Kristallnacht – Déjà Vue – Detroit – 2014

 

“Kristallnacht, literally, “Night of Crystal,” is often referred to as the “Night of Broken Glass.” The name refers to the wave of violent anti-Jewish pogroms which took place on November 9 and 10, 1938, throughout Germany, annexed Austria, and in areas of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia recently occupied by German troops.

Instigated primarily by Nazi Party officials and members of the SA (Sturmabteilungen: literally Assault Detachments, but commonly known as Storm Troopers) and Hitler Youth, Kristallnacht owes its name to the shards of shattered glass that lined German streets in the wake of the pogrom—broken glass from the windows of synagogues, homes, and Jewish-owned businesses plundered and destroyed during the violence.”

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005201

 

There is none more fundamental Human Right that the right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Belief and Speech – but this basic Human Right encompasses more than just this.

“Freedom of speech, of the press, of association, of assembly and petition — this set of guarantees, protected by the First Amendment, comprises what we refer to as freedom of expression. The Supreme Court has written that this freedom is

the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom.” Without it, other fundamental rights, like the right to vote, would wither and die.”

https://www.aclu.org/free-speech

 

Instigating, calling for, threatening, or perpetrating violence against those who do not believe what you believe, who do not agree with your opinion, who do not think the way you think – is akin to the progrom that the Nazis perpetrated against the Jews – and Kristallnacht was the first salvo in what became one the most horrific murderous periods of genocide in human history – and it began with broken glass.

Feminists have now embarked on preparations for another Kristallnacht – 76 years after that first Kristallnacht – because they do not believe that anyone has the right to believe, think or articulate anything other than what they believe, think or articulate.

Feminists are the new Nazis.

As a free citizen of the Republic of Ireland I declare that in my opinion feminism is a hate movement, a terrorist organisation and is akin to Nazism.

That anyone who collaborates with, supports, endorses or stands idly by and refuses to condemn feminism in all its manifestations, roots and branches is equally culpable, equally complicit is supporting a terrorist organisation, a hate movement and an ideology that has no other comparison other than to Nazism.

On June 26 – 29 2014 A Voice for Men (AVfM) intends to hold an International Conference on Men’s Rights in Detroit – the hotel at which this conference is being hosted has been in contact with Paul Elam owner and publisher of AVfM to make him aware that serious threats of violence, and of death threats have been made against not just conference attendees but the hotel, its staff and other guests.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/threats-of-violence-and-death-against-doubletree-hilton-in-detroit-over-mens-conference/

http://www.avoiceformen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/05/AVFM-Security-Letter-REDACTED.pdf

From a reading of the communication sent to Paul Elam from the hotel – two things are clear – the hotel is taking these threats seriously, and the hotel also expects the conference organisers to pay for the protection of the hotel, its staff, its guests and conference attendees.  Including attendees from other sovereign states – we’ll get back to this shortly, and anyone who just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Against terrorists.

Except – the issuing of credible threats is a Federal Criminal Offence in the US – it is a crime.

“b)Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(c)Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(d)Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

Source

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 741; Pub. L. 99–646, § 63,Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3614; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), (H), (K),Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875

See also

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/876?qt-us_code_tabs=0#qt-us_code_tabs

 

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) states: “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any   communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.” From the wording of § 875(c) it is clear that the legislator did not require the element of ‘intent.’ Thus, it is irrelevant if the accused claims he/she did not have the intent to produce any injury on the victim; the mere act of sending the e-mail with threatening messages typifies the criminal conduct.

The holding in United States v. DeAndino, 958 F.2d 146 (US Ct. App. 6th Cir. 1992) confirms this statement. In DeAndino, the court held: “A criminal statute such as 18 U.S.C.S. § 875(c) does not contain a specific mens rea element. However, such a statute is not presumed to create a strict liability offense, because mere omission from the statute of any mention of intent will not be construed as eliminating that element from the crime denounced.”

In other words, ‘federal stalking,’ as this crime is also known, is not a strict liability crime but it does require prosecutors to prove that the accused committed the offense. Thus, the ‘wording’ of the e-mails and the e-mails themselves are critical evidence in these cases.

Threats of injury must be found in the e-mails sent by the accused. As the Court held in DeAndino, the words in the [e-mail] message must fully, directly, and expressly set the elements of the statutory offense.

For instance, in Tuason, the wording of one of his e-mails said: “Mulatto kids are ugly freaks that should be destroyed. . . The blackie should be castrated. I want people in public malls, photo shoots, TV studios, radio, concerts, arenas, restaurants, NBC TV, Bravo TV, parties, sidewalks, etc. to stare and stab dead any blackie with a white girl like “SS”. . . If not, I “HK” WILL BOMB THE PLACE.” These words are a clear example of threatening words of injury under the federal statute.

Many other US circuit courts have followed this interpretation in DeAndino. For instance, the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth circuit courts have followed this interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) as not requiring specific mens rea (mental state of intent).

DeAndino held that this crime requires three specific elements: (i) there must be a transmission in interstate commerce; (ii) there must be a communication containing the threat; (iii) and the threat must be a threat to injure the person of another.

Therefore, according to 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) sending e-mails with words threatening injury is a federal crime and can be easily proven by showing that it was sent to a person in other state, showing the e-mail, and the wording the e-mail contains.

Thus, individuals prompt to explosive reactions should be cautions when wording their e-mail messages. A simple ‘mistake’ in wording e-mails threatening its recipient with an injury, even if not intended, may typify a federal crime with a harsh imprisonment sentence.”

 

http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?id=2064&s=latestnews

 

The communication from the hotel makes reference to “calls” and “other threats” would it be beyond the realms of possibility that these threats were also issued via email, and/or online?

The hotel suggests that AVfM pays for extra police officers in order to protect, the hotel, its staff, its guests and conference attendees. From terrorists, and to take out insurance – against terrorist threats.

I have some questions – is the FBI involved? Are Detroit police investigating these criminal acts?

Again from reading the communication sent to Paul Elam from the hotel – these threats are being made against not just actual attendees of this conference – but hotel staff, hotel guests NOT attending this conference and one presumes any other person who might happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Again – I ask –  is the Federal Bureau of Investigation  involved in what appears to be credible threats of violence and credible death threats?

Back to citizens of other sovereign states who may either be attending this conference or just happen to be guests of this hotel at the same time.

Will the US State Department now be issuing warnings to citizens of other sovereign states intending to visit the United States of America that they do so at their own peril – recommend that visitors bring full body armour and take out either private insurance or hire private security personnel to accompany them on their visit to the United States of America – “Land of the Free, home of the brave” because apparently now, one only gets state police protection and Federal protection against threats of violence, and death threats from feminists, if one pays – the police force.

I recommend that citizens of other sovereign states intending to visit the United States of America, contact their embassies and Foreign Affairs Departments to make formal complaints to the government of the United States of America that threats of violence, and death threats against either US citizens or citizens of other sovereign states are tolerated in the United States of America – if they are made by feminists.

Apparently the targets of these threats of violence or death are irrelevant – whether attendees at a conference, staff of hotels or any other guests who just happen to be there.

So, what is it that the feminists who have issued these threats are “objecting” to? Not by disagreeing, not by legitimately protesting under legally sanctioned “freedom of association” – but by issuing death threats and threats of violence – not just against conference attendees, but the hotel, its staff, its guests, citizens of other sovereign states and any other person who – as I said – happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because they do NOT uphold or believe in that most basic of all fundamental Human Rights.

Freedom of Speech, thought, conscience and belief.

 

Many people have written about this fundamental Human Right – the prophetic George Orwell

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

George Orwell

Apparently in the United States of America – the home of “Liberty” if feminists don’t like what they hear – they will threaten violence and death against those saying those things they don’t want to hear – so that nobody else gets to hear them either – this would be in pursuit of “equal rights” no doubt?

Several US presidents have also addressed the issue of Freedom of Speech.

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

George Washington

It would appear that George Washington knew what he was talking about with regard to “slaughter” as feminists appear to believe that killing those with whom you disagree with is a legitimate way to advocate for “equal rights”

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”

[Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”

Harry S. Truman

Mr. Truman was prescient – “a country where everyone lives in fear.” From feminists – who will perpetrate violence or fatal injury upon anyone who “disagrees” with them.

How about one of the famous Americans of all time?

“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”

Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogood, The Busy-Body, and Early Writings

Did I mention that America prides itself on being the bastion of Liberty and Freedom and Democracy?

“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”

[The One Un-American Act, Speech to the Author’s Guild Council in New York, on receiving the 1951 Lauterbach Award (December 3, 1952)]”

William O. Douglas

Our own inimitable Oscar had something to say about Freedom of Speech.

“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.”

Oscar Wilde

A twist on that most famous of all quotes about Freedom of Speech.

“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

Voltaire

Though from the feminist perspective that should read “if I don’t agree with what you say – I will visit death and violence upon you – so that you don’t get to say what I disagree with”

 

The last word goes to Christopher Hitchens.

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.”

Christopher Hitchens

I would like to add this – for any feminist attempting to pull the NAFALT – (Not All Feminists Are Like That) card – let me say this – ALL feminism is like that – if you subscribe to, endorse, support or turn a blind eye to the toxic roots, murderous and criminal behaviour of ANY section, part, branch of form of feminism – you ARE like that.

And you can kiss my Irish arse.

 

All quotes from – http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/freedom-of-speech

 

For those who think “this has nothing to do with me, am not either a feminist or a MRA/MHRA – storm in a teacup” – then bear this mind.

Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

 

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.”

 

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

 

You don’t have to be a feminist or a MRA/MHRA or any other designation to believe in the sanctity of Human Rights – hell you don’t even have to like the human being whose rights you acknowledge as being sacrosanct – even the biggest arsehole on the planet has those Human Rights.

You don’t have to be anything but a Human Being to speak out against injustice, against prejudice, against hatred, against bigotry.

For those feminists caught in that toxic loop – “you must be a feminist” – I’m NOT a feminist – and hey look – my head didn’t explode – an asteroid didn’t hit the earth – the sun didn’t fall out of the sky.

I’m NOT a feminist and I believe 100% in the sanctity of Human Rights – you don’t you are a female supremacist – a supporter of thugs – of terrorists – unless you completely disavow and reject any tenet of feminism –  and you continue to stand idly by and say nothing about what YOUR movement deems a legitimate form of protest – threats of violence and death threats against those who also declare – I’m NOT a feminist.

Not speaking up – turning a blind eye makes you complicit.

These people claim to speak on your behalf – to be the voice of feminism – THIS is what your feminism is – in all its putrid toxic murderous and vile hate-filled glory. Your feminism.

There have been many many people whose beliefs were so deeply held they were worth dying for – YOURS apparently are worth killing for.

 

Edit – just got notification of this at change.org

“Its Time To Class Feminism As a Terrorist Group”

 

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-government-its-time-to-class-feminism-as-a-terrorist-group

Advertisements

7 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. donzaloog
    Jun 01, 2014 @ 17:15:25

    Well said. Feminism definitely is the new Nazis.

    Reply

  2. caprizchka
    Jun 01, 2014 @ 21:43:53

    Americans it would seem are more concerned that a “racist” may own a professional sports team.

    I’ve heard that anyone who is anti-feminist is a racist, violent gun nut, who doesn’t care about global warming, and might even eat meat or smoke, doesn’t exercise enough, is ratcheting up health care costs, doesn’t like children, or cats, doesn’t believe that evolution should be taught in schools, and is otherwise a burden to society. Fortunately, there are plenty of prisons and camps for those undesirables.

    Speaking of undesirables, I hope you don’t mind that I’ll be stealing some of your links and using them to inform various untermensch.

    Meanwhile, I think that this is an excellent idea: “I recommend that citizens of other sovereign states intending to visit the United States of America, contact their embassies and Foreign Affairs Departments to make formal complaints to the government of the United States of America that threats of violence, and death threats against either US citizens or citizens of other sovereign states are tolerated in the United States of America – if they are made by feminists.”

    Of course, we may not even have anything called a “sovereign state” after this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10859230/Prince-Charles-reform-capitalism-to-save-the-planet.html

    Reply

  3. caprizchka
    Jun 03, 2014 @ 21:42:04

    Reply

  4. Sophie Jameson
    Jun 04, 2014 @ 18:08:25

    Your hatred of women disqualifies you from relationships with them. So why exactly would we care? You self-identify: just another creep.

    We have the joy of loving, living and making babies with real men: men like my sexy romantic husband, who gave up a job he hated to stay home when our kids were small while I developed my own tech business and paid the bills.

    We work together to make a better life for ourselves, and sex roles don’t limit us. That’s what feminism is about – men and women get greater flexibility, more space.

    Feminists like my darling father who, after a lifetime as a doctor, learned to cook when my mother became too disabled to do so… All the men in my life are feminists, because feminism frees both men and women, while respecting both.

    I have two young adult sons. Why am I not surprised that they both have long term girlfriends: amazing girls; talented, charming and kind? If you love women, women will love you right back. Not a skill you’ve learned, it seems.

    And this Nazi stuff? Comparing your conference with the events of the Holocaust? That’s so completely lacking in a sense of proportion It’s beyond disgraceful. I can only hope Jewish activists come after you for an apology.

    Reply

    • anjaeriud
      Jun 05, 2014 @ 01:55:06

      I’ll be honest – I get a fair few ranty longwinded and general insane comments from feminists – sigh – and I usually only approve maybe one or two – for illustrative purposes – to show how totally off their trollies the vast majority of feminists really are.

      This one got approved because it encapsulates not just feminism but rampant egotistical gynocentrism – it is the perfect example of someone who is so blinded, so ridiculously purile that to not approve it would be a wasted opportunity.

      At least this one didn’t accuse me of have a tiny penis – though did throw out the “just another creep” salvo. 

      Before I get into this – first – welcome to the Twilight Zone Sophie – or should that be feminist hell?

      Either way I may have to add a little extra tag to the title of this blog for any other feminists who wander in here

      “Abandon all hope, all ye (feminists) who enter here” – catchy isn’t it? 🙂

      Your hatred of women disqualifies you from relationships with them. So why exactly would we care? You self-identify: just another creep.

      They always open with a home run of stupidity don’t they? Sophie – I’m female – did the picture not give you a clue? We are obviously in the presence of a seer, a prophet, and possibly even God – because Sophie here gets to dictate to random strangers who they may or may not form “relationships” with – the oracle has spoken.

      For what it’s worth I don’t particular hate “women” as a class or a group or a herd – mostly I am indifferent to most of them – feminists on the other hand barely qualify as sentient – ergo – not worth hating.

      We have the joy of loving, living and making babies with real men: men like my sexy romantic husband, who gave up a job he hated to stay home when our kids were small while I developed my own tech business and paid the bills.

      Eeeeemm. Thanks for sharing your…….story…..or rather stories of “we” whoever “we” are

      We work together to make a better life for ourselves, and sex roles don’t limit us. That’s what feminism is about – men and women get greater flexibility, more space.

      This is how I know Sophie is not so much a feminist as a dyed in the wool unrepentant gynocentrist – because Sophie knows sod all about feminism – well other than what she picked up from Cosmo – and rent a wretch articles on Huffpo. No “real” feminist would ever in a million years make a statement like “We have the joy of loving, living and making babies with real men”

      Real men????? Sophie – every rancid lesbian man-hating toxic “real” feminist” is now sharpening her talons – working up a globus of bile and vitriol flecked phlegm and will spit it out at you like the stuff the creature in Alien did – your face will melt off – bummer! 🙂

      Women have been drummed out of the global coven for less – “real men lol

      Feminists like my darling father who, after a lifetime as a doctor, learned to cook when my mother became too disabled to do so… All the men in my life are feminists, because feminism frees both men and women, while respecting both.

      What does being a decent human being have to do with feminism? Anyhoo – see – told ya – Sophie isn’t a feminist – she may be a pain in arse gynocentrist but she ain’t a feminist – nosireebob.

      God – does anyone else feel incredibly sorry for any of those “men in her life” – I know I sure do.

      I have two young adult sons. Why am I not surprised that they both have long term girlfriends: amazing girls; talented, charming and kind? If you love women, women will love you right back. Not a skill you’ve learned, it seems.

      Female! And nope don’t “love women” why the fuck should I? Is there a course or something that one goes on to acquire this “loving women” skill?

      And this Nazi stuff? Comparing your conference with the events of the Holocaust? That’s so completely lacking in a sense of proportion It’s beyond disgraceful. I can only hope Jewish activists come after you for an apology.

      Was there some part of “feminists are the new Nazis” that you didn’t understand? Feminism is a totalitarian, corrupt hate movement, it is a vile doctrine peddled by liars, frauds, nutcases and lunatics – now – who can we compare that to?

      Bye Sophie – this was your one and only shot – now that you’ve vented – you must feel sooooooooooooooo much better – you told me didnt ya? 🙂

      Reply

  5. John mws
    Jun 06, 2014 @ 20:57:40

    Even kids movies understand the metaphor better then gender feminists.

    Reply

  6. wtfwtf13
    Jun 10, 2014 @ 16:06:26

    Feminism is a totalitarian, corrupt hate movement, it is a vile doctrine peddled by liars, frauds, nutcases and lunatics – now – who can we compare that to?

    Great minds think alike ! LMFAO!
    Other than a totally brain fucked mangina with a severely damaged endocrine system everyone would agree with your opinion if they made a fair assessment of what’s happening right under our noses.
    Didn’t Sophie Jameson reek of a female supremacist ?
    @ Sophie Jameson first off you need to be loveable to be loved.
    Wish they had taught you about finer human feelings instead of putting a condom on a banana or how absolutely awesome and indispensably vital orgasms are, in the much vaunted sex education classes. You probably wouldn’t have turned into entitled selfish bitch you are now.

    The following is just a tale but is indicative of what people desired back then .
    If nothing else it at least helped them retain their sanity.

    http://classiclit.about.com/od/thegiftofthemagi/a/aa_giftmagi.htm

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: