Category Archives: Retorts & Explanations

Kill To Save

Recently an article on Slate.com disturbed me more than usual because it finally “explained” why we see so many videos coming out of China and elsewhere in Asia where drivers hit accidentally a pedestrian or cyclist and then make sure to kill if they were only injured.

These type of socio-happenings bothers me a lot because these “civil” deaths do not occur in war zones, nature devastation, accidents or sickness, instead a lot of these people have been killed “calculatingly” and I use the word calculatingly because nothing is closer to the topic than a word deriving from “calculate”, because that’s exactly what these murderers do – they calculate their penalty equal to a terrorist calculating their damage.

It’s hard to read an article that says a person was killed because he/she was in the midst of a shooting, a car accident, a war zone and so forth but to read they have been “simply” hit, often only dazed AND than being run over on purpose to make sure one dies is in my book one of the most disgusting, revolting actions available to a human while alive and even more so when it’s an entire region under the same attitude.

Of course, we cannot speak for the entire region as if everybody does this furthermore it is becoming rare and things are changing. But it is going to take a while before true changes occur because at the moment we can clearly realise that they are not totally ready to change because many news and police enforcement take the driver’s side when compelling video evidence is presented. This blatant stupidity, archaic mentality, unafraid and calculated empathy – an affront to any proper way of life and justice.

At the end these people kill their victims for not paying too much money. It’s a sick system and nothing else.

Pro-Choice

whatever-fits-their-mind
These moral crusaders are happy the Supreme Court of the United States favored Lobby Hobby as birth control is a form of abortion, they say. Okay, now what I want to see from these people is picketing Lobby Hobby to protest the vast majority of Chinese products Lobby Hobby sells. Because Chinese are among the most abortion prone people on earth where over 30,000 abortions are performed each day and many are “forced” to do so. Buying from abortionists or getting rich with their products is okay with these Christians but please do freak out over something that does not exist yet. You cannot have more morally hypocrites and poor thinkers than these groups I tell you. These people are not pro-life they are pro-whatever-fits-their-mind.

Why Change The Name Of The Washington Redskins?

“Redskins means nothing to me as I have nothing against Natives so removing the Redskins name for the NFL team equals to stupidity for me and many others as well.”

The phrase you just read above is common among good intentioned people; in fact that line would be similar to what I would have said a few years ago. With time when someone really wants to become knowledgeable must also be able to walk in other peoples shoes as much as possible. Even if it is not possible to truly feel like another we can have a good idea, thus to achieve that feeling you must be able to think properly as well. Therefore, for some of you that still do not understand why it is important to change the name of the Washington Redskins let me explain it this way: Redskins for the majority of natives equals disparaging thoughts and they are right about it because they do not use this word amongst themselves in the first place because of the historical nature and use of the word. The word redskin is the same as other slurs against other races.

Imagine you are Italian and a team out there is called Washington Waps or if you are of African descent Washington Nigers or if a Jew Washington Bignoses. Better yet if you are white American what about the owner being black and they name their team Washington Crackers? You get the idea it is neither right nor fair and it has nothing to do with politically correctness but simple respect, understanding and letting go of things that do not have place in modern days.

There are also many natives who do not want to change the name of the Washington Redskins because it does not offend them, they say. But here is the deal with these people as I analyzed as much as possible these natives who are in favor of keeping the name and I found out often they are either; not on a reserve, poor thinkers thus not very bright people to start with, lives a life far away from anything related to native ways and finally many behave reminiscent of Stockholm syndrome to the point I feel they disgust their heritage.

You want to use something related to natives?

Try Washington Tomahawks, Natives, Warriors, Riders, Arrows, and Nomads just to name a few.

The key to good all around life and or success is being able to change, adapt, learn and realizing mistakes if there is one and not to be staunch about things you cannot even defend morally, logically or understand. When you try while being unable to defend your points you are automatically on the wrong side of history because the majority does try to live better on a daily basis and these little changes means a lot, especially for the ones involved here, the proud unashamed natives.

Change the Washington Redskins name and let us move forward fast.

When A Superstitious Mind Thinks Out Loud

The other day when I opened my regular news webpage I read a few funny lines, and here are the 3 to keep in mind;

– “USA might be responsible for cancers affecting Latin American leaders”
– “Would it be strange if they had developed the technology to induce cancer?”
– “difficult to explain using the law of probabilities”

chavez_cancer_fairy_duster

All these sentences were made by Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, a beautiful and capable country, north of Brazil in South America.

Hugo Chavez did say he was thinking out loud and not accusing per say, subsequently I have to give him that freedom, so go ahead and think aloud Mr Chavez. But does Mr Chavez understand the implication of the words and sentences he uses and says? Why would a president make a remark of such size with no pedestal?

How can a president, a leader with no military investigation or backup, no proof whatsoever, talk about the possibility that another country may be giving cancer to leftist leaders? These are pure child level play, and no one questions? He is not retired, not part of a book he is writing, not making a comment after a factual case, he’s just thinking aloud at an international level, that’s all, without even thinking of the repercussions?

When Chavez says the USA can potentially build or use such technology, did he ever think the USA could have built easier killing devices or use better astute? Why cancer? Why not invent something that is sure to kill? Cancer nowadays can be defeated on a regular basis, all depending on the cancer type, but since not all were affected by the same cancer, making these types of killing astute even less likely as we have now at least 2 types of research to complete, as each cancer acts and defends itself differently. But at the end, one should also ask; why would the USA spend time, effort and money into a method that is so unreliable? Probability wise, sending someone physically would have a greater chance of murdering one of these leaders.

And since we are talking of leaders, what kind of leader is Chavez? By stating this untactful and illusory statement, he creates a feeling of mistrust within is own circle, did he ever think about this one? The possibility that someone very close to these leaders is doing actions of installing or triggering cancer is in mind. Because how can you explain all leaders having cancers and no one else around them being affected, this means pin point targeting, thus inside job theory becomes plausible to a greater extent.

Nevertheless, how can the USA or any other nation out there achieve multiple infiltrations at this HIGH LEVEL at the “same time period”, while administrating something having little to no chance of succeeding, again, the question remains; why do all that research and preparation, with the amazing luck in achieving total infiltration synchronisation, to perform a “perhaps” kill?

But is this the only question we should ask ourselves to escape foolishness? Not yet, my true question would be this; Why South American leaders? As far as I am concerned and with all my thoughts and military assessments, including plot theories with other far nations, I just cannot see the priority, it’s that simple. Because priority is directed by concerns, while we do have to be careful how some of these leaders are and act, especially Chavez, at the end they pose no true immediate concerns to the point of killing an entire leftist clan, especially not with present leaders, with their will and capabilities, including Chavez, which he can be quite rational, believe it or not. But I also think the pentagon is doing well concerning South America, which is none lethal pressure, I just cannot see otherwise.

When does the USA kill foreign state leaders? When was the last time you heard of a slaughtered, poisoned or dead from cancer leaders? I think some of these latest revolutions around the world produced such metaphor, don’t you think? Dead leaders, be it by cancer or mysterious deaths do not come often in the news, do they? And if we take Chavez’s sentence; “difficult to explain using the law of probabilities”, then we can say the same about the possible probabilities of such coincidence, as it is possible due to the improbability of probabilities itself. Discrediting the very fact it is possible, shows that one does not understand the “laws of probabilities” to start with. For me, it is the same as saying it is too complicated to be the work of a blind man, non sense.

And above all, let’s not forget all of those who did not get cancer and are leftists in power and friends of Chavez, what about them? And to not be confused with old age cancer possibilities, lifestyle is also to be considered, remember being a politician is not necessarily good for ones health, as we know cancer do have tendencies to affect nutrient defective bodies, not a rule but some type do get triggered by low “substance-X” or even the opposite, being triggered by “higher” substance-X, anyway this can get quite complicated and not for this topic.

Ultimately, Chavez’s theory could easily be shut down by saying; show me proof, show me the dead bodies and show me the dead body of Castro and other higher priority leaders that are still alive!

(To take note, the Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner did not have cancer after all; news agencies reported today, January 7 2012)