Monday, January 15, 2018

Goodbye, Germany.


I've been saying it on Twitter for awhile now, but what we're seeing in Europe (Germany and France especially) is NOT immigration, but INVASION.

History repeats itself. In the 8th century AD, the Caliph Uthman conducted military campaigns in Europe and Northern Africa. Notably invading Spain. The Islamic, Arab world also conducted slave raids into Europe, starting in the 7th century, not stopping until the 20th century. These invasions and slavery are what instigated the crusades. It was the Barbary Pirates in the 18th century that caused the US to form its navy.

In all of these cases, the Muslims were stopped. Eventually. Now it appears that Islam is once again trying to conquer Europe. This time, they're using "immigration," instead of war. This time they've persuaded the media and are using their allies to change the native population's perspective.

WAKE UP GERMANY! WAKE UP FRANCE! WAKE UP AMERICA! WAKE UP CHRISTENDOM!

This isn't immigration, this is the threat of our eradication. They have to go back.

Monday, January 8, 2018

Trans Ban - Overruled

Back in July, 2017, I voiced my opinion on Trump's ban. Well, recently, the courts have decided to overrule this ban. As you can probably guess, I don't think this is a wise idea.

I also agree with Frank Gaffney, but let me add some insider knowledge. I'm going to talk about one branch of the military that I have personal experience with: the US Navy.

The first issue that the Navy will face will be what rates the trans will be allowed to enlist into. Some rates are primarily ship based, some are primarily shore based, and others are mixed. The living quarters aboard ships and in barracks are divided by sex. The ships and submarines have limiting space for quarters. Smaller ships like the cruisers and destroyers usually have just enough space for their crew and no more, so any rates that would be specifically restricted those two classes are out. Destroyers make up the largest chunk of the Navy's fleet. Submarines, littoral combat ships, and the Zumwalt class don't have the space either. This leaves the Navy with only amphibious assault ships, aircraft carriers and shore duty rates.

That's about 40 ships and numerous bases. Of those 40 ships, the aircraft carriers and helicopter carriers are the largest and would have the most space to provide for special living quarters these trans would require. I don't know about the smaller LSDs and LPDs, they may or may not be able to accommodate separate quarters for trans-men and trans-women. Either way, the ships would require 6 new living spaces - because not only would they have to be split up by trans-man/woman, but also by junior enlisted/senior enlisted and officers.

That's quite a bit of space, and it also narrows down the rates available to trans to those rates that serve aboard those classes of ships or primarily shore commands. That goes for orders as well. This means that the US Navy will have to set aside a certain number of orders and rate slots that can only be fulfilled by trans. This will affect sea-shore rotation, the second issue the US Navy will face.

How much of an affect on the sea-shore rotation and available orders this will, I can't say. Often times it seemed like there weren't enough for what people wanted/needed. It could be negligible, but it may also be significant enough (at least in the minds of sailors) for other sailors to development resentment towards trans and their special treament.

The next issue is pronouns. Mostly, the push for "gender neutral pronouns" comes from non-trans pushing their political agendas. The Navy is not immune to this. What will happen if a captain accidentally "mis-genders" a trans, that trans gets "triggered," and then files a formal complaint? I foresee this resulting in many people using neutral terms like: shipmate (hated by the junior enlisted), seaman, sailor, petty officer, etc. What will they do for officers to replace Sir/Ma'am?

Lastly, but not least, is morale. Certainly sailors, soldiers, marines, and airman will see the special accommodation and treatment the trans will get. This will be a point of contention leaders will have to carefully navigate in order to maintain good morale and esprit de corp.

On top of what I said in my previous post about boot camp, PRT standards, medical costs, training, re-training, and mental illness, the Navy will have to set aside special accommodations for just a handful of sailors and drastically change the way they do things.

For what? I still haven't seen any real benefits of allowing trans to enlist. The above would cost millions if not billions in taxpayers' money (HEY! You and I are taxpayers! That's our money paying for this!). I can, however, find articles on the psychological dangers of transitioning.

All I can see are huge costs for effectively 0 gain. Approximately 0.6% of the adult US population is trans. About 1.4 million. Let's say about 1% of the trans population want to enlist. That's 14,000 new service members that will need special treatment and accommodation. Physically, they aren't any better then straight or gay people, and they may actually be worse. Mentally, we already know they're more prone towards depression. Is the military really that starved for recruits?

So, what is this really about? It's about converging the military into another SJW organization that is more interested in diversity and virtue signalling than its actual job. It's about taxpayer funded elective surgeries. It's about un-elected, activist judges snubbing the President and over turning an order - a dangerous precedent. It's about the GI-Bill and VA benefits that the trans would have access to. It's about politically minded officers looking to bolster their post-military prospects.

In short, this isn't about trans in the military, but about using trans and the military as political pawns for personal gain.

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Star Wars: The Last Jedi - My Last Movie

I don't know what to say about this film that hasn't been said already. I wanted to write an in-depth review, but frankly, I can't muster the strength to do so. Instead, I am opting to share two video reviews that are similar enough to my own views on the film. You can watch these videos, or just skip to the bottom where I will add a little bit.

These reviews are full of spoilers.



To add to what Sargon said, it's not only that Poe is a captain, but it's also that he is the squadron commander of all of the fighters and bombers in the Resistance fleet. This means he is part of the ship's command staff and a department head - IE, he would've been a senior officer and subordinate to the ship's captain. He should NOT have been left out of the plan like he was. This is just lazy writing.

Vice Admiral Holdo and General Leia never wore uniforms. As military leaders, acting in their formal capacity as an admiral and general, this is just stupid. The reason why officers wear uniforms, or at the very least rank insignia, is so they can be readily identified. Every lowly Resistance fighter would've had the authority to question their commands if they issued an order, and they would waste time verifying their identity. Yes, Poe does it as well, and it's stupid too. I know that they wanted to make Holdo like Mon Mothma, but Mothma was a senator and held no formal rank - and even she had military leaders who commanded the actual Rebel forces. Again, this is lazy writing.

I also thought that I had read somewhere that Holdo didn't wear a uniform because she wasn't playing by men's rules. Again, this is stupid. The uniform is a symbol of authority.

Lastly: lens flare. I hate lens flare. I find it incredibly distracting and it's often inserted into scenes where its appearance is just moronic. The disgusting use of lens flare in this film is enough to make me hate it. I will admit, this may be just a personal foible of mine that I need to get over, however, that's a hard argument to make when I've seen plenty of films that didn't use lens flare that looked just as good or better.

In summation, this movie was just stupid. It is pure feminist and diversity propaganda, but as Stefan explained, it fails as propaganda, because the Resistance is nearly wiped out.

Disney has sacrificed the Star Wars franchise to the false god called diversity and feminism. Since Disney is buying Fox, and given how corrupt Hollywood is, this will be my last movie. It's time to let go of Hollywood, and kill it, if I must.

Saturday, December 16, 2017

Spider-man Homecoming Review

I just finished watching Spider-man Homecoming, and I have to say, this movie is NOT for children. Oh, it certainly is targeted at children, but it isn't for children. Why? Three scenes.

The first scene involves Flash and Peter. Flash passes Peter as he is walking to class at their school. As Flash passes Peter, he calls him "Penis Parker." I remember being 15, and I don't ever remember penis being used a derogatory nickname. Could it have happened? Yes. Could times have changed and now kids use such language? Yes. Do I think it's good? No.

The next scene, Flash is a DJ at a house party, and gets all of the kids to start chanting Penis Parker. What the fuck is wrong with these kids? Peter isn't even there to defend himself when this is happening, so it's straight up cowardly of Flash.

The last scene, Ned is in the school's computer lab, and he gets caught by one of the teachers. When asked why he's there, Ned replies that he's watching porn. What the fuck? Imagine you took your child to this movie, and he/she hear's that line, and later asks you: "What's porn?" Imagine your child hears that line, doesn't bother to ask you, and just looks it up online later? This line was completely inappropriate, and could've been easily replaced with: "Playing video games."

These three scenes are just gross. Sadly, it's not surprising considering all of the sexual impropriety in Hollywood that is being revealed and everyone has known about. From a certain perspective, these scenes could be considered grooming. I certainly consider it grooming.

The three scenes aside, there is some strong messaging going on in this film.

All of the relationships are interracial. Peter is attracted to Liz, who is half-black. Michelle (Mary Jane's replacement) is some sort of ethnic, and she's attracted to Peter. Ned is Asian and Peter's best friend. Flash is no longer a white guy, but now a brown kid - possibly Middle Eastern, or Indian. Flash is with a white girl. Toomes (Keaton), is married to a black women - the only successful relationship in the film. Tony Stark has a semi-successful relationship with Pepper Pots still, but it's one scene at the end, and very small.

Why is it wrong to white wash characters, but it's fine to replace white characters with people of color?

Using a younger actress to portray Aunt May was quite likely intentional as well. I think it's intended to positively portray single-mothers. Aunt May behaves like a bad mom, taking Peter to his first house party (with likely under-age drinking), demonstrating she doesn't know how to tie a tie, and just trying too hard to cool. There is a scene, where May is comforting Peter, holding his head against her stomach. This scene is incredibly infantilizing, somewhat sexual, and again, I remember being 15 and I never wanted to be treated that way by my mother. So there's a bit of Oedipus Complex in that relationship with how dependent she is on Peter.

Ben Parker is completely absent. He's not even mentioned. So Disney/Marvel has fucked off with the most important lesson in the Spider-man cannon: "With great power, comes great responsibility." Ben is replaced with Tony Stark, he's not a good replacement.

Finally, at the very end of the credits, there is a scene from Captain America about patience. It's supposed to be funny, but essentially comes off as: "Don't be patient. Patience is for suckers." Thanks for spitting in the face of your fans who patiently wait for the end of the credits for any possible Easter eggs, and teaching kids that patience is dumb.

If it weren't for these three scenes and the underlying messaging, this would've been a good movie. It has all of the qualities of a good Marvel movie. Tom Holland is a good Spider-Man. Keaton is a great villain, and the Vulture costume is great. It's shot well, well acted, well paced, and the action scenes are good and many of the action scenes challenge Spider-man.

Don't watch this with your kids. Don't let children watch this movie. They don't need to be introduced to pornography through a super-hero film.

The author always bleeds into their work. What do these messages say about the author? What does this say about Disney, Marvel, and Hollywood?

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."

Matthew 7:15-20

Saturday, December 2, 2017

A Tale of Two Deaths

You may have heard about the death of Kate Steinle and the results of the trial of her killer. What you probably haven't heard of, is the death of Rosemary Billquist.

Rosemary was killed by someone hunting after legal hours, by a handgun, at about 200 yards. Her killer has cooperated with the police, and is being charged with 2nd degree manslaughter. It's important to note that he hasn't been tried yet - his date is in January.

What are the commonalities? Both victims were women. Both victims were killed by handguns. Both died in the hands of loved ones. Both were shot in circumstances that they considered safe. The killers were both male.

What are the differences? The states are different and on opposite coasts. One killer was a legal citizen, the other was a criminal, illegal immigrant. One killer used a legally owned firearm, the other was committing felony possession of a stolen firearm. One killer has been acquitted of all but one charge, the other has yet to be tried. One killer is a brown Mexican male, the other is a white American male.

Again, I want to stress, that Jadlowski hasn't been tried yet. Regardless, this is going to be an interesting case because of the precedent set by the Zarate trial and outcome. If Jadlowski is found guilty - especially of manslaughter - what will that say of our legal system? If Jadlowski is found not guilty of all but one charge, will that be fair and equal justice?

It's also going to be very interesting in watching how Jadlowski conducts himself in court, what story he goes with, the case prosecutors make, and the defense the defenders make.

Another important note, from what I've read so far, Jadlowski has so far cooperated with the police and tried to administer aid to Rosemary. Zarate on the other hand, ran like the coward he is, and lied about his actions, changing his story several times.

Friday, December 1, 2017

Cultural Marxism

This video is from 1998, and in it, Bill Lind explains the dangers of Cultural Marxism. One of the big reveals for me was just how long the convergence has been going on. Listen closely. If true, the active undermining of the West has been ongoing for 100 years now.

Dwell on that for a moment, and the significance of that.

Monday, October 16, 2017

My Review of A Throne of Bones by Vox Day

I read A Thrones of Bones because Vox Day does a pretty good job of subtly (your opinion may vary) hyping it up, and I have to say that I'm happy that I did.

I don't read much fantasy. I prefer science fiction. However, I do find myself occasionally desiring to break out of that genre from time to time. I bring this up because the only other two "epic" novels that I've read have been The Stand by Stephen King, and The Fellowship of the Ring by J. R. R. Tolkien. In  comparison to these two books, I much preferred A Thrones of Bones.

In Comparison to The Stand:

A Throne of Bones doesn't dedicate a significant portion of its middle section on characters that will never appear again - just to fluff the page count, show how bad the world is, and provide an outlet for some of King's numerous, weird hang-ups. Vox, unlike King, also keeps the number of perspective characters to as many as he is willing to handle, which prevented him from having to write some convoluted plot twist where many of the characters are conveniently blown up. The ending in A Throne of Bones is also superior to The Stand's ending. The Stand's ending felt like an incredible waste, and a large WTF?!?! moment for me - the big bad villain is defeated by one of his minions, and the "heroes" contributed absolutely nothing to that defeat - incredibly disappointing. A Throne of Bones' ending sets the stage for the next book in the series, and felt like a good, natural stopping point.

In Comparison to The Fellow of the Rings:

J.R.R. Tolkien is undeniably the father of modern epic fantasy, and his influence on the genre is carried over into the pages of A Throne of Bones. If you're familiar with the Lord of the Rings' orcs, goblins, trolls, dragons, elves, dwarves, and humans, then you'll find Day's fantasy beings comfortably familiar. For me, I never got past Tolkien's first book in his Lord of the Rings trilogy. Tolkien spent far too much time in the Shire, focusing on Frodo's life, that ultimately, didn't matter. By the time I got to the end of the book, I was done. To this day, I still don't know if I want to continue reading the series, and since I've seen the movies, I don't really feel the need to. However, with A Throne of Bones, I never got bored. It may have been a bit slow to start, but once "the ball" got rolling, I wanted to keep reading.

I'm now done directly comparing these books.

The story focuses around the consequences of one of the characters' (Corvus's) decision and the growing unrest in the Amorran Empire. It is well paced and none of the scenes or characters seemed wasted or pointless. The central characters are all fleshed out, with motivations, strengths and flaws. It's a bit surprising to find myself liking Severus Patronus's (one of the antagonists) love for his daughter, and understanding Magnus Valerious's (another antagonist) pain and sadness. I also really enjoyed the love between many of the characters, and this is clearly something that Vox is quite versed in.

The world of Selenoth is similar to Middle Earth, but with a Roman Empire twist that was quite refreshing, although I found the Latin names difficult at times. World building is handled well enough. Vox doesn't spend much time on overly descriptive text of the scenery, and in this way is similar to Isaac Asimov and his Foundation Trilogy - a stylistic choice I find myself enjoying. Despite this, you get a good enough sense of the world that your mind can fill in the blanks.

The one flaw, and you may, or may not consider this a flaw, is that if you follow Vox Day at all, then you will see the author in his writing. I personally don't consider this a flaw. Many great authors wrote from their own, personal experiences. Frank Hubert studied beach conservation, and this is reflected in Dune. Stephen King has many hang ups, and it's present in all of his books. Palahniuk experienced some weird shit, and those experiences contributed directly to Fight Club, Rant, and I'm sure much more. While you may not like that, I do, as it contributes to a deeper understanding of the messages that the author wants to convey in their stories.

In conclusion, if you like fantasy, I definitely recommend this book. If you like Vox Day, I definitely recommend this book. A Throne of Bones is a deserving heir to Tolkien's epic, modern fantasy. I look forward to A Sea of Skulls - which is already available, but there is an extended version that I'm waiting on.

A Throne of Bones is available on Amazon.com and is published by Castalia House.