▶ KGB defector and propaganda expert Yuri Bezmenov on the lie of "equality" - YouTube
Posted by UncommonSense 11 years, 11 months ago to Politics
This is regarding the on-going "equality", especially among the LGBT crowd. PAY ATTENTION to this superb video. "Yes, equality, yes equality, people are equal" (Russian accent)
Pay attention to what Yuri says beginning at 1:48. SPOILER: Anything built around "equality" will COLLAPSE. Stop pushing the propaganda of equality. Instead, start pushing for LIBERTY for individuals, free of Government interference.
Pay attention to what Yuri says beginning at 1:48. SPOILER: Anything built around "equality" will COLLAPSE. Stop pushing the propaganda of equality. Instead, start pushing for LIBERTY for individuals, free of Government interference.
"God is not a respecter of persons." = equality
An eye for an eye = equality
The Creator blesses the good, bad and ugly with the blessing of rain and sunshine = equality.
Everyone shall reap what they sow = equality.
12 There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death. (Pro 14:12 NKJ)
We all need to examine our judgments and actions.
2 ".......yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. (Joh 16:2 NKJ)
In most struggles and conflicts, most people feel justified in what they choose to do to their enemies. The Pharisees of the Christ's day felt they were killing one man to save their nation from being wiped out by Rome and thus doing a righteous holy service to God. They were wrong.
The Creator has endowed all humans with unalienable equal rights( not equal strength, beauty, talent, etc.) and no individual, race, religion, royalty, etc. with superior rights. Those who have been forced to live with inferior rights have the right to use the minimum force necessary to increase their rights to a level equal to those who unjustly use offensive force to enforce their false superior rights. Any black or white who is willing to kill to enforce his false superior rights deserves to reap what he sows
And no one in the 18th century understood LGBT issues. They were aware that homosexuality existed, certainly, but that doesn't mean they understood it. The science on that subject wasn't conducted until the 20th century. Do you really want to hold the position that 18th century scientists and doctors were more knowledgeable than modern ones? I mean seriously, physicians in that day believed that using leeches to drain sick people of their blood was a beneficial way of healing people. But that pseudo-scientific belief led to the death of George Washington.
After watching the video above I found another that is even scarier and correct in every point he makes. Please follow the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3nXvScRa... It is the perfect explanation for Obama or at least to what has happened to our population. Yuri Bezmenov indeed foretold the future and the future is here. His videos should be seen by every American and I humbly ask that you will send it to everyone you know. It is indeed late, but hopefully not too late to save this nation.
Sincerely yours,
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
Can you take two magnets with the same polarity and have them be attracted to each other? NOPE. It's wrong to think that two magnets with the same polarity are just as useful as two magnets with opposite polarity.
So your whole argument is centered on pure sexual attraction, and that there is nothing wrong being sexually attracted to anything, even if it isn't procreative? Hmmm, sounds a lot like 'do thou shall wilt' BS. Anything goes Maph is that it? That's satanic and yes, it's wrong.
Your view on open sexual attraction opens the door to even more perversion. If a guy is seriously sexually attracted to his dog/horse/sheep/automobile/DEAD PEOPLE , according to your flawed logic, you're ok with it?! Seriously. Your views are totally screwed up on marriage and sexual attraction.
Marriage is NOT is function of the State. Although your claim may be factually correct, concerning the middle of the 19th century, what about the 2-3000 YEARS before? Oh, that's right - it's about God & His sacrament.
Governments rise & fall, but God always remains the same. You can take gov't, I'll side with God. He was the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. With gov't, NO ONE can ever know what they'll get.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident,"
So what follows are self-evident truths.
"that all men are created equal,"
First self-evident truth.
"that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights,"
Second self-evident truth.
"that among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness---"
Third self-evident truth.
"that to secure those rights, governments are instituted among men,..."
Forth self-evident truth.
"that when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends..."
Fifth self-evident truth.
"...happiness."
End of sentence and list of self-evident truths deemed necessary to list by authors and signers.
Don't see 'equal rights'. You're perfectly free to interpret, be confused, or imagine something there that's not, but I don't have to agree with you and I'll continue to blame many (if not much) of the problems facing this country today on those of your ilk that do as you.
As an aside, I'm pretty confident that the authors of the DoL and the Constitution were probably fully cognizant of LGBT issues. Many of them were students of the natural sciences. It's not a new thing in the circumstances of human life anymore than any other birth defect. They just didn't imagine sexual preferences to be of any import or concern in entering into a revolutionary war against the most powerful nation on earth, or in instituting a completely new form of government.
---
And you think the government was telling the truth?
IF anyone's rights were violated (foreigner's rights are not protected by the Constitution), EACH person as an individual had his rights violated.
There were Japanese-Americans who were not interned; there were Japanese-Americans who fought in Italy. Were their rights violated, because they fit into the classification of "Japanese-American"? No. Because groups don't have rights. Because Ubuntu is a lie.
Tell me, how do you explain the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII? I guess since it was only against Japanese-Americans, a specific group, no one's rights were violated?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created EQUAL, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable RIGHTS [...]"
This clearly says that all men are created equal, specifically in regards to their unalienable rights, which were endowed by their Creator. It can't be any more plain than that.
As I keep telling everyone, groups do not have rights. Individuals have rights. Therefore, the are... EACH OF THEM... endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
"Rights" are not analog; there is no degree to possessing a right. You either possess it, or you don't.You can't apply equality to a binary concept like that.
But, no right can require the assertive effort of another. For example, there can be no "right to health care" *if* said care requires a doctor to work on you. Such slavery would violate the doctor's rights.
You can't have a "right" to a job, because that would require the employer to hire you.
You don't have a "right" to free condoms, because either someone has to pay for them, or someone else has to manufacture them without compensation. Further, someone must be compelled to manufacture them if nobody wants to manufacture them.
I don't see how you can read that and not get equal rights out of it. >_>
As regards Jefferson's statement, I doubt that any could find justification to describe those men as 'barbarous ancestors.' In fact, I believe that most would find them to be more enlightened than most of today's population and no doubt better educated and more concerned for their progeny. It's only through redefinition and conflation that you find this 'notion of equality.'
I like Bezmenov - he is like a pro-capitalist dynamo! I truly believe one has to experience the evils of the socialist communist machine to be able to so elequantly speak against it... They saw the deliberate destruction of their country by that horrid system, and as someone who actually crafted the propoganda for the "official party line" he comes off brilliantly.
But to tie his very true message about the falsehood of forced equality into some anti-GLBT message? That's flaky. I know a LOT more plundering socialist straight moochers than gay ones, and a lot more GLBT enterpreneuers, capitalists, and right-thinkers than communistic socialist ones.
What do you mean?
http://blog.reeset.net/wp-content/upload...
But yes, you are correct that the notion of equality as written in the Declaration of Independence was intended to mean equal rights, and not any other form of equality. I said as much in my own post.
And marriage has been a function of the state since the middle of the 19th century, so saying that it's a purely religious institution is simply incorrect.
Wrong. The correct way to phrase that is, "because several European countries did not permit commoners the same exercise of their rights as royalty".
It's still historically wrong, but at least my way it's accurate.
One cannot "increase" or "decrease" rights. That's like increasing or decreasing pregnancy, or existence.
How do you define "right-thinkers"?
I'll link some pictures of the Folsom Street Fair and you point out to me all the entrepreneurs, capitalists, "right-thinkers"... and I'll point out to you all the socialists.
Load more comments...