Hugh Janus
Anita Lay
Mike Hunt

NPR is blinded to reality.


While yo look to NPR what about local news? How many arsonist are mentioned?

Archived news articles:
Jedidiah Fulton, 39 [https://archive.is/GWLYq]
Alberto Vincent Acosta [https://archive.is/cFPbd]
Kevin Carle, 37 [https://archive.is/xHiFO]
Ivan Geronimo Gomez, 30 [https://archive.is/mhKtG]
Guadalupe Molina-Pacheco [https://archive.is/US23e]
Julian Draper [https://archive.is/JyfJe]
Demarco Covey, 24 [https://archive.is/owMeD]
Wesley James Bergman, 37 [https://archive.is/rl2cm]
Elias Pendergrass, 44 [https://archive.is/wJ1XR]
Unknown [https://archive.is/mOAqq]
Anita Esquivel, 37 [https://archive.is/nMZFo]
Vanya Hummel, 24 [https://archive.is/DgwbY]
Unknown [https://archive.is/wZqgM]
John Davies, 55 [https://archive.is/VDg3M]
Unknown [https://archive.is/twWHf]
Unknown [https://archive.is/jjLfn]
Christine Comello, 36 [https://archive.is/4mLJT]
[https://archive.is/XxPPE]
[https://archive.is/Vvnoz
Alexander Bradford Smith, 26 [http://jailviewer.co.douglas.or.us/Home/BookingSearchDetail?BookingNumber=B20002631]
Unknown [https://archive.is/0pex9]
[https://archive.is/8Jli1]
Unknown [https://archive.is/JkLAw]
Jesse Peterson, 30 [https://archive.is/gQg3e]
Jeffrey Accord, 36 [https://archive.is/j3yuB]
[https://archive.is/UszGL]
[https://archive.is/nJ9OU]
Facebook stream mirror; [https://www.bitchute.com/video/iCiNEzxzOaqd/ (embed)]
2014 Ferguson Arrest; [https://archive.is/IgEUL]
Info roundup; [https://archive.is/JxZ4P]
Unknown [https://archive.is/oTl3d]
Unknown [https://archive.is/knQbj]
Unknown [https://archive.is/AEQgp]
Milton Loice Moran, 48 [https://archive.is/PiJpR]
Anthony Travis Bodda, 21 [https://archive.is/eQ8HB]
Alexander Jones, 36
Unknown [https://archive.is/eAHK7]
Michael Jarrod Bakkela, 41 [https://archive.is/DGEGz]
[https://archive.is/Vr0Tj]
[https://archive.is/mqJnI]
Jonathan Maas, 44 [https://archive.is/Hw9JKJK" target="_new" title="archive" id="archive_today">]

BOSE? Bose-Einstein condensate

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/news/2016/7/27/they-really-do-exist-nasas-ghostbusters/

In a team of professional ghost busters, Anita Sengupta would most certainly be the enthusiastic and multi-talented leader. She’s already taken on roles developing launch vehicles, the parachute that famously helped land the Mars rover Curiosity, and deep-space propulsion systems for missions to comets and asteroids.


Sengupta and other members of the entry, descent and landing team for NASA's Mars rover Curiosity discuss the nail-biting details of the August 2012 landing.

Most recently, she’s carved out a niche as the project manager for an atomic physics mission, called the Cold Atom Laboratory, or CAL.

Since the mission was proposed in 2012, Sengupta has been leading a team of engineers and atomic physicists in developing an instrument that can see the unseen. Their mission is to create an ultra-cold quantum gas called a Bose-Einstein condensate, which is a state of matter that forms only at just above absolute zero. At such low temperatures, matter takes on unique properties that seemingly defy the laws of thermodynamics.

Anita Bath. That took me a minute to figure out. Sounds hillarious when she says it at 2:26

Where is this dudes database of fake honey or tainted honey?

I agree, there's no proof the accusations happened.
There could easily be proof that contradicts her story, though, and if there is, it makes an FBI investigation dangerous for her.
If she/they can prove he lied under oath about details that can be proven, even if the underlying charge can't be, he should be disqualified to be a judge imo.

Far more worrying to me is the accusations he helped his mentor, Kozenski, hide his decades of sexual misconduct, abuses he was removed from the bench/forced into early retirement for but that Kavanaugh, his close friend and confidant, claimed to know nothing about, even though Kozenski had public websites dedicated to racially and sexually inappropriate materials and many accusations of inappropriate behavior at work, including forced pornography viewings in his chambers by female clerks.
Edit: if he's willing to hide one bosses crimes, what's he prepared to do for Trump?

Yes, I hope we've made some progress since the way Anita Hill was attacked for coming forward at great personal cost, but I doubt it. It's clear those in control are unphased by the accusations, true or not, because he's their only chance to drive the court far right. Nothing else matters to them. That is a sad state we find ourselves in.

Even if they did, it wouldn't show evidence that he assaulted her. She has no worries about an FBI investigation because there is no evidence to find. Literally none, other than the marriage counselling thing you mentioned.

I'm sorry, but simply accusing someone of assault doesn't mean it happened. I don't know what her reasons are and I don't know if he did assault her, I just know that as long as we have no evidence he couldn't be convicted by a court in the nation. If he couldn't be convicted, he shouldn't be held accountable as far as his future career goes. I recall that it used to be innocent until proven guilty, not the way it is now.

I am worried he will end up fucking up Roe v Wade and I support legal abortions, but at the same time, I can't say he should be barred from the opportunity of his lifetime based on a simple accusation from someone who went 36 years without mentioning it to anyone other than her husband and marriage counselor.

Anita Hill had a much better case versus Clarence Thomas and the Democrats still voted him into SCOTUS.

I think the US needs "Anita Hill for President."

I want her to nominate someone to the Supreme Court.

Your video, 16 seconds: The Killing of Anita Kurmann, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 2 Badge!

Dude, Anita Sarkeezian is not in this Video. That's Ana Whatsherfacecaspersomethingboo.
You don't have to like TYT, they're a bit douchey, but if you mention people by name, make sure you get them kinda right. The only thing these two women have in common is a dark hair color.

I don't really care what his fans said on Twitter or anywhere else for that matter. Unless he explicitly instructed them to go out and harass somebody you can't realistically hold him responsible for the actions of others.

1:1 example? Were we even reading the same article? The bulk of the article describes how the Baphomet board on 8chan used publicly available information, possibly gleaned from thunderf00t's video, or perhaps not, to target Jennifer Keller and her business. The folks over at Baphomet were really just doing this for their own amusement, here's a quote from the article.

" I'll save the trouble that I'm a bit of a thunderfag and while I understand he's a cucked shithole obsessed with Anita Scamkeesian, the fact they will get him fired merely on the base of their hurt feelings kind of ticked me off. "

I should also take a moment to point out that Jennifer Keller aka 'Laughing Witch' on YouTube along with others engaged in a letter writing campaign to try and get Phil Mason 'thunderf00t' fired from his job. Now I don't know about you, but I would call that harassment. I find that kind of behavior unacceptable no matter which side you are on. But there she was, down in the trenches slinging shit right along side the other trolls and misanthropes.

As for specious arguments, the focus on minor details and painting whole groups of people with a broad brush, Sarkeesian and company do all of these things. Sarkeesian criticizes an industry and thunderf00t attacks her criticisms and questions her rationale. But supporters will try to draw attention away from his arguments by calling it an attack on her.

You want to hold thunderf00t responsible for the actions of trolls and MRA wack-jobs, but are you willing to hold Sarkeesian responsible for the actions of feminism's lunatic fringe?

Why look for that excuse? I think the word you are looking for is 'validation'. I think it's really human nature that compels us to search out those who we see as being like us and helps to reaffirm our beliefs. Fox News became a media empire based almost entirely on this principle and ever since then many other media outlets have followed suit.

@Imagoamin
I read that article a little while back, but I'm not sure taking away Patreon or ad money would silence those people. I'm pretty sure many like thunderf00t would just keep on doing what they're doing anyhow. I've watched some of thunderf00t's videos and while they may not use the most genteel language or may come off as snarky but it never sounded like harassment to me.

YouTube, and the internet in general are a soapbox which people like Anita Sarkeesian can use to criticize popular media and can also be used by others to criticize Sarkeesian in turn, this is perfectly fair in my opinion.

tag: Thunderf00t
I used to think he was great but his obsession with Anita Sarkeesian got boring very fast.

@enoch

No, no, no, man, I would never downvote something because the speaker held an opinion about a certain topic that I disagreed with. Rather, I downvoted this because the subtext of the video is clear: you don't have to listen to what SJWs say because they are self-important blowhards who were coddled as children. Doesn't matter what the argument is that they are proposing. They are SJWs and therefore their ideas cannot be worth listening to.

And more specifically, if you pay attention to the images he is showing as he narrates his stance: you don't have to listen to what Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, etc. say about games (he's showing their pictures while decrying SJWs).

This is classic GamerGate tactics. Rather than actually debate the issues, which are the representation (or lack thereof) of women and other minorities in video games, he wants to dismiss the argument out of hand. You see it all the time in GamerGate supporter comments:

"Anita is a con artist looking to scam Kickstarter supporters out of their money."
"Anita is the feminist equivalent of a TV evangelist."
"Anita has hijacked feminism."
"Anita isn't even a real feminist."
"Anita's not really a gamer."

And so on.

They are desperate to get people to dismiss Anita's criticisms out of hand, mostly because even the most ardent haters can't deny there are problems with the representation of women and other minorities in ALL media, some of which are specific to video games.

It's all a big distraction from the issues. So what if everything GamerGate supporters allege is actually true? So what if she were stealing kickstarter money? So what if she is pushing some kind of feminist agenda in games? So what if she has appointed herself as a spokeperson for feminism?

Even if it were all true, the only important question is whether her arguments about the representation of women in games are valid and well-founded.

So, I downvoted this because essentially the author is advocating judging arguments on the basis of the arguer's reputation (for example, as an SJW) rather than on the merits of the argument itself. I see it as more blatant GamerGate propoganda trying to justify attacking the argument makers rather than dealing with the argument itself. Fuck that noise.

SJW is such a useless label at this point. It is now used purely as a cop out these days, a pejorative that supposedly gives you a free pass to ignore what someone is saying because clearly they are an coddled idiot (otherwise they wouldn't be an SJW).

I absolutely agree with you that justice, freedom of speech, freedom of dissent, etc. are important. And it is troubling that people in recent days are abusing the system to shut down dissenters. But this is the world we live in now and it really only reflects the political situation in Washington that has been going on nearly a decade now--lines drawn in the sand and ideas shouted down merely because they were spoken by someone on the wrong side of the line. I guess it isn't surprising that public debate is mirroring what we've been seeing in the capitol, only with the anonymity of the Internet allowing people to take it to a whole new level with doxxing, swatting, etc.

@Jinx

hey thanks for keeping this conversation going and not just making assumptions and allowing us both to come to a better understanding.

though i am not really surprised,i am gladdened.

in my opinion,i think this situation may be a problem with indentifying with labels and maybe putting too much weight on them to convey complicated and complex human interactions.

i would call myself a social justice warrior,but i would never identify as those who behave is the extremists do.but to imply that the responsibility is on ME,or any other critic,to redefine these radical social justice warriors as somehow not being representative of the majority,is a false dynamic,because that is how they define themselves.

basically the "No true scotsman" fallacy.which is employed ad-nauseum by these extremists.that somehow if you do not adhere to their radical agenda you are somehow not qualified to label yourself:feminist,anarchist (this has been directed at me),socialist, etc etc.

this is just a silly and binary way of breaking down peoples complex human perceptions and understandings to fit a narrow,and restrictive narrative,in order to achieve an agenda.

so while we all viewed GW bush's "if you're not with us,you're against us",as an inane and utterly stupid statement.how come there is little push back when the EXACT same tactic is used to silence someone who may not be 100% on board with a certain agenda?

does me posting this video automatically translate to me being "anti-social justice warrior"?

of course not! that is just silly,but in todays climate that is exactly how some people view complex situations,and it HAS to stop!

you brought up police.
good.
lets use that as an example.
the fact the americas militarized and dysfunctional police force has accounted for more police shootings than soldiers have died in iraq.do we REALLY need to be told that it is not ALL cops.

of course not.again,that is silly but it DOES mean that maybe there is a problem within the institution that needs to be addressed.

here is a perfect case for social justice warriors to bring this corruption and rot to the surface,and here we have black lives matter.which is receiving mixed coverage in the media,but they have gotten people talking and even some incremental reforms in the woks AND,just recently..6 cops fired from a cleveland precinct for shooting civilians.this is where social justice warriors are not only necessary but vital!

but what if.....

those cops who were feeling threatened,or intimidated by the criticism and examination of their institution coming from black lives matters decided to use a tactic right out of these extremists playbook?

maybe some doxxing?
exposing personal information about the protesters?
how about a few false accusations of rape?
maybe personal harassing calls to friends and family members of the black lives matter movement?
how about some false charges of harassment and sexual discrimination?

that would effectively shut down the black lives matter movement within weeks,and how would we respond to that kind of underhanded tactics?

we would be outraged.
we would be furious at the absolute abuse of power.a power bestowed by the state.

and our outrage would be justified.

do you see where i am coming from here?

in the example i have given,which may or not be the best analogy.we can easily see the abuse of power as a form of bullying to get a group that is a dissenting ideology..to shut..the fuck..up.

freedom of speech is NOT just speech you or i agree with,or happen to support,but it also speech that we may dislike,disagree and even find offensive.

but by allowing those we dislike or disagree to say their piece,allows us and everybody else to examine,discern and ultimately discard as ridiculous.or,converesly,find some merit that was previously hidden from us,due to our lack of knowledge or understanding.

i realize i am reiterating my previous point,but i think it is so very important.

free speech allows the free flow of ideas and dialogue and allows good ideas to be absorbed into the body politic and the bad ones discarded into the trash bin.

but there MUST be the allowance of the free flow of thought!

so when i post a video such as this i am not ridiculing actual socially conscious people.i am exposing bad ideas,supported by narrow minded people who wish to impose THEIR sense of how a society should be and attempt to circumvent the very slow process of discussion,argument and debate by hijacking the conversation and shutting down all dissent and disagreement with the most fascist tactics possible.

up until a month ago i was fairly ignorant to things like gamergate and whatnot.i thought i had a pretty fair understanding of what a social justice warrior was,and even included myself as one.

but then,quite by accident,i fell upon a few stories that highly disturbed me.one ,in particular was the case of greg allen elliot who was being criminally prosecuted for harassment on twitter.

now the case was finally resolved,and elliot was found not guilty.
so hooray for justice right?
free speech won in the end right?
or did it...did elliot actually win?
i am not so sure.

you see.
he was a web designer.
and once he was charged 3 years ago,he was banned from any internet use.so effectively he was jobless.
on top of that his defense cost 100k.
sounds like a loss to me.

now let us examine stephanie guthrie.a prominent toronto feminist and tedtalk speaker:
1.she made the accusation of harassment and brought the charges.
2.even though this all started with a man who created a game where anita sarkesians faced was punched,and was the supposed imetus for all this fuss,guthrie never laid charges against the creator of the game.though she did,along with her followers harassed and bullied this man until he closed down his account.so chock one up for feminism? i guess?
4.what guthrie found so reprehensible about elliot was that he had the audacity to question guthries rage and called for a calm interaction.(mainly because there are literally 100's of face-punching games).
5.guthrie and her followers found this call for calm offensive and doxxed elliot and proceeded to harass his employer,his family and ffirends.
6.elliot lost his job.his employer could not handle the harassment.so feminist win again? i guess?
7.when guthrie blocked elliot on twitter she continued to publicly accuse him of misogyny,bigot and even a pedophile.
8.she then brought accusations against elliot for criminal harassment,and that she "felt" harassed.
9.guthrie has paid ZERO for her accusations.she has suffered no accountability nor responsibility.

now the court case is over,and elliot has been vindicated and free speech is still in place for today.

but lets look at the bigger picture.
and let us imagine how easily this situation could be abused.
can we really look at guthrie vs elliot as ANY form of justice? or is it MORE liekly that guthrie was abusing a court system to punish a man she happened to disagree with?with ZERO consequences.

now maybe you agree with guthrie.
maybe you are one of those people that believe in your heart that words are weapons and people should be held accountable for those words.they should be stripped of wealth,work and home..they should be punished.

ok.
thats fine.
maybe you agree because it is a matter you support?
a racist pig loses a job for saying racists things.
or a bigot gets kicked out of his apartment for being a bigoted asshole.

but how about this..
hypothetically:
a devout chritian woman is protesting an abortion clinic with her children in tow.

and lets say a pro-choice atheist comes over to her and starts to berate her i front of her children.ridiculing her for her beliefs and saying jesus was a zombie.that she is a horrible person for believing in such a tyrannical deity,that this so-called all-loving entity punishes all no-believers in a lake of fire for all eternity.that as a mother,teaching her children to worship such a god is tantamount to child abuse.berating her so badly that her children begin to cry?

now what if that interaction was filmed?
then posted to youtube?
what if a "social justice warrior" of the religious flavor decided that berating person needed to pay for his words?
what if that person got doxxed?
and the end result was he loses his job (because corporations are notoriously controversy allergic),and maybe his landlord is notified and he is kicked out of his apartment?

would you be ok with all that?
because that is the EXACT same metric that radical social justice warriors use!

and what about false accusations?
you dont even have to be actually offended and /or harassed,you just have to accuse and the rest takes care of itself.

are you ok with that kind of creative abuse?

so when i bring things like this to the forefront and attempt to expose the underlying idiocy.what i just wrote is where i am coming from.

and yes.these radicals and their underhanded tactics need to be exposed and all the attention brought to them the better.

why? because what and how they are behaving is anti-democracy anti-freedom and anti-liberty.

and i am all for debating specific issues,and will gladly do so..with glee,but i will not and cannot respect what the radical elements are doing to an otherwise worthy cause.

and YOU should be calling them out as well.

i know this is long and i probably lost the plot somewhere,but this is very important,becuase it threatens all of us and if we simply ignore these nimrods they will just become even more entrenched,self-righteous and arrogant in their own little bubble worlds.

that bubble needs to be popped,and soon.

anyways.thanks for hanging (if you made it this far)
there will be danishes and punch in the lobby!