Wednesday, August 28, 2013

It Sounds Like a Racial Hate Crime....Again !!

Last week, police in Spokane, Washington were on the lookout for two 16-19 year-old male black ''gutter-rats'' in connection with the random beating to death of  88-year-old Delbert Belton, an Army veteran ( right) who was wounded at the Battle of Okinawa in World War II. According to a press release from the Police Department, "Officers responded to an assault call at the Eagles (veterans) Lodge where they found Mr Belton in his car with serious injuries to his head. He was taken to the hospital where he died as a result of his injuries.'' Witnesses described the suspects as young African-American males of average build who assaulted Belton, known as ''Shorty'' to his friends, as he was about to enter the lodge at 8 pm to play pool, with large flashlights. Shorty's friends say he was a kind old man and ''full of life and loved working on cars and helping others out.''

The next day, released surveillance photos (it's amazing that punks in general rarely think of being watched by CCTV) one teenager, Demetrius Glenn, 16, (left) was arrested with a charge of first degree murder and robbery. After a four day man-hunt, another fugitive teenager, Kenan Adams-Kinard, 16, (right) was arrested and also charged with first degree murder. Several other people found with Adams-Kinard have been arrested for rendering criminal assistance to the teen during his time hiding in a basement apartment.

Here's an Editorial By Doug Giles on the Clash Daily Blog Site Yesterday:

        Dear Black Thugs: You're Making It Hard For Us White Devils to Believe You're Really Innocent Children !

          According to the lame-stream Media, President Obama and the slick-haired Al Sharpton, we white devils are supposed to feel sorry for the plight of the black teen. I do believe Americans, by and large, do have sympathy for any person or group who've had life deal them a bad hand.

          However, young black thugs, you have got to work with us a little bit because you're kind of operating against the storyline the aforementioned are singing about y'all, and thus, making t difficult for us to soulfully commiserate. Of what, pray tell, do I speak ???

        Well, homeboys, it goes like this: For us to give a crap about your below-par existence we'd like to hear less and less about.....

         = Your ghastly grades in school                             = Your ridiculous dropout rates
         = Your colossal out of wedlock birthrates             = Your love affair with drugs and alcohol
         = Your #hatethem tweets at white people              = Your flash mobbing & robbing places
         =  Your ginormous, misplaced racial chip on your shoulder
         = Your audacity to blame everybody and their dog for your odious behaviour
         =  Your embracing of a musical culture (rap-crap) that celebrates the of shooting cops and doing filthy things to someone's daughter.

           Yes, if you could/would chill on some of that stuff, well...that'd be great. That would make us ''crackers'' think, ''Hey, maybe you're serious about getting out of the ditch you're in.'' But, another difficult thing that makes it hard to believe you're just poor, helpless victims of the ''machine'' is when a couple of deadshits from your cesspool gun down an innocent, twenty-two-year-old, white Aussie student just to spice up the inherent boredom which accompanies the dog-days of summer. Yep, that heinous stunt really makes all this ''poor you'' crap fly right out of our windows.

          And lastly, I hate to be negative, but there was one more disgusting incident perpetrated by two black teen scumbags this week that also unravelled the sweet story Sharpton and the President would have us believe. It was that beating to death of an 88 year-old WWII vet. That demonic deed, coupled with the murder of Chris Lane, (left) makes it impossible for anyone with a brain to feel anything towards your personal dilemma.

           Yes, the brutal murder of someone's grandpa and the senseless slaying of someone's son by black thugs does nothing but reinforce what the FBI National Crime Victimization Survey concluded, namely, that young black males are seven times more likely to commit murder than people of other races. And those assholes up in New York City are protesting the STOP and FRISK program since it profiles blacks and Hispanics. Suck it up people, that program significantly dropped NYC's crime rate since it started and your feelings be damned! Look...let's face it, we can't help being suspicious of young black teens, traveling in groups (packs), taking an unusual interest in our person, especially if they're dressed like gangbangers in their oversized Hoodies. The reality is too overwhelming.

The Way I See It.....Martin Luther King must be spinning in his grave to see how his ''dream'' of 50 years ago has been turned into a nightmare, by white Democrats, who have caused his people to grow lazy, promiscuous and feeling ''entitled'' by years of irresponsible welfare handouts.

Is America Twerking Towards Gomorrah !

Viewers of the MTV Video Music Awards on Sunday night were treated to a bizarre dance routine from former Disney child actress Miley Cyrus, which CBS News described as ''one performance that won't be forgotten very quickly.''  Another news station commented that is was very much like ''soft porn, like you'd see at a strip club.''  Cyrus gave Robin Thicke a ''lap dance'' and paraded around in her flesh coloured underwear with dancing bears, ''twerked'' her butt off and grabbed her crotch a few times. Not to mention the tongue. we saw a lot of that. Thicke's mother, Gloria Loring, told OMG Insider, ''I don't understand what Miley was trying to do. I think she's misbegotten in this attempt of hers. And I think it was not beneficial for children to be exposed to this..'' She added, ''I didn't get what her point was. It was so over the top as to almost be a parody of itself.''

The word SLUT comes to mind. Anyway, if you're unfamiliar with term, ''twerking'' is a dance move that dispenses with all the other subtleties of dance to deliver pelvic trusts and butt wiggles. CBS left out the part where young Miley grabbed a form finger from an audience member and began rubbing it against her crotch. She wound up simulating a bit of anal penetration with Ms Loring's son, who was singing with her on stage. And the ''bears'' in the act were dancers dressed like children's Teddy Bears, adding a lovely touch of paedophilia chic to the show.

It wasn't so long ago that I still remember my granddaughter adoring ''Hannah Montana.'' She's turned fourteen, still in that tender age in a young girl's life when liberals think she should be able to get morning-after birth control pills over the counter, without her parents consent. I can tell Robin Thickes mom what Miley was ''trying to do.'' Most obviously, it was a bid for attention, another jolt of cheap stimulus to the frontal lobes of a jaded culture that expects nothing from young people, and is therefore shocked by nothing they do. It's not easy to generate controversy in a society whose only standard is that there should be no standards. The only way for a barely-legal singer to get tongues wagging is to wag her tongue.

What would have been controversial is if she was supposed to sing and dance modestly, endorsing abstinence, traditional marriage and self-discipline, but the people marketing her music wouldn't like it. It's hard to squeeze cash from rebellious teenagers with  message like that, and all the wrong people would have applauded. I would also advise you not to underestimate the importance of the paedophile edge to Miley's routine.(See Posting ''The Agenda to Legalise Paedophilia'' (February 16, 2013) Sexualizing young people is an important mission of the Left. They want girls to jump right from Teddy Bears to Planned Parenthood. That helps dissolve the bonds of family, which is a fading bastion of independence, self-reliance, and decency against collective power. It's important for the ''Ozzie and Harriet'' crowd to feel utterly marginalized, as unwelcome in 2013 as the pilgrims of Plymouth Rock. We are supposed to accept that the world has forever moved on from those days.

You see, parents can't control their kids -- indeed, their influence is expressly unwelcome when it comes to sexual training, where the concept of ''parental consent'' has become as antique as the pocket watch or bustle. Liberal (read Leftist) culture defines wanton sexuality and the rejection of family authority as ''empowerment.''  It softens people up for hardcore government dependency when they're forced to stop twerking and face the consequences. Also, sexy children make a nice distraction for the older members of the Low Information Voter (LIV) community, who crave transgression and worship youth, working as hard as possible not to grow up.

Miley Cyrus was on the bill with Lady Gaga, who is supposed to be the second coming of the aging Madonna. Lady Gaga is said to have been ''upstaged'' by Miley's re-enactment of a Japanese schoolgirl porn video, because all poor Gaga could think to do was dress up as a nun. What kind of rebellion against authority is that? Nuns are so pre-ObamaCare. Religious conscience has given way before the power of the Almighty State . Nuns are just marking time until they're legally compelled to perform abortions.
It might seem pathetic to watch these ''edgy'' artists flaunt their defiance against thoroughly vanquished traditions, but maybe it's an encouraging sign. Their marketing gurus apparently think there's still a bit of milk in the old scared cows. The kids of 2013 can still savor a look of scandalized horror of Mom and Dad's faces. Someone apparently thinks ''family values'' haven't quite been beaten death. Which is good, because ''family values'' remain our only hop for pulling out of the social and economic dive the U.S. finds itself in. The upper class retains the ''secrets'' of decorum, respect, and fidelity that everyone else has been tricked into forgetting. Back when the Left set about turning the phrase ''family values'' into a post-modern joke, laughs were had at the expense of uptight squares who didn't understand the difference between safeguarding important principles and having a bit of fun. Well, the joke is on everyone else. We could see the pendulum of fate quite possibly swing the other way.

The Way I See It.....we never should have forgotten the potent connection between thought and expression, the importance of habit and ritual. It is difficult to treasure what a saturation media culture treats like trash. And it doesn't help that the law of diminishing returns obliges the people who dug our cultural pit to dig more frantically as the hole grows deeper, madly searching for whatever flickers of shock value might still be left to uncover.

Societies die from thousands of cultural cuts. Children are powerfully influenced by popular culture. They yearn for guidance and inspiration from the adult world. They receive the lesson transmitted by crap like the MTV Video Music Awards. Kids a bit younger than Miley remember what she used to be, and they see how she is now. They see the road stretching between those points, and they follow it. Unfortunately, they don't understand that if you want to live a hedonistic anything-goes lifestyle, starting before you are legally allowed to purchase alcohol, and avoid being destroyed by the consequences, it really helps to be a millionaire.

Saturday, August 24, 2013

It's a Shame You and Your Butler Don't Ring True Oprah !

You don't have to watch her cable network to see Oprah Winfrey these days; the billionaire media powerhouse and occasional actress is busy promoting her new film, Lee Daniels' "The Butler'' as well as opening up some racial and political divisions in the bargain. It just goes to show you money doesn't give a person any extra common sense. Oprah's not the first idiot to compare Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till, a 14 year old Negro boy who was brutally beaten and killed by two brothers for supposedly flirting and whistling at one brother's wife in Mississippi in 1955. (See this early month's posting "No Comparison: Trayvon Martin was No Emmett Till)") It is a reckless comparison that fails to take any of the facts of the George Zimmerman case into account, aside from the race of the victim.

Last Thursday, CNN's Anderson Cooper interviewed Oprah and Forest Whitaker, both starring in the Oscar-touted ''The Butler'' film. During the interview, in which Cooper thoughtfully nodded as Winfrey and Whitaker race-baited about the Martin/Till comparison and adding that Americans were racist even if they didn't have ill will toward black people. DUH?  When Cooper cited polls showing showing that black Americans were upset over the Trayvon verdict while white Americans thought too much had been made of the case, Oprah sighed, ''Oh, I know, I know. That's why I love the film in light of this discussion. I mean, look at the film, beginning with that lynching scene and ending with walking into Obama's office, look at what has happened in the span of a man's lifetime.''

Whitaker chimed in, ''This movie reminds us of the circular motion of things, we're looking at all these situations of black suffering and recognizing we have to move ourselves forward.'' Cooper then asked, ""It's amazing to me how people from different backgrounds see this.'' He then talked about a juror ''who did not understand, did not feel linked to Trayvon Martin, but felt connected to Zimmerman in a way, yet feeling race was not part of the case at all.'' Oprah couldn't wait to jump in, blurting, ''People don't feel it's race because people don't call it race. A lot of people think if they think they're not using the n-word themselves, they physically aren't using the n-word, and do not harbour ill will towards black people that it's not racist. But to me it's ridiculous to look at that case and not to think that was involved.''

The new film is a political drama that takes its cues from a Washington Post article about a black servant named Eugene Allen who worked in eight presidential administrations from 1952 to 1986.. That part of the story is essentially unchanged. The rest of the film, is a movie stuffed with left-leaning politics, historical re-creations and presidential imitations and is rife with inaccuracies that should be corrected. Such as:
  1. 1.  President Ronald Reagan was indifferent to the suffering of people of colour. This week two Reagan biographers, Criag Shirley and Paul Kengor shredded this notion. Shirley detailed the president's legislative achievements and personal outreach to his black peers while Kengor asserted the film amounts to what he describes as ''Hollywood malpractice''. ''It is baseless to depict President Reagan as racially insensitive and indifferent to apartheid.'' 
  2. The Democrats helped pass the Civil Rights Act: This is more of an inaccuracy by omissions. The film showcases how both Presidents Kennedy and Johnson rallied on behalf of civil rights, but what's left out is the voting record on the historic Act. Turns out 80% of the NO votes in the Senate came from Democrats. It was the Republicans that teamed up with President Johnson to pass the legislation. After it passed, the film doesn't quote Johnson as saying, ''I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years!''  (Read  my August 7th posting)
  3. President Nixon dismissed black Americans -- save for their votes: The film shows Nixon (John Cusack) promoting his upcoming election battle with Kennedy by giving campaign buttons to the butler and other black servers. His record on school integration outpaced his predecessors and Allen has spoken fondly of Nixon in press interviews.
  4. The Butler disliked President Reagan: The real Eugene Allen has expressed affection for all the presidents he served, noting he voted for each while they were in the White House. A framed photo of the Reagans was displayed on his living room wall and he got a hug from Nancy when he retired. Hardly sounds like the character played by Forest Whitaker, who appeared to be fed up with the Reagans and quit for that very reason. It's all Bullshit!
  5. The Butler met Obama: The film uses a framing device of the Butler waiting to meet personally with Obama. There's no official record of such a meeting, although Allen was a VIP guest at Obama's swearing in.
  6. Leftist screenwriter Danny Strong took tremendous liberties with Allen's life beyond the name change to Cecil Gaines. He gave the butler two sons, not one and made his wife (Oprah) a heavy drinker and fictionalized much of his story prior to entering the White House.
The Way I See It.....The Butler is in no way an authentic bio-pic of Eugene Allen's life as a White House butler.  It gives the impression of a life like that but is skewed to making political points when there aren't any. It is a shame that Oprah Winfrey and her obvious racial paranoia felt she had to make a story that, instead of lifting a coloured man's occupation to something to be admired, into a tome to highlighting racial division. It's ''spin'' like that we don't need at this time. Just like her ludicrous experience in a ritzy boutique in Zurich.

According to Oprah, she saw a nice handbag behind the shop assistant's head and asked to look at it. ''No, you don't want that one,'' the shop girl allegedly replied, ''you want this one, because that one will cost too much.,''  and showed her a similar, but cheaper handbag. Oprah was wounded. So when she left he shop she went straight onto Twitter, and then the Larry King Show, and then an interview outside some Hollywood bash, to rail against this act of blatant racism and to castigate the shop girl. ''Racists these days don't come up to you and call you something horrible to your face,'' she explained, ''it doesn't happen like that anymore.''

And what happened to the racist shop assistant? She says it didn't happen like that at all. She says Oprah inquired about the expensive bags and she showed her the cheaper ones which looked the same, just to be kind. She claims she offered to get the expensive bag down for Oprah but the star did not want to see it. By that time Oprah's Racist Paranoia kicked in. ''I'm so sorry, I'm must have been a misunderstanding. I would never wish to offend Ms Winfrey in any way,'' said the shop assistant. And why, she asked, would a woman so rich and powerful and famous as Oprah persecute a simple shop assistant through the world's media? Ah, shut up racist -- we know who the real victim is here!

Friday, August 23, 2013

It Sounds Like a Racial Hate Crime To Me !

Remember how the media, celebrities, politicians and Black activists falsely portrayed the shooting in self defence of Trayvon Martin by Latino George Zimmerman as a white-on-black hate crime? And remember how some media outlets doctored evidence to make Zimmerman seem motivated by racism? I even remember how the Head-Race-Baiter, President Barack Obama amped up the racial angle by saying:
          ''You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son.....another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.''

The Trayvon Martin killing was portrayed as a hate crime when it wasn't. But Christopher Lane's killing is being described as no hate crime when it possibly is. More on that later.

Here are the three youths charged over Lane's murder - from left to right, James Edwards 15, Chancey Luna 16, and Michael Jones 17. Isn't it astonishing how the authorities and journalists are now doing their best to pretend there is no racial element to Lane's senseless murder.

Typical is this report in Time Magazine: 
         ''With a motive that's both chilling and simple -- to break up the boredom of an Oklahoma summer -- three teenagers randomly targeted an Australian collegiate baseball player who was attending school in the U.S. and killed him for fun, prosecutors said Tuesday as they charged two of the boys with murder.''
          ''Prosecutor Jason Hicks called the boys 'thugs' as he describes how Christopher Lane, 22, of Melbourne, was shot once in the back with a .22 revolver and died along the tree-lined road on Duncan's well-to-do north side. He said the three teens, from the grittier part of town, chose Lane at random and that one of the boys thinks it's all a joke.''
          '''Hicks charged Chancey Allen Luna, 16, and James Francis Edwards, Jr., 15, with first-degree murder. Under Oklahoma law they will be tried as adults. Michael Dewayne Jones, 17, was charged with using a vehicle in the discharge of a weapon and with accessory to first-degree murder after the fact.''

Everyone seems very eager to take at face value the statement of one of these animals, the driver charged with being an accessory -- that they were ''just bored'':  Duncan police chief Danny Ford told AP, ''They saw Christopher go by, and one of them said, 'There's our target.'  He stated that 'We were bored and didn't have anything to do, so we decide to kill somebody.'''  Just Bored?  In fact, the two youths charged with first-degree murder seem to be aspiring members of the largely African-American Crips gang - and have had themselves pictured flashing gang signs. I'm sure further information showing what kind of scum they really are will come out over the next couple of weeks. Just think what a lopsided big stink would occur if it was a bunch of white kids saying they were just bored and needed to kill someone.

The killers were arrested outside of a church, where they were alleged waiting to kill a boy who'd refused to join their gang. James Johnson, 52, called the police to tell them that the accused killers were hiding in the car park of the Immauel Baptist Church car park at about 5 pm, two hours after they shot Chris Lane.  ''My son called me and said, 'Dad, they're saying they're coming to kill me,' so I called the police and they got here within minutes.'' Mr Johnson claimed that Edwards Jr had threatened the life of his 17-year-old son, also Christopher on Facebook. ''They threatened to kill my son because thy are in a gang, the Crips, and were trying to get y so in it and I wouldn't let him do it.

The Way I See It.....lets not blame the guns again. It has more to do with the gangsta culture...the Rap-Crap these kids are constantly listening to.  The references to killing cops and beating and raping women, etc. From where did these boys get the gun and the wads of cash we're told they've photographed. But not only did these killers seem members of a gang, but members of a gang with a racist agenda. Luna's Facebook cover photos include a Black Power poster picture. Edwards had a hatred of whites, as his Twitter postings show:

''90% of white ppl are nasty. I HATE THEM!''  Then Edwards Tweets he also marked Zimmerman's acquittal by knocking out ''woods'' - slang for white people: '' Ayeee   I knocked out 5 woods since Zimmerman court :) lol shit ima keep sleepin shit! ''

So there is at the very least the possibility of a racist motive to this alleged urder by men who'd expressed such racist opinions. So what do the people who helped vilify George Zimmerman as racist say of this murder?  Race-baiter #2, Jesse Jackson, can summon up no more than a frown on Twitter:
              ''Praying for the family of Chris Lane. This senseless violence
                  is frowned upon and the justice system must prevail.''

Question: Will Obama now say that if he had a son, he'd look like one of Chris Lane's killers?

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

The Most Fearsome Terrorist Groups are Facing Off in Syria !

Hezbollah militia in Syria
The battle for the soul of Syria has taken an even deadlier turn over the past three months. The strategic center of the Middle East is also now a battleground between Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, the region's two toughest extremist movements. The groups, both with roots outside Syria, represent rival versions of jihadism. Both use the same repugnantly violent tactics and advocate rigid Islamic rule: they're just from different sects but from the same camel dung-heap.

This war within a war carries new dangers for the Middle East, for Islam and for the outside world. The regionization of the conflict was reflected on May 25 when Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah vowed his Lebanese militia would ''bear the responsibilities and the sacrifices. This battle is ours, and I promise you victory.''  Since then, his fighters have helped repel the rebel's spring offensive in northern Syria. In a pivotal battle on June 5, they helped the Syrian military recapture the city of al-Qusayr, a rebel hub for the past year. The victory was a huge military and psychological break for President Bashar Assad -- and a particularly forceful way for Hezbollah to announce its presence in the fray.

Among Assad's enemies, al-Nusra Front -- the best-armed and most disciplined of the rebel's many disjointed factions ( left ) -- formally announced its allegiance to al-Qaeda. It has been especially effective this year in northern Idlib province and in the eastern Damascus suburbs, reportedly with growing help from foreign fighters from Libya, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and beyond. Hezbollah and al-Qaeda are also now redefining the Syrian conflict in sectarian terms, pitting Shi'ites against Sunnis and inflaming passions that date back to Islam's greatest split 1,400 years ago, when two factions of the Prophet Muhammad's followers quarrelled over who was his rightful heir. As a result, the conflict is no longer just about man-made ideology or temporal politics or an autocratic dynasty. It's also about interpreting God's will, but this time the Angel Gabrielle has not interfered with his ramblings.

The dangers are reflected in each group's recent targets. The al-Qaeda affiliate claimed to have dug up the remains of a 7th century Shi'ite martyr Hojr Ben al-Kundi after destroying his shrine outside Damascus. In turn, Sunni mosques have come under increasing attack (right). This sectarian stupidness is spilling across Syria's borders. Already attacks have erupted in Lebanon with a 100 kg bomb detonated in the Hezbollah neighbourhood in Beirut. For the outside world, the possible consequences of this escalation are also dire. Hezbollah and al-Qaeda are responsible for two of the deadliest attacks on U.S. targets since World War II. Hezbollah killed 241 Marines in a bombing in Beirut in 1983, and al-Qaeda killed nearly 3000 people on Sept. 11, 2001 in New York City.

The role of both groups' followers in Syria increases the danger that Hezbollah or al-Qaeda could gain a long term political or physical foothold in one of the most important countries in the Middle East. That sort of influence would represent the exact opposite of the democratic dream envisioned by many in Syria when the initial protests erupted in March 2011, triggered by the arrest of teenagers who had spray-painted antigovernment graffiti on the walls in the Syrian town of Dara'a.

The Way I See It.....the presence of Hezbollah and al-Qaeda in Syria will also almost certainly complicate diplomatc efforts to find any form of political compromise. Neither group has ever shown much interest in negotiating. The flames of hatred and mistrust even after the war ends will be hard quench. As history repeatedly shows, sectarian wars are often harder to resolve than political conflicts.

The biggest losers from the emergence of this new fault line are the uprising's early heroes -- the peaceful dissidents and defectors who later took up arms to protect themselves against Assad's military. Their brave struggle seems increasingly marginal as Syria becomes a battleground for the region's extremists.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Skip the Screening: Prostate Blood Test Doesn't Save Lives !

Medical dogma in cancer care has always been that preventing cancer is better than treating it. So routine screening for the early detection of the disease makes a lot of sense. But now a U.S. government group says that logic doesn't apply when it comes to the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test for prostate cancer.

Regular screening doesn't always save lives once you account for the high rate of false positive results, and it increases men's risk of serious complications from biopsies and treatment of the tumours that would never have killed them. So in new guidelines concluding that the harm of testing outweigh the benefits, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that no men receive routine PSA screening at any age. The advice is based on a review of the research, including two large trials of the PSA test, which found no significant difference in survival rates between men who did and did not get screened, after 10-14 years of follow up.

Prostate Cancer Cells
The idea of forgoing a cancer screen runs counter to everything patients and doctors have been taught about prevention, but the panel's advice stems from the New Science of understanding that not all cancers need to be treated. That's especially true of prostate tumours, which are generally slow-growing and often don't require aggressive intervention: 25% of men test positive for prostate cancer, but only 3% will die of it. Meanwhile, PSA testing can lead to medical interventions that unnecessarily raise the risk of infection, impotence, incontinence and even death.

It may take a while for doctors to accept the new advice, and critics are concerned that halting PSA tests will lead to a rise in more-advanced disease, which is harder to treat. The task force stressed, however, that patients with a family history of prostate cancer or other risk factors may still ask their doctor whether the PSA test makes sense for them, even if it's not part of their routine check-up.

Medical Evolution:   Health advice is based on research, but medical knowledge keeps advancing. The Old Science gives way to New Science; here's a few examples:

     Old Science:   Many organizations advised women to start screening for breast cancer at age 40.
     New Science:  To avoid misdiagnoses, women should start breast screening at age 50.

      Old Science:   Estrogen and progestin protected post-menopausal women from heart disease.
      New Science:  Hormones do not protect the heart and can increase the risk of breast cancer.

      Old Science:   Chest X-rays can detect early lesions and get patients treated sooner.
      New Science:  X-rays don't help patients live longer even after they are treated.

The Way I See It.....there are a number of natural medicinals available that can help reduce some of the benign swelling of the prostate to aid in reducing the number of nightly trips to urinate by allowing fuller emptying of the bladder. Research has shown that a diet rich in lycopene-containing foods helps lower the risk of prostate and other cancers. Lycopene is a carotenoid -- a family of pigments that give fruits and vegetables their brilliant red, orange and yellow colouring. It is a powerful antioxidant that eliminates dangerous free radicals that can damage DNA and other fragile cell structures. Tomatoes are an ideal source of lycopene and is better absorbed in the body when it's combined with some fat, so don't hold back on the tomato sauce.

Now in a report just published in the journal Neurology, a team of Finnish researchers has linked lycopene levels in the bloods to stroke prevention. They made this connection after following more than a thousand middle-age men for 12 years. Men with the greatest amount of lycopene in their blood had a 55% lower chance of having any kind of stroke. The lycopene connection was even stronger (59%) when it came to protecting against strokes due to blood clots (the most common kind). The finding came as a surprise -- the researchers initially wanted to know if other antioxidants affected strokes, such as alpha carotene, beta carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E. But they didn't. So, that makes the succulent tomato far more than a food; that makes it almost a nutraceutical. Other lycopene-containing foods range from tomato puree, juice, and paste as well as watermelon and red or pink grapefruit. Enjoy!

The Egyptian Democratic Coalition Puts it to Obama !

The National Salvation Front, a coalition of pro-democratic and secular parties in Egypt, set out its objections to remarks made by President Barack Obama on the weekend. Led by Ahmed Said of the Free Egyptians Party, the group issued the following stern letter:

     ''Like most Egyptians, we listened with attention to your statement on Egypt's latest developments. As representatives of the non-Islamic political forces in Egypt, we believe in the same fundamental values on which the U.S. was founded. We have 7,000 years of civilization and history that gives us a special identity that we are fighting to keep since the Muslim Brotherhood came to power. 

     "Let us first educate you about who the Muslim Brothers are: They're an unlawful organization operating outside the realm of Egyptian law, receiving foreign funding and laundering money in a flagrant breech of international law. Their aim is to rule the world through a so-called Islamic Caliphate a they believe in their absolute supremacy. They pretend they are God's emissaries and they will not rest until they have forced the whole world into submission. For them, Egypt is the launching pad to achieve their fascist dream. Their international reach spans the globe and they command the hearts and minds of many unsuspecting politicians. They have used deceit, soft speeches, international funds and whenever required, violence, to impose their will.

     ''The rule of deposed President Morsi showed how in less than a year they abused the wishes of the people, reneged on their promises and overturned the rule of law by issuing constitutional diktats controlling the judiciary as well as the legislative arms of the state. This was enough to impeach any president in a democratic nation but Egyptians couldn't refer to their Supreme Court as it was also controlled by thugs. So finally, Egyptians took to the streets and this century's second 'peaceful unarmed' revolution took place in June to recall the president and a reject the rule of the Brotherhood. We deposed our president not because he was inclusive, as you naively represented, but because he broke his constitutional oath and became another dictator, like the one we removed in January 2011. This was the will of freedom-loving people.

     ''It's time we address a few points of your address. Despite the perception, history will tell of a Western media consistently portraying only one side -- the Islamist's) We have to let you know some facts and some truth. Like the day President Morsi was ousted by popular demand and with the Army's help. The Western media and emissaries from the U.S. ad Europe have consistently described the sit-ins that paralysed Cairo as 'peaceful demonstrations.' They chose to ignore that Morsi's backers were torching churches and killing randomly and destroying private and public properties across Egypt. Peaceful demonstrators do not threaten Christians with genocide as many Brothers declared in hate speeches from the sit-in stage. Peaceful demonstrators do not raise the black flags of al-Qaida while marching with pictures of bin Laden on their chests.

     ''While the Western media was focusing on the clearing of the sit-ins and moaning over the number of those killed, more than 45 attacks were made on Christian installations across Egypt, resulting in the torching of 19 churches and cathedrals, some built in the 6th Century. The list goes on, but your intelligence reports should enlighten you, especially if you read them. You know Mr President, it is important that you see reality, especially that the American people have themselves suffered from the dark evil of Islamists where unfortunately thousands of Americans died from their terror. The Muslim Brotherhood and their jihadist allies have never known and will never know peace.

     ''Mr President, we are on the side of freedom, we are on the side of human rights. We all on the side of justice for all. Is it too much for Egyptians today to have the support of the American people during on war on terror? How can the same group be named terrorists in the U.S.A. and peaceful demonstrators in Egypt? How can these be the ones you say you will never negotiate with while your government demands that we Egyptians not only negotiate with them but also partner with them in building a modern Egypt. This is grossly illogical. With this in mind we hope that this letter will get your attention for, after all, we are now representing the majority. Our present government represents us, the secular, civil and liberal political forces. We hope that you will find it of value to probe more and investigate more and ask more. When you do, we are ready to come to you in a delegation and discuss and explain more. We are sure that you will realize that, after all, Egyptians are indeed a great people deserving a great future.''

The Way I See It.....when Obama ignored his CIA assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood prior to the election last year his Mid-East policy went off the rails. The amazing deafness of Team Obama to the ''Mein Kampf'' type of rantings of the MB when they were free to express themselves after Mubarak's ouster showed how out of touch they were to the whole Middle East dynamic. Obama chose to consider one side of picture that allowed him to show that his ass-kissing of a radial Muslim group was better for the future of Egypt. Thank God that General al-Sisi and his Army were there to rescue what was left of the democratic fabric of the Egypt. 

Now Obama still sticks to his delusion by cancelling Operation Bright Star. Well Mr President, Operation Bright Star means nothing to most Egyptians, but it is the misunderstanding and misleading of the American people that they worry about and you should care about. The Egyptians feel betrayed by the one country, which holds the torch of democracy high, that can't come to grips with the reality that the Brotherhood defiled the very essence of the meaning of a democratic state. Obama and his cronies have lost the plot and don't know who their friends are anymore.

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Egypt's Lesson: Being Elected Doesn't Make Extremists Safer !

Egypt's army decided to strike now before the Muslim Brotherhood became too strong. I suspect they recognized that the longer they waited to crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood encampments the better prepared the MB would be to resist. And they have resisted, and are still doing so. Several score policemen are dead among the 700 hundred of protestors in Cairo and around the country. So are hundreds of mostly innocent Copts, who have no recourse but to be on the wrong side of the Brotherhood's murderous intolerance. Indeed, spending energy and resources to kill Coptic civilians and burn down their churches while Muslim police are bearing down on you with shotguns furnishes about the best example there can be of how the Brotherhood's fanaticism completely swamps its capacity for rational planning of any kind. The army is, thankfully, about to ban this Islamic filth very soon.

The MB under Morsi found that democracy can be just another way of imposing authoritarian rule or in this case, even an utterly incompetent one. I think Washington's fascination with the Brotherhood is the product of a search for an Islamist organization that reflects the ''culture'' of the Middle East and isn't violent. There is a lack of appreciation from Team Obama for the fact that just because an organization doesn't lead with violence doesn't mean it's going to be moderate, secular-leaning, democratic or capable of governing. Far from finding an Islamic justification for democracy, they were simply redefining democracy in a way that wasn't democratic but sounded good to the West. After Obama's 2011 ''apology tour'' of the Middle East the extremists saw a weakness in America's thinking to be exploited.

By the time of Morsi's first anniversary as president we had a massive outpouring against Morsi due to his frankly undemocratic rule of the country and his bid to consolidate power for the Muslim Brotherhood. Secondly, Morsi completely lost control of the state. By the time the protests started on June 30, he didn't control anything. He didn't control the police and he obviously didn't control the military. He didn't control any of the institutions of government, and it made his presidency untenable. So the military under General Sisi stepped in. The military believes it not only had to removed Morsi, it has to decapitate the entire organization. Otherwise, the Brotherhood will re-emerge and perhaps kill the generals who removed it from power.

Over it's one year in power, the third-rate politician, Morsi, lost substantial public support. The young Egyptians could see their efforts to oust Mubarak for a change in a democratic direction begin to fade into another tin-pot dictator. Think back to the early presidential elections in 2012. Morsi only won 5 million votes, which was 25% of the votes cast. The Brotherhood's power is not derived from mass public support and it never has been. It is derived from its exceptional organization capabilities on one hand, and the fact that the rest of Egypt is deeply divided and highly disorganized on the other. The MB wants to consolidate power in Egypt and then create a global Islamic state, a Caliphate. It's a key part of their ideology and their rhetoric. They can't and won't share power with any faction.

Over the past few years there has been a gross naivety in Washington as a whole but especially the Islamist in anti-American clothing: Obama! Such is the absurdity of both parties' stance towards Egypt: the Egyptian military is doing America's dirty work, suppressing a virulently anti-modern, anti-Semitic and anti-Western Islamist movement whose leader, Mohammed Morsi, famously referred to Israelis as ''apes and pigs.''  It did so with the enthusiastic support of tens of millions of Egyptians who rallied in the streets to support the military. And the American mainstream reacted with an ideological knee jerk. America's presence in the Middle East has imploded.

The Way I See It.....America's credibility in the Middle East, thanks to the delusions of its government, is broken, and it cannot be repaired within the time frame required to forestall the next stage  of violence. Egypt's military and its Saudi backers are aghast at American stupidity. Israel is frustrated by America's inability to understand that Egypt's military is committed to upholding the peace treaty with Israel while the Muslim Brotherhood wants war. Both Israel and the Gulf States observe the utter fecklessness of Washington's efforts to contain Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Last night on an Australian television program The Project,  I listened to ABC Muslim presenter, Waleed Aly make an impassioned plea for sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood (as well as an attack on further attempts to stop what's in effect illegal immigration into Australia, predominantly by Muslims). He was given a supportive hearing by the rest of the other idiots on the panel. It was a chilling moment -- and it was not the only occasion when nice Mr Aly has sided with or run interference for Islamists.  He better get his priorities straight or he'll get a taste of deportation.

We can condemn the killings in Egypt and mourn the death there of democracy. But for Aly to present the events as simply a clash between a brutal military and their elected victims is a gross and deceptive simplification - a tale as fanciful as another Aly subscribes to, of Muhammad riding up to heaven on a winged horse to take dictation from God. As always the truth is more complex.

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Ian Stirling:'' I Found a Polar Bear Who Died of Climate Change! ''

Will wildlife biologist and Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) member Ian Stirling now say anything -- no mater how unscientific -- to garner more sympathy and media attention for polar bears?  It appears he's back into ''tragedy porn''.  A tabloid-style picture-is-worth-a-thousand-words article appeared in the environment section of the UK newspaper The Guardian last week with a picture of a dead polar bear meant to wring your heart. The picture is a vehicle for statements from Stirling and others that this poor bear died from climate change. The caption below the photo of the dead animal read: ''This 16 year old male polar bear died of starvation resulting from the lack of ice on which to hunt seals, according to Dr Ian Stirling.''

Many folks have been asking questions about this and so have I. I suggest this is what really happened: the polar bear biologists working in Svalbard earlier this year knew this bear was going to die back in April when they captured him -- they simply waited with a photographer on hand, until he died. It was an orchestrated photo-op. The Guardian quoted Dr Stirling (below left) explaining the circumstances of the dead polar bear:
           ''The bear had been in apparently good health when it was examined by scientists in April in southern Svalbard. It was found dead three months later (July) 250 km away in northern Svalbard, far from its normal range. Most of the fjords in Svalbard did not freeze normally last winter, driving the bear further afield in the hunt for food. From his lying position in death the bear appears to simply have staved and died where he dropped, having been reduced to little more than skin and bone.''

Ashley Cooper, the photographer who took the picture, said the sight of the dead bear was ''desperately sad.''  He added, ''it looked basically like a rug because there was just no weight on it at all.''   He said he saw five live polar bears during a 12 day trip to Svalbard in July. Three looked ''quite thin'' and the others looked healthy hunting on the sea ice. Now, I ask, how is it possible that his bear was healthy in April but dead by starvation less than 3 months later? Why was he even on land in April? Why was global warming activist photographer Ashley Cooper in Svalbard in July, fortuitously available to take the bear's picture?

The fact that the bear was onshore in April, available for capture by polar biologists, is a Red Flag. He should not have left the ice this early. He should have been out on the ice hunting seals. The ice may have pulled away from the shore but there was no compelling reason for him to go on shore if he was healthy and still successfully hunting -- he just had to stay on the ice. He must have been sick or dying of old age. I say this bear was doomed back in April by the simple act of leaving the ice so early and the biologists working the region (putting collars on bears) had to have known it: leaving the ice in April was not normal behaviour. I suggest they alerted their colleagues (in crime) and then kept track of him until he died, so Cooper (right) could get a useful picture of his dead carcass.

Male polar bears routinely go through a 4 month fast every summer of their lives (females go for 8 months). A bear in good condition should be able to live through a 3 month fast -- since this bear didn't survive for 3 moths, he could not have been healthy. It's old bears that starve to death; something goes wrong with their ability to fast properly and they burn their stored fat too quickly. The decline of old age is highly individual (which is way some die at 15 or 18 years, while a few live past 20). Polar bear biologists will  routinely use ''tragedy porn''. It's worth noting that there haven't been any incidents of cannibalism this year (despite the record low sea ice in September 2012), so this emaciated dead bear was the next best thing to emphasize the ''message'' that polar bears are already being harmed by global warming.

The Way I See It.....this incident is meant to prime the media pump to make the PBSG get maximum coverage and that the right hoax message is spread. They did it before, back in 2009, before the international climate meetings in Copenhagen (IPCC) and it worked very well for them. Their press release showing the shocking photos and video of cannibalism in Western Hudson Bay of an adult male dragging around a carcass of a cub it had killed and partially consumed. It is telling that Mr Cooper just happened to be on hand to take that picture too, with the Polar Bears International (PBI) also in on that circus.

There seems to have been no press release associated with this report (there is not one listed on their website), so how did the Guardian get sucked-in with this story? Who told them what was going on? Ian Stirling? Apparently, he is now an employee of PBI, although there is nothing on their website to indicate he is more than the ''scientific adviser'' he has been for a long time. So this story also is an announcement of sorts that Stirling has become a professional advocate. This should add an extra income stream to his already lucrative largess from the government trough he has his ''snout'' in. In short, it's pretty clear to me, and perhaps you now too, that this poor bear did not die of climate change: he was simply used as a prop for a message that activist polar bear scientists want to convey, even if that message is no longer valid with no significant warming for the past 17 years!

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Bill O'Reilly's Shocking Fractured Historical Fact !

I'm hoping that this posting will be the last to cover the recent Trayvon/Zimmerman incident and the subsequent upsetting of race relations across America. In the many previous postings I have tried to shine the light of reason on the facts and dispel the emotional blindness gripping many black people. After I finished last Monday's posting on the Trayvon/Till comparison this came up. During his otherwise excellent commentaries on race in America, Bill O'Reilly, (photo right) host of the No. 1 cable news show, The O'Reilly Factor (Fox News Channel), claimed last night that the one person who tried to help African-Americans more than any other was....Robert F. Kennedy!

No one laughed and they should have. I guess that's what they're teaching these days at the John F. Kennedy School of Government. (I can't wait to hear how Ted Kennedy helped eradicate drunk driving!) So now, according to O'Reilly's fractured history, Bobby Kennedy was ''the guy who was really concerned about African-Americans'' and ''who really DID SOMETHING. He went in with the federal government and he cleaned out the rat's nest that was abusing blacks in the South.''

Although this myth has been polished to perfection by the Kennedy PR machine (requiring all Kennedy stories to illustrate either courage of adorableness), it is simply a fact that helping blacks was not the Democrat's priority. Even the ones who wanted to, such as Bobby and John Kennedy couldn't risk upsetting the segregationists, more than 90% of whom were Democrats. The job of actually enforcing civil rights and desegregating Southern schools fell to Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon. In May 17th, 1954, the Supreme Court handed down its decision by 9 votes to zero in the Brown v. Board of Education. This ruling was expressly endorsed in the Republican Party platform, but not the Democratic platform.

James Meredith Knows His Rights
Five years after Eisenhower had shown the Democrats how its done by sending federal troops to desegregate Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, President Kennedy and brother Bobby still dragged their feet in helping James Meredith enter the University of Mississippi. On February 7, 1961, Meredith wrote a beautiful letter to the Department of Justice, describing his inability to enrol at the University. He wrote:
          ''Whenever I attempt to reason logically about this matter, it grieves me deeply to realize that an individual, especially an American, the citizen of a free democratic nation, has to clamor with such procedures in order to try to gain just a small amount of his civil and human rights, and even after suffering the embarrassments and personal humiliation of this procedure, there still seems little hope of success.''

The full letter is worth looking up. I would venture to guess there are not many college applicants of any race who write this well today. (You know why?  Because Americans don't read anymore to gain fluency of vocabulary. They watch cable news and fill their heads with nonsense history and false facts.), In response to Meredith's eloquent letter, Bobby Kennedy did nothing. And that's how Bobby Kennedy ''cleaned out the rat's nest that was abusing African-Americans in the South''! So, with the damn Democrats in the White House, Meredith had to take his case to the Supreme Court. Liberals were engaging in their usual massive resistance to court rulings they don't like and neither bobby or JFK would dare to stop them.

Meredith Escorted By Federal Marshalls
In June, 1962, a federal appellate court ordered the university to enrol him, but the segregationists would keep issuing stays to prevent enforcement of the ruling. Only when these stays were appealed to the Supreme Court did Bobby's Justice Department finally get the them lifted -- nearly two years after Meredith had written that letter to him asking for help. But the state would not admit Meredith to ''Ole Miss''. When JFK wrote a letter to the segregationist Democratic governor, Ross Barnett, to follow the courts ruling or face a fine of $10,000 a day, it was ignored. The Kennedy brothers then sent the National Guard in to force the University of Mississippi to admit James Meredith. But the rest of the South remained segregated as long as Bobby Kennedy was Attorney General and either JFK or LBJ was in the White House (LBJ on the 1964 Civil Rights Act: ''I'll have those n*ggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years,'') 

The Way I See It.....the blacks still don't know who their real political friends are and still vote for the Democrats. They may say their hosannas to Bobby Kennedy, but they would have to wait for Republican Richard Nixon to become president to win the full promise of Brown v. Board of Education. There was more desegregation of American public schools in Nixon's first term than in any historical period before or since. It was not an accident that Nixon launched his comeback in 1966 with a Op Ed column denouncing Democrats for trying to ''squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.''  He was so right.

Crediting Bobby Kennedy for the great work he did on behalf of black Americans would be like calling Harry Reid the country's greatest champion of the unborn. Sure, Reid says he's pro-life, but he dare not act on it lest he upset the rest of his party. It was the same with the Democrats and the civil rights issue. If know want to say something nice about Bobby Kennedy, remind everyone that he proudly worked for Sen. Joe McCarthy.

NOTE:  Read my post "Here Come The Closet Black Conservatives !" (August 26, 2012) for
information on a documentary that exposes the Democrat's wish to keep blacks on the ''plantation''.

Monday, August 5, 2013

No Comparison: Trayvon Martin was No Emmett Till !

Emmett Till ---------- Tryvon Martin

The phenomenon is apparent in much of the commentary, especially being promulgated by the ''dynamic-duo'' of race-baiters Messrs Jackson and Sharpton, on the George Zimmerman case. Facts were blithely ignored -- the fact that Zimmerman is Hispanic, not white, by current standards; the evidence that he and not his victim, Trayvon Martin, was pummeled and wounded; the failure to find any hint of anti-black bias in Zimmerman's past. Instead, there was a desperate longing to see this unhappy incident as a case of a white racist hunting down and murdering an innocent black -- with a view to establishing that this kind of thing happens all the time.

It isn't!   Yes, young black men are homicide victims in large and tragic numbers. But the perpetrators are almost always other young black men, as in President Obama's hometown of Chicago, where almost every weekend there are multiple such murders. Nevertheless, journalism is full of opinion articles, many written by people who should know better, like that twit Oprah Winfrey, likening the death of Trayvon to the murder of Emmettt Till in Mississippi in 1955.  The reality is that young Till was a 14 year-old black boy raised in Chicago who, on a summer trip to visit his great-uncle and cousins, came to his native Mississippi Delta region.. It all started when he accompanied them to a grocery store to buy candy. What poor Emmett didn't realize when he crossed the Mississippi state line was that he went back into the 18th Century and his Chicago free-mindedness was in alien territory. He reportedly ''wolf-whistled'' and flirted with the 21-year-old Carolyn Bryant, the married proprietor, and held her hand briefly. Several nights later, Carolyn's husband Roy and his half brother J. Milam arrived at Till's great-uncle's house where they took Emmett, transported him to a barn, beat him and gouged out one of his eyes, before shooting him through the head and disposing of his body in the Tallahatchie River, weighing it with a 70 pound (32 kg) weight around his neck with barbed wire. His body was discovered and retrieved from the river three days later.


The trial attracted a vast amount of press attention. The all-white jury acquitted them of kidnapping and murder after deliberating 67 minutes. Months later, Bryant and Milam, in a Look magazine interview, protected against double jeopardy, admitted that they indeed killed the young man. Till's murder is noted as a pivotal event motivating the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Events surrounding Emmett Till's life and death, according to historians, continue to resonate, and almost every story about Mississippi returns to Till, ''in some spiritual, homing way.''

In the process, Northerners were forced to confront the brutality with which white Southerners enforced the subjection of blacks. This went beyond the laws requiring segregated schools, buses and drinking fountains. Also in place was an unwritten code of behaviour, breach of which could result in violent retaliation. Blacks were called by their first names and could approach white's houses only by the back door, and black men could never, never ogle white women. In fact, from 1895 to 1935 a little more than 500 blacks were murdered in Mississippi alone! You see...this was unknown to most Northerners, as there was almost no migration between South and North in the years between the Civil War and World War II.

Rosa Parks Under Arrest
The great genius of the civil rights movement was to make Northerners face the reality -- and the violence -- of the segregation system. The Emmett Till case was one of the first incidents that forced them to do so. It was followed 10 months later by Rosa Parks' arrest for her refusal to move to the back of the bus and Martin Luther King's resulting Montgomery bus boycott. So it is sometimes said that laws cannot change customs. But the Civil Rights Act of 1964, banning racial discrimination in hiring and public accommodations, did if fact change behaviour in the South. It not only ended legally enforced segregation but effectively ended the unwritten code of black subjugation.

The Way I See It.....the America of our time, the America of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman -- is hugely different from and obviously hugely better than the America of Emmett Till. Back in the 1950's, most Americans -- not only in the south but across the nation -- opposed interracial marriages. Today things are different. President Barack Obama, twice elected with majorities of a cross-section of the voting public, is the product of a mixed-race marriage. Black presence in neighbourhoods no longer results in rapid white flight.

Yet, it seems, many Americans have a desperate need to believe nothing has changed. The irony is that those who claim they lead the civil rights movement today have a vested psychological interest in denying its great triumph by drawing comparison with today's tragedy and spreading the white guilt further and ignoring the black youth crisis in their midst.