Paul Hollander is a Jewish-American Neo-Con from Hungary. His main point, that he hammered away on, year after year at the Heritage Foundation, New Criterion, National Review, etc, was that Nazism, Anti-Americanism, “Anti-Semitism”, Anti-Zionism, Communism, and “Islamism” are all “The Politics of Envy.” — “They’re just Jealous…” They envy us because we’re special…” “They’re jealous because we’re superior…” — All typical Jewish attitudes.

One of his themes was the failure to deal with the Communist crimes against humanity (which he absurdly believed were motivated by “antisemitism” — try not to laugh). Keeping in mind that his main goal was to foment, in typical Askenazi fashion, hatred of post-Soviet Russians (and of course hatred of Russians in general, in all places, at all times), the following article is still interesting. He never heard of Freemasons, even though he was one. Of course all “antisemitic” “conspiracy theories” are psychoanalyzed and Talmudically dismissed. The idea that Jews ran the USSR is an absurdity! which is why he doesn’t mention how many of the Communist villains he names were Jewish. This is a typical example of Jewish “controlling the opposition.”

Soviet terror, American amnesia: there has been a striking asymmetry between the American responses to the two great mass murders of our century, the Nazi and the Soviet. Why?

By Paul Hollander, Cover Story, National Review, May 2, 1994

IT HAS been customary in our times to make reference to the Holocaust whenever we wish to allude to some unrivaled evil. The Holocaust became the undisputed reference point for self-evident evil, and for good reason. By the same token, words like “Nazi,” “Auschwitz,” “Storm Troopers,” and “Gestapo” are reflexively appended to political or social phenomena we wish to discredit conclusively.

It rarely happens that self-evident evil is denoted by reference to the mass murders committed in the Soviet Union under Stalin. Words like “Soviet,” “Soviet Communist,” “Kolyma,” or “KGB” are rarely used to discredit political movements and practices. It is doubtful that one in a thousand Americans knows what Kolyma was, or would recognize the name of a single Soviet concentration camp. It is just as unlikely that one in a thousand Americans has heard the names of Beria [supposedly Mingrelian...], Serov [reportedly Jewish; Jewish wife; appointed the Jew Semyon Moiseyevich Krivoshein to lead the Soviet liquidation of Christian Polish national leadership], Yagoda [Jew], or Yezhov [unknown background, 2 Jewish wives; Ynet, Israel: "Yezhov, the "bloodthirsty dwarf....was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his Book "Stalin: Court of the Red Star", Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women."], who used to be in charge of the Soviet mass murders.

Indeed, as Soviet mass graves have been discovered, one after another, in the last few years, the American media have greeted the discoveries with remarkable equanimity. One alone, in Kuropati, near Minsk, was estimated by Soviet sources to contain over a quarter-million remains; Bykovnia, near Kiev, a similar number, killed during the 1930s. No Russian reporters or officials appeared on our television screens to comment on these discoveries, and no American television correspondents reported breathlessly from the scene. We were also spared the reflections of academic specialists regarding the significance of these findings for a reassessment of the Soviet mass murders.

It is not my purpose to dispute the uniqueness of the Holocaust. The question here raised is why, in comparison to the intensity of the moral outrage evoked by the Holocaust, the Soviet mass murders have stimulated so little moral energy.

[Why? Because the USSR was conceived in New York, was kept alive by the USA, and was run by Jews. That's why. - Akira]

Genocide or Mass Murder?

IT IS tempting to suggest that the differences between the character and procedures of the Nazi and Soviet mass murders account for the different moral responses to these slaughters.

In Nazi Germany the state set up highly efficient extermination plants (gas chambers, crematoria) with no less a goal than the total elimination of the Jewish population of Europe, perhaps some day of the whole world. It was a carefully planned, highly organized operation that had spectacular results: the killing of six million Jews and smaller numbers of other “undesirables.”

These mass murders [Jewish propaganda] gave rise to the term “Holocaust” and popularized the concept of “genocide”–so much so that since the 1960s it has been applied with diminishing discrimination to far lesser outrages, such as the “cultural genocide” of some minority underrepresented in institutions of higher education, or policies of proposing birth control to unwed mothers. Radical feminists called pornography “genocide”; for some “experts” of the “recovery movement,” childhood is a “holocaust”; the homosexual organization Act-Up asserted that “Dinkins’s policy is genocidal.”

The Soviet mass murders were in significant ways different from the Nazi ones. There was no plan corresponding to the “final solution” (the killing of a group of people in order to purify the world of evil); no particular ethnic group was singled out for total elimination; indeed, the victims came from every social stratum and ethnic group of Soviet society. There were no extermination camps using modem technology and machinery. The victims were killed in relatively old-fashioned and inefficient ways: either shot or allowed to die of starvation, cold, and disease in what the Soviet authorities called “corrective labor camps.” (According to Mikhail Heller and Aleksandr Nekrich, two Russian emigre historians, “it was Lenin [Jew] and Trotsky [Jew] who were the first Europeans to use the term “concentration camp’ as early as 1918.)

On the other hand the total number of the Soviets’ victims was far greater than the Nazis’, if we add [even without adding] in those who were victims of politically induced famine and deportations. According to General Volkogonov, head of the parliamentary commission on rehabilitation, “from 1929 to 1953 … 21.5 million people were repressed. Of these a third were shot, the rest sentenced to imprisonment where many also died.” These figures did not include famine victims and deported ethnic groups.

[Therefore, the Judeo-Masonic-American USSR, according to Soviet historians, straight out murdered at least 7,000,000 "goyim" -- far, far, far  outnumbering the amount of Jews murdered by the Nazis.]

A large portion of the Soviet [and Nazi] victims, some might argue, were not actually killed, they just could not survive the harsh living conditions in the camps, including the bad weather, not subject to human control. These living conditions, some might further contend, resulted less from ill will or deliberate policy than from overall backwardness, sloppiness, and even the needs of the economy. After all, slave labor was badly needed to carry out the great projects of the early five-year plans, and if mortality rates were high, these regrettable sacrifices were exacted to accomplish worthy objectives. There was one striking expression of a matchless cynicism the two camp systems had in common. At the entrance to the Nazi camps were signs reading “Arbeit macht frei” (Labor liberates), while over the gates of Kolyma there was the inscription “Labor is a matter of honor, courage, and heroism.”

Doubting the Soviet Record

ANOTHER possibility is that it was the relative paucity of information about the Soviet mass murders that explains the different moral reactions. While in the post-Stalin era the quantitative dimensions of Soviet mass murders began to emerge, they remained an abstraction for the public at large, even for the well educated. As Arthur Koestler noted half a century ago: “Statistics don’t bleed; it is the detail that counts.” And when gradually the details were furnished by the survivors’ accounts, they were often denigrated (especially by the revisionist historians) for being too personal and emotional to be treated as reliable.

At the end of World War II the Nazi system was destroyed; cameramen freely entered the former camps [and even filmed Hollywood fantasies of "Jew-Fat Soap, Jew-Skin Lampshades" and other Judaic obscenities]; archives were opened; many perpetrators of these crimes were interrogated, studied, and brought to justice [or judicially murdered]. A substantial portion of American and European populations were exposed to pictures of gas chambers, crematoria, heaps of corpses, emaciated survivors.

So long as the Soviet system was a going concern, little corresponding information about the Soviet camps was available. Western reporters and social scientists could not explore former or existing camps to reconstruct the past. Until Gorbachev came into power the Soviet system was highly secretive.

Still, lack of information as such was not decisive. There was some information already in the 1930s, more after World War II (including the work of Dallin and Nicolaevsky published in 1948), and much more following Khrushchev’s de-Stalinization campaign starting in 1956. Robert Conquest’s massive pioneering work, The Great Terror, has been available since 1968. In 1978 he published Kolyma: Arctic Death Camps, a stunning study of the most murderous Soviet camps. There were even some comparative accounts (based on personal experience) of Nazi and Soviet concentration camps, such as Under Two Dictators by Margarete Buber and Gustav Herling’s World Apart.

But these works attracted little public attention and sparked little moral outrage; it is this tepid reaction that invites further inquiry.

The controversy that surrounded Viktor Kravchenko is a case in point. The flower of the French intelligentsia vilified Kravchenko (a Soviet defector and author of two important books) in the late 1940s and ridiculed his allegations about Soviet camps. The attitude of the Left in the United States was no more charitable. A reporter for The Nation sneered in 1949: “The man [Kravehenko] is very cheap . . . What he lacks is distinction and culture . . . he is also a very poor propaganda agent. He commits mistakes by exposing his hand at points where the game demands that he hide it.”

At the time of his defection (in 1944) Time magazine had written: “Editorial comment [on him] was minimum and cautious. Most US. editors, mindful of the delicacy of U.S.-Soviet relations . . . and of the 26-year-old difficulty in getting at truth in any item dealing with Russia, did not want to stick out their necks.”

More recently Noam Chomsky [Jew] expressed (also in The Nation) grave doubts about the credibility of Cambodian refugees and their accounts of the massacres perpetrated by the Pol Pot regime.

It must also be recalled that after World War II over two million Soviet refugees in Western Europe (prisoners of war and slave laborers taken by the Germans) were forcibly repatriated with the assistance of British and American troops — an event that failed to generate widespread moral outrage at the time.

The [engineered] collapse of the Soviet Union created a new situation. It has now become possible to construct a visual (as well as historical-statistical) record of its dark deeds, to visit former camps and newly discovered mass graves, to interview survivors and relatives of victims. While there have been a few reports, American journalists have not been flocking to the sites of Soviet mass murders; camera crews have not been recording the remains of the Gulag Archipelago. (Rare exceptions include a 1989 60 Minutes segment about the “last political prisoners” in the Perm 35 camp; a segment on Kuropati mass graves in the PBS program “Inside Gorbachev’s Russia,” produced by Hedrick Smith; a March 1990 National Geographic article entitled “Last Days of the Gulag?” and a March 1993 New York Times Magazine article on the discovery of skeletons in Kolpashevo, Siberia.)

There have been no television documentaries of the Gulag, not on public television, CNN, or the networks. Russian television programs about these mass murders have not been shown on American television. No Hollywood movie has attempted to show any aspect of Soviet repression and terror, with the partial exception of Dr. Zhivago. (There was one English film based on Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, and an American cable TV film in 1985 entitled Gulag that was more of a spy thriller.) There have been no conferences or symposia comparing the Nazi extermination camps to the Gulag Archipelago; no inquiry into the applicability of the “obedience to authority” theory of mass murders (devised by Stanley Milgram [Jew] to explain Nazi murderousness).

It is not unreasonable to believe that the same political predispositions which in recent times expressed themselves in ridiculing the idea that the Soviet Union was an evil empire played a part in the neglect of the topic of the Soviet mass murders.

No Moral Equivalence

THOSE left-of-center on the political spectrum and most deeply estranged from American society seemed to have had the greatest difficulty expressing moral indignation about the Soviet atrocities — even when their existence was no longer in doubt.

If there ever was a book one would have expected to delve into the moral dimensions of the Soviet mass murders, it was Sanctions for Evil: Sources of Social Destructiveness, a collection of 18 essays by [Tavistock and] American social scientists published in 1971. The dust-jacket made clear, however, that the moral concerns of the editors and contributors would not extend to the outrages perpetrated by the Soviet Union and other Communist systems: “My Lai. Biafra. Detroit riots. Hiroshima. Dachau. Lynchings. Indian massacres. Salem witch hunts. Spanish Inquisition. Dynastic wars. The crusades. The inventory is endless.”

The endless inventory had no room for the victims of the Soviet Purges and labor camps. The only reference in the entire book to Communism or Communists was as victims of persecution in the United States; fear of Communism was a pathology of American society. There was also a vigorous defense of the exclusion of those on the Left from the famous study of the authoritarian personality.

In 1969 Michael Parenti, a political scientist [Parenti: "In Nazi Germany ... Anti-Semitic propaganda was very emotive and irrational, but cleverly crafted to appeal to certain groups. Workers and peasants were told, "It's the Jewish capitalists, the Jewish usurers, who are doing this." The middle class was told, "It's the Jewish trade union leaders and the Jewish communists who are doing this." The superpatriots were told, "The Jew is the enemy alien, an internationalist." This is the rational use of irrational symbols and arguments."] and relentless critic of American society, had this to say about Soviet camps:

“For many years anti-Communist writers claimed that at any one time, anywhere from 15 to 25 million Soviet citizens were suffering the horrors of slave labor camps … By such statistics, the sum total of people incarcerated … over a 25-year period would have consisted of an astonishing proportion of the Soviet population; the support and supervison of labor camps would have been Russia’s single largest enterprise. That the USSR could have maintained this kind of prison population is, to say the least, highly questionable.”

Another illustration of these attitudes has been the fate of a remarkable document published in English in 1980, The First Guidebook to Prisons and Concentration Camps of the Soviet Union. It was put together by Avraham Shifrin [Jew -- see notes in Comments section below], a former inmate of these camps. This massive and meticulous work provided information about two thousand penal institutions, complete with maps, charts, and even some photographs; it also included a list of 41 “death camps,” “where prisoners, forced to work under dangerous, unhealthy conditions for the Soviet war machine, face virtually certain death.” The book was barely noticed; its author did not appear on talk shows, and it received a total of two short reviews in the United States in publications few people read. [But I suspect it was only published in the first place because the writer was Jewish, and promoted the myth that the USSR was "antisemitic" - Akira]

A memorable example of the mindset here examined was reflected in a 1987 public-television program entitled “The Faces of the Enemy,” produced by Sam Keen [Jew], better known as the author of Fire in the Belly, a popular male consciousness-raising book. The program was designed to explore the links between dehumanization, political propaganda, and extremism, yet made virtually no reference to such phenomena when manifested by Communist movements or systems. (I wrote to Mr. Keen pointing out the one-sidedness of the program but got no reply.) While the atrocities associated with Nazis, right-wingers, and U.S. policy in Vietnam were well covered, there was no reference to Stalin, Mao, the Cultural Revolution, or Pol Pot.

This historic anmesia and asymmetry is also apparent in high-school textbooks in social studies and contemporary history, which rarely make reference to the Soviet (or other Communist) mass murders alongside the Nazi ones. Teaching at a large public university for a quarter-century I have yet to encounter a student who was aware of the Soviet mass murders before entering the university; the majority graduate without learning of such matters.

It should be noted that while social scientists in general paid little attention to the Soviet mass murders, there were important exceptions, notably Irving Louis Horowitz [a Jew whose main point was that the essential characteristic of both Nazi Germany and the USSR was "antisemitism"], author of Taking Lives: Genocide and State Power (1982), and Terence Des Pres, author of The Survivor: An Anatomy of Life in the Death Camps (1976). Both examined comparatively the Nazi and Soviet mass murders and concentration camps.

But as the so-called revisionists (their common denominator was a rejection of the totalitarian model and a less critical view of the Soviet system) became more prominent in Soviet studies during the 1970s and ’80s new attempts were made to minimize the Soviet mass murders. Best known for these efforts has been Professor J. Arch Getty, who sought to bring new perspectives to the Purges, treating them largely as an administrative procedure whereby certain Party members are periodically expelled. [Getty says Stalin wasn't really in control of the USSR. If not him, then who? - Akira] He also sought to discredit the aecounts of the surviving Soviet camp inmates. [A Denier!? - Akira] More recently Professor Getty in a journal article arrived at higher estimates of the number of victims but in another recent publication, edited by Professors Getty and Roberta Manning (Stalinist Terror: New Perspectives, 1993), there is a renewed effort to keep the numbers down. More interesting, however, from the standpoint of the moral response to such matters, is the interpretation of the outrages acknowledged. The pursuit of detachment brings back a remark Czeslaw Milosz made in his Captive Mind forty years ago:

“From the moment we acknowledge historical necessity to be something in the nature of a plague, we shall stop shedding tears over the fate of the victims. A plague or an earthquake does not usually provoke indignation. One admits they are catastrophes, folds the morning paper, and continues eating breakfast.”

What one finds in the new analysis, if not exactly an evocation of “historical necessity,” is certainly akin to a plague or earthquake. Getty and his colleagues are anxious to diminish both Stalin’s personal responsibility and that of the political system he created; they consider it a mistake to seek “the origins of Stalinist terror in the person of the deranged dictator, the ‘administrative system’ of the time, or the very nature of Leninism.” What then are we left with?

We are left with an explanation of these events which denudes them of a moral focus or definition. Getty and William Chase wrote:

“When the terror erupted in 1936-37, it quickly went out of control, chaotically reflecting personal hatreds [that is, at the local level--P.H.] and propelling itself with fear. Explanations of the terror … should be supplemented by approaches that account for lack of coordination, local confusion, and personal conflicts.”

“Uncoordinated” terror reduces the responsibility of the political system–as do “local confusion” and “personal conflicts.” Earlier in the same volume Getty and Manning also suggest (as they refer to the writing of Gabor Rittersporn, another of the revisionists) that

“Stalin … Ezhov [chief of the NKVD] and highly placed NKVD operatives sincerely believed that the nation was riddled with plots and conspiracies … He [Rittersporn] intimates that this response was rooted in traditional rural beliefs that the machinations of evil spirits accounted for commonplace misfortunes … Rittersporn’s work suggests that the elements of pre-revolutionary rural culture helped fuel Stalinist persecutions, under the impact of … scarcity … and leaders who shared, politicized and used such traditional beliefs.”

What Getty and his colleagues here suggest is that conspiratorial fantasies sincerely entertained help to explain the terror and possibly also its spontaneous, uncoordinated aspects. (The Nazis too sincerely [and correctly] believed in conspiracies, and especially the Jewish world conspiracy, which in no way undermined their ability to devise efficient ways to get rid of the Jews [Of course the Jewish Money Power and Zion-scamsters didn't undermine attempts to get rid of Jews. Jewish suffering benefits the Elders of Zion. And the Zionists wanted Jews out of Europe and installed in some Arab's former home. - Akira], nor was the outside world inclined to diminish their responsibility on account of these delusions.) In turn, the non- or pre-Soviet factors — the “pre-revolutionary rural culture” and “traditional rural beliefs” — are enlisted to further dilute the responsibility of the Soviet system.

Elsewhere in the volume Roberta Manning wrote:

“In the late 1930s, reformist efforts gave way to terror under the impact of the desperate conditions of the times. Political, social and economic tensions, aggravated by the onset of German expansionism, the sudden escalation of ongoing border conflicts with the Japanese in Manchuria, the 1936 crop failure, and national decisions to prosecute former members of defunct opposition movements created a tense political climate.”

[All true, but who created the USSR in the first place? - Akira]

When all is said and done “the new perspectives on Stalinist terror” proffer an exceedingly wide range of factors and explanations, all of which appear independent of human political will. It is an approach that relieves the commentator from facing questions of moral responsibility or experiencing a sense of outrage.

The moral sensibility here discussed has not been limited to Americans. A small empirical study of my own (reported in my book Anti-Americanism, 1992) revealed a similar pattern among a group of Canadian academics. When asked (in a mail questionnaire) to list the most shocking historical events in this century, in the first instance 52 per cent chose the Holocaust while virtually nobody mentioned any Soviet outrage. In the second instance 15 per cent made reference to Stalin’s Purges. Further light was shed on these attitudes when, in response to the question whom they considered the least admirable political leaders in this century, Reagan was nominated in the first instance by 29 per cent, Stalin by 8.5 per cent.

Another telling illustration is the widespread ridicule President Reagan was subjected to for referring to the Soviet Union as “the evil empire.” So self-evidently wrongheaded was this attribution that no one bothered to explain why exactly it was so laughable.

The unpopularity of Solzhenitsyn among American liberals and left-of-center intelligentsia is yet another reflection of this mindset. [No. Solzhenitsyn was "unpopular", to say the least, because he offered some mild criticism of the Talmudic Tyranny that had tried to crush him.] His unhesitating association of the Soviet system with evil, his fiery anti-Communism and determination to give it a moral dimension, did not go down well. It was admissible to express regret or sorrow over the Soviet mass murders, but moral outrage was overdoing it. He also committed the unforgivable offense, Tom Wolfe noted, of suggesting that not only Stalinism and Leninism, but Marxism [Noachidism] and the pursuit of Marxist [Talmudic] sociahsm led to the camps. Joseph Brodsky thought that Solzhenitsyn’s unpopularity had to do with the “disturbing evidence” he presented which threatened the “mental fence that was constructed especially by the Western Left” around the topic of Soviet atrocities.

There is one notable similarity between responses to the Holocaust and the Soviet mass murders: in both instances there have been efforts to dispute the magnitude of the killings. However, Holocaust revisionists have been regarded as cranks and frauds. By contrast Professor Getty and his colleagues, although criticized by some, were hardly read out of the scholarly community. Purge revisionism has been more acceptable than Holocaust revisionism.

At a time when at last the Soviet Union joined Nazi Germany among the great defunct tyrannies of modem history and perpetrators of mass murder unrivalled in scale, there is new relevance to the question why the revulsion occasioned by the outrages of the Soviet system has been more muted than the corresponding sentiments stimulated by the Nazi misdeeds, especially at a time when new evidence of every kind (from mass graves to archives) has become available.

The Sources of Moral Obtuseness

SINCE public awareness of world events is largely the creation of the  [Judeo-Masonic] mass media it is important to reiterate that media coverage of Soviet mass murders was largely non-existent while they were committed and sparse in the subsequent decades.

It should also be pointed out that not all Soviet mass murders were committed in the distant past. Spectacular mass murders of civilians were carried out by Soviet forces in Afghanistan under Brezhnev in the 1980s. They too received perfunctory coverage in the media, although it was occasionally noted that the civilians killed numbered in the millions.

If by now it has been established that atrocities of the Soviet system neither deeply penetrated popular and scholarly awareness (except that of a handfill of specialists) nor stimulated moral responses comparable to those evoked by the Nazi ones, it remains to attempt to explain this phenomenon.

One explanation may be found in the longstanding, indeed chronic, Western ignorance and misperception of the Soviet system produced by attitudes ranging from outright affection to benefit of the doubt. It is no longer in dispute that many Americans, and many highly distinguished ones among them, completely misread the nature of the Soviet system through much of its existence and especially during its most murderous decades. What is less widely recognized is how long these wrongheaded assessments persisted and how they might have influenced the moral responses, past and current, to the Soviet mass murders.

The roots of present-day attitudes reach back to the 1930s [1917, or 1910, 0r 1905, or when masses of Askenazim flooded into the U.S.A.] In those years, when influential [Judeo-Masonic] opinion-makers were impressed by the Soviet Union, either they found it inconceivable that such an admirable [a Judeo-Masonic] system could commit mass murder, or they wrote the atrocities off as the reasonable costs of the noble experiment.

Upton Sinclair [see Comments section below] wrote in 1938 about the collectivization and resultant famines:

“They drove rich peasants off the land and sent them to work in lumber camps and on railroads. Maybe it cost a million lives — maybe … five million — but you cannot think intelligently about it unless you ask yourself how many millions it might have cost if the changes had not been made. … There has never been in human history great social change without killing. In the mid 1940s it appeared to Jerome Davis, who was a professor at Yale Divinity School, that during the Purges only a tiny percentage of the population was involved and the same years which saw the treason trials saw some of the greatest triumphs of Soviet planning. While the screws tightened on a tiny minority, the majority of Soviet people were enjoying greater prosperity.”

[How about this for a re-write of Sinclair?: "The Nazis drove parasitical Jews to work in camps. Sure it cost six million lives, but you cannot think intelligently about it unless you ask yourself how many millions it might have cost if the changes had not been made. There has never been in human history great social change without killing. During the purge of the Jews, only a tiny percentage of the population was involved and the same years which saw the removals saw some of the greatest triumphs of Soviet planning. While the screws tightened on a tiny minority, the majority of Aryan people were enjoying greater prosperity." -- Akira]

In 1953, seeking to justify violence associated with the Purges, Leo Huberman [Jew] and Paul Sweezy [Jew], two American academic Marxists, asked:

“Is violence used to perpetuate a state of affairs in which violence is inevitable, or … [is] it used in the interests of creating a truly human society from which it will be possible at long last to banish violence altogether?”

This was a rationalization the Nazis could also have gladly endorsed; after all, once they purified the world of Jews there was not going to be any further need for violence.

Thus to the extent that the Soviet mass murders and political violence were confronted by those on the Left, and especially the far Left, they were morally neutralized by the time-honored device of viewing them as regrettable means to glorious ends. Legitimizers of Soviet violence were interested only in the ends and knew little of the means, nor were they anxious to learn about them. Sartre provided the most ambitious (and morally repellent) rationalization for this position:

“Like it or not, the construction of socialism is privileged in that to understand it one must espouse its movement and adopt its goals; in a word, we judge what it does in the name of what it seeks and its means in the light of its ends. . .”

Even more remarkable, in the 1930s the Soviet prison camps were often viewed as humane institutions of character reform rather than places of slow extermination. According to Anna Louise Strong, they were “remaking criminals.” Professor Gillin, a leading authority on penology and former president of the American Sociological Society, averred that “the system is devised to correct the offender and return him to society.” Ella Winter was delighted to learn that criminals were not treated as outcasts. Harold Laski [Miliband's Mentor - Akira] (the hundredth anniversary of his birth recently celebrated) had no doubt about the superiority of the Soviet penal system over its Western counterparts. He was also struck “by the excellent relations between the prisoners and the warders . . .” (Reference to any such foolishness was missing from the article in the December 1993 New Republic entitled “Our Harold,” written by his biographer.) The Webbs [Fabian Socialists, a la Blair et al - Akira] found the prisons “as free from physical cruelty as any prison in any country is ever likely to be.” Maurice Hindus, the veteran reporter on Soviet affairs, concluded that “Vindictiveness, punishment, torture, severity, humilation have no place in this system.” [In "Broken Earth", Hindus said that there was no "antisemitism" is the USSR, where "The Jew is a Free Man!" - Akira] Mr. and Mrs. Corliss Lamont spoke to prisoners who informed them that they did not feel as if they were in prison, and the Lamonts had no difficulty believing this. This was in the 1930s. A decade later Henry Wallace and Owen Lattimore still found much to praise in the notorious prison camps of the Soviet Far East.

During World War II, the wartime camaraderie precluded inquiry into the Soviet outrages. During the classic Cold War years there was a greater readiness to criticize the the Soviet system, but the immediacy of the massive, well-documented evil of the Holocaust helped to blot out concern with possible Soviet equivalents. [How convenientt - Akira]

At the end of the 1940s McCarthyism arose and strongly reinforced the attitudes here examined. Ironically, Senator McCarthy achieved exactly the opposite of what he had intended: he succeeded in discrediting, for decades to come, opposition to Communist movements and systems.

[This is because McCarthy was empowered by the Judeo-Communists to catch some  sacrificial "low-hanging fruits", and then gotten rid of when he got close to the truth. BTW, McCarthy was not with the HUAC, which itself was set up by the NKVD, via the Lithuanian Jew spy Congressman and Justice Dickstein, as a Judeo-Masonic way of controlling opposition. - Akira]

In his book-length critique of anti-communism Parenti linked it to “patriotic hooliganism, collective self-delusion, the propagation of political orthodoxy, the imprisonment of dissenters, and the emergence of a gargantuan military establishment … Abroad anti-communism has brought us armament races, nuclear terror, the strengthening of oppressive autocracies … the death and maiming of American boys and the slaughter of far-off unoffending peoples. … [it] brought us grief and shame. After McCarthy a vocal anti-communist stand became an embarrassment (“witch hunt,” or “Red baiting”), an attitude disdained by self-respecting liberal intellectuals, journalists, and even politicians.”

From the 1960s until the rise of Gorbachev in 1985 it was the dread of nuclear war that exerted the major influence on Western perceptions of the Soviet Union. The peace movement successfully promoted the belief that questioning the moral record of the Soviet system would undermine peace. Instead we were urged to focus on matters which our two countries have in common, as for example the love of children and the goodness of ordinary people. Since trust was so ardently sought, it was worse than impolite to seek to unearth Soviet policies of the past (and some of the present) which would have given pause to those in pursuit of good relations.

An 1983 account by a member of an American peace delegation to the Soviet Union was typical: “…what we lacked in knowledge we made up in enthusiasm and we shared a.. faith that women of our two countries were probably more alike than different.” It was further argued that “people who cultivate wheat can’t possibly want war.” Norman Mailer ably summed up these feelings: “We live with the scenario that Russia is an evil force. Now, the world is on the edge of destroying itself. Can we afford abhorrence any longer?” Two prominent peace activists, Drs. Chivian and Mack, even found that Soviet concealment of the Chernobyl disaster was owing to the laudable “tendency on the part of the Soviet leadership to downplay catastrophes and instead offer reassurance to the Soviet people so as to prevent emotional distress.” They averred that such practices were beneficial for mental health.

Such attitudes were not limited to peace activists and intellectuals. A Yankelovich survey in 1984 found that younger and better educated Americans were more willing to give the Soviet Union the benefit of the doubt and had more trusting attitudes; their majority believed that “we would be better off if we stopped treating the Soviets as enemies and tried to hammer out our differences in a live-and-let-live spirit.”

Whatever the merit of these attitudes for preventing nuclear war, they were not apt to create an atmosphere in which Soviet mass murders could be critically examined and evaluated, comparatively or otherwise.

The peace activists were motivated not only by the fear of nuclear war. There was cross-fertilization between the peace movement and what came to be called the adversary culture. Highly critical of U.S. foreign policy and of traditional American social/cultural values, these movements were disinclined to be critical of any political system which was also critical of their own. Suffused with an acute awareness of the ills of their own country, they were doubtful that any other system could exceed its evils.

It was under these conditions that the concept of moral equivalence between the United States and the Soviet Union emerged. Sam Keen [Jew] wrote:

“In the current USSR-U.S. conflict, we require each other as group transference targets. … We see the Soviets as making the individual a mere means to the goals of the state. They see us as sanctifying the greed of powerful individuals at the cost of community, and allowing the profit of the few at the expense of the many. And so long as we trade insults, we are both saved from the embarrassing task of looking at the serious faults and cruelties of our own systems.”

Characteristic of this mindset were the contentions of Richard Barnet in what I once called the definitive handbook on moral equivalence, The Giants, published in 1977. He suggested, among many other parallels, that “both societies were suffering a crisis of legitimacy,” [true, true -- Akira] that “the madness of one bureaucracy sustains the other” [so true! -- Akira], and that “each [country] is a prisoner of a sixty-year-old obsession.” Marshall Shulman [Jew; founding director of W. Averell Harriman Institute for Advanced Study of the Soviet Union at Columbia University, information officer for the U.S. mission to the U.N., special assistant to Dean Acheson, special advisor on Soviet affairs to Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance, associate director of the Russian Research Center at Harvard University], the well-known Sovietologist and former high-ranking State Department advisor, began a major article in Foreign Affairs in 1987 with what became a standard incantation:

“Both the Soviet Union and the United States have been so constrained by parochial domestic interests and weighted down by outworn ideologies that they have been unable to summon up a competent and enlightened management of their affairs … proportionate to their respective and common problems. The images of moral equivalence also deeply penetrated popular culture. Le Carre portrayed the espionage establishments of both the United States and the Soviet Union as corrupt, the Americans often markedly more so, “idiots and/or fascistic puritans … objects of authorial loathing” as Walter Laqueur recently observed. James Bond movies made sure that the bad guys were rarely actual KGB agents but rather renegades of some kind [just like in James Bond movies there has never been a Jewish villain, unless you count Goldfinger ... No. no ... Bond believes Goldfinger to be a Balt, and Goldinger was banned in Israel because the actor had been a Nazi Party member; the character was named after a Hungarian Jew Goldfinger who built the British Communist Party's HQ -- he threatened to sue Ian Fleming, until Fleming threatened to change the name to Goldprick; Ernst Blofeld was a Graeco-Polack of all things; Dr. No was a typical Sino-Teuton Methodist  Freemason, played by Joseph Rubin Wiseman; Max Zotin was the product of Nazi medical experimentation, an Überkind raised by the KGB and played by Überkraut Christopher Walken -- Akira], or deranged fanatics of no discernible political affiliation giving trouble to both superpowers.

There is no doubt that the deeply felt belief in the moral (or immoral) equivalence of the United States and USSR was in large measure responsible for a climate in which it was not easy to publicly discuss or evaluate the historic moral outrages of the Soviet system.

It should also be noted that until its actual [artificial and engineered] collapse there was hope (in the West [lodges]) that the Soviet system could be reformed [combined with the "West" as a great Judeo-Masonic Capitalo-Communist Megastate]. The USSR survived much longer than Nazi Germany [because the USSR was created by the lodges and synagogues and Nazi Germany was opposed by the lodges and synagogues], and that in itself seemed to prove something. The reforms that followed the death of Stalin, and later Gorbachev’s rise to power, provided something of an implicit retroactive justification for the horrors of the earlier era. Could the great sacrifices have been for nothing?

Gorbachev created high expectations of both reform and institutional continuity, so much so that the historian Moshe Levin [Jew] envisioned (in 1988) a rejuvenated Party and union of states:

“For the party is the main stabilizer of the political system and few groups would back measures likely to erode the integrity of the entire union or the centralized state. The party … is the only institution that can preside over the overhaul of the system without endangering the polity itself in the process. There was new hope, among some American intellectuals, that at long last under Gorbachev socialism with a human face might arise at the birthplace of the deformed system.”

[That was the plan, but the Russian's have been removing the Judeo-Masonic "socialists" and their "Western" Judeo-Masonic "capitalist" enablers. But Obama is the new "socialism with a human face". Ugly, yes, but still somewhat human. - Akira]

Anti-Anti-Communism

AT THE HEART of these asymmetries two principal strands converge. There are on the one hand the remnants of an old pro-socialist idealism that cannot bring itself to believe the worst about a system which at one time was reputed to be the builder of socialism; it is galling for critics of capitalism to rank its arch-enemy as a moral rival of Nazi Germany.

[Capitalism is Communism - Akira]

What makes this residual affinity especially compelling as an incentive to ignore or minimize the crimes of the Soviet system is its distinguished lineage, which includes so many eminent American intellectuals and public figures from the 1930s until the Gorbachev era. No list of similar length and distinction could be compiled of American conservatives expressing admiration for Nazism, sympathy for which was largely confined to fringe elements in American politics and public life. And if a recent PBS documentary (America and the Holocaust) sought to establish American moral failure regarding assistance to the victims of the Holocaust, there is room for a similar searching look at American attitudes and policies regarding some of the victims of Stalin (in particular the Soviet refugees repatriated to the Soviet Union after World War II) and at the moral restraints which grew out of the wartime cooperation, as well as from illusions regarding the nature of the Soviet system.

The second strand is the hardy heritage of McCarthyism: its unintended [co-ordinated] discrediting of anti-communism which gave rise to anti-anti-communism, a mindset strengthened by the rejection of Western values that emerged in the 1960s.

In the anti-anti-communist position two contradictory attitudes came together: on the one hand, it was perfunctorily acknowledged that Communist systems (or some of them) were bad, but asserted that this did not justify dwelling on their shortcomings; on the other hand, anti-communist attitudes were denounced as an obsession, a fantasy, a phobia, a pathology [like "antishemitism"? - Akira], and a metaphor for everything that was wrong with American society. Once the criticism of and concern with Communism was deemed an aberration, little room was left for freely expressing moral indignation over its misdeeds, including the mass murders of Stalin.

As long as the attitudes here described persist–and especially the sentiment that the evils of American society outweigh all others and disqualify its members from passing judgment on the moral outrages committed by Communist [or Nazi? - Akira] governments — there will be little incentive to confront and reassess the moral implications of the [Judeo-Masonic] Soviet mass murders.

Zapoznanie dziewczyny przez nk
uwaga nie radze tego próbować hehe ale takie pomocne rady można znaleźć w sieci. Kompletna porażka….

“Ja doradziłbym Ci coś takiego:
Widzę, że już ją trochę obserwujesz – na bank wiesz gdzie np. chodzi do sklepu po zakupy, na jakim terenie chodzi wyprowadzac psa (może ma jakiś “utarty szlak” którym zawsze podąża). Obserwuj i daj się zaobserwować -> zacznij chodzić w te same miejsca ALE nie śliń się do niej od razu Zobaczy Cię kilka razy w realu i wtedy jej wyslij zaproszenie (nie pisz wiadomości) tylko zaproś do znajomych. Wiadomość wiązałaby sie z tym, ze mogła by sie domyślić co planujesz i zwyczajnie OLAC a takze to, że piszesz do niej na NK a nie odezwiesz sie w realu przedstawialoby Ciebie jako pierdołę (sory za zwrot;)).

Teraz opcje są dwie:
1A) Przyjmie zaproszenie i nic nie napisze -> przy nastepnym “przypadkowym” spotkaniu w realu zagadujesz do niej
1B) Przyjmie zaproszenie i napisze wiadomość -> pierwsze lody przełamane -> ustawiacie sie na wspólne wyprowadzenia piesków w realu
2. Odrzuci zaproszenie. Wtedy jej piszesz coś w stylu: “Sory – żadko siedzę na NK, a przez przypadek wysłąlem zaproszenie do Ciebie zamiast do dziewczyny, którą spotykam na osiedlu”.
Nie ma opcji, żeby nie odpisała -> A twdy w zalezno.ści od odpowiedzi działasz dalej. Kontakt jest

TYLKO pamietaj: PIERWSZE MUSI CIE ZOBACZYC KILKA RAZY W REALU DOPIERO POTEM WYSYLASZ ZAPROSZENIE NA NK ;]”

Dziewczyny z naszej klasy. Najładniejsze i najbardziej sexowne dziewczyny wybrane starannie z portalu Nasza Klasa i podobnych. Nagie Zdjęcia dziewczyn z Naszej Klasy. Fajne laski z nk.

Super laska prezentuje bikini. Laska w bikini pieści swoje ciało.

Pluralism vs State Sovereignty

Laski as a pluralist is the most forceful and sweeping critic of the theory of absolute sovereignty of state. In his ‘A Grammar of Politics’ he goes so far as to declare that it would be of “lasting benefit to political science, if the whole concept of sovereignty were surrendered” and more particularly the ‘arid’ and ‘unfruitful’ concept of legal sovereignty.

The views of Laski and other pluralists are at variance both in the way they attack the traditional theory of state sovereignty and the position they precisely assign to other associations in the pluralist society. Laski is not at one with everything that Dugnit, Figgis, Barker, Cole, Lindsay or Maclver has to say on this subject. While Dugnit attacked the absolute theory of sovereignty mainly from juristic point of view; Figgis sought to provide autonomous right of churches and communities; Barker was concerned more with economic and professional groups, Laski was anxious to assign a place of honour to trade unions. Just like the advocates of idealism, utilitarianism, liberalism and communism, exponents of pluralism laid different and varied emphasis on certain aspects of their theory. Again, like these “isms”, pluralism was not a rigid theory as is often mistaken from Laski’s radical views and often forgotten that later on Laski himself had abandoned these views as leading to anarchy of association and jumble of trade unions, competing, quarrelling and fighting among themselves. Caker is, therefore, right in defining pluralism in such words. According to him Pluralism, is a term applied to the somewhat varying doctrines which are alike in their common opposition to the traditional theory of state sovereignty.

We are here to examine chiefly Laski’s views on this subject, who, as Coker says, is most sweeping and emphatic of all pluralist in his theoretical attack on monistic conception of state sovereignty. No theory of state is created ex-Nihieio. Laski, who, like Machivelli, was amenable to the influence of his age, was not expected to fly in the high airs of abstract imagination. He never created a Utopia like that of Thomas More. Laski, as an exponent of pluralism, shows the influence of Mill and Green who had already questioned the states claim to omnipotence by assigning to the individual a moral personality whose personal liberties state had a duty to safeguard.

“All pluralist theory” says Coker (Including Laski’s theory) ‘‘shows the influence on the one hand, of earlier sociological and juristic discussion of the states relations to economic and professional groups and, on the other hand, of broader ethical and philosophical ideas as to the value of variety and freedom in self-expression as J.S. Mill’s moral and intellectual individualism and in T.H. Green’s idealist doctrine of self-realization”.

Besides the influence of utilitarianism of Mill, idealism of Green, Fabianism of Webb, Shaw, Juristic discussion on the relations of social and economic group with the state had significant impact on Laski’s political thought. Before we describe the nature, implications and consequences of attack it is relevant to explain in brief the object of attack. Crushing blows have been dealt to the so called absolutist view of state sovereignty.

The most sought for target of disparagement is Hobbes concept of absolute sovereignty (and Austin’s view of legal sovereignty). In fact case for pluralism is a straight fight between Hobbes and Laski. Both have their supporters and camp-followers. If Hobbes is prince of absolutism, Laski can be regarded standard-bearer of pluralism’s attack on absolutism. The former is the godfather of the traditional theory of state sovereignty while the latter has come to be regarded its grave- digger.

Jumalauta! Se saatanan läski sit on haastamassa mua käräjille jostain vitun tasa-arvoskeidasta! Ja henkisestä kivusta ja mielipahasta läädi läädi VITTU JOO! Perkele! Siis jumalauta tää on holhousyhteiskunta, pitäiskö tommosen lyllerön vaan antaa edesvastuuttomasti kulkee kauppaamassa itteensä töihin kuntosaleille, terveysalan firmoihin ja kai se johonki missikisoihinki itteensä ja ruhoonsa tunkee. Vittu tätä mä vähiten kaipaan kun nyt alkaa joulusesonki ja oon hukkumassa tähän kaikkeen ja pitäis lähtee vielä tappeleen lehterille jonkun syltyn kanssa!

Miten vitun hukassa ihmiset on ittensä kanssa. Voitteko kuvitella et BB-Justiinakin on mainostanut olevansa pieni ja pienirintainen. Siis se melkein 180-senttinen amatsoni, jonka astellessa tanner tömisee. Ja se marko on kyllä niin surullinen tapaus, se huohottaa koko ajan kun se on niin pahasti ylipainoinen, jo pelkkä tiskaaminen näännyttää sen. Se mies on varmasti sairas eikä yhteiskunta saisi rohkaista ihmisiä tekemään kropalleen kaikkea edesvastuutonta, kuten polttamaan tupakkaa, vetämään viinaa ja ylensyömään.

Hah, mä otan kasan nauhoitteita oikeuteen tuekseni. Näytän niille BB-Markoo ja onneks mulla on vielä tallessa Dr. Philin jakso, jossa oli äärettömän läskejä, kuoleman partaalla olevia lapsia, joiden vanhemmat eivät hennonneet laittaa niitä kuriin. Ja mun kaveripiiristä onneks löytyy oikeusoppineita vaikka millä mitalla, laardi tulee niin kympillä kyynelehtiin.

Vittu. Ees Leena Mörttisen, Mörttyliiniseni kuvien tsekkailu ei nyt lohduta.

Dzisiejsza notka będzie nacechowana szowinizmem i negatywnym nastawieniem do kobiet. A wszystko dlatego, że po premierze filmu “Galerianki” spędziliśmy blisko 10 godzin biegając po Złotych Tarasach szukając okazji i… nic. Teraz wy szukajcie na Allegro ciuchów w okazyjnej cenie od użytkownika JakŻyć.

Po naszym ostatnim apelu wprawdzie przysłałyście nam całą masę swoich fotek, ale na wszystkich jesteście ubrane! Jakbyśmy chcieli pooglądać sobie ubrane laski, to byśmy kupili sobie TeleTydzień. Ale to nie koniec długiej listy faux pas popełnianych przez dzisiejsze kobiety. Żyjemy w czasach, gdzie mężczyźni mają szybkie samochody, konsole do gier i redtube’a, więc na drodze naturalnej ewolucji odpowiedzialność za przedłużenie gatunku i prokreację spada na kobiety (a z tym u nich słabo).

Korzystając z okazji pragniemy wyróżnić TeleTydzień jako jedno z naszych ulubionych czasopism. Mówi o życiu jak mało co, serio!

To smutna prawda, ale mężczyźni w dzisiejszych czasach się zmienili. Niektórzy mają nawet własnego męża. Spadek zainteresowania płcią przeciwną drastycznie maleje, choć nie bez przyczyny. Pozostaje więc przejąć pałeczkę (i naprawdę to zdanie nie zawiera żadnych podtekstów), przeczytać naszego bloga i zabrać się do roboty!

Jako idole milionów Polaków, którzy wprawdzie nigdy nie wyrywali żadnego faceta, ale gdyby tylko chcieli to na pewno by wyrwali, zdradzimy wam, nasze czytelniczki, tajniki uwodzenia facetów. Sami boimy się, co z tego wyniknie, jednak świadomi faktu, że los ludzkości jest obecnie w naszych rękach – zaryzykujemy! Oto krótki poradnik, który sprawi, że nawet sami Zakościelny, Małaszyński, Hołownia, Kuba i Kazik wam się nie oprą!

1. Bądź ładna

No dobrze, jednak coś napiszemy, bo nasz żydowski wydawca płaci nam wierszówkę od ilości słów. Nasze zasady są proste i klarowne. Jeśli jesteś ładna, to nie oprze ci się żaden facet. Prawdopodobnie nie stworzysz z nim rodziny, albo nawet na odwrót – jeśli dodatkowo obydwoje nie grzeszycie inteligencją to istnieje spore ryzyko, że jednak stworzysz, choć nie będzie to waszą intencją. Jeśli jesteś ładna to ładnie wyglądasz w czarnym, czerwonym, pomarańczowym, a nawet zielonym. Jeśli jesteś ładna to nie płacisz mandatów, nie dźwigasz tornistra, a wszyscy faceci są dla ciebie mili. Jeśli jesteś ładna to obcy ludzie zapraszają cię do znajomych na Naszej Klasie!

Dziewczyna z Colą. W całych googlach nie mogliśmy znaleźć dziewczyny z Cherry Coke. To skandal, więc ogłaszamy konkurs. Przysyłajcie nam swoje zdjęcia z Cherry Coke. Nagroda - jeśli jesteś ładna - upojna noc z Kubą, jeśli jesteś brzydka - upojna noc z Kazikiem.

2. Dbaj o swój PR

Jesteśmy w stanie zrozumieć, że piękno to pojęcie względne. Jeśli już jesteś gruba, brzydka, zezowata, łysiejesz, wypadają ci zęby, masz 20 lat, a za  sobą już menopauzę, itp., itd., etc., – naprawdę, TO WIDAĆ. Zasadą prawidłowo działającego Public Relations jest ukrycie swoich wad, dlatego opowiadanie o nich na lewo i prawo to nie koniecznie skuteczna metoda walczenia z kompleksami. Tak samo jak eksponowanie niedoskonałości. Jak jesteś gruba to nie wkładaj obcisłych bluzek, tylko coś luźnego. Można wyglądać fajnie, bez obrzydzania innym życia. Jeśli dobrze się zamaskujesz ofiara będzie twoja, a w decydującym momencie niestety trudno się wycofać.

Czujemy się okropnie i wiemy, że pewnego dnia pożałujemy tej notki… Ale warto dodać, że duża ilość dobrego alkoholu sprawi, że każda z was stanie się piękna.

3. Cycki

Każdy facet lubi cycki. Jeśli twierdzi, że nie lubi, są mu obojętne, “kocha cię za co innego”, “docenia twój charakter” to znaczy, że jest gejem albo twój tata jest bogaty, a on ma długi. Najpewniej ściga go mafia. Nie jest prawdą, że nadmierne eksponowanie biustu czasem bywa niestosowne. Prawdę powiedziawszy gdyby któraś z was aplikowała do redakcji JakŻyć to jedynym kryterium jakim byśmy się kierowali byłyby wasze cycki. Zwłaszcza od czasów, gdy wynaleźli te ekspresowe kawy w saszetkach.

Cycki. Ktoś może poczuć się zgorszony, ale my wierzymy w teorię sex sells.

4. Gotowanie

Miejsce kobiety jest w kuchni To już nie jest średniowiecze, zaś ty możesz śmiało zająć się rozwijaniem swojej osobowości. Nie może jednak dojść do konfliktu interesów i twój mężczyzna nie powinien chodzić głodny. Nie gotuj mu obiadu, bo i tak zrobisz to gorzej niż jego matka. Prawdopodobnie zrobisz to gorzej nawet niż pani Barbara z pobliskiego speluno-baru, ale tak to jest, jak zamiast szkolić się w sztuce gotowania, zachciewa ci się fryzjera, kosmetyczki albo studiów.

Zamów mu pizzę. Będzie szczęśliwy. Będzie jeszcze bardziej szczęśliwy jeśli tę pizzę podasz mu nago (chyba, że jesteś brzydka – wtedy nie), a najszczęśliwszy na świecie będzie jeśli podasz mu ją wraz z litrem idealnie zmrożonej Cherry Coke.

5. Reguła Ligi Mistrzów

Gdy brakuje tematów do rozmowy z facetem, zawsze, ale to zawsze można porozmawiać o piłce nożnej. Jeśli chcesz trafić w jego gusta pozytywnie i z aprobatą wypowiadaj się o poczynaniach jego ulubionej drużyny (a także pokrytykuj PZPN i głośno krytykuj pomysł powołania Dudka). Rozpoznanie ulubionej drużyny twojej potencjalnej ofiary jest bardzo proste. Przeciętny heteroseksualny facet zaczyna interesować się piłką nożną w wieku 8-10 lat. Dodajemy więc do daty jego urodzin te 8-10 lat i sprawdzamy kto w tamtym okresie wygrywał finał Ligi Mistrzów. Odrzucamy niemieckie drużyny, bo żaden szanujący się Polak nie będzie kibicował Bayernowi albo Borussi. Teraz pozostaje tylko przychylnie wypowiadać się o tych drużynach (masz przynajmniej 33% szansy, że trafisz!) i facet jest twój.

Jeśli zastanawiasz się czemu twój facet nie kibicuje Bayernowi Monachium to na tym obrazku masz przynajmniej jeden powód.

Uważaj jednak, żeby nie przeholować. Jeśli okaże się, że zbyt dobrze kumasz klimaty futbolu zostaniesz jego kumplem z cyckami. A kręcenie z własnymi kumplami jest obleśne.

6. Rodzice & ślub

Sesja wrześniowa, wizyta u stomatologa i poznanie twoich rodziców to trzy najgorsze rzeczy jakie mogą spotkać w życiu twojego potencjalnego chłopaka. Uwierz nam na słowo. Jest jednak jeszcze gorsza, ponadligowa rzecz jaką możesz wyświadczyć swojemu obiektowi zainteresowań. Jest to nagabywanie do oświadczyn. Otóż przeciętny heteroseksualny mężczyzna nie myśli o ustatkowaniu się przed trzydziestym rokiem życia, jeśli to robi to:

- ma długi (nie będzie chciał słyszeć o rozdzielności majątkowej)

- jest gejem (szuka przykrywki, nie będzie chciał słyszeć o nocy poślubnej)

- mama mu każe (będziesz miała teściową w domu co 2 dni, na dodatek wypomni ci, że nie umiesz gotować i zamawiasz chłopakowi/mężowi pizzę).

7. Cycki

Wiemy, że już było, ale na wszelki wypadek jeszcze raz przypominamy!

Google twierdzi, że cycki to tylko za pieniądze. Galerianki były (a raczej: nie były) innego zdania...

8. Feminizm

Jeśli jesteś zadeklarowaną feministką nie powinnaś szukać sobie chłopaka, a tym bardziej zawracać mu głowy tymi pierdołami u równouprawnieniu. Najprawdopodobniej gówno to obchodzi, a jeśli jest inaczej, to z całą pewnością twój chłopak jest gejem i liczy, że razem zaczniecie chodzić na parady.

9. Szanuj się (trochę!)

Przeciętnego normalnego faceta kręcą łatwe panienki (jeśli jest inaczej, to znaczy, że jest on gejem i po prostu szuka kumpla z cyckami do czytania poezji, chodzenia na parady i zajebiste imprezki w Utopii), ale z drugiej strony doktryna wyraźnie przestrzega przed nazbyt łatwymi panienkami.

Wprawdzie zza oceanu napływają pozytywne wieści na temat walki z wirusem HIV, niemniej jednak obawa przed nadmiernym uwikłaniem w ojcostwo jest znacznie większa. Chyba, że facet ma więcej niż 30 lat, wtedy ma inne priorytety. Albo jest gejem i… ok, chyba już załapałyście.

Dziewczyna ze wsi

Szczególnie mocno szanujcie się dziewczyny ze wsi. Macie tam w ogóle internet? Zrobicie wszystko byle tylko mieć dziecko przed 18 rokiem życia i ustawić się w najpowszechniejszej w waszym regionie sposób unijnych dotacji o nazwie Alimenty!

10. Przejmij inicjatywę!

Kup swojemu facetowi kwiaty, zaproś go do kina i restauracji, w automacie na stacji benzynowej zaopatrz się w co trzeba, potem spędźcie przyjemne chwile w jego sypialni, po czym nad ranem zniknij niepostrzeżenie i więcej nie dzwoń i nie pokazuj mu się na oczy!

Po 11 czyli Katecheza: Czytaj nasz blog.

Trudno ukryć (staramy się, nie jest to jednak łatwe), że jesteśmy zajebiści. Wasze babki i matki nie miały tyle szczęścia (czyt.: internetu) co wy, dlatego dziś są stare i brzydkie. Dzięki naszym poradom zajdziecie naprawdę daleko, a być może pewnego dnia w “tej trudnej rozmowie” polecicie naszego bloga swoim córkom.

The Wikipedia page on the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition was repeatedly ripped out by an anti-gun cabal. I seems that Wikipedia has become politicized and manipulated by the Politically Correct.

Below is the content, minus all the references, about Mayor Bloomberg’s coalition. Please go to Mayors Against Illegal Guns Conservapedia page to see it all. http://www.conservapedia.com/Mayors_Against_Illegal_Guns

There are a lot of indictments and felony convictions for members of a “crime fighting” organization!

The Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition is a leftist political coalition of mayors from about 400 United States cities, with a stated agenda of “making the public safer by getting illegal guns off the streets.” The group was formed by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The coalition’s CEO is Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.

The majority of members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition are Democrats.

Criticism of Methods and Hypocrisy

Bloomberg has been sued for defamation by a Smyrna, Georgia gun dealer represented by former congressman Bob Barr.^[1][2]

Indicted, convicted, and scandalized members

A substantial number of member of the coalition have been indicted in recent months, on felony charges. Here in the US, conviction of felony means the immediate loss of both the right to vote and the right to own a gun for the rest of one’s life. This is an organization that espouses doing away with “illegal guns”, yet a surprising number of their members have made choices in their lives that have set themselves on the path to being disenfranchised from ever owning a gun.

Personal character and integrity are prerequisites for anyone entering public office, to serve in an elected position of “special trust and confidence”, such as a mayorship. Abuses of that trust, gross lapses of integrity, and forays into criminal conduct are not tolerated in our society. If anything, elected politicians are held to a higher standard than the general public, and their actions are closely watched. For an elected official to become a criminal, when they themselves are entrusted to protect us from criminals is nearly the most heinous and unforgivable thing imaginable in a democratically-ruled republic. For some of these same individuals to continue to be considered members in good standing of a “crime-fighting” organization–and not even censured by the organization–has been criticized as being hypocritical.

Four current and former members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition are currently under felony indictments, five others were recently convicted of felonies, one indicted member died of a heart attack before completion of his trial, and one member was recently convicted of a violent misdemeanor. The indicted and convicted members and former members include:

• Former Mayor Gary Becker^[3] of Racine, Wisconsin is under five felony indictments for child pornography, attempted child sexual assault and child enticement.^[4] He resigned after pleading not guilty and being released on bond.^[5] His location is currently being monitored electronically, as he awaits a trial scheduled to begin in October, 2009.^[6]
• Former Mayor David Della Donna^[7], of Guttenberg, New Jersey was indicted under a Federal extortion and mail fraud charges.^[8] He was convicted in 2008^[9] and sentenced to four years and three months in federal prison.^[10]
• Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted in 2009 on twelve counts^[11], comprising four counts of perjury, two counts of misconduct, three counts of theft, and three counts of fraudulent misappropriations.^[12] The felony theft charges stem partly from incidents in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 in which she allegedly misappropriated gift cards intended for the poor and used them for personal purchases.^[13][14] Dixon’s trial, originally scheduled for September 8, 2009, was postponed to November 9, 2009.^[15]
• Mayor Jerramiah Healy was convicted for obstruction of justice in 2007^[16] and more recently was implicated in the corruption sweep in New Jersey involving the sale of body parts and money laundering. In all, 44 individuals were indicted. (Healy was named as “JC Official 4″ and implicated, but was not indicted, in the probe.)^[17][18][19]
• Former Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was indicted, arrested, and convicted. and subsequently jailed for 99 days. Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to two felony obstruction of justice charges stemming from his efforts to cover up an extramarital affair. He also pleaded no contest to charges of assaulting a police officer attempting to serve a subpoena on a Kilpatrick friend in that case.^[20] The charges and allegations (not all against Kilpatrick himself) were of marital infidelity, conspiracy, perjury, corruption and murder.^[21] Following Kilpatrick’s conviction, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms called on Kilpatrick to resign from the Coalition.^[22]
• Mayor Larry Langford was investigated in 2007 by the SEC on corruption charges. In 2008 a lawsuit was filed against him for illegally accepting $156,000 in cash and benefits. On December 1, 2008, Larry Langford was arrested by the FBI on a 101 count indictment^[23] alleging conspiracy, bribery, fraud, money laundering, and filing false tax returns^[24] in connection with a long-running bribery scheme.^[25][26][27] His trial date was postponed to October 2009, and the trial venue moved to Tuscaloosa, Alabama.^[28]
• Deceased Mayor Frank Melton at the time of his death was under felony indictment on civil rights charges.^[29] (He died before a scheduled re-trial, following a mistrial.) In 2006, Melton pled guilty to a firearms charge, stemming from a raid (in which he was armed with a concealed pistol) on a suspected crack house. Melton conducted the extra-official Buford Pusser-style raid without a warrant to “bust up” a duplex apartment, accompanied by a group of youths that were not sworn law enforcement officers. That same event led to Melton’s civil rights indictment. In November 2006, he pleaded no contest to three misdemeanor charges: carrying a gun in a park and in a church, and carrying a concealed weapon.^[30]
• Mayor Eddie Perez was indicted on bribery, fabricating evidence, and conspiracy to fabricate evidence felony charges.^[31] Perez turned himself in to state police, stating that he had a lapse in judgment but did nothing illegal, and vowed that he would not step down as Hartford’s mayor.^[32] He was arraigned on September 8, 2009.^[33] His trial date was postponed to November 2009^[34], and then to February, 2010.^[35] On September 2, 2009 Perez was again arrested, and additionally charged with first-degree larceny by extortion, stemming from a no-bid parking lot deal, unrelated to the other corruption charges.^[36] He again proclaimed that he would stay in office, despite these new felony charges.^[37]
• Former Mayor Samuel Rivera, of Passaic, New Jersey was convicted of corruption, influence peddling, and extortion charges.^[38][39] In August 2008 he pled guilty,and was sentenced to 21 months in prison.^[40]
• In 2008, former Mayor Will Wynn was convicted of Class C misdemeanor, for a choking assault on a man who had crashed a party.^[41]

Five current members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition have been troubled by scandals that involved firearms:

• As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg came into office, he inherited a chronic firearms permit favoritism scandal from his predecessors that still remains an unresolved issue. Writing in the New York Sun, attorney David Kopel observed: “The problem is acute in New York City. Celebrities, the ultra-wealthy, and the politically influential get carry permits. But many of the people who need them the most — such as stalking victims, or crime witnesses who have been threatened by the criminal’s friends — often do not.”^[42] There are currently only about 36,169 permits to keep firearms in private homes in New York City, with the majority issued to retired police officers. Of these permit holders, only 2,516 are more liberally licensed for concealed carry outside their homes. The issuance of permits is discretionary in New York City, per Penal Law 400^[43]. (It is considered a “may issue” locality, unlike the “shall issue” policy used for concealed carry in most other localities.) Despite “tight” restrictions on “demonstrated need or special danger”, a who’s-who list of celebrities, billionaires^[44], entertainers^[45], professional athletes^[46], and politicians^[47] has somehow managed to get firearms permits. This list includes New York Times publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, publisher Michael Korda, and talk show host Howard Stern.^[48] In 2007, The New York Post reported that gun license holders include financier Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr., Queens district attorney Richard A. Brown, Westchester County district attorney, Janet DiFiore, music executive Tommy Mottola, chief executive of Marvel Comics, Isaac Perlmutter, radio show host Don Imus, lawyer Barry Slotnick, lawyer Raoul Felder; publisher Robert Forbes, the cab-driving political activist Fernando Mateo, former new York Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno (recently indicted for fraud), actor Robert De Niro, actor Harvey Keitel, film producer Martin Bregman, cosmetics heir Ronald Lauder, and Aerosmith singer Steven Tyler.^[49][50] All of these individuals have retained their gun licenses under Bloomberg’s “tough on guns” administration. The New York Post noted: “Television news anchor John Roland, who let his license lapse in 2006, got his gun permit back in 2007.”^[51] A surprisingly high number of celebrities have concealed carry permits, rather than the more common “keep at home” (premise) permits. According to The New York Times, “Mr. Bloomberg asked Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly to look at the issue, and added: ‘If you want a gun permit, you should have to really show that your life is in danger, and that having a gun will protect you, will improve the chances of you surviving.’”^[52] But despite Bloomberg’s publicly-stated concern, there have been no announcements of any celebrity gun permits being rescinded, or any reforms to prevent favoritism, cronyism, bribes, or other abuse of discretion in license issuance. With a city population of 8.3 million, the 36,169 gun permit holders represent just .043% of the population and the 2,516 concealed carry permit holders represent a scant .003% of the population.
• Mayor Richard M. Daley has been criticized for the city of Chicago’s long-standing practice of providing armed bodyguards for a number of city politicians, including city clerk James “Jim” Laski. In the city clerk scandal, Daley was shamed into removing the perk of the armed bodyguards for the clerk. The Chicago Sun-Times reported: “The decision was made almost immediately after Laski became the first elected official to be caught up in the Hired Truck scandal. But Daley insisted that the bribery and extortion charges against Laski were not the trigger. It was the fact that, until this week, Laski had not been showing up for work.”^[53] Laski was later convicted of taking $48,000 in bribes and received a two year sentence.^[54] Former Mayor Eugene Sawyer, City Treasurer Judy Rice and Alderman Edward M. Burke, chairman of the City Council’s Finance Committee still have armed bodyguards.^[55]
• Mayor Gerald Jennings of Albany, New York was implicated in a scandal regarding the alleged illegal purchase of 52 machine guns.^[56] It is unclear whether the weapons were purchased for departmental use or for the use of private individuals. Weapons were delivered to Police Department addresses but apparently paid for with private funds. The Department has not produced a list of weapons, their location, the names of the individuals who purchased them, or their disposition or destruction. At least one later turned up, illegally for sale to the public, in an area gun store. The police officer who sold the gun to the store has testified that he bought it from a Police Union official who was also the Department’s armorer.^[57] The current Chief of Police is the fifth appointed by Jennings.^[58] The case is still open.^[59]
• Following the illegal seizure of firearms in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Mayor Ray Nagin settled a lawsuit and had a permanent injunction issued prohibiting Nagin or any New Orleans employee from confiscating any lawfully possessed firearm and ordering the return of hundreds of illegally confiscated firearms. (They had been confiscated at Mayor Nagin’s order.).^[60] Nagin’s administration has also been troubled by reports of improprieties with the police department evidence rooms, where guns were stolen, guns were allowed to rust, and $200,000 in cash was stolen.^[61][62]
• Mayor Bill White’s administration has been embarrassed by an ongoing scandal involving guns stolen from the Houston Police Department’s evidence room. In January 2009, the Houston Chronicle reported: “For months, maybe years, people with criminal backgrounds had access to secure areas of the police station, including a property room from which 30 guns disappeared within six months, according to internal police documents. The documents, obtained by the Houston Chronicle, indicated that lax security created an environment ripe for theft. No one has been charged in the gun thefts, although police suspected telephone repairmen who admitted stealing other items, and a temporary employee who had access to the property room while awaiting trial on aggravated robbery charges.”^[63][64]

Resignations from the coalition

Announced resignations

Twelve mayors that had been members^[65] have withdrawn from the organization, claiming either that they were misled about the group’s anti-gun platform, or that they were enrolled in the coalition without their knowledge.^[66][67][68] They are:

• Idaho Falls, Idaho Mayor Jared Fuhriman^[69]

• Carmel, Indiana Mayor James Brainard

• Rio Rancho, New Mexico Mayor Kevin Jackson^[70]

• Anchorage, Alaska Mayor Mark Begich^[71]

• Oldmans Township, New Jersey Mayor Harry Moore^[72][73][74]

• Walton Hills, Ohio Mayor Marlene Anielski,^[75]

• Williamsport, Pennsylvania Mayor Mary B. Wolf^[76][77]

• Madeira Beach, Florida Mayor Patricia Shontz^[78]

• Knoxville, Tennessee Mayor Bill Haslam^[79][80]

• Warsaw, Indiana Mayor Ernest B. Wiggins^[81]

• Sioux Falls, South Dakota Mayor Dave Munson^[82]

• Houston, Texas Mayor Bill White^[83]

In her resignation letter, Mayor Patricia Shontz of Madeira Beach, Florida wrote, “I am withdrawing because I believe the MAIG is attempting to erode all gun ownership, not just illegal guns. Additionally, I have learned that the MAIG may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership.” She added, “It appears the MAIG has misrepresented itself to the Mayors of America and its citizens. This is gun control, not crime prevention.”^[78]

In his resignation letter to Bloomberg, Mayor Harry Moore stated: “It is simply unconscionable that this coalition, under your leadership, would call for a repeal of the Shelby /Tiahrt amendment that helps to safeguard criminal investigations and the lives of law enforcement officers, witnesses and others by restricting access to firearms trace data solely to law enforcement. How anyone, least of all a public official, could be willing to sacrifice such a law enforcement lifeline in order to gain an edge in suing an industry they have political differences with is repugnant to me. The fact that your campaign against this protective language consisted of overheated rhetoric, deception and falsehoods is disturbing.”^[84]

The resignations of Kevin Jackson and Jared Fuhriman left the state of Idaho completely unrepresented in the organization, and Alaska with just one representative mayor. Since Mayor Rocky Anderson of Salt Lake City left office, it has also left Utah unrepresented. Mayor Kathy Taylor of Tulsa, Oklahoma has announced that she will not seek re-election^[85], and as of September, 2009, her name has been removed from the coalition’s roster. This also leaves Oklahoma unrepresented. According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors there are 1,201 cities in the US with a population of 30,000 or more that are headed by mayors.^[86] Several of the mayors in the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition represent even smaller towns and cities–particularly in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which are disproportionately represented.

Legislative Initiatives

With the stated goal of reducing the number of straw purchase of guns, the coalition has favored new legislation to require mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns.^[87] As of September, 2009, seven states (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Rhode Island) and the District of Columbia have laws criminalizing failure to report lost and stolen guns to law enforcement. Several other states and local governments are working to pass similar laws.^[88] Critics counter that straw purchases are already illegal, and hence mandatory theft and loss reporting laws are redundant.^[89]

Former prosecuting attorney C.D. Michel analyzed mandatory reporting laws, using one in Ventura County, California as an example: “Ironically, the ordinance cannot be used against the real bad guys. No law can compel lawbreakers to report themselves. So a straw purchaser who legally buys a gun cannot be compelled to report that he resold it illegally. And since it wasn’t actually lost or stolen, he hasn’t violated the ordinance. Similarly, if a felon prohibited from possessing a gun illegally possesses one anyway, and it is lost or stolen, he can be prosecuted for having the gun in the first place, but cannot be prosecuted for failing to incriminate himself by reporting the loss. Enforcement of these ordinances places prosecutors in a precarious legal and ethical position. Say a straw-purchaser’s gun is recovered at a crime scene and traced back to him. If he lies to police claiming his gun was “stolen” when he really sold it on the black market, will we nonetheless prosecute him for something he did not do (fail to report the “stolen” gun — which wasn’t actually stolen) but to which he “confessed”? Ethics and legality aside, securing a misdemeanor conviction for failing to report a theft (that never occurred) likely prohibits prosecuting the straw purchaser for the more serious felony black market sale or for making a false statement to police. Perhaps worse, gun owners who truly are burglary victims must now hesitate to speak with police if their stolen gun is recovered at a crime scene. If the gun owner failed to report the loss at all, or on time, she faces possible criminal prosecution if she cooperates with police investigating the recovered gun. She should remain silent, get a lawyer and seek immunity first. Legal representation may also be appropriate when a gun is first discovered missing. The owner can be prosecuted if the theft is not reported within 48 hours of when the owner “should have known” the gun was missing. Proponents have made clear they believe “responsible” gun owners should know where their gun is at every single moment and “should know” a gun is gone immediately. And the fear of prosecution will encourage those who miss the 48-hour window not to report the loss at all. Effectively, these ordinances place the legitimate gun owner in jeopardy of prosecution for becoming a victim of a crime. In light of these liabilities, gun-rights groups and the criminal-defense bar have begun advising gun owners — who would ordinarily be happy to assist police with their investigation — that they need a lawyer if they are contacted by police.”^[90]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Mayors_Against_Illegal_Guns

Decentralization of power is a paramount necessity because absolute power is likely to corrupt absolutely those who wield and in the second place is likely to result in its perpetuation and ultimate destruction of civil liberties of the people and their representative institutions, as well as voluntary associations.

It is the right of the trade union to be concerned in the administration of industry and to be consulted in the determination of wages that pluralists like Laski attach importance to.

The problem of representation is to enable mass of men to have some share in the government, howsoever indirect, periodic and inadequate it might be. Laski grants sufficient freedom to representatives and warns that too much cannot be expected from them. They will not be delegates in the sense either (a) ‘making all their views on new problem back to their constituents for approval’. Nothing more is conceded to the people than their right to elect their representatives once in ‘four or five years and, in the case of national emergency, right to put pressure through their groups. As mere right to vote is not enough so is the existence of representative institutions. A system, to be just, must have educated a politically conscious system and exercise discretion in the selection of their representatives. They should also have rights, leisure and minimum economic well being.

There seems to be “no inseparable bond between pluralism and administrative decentralization”. Laski’s pluralism involves the making of decisions out of the interests which will be effected by them and, in turn their application by those interests. For Laski it means self – government in industries like mining, textile and steel; it also means existence of consultative bodies or representative of the professions, e.g., surrounding the Ministry of education with bodies entitled to speak on behalf of parties to the educational process and entitled to be consulted because they are entitled to speak. And, for Laski it also means the abandonment of concept of state sovereignty in the sense which ‘equates’ government with society.

The principle of social organization in the pluralist society of which Laski speaks is that an individual is entitled to act in the way his instructed conscience directs him. It is the insistence that coordination should grow from within and not be imposed from without. Laski’s scheme rightly recognizes the necessity of a coordinating authority but, be it noted, not of the same type as was advocated by hobbies in Leviathn and even as exists in the modern class states of which we have ample experience.

This ‘creative coordination’ can only be there if for the whole people conditions of decent life exist. To prove the validity of this Marxian truth Laski reiterates that a man cannot be his “best self, if he is involved in a perpetual struggle to satisfy the barest minimum of physical appetites”. A society to be pluralist and just, must therefore, recognize all the rights postulated by Laski. Freedom of speech if life blood of the society. Without universal education some will have access to power and inclination to perpetuate them in power. If vast property is held in private hands , its owner will control the state in their own interest to the exclusion of property less.

BOHATEROWIE

Anna Dlugolecka – „zona w stanie rozwodu“  z wyksztalcenia – kosmetyczka, „licencjonowany menager“ a poza tym: projektantka mody, podrozniczka, poetka, grafik, fotograf a ostatnio takze rezyserka, scenograf (w jednej osobie) oper Mozarta jednym slowem kobieta renesansu zwana w blogu ARTYSTKA w wyjatkowy na skale swiatowa sposob umiejaca roztrwonic kazde zarobione przez jej oficjalnego (jeszcze niestety) meza pieniadze …. oczywiscie w imie „sztuki“….

DON GIOVANNI (DG) – narrator, na codzien na papierze (jeszcze niestety) maz Artystki, zwany w blogu DON GIOVANNIM (DG) w chwili obecnej probujacy ulozyc sobie jakos zycie z dala od wielkiej „sztuki“ oper, mody i wszystkiego tego co finansowal przez ostatnie 5 lat….

Dariusz Mikulski – obecnie jeszcze dyrektor w Filharmonii Walbrzyskiej i staly (bardziej lub mniej ale za to od 15 lat) kochanek Artystki , wprowadzajacy ja od 3 lat w arkana sztuki operowej zwany dalej w blogu DYREKTOREM

Maciek Malicki –  kochanek Artystki, ktory z braku  pomyslu na zycie zostal misjonarzem i ‚krolem Zimbabwe“, (koles), ktory za pomoca strony internetowej skutecznie zwabia zadne ‚afrykanskich przygod“  kobiety z polski na swoja misje w Bulawayo (Zimbabwe), wyznajacy zasade ze w zyciu liczy sie tylko „sex,drugs & rock’n roll“ a przyjaciel to dla niego gosc co kase pozycza lub wodke stawia… zwany dalej w blogu MESJASZEM

Nasz bohater, nasz  idoil wybawiciel Don Giovanniego, Dyrektor, Dyrygent Dariusz Mikulski pokazal w koncu ze ma jaja I ze niezly z niego kawalarz bo pozwal Don Giovanniego do Sadu o obraze majestatu!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wierni Blogo Czytacze ! W koncu slowo stalo sie cialem I mamy prawdziwy, najprawdziwszy z prawdziwych process o znieslawienie ….. !!!!!!!!

Pan Dyrektor-Dyrygent  pozwal mnie malego I drobnego Don Giovanniego przed oblicze Sadu Najwyzszego, Iz w blogu swym (znaczy sie tym) obrazam jego dobre imie, gdyz on nigdy ale to nigdy przenigdy nie mial romansu z zona DG, (ze nawet jej dobrze nie zna)…

…a w zwiazku z tym nie moglo to miec wplywu na fakt wyrezyserowania opery przez kosmetyczke z zawodu I ze oskarzenia te (o nepotyzm) uniemozliwiaja  jemu biednemu robaczkowi wiarygodne prowadzenie jednostki budzetowej…..a poza tym,ze DG oskarza go w swoim (znaczy sie tym) blogu o kradziez……ale za to ….. bez wlamania.

Wezmy przez chwile na powaznie slowa Pana Dyrektora Dariusza Mikulskiego i zestawmy z zacytowanym na obrazku powyzej smsem. juz po krotkiej analizie wcale nie popartej naukowymi badaniami wyniklo by nam, ze kolega Dyrygent to mitoman i erotoman gawedziarz a tego typu zwierzenia czyni do ktorejs swojej reki…. to ja juz wole uchodzic za dupcyngera inwestora niz przyznac sie ze w wieku prawie czterdziestu lat nadal jade na recznym…a to chyba bedzie probowal przed sadem udowodnic Wybawiciel Don Giovanniego.

Po otrzymaniu oskarzenia z Sadu, DG zadzwonil wiec doDyrektora/Dyrygenta (robaczka biednego) I zaproponowal, aby ten akto skarzenia wycofal w zamian za co DG obiecuje nie wspomniec o tym ani slowem aby nie robic Dyrektorowi wiecej obciachu.

Po chwili, kiedy to Dyrektor odzyskal juz mowe odpowiedzial : “oddajmy krolowi co krolewskie a cesarzowi co cesarskie…..”i tu …… Don Giovanniemu az dech zaparlo z radosci, ze wreszcie Panstwo (Kochankowie z Werony –  Artysci Prawdziwi) zechca oddac zainwestowana w ich opery i ksztalcenie kase i wlasciwie to juz nie bedzie mial im wiecej za zle, ze wyzywaja go od krolow lub cesarzow

a poki co moi Drodzy Blogo Czytacze w oczekiwaniu, az spelnia swoja obietnice mamy rozprawe, ktora odbedzie sie w Warszawie , na ktora Was wszystkich serdecznie zapraszam w charakterze swiadkow i widzow…. WSTEP WOLNY !!!!!!!!!! A o dokladnym terminie powiadomie na blogu….. tez nie moge sie doczekac ! )

zanim przesmykne sie do klu tematu , krotko nawiaze do dzisiejszej prasy w ktorej to przeczytalem,

ze niejaka DODA obrazila uczucia religijne (katolikow) i prowadzone jest przeciwko niej sledztwo na

podstawie donosu przewodniczacego Ogolnopolskiego Komitetu Obrony przed Sektami niejakiego Rysia Nowaka.

Od razu poczulem miete do niejakiej DODY i wyszedlem przy tym na nieuka I wsiocha bo kompletnie nie kojarze kobiety

ale o to mniejsza bo przyplusowala znajomoscia tematu z zakresu Biblii za co groza jej 2 lata odsiatki.

(Kocham ten kraj !!!!!!!)

Otoz podczas jakiegos wywiadu DODA powiedziala (cytuje za info w internecie )

bo ciężko wierzyć w coś, co spisał jakis napruty winem I palacy jakies ziola“.

Pominmy zatem kwestie wolnosci slowa bo ona zarezerwowana jest tylko dla katolikow. Ze niby nie mam racji ?

…… no to dowod jeden z wielu! – kolega Wojtek  Cejrowski (ktorego nomen omen bardzo lubie i cenie za jego sposob na zycie i

umiejetnosc sprzedawania tego na zewnatrz) nazywa gejow pedalami i wszystko ma byc ok !!!!!!!!!

Pominmy zatem takze kwestie, iz Pan Rysio przewodniczy organizacji zajmujacej sie tepieniem konkurencji

dla kosciola katolickiego, ktory sam w sobie jest najwieksza sekta na swiecie …

…….bo spelnia wszystkie warunki jakie sa niezbedne aby tak ja okreslac.

Pominmy zatem takze fakt, ze uwielbienie katolikow do alkoholu jest atrybutem ich

religii, co potwierdzaja ksieza podczas kazdej mszy, kiedy to nawyzywawszy swoim

klientom (wierzacym) od alkoholikow, w 2 minuty pozniej zapijaja to kieliszeczkiem

(sorry) kielichem wina czyniac to bezczelnie na oczach  spragnionych wiernych,

niepomni na wlasne nauki ze spragnionego nalezy przynajmniej poczestowac jesli nie napoic.

(przy okazji dodam iz popijane wino jest pedzone potajemnie i rozprowadzane bez banderol,

pomysleliscie o tym ? … jaki to rynek ?…. a jaki to wniosek ? ….

…..no nie podaruje sobie tego ,

….musze to napisac …..

najwieksza produkcje i dystrybucje nielegalnego alkoholu ma w Polsce …… kosciol !!!!)

Pomijajac cala ta kwestie musze jeszcze przytoczyc anegdote z Biblii, kiedy to Jezus

na jakiejs imprezce slubnej chcial sie zaprezentowac i zamienil wode w wino jakby

katolicy bez gorzaly nie mogli pobalowac.

Dlatego tez nastepnego dnia kiedy trzeba bylo kaca leczyc i wyslac kogos po wode -…. blagali,

aby poszedl ktokolwiek byle nie Jezus.

Tak wiec skoro pominelismy juz wszystkie istotne kwestie pozostaje sie zastanowic

za co naprawde (no bo przeciez nie „za prawde“) katolicy moga byc oburzeni na kolezanke DODE.

Otoz tylko i wylacznie za slownictwo.

Bo gdyby zamiast slowa „napruty“ uzyla „napity“ a zamiast „jakies ziola“ po prostu „maryche“ to wszystko

byloby ok, a tak moze byc pierwsza w Polsce skazana za nieumiejetny dobor slownictwa,.

Mogl on przeciez zasugerowac odbiorcom, ze tworcy Biblii to moczymordy icpuny a przeciez wszyscy wiemy, ze tak nie JEST !!!!

Bron boze !!!!!!!!!

Przeciez pierwsi papierze (prezesi) tej firmy / sekty , zbierajac do kupy luzne zapiski paru madrych ludzi

i wydajac je w formie Starego i Nowego Testamentu nigdy nie dotykali alkoholu i mlodych dziewczat (chlopcow),

odmawiali sobie dobrego jedzenia i wszystko co im bogaci przynosili oni oddawali natychmiast biednym.

I wogole cale zycie spedzili na poniewierce w kurzu i spekocie aby tylko katolicy mieli swoj elementarz.

Swoja misje doprowadzili do perfekcji i wydali cos co czytaja wszyscy i wszyscy maja nauki w niej zawarte gleboko w dupie.

Poczawszy od pijanych rozpustnych prezesow (papierzy) a na klientach (wierzacych) skonczywszy.

Bo jak inaczej nazwac zachowanie ludzi, ktorzy sluchajac „pieknych nauk o przykladnym zyciu“ ,

po wyjsciu z kosciola znecaja sie nad rodzina, pija, kradna i morduja.

Patrzac na ich zachowanie Don Giovanni postanowil nigdy w zyciu nie przeczytac Biblii bo niedaj bog stanie sie taki jak oni.

A skoro tak, to jak widac w podtytule tej opowiastki : „ dobry katolik to martwy katolik“ i za nim rzuca sie na DG coby go ukrzyzowac (co tylko potwierdzi ich

niewatpliwa tolerancje, dobroc i umiejetnosc przebaczania) postaram sie udowodnic moja teze.

Dowod bedzie krotki :

Po pierwsze, drugie …. i ostatnie :

martwy katolik nie grzeszy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tak wiec umierajac uwalnia ten swiat od swojego bytu, ktory juz od samego poczecia byl efektem grzechu i tak juz mu zostalo do konca.

Ktos jednak moze mi zarzucic : „… przeciez tylu wspanialych ludzi bylo katolikami !“

odpowiadam wprost : swiat jest pelen zblakanych owieczek, a im ktos lepszy tym latwiej ulega socjotechnice.

Ta socjotechnika doprowadzona do perfekcji przez Watykan na przestrzeni dziejow, wpoila katolikom niewiarygodny strach przed smiercia.

W jej obliczu wali sie wszystko i nawet ksieza nie staraja sie z tym chwilowym brakiem wiary walczyc.

Przykladny katolik uczeszczajacy regularnie do kosciola i przyjmujacy sakramenty

(czyli w nomenklaturze pozostalej czesci swiata – przechodzacy nastepne stadia

wtajemniczenia) wie, ze jesli bedzie „grzeczny“ za zycia, to po smierci czeka go nagroda w postaci nieba,

gdzie jest cudownie i pieknie i bez problemow.

Jesli natomiast „grzeczny“ nie bedzie to wyladuje w piekle czyli bedzie mial przerabane na wieki wiekow.

Niesttety, jak juz wczesniej na lamach tego bloga pisalem, kosciol nie daje gwarancji

na zbawienie katolikom, nawet jesli przestrzegaja dekalogu.

A dlaczego nie gwarantuje ? – bo zbawienie jest produktem czysto marketingowym co dociera do katolikow dopiero,

gdy smierc odbiera im najblizszych.

Zamiast podskakiwac z radosci, urzadzac fieste i balowac calymi dniami i nocami na czesc umarlego

(bo przeciez w koncu przestal sie meczyc na tym ziemskim podole i ma okazje bez problemow istniec w raju lub niebie….jak zwal tak zwal),

katolicy wylewaja lzy, biadola i rozpaczaja na czym swiat stoi.

Zmiast w mysl doktryny katolickiej dzien pogrzebu uczynic radosnym swietem, oni czuja sie pokrzywdzeni i

nieszczesliwi nie myslac o tym, ze osoba ktora odeszla z tego porabanego swiata jest od tej chwili poprostu i zwyczajnie

WOLNA !!!!

(a wiec bylo nie bylo szczesliwa)

Nikt nie moze juz jej skrzywdzic. Nic zlego juz jej nie dosiegnie.

Takiego podejscia do tematu nie reprezentuja nawet sami ksieza, ktorzy podczas ceremonii pogrzebu beznamietnym glosem i ze wzrokiem tepo wlepionym w dziure

ziemii powtarzaja : „… cieszmy sie i radujmy bo oto Pan przyjal swoja owieczke do zycia wiecznego…“

Normalnie w takich chwilach wszyscy dookola powinni podskakiwac z radosci. Tanczyc, spiewac jednym slowem – cieszyc sie (szczesciem zmarlej osoby).

Juz slysze te slowa skierowane po adresem DG. Ze jest tepym cynikiem i ciekawe co by powiedzial gdyby jemu ktos naprawde bliski umarl ?????? !!!!!!!!!

Wiec DG odpowiedzial by, ze jego bol nie znalby granic, bo nie jest katolikiem i nie wierzy w brednie o zyciu wiecznym wiec zachowywalby sie uczciwie

w stosunku do swoich pogladow. I chodzilby oplakiwac droga mu osobe we wszystkich miejscach, w ktorych ramen przebywali.

I dlatego, niepojetym jest dla DG sposob rozumowania (lub raczej braku rozumowania) katolikow, ktorzy wbrew swojej religii Swieto Zmarlych uczynili

dniem smutnym i przygnebiajacym. Nie jest to natomiast wbrew ich sugestiom dzien refleksji, bo jesli przez 364 dni w roku nie zrozumialo sie idei gloszonej przez ich

religie to nie ma nadzieji ze stanie sie to wlasnie teraz.

I tym optymistycznym akcentem:

POZDRAWIAM WAS WSZYSTKICH Z OKAZJI DNIA WSZYSTKICH ZAKOPANYCH

PS. dla porzadku podam, ze zdjecia wykozystane w tej czesci bloga pochodza w ulubionego przez DG w ostatnim czasie kalendarza wyprodukowanego przez firme

„LINDNER“ zajmujaca sie produkcja trumien (www.zptlindner.pl)

No i to byloby na tyle refleksji, ktore przepelnily DG na 3 dni przed majaca sie odbyc kolejna sprawa rozwodowa, podczas ktorej to rodzice artystki beda zeznawac jaki to z

DG byl dran i przestepca i jak pastwil sie nad rodzina. Poniewaz sa praktykujacymi katolikami wiec nie cofna sie przed zadnym klamstwem i oszczerstwem i zdaje sie ze

ten etap rozwodu DG bedzie mial pod gorke. Jednak dzielny jest z niego ”maz” i zamiast chodzic po cmentarzach zastanawiajac sie po raz kolejny nad geniuszem

wiary katolickiej kompletnie niezrozumialej dla jej wyznawcow oddal sie czytaniu emailii od artystki co natychmiast wprawilo go w ”doskonaly nastroj” w sam raz na ta

chwile i natchnelo do napisania swojej auto  kontra jej biografii.

Pora  ku  temu j est  jeszcze t ym  bardziej  odpowiednia , gdyz juz w grudniu tego  roku  nasza  najlepsza  polska  kosmetyczka  wsrod  rezyserow  operowych

i jednoczesnie najlepszy polski rezyser operowy wsrod  kosmetyczek bedzie przedstawiala „swoje dzielo“ czyli „Czarodziejski  Flet“ na deskach samej   OPERY WROCLAWSKIEJ.!!!!!!!!!

Poniewaz  sukces  jest  gwarantowany   (finansowy,  bo t ylko  takim DG  w  tej chwili jest zainteresowany)  Don Giovanni zamierza sie zwrocic do Pani Michnik ( Dyrektora Opery) o sprawiedliwy podzial lupow.

Zapowiada  sie  wiec  duzo  szumu I  pewnie  wszyscy  chcieliby  wiedziec  kim jest  skad  pochodzi,  z  kim chodzi I dokad zajdzie  Anna Dlugolecka.

Tak wiec panie I panowie dziennikarze ! ponizej dostajecie gotowca ….

Za  darmo (poki co….)

Nieautoryzowana biografia

Anny Dlugoleckiej I Dariusza Mikulskiego

w powiazaniu z autobiografia autoryzowana

Don Giovanniego

rok 1964 – bez wczesniejszych uzgodnien I bez porozumienia z nim samym ….. na swiat przychodzi Don Giovanni,…potem przedszkole, szkola podstawowa, pierwsza komunia, druga komunia, trzecia……,

w tym czasie w 1971r, gdzies na dalekiej prowincji w niewielkim  miasteczku zwanym do dzisiaj Makowem Maz.  przychodzi na swiat dziewczynka, ktora na zawsze zatruje zycie wielu ludziom…..

….DG nie majac poki co pojecia o jej istnieniu dzielnie kroczy przez zycie i konczy osrodek szkolno-wychowawczy a w 1983 podejmuje studia dzienne – czteroletnie, ktore szczesliwie (dla wykladowcow) konczy po 10 latach…

w tym czasie dziewczynka z Makowa dorasta……..

w tak zwanym miedzyczasie (czyli pomiedzy zajeciami w szpitalu i na uczelni) od 1984 roku DG pracuje Ii samodzielnie zarabia na utrzymanie swoje i otoczenia, a w 1988 otwiera swoja pierwsza firme (glupi I naiwny bo od tej chwili ma juz same klopoty I nigdy chwili spokoju)….

W tym czasie dziewczynka z Makowa dorasta nadal …..

W 1990 r DG poznaje swoja pierwsza zone I od razu zakladaja bardzo podstawowa komorke spoleczna. Brak doswiadczenia DG w tych sprawach wydluza mu okres podjecia decyzji o slubie do 5 lat;. Dopiero po 5 latach wspolnego mieszkania, niekonczacych sie imprezach i sprawdzeniu ze wybranka aby na pewno jest doskonala gospodynia , zeswietnie prowadzi dom , doskonale gotuje, ze jest w stanie wiele zniesc i wybaczyc wiele i ze lepszej to juz nigdy nie znajdzie, DG postanawia sie oswiadczyc i w czerwcu 1995 wypowiada sakramentalne TAK !!! …. na „wieki wiekow … AMEN“ ….

W tym samym czasie dziewczynka z Makowa dorosla bardzo i ukonczyla szkole podstawowa, liceum I studium kosmetyczne w Gdansku.

Czas jest pojeciem wzglednym i „wieki wiekow“ trwaly cale 3 miesiace, kiedy to DG podczas spotkania ze swoimi starymi przyjaciolmi wysluchal ich usprawiedliwienia z powodu nieobecnosci na jego pierwszym w zyciu slubie. To co uslyszal, rzucilo zupelnie odmienne swiatlo na jego wybranke. Wsciekly na przyjaciol, ze mogli mu przeciez przynajmniej wydatkow zaoszczedzic, po 5 latach wspolnego zycia i 3 miesiacach malzenstwa, trzasnal drzwiami zostawiajac wszystko i zlozyl pozew o rozwod.

Zachcialo mu sie takze rozwodu koscielnego I w tym celu udal sie do

KURII.

Tam, po godzinie oczekiwania na lawce (na szczescie nie na kolanach) w

przerazliwie zimnym I ciemnym korytarzu, sekretarka/asystemtka/sluzaca zwana potocznie siostra ksiezy zaprowadzila

DG przed oblicze dosyc opaslego papieza po czym po cichutku zamknela

drzwi jakby sie bala ze z futryn wyleca ,bo cegly nie na zaprawe tylko

chlopskie jaja byly murowane.

Papierz nawet nie ruszyl tylka z za biurka tylko popatrzyl groznie na

usmiechnietego DG i nie mogac sie doczekac , burknal pierwszy :

- niech bedzie pochwalony Jezus Chrystus …

- no….. niech bedzie…. Dzien dobry … odpowiedzial radosnie DG

- z czym synu do mnie przychodzisz ? – zadudnilo pytanie

DG wyjatkowo nie lubi kiedy ktos podszywa sie pod jego ojca, ale zeby nie

zadrazniac sytuacji I dac poczucie wladzy przeciwnikowi odparl grzecznie :

- trzy miesiace temu wzialem slub w kosciele I chcialbym sie teraz

rozwiesc…

I tu nastapil dziesieciominutowy wyklad na temat nieodpowiedzialnosci,

braku szacunku itd…. Przerywany sapaniem I przeklenstwami rodem

z samego Watykanu… DG sluchal cierpliwie udajac niedorozwinietego bo

inaczej musialby wstac I przylac papiezowi, ktory najwyrazniej go obrazal.

Na szczescie przestal go nazywac wlasnym synem, za co DG przyznal mu

jeden punkt I zakwalifikowal do dalszej konwersacji.

Kiedy papiez mocno juz sie zasapal, DG spytal uprzejmie :

- ile ?

I ku swojemu zdumieniu uzyskal bardzo precyzyjna odpowiedz bez

jednego nawet sapniecia:

- trzykrotnosc miesiecznego dochodu…

„shit ! czy on zglupial do reszty ?“ – pomyslal DG – „I jak tu czlowiek ma

byc uczciwy ?“

ale papiez najwyrazniej przejrzal pokretne mysli DG I nadal bez sapniecia

dorzucil :

- ale dochod przyjmujemy na podstawie zaswiadczenia z urzedu

skarbowego…

„to cwaniaczek drobny ! , to barbarzynca, zdzierca ! to konkwistador !!!“ –

DG nie wierzyl wlasnym uszom…. „Wiec nie ma problemu z rozwodem

koscielnym, jest to tylko sprawa kasy ??????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DG postanowil sie wiec targowac I rozpoczal obslizgle :

- prosze pana, fakt ze prowadze firme nie dyskredytuje mnie w

oczach Boga wiec proponuje zwyczajowa stawke, czyli co laska,

czyli max 5 zl…

jednakze slowa DG jakby nie docieraly do siedzacego naprzeciwko, ktory

najwyrazniej obliczywszy sobie w myslach ile zarobi gdy zlupi DG, oddawal

sie blogiemu shopingowi czyli modlitwie (w nomenklaturze katolickiej).

Nie mogac doczekac sie zadnej reakcji DG postanowil podbic stawke :

- no dobra ,niech panu bedzie trzykrotnosc czyli 15 zl ..

nic…..

tylko cisza w odpowiedzi…

straszna cisza….

powietrze zaczelo powoli gestniec…

chyba bedzie lalo….

oczy papieza powoli nabieraja wyrazistosci,, jego duch powraca na ziemie,

jego sylwetka prezy sie coraz bardziej a usta otwieraja sie powoli….

Otwieraja sie I otwieraja…. Od wciaganego (gestniejacego) powietrza,

twarz papieza stala sie juz purpurowa, ale on nadal nie przestaje wciagac

…..

„shit „ – pomyslal DG – „ jak tak dalej pojdzie, to….“ Nie konczac juz

nawet mysli, rzucil sie w kierunku okna I otworzyl je na osciez.

Do zimnego pokoju wplynelo cieple wilgotne jesienne powietrze.

Od razu zrobilo sie fajniej….przynajmniej Don Giovanniemu. Promienie

slonca swiecily mu prosto w twarz I to przyjemne ciepelko wlalo w niego

nastepna porcje optymizmu. Odwrocil sie wiec radosnie do mezczyzny za

biurkiem I spytal :

- to co , deal ?

papiez, ktoremu najwyrazniej to swieze powietrze tez posluzylo, bo twarz

z purpurowej zmienila sie na zielona, poderwal sie gwaltownie na nogi I

nie mogac wykrztusic zadnego cenzurowanego slowa zaczal wymachiwac

rekami liczac na inteligencje DG….

I tu sie nie zawiodl, chociaz z poczatku DG myslal, ze papiez rece po kase

wyciaga I juz chcial mu 15 zl nasypac, kiedy papiez jakas niezbornoscia

ruchowa sie wykazal I jego rece zaczely latac niczym holenderskie

wiatraki.

DG bojac sie rozsypac tyle kasy, czym predzej schowal je do kieszeni,

nacisnal klamke I rzucil na odchodnym :

- nie, to nie..

Po tych niezwykle odwaznych  slowach DG rzucil sie do ucieczki zanim papiez zdazy

jakies posilki wezwac I do lochu na wiele lat go wtracic.

Gdy tylko opuscil ponury gmach KURII (przez nikogo nie niepokojony oczywiscie) na

zewnatrz przywitaly go piekne, piekielnie piekne i cieple promienie slonca.

„ach“ – westchnal DG – „zycie jest piekne…“

CD wkrotce bedzie opublikowany……………..

Kännissä olet ääliö, niin ku mäkin

No näinhän siinä kävi, että vedin pari Buranaa massuun ja lähdin kuitenki yöhön. Tarkoitus oli käydä vaa kuuntelee frendin keikat nopeesti, mutta  baarikierrokseks se meni kuitenkin, snadisti. Tiedän jo nyt, että tää oli tyhmä veto, mut alkoi kaatuu seinät päälle, kun kaikki oli liikkeellä. On tää surullinen kaupunki, ainakin sateella, ja verrattuna Helsinkiin. Jengi on ihan naamat aivan sama onko ikää 14 vai 41. Kyl mää välil mietin, että miten helvetissä pystyy pitää omat kersat poissa tosta perseilystä, mitä noi nykyteinit harrastaa?

Tommoset just yläasteella olevat tytöt kulkee puolialastomina kaupungissa ja on niin naamat, että lähtee kenen tahansa matkaan, jossei vapaaehtoisesti niin pakolla. Housut roikkuu niin, että puoli persettä näkyy ja paidat sopis kooltaan paremmin Barbeille. Ei saatana sentään. Ja kundit… Hädin tuskin 12 vuotta vanhemmat talliaiset vetää reippaasti viinaa suoraan pullosta ja polttaa ku korsteenit. Huumekauppiaatki on tullut osalle tutuiks. Siis mitä helvettii? Ja mikä oudointa pullosta juodaan keskellä katuu poliisien silmien alla yhtään  häpeilemättä. Mäkin kulmalla yks teini kerättiinkin sit poliisiautoon, kun se kusi maijan kylkeen ja oli vääntämässä torttua samaa settiin. Idiootti, tai ehkä se tartti yöpaikkaa, kun ei voinut mennä känässä himaan. Oliko tää muka tällaista munkin nuoruudessa? Ei taatusti. Tai sit aika vaan kultaa muistot.

Mut pahimpia on noi keski-ikäiset, jotka huuruissaan pyrkii Hämeensiltaan tai johonkin vastaavaan aikuisten lihatiskimestaan. Ei jeesus. Päivällä niin fiksuista ja huolitelluista sihteereistä, sairaanhoitajista, myyjistä ja Kelan tädeistä kuoriutuu yöllä todellisia vamppeja. Hyi karmee sentään, mikä saa ryppyisen viiskymppisen akan lyömään lilaa luomiväriä naaman täyteen nii, et näyttää Nykäsen uhrilta. Tai sit se äiti-helmiäinen. Voi jeesus.. Eiks ne tiiä, että vaalee korostaa ryppyjä? Mäki tiiän enemmän meikeist Seijan takii kun noi uutta nuoruutta etsivät epätoivoiset horot.  Niin, ja jossei silmien sotamaalaus riitä, niin toki tumman bleiserin taskusta löytyy myös kirkkaanpunainen Lumene-huulipuna vuodelta -76. “Uutta en osta, kun tätäkin on viel niin paljon jäljellä”. No, kai sitä on, jos käyttää sitä kerran vuodessa ja silloinkin onnistuu tekemään ittestään enemmän Riesapellen näköishahmon kuin tyylikkään aikuisen naisen. Ja ne avokkaat. Jeesus sentään. Ståhlbergilla on sellaiset mummoballet, mutta se onkin MUMMI.

Yhtä asiaa mä kuitenkin “ihailen” noissa ikälopuissa rilluttelijoissa. Nimittäin itsevarmuus niillä tuntuu olevan huipussaan, ainakin päihteessä. Tiukat läskejä korostavat topit, jotka sopis ennemminkin tätien lasten päälle, kuin heille itselleen, on tosi rohkeita, eli ällöjä. Avokauluksisista paidoista tunkee esiin ne kolme lasta imettäneet rinnat, joita epätoivoisesti yritetään hivuttaa ylemmäs rintsikoilla, joissa ei ole edes kaaritukia. Kukas sitä nyt semmoisia moderneja push-up -luomuksia käyttäis? Hei, ottakaa mallia teini-ikäisistä tytöistänne.  Keski-ikäisistä äijänlantuista en sano mitään. Ei ansaitse vuodatusta.

Niin joo… Asiaan. Lopulta päädyttiin Ipaan. Ensin kiepattiin tosin Kotibaariin kautta muutamalle. Halpa kalja on selkeesti ajanut manselaiset Kotiin.  Istumaan pääsystä ei siis ollut toivoakaan. Sama Tabussa. Vedin muuten sielläkin lasin paskaa punkkua ja nautin muutaman siduka, kunnes frendit lähes kantoi Ilvekseen.  Onneks oli tuttu kaveri ovella, ni päästiin järkevästi sisään. Oli muuten helvetin hankala  liikkua tupaten täydessä raflassa kolmioliinan kanssa. Melkein jouduin tappeluun, kun vahingossa puskin kyynärpäällä munafarmareissa, purkkareissa ja nahkavahvike-pikkutakissaan kuljeskelevaa Toijala-junttia kylkeen. Perkele sentään, ei iso mies kolmioliinoineen voi mahtua pienempään tilaan.

Illan huipennus tapahtui Ipan aulassa just ku olin lähdössä himaan. Siinä  pikkupäihteessä lörpöttelin aikani puolitutun mimmin kanssa (Kauppiksen Kiertopalkinnoksikin kutsutun), joka kyseli, tunnenko mä kauppiksesta sitä jätkää, joka kirjoittaa Ristipissareita. Voihan vittu! Joku frendi oli pistäny FB:ssä Yön saalistajaan linkin ja nohevana tyttönä muikki oli lukenut, et yksi kirjoittajista on kauppakorkeessa. No niin just … Oli vähän pokassa pitelemistä, kun esitin täysin tietämätöntä. Nauroin mielessäni hiljaa kipeenä, kun muija ylisti mua siitä, että oon kunnon  mies, enkä sellainen sika niinku “se Jontte”. Ihan ku se ois henkilökohtaisesti tuntenut jonten, vaikka se mies ei tod. missään kauppisporukoissa liiku. En tietty eleelläkään paljastanut, että oon P-Man, vaan olin jutussa mukana  pokkana ja kyselin, lukeekse itte blogii ja mitä diggaa siitä. Ilmeisen suuri bolemiikki on syntynyt kauppislaisten keskuudessa siitä, kuka se yks “tuttu” kirjoittaja on. Kuulin siltä muikilta villin huhun: Joku tokan vuosikurssin jätkä ois alkanut lyyä vetoa kirjoittajien henkilöllisyydestä. Voi morjens! Oiskohan isot rahat jaossa? Kelpais työttömälle….

En mää lopulta kauaa jaksanut hillua yössä, vaan suuntasin lopulta kinkin kautta himaan nauttimaan pari kaapissa oottanutta Karhua. Nähtävästi Erkillekin oli muutama maistunut. Niin joo, loppuhuipennus ennen kuin pääsin Hämptoniin! Kotimatkalla Ipan ees törmäsin siihen ihanaiseen farkkumyyjään. Tai saattoi se olla joku samannäköinenkin, koska sen verran oli kuitenkin promillee mulla. Mut leikitään, että se oli se. Mikä friidu! Sen kun sis pulloon, en koskaan päästäis vapaaksi. Ehkä vähän antaiaisn ruokaa toisinaan, mutta muuten vaan ihailisin ja kattelisin sen suloisia kasvoja kirjahyllyn kulmalla, missä pullo jököttäis.

Summa summarum: En tullut hulluu hurskaammaks tästäkään illasta, mut tulipahan käytyä ulkona ja juotua itselleen lisää vatsamakkaroita.Ja kättäkin särkee. Mä alan olla liian vanha rellestämiseen.

Öitä.

Moro ny.

Villa Testos sulkee jykevät ovensa just ny.

MAITOOOO MÄ HALUUN MAITOOOOOO,,,,,,MÄ TARVIIN MAITOOOOO,,,,,,,,

APINA PIERASEE TOISE NAAMALLE,,,SIIS PITÄÄ IHAILLA KU SE OIKEE LÄHTEE TUOLTA ETTÄ EI VITTU NYTO TULOSSA ÄKKII TONNE YLÖS PIERASEE TON NAAMALLE,,,AIKA VIILEE SUORITUS,,EHKÄ AIKA TYLSÄÄ NOILLA TUOLA,,,

JUMALAUTA KOKO MENUUUU!!!!!!!!!!KAIKKEE PITÄÄ OLLA!!!!!,,,,HOVINARRIN PALUUU,,,,KOHTA RUPEE TIPPUUN HAHAAA,,,

VITTU HYVÄ JÄTKÄT…TEILLÄ LEIKKAA HYVIN,,

LEIKKIKÄÄ LAPSET LEIKKIKÄÄ…

Viides avioero vei ahvenanmaalaisen kirkkoherran Porvoon piispan Gustav Björkstrandin puheille kevättalvella.

EI OO HELPPOO,,,,,MUTTA ONNEX JUMALA PELASTAA,,,,

Oulun seurakuntien Elossa.fi -kampanjan tunnukseksi valittu kirkkovene kuvastaa elämää, josta jokaisella on oikeus ja lupa nauttia sekä iloita, sanoo kappalainen Kimmo Kieksi.

PILLUMAGNEETTIIIII!!!!!!!!,,,KAI USKOVAISETKI NUSSII,,KAIKKI NUSSII,,,JA PILLU ON ELÄMÄ,,PILLU ON MAAILMA,,PILLU ON ILO,,,PILLU ON ALKU…PILLU ON KEHTO,,,PILLU ON PYHÄ,,,PILLU ON PARAS,,,PILLU ON HELMI,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

KAIKKEE SITÄ VITTU SILMÄ NÄKEEKI,,SLAYER TAIS VOITTAA JONKU VITUN PALKINNON TÄSTÄ VIDEOSTA OLIKO SE GRAMMY TAIJOKU ENMÄÄMUISTA,,,,,

ÄIJÄ ANTAUTUU KORKKIFLUNSSALLE?????,,,,LEPO VAA ÄLÄ JÄNNITÄ OTA RENNOSTI TIÄXÄÄ….

TOI ON LAHJAKAS,,LOL ,,,,,HALUUKKO MAISTAA MUN PROTEIINIMAITOO???

Anaheimin ankkoihin Teemu Selänteen tutkapariksi liittyvä Saku Koivu halusi antaa pikkuveljelleen rauhan luoda omaa uraa Minnesotassa.

NONII NYT ALKAA MEDIAHAIPPI SUOMESSA!!!!!,,,SAKU KOIVU JA VITTU SELÄNNE SAMASSA JOUKKUEESSA!!!,,,NYT SE MESTARUUS SUOMEEN!!! SIIS MEIDÄN STANLEY CUP SIIS VITTU MEIDÄN POKAALI!!!!!,,HYVÄ SUOMI!!!!!!!! AINOO VAA ETTÄ PELAAKO SELÄNNE EDES ENSKAUTTA ENÄÄ SATANA VANHA MIÄS,,JASITTE JOS OIKEESTI PITÄS POKAALIA VOITTAA OLIS PITÄNY OTTAA KOIVUISTA TOI MIKKO TONNE ANKKOIHIN,,,

MONOT JALKAA PERKELE JA LADULLE!!!!!! HAVUJA PERKELE HAVUJA!!!!!!!!

EI EI EI ENMÄÄ NYT PUHU SEMMOSISTA KÄÄRMEISTÄ SUIHKUSSA SIIS TIÄXÄÄÄ BODYSNAKE TEKEE LÄSKEILLE SUIHKUSSA KÄYMISESTÄ HELPOMPAA,,LÄSKIT ON LEPPOSIA JOS ET TIÄNNY,,,,KAIKKEE PITÄÄ OLLA!! JOPA LÄSKEJÄ JA KÄÄRMEITÄ..

KOMEET PUSKAT,,MUTTA TOIVOTTAVASTI EI SIELÄ PIKKUHOUSUJEN ALLA,,,,KÄÄRI HORO KÄÄRI!!!!!!!!!!

40 VUOTTA JA SIKANA FLUNSSASSA!!!!!!!!!

EI HUANO IDEA MUTTA JOOOOOO,,,,,,,,

Influenssasta sairauslomasuma?

Terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitoksen asiantuntija arvioi sairauslomasuman alkavan pian, kertoo Savon Sanomat.

JOS ENNUSTUS PITÄÄ PAIKKANSA ETTÄ TOSSAKU KOULUT ALKAA TULEE HUIPPU ETTÄ SUOMESSAKIN MILJOONA IHMISTÄ ON TIÄXÄÄ SIKAFLUNSSASSA NIIN SE VITTU TARKOTTAA ETTÄ JOKA VIIDES SUOMALAINEN SAA SIKAINFLUENSSAN!!!!!!MITÄ VITTUA!!!!,,,,,MUN VITUN PASKALLA SÄKÄLLÄ MÄÄ JUST OON TOSSA RYHMÄSSÄ ELI MÄÄ TUUN OLEEN SIKAFLUNSSASSA VITTU VÄHINTÄÄ KAX KERTAA,,,OIKEESTAA MÄÄ VOISIN SEN EKA OTTAA JO NYT ,,,,VITUTTAA JO VALMIIX MÄÄ OON NIIN VITUN HUONO SAIRASTAAN,,,

OIKEE PACMAN!!!!!!,,,,MÄÄ RUPEISIN ITKEEN JOS NÄKISIN TON,,,,

Tym razem kolejna porcja imprezowych lasek. Na zabawach nieważne gdzie, czy to w remizie czy w porządnym klubie laski walczą o miano najseksowniejszej. Oczywiście im bardziej prestiżowy klub tym lepsze laski i wiadomo… więcej chłopców walczących o względy… Przejdźmy do fotek:

jak widać na fotkach seksowne laski są dostępne i warto ruszyć przysłowiowe cztery litery aby je poderwać.

Wiadomo że najlepsze są młode laseczki i ch ponętne ciałka. Zdjęcia erotyczne z młodymi dupciami na których prężą się przed obiektywem. Pokazują cycuszki, piersiaczki, pupeczki, cipki.

Kuten useimmat käyttökelpoiset ajatukseni, myös viimeisin syntyi paripäiväisen tajunnanlaajennuksen jälkitiloissa. Herättyäni eräs maaliskuinen sunnuntaipäivä toveri Paukkosen sohvalta puimme maailmanmenoa, kun sisälläni syntyi voimakas tarve kokeilla jotain erikoista: selviäisikö 20 vuotta ravintoketjun huipulla paikkaansa pitänyt 90-kiloinen peto kuukauden ilman eläintovereidensa ravinnoksi käyttämistä. Tuolla hetkellä olin kuitenkin sen verran realisti, että päätin siirtää empiirisen kokeeni aloituksen toukokuun ensimmäiseen päivään, jotta ehtisin sivistää itseäni jo valmiiksi kasvisresepteillä ja varautua henkisesti tähän taisteloon.

Ja mitä vielä. Toukokuun ensimmäinen tulikin tänä vuonna edellisvuosia aiemmin ja olo oli lievästi sanottuna pelästynyt, kun vappupäivän pitsastani ei enää löytynytkään neljää lihatäytettä. Toveri Paukkosen riemuksi kokeeni ajautui osittain karille jo edeltävänä yönä, kun ravitsemusliikkeestä saavuttuamme kysäisin juuri alkaneesta kokeestani hyvin tietoiselta Pasilta “Voinko syödä jääkaapissasi olevan lihapiirakan?” Pasi tarvitsi siis noin neljä tuntia karauttaakseen kokeiluni karille. Aamulla tuomarineuvoston kuultua lausuntoni koetta päätettiin kuitenkin jatkaa entiseen malliin, sillä tapahtunut sääntörike oli käynyt allekirjoittaneen ollessa kunniattomassa tilassa.

Koska ruuanlaittotaitoni ovat lähempänä McDonald’sin kokin kuin Chez Dominiquen keittiömestarin tasoa, koin nestemäisen viljan aiheuttamissa jälkitiloissa pientä huolestusta selviytymisestäni. Näin Vegetariana-pitsakotelovuorten nousevan silmissäni ja pankkitilini ehtyvän jopa aikaista nopeammin. Jo muutaman vuorokauden kuluttua ja toveri Kuhmosen kasaaman ostoslistan avulla aloin kuitenkin ensimmäisen kerran hämmästellä, mihin ihmeeseen olin aiemmin lähes päivittäin nauttimani lihan oikein tarvinnut. Reseptirepertuaarini kasvoi silmissä sekä vyötäröllä ja huomasin nopeasti, kuinka suuren itseisarvon asemaan olin liharuoan aikaisemmin asettanutkaan. Tämä sai miettimään myös sitä, kuinka monella ihmisellä vihreän lautasen -kammo johtaa juurensa vain ja ainoastaan omiin ennakkoluuloihin ja pinttyneisiin ajatusmalleihin. Jos minun kaltaiseni hippi on voinut kyseenalaistaa kasvispohjaisemman ruokavalion, on kait turha odottaa välitöntä asennemuutosta tavan tallaajaltakaan. Mitä useamman vuorokauden selviydyin hengissä kasvisvaihtoehdoilla, sitä enemmän aloin kuitenkin nähdä lihansyönnin jälleen yhtenä länsimaisen yhteiskunnan itsekkyyden symboleista.

Vaikken hippikraatiksi leimautumisvaarasta huolimattakaan aio täysin lopettaa sekasyöntiäni, tulee lihan osuus ruokavaliossani tippumaan aiemmasta hyvinkin merkittävästi.  Vegetarismi ja veganismi ovat äärimmäisen eettisiä valintoja ja nostan hattuni korkealle niille, jotka kyseisen elämäntavan pystyvät valitsemaan. Mielestäni olisi kuitenkin täydellistä kieltäymystä tärkeämpää, että jokainen meistä sekasyöjistä pystyisi siirtymään entistä vihreämpään ruokavalioon, vaikkei kokonaan lihasta kieltäytyisikään. Vaikka myös eläinten oikeudet ovat minulle tärkeä kysymys, on kuitenkin suurempi rikos syöttää ihmiselle kelpaavaa ravintoa länsimaalaisten patoihin joutuville eläimille ja näin jättää kehitysmaiden ihmiset vaille leipää. Jos lihatiskille on tarvetta mennä, voi ainakin tarkistaa, että kyseessä oleva tuote sisältää eettisen sertifikaatin. Maailmaa ei ehkä pelasteta yhden lounaan avulla, mutta muutoksen on lähdettävä yksilötasolta. Siispä: kaikkien maiden proletariaatti, prekariaatti ja porvaristo, syökää oikein!

Eettisin tervehdyksin,

kamrat Pulkka

Kasvissyöjät tuntevat myötätuntoa eniten jäniksiä, oravia ja murmeleita kohtaan, koska tuntevat heihin outoa yhteenkuuluvuutta. Vaikka he väittävät syövänsä terveellisesti ja puolustavansa eläinten oikeuksia, ovat he oikeasti vain entisiä koulukiusattuja, jotka puolustelevat ulkomuotoaan “persoonalliseksi” ja “erikoiseksi”. -Hikipedia

Ponad 70 domen.

wszystkie domeny na sprzedaż.

Chcesz kupić wyślij zapytanie na: tyleoile@o2.pl

bicing.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
bukietdomen.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
centrumlider.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20
chelseafootball.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
cmentarzdomen.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
counrty.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02

designsquad.pl 2009-03-09 2010-03-09
deskarz.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
dilards.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
domekwogrodzie.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
forummeblowe.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
gastromeble.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
gpssprzet.pl 2009-01-01 2010-01-01
grzejgazem.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
hipokrates.org.pl 2009-04-24 2010-04-24
hiszpanskaporcelana.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02

klubsamotnych.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20
kwalifikacje2010.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
kwalifikacje2012.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
liniaprodukcyjna.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
mebledosklepow.pl 2009-04-01 2010-04-01
meblegastro.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
mebloweforum.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
mlecznekwoty.pl 2009-04-05 2010-04-05
monatazowelinie.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
narodowy2012.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04

nefretette.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04
ninjadomeny.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
plaszczwodny.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
pocztoweznaczki.pl 2009-02-26 2010-02-26
pokerwirtualny.pl 2009-04-05 2010-04-05
produkcyjnalinia.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
produkcyjnelinie.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
worldofpoker.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
białydomek.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
gpssprzęt.pl 2009-01-01 2010-01-01

liniamontażowa.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
małybiałydomek.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
mebledosklepów.pl 2009-04-01 2010-04-01
montażowelinie.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
płaszczwodny.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
polskikrzyształ.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
tłumaczenieonline.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04
wyposażeniehotelu.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
wyposażenierestauracji.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
wyposażeniesklepu.pl 2009-04-01 2010-04-01

znaczekpocztowy.pl 2009-02-27 2010-02-27
zmysłowakobieta.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20
zęza.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
zenza.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
zmyslowakobieta.pl 2009-04-01 2010-04-01
okrąglak.pl 2009-03-06 2010-03-06
sportowezakłady.pl 2009-04-05 2010-04-05
mebleswarzędz.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
swarzędzmeble.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
aptekakrólewska.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14

wirtualnapolonia.pl 2009-04-24 2010-04-24
oneradio.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
1radio.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
24radio.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
aptekakrolewska.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
babialnia.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20
czasherbaty.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
dejure.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
esspreso.pl 2009-03-06 2010-03-06
euro2012.info.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04

rivi.pl 2009-04-10 2010-04-10
szlafmyca.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04
szuszop.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04
tuitu.pl 2009-02-14 2010-02-14
laski.sex.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20
lexartis.pl 2009-02-02 2010-02-02
chlopskazagroda.pl 2009-05-04 2010-05-04
bobu.pl 2009-04-20 2010-04-20