Defending Jeb Bush

WHY JEB BUSH SHOULD HIRE MY GAY ASS

Wed Shevat 22, 5775 12:35PDT

I was fired for being Gay Married.  I was fired for my love.

I'm not using a spell-checker, or software syntax-examiner;  I type my thoughts quickly, post my entries on-line to my blog or Facebook, unedited, as-it-unfolds.  I trust education, and that it prepared the populace to figure-out simple typos/spelling-errors, occassional miswordings or word-skips, without judging, and/or, without one's thoughts being derailed.

There is something about LGBTs that is oftentimes overlooked:  we don't have a 'chapel,' or a 'community center,' there are no "membership cards," and, unlike those that know nothing about us (other than the superstitions, rumormongering) we are not telepaths; if one is told something, the rest are not 'updated' by 'osmosis.'

We do not have the social-network that religious groups have.  We have no special-education; no "common theme" other than what is applicable to all people equally: equality, and justice for all.

I was born-in to a system that claims I cannot have been "born this way," that being Gay is a "lifestyle choice."  I dispute that, vociferously, because hating Gays and Lesbians is a lifestyle choice, and those that 'subscribe' to such ways of thinking, go to churches and 'conservative meetings,' then repeat somebody else's thoughts as if one's own.  That's plagiarism to me.  I think independently.  I think for myself, because I trust my Freewill.

"Conservative" to me, the concept, along with the concept of a "Gay Republican," is perceived by most LGBTs I've ever known or read or heard, as "insanity."  However, the terminology is misunderstood, and, like those that choose a lifestyle that lives in fear and hatred of us, the LGBT 'counterpart' to that is as equally stereotypical;  the only 'equality' we truly have: misunderstandings all around.

So let me explain what I mean when I say that I am a "Gay Republican."  I am what used to be called a "Liberal Republican," before religious fanatics, fringe-movements, molested the word "conservative" into racism, bigotry and religious supremacy.  A Liberal Republican are those with true conservative values.  So, what is "conservative" in context with "Liberal Republican," and does it differ from what is stereotyped as "conservative"?

The 'simple' of it, is like this:  It is not a 'conservative value' to use one's gift of sight, to perceive 'offenses' as excuses to ban, censor, outlaw, and hate someone out of a livelihood.  It is a real, true conservative value to retain one's Freewill to "look away;" to preserve one's Freewill to "avert one's eyes."  (or, change the channel; or not buy a magazine, etc.)

My grasp of "conservative values," therefore, has not been perverted by religious extremism brainwashing LGBTs into a goose-step in lock-step condemnation, excuses to discriminate against another solely based on one's opinions about politics and faith.  Church, church-goers, and Gays of Faith and the entire LGBT community, all have more things in common than "commonly thought."  I strive to remind those around me, regardless of sexual-orientation or religion or politics, of that altruism.

Yes, I could spend many hours, days even, editing, 'perfecting wording,' asking a dozen or so people in how to word my thoughts 'better,' but then it would be their thoughts, not mine.  And it wouldn't be "as it unfolds," but some fake 'mirror' of reality, a 'graven image,' therefore, instead of who and what I truly am.  Born this way.  Naturally.

Qualifications is this letter and all my writings online, decades of defending equality, free-expression  either for or against faith and politics, the fact I passed all five adaptive tests to earn one of the first MCSDs while computer scientists failed (which proves I use resources wisely), and my life-long commitment to defending the sanctity of marriage, which is monogamy, regardless of gender or orientation (otherwise it's privacy-intrusive as excuses to discriminate based solely upon religious-extremism (which is the forcing of others to 'comply' with one's own faith-based viewpoints)).

Lastly, there are many LGBTs that are considered to be "more qualified," but what is the criteria for the claim?  Did the employed LGBT have a meltdown because somebody called them a name, thereby prove that all it takes is a word, a single word, to derail his/her thoughts?  Focus?  Job?  Life?  And, is it a woman, divorced from a man, with children, now claiming she is 'gay' and in a 'lesbian relationship'?  That would be the opposite of the definition so the terminology as she would neither be a 'lesbian' nor a 'gay', but a bisexual, even if she's in a same-sex relationship.  Further, I don't need the 'endorsement' of someone else's opinion in order to function, or work, be it about politics or religion.  Freedom is about retaining one's own personal-relationship with their faith, not a 'right' to deny equal opportunities to those in one.

 -- "For there will never cease to be needy ones in your land, which is why I command you: open your hand to the poor and needy kinsman in your land." Torah DEUTERONOMY 15.22 RE'EH

Kind regards, always,

CLAYTON LEON WINTON , citizen#C03183395

1818 E. 16th Ave., Spokane, WA., 99203

(end:  13:22PDT, total time: approx 45-mins)

Defending Monogamy

Defending Monogamy :

(begin: Wed Shevat 15, 5775 08:48PDT)

ABC's GMA did a segment this morning about monogamy.  It included a survey of those who think social media may have an impact on monogamous relationships.  Fifty-seven percent of responders think so.

In the real world, the sanctity of marriage is defined by defending monogamy.  It is the foundation of marriage, and Marriage Equality for we Gays must include the same definition, or we are not seeking Equality at all, but some form of "special equality," or "more equality," and there is no such thing.

I have defined, repeatedly, how monogamy, regardless of spelling, is a key-component in defending we Gays from the asymmetrical warfare waged against us.  Now, this is important, pay attention:  in the rural areas, a Gay's "one and only" often comes from the cities, not always but often.  What they know of that individual is what they are told.  And oftentimes that individual is living a double-life, cowering behind a woman in a closet of deception, lying and cheating;  when they are 'done' with their same-sex "encounter," they return to their closet-of-deception, cowering behind their 'woman.'  The lies they told their "straight friends," are the lies they told their "gay friend(s)."  Perhaps different words, different types of excuses, but lies nonetheless.

Rural Gays are often accused of "seducing married men."  The reverse is usually the case.  Further, the liar and cheater, when their closet-of-deception is 'stripped-away,' they make themselves-out as being "victims of their sexuality."  Even if they become involved in a same-sex relationship, after they are divorced by the woman and kids they always lied to, they are not 'gay,' they are Bi-sexual.  These are Bi-sexual issues, not 'gay-issues.'  Gays were lied to, just like 'straights' (Str8s).  And after the liar "comes out," they are still Bi-sexual, not Gay, and once the figurative daylight illuminates their dark deceptive closet and they 'confess,' they are not proving any form of "integrity," they only prove they never had any integrity whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the Rural Gay they lied to, monogamous, is told by their "love" that they are the "one and only," and trusting in that love, become POSITIVE, not just for STDs, but all the stresses and neurosis that goes-along with deception, including higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse and trauma.  The Str8 women and family experience similar outcomes.  That is the only "gay equality" most of the world knows.

That makes Gays more VULNERABLE, to stereotyping and bullying and gay-bashing and discrimination in employment, housing and finance.

The non-monogamous stood before G*d and Country, friends and family, and made a promise and a commitment.  They lied to Church too, see.  Gays didn't.  We did no such thing.  We need protections from the non-monogamous, from Bi-sexuals, from liars from cheaters, just like Str8-spouses, male or female.

Further, the non-monogamous, after proving to have developed only ONE real 'discipline,' i.e., lying and cheating, take that to work with them as well.  They are the first to make-up an excuse on-the-fly; the first to take credit for someone else's accomplishments, the first to blame another, the first to ridicule and scorn in the pathetic attempt at making themselves-out as being "superior/supreme."  They are so 'good' at it, they often rise-above their colleagues, having a lifetime of 'practice' in their closets-of-deception cowering behind women.  This is why Commanding Officers are oftentimes dismissed if it becomes known they are engaged in affairs, because they proved lack of discipline in not upholding their commitments; they oftentimes abused their co-workers and employers making excuses (lies) and therefore deceiving colleagues and staff.  Not always, but usually.  Not every single one of 'em, but most.  This is also why I was against the decision about a Lesbian who had an affair with a married 'str8-woman' that was in the news several years ago.  I consider it to be a situation of "aiding and abetting the perpetration of lying and cheating while in uniform."

We need protections from such peoples' behaviors as that.  They have their own unique problem-sets they chose.  They had a choice.  We did not.  They need their own forms of 'services' and their own forms of 'outreach' and their own forms of 'counseling' and their own forms of 'defense,' but whatever that may be, it's not us.  And they must stop hiding behind the GAY LABEL as their excuse, for every time there is such an incident, another hundred Gays and Lesbians are hated-out of equality.

Shalom and Amen.

Kind regards, always,
CLAYTON LEON WINTON citizen#C03183395
1818 E. 16th Ave., Spokane, WA  99203
(end: 09:20PDT)

---------------------------------------
(1st effort to correct typos and spelling-errors, begin Thu Shevat 16, 5775 08:41PDT)
(My opinion is that if anybody reads my quickly-typed, freely-expressed thoughts, I trust their education-level to be sufficient to figure-out typos/spelling-errors without judgements, for unlike others, I do not think faking 'perfect' by using computer-enhanced software proves intelligence at all, just how fake a person truly is.  Spell/typo 'corrections' complete at Thu Shevat 16, 5775 08:48PDT, total time: 7-mins; as for syntax, I didn't bother as same concept is applicable, as always)

---------------------------------------
A brief word about spelling:
1) I usually spell "monogamy" as "monogomy," because it does not include "game" at the end of it, as relationships are not "gamey" (wild) and/or have nothing to do with playing games except to the immature.  It's my personal preference.
2) I usually spell "lie" in the plural as "lieing", which is technically "incorrect."  It should be "lying," but when translated, it is transliterated as "to lay on the ground." A "lie" is an untruth, not a "nap."
3) Words that I do not think of, or use often, I misspell/mistype frequently.  For example, the word that sounds like "onohmonopia" is not one I type/say very often and as a result, I spell/type it a number of different ways.  The obvious intent is:  (if I can think of the correct spelling or find it somewhere) "anomateopia" ??  okay, wrong, I'll look it up.  Here:  on·o·mat·o·poe·ia

Defending Spokane (Gender Wars)

Tue Shevat 14, 5775 18:19PDT

Dear 'powers-that-be' :
re: Spokane and attacks against Transgenders and Gays and anybody 'different' :

I grew up here in Spokane County; went to school here, graduated from U-High in Spokane (before there was such a thing as "the city of Spokane Valley," and live in Spokane (within city-limits today).  I've never hid in a closet-of-deception, cowering behind a woman, telling her and kids a bunch of lies, and then, when caught, claimed to be a "victim of my sexuality."  Those are not Gay-issues.  But we are all stereotyped as being that way, and all those involved in that behavior, their cheating and lieing, stirs-up alot of anger against us.  But we aren't doing those things.  We never did those things.  We were never involved in any of it.  Those are not Gay-issues.  Those are bi-sexual issues.  And even if those involved in it, 'settle' in some type of 'same-sex relationship,' even if they start calling themselves 'gay,' they are not.  They are still Bi-sexuals, just in a different 'stage' of a typical Bi-sexual lifestyle.

They need their own 'help,' their own 'services,' their own 'outreach' their own 'protections.'  It isn't us.  And rest assured, all the cheating and lieing they told 'straights,' were used to deceive we Gays, too.

Same with Lesbians.  There are more and more Bi-sexual woman, who divorced from a traditional family environment, then got involved in a same-sex relationship, and now claim they are the 'voice and face of what a 'lesbian' is.  That is false.  They are not.  They are still Bi-sexuals, just in a different 'stage' of the typical Bi-sexual Lifestyle.  It may be long-lasting.  It may not.

I mention all that, because Transgender people have their own issues, their own needs, their own unique sets of problems, their own cries of 'help,' which is not us (we Gays) either.  I don't pretend to understand what a Transgender is going through, anymore than that of a Bi-sexual man with children claiming to be a "victim of his sexuality."  To me, that man, after his closet-of-deception is stripped-away, after he (as it is said) "comes out," isn't "proving integrity," at all;  he's just proving he never had any.  Perhaps that's part of his/her 'healing,' I don't know.  They must define that themselves, between each individual and all the people they cheated and lied to.  I've never been in a sexual-relationship with a woman, so I cannot be expected to "identify" with a Bi-sexual's issues.

Transgendered people are all unique, and have their own individual existence.  The 'big argument' people make against them, is that the Transgender "hated themselves as one gender, therefore trained themselves to find "liberation" by becoming (wishing or choosing to be) another gender."  The whole world is grappling with that.  But one thing is certain, these are unique individuals with his/her own sets of unique problems.  Nobody is "walking in their shoes" except themselves.  It doesn't matter if someone thinks they are "choosing" or "manufacturing escapes or excuses", or think they were "born in the wrong body" or whatever, the fact remains that these individuals are not "assimilating" into society, are not getting a "fair shake" in some manner or another and they themselves struggle to define it.  That in itself is a "born-in to" situation, their "gender-dysphoria".  Like it or not.

We as a city and a society, especially the Gay and Lesbian community, are ill-equipped to handle it.  We don't need a million-dollar "study" to "job-security" a future-generation of college-grads, professionally-unionizing, "donating-back" to a particular political-entity (party) of the Legislative Branch for more, more, more money, resources, perks, benefits and raises, annually forevermore, at taxpayer-expense.  We don't need any more of it, and Spokane taxpayers can ill-afford it.

This society is producing many positive symptoms which are mis-diagnosed merely to become a political entities' "donation-base" of voters (organized vote-buying at the expense of all the other taxpayers).  That equation is old and tired and needs be retired.  It, as a social-paradigm, has never solved anything, or made anything "more efficient" nor "less expensive," only become an ever-growing bureaucracy, the 'target' of Credential Sales by predatory-educational institutions.

That said, we need to LISTEN.  It's really SIMPLE.  WE JUST NEED TO LISTEN.  We need to put aside the assumptions and all the pre-programmed soundbites and "reasonable-sounding" platitudes, and just listen.  We don't know how to 'help' these individuals and their unique problem-sets; they need to tell us, and we are not listening, instead, our attention is constantly mis-directed to Credential Sales, politicos, and religious diatribes (and they've had their say, over and over and over, eh?)

This latest attack against a Transgender, who is a "stranger in a strange land," and born-in to it no matter how one views it, isn't being solved by blaming everybody in the city or Police Department or anything else as being "insensitive" and "hateful."  But "slow to respond" to UNIQUE demographical issues?  Yes.  Guilty-as-charged.  Over and over, because profiting from atop the rubble, misery, confusion and grief is just "job-security" to institutions that sell credentials, to become a "union job" that collects "donations" to a political-entity (party) of the Legislative Branch for more, more, more, claiming how everything is now, "new, improved, cleaner, better, brighter, whiter, super-duper more-efficient, less-expensive," and honestly, nothing has ever been made less-expensive by it.  Ever.

We don't need another "statewide initiative," and we don't need another "national roundtable event" or "worldwide super-analysis."  We can figure it out.  Together.  We just forgot to shut up and listen, and I have 15 dead friends that I grew-up with right here that proves it.

Kind regards, always,
CLAYTON LEON WINTON citizen#C03183395
1818 E. 16th Ave., Spokane, WA  99203

(end: Tue Shevat 14, 5775 19:07PDT)

Defending DataCorp

Sat Shevat 11, 5775 22:35PDT

Defending DataCorp

Dick Cheney introduced the Paperwork Reduction Act to eliminate redundant paperwork schemes.  We need a Data Reduction Act to accomplish the same goals.

Furthermore, what we have today, attacking governments throughout the world from the inside-out, is a Predatory Credentialing System.  That is a piece of legislation that funds credential-sales at taxpayer-expense.  What that is, is "job-security" for future-generations of college-grads, professionally unionizing, 'donating-back' to a particular political-entity (party) for more benefits, perks and raises, annually, at taxpayer-expense, profiting from atop rubble, confusion, misery and grief.

For example, our Healthcare and Justice systems:  To colleges, tech-schools or universities selling credentials, "success" to them is "all beds full," and, hopefully, there will be more and more beds to fill.  To everybody else in the world, "success" in terms of both healthcare and criminal-justice, is "all beds empty," because everybody is healed, peaceful and healthy.

As for toxic cleanup, it too has become a giant bureaucracy, professionally-unionized, profiting from more and more types of "spills" and "messes."  If there were truly fewer "spills," and/or all 'messes' were cleaned-up, they would be out of jobs.  Universities secure credential sales by growing government bureaucracies at taxpayer expense.

With that in mind, we must be forward-thinking when it comes to privacy and data security.  These are the "cream" of college, tech-school and university credential sales.  The data-systems built and designed and administered are all graduates of these credentialing programs.  What we have experienced for real, for everybody else, is greater VULNERABILITY for the individual citizen and growing LIABILITY for private industry and governments, worldwide.

Cyber-vandalism, data theft, identity theft, credit card fraud, transfer of child pornography, sell of weapons, chemicals, bio agents and human trafficking is "job-security" in terms of credential-sales to colleges, tech-schools and universities, to lure future-generations of college-grads into their credentialing programs, and upon graduating a "promise" their investment in a credential will be rewarded with a "good paying job."  But that is always the same:  job-security for those college grads, who professionally unionize, pool their 'donations' to a particular political-entity (party) of the Legislative Branch, always demanding more, more, more perks, benefits and annual raises.  As a result, VULNERABILITY increases with LIABILITY, and government can't keep up.

We need a DataCorp.  It should be administered by GayLandIs.  There will be no chance of blackmail or theft.  And for the years-of-service volunteered, the local will be in isolation, where the vounteers live and work.  There will be zero connectivity.  It will be a true archive.  GayLandIs is the only demographic, worldwide, capable of the unique pressures, and detachment from personal-relations, as there will be no families of children, no 'personal entanglements.'

The importance of that would take volumes to describe and would not cover the half of it.  Only the highest levels of discipline would be tolerated.  It needs not be yet another PhD-predator credential-salesjob.  On the contrary it's about defending all people and government(s) against exactly that.

Consider this:  I just watched a 'prophetic' episode of Star Trek original.  It was a trial of an Officer.  The 'witness' against the Officer was not a human, but a machine.  A computer.  The data indicated the human Officer was liable.

BODY CAMERAS and POLICEMAN are the topic, today.  The same situation WILL ARISE.  The Spokane Police Department, for example, under Frank Straub, is now migrating to BodyCams for all Officers.  Where and Who and How the data will be stored, and who and how the copies are differentiated from the originals in ARCHIVE is still an UNKNOWN, as it is throughout the United States, every city, every police force, every state, every country, Federal Law Enfrocement inclusive, and the Department of Defense, too.

We need this.  Yesterday.

Kind Regards, always,

CLAYTON LEON WINTON citizen#C03183395

1818 E. 16th Ave., Spokane, WA, 99203

Defending Google -- WHY SHOULD GOOGLE CARE?

The internet company called, "Google," was started by a couple of kids, young guys, "20-somethings."  Their goal was to make money to buy 'stuff.'  Developing a mission statement that markets a service and an ideal was the challenge, as it is for all companies, and, proving it.  Is it just about making money to buy 'stuff,' or, to provide a service that is helpful to others at a reasonable cost, with a reasonable profit to live, well, reasonably?

Over the years, Google expanded, hiring thousands.  Every "new idea" became a "division" to add another product.  Was the new product or service to provide a better value for the customer, or to maximize their own 'phaaat-bottom' lines?

Most customers of Google are not the millions of end-users that use Google products, so writing about it makes it seem confusing.  A customer of Google is someone that buys or "rents" a "platform" from which to "pitch" their own products or services to end-users and other businesses.  The end-user is the guy sitting at home, that types "http://www.google.com" into their internet browser, and then searches for something, a book, a word, an article about history or definition of pending legislation, etc.  

And there are many ways to make-use of Google Products, free for end-users.  Whle using calculators or spreadsheets or YouTube video-sharing or photo-album sharing or address books and so much more, the end-user allows other companies to "pitch" their products on-screen.  These may not be "plain 'ole" advertisements.  These are tiny "snippets" of something to "grab your attention," even for a moment, just-in-case it could be 'helpful' to you while doing whatever it is you are doing.  Pop-up ads are annoying and "block your path," therefore are disruptive, burdening end-users with "additional steps" and "functions" that have nothing to do with one's tasks, hindering your on-line experience.  Google strives to do better.

Blogger is a Google Product.  Anybody can freely-express themselves in an online blog, which is a 'journal' to write one's thoughts, to freely-express one's opinions or beliefs.  These blogs are "searchable" from the Google Product "search," so other people can find 'articles' about things of interest.  Are you into gardening?  Well, there are thousands who are.  Need "insight" into auto-mechanics?  Somebody had the same problem you have, and wrote a blog about it.  See how that works?

It's a valuable service.  And it's free, to anybody that wishes to make use of it.  It's paid for by Google's customers.  It's free to everybody, but Google's customers pay for it, by "renting" a space to "grab your attention" while using the free online service, in a non-disruptive way.  If you search for blog entries about gardening, a Google Customer bought space and time to also show you that they have a magazine about gardening you can subscribe to, or a handy-dandy gadget about gardening you may find useful at home, in your own garden, for example.

That's why the service is valuable.  That's why Google expanded into a broad range of Products, but it is the Google customer that pays for the convenience.  It's all free to end-users.

So, what if an end-user has a complaint?  They aren't paying for anything.  They aren't "out" anything, monetarily, if something free isn't "working properly" or didn't do what they thought it would do.  Should Google care?

If you were given a free pair of shoes, and they didn't fit, who are you going to complain to?  What exactly is the complaint?  Should Google care?  WHY SHOULD GOOGLE CARE?

I started a blog years ago.  Before starting my blog, I used pencil and paper, writing in a journal, spiral-bound note-books, etc.  I started doing this as a kid.  Before there was an internet, I was doing this on old BBS/EBBS systems, saving-to-disk.  It's about my own faith, see.  It doesn't matter the topic or the words used, it's about doing it, exercising free-expression.  In so doing, per my faith, one's "heart" is "clarified" by "sorting through" the many thoughts of every-day existence.  It's an ancient proverb, it comes from the Torah, and is applicable to all people, equally.

The blog I started online was on a website called, "Blogger."  At the time, it was not owned by Google, so it was not a Google Product.  I could, however, use Google Search to find my blog, or words or phrases in my blog that I had written about.  That was very helpful.  Did I use the word "Nephelium?"  I could find it in my many blog posts on Blogger, using Google Search.

Google bought Blogger, and moved my blogs from "blogger dot com" to "blogspot dot com."  Ever since, I cannot search for anything in my blogs.  Further, the title of one of my blogs on Blogger was "BrutalHonesty," and it was unique, and I could type the name into my web browser's address bar and see my blog.  Ever since Google bought Blogger, that is not the case, it takes me someone else's blog, called, "RandomThoughts," which has nothing to do with me, or my topics, or my faith.

Further, when I type in the web address of my blog, it re-directs me to "brutalhonesty2" instead of "BrutalHonesty dot blogger (now blogspot) dot com."  In other words, my freely-expressed words, as per my faith, are hidden-away, somewheres, and unsearchable, in an electronic "dark-cave." THE PIT.

Is it because of my faith?  Is it because of my sexual-orientation?  Is it because of my Disabled American status?

WHY SHOULD GOOGLE CARE?

And this is where the 'arguments' go haywire and endless complicated "business models," memorized soundbites, reasonable-sounding platitudes, and text-book back-office jargon becomes a mindless droning-sound.  

I can imagine the "sales-pitch" to a customer of Googles, buying space and time, to promote their own products and services to the many free-users of Google's.  The Google marketing-rep may make a commission, and I can imagine he or she saying something like this:  "We have algorithms that determine, over time, which end-users actually buy products that are shown on their computer screens while using Google, to single-out the low-income, disabled, or, to be 'pc' , "non-buyer" , and by doing so, you won't have to waste your ad dollar on those that won't buy anything anyway."

I can imagine that, and a whole lot more.  National legislation and being dragged before Congress like Bill Gates and Microsoft, with a sizeable portion of future Google profits funding Legislators to victimize their next corporation.  PROVE ME WRONG, PLEASE!

Kind regards, always,

CLAYTON LEON WINTON

1818 E. 16th Ave., Spokane, WA 99203

==============================

Update: comments I put on my Facebook page:  GOOGLE, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION:
Sun Shevat 19, 18:42PDT

Clayton Winton I just saw on NBC Nightly News a report about a new app that identifies the location of Police Officers. The Los Angeles Police Chief has sent a letter to Google to object. THIS IS ALSO AN LGBT ISSUE, so pay attention: 

When you are in PUBLIC, and somebody IDENTIFIES you to others, that is giving-out your PERSONAL/PRIVATE info. That's how gay-bashings occur, and throughout history, that is how blacks were lynched; gays were beaten or killed; men, women and children raped, robbed or whatever. 

Now, the Civil Rights 'people' are saying it's a matter of "free speech." That a REGISTRY of "types of people" is about "free speech." That's what was said before rounding-up Gays and Jews and marching us to death camps.

You do not have a right to identify personal info about anybody in Public. You do not have a right to take private info and 'share it' with anybody. You only have the right to do such things about yourself, by yourself.

I am not only Defending Policemen here, but LGBT too.

21 mins · Like

Defending Jews ; Int'l Holocaust Remembrance Day

Fri Shevat 3, 2015

 -- for: International Holocaust Remembrance Day (The UN General Assembly designated January 27—the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau)

MY WORDS:

It is interesting, how Protestants always teach in bible studies how " ... the Jews always just argue(d) amongst themselves."  Even in Catholicism, there are several priesthoods of Judeo-Christian descent that still promote such things, in that way.

Let me clarify:   We are talking about time-periods and education.  Today, when it comes to vast topics, such as terrorism, the 'lay-person' is not privy to any knowledge that prevents it, therefore cannot make policy about it, nor argue any strategy to handle, say, ISIS or ISL.  Any effort in doing so, is devoid of real intel.  There is no knowledge of military capability, weaponry, supply, funding, international treaty law or anything else, only news-clips and magazine articles.  Only the experts can argue the case.

Likewise, during the time-period, long ago, there was no education, the "general public" being ignorant, incapable of reading and writing, no knowledge of law, monetary systems or forms of government.  Today, each topic is specialized, and requires a PhD to be regarded as an "expert" in any one particular field.  It takes a panel of such 'experts' to arrive at any agreements, or agree upon any course of action.

Therefore, which group of people, demographically, had the knowledge?  Who had the education to discuss theology?  Jews.

Further, in today's "pop-culture" lexicon, we mis-use the word "argument."  An "argument" is not a squabble, it is not a "disagreement."  An argument is one-side of a topic.  An individual formulates their "take" or opinion about a topic, based-upon their level of real-life experience, training, education, and anything 'new' (news) as it becomes available, updating their opinion in real-time.  The presentation of their opinion is their 'argument.'  Another person does the same.  The two discuss their arguments, civilly, with respect and dignity.  Perhaps they'll both update their opinions (arguments) and arrive at some form of agreement as to future presentation and acts.  That's the beauty of communication, of dialogue.

So, when the "christian" reads commentary about their "old" or "new" testaments (scriptures), and is told, "The Jews just argue amongst themselves," that does not imply they hatefully squabble nonstop.  It never meant that.  It's only pop-culture lexicon, colloquialism, ignorance within a so-called "educated society" that promotes that idea.

When doctors "argue amongst themselves" as to how to best handle the Ebola outbreak, there are no credible opinions (arguments) to be taken into consideration from 'laymen' (non medical-doctors and disease-control experts).

All the "old testament" came from, and is a translation (transliteration) of, the Torah, the first five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leveticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.  Then, all the other 'books' of "the prophets," and then, "the writings," which comprise the remainder of the "christian bible's." Old Testament.  It was a gift from scholarly Jews who were the only experts, therefore could only be, and were, and in many cases still are, the credible arguers of such topics.

See how that works?  It's simple.  And it was never intended to be "overly complicated."

Kind regards, always,

CLAYTON LEON WINTON  citizen#C03183395 קלייטון ליאון וינטון

Defending Speaker Boehner II

Update: Thu Shevat 2, 5775 08:30PDT

On the news ticker this morning, on GMA, was a blurb about how the House Speaker, John Boehner breached protocol by inviting Israeli PM Netanyahu to address Congress.  I do not that that is correct.  The Speaker may invite anybody to address Congress.  As to whether or not all the 'chips' fall-in to place, and all the 'approvals' signed-off, etc., is another matter.  No singular individual can set the agenda of Congress, in other words.  Obviously.

 -- well, maybe terrorists.  Or, at least disrupt proceedings.

And the subtle promotion of PM Benjamin Netanyahu being somehow correlated with "terror" in a derogatory way, seems to be the agenda of many.  It's Palestinians and their supporters here and abroad, cheering with Iranians and Chechyns and Ugurs for the utter destruction of Russian, US'an, China's and Israel's governments, afterall, the EU inclusive.

It was similar forces that defeated Germany in WWI, then turned it over to a PhD cabal to rebuild it into a powerhouse of fascist militancy run by PhDs that attempted to overthrow the world just twenty years later; the German Citizen scapegoated.

I don't think the world is that complicated; just presented as "greatly complicated" for evil people to repeat the evils of history.  History never repeats itself, only evil people repeat evil deeds from history, against the rest of us, each and every individual an inherently unique and priceless life, their potential to pursue happiness and liberty according to their own Freewill, unless waylaid or circumvented by evil design.

I invited PM Netanyahu to address my country, my people, my world, my Legislative Branch within my government, as a citizen.  I have that right.  Thank you, Speaker Boehner, for extending my invitation to one of the most inspirational people in the world during my lifetime.

Did you know his picture on my list of Inspirational People on my Facebook page was defaced by cybervandals?  By haters?  Did you know, Speaker Boehner, that just because I displayed his picture, and the picture of Eva Lassman, Holocaust Survivor, that my Facebook page was attacked?  That my display of the TaNaKh on my Facebook page brought hatred against my person, my efforts, my pursuits of free expression and free speech and freedom to express in my own words my faith?

 -- they distorted my pics; they made my Inspirational People and my Book List, the TaNaKh, junk?  Did you know that?

 -- and when I expressed displeasure, was accussed of being "emotionally unstable"?  Did you know that?

It's shradenfraude, the "new, improved, cleaner, better, brighter, whiter, super-duper more efficient, less expensive" version, but the costs are the same:  incalculable.

LET PM NETANYAHU ADDRESS CONGRESS AND THANK YOU!

Kind regards, always,
CLAYTON LEON WINTON citizen#C03183395

====================

note:  Defending Speaker Boehner, Part-1, and Defending Shinseki, is found in my blog titled "BrutalHonesty" here on Google Blogger.