ISKANDER
0
La histeria feminista por la absolución de Jackson demuestra que el sexismo sigue vivo en America
No os dejéis engañar por el título. Es muy interesante.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/u-v/usher/2005/usher061705.htm
Feminist Hysteria Over Jackson Acquittal Proves Sexism Still Alive In America
June 17, 2005
by David R. Usher
On Monday, Michael Jackson was found “not guilty” by a jury of eight women and four men, who could not even muster one vote towards conviction on even one count. And this is in spite of the fact that both gender and race of the jurors were theoretically working against him.
An acquittal is what I expected, as discussed in my previous MND article Feminism, the WKKK, and the Gender-Lynching of Michael Jackson.
The atomic reaction of feminists to the decision proves the main point of my previous piece: The prosecution of Jackson was, in fact, intended to be a moneymaking feminist gender-lynching of a rich, eccentric, male (who also happens to be black) by a collection of lawyers playing feminist card games
Pundits thought the O.J case was parallel to the Jackson case. They were wrong. Sneddon’s playbook came from the McMartin and Little Rascals ritual abuse cases, which both resulted in guilty verdicts based on Martian fairy tales.
Fox almost had to call out the National Guard to stop the brouhaha on Hannity and Colmes Monday night. Geraldo Rivera, who bet his 40-year-old mustache on the acquittal, was there to graciously accept his win from Sean Hannity.
It was a sane show until feminists entered the fray. As the interview proceeded, Sean Hannity became obviously unnerved, glancing around and wincing while his feminist guests ran out of control (of even themselves).
Celebrity Justice Pat Lalama was apoplectic, shoving her fierce feminist face into the camera while literally scorching the inside of my picture tube with flaming rhetoric torching from her mouth.
Marsha Clark, the lead prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial was a howler. She scowled, gritted her teeth and clenched her jaw while alien guttural sounds echoed across America.
Gloria Allred, who traditionally becomes larger than any room she happens to be in, and keeps control of the debate by imitating an overheated steam calliope, was uncharacteristically reserved in her recital of feminist mantras..
Not one of members of this pink-tower gang uttered a single phrase that could possibly register with an intelligent human being.
In simple language, here is their message: Jackson should have been convicted because he should have been convicted. Period. They pretended that the jury was either “dumb” or blinded by the celebrity lights that the judge did not allow into the courtroom. All three frantically shifted the focus to “all those abused children out there”, and then ramped up the volume to replace fact with fear in the minds of viewers.
First, remind yourselves that all three of our Vesuvial feminists are also accomplished lawyers or experienced students of court. These women are not stupid. They know what facts mean, how to use them when it is convenient, and what to do when the facts don’t support their political objectives. They were trained to do this in college interdisciplinary women’s studies programs, which forcefully inject feminist dicta into core academic studies in most universities nationwide.
Conclusion: These women know exactly what they are doing, and the movement they are doing it for. In this case it backfired, and in a most revealing manner.
The Jackson case ended up professional suicide for Thomas Sneddon and our three clangorous feminists. There were no physical facts clearly supporting the prosecution. In fact, most of the physical evidence tartly disproved Sneddon’s imaginative allegations. The rest of the trial should have been conducted on Jerry Springer.
This knowledge did not fall into Sneddon’s lap late in the case. He knew it from day one. Why?
The case was a pink herring beginning the day the boy made his report to the police. It is standard procedure when a child reports sexual abuse, for police to set up a phone call or other monitored contact with the alleged perpetrator so police can capture the evidence needed to validate the case and convict. The boy refused to make the phone call, and instead asked the police not to tell his mother that he even met with them.
There is no reason on earth for the boy not to help proving his story, unless of course the allegations were fictional and his manipulative mother programmed him to cover the source. Sneddon, and everybody else close to the case, could not have reasonably ignored this three-alarmer.
It was clear from the start there would be no meat to accompany the overcooked potatoes served up for the greatest gender-lynching ever attempted in the Millennium Coliseum.
In the eyes of feminists, Jackson should have been convicted solely on suspicion rising from the unquestioned words of a programmed child and a mother with a history of extortion.
This is not law. It is the finest example of feminist sexism witnessed since the movie “First Wives Club” hit the screens in 1996. The Jackson case bears much more meaning than any movie could, because it demonstrates real living sexism. It is a national disgrace these minions of misandry are given prime time when the media would never air the equally-reprehensible views of the Ku Klux Klan.
Jackson is fortunate. He could spend a fortune proving his innocence. Most men cannot afford justice, and lose by fiat. The same feminist methodology applied in the Jackson case is misused in the vast majority of false child abuse and domestic violence cases in America today. Any man accused is somehow guilty even if he has the money to prove himself innocent. We are supposed to do what feminists want.
Those in power well know that any male who fails to comply with feminist demands will be taken down in a hail of allegations too. This is the major reason why the majority of politicians (even Republicans who know better) roll over when feminists even look in their direction. Feminists collect dirt on every politician by using sex to put men into embarrassing situations. This is the motto of the V-Day celebration in action, where “women use their sexual power to get what they want from men”. Anything that cannot be enticed from men, they make up anyway.
This is how the Violence Against Women’s Act got funding in 2000. John Ashcroft, then a Missouri Senator facing re-election in 2000, held VAWA back on principle for quite some time, but mysteriously let it out of committee and pushed it through for the election. His top aide defended the action to me -- claiming VAWA was fully constitutional -- despite knowing that VAWA is just as much a constitutional outrage as a “Violence Against Whites Act” would be. His words to me were, “if you guys want money you will have to come up here and get it”. Of course, the issue is not about money, it is about the constitution itself.
A surprising number of Americans still imagine that Jackson must have abused somebody. This is precisely how we have been programmed to think by feminists throughout the liberal media.
Consider this: If Jackson really was abusing children, he would be doing it secretly -- without openly publicizing his “work for children”. Secondly, can anyone name even one real child molester who actively proclaimed their activities and identity in public before getting caught? Thirdly, the rich do illegal things where they can get away with it. If Jackson were a child molester, he would do it overseas where nobody cares or notices, and not even recognize him.
Now, understand this: The only difference between racism and sexism is the target for premeditated social and economic abuse. Both sexism and racism in America have historically been accomplished via networks inculcating hate, via expansive sexual imagery of men, which is promoted widely to anesthetize the public so they don’t notice the “lynchings” taking place until fifty years too late.
We have substantially ended racism. However, vestiges remain which are actually driven by sexist attitudes towards males of all races.
The great civil rights advancements of this century will rise from the burgeoning mainstream pro-family marriage movement, which must rightly end feminist sexism to reach its goal. This movement will succeed because feminism is the true source of father-absence and the myriad of vastly-expensive problems milking taxpayers, driving deficits, contorting politics, and seriously hampering American progress.
“We must now grant to fathers the same right to be in the family as we have granted to women in the workplace. Any questions?
David R. Usher
No os dejéis engañar por el título. Es muy interesante.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/u-v/usher/2005/usher061705.htm
Feminist Hysteria Over Jackson Acquittal Proves Sexism Still Alive In America
June 17, 2005
by David R. Usher
An acquittal is what I expected, as discussed in my previous MND article Feminism, the WKKK, and the Gender-Lynching of Michael Jackson.
The atomic reaction of feminists to the decision proves the main point of my previous piece: The prosecution of Jackson was, in fact, intended to be a moneymaking feminist gender-lynching of a rich, eccentric, male (who also happens to be black) by a collection of lawyers playing feminist card games
Pundits thought the O.J case was parallel to the Jackson case. They were wrong. Sneddon’s playbook came from the McMartin and Little Rascals ritual abuse cases, which both resulted in guilty verdicts based on Martian fairy tales.
Fox almost had to call out the National Guard to stop the brouhaha on Hannity and Colmes Monday night. Geraldo Rivera, who bet his 40-year-old mustache on the acquittal, was there to graciously accept his win from Sean Hannity.
It was a sane show until feminists entered the fray. As the interview proceeded, Sean Hannity became obviously unnerved, glancing around and wincing while his feminist guests ran out of control (of even themselves).
Celebrity Justice Pat Lalama was apoplectic, shoving her fierce feminist face into the camera while literally scorching the inside of my picture tube with flaming rhetoric torching from her mouth.
Marsha Clark, the lead prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial was a howler. She scowled, gritted her teeth and clenched her jaw while alien guttural sounds echoed across America.
Gloria Allred, who traditionally becomes larger than any room she happens to be in, and keeps control of the debate by imitating an overheated steam calliope, was uncharacteristically reserved in her recital of feminist mantras..
Not one of members of this pink-tower gang uttered a single phrase that could possibly register with an intelligent human being.
In simple language, here is their message: Jackson should have been convicted because he should have been convicted. Period. They pretended that the jury was either “dumb” or blinded by the celebrity lights that the judge did not allow into the courtroom. All three frantically shifted the focus to “all those abused children out there”, and then ramped up the volume to replace fact with fear in the minds of viewers.
First, remind yourselves that all three of our Vesuvial feminists are also accomplished lawyers or experienced students of court. These women are not stupid. They know what facts mean, how to use them when it is convenient, and what to do when the facts don’t support their political objectives. They were trained to do this in college interdisciplinary women’s studies programs, which forcefully inject feminist dicta into core academic studies in most universities nationwide.
Conclusion: These women know exactly what they are doing, and the movement they are doing it for. In this case it backfired, and in a most revealing manner.
The Jackson case ended up professional suicide for Thomas Sneddon and our three clangorous feminists. There were no physical facts clearly supporting the prosecution. In fact, most of the physical evidence tartly disproved Sneddon’s imaginative allegations. The rest of the trial should have been conducted on Jerry Springer.
This knowledge did not fall into Sneddon’s lap late in the case. He knew it from day one. Why?
The case was a pink herring beginning the day the boy made his report to the police. It is standard procedure when a child reports sexual abuse, for police to set up a phone call or other monitored contact with the alleged perpetrator so police can capture the evidence needed to validate the case and convict. The boy refused to make the phone call, and instead asked the police not to tell his mother that he even met with them.
There is no reason on earth for the boy not to help proving his story, unless of course the allegations were fictional and his manipulative mother programmed him to cover the source. Sneddon, and everybody else close to the case, could not have reasonably ignored this three-alarmer.
It was clear from the start there would be no meat to accompany the overcooked potatoes served up for the greatest gender-lynching ever attempted in the Millennium Coliseum.
In the eyes of feminists, Jackson should have been convicted solely on suspicion rising from the unquestioned words of a programmed child and a mother with a history of extortion.
This is not law. It is the finest example of feminist sexism witnessed since the movie “First Wives Club” hit the screens in 1996. The Jackson case bears much more meaning than any movie could, because it demonstrates real living sexism. It is a national disgrace these minions of misandry are given prime time when the media would never air the equally-reprehensible views of the Ku Klux Klan.
Jackson is fortunate. He could spend a fortune proving his innocence. Most men cannot afford justice, and lose by fiat. The same feminist methodology applied in the Jackson case is misused in the vast majority of false child abuse and domestic violence cases in America today. Any man accused is somehow guilty even if he has the money to prove himself innocent. We are supposed to do what feminists want.
Those in power well know that any male who fails to comply with feminist demands will be taken down in a hail of allegations too. This is the major reason why the majority of politicians (even Republicans who know better) roll over when feminists even look in their direction. Feminists collect dirt on every politician by using sex to put men into embarrassing situations. This is the motto of the V-Day celebration in action, where “women use their sexual power to get what they want from men”. Anything that cannot be enticed from men, they make up anyway.
This is how the Violence Against Women’s Act got funding in 2000. John Ashcroft, then a Missouri Senator facing re-election in 2000, held VAWA back on principle for quite some time, but mysteriously let it out of committee and pushed it through for the election. His top aide defended the action to me -- claiming VAWA was fully constitutional -- despite knowing that VAWA is just as much a constitutional outrage as a “Violence Against Whites Act” would be. His words to me were, “if you guys want money you will have to come up here and get it”. Of course, the issue is not about money, it is about the constitution itself.
A surprising number of Americans still imagine that Jackson must have abused somebody. This is precisely how we have been programmed to think by feminists throughout the liberal media.
Consider this: If Jackson really was abusing children, he would be doing it secretly -- without openly publicizing his “work for children”. Secondly, can anyone name even one real child molester who actively proclaimed their activities and identity in public before getting caught? Thirdly, the rich do illegal things where they can get away with it. If Jackson were a child molester, he would do it overseas where nobody cares or notices, and not even recognize him.
Now, understand this: The only difference between racism and sexism is the target for premeditated social and economic abuse. Both sexism and racism in America have historically been accomplished via networks inculcating hate, via expansive sexual imagery of men, which is promoted widely to anesthetize the public so they don’t notice the “lynchings” taking place until fifty years too late.
We have substantially ended racism. However, vestiges remain which are actually driven by sexist attitudes towards males of all races.
The great civil rights advancements of this century will rise from the burgeoning mainstream pro-family marriage movement, which must rightly end feminist sexism to reach its goal. This movement will succeed because feminism is the true source of father-absence and the myriad of vastly-expensive problems milking taxpayers, driving deficits, contorting politics, and seriously hampering American progress.
“We must now grant to fathers the same right to be in the family as we have granted to women in the workplace. Any questions?
David R. Usher
Última edición:
