Gillette ad

Publié: janvier 15, 2019 dans Uncategorized

The fine folks at Gillette recently decided to take a break from peddling overpriced razors and instead focus on insulting their entire customer base. Presumably taking the advice of a marketing agency staffed exclusively by pink-haired feminists, Gillette released an ad this week which encourages men to stop raping and bullying and doing all of the other things that men will inevitably do until their shaving cream tells them not to.

The video, which has racked up an impressive 313 thousand dislikes on YouTube, opens with various scenes of men and boys doing various obnoxious and awful things. It is implied that we men have excused these behaviors by shrugging and muttering "boys will be boys." The ad makes this point very subtly, by showing a line of men saying "boys will be boys" in unison as they watch two other boys fight.

But then! "Something finally changed," the narrator tells us. "There will be no going back," we are assured. What changed? The Me Too movement. This, according to Gillette, was the seminal moment when men realized that they aren’t supposed to rape, assault, harass, or bully. We learned to "act the right way." Though, the narrator allows, "some already are." Then we are shown various examples of men doing really basic, human things, like encouraging their children and breaking up fights.

Feminists love the ad and apparently cannot understand why so many men have reacted negatively to it. I thought I would help them out by offering a mansplaination:

1) The Me Too movement didn’t "change" anything for most of us. It is obviously insulting, not to mention absurd, to suggest that men, as a whole, experienced some sort of great awakening when Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, and Kevin Spacey got in trouble. We already knew that it’s wrong to rape. We were already well aware that harassment is not okay. There is not a single man on Earth who watched a news report about Weinstein, slapped his forehead, and said, "Oh! So we’re not supposed to do that? Alright then! My mistake!" Even the men who do those things already knew they weren’t supposed to do them. They do the things anyway because they are evil, and that’s what evil people do.

But the vast majority of men are not rapists or harassers and were, prior to this past year, already staunchly opposed to both activities. There was nothing epiphanic or revolutionary about Me Too for us. To insinuate that we learned that rape and assault are bad, or that we needed needed to learn such a lesson, is patronizing in the extreme.

2) "Boys will be boys" is not a rationale for bad behavior. In my entire life I have never once heard anyone, ever, offer "boys will be boys" as an excuse for rape or bullying. I have never seen a bunch of men standing around watching a kid pummel another kid while they all nod in approval and say "boys will be boys" to one another, like programed automatons. Have the people at Gillette ever even met an actual human man before? Perhaps not. Maybe that’s why they think we need a razor with 14 blades to shave in the morning, as if our beards are made from the steel bristles of a wire brush.

In any case, "boys will be boys" does not generally function as an excuse. It is a cliche but, like many cliches, it contains great wisdom. Boys will indeed be boys, and should be boys, and should be allowed to be boys without their natural boy-ness being constantly suppressed. Boys are energetic, aggressive, creative, competitive. They need safe and accepting outlets for these impulses. Incidentally, rolling around and roughhousing is one such outlet. The ad shows an enlightened man swooping in to stop a couple of young boys from wrestling around in the grass, which is exactly the wrong approach. As long as it’s all in good fun, and nobody is getting seriously hurt, and it is not a case of assault or actual bullying, then the fatherly instinct to step back and let the boys be boys is correct.

There are only, in the end, two options. Either we let boys act like boys or we force them to act like girls. But the latter option makes as much sense as forcing girls to act like boys. You wouldn’t demand that your daughter stop playing with dolls and go out and wrestle in the grass instead. Why should we demand the reverse of boys? That’s the point of "boys will be boys," and God help the boys cursed with parents who don’t understand this point.

3) The ad says that "some men" act the right way. Can you in your wildest and most fevered dreams even imagine the reaction to an ad that spoke about women in these terms? Imagine an ad for Dove body wash that shows women doing stereotypically negative things like gossiping and nagging and shopping too much, and then the narrator comes on: "Sure, some women act the right way." Feminists would be rioting in the street. They’d storm Dove headquarters and stone the head of marketing to death with loofahs dipped in cement.

But no such ad would or could ever exist. Women are not lectured and scolded this way. This sort of treatment is reserved for men. And men are tired of it. We’ve heard it enough. We’re terrible; we’re horrible; we’ve ruined the world. Okay, we get it. Thank you. Now shut up and sell your 14-bladed razors and leave us alone.



The majority of American Millennials identify as socialist, according to surveys by both Reason-Rupe and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. That’s the bad news. The good news is that just 32 percent of Millennials can define socialism. The frequently-wrong but never-in-doubt freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., may indeed be the voice of her ignorant generation.

During an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” Anderson Cooper asked Ocasio-Cortez, “When people hear the word socialism, they think Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela. Is that what you have in mind?” He neglected to mention the vicious socialist regimes of Cambodia, Ethiopia, Poland, Romania, North Korea, and China, among others.

Ocasio-Cortez retorted, “Of course not. What we have in mind—and what of my—and my policies most closely resemble what we see in the U.K., in Norway, in Finland, in Sweden.” In fact, her economic proposals bear little resemblance to British and Nordic public policy.


As early as the 1950s, Britain began to privatize its social security and pension programs. By the 1990s, as decades of socialism caused economic growth to stagnate, Sweden followed suit. Neither Sweden nor Norway mandates a minimum wage, and Britain demands a minimum wage well below Ocasio-Cortez’s proposed $15 per hour. Britain and Finland offer a lower corporate tax rate than the United States, and all the nations she names have lower rates than her proposal of 28 percent. None has a health care regime as socialistic as her proposed Medicare-For-All scheme, which constitutes a full federal takeover of health care.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ignorance of economics and foreign affairs typifies her generation. Despite holding expensive degrees in both Economics and International Relations from Boston University, Ocasio-Cortez threw up her hands in exasperation during an interview on Margaret Hoover’s “Firing Line” program, laughing, “I’m not the expert on geopolitics.” Fortunately for her, in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king; and among a blithely ignorant generation, the lightly educated activist is congresswoman.

The seed of Millennial miseducation, which grew into the Tree of the Lack of Knowledge as activist educators substituted ideology for scholarship, is finally bearing its rotten fruit. According to one survey, one third of Millennials believe President George W. Bush killed more people than Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. Over 40 percent of Millennials have never heard of Mao Zedong; another 40 percent and 30 percent, respectively, are unfamiliar with Vladimir Lenin and Che Guevara. Two-thirds of Millennials cannot identify Auschwitz, and 22 percent have never heard of the Holocaust, twice the percentage of American adults on average.

Millennials might not know much, but according to a 2016 Harvard survey, they know they don’t support capitalism, with 51 percent of young adults rejecting economic freedom.

During the 2018 midterm elections, the Democratic Socialists of America endorsed 42 candidates for local, state, and federal office across 20 states. Of those candidates, 24 won their primary campaigns, and 18 won in general elections. Millennials have largely cheered them on. Raised in the United States after the fall of the Berlin Wall, these young Americans have been sheltered both empirically and academically from the myriad horrors wrought by socialism throughout history. And so the problem worsens.

Socialism is an economic disease born of envy and ignorance. Unfortunately both abound in our present politics. The sickness has found an attractive spokeswoman—perhaps, sadly, the voice of her generation.

Michael Knowles is an author, actor, and hosts "The Michael Knowles Show" at the Daily Wire.

Expérience 1

On prend un rat et on le met dans une cage à deux compartiments, c’est-à-dire, dont l’espace est séparé par une cloison dans laquelle se trouve une porte. Le plancher est électrifié. Avant que le courant électrique ne passe dans le grillage du plancher, un signal prévient l’animal qui se trouve dans la cage que, quatre secondes après, le courant va passer. Mais il ne sait pas au départ. Il s’en aperçoit vite. Au début, il est inquiet et très rapidement il s’aperçoit qu’il y a une porte ouverte et il passe dans la pièce d’à côté. La même chose va se reproduire quelques secondes après. Mais il apprendra aussi très vite qu’il peut éviter la «punition» du petit choc électrique dans les pattes en passant dans le compartiment de la cage où il était au début. Cet animal, qui subit cette expérience pendant une dizaine de minutes par jour pendant sept jours consécutifs, au bout de ces sept jours, va être en parfait état, en parfaite santé : son poil est lisse, il ne fait pas d’hypertension artérielle ; il a évité, par la fuite, la «punition» ; il s’est fait plaisir ; il a maintenu son équilibre biologique.

Expérience 2

Dans cette seconde situation, la porte de communication entre les deux compartiments est fermée. Le rat ne peut pas fuir. Il va donc être soumis à la punition à laquelle il ne peut pas échapper. Cette punition va provoquer chez lui un comportement d’inhibition. Il apprend que toute action est inefficace, qu’il ne peut ni fuir ni lutter. Il s’inhibe. Et cette inhibition qui s’accompagne chez l’homme de ce que l’on appelle l’angoisse, s’accompagne aussi dans son organisme de perturbations biologiques extrêmement profondes. Si bien que si un microbe passe dans les environs, s’il en porte même sur lui-même, alors que normalement, il aurait pu les faire disparaître, là, ne le pouvant pas, il fera une infection. S’il a une cellule cancéreuse qu’il aurait détruite, il va faire une évolution cancéreuse. Et puis ces troubles biologiques aboutissent à tout ce qu’on appelle les maladies de «civilisation» ou psychosomatiques. Les ulcères de l’estomac, les hypertensions artérielles, ils aboutissent à l’insomnie, à la fatigue, au mal-être.
Le système actuel nous a enfermés dans une société punitive qui affaiblit nos défenses immunitaires : taxes, impôts, lois répressives, absence de liberté d’expression, petite criminalité qui empoisonne notre quotidien, restriction de la circulation, loisirs imposés, etc…

L’Enfer musulman.

Publié: décembre 26, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Plus de 670 millions de non-musulmans ont été massacrés depuis la naissance de l’Islam. Les chiffres continuent d’augmenter tout le temps– le dernier en titre étant la Syrie, avec un nombre estimé entre 400 000 et 480 000 morts, tandis que d’autres massacres oubliés de l’histoire ne cessent d’être ajoutés.

  • Au total, plus de 80 millions de chrétiens ont été tués par des musulmans en 500 ans dans les Balkans, en Hongrie, en Ukraine et en Russie.
  • Des chiffres manquent encore sur le génocide islamique du peuple juif, l’objectif constant de l’Islam depuis 1400 ans.
  • Puis il y a l’Inde. L’estimation officielle des massacres musulmans du peuple hindou est de 80 millions. Cependant, l’historien musulman Firistha (né en 1570) a écrit (dans Tarikh-i Firishta ou le Gulshan-i Ibrahim) que les musulmans ont abattu plus de 400 millions d’hindous jusqu’au sommet de la domination islamique de l’Inde, ramenant la population hindoue à 200 millions à l’époque.

Avec ces nouveaux ajouts, le nombre de personnes tuées par les musulmans depuis la naissance de Mahomet serait de plus de 669 millions de meurtres.

Islam : La religion du génocide

L’inquisition espagnole

Pensez que l’inquisition espagnole a été mauvaise ? Réponse : plus de gens sont tués par les islamistes chaque année que pendant la totalité des 350 ans de l’Inquisition espagnole.

L’Inquisition espagnole était une réponse à la nature multi-religieuse de la société espagnole suite à la reconquête de la péninsule ibérique par les Maures musulmans.

L’inquisition (Tribunal del Santo Oficio de la Inquisition) de 1478 à 1834 a été établie en raison d’invasions musulmanes. C’était une guerre destinée à mettre fin à l’infiltration islamique et à la conquête arabe. Il est assez intéressant de constater à quel point leur méthodologie était similaire à celle des musulmans. Était-ce l’habitude prise suite à une longue association sous domination musulmane, ou une stratégie…

Après l’invasion en 711, de vastes zones de la péninsule ibérique ont été gouvernées par les musulmans jusqu’en 1250. Les musulmans voulaient prendre le contrôle dans tout le pays et de s’étendre en France pour installer un État islamique– comme aujourd’hui l’Etat islamique qui se conforme aux mêmes lois du coran. Cependant, la Reconquista n’a pas entraîné l’expulsion totale des musulmans d’Espagne, puisqu’ils ont été tolérés par l’élite chrétienne au pouvoir.

Pour expulser le parasite islamiste, le Tribunal a tué tous ceux et celles qui étaient soupçonnés d’être contaminés par l’Islam, même ceux qui étaient asservis par les musulmans.

L’Inquisition non seulement pourchassait les protestants et les Marranes, faux convertis du judaïsme, mais recherchait aussi des faux convertis ou récidivistes parmi les Morisques, musulmans convertis de force au catholicisme. Beaucoup de Morisques étaient soupçonnés de pratiquer l’Islam en secret. L’inquisition a tué toute personne soupçonnée d’être des traîtres ou des taupes. Personne n’a été épargné.

L’initiative fut si réussie, qu’en 1609, en l’espace de quelques mois, l’Espagne se vida de ses Moriscos. Les expulsés étaient les morisques d’Aragon, de Murcie, de Catalogne, de Castille, de Mancha et d’Estrémadure.

En d’autres termes, l’inquisition espagnole a sauvé toute la région de la domination islamique. Ce fut un acte héroïque brutal mais essentiel dans l’histoire qui a vu le sacrifice de millions de personnes.


Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race et Culture*, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estime que 11 millions d’esclaves ont été expédiés outre-Atlantique et 14 millions ont été envoyés dans les pays islamiques d’Afrique du Nord et du Moyen-Orient.

Pour chaque esclave capturé, beaucoup d’autres sont morts.

Les estimations de ces dommages collatéraux varient. Le célèbre missionnaire David Livingstone a estimé que pour chaque esclave qui a atteint une plantation, cinq autres ont été tués lors du raid initial, ou sont morts de maladie et de privation durant les marches forcées. [Conseil presbytérien des femmes, David Livingstone*]

Ceux qui ont été laissés derrière, les très jeunes, les faibles, les malades et les vieux, moururent tôt puisque les principaux fournisseurs de ressources et protecteurs avaient été tués ou réduits en esclavage.

Donc, pour 25 millions d’esclaves livrés au marché, nous avons environ 120 millions de morts.

Et bien entendu, il n’est plus secret que l’Islam dirigeait (et dirige toujours d’ailleurs) le commerce des esclaves en Afrique. Les récentes publications sur les marchés aux esclaves d’Irak ne sont que la dernière manifestation d’un phénomène inscrit dans le coran.

Les chrétiens

Le nombre de chrétiens massacrés par l’Islam est estimé 9 millions [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Tendances Chrétiennes du Monde AD 30 –AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, tableau 4-10].

L’estimation approximative de Raphael Moore dans son livre Histoire de l’Asie Mineure est que 50 millions de chrétiens sont morts dans les guerres menées par le djihad (

Ainsi, en comptant le million de chrétiens africains tués au 20e siècle, nous avons :

  • 59 millions de chrétiens tués en Asie Mineure
  • 80 millions de chrétiens tués par des musulmans pendant 500 ans dans les Balkans, en Hongrie, en Ukraine et en Russie.


Koenard Elst dans son ouvrage sur le négationnisme en Inde donne une estimation de 80 millions d’hindous tués par les djihadistes en Inde. (Koenard Elst, négationnisme en Inde, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, p. 34.)

L’Inde est aujourd’hui la moitié de la taille de l’Inde ancienne, en raison précisément du djihad. Les montagnes près de l’Inde, qui s’appellent Hindu Kouch, signifient le «bûcher funèbre des Hindous» (voir, Hindi Kouch).

[Mise à jour : Selon des rapports de 1899, notamment une déclaration faite par le chef religieux indien Swami Vivekananda citant l’historien musulman Firistha, les musulmans ont massacré plus de 400 millions d’hindous pendant le règle musulman de 800 ans, ramenant la population de 600 à 200 millions. Firishta a écrit le Tarikh-i Firishta et le Gulshan-i Ibrahim. Si les musulmans ont effectivement abattu plus de 400 millions de personnes en Inde, le génocide musulman dans le monde dépasserait 890 millions de victimes.

«Lorsque les Mahométans vinrent pour la première fois, on nous a dit– je pense, selon l’autorité de Ferishta, l’historien musulman le plus âgé– que nous étions six cents millions d’hindous. Nous sommes maintenant environ deux cents millions. » (Interview de Swami Vivekananda, publiée dans Prabuddha Bharat. Avril 1899 et compilée sous la rubrique «Sur les limites de l’hindouisme».)


Les bouddhistes ne suivent pas l’histoire des guerres. Gardez à l’esprit que dans le jihad, seuls les chrétiens et les juifs étaient autorisés à survivre en tant que dhimmis (serviteurs de l’islam) ; tous les autres devaient se convertir ou mourir.

Le jihad a tué les bouddhistes en Turquie, en Afghanistan, le long de la Route de la Soieet en Inde.


Le total est d’environ 10 millions. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Tendances Chrétiennes du Monde 30 ap. J.-C. 2200, Bibliothèque William Carey, 2001, p. 230, tableau 4-1.]

Les Juifs

Assez curieusement, l’islam n’a pas tué assez de juifs dans son jihad pour affecter de manière significative les totaux du génocide. Le jihad des juifs, en Arabie, a été efficace à 100%, mais les victimes se comptaient en milliers, pas en millions.

Après cela, les juifs se soumirent et devinrent dhimmis (serviteurs et citoyens de seconde classe) de l’Islam et n’avaient plus de pouvoir politique.

Données manquantes

  • Perses. Les musulmans ont envahi et occupé la Perse qui était pacifique, qui était disciple de Zorohaustra. Le nombre de morts n’est pas encore connu.
  • Chrétiens du Moyen-Orient.
  • Chinois pendant les invasions mongul.
  • Les musulmans ont massacré 11 millions de musulmans depuis 1948, en plus des 669 millions de non-musulmans qu’ils ont assassinés au cours des siècles. Combien de musulmans ont-ils assassinés pendant plus de 1400 ans, nous l’ignorons encore.


670 millions de morts, c’est plus que Staline, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, les croisades, l’inquisition, et la guerre de 100 ans réunis. C’est plus que les génocides socialistes du 20e siècle. Et le plus terrible, c’est que ça ne s’arrête pas ! Il ne se passe pas un jour de l’année sans que des personnes soient tuées au nom de l’islam.

En fait, aucune idéologie n’a été aussi génocidaire que l’islam.

Aucune idéologie n’a été si sanguinaire depuis si longtemps, depuis des siècles.

Et aucune idéologie n’a jamais été aussi hostile à la liberté, à la femme, et aux droits de l’homme.

Il serait temps que ça s’arrête. Pour de bon. Mais ça ne s’arrêtera pas. C’est le plus grand danger pour l’homme mais les écologistes préfèrent s’intéresser au danger climatique pour l’homme. C’est le système le plus meurtrier mais les médias préfèrent montrer du doigt les néo-nazis et suprémacistes blancs, qui représentent une microscopique minorité.

C’est la religion du génocide alors on dit d’elle que c’est la religion d’amour, de tolérance et de paix.

traduction © Prescilla Stofmacher pour

American socialism

Publié: décembre 16, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Liberals are trapped in a self-reinforcing cycle. When they use their positions in American culture to lecture, judge and disdain, they push more people into an opposing coalition that liberals are increasingly prone to think of as deplorable. Democrats have done nothing since Trump’s election to reduce these feelings. On issue after issue the Democratic party has moved to the left, catering to a progressive base outraged at Trump’s election and seething at how the Democratic establishment foisted a fatally flawed candidate upon them. The trouble is that when government tax revenues are divvied up among special interests, kids come last. Older Americans get the lucrative government jobs. They then implement seniority laws and credentialism requirements to keep others out. Government spending, much of which is financed by borrowing, also disproportionately benefits seniors. Kids get stuck with the debts. That only validates their own worst prejudices about the other America. But you know full well that liberal democracy – from the perspective of socialists – isn’t true democracy at all. It is merely a necessary bridge they require to get into power. What’s the point in establishing socialism if the next election cycle a bourgeois counter insurgency undoes your progress? Isn’t ?

Electeurs ….

Publié: novembre 23, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Vous avez voté pour un bourgeois centriste qui élimina les nôtres (avortement facile) au profit des autres (Regroupement familial). Pour un ancien cagoulard, faux résistant mais vrai vichyste qui ouvrit les portes de la France aux allogènes. Ensuite pour un ancien communiste reconvertit en centriste de droite qui balaya la conscription nécessaire à l’assimilation. Et pour finir, des parvenus pousse-tampons qui se remplissent la panse jusqu’à plus soif en attendant le dernier rideau…… Et vous voulez que je mette un gilet jaune ?

Vous êtes des crétins !…. de ceux qui restèrent silencieux sous l’occupation.


Publié: septembre 29, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Females are emotion based creatures. This is one of the most important things men have to understand about women. It factors into every interaction with them and every dynamic of a relationship. Not all men have the ability to see through women. Four and a half billion years of evolutionary drive tricks most men. Lies, treachery, and deceit are her way of life. The true nature of a woman. The road to divorce court, family court, and jail is paved with the bodies and wealth of men who believed “she would never do that to me”. She is extremely selfish. Women act like children and I don’t trust children. They lie, cheat, steal, smash things and whine when they don’t get their way.

A man can go through hundreds of women and not find an exception. That is, if he pays attention and doesn’t allow the predator to put his mind into a trance. Only moments when his biology betrays his mind and he allows the predator to get too close does he find himself at risk of losing his freedom, money, and property. She can never make up her mind on what she want’s and what she does not want. Pathological liar.Thrives on drama, emotional dominance and emotional manipulation. Women lack logical faculties and integrities.

Never trust a woman, for that trust will always be betrayed. Marriage and the nuclear family, the bedrock of Western civilization, are now dead and with its death the civilization will also die. In brazil there is an expression that says "Mary goes with the others". Basically it defines the herd mentality that women have in general. Now it is the pc / diversity thing. She will lie to get what she want’s, no morals or ethics.  And who needs logic when you’re a woman?

They are raised to believe they are the center of the universe, are entitled to whatever it is their fickle heart desires, and incapable of doing wrong. I’d say conservatively 98% of women are useless. I’m not saying they don’t do anything, but generally it is something lacking real meaning or merit. Women lack compunction. Women hyper game, You can always trust a female to do what females do… connive, manipulate, sling guilt and blame on you and then trade up to a more wealthy and higher status man as soon as she gets a chance…


I know what you gonna say … “not all women are like this blah blah blah” ….

… only 99%




Publié: septembre 5, 2018 dans Uncategorized

L’administration Trudeau a déjà tué deux projets de pipelines importants. Ensuite, pour sauver la face, Trudeau nationalise le Trans Mountain Pipeline par une tentative cynique en dépensant 4.5 milliards de dollars de l’argent des contribuables. Se rendant compte de son hypocrisie, Il promet aux Canadiens que cette fois le trans Mountain pipeline sera construit. Un tribunal en décida autrement et l’expansion du pipeline ne sera pas approuvée.
Maintenant, les Canadiens ayant voté pour lui en sont pour leurs frais. Les promesses n’engagent que les imbéciles qui les croient. Voyez les Français avec Mitterrand !


Publié: juillet 4, 2018 dans Uncategorized

The Americans are celebrating the fourth of July….. I bet most of millennial have no clue why they are celebrating it. Videos online questioning their high IQ demonstrate their ignorance. Public education system has been hijack by the left, it’s no surprise History is not taught at schools… just propaganda. Now that the democrats are openly socialists, waiting to admit they are full communists very soon, it’s no wonder our kids and even young adults are the stupidest ever.

And, by the way, the declaration of Independence was not signed the 4 of July but two days before. The stamp on the back of the document was the day they archive it. Just saying !

12 Types Of Women To Avoid

Publié: juin 10, 2018 dans Uncategorized


Every single one of us has made mistakes with women. We’ve been conned, duped and dazed by physical attraction. We’ve made fools of ourselves by kissing the feet of females who treated us like dirt. We’ve wasted countless hours and spent small fortunes chasing after women who lied to us and used us, and turned out to be rotten.
But do we learn from our experiences? No. Every time we think it’s going to be different. We think if we just try harder, or do one little thing differently, the result will change.
Well, it’s not going to change. If you keep pursuing the same kind of woman, you’ll just get your heart broken over and over again.
Keep a watchful eye out for the following list of women, and you’ll be one step closer to curing yourself of habitual bitch-dating:
1- Miss Feminist
This woman postulates that all the ills of society are orchestrated by men and the best thing a man can do to improve himself is cut off his testicles and grow a pair of ovaries. She believes that women are angelic creatures who would make the world a utopia if only the male "patriarchy" would allow them to. Any woman who promotes these absurdities lives in a fantasy world and will have no problem at all treating a man in a way that she would never herself abide by. You can easily identify her by her incessant mantra, "All men think with their penises." Avoid her at all costs.
2- Miss Take
She’s out for your money — pure and simple. Miss Take is the ultimate in high maintenance. She expects a man to finance her entire life just because she is biologically female. To her, a man should pay for drinks, dinners, trips, flowers, and jewelry, while she feels absolutely no guilt or compulsion to reciprocate. She is nothing but a whitewashed prostitute. Miss Take thinks her vagina is plated with gold and is worth a million dollars. She is greed personified. Since she has no concept of someone else’s feelings, her only interest is in getting what she wants. And don’t be fooled — some apparently very "nice" girls are the greediest of them all.
3- Miss Romance
This type of woman lives in a fantasy world of Lifetime Channel movies and romance novels. Every night she goes home alone to spend hours flipping through her bride magazines, imagining that, at any moment, Prince Charming will ride up on his white horse, sweep her off her feet, and offer her a problem-free existence for the rest of her life. The Miss Romances of the world have been coddled by parents and family, told they are "princesses," and have absolutely no idea that real life consists of paying bills and cleaning toilets. Miss Romance will expect to be taken care of, will be a dud in bed, and will, almost overnight, turn into a shrieking nag. Run.
4- Miss Elusive
This woman is closely allied to Miss Romance, but with a dark side. She is usually one of the "walking wounded" — someone who has been hurt in past relationships and so subconsciously avoids or sabotages new relationships in the present. Your association with her will be one of utter frustration, as first she shows great interest in you, but very quickly runs away — then repeats this cycle over and over again. Miss Elusive is the queen of mixed messages. She will flirt with you and date you, but you’ll never get past "friend" status. What you will get is a million excuses for her unavailability, all calculated to deceive herself that she just doesn’t have time for a relationship. Save yourself some heartache — don’t get involved with her.
5- Miss Angry
Like Miss Feminists, Miss Angrys really don’t like men. They scorn the male gender and can rattle off all the wrongs and misdeeds of every man they’ve ever encountered. To Miss Angry, there’s no such thing as a nice guy — they’re all "jerks," "creeps" and "pigs." Many of them have lots of simmering anger at men, which can explode at any moment like an erupting volcano. Unless you’re into lots of drama and screaming, stay away.
6- Miss Insecure
This woman seems great at the start because she’s very nice, accommodating and treats men well. But her inner insecurities don’t take long to surface. Pretty soon she’s calling you 10 times a day, asking to see "where the relationship is going," or because she "just wants to hear your voice." She needs constant reassurance that she’s attractive, and worries incessantly about her makeup, hair and the alignment of her clothes. She’s clingy, needy and compulsively agonizes that you’re going to leave her at any moment for "someone better." This kind of thing can get really creepy really fast.
7- Miss Bitch
Miss Bitches are the sulkers, pouters and ball-busters of the female world. They are very unpleasant people who treat their fellow humans poorly, care only about themselves, and aren’t concerned at all if they hurt you or anybody else. Most Miss Bitches qualify as Miss Takes, too. Miss Bitches are usually good-looking and well dressed, and you can easily identify them by the scowls on their faces as they imperiously strut through the world.
8- Miss Me
A close relative of Miss Bitch, Miss Me is entirely focused on herself. Miss Me needs to be the constant center of attention no matter what she does or where she goes. She is a selfish, self-indulgent, self-serving narcissist who was raised as "daddy’s little girl," and expects the same from you. Unless you enjoy the company of spoiled brats, stay far, far away.
9- Miss Desperate
Whether it’s her baby clock ticking or she’s the last of her girlfriends to trap a man, Miss Desperate wants to get married — now. She doesn’t care who the guy is or what he does — as long as he’s got a penis she can drag him to the altar. Watch out for this one!
10- Miss Turncoat
She’s a conniving little piece of work who’s an expert at conning men. Miss Turncoat will tell you exactly what you want to hear until you’re hooked deep into the relationship (or married) and then the truth comes out. Overnight, your sweet little girl turns into a demanding, greedy, mercenary harpy who will browbeat you into submission if she doesn’t get her way.
11- Miss Tease
Usually, you can spot Miss Teases a mile away because she flirts with anything in pants and flaunt her sexuality at every opportunity. Sometimes she sponges off older men; sometimes she’s a ball-buster who enjoys getting men sexually excited and then walking away; and sometimes she just basks in her sexual power by attracting men like bees to honey. No matter how she operates, you can’t trust her because she craves male attention and if somebody better comes along, she’ll dump you in a heartbeat.
12- Miss Controlling
She is a subtly nasty one who will wind up directing every phase of your life. She will tell you what to wear, where to go, who to talk to, what friends you can have, what you can eat — everything. And if you try to stand up for yourself, she will cut off sex, cry, scream, pout, or use any other deceptive female tactic until you give in and succumb to her demands.

you’ve been warned!

These are some of the worst of them. Obviously, there are some good women out there who share only portions of these negative qualities. But it’s always best to be on the lookout for the Misses listed above.
And now that you know better, if you hook up with one of these women, you have only yourself to blame.
Matthew Fitzgerald is the author of Sex-Ploytation. He has appeared on radio shows from coast-to-coast in the United States and in Canada, and has been featured on the Montel show and The Other Half.

Why Women Go To College ?

Publié: juin 10, 2018 dans Uncategorized



Vox Populi


Last week I met a 22 year-old college graduate on the subway who told me that she had majored in English. I asked if she had read Walt Whitman and she replied, “Who’s he?” I said that he is considered by many to be the greatest American poet and that much of his work can be found in Leaves of Grass. She never heard of that either. I asked if she had read Dante, Boccaccio, Rabelais, Cervantes, or Balzac, and she replied, “Who are they?”

I decided to drop my inquiry of her knowledge of western literature and instead decided to pursue her reason for going to college. The normal response by women to that question is to get an education so that they can get a job and make some money and be somebody. She short-circuited the process by stating that she got an education to make some money. When I explained the usual response I get to that question I asked her what part of speech education, job, money, and somebody are, and she did not know. She did not know a verb from a noun or adjective. I normally explain that these are nouns and if women speak in nouns, they cannot possibly make change, since to make change requires the use of verbs. I went to school to learn, and then I went to work, where I had the opportunity to build, to create, and to make things. Men are verb people.

This exchange with the English major caused me to reflect on letters I receive from the Association of American Scholars in which they indicate that a test given to high school graduates was given to college seniors 50 years later, and the college seniors did not do as well on it as the high school graduates a half century earlier. In practical terms that means women who graduate from college today don’t know as much as their grandmothers who graduated from high school 50 years earlier. I went to school with their grandmothers and can say without reservation that they don’t know as much as their grandmothers did.

One would think that if college doesn’t teach more than what high school used to, people would stop going to college, but this is not the case with young women; their enrollment in higher education continues to increase. The reason for this apparent anomaly is because women do not go to school to learn. They go to school to be. Men on the other hand go to school to learn and when they recognize that they are not learning they drop out of college. High school boys cannot drop out; instead they commit truancy. Grade school boys can neither drop out nor commit truancy, so they are given Ritalin to endure instruction for noun oriented people. There is a dual issue here. Aside from men realizing they are not learning, why does get a diploma satisfy a woman’s need to be? Or does it

The feminine principal is the receptive entity in gender relationships. Since she cannot aggressively pursue, she must attract. She in essence is saying look at ME. I am worthy of being your mate. This natural and healthy activity attracts the male. The purpose of gender is to mate, and the feminine principle attracts the male so that he will mate with her. However, family has been destroyed in the Western culture and males have willing surrendered their naturally assertive role. A woman now has no purpose in saying look at ME. Yet in is part of her psyche to be wanted. This desire to be noticed and wanted is replaced by a piece of paper, a certificate, degree, or license. She is continually propagandized and motivated “to get an education and be somebody.”

The recruiting slogan of the US Army “Be All That You Can Be” is geared to women. Many have opted to do just that and some went to Abu Ghraib prison and made pornographic movies, got pregnant, and were sent back to the states for an all expenses paid delivery.

A piece of paper is a poor substitute for marriage and family and it is a tragedy that women go to school in order to compensate for the lack of demand for their natural function-being a wife and mother. Is it any wonder that the number one debilitating illness of the American woman is depression?

The only natural relationship between men and women is to mate and propagate the species. The fundamental unit of society is the family and it requires support. We need a change in our fundamental values. When that happens all the “big” problems that we address will disappear of their own accord; however, women are the receptive entity of society; they cannot bring about change. The challenge for men at this time in Western society is to rise to the occasion and bring about the needed change in values that will rebuild the family and tribal structure


By Elder George

Since many of the mothers keeping children from their fathers have

emotional/personality disorders, "for the sake of the children" those

children should be given to their fathers?

>Dads Play Key Role in Kids’ Mental Health

Important when mother is suffering, study says

(HealthDayNews) — A father’s good mental health can

greatly reduce the negative impact of a mother’s poor mental health on

children’s behavior and well-being.

That’s what Cincinnati Hospital Medical Center researchers report in the

August issue of the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

"If a mother and father are depressed, the odds that a child will have

behavioral or emotional problems go up eightfold," study author Dr. Robert

S. Kahn, a physician/researcher in the division of general and community

pediatrics, said in a prepared statement.

"The risk is less elevated if only the mother reported poorer mental health

and not elevated at all if only the father reported poorer mental health,"

Kahn said.

The study also found that when both a mother and father have mental health

problems, the influence on behavioral problems in their children is

especially strong in boys.

Khan and his colleagues examined data from a survey of families of 822

children, aged 3 to 12.

"Many studies have shown that poor maternal mental health has negative

impacts on their children’s behavior and emotional health," study co-author

Dr. Robert C. Whitaker said in a prepared statement.

"Rarely have studies used information about the mental health of both

parents to assess outcomes in their children. This study suggests that what

happens to children’s well-being when their mothers suffer mental health

problems depends on whether the father is healthy," Whitaker said.

More information

The U.S. National Mental Health Information Center has more about child and

adolescent mental health ( ).

— Robert Preidt

SOURCE: Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, news release, Aug.

2, 2004

Women are Liars.

Publié: juin 10, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Women are Liars.

NINETEEN out of 20 women admit lying to their
partners or husbands, a survey on attitudes to truth
and relationships has found.
Eighty-three per cent owned up to telling "big,
life-changing lies", with 13 per cent saying they
did so frequently.
Half said that if they became pregnant by another
man but wanted to stay with their partner, they
would lie about the baby’s real father.
Forty-two per cent would lie about contraception
in order to get pregnant, no matter the wishes of
their partner.
And an alarming 31 per cent said they would not
tell a future partner if they had a sexual disease:
this rises to 65 per cent among single women.
In the poll of 5,000 women for That’s Life!
magazine, 45 per cent said they told "little white
lies" most days. The favourite untruth was "of
course you don’t look fat", with "these shoes were
only £10" in second place.
Jo Checkley, the editor of That’s Life! , said that
while many women now lied to avoid hurting their
partner’s feelings, covering up the truth about a
baby could have far more damaging
She said: "Modern women just can’t stop lying, but
they do it to stop hurting other people’s feelings. It
could be argued that these little white lies simply
make the world go round a little more smoothly.
But to tell a man a baby is his when it’s not, or to
deliberately get pregnant when your partner
doesn’t want a baby, is playing Russian roulette
with other people’s lives."
The National Scruples and Lies Survey 2004 found
plenty of untruths were told over the Christmas
period. A total of 78 per cent said they would pass
off a second-hand gift as a brand new present,
while half have lied about a Christmas card being
"lost in the post".
Women will also lie to save people’s feelings, with
only 27 per cent saying they would tell a man if he
was hopeless in bed (although a third would tell
their friends all about it).
Just over half would flatter a man if he asked them
about his looks and only 46 per cent would give
the "brutal truth". However, 61 per cent of women
would want their partners to be "brutally honest" if
they asked them "do I look fat?" or "do you think
my best friend’s attractive?"
Elsewhere, 54 per cent admitted stealing sweets
or chocolates; 23 per cent would "sneak a bottle
or two" home if they were invited to a party by a
well-off friend; 49 per cent would "kiss and tell" to
the media for £25,000 if they had a one-night stand
with a celebrity; and 38 per cent say they would
marry purely for money.
Nearly half said they had faked orgasms and 55
per cent admitted claiming they were tired, had a
headache, or felt ill to "get out of lovemaking".
Nineteen per cent of women with a long-term
partner said they had cheated on him, while 30
per cent of all women have had an affair with a
married man. Sixty-eight per cent said they did not
trust their partner.
As far as trustworthy personalities are concerned,
the woman with "the most honest face" was Fern
Britton, the This Morning host. She was followed
by the singer Kerry Katona (formerly McFadden),
Sharon Osbourne of The X Factor and the Queen.
The "most honest male face" jointly went to Ant
and Dec, the presenters of I’m A Celebrity … Get
Me Out Of Here!, with Prince William second.
The results come in the wake of the controversy
surrounding David Blunkett, the Home Secretary,
and his former lover, the publisher Kimberly
Quinn. They had a child, but she kept details of
the affair secret from her husband Stephen, even
taking her son to Corfu for a week’s holiday to
bond with him this year.
Mr Quinn accepted his wife’s story, but she had
covered up the fact she was accompanied by Mr
• The survey questioned 5,000 women, average
age 38, across Scotland, England, Wales and
Northern Ireland.
Top ten porkies
That’s Life! magazine has carried out its National
Scruples and Lies Survey 2004 to find out the top
ten lies told by women. They are:
1. "Of course you don’t look fat!"
2. "These shoes were only £10."
3. "The bus/train was late."
4. "I’ve got a headache."
5. "I’ve only had one drink."
6. "That dress looks good on you."
7. "The cheque’s in the post."
8. "You look ten years younger."
9. "You’re wonderful in bed."
10. "I love you."




VICTORIA – Terry is like any other spouse who has suffered physical abuse at a partner’s hands. The shame, the stigma, the sticking it out in the hopes that things will change – all these are part of Terry’s experience.

"I couldn’t believe it was happening to me," says Terry in a phone interview. Terry is not his real name. Yes, you just read a masculine pronoun.

He is one of Canada’s 546,000 male victims of domestic abuse. His wife’s behaviour escalated into physical violence within their first year together. Identifying factors about Terry’s story have been altered.

While the ratio of male-to-female victims is much closer than commonly believed, the availability of support services is lopsided, says Robert Waters, 51, a fathers’ rights activist.

"There is a reluctance on the part of the spousal-violence industry to acknowledge that females could be perpetrators and males could be victims," Waters says.

The report, Measuring Violence against Women: Statistical Trends 2006, shows that male victims of spousal assault trail females by only one percentage point, with seven per cent of female respondents saying they had experienced violence from their partners within the past five years, compared with six per cent of men. That’s 654,000 women and 546,000 men who have experienced physical abuse ranging from shoving, slapping and scratching all the way to assault with a weapon.

It’s a far cry from the rate of assaults found in a 2005 report from the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, where only two in 10 offences are reported to police by male victims.

Sherry Wallace, a spokewoman for StatsCan, says that the disparity between the reports can be attributed to men’s reluctance to report violence to police. Men are only half as likely as women to seek social services and to report violence to police.

Jonathon Van der Goes, 55, director of client services at the Men’s Resource Centre in Nanaimo, B.C., says it’s very difficult for male victims to come forward. "It’s absolutely a harder thing to do. They have a sense of powerlessness. The stigma is huge."

So huge, in fact, that counsellors at Victoria’s Men’s Trauma Centre recommend male victims call them before calling the police so they can accompany the victim to the police station.

"We know the officers; we can steer the victim through the process," says Alana Samson, 56, therapist and director at the centre. "It’s such a tremendously difficult step to take that they need the support. Being abused is one thing, but when someone disbelieves them, it can be worse than the abuse itself."

Emotional abuse typically predates physical abuse, and in this area, victim support counsellors say some abusive women might excel over males.

"They know what hurts and where. They know how to humiliate," says Maureen Betts, 57, program manager at Greater Victoria Police Victim Services. "They can have incredible psychological power over another person. It’s a bullying mentality they had as children, and they’re very successful at it."

Women are more likely to kick, bite, hit or slap their partners, and Frances Strauss, 58, victim services co-ordinator at the Men’s Trauma Centre, says a woman wielding a frying pan is not just a stereotype. Ambush is a common strategy.

The StatsCan report says, "Overall, women were two-and-a-half times as likely as men to report the most serious forms of violence, such as being beaten, choked, threatened with a gun or knife, and sexually assaulted." But the estimated number of men who suffered attacks of this severity over a five-year period was 89,000, markedly less than the 254,000 women, but a number that Waters says should draw more attention.

Males are also victimized by their homosexual partners. The survey found that between 1991 and 2004, spousal homicides among estranged homosexual partners showed the same history of domestic violence as for female divorced heterosexual homicide victims. Spousal violence is twice as common among homosexual couples.

All the problems that abused women face are shared by male victims, but with a twist. Female assailants sometimes exploit the stereotypes in the social services and justice systems to their advantage.

Strauss says, "The wife says (to her male victim), Do whatever you want, I’m going to call the police and say that you hit me.’ "

Sometimes men stay in the relationship because they fear leaving their children alone in a home with a volatile mother who might later use the court process to block the father’s access.

"They know that the courts tend to see the mother as the primary parent," Waters says. "Once a man has been accused of abuse, he has a very difficult time overcoming that allegation. Even if you overcome, there’s six to 12 months to wait for a court date, and the stigma sticks."

Like most male victims, Terry never reported the abuse to police. He’s still wary of rocking the boat with his ex-wife, who has custody of their children, and from whom he is divorced. He is, however, in counselling.

Joanne Hatherly

Victoria Times Colonist

Robert Mueller

Publié: juin 5, 2018 dans Uncategorized

The Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, has had a very interesting career. As a Harvard Law School graduate, he was a contemporary of Harvey Silverglate, another attorney of some renown who has recently come out and accused Mueller of attempting to entrap him with a fake witness and fake drugs.

Later in his career, Mueller’s FBI agents were accused of wrongdoing and collusion with military investigators in the conviction of Jeffrey D. MacDonald, a man accused of killing both his wife and his two children on post. When MacDonald had amassed evidence that he was framed, he hired Silverglate and when the attorney arrived at a meeting with the government agents, Mueller was also present and began the meeting by admitting outright that no amount of evidence was going to gain a second look for the convicted man!

The many strange and unethical behaviors by Mueller aside, it has become more and more apparent with every passing day that this man has a personal vendetta against the president and is set on doing anything he can to help his own friend, James Comey. Additionally, he appears to be ready to find anything to pin on the president or his staff.

A new WikiLeaks addition has hit the ether, and it appears that Mueller was specially handpicked by Hillary Clinton as the one person she trusted above all others to personally deliver the samples of enriched uranium to the Russians in a clandestine meeting that took place on a tarmac, of all places! Worse still, many fear that his job now as special counsel might also encompass the “cleaner” of Clinton scandals…in other words, making evidence of Clinton and Obama collusion with the Russians conveniently disappear without a trace!

Robert Mueller, who is the Special Counsel in charge of the investigation into whether or not President Trump and his staff colluded with Russia, whether there were financial dealings for which Trump benefitted from Russian currency, and also whether or not he had assisted the Russians in influencing the outcome of the election.

Mueller’s zeal is legendary, especially when it comes to nailing high-level Republicans and Right wingers. As has been talked about in the press, a new push has been issued by the Democrats to make this story about Russian collusion for Hillary, Obama, Holder, Comey, Podesta and De Blasio disappear. If you’ve noticed, it’s also been extremely ramped up in order to make Donald Trump appear to be guilty when all the evidence for collusion is right here in the Democrats’ corner!

Even today, a group of protesters (obviously bought and paid for by Soros and others) was on hand and conveniently threw a bunch of Russian flags in the face of the president as he appeared!

They are desperate because of all the new information that is being uncovered. There is also news that Robert Mueller has expanded the scope of his investigation as of yesterday to include the Podesta Group. That says one thing to many people following this unfolding situation.

Mueller is attempting to hide or destroy evidence that is out there and is damning to the Democrats. The Podesta Group is linked as well to this mess and it needs to go away…and fast! Meanwhile, the information continues to pour out into the media about Mueller.

Even as he was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), he had opportunities to go abroad and visit with Russian officials! So, this implicates him as well!

Hillary Clinton, as has been revealed in a new WikiLeaks release, personally requested that Director Robert Mueller oversee the delivery of the sample of uranium to the Russians on behalf of the committee in support of the Uranium One deal!

Not only did he get the nod for this exchange, it was set to take place on a runway tarmac inside an airplane with Russian and Georgian officials! That meeting was conveniently not brought up at the hearings. But why?

Hillary made the Uranium One shady deal happen by virtue of her and Eric Holder’s sway on the government committee which would give it a thumbs-up or thumbs-down and she then needed a lackey to deliver the sample goods. Mueller was that lackey, according to the newest leaks!

The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle. It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.

The FBI Director was originally scheduled to ‘return’ a sample from the DOE stockpile to the Russians in April but the trip was postponed until September 21. Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.

“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance.”

But possible even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminisce of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.

Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.

Previous deals! Imagine this for a moment: The Holder DOJ discovered in 2009 that the Russian spies inside the United States were targeting and influencing American politics going all the way back to 2004!

Who was the Director of the FBI in 2004 and in 2009? Robert Mueller! So, the question remains as to why none of this information was ever picked up by the House or Senate Intelligence Committees? Because, as has been attested to by members of both chambers, neither the FBI nor the DOJ ever came to them to tell them of their findings!

Joe Hoft, guest writing at the Gateway Pundit, has offered that he believes that the entire reason for Mueller having been tucked into the Special Counsel bed in the first place was to hide the very information that is currently being leaked to the press. While it’s true that people are learning the truth through alternative media sources (and to their credit, The Hill, which proves day after day how much it despises Trump), it is nevertheless up to Robert Mueller and the Fake News Industrial Complex to decide what is important, what is punishable, and most shockingly, what is going to be revealed in the end.

Rush Limbaugh has hammered this opinion home as well on his show. Limbaugh offered the opinion yesterday that he believes that the reasons why the RINOs allowed all of this to pass them by without question was because they honestly believed that Clinton would be their president today. As such, they were not going to cross her and suffer her legendary Hillary Clinton-style payback.

In addition, many other alternative media sources are beginning to suspect that Rod Rosenstein, who was the man directly responsible for slipping Mueller in as Special Counsel, has a hand (as well as a vested interest) in making all this disappear. Perhaps he too felt the sting of a possible “whitelash” from Clinton.

Many may be wondering why Rosenstein was the man to appoint Mueller. If you recall, one of the first things that Attorney General Jeff Sessions did when confirmed was to recuse himself from the Trump-Russia collusion investigation. By doing so, he set up Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, to name the appointment of a Special Counsel. Let’s not forget that Rosenstein was a George W. Bush Establishment appointment, and that he was recruited by none other than Eric Holder himself to work in the Department of Justice!

If we continue to follow the strangling vine farther back, we only uncover more questions and more individuals wrapped up in this ever-increasing scandal of incredible scope!

Robert Mueller was the Director of the FBI from 2001 to 2013, appointed to his position by George W. Bush. Believe it or not, Mueller is a registered Republican! Bet you didn’t know that. If you had, would it have changed your opinion of what this man is most likely doing?

There is another aspect of the draconian tactics that have been undertaken by this man that call into question his ethics and his bullying of witnesses. For example, the pre-dawn raid of Paul Manafort’s Virginia home while he and his family were sleeping is a perfect demonstration of how Mueller’s team operates when he wishes to intimidate witnesses, according to many professionals who are contemporaries of the Special Counsel.

However, new evidence has pointed to yet another blockbuster piece of evidence that has many scratching their heads as well. Manafort has been revealed by a new witness who is a whistleblower for the Podesta Group to be one of THE main liaisons between the Russians buyers and the Clintons, with Mueller fully aware of this link all the way back in 2009. The whistleblower also claims to have extensive evidence of such information that will basically nail John Podesta to the wall.

This is developing as I’m writing this. In addition to this, there is also explosive new allegations that another witness is ready to testify that the Clinton campaign is one of up to three different entities who funded the infamous Trump Dossier! The other entities appear to be the DNC and believe it or not, a high-ranking member of the Republican Party! Could this be why John McCain was in possession of this document and why he was peddling it early on to all of the intelligence agencies?

One wonders why Mueller has not used the pre-dawn raid tactics on these entities.

Le tombeau

Publié: juin 5, 2018 dans Uncategorized

Pour avoir beaucoup voyagé, par expérience, je perçois un lent inéluctable et irréversible déclin de notre culture et une transformation radicale de notre identité judéo-chrétienne. L’Occident se meurt et nous le savons. Ce que nous ignorons est la façon dont notre démise se fera. J’ai la certitude que cela sera la leçon du 21e siècle .. la certitude de baigner dans le sang. Nous en paierons le prix.

Le feminisme destructeur …

Publié: juin 5, 2018 dans Uncategorized,234545

Le suicide culturel est une invention française. Giscard, Chirac, Mitterrand et les autres le savaient. La presse collaborationniste sait mais parle peu de la pression migratoire. Nos politiciens savent mais s’empressent de nous éclairer sur l’accessoire. Le peuple sent et courbe encore l’échine. Puis viendra le temps où les atrocités terroristes seront devenues anecdotes et où les Français ayant capitulé se rappelleront le temps où ils pouvaient voter. Ceux qui se tiennent debout aujourd’hui font des listes. En 2050, un quart de la population globale sera africaine et en 2100 se sera la moitié de la population mondiale. Les projections démographiques pour l’Afrique sont alarmantes, elle continuera à connaître une forte croissance démographique dans les décennies et le siècle à venir. Pendant ce temps, l’Occident choisi le féminisme et nos femmes, l’avortement et la carrière.

12483501_1073507996016963_685653022_nL’Islamisation du sous-continent avec pour corolaire conflits et guerres rendra l’explosion d’une émigration expansionniste obligatoire. Le Q.I des Africains oscillant autour d’une valeur de 67 (Perspective comparative de Rushton), l’Europe retournera à l’Age des ténèbres avant que mon petit-fils n’atteigne l’âge de la retraite. La perte d’identité subie est similaire à l’identité ressentie. C’est moins le changement qui effraie que sa vitesse.

Vous avez fait l’erreur d’élire le Troisième président de la Ve République, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing le 19 mai 1974 ! Ce jeune Président (il n’a alors que 48 ans), préférant le costume à la jaquette, conduisant lui-même sa voiture, celui qui trouve la vie politique française de l’époque trop «guindée» s’appliquera, tout au long de son septennat, à jouer de l’accordéon chez l’habitant et a fréquenter les starlettes sous les caméras tout en déclarant l’avortement un progrès humain qui éliminera des dizaines de millions de français depuis le 26 novembre 1974. Simone Veil prononça le discours qui allait préluder au vote de la loi sur l’interruption volontaire de grossesse. Les chiffres sont particulièrement éloquents : chaque année, de 210 000 à 220 000 IVG sont pratiquées en France pour plus de 800 000 naissances. Aussi, le Décret du 29 avril 1976, Instituant le regroupement familial fut rendu légal, et institutionnalisé par Giscard, son premier ministre Jacques Chirac et le ministre du Travail Michel Durafour. Ces deux points cruciaux de la politique française sont à l’ origine de notre déclin et de notre disparition rapide sur l’échiquier mondial des puissantes nations.

Du déclin à la décadence, la France accélérera sa décomposition lorsque vous décidiez alors d’élire une autre ordure, récipiendaire numéro 2202 de la francisque, délégué du Service national des prisonniers de guerre, au printemps 1943, François Mitterrand ! De la Cagoule (1935) a la collaboration, le petit François fut de tous les coups tordus ( Affaire de l’observatoire, René Bousquet, maitresses cachées, etc…) en ouvrant grandes les vannes de l’immigration musulmane.

Et comme cela ne suffisait pas, vous avez élu un autre sac aux ordures, celui qui ne reforma rien mais qui enterra la conscription qui avait permis pourtant, depuis des siècles, l’intégration et l’assimilation des populations allogènes de tous les coins de la terre ! Jacques Chirac vous aura berné en se prétendant conservateur alors qu’il ne fut qu’un passe-plat au socialo-mondain du marxisme culturel, livreur du journal communiste l’Humanité dans sa jeunesse et créateur du ‘ne rien faire pour durer’ !

Dans le vide-ordures, vous y trouverez aussi des tonnes d’énarques parvenus, beaucoup de trotskistes et surtout beaucoup de collabos de la première heure. Vous avez écouté la pensée rectiligne des medias aux ordres lorsque vous élisiez un excité de la talonnette avec verbe mais sans actions puis un pousse-papier de sous-préfecture, minable représentant de cette déliquescence crasseuse qui a fait de la France une république bananière !

La démocratie n’est pas un système de justice et de lois. Elle est l’exemple de la perversion d’un organisme humain sans objectifs ni désirs.

Lorsqu’un officier de police vous arrête pour excès de vitesse, il ne connait pas plus la loi que vous. Il est même fort probable qu’il l’a connait moins. Il ne fait qu’appliquer ce qu’il fait tous les jours de la même façon. Mais il porte un uniforme et un badge et cela change tout !

Lorsqu’un juge prends une décision dans un tribunal qui impactera votre vie entière, il ne connait pas, non plus, la loi plus que vous mais il l’applique toujours selon ce qu’il croit être justice. Mais, là encore, il porte une robe et cela change tout !

Lorsque qu’un politicien propose un amendement, une loi ou un article a la constitution, il ne connait rien de la loi ni de la constitution, comme nous tous. Seulement il porte un statut et cela change tout !

Nous faisons fi de notre bon sens lorsque nous nous adressons à nos policiers, juges et politiciens. Car nous pensons qu’ils connaissent leurs métiers et surtout la loi. Or, cette loi n’est jamais appliquée, la justice n’est jamais donnée et la constitution n’est jamais suivie.

Lorsque le policier vous arrête pour excès de vitesse, il le fait pour des raisons pécuniaires et d’avancement de carrière. Car, il ne vous arrête jamais pour être resté sur la voie de gauche sans avoir dépassé cette vitesse. Or c’est l’obstruction qui prédispose à l’accident, pas la vitesse ! La vitesse accroit les conséquences de l’accident, pas son origine ! Seulement il ne connait pas la loi ! Il n’est pas juriste ! Il n’arrête le conducteur que s’il sait qu’il y gagnera quelque-chose. Mais devant l’ignorance des gens, son uniforme le sert ! Il n’a pas le temps de lire et d’apprendre le code de la route et les millions de textes créés chaque année par le législateur. Mais il porte un uniforme et cela change tout !

Lorsque le juge rend une décision dans un tribunal, son verdict n’est pas le résultat de la loi, il n’est que ce qu’il pense être juste ou politiquement correct. C’est d’ailleurs la raison du recès entre chaque affaire. Ceci lui permettant de se plonger dans les millions de pages contradictoire de sa bibliothèque de son bureau qui, au final, n’apportera rien en éclairage et le renforcera dans l’idée qu’il détient un blanc-seing sur l’avenir des individus. Ce qui lui permettra d’apprécier la loi … ou plus subtilement, de la faire ! Mais il porte une robe et cela change tout !

Lorsque le politicien décide de ce qui est bien ou pas et s’arroge le droit de l’inclure dans la loi, il le fait non seulement sans vous demander votre avis mais surtout, il le fait sans connaitre la loi. Il le fait car il peut le faire. Sa carrière et son enrichissement sont son objectif. C’est pourquoi les millions de textes n’ont aucun sens et n’existent que pour justifier les prébendes des acteurs des gens en uniformes, en robe ou en costume trois-pièces !

– « Cessez d’emmerder les Français », disait le meilleur des Présidents normaux de la Ve République. Georges Pompidou n’était pas un politicien. C’était un homme de haute culture, de grande intelligence, qui pratiquait le réalisme et le bon sens de sorte qu’il pouvait être compris de chacun. Les temps ont changé. Trop de politiciens, trop peu de problèmes résolus… (Christian Vanneste)-

Il est certain que je ne sais rien. Mais ce dont je suis certain, est que notre destin est incertain. Histoire d’une tragédie d’un peuple esseulé et brisé par des incompétents (rappelez-vous l’abandon de la conscription, le regroupement familial, l’avortement facile et remboursé, l’invention du RMI, l’abandon du franc, Schengen, Maastricht, etc.) Ce Tancrède Voltairien promu par une caste oligarchique sur les décombres d’une nation, troisième puissance mondiale en 1970, a réussi le pari fou de se suicider en 1981. La France en continuant à vivre en déficit repousse le moment ou le sang coulera à flot et surtout ou les idiots utiles du marxisme génétique devront choisir entre la collaboration ou la mort. Bien sûr le cancrelat fonctionnaire continuera de prier pour qu’un autre Mitterrand ou un autre Hollande repousse un peu plus le moment du retour de bâton, mais il est trop tard …

L’ironie de cette tragédie est que les imbéciles font encore semblant … Ayant toujours eu un fervent intérêt pour l’Histoire, je vois la France devenir rapidement ce que je pressentais en 1981. Oui, je sais … je sais… encore un article larmoyant sur le déclin de la France (et du monde libre), allez-vous penser ; mais ces écrits sont nécessaires pour comprendre ce qui adviendra après la mort de cette nation. Le socialisme n’est pas une invention nouvelle et n’est pas, non plus, responsable de tous les maux de la Terre. Mais dans tous les cas, il en est le géniteur. Inutile aussi de vous faire la liste de tous les dictateurs qui, sans exceptions, étaient tous socialistes ou apparentés. Blum, Laval et des millions d’autres ont tous utilisé l’idéologie victimaire socialiste pour faire souffrir les peuples par centaines de millions…

En France, le socialiste Giscard (surtout ne me faite pas la remarque qu’il était UDF) a permis au Cheval de Troie Islamique de caracoler sans aucun freins à son expansion. Son bon Ministre, victime professionnelle, Simone … elle … s’occupa de faire de la place aux allogènes ! Le regroupement familial pour les uns et l’avortement libre et gratuit pour les autres auront permis le remplacement de population. Le parvenu Mitterrand, de tous les coups sombres, n’ayant qu’une idée en tête, depuis sa Francisque, finit par rendre la France ingouvernable après quatorze années de prébendes gaucho-mondaines.

Enfin, une suite de petits cons aux idées courtes mais lucratives pour les leurs, leur succédèrent.

Ce demi-siècle de pourriture socialiste ne fut pas seulement une idée française. Au Canada Pierre-Eliott Trudeau (et aujourd’hui son fils) et Bill Clinton et ses sbires (Obama etc..) aux Etats-Unis firent de même. Le ‘motto’ étant toujours de s’enrichir sur le dos de l’imbécile en lui promettant de faire son bonheur malgré lui ! L’Europe, malgré elle, obligée par nos seigneurs bureaucrates de se fondre dans la médiocrité au point de disparaitre culturellement, rends désormais l’âme par l’immigration-invasion que nos chers technocrates appellent tous de leurs vœux.

Seulement l’Histoire laisse des traces. Ce qu’elle nous apprend est que les civilisations disparaissent toujours de la même façon. Féminisme et socialisme ont assassiné la France… Vivement la guerre … !

Le président fromage

Publié: janvier 19, 2018 dans Uncategorized

DSCF2419 - CopyLes fables de Patschef

Le président fromage

Il était une fois dans ce pays jadis de cocagne;

Un verrat envieux, miteux et toujours en campagne;

Se désespérant du manque de considération

Des autres animaux de cette pauvre nation;

Se demanda depuis tout petit porcelet

Comment mentir encore en singeant le simplet.

Truies, gorets et pervers narcissiques;

L’ayant suivi dans son ascension épique;

Se demandèrent pourquoi leurs vies ne s’amélioraient

Alors qu’ils avaient jusqu’ici tout accepté.

Ce que semblaient ignorer les animaux qui le suivirent

Est que mentir est le propre du parvenu sans cire;

Car sans le lustre lui permettant de briller;

L’imbécile ne peut que couiner.


Publié: novembre 14, 2017 dans Uncategorized

Maintenant que la crise des allégations féminines envers les homes se tasse un peu, j’aimerais vous faire part de mon humble avis à ce sujet.

La weinsteinerie a assez duré …

Il est entendu que je ne cautionne jamais des actes sexuels délictueux envers quiconque. Cependant, l’hypocrisie féminine est dorénavant à son paroxysme, non seulement avant ces affaires étalées dans la presse occidentale, mais surtout depuis que les précieuses ridicules, mantes religieuses prêtes a tout pour se faire une place au soleil, sont devenues les cloches merles d’une société en pleine déliquescence.

Il était déjà difficile, pour un homme, d’entrer dans un ascenseur seul avec une femme en Amérique du Nord. Alors, la regarder dans l’espace public deviendra, si l’on n’y prend garde, illégal et punissable par la loi. Car, voyez-vous, les femmes modernes ne sont pas exemptés de travers. Et j’aimerai, si vous me le permettez, vous rappeler certains faits qui n’ont pour l’heure pas été en première page des journaux.

Les femmes sont majoritaires dans les meurtres des plus faibles. La société inventa même un mot pour l’expliquer : ‘Infanticide’. Elles sont aussi très largement représentées par l’accès a la ‘promotion canapé’ et les jérémiades incessantes pour l’obtention de quotas. Pour chaque heure effective travaillée, elles sont rémunérées (stats) mieux que leurs partenaires masculins. Malgré qu’elles aient toutes une carrière plus courte que les hommes, elles finissent leurs vies plus riches qu’eux. Le taux de suicide masculin est quatre fois supérieurs à celui des femmes (et pourtant aucune aide logistique ou étatique pour eux). Les femmes, pourtant, se plaignent de ne plus trouver d’hommes désireux de s’engager. Or, la moindre allusion, quiproquo, clin d’œil, flirt, etc. peut amener un homme en prison. Essentiellement, elles savent la justice biaisée en leurs faveurs et sont très largement majoritaire à initier le divorce. Ceci, bien entendu, sans parler de leur aptitude à s’offusquer lorsqu’un homme désire s’aventurer sur le terrain glissant des compliments. Là, quoiqu’elle soit sur-sexualisée physiquement en public, les hommes doivent comprendre qu’ils doivent baisser la tête. La femme ne se trompe jamais et n’a jamais tort (j’entends déjà les commentaires…) mais n’assume ni ne prends jamais aucune décision qui entraverait sa condescendance naturelle. Bref, vous l’avez compris, l’hypocrisie féminine m’ennuie. Et je ne suis pas le seul. Les Américains ont inventé les Mgtow (ces mâles qui ne veulent plus être associé à aucune femme, ni de près, ni de loin) et je ne suis pas loin de penser qu’ils ont raison. Cela va très mal finir. Elles porteront la burka …. Et je m’en fous !