What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.
I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status.
For those who stayed, read on;
(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)
A “VIRTUOUS” MAN
A powerful man in his 50’s had a wet dream that involved a 6 year old girl. He knew the girl’s father and as appalling as it sounds, he convinced the father to allow him to marry the 6 year old girl. 3 years later, the man in his 50’s sexually molested the 9 year old girl with the intention of getting her pregnant. Despite all this, he faced zero consequences for his acts of pedophilia. Quite the opposite, that pedophile is actively revered and celebrated around the world.
Would you like to know his name? That pedophile’s name is the “prophet” Mohammed and the victim of his pedophilia was Aisha.
Allow me to clarify: the Islamic prophet Mohammed was a blatant pedophile who molested a girl by the name Aisha when she was only 6-9 years old.
How can a pedophile be revered instead of reviled? Simple, most Muslims refuse consider Mohammed accountable for his criminal acts because they believe Mohammed did so many good things for the Islamic world that molesting Aisha at 9 years of age, “simply should not” count.
In plain English a pedo like Mohammed gets a pass because he was “too virtuous”.
But wait, it gets worse, once you start talking to Muslims in civilized, non controversial ways (disclaimer: you manipulate them into trusting you) you then preface your upcoming question with a direct criticism of the crimes depicted in the bible (of course that they love agreeing with you when you harshly criticize the bible, as a result they often assume you are on their side) then, when their guard is down, you very smoothly ask them something along these lines:
“OK, you clearly know much more about Islam than me, please tell me the truth of what happened between Muhammad and Aisha because plenty of people like to hate on Islam and claim Mohammed had sex with her when she was only 6 or 9, is that really true?”
Usually 3 things will happen:
1) They avoid the question
2) They try to change Aisha’s age to 12
3) They say Mohammed cannot be questioned. End of the story.
Point 3 is especially interesting, because if you are skilled enough, you feign innocence then bring up the verses where Aisha’s age is clearly stated when she was molested by Mohamed immediately after you bring up the fact that Mohammed himself decrees that having sex with girls who have not yet menstruated is “acceptable” (Qur’an 65:4) .
Then you state that pedophilia is a horrible crime and should be punished, then they are forced to agree with you but then…they go back to giving Mohammed a pass.
Why? Because he was ” too virtuous”.
See where this is going?
It does not matter how much evidence you bring up, most Muslims cannot be persuaded about Mohammed being a pedophile. They may agree with you that modern pedophiles must be punished but their pedo-Prophet Mohammed? He gets a pass.
You could spend hours speaking in the most tactful of terms and show them the best of evidence but they inescapably go into FULL UNPERSUADABLE mode after going through the “triple R” stages which go like this:
- Refuse the validity of evidence of their chosen leader’s crimes
- Refuse to assign any accountability to their chosen leader
- Refuse to be persuaded
As a result of adopting the triple R , Muslims usually go into full UNPERSUADABLE MODE.
See, the inconvenient truth is that for “unpersuadables” what counts is belief not reason. They have already made up their mind and they may entertain perfunctory discussion with you for ornamental reasons. They just pretend to think to avoid looking entirely dumb in conversations. Make no mistake some are very dumb but some even hold Phd’s and doctorates.
In the case of the ones with higher education, it is just fascinating to notice how, deep down, they are aware their belief makes no sense yet they just consistently decide not touch that dark object of faith in their otherwise bright minds. Theirs is an act of willful, selective ignorance.
It is a fascinating contradiction because many of them have higher than average IQ’s but choose to be selectively dumb when it comes to their faith. Thus they willfully choose to make their intellect ornamental. Theirs is a matter of faith not reason and evidence.
Many of these examples of otherwise (almost mentally sane) people who actively choose to refuse all evidence and become unpersuadable are depicted in Will Storr’s Book “The unpersuadables: Adventures with the enemies of science”
One needs to be careful when dealing with unpersuadable Muslims who went through the triple R stages. See, after prodding them with questions they get secretly angry and as a result they usually go into full DARVO against you (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) or in plain English they will spin anything you say as “discrimination” or “Islamophobia”
A “VIRTUOUS” WOMAN
Religions like Islam are not alone in their unpersuadable behavior, quite the opposite, those who closely resemble Islam are feminists themselves. It only suffices to swap Mohammed’s pedophilia with Hillary’s private server scandal then you get comparable (if not equal) levels of unpersuadable behavior.
Just for the sake of argument let’s do some brief word swapping:
A powerful woman in her 60’s had a wet dream that involved being above the law and deleting confidential and classified emails at will by illegally using her own email server, she knew the right IT experts and as appalling as it sounds, convinced one to install the little server in her basement.
A few years later, the woman in her 60’s had illegally deleted over 32K private emails and nearly 2.1K Classified State Department emails all with the intention of being above the law but faced zero consequences for her acts of corruption.
Despite all this, she faced zero consequences for her acts of corruption. Quite the opposite, that corrupt feminist is actively revered and celebrated around the world.
Would you like to know her name? That woman’s name is the “Democratic US President Candidate” Hillary Clinton.
But wait, it gets worse, once you start talking to Democrats in civilized, non controversial ways (disclaimer: you manipulate them into trusting you) you then preface your upcoming question with a criticism of the flaws & crimes on the Republican side (of course they love to agree with you when you harshly criticize the other side, after this they assume you are on their side) then you very smoothly ask them something along these lines:
“OK you clearly know much more about the democratic party than me, please tell me the truth of what happened between Hillary Clinton and the email server because plenty of people like to hate on feminist democrats and claim Hillary illegally deleted over 32K private emails and nearly 2.1K Classified State Department emails, is that really true?”
Usually 3 things will happen:
1) They avoid the question
2) They try to change the server’s location.
3) They say Hillary cannot be questioned. End of the story.
Point 3 is especially interesting, because if you are skilled enough, you feign innocence then bring up the laws on federal government record keeping where it is clearly illegal to delete classified emails without authorization and how the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns about Hillary Clinton’s violations of those federal laws. Then you state that corruption is a crime and should be punished, then they agree with you but then…they go back to giving Hillary a pass. Why? Because she is “too talented”.
See where this is going?
It does not matter how much evidence you bring up, most democrats cannot be persuaded about Hillary Clinton being a corrupt politician.
They may agree with you that corrupt politicians must be punished but their crooked-Feminist Hillary? She gets a pass.
You could spend hours speaking in the most tactful of terms and the best of evidence but they will inescapably go into FULL UNPERSUADABLE MODE after going through the “triple R” stages which go like this:
Refuse the validity of evidence of their chosen leader’s crimes
Refuse to assign any accountability to their chosen leader
Refuse to be persuaded
As a result of adopting the triple R , democrats usually stay into full UNPERSUADABLE MODE.
It is impressive how fervent both Muslims and Democrats get when you openly criticize their respective chosen leader, they just cover their ears and no evidence will suffice. That is when you realize you are not dealing with rational adults.
First they expect you to agree with them or else they label you as “hateful” because disagreeing means you either are an “Islamophobe” or just a “misogynist”. But what truly is fascinating is how both Muslims and Democrats DARVO you like clockwork.
Why do these fervent democrats mimic their radical Muslim counterparts?
Do they even realize how religious it is to demand lack for accountability for Hillary?
To the democrats, the email scandal or the Benghazi attack controversy or any amount of evidence against Hillary Clinton is refused and falsely labelled as “blasphemous-misogyny”
All of the above regarding Islam and the Democratic party boils down to the following two parallels between Muslims and democrats:
*Regardless of evidence, if you accuse Mohammed of pedophiia you are DARVO’ed and they accuse you of blasphemy/islamophobia.
*Regardless of evidence, if you accuse Hillary of any crime you are DARVO’ed and they accuse you of hate/misogyny.
When your chosen leader cannot be held accountable for his or her flaws you have a perfect dictatorship with DARVO as a side dish.
FEMINIST ORNAMENTAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Despite the scandals, most politicians at Hillary Clinton’s level already are extremely wealthy and if they mismanage the country, they would face minimal consequences because they nearly always get to retain their wealth.
In the corporate world, this safety net against mismanagement and accountability is called “the golden parachute” but in the political world is more of a “golden fortress” where politicians can easily retreat to avoid any accountability for their often downplayed gross negligence.
But let’s call a spade a spade, Donald Trump would have as much as a “golden fortress” as Hillary and in case the economy crashed while either of them was in command, neither would face direct consequences. (not impossible but unlikely for them to end up in jail or destitute)
However, there is remarkable difference, unlike Trump, Hillary has, by virtue of her gender, many, many more avenues to avoid accountability. Let’s not forget that the “patriarchy is against all women” and she can always say she failed because of the patriarchal system made by men. Perfect plausible deniability of any responsibility for feminists. or in plain English feminist can always say
“it wasn’t her, it was the patriarchy”
When the patriarchy is to blame for Hillary’s bad decisions, you have a recipe to bankrupt a country. Despite all this, her followers are incredibly eager to exculpate and downplay all of Hillary’s flaws, just like Muslims do with their pedo-prophet.
Look at what is happening right now, despite the mail server scandal, the ongoing email probe and the mounting evidence on her blatant disregard of laws Hillary’s supporters STILL bend over backwards to defend her in full unpersuadable mode.
The leftist media is also guilty, after Romanian hacker Marcel Lehel Lazar AKA “Guccifer easily hacked into then exposed Hillary’s laughably vulnerable email server , NBC delayed reporting on it for more than a month.
Just put two and two together, why would NBC delay such a profitable story and forego all that advertising money? Most likely they intentionally sat on the evidence to avoid damaging Hillary’s chances of winning the election. Despite the evidence, NBC management remained as unpersuadable as Muslims defending & downplaying Mohammed’s crimes. NBC management worships their own criminal prophet: Hillary Clinton
As you can tell, wealthy politicians are often shielded from real repercussions for their actions because their followers often lie on their behalf to take as much accountability from them. This reduction of accountability only worsens when it comes to female feminists in power.
But it could get much worse (in orders of magnitude worse) because as long as the American people elect a woman or a member of a minority. Why? Because those de facto victim status automatically take away accountability from that woman/minority member.
Hence why with politicians, the last thing you want is to give them even more avenues to avoid accountability. Gender or race are some of the widest avenues to achieve plausible deniability.
This de facto plausible deniability makes it incredibly easy for supporters of the woman/minority member to dismiss valid criticism as mere “discrimination”. Just the way Muslims disregard valid criticisms as “Islamophobia”
That false “discrimination” blanket statement is almost always absent with white straight men, because almost always, the first thing that comes to mind when criticizing a white male is:
“Yeah, he fucked up”
As opposed to what comes to mind when criticizing a woman/minority members:
“Yeah, that woman/minority member fucked up but I don’t want to be accused of discrimination…”
THAT OBSCURE NEED FOR POWER
You have to wonder the authentic reasons why Hillary Clinton wants to become the next president.
It is not about the money, she already is extremely wealthy. It is also unlikely she is doing this because she wants to “make America great again”. First, because that slogan is already taken and second because her “democratic” socialism is unlikely to help the ailing American economy.
The country already is to the knees in debt and expecting companies to pay even more taxes to feed their socialist beast is shamefully absurd. In reality, companies are far more likely to flee to foreign countries with much lower tax rates before Hillary tries to increase taxes to bleed them. Expecting companies to foot the bill of feminist socialism is just as delusional as feminism itself.
No, Hillary is unlikely to have America’s best interest in mind. By Occam’s razor it would make much more sense that she is doing it because she wants power to compensate for her intense and fossilized inferiority complex (like most feminists in their 70’s do).
Most women who embrace feminism do so to cope with past sexual assault trauma and/or overcompensate for an intense inferiority complex.
Think about it, most women who embrace feminism do so to cope with past sexual assault trauma and/or overcompensate for an intense inferiority complex. Hillary is an ardent feminist, so it would stand to reason she was sexually abused in her youth and/or wants to overcompensate for her closeted and fossilized inferiority complex.
Make no mistake, Hillary is a feminist therefore a hypocrite, not a noble person. She wants power: plain and simple.
Most likely what moves her is her need for recognition, her need for status. Just put two and two together, if she needs that much validation and prestige is because deep down, she knows she is just a tiny inhabitant of that giant shadow her husband (still to this day) casts over her.
Look at her last name, she is even a parasite at that level. How do most people remember her?
Exactly, “Bill Clinton’s wife”.
She is a glorified appendage that never earned that recognition on her own. The husband’s last name “empowered” her. How come she did not change her last name many years ago? Why would she serve the patriarchy by becoming Bill Clinton’s property?
Simple, she was “empowered” by her parasitical nature. She is a hypocrite, she adopted and kept that last name because it gave her the recognition and power she could never earn on her own. She is a feminist parasite.
Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton is too careless a parasite at too many levels to even aspire to be a competent liar or even care about covering her tracks. Giving near absolute power to an ardent corrupt feminist like Hillary would be suicide for the American economy.
See, here is the thing about power, you either claim it yourself or someone gives it to you out of guilt or pity. The inconvenient truth is that Feminists were “empowered” by men. Power was given to them out of guilt/pity but they never earned it.
That in and of itself is the summation of feminism and Hillary’s life. She has been given possibly countless concessions and opportunities because of collective pity towards feminists. Feminists have the bad habit of painting the word “PARASITISM” in a bright euphemistic shade of feminist pink to make it look like their imaginary “empowerment” word.
If success is given to you, it is not success, it is a lie.
Same applies to intellectual respect and success in life through hard work. Both have to be earned, never “given”.
That is why most feminists are a public refutation of intellectual honesty. They lie to themselves then to everybody else about their true intellectual capabilities. They even go as far to publicly perform the following most spectacular form intellectual dishonesty and DARVO:
White feminists are the authentic product of privilege YET they have the gall to accuse all white men of “privilege”.
Last time I checked, intelligence was not a penis but if it were, feminist would also have that chronic form of penis envy.
Judging by her actions, Hillary Clinton, believes laws do not apply to her and her unpersuadable democratic followers are a public demonstration of true ignorance, just like Islam.
Thank you for reading.
SOME OF YOU MAY COMPLAIN COMPARING HILLARY CLINTON TO A PEDOPHILE IS “OFFENSIVE” BUT WHAT IS BEING COMPARED HERE IS HER UNPERSUADABLE FOLLOWERS REFUSE ALL EVIDENCE AGAINST HER THE WAY ISLAMIC UNPERSUADABLES DO WITH EVIDENCE AGAINST MOHAMMED.
IN ANY GIVEN CASE, REST ASSURED THAT I DO NOT GIVE ANY PARTICULAR FUCK IF YOU GOT OFFENDED.