Opinion at SpelledSideways

There is so much smoke around the Iranian Mullahs’ bomb that makes Tehran’s smog feel like a fresh ocean breeze, by comparison. Here is a partial list of views about the Mullahs, their capabilities and intentions about the bomb affair.

* Will never dare to use the bomb, even if they had it. To do so would be suicidal.

* Don’t have the means of hitting Israel with the bomb, their professed favorite target.

* Are environmentalists aiming to curb global warming caused by the use of fossil fuel.

And on, and on, and on, goes the litany. I believe, based on facts rather than wishful thinking, that every one of the above assertions, as well as all other similar dismissive arguments are both false and fraught with danger, because all the above arguments are confounded by various amounts of denial.

Psychological denial is a common quirk of the human mind. People use denial to distort, even refute reality, when accepting it is too threatening to them. Alcoholics are habitual users of denial, a major tranquilizer of the mind. The alcoholic will adamantly deny having any problem with alcohol and continues to drink, even in the face of irrefutable contrary evidence. Denial is resorted to by both individuals and groups, and can be just as deadly for both.

Perhaps the most compelling dismissive argument is that the Mullahs would never dare to use the bomb, since it would be suicidal to do so.

This argument is just as flawed as the rest. The “mutual deterrence” argument may work in state-to-state confrontations. It apparently has worked in the past and the hope is that it will work in the future. However, the mutual deterrence argument fails when a non-state entity is the adversary. The Mullahs don’t have to lob a bomb at Israel or at anyone else to inflict huge harm. They can pursue their cause of death and destruction by simply providing their killers with dirty bombs in a suitcase. Given the Mullahs’ fanaticism and Machiavellian nature, they would come up with a myriad of clever schemes to achieve their objectives.

Consider dirty bombs. They are easy to make, are portable, can kill as well as make a city uninhabitable, without leaving a “finger print.” The Mullahs can go to work then turn “innocently” to the international community for help-to find a group of rogue radicals, so they claim, who had penetrated their facilities and have made off with a loot of radioactive stuff.

It is not as if events like this have never happened in the past. Deadly stolen radioactive materials have found their way to the black market on a number of occasions. The world would respond in panic, yet with its usual arthritic sluggishness searching for the miscreants. Given how clumsy and disorganized the world’s intelligence community is, the prospect of acting expeditiously, much less apprehending the “thieves” is not very encouraging. This is particularly the case when the Mullahs themselves would have a short leash on the “thieves,” to hide them and deploy them only with the greatest of care.

Iran’s ruling Mullahs are clustered around major factions such as the conservatives, the moderates, and the so-called reformists. Yet, the differences among these factions are tactical rather than strategic. One and all share the same overarching goal of defeating the “Crusader-Zionists” by any and all methods possible; bringing about the “end of the world” Armageddon; and, thereby creating the requisite conditions for the appearance of the Hidden Imam, the Mahdi, to assume his rule of the world.

Therefore, it is "Carteresque" (foolish risk-taking a la Jimmy Carter’s throwing the nation’s lot with the Mullahs during the 1979 Iranian Revolution) to overlook the fact that it is Islam, irrespective of any and all considerations, that poses a deadly threat to the world. Choosing one faction over another is no choice at all.

What is the likelihood that the ruling Mullahs will actually use the bomb? If they remain in power long enough to have it, they are very likely to use it, in one form or another. At the very least, they use the bomb for blackmail and intimidation in the region. Not even the all-out nuclear exchange can be ruled out. Islam is a religion centered on death with the faithful eyes fixed on the afterlife and its promised eternal pleasures. If the faithful kills, he goes to Allah’s paradise; if he gets killed, he goes to Allah’s paradise.

The Mullahs’ claim that they are pursuing the nuclear program to meet the country’s energy needs could only fool the most gullible-denial type. Why is it that the Mullahs invest nothing at all in stopping the leak of more than six percent of the precious oil they pump out? For every 100 barrels, six barrels of Iran’s irreplaceable national treasure dissipates at the wellhead. Yet, they spend billions of dollars to harness nuclear energy. Just as troubling is the fact that Iran sits on one of the world’s most dangerous earthquake fault lines. Building nuclear plants on sites such as the one in Bushehr is absolute insanity.

Speaking of insanity, Ahmadinejad, the Monkey, comes to mind. He is dismissed as being a zany fanatic who shouldn’t be taken seriously for his bomb-rattling threats. But this type of dismissiveness can prove deadly. Recall that even a multi-billionaire former president of Iran Rafsanjani, a man seen by many as moderate and a shrewd live-let-live type, has publicly announced that a single bomb would finish off Israel while the Muslims would suffer a setback from which it can easily recover.

The Mullahs are proven vicious mass killers. They summarily executed tens of thousands of Iranian dissidents. They had no qualms at sending thousands of children to clear the minefields ahead of their tanks during the 80-89 war with Iraq; and, they have thousands of “martyrs” brainwashed and prepared to serve as bomb mules to be dispatched to any place in the world.

Sadly, once again it is the peak of “Me First” time with American politicians. Time and again we are told by the politically correct “experts” not to worry about Islam posing a threat to our way of life. We are repeatedly lectured that only a very small minority of Muslims are troublemakers who are giving the peaceful masses of Muslims a bad name. We are also informed that the terrorists, who happened to be Muslims, are the disaffected and the young. And not to worry, since as the fire of youth turns to ashes of old age the rebellious will mellow, as they always have.

In the meantime the real enemy, Islamofascism is forging ahead toward its goal of dominating the world.

I have been warning that it is a deadly miscalculation to engage in infighting, and sit and wait this emerging catastrophe out. It is little more than an exercise in denial to believe that nothing bad will happen, and that the corrupt inept Mullahs will likely shoot themselves in the foot instead of wreaking havoc on the world. I also keep pleading that we should forthwith help the Iranian democratic opposition and send the death-bearer Mullahs back to their mosques. It is the free world’s best and urgent option.

What sane person would want to take a chance to wait and see if the mad Mullahs, once they have the bomb, would use it or not?

Church & State - Separate & Unequal??

Should people who are Christians be involved in politics? I have received email from people who believe that politics and religion should never be mixed. A common statement that is retorted endlessly is "Separation of Church and State".

I agree that separation of church and state is a very wise thing. Our founding fathers specifically spelled out in the First Amendment that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". So indeed, it is self evident that the government has no role in creating a "state church" or in being a theocracy.

Here is an assumed and misplaced thought, that there is an automatic separation of of Religious Faith and state. If you look at the First Amendment again, you will see that it is quite specific in its definition...it restricts the government, not religion. Nowhere do you find restriction on the ability of churches or preachers from criticizing the government on the basis of Christian morality. Society can take it or leave it, but they certainly do not have the legal right to shut it up.

We live in an era where the voice of faith is diminished, ridiculed, attacked and told it has no place in the marketplace of ideas, either in education or government. Why should the influence of governmental policy only be guided by the godless? Our founding fathers would be aghast!

There is no evidence to imply that the founding fathers ever intended to deny the "voice of faith" influence in the public square of ideas. To think differently would show one's ignorance of history and a mountain of written evidence contrary to that conclusion. The Constitution is clear, that the "separation of church and state" had the intent of only being a one way street...to keep government out of the business and practice of churches.

Our heritage is replete with examples of faith and government. Whether it has been the practice of opening prayers from the very beginning of our nation to the present of both the Senate and Congress, the depiction of the Ten Commandments on buildings in Washington, DC, or in more recent times , long public prayers by Franklin Roosevelt on D-Day , or Dwight Eisenhower at the beginning of his inauguration speech in 1952.

How have we come to be a nation without a moral compass?...it is because too many preachers and too many people of faith now fear to exercise their Constitutional right to be a part of the public marketplace of ideas. Political correctness has attempted to banish our heritage of faith to the closet. When freedom of religion and its ability to be heard is oppressed and diminished, realize that tyranny is never very far behind.

Are Liberals Mentally Ill?

Dr. Lyle Rossiter, a veteran psychiatrist, wrote a book explaining the ideology motivating leftists/liberals/progressives is—in fact—a mental disorder. His work, The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness explains the diagnosis.

Rossiter writes, "Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded." He also adds, “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

Though somewhat generalised, Dr. Rossiter has a valid point. Leftist thinking is oft reduced to a cacophonous calliope of irrationality devoid of the jacket and tie of facts. For the Leftist, up is down, in is out, immorality is good, and God is evil. This mindset stems from a skewed view of life and an abiding hatred for authority—unless, of course, the inmates take over the asylum. Then, and only then, must authority be obeyed.

To quote from the movie Dream Team, a Leftist is like “an escaped mental patient with a low frustration tolerance." He demands life to be “fair” and “equal”. Not unlike their days at recess when many of them protested to an authority figure (teacher), demanding she equalise outcomes because they’d lost all their marbles in a schoolyard match due to their lack of mibs shooting skills.

Despite concrete evidence that raising tax rates reduce revenues by robbing the productive of the incentive to produce above and beyond the norm, leftists/liberals/progressives insist we try again in the interest of fairness. Let’s do the same thing over and over, each time expecting a different result.

The victims of this mental affliction may be found in all walks of life, including religion. However, the term Liberal Christian is always an oxymoron. Two competing belief systems cannot be melded together. One is without reason, hence oft irrational to the point of psychosis, while Christianity is not. A “liberal” Christian is simply a liberal who has co-opted the language of Christianity for the purposes of deception.

To a leftist/liberal/progressive—like a mental patient convinced of his own sanity—it is the grownups in society that are mentally deficient. The Leftist claims a unique insight to deeper truths, an insight we grownups and caretakers lack. To the Leftist, he makes perfect sense and cannot understand why grownups rarely take his advice. Most likely another grassy-knoll conspiracy; or something.

We grownups should always keep in mind that in an insane society, the sane man must appear insane.

Liberals may be the tares in the wheat field, and while I don’t advocate rooting them out, we need to remember we don’t put children behind the wheels of vehicles. If Hannibal Lecter is last person on earth we’d want to smoke a joint with, why in God’s name would a sane man put a liberal in charge of our society?

Restoring The Dollar

With all the problems that are facing the economy today, it is amazing that within my short lifetime that the United States was once considered the vanguard of global financial strength. Now, our dollar is being considered to be replaced as the world's reserve currency.

A lot of that credit can be traced to the backing of our currency by hard assets, such as gold and silver. The Constitution itself addresses this issue in Section 8 of Article 1 by stating that only Congress would have the authorization to coin money, and NOT a consortium of independent banks, which is in reality what the Federal Reserve is.

Look carefully at the bills in your wallet. They are called "Federal Reserve Notes". They do not imply any backing by either gold or silver. Up until 1964, dollar and other denominational notes carried the slogan "Silver Certificates" with the added verbiage of "In silver, payable upon demand". Thus true wealth, whether it was gold or silver was backing our currency.

What was the fruit of such an asset based system? Indeed they were myriad. As late as 1969 we had a balanced Federal budget. We were a net lender to the world, and not a hopelessly dependent debtor nation to a Communist country like China. We dominated the world economically, and were a net exporter of goods, and not just the consumer nation we have devolved into today.

Even things like our lunch money as school children reflected this strength. I remember vividly receiving my lunch money in the early 1960's for elementary school. These coins were composed of real silver for the dimes, quarters and half dollars. Nickels were made out of real nickel, and pennies were made out of real copper, not the cheap zinc imitations of today. Again I marvel at how far we have slipped as a people. Our pride as a nation has been broken.

Under a hard asset monetary system, inflation remained in check. In fact, there was very little if any inflation for the entire time period from 1800 to 1913 under a hard asset system. Even after the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, because of at least a partial tether of gold and silver reserve status, inflation remained under 2% annually for 50 years. Remember that inflation is a secret tax that slowly robs your money of its purchasing power. Since the 1970s, when the restraint of asset back currency was abandoned, your purchasing power has declined nearly 4.5% a year on average. Additionally, this has allowed government to indebt us with trillions of dollars of future liabilities because they were freed of the restraints of sound Constitutionally mandated money.

When elected to Congress, I pledge full efforts to restore our monetary system to sound practices and Constitutional asset based standards.

Does Islam Breed Violence?

Truth be told, violence is the animating force of Islam. Islam is a religion born through violence, raised by violence, which thrives on violence, and which dies without violence.

Top

That's So Gay

by Henry Makow

"We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst." J. Edgar Hoover (Elks Magazine, August 1956.)

Millions of young people say, "That's so gay" to denote alien, different or unhealthy.

To me, this is a hopeful sign that civilization may yet survive.

For Rockefeller-Rothschild social engineers, however, it's a nightmare.

These youths did not imbibe the propaganda that gay and straight are the same, i.e. "lifestyle preferences" like cable or satellite.

So these Cabalist bankers have launched an expensive "public service" TV campaign to teach kids that obeying their healthy instincts is "homophobic."

They've got celebrities like lesbian comedian Wanda Sykes and Hillary Duff overhearing teenagers, interrupting and chewing them out. "How would you like it if your identity was used to mean dumb or stupid?"

ANTHROPOLOGY

Every first-year anthropology student learns that group cohesion is maintained by defining in-group and out-group behavior. If a group cannot define itself in these terms, it disappears. (For example, homosexuals use the derogatory term "breeders" to refer to us.)

You're not homophobic. This campaign is a rearguard action in a war on your sexual identity. Gay Pride apparently is OK but heterosexuals cannot uphold their identity. I'm here to tell you, "Bend over no more."

Until 1975, homosexuality was considered a developmental disorder. Therapists thought it a major neurosis, a sexual perversion and even a physical illness. Then the Rockefellers yanked the American Psychological Association's chain and magically, overnight, what for centuries had been abnormal, suddenly was normal.

This is part of a larger attack on gender and marriage designed to decrease population and undermine the family. In the bankers' New World Order, children are born to single mothers or in laboratories and raised by the state to serve the bankers.

Do you really think the Rockefellers, who financed Eugenics for a century, including Mengele's heinous experiments in Auschwitz, care about homosexuals' feelings? No, they are trying to turn you into homosexuals. They want you to suffer from this disorder. That's why you are learning in school that homosexuality is normal .That's why they use psychological war (guilt) to level your heterosexual defenses.

This isn't about equality and human rights. It's about social engineering and mind control. It's about depopulation and dictatorship.

GAYS MORE EQUAL

In 2002, a Mormon girl was ribbed by her new classmates. "Do you have ten moms?" To which she replied, "That's so gay."

Those three words landed her in big trouble. So how selective is this? A Christian's feelings can be hurt, but not a gay person's? Why is that?

They are not promoting tolerance. They are not promoting Christianity. They are promoting homosexuality.

The organization behind the ads, GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, has 40 full-time employees! They sponsor pro- gay propaganda in thousands of schools under the pretense that gay youths are being persecuted. The Rockefeller Foundation is paying.

Wake up heterosexuals! Wars of aggression always use a phony pretext of defending someone from attack.

In reality, heterosexuality is under attack. You are being persecuted. You are coerced to adopt unhealthy behavior which will prevent you from marrying and procreating.

For course, gay youths should be treated with kindness and consideration. It's not their fault they are gay. They're not aware of how homosexuality being used. But let's draw a line. They're not the same as we are and we have a right to say so.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND

Our society has been subverted by Cabalist bankers, including many homosexuals, who have stolen the governments' credit card. Now have to create a dictatorship to protect their prize.

They are behind all wars, depression, 9-11 and the credit crunch. These are ways to degrade and demoralize humanity so we will accept their tyranny.

Instead of thinking of homosexuality as same-sex attraction, think of it as gender role confusion resulting in "failure to permanently bond with (i.e. marry) a member of the opposite sex." This failure results in arrested development. Homosexuals generally compensate by having promiscuous sex.

Can you see how, in these terms, heterosexuals have become like homosexuals? Courtship is almost dead. Anonymous sex ("hooking up") is in. The marriage and birth rates are down 33% to 50% from 50 years ago. Forty per cent of children are born out of wedlock.

Heterosexuality is not a "lifestyle preference." Heterosexuality is being part of the natural life cycle essential to personal development, happiness and the survival of the species. A country that cared about its survival would foster courtship, marriage and family. Children need the security, love and example of heterosexual parents in a strong marriage.

A country that has been subverted by an alien occult financial power perverts its young men and women. Our politicians, media and educators serve this alien financial power.

Here is what a nurse says about perversions and diseases liniked to the "gay lifestyle."

The bankers foster the illusion that gays are just like us, interested in marriage. They aren't. In Holland and Sweden where gays are allowed to have civil unions, less than 3% do. The same is true of Canada. The bankers want you to behave like most gays. They want you to have sex but not marriage and family. They own the world and see you as cattle or "useless eaters."

CONCLUSION

So on Father's Day, let's celebrate heterosexuality. Let's celebrate marriage and children.
Let's celebrate men who support and lead their families, and women who sacrifice for husband and children.

As for the Rockefellers' commercials, let's say, "That's so gay!"

"Published originally at EtherZone.com Publication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Top

Liberty vs. Demagogues

by Amil Imani

What is a demagogue? According to the encyclopedia, a demagogue is a politician skilled in oratory, flattery, and invective, evasive in discussing vital issues, promising everything to everybody, appealing to the passions rather than the reason of the public, and arousing racial, religious, and class prejudices.

History tells us that personal liberty is most often the demagogue's first victim, particularly when popular sentiment is whipped up against some internal or foreign enemy. In other words, liberty and demagogos cannot coexist. The ancient Greek word "demagogos" means simply a spokesman for the people or, more pejoratively, a leader of the mob. “Modern usage implies rhetorical gifts and the ability to arouse an audience, usually with the promise of radical change.”

We have been warned of three kinds of people: charlatans, demagogues, and politicians. And, more often than not, someone will rise up who is all three of these characters wrapped into one. Our liberty is the most precious possession. Many will aim to rob us of it and, by so doing, add to their own power, while trying to force us to become robots. We need to be vigilant and guard our liberty with our very lives.

Desperate situations spawn desperate measures. Not having learned the lessons of history, many people will turn to charlatans, demagogues, and politicians with dire consequences. Just a few old and recent cases of this tragic misstep should warn us not to be victimized in the future by frauds.

From the primitive land of the Arabian Peninsula of over 14 centuries ago rose Muhammad, an illiterate hired hand of a rich widow Khadija, claiming that he was the bearer of a perfect life prescription from God—the Quran. He claimed humanity could do no better than to follow its precepts as well as to emulate Muhammad’s own life example for a guarantee of bliss and salvation. In exchange for this, people must embrace Islam—surrender—by surrendering their Liberty to Muhammad.

Question: Why would the All-Wise Lord choose an illiterate desert-dweller, of all the people in the world, to be his messenger? Why choose a man who couldn’t read or write, a man who, over the course of 20 years, claimed to be receiving periodic revelations from God and had to rely on others who could write to jot down his recollections? These recollections were recorded as the word-for-word literal utterances and commandments of God. Furthermore, a dozen versions of the book of Allah, the Quran, turned up and a fallible Caliph selected one of them and had the rest burned. Burning books has ever since been a companion to Islam’s mission.

To this day, in places where Islam rules, many books are banned, newspapers and magazines are systematically either censored or shut down, and other non-print media are methodically blocked. Then liberty, deeply cherished by democracies, is replaced by submission—unquestioning obedience and adherence to the dictates and precepts of the all-knowing and all-wise Allah.

In no time at all, the savages of Arabia, allured by the win-win promise of Muhammad—you kill you get the booty from your victims in this world—you get killed and your abode will be the unimaginably glorious sensuous paradise of Allah—sword-in-hand, sallied forth to lands near and far.

From the “civilized” land of Germany rose a syphilitic lout who called on the German people to surrender their liberty to him in exchange for a surefire solution to all their economic and social ills. He successfully portrayed the Jews as the main cause of the nation’s suffering. Before long, the masses of gullible easy-solution seekers formed long lines in towns and villages of the land, tripping over each other in eagerness to surrender their liberty to the savior Fuhrer.

The German people blindly subscribed to the Nazi’s promises of economic revival, restoration of German pride, and the establishment of supremacy for the Aryan race. In a blink, hordes of rabid Brown Shirts fanned the length and the breadth of the land hunting the Jews. The fire of anti-Jew mania quickly expanded to devour Gypsies, non-Christians in general, the physically or mentally handicapped, the homosexuals and more.

The genocidal Hitler found it expedient to overlook some of the “despicable” Semitic people—the Arabs—by affording the Grand Mufti of Palestine, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a fellow Jew-hater, a most effusive welcome to Germany. To fool a majority of the people for a considerable period might be fatal. Hitler needed only a few years to ruin Germany.

There is hardly a need to document the horrors of the Nazi episode here, where a charlatan managed to hoodwink a nation, rob the people of their liberty and cause so much death and destruction.

It is unthinkable that an ancient nation—Iran—with a distinguished history, allowed a high order demagogue, Ayatollah Khomeini, to rally the people against the Shah with promises of rule for the people and justice for all. The long-suffering Iranians of all strata readily surrendered their liberty to the turbaned bigot and his gang of murdering sycophants.

In Iran, wishful thinking people saw the “holy man of Allah” as an answer to prayer. The fanatic Muslims perceived him as the one who would revive the flagging fortunes of the faith of Muhammad and pave the way for the much-anticipated advent of the Saheb-ul-Zaman (the Lord of the Age.) The secularists hoped for freedom from the Shah’s dictatorship. Religious and ethnic minorities dreamed of a time when unscrupulous power brokers would no longer victimize them.

Gullibility was not limited to the Iranians who swelled the ranks of the fraud. On the other side of the world, the President of the United States of America—the Lusting in the heart Carter—saw Khomeini as a saint and a savior. Carter provided the crucial support to the man whose greatest claim to the rank of the Grand Ayatollah was his lengthy dissertation on matters concerning sexual intercourse with animals.

No sooner had this fraud of Allah ascended to power than the Iranians of all strata began to pay the price - tens of thousands with their lives - for the folly of letting the three-in-one Ayatollah make decisions for them, the three-in-one that we had been warned about.

For over thirty years the Iranian people have been paying for the tragedy that has befallen them. And that’s not where it ends. Khomeinism is the fire that is spreading beyond the borders of Iran. Khomeinism is a recent violent version of Islam’s Shiism. Islam means surrender. Surrender to the will and dictates of Allah as revealed by Mohammad.

A true Muslim does not and cannot believe in liberty. Everything is up to Allah, so says Mohammad. Everything that a Muslim does is contingent upon the will and decree of Allah. It is for this reason that the phrase Ensha-Allah (Allah willing) always accompanies any promise or commitment that a believer makes. By embracing Muhammad as the unerring and eternal emissary of Allah, a Muslim surrenders his liberty to decide for himself.

The Muslims’ surrender of liberty is not merely a matter of personal choice. The Muslims, having abandoned their most precious rights, are out to make all non-Muslims also do so, by hook or crook. It is said that misery loves company. And the type of misery that Islam has visited on the Muslims and the Islamic lands is a rapidly spreading plague that must be resisted by all who cherish their God-given Liberty.

In the land of the free and home of the brave, a prince charming rose up in the person of Barrack Hussein Obama, promising “A Change We Can Believe In.” Waves of the populace sang the song with him, “Yes We Can.” The skill to arouse the public to frenzy does not make one a worthy leader, nor should one automatically assume that his policies will equal prosperity or liberty.

In a climate of insanity, the people of the land called America, having been deceived by a depiction of a fair and caring socialistic idea that would exalt itself as their protector and provider, chose a charismatic, soft speaking “prophet" as their savior, and some people even called him “The Messiah.” He emerged from the fog with a message that had no meaning, yet he was able to hypnotize people by telling them he was sent to save us from ourselves. Never mind his lack of experience, his questionable ethics and integrity, his humongous ego, and his past association with evil doers, for he will save us with hope and change.

Many Americans forgot that anyone who claims special privileges and status for himself, makes outlandish promises and threats, pits one people against another, fits the bill of three-in-one. The most dangerous person of all is anyone who persuades you to give up your liberty in exchange for your security. And we all have heard the cliché “those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.”

The lesson is clear. Beware of the demagogue who will use your emotions to further his political ambition. Undoubtedly, he serves as the greatest threat to our liberty. He paves the way for the advancement of totalitarianism and our liberty will assuredly be among the very first victims of demagoguery as soon as he assumes power.

Top

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

Top

The Trinity of Hell

Top

Nigger

Controversial speech will always need vigilant protection. To say that a certain word is good or bad is fine; but to use the powers of the government, industry, media, mobs or education to punish an individual for using that word is wrong. I don't like words like "bitch, cracker, snow white, polygamist, racist, Islamophobe, Jew-lover, etc." but I don't throw a tantrum over them, and it would certainly never, ever, EVER occur to me to demand punishment for their use. Why on earth should we make an exception for Nigger? — Resa LaRu Kirkland

Article

Top