Saturday, January 26, 2013


The talk world is abuzz about the decision by Leon Panetta (one of whose admirers is Pope Benedict, I am sorry to say), obviously acting on orders of his bosses, to place women in combat positions.  Listening to the various talking heads one is amazed.  The liberal types praise the decision as a victory for women (?) while the so-called conservative types say, essentially, "well it's OK, as long as they can keep up with the men"(?)

Let us cut through the fog created by the two-headed libcon beast and face the stark truth: a nation that would dare to send women into combat is a nation that is sick in it soul.  It is lost.  The question is no longer if the Benighted States of America will collapse; it is a question of when.  No nation that would do this to its wives and mothers can be expected to last too much longer.  Notice that neither the libs nor the cons even address this.  And why should they?  They are in essence two heads of the same coin.  The monstrosity of placing a woman into combat has not even protruded itself upon their intelligence.

Nor should this come as a surprise.  The twisted minds of the power elite in government, media and business are every day forcing some perversion or another down the throats of those it illegitimately rules.  Abortion and sodomy are its current favorites but if we are honest with ourselves in America we will see that the rot set in a long, long time ago making it inevitable that we would be at this sorry pass.  The seeds of this destruction of morality were already sewn in the late 18th century, and have been slowly coming to fruition since that time.  Many of a patriotic bent are loathe to accept this judgment.  But until they see that it was the false principles of the Enlightenment and its bastard child, Deism, sprinkled with a healthy dose of that scourge of Christianity, the masonic cults, that brought about the nation that we currently live in they will never be able to understand what is happening to them.

Question: Can we now offer apologies to Phyllis Schlafly?  That poor women was laughed to scorn for suggesting that the so-called "Equal Rights Amendment" of the early 70s would pave the way for placing women in combat.

Not anchoring one's self to the Truth is what produces this kind of outrage.  Few care.  "Women hold high positions in business, are firemen and policemen, so why are we upset about sending them into combat?"  You will hear that illogical cliche a thousand times.  But what about the nature of women?  Alas, propaganda has been so successful that far too many women and girls have fallen for it.  This propaganda has succeeded in robbing women of some of their natural, unique virtues.  No longer content with creating homelife and bringing up their children, the job assigned to them by God Himself, they have allowed themselves to be manipulated by the clever ones into turning their world, and society along with it, topsy-turvy.  Yes, "women hold high positions" Ma Barker.

The sorry results are all too clearly seen around us, and the worst of it is the children brought up not by their mothers but by paid babysitters or overburdened grandparents.  Children not brought up by their natural parents are quite easy to spot: the either sullen and terrified ones or the out-of-control screamers are almost in every case those brought up by someone other then the person whose responsibility it is to do so.  These children finally get to see their tired and worn-out parents, who are so out of touch with them that they are at a loss as to how to deal with them, only after they've returned home from work.  And by then they are usually too exhausted to even play with them.

That situation is bad enough.  But we must ask what kind of a woman, single or married, would go off to battle so that her children will not see her for a couple of years, or possibly ever again? 

I would deem that woman a deeply troubled soul even, potentially, a lost soul, a casualty in the aggressive and perverse war against femininity.  It is horrible enough for men to have to go to war; but a woman? [Let us put aside for a moment in this discussion our patriotic Americanism, with muskets and flintlocks and Bowie knives at the ready, fighting the historical battles of centuries past.  The kind of aggressive, unjust wars that America has been fighting of late should be shunned by all soldiers, and all real patriots.]  It is an insult to her better nature; indeed it is an insult to her nature, period. 

Our present world makes the promoting of propaganda a piece of cake.  Billboards, the internet, music, radio, television, movies, newspapers and the ubiquitous hand (most often unseen) of the Big Government/Big Business conglomerate are daily, hourly, dumping this malignant garbage into our heads.  It takes an extraordinary person to keep his or her sanity in the face of such a juggernaut of mendacity.  A woman who would leave husband and children to go off into the military, either as a liberal feminist crusader or a conservative misguided patriot, is a woman who has succumbed to these lies and needs help.  Our help.

Alas only we average ones can offer that help.  She will most likely not find help from her church, whatever "denomination" it is.  As usual the Catholic leaders, cowards nearly to a man, will not dare to speak up against this monumental evil.  They have been doing yeoman work ignoring moral evils for several generations now so it is hardly likely they will summon the courage to cry out against this.  After all, chivalry is so medieval, kind of like the ancient Mass.  They can't be bothered teaching the Faith and its necessity for eternal salvation.  That's not their job, for heaven's sake!  So it will be up to us to do what we can to encourage these women to be ladies, not amazons.  Funnily enough, some conservative blowhards are worried more about women falling into the hands of those nasty Arabs and the fate worse than death that awaits them in their clutches.  If recent history is anything to go by they will, if captured, be treated far better by their captors than by their fellow US soldiers.  (And, horribly, they will be treated better by their Arab captors than some gung-ho  women treated the captured Iraqi freedom fighters in Abu Gharib.)  A film producer acquaintance of mine was in the military in the 1980s and she said to me that even then the place was rife with lesbians.  Imagine how it is now under the lunatics who are currently in charge of the Washington asylum.  So these women in the military have to face not only very angry Arabs whose countries we are invading and whose families we are killing but they will be at the mercy of the normal male soldiers who are even now contributing to the rape statistics, and they will also be at the mercy of female sexual deviants.  This is the kind of life a normal, healthy woman would aspire to??

Of course even so grim a story as this has its comic side.  The sight of some of these plump harridans brandishing a rifle and striking a gallant pose while trying to look tough has to be seen to be believed.  Quite pitiful, really, though I would imagine that Stan Freberg or Sid Caesar would have fun with this absurd situation.

But cannon-fodder is always in heavy demand by despotic regimes so Leon Panetta will do his bit to supply more it.  International Finance and its attack dog, the USA, are hungry animals. More warm (for the moment) bodies are required to invade countries who have done us no harm but are very much in the sites of these maniacs who run our country from the shadows.  And now these tragic women will be that fodder. 

And they will give up everything.  For nothing.

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...