True Equality

Do you like filler?

ArgusEyes — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:35:43 GMT

For the 10 people who actually read this thing and care, I still am feeling quite tired due to working singularly on a quite complicated project for my work. I have put up filler in the past (Tom Leykis, Dennis Prager, Mike McConnell, etc).

Do people enjoy watching these? I think that it does contribute so that's why I've done it in the past but I always feel a little guilty about doing it on a channel that should mainly be about producing original content.

Leave your views in the comment below.

On a break.

ArgusEyes — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:37:19 GMT

Long time viewers will notice that I occasionally go on a break (normally without telling anyone) and I thought I should mention that I am on one now, I normally resume video making activities when I feel “back in the mood” to do it.

[edit] I will try to keep the blog updated as it requires less effort than making a video. If the break continues for too long then I will post some of that cheapo taken-from-a-podcast content like I do sometimes with the Mike McConnell or Dennis Prager shows. I try not to post too many videos like this as I see it as a little cheap to people expecting original content. However, there is good stuff to be had in some of these clips that is not already on youtube and I think others will like it.

Idiotic viewer feedback #2 - I hate childbirth!

ArgusEyes — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 23:09:57 GMT

This one goes way back.

Filming people having sex is not normal and therefore could never be consensual. When a couple are in love are they always want to keep it private.Pornography is the same as prostitution and prostitution is multiple rape/sexual abuse.Anyone who doesn,t believe that pornography should be eliminated is a coward and is afraid of that people might think of you as anti-sex prudish odd and 'not-with-it'That is cowardlyFeminists can see that porn treats women as not human.There can never be regulated porn because it is not natural for women especially to have sex without love.It would still be only men who would buy porn because they don,t go through pregnancy,childbirth,emotions. It is unacceptable to be racist so it should also be unacceptable to be sexist.This is what porn is-sexist.Also you seem to have forgotten the obvious which is that sexuality is for procreating children and for love-you should not ignore natures rules. Very un natural

If you cant understand that hen you have been brought up with a very distorted version of sex education-if it can be called that. Another reason why porn is so humiliating is because is because of the pain women go through when they give birth and the hardship of pregnancy. Porn trivialises a womans sexual parts(sexual parts being the same as her reproductive/procreative parts) which is why it is so cruelly and sadistically insulting.

If you cant understand that then at least think of the fact that you would not exist if you mother never conceived you,carried you for 9 months and then gave birth to you.So you think that women are inferior then it follows you think that your mother who gave you life is inferior to you and to all men.Dont even think that childbearing is not important in itself and for humanity because without it there would be no people.

By the way, I've put this in paragraphs. The original email was all one big block of text. I imagined if this woman were saying this that she would be talking very quickly and in a high pitched way.

Filming people having sex is not normal

Define “normal” many couples film their sexual acts for their own pleasure. Also who cares about normality, the rules are not defined to maintain the common opinion.

When a couple are in love are they always want to keep it private

Nope. Swingers.

Pornography is the same as prostitution.

Maybe, but why is prostitution illegal anyway? Is sex legal? Yes. Is free trade legal? Yes. Is selling sex legal? No. Work that one out.

and prostitution is multiple rape/sexual abuse.

Nope. If it is consensual then it's not rape.

Anyone who doesn,t believe that pornography should be eliminated is a coward and is afraid of that people might think of you as anti-sex prudish odd and 'not-with-it'That is cowardlyFeminists

Punctiation is your friend. Also, you can guage the emotional sophistication of an opponent by asking why those who agree with you disagree with you. If what you get back is an ad hominemn then they are a very wise and unsophisticated person.

There can never be regulated porn because it is not natural for women especially to have sex without love.It would still be only men who would buy porn because they don,t go through pregnancy,childbirth,emotions

Really? Well how about you stop defining what women can and can't do based upon stereotypes about them eh? Seriously, generalisations are O.K. I use them a bit meself but you've got to provide examples. This flawed woman's email is a litany of generalisations and stereotypes. It's a veritable Gish-Galllop of hysteria.

Also you seem to have forgotten the obvious which is that sexuality is for procreating children and for love-you should not ignore natures rules. Very un natural

You know what else is unnatural? Cars. Give me your keys.

There is a logical fallacy called the “naturalistic fallacy”. It basically means that a person assumes that something is good if it is natural and/or something is bad if it is not natural. Poison ivy is natural and space flight is unnatural, get it? We as humans are where we are because we have risen above out environment and harnessed it to our own means.

If you cant understand that hen you have been brought up with a very distorted version of sex education-if it can be called that. Another reason why porn is so humiliating is because is because of the pain women go through when they give birth and the hardship of pregnancy. Porn trivialises a womans sexual parts(sexual parts being the same as her reproductive/procreative parts) which is why it is so cruelly and sadistically insulting.

If you cant understand that then at least think of the fact that you would not exist if you mother never conceived you,carried you for 9 months and then gave birth to you.So you think that women are inferior then it follows you think that your mother who gave you life is inferior to you and to all men.Dont even think that childbearing is not important in itself and for humanity because without it there would be no people.

I’m trying as hard as I can to follow this woman’s train of though and I’m coming up dry.<.p>

I’m anti-birth now? I don’t know what I said to set her off let along if I said anything about child birth. As far as I know I’ve always been pro childbirth. Since she petered out like a yammering cat woman I will try to sum up my opinion on porn as succinctly as I can.

Porn uses women, it exploits their bodies for the sexual satisfaction of (mainly) men in the same way as my company exploits my enormous programmatic prowess and brain power to tap away at a keyboard for five days a week. Or that a city council exploits the proletariat to fling our garbage bags into a big truck. Lots of us are exploited for our abilities and efforts. It’s called work.

This is freedom. In freedom some people are going to do things you wouldn’t. Get over it. As long as they are not forced to do it then you shouldn’t butt into other people’s business with your sexual hang-ups.

Latest friday feminist fuck you. Can you guess who it is? Go on, guess..

ArgusEyes — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:59:40 GMT

Listen, Learn, Repeat

ArgusEyes — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 22:46:02 GMT

To feminists, gender is more important than skill.

ArgusEyes — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:34:07 GMT

British men - You also need to wake up!

ArgusEyes — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:08:00 GMT

Boycott relationships. Your country wants you to do it apparently.

Feminism and the left

ArgusEyes — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:12:57 GMT

You know, I used to be subscribed to Feministing so I could get their latest videos but they blocked me so I have to remember to occasionally check back to see what those gals are getting themselves up to.

I checked back today and I see that they have indeed been busy, they have 4 new videos since I last looked, and I took a look at the titles and had a little thought, and that is that I was once criticised by a commenter because I had dared to say that feminism is normally associated with the political left.

I would have thought that the association between feminism and the left was obvious on the face of it – like looking at a tree and saying “that’s green”. And then meeting someone who says “how can you say that”. It’s as plain as the nose on my face and the person who cannot see that

I listen and watch hundreds of pieces, be it video or articles, on feminism and gender in politics every week. And there is one piece that I am kicking myself that I didn’t save, I have looked for it and cannot remember where I saw it originally so I will have to describe it to you. There was a video interview with someone who was a member of the national organisation for women, this was back when Hillary Clinton was still in the running and she was commenting on feminists and the political candidates that they support and she made the point that Feminists don’t always support the female candidate. And she cited a number of examples from the past where her organisation supported a man over the women, when the man was a democrat and the woman was a republican. I don’t think she even realised when she was saying it how much of an admission she was making. To a feminist, the one thing that will trump gender is politics.

There are many left politicians who confess their feminist leanings, not just saying they support feminism because a political candidate would be committing political suicide if they criticised feminism, but actually fully embracing and being a feminist, Hillary Clinton is a great example of this.

Feminists normally shill for the left political candidate. After Hillary was gone they reluctantly shifted to Obama. And whilst we are on Obama. Try this on for size. Type “feminists for Obama” into Google, you’ll get a bevy of support for him. Type “feminists for john McCain” and the Feministing videos which say “fuck you” to him will show up in the first and second places.

Go to a feminist’s blog and look at the advertising all over the place

Look at some of the different types of feminism. There’s socialist feminism, there’s Marxist feminism, there’s a very small subset which I agree with, called individual feminism and if you type “conservative feminism” into Google then all you will get is people laughing at the term and calling it an oxymoron.

Which political persuasion is likely to appeal to the feminist mindset more? The right? With its tendency towards personal rights and responsibilities, smaller government, more individual freedom?

Or the left? With its tendency toward equality as an encompassing whole, more government fiddling of the figures and the governmental intrusion to instigate social programs to change the sheep like masses until we finally reach utopia.

And in case you’re wondering, yes, I did insert my own personal bias in there. An in-depth discussion of the right/left political mindset is a topic that has been discussed by many greater than I. And is a topic for another day.

But it is clear to see that of the right/left mindset, the victim based worldview of the feminists finds itself drawn to one side over the other. In fact, I personally believe that the right is the political personification of the masculine mindset. And that is personal responsibility, individuality and strength, and the freedom to act on your own recognisance. And to also, be quite bull-headed at times and to not realise it.

And the left is the political personification of the feminine mindset. And that is groupthink, the protection of the group, the strive to not offend, to try and please everyone and the stifling imposition of safety upon those who must be mothered. And also, the attempt to be as kind to everyone as you can be, even if that kindness is enforced.

Now. Let’s examine the titles of the latest three Feministing videos.

Friday Feminist Fuck You: Heidi Harris
Friday Feminist Fuck You: Rush Limbaugh
Friday Feminist Fuck You: John McCain

This should put the nail in the coffin of any last stragglers of tough that feminism is not related to left though. Why is this important? Well it is the same effect that feminists approach you claiming that they are about equality and they just want the same rights for women’s for men - the usual canter. And then you ask them the same tired set of questions that we know will bring down every feminist such as, oh, I don’t know, if feminists are for equality then why don’t they support equality – little things like that. And you ask them about father’s rights and the ways men are oppressed and that the thing they say are oppression aren’t really oppression and then they let their guards down and they admit that - of course, they are FEMinists and of course they are for the advancement of women and the men can fend for themselves in their eyes.

Well, that’s not what you said in the first place is it sister? Where’d all this talk about equality go?

The refusal to admit that they are bound to the left is the same effect. If feminists admit to what they actually are, and that is a left leaning political movement that is for the advancement of women’s rights over men’s then they lose the benefit of some of that high falutin’ language about being for equality don’t they?

RE: Friday Feminist Fuck You: John McCain, rant on wage gap

ArgusEyes — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:01:32 GMT

Misrepresentatiion #1:

A lot of sources state that McCain “voted against” the law. In fact, McCain did not attend the vote at the senate. [1]

But don’t take my word for it. Ann from Feministing corrected her post. [2]. But not her youtube video. [3]

The proper way to respond to a mistake is to admit to it. Video descriptions are editable and a correction on behalf of the author testifies to intellectual credibility. [4]

Misrepresentation #2

The Ledbetter pay act would have guaranteed employers the right to sue for discrimination:

This falsehood is propagated by Ann at 0.48 in her video on the subject [3]. In fact there are many other remits under the law that can be used to address grievances like this such as Title VII and the Equal pay act [5].

Misrepresentation #3

This is an opposition of the equal payment for women:

To quote the Feministing website:

“And not holding businesses accountable for wage discrimination is the same thing as endorsing it.”

This is simplistic thinking. It’s a false dichotomy in the first place. Businesses can still be held accountable by the relevant investigative agency when a claim is filed. The Ledbetter law relates to an employee’s pay discrimination claims and increasing the time period where a claim can be filed this is not groundbreaking legislation by any objective means and it is dishonest to colour people who are concerned for the state of the law or increase in the litigiousness of society as being anti woman or anti fair pay.

Misrepresentation #4

Lilly Ledbetter was paid less because she was a woman, and she never received recompense from her case.

To quote the Supreme court of the united states document on Ledbetter v. Goodyear tire and rubber corporation:

“During most of the time that petitioner Ledbetter was employed by respondent Goodyear, salaried employees at the plant where she worked were given or denied raises based on performance evaluations.”

...

“There, Ledbetter alleged that several supervisors had in the past given her poor evaluations because of her sex;”

...

“Goodyear maintained that the evaluations had been non-discriminatory, but the jury found for Ledbetter, awarding back pay and damages.”

The question was on the status of her performance evaluations. The jury rules for Ledbetter and awarded back pay and damages. Ledbetter appealed anyway and this is when her claim was barred due to time constraints.

Misrepresentation #5

This law was solely about increasing the window in which claims could be made.

The law also had clauses to allow “someone other than the employee” to bring a claim. This may be a beauorcratic organisation. Leading open a huge legal hole which politically motivated groups and parties to insert themselves into a situation.

The decision on the bill is completely inline with partisan politics. With the political left aiming to increase the reign and affect that government can have on private businesses and with the political right acting to minimise the government intrusion.

I have included sources because I believe that issues such as this deserve the in-depth treatment it has certainly not received in the popular press.

In light of Feministing’s treatment of this topic I have to stand by my previous statements that Feministing as an organisation is intellectually vacuous, given to cheap and simplistic gender demagoguery and propagating hatred and false information in line with a radical feminist, sexist agenda.

Sources

[1] McCain Opposes Equal Pay Law – Washington post
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/24/by_juliet_eilperin_washington.html

[2] John McCain supports wage discrimination - Feministing
http://www.feministing.com/archives/009085.html

[3] Friday Feminist Fuck You: John McCain - Feministing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qjaXk-qCVw

[4] The problems with feminism, ArgusEyes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68l4XUeJYo0

[5] Nothing Fair About the “Fair Pay Act” - Hans Bader
http://www.openmarket.org/2008/04/29/nothing-fair-about-the-fair-pay-act/

[6] LEDBETTER v. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO., INC.-SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/05-1074_All.pdf

[7] Post Editorial for Changing Lawsuit Deadline Based on Factual Misunderstanding - Hans Bader http://www.openmarket.org/2008/04/23/post-editorial-for-changing-lawsuit-deadline-based-on-factual-misunderstanding/

Idiotic viewer feedback #1 - I live in my parents basement.

ArgusEyes — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:25:19 GMT

From My challenge to Jessica Valenti.

I'm not sure if you're aware but you come across as a pathetic infant, splutteing in rage and indignation due to the fact that you got caught out.

It's clear you're terrified of confident and capable women and wish to blame them for all your failures. In your mind if it wasn't for feminism you would be king of the world instead of still living with your parents.

I'm just glad that England has sensible gun laws otherwise you would be dangerous. Get some counselling

My Response:

I love when people go out on a limb and make a bunch of blind guesses. In fact you're the one who looks like a spluttering infant right now. Let's take a look at each one of your lies.

“…due to the fact that you got caught out.”

Caught out? What?

“It's clear you're terrified of confident and capable women.”

On the contrary. A confident and capable woman would not go anywhere near the kind of victim demagoguery Jessica Valenti peddles. It takes an incredible insecure woman to be on Feministing’s side.

“blame them for all your failures”

Failures? Of course you know nothing about me at all. In fact, the reason I’ve not released a video in so long is due to the amount of work (in and out of home) I’ve got on so nice try. When you don’t know someone but you’re going to make up something about them then it’s not just a lie, it’s the worst kind of slander as well.

“In your mind if it wasn't for feminism you would be king of the world instead of still living with your parents.”

Again you claim I am acting like an infant but you’re pretending you know what I think and do, you are a lying slandering piece of scum who talks shit on youtube. And, like all the worst youtube scum, you don’t have any videos of your own. To make a video would mean showing the world your face and standing up to criticism. And that would require a modicum of courage, of which you have none.

B.T.W. I left home at 18. I know lots of people who continue to stay at home, not me.

Tom Leykis on domestic violence

ArgusEyes — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:09:44 GMT

I haven't done a video in a while so I thought I'd phone one on in and release this interesting monologue from shock jock Tom Leykis. Some are going to complain but I don't relate to most of what Tom says. Occasionally he has an interesting topic like this.

I agree with a lot of what Tom has to say here, there is a limit of how much a person can be completely absolved from a situation. But to even voice thoughts of this kind is called "blaming the victim". Sometimes the victim deserves a portion of the blame. That is reality.

Say I was murdered for walking the docks at night. The person who murdered me should be caught and held to account for the crime. But I played a part in the fate that befell me. The same way that a person accepts the chances of cancer if they were to smoke. Don't cry afterwards because you decided to smoke and then got cancer.

A person who has committed domestic violence has committed violence -- that is illegal. In caring societies we should have laws against violence, and we do. In the past much of DV was ignored and the feminists changed attitude. We should also help people who have nowhere to go, like a housewife with no job skills.

We should help people but we should not capitulate to their helplessness. De-politicise DV, and realise that like all crimes, you cannot completely stamp it out. A lot of it stems from a state of mind.

I am not a fan of MRA's becoming victim mongerers. But I have two problems with DV as it stands in the modern zeitgeist:

1) The services provided are for women only. This is oppressive against men and violates the constitution of the U.S.

2) There are lies spread by the feminists to increase confusion and anti-male sentiment. Their way lies not in the truth.

He was survived by his wife...

ArgusEyes — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:56:36 GMT

A father's rights

ArgusEyes — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:51:22 GMT

A very interesting looking film.

Film webpage: http://g2rdistribution.com/

Trailer: http://g2rdistribution.com/afr.trailer.html

YouTube version:

Check out this guys channel as well, this guys is a campaigning divorced father with lots of videos relating to father's rights.

The trailer impressed me, you can go to the website and purchase the film for 15 bucks. I’m not sure how else this has been distributed. Be it on T.V. or in theatres but you can watch it online as well. I’m not really a fan of that, I prefer to actually own the product and there are issues with R1 vs. R2 DVD players (we use R2 in the U.K.). Also, I just forked out £260 (over 500 dollars) on a new exhaust and am not buying anything for the next month – guaranteed!

If I ever get this in the future you can be sure that I will review it but it does look promising. If any of you guys have watched the film then sent me your mini-reviews in the comments section.

To be a feminist's daughter

ArgusEyes — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:43:58 GMT

A very interesting article.

How my mother's fanatical views tore us apart

She's revered as a trail-blazing feminist and author Alice Walker touched the lives of a generation of women. A champion of women's rights, she has always argued that motherhood is a form of servitude. But one woman didn't buy in to Alice's beliefs - her daughter, Rebecca, 38.

Here the writer describes what it was like to grow up as the daughter of a cultural icon, and why she feels so blessed to be the sort of woman 64-year-old Alice despises - a mother.

Taliban Murder 2 Women

ArgusEyes — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:30:16 GMT

Islamic evil seems to be a popular topic in the AP today so here's another one.

AP Stringer Stands by as Taliban Murder 2 Women, Gets Snuff Footage

Shit like this almost makes me want to become a feminist

ArgusEyes — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:28:13 GMT

I kid.. We know that the feminists don't fight against the real evils against women. Which, seem time and time again to be Islam.

The Men's Coalition... Stealth feminist apologists?

ArgusEyes — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 19:39:00 GMT

http://www.themenscoalition.org.uk/Welcome.html

The Men’s Coalition is a new organisation that aims to put issues of concern to men and boys such as health, parenting and caring, relationships, education, employment, crime and violence firmly on the public policy agenda.

At the bottom of the page it states that the Men's Coalition supports the White Ribbon campaign which bills itself as "Men working to end men's violence against women. As anyone who has seen my videos should know, language like this gets me seeing red a little bit. Why just men's violence against women? If you read their F.A.Q. page then they specify that they are talking about DV and rape.

That is a bit dissapointing but there are many things on their website which seem promising. Could you guys weigh in with your opinion of this?

Watch these and then buy the book

ArgusEyes — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:48:59 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DD40D63DBCDFCA94

http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Male-Power-Warren-Farrell/dp/0425181448/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215776892&sr=1-1

Call for new rape inquiry squads

ArgusEyes — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:39:15 GMT

Consider this piece from the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7496013.stm

What do you see in this piece? Objectivity? Balanced reporting? Gender demagoguery? Go on, pick one. I don’t have time to completely rip this to shreds but I’ll take the following paragraph:

He argues more expertise in the early stages of an investigation would improve the quality of evidence gathered and prevent rapes being wrongly classified as "no crime".

This is very telling. Basically, all accusations of rape are legit. Therefore if at the end of the process the conviction rates are low then that’s just a sign of the bastards getting away with it.

Mr Yates said rape was a difficult crime to investigate given that most cases involved people who knew each other, where consent was the primary issue.

Read: “We are coasting on the popular image of rape being some guy leaping out of the bushes with a knife and horrifically raping an innocent woman with the reality which is that the definition of rape has been greatly expanded to accommodate women who have sex, offer no objection, and then change their minds afterwards. Whilst the bad image of rape is still in the minds of the masses then we can push through any legislation we want to revoke “innocent until proven guilty””.

Are there stats in here about false accusations? Nope.

Also observe the usage of the word “victim”, which is aided by the pictire they chose. They are considered verbatim victims, any honest person would agree that “accuser” or “potential victim” would be better terms. I should mention that here in the UK, the BBC is tax-payer funded through a TV license, lovely.

My reply to MarquisMongaga

ArgusEyes — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:54:28 GMT

Note the thoughtful pose.

Does that make me half evil?

ArgusEyes — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:38:37 GMT

Not that I would believe in superstitious stuff like that in the first place. Seriously though, thanks for the subscriptions people. It’s shot up in the last few weeks. Stuff like this keeps me making the videos because the natural tendency is laziness!

When feminist don’t care about the murder of women

ArgusEyes — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 22:33:44 GMT

A while ago I read a story to you about a young girl in Iraq who was horrifically murdered by her father and then thrown into a makeshift grave whilst her family spat on her body.

I have been sitting on this information for a while but I have a sad follow up to the story. The girl who was killed was called Rand Abdel-Qader, and now her mother Leila has been murdered also.

It was two weeks after Rand's death on 16 March that a grief-stricken Leila, unable to bear living under the same roof as her husband, found the strength to leave him. She had been beaten and had had her arm broken. It was a courageous move. Few women in Iraq would contemplate such a step. Leila told The Observer in April: 'No man can accept being left by a woman in Iraq. But I would prefer to be killed than sleep in the same bed as a man who was able to do what he did to his own daughter.'

Her words were to prove prescient. Leila turned to the only place she could, a small organisation in Basra campaigning for the rights of women and against 'honour' killings. Almost immediately she began receiving threats - notes calling her a 'prostitute' and saying she deserved to die like her daughter.

Even her sons Hassan, 23, and Haydar, 21, whom she claimed aided their father in their sister's killing, disowned her. Meanwhile, her husband, a former government employee, escaped any charges, and even told The Observer that police had congratulated him on what he had done.

It is not known who killed Leila. All that is known is that she was staying at the house of 'Mariam', one of the women's rights campaigners, whose identity The Observer has agreed not to reveal. On the morning of 17 May, they were joined by another volunteer worker and set off to meet 'a contact' who was to help Leila travel to Amman, where she would be taken in by an Iraqi family.

'Leila was anxious, but she was also happy at having the chance to leave Iraq,' said Mariam. 'Since the death of her daughter, her own life was at serious risk. And this was a great opportunity for her to leave the country and to fight for Iraqi women's rights.

'She had not been able to sleep the night before. I stayed up talking to her about her plans after she arrived in Amman. I gave her some clothes to take with her and she was packing the only bag she had. She was too excited to sleep.'

Mariam said that when she awoke Leila had already prepared breakfast, cleaned her house and even baked a date cake as a thank-you for the help she had been given. After the arrival of 'Faisal', the volunteer (whose identity is also being protected), the three left the house at 10.30am and started walking to the end of the street to get a taxi. They had walked less than 50 metres when they heard a car drive up fast and then gunshots rang out. The attack, said by witnesses to have been carried out by three men, was over in minutes. Leila was hit by three bullets. Mariam was hit in her left arm and Faisal in her left leg. 'I didn't realise I had been shot for a few seconds, because as I heard the gunfire I saw Leila falling to the ground and saw blood pouring from her head,' said Mariam. 'I was so shocked, I didn't immediately feel the pain.'

Since February 2006, two other activists from the same women's organisation have been killed in the city. One of them was reportedly raped before being shot. The other, the only man working for the non-governmental organisation (NGO), and a father of five who was responsible for the organisation's finances, was shot five months ago.

Read the full article.

I’m going to stop there. I recommend that you read the full story which I shall link in the video description and in my blog. It goes into more details of how Mariam had to take sedatives to help her sleep at night because of continuous nightmares, and how the police stated that her death was just a coincidence. I don’t buy it.

Here’s what gets me.

Feminists, apparently, are THE people who beat the female drum more than others do.

Apparently, they’re THE cheerleaders for the woman crowd.

This is to the feminists.. Doesn’t this shit piss you off?

When I made the original video all I got were dismissals to the argument, not one feminist stood up to the plate and rebuked this behaviour. Which was what my original point was, that feminists take pot shots at their own culture which reveres women above all others, and fail to criticise a truly misogynist oppressive culture.

They mainly said things like “the fact that there is oppression in other cultures doesn’t mean that we can ignore the problems in ours”. I’m fed up of being asked to defend a position I didn’t posit. This was not the point of my original video.

But I know why they made this point, the idea of criticising Islam so frightens these politically correct cowards that they will grasp at any straw that they can to avoid the real issue, this ranges from making strawman arguments like I read to you or discussing the wage gap. If you do this in response to this video then you are avoiding the truth because the truth is so ugly that it burns to look at it. It’s like the sun, it’s so painful to stare directly at that people will cast their glance askew to avoid it.

It hurts to look at abject evil, but we need to do it.

Also I want to say. Making a comment along the lines of “these oppressions exist in other cultures and doesn’t apply to our own” is not sufficient…

Do the Dutch not have to deal with the religious sensitivity of the Muslims because the Muslims are only in the Middle East? No! The Muslims are there in their own country.

Did the riots in France not happen because the Muslims are another culture? No! The Muslims are in France.

So the evils of Islam are applicable to western cultures. Because they are IN those western cultures. Maybe feminists want to reconsider their attitudes to Muslim immigration if the rights of women matter to them so much. Here in the U.K. the Muslims are gravitating towards implementing Sharia law into the law of the U.K. How does that bode for women’s rights?

Anyone of any stripe who does not have his or her head in the sand, needs to discuss these issues.

So I must reiterate, doesn’t a story like this make you angry dear feminists? It made me furious, I’ve not seen a feminists rebuke this and if you know of one then please let me know:

Rebuking bad behaviour is not difficult, all it takes is a little testicular fortitude. I rebuked the use of the term “feminazi” in a video. I rebuked the commenter who said that Wendy McElroy was just another evil feminist who was tricking us all. Wendy does good work on men’s rights issues and I value her contribution.

And I find it interesting that the one highlighting these issues is a Men’s Rights Activist, it should show you how far feminism has come. And of course, I’m pandering to the bigoted ideas of the radical feminists here because being a Men’s Rights Activist doesn’t mean you’re a misogynist. In fact, after the reactions I got to this horrific event I think we actually care more about women then the feminists do.

And if you want to help women, don’t donate to the western feminists, donate to this women’s charity in Iraq which helps women leave the country, I’ll try to find their identity. That’s all I’ve got to say. This video is in memorandum of Rand and Mariam Abdel-Qader, may they rest in peace.

A very important video

ArgusEyes — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:57:23 GMT

This is why we do what we do.

Linkage!

ArgusEyes — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:00:52 GMT

I have finally gotten around to adding some more links to the sidebar on the right. I have added all the old sites I have in my bookmarks, if I am missing one then you can contact me with the links you want me to add.

I am back from my hols, video coming soon.

On my hols...

ArgusEyes — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:42:44 GMT

Sorry for the lack of updates, but I have been on my holidays. Next week I shall be home and should still have some spare time so I am planning to get something made.

The story from the other side of the fence.

ArgusEyes — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:21:19 GMT

Links:
http://uk.askmen.com/toys/top_10_300/327_top_10_list.html
http://www.glennsacks.com/campaigns-detroit-news.php
http://www.glennsacks.com/volvo.php
http://www.davidandgoliathtees.com/index.php?mode=HCGT

Do as I do Jessica valenti

ArgusEyes — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 00:25:29 GMT

From Feministing (again):

"Yeah, a bunch of misogynist trolls have swarmed the site. I'm sorry to Feministing readers for the nonsense. I'm going to shut down comments for the weekend until they find something better to do (because I just can't spend all weekend online deleting and banning).”

“But in the meantime, this serves as a pretty good reminder as to why feminism is so needed! (Even if it does kill my Friday night occasionally.)"

Read: Thos icky boys are invading our little girl’s club and I need to expel them all. It’s the patriarchy!

Sorry Jessica, when you talk shit about people they tend to want to defend themselves. Not all defences are what I would call “cogent” but I’ll give you some tips to show you the kind of nice guy I am.

When it comes to opposing views. You can save yourself time and effort by not being a comment dictator and just letting them on there.

Your head is probably reeling right now, so I will try and say it again a little slower.
Just. Let. Them. On. There.

You’re faithful minions will have fun replying and saying things such as “you’re afraid of women” or “you’re not real men”. The furore will drive your traffic up.. It’ll be a regular internet bonanza!

And most importantly of all. You won’t come off as a prissy little girls who cannot handle opposing views.

Also. The line that “this shows why feminism is needed” is used to death by Jessica. As you should know by now, I read her bloody book and read her bloody blog and trust me – this is overused. EVERYTHING show that feminism is needed.

A word to the wise Jessica, one asshole or a bunch of assholes does little to prove systemic oppression of women which needs a left-based sexist socialist ideology to counter it. You make a living talking smack about men and when we reply in kind it is used as a proof of some societal evil. Pay heed to these words from a wise man.

Any loon feminist can accuse men of being rapists, killers, sadists, and Marines. These are pretty serious charges. A fellow could take exception to them. But if I say something comparatively innocuous in return, such as that I weary of being harried by a rat-pack of diesel-fired tarantulas who mostly look like Rin Tin Tin's littermates--why, they get mad. (Yes, I know, that was a three-animal zoological-automotive metaphor. Patent applied for.)

I figure if radical-feminist ladies can talk ugly about us, then we can talk ugly about them. And we're probably better at it, which they might bear in mind.

Another good slam of Feministing

ArgusEyes — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:39:36 GMT

I was sent this link to a good blog post that further demolishes the ladies at feministing.com

http://daltonator.net/durandal/blog/?p=122

There are some very good bits:

One source of these steaming shovelfuls is Feministing, a web site run by self-styled “feminist” writer Jessica Valenti, author of Full Frontal Feminism. While the site bills itself as a blog for young feminists, it is in fact a “me too” web page where Miss Valenti’s sycophantic friends and cultish followers get together to recite dogma, honor the sacraments, pledge their devotion and excommunicate or anathematize the unbelievers. Any who dare to disagree with or mock the more ridiculous dogma are branded heretics (or “assholes”) and abjured with the magic words “Fuck You!”, a devastating show of wit, no doubt.

And...

It is the act of pointing out that such thinking is harebrained that is unforgivable, according to what they call “Feminism 101″, the mere mention of which is believed by the faithful to counter all facts, reason and logic in much the same way that fundies counter all arguments with “The Bible says so!”. In fact, the denizens of Feministing draw “Feminism 101″ like Randolph Scott drew his six-shooter in his old Westerns, but like Scott’s revolver, it’s full of blanks.

But go and read it for more good stuff.

The article also raises some interesting points. At the beginning he raises a dictionary quote such as this one.

fem•i•nism –noun 1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.

And then goes on to basically say that people who agree with this should reasonably be called feminists. I agree that most decent people agree with these principles. And if that is the case, do we need a term for us? Or do we merely need to shame those who don’t believe these things. I.e. we call people who don’t believe in equality between the races racist, we don’t call people who do believe in equality between the sexes pro-race. It’s not needed.

And we don’t need the term feminism, by the same logic. But, I would also like to say that the modern feminist movement is a political movement that has been very successful in appropriating this definition for themselves. So much so that if you go and ask a good young woman who would call herself a feminist such as this, and you ask her why she is a feminist then she will say something along the lines of “because I believe in equality”. The irony is that if you truly believe in equality then you have to go against what the modern feminist movement believes.

Just disgusting...

ArgusEyes — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:18:10 GMT

A word to all the feminists who swallow the wage gap myth

ArgusEyes — Sat, 31 May 2008 22:35:53 GMT

Watch and learn.

Where is ZenPriest now?

ArgusEyes — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:24:30 GMT

In my video about true equality, I made reference to an essay called "hate bounces". I don't think that ZenPriest has updated that site in a while and what I would like to do, is to read this piece in its entirety as a youtube video.

I don't know about anyone else but the piece really hit home with me when I read it for the first time. Does anyone know where I can contact him, the email address from his site does not appear to work.

Fred on common sense

ArgusEyes — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:38:47 GMT

Since I read a part of his article in my latest video. I though it would be a cool idea to list some of his best material as regards feminism.

I recommend you go on over and check out all of his stuff.

Welcome to True Equality

ArgusEyes — Thu, 29 May 2008 00:26:54 GMT

Until now I’ve called my channel a susurration of a shibboleth. It was about standing out from the norm. That particular message has had its time and I think there is a new message I want to convey. My thinking over the past months has definitely been tending towards on thing and that is the continuous difference between those in the men’s movement and feminists in our ideas about equality.

This was pretty much encapsulated in my last video. Which, really, should have been the first video I made for youtube. It would be right at the top of my MRA 101 list because it encapsulates why us strange creatures called Men’s Rights Activists do not call ourselves feminists. I mentioned the differing idea of equality which is given by the following blurb:

What is equality? We in the men’s rights movement believe in equality of opportunity, that as long as the playing field is level then the outcomes should not matter. The feminists tend to believe that equality of outcome is what matters, that the columns under men and women must match for there to be no more sexism. So what really matters at the end of the day is what you are comparing. Rights or outcomes? This is the foundation of our debate.

Now, certain problems have nothing to do with this, I acknowledge that. However, this fundamental disagreement is present in so many arguments between men’s rights activists and feminists. Here are three examples of what I’m talking about when I talk about the feminists view of equality of outcomes.

Feminists use the gap between men and women in pay to support the idea of the supposed oppression of women.
Feminists use the gap between men and women in collegiate sports enrolment to support the quota-based law called title nine.
And, feminists use the differences between men and women in many professions. To make a case for the forceful insertion of women into those professions. A prime example of this is the FASCIST law passed in Norway where companies are forced to have 40% of their board of directors be female.

What does it take? What does it take to believe in these foolish ideas, and they are foolish. They hurt men, and they infantilise women. How can the neurons in the brain misfire to such a way so that people can support such idiocy, not only in practice. But to the extent that it gets encapsulated into law?

It takes the belief that men.. and women.. are basically the same. That apart from their physical appearance that they think in the same basic ways. This is foolish and any remotely normal person who has usual interactions with men and women will notice that we are fundamentally different.

Modern feminist may say. Oh no, I don’t support that idea. Well no shit. It’s untenable. But back in the heyday of feminist thought they tried this. They stigmatized raising boy children differently to girl children, they said that if you give the girl a truck and give the boy a Barbie then you can switch the roles. Nothing demonstrates the fallacy of this better than the case of David Reimer who was tortured in the name of feminist theory. His story will be made in a separate video. But needless to say that the theorising of the feminist fell down when empirically tested. It also falls down in the light of common sense.

I hope by now, that I have demonstrated fallacy inerrant in the idea that men and women are the same. We are not. So in this light the feminist ideal of equality is flawed. But what about my own ideal? Why do I think my own standards of equality are sufficiently better in order to make the claim that they represent “true equality”?

My system says, what you want to achieve as a society is equality of opportunity. This means that you do not deny anyone the opportunity to apply for a job, and a job is defined by a set of criteria. You want to become a fire fighter or a soldier? Great then there are a number of pre-requisites that you’ll need in order to do that job. You’ll need a certain level of fitness and you’ll need to be able to lift a certain amount of weight. No one is intrinsically blocked from applying but due to the requirements of the job you will see a number of patterns in who makes it in. Be it more men or more women, depending upon the particular job of course.

Now take the feminist model. I as a man am not fit enough to become a fire fighter but a women who is weaker than I might get in on the back of positive discrimination. What does this achieve? Well first of all it fills a slot with someone who is not able to do the job, it puts pressure on the other people in that profession to pick up the slack after her. Nothing demonstrates that point more than this article from Fred Reed about women in the military.

Fred--Your article "The Realities of Women in Combat" really struck a chord with my experience in the Air Force. I was a shop chief with the 28th Avionics Maintenance Squadron in the 1980s. There were two women assigned to my shop. One was really sharp at her job, but she couldn't change an RT-274/APN-81 without male assistance. The other couldn't even carry her own tool box to the flight line!

Supposedly, we supervisors were assured by the brass, these women were screened before being allowed into avionics maintenance by having to pass weightlifting standards. Yeah, right. They had to be able to lift 50 pounds. An RT-274 weighed in at 125 pounds plus. I don't know what the problem was with the woman who couldn't carry her own tool box. But I couldn't get rid of her due to pressure from the brass. So, I put her in a weight training program at the base gym. Until her honorable discharge and a pat on the back for a job well done, she never carried her own tools. She, therefore, was never able to pull weekend duty alone; there had to be a male assigned as well to carry her end of the job as well as his own.

Saving lives, fighting fires, fighting wars and protecting citizens are not areas where I want social experiments run. When you are being mugged, or your house is burning down you want the best person to save your life. It is beyond me why we give feminists credence in their clearly bad and erroneous ideas.

I also want to give a shout-out to my new blog I am creating. In the theme of this video I have called it true-equality and you can find it at true hyphen equality dot net. I have improved it so that I can more easily add blog posts and I will try to add a new post every day.

RE: Friday Feminist Fuck You

ArgusEyes — Wed, 28 May 2008 23:47:03 GMT

There is a youtube channel out there called Feministing, named after the famous feminist blog of the same name started by Jessica Vallenti.

On Fridays one of the Feministing team makes a video called “Friday feminist fuck you”. Which is basically a rant about some person or institution which has committed some sexist act which has irritated them.

Here is a list of the Friday feminist fuck you topics on chronological order, from the first to the most recent:

Grover Cleveland High,
Academy Awards,
Anti-feminism in the media,
Dr. Laura,
Fox and Other Race-Dumb Outlets,
Miss Bimbo,
Public Perverts,
The U.S. Army,
WNBA Public Relations

Dear women of Feministing. You are all cowards!

There is no courage in saying fuck you to the institutions and people in the freest country in the world who have committed some pathetic infraction that has offended your delicate feminist sensibilities.

There is one overriding and prominent evil that oppresses women in the world today. And it’s called Islam and most Feminists ignore the plight of women who need them the most.

Where is your “fuck you Saudi Arabia” video? Where women are not allowed to drive and are banned from voting.

Where is your “fuck you Hojatolislam Hassani”. Who is a top Iranian cleric who said that women who do not wear the Hijab should die. And not only that. The women, their husbands and fathers should die. So three people should be killed when a woman fails to wear a piece of cloth over her head.

Where is your video “fuck you Abdel-Qader Ali” who, well, let me read you this little story...

Two weeks after The Observer revealed the shocking story of Rand Abdel-Qader, 17, murdered because of her infatuation with a British solider in Basra, southern Iraq, her father is defiant. Sitting in the front garden of his well-kept home in the city's Al-Fursi district, he remains a free man, despite having stamped on, suffocated and then stabbed his student daughter to death.

It was her first youthful infatuation and it would be her last. She died on 16 March after her father discovered she had been seen in public talking to Paul, considered to be the enemy, the invader and a Christian. Though her horrified mother, Leila Hussein, called Rand's two brothers, Hassan, 23, and Haydar, 21, to restrain Abdel-Qader as he choked her with his foot on her throat, they joined in. Her shrouded corpse was then tossed into a makeshift grave without ceremony as her uncles spat on it in disgust.

'Death was the least she deserved,' said Abdel-Qader. 'I don't regret it. I had the support of all my friends who are fathers, like me, and know what she did was unacceptable to any Muslim that honours his religion,' he said.

Yeah, no, you’re right. Fuck you Dr. Laura. Fuck you Miss Bimbo. These are the things that matter.

And I want to hive a shout out to some honest feminists. In the UK there is a radio station called radio 4 and they have a program called women’s hour. I disagree with what is said a lot of the time but they are worlds more honest about the issues than Feministing is and they regularly feature segments about women in other Islamic countries.

Some of these Feministing videos deal with legitimate issues. For example, the one on the U.S. Army, although I find it interesting that you dealt with a legitimate issue in a cack-handed way that was about as deep as most feminist treatments of issues. Others in the series are just pathetic. For example, one of the videos was entitled “Friday feminist fuck you: public perverts”. I remember seeing that and thinking. “wow.. What a cowardly” sentiment. And it is. Do you think there are any people out there who defend perverts? No! Everyone is against perverts and you simply want to obtain the cheap heroism of gaining a knockout victory over such a decrepit target.

The annoying thing is that feminists use examples like Iran when you argue with them and they want to justify their existence even though they do no real work in fighting these injustices. Citing places like Saudi Arabia to back up your arguments which are primarily about the western world is a deeply dishonest act. Look at the titles of the Feministing fuck you series. Are any of them about real injustices that women around the world face?

At least Men’s Rights Activists fight proper injustices in the societies in which they exist. I, a men’s rights activist has done more to shine a light on the true oppression of women than any feminist I have seen on youtube to date. Western societies are the most free in the world for women, women in these societies have more rights than the men do so stop pretending that this is where the atrocity lies and point your efforts where they rightly belong.

Why I am NOT a Feminist

ArgusEyes — Wed, 28 May 2008 23:41:55 GMT

Not a day goes by without me getting a message in my inbox or a comment on one of my videos saying something along the lines of:

I am a feminist because I believe in equality and what’s wrong with that!?

Let me say something now that, for some reason, isn’t said enough. Apart from a few nut-jobs here and there, we all believe in equality. OK? It doesn’t need to be said.

People who say that feminism is about equality have some major misconceptions about what feminism actually is. Feminism is not a state of being. It’s not something you just are like you might be an jew or a homosexual.

It is an ideological movement. Ideological movements are movements that are concerned with ideas. Feminism is comprised of ideas and theories and hypotheses. These ideas can be evaluated on their individual veracity and then accepted or dismissed. And over time common threads are observed in the ideas of the feminists that testifies to the character of the movement. This is what I consider my primary role to be... To evaluate the ideas and trends of feminism. As I’ve made quite clear before, I don’t think feminists are bad, I think that in general they have bad ideas because they base them on false premises.

Why don’t I call myself a feminist? As I have stated before. Feminism is not a state of being. So you can believe in equality and not call yourself a feminist. And that’s what I and a lot of other men’s rights activists believe. In fact, a lot of us feel that feminists do not believe in the kind equality that we, and most rational people, believe in.

For those who are actually able to think, you will realise that the word equality doesn’t have a meaning that is a clear as people intent it to be when they bleat it out. To me, men’s rights activism versus feminism is about two conflicting models of what the word equality means.

To most feminists equality means equality of outcome. That if you add up the numbers at the end of the day, if the column under men and the column under women don’t match exactly then this is proof positive that women are being oppressed.

To most Men’s rights activists, equality means equality of opportunity. In that you should face no discrimination based upon your sex, race or sexual preference in a civilised society. And that if the system is fair, then the outcome vis a vie women vs. men, white vs. black. Etc. Doesn’t matter at the end of it because your own choices led to that particular outcome.

Which one of these views is correct? Obviously I am going to say the second one.

Life is rarely a dichotomous choice between two different ideas. But this is one of those times. You cannot have a completely fair system and then have the government stick its nose in afterward in an attempt to fiddle the numbers to make it appear fair. Fair is giving everyone the same chance. Fair is not raising those who didn’t put in the effort up on a pedestal to the level of those who gave a damn.

Unlike the two models of equality which I have mentioned. A lot of the time I believe in situations where you have a choice between two views, the truth lies somewhere along the middle path between the two choices. When you have two views of society which are given to you by two special interest groups, each of which represents one half of two possible sides, then each represents a side that the other will find it hard to relate to. In my opinion the Men’s rights movement grew from the extremes that feminism created and exists to present the problems that affect men. I’ve always been honest that I believe that. It’s time for the feminists to come clean and admit that they have a female-centred agenda as well. Instead of the usual B.S. about representing what is best for both of the genders.

Feminism is our ticket to true gender salvation? Salvation for both genders from a movement with a gendered name. Bollocks! Modern feminism, which is far from its more noble roots. Has had a total reign and has been having the say for both sides for far too long now. And the damage should be clear for everyone to see. They have damaged men, women and society. We need the other voice now. We need to hear the other side of the story. This is the main reason why I don’t call myself a feminist. Feminism does not speak for me! Feminism does not speak for me...

I recommend a brilliant essay which I shall link to on the left called “hate bounces: how man hating and man bashing harms women: The making of a misogynist”. The essay details the life story of a man who grew up to hate women due to feminism. It says so much that I want to say and it says it so well that I implore you to simply read it yourself. For now, I will read a part of the essay that applies directly to my life experience:

I remember the first time I saw the slogan "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle", I knew my face had just been spit in. Men were not just useless to women, we were irrelevant. We had no purpose in a woman's life, and did not belong in her world at all. It was a message of hate, dismissal, and refutation. But, I also saw it as a warning of what was to come. It was like seeing clouds on the horizon, and knowing that it is time to get under cover because a storm is brewing.

Now before you start psycho-analyzing, the quote made me angry and hurt my feelings a bit, but it did not have as much of an effect on me as it did on this guy. But when I first heard the famous feminist slogan coming from the mouth of a young woman on my university campus then I realised that part of feminism was hateful to men and it was seeping into the mind of young women and poisoning their view of men then I realised that I could never call myself a feminist. After realising this, I pondered the strange creature called the male feminist. How could one embrace an ideology that was so hostile to them?

Needless to say, the quote doesn’t even make sense. I have never met a woman who does not consider a relationship to be an very important part of her life. The reason I never took the quote too seriously is because I saw right through it to what it really was. It was posturing. It was the angry outburst of a foot-stomping child of a movement trying to convince itself that it didn’t need to rely on men, lying to itself to try and deny the truth, that men and women do depend on each other. It spoke to me of an immature movement driven by emotion rather than logic. A movement striving not towards truth, but towards anger, victim-hood and demagoguery.

So. Apart from the spit-in-the-face hostility to men, the one-sided treatment of gender issues and the flawed idea of what equality is. Why else don’t I call myself a feminist?

For the answer to that question, watch my older videos and stay tuned for the new ones because what I offer is the voice from the other side of the aisle. And that is a voice you are not going to hear from a feminist anytime soon.

Dennis Prager responds to Keith Olbermann on President Bush

ArgusEyes — Wed, 28 May 2008 23:37:03 GMT

This is off topic, but the truth has to be served.

Keith Olbermann, a far left thug, leads a dishonest slanderous television program. His every word needs to be treated with the utmost scepticism. I'm not a fan of Bush, but lies and distortions should not be used by anyone. This is a video reply to TurpisHaereticum who posted the Olbermann diatribe.

To leftists: Just because you differ with a person. That does not make that person evil. You need to lean the different between a differing opinion and a bad one. Likewise a comment that differs from you is not bad and deserving of being down-thumbed into a hidden state just because it differs.

Perhaps you would like to think about how much intellectual substance there is to a post that says "FUCK BUSH". Does that deserve to be thumbed up? If it feels like I am talking to you in a condescending way then stop acting like irresponsible children who need to be talked to as thus.

If Turpis has any interest in honest discourse then he will remove the thumb system from this video so that the leftist tendency to silence opposition will not find a niche in which to manifest itself.

Read the original transcript:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10316_Page4.html

Q Mr. President, you haven't been golfing in recent years. Is that related to Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it really is. I don't want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander-in-Chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be as -- to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.

Q Mr. President, was there a particular moment or incident that brought you to that decision, or how did you come to that?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I remember when de Mello, who was at the U.N., got killed in Baghdad as a result of these murderers taking this good man's life. And I was playing golf -- I think I was in central Texas -- and they pulled me off the golf course and I said, it's just not worth it anymore to do.

A Retrospective. A thanks. A forecast. A proper video

ArgusEyes — Sat, 10 May 2008 23:25:37 GMT

Sorry for the wind at the beginning. It gets better after a minute or so.

An update about what is happening with me. A thanks to the subscribers and my plans for the future.

That *pock* sound you hear in the background is a farmer dispatching our feathered/furry friends.

RadioCritique: Momager. Should a stay at home mom be paid?

ArgusEyes — Sat, 10 May 2008 23:24:35 GMT

Scott Sloan in for Mike McConnell on the Mike McConnell radio show. The first hour, should stay-at-home moms (mums for us Brits) be paid? My answer -- hell no and Sloan agrees.

This is a radio critique. I will be playing part of the show and inserting my own comments throughout. Apologies for the long wait since my last video as well as slurps, sneezes and speech impediments.

Download the show here:
http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/CINCINNATI-OH/WLW-AM/MCCONNELL041708HR1.mp3

Scott Sloan:
http://www.700wlw.com/pages/onair_scottsloan.html

Mike McConnell:
http://www.700wlw.com/pages/onair_mcconnell.html

The gender card, Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Sullivan

ArgusEyes — Sat, 10 May 2008 23:21:50 GMT

Taken from the Tim Russert Show 4-5-08.

Dennis Prager deconstructs Hillary Clintons comments

ArgusEyes — Sat, 10 May 2008 23:21:08 GMT

A clip from the Dennis Prager show which discusses Hillary Clintons comments which I mentioned in my previous video. As you will notice, the opinion I stated in my last video and Dennis's opinion are the same. Dennis's comments here go more in depth than mine did and I see no reason to add anything else.