henrymakow.com

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:27:54 +0000

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:33:49 +0000

"The most dangerous revolutions are not those which tear everything down, and cause the streets to run with blood, but those which leave everything standing, while cunningly emptying it of any significance". The Danish philosopher `Kierkegaard`.

London's Evening Standard Edition for 1st July 2008 reported in an article entitled `Happyland` that a recent opinion poll revealed that of all the peoples of the world, Danes were the happiest. This the poll stated was due to the country's peaceful atmosphere, Democracy and social equality.

In recent times, there have been several such surveys conducted, all of which asserted that Denmark is the happiest place on the planet. The question is of course, why do we need to keep being told this? What is the purpose, and is there an agenda? I am a British expat who has lived here 13 years and for the life of me, I cannot see Danes as being a happy people at all.

Denmark is, and has been for years, a `Test Zone` for the European Union in particular and the emerging New World Order in general. The constant reinforcing of this Danish `fairy tale` in the international media is contrived to convince people that the subtle mental prison that is Denmark is a highly desirable model that all should strive for.

The Danish concept of happiness is quite different to that of say the USA, or any of the other English-speaking land. Danish happiness is tied up entirely in one word; `Tryghed` or safety/security. Now these elements might be necessary for a happy life, but they do not constitute happiness in themselves. A prisoner sentenced to life might feel `safe and secure`, but how many would claim to be happy?

The most common English dictionary definition of happiness is; " A state of pleasure, joy, exhilaration, bliss, contentment, delight, enjoyment, satisfaction".

Of the above, I can only say that I have witnessed in the Dane a sense of resigned contentment and satisfaction with his or her lot. The other elements are highly conspicuous by their absence. It should be noted that Danes are generally undemanding and compliant by nature and so long as the Status Quo is maintained, they shuffle about their lives innocuously enough.

So what is this all about then? It's about constructing an environment where people become servile and acquiescent. Grateful for the `scraps` handed down to them by their benevolent master, the State. As Aldous Huxley wrote in Brave New World, "The perfect Totalitarian State is one where the political bosses, and their army of managers, control a population of slaves, who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude". This describes the conditions in Denmark perfectly.

Denmark and the Danes, along with Sweden (please read `The New Totalitarians by Roland Huntford) have been used as a model for the EU Superstate. Danes are kept in the dark and fed on Mushrooms.. To instill a sense of superiority and security, the Danish State Propaganda Machine must continually convey these messages:

That it is in every respect functioning successfully.

That is superior in all aspects.

That the people and the state are indivisible.

That the state apparatus is the democratically elected guardian of the Danish way of life.

Leonard Schapiro wrote ; "The true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought reveals itself as a jarring dissonance".

If Denmark is filled with all these happy folk, why is it that this Socialist Utopia has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, especially amongst the youth, with a rapidly growing number of young people of school age being prescribed anti depressant drugs, massive levels of alcoholism, a growing disaffection between the genders, resulting in low marriage levels, a below replacement birth rate, and a alienation and polarization between the generations. Is this really a description of `Happy land`?

So, are Danes happy? They have certainly been conditioned to believe they are. Are they secure? The illusion that they are remains, but cracks in the `dam` are appearing. For the present, until the `experiment` is concluded, and so long as they continue to acquiesce to the relentless demands for an ever greater share of their personal wealth, Danes will continue to worship their holiest of Holies `Tryghed` and believe themselves `cared for` by their `benefactor and protector`, the Danish State .

In conclusion, the Danish variant of happiness is simply not the same as one would find in, for example, Australia or the USA . Like a Canary in a cage, provided all the essentials of survival are present, with the illusion of credit created affluence intact, the Dane will proclaim his `happiness`. Tragically, he/she is not qualified to answer the question as he/she simply doesn't know what happiness is.

Postscript: Yesterday evening, I was walking my dogs in a small wooded area near to my home when I met young couple innocently enjoying a Mid Summers evening together. I knew immediately that they were not Danes, as they were smiling and warmly greeted me, even acknowledging my dogs, and this is not the kind of behavior I have come to expect from the natives, who usually give a brief, stoic nod of the head, ignore the dogs and hurry on their way, in case I might engage them in conversation. Anyway, it turns out that the young couple were from the Ukraine. We stood and chatted for a while, and as it always does when one meets other Non-Danes in Denmark, the question of how each of us likes or dislikes living in the country, and how we perceive the natives, arose. We agreed that Danes were `decent enough, but a little stern, stoic, not over friendly, often unwelcoming, miserable when sober, and difficult to come in contact with on a personal level`

I have had many similar conversations with foreigners from all over the world who were/are resident here. It should be added at this stage that of course, one does find helpful and friendly Danes as one does everywhere. But it's not the individual character I am talking about here, it is the national character, and it is my experience that a happy, friendly, open Dane is the exception, rather than the rule.

Coming soon: Has Denmark been a `Test Zone` for Codex Alimentarius?

An Illuminati Primer

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:34:57 +0000

By Henry Makow Ph.D.

(From Nov. 19, 2005)

Politics has banished Religion from public discourse but Religion still offers the best description of political reality.

The essence of political struggle is actually spiritual, a cosmic battle between God (Good) and Satan (Evil) for the soul of man.

The struggle is between an international financial elite dedicated to Satan, led by the Illuminati, and the remnants of humanity that still uphold God's Plan. The unsuspecting masses hang in the balance, inhabiting a fool's paradise like children.

This struggle is not between nations, religions or between ideologies of Left or Right. This occult elite creates and controls both sides of every conflict in order to obscure and at the same time advance its long-term agenda.

The elite plan is to remake the planet as its private neo feudal preserve. This involves the reduction of the world's population through plague, catastrophe or war; mind control/breeding of the survivors as serfs; and the enshrinement of Lucifer as god.

A cataclysm could happen within the next 10-20 years. We're living on borrowed time, duped by the media and distracted by sex while the elite tests and imposes various methods of manipulation and control.

Thousands of organizations like the UN promote the elite's "world government" agenda with practically no public scrutiny. More recently, the elite instigated the Sept. 11 attacks in order to justify their "War on Terror" the repressive "Patriot Act", and Iraq War. The flooding of New Orleans, vaccinations and the bird flu epidemic are other tests or possible harbingers.

Sophisticated and dedicated people roll their eyes when told about this conspiracy. They are hypnotized by their "education" and the mass media.

The "Illuminati" sounds fantastic but it is NOT a chimera. Hidden within Freemasonry, it is the Church of Satan. Its membership was known; its premises were raided. Plans and correspondence were seized and published. Defectors attested to the grave danger at formal inquiries. It was suppressed but went underground. It has since grown so powerful that it has literally defined the modern age (under the guise of "progress," "reform" and "revolution") and now threatens the future of humanity.

THE ORIGIN OF MODERN DYSFUNCTION

The term "Illuminati" means "enlightened ones" and refers to Lucifer, the "light bringer." Its essential philosophy is to substitute "reason" i.e. expedience for "right reason" i.e. universal morality.

"Do as thou wilt" was the Illuminati motto. The Illuminati will define reality, not God or nature. Illuminism or "humanism" is a secular religion and a transition to Satanism (i.e. "tolerance"). The decline of public decency makes this increasingly apparent. Look for the world to increasingly resemble the game "Grand Theft Auto" or an occult Hollywood feature.

Whether it's a plant, a dog or a child, each flourishes naturally following its inherent design given a little nourishment and love. The Illuminati wishes to negate the inherent course of human development by promoting dysfunction under such guises as "freedom" and the cookie cutter of "equality."

The Illuminati represents the traditional feudal power elite, the alliance of European aristocracy and Jewish moneylenders, united by money, marriage and the occult. In 1770, Mayer Rothschild hired the 22-year-old Adam Weishaupt, a university instructor (son of a rabbi raised as a Catholic) to attract the cream of European society to a secret cult designed to reverse the course of Western (i.e. Christian) civilization (hence the term "revolution.")

I am summarizing "Final Warning" an online book by David Allen Rivera and James Wardner's excellent book "Unholy Alliances" (pp.34-51)

The Illuminati was founded May 1, 1776. Weishaupt wrote: "The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment, let it never appear, in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name, and another occupation. None is fitter than the three lower degrees of Freemasonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it."

An understanding was reached with the Masons at the Congress of Wilhelmsbad on December 20, 1781 to add the Illuminati hierarchy to the first three degrees of Masonry. On returning home, Comte de Virieu, a Mason from the Martiniste lodge at Lyons, reported: "I can only tell you that all this is very much more serious than you think. The conspiracy which is being woven is so well thought out that it will be impossible for the Monarchy and the Church to escape it."

Nesta Webster in her book World Revolution describes the modus operandi of the Illuminati. It applies to Adolph Hitler as well as Timothy Leary: "The art of Illuminism lay in enlisting dupes as well as adepts, and by encouraging the dreams of honest visionaries or the schemes of fanatics, by flattering the vanity of ambitious egotists, by working on unbalanced brains, or by playing on such passions as greed and power, to make men of totally divergent aims serve the secret purpose of the sect."

The Illuminati also used bribes of money and sex to gain control of men in high places, and then blackmailed them with the threat of financial ruin, public exposure or assassination. This continues to the present day.

Weishaupt wrote: "One must speak sometimes in one way, sometimes in another, so that our real purpose should remain impenetrable to our inferiors." And what was that purpose? It was "nothing less than to win power and riches, to undermine secular or religious government, and to obtain the mastery of the world."

The first priority was to enlist writers, publishers and educators. The modern pantheon of great thinkers, from Darwin to Nietzsche to Marx, were Illuminati pawns or agents. Of one university, Weishaupt wrote: "All the professors are members of the Illuminati...so will all the pupils become disciples of Illuminism." (Wardner, 45)

As the Order spread throughout Germany, money was contributed from such leading Jewish families as the Oppenheimers, Wertheimers, Schusters, Speyers, Sterns and of course, the Rothschilds. Gerald B. Winrod wrote in his book Adam Weishaupt: A Human Devil "of the thirty-nine chief sub-leaders of Weishaupt, seventeen were Jews."

From Bavaria, the Order of the Illuminati spread like wildfire... Soon they had over 300 members from all walks of life, including students, merchants, doctors, lawyers, judges, professors, civil officers, bankers, and even church ministers. Some of their more notable members were: the Duke of Orleans, Duke Ernst Augustus of Saxe-Weimar-Coburg-Gotha, Prince Charles of Hesse-Cassel, Johann Gottfried von Herder (a philosopher), Count Klemens von Metternich, Catherine II of Russia, Count Gabriel de Mirabeau, Marquis of Constanza ("Diomedes"), Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick ("Aaron"), Duke Karl August of Saxe-Weimar, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (a poet), Joseph II of Russia, Christian VII of Denmark, Gustave III of Sweden, and King Poniatowski of Poland.

By the time of the 3rd Masonic Congress in Frankfurt in 1786, the Illuminati virtually controlled all the Masonic lodges, which represented three million secret society members across the various German provinces, Austria, Hungary, England, Scotland, Poland, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, Holland, Spain, Sweden, Russia, Ireland, Africa, and America. (Wardner, p. 39)

In the 1790's there was an Illuminati scare in the United States. At Charlestown, in 1798, the Reverend Jedediah Morse preached: "Practically all the civil and ecclesiastical establishments of Europe have already been shaken to their foundations by this terrible organization, the French Revolution itself is doubtless to be traced to its machinations..."
(Wardner 48)

In 1832 William Russell established a chapter of the Illuminati at Yale called the "Skull and Bones." President G.W. Bush, his father and John Kerry are members.

On Sept. 9, 1785, Joseph Utzschneider, a lawyer, and two other defectors revealed the Illuminati goals before a Court of Inquiry in Bavaria: Abolition of the Monarchy and all ordered government; Abolition of private property (which the Illuminati will assume); Abolition of Patriotism (nations); Family, (through the abolition of Marriage, Morality, and by government providing "Education" for children) and finally, Abolition of all Religion, particularly Christianity.

These are exactly the goals of Communism, enunciated by Marx in 1848. The Illuminati and Communism go hand-in-glove. The term "Reds" originates with "Red Shield" the Rothschild name. The satanic five-pointed star is the symbol of both.

CONCLUSION

Mankind has taken a wrong turn and appears doomed to annihilation. The political, cultural and economic elite of the West is either dupes or willing agents of a satanic conspiracy of cosmic proportions.

If we and our children are to suffer and die prematurely, at least we know the real reason. That is a privilege not granted to millions of our ancestors.

God and Satan made a wager for the soul of man. If God wins, man revels in the glory of his Divine Birthright. If Satan wins, man is destroyed. In a nutshell, this is the religious nature of politics.

We can instantly recapture an essential part of religion by incorporating the dictim, "Do Unto Others as You Would Have Them Do Unto You," in our lives. The essence of all true religion is to obey God (i.e. spiritual ideals like justice, truth and love) instead of personal desire, to be selfless instead of selfish. Like a snowflake, this is how disparate elements arrange themselves according to the Plan ( i.e. Love) and achieve Perfection.

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

See my "Rothschilds Conduct Red Symphony"

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:27:52 +0000

Kinsey Coverup (Google Video 15 min)

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:37:43 +0000

NWO Scoreboard Canada

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:20:58 +0000

by David Warren,
The Ottawa Citizen
Saturday, June 28, 2008

As was perfunctorily reported on Thursday, the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission, one of three HRCs to which Islamists took Maclean's magazine for having published Mark Steyn, has self-protectively dismissed the case before it could come to tribunal. The Ontario HRC had previously dismissed it: but with an outrageous statement from its chief commissioner, Barbara Hall, to the effect that Maclean's was guilty of publishing "hate," nonetheless. She regretted that her commission had no mandate to try the case, but looked forward to a time when this mandate would be extended.

A British Columbian "human rights" tribunal did, however, decide that it had jurisdiction over what a Toronto-based magazine could publish, and the show trial against Maclean's continues there, with judgment awaited. The Alberta HRC continues to try Ezra Levant and his Western Standard magazine (now defunct in print) -- in proceedings that have gone on for more than two years. The Canadian HRC has taken 16 months in preliminary consideration of the case a gay activist brought against the small Toronto-based Catholic Insight magazine. Indeed: prolonged and arbitrary delays appear to be part of the method by which the HRCs bleed their respondents dry with legal and other expenses.

I have mentioned only the current cases in which periodical publications have been prosecuted, in the strange new world of "Kafkanada" -- where you can be tried for the same imaginary "hate crimes" in any or all federal and provincial jurisdictions, simultaneously or sequentially. A single complaint by any reader anywhere is enough to launch a secret inquiry. The target has no right to confront his accuser, and will not at first even be told who he or she is.

Truth is no defence, the absence of harm is no defence, there are no rules of evidence whatever, and the inquisitors of these kangaroo courts may ultimately reach any "judgment" they please, after months or years of playing cat-and-mouse with their selected victim.

A Protestant minister in Alberta was, for instance, recently ordered to publicly renounce his Christian beliefs, as well as pay a big lump sum to the anti-Christian activist who had prosecuted him, in a case I mentioned in a previous column, and which I am pleased to see is getting wide publicity in the United States even if not up here. "Re-education" programs are frequently assigned, for which the victim must also pay.

All of the complainant's expenses are paid by the taxpayer, as well as all of the overheads and expenses of the jet-setting "human rights" bureaucrats, who do all the prosecutorial work, as well as providing both judge and jury. The system is, in principle, indistinguishable from that in place during the Cultural Revolution in Maoist China. It was perpetrated by leftist activists on the Canadian people while they were sleeping. It is a system of the activists, by the activists, and for the activists.

The people are still sleeping, but some "blowback" has finally begun to occur. Given its very eccentric inquisitorial practices, which have been documented and publicized on the Internet, the CHRC is now under an RCMP investigation, a Privacy Commission investigation, and there is a Parliamentary investigation pending. (As a public relations exercise, the CHRC has also hand-picked its own "independent" investigator to do what we can only assume will be a defensive whitewash, as usual at taxpayer expense.) It is against this background the CHRC decided that the better part of valour is discretion, and that it truly did not need to be prosecuting such high-profile targets as the bestselling author Mark Steyn and the mainstream newsweekly Maclean's, at the present time. The CHRC can retrench, and return to its bread-and-butter business of destroying little people who command no publicity -- biding their time until circumstances are propitious to "extend their mandate" again.

Vigilance is the price of liberty, and it is crucially important that we not take the heat off Canada's HRCs when they retreat. Canadians need to know the whole truth about what these vile "human rights" investigators have been doing, and their past victims should be exonerated.

Given what has already occurred, it is not enough simply to fire the people responsible for specific abuses. The Human Rights Code must be rewritten to eliminate future challenges to free speech and press, and the HRCs themselves taken down. The very notion that "your freedom ends when I begin to feel offended" must be shown for what it is: totalitarian flotsam in the fetid swamp of politically correct thought.
------

David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:38:13 +0000

Fashion Attack on gender

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:18:22 +0000

I came back with a better comment to the Jone's article. I can relate to what you wrote here.

"I am a product of the "Jewish revolutionary" brainwashing myself, a Socialist, Zionist and Feminist for most of my life. I used to look askance at the satisfaction Christians got from normal life and feel that "normal" was boring. I remember reading Paul Krassner's "The Realist" where he depicted Snow White having sex with the Seven Dwarfs and thinking "yes! this exposes the hypocrisy of the US" then at war in Vietnam."

We didn't have to be Jewish to be conditioned into all of the above beliefs and reactions. I was. The formula worked on much of the 'baby boomer' generation.

I grew up in brand new suburbia in north Florida during the 60's. I had no reference points in suburban reality to relate to the world my grandparents, even my parents grew up in. Suburbia was an entirely insulated 'habitat' reserve. Food came packed from the supermarket, there were no cows to milk, no fields to plough. No 'chores' required for daily living or contribution to 'earn my keep' either in the home or community.

And there was no community. It wasn't a 'town'. Nobody had any roots there. Only the adults knew what a town meant - relatives all living in the same area, neighbors your parents had grown up with. We had nothing of the kind.

There was no Great Depression, no visible war. All of the 'real' stuff we knew about from black and white television.

They provided as many as possible of our generation an insulated life growing up. I'm sure now that was deliberate....getting everybody to buy into those affordable little reservations where everything was cushy and easy and affordable. (for while, anyway). The reality I grew up in was a distortion. It wasn't normal, but they told us it was normal. So "normal" was dull and boring, as you said.

By 1969, my juvenile heros and role models were Lenny Bruce, Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Reuben. I'd read their interviews in Playboy magazine, and bought their books. Bruce's biography glamorizing his life as a street grifter, pimp, dope dealer and strip joint comedian. Reuben's "If If Feels Good - Do It!" and Hoffman's "Steal This Book". I thought these guys were poking holes in "hypocrisy of normal". After all they were famous, and I figured they were rich.

Bruce was dead at 40 broke and with court cases pending, on a seedy motel bathroom floor with a needle still in his arm. Hoffman either committed suicide or was murdered, alone in his girlfriend's lakehouse and wasn't discovered for over a week. Reuben was oddly hit by a car on a sidewalk in Soho late one night. Hoffman and Reuben knew too much about how the 'revolution' really worked, what it was really about.

So I supported everything Penthouse and rock stars and Hollywood endorsed. I supported sex liberation - not just for my personal interest (getting nice girls to do the stuff I saw in porno - I said, 'hell yeah!' when I saw that cartoon of Snow White too...), but for EVERYBODY whether I thought what they did was repulsive of not. I was a liberal. "different strokes man". I supported abortion -- though I knew if I was a pregnant girl, I wouldn't be comfortable with doing that.

In fact I was personally uncomfortable with most everything on the liberal agenda - but I bought a notion that being 'fair' is only possible without any rules at all, because a law might offend somebody.

We were brainwashed.

And speaking of brainwashing, Steve tipped me off to the latest Anjelina Jolie movie. Released Friday, but he sent a link with the movie bootleg up for free from somewhere in Asia. High quality.

I would never pay 20 bucks to sit through this crap anymore, but I took a look at it until I had to turn it off.
You'll see what heavy duty programming they're doing to the boys and girl today. Suffice it to say that not only is it heavily triggering violence in a 'normal' setting, and a dissociative identity program load for direct downloading into video game controlled youth, but look who's got the big hot gun now....
http://www.wantedmovie.com/

The young guy in the film is a whiny wimp -- she's the stone killed killer. James Bond inversed.
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v14549293arzm3fXR

Soundtrack is heavily loaded with programming. "I used to think I had a purpose. I do whatever I'm told.....etc. "
http://www.myspace.com/wantedsoundtrack

And Steve found this bio of the director...Soviet trained....
director:
Timur Bekmambetov is a Russian-Kazakh film director known for vampire franchise Nochnoy dozor (2004) and Dnevnoy dozor (2006).

He was born Timur Nuruakhitovich Bekmambetov on June 25, 1961, in Guryev, Soviet Union (now Atyrau, Kazakhstan). His father, Nuruakhit Bekmambetov, is a manager at Guryev Energy company; his mother, Mira Bogoslavskaya, was a journalist. Young Bekmambetov was raised along the Ural river in Kazakhstan, Soviet Union.

In 1978, aged 17, he moved to Moscow. There from 1978 to 1980 he attended the Moscow Energy Institute, but he was more interested in art and movies. Eventually he dropped out of college, and joined the cultural milieu around such artists as Anatoli Zverev and Oskar Rabin.

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:30:28 +0000

These International Bankers, acting through their "U.S." Fed, profit both by creating money out of "thin air" and by collecting "interest" from U.S. Taxpayers on the Treasury Securities it has bought with U.S. Dollars (Federal Reserve Notes) it has created out of thin air. This is all eloquently described by the Dean of the Newsletter Writers, Richard Russell:

            "I still can't get over the whole Federal Reserve racket.

Consider the following - - let's take a situation where the U.S. government needs money.     The U.S. doesn't just issue United States Notes, which, of course it could. These notes would be dollars backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. No, the U.S. doesn't issue dollars straight out of the U.S. Treasury.

This is what the U.S. does - - it issues Treasury Bonds. The U.S. then sells these bonds to the Fed. The Fed buys the bonds. Wait, how does the Fed pay for the bonds? The Fed simply creates money "out of thin air" (book-keeping entry) with which it buys the bonds. The money that the Fed creates from nowhere then goes to the U.S. The Fed holds the U.S. bonds, and the unbelievable irony is that the U.S. then pays interest on the very bonds that the U.S. itself issued. (With great profit to the private owners of The Fed - - Ed. Note) The mind boggles.

The damnable result is that the Fed effectively controls the U.S. money supply. The Fed is ...not even a branch of the U.S. government. The Fed is not mentioned in the Constitution of the United States. No Constitutional amendment was ever created or voted on to accept the Fed. The Constitutionality of the Federal Reserve has never come before the Supreme Court. The Fed is a private bank that keeps the U.S. forever in debt        - - or I should say in increasing debt along with ever rising interest payments.

How did the Fed get away with this outrage? A tiny secretive group of bankers sneaked through a bill in 1913 at a time when many in Congress were absent. Those who were there and voted for the bill didn't realize (as so often happens) what they were voting for (shades of the shameful 2002 vote to hand over to President Bush the power to decide on war with Iraq)."

                                    Richard Russell, "Richards Remarks," dowtheoryletters.com, March 27 2007

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:22:01 +0000

Free Speech We Hate

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:05:21 +0000

Hollywood Home Movies

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:19:38 +0000

Movie Tip: "The Mongol" is Great! (Eng. Subtitles)

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:33:20 +0000

General Strike July 4 Vs. NWO

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 14:04:36 +0000

The world we're living in is ever full of contradictions.

"HOUSTON Houston's police chief is suggesting putting surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets and even private homes."
"Chief Harold Hurtt today said it's another way of combatting crime amid a shortage of officers. (2006)

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=6506

Today driving to the grocery store, I switched on the radio in the middle of a spot beating the drums for 'gay pride week'.
The story was of some court case in Houston in the 70's which they said led to some Supreme Court decision to curtail police from questioning men loitering too long around bathrooms in public parks or in porn store parking lots - IF the men told told them they were gay and protested 'harassment'.
The lawyer for the case said in this gay pride week interview, "We knew we couldn't win the case in Houston at the time, and that the Supreme Court hears few cases. But we pursued the case through the entire process and made it to DC.
Municipal and State judges are all elected and accountable to the voters, so we knew our best chance was the unelected judges of the US Supreme Court. "

He said that like it's good thing. Like, "it's great to live in a democracy". Where the agendas are just taking over the heads of the public to the highest court in the land -- where the majority public weil is disregarded.

I gave the back story on the Houston Police Chief, who also was quoted in this story for supporting "sensitivity training" for the police - so they'd know to ignore homosexuals 'cruising' bathrooms, essentially. Gay's call park bathrooms, 'glory holes'. Wonder why?

You can be sure there won't be any cameras installed too close to such places where gays like to hang out. That might be 'insensitive'.

As I pulled up to the store, a squad car and two cops were questioning a black vagrant. When I came out of the store they were putting him in the squad car.
I figured the man wasn't gay.

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 05:18:46 +0000

Dear Dr. Makow,

I know it may sound strange, but I felt compelled to write and thank you for your efforts in informing people of the "feminist" movement.

I am a 33-year old woman, married and a mother of two great sons. I also have three brothers, and many, many, male cousins, so I am especially sensitive to the way (the U.S.) is, in my opinion, downright hostile towards both men and traditional families. I am sick of it.

New studies have shown that (in the U.S.), boys' high school graduation rates, literacy, and college attendance numbers are plummeting. Most public school curriculums switched to "girl-friendly" many years ago. Which is great to help the girls...but it has come at the expense of boys. There is a definite "female vs. male" message being sent to Americans.

I can tell you that while I was in college, I only admitted that I wanted to be a stay-at-home mother (eventually, after finding the right guy) ONE time. I was thoroughly berated and humiliated, and never mentioned it again. Women in my generation have been taught that we "are above" being "just" homemakers, and that we "shouldn't have to deal with" the day-to-day business of child rearing and housekeeping...because we have "better" things to do!! We're supposed to go make our "mark" on the world. Personally, I can't think of a better way to influence the world in a positive way than by raising responsible, loving, Christian children.

The results of the "feminist's" absurd line of thinking, I believe, can be seen in today's whopping childrens' obesity rate, complete lack of social graces, and childrens' affinity for internet social networking sites. (Most women my age can't--or won't--cook meals, so they get fast-food regularly, causing obesity and malnutrition. And kids are not getting the unconditional love, support, and TIME from their parents that they desperately need!) So they go and find it wherever they can! The recent "pregnancy plot" in Gloucester, Mass. is the perfect example of the serious state of affairs in the U.S. Where were those girls' parents?

I know that my following "gripes" are small and insignificant, but to me, they emphasize the current "Girls are Better" attitude held by, seemingly, the masses.
1) I can't find nice clothes for my sons! Every children's clothing store I enter devotes approximately 75% of its stock to girl clothes. Boys clothes get only 25% of floor space.
2) Parents (mothers) keep using boy names for their daughters...regardless of the consequences that may cause for boys. I don't understand this thoughtless cruelty. Don't fellow mothers realize that it is humiliating for boys' names to "become" feminine due to improper usage? Or is it their goal to begin the "humiliate the men" process in kindergarten? (And NO name is safe: everything from Noah and Matthew to Emerson is being used for girls. There is a four-year-old girl named "Hunter" on my sons' tee-ball team this summer.)

Even most baby-name books promote this insane practice! The book titled "Beyond Jennifer & Jason, Madison & Montana" by L. Rosenkrantz and P. Redmond Satran includes the quote, "As more and more previously all-boy names are claimed by girls, we worry that boys will have fewer decidely masculine choices left. This may be bad news for boys, but it's good news for girls, giving them more and more interesting options" (page 52, top paragraph). They proceed to include among their "Best new name choices for girls": Aaron, Andrew, August, Bronson, Bruce, Dominic, Hunter, Nicholas, and Troy.) They later describe "androgynous and ambigender names".

I believe that it is un-Christian to give girls male names (based upon Deut. 22:5), "The woman shall not wear what which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do are an abomination unto the Lord thy God". If giving girls male names isn't "dressing" them in what pertaineth to a man, I don't know what is!

The only thing that helps "keep my chin up" reagrding the "names" scenario is this: ironically, stealing boy names and giving them to girls is actually (on a philosophical / academic level) purely chauvinistic!! (You have probably guessed that my sons have names that are now in danger of being considered feminine.) The women who believe themselves to be "promoting female empowerment" are actually displaying their opinion that masculinity is superior to femininity. Which is funny. Until I realize that their ignorance is causing harm to my sons.

I know that my concerns don't equal the larger world concerns, but they are the day-to-day worries of a stay-at-home mom "in the trenches". Thank you again for your work, and for the opportunity to express myself.

Sincerely,
Jennifer