The  Rocky  View  of
News, Current Events
& Comment
Whatever the evil (poison) is, it must be presented in a mix of something good, or good for you.
Rat poison is like this, 99.5% of the ingredients are tasty and nutritious for the rat
(otherwise, they wouldn't eat it, would they?).  Only .5% (1/2 percent) is deadly.
I am reminded of Dad's special brownies.  It is the same truth.

---

If you want to remain in your ignorance then take this blue pill -

Some women keep them in a stew by irritating ways and words; others roast them.  Some keep them in a pickle all their lives.  It cannot be supposed that any husband will be tender and good, managed this way; but they are delicious when properly treated.

In selecting your husband, you should not be guided by the silvery appearance, as in buying mackerel, nor by golden tint as if you wanted salmon; be sure you select him yourself, as tastes differ.  Do not go to market for him, the best are always brought to your door.  It is far better to have none, unless you will patiently learn how to cook him.

See that the linen in which you wrap him is nicely washed and mended, with the required number of buttons sewed on.  Tie him in the kettle by a strong silk cord called comfort, as the one called duty is apt to be weak.  Make a clear, steady fire out of love, neatness, and cheerfulness.  Add a little sugar in the form of what confectioners call kisses, but no vinegar or pepper on any account.  A little spice improves him, but it must be used with judgement.  Do not stick any sharp instruments into him to see if he is becoming tender.  Stir him gently, you cannot fail to know when he is done.

If thus treated, you will find him very relishable, agreeing nicely with you and the children, and he will keep as long as you want, unless you become careless and set him in too cool a place.

~Author Unknown
 

[Can a demonstration of intelligence help determine the evolution vs creation debate?  Ants actually use aphids as workers (slaves) and actually herd the aphids to make them more productive.  Is that mindless meanderings?  What of octopi?  I have seen them, within seconds, unscrew a jar and remove the contents.  Here is a story about the intelligence of octopi.  If intelligence migrated from lower forms to human, then why do the largest animals - whales and dolphins unquestionably exhibit intelligence?  And what of ants and octopi?]

"Researchers and aquarium attendants tell tales of octopuses that have tormented and outwitted them. Some captive octopuses lie in ambush and spit in their keepers' faces. Others dismantle pumps and block drains, causing costly floods, or flex their arms in order to pop locked lids. Some have been caught sneaking from their tanks at night into other exhibits, gobbling up fish, then sneaking back to their tanks, damp trails along walls and floors giving them away."

For more goto the URL above and read the story.
 

The case of Upper Southampton, PA police Lt. David Johnson is a text book example of how gun laws hurt the wrong people-law-abiding, productive citizens instead of career criminals-the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

And the disposition of that case, with Lt. Johnson winning back his gun rights, is a slap in the face to every other law-abiding citizen who has lost his or her gun rights based on a past misdemeanor conviction, not the felony arson for which Johnson was convicted in 1959, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) added.

 Johnson's conviction did not prevent him from becoming a police officer in 1966, or keep him from rising to a position of responsibility in his department and his community. But because the state Uniform Firearms Act was amended to include arson as a disqualifying crime, even if it happened years ago, Johnson nearly lost his job.

 "What happened to David Johnson was disturbing," said CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron, "but not nearly as repugnant as the way citizens who have been convicted of far lesser crimes are treated by police and the courts, due to oppressive anti-gun laws passed as panaceas to crime. Thousands of law-abiding citizens all over the country, none of whom was convicted of a crime as serious as arson are suffering, and the common denominator in all those cases is a gun control law designed to make increasing numbers of good citizens ineligible to own firearms.

 "Because these laws are written to work retroactively," Waldron stated, "they have made criminals out of people who may have made one mistake years ago, and have since led exemplary lives. Johnson appears to have gotten special consideration because he is a police officer. That doesn't wash. While we're glad Johnson has his gun rights back, this does not address the troubles being experienced by tens of thousands of other citizens whose civil rights are still being trampled.

 "But anti-gun extremists don't care about that, and never did," Waldron continued. "The Centers for Disease Control released a study recently that proves gun laws do not effectively reduce crime. Johnson's case is an example of what gun laws are really all about: disarming people who pose absolutely no threat to the public safety."

 "Unless, and until, every other citizen ensnared by unjust, retroactively-enforced laws is granted the same kind of relief provided Lt. Johnson simply because he is a police officer," Waldron stated, "these laws and their enforcement remain a black mark against equal justice. Johnson's circumstances are really no different than anyone else who has been legislatively disarmed by a zealous gun law. The bottom line here is that the law in Pennsylvania, and similar laws everywhere, need to be changed or repealed, not just for Johnson's sake, but for the sake of every other law-abiding gun owner whose rights have been trampled for something that may have happened decades ago, and for which he or she has repaid the community many times over by becoming a productive citizen who learned a lesson from a bad experience."

 With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
 

a r t i c l e   /   c o m m e n t a r y

Second Amendment Foundation Says Anti-Gun Missouri Police Chief Should Shelve Confiscation Plan
http://www.saf.org/
contributing editor Bob

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today said Hazelwood, MO Police Chief Carl Wolf should set his personal anti-gun politics aside and shelve an order to have his officers seize firearms from motorists they encounter in routine traffic stops, when the state's concealed carry law takes effect.

SAF obtained a copy of Chief Wolf's memorandum to his officers, ordering them to check any firearm they find in any vehicle they stop, to determine whether it is lost or stolen, and finally, "Officers shall then seize the firearm, package as evidence, and forward the firearm…to the St. Louis County Firearms Lab, to determine if the firearm has been used in the commission of a crime."

 "This is an outrage, and it violates Fourth and Fifth Amendment provisions regarding illegal search and seizure, and due process," stated SAF Founder Alan Gottlieb. "Chief Wolf's vehement anti-gun attitudes and his long-standing opposition to concealed carry for Missouri residents are well known. By issuing this order, Wolf is clearly allowing his personal biases to influence how he runs his department.

 "Seizure of a firearm for no other reason than blind suspicion to find out whether it's been used in a crime amounts to a legal fishing expedition, and tramples all over such long-standing legal principles as 'innocent until proven guilty' and 'probable cause'," Gottlieb added. "Chief Wolf is a vocal opponent of concealed carry in Missouri, and he even allowed himself to be quoted in a 1999 Handgun Control news release.

 "By ordering his men to seize all firearms-and there is no indication in his memo that there should be any exceptions, despite his claims of officer discretion to the contrary-Chief Wolf is practicing a new, and contemptibly low form of harassment," Gottlieb observed. "Law-abiding Missouri gun owners should not be fearful of driving through Hazelwood, and having their property confiscated, pretty much on a whim, because Chief Wolf doesn't like a new gun law. Has this guy ever heard of the Bill of Rights?

 "Missouri gun rights activists," Gottlieb concluded, "are justifiably concerned that Chief Wolf's order could result in a tragic incident that might later be used to justify his opposition to the citizens' right to bear arms. If Wolf wants to practice politics, he should first get out of law enforcement. This kind of demagoguery should not have the protection of a police chief's badge."

 The Second Amendment Foundation is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers & an amicus brief & fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
 

You have probably already seen or heard the commercials advertising the new (2004) debt instrument (see next article) denominated as 20.00.

...
(right click on images to save them and then view them in your favorite image viewing program for a better look/see)

This could be a little funny if it were not so serious.  Speaking before the US Senate, Anselm Rothschild said

This new face of the "20" federal reserve note is at least the 2nd change in less than 10 years and 3rd change in around 50 years.  Why keep changing anything?  Because it keep the followers off balance.  You scoff.  Have you not complained about a boss who tells you one thing then tells you something different?  It is the same thing.  The changes made your life difficult and by the time you get to whatever end there might be, you do not recall the beginning.  As the philosopher Santayana once said,

Ultimately, the goal of all these change is different that the espoused claims.  It is claimed that this makes the system more secure and safe and protects you (what a joke).  At least one real reason is to prepare the masses of sheople (people acting like herded sheeple) for a cashless system.  One day the powers-that-be will finally declare they have the ultimate solution to the not-so-legitimate cries of security and announce the electronic debt (see the next article) system.

Moreover, they are advertising the new notes, like you would rush out and get some as you might for a hamburger commercial.  Why not just loan them into circulation (as they have since around 1913) and let people get them the old fashion way.

Evidence that people are getting use to change and will take whatever handed them was recently reported when the man passed a "200" federal reserve note and the cashier took it and even gave change.  An article on that incident is found in the Rocky  View  at
 http://rockyuno.home.att.net/Browser/news_comments_current/200309/200309index.html#21
and at http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=&p=%24200+bill+roanoke
 

the offices of Dewey, Cheetum & Howe

It is not money
[Some people already understand what is meant by a "debt instrument" especially as it relates to the "monies" of the US and the world.  the rest of you are "useless idiots" (and before you get your panties in a wad, learn the origin and meaning of the term).  But here is a declaration from the beast itself.  The NOTES you carry or for which you redeem your checks or for which you work so very hard to get, are NOT money, they are "evidence of debt".  They are eveidence of something owed - still.]

http://www.moneyfactory.com/document.cfm/18/104

Defacement of Currency

Defacement of currency is a violation of Title 18, Section 333 of the United States Code. Under this provision, currency defacement is generally defined as follows: Whoever mutilates, cuts, disfigures, perforates, unites or cements together, or does any other thing to any bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt issued by any national banking association, Federal Reserve Bank, or Federal Reserve System, with intent to render such item(s) unfit to be reissued, shall be fined not more than $100 or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

Defacement of currency in such a way that it is made unfit for circulation comes under the jurisdiction of the United States Secret Service. Their address is: United States Secret Service, 1800 G Street, N. W., Washington, DC 20223.
 

Why Men Are Losing Interest in Women
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
September 28, 2003
http://www.savethemales.ca/000107.html
contributing editor D

ABC's flagship news program "20/20" Friday was devoted to the "biggest secret of American marriage."

"As many as 20% of American marriages are sexless," host Barbara Walters intoned. "It's not women who don't want sex as you might expect, it's the men!"

The program focused on two couples. In both cases, feminist mind control is responsible for their problem but the TV program wouldn't admit it.

One man was married to an attractive 30-something woman who is a stripper! Reporter John Stossel thought this made her husband's indifference even more astonishing. The show's marital therapist, Michele Weiner-Davis, ignored this as a possible explanation for the man's impotence.

Feminist groupthink says a woman's sexuality is the same as a man's, hers to enjoy (or sell). In this essentially lesbian mindset, the male's response to such women is considered irrelevant.

I beg to differ. The stripper's husband is impotent because he is a cuckold. Sex is an act of possession. The husband cannot possess his wife because she gives herself to hundreds of other men every day. She makes part of their living this way.

When a woman's sexuality is "her own," essentially it potentially belongs to any man. She is public property, which is what the framers of the Communist Manifesto envisaged. (Children will also belong to the state.) She is unfit for a long-term monogamous relationship.

A woman thrives best in the context of a loving marriage. Despite what feminism says, most women want to belong to one man, their husband.

THE SECOND COUPLE

Here the wife criticizes and nags.

"I can't be myself," the husband says. "I'm walking on eggshells all the time."

The wife is emasculating her husband. He compensates by riding a Harley and volunteering at the local fire department.

The therapist suggests that the wife stop nagging and the husband listen. She doesn't notice that the husband responds only after the wife starts to cry.

Men respond to vulnerability in a woman not power. As I have said before, heterosexual love involves the exchange of power for love. Men want power. Women want love. The female surrenders and allows the male to protect and possess her.

In return for her acquiescence, the male loves her in the full sense of the word. He is in charge but he also wants to make her happy. This is natural when someone makes you happy.

Women need to give men the power to love them. My wife's mother gave her daughter good advice: "Look for a man to take care of you but be able to take care of yourself."

PENIS EQUALS POWER

In the filmThe Crying Game(1992), director Neil Jordan captured the experience of the modern male: When the protagonist discovers his girlfriend has a penis, he runs gagging from the room and vomits.

This film notwithstanding, today's female impersonators are mostly women. By encouraging young women to be "strong and independent", feminism has outfitted them with a mental phallus. They have become men and made men redundant. Then they try to coerce men to love them as if we were their hand puppets.

In reality, a woman's power consists in being without penis, being everything a man is not. Not aggressive, forceful, dynamic, muscular and driven. Some weak men are attracted to "dynamic" women but they are really looking for themselves.

Feminine power consists of persuasion rather than force. A real woman relies on moral authority and her attraction: beauty, grace, charm, love and devotion. These women are very rare and in great demand.

Men and women are different. Jonathan Swift remarked that women love flattery but men are embarrassed by it. This is because men are active by nature and women are passive. The universe is held in balance by positive (active) and negative (passive) principles. Marriage is the way heterosexuals achieve this balance.

MEN NEED TO TAKE CHARGE

A man told me that after he has done home renovations all day, he is afraid his wife will "go ballistic" if he asks why she didn't even do the dishes.

An Australian man recently wrote to me: "For too long I have made girlfriends insecure by not telling them what I wanted because of a fear of appearing overbearing."

Men need to assert their just leadership and dump the women who don't like it. There are plenty of fish in the sea and they are biting. With patience and firmness, some feminists can be saved. The rest can be thrown back.

Generally speaking, men need to figure out what they want to do with their life. You might ask what God wants you to do. Then define the role you want your wife to play and find a woman who is eager for the part.

This is what women really want. They are attracted to a dynamic man whom they cannot control. He must have a wholesome vision where she is cherished for her contribution.

FEMINIST ROAD KILL

Feminism teaches that male and female are the same and sex roles are merely "stereotypes". As a result, millions of people are clueless about their sexual identities and suffer from arrested development. I was one of them.

I'm 53 years old. Normally I would have had a family and three grown children by now. Instead, I have been divorced three times and have one child. It took me until age 50 to figure out what was happening and finally make a successful marriage.

Feminism corrected some abuses but these reforms mask its real agenda. Feminism is a cruel hoax. It is a psychological warfare program to depopulate and destabilize society, invented by the same Illuminists who gave us Communism. They will exploit any grievance to advance their "New World Order" a system of world government that omits to mention democracy.

Contrary to what media and educators would have us believe, perverts and criminals run the world. This may sound outrageous. If it were fiction, I would have thought of something more plausible. For a concise well documented explanation, I urge you to read William T Still, New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies, 1990. It is will change the way you view the world.

The Illumnists use the education system and mass media to subtly shape our thoughts. We are conditioned to listen to others instead of trust our own instincts and common sense. Generally speaking, people are very gullible.

CONCLUSION

The woman's role is to empower a man. He uses this power for her benefit. Together they are a team. This is the way heterosexuality works.

We cannot conceive that our leaders wish us harm. But this is the case. Generally feminism has resulted in the degradation of women, family, and society.

Communism and Nazism were dress rehearsals for the New World Order. But remember, they both failed. The New World Order, a.k.a. "globalism" will fail too. The human race cannot be enslaved.

----------
Henry Makow, is the inventor of the board game Scruples, and the author of A Long Way to go for a Date. He received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto. He welcomes your feedback and ideas at henry@savethemales.ca.
 

Marriage - Just Say No
Marriage Crumbing Fast As A Western Institution
By Darren Blacksmith
conttributing editor George

Anti-Feminism.com
via http://www.rense.com
10-4-3

The forces building against marriage are insurmountable; marriage is crumbling in the West, and may soon be almost gone.

Don't do it guys. Don't get married. It hurts me to say this, as I've always viewed a successful marriage as my main goal in life, and I'm one of the most romantic fools you'll ever meet. But I can't deny reality any longer.  I address myself here to the 'good guys', the men who work hard, who treat women nicely, act responsible then get turned over by women who call them 'boring' and prefer to date the bastards. Do you believe your value to a woman is purely to add a bit of color to her life, as someone to challenge her and keep her on her toes, as nothing but the bad boy who will prove to her that all men are scum? If so then by all means get married, but brace yourself for the very real possibility of what happens when your nuclear family goes nuclear.

Dating and finding a wife is a game of numbers. To get a date you are going to have to talk to a certain volume of women, to get a girlfriend you're going to have to get a certain volume of dates, and to get a wife you are going to have to work yourself through a certain volume of girlfriends. But as any serious young guy knows: Western women are sabotaging the game. They have become indifferent towards men and scathing towards good men. I don't sincerely think that older men have any appreciation of how bad things have gotten for young men looking for a date.

If you are in possession of a decent character, if you believe you have a right to keep the fruits of your labour, and that no-one has the right to stop you from spending time with your own children, then consider Western marriage an extremely high-risk project. Ignore the pressures and ridicule your family and women may throw at you. You are not a sacrificial lemming whose only option is to queue up on the cliff-top and jump, hoping for the best. In the current climate, women have no right whatsoever to lecture us on the need for us to marry. They are not the ones committing suicide en masse due to their kids being taken away and poisoned against them. They are not the ones divorced for no reason then kicked out of their house and forced to spend the rest of their lives labouring simply to meet the costs of a family that now hates them.

No, the truth is that not only has marriage in the West become a losing proposition for a man, its an institution looking extremely vulnerable from a barrage of attacks from multiple directions. And you owe it to yourself to take a long hard objective look at Western marriage, its pitfalls and perils.  Already over the last three decades marriage has crumbled, and I see every sign that this trend will continue. Feminism is undoubtedly the single greatest cause of the breakdown of marriage, and this shouldn't be any surprise, it was one of feminism's stated goals from the very beginning to destroy marriage and the nuclear family, which were regarded as "Patriarchal" oppression of women.

And while the odds of having a successful marriage shorten every year, the single lifestyle becomes ever more attractive for both men and women. So, even if one or a few of these forces were to be stopped and reversed, I don't believe the momentum against the destruction of marriage itself can be stopped.

There are seven main forces acting against marriage:

1. Breakdown of the heterosexual model

What exactly is a Western wife offering to her Husband that she hasn't already given to other men? She may have already shared her body with tens of other men, and she is likely to submit more to the masculine authority of her boss than she will ever do to you. The age-old model of masculine/feminine differences and expectations in marriage has been totally eroded.

What we have instead of the heterosexual model is an unstable and largely self-contradictory model based on androgyny and materialism. Couples get married because it's a great way to improve their lifestyle through pooling their assets. They are both devoted to seeking power through their own careers more than they are devoted to each other. It's a temporary arrangement, only held in place until some better 'deal' is on the table.  Given this, it should come as no surprise that Western governments have been under increased pressure to legalise and legitimise homosexual marriages.

2. Diminishing social pressure

It's an obvious point, but the stigma attached to 'living in sin' has collapsed in the now more secular West. What begins as a 'try before you buy' arrangement to live together first and see how things go, becomes entrenched as the standard, and then many people (well, men) wonder what the point of getting married would be. The momentum of this view is now so strong that I can't envisage any circumstances under which the church would be able to regain its power and insist on marriage as the only way a man and woman can live together as a couple. It's just not going to happen.  Also, not only is it increasingly socially acceptable not to marry, but also the sexual revolution is continuing at full pace, amounting to legitimising the 'swinger' lifestyle. In fact, to call someone a 'swinger' is now anachronistic because their attitudes and behaviour are absorbed into the mainstream. Pornography, gay-experimentation, three-somes, sodomy, masturbation, and many different forms of sexual experience are increasingly talked about openly and less likely to be condemned. I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm just saying its occurring. And it weakens the exclusivity of marriage.

3. Growing temptations and opportunities for cheating

Listen guys, how sure are you that you would never feel the urge to cheat? Are you sure that you could stay faithful to that one woman for the rest of your life, despite the relatively easy availability of single woman who'll casually sleep with you?

You'd never do such a thing?

The very suggestion is monstrous?!

Well, good. But here's a harder question for you to answer: Are you 100% sure that your wife will never cheat on you given the ever increasing opportunities for her to do this? If she works - which she probably will - then her chances of being tempted to stray are vastly increased. And if you have Internet access there is the chance some smooth-talking guy will start taking to her online, and before you can say "cybersex" there will be some electronic intimacy going on.

You can bet that she has already unconsciously memorised all the rationalisations for cheating on you ("There was not enough emotional communication", "We grew apart") Oprah and Rikki taught them to her.

4. Distrust and the divorce industry

With the Western divorce courts outrageously biased against men, the prospect of a divorce is particularly frightening to a hard-working devoted man and particularly tempting to a bored, restless woman.

There are huge financial interests from the legal industry to fan the flames of marital disharmony: divorce is a lucrative opportunity.

As an example of the sort of advice that divorce lawyers are capable of giving, consider the following quote from "Divorce War-50 Strategies Every Women Needs To Know To Win":

"Criticize Him Dailyby carving into his ego like a Thanksgiving turkey, you can effectively break down his self-esteem A man's self-image is greatly affected by his perception of his virility. If you degrade his sexual ability, you will essentially emasculate him- his entire sense of self-worth will be dismantled."

Be aware that if your wife gets bored and hits you with a no-fault divorce, she will profit, the lawyers will profit, but you could be emotionally and financially destroyed.

5. The death of romance

The feminine, pure yearning for romance is dead. The object of the game for Western women today is to 'enjoy their independence'. This is incompatible with what provokes a man to treat women romantically and commit to them. A man looks at a good-time girl and sees a good-time, he doesn't see a feminine woman that he longs to cradle in his arms, protect and cater for. And the dirty little secret that the feminists don't want you to know is that the good-time girl generation of Western women are riddled with sexually transmitted diseases, some of which lead to infertility. There is an epidemic. Particularly amongst teenagers, with their cellphones and Email it is easy for them to 'hook up', and why shouldn't they? Ever since they were kids the TV, movies and magazines have been telling them there's nothing wrong with it. When I now hear of a girl loosing her virginity at 12 or 14 I don't even think it unusual anymore. But what blows my mind is imagining a girl loosing her virginity at 12, and not getting married till she's 30 or 35, and seeing it as her right to hook-up with men: how many men with these girls have slept with before they marry? To not expect any psychological or gynaecological consequences to this is insane.

6. The pool of psychologically healthy people is drying up

Stable people make for stable marriages. This is something not often discussed because it offends a lot of sensibilities and is politically incorrect to say, but please bare with me: I'm not mentioning this to demean anyone, I'm simply stating it objectively as a force that is working against marriage. As divorce and raising children outside marriage has skyrocketed over the past three decades the harm this has done to new generations is huge. Many now are very cynical about marriage, many are psychologically harmed; they have issues with trust, they have low self-esteem, depression, or simply no understanding of how family life can work. Many who have been brought up by a single mother have contempt for the very existence of fathers. Such a population of people does not bode well for fighting against the odds to make marriage work again.

7. Increased attractiveness of the singleton lifestyle

Again, this has been discussed endlessly in the media: there are more perks for the single person than ever in history. Aside from the explosion of consumer choice in dining and entertainment there are now more product options for the sexually hungry. The unsavoury but honest truth is that there has been an explosion of single men (and even women) accessing the vast online reservoirs of pornography and women are now funding a fast-growing industry of vibrators (available for the 'sex and the city' generation of girls in all varieties of shapes, designs and speeds); instant sexual satiation for a generation for whom commitment has become too unattractive.

If you want to have children and value the security and love that marriage has the potential to offer then you will vastly lower the risks of marriage by seeking a non-Western woman. Yes, there are indeed Western women who would make excellent wives, but the ones who would enrich your life and truly never opportunistically cheat on you or divorce you are few and far between. And the main problem is that it's impossible to identify them. I've known several women who I thought were really decent people and credits to their husband's who then decided to bale out of their marriage and took their husband for a ride in the process. You would never have guessed they'd have done this. Their husbands certainly didn't. Almost everyone now has family members (two cousins in my case) who they now never see because the ex-wife has made it impossible.

As I said before, looking for a wife is a game of numbers and opportunities; it's just like fishing. Now, the river of the feminist-indoctrinated countries has a high percentage of fish that are poisonous to you, but the river of the traditional countries is largely stocked with healthy and delicious fish. Which river will you choose to fish in?

I'm not a hater of Western women and I am not saying this because I believe Western women are evil to the core. The reason that 'no' must be considered an option for men thinking of marriage is that the lifestyles, culture and expectations of Western women are now such that its an uphill struggle to successfully marry one. Even if we totally destroyed feminism tomorrow, its effects would continue for years. It would take probably one or two more generations to purge the feminist poison from our societies. Don't think you can change one of these women; to think that is nothing short of arrogance.

I predict that as the cost and availability of travel and communication become more accessible around the globe, more Western men will come into contact with traditional, non-Western women and immediately notice an opportunity for a happy marriage. For American men this is most likely to be a Mexican or other Southern American woman, for British men this may be the Southern or Eastern European woman, and those lucky Australian men have a vast population of Asian lovelies right on their doorstep.

When it comes to considering marriage, be a man. Don't let other people, particularly women, manipulate your emotions on this subject. Think it through rationally and assess whether you are willing to take the risk, whether you are willing to pay the price. You don't have much choice whether to let pushy, man-bashing Western women into your workplace, gym, library, or sports club, but you can keep them out of your marital beds.

Join the debate: DarrenBlacksmith@yahoo.co.uk
http://www.anti-feminism.com/NoMarriage.htm
 

If you are interested in a list of all homeboys/girls who have lost their lives in connection with the aggression on Iraq, check this site.  It includes a biography of each.
http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Details.aspx
 

duh

Need an employee with both experience and honesty?  Maybe you know someone who's hiring?
contributing editor-- Larry

...

Q >> I cannot express to you how I feel about the overwhelmingly male-dominated world in which we liv: history, politics, journalism, broadcasting, business – even last names after marriage.  Can you identify any religions that are not patriarchal in nature?
-- Joyce Haver, Monroe, Michigan

A >> It is possible that matriarchal religions have come and long gone, but virtually nothing exists now, unless you include witchcraft or the goddesses in Hinduism, which is highly patriarchal in nature.  This is no surprise.  Men have created nearly everything in the world, including all the institutions you mention.  But their achievements are to their credit, not their debit!
-- Marilyn Vos Savant (Ask Marilyn, October 5, 2003, Parade)
 

a r t i c l e   /   c o m m e n t a r y

Living the best of evils??

Have you noticed that our society is increasingly allowing homosexuality, a practice that is blatantly contrary to the commandments of the Creator.

Have you noticed that our society (especially in Utah) is increasingly cracking down on plural marriages (multiple spouses, particularly multiple wives).  In the case of plural wives, there are at least examples of this being allowed and/or tolerated by the Creator.

The very cops who are removing husbands from their wives and children, whereby making the children fatherless, are at the same time protecting homosexuals.

If there is judgement coming on our society, what do you think it might be?  Will we survive or will we be treated like several in history, such as Sodom and Gomorrah.
 

duh

Just because you do not believe there is a conspiracy, just goes to prove how well it is working.
 

goto top .....mailto:  therockyview@tellme1st.net