27 thoughts on “JLBE1690 | Are You a Hate-Filled, Homophobic Extremist?

  • 23-August-2016 at 11:23 am
    Permalink

    Not sure if it is ok for me to comment, because Im not gay, but just a man who has sex with other man as per the flinders uni definition. lol

  • 23-August-2016 at 2:15 pm
    Permalink

    THEY HAD A FUCKING GAY PRIDE GAME IN AFL? FUCK
    all the men have gone away.

    In what world do these people think anyone gives two shits about the goings on in their anus?

    Why is it so hateful to say “Leave it at home poofta” ?

    If I was to go to town and act sexual near everyone, I would be arrested without question.
    If I, presenting as a straight, white, intelligent man do anything “out of line”, it gets called out immediately and I am given no excuses for my behaviour.

    The second you criticize gays you’re extreme, the second you criticize Christians you’re a comedian.
    I am both so I’ve found going full boar with facts and reasonable points are never going to swing someone who shouts “heretic” but the people around have probably never heard a reasoned, calm point as to why gays are such a problem.

    Homosexuality was only lifted from the DSM for political reasons, the diagnosis stands true.
    Clearly.

    I mean how could you not see this? Most of our lives are driven by the yearn to pro-create, it is on the tip of our tongue, the base of our action at every turn – gay people do not share this drive, what else do they not share?

    So much more to say – comment window crashed on me a couple times so I’ll leave it there

    • 29-August-2016 at 5:27 pm
      Permalink

      Yep. Imagine heterosexuals being as flamboyant about their ‘sexuality’ (degenerate impulses) as some of the more extravagant homosexuals are acting today. I would have zero respect for them, so why would I have any respect for these utter degenerates? Because I am afraid of being called nasty names by programmed morons? If a man and woman, or two men, or whoever want to engage in sodomy and other similar sexual acts, that is up to them. The notion that this ought to be celebrated, championed, or promoted – especially to children – is another thing altogether. And where to from here? We got to this point pretty quickly, who knows what the AFL and other groups will be pushing in 2026 and beyond.

  • 23-August-2016 at 5:13 pm
    Permalink

    One of the most common response to a argument against gay marriage is something like: ‘Well how would you feel if you were told that you weren’t allowed to get married or not allowed to do something in general’. I hear that a lot. It really shows how we live a very spoiled society, how we always must be able to get what we want. Well life isn’t meant to be perfect or wonderful. Sometimes people have to accept you can’t always get what you want. And I’m sorry, the gay marriage topic isn’t as simple as what people assume it is. I use to be pro gay married, well not really pro but didn’t really have anything against it. I guess marriage could be a sacrifice that a gay person may have to make, given that the majority of society don’t want it, and for good reasons… This video discusses a good reason why it’s not such a simple topic as people think.

    • 29-August-2016 at 5:22 pm
      Permalink

      Is it really about people either getting or not getting what they ‘want’? Or is it more about the average person being programmed to parrot the key talking points being fed to them a la ‘four legs good, two legs bad’ in Orwell’s Animal Farm? What I mean is, if somebody says they are for gay marriage, does it make sense to tell them they can’t have what they want, or is it more worthwhile to delve into why they think they want something in the first place?

      • 31-August-2016 at 12:16 pm
        Permalink

        And as i said they’re response will be, ‘Well how would you feel if you were told you’re not allowed to get married? You would feel that that’s not fair wouldn’t you?”. They’re influenced by our strong left wing mass media which leads them to think that way.
        It’s all about the rights of a selfish, spoilt adult gay person. Everyone fails to acknowledge the rights of the children, who eventually will have no rights whether they are to grow with both a biological mother and father.

  • 24-August-2016 at 12:00 am
    Permalink

    The AFL is a Marxist institution, and the proof of that is in the eating of the pudding:

    pro-LGBT (as demonstrated in the video);
    pro-multicultural (promote a multiculturalism round, lavish praise and protection upon next to useless foreign-born players, prayer rooms for Muslims at venues);
    pro-socialist/egalitarian (gives handouts to struggling clubs, salary caps and player retention schemes, player drafts, all with the intention of ‘equalizing’ the competition but has only worked in theory, since they can’t get their systems straight);
    anti-racialism (detaining, shaming and naming a 13 year old school girl for calling an Aboriginal player an ‘ape,’ taking umbrage at crowds for booing indigenous players and hitting other supporters with life-time bans for ‘racial’ slurs);
    pro-political correctness (how dare people criticize the ‘fairer’ sex, especially one rather abrasive and hostile old hag in Caroline Wilson, but acceptable when subjected to it by her own colleagues);
    and about to embark on creating a ‘spectacle’ with a newly established league for women (for women MUST be equal to men, but we dare NOT criticize them, and of course, whatever Americans do, Australians MUST follow).

    So either knowingly (and who wouldn’t have their suspicions?) or unknowingly, the Bolshevik-styled AFL would seem to be following the Protocols of Satan (better known as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion) to the absolute letter!! Whether Jews run the AFL or not, the AFL appears to be heavily influenced by their propaganda.

    Perhaps someone should ask the AFL why same-sex couples only ever seem to adopt (perish the thought) boys if the couple are male and girls if the couple are female. Funny that. And just imagine being adopted by either one of these sodomites/dykes. Perhaps the AFL’s CEO might like to consider one of these couples as babysitters for his kids. I’m sure that would go down extremely well.

    Unless nations yield to Jewish degeneracy, they will always be targets. One need only observe the Jewish controlled NATO pitted against a determined Russia to see the truth of that. So while Russia returns to its old Orthodox traditions, we in the West are being subjected to Talmudism daily.

    If you think I’m pushing the analogy too far, then you’d better think again. Putin perceives this threat very clearly and is fighting back. Meanwhile, Marxist institutions like the AFL promote sodomy and degeneracy while undermining our Christian values. Soon, there won’t be a single Christian value worth saving.

    And for this we have Jews to thank.

      • 24-August-2016 at 4:18 pm
        Permalink

        That is your proof?

        The research community honors your critical skills.

        • 25-August-2016 at 1:40 am
          Permalink

          Sorry, yes, Vladmir Putin who boasts about the enormous ‘nuclear arsenal’ he has is truly fighting global Judea. Christ…

          • 25-August-2016 at 2:38 pm
            Permalink

            ‘Christ’ you say … Not that you would know anything about Christ, but who is responsible for having resurrected Orthodox Christianity in Russia and built numerous Churches all over Russia?

            Who has returned family values and put a stop to the open spread of sodomy throughout Russia?

            Who has encouraged Russians to have more children and ended late term abortions?

            Would that be the Jews, or would that be Putin?

            Watch this and think about how retarded you sound.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uvWkgz1XQM

            You have a lot to learn if you want to be a good liar.

          • 29-August-2016 at 5:45 pm
            Permalink

            That about sums it up. Well said.

        • 26-August-2016 at 10:52 pm
          Permalink

          Are holohoax denial laws putting your wallet in hock for thousands of dollars of fines or behind the prison bars of overcrowded ex-KGB Russian dungeons for 5 years or more “proof” enough? You CI people are very much like regular Christians, blinded to ex-KGB Putin’s and other declared “Christians” totally unprincipled actions in service of elite Jewry and Jews only, as long as they are pro-white and pro-Christian as bait. I totally agree with Putin that homosexuality should never, in any way, be propagandized to children or for that matter to anyone under 18 years of age. However, I recognize that as not much more than bait when the gigantic hook of holohoax denial came in with the gift of untouchability for his Lubavitcher-Hebrew bosses.

          If you’re gullible enough and blinded by Christianity enough to think that putting 163 million mostly White Russians under thought crimes legislation is an “honorable” and “politically expedient” move in order to be able to make “more important chess moves” later (when? one hundred years from now maybe? lol) like some bizarre characters of the Mike King aka TomatoBubble and Bro Nat aka Krusty the Klown variety have hilariously suggested, I’ve got about three shit-tons more damning evidence for you at post #33 (just luck, I never planned to end up on that number) here https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?p=1062190358#post1062190358 copied and pasted from a WN guy who did most of the work. I deleted the posts from the “white supremacist” sites like Stormfront and did not link to his own WN site which promoted nonsense like “planes on 9/11″ and the plane-hugging, fraudulent and top-recommended/”top-favorite” of 99.9% of all conspiracy-wise WN sites: “9/11 Missing Links” made by the CI WN Mike “Prothink aka Prostink” Delaney and his pre-CI mulatto National Socialist buddy John Alan Martinson.

          • 26-August-2016 at 10:56 pm
            Permalink

            P.S. Almost all the real research for “Missing Links” was done by Christopher Bollyn, another 9/11 plane-hugger I consider a shill just like the “Army College Professor” Alan Sabrosky who came out later with the same plane-hugging BS with only his bait pointing to “Israel.”

          • 29-August-2016 at 2:16 pm
            Permalink

            One of the web’s most infamous troll finds his way on this forum.

            Keep shilling dipshit.

            Your words are your own personal indictment.

          • 29-August-2016 at 5:49 pm
            Permalink

            Do you seriously believe Negentropic is a ‘shill’? I don’t understand the need for or perceived benefit from name-calling on sites like this one. Negentropic has done more than his fair share trying to get the word out about many things including the usual suspects and their control over seemingly every important institution, and you have done plenty yourself to spread this info via the comments threads on youtube, this site (and likely elsewhere as well). That seems to me like an important and fundamental thing you both have in common. Why allow yourselves to divide yourselves so easily? Old mate Shekelstein has it far too easy.

          • 29-August-2016 at 5:54 pm
            Permalink

            Thanks for the link to the post and the additional information. I agree with you entirely that Putin is just another obvious puppet whose strings are pulled by the same group who run the whole show. Perhaps consider going easy on the CI people though, some of whom may wander over to this site from time to time and find something useful while here. I’m not aiming for this site to become a ‘broad church’ but, at the same time, the facts can usually speak for themselves without the need for any ad hominems thrown in there. From the little I know of CI types, they at least understand race realism and the JQ, which is a pretty good base to work from.

    • 29-August-2016 at 5:19 pm
      Permalink

      A couple of things to touch on, there:

      As far as the AFL goes, you are right that they are effectively a Marxist organisation, both in how they manage their own league, and in the broader role they play in the cultural marxist agenda being pushed heavily here in Australia. One could make the case that the league is better for having some measures in place to ensure competitiveness across the entire competition, lest it end up like the EPL whereby (until recently) only four or so clubs dominated the top division. Of course, this is barely anything more than theoretical, as the competition is now run like a business, with the key decision-makers remunerated according to KPI largely dependent on TV revenues and so forth. More importantly, the AFL is used to push cultural marxist agendas, namely those relating to ‘indigenous’ issues, anti-‘racism’, the queer nonsense as highlighted in this video and more recently ‘gender equality’ – which I expect will flat on its face once the new ‘womens league’ runs out of novelty factor and punters see it for what it is: a bunch of fat dykes struggling to kick scores which would embarrass local U14s.

      As for Putin, do you seriously think he is ‘standing up to the NWO’ (or anything similar)? If so, why?

    • 29-August-2016 at 4:16 pm
      Permalink

      Are there any successful, flamboyant LGBTIQZ characters in WWE yet? One would think it is only a matter of time.

  • 28-August-2016 at 1:02 pm
    Permalink

    Homosexicles are the next stage of evolution. they will soon out-breed us hater-o-sexuals and the world will be a one trans-world order of androgynous beings like data from star trek; or was that androidgynous? either way, since your food and household products are all filled with hormone disrupters and estrogen mimicking chemicals, there will very soon be a skinny-jeans wearing, high-talking, hand-talking sissy-boy in one out of every four stork deliveries of so-called “males”.

    “not that there’s anything wrong with that”, said the cast of seinfeld. but let’s not kid ourselves, this is no mere accident. if only those fancy-pants, twerky dance girly-men actually KNEW that they were simply part of a long orchestrated psy-op; a false narrative of homosexuality which is meant to explain the condition of “your mother ingested too much soy and BPA before she was pregnant with you, and so you developed a girl’s brain and a more feminized boy’s body”, by passing it off as some totally natural thing where god just “forgot to put you in the right body”.

    imagine the excitement when the controllers realized that they could actually CREATE a new class of people for their divide and conquer program, by simply convincing mothers to ingest hormone altering chemicals which would affect fetus development. and then convincing those same mothers to inundate that child with further estrogen boosting products, so that they could fall nicely into their prefabricated narrative of the gays’d and confused trans-gendered kid with a victim complex.

    not that i care, i actually think that the whole thing is quite funny. as is john le bon’s reaction to the school’s teaching children about this. as if is the school’s fault and not the parents’. no wait, now all of a sudden it’s OUR responsibility instead, presumably. um, john…just, no.

    people are dumb. that is the sad fact. but as long as people continue to reproduce, our world is only going to fall further into a literal reenactment of the movie idiocracy. so you might as well teach your children how to be presidential, because pretty soon there won’t be any truly intelligent people left in this world. and actually, you might consider naming your children “NOT SURE”, just in case:(

    oh, btw john, do you still believe that the world is a ball? because, i’d like to know why exactly you believe this, seeing as how the ONLY reason anyone WOULD, is that they were shown several FAKE pictures of it from space. so even if there IS some anomalous retrograde motion of the stars in the southern latitudes, and some flight time between australia and south america which doesn’t comport to the OBVIOUSLY inaccurate flatter maps, the logic doesn’t follow from that that the ball is automatically a forgone conclusion.

    i’m NOT saying that the earth IS flat, but only that there is no reason to ASSUME (which you would have to, since there is in fact no evidence) that it is round. the burden of proof is on ball-believers to prove that there is curvature, which they have NOT; NOT for ball-earth skeptics (which you seemingly once WERE) to prove that it is NOT a ball. a ball simply doesn’t make any sense at all. you cannot concede gravity to be a hoax and still beLIEve in a globe, after all.

    p.s.- that’s an epic beard you have in eric dubay’s newest hitler-loving, “everyone’s a shill but me” rap! ’tis a pretty catchy tune tho; perhaps you should embrace the shill label, like marky mark sargeant, as i think it adds shill street cred:)

    *as if it IS the school’s fault.

    a little too hasty on the “submit” button. damn spellcheck doesn’t recognize bad grammar apparently…

    [Edited by JLB on 29-Aug-2016 to condense two posts into one]

    • 29-August-2016 at 4:14 pm
      Permalink

      You are right that the children ought to be the parents’ responsibility. How many parents in Australia today do you think have any idea what is being forced down their children’s throats? Yes, it is their fault that they are oblivious, but it is important to understand why this is so. People have been conditioned and trained into abject stupidity and irresponsibility from the day they were born (and in many cases well before). To blame them solely for their actions/inaction is little different to blaming the poorly-trained dog for its behaviour. There is a root cause to all of this, and that is the point I was making. Would you agree with this?

      As for the shape of the earth, I have addressed this many times. Please see this podcast I took part in a couple of months ago:

      http://fakeologist.com/blog/2016/06/27/radio-rollo-4/

  • 30-August-2016 at 11:58 am
    Permalink

    i’m so glad you used the analogy of poorly trained dogs, because then i can come back with “well then we should just have them spayed or neutered”. since this is likely the ONLY way to ever save the human race from itself, besides (fingers crossed) some deluge-like global cataclysm in the not-too-distant future.

    i admire your enthusiasm, but to be honest, it’s a numbers game; and frankly, we just don’t got ’em. and yes, i do agree with you, there IS a root cause to all of “this”, and it is humanity’s ability to autonomously reproduce. you have two sides of the coin. if i may, without setting up a “false dichotomy”: #1, either there IS a creator or there isn’t. dichotomy #2, that creator cares about us or it doesn’t.

    if autonomous reproduction with no proper guidance (which you are attesting to) and rulers who take advantage of this fact at every turn is the case, then it’s likely the creator DOESN’T care. ergo, we can assume that population is OUR problem to take care of, but must concede that it is THE problem, first.

    think about the scene in the matrix where morpheus is explaining those who are so hopelessly inured by the system, that they will fight to protect it. unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be some grand architect that we can bargain with in the end. although it IS rather telling that it specifically refers to those who WANT to be woken up. at this point, that is less than a fraction of a percentage of humanity, i’m afraid.

    or, it’s possible this is a test or experiment, in which case, since we don’t KNOW what the desired outcome is, we still have to work under the assumption that the creator either doesn’t exist, or doesn’t care, since we have seen no evidence of either, outside an initial structure of design (a long dead or gone creator, or hi-jacked creation, perhaps?).

    either way, it DOES NOT change the fact that population is the (current) controllers’ primary weapon against us, even IF part of that is vastly inflating population numbers, JUST like they make us believe that there are billions and billions of galaxies and planets in space! you cannot avoid this logical conclusion, because i KNOW that your very left-brained mind will short-circuit if you try to fight the cognitive dissonance too long.

    whatever the case, whether or not you read this, i truly hope that you continue to produce thought-provoking and intellectually honest media, at a level that is light-years (i know, not real) ahead of your age. you’re head and shoulders ahead of the rest, mate. just keep doin’ what you’re doin’!

    [Edited 30-Aug-2016 by JLB in order to fix grammatical error at user’s request.]

    • 03-September-2016 at 1:37 pm
      Permalink

      Thanks for the kind words and for putting so much thought into your comment. A lot of what you say here seems to of an existential nature, and this is a field of inquiry on which I have a good deal to say, but have been largely holding back on saying it. There are a number of reasons for this. At a future time I will go into more detail about my own thoughts but suffice to say, it seems to me that we all get to choose what this realm of existence is. If the majority of people live as though this is hell (and they do), does that make this place hell? Or is there an element of quality over quantity, and the only quality we can really know is our own? Ergo, is your position as a rational one based on evidence, or it a defeatist one driven by emotion, or is it something else altogether?

      I would appear to have my own biases. For instance, I am too far along in my own deprogramming to go back to watching television or films as the masses do. That, right there and then, is the end of regular socialising with the average person around me. Once you let go of pop culture, you let go of a large (and increasing) part of culture altogether. It seems natural for those who have found themselves outcast (even if by their own intentional actions) to become predisposed to finding and focusing upon fault in the majority group. Now that I have so much more time on my hands than the typical drones (who consume literally hours of programming per day), even if I did not believe in any ultimate benefit external to myself from doing so, I would be more likely to produce content critiquing culture than to take part in it. This opens up the possibility that I might seek to find post-facto rationalisation for a pastime/hobby I engage in anyhow. Do you see what I mean when I speak of my own potential bias?

      I don’t pretend that what I am doing is going to have any ultimate external effect. Certainly I do not believe there is much hope for the masses at large, especially given what I know about the mechanics of the conditioning process. An intelligent person need only to listen to Jeanice Barcelo in one interview to recognise the depths of conditioning that the masses are subjected to before they are even born. A small few of us may, for whatever reason, recognise our own conditioning and begin the process of healing ourselves, but this is evidently few. Even within the ‘truther’ circles online, it is blindingly obvious that the majority of people involved are still just as hopelessly conditioned as any other subset of the masses. On the micro I like to think there is always hope, on the macro I think there is very little indeed.

      Why, then, spend as much time doing what I am doing, when I could just as easily find another use of my time? For now, I get a tremendous amount of joy out of this work. This stems, I believe, from my own moral compass – an understanding that even if I am the last good person left on earth, right and wrong does not change. There is truth, there is goodness, and if my belief in these central precepts amounts to ‘faith’ (or is itself the result of some other aspect of my conditioning) then let this be so for now. Knowing what I know, I can’t not do what I am currently doing. This, like anything, may change in the future.

      • 04-September-2016 at 11:12 am
        Permalink

        “Knowing what I know, I can’t not do what I am currently doing. This, like anything, may change the future.” I prefer this version.

  • 04-September-2016 at 1:12 pm
    Permalink

    delving into thoughts about existential nature is the basis for philosophy, which primarily focuses on the realm of speculation, which i realize is not an area you prefer to venture into.

    the idea that we all get to “choose what this realm of existence is” seems an awful lot like solipsism. this seems to be right up the alley of many of the new age proponents, and is a perspective i try to avoid at all costs.

    however, i DO recognize the importance and legitimacy of ideas such as the so-called “law of attraction” and how in many cases we are “as happy as we choose to be”, and are able to use something akin to the placebo effect to alter reality in accordance with our will. in other words, “ignorance is bliss.”

    i won’t pretend to be able to explain or understand such an effect, but i do know that it’s a fine-line between this and the phenomenon of confirmation bias, where we selectively cherry-pick evidences which confirm our expectations of what reality SHOULD be, so that we can comfortably define our perceptions based upon those evidences alone.

    this brings me back to two very important existential questions i seem to circle back to time and time again: 1) can we ever hope to definitively PROVE objective reality; and 2) how would we recognize ultimate truth, even if it was handed to us?

    both of these questions must be contemplated in light of the recognition that we exist within a sea of lies. just as a fish which exists in the ocean does not recognize what water is, we can only recognize what truth is if we have been taken out of that sea of lies and shown context for what our reality is based upon a medium which sufficiently contrasts that which we have for so long known to be our existence; i.e. some existential truth, or absolute truth.

    but even though the fish would IMMEDIATELY recognize the air outside the water for what it is, in stark contrast to his current existence in water, truth may not be so readily discernible as an antithetical concept in relation to the commonly accepted lies that we are accustomed to.

    this is due to the powers that be diluting truth down to a level in which we can become slowly acclimated to it, without any noticeable transition between it and the world of lies in which most perpetually reside. which takes us into the next question of “pop-culture” and truth in fiction.

    as i’m sure you are aware, and as youtubers such as russianvids has so proficiently laid bare, the controllers are inserting many levels of truth into our favorite “past-times”. they are basically fictionalizing the truth, so that the truth is synonymous with fiction.

    the question is not WHETHER they are doing this, but WHY. i would submit that PART of the reason for this, is to ease the transition between the world of lies and truth, so that we will not readily perceive the difference. the flat earth movement could very well be a part of this tactic, as it was put into our media even in the decade or so prior to eric dubay and math powerland breaking out onto the scene with their flat earth revelations.

    getting back to the topic at hand, however, i DO find it interesting that you admit that your “moral compass” may be influenced by mere belief, rather than some higher immutable concept of “natural law”, as establishment “truthers” such as mark passio likes to endlessly pontificate about.

    in your mind then, truth is absolute? this makes sense to me based on how our reality works, but it is rather the INTERPRETATION of those absolutes, which concerns me. for example, if murder is evil, then certainly the old testament deity is evil for ever manifesting a world-wide flood.

    yet, i would submit that we could CERTAINLY use one of those right now, since a restarting of humanity might actually result in a net DECREASE in suffering, in the long run, if this current iteration of homo-sapiens were to be destroyed, with the promise of a fresh-start where humanity actually lived in harmony with their environment and each other; a concept which is entirely foreign to virtually anyone alive today.

    this goes hand-in-hand with my whole population argument, which i will spare you the details of for now. but suffice it say, the argument breaks down to a commonly expressed theme of the “greater good”, and how the needs of the many outweigh the few. some might call this communism, a term which has been hi-jacked to poison the proverbial well in regards to any form of social structure in which humanity works toward common ideals or goals; hence the tower of babel story, if you can read between the lines.

    anyway, that’s probably enough light reading for you for now. i can hardly expect you to sort through the many comments from your adoring fans, regardless of HOW thought provoking they may, in order to reply to little old me and my delusions of grandeur.

    thanks again. i always enjoy peering into the mind of john le bon; it’s like watching the movie “being john malkovich” while on an acid trip. cheers!

Leave a Reply