Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 23rd, 2014 #21
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default




The Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review interviewed poet Allen Ginsberg a homosexual pedophile Jew , shortly before his recent death. In a generally flattering article, they report Ginsburg's philosophy (not mentioned by the mainstream press) about sex with children, and offer no judgmental comment about it. The article is entitled, "The Liberation is the Word" (Summer 1997):

(Allen Ginsberg): "Like the whole labeling of pedophiles as 'child molesters.' Everybody likes little kids. All you've got to do is walk through the Vatican and see all the little statues of little prepubescents, pubescents, and postpubescents. Naked kids have been a staple of delight for centuries, for both parents and onlookers. So to label pedophilia as criminal is ridiculous."

https://fr.wikiquote.org/wiki/P%C3%A...ournal.2C_1997



'Gay' laws set stage for pedophilia 'rights'


Quote:
As legislators and other government officials promote gay friendly laws, they are unwittingly laying the foundation for special protections for pedophiles, including the right to work with children, family advocates warn.

Linda Harvey of Mission America said the push for equal rights for pedophiles will become more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves.

Its all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction, she said.

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders after intense lobbying by homosexual-rights groups.

At the time of the delisting, critics warned that it would eventually lead to acceptance of other types of sexual deviancy, including pedophilia. Supporters of the gay lifestyle decried the comparison, insisting that no such thing would ever occur.

However, it appears the critics were right on the mark.
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/07/gay-la...kq5cWSDXPq6.99
__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.
 
Old February 24th, 2014 #22
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Karl Radl
Default

http://semiticcontroversies.blogspot...-and-jews.html
__________________
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #23
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

bryan singer and hollywood sex ring - jews preying on teenaged boys

http://jezebel.com/inside-the-hollyw...-si-1567755415
 
Old June 9th, 2014 #24
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
jewsign

Jewish french deputy, Daniel Cohn-Bendit admits to pedophilia

The Jewish-french-German European deputy, Daniel Cohn-Bendit admits to be a pedophile in the french television program "Apostrophe" presented by Bernard Pivot in 1982.

Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=625_1...bdFHLCJuxaH.99


The Sexual Revolution and Children: How the Left Took Things Too Far

Germany's left has its own tales of abuse. One of the goals of the German 1968 movement was the sexual liberation of children. For some, this meant overcoming all sexual inhibitions, creating a climate in which even pedophilia was considered progressive.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-702679.html




In his 1975 autobiographical book "Der Grosse Basar" (The Great Bazaar), Green Party politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit describes his experiences as a teacher in a Kinderladen in Frankfurt. When the children entrusted to his care opened his fly and began stroking his penis, he writes, "I was usually quite taken aback. My reactions varied, depending on the circumstances."


'Look, My Vagina'

Quote:
In his 1975 autobiographical book "Der grosse Basar" ("The Great Bazaar"), Green Party politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit describes his experiences as a teacher in a Frankfurt Kinderladen. When the children entrusted to his care opened his fly and began stroking his penis, he writes, "I was usually quite taken aback. My reactions varied, depending on the circumstances."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-702679-2.html


'That Hurts'


Quote:
Here, too, the distinctions become blurred. How should we react when Cohn-Bendit writes, in his memoirs, about "little, five-year-old girls who had already learned to proposition me?" It wasn't the only time the Green politician raved about his experiences with children. In a largely unnoticed appearance on French television on April 23, 1982, Cohn-Bendit, a member of the European Parliament today, said the following:

"At nine in the morning, I join my eight little toddlers between the ages of 16 months and 2 years. I wash their butts, I tickle them, they tickle me and we cuddle. … You know, a child's sexuality is a fantastic thing. You have to be honest and sincere. With the very young kids, it isn't the same as it is with the four-to-six-year-olds. When a little, five-year-old girl starts undressing, it's great, because it's a game. It's an incredibly erotic game."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-702679-3.html
__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.

Last edited by RickHolland; June 9th, 2014 at 07:02 PM.
 
Old July 4th, 2014 #25
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default "At the United Nations, Its Human Rights, Putin-Style"

Dr. Jay Michaelson is the author of five books including God vs. Gay? The Religious Case for Equality
Quote:
The UN Human Rights Council just passed a resolution that could have come from Pat Robertson—but passed thanks to Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” So says one character in George Orwell’s 1984, the dystopian novel in which “Newspeak” redefines many words and eliminates many more.

Away from the U.S. media spotlight, the United Nations Human Rights Council today took the Orwellian step of redefining its very mission: the term “human rights.” For more than two hundred years, human rights have been (as the term implies) rights borne by individuals. “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” reads the U.S. Declaration of Independence, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Setting aside the Framers’ limited understanding of “men,” these and other fundamental statements of rights set forth rights that pertain to individuals. But today, a majority of Human Rights Council members voted that they may pertain to groups as well—specifically, to families. This is not the usual sense of “group rights” such as a nation’s right to self-determination, or a minority group’s rights to be free from discrimination. On the contrary, granting human rights to “families” is meant to take individuals’ rights away.


In a surprisingly lopsided vote, the HRC stated that “the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and entitled to protection by society and the State” and discuss states’ obligations to provide such protection.

To those unaccustomed to the machinations of the UN, this may seem like yet another insignificant and toothless resolution. But it is actually a big deal.

First, this resolution is part of a massive campaign, led by an “unholy alliance” of Russia and developing world countries, to fundamentally alter the definition of ‘human rights.’ Alongside the radical proposition that rights are enjoyed by groups as well as individuals—which, if taken to its logical conclusion, would justify one group excluding or marginalizing other populations in order to protect its collective rights—there are several processes underway that would include “traditional values” as human rights in and of themselves.

Put into practice, this would mean that countries could deny a woman or gay person’s individual rights (to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, for example) in the name of the “traditional values” rights of others. Thus, those in power can imprison gays, prevent women from voting, and similar “traditional” things, all under the cover of international law. Where today international human rights norms are used to hold countries accountable for such acts, tomorrow’s would permit—indeed, favor—them.

Second, the way this vote panned out is particularly horrifying. As the “Protection of the Family” resolution was being developed, it became clear to more liberal nations that it was going to pass. Even the United States was loathe to vote against a resolution “protecting the family”—who doesn’t want to protect families? So, an amendment was proposed—formally put forward by Uruguay—that would acknowledge that “various forms of the family exist.”

This amendment would cover not just same-sex couples, of course, but families where grandparents raise the kids, or single-parent families—anything other than the assumed norm of the “traditional” family. And it would make clear that subsequent UN action could not be used as a club against families diverging from that norm.

But as soon as Uruguay proposed the amendment, Russia pulled a little-used administrative trick—a “no-action” motion—to prevent it from even being discussed. That motion passed 22-20, with 4 abstentions. The United States voted against.

In other words, the Human Rights Council decided not to even talk about the diversity of families. Talk about don’t ask, don’t tell.

And then there was the final tally: 26-14-6. There was hope that some “swing” countries—South Africa, India, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam—might vote against, or at least abstain. But they didn’t. This margin represents a significant victory for Putin’s Russia, which is building an anti-Western bloc using women’s and LGBT rights as wedge issues.

To get a sense of the bloc, here are the 20 other countries that voted with Russia: Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, China, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gabon, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Maldives, Morocco, Namibia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela. A motley crew, to be sure: Islamic states, sub-Saharan Africa, China. What unifies them? These are generally countries with appalling human rights records. But if they get to redefine what “human rights” even means, then they might suddenly look like Amnesty International.

In other words, the entire international framework of human rights is in danger. Not from this one UN decision necessarily, but from the campaign of which this is a small part. The question is, will anyone notice?

There are some hopeful elements in an otherwise dreadful day for human rights.

First, contrary to Russia’s binary rhetoric, this is not an East-West, or North-South, split. Voting with the United States and Europe were Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Japan, Mexico, Peru, and South Korea. The gradual but inexorable movement of Latin America to the pro-human-rights side is a significant shift, little noticed in the introverted United States but with great importance overseas.

Second, it could have been even worse. Saudi Arabia had proposed an amendment specifically defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Fortunately, when Russia’s anti-diversity motion passed, Saudi Arabia withdrew it.

Third, as is often the case with UN resolutions, today’s act is only the first step. We’re a long way from family values—now family rights—being used to defend anti-women or anti-gay laws in international courts. Sometimes, the grindingly slow pace of the United Nations can be a blessing.

Finally, it’s possible that this vote might serve as a wakeup call to Americans who assume that “human rights” are universal and agreed-upon. As has often been the case with issues of LGBT equality, this vote is the canary in the coalmine. Just as Putin clamped down on gays as part of a wider destruction of civil society, so too the Putin Bloc at the United Nations is attacking gays and women as part of a wider attack on the concept of human rights itself. Maybe, just maybe, this warning sign won’t be ignored.

Then again, it’s probably nave to hope that Americans will ever care what happens at the UN. But we should.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...tin-style.html
 
Old July 4th, 2014 #26
Frank_Rizzo
Junior Member
 
Frank_Rizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 113
Frank_Rizzo
Default

Ted Pike discusses the origins of Jewish pedophilia in his production The Other Israel.

 
Reply

Tags
jew pedophilia scandal, jews promoting pedophilia

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 PM.
Page generated in 0.12810 seconds.