Posted on 12/01/2010 7:34:46 AM PST by massmike
The DC snipers John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo were also flaming homosexuals yet you would never know it because of the way the media blacked this information out. Why do the media protect these cretins? Maybe because most in the media are themselves fudge packers.
What do you expect?
You're dealing with people who “define” who they are through their sexual orientation.
There is a reason why when dealing with these sorts of folk often end up talking about their sex organs at some point. You can have a conversation on C# and how to deal with certain types of arrays, and yet the conversation will somehow end up about their lover, disease, discrimination against them, why they became that way............. Sex dominates their life. That is who and what they are. That's why they seek affirmation, why they want to take the biggest drum they can find and run around banging it, screaming how gay they are..............
Yes you're right. Most (The overwhelming majority) of gays, especially the young ones, are messed up from A-Z when you look at their lives. That's why close minded people like me would have an issue with an openly gay teacher or day care provider etc.............
“Maybe because most in the media are themselves fudge packers.”
WE HAVE A WINNER, FOLKS!!!
The media and Hollywood are busy making those who engage in anal sex..a constitutionally protected, oppressed class.
Homosexuals WILL be protected from those who speak out...like clergy and families trying to protect their children.
Hate crimes laws coming soon.
The part about Assange may explain why Rush has been just pounding on the guy using the word "sissy" over and over again this week. I think Rush sometimes learns things that he can't categorically cite a source for publicly, so he drops really obvious hints.
This behavior must be limited to homos. I had a secret clearance while in the Air Force, and had plenty of knock-down, drag-out fights with my wife. It never entered my mind that I could soothe my anger by publishing state secrets. Of course, back in those days (Nixon was President,) the penalty for treason was execution. Now, they probably give you a spot on The View.
1. Political Correctness: When certain views or ideas are taboo. The discussion of the decay of family within the African American community and the affect it has when kids are raised fatherless. Americans are “hypersensitive” to issues of race, religion, sexuality, sexual orientation and national origin. Anything that puts cracks into the “Star Trek Enterprise” egalitarian world of relativistic mush where we pretend there are no differences between girls and boys, where everything is equivocal and brings equally good outcomes is suppressed. You see this in education, the DoD............ It is actually surprising that the CDC still keeps statistics and openly publishes them regards HIV and sexual orientation, since this fits one of those criteria and the usual way it's suppressed is by not even asking the questions.
2. Group Think: When certain ideas have become entrenched and established even though all evidence begins to discredit them....i.e. Global Warming. Once certain things become established or pick up steam in society, standing out in front and arguing with it is like jumping out on on the railroad tracks, sticking your arms out at a bullet train coming your way and screaming “STOP.” From Acid rain, the coming ice age, ozone hole to the threat of DDT........ once these things become a social movement like the current “green” fad you can't deal with them rationally or logically and all the contradicting or negative information somehow doesn't find it's way into the literature, movies, textbooks. Once these fads get entirely discredited they just slowly fade away.
3. The fake high brow culture: When some concept or expectation of decency in an ethical relativistic manner selectively applied requires self censorship, i.e. the removal of what an abortion looks like or how that process works on Youtube. There is this belief in Hollywood, the news media (TV, Internet, radio, print) and in the arts of freedom of expression and they will print pictures of dead soldiers and caskets, show a man being raped by a donkey....... You can make documentaries like Michael Moore, or even put a crucifix in a bowl of urine and call it art........ but the idea of portraying a Muslim as a terrorist in a TV show, or a gay person as negative is just over the top “uncultured and distasteful!”
1. If gay marriage becomes legal, gays will target churches opposed to gay marriage and they will lose their IRS tax exempt status. There are cases in the books already if a church refuses to marry a legally qualified couple, they lose tax exempt status.
2. After 9/11, agencies were criticizes for not sharing information that could have prevented it. So now 600,000 people have access to the information that was leaked. All it takes is one Lady Gaga fan...
Security clearances are granted by a need to know, not rank. An E-1 can have a SECRET or even Top SECRET clearance and once he accesses SIPRnet,a whole other world is open.
Not buying it. Homosexuals are security risks when they fear being outed, thus giving something to blackmail them over. A completely admitted homosexual can’t be blackmailed about it, so his homosexuality isn’t a security risk. However, we don’t allow homosexuals to openly serve in our military. Discovery of that homosexuality should be cause for immediate clearance revocation.
Discovery of any closeted homosexual, even non-military, should get a clearance revoked. If he isn’t fully admitting it to friends and family and on his security clearance forms, he’s a blackmail risk.
But I think the larger lesson from this is compartmentalization. Access to classified SIPR data is based on clearance and need-to-know; however, the need-to-know isn’t required to be enforced (it is for Top Secret). It’s the honor system to not read stuff that doesn’t have to do with your job. Every military information owner should take a look at all of his SIPR data, and even NIPR (unclassified) data, and put reasonable access controls on all of it. Too much of it is probably just sitting out in the open for anyone on the network to access. Just making a directory permissions setting would have probably stopped this guy.
Having known a lot of gays, I'd have to agree. However, there are those stable ones. When I grew up there were two women in their 40s who lived together down the street, good friends with my family, nice, stable people you could trust. To me they were just regular people who I thought were roommates; there was no indication otherwise. Later I found out that wasn't quite the case. They had no "gay pride" or activism, they didn't identify themselves by it.
But, as you say, they were the exception.
...and in some countries,pastors are threatened with fines and/or jail for speaking against homosexuality...
A lot of people think of Sweden as a ‘tolerant’ nation. But lately it’s starting to show intolerance towards Christianity. A pastor there has been sentenced to jail for preaching against homosexuality and other sexual sin.
http://www.akegreen.org/Links/L14/L14.html
Canadian Pastor Faces Jail Time And Fines Over Criticism Of Homosexuality
http://www.narth.com/docs/faces.html
Here are some examples of their “tolerance” toward churches...
Prominent homosexual activists lead screaming demonstration, terrorize Boston church sponsoring ex-gay religious event.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/ParkStreetChurch_0428/index.html
Homosexual activists terrorize Boston church during ex-Gay conference while police watch.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/events05/love_won_out/index.html
Homosexual groups and their allies — including public officials — attempt to terrorize Christian event.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/events06/MrHetero/index.html
While in the Army, Manning has openly participated in gay rights marches, even publicly demonstrating against the military. In addition:
His Facebook page reportedly included a photo of him marching in a gay pride parade. His big interest was to “Repeal the Ban” on homosexuals serving openly in the military. He proclaimed his support for the National Center for Transgender Equality. He also talked about going to gay bars.
According to newspaper reports, he was prone to fits of rage. At one point Manning was demoted for assaulting an officer. He also wore custom dog tags labeling himself as “Humanist” (as his religious affiliation). And like many male homosexuals, Manning reportedly had a terrible relationship with his father, who had also been in the military and was divorced from his mother.
Manning was very upset over a breakup earlier this year with his homosexual lover, a student at Brandeis University who according to the New York Times described himself on his blog as a “drag queen.”
The Montreal Gazette reported that “Manning could ‘identify’ with Iraqis and Afghans who he believed had suffered as a result of U.S. policies, especially because he himself was a “a member of a minority” treated unfairly by the military.”
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/10d/wikileaks/index.html
Hey, where you been? I haven’t seen you around for a while. :)
Fox has to consider the sensitive feelings of Shep.
indeed we can’t have shep Smith getting her knickers in a twist
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.