“moral panics” are subhuman:


Some woman and her husband were basically ‘railroaded” back during the “Satanic ritual abuse” bullshit back in the 1980s.  She was (finally) released some years ago — having been imprisoned for nonexistent “crimes” — because self-proclaimed “vigilant parents” were gullible as fuck, engaged  in a “witch-hunt”, and ended up victimizing these people, as a result.

I offer this up as a “cautionary tale” to anyone (including Karl) who may be stupid enough to actually believe that the “Monarch Project” actually exists.

“Fritz Springmeier” and “Cathy O’Brien” are both — most likely – undiagnosed schizoprenics who have (somehow) managed to remain semi-“functional”, because their particular “subculture” is unusually compatible with their specific brand of delusional idiocy.

Karl (of course) is a die-hard believer in such things.


THIS is an impressive summation, in itself:

To state it plainly, indoctrination means to heavily influence someone into believing a particular set of ideas, whether they are political, cultural, or religious. Most often, this is done when the individual is particularly young, when he or she lack the ability to reasonably conclude whether or not a statement is true. Those who’ve experienced heavy indoctrination may be unaware of competing theories, alternate hypotheses, or even whether the ideas hold any merit at all; those ideas are simply believed and held dear for an unknown period of time.

I’d never advocate for one to indoctrinate their child with strong atheist ideas either; I think it’s very important that we teach children how to think, not what to think. I attended a religious institution as a young boy, around the age of 11 or 12. Up until that point, I will say, I wasn’t too concerned with religious beliefs. I rarely attended church services with my family, occasionally took part in religious traditions, and prayed now and then; I was far from a firm believer and I don’t think my parents ever were either. We were simply doing what everyone else was doing. That was, I think, the most important part of my experience as a child; I was never taught these things to be true by those whom I respected the most.

Since I was enrolled in this religious body, I do have firsthand knowledge regarding the practices of indoctrination. The pre-kindergarten class was heavily populated; the surrounding school district had a reputation of holding poor pre-kindergarten class, leaving this particular school the only option for many parents. We as older children often read them Bible stories, rehearsed prayers with them, taught them Christian hymns, and so on and so forth. What bothers me about it now was that I gladly took part in it. These poor children had no choice in the matter. They were being taught by their authorities that these particular sets of religious beliefs were true, without a chance of error.

And most of these children would stay in this particular school system, as most who had attended were my age. Almost all would tell you they knew God was real, Jesus walked on water, healed the sick, rose from the dead, was resurrected and ascended into heaven on the third day; to them, all of these things were as real as you or I. Never did they entertain the idea these things might not be true and neither were they influenced to challenge those beliefs. They weren’t taught about other faiths and why other individuals find those to be true. It was a terrible environment for a child to have been brought up in and I sincerely hope I am not the only one to have escaped from the information they forced on everyone. I even refrained from challenging out of fear I’d be mocked or punished; in a way, I indoctrinated myself into thinking religious beliefs were off the table to debate.

So what age are children most vulnerable to indoctrination? Children are typically open to believing almost anything told to them, without question. During early childhood, children are most receptive which is why education is most important during this period of time. Learning comes faster, the memory is crisp, and children are generally open and willing to accept new information without inhibition. The age of reason is typically considered to be around 6 or 7, when the child begins to have the capabilities to weigh options and reach conclusions. This is when we must be vigilant when trying to help them develop the how to think approach. The Socratic Method effectively helps the child develop the critical thinking skills needed to maintain a healthy thought process. This period of time hasn’t gone unnoticed by those who seek to mold the mind of the young for religious reasons.

Most Christian church organizations heavily involve children in many different events. Sunday school, summer Bible camps, wilderness retreats, catechism or confirmation, plays, and musical ceremonies top that particular list. These organizations are quite aware how impressionable children are and it appears as though they’re taking full advantage of that. Some evangelical Christian organizations fully and publicly acknowledge what they’re doing.

In Islam, indoctrination is taken a bit more seriously. From a very early age, Muslims are taught to memorize the Koran; sometimes, this often holds importance over studying other more earthly curriculums. This has two significant disadvantages. Firstly, this has a long lasting effect on the child’s cognitive development, as it’s primarily based on one particular source. Secondly, as a result of that, they will learn to reject other sources of knowledge simply because it deviates from what Islam teaches. This then, as I state previously, creates an “us” versus “them” frame of mind, completely carrying the Muslim believer further from enlightenment; never questioning and always accepting, brainwashing at its best. The very same can be said for most of the orthodox Jewish population. Anywhere religious instruction exists, expect indoctrination to take place.



The above is just about the best summation of the topic that I have encountered so far.

Stupid bitch votes for Trump — and gets exactly what she deserves

The owner of a popular Granger restaurant, Roberto Beristain, has signed papers agreeing to be deported, possibly any day now.

His wife, Helen Beristain, said that Roberto told her in a brief call Thursday from an Illinois detention facility that he figures: “I’m going to do this the right way.”

Their story has drawn national attention — and threats and calls to Eddie’s Steak Shed — particularly since Helen has said she voted for President Donald Trump. Now, she says she regrets that vote.


“I wish I didn’t vote at all,” Helen Berestain said Friday. “I did it for the economy. We needed a change.”

She recalls that Roberto had complained, “He’s going to get rid of the Mexicans.”

But she countered with Trump’s words, that he would deport only the “bad hombres.”

The Beristains, she said, were all for deporting illegal immigrants who were criminals, bringing drugs or abusing the system, “but not to get rid of all the people. This is not what America is, the land of the free.”

“It’s regular people,” she said of who’s being deported. “It doesn’t mean they are bad. They need to draw a line.”

She also revealed that she, like her husband, had once been an illegal immigrant, though now she is a U.S. citizen. She is originally from Greece.

She said they will continue to try, as they have “many” times, to legally fix Roberto’s immigration status.

Roberto Beristain, 43, who has lived in Mishawaka with Helen and three of their children, has been detained since Feb. 6 when he checked in, as he does every year, with officials from the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

He’s held a voluntary deportation order since 2000, after he and Helen inadvertently crossed the Canada border while visiting Niagra Falls, and agents discovered that he was in the U.S. illegally. Beristain, who is Mexican, opted to stay since he was concerned about, Helen, who had high blood pressure and was pregnant with their daughter.

By working with ICE agents, he was able to gain a work permit, driver’s license and a Social Security number marked “Valid only with Department of Homeland Security authorization.”

He’d worked at Eddie’s Steak Shed for eight years until January, when he bought and took over the restaurant from his wife’s sister. It employs about 20 people.

What’s unclear is when or how he would actually be transported back to Mexico. ICE had informed one of his attorneys that it could be as early as Friday.



I love it!

I genuinely, genuinely, GENUINELY love it!

So, the stupid cunt (who was an “illegal immigrant”, herself at one point), voted for Trump – thinking he would only go after “those” people.

I hope this stupid cunt cries herself to sleep every night for the next ten years, while her husband is stuck in Mexico.



The number of each “kind” that were to be brought on Noah’s Ark during the global flood is inconsistent within the Bible. The contradiction can be found between Genesis 6 and Genesis 7 when God is telling Noah the number of animals he is to bring. Furthermore, the passage in Genesis 7 is an anachronism in biblical chronology, because which animals are clean and which are unclean was only revealed in laws given to Moses after the exodus of Israelites from Egypt.

Biblical scholars have several different models for the origins of the Bible, including Genesis. One model is the documentary hypothesis, which holds that the Bible was assembled from multiple independent sources, each written centuries apart from the others, in a process of redaction. This means that one or more ancient Jews “spliced” different versions of different stories into one long book (or rather, five longish books), resulting in noticeable duplications and contradictions (such as the separate creation stories in Genesis 1 and 2, and of course, the issues discussed on this page). Another possibility is that the Bible did begin as a single narrative, and over the centuries various stories, rules, and commentaries were added and subtracted to it — rather like a wiki. Either way, it is believed that the command to bring seven pairs of clean animals was a later variation, added to the story so that Noah has some clean animals to sacrifice at the end without making them extinct.


And…..they wonder why they’ve lost all credibility outside of their own shitty, crumbling cults.


Extrapolate THIS, to pretty much everything else from “religion” or “mythology”:

The most common non-solution thrown out by creationists at this point is “Goddidit” — God provided the wood, held its planks together, etc. This opens the door for a number of gaping plot holes:

  • If God magicked high-quality trees for Noah to chop down, why didn’t he simply magic the entire boat into existence? Noah was a several-hundred-year-old senior citizen — and no carpenter. Why make him suffer?
  • On top of that, why not will something a bit more technologically impressive? Surely an all-powerful, all-knowing deity could come up with something better than a cramped, rickety wooden boat that’s rotten before it hits the water? Wouldn’t materializing a high-tech super submarine or goddamn spaceship be a far more efficient means to convince future generations? And for that matter, why is saving the animals even necessary? If you have the power to magic anything into existence, why not just magic the animals back into existence after you are done flooding the Earth. After all, you did it once before, so why not just do it again?