Safe Schools Czar: “Killing Someone Who Calls You a Faggot is not Aberrant Behavior…”

This guy needs to go down!

(Err…and, I don’t mean in a homosexual way).

Safe Schools Czar: “Killing Someone Who Calls You a Faggot is not Aberrant Behavior…”

Verum Serum
Posted by Morgen on October 11, 2009

Here’s the full quote from Kevin Jennings in 1998:

We need to own up to the fact that our culture teaches boys that being “a man” is the most important thing in life, even if you have to kill someone to prove it. Killing someone who calls you a faggot is not aberrant behavior but merely the most extreme expression of a belief that is beaten (sometimes literally) into boys at an early age in this country: Be a man – don’t be a faggot.

As Suzanne Pharr so eloquently explained in her landmark work Homophobia: A Weapon of Sexism, antigay bigotry is inextricably intertwined with the maintenance of “proper” gender roles by which little girls are supposed to be “sugar and spice and everything nice” and boys are supposed to be, well, quite the opposite. When boys take up guns to kill those who torment them with words like “faggot,” we shouldn’t be surprised. They’re just doing what we have taught them to do.

CLICK HERE to continue reading.

Zimbabwe Farmer Begs Obama to Stop Mugabe Land Grab

Fat chance of that, bucko!  Or, have you forgotten how Obama helped to put Mugabe and his thugs in power?   And, even after destroying Zimbabwe, Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize…

Zimbabwe farmer Ben Freeth begs Barack Obama to stop Robert Mugabe land grab
Times Online – 11 October, 2009

A British farmer who stood up to Robert Mugabe and was beaten, abducted and finally had his house burnt down has travelled to Washington to ask the Obama administration to put pressure on the Zimbabwe government before it seizes the last remaining white farms.

Ben Freeth, who moved to Zimbabwe from Kent, joined his father-in-law Mike Campbell in taking Mugabe to an international court to stop the farm seizures. Their secret footage of the campaign of intimidation launched against them will form part of a film to be released in London this month.

A Southern African Development Community (SADC) tribunal in Namibia ruled last November that the farm seizures were illegal and ordered Zimbabwe’s government to pay costs. Within a month President Robert Mugabe’s regime had sent thugs to set fire to both men’s farms while they were at church, destroying everything they owned as well as the homes of their workers.

In June the tribunal ruled that Zimbabwe was in contempt of court. Far from respecting the decision, a leaked document published in The Zimbabwe Times last week revealed that Mugabe plans to expel all the remaining white farmers and seize their land.

The land seizures were expected to stop when the former opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai became prime minister last year after agreeing a peace deal with Mugabe. Tsvangirai, originally backed by white farmers, was even considered a candidate for this year’s Nobel peace prize.

Freeth said he had written four times to Tsvangirai but his letters were never acknowledged. Although the main levers of power such as the army, police and justice ministry have remained in Mugabe’s hands, Freeth insists that “Tsvangirai could at least be calling for action. He doesn’t seem interested in doing anything to get the rule of law respected”.

In desperation he decided to take his case to Washington. He spent Friday on Capitol Hill telling his story to legislators and hopes to meet Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, this week.

“The United States is the biggest bilateral donor to Zimbabwe and it’s really important that they put pressure on the government to ensure the court judgment is respected,” he said.

Last year the United States provided $900m in humanitarian assistance to Zimbabwe, but Barack Obama has made clear his frustration at Mugabe remaining in power.

[LOL!  Yeah, r-i-i-i-ght!  As if we are all stupid enough to actually believe that line of political BS.]

The Nobel Committee Has Hung an Albatross Around Obama’s Neck

Thought for the day:

If Obama truly believed that he didn’t deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, he would have refused it, wouldn’t he?

O’s albatross
Misguided Nobel will weigh on rest of his presidency
By JOHN BOLTON – NYP
October 11, 2009

Americans were justifiably proud last week of their many Nobel Prize winners. Eight of the nine honorees in physics, chemistry and medicine were US citizens, some native-born, some naturalized, a near total American sweep. And their achievements were glorious: better understanding how DNA works, the basis for enormous medical progress; developing fiber-optic cable, revolutionizing global communications; and advances in cell biology, with enormous implications for treating cancer. In each case, these breakthroughs, some made as long as 20 years ago, have proven themselves beyond the laboratory, and already made enormous real-world differences.

Next to these marvels, how to explain the Nobel Peace Prize, the most prestigious of all, to President Barack Obama, in office less than nine months?

The Nobel Prize web site says the awards recognize “extraordinary achievements,” but the Obama citation refers only to his “extraordinary efforts,” a dramatic contrast. Accordingly, President Obama was gracious and humble in his remarks after the award, but he would have done better to decline the award entirely, and invite consideration only after he fashioned a real record of achievement.

Unfortunately, this year’s Peace Prize follows a decades-long series of politicized decisions by the Norwegian Nobel committee. The committee has repeatedly rewarded its ideological brethren, the common theme being a desire to produce a more modest role for the United States in world affairs, and a larger role for multilateral organizations, or, as some describe it, “global governance.”

Saturday Night Live Mocks Our Glorious Dark Overlord

Well, not really.  More like they are taking the opportunity to trash Bush.  What did you expect?