible how to build an atomic bomb, or how to cure bacterial infections, or how the human immune system works. and it's because it's not about those things. In fact, the textbooks we currently have, will probably all be obsolete in about a few decades' time. But it's been 2000 years, and some of the things the Bible talks about are still relevant to us today, and will probably remain so for as long as humans stay the way they are. and I say this as a non-Christian. I have read parts of the Bible and I can honestly tell you that it just draws me in. It makes me ponder. I didn't gain scientific knowledge from it, but I have gained understanding, and insight into weighty matters. I am not saying you have to believe in the Bible. just that it's not fair to compare it to say, a university textbook. That's not what the Bible is trying to be.

Another thing is that people often focus on superficial stuff in the Bible, you know, the unimportant things, and make a big deal out of it. For example, people would say that virgin birth is impossible. I mean, we live in the 21st century, we have come a long way in terms of scientific knowledge, we are taught biology in high schools. Do you really think it's some kind of achievement to point out the impossibility of virgin birth? I am not defending virgin birth, I don't believe it either, but trotting it out as proof that the Bible is a bunch of bunk is just stupid. For the era that it was written in, which is two thousands years ago, the Bible was revolutionary. Yes, there are embellishments throughout the book, but overly focusing on them blinds you to the many messages that the book contains.

Any atheist can criticize the Bible; it takes a special kind of atheist to appreciate it.

A lot of liberals, and almost all feds such as the CIA, the FBI, Canada's CSIS...etc, think that intelligence is the single defining trait in a human. This is a very shallow, one-dimensional approach to what truly makes a human human. Because, guess what? Intelligence isn't confined to humans. Many animals have intelligence, too. True, they aren't as intelligent as we are, but they still are intelligent to some degree. This proves that intelligence isn't uniquely human. So what's uniquely human? What sets us apart from animals? Well, this is a huge topic, I won't get into it, but I will throw something out, for you to chew on: I say things like compassion, kindness, spirituality, the ability to believe in something, are completely human. These things cannot be found in non-human animals, no matter how smart they are. Therefore, these things rank above intelligence. You have to realize that the feds, despite their purported high intelligence, are only smart in a very narrow sense of the word. They put great emphasis on things like having an excellent memory, having encyclopedic knowledge, the ability to process and recall a huge amount of information (no matter how pointless), to name just a few. Basically, things that the truly intelligent look at and laugh at. Why are feds this way? Well, you need to realize that these fed agencies have fallen under Jewish influence. The top people at these institutions are all Jews. And Jews, despite what we have been told, are not nearly as smart as they would have us believe. Jews believe in things like obedience to authority , orthodoxy, minute rules that don't have any significance, there is only one way and it's my way...etc. They don't tolerate plurality of belief and they don't value independent thought and rational inquiry. They like to demand complete, unquestioning obedience from others, and they hate two-way dialogues. Just look at how their God behaves as seen in the Old Testament, the Jewish Bible. So not only are Jews clueless enough to believe intelligence is what truly defines a human, their idea of intelligence is also pathetically lacking. And feds, the protege of Jews, naturally fall into the same trap. Liberals, who take cures from feds and Jews, follow the exact same things. In fact, look at Wikipedia, which has a raging neo-liberal bias and is very probably written and edited by hardcore lefties and actual, literal feds. This site reveals how a fed's mind works. There is a huge amount of information, however there is no real insight. It's just stuff upon stuff. There is no original thought, it's just the gathering and publishing of other people's intellectual fruits. The scale is grand, I will give you that, but it's still all just endless regurgitation and the reposting of other people's thoughts. I don't know about you, but when I want to look something up, I have to always read a source that's other than Wikipedia, because they like to pack the articles full of so much stuff, that real meaning is lost under a mountain of words. If I need to have another site up at the same time as Wikipedia to find what I want to know, then I am sorry, Wikipedia has failed as a gateway to knowledge. And this shouldn't surprise us, because Wikipedia is staffed by lefties, and greatly influenced by feds. Feds very likely believe that if they manage to memorize a ton of info, such as found in the countless articles and entries on Wikipedia, that it must mean they are very smart. In fact, their dicks probably get hard as they recite to one another the many fine details of the various articles they have committed to memory. And it's not just feds, Jews do this too.

Another thing about feds: let's assume that they are truly intelligent. You all know my stance, I don't think they are, but for the purpose of this article, let's say that they are. Feds look down on us. They don't think they should use their intelligence for noble purposes, such as lighting up the way ahead for humanity. Instead they let it puff their heads up, they become conceited, and all they want to do is jerk themselves off thinking how much better than us they are. In fact, they downright despise us for not being as smart as they are. The reason feds act this way is because, you guessed it, they took a page out of the playbook of Jews, their masters. Jews think they are smarter than everybody else and they absolutely hate people for being not as smart as they are. You can see this first hand in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Rand was a Jewess. And the central theme of her novel was that smart people are the backbone of society, if they collectively withdraw their creative labor, society collapses. Regardless of whether this is true, what you can't deny is that she had disdain and extreme hatred for people she considered to be dumber than she was. It never occurred to her that intellectuals have a duty to improve humanity. No. All she could think about was how to withdraw her purported high intelligence so as to punish society. She was this way, because Jews are this way. Jews hate the world. Jews hate everybody beside their own. And if they think you are dumber than they, they hate you even more. They spit on those they deem intellectually average. I say this has gone on long enough. Let me make a stand: intelligentsia have a moral obligation to uplift the rest of society. I don't know if I am smart or not, but if I am, I know that I should use my intelligence to show humanity the way out of ignorance and backwardness. I have a duty to humanity. This is what's truly noble, and what the educated should aspire to do. So I say to the rest of us: Let us put the atlas back on our shoulders.


Oh and by the way, I don't know if you have heard of Ayn Rand's "tears of splendor". So basically, when she first set foot on America, she saw the many skyscrapers in New York, and they moved her to tears. And she had since written many times to praise capitalism, industry, and all that. You might think this is something, but it really isn't. She praised things that led to economic prosperity, because economic prosperity gave her enjoyable things like delicious food, house in a nice neighborhood, clothes, shoes, entertainment, and such. So basically, material comforts, which are the ultimate good to a Jew. This shouldn't surprise us, because Jews are very worldly, anti-spiritual people. They don't believe in a whole lot of spiritual matters. They only look at what can add to their pleasures and comforts. Which shouldn't surprise us. They have been this way ever since the Biblical times. Remember that they grew out of the Pharisees. If you still have a Bible around, flip open the pages to read about what the Pharisees were like and what they believed in. By the way, this isn't a religious argument. It's a biological argument. Pharisees weren't just spiritual predecessors of Jews. They were literal ancestors of Jews. Modern Jews grew from the Pharisees by blood. Jews have Pharisees' genes. So whatever the Pharisees were like back then, that's what Jews are like now.