Is “Freakism” the New “Feminism” run Amuck?

An Infinite Rainbow of Oppression

Posted on | February 18, 2015

Sarah Deragon (@identityproj) is a feminist and a lesbian, but I repeat myself. Tuesday, I posted a series of “Queer Feminism” headlines from EverydayFeminism.com to illustrate the extent to which the feminist movement has become obsessed with perverse sexuality. One of the headlines I included was this:

Powerful Photos Fearlessly Redefine
What It Means to Be LGBTQIA+

Because I was just linking headlines, I didn’t click to see the “Powerful Photos” until after I’d posted the article and commenters began pointing out what a weird series of photographs Sarah Deragon (who labels herself “Queer Femme”) had compiled there. A few of the labels:

“Fat Fierce Queer Femme”
“Queer Femme Jock”
“Trans Femme Genderqueer”
“Plus Sized Polyamorous Pansexual”
“Old School Dyke Leather Butch”
“Fat Queer Indigenous Femme”
“Poly Fag Queermo”
“Sassy Switch Femmeboi”
“Fierce Queer Xicana Femme”
“Queer Femme Psychic”

Go take a look at this collection of weirdness, which inspires the question, Is “Carnival Sideshow Freak” a gender identity yet?

This is “Everyday Feminism” in 2015. Welcome to the Obama Age, where “normal” is the problem and “queer” is the solution.

The What????

‘The True Peaceful Nature of Islam’

Posted on | February 18, 2015

That phrase appears in an op-ed column President Obama published in the Los Angeles Times. Perhaps our president hasn’t been paying close attention for the past 30 or 40 years, but it seems to me that the Muslims who want to kill or enslave us all might disagree about the “true peaceful nature” of their religion. More wisdom from our president:

Governments that deny human rights play into the hands of extremists who claim that violence is the only way to achieve change. Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies.

Katie Pavlich:

What, exactly, does Obama mean when he says “legitimate grievances”? The grievances Al Qaeda and ISIS hold are against infidels and Muslims who don’t go far enough to wage jihad on the West.

Muslims want to kill or enslave us all. This is the “true nature” of Islam. It’s in the Koran. That’s their “grievance.” Period.

From TOM: http://theothermccain.com/

Follow the links in This Article to Send Your Senator a Letter Objecting to the ATF Banning AR-15 AMMO

ATF Seeks to Suppress AR-15’s by Banning Common AR-15 Ammo


Not a GOA member yet? Make sure to join Gun Owners of America!


ACTION: Urge your Senators to “defund” the ban on AR-15 ammunition, and urge them to put a “hold” on the nomination of Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch until the ATF backs down from its unlawful gun ban.

Obama/Holder Exact Revenge on Gun Owners

In the winter of 2012-13, Barack Obama went to war against the AR-15. Every liberal establishment ally in the country was mobilized to ban the rifle and destroy what they dismissively called “the gun manufacturers’ lobby.”

In the end, fewer than 40 senators (in a Democrat-controlled Senate) voted to ban semi-automatics.

So what do you do when even a Democrat-controlled Senate will not support your lunatic agenda? What do you do when your agenda runs contrary to the law and the Constitution?

You just ignore your opposition and go on the offensive, which is exactly what the Obama Administration did within the past week.

ATF Violates the Law in Proposing New Ammo Ban

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is proposing to illegally suppress the AR-15 by banning M855 ammunition for that rifle as “armor piercing ammunition” under a 1986 statute banning certain types of ammunition — a statute which amended the Gun Control Act of 1968.

GOA’s Legislative Counsel fought this law as a staffer in the U.S. Senate, arguing that it was a “camel’s nose under the tent.” Sadly, a “compromise” which was struck by some short-sighted pro-gunners in 1986, and the bill was allowed to pass.

Thus, the ammo ban applies to:

(1) Ammunition constructed entirely of “tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium, copper, or depleted uranium” or,

(2) Certain “full jacketed projectile[s] larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun…” [18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B)]

Obviously, SS109 and M855 ammunition — with a traditional lead core and a steel tip — is neither. Rather, this is an illegal attempt to ban or limit AR-15’s by banning types of AR-15 ammunition.

Moreover, any particular ammunition can be, and has been, exempted if it has a sporting purpose. Well, according to surveys, the AR-15 is used for target shooting or hunting over 50% of the time — thereby, making its ammunition easily fit within the “sporting purpose” test, no matter what the composition of the ammunition.

Hunters Beware!

The AR-15 is one of the most popular guns in America. But even if you don’t own one — hence, you may be thinking you don’t have a “dog in this fight” — realize that this ban DOES AFFECT YOU.

If the ATF can get away with illegally banning a popular ammo round (because it can penetrate body armor), how long do you think it will be before it’s banning other popular hunting rounds — which, by the way, can also penetrate body armor!

The ATF is accepting comments on this proposal until March 16.

GOA is working on submitting its own comments, and we certainly don’t discourage others from submitting theirs as well.

Most importantly, however, GOA will be working with Senators to “defund” or overturn this ammunition ban.

ACTION: Urge your Senators to support the following measures:

(1) Ask that the nomination of Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch (dubbed “Eric Holder in a skirt”) be put on hold until the ATF backs down from its unlawful gun ban; and,

(2) Urge Senators to support an amendment to the DHS appropriations bill which would forbid the ATF from going forward with its lawless proposal.

Of Course it is. Always has been.

Top UN Climate Commie Confirms: Global Warming Is About Imposing New Economic Order

At last a little transparency from the globalist elite:

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

That economic system has created more wealth, and consequently lifted more people out of poverty, than would be conceivable without it. Wealth creates independence. Consequently, authoritarians are not fond of economic liberty a.k.a. capitalism.

Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

Apparently Christiania never heard of the nightmarish Russian Revolution — unless that didn’t count because it failed to produce the planet-wide oligarchical collectivist tyranny dreamed of progressives.

Christiana_Figueres
The visibly evil Christiana Figueres, picking up where Stalin left off.

On tips from Dragon’s Lair and Petterssonp.

From MB: http://moonbattery.com/

Of Course Obama Opposes Egypt’s Plans. He Loves mooslim Terrorists.

Obama Regime Has Opposed Egypt’s Attempts to Fight Islamists in Libya

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi once was a very bad guy, but before his demise he had long since been pacified by Ronald Reagan, had renounced weapons of mass destruction after W’s invasion of Iraq, and was cooperating in the War on Terror. So Obama illegally helped remove him from power, creating a power vacuum that was predictably filled by Islamic radicals. This resulted in the Benghazi fiasco, and in the recent beheading of 21 Egyptian Christians in Libya (whom the Obama Administration pointedly does not refer to as Christians). Meanwhile the current anti-jihadist government of Egypt is picking up some of the slack left by Obama’s lack of interest regarding the Islamic State. This government replaced an Islamic Muslim Brotherhood regime that was enthusiastically backed by Obama, who had helped overthrow our crucial ally Hosni Mubarak. When the Muslim Brotherhood lost power, Obama responded by cutting off military support.

A story from last August helps fill out this picture:

The United States does not support Egyptian and Emirati airstrikes against Islamist militias in Libya because the U.S. believes the crisis in Libya must be resolved politically and without outside interference, a Department of Defense spokesman said…

Libya’s slide into anarchy has alarmed neighboring Egypt and several Gulf states, who have voiced concern that chaos there will help to spread the jihadist threat in the region. An al-Qaeda-linked group, Ansar al-Shariah, controls most of Benghazi and another Islamist faction, Fajr (“Dawn”), seized the Tripoli airport at the weekend.

Qatar, whose backing for Islamists including the Muslim Brotherhood across the region has angered its Gulf neighbors, has funneled support to the Islamists in Libya.

Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are believed to be supporting a former Gaddafi-regime chief of staff, Gen. Khalifa Hifter, who early this year declared war on the Islamist militias. The Islamists have accused him of being an “American agent,” although the State Department says the U.S. does not support him.

Of course not. Obama’s State Department is squarely on the side of the Islamists.

obama treason

On a tip from TaterSalad. Hat tip: LibertyNEWS.

From MB: http://moonbattery.com/

Backdoor in-your-face gun control

BACKDOOR GUN CONTROL: OBAMA’S ATF PROPOSES AR-15 AMMO BAN

A notice from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) shows the agency is considering a ban on the popular M855 AR-15 round — by re-categorizing the round as “armor piercing.”

Once categorized as “armor piercing,” sales of the M855 rounds can be restricted or banned altogether under language in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), which describes marketable ammunition as that which is “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

The ammunition guidelines set forth in the GCA are intended for handguns, but are also being applied to ammunition used in AR-15 rifles because AR-15 pistols fire the same ammunition.

On Friday, the NRA-ILA responded to ATF’s pending ammunition ban, describing it as “a move clearly intended by the Obama administration to repress the acquisition, ownership, and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles.” The NRA-ILA made it clear that this is but a “continuation of Obama’s use of his…

America has been Had

Obama and the Muslim Gang Sign

Is President Obama a Muslim? A lot has been written about this, but if photographs speak louder than words, then a photo taken at last August’s U.S.-African Leaders’ Summit in Washington D.C. might shed considerable light.

It shows Barack Hussein Obama flashing the one-finger affirmation of Islamic faith to dozens of African delegates.

Barack Hussein Obama flashes the Muslim shahada to delegates of the US-African Leaders Conference in Washington DC in August 2014.

The Associated Press took this astonishing photo as the African dignitaries joined Obama, who hosted the event, in a State Department auditorium for a group photograph. It was published in an article in Britain’s Daily Mail, and it was the only use ever of the photo.

The one-finger display is the distinctive Muslim gang sign: The index finger points straight up while the thumb wraps underneath and presses against the digital phalange of the middle finger. The remaining fingers are squeezed against the palm in order to highlight the extended forefinger. The extended finger is symbolic of the one-God concept of Muhammad and is understood by all believers to be a symbolic shahada, the Muslim affirmation of faith: There is but one God and Muhammad is his messenger.

Thus when believers stick their index finger in the air, they demonstrate they are partisans of Muhammad’s God concept. And they also affirm their belief in Muhammad’s claim he was the interface between God and man. They also demonstrate they are part of the umma, the exclusive transtribal supertribe of believers that Muhammad started 1,400 years ago.

With his forefinger in the air, Obama affirmed his membership in this tribe.

ISIS fighter displays the gang sign. To Muslims, the extended forefinger is symbolic of the fundamental belief of Islam: There is but one God and Muhammad is his messenger.

The Daily Mail editors did not understand what they were looking at. They captioned it “finger wagging” by Obama. But the African dignitaries understood, and a range of reactions can be detected among the ones who observed the gesture: amusement, surprise, curiosity, disapproval, contempt. Note the reactions of Abdelilah Berkirane, the prime minister of Morroco pictured just behind Obama’s left shoulder, and Ibrahim Boubacas Keita, the president of Mali in white garb and hat. They are Muslims through and through, and they are all smiles. They knew what Obama’s upright forefinger meant.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/obama_and_the_muslim_gang_sign.html#ixzz3SCCbpqNQ

A “Crusades” History lesson

The Truth About the Crusades

Traitors against Western Civilization reflexively side with its historic enemy, Islam. Those who are ignorant or assume their audience to be ignorant of history will often evoke the Crusades as a great sin against the peaceful Muslim world. Last week Obama appalled decent people when he attempted to justify the Islamic State’s atrocities by denouncing Christianity. Naturally he mentioned the Crusades, as Bill Clinton did right after 9/11 for the same malign purpose.

In reality, the Crusaders were heroes who fought a defensive war against the same menace of expansionist Islam that is on horrific display today. Dr. Bill Warner provides some visual perspective:

First Principles debunks four myths anti-Western liars have propagated regarding the noble Crusades;

Myth #1: The crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim world.

Myth #2: Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich.

Myth #3: Crusaders were a cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda; rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives.

Myth #4: The crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians.

To learn what really happened, read God’s Battalions by Rodney Stark. If you don’t have time for a whole book, there is an excellent historical overview at Crisis Magazine. Highlights:

Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity — and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion — has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.

And beyond, to the present day (e.g., al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden, Iran’s Ali Khamenei, the Islamic State’s Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi).

With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed’s death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt — once the most heavily Christian areas in the world — quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

We face a similar choice between self-defense and annihilation today. If this isn’t obvious already, it will be when Obama has finished facilitating Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.

On tips from Sean C, Troy, Stormfax, Bodhisattva, and Dan. Hat tips: Intellectual Froglegs, NRO, NRO.

Found at MB: http://moonbattery.com/

Walls. Designed to Make you Dependent on the Government.

Lefty governments always have walls around them;

their ideas are “so good, they have to be forced,” as the saying goes.

In America, the wall is a wall of expense, debt, and financial dependence. Just like communists, which is what they are — they don’t want anyone scrambling over that wall. So they make things more expensive. Don’t believe me, go and look at their positions on domestic issues. Each and every single one. Ask yourself: Does this make products and services cheaper, or more expensive? I’m sure you’ll find a lot where they make things “affordable,” but that just means they’re forcing taxpayers to buy it for people who don’t want to pay for it. When they have an effect on the cost of something, the effect, consistently, is to raise the cost. They’ve been doing it for a hundred years solid with no let-up. They don’t want you to make it, they want you dependent.

House of Eratosthenes

From AD:  http://americandigest.org/