The Very Radical Racist Background of Michelle Obama !

I did some background checking into Michelle Obama and her links with socialists, communists and other ranking radicals that wish nothing more than to destroy the United States as it is, and create a brand new United States! I've exposed three of Barack Obama's socialist mentors (31August - 3 September, 2012) that infected him with a distaste for the American society as a whole. This may sound shocking but it is true. Some of the words spoken by Michelle and her husband have come directly from that radical book entitled Rules for Radicals by Saul D. Alinsky. I have exposed Alinsky's background in a previous posting  (OBAMA: Lucifer is My Homeboy! - 13 September, 2012) Check it out.

Since it is hard to find her high school history, I'll start with Michelle LaVaughn Robinson's college days....and what days they turned out to be. In a February, 2008 interview with Newsweek, Michelle Obama revealed that she got into Princeton, not on the strength of her grades, which she admits were unexceptional, but thanks to her brother Craig,  star athlete and gifted student who preceded her to the university. As a ''legacy'' candidate and a beneficiary of affirmative action, Michelle was granted an opportunity that others more accomplished were denied. She got her college education due to her brother and her ethnicity, not her excellence in academics.

So why is she such an ungrateful radical racist woman? Let's take a look to see just what she was doing at Princeton while she was there and what types of people she had as her close friends. Some of Michelle's contacts were of the Marxist/socialist types. Charles Johnson wrote in 2012 that he remembers ''Michelle Obama attended and promoted a Black Solidarity event for guest lecturer Manning Marable, ( left ) who was professor of African-American Studies at Columbia University and according to sources, probably the best known black Marxist in the country.'' The event was the work of The Third World Center (TWC), a campus group whose board membership was exclusively reserved for only minorities. Michelle Robinson is listed as a junior member of the eleven members on the board.

We must now wonder, why did the people elect a man with a wife that has such a background, mixed with Marxism and Communism associations. Michelle Robinson's racial animosity of Caucasian people is exposed through her articles and statements from the time she was at Princeton. One can see this in her expressed ideas that the white population at Princeton were a bunch of ''racist'' individuals. The TWC governing board's obsession with race irrupted in an editorial in October, 1981. They took great offense to an op-ed titled ''Rebuilding Race Relations,'' calling the article ''racist, offensive and inaccurate'' for daring to question the group's true commitment on race relations. They wrote a scathing letter to the editor; ''The word RE-building implies that race relations once existed and, for some mysterious reason, fell apart. we, on the other hand, believe that race relations have never been at a satisfactory level. We cannot RE-build something that never existed in the first place.'' 

Michelle and Barack at a Marxist meeting

Princeton was getting more and more concerned about the self-segregation by black students and proposed reforms to counter it, including no longer permitting black students to all room together n one dorm and integrating black freshmen into the general student body. The TWC strenuously opposed all of these reforms, arguing that integration of non-white students would harm the ''support system'' available to them, especially blacks. Once again Michelle sent off another scathing letter stating, ''Don't hide behind excuses and reasons to integrate the college campus on our part. The bottom line is that white students on this campus are racist, but they may not realize it and minority strife would worsen.''  You can see that Michelle was actually biting the hand that fed her!

It looked like Michelle was in a group that found fault with anything that dealt with ethnicity. In 1983 she did more than make meetings and express her seemingly hate for whites, she went on with the TWC and made demands for minority only meetings. She would be up in arms to stop such meetings if they were to the exclusion of minorities. Yet it was fine, and even better, when she stood alongside a segregation policy that banned whites from any meetings held by the TWC! This is well noted in statements recorded in 1984; ''The TWC's board demands that non-white students should have the right to bar whites from their meetings on campus.'' The ban was frankly unnecessary, since whites were made to feel unwelcome at the meetings if they were invited at all.

The Way I See It.....Michelle Robinson (Obama) did not like the idea of all ethnicities working together, and would rather have them separate from each other. However, this is not what America had been working towards. It had been working, since the mid-1960s, towards having ethnic groups working together and not apart. This was so people could be together as one nation, as the Founding Fathers had proscribed and the efforts of the civil rights movement to bring to reality.

Yet it was Michelle that had stated that race relations at Princeton were deficient. However, it seems she was part of the problem. She sat on the board of the TWC to force Princeton to have separate meetings for minorities without any whites allowed. This attitude does not bring ethnicities together to discuss any sensitive issues they may have and therefore doesn't resolve problems. It would make them worse due to the distancing of those minorities from the white population. This would only breed suspicion amongst the white population at what the minorities were planning next to disrupt the running of the university. However, this was just the beginning for Michelle Robinson as she learned to use Saul Alinsky's works, a man she admired along with her husband Barack.

All Together Now: "LIAR, LIAR....Pants on Fire !''

It's disgusting to see how often Obama's ''useful idiots'' in the media defend his lying?  How many times did Barack Obama make that false claim about his signature legislation?  Time after time, before and after the law went into effect, the President and his aides have promised that people who liked their current health insurance would be able to keep it under the Affordable Care Act.

''If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period,'' Obama said in a speech to the American Medical Association on June 15, 2009. ''If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matte what.'' The president and his cronies have repeated variations on the pledge countless times. The thing is, he wasn't telling the truth; So imagine the surprise of many Americans last week when they received notices that their health insurance policies were being cancelled.

The reality is....right from the start, Obama's team knew this was a lie, but approved it!  One former senior administration official said that as the law was being crafted by the White House and lawmakers, some White House policy advisors objected to the breadth of Mr Obama's ''keep your plan'' promise. They were overruled by political aides, the former official said. Some aides believed that the (inadequate) grandfather clause was enough to make Obama's assurance true enough, but the White House clearly didn't want to confuse people with the full story of the disruptions that would occur under the law.

Now Obama is lying about the lying!  He says he said, Now, if you have or had one of these plans before the Affordable Care Act came into law and you really liked that plan, what we said was you can keep it if it hasn't changed since the law passed.''  Yeah...right. So it is so very useful to Obama to have a leftist paper like the New York Times spin for him, calling a lie something nicer. An editorial in their Sunday Review page entitled ''Insurance Policies Not Worth Keeping'' they wrote "Mr. Obama clearly misspoke when he said that by law insurers cannot continue to sell policies that don't provide the minimum benefits required as of next year.''  MISSPOKE? As in accidentally used the wrong words? The New York Times is a disgrace. It lies to defend a lie by a liar who now lies about it , too. Team Obama members, like Debbie Schulz, (above) came out publicly to also back up her boss's falsehood.

Former Massachusetts Gov Mitt Romney, on NBC's ''Meet the Press'' accused the president of ''fundamental dishonesty'' with his ObamaCare promise. ''He wasn't telling the truth and he, and now we, know it!  That fundamental dishonesty has really - has really put in peril the whole foundation o his second term,'' Romney said. "I think it is rotting it away. What has really undermined the president's credibility in the hearts of the American people is that he went out, as a centrepiece of ObamaCare over the last several years, saying time and time again that fundamental to his plan was the right people would have to keep their insurance, and he knew that was not the case.''

Romney added; Had the president been truthful and told the American people that millions would lose their insurance and millions more would see their premiums skyrocket...there would have been such a hue and cry against it, that it would not have passed. So Mr Obama turned deceitful.''
The White House quickly went on the defensive. They brought out Ezekiel Emanual, an architect of the Obama plan. He explained, ''You would expect at this stage of the game (?) after the initial shock wears off, that not a lot of people will sign up. People will put off buying until the end.'' The flawed debut of the health website, with delays, outages and software errors, is tarnishing Obama's legislative achievement and has complicated his second term agenda as his approval rating dropped.

Veteran Comedian Jackie Mason

Forty-seven percent of Americans (most likely the ones not on government handouts) said the government is doing a ''poor'' job of implementing the health law, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found. Thirty-seven percent say the law itself should be repealed. ''I think government is inherently inept, because they don't work on a profit motive,'' Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, said on the ''This Week'' program. ''I would say that there are fundamental things government can do. But government shouldn't take on new opportunities or new things to do when it's not managing what it has now.''  Comedian Jackie Mason, last week, said on a radio interview that ''this President of ours finds it easy to lie, and then when found out, he lies to cover the lie. He is a pathological liar and should be locked up in a sanatorium!''

The Way I See It.....the right way to deal with health care reform is not to have a one-size-fits-all plan that's imposed on all the states, but recognizing the differences between different states' populations, states should be able to craft their own plans to get all their citizens insured, and to make sure that the pre-existing conditions are covered. I think they are going to find, when it's all said and done, after all these states, getting away from Obama's socialist agenda, that are now laboratories of democracy get their chance to try their own plans and find the best path that'll end up with a nation that has taken a mandate approach. Romney's final word says ''Obama must work with Republicans if he's going to fix the mess that the ObamaCare rollout has become.''

UPDATE:  Obama's overall job rating has dropped to 41% since last December. A majority (53%) now disapproves of the way he is handling his job as president.

It's a Future Feast of Good News !

You'd think the greens, (watermelons are a more meaningful term), claiming to love nature, at least understood crops better than most of us. Yet they still keep freaking that we'll run out of food. First they feared we were breeding like rabbits and eating the planet bare. Paul Ehrlich, now professor of population studies at Stanford University, became the most famous eco-catastrophist with his 1968 best-seller, The Population Bomb. ''The battle to feed humanity is over,'' he declared. ''In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date, nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.'' (Read my post: Ehrlich: More Cock-ups then Cock Robin - Nov.4, 2011)

But then came the green revolution.  With better and smarter plant breeding, communications, transport, storage, irrigation and gene technology, the world's food supplies exploded. There is now no mass starvation outside war zones and closed dictatorships like North Korea. Once again, modern man - and woman - showed we could be masters of our fate if we trusted to reason, not fear. But then came the global warmists, who just could not let a good food scare go to waste.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, for instance, warned in 2001 that global warming would ''adversely affect wheat and, more severely, rice production in India.'' Professor Ian Lowe, president of the Australia Conservation Foundation, warned last year; ''It will be less and less likely that we can feed the human population if climate change continues on its present trajectory.'' Stanford environmental scientist David Lobell claimed on 2008 ''the majority of the world's one billion poor depend on agriculture for their livelihoods, and agriculture is also most vulnerable to changes in climate.''

But GOOD NEWS, my quivering green alarmists! The U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organisation's latest Crop Prospects and Food Situation report says cereal production jumped 7% this year. ''The increase would bring world cereal production to 2479 million tones, a new RECORD level.'' And this year's wheat output was ''the highest in history.'' While India expects a bumper rice crop and soybeans after last month's monsoon. The Consortium of Indian Farmers Associations is tipping a record year. Another green scare goes Bust!  Why do we fall for so many of them??

It seems like the leftist New York Times has ignored the U.N.'s good news and fallen for the warmist propaganda hook line and sinker with an article they published last weekend entitled Climate Change Seen Posing Risk to Food Supplies. The article went on to say that some scientists feel that climate change could potentially undermine crop production and drive up prices at a time when the demand for food is expected to soar. In an earlier assessment, the scientists concluded that rising temperatures will have some beneficial effects on crops, but now they say, globally, it will make it harder for crops to thrive - perhaps reducing production over all by as much as 2% each decade for the rest of the century, compared with what it would be without climate change. Do we trust their computer modelling this time??

The Arctic Ice Has Returned

These warnings come from a leaked draft of a report under development by a United Nations panel. A spokesman, Jonathan Lynn, stated, ''The document is not final and could change before it is released in March, next year.''  The New York Times further quoted him saying ''sweeping impacts from climate change are already occurring across the planet and that these are likely to intensify as human emissions of greenhouse gases continue to rise.'' The Times stated the warning on the food supply is the sharpest in tone the panel ever issued. However, the claim about ''sweeping impacts from climate change...." is false, contradicted last month by the very IPCC that the Times cites as its source.  Of course there was no mention of the reality that the past 16 years showed miniscule warming and with a slight cooling trend in the last two years. The Arctic Ocean is full of ice and the Antarctic ice shelf has had the most snow build up in 20 years.

The Way I See It.....this news story on an unreleased IPCC report which isn't finalised, could change and isn't available for sceptical scientists and reporters to check. Parts of it have been released to a sympathetic news outlet. Smell a rat?  Now note further. In fact, this food scare is not at all ''the sharpest in tone'' from the IPCC. The IPCC has flogged this same tired scare for a long time, as I mentioned, since 2001. That prediction of 12 years ago has so far proved completely false. It was embarrassing enough for the IPCC in last month's released summary to admit there has been this dramatic slowdown in global warming that their climate models didn't predict.

My fact checking this weekend has more good food news thanks to the that 25% rise in carbon dioxide. India looks set for bumper harvests of winter crops such as wheat, chickpeas and rapeseed in the wake of a strong monsoon that has left the soil moist and topped up reservoirs. Global production of wheat and rice have all more than doubled since 1970 as global warming occurred. Corn production, the current flavour of the month for internet fear-mongering, has more than tripled since 1970. So, too, has global vegetable production as a whole. The whole idea that the picture of our natural world in turmoil as plants and animals colonize new areas to escape rising temperatures or become extinction sounds like a Cock Robin sequel.

The Free Fall of the Green Nazis !

As I have often warned....the far Left is actually closely related to the far Right. Both believe in sacrificing individuals to the collective. One example I've mentioned a couple of times, one as early as three years ago (Hitler was a Green Guru Too (He's Back!) 30 December, 2010).

The Nazis drew heavily on a romantic, anti-science, nature worshipping, communal and anti-capitalist movement that tied German identity to German forests. In fact, Professor Raymond Dominck notes in his book, The Environmental Movement in Germany, two-thirds of the members of Germany's main nature clubs joined the Nazi Party by 1939, compared with just 10% of all men. The Nazis also absorbed the German Youth Movement, the Wandervogel, which talked of our mystical relationship with Mother Earth.

It was for the Wandervogel that the philosopher, mystic and poet Ludwig Klages ( right ) wrote his influential biocentric essay Man and Earth in 1913. In it, Klages warned of the growing extinction of species, the destruction of forests. the disruption of the ecosystem and subsequent food shortages and starvation. People were losing their relationship with nature, he warned. Heard all that recently? This essay by this notorious anti-Semite was republished in 1980 to mark the birth of the German Greens -- the party that inspired the creation of Australia's own Greens party. Its message is much as Hitler's own Mein Kampf : ''When people attempt to rebel against the iron logic of nature...their actions against nature will lead to their own downfall.''

After WWII, the Greens Party traces its origins to the student protest movement of the 1960s, the environmental movement in the 1970s and grew in stature and strength formalize their union in 1980. The basis was on Germany's pre-war relationship with the nature movement which then the focus was on the environmental protest to nuclear power, and the movement was also directed especially at German labour, business and politicians. They first won representation at the national level in 1983. With the unification of East Germany, they merged with the East German environmentalists, known as the Alliance 90 Party.  and from 1998 to 2005 it formed a coalition government with the Social Democratic Party (SPD). After the Fukushima disaster, as they made up 18.5% of the government, they convinced Angela Merkel to shutdown 8 of Germany's 16 nuclear power plants.

Before the recent mid-September elections the Greens ham-fistedly championed a ''vegetarian policy'' that resulted in the once-mighty German Greens in freefall. This dramatic fall in the polls has been blamed squarely on their ludicrous Veggie Day proposal, in which canteens would be obliged to offer only vegetarian food once a week, with Germans (among the most enthusiastic carnivores in Europe) encouraged to follow suit at home. ''Verruckt!" (crazy) was the comment in many newspapers. In an election campaign that was often described as dull and detached, critics seized on Veggie Day, making it one of the most talked about proposals from any party. It received almost as much airtime in pre-election debates as Syria and the Eurozone crisis combined. Opponents in the liberal Free Democratic party fired up barbeques in protest.

The election finished with the Greens only acquiring 8.4% of the vote, a staggering 10 points drop. The numbers make Green prospects of becoming the third strongest party in the next Bundestag less likely, causing hopes to fade on the left of a Green-Social Democrat coalition. The Greens' mistake? Manfred Gullner, one of Germany's foremost pollsters, put it down primarily to their decision to shift focus away from their core issues - the environment, woman's equality and peace - and to start dictating terms concerning social justice. ''That was a strategic mistake, because it doesn't belong to their founding ideas,'' he said. ''It's a topic that remains the preserve of the SPD .'' And Veggie Day? ''Just another foolish mistake among several,'' he told the foreign press.

Sigmar Gabriel (L) welcomes Merkel & Ronald Pofalla  (R)

The Greens have not been helped by the fact that they were instrumental shutting down nuclear power plants and allowing electricity bills to rise and the use of power becoming a luxury as a consequence. It has also fought an image problem over its tolerance of paedophilia, a 1980's shadow hanging over the party and their push for same-sex marriages. Also their reckless push for subsidies for wind and solar power before the other 8 nuclear plants get shut down and burdening the German people with a renewables-related surcharge of 20%.

The Way I See It.....within the Greens Party itself criticism is rife that the once-towering force of the ecological movement in Europe has failed to connect with the voters. Ruth Kastner, head of the Greens in the state of Schleswig-Holstein, has accused the party's leading candidates, Jurgn Trittin and Katrin Goring-Eckardt, of poor communication, bemoaning the fact that Veggie Day, more than any other Green policy, has left the party open to accusations of pushing for an ''ecological dictatorship.'' The Watermelon image comes to mind: GREEN on the outside, but oh so RED on the inside!

Fortunately German Chancellor Angela Merkel won the lection and is reinstated as the leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The conservative bloc, made up of the CDU and their Bavarian allies, the Christian Social Union (CSU), emerged as the strongest force in the September election but is still short of enough seats to rule alone. Leader of the SPD, Sigmar Gabriel, made it clear that his party may not come to ''the party'' to make a ''grand coalition''.  He said to a meeting of his party's Berlin branch, ''If we have good reasons, we can ultimately say no and accept new elections.'' The two sides want to wrap up negotiations by November 26, after which the SPD plans to allow its 472,000 members to vote on the deal. The result of the full-party vote is due December 15. If the deal goes through, the government could start work the next week.  Nobody will be missing the Greens.

The Marriage Whisperer: 5 Sex Mistakes Women Make !

One of the joys - and the traps - of being in a long-term relationship is that you get very comfortable with each other, whether it's on the couch, in the kitchen or in the bedroom. You know what your partner likes and you don't have to quietly stress about the possibility of getting it all wrong. And that's great when you're choosing a DVD together, or cooking his favourite meal, but when it comes to getting your ''sexy mojo'' on, being able to fact track your communications is not always a good thing. Not only can it make our sex lives something far less than exciting, but we can develop bad habits that are repeated over the years. Instead discover simple ways you can avoid getting in a rut with your partner. Here's how:

Sex Mistake #1:   NOT INITIATING SEX WITH YOUR PARTNER

For most women, initiating sex is just not something you do - it falls into the Man's Job category, along with checking the oil in the car and mowing the grass. Whether it's because you don't want to come across too pushy or unladylike, or you are accustomed to being tapped on the shoulder or other body part by your ever-keen partner, initiating sex is not something many women do often. But give it a try - men like to be pursued just as much as women do, so he'll appreciate that you're interested an your advances will make him feel prized.

Sex Mistake #2:   OVER-THINKING WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE - BECAUSE HE ISN'T !

A body that had borne children is a beautiful thing (yes, stretch marks and all) - sure, it isn't the body you probably flaunted when you first met, but neither is his! Being naked is a habit we fall out of as we age - between our need for sleep and young children who wake early, intimate acts tend to take place under the covers in the dark of night.

Even if you can't bring yourself to be completely naked, try to relax about the bits your partner will see (and they will only be bits!). Flesh is flesh and if you truly do want to get out of bad habits in the bedroom, you need to be able to relax enough to enjoy it and not worry about any of the wobbly bits. And remember this....men are notoriously unobservant! Remember the haircut you spent a fortune on that he didn't notice for days?  How likely is it that he's going to notice that your skin is not quite as tight as it was ten years ago?


Sex Mistake #3:   BELIEVING HE'S ALWAYS UP FOR SEX

Despite what we are led to believe, men's libidos aren't permanently set on GO (unless he's regularly visiting a Chinese restaurant specializing in animal's genitals - See Previous Posting). Sure, teenage boys are mostly ready and willing anytime, anywhere, anyhow, but grown men are a different story. The daily pressures of everyday life - work, finances, family obligations - can have a big impact on your man's libido, so there will inevitably be times when he just wants to go to bed to sleep and noting more.

His lack of desire should not be read less as a personal rejection (yes, he still love you) and more as a normal fluctuation of libido - after all, how much do you feel like having sex after a big day of kid-wrangling? And that you sill love your partner goes without saying.

Sex Mistake #4:   NOT GIVING HIM GUIDANCE - HE'S NOT A MIND-READER !

Many women don't like to talk directly about sex - but you're unlikely to have a satisfying sexual relationship unless you communicate clearly with your partner. You are not a passive vessel so take responsibility for your own pleasure by telling him what you like (or don't like) and you will go a long way to having a sex life that works for you both.

Men usually like to please...so a little tactful direction will pay off big dividends in the bedroom next time. Just be tactful about delivering your message - try not to hurt his feelings, particularly if you are asking him to stop doing something that he's been doing for years, under the assumption that you liked it.

Sex Mistake  #5:   STICKING WITH THE FAMILIAR

Familiar is comforting - but it's not very exciting. After years of doing the same things the same way, sex can become more of a ritual than most of us like to admit. Try spicing things up occasionally by doing things slightly off-beat, change the routine, play a sex game ( book on right ) or create a fantasy scenario. And don't wait for your partner to suggest it - you can take the lead here!

And remember, if he suggests doing things differently, don't take it personally. Trying new things in the bedroom or, for that matter, any room in the house doesn't mean he's unhappy with your sex life. it merely means that variety is the spice of life. So start cooking up an erotic feast!

The Way I See It.....the actual ''spice of life'' means that some foods can actually play a part prior to foreplay.  Of course, oysters come to mind with a drop of champers, but if that's not your fancy the super-sensuous chili-chocolate is right up there for starters. Bananas and Avocados can assist in sexual stamina, while Asparagus offers lots of folic acid that increases histamine production which makes reaching orgasm easier for both sexes, while Figs and Nutmeg are powerful stimulants to sexual appetite. Ginger gets some love in the Kama Sutra for its ability to stimulate blood flow which makes the erogenous zones much more sensitive. Celery is a super-food when it come to getting you in the mood. It contains a male hormone androsterone, which acts as a pheromone, it arouses females sexually. They can very well be your recipe for loving-making success.

One Man's Meat is Another Man's Viagara !

Editor's Note:  I have looked forward to doing a few posts in a lighter vein, here's my chance. Excuse the Yuk-Factor!


Holding aloft a half-metre long horse penis, chief Xiao Shan confidently declares ''it is the most delicious'' of the ingredients in a Chinese hotpot of male animal genitalia, one of the many Asian remedies to boost the libido. ''The (horse) texture and the flavour are both very good. It is also good for one's health,'' says Xiao, who has been preparing male organs since he was 13, using skills handed down in his family for several generations.

Penises and testicles from donkey, goat, bull, deer and dog, the other contributors to this $US200 feast, are laid out on a kitchen table, like a sorry row of odd-sized sausages, and mixed vegetables, all waiting to be sliced up by his looming intimidating cleaver. It's enough to make a grown man wince! Sourced from some of Asia's wildest and most rugged terrains, the organs are chopped before being arranged on a bed of lettuce around an elaborate glass stand, more akin to something that might display fairy cakes or scones in a high-class cake shop.

Li Yanzhi, manager of the Chaoyang branch proudly says that the unique dishes at Guolizhuang, China's only penis speciality restaurant chain, are popular among business parties and government officials who are used to regularly bragging, ''Mine is bigger than yours.'' (whether it be their bank balances or their employment force). ''The vast majority of customers are male,'' she added, with many of them searching for increased potency and sexual prowess at the restaurant, which also serves organs from ram, yak, seal and snake -- which have two penises each.''

It seems Chinese people believe they can replenish different parts of their bodies by using the same ingredients, which, Li continues, ''means whatever you eat is nutritious for that part of the body. Eating penises and testicles can make a man stronger and enjoy a wonderful sex life. Potent in bed''  Of course, there is no orthodox scientific evidence for such claims, but across Asia there are various versions that come with similar boasts. (As long as your not looking for a cure for haemorrhoids!)

In Pakistan's business capital Lahore, Takatak -- a dish whose name is derived from the sound of the clanging of knives used to make it -- consists of chopped goat and sheep hearts, brains, kidneys and testes. ''Usually, men eat it so that they stay strong and virile,'' said Faher Hayat, a chef whose roadside restaurant serves the offal with onions, tomatoes, ginger, peppers and coriander.

On the side of traffic-clogged roads in Jakarta's old town, men looking to improve their sexual performance flock to stalls to drink snake blood. Customers pick out a snake, which go for 70,000 rupiah ($6) each, before a vendor carefully hauls out the selected serpent, hacks off the head with a meat cleaver and grips the snake's headless body vertically to allow the blood to drip in a teacup or glass. A spoonful of honey is added to sweeten the bitter mixture, seen not so much as a virility booster but also as a remedy for diabetes, high blood pressure and other ailments.

At a Beijing penis restaurant, customer Wei Jungsheng, 47, is a devoted believer. ''It does work very well,'' says the construction businessman. ''After I took it, my hair stopped falling out, and now I feel very energetic the whole day. Before I needed to sleep at noon to not get tired, now I don't need to anymore. Every aspect of my life has become fantastic!'' (Except now he has an urge to eat mice!) The restaurant's nutritionist says that its most popular dish is deer, seen as particularly effective due to each breeding male having scores of sexual partners. ''One deer penis has the same potency as three bull penises,'' says Du Yuemei, who goes to each table to enlighten guests on the supposed health benefits of the dishes and regale them with tales of the animal's vigour in the wild.

A Stag with his Harem

With a hint of a smile, she admits to being asked embarrassing questions by some customers, but is immune to attempts to make her feel uncomfortable. ''I know my job is kind of unusual, but it makes me feel good though, that I am involved in dietary therapy for men. It's very unique,'' she adds, before curtseying and leaving the room, a signal for the waitress to begin placing the ingredients into the boiling soup, made up of deer heart, duck stock, assorted penises and Chinese medicine. The first to emerge -- steaming hot and slightly shrivelled compared to their earlier appearance - are the goat and bull penises. The goat's was rubbery and slightly stringy while the bull's curled into a squid-like ring, but with  a firm texture not easy to swallow (gulp!).

The male members were elevated slowly, ritual-like, out of the pot. Both the donkey and horse penises were presented in bacon-like strips, but the flavour of the donkey was mild, while the intense, meaty horse was easily the most distinctive ingredient of the meal. In contrast, the testicles had a lighter texture, varying from somewhere between tofu and pate. When the deer penises appeared, it was slightly frayed and another rubbery offering, while the wild Russian dog has a spicy, almost zesty flavour, despite looking like slices of undercooked pig-skin. It was the only imported dish on the menu and the only animal to have a penis bone which was ceremonially presented in a red gift box to the host at the end of the meal for good fortune.

The Way I See It.....the oriental part of the world has developed some strange and often repugnant eating habits, especially in the male of the species, that continue to be based on the unproven idea that eating an animal's innards relates to the healing that person's ailing organ or glandular function.
Aside from a practical approach of eating insects, from spiders to scorpions, for their protein content, the killing of larger species for a ''libido hit'' is downright pathetic.

And now I've come across evidence that Chinese people are known to be eating babies and this news has been circulating through the internet and is shocking the world. An email report received by the Seoul Times confirmed that information with several vivid and appalling pictures of embryos and foetuses made into a soup for human consumption that I have seen.  The report went on. A town in the southern province of Canton (Guangdong) is now the focus. It is revealed that the inhabitants are enjoying baby herbal soup to increase overall health and stamina and, of course, the power of sexual performance in particular. It seems the Chinese ''one-child'' policy is producing a lucrative market in aborted children. Sick Bastards !!!

State-Of-Emergency ! Australia Burns !

A State-of-Emergency was called yesterday by the Premier of New South Wales, Barry O'Farrell as 65 Bush (forest) fires were still out of control across the state. There is a 300 km long front from Lithgow into the Blue Mountains threatening more hilltop towns. Already 210 homes have been destroyed with only 50% of the fire devastated areas assessed. The Australian Fire and Emergency Service says it is the worst Bush fire season since the 1960's. It seems  above-average rainfall of the preceding three years, which contradicted the diehard warmists predictions of permanent drought, caused a heavy grass fuel load throughout the grassland areas of the state, in conjunction with gale force winds, has allowed the scene to be set for a conflagration.

Flap, flap, flap. See the global warming vultures over the NSW fires, searching for a feed. The biggest is ratbag deputy Greens leader, Adam Bandt, who at the height of the fires on Friday urged us to read his latest green sermon. Showing a picture of the smoke haze over Sydney and linking to his article in the far-Left Guardian, he tweeted: ''Why Tony Abbott's plan means more bushfires for Australia and more pictures like this of Sydney.'' Click his link and you find Bandt claiming that ''by repealing the carbon tax, Tony Abbott is failing to protect his people.'' Worse, even, Bandt claims Abbott, the volunteer firefighter, is actually starting fires: ''Donning a volunteer firefighter uniform for the media is a con if you're also helping start fires that put people's lives in danger.'' says Bandt, who never fought a fire in his life.

Adam Bandt is not just an alarmist but a hypocrite, having three years ago preached that ''trying to turn a tragedy so quickly into some kind of perceived political advantage was outrageous.'' He is also deceptive, given that the cause of the fires ferocity, as I mentioned, is not global warming, but the heavy rains promoting a huge growth of grasses. The must bear the distinct burden of culpability in this ongoing tragedy with their constant refusal to allow state governments to carry on with yearly back-burning the undergrowth in state forests.

Another warmist vulture flaps around the terrible NSW fires. It's tragic that the global warmists clinging to their shredded beliefs have now become the ''deniers''. John Conner, the CEO of the Climate Institute, who should know better by now, writes,  It's time to up to real and growing climate change risks and impacts, such as the growing severity and frequency of our bushfires. Our national, state and individual interests depend on better preparation for growing climate change risks which threaten personal health and safety as well as economic stability and our fragile environment.''  (sic!)

Peter  FitzSimons

And here's an unexpected warmist that's come out of the closet; Sydney Morning Herald columnist, historian and general wiseass Peter FitzSimons (photo right) putting his inappropriate comments on Twitter. ''All strength to the firefighters. And who should be ''repenting''? The Prime Minister!  Broadly, the increase in cyclones, bushfires, droughts, floods, the lot, is entirely consistent with the model of Climate Change.''  Oh Peter, you are so delusional! The obvious points are that global temperatures have been flat for 15+ years, that Australian policies would make no difference to them, that the NSW fires are just like the ones we've had so often. The claims that FitzSimons makes turn out to be false. More Cyclones?  NO.  More bushfires? In fact the deadliest bushfires in NSW all occurred decades ago. More Droughts? NO (says latest IPCC report). More Floods? Little evidence (IPCC says again), ''The lot''? Again, the IPCC can't find it.

The Way I See It.....fossil evidence suggests that fire was a part of the Australian landscape long before the existence of human beings. It appears that, with the arrival of humans over 50,000 years ago the frequency of fire may have increased. Aboriginal people used fire skilfully....to encourage grassland development in some areas and also increase the abundance of plant foods and animals. With the arrival of Europeans the fire regimes changed. Fires are now less frequent, but when they do occur the are more intense and often cause a lot of damage as more people love to live in heavily wooded neighbourhoods.

Today, Australia's emissions are 1.5% of the global total. If we reduced that to zero overnight, it would make no difference at all to the climate. As it is, we are only planning to reduce by 5% by 2020, or in other words, 0.075% of global emissions, when the major emitters are doing close to nothing by comparison. And ''Watermelon'' Bandt thinks that will make a difference to bushfire frequency or intensity? Idiotic statements like this will ensure the Greens are consigned to the sewer of Australian political history.