Islam, homosexuals, and Donald Trump Part #2 Wikipedia provides an article entitled "List of Islamist terrorist attacks" which lists nearly all of the best known Muslim-inspired atrocities committed in recent years. Here are some of these outrages, enough to give you a sense of what has been happening and refresh your memory. There are, of course, many more. All of this started long before 911 but let us focus just on the years from 2001 to the present; comments are quotations from the Wikipedia article. . 2001 Attack on the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly 38 killed. Haifa bus 16 suicide bombing 15 dead, 40 injured Suicide attack on Indian parliament in New Delhi, 7 killed, 12 injured. . 2002 John A. Muhammad sniper attacks, aka Beltway shootings.17 killed, 10 wounded. Yeshivat Beit Yisrael suicide bombing, Jerusalem. 12 killed, 54 injured. Passover massacre, by Hamas, Netanya, Israel. 31 killed, 140 wounded Matza restaurant suicide bombing Haifa, Israel. 17 killed, 40 wounded. Tourist bus murders, Kaluchak, Kashmir. 31 dead, 47 wounded. Zamboanga City, Philippines bomb blasts. 4 killed, 25 wounded. Bali bombings, 202 deaths, 240 injuries. Moscow theater hostage crisis 170 killed, 700+ injured. Mombasa attacks, Kenya. 13 killed, 80 injured. . 2003 Tel Aviv central bus station massacre. 23 dead, 100+ injured. Riyadh attacks, Saudi Arabia. 39 killed, 160 wounded. Marriott Hotel Jakarta, 12 dead, 150 wounded. Maxim restaurant suicide bombing Haifa, Israel. 21 killed, 51 injured. . 2004 Madrid train bombings. 192 dead, 2,000 injured. Moscow Metro bombing. 41 killed, 120 injured Saudi Arabia, Khobar massacre 22 deaths, 25 injuries. Iraq churches attacks. 12 killed, 71 wounded. Bangladesh, Dhaka grenade attack. 24 killed, 300 injured. Moscow Metro bombing. 10 killed, 50 injured. Beersheba bus bombings, Israel. 16 killed 100+ injured. Beslan school hostage disaster. 344 killed (186 were children). Australian Embassy, Jakarta, Indonesia. 9 dead, 150 wounded.
Sinai bombings, Egypt. 34 killed, 171 injured. Murder of Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, Netherlands. . 2005 London bombings, often referred to as 7/7. 52 killed, 700 injured. Assassination of Rafic Hariri, former Prime Minister of Lebanon in Beirut HaSharon Mall suicide bombing, Israel. 5 killed, 90+ injured. Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. 64 people killed. India, Delhi bombings, India. 60 killed, 180 injured Indonesia, Sulawesi. Muslims behead three Christian girls. . 2006 Mumbai train bombings. 209 killed and over 700 injured. . 2007 Iraq, Qahtaniya bombings. 796 killed, 1,562 wounded. . 2008 India, Ahmedabad bombings. 56 dead, 200 injured. . 2009 Indonesia, Marriott and Ritz-Carlton Hotel bombings. 9 killed, 53 injured . 2010 Nag Hammadi massacre of Coptic Christians, Egypt. 11 killed 11 injured. Moscow Metro bombings. 40 dead, 102 injured. Iraq, May 10 attacks. 100+ dead 350+ injured. Uganda, Kampala attacks; suicide bombings carried out against crowds watching a screening of the 2010 FIFA World Cup Finals 74 dead, 70 injured. . 2011 Egypt, Alexandria bombing 23 dead, 97 injured. January 2011 Iraq suicide attacks. 137+ killed, 230 injured. China, Kashgar, Uyghur rampage. 15 killed, 42 wounded. India, Delhi bombing. 17 dead, 76 injured. Nigeria, Christmas Day bombings. 41 people dead. . 2012 Iraqi bombings, Baghdad and Nasiriyah, by Islamic State. 73 dead, 149 injured. Iraq, Baghdad. 83 dead, 250+ injured. Iraq; March attacks against several cities. 52 dead, 250 injured. . 2013 Pakistan, January 10 bombings. 130 dead, 270 injured. Boston Marathon bombings. 3 killed, 183 wounded. Turkey, Reyhanlı bombing. 52 dead, 140 injured. India, ten bombs explode at Buddhist Mahabodhi Temple complex, Bodh Gaya. 5 wounded, extensive property damage. Pakistan, Peshawar church attack, 83 killed, 250 wounded. Nigeria, Gujba college massacre. 44 students killed by Boko Haram . 2014 Belgium May 24, 2014 – Jewish Museum of Belgium shooting 4 dead. Canada, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu ramming attack. Lone attacker used his car to run over two Canadian soldiers. 1 killed, 1 injured Canada, shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa. Lone attacker shot a soldier at a war memorial and attacked Parliament. 1 killed. Syria, ISIL fighters massacred 700 people of the Shu'aytat tribe United States, October 23, 2014 – Zale H. Thomson, also known as Zaim Farouq Abdul-Malik, attacked four New York policemen in the subway with a hatchet. Killed by police on the scene. France, Tours police station stabbing. Man yelling Allahu Akbar attacked a police office with a knife. He was killed and three police officers were injured. France, Dijon. Man yelling Allahu Akbar ran over 11 pedestrians with his car. . 2015 Nigeria, Baga massacre. Boko Haram kills at least 200 people, 2000 missing. Kenya, Garissa University College attack by Al-Shabaab. 148 killed. United States, May 3, 2015 – Two gunmen attacked the Curtis Culwell Center during a 'Draw Muhammad' cartoon art exhibit in Garland, Texas . 2 dead (perpetrators), 1 injured. . The sarcastically named "Religion of Peace" site, which keeps track of Muslim attacks on others, counts about 29,000 terrorist killings since 911. . What is the typical response of left-wingers? An attempt to divert attention from Islam, refusal to face the fact that Islam is a criminal religion and that all (all) Muslim terrorists are motivated by the teachings of their religion. These are not peripheral teachings only believed in my fringe sects. The sources repeatedly cited by Muslim terrorists are verses from the Koran (which no Leftists ever seem to have read), passages from the most well known Hadiths, and other passages from well known imams and other Muslim leaders. . None of this matters to Leftists -and most Democrats are Leftists. This is because they refuse to become informed about Islam; all information they do look at consists of interpretations written by Leftist writers who have not researched Islam, either. . Instead, so we are told, the problem is loose gun regulations. Inasmuch as I agree that there need to be more gun restrictions they have a point. However, it is irresponsible in the extreme to evade the fact -which is evaded in virtually every case- that motivation to use a gun actually matters. For Muslims the motivation operates even when there are no guns or when guns are only a small part of the picture. The Boston marathon bombings were carried out with homemade explosives that used nitrate and perchlorate-based oxidizers. . By the logic of Leftists everyone should have demanded that Congress pass laws against purchase of oxidizers. The Tsarnaev brothers killed and maimed people with bombs made from hardware store chemicals. Other Muslims have made use of knives, but they killed people anyway. What conceivable excuse is there for not doing research and investigating what it is that Muslim religion actually consists of? . But wait, it get even worse. . There are people who can think of no better response than to blame Christians, but in all the years since 2001 there seem to be no more than 2 or 3 killings of Muslims by Christians in any kind of unprovoked attacks. This is "two" or "three." Not two hundred or three thousand. Just 2 or 3. . To return to Stevens article, Donald Trump, while he boasts about being "right on radical Islamic terrorism," has "not actually said anything that would address the problem of home-grown Islamic State fighters... [and] he never actually proposes what to do about Islam. . To set aside the merits of gun control even though I favor a ban on sales of assault weapons, the fact is that such a policy does nothing to address the issue of Muslim motivation to commit murder. Leftists simply refuse to face this unpalatable fact -because they have been completely brainwashed by their ideology, a point-of-view that excuses just about everything that Muslims do, and which has little or no toleration for criticism of Islam -which, of course, almost no Left-wingers have actually taken the time to study. . Maybe if you listened to someone else besides me some of what I am saying might register better. Try a Google experiment. type in Youtube and Melanie Phillips and look for her talk, "Rising Anti-Semitism in Europe." Although we disagree about a few secondary matters her point of view is very close to my own -and she is a lot more pleasant to look at than I will ever be. Her argument about Islam is not far from my own views. Unlike maybe 98% of Left-wingers she actually knows what she is talking about. . This criticism is not meant to be taken as hyperbole. Leftists -this means Democrats as well as their neo-Marxist allies, argue on the basis of presumed knowledge all the while being hopelessly uninformed about Islam (or any religion). They can't be bothered to study Muslim teachings, they have an aversion to religion generally and it is so much easier to simply make one Democratic Party talking point after another. And if you can think of a few exceptions to this rule, so what? That is all they are, exceptions. Otherwise Democrats and other Leftists, including British Left-wingers, feel free to make any statements about Islam as they see fit -with no obligation to actually make themselves informed on the subject. . Besides, who is there to challenge them? Certainly not the mainstream media, which shares their values and their ignorance. And not the establishment Right, either, which also has no use for any kind of religion and insists that there is no such thing as 'Muslim' motivation, everything is a question of money, who has it and who does not. . That is, all of this disgusts me in the extreme. It does seem that Democrats are worse but this is to damn the GOP with faint praise; Republicans aren't much better. They're all cultural illiterates, they're also illiterates of religion and especially illiterate about Islam. They argue on the basis of sheer ignorance. Doing so they pride themselves on how enlightened and well informed they are. Which is why, as a political Independent, I utterly detest today's Democratic Party and have almost no respect for the Republican Party. But to return to the article under review... . As Stevens put it: "Hillary Clinton wants to blame guns. Donald Trump wants to blame immigrants. Neither one is right. It's the Islamic ideology that is the problem, one that has been handed down since Mahomet himself sought to conquer Mecca, Medina, and the entire Arabian Peninsula. It is an ideology of killing and of conquest." . But how can Trump offer a critique of Islam? He is ignorant of nearly everything about Islam except what he reads in the newspapers. . This is hardly my opinion alone. Another article on the subject that can be recommended was written by John Nolte and was published at Breitbart for December 9, 2015. Nolte also takes the view that Trump is right about Islam. However, Trump is mostly operating in the dark about what, exactly, Muhammad's religion consists of. So Nolte prepared an annotated list of facts about Islam that are completely true yet unacknowledged by nearly all journalists and nearly all political figures of stature. . Said Nolte, the public may hear Wolf Blitzer whitewash Islam, or GOP establishment leaders sing praises to Mohammad's religion, but "the American people know these are lies." So, here are just a few inconvenient truths about Islam that are undeniable that the media and most of our political leadership pretend do not exist -unless, because they have not studied the subject at all, they are ignorant about it, i.e., irresponsible, since they make decisions based on their ignorance, decisions that effect the lives of many people. . * Muslims account for only about 1 percent of the U.S. population but account for about half of terrorist attacks since 9/11 . * “According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that ‘Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah.’” Because the media doesn’t like these numbers, they unilaterally declare the poll “widely discredited.” Other than partisan bedwetting and lying, there is nothing out there — no data — that discredits this poll." . * Disturbing percentages of the world’s Muslims support suicide bombings What we hear from news organs like the Washington Post is spin to the effect that not all that many Muslims globally regard suicide attacks as justified and, therefore, we don't need to be concerned about Muslims coming to America. Steven's reaction was this: "Rest easy with these incoming Muslim immigrants, America, because only 34% or 9% or 42% or 8% or 70% or 39% of the world’s Muslims view suicide bombings as justified." . * "Throughout the various regions of the world, anywhere from 12% to 84% of ...Muslims back Sharia Law. Only in Southern-Eastern Europe and Central Asia is this number below 64%.... Sharia Law means death to homosexuals, death to non-Muslims (unless they convert), and horrific oppression of women." . . These are the facts. Muslim ideology -Islam, in other words- is the problem. Ibn Warraq said exactly this over 20 years ago in his 1995 book, Why I Am Not a Muslim. Which is to say that at most Trump gets a little of the issue right. But he is unprepared to exploit the advantages his position gives him simply because, for the most part, he doesn't know what he is talking about. Nor, to the best of my knowledge, has he made a serious effort to make himself belatedly informed. Where is Pamela Geller on his staff, Robert Spencer, or maybe some people from Religion of Peace? Instead, Trump's information-free campaign continues as before, the only difference now and then when he raises the ante in his speeches. . Here is a news item from a publication that could be of considerable use in a campaign to inform the public about the realities of Islam, the Christian Post. As a Stoyan Zaimov article said in its headline: US Accepting Only 28 Christians vs. 5,435 Muslim Refugees... . A massive genocide of Christians is now going on in the Mid East, mostly in Iraq and Syria but also in parts of Turkiye, Libya, and Yemen. Pakistan not only kills Christians in large numbers but also murders many Hindus. The Obama administration for 2015 through early 2016 has almost completely excluded Christian refugees. Why isn't this a major political issue in America? . Moreover, most Muslims in some countries, like Afghanistan, want to live under Shariah law wherever they may be resident; in Kabul and Kandahar and elsewhere in the country a recent Pew poll found that 99% of Afghans have this view -which is even higher than 84% for Pakistan. Why then has the US allowed 11,000 Afghanis to immigrate to America since 2009? The number for Iraqi Muslims is also high, 91%. Exactly why have 83,000 Iraqis been admitted in the past seven years? Not that Iraqis who regard Shariah as evil should be kept out, my view is the exact opposite. But there seems to have been no effort at all to exclude 'Shariah Muslims' and only allow Iraqi Christians or secular Iraqis into the United States. Immigration policy under Obama is blatantly pro-Islam and yet no-one says a word. . At that, according to an article by Tim Murphy in the March 30, 2016, issue of Mother Jones, on the subject of immigration reform, Trump's policies, when analyzed, are based on an egregious double standard. Here are the opening paragraphs of the article; this pretty much says it all: . "Donald Trump told a Wisconsin town hall on Wednesday that his proposed ban on Muslims entering the United States would have an exception for the billionaire's rich friends. . "I have actually—believe it or not—I have a lot of friends that are Muslim and they call me," Trump said, when asked about his plan by MSNBC's Chris Matthews, the event's moderator. "In most cases, they're very rich Muslims, okay?" . "Matthews then asked Trump if his rich Muslim friends would be able to enter the country under Trump's Muslim ban. "They'll come in," Trump said. "You'll have exceptions." . I can tell you my reaction on reading this; these are my exact words at the time: "What the hell is this?" . . ----------------------------------- . . There is one last coincidence in this story. . As noted by a good number of writers, including homosexuals themselves, most (overwhelmingly) anti-homosexual violence is committed by homosexuals acting against other homosexuals. This is true for female homosexuals at Summer literary fairs who demonstrate S/M techniques for the benefit of other female homosexuals; Hypatia magazine once ran a feature article on the subject. It is true at the bathhouses in San Francisco. It is true in New York City homosexual bars and among "leather queers" in LA. And let us not forget some of the worst mass murderers in US history, homosexuals like Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, and Juan Corona -who killed other homosexuals or, anyway, males whom they could use as if they were homosexuals. . Homosexual vs. homosexual violence? Is this some kind of smear? After all, "everyone knows" that just about all anti-homosexual violence is carried out by rednecks and young punks who attack "faggots" for kicks. Actually, however, as with so much else about homosexuals, this is an example of one more myth that is based on fiction. By far. It isn't even close. Most violence against homosexuals is committed by other homosexuals. . Not that I have not pointed this out before. On the contrary this theme has been a subject mentioned in my writings many times over the years, since about 1997 when first learning about the magnitude of the problem. However, people I know simply do not allow the information to be absorbed in their memory. It is denied -in the psychological sense, which, of course, is a form of pathology itself. It isn't healthy to pretend that facts do not exist even when you know perfectly well that they do but then repress them out of (conscious) existence because acknowledging them would require you to admit that your values, some of them, are based on mistaken premises. . People cling to their "guns and religion," so to speak, in this case "fictions and legends," because of what others might think. When "everyone" you identify with believes in something, no matter how stupid or wrong, it can be difficult to take an independent position on an issue. Which you would know if you studied the behavioral sciences but, of course, you can't be bothered because "what good is it?" And so you are swept along with whatever social current you cannot resist because of your ignorance. And you congratulate yourself on how smart you are. . Challenging people you identify with may not be easy but sometimes it is the right thing to do. Unless you don't value your integrity all that much. Still, it is a problem. Doing so may be taken as defection -or preliminary to defection. It may jeopardize your membership in a group; the others might become irritated and express opposition to your views. They might become angry and take steps to ostracize you. This can be threatening -it might mean loss of income, loss of status, loss of influence, and other liabilities. And if that is the projected future we know how things usually turn out: Truth is sacrificed on the altar of social conformism. If you need to believe in lies to retain membership in a valued group or remain part of a relationship that means the world to you, well OK. That's a small price to pay for the perks of belonging, or the advantages of intimacy. . This is understood. However, maybe because I value my integrity more than many other people do, this is NOT a course of action I can take -at least if an issue really matters to me. . There is one other common reason for willingness to believe lies: It may give you an excuse to be intellectually irresponsible. The only way to actually hold your ground successfully against popular opposition to your views is by becoming very well informed -to the extent that you have a surplus of knowledge which you have tested and can use to out-argue anyone else. You know more than others in your circle and because of this fact you have supreme self confidence. You know, for a fact, that their arguments are built on fallacies, not research, urban myths, the effects of in-group pressure, etc., and maybe even psychological insecurities. . You need to understand that I understand these dynamics and do not respect them for one minute. What must be added is that I have "been there, done that," and do my best not to be too judgmental. Still, I don't tolerate this of myself and expect others to eventually do the research, root out the fallacies in their thought processes, and identify myths for what they are, and be able to take positions even when they might be unpopular if, that is, you really have done your homework and know what you are talking about. .. In this context it happens to be false that homosexual violence is mostly a matter of violence by heterosexuals against homosexuals. The vast majority of violence against homosexuals is perpetrated by other homosexuals. .. There are a number of other myths about homosexuals that are widely believed. We are supposed to think that homosexuals do not molest children at high rates when, in fact, they do so at a minimum of 10 times anything found among heterosexuals, we are supposed to think that such problems as homosexuals have are caused by "homophobia" when, in fact, these problems (extreme levels of substance abuse and high suicide rates, for example) are exactly the same in the most tolerant societies like the Netherlands and New Zealand as they are in conservative strongholds, and we are supposed to think that their health issues are about the same as those for normal men and women when, in fact, homosexual health is a catastrophe by any standard measure -with rates of many illnesses (gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Hepatitis A, B, C, D, herpes simplex, scabies, etc.) many times that of heterosexuals, sometimes literally hundreds of times greater. But let us focus on homosexual vs. homosexual violence. . After all, no matter how much evidence is provided to the cognoscenti it is not believed -because "enlightened people" are excused from making themselves informed. All they need to do is conform to elite opinion. However, maybe by supplying some hard data about homosexual violence against other homosexuals in the context of mass murder in Orlando maybe a little will stick. And homosexuals are very violent. . Here is some evidence that simply cannot be argued with: . JD Glass, writing in the September 4, 2014, issue of The Advocate, a homosexual newspaper/magazine, pointed out that two recent controlled surveys make it undeniably clear that homosexual vs. homosexual violence is very high. The reason for the interest of the paper was that homosexuals are now agitating for shelters for "battered queers," viz., the way that there are shelters for battered women. Hence one survey cited was that conducted by a group women activists under the title "National Violence Against Women." They wanted to know if it was at all justified to allocate resources to homosexuals when money was often in short supply for needs of abused women. The answer was not what they expected. . Homosexual violence rates over a lifetime for homosexual males vs other homosexual males is nearly one out of four, 22 %. For female homosexuals the rate is even worse, one out of three, 35%. . In contrast, women who are beaten up or otherwise attacked by men in their homes stands at 20%, not quite half that of female homosexual violence against other female homosexuals. But there was another surprise, 7% of heterosexual men are attacked by heterosexual women. We can be a violent species and contrary to everyone's expectations women participate in the mayhem at high rates. And contrary to CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, NPR, OPB, CNN, and so forth, millions of homosexuals report that they have been assaulted by other homosexuals -far more than the reported 1,000 to 3,000 cases of so-called "fag bashing" by heterosexuals in a given year. . A 2013 survey by the CDC affirmed these results. The numbers for victims of violence among the same groups are: 44% for female homosexuals and 26% for homosexual males. The CDC also had a category for bisexuals who, it turns out, get the worse of both worlds: 2/3rds of female bisexuals get beaten up, one third+ of male bisexuals. Heterosexual rates are far lower for each gender compared to all others. . The Advocate made its case; the Advocate's data makes my case for me. . Which, incidentally, lends support to the case that Dr.Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute has been making for three decades now, in every instance vilified as a "homophobe" and troglodyte. This is typical of the Left, of course. In my dealings with Democrats a standard response to just about any fact-based critique is to reach for the nearest ad hominem attack that may be handy. Call names. Impugn the reputation of someone. Blame the Republicans -shift guilt regardless of the facts. This kind of thing also occurs on the Right, needless to say, but in my experience it is worse on the Left -and that is saying something. . But it now appears that even his usual detractors will be hard pressed to deny Cameron's findings in his paper, "Violence and Homosexuality." In San Francisco one out of four (24%) of male homosexuals have been raped by other male homosexuals. There are also a significant number of homosexual rapes of heterosexual men, 9%. . Cameron also reported, based on death notice research of 6,714 obituaries in homosexual newspapers across the country, that 3% of male homosexuals and 20% of female homosexuals died due to murder in one year. A separate study confirmed these findings, reporting that 1.4% of male homosexuals and 7% of female homosexuals died because they were killed by other homosexuals. The rates involved for each gender are approximately 100 times that for heterosexuals. . It isn't just Cameron. To supply one recent example, the Miami Herald for October 7, 2007, reported that all the hospitals in the North Broward Hospital District have programs in place to treat homosexual victims of homosexual violence. After all, the 24 hour domestic abuse hotline for homosexuals receives about one call per day, as many as 30 calls each month. But there are many more cases than that. Broward prosecutors, the article reported, processed 750 homosexual vs. homosexual violence charges in the three month period April-May-June of 2007. That is equivalent of 3000 cases annually in Miami alone. . This phenomenon has been known for many years. Media elites simply have not wanted to report the facts. In the era when many newspapers were still conservative this was largely due to squeamishness. Since about 1975 it has been due to Political Correctness. In either case the story was not told. . However, as long ago as 1977 with the publication of John Rechy's The Sexual Outlaw, which was a best seller and reviewed favorably by the LA Times and other publications, 'everyone should have known that the image homosexuals wanted others to believe about themselves was pure sham. No later than 1991 it should have been obvious that it was a complete farce. It was in 1991 that two homosexuals, David Island and Patrick Letellier, published Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them. It was an exposé of homosexual domestic violence in the United States. The book's findings were astonishing. The authors estimated that there were 500,000 cases of homosexual vs. homosexual domestic violence in America every year. . To be sure, they had an agenda, they were among the first homosexuals to promote the idea of shelters for homosexuals abused by other homosexuals. Hence in my writing I have allowed for exaggeration by cutting in half the number of cases of homosexual perpetrated violence, to 250,000 -out of a US homosexual population of maybe 20 million although no-one is sure and it could be as low as 12 or 13 million, but that is the range. There is nothing like a 10% tally, a figure invented by Kinsey based on research long ago discredited by Judith Reisman. The actual figure is about 3%, at most 3-1/2%, and that is all. . Despite the blatant lying by feminist groups about rates of violence perpetrated by men against women we know the actual rate, or a close approximation, inasmuch as the Bureau of Justice reports on this phenomenon. According to a 2008 BOJ study by Shannan Catalano, Erica Smith, Howard Snyder, and Michael Rand, "Female Victims of Violence," there are about 550,000 cases of male vs. female domestic abuse in the US annually. Do the math. The homosexual population produces about 250,000 cases at 3% of the total population. The heterosexual population is 97% of the total and it accounts for somewhat more than a half million cases. The ratio is around 7 or 8 times more domestic violence among homosexuals than among heterosexuals. If the truth actually is around 500,000 acts of homosexual vs. homosexual violence per year the ratio would be about 15: 1. . Is it any wonder that David Island and Patrick Letellier argued that at least violent homosexuals should be classified as psychopathological, having a mental disorder? . Needless to say the book was attacked furiously by the great majority of homosexuals and ignored universally by the mainstream press. News people, after all were defending the official motto of the Society of Professional Journalists: "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts." . . Here and there some news about homosexual vs. homosexual violence seeps out. An example was a feature article that appeared in The Atlantic in November 2013. There was also a major article that was published in the November 23, 2000, issue of Portland Mercury written by Michelle Milne. That article is interesting for three reasons, (1) the estimate that one out of four homosexual relationships are violent, which would mean 3 to 5 million cases of homosexual vs. homosexual violence annually in the Unites States, a figure that may be high but might also be more accurate than my estimate, and (2) the false claim that there is "just as much" domestic violence among heterosexuals when, in fact, there is ten times less per capita and (3) the fact that there is something called the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Projects, a network of 25 nonprofit homosexual organizations in major American cities around the country all dedicated to providing services to homosexuals who have been beaten up by other homosexuals. . In other words, there is a lot -a helluva lot- of homosexual vs. homosexual violence. Homosexuals are not "just like" heterosexuals. They are more violent, apt to commit more crimes of all kinds, more susceptible to behavioral disorders, and far less healthy overall. But here the focus is on their violent behavior . . The relevance of this information is that Sitora Yusufiy, the first ex-wife of Omar Mateen, made the claim that her husband of the time was homosexual or, perhaps more accurately, was bisexual. This story has been widely reported in major American news outlets after Sitora broke the story on Brazilian television station SBT. And as a side note, whether or not to believe the allegation is anyone's guess, Sitora's current boyfriend has aid that the FBI contacted them and asked that they not break the story. . According to a New York Post news story the Palm Beach Post had reported that Mateen had approached various homosexuals in the past seeking sexual encounters and that several had turned him down; possibly others accepted his requests. . The NY Post also reported that a so-called drag queen told a Canadian newspaper that Mateen had been a patron at the Pulse since 2013. Other reports indicate that Mateen had tried out a number of other homosexual bars before choosing the Pulse for his purposes . Still another report in the Post observed that one regular patron of the Pulse said: "He’s been around us,” ...“Some of those people did a little more than (kiss) outside the bar … He was partying with the people who supposedly drove him to do this?" . Meanwhile the Los Angeles Times reported that Mateen made use of so-called "gay dating apps" on a frequent basis -you know, the kind of apps marketed by Apple Computers, the same company that killed the few Christian apps it had sold few years ago and banned them from its stores . The British newspaper, the Daily Mail, reported that Mateen had sent penis pictures to various homosexuals although what to make of this story isn't clear. If Mateen sent such pictures how would anyone know if the photos were of himself or were images he pulled from the Web? Still, if he did send such photographs that would seem to add weight to allegations that he was homosexual. . As Jay Michaelson said in the Daily Beast recently, so far the evidence is "patchy and unclear." But it adds up. . We cannot rule out the police theory that Mateen's visits to the nightclub were for the purposes of "casing the joint," but that view has far less traction than it did even two or three days ago. It is quite possible that Mateen was a homosexual conflicted by the contradiction between his religion and its vehement anti-homosexual stands and his inner feelings that may have led him to mass murder. Considering all the Muslim preaching to the effect that homosexuals should be killed, Mateen's actions might well have been his way of wiping the slate clean, making up for past lapses by going on a killing spree. It might even explain why he laughed as he fired repeatedly into the crowd, killing homosexuals. . What would Mateen have done on homosexual dates? What all male homosexuals do: Rimming (licking each other's anuses), asshole ramrodding, sucking each other off, urinating on each other for fun, rolling around on the floor in feces, jerking each other off, and so forth. Let's not use euphemisms here, how about telling it like it is? . Here is how Barack Obama described homosexuality during his speech following the massacre, at that point talking about Pulse, which he said is "more than a nightclub — it is a place of solidarity and empowerment where people have come together to raise awareness, to speak their minds, and to advocate for their civil rights." Everyone who isn't dead from the neck up knows what a travesty that description is; it is a sick joke. It is gross misrepresentation of the greatest possible magnitude. The question is necessary: When is that pro-Islam sonovabitch going to stop lying to us? . . . . Billy Rojas June 17, 2016 -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
