🔥 | Latest

Feminism, Fucking, and News: Mr.Knowledge13 @True_kwu Follow Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical composer's mother was a Moor Even though paintings of the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death mask highlights his African features. 9:23 AM-19 Mar 2018 1,202 Retweets 1,985 Likes 砝ビ) ③巻 Thanbo @DeboTARANTINO Follow Damn we got zaytoven and beethovern Mr.Knowledge13T @True_kwu Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical composer's mother was a Moor. Even though paintings of the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death .む 7:14 AM- 20 Mar 2018 ed OC 5,287 Retweets 7,150 Likes lastsonlost: libertarirynn: feminists-against-feminism: feminists-against-feminism: allronix: nicky-cass: absolutely-walnuts: holy shit “Ludwig van Beethoven was of African descent, and the truth of his ethnic origins was covered up through a mixture of white powder worn on his face when out in public, the use of body doubles for portraits, and “euro-centric” historians, hiding the truth of his genetic heritage.“ - src I’m mad that we aren’t taught this Again, PLEASE fact check. This is bunk.  The man pictured is indeed a Black composer, but he’s not Beethoven! He’s  Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges   The Chevalier was a renowned Renaissance man of his era; a skilled soldier, revolutionary, composer, piano tutor (to Marie Antoinette!) , writer, actor, and singer.  Please do not erase him from history for the sake of an appealing lie.  pfft, so you’re telling me this was a bunch of bologne? … Bologna? And Tumblr continuesto be completely embarrassing It’s like we have a generation compulsive pathological Liars. Not only that but like the person above said they completely erased the identity of a legitimate black classical composer, and it’s fucking awesome to know that those existed. You had an opportunity for legitimate representation and you decided to turn it into a ridiculous lie instead.
Feminism, Fucking, and News: Mr.Knowledge13
 @True_kwu
 Follow
 Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black.
 The classical composer's mother was a Moor
 Even though paintings of the composer
 depict him as very Caucasian, his death mask
 highlights his African features.
 9:23 AM-19 Mar 2018
 1,202 Retweets 1,985 Likes
 砝ビ)
 ③巻

 Thanbo
 @DeboTARANTINO
 Follow
 Damn we got zaytoven and beethovern
 Mr.Knowledge13T @True_kwu
 Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical
 composer's mother was a Moor. Even though paintings of
 the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death
 .む
 7:14 AM- 20 Mar 2018
 ed OC
 5,287 Retweets 7,150 Likes
lastsonlost:

libertarirynn:

feminists-against-feminism:

feminists-against-feminism:
allronix:

nicky-cass:

absolutely-walnuts:

holy shit
“Ludwig van Beethoven was of African descent, and the truth of his ethnic origins was covered up through a mixture of white powder worn on his face when out in public, the use of body doubles for portraits, and “euro-centric” historians, hiding the truth of his genetic heritage.“ - src


I’m mad that we aren’t taught this

Again, PLEASE fact check. This is bunk. 
The man pictured is indeed a Black composer, but he’s not Beethoven! He’s 

Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges

 
The Chevalier was a renowned Renaissance man of his era; a skilled soldier, revolutionary, composer, piano tutor (to Marie Antoinette!) , writer, actor, and singer. 
Please do not erase him from history for the sake of an appealing lie. 

pfft, so you’re telling me this was a bunch of bologne?

… Bologna?

And Tumblr continuesto be completely embarrassing

It’s like we have a generation compulsive pathological Liars.

Not only that but like the person above said they completely erased the identity of a legitimate black classical composer, and it’s fucking awesome to know that those existed. You had an opportunity for legitimate representation and you decided to turn it into a ridiculous lie instead.

lastsonlost: libertarirynn: feminists-against-feminism: feminists-against-feminism: allronix: nicky-cass: absolutely-walnuts: holy shi...

Feminism, News, and Paintings: Mr.Knowledge13 @True_kwu Follow Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical composer's mother was a Moor Even though paintings of the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death mask highlights his African features. 9:23 AM-19 Mar 2018 1,202 Retweets 1,985 Likes 砝ビ) ③巻 Thanbo @DeboTARANTINO Follow Damn we got zaytoven and beethovern Mr.Knowledge13T @True_kwu Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical composer's mother was a Moor. Even though paintings of the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death .む 7:14 AM- 20 Mar 2018 ed OC 5,287 Retweets 7,150 Likes feminists-against-feminism: feminists-against-feminism: allronix: nicky-cass: absolutely-walnuts: holy shit “Ludwig van Beethoven was of African descent, and the truth of his ethnic origins was covered up through a mixture of white powder worn on his face when out in public, the use of body doubles for portraits, and “euro-centric” historians, hiding the truth of his genetic heritage.“ - src I’m mad that we aren’t taught this Again, PLEASE fact check. This is bunk.  The man pictured is indeed a Black composer, but he’s not Beethoven! He’s  Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges   The Chevalier was a renowned Renaissance man of his era; a skilled soldier, revolutionary, composer, piano tutor (to Marie Antoinette!) , writer, actor, and singer.  Please do not erase him from history for the sake of an appealing lie.  pfft, so you’re telling me this was a bunch of bologne? … Bologna? And Tumblr continuesto be completely embarrassing
Feminism, News, and Paintings: Mr.Knowledge13
 @True_kwu
 Follow
 Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black.
 The classical composer's mother was a Moor
 Even though paintings of the composer
 depict him as very Caucasian, his death mask
 highlights his African features.
 9:23 AM-19 Mar 2018
 1,202 Retweets 1,985 Likes
 砝ビ)
 ③巻

 Thanbo
 @DeboTARANTINO
 Follow
 Damn we got zaytoven and beethovern
 Mr.Knowledge13T @True_kwu
 Ludwig Van Beethoven was so called Black. The classical
 composer's mother was a Moor. Even though paintings of
 the composer depict him as very Caucasian, his death
 .む
 7:14 AM- 20 Mar 2018
 ed OC
 5,287 Retweets 7,150 Likes
feminists-against-feminism:

feminists-against-feminism:
allronix:

nicky-cass:

absolutely-walnuts:

holy shit
“Ludwig van Beethoven was of African descent, and the truth of his ethnic origins was covered up through a mixture of white powder worn on his face when out in public, the use of body doubles for portraits, and “euro-centric” historians, hiding the truth of his genetic heritage.“ - src


I’m mad that we aren’t taught this

Again, PLEASE fact check. This is bunk. 
The man pictured is indeed a Black composer, but he’s not Beethoven! He’s 

Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges

 
The Chevalier was a renowned Renaissance man of his era; a skilled soldier, revolutionary, composer, piano tutor (to Marie Antoinette!) , writer, actor, and singer. 
Please do not erase him from history for the sake of an appealing lie. 

pfft, so you’re telling me this was a bunch of bologne?

… Bologna?

And Tumblr continuesto be completely embarrassing

feminists-against-feminism: feminists-against-feminism: allronix: nicky-cass: absolutely-walnuts: holy shit “Ludwig van Beethoven was of...

80s, Be Like, and Bless Up: When you try to pretend you're not looking at your crush, and then eye contact happens. New rule for all of u people who wear black shades in the airport but don’t have a eye condition: u a jacka$$ 🙂. No offense! 😂 Now as always my rules come with exceptions. First, u been in a action film starring the Rock or a romantic film starring Sarah Jessica Parker. U feel me? A film errybody seent. Oh u acted in one art house film that was featured at the Aspen Film Festival and got a small release in NYC and LA but u rocking Gucci shades at O’hare? U a jacka$$ 🙂. Even a B-list celebrity like Kid Cudi Imma let u rock shades out the goodness of my heart. Like to a oddly specific subsection of 2000s-era stoners u a legit star - shades are ok because them oddly specific fans is hella in love with u and U want a lil privacy. Plus people gon be like “wow kid cudi flying spirit airline?? Damn. Times is rough. AHIMMMMAHHHHHHOHHHHH.” [I always pictured Kid Cudi fans moan like Cudi in private lmao.] He might wear shades to be like “aye lemme hide a lil bit and eat my airport Cinnabon with jiz sauce in peacington.” I feel that. Second, legit athletes. But see it’s always that dude that’s 6’5”+ who wanna rock shades in the airport to create confusion. He ain’t a NBA player but he might could had played college ball. Bruh. U ain’t famous. U just lengthy 😂. “Well smash maybe u just jealous of these actors, rappers and athletes — salty a$$. U just a nobody with a meme page LMAOOO.” Ummmm exactly! And I love it that way! 😂 That’s the whole point. People wear them shades in airports to pretend like they don’t wanna be recognized but low key dying to be recognized. The shades - which is suppose to obscure they identity - actually draw attention to them. People look harder to see who they are. Like them dudes who was heavy metal artists in the 80s but still rock the big hair like ya auntie Julie and tight fake leather pants like homie just dying to be spotted by someone (...like ya auntie Julie lmao she still play they music! She never moved on! She’ll STILL smash Jerry the drummer just to brag at the hair salon! Raw! Knowing she number 8,762! Go head Julie u wild lmao!) Anyway bruv, stop. Take them shades off. See? Light is lovely. Bless up 😂😂😂
80s, Be Like, and Bless Up: When you try to pretend you're not
 looking at your crush, and then eye
 contact happens.
New rule for all of u people who wear black shades in the airport but don’t have a eye condition: u a jacka$$ 🙂. No offense! 😂 Now as always my rules come with exceptions. First, u been in a action film starring the Rock or a romantic film starring Sarah Jessica Parker. U feel me? A film errybody seent. Oh u acted in one art house film that was featured at the Aspen Film Festival and got a small release in NYC and LA but u rocking Gucci shades at O’hare? U a jacka$$ 🙂. Even a B-list celebrity like Kid Cudi Imma let u rock shades out the goodness of my heart. Like to a oddly specific subsection of 2000s-era stoners u a legit star - shades are ok because them oddly specific fans is hella in love with u and U want a lil privacy. Plus people gon be like “wow kid cudi flying spirit airline?? Damn. Times is rough. AHIMMMMAHHHHHHOHHHHH.” [I always pictured Kid Cudi fans moan like Cudi in private lmao.] He might wear shades to be like “aye lemme hide a lil bit and eat my airport Cinnabon with jiz sauce in peacington.” I feel that. Second, legit athletes. But see it’s always that dude that’s 6’5”+ who wanna rock shades in the airport to create confusion. He ain’t a NBA player but he might could had played college ball. Bruh. U ain’t famous. U just lengthy 😂. “Well smash maybe u just jealous of these actors, rappers and athletes — salty a$$. U just a nobody with a meme page LMAOOO.” Ummmm exactly! And I love it that way! 😂 That’s the whole point. People wear them shades in airports to pretend like they don’t wanna be recognized but low key dying to be recognized. The shades - which is suppose to obscure they identity - actually draw attention to them. People look harder to see who they are. Like them dudes who was heavy metal artists in the 80s but still rock the big hair like ya auntie Julie and tight fake leather pants like homie just dying to be spotted by someone (...like ya auntie Julie lmao she still play they music! She never moved on! She’ll STILL smash Jerry the drummer just to brag at the hair salon! Raw! Knowing she number 8,762! Go head Julie u wild lmao!) Anyway bruv, stop. Take them shades off. See? Light is lovely. Bless up 😂😂😂

New rule for all of u people who wear black shades in the airport but don’t have a eye condition: u a jacka$$ 🙂. No offense! 😂 Now as always...

Bad, Crazy, and Lol: <p><a href="http://the-pyroveride.tumblr.com/post/109178070113/proudblackconservative-the-pyroveride" class="tumblr_blog">the-pyroveride</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudblackconservative.tumblr.com/post/109177735279/the-pyroveride-proudblackconservative">proudblackconservative</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://the-pyroveride.tumblr.com/post/109177411663/proudblackconservative-pictured-a-photographic">the-pyroveride</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudblackconservative.tumblr.com/post/109176913764/pictured-a-photographic-representation-of-what">proudblackconservative</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>Pictured: A photographic representation of what happens when you trust the government to “boost the economy”.</p> </blockquote> <p>Ya know, he’s right.</p> </blockquote> <p>You just misgendered me and I’m calling the police. #toteskidding #butiamactuallyfemale xD</p> </blockquote> <p>Oh, i really didnt know that. my bad, I just assumed by your picture icon. No worries then. I still agree with your page either or.</p> <p>Now if you had been some crazy tumblr feminist they would be freaking out and going ape shit and dealing with hour upon hours of anon hate by a simple misunderstanding. </p></blockquote> <p>Lol, no worries. It happens pretty often, actually.</p>
Bad, Crazy, and Lol: <p><a href="http://the-pyroveride.tumblr.com/post/109178070113/proudblackconservative-the-pyroveride" class="tumblr_blog">the-pyroveride</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudblackconservative.tumblr.com/post/109177735279/the-pyroveride-proudblackconservative">proudblackconservative</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://the-pyroveride.tumblr.com/post/109177411663/proudblackconservative-pictured-a-photographic">the-pyroveride</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudblackconservative.tumblr.com/post/109176913764/pictured-a-photographic-representation-of-what">proudblackconservative</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Pictured: A photographic representation of what happens when you trust the government to “boost the economy”.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ya know, he’s right.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You just misgendered me and I’m calling the police. #toteskidding #butiamactuallyfemale xD</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Oh, i really didnt know that. my bad, I just assumed by your picture icon. No worries then. I still agree with your page either or.</p>
<p>Now if you had been some crazy tumblr feminist they would be freaking out and going ape shit and dealing with hour upon hours of anon hate by a simple misunderstanding. </p></blockquote>

<p>Lol, no worries. It happens pretty often, actually.</p>

<p><a href="http://the-pyroveride.tumblr.com/post/109178070113/proudblackconservative-the-pyroveride" class="tumblr_blog">the-pyroveride</a>...

Food, Radio, and Soon...: Anonymous asked you I'm so tired of seeing everyone whitewash poor Tamika! Please cosplay her accurately or don't at all. Anonymous asked you isn't tamika black? Anonymous asked you you'd be pretty cool if you weren't white. there are so many white characters you could cosplay, so why can't you let poc stay poc? Anonymous asked you Why are you whitewashing Tamika Flynn?! Not cool <p><a href="http://this-blog-is-no-longer-active.tumblr.com/post/83940379339/ooc-post-id-like-to-remind-everyone-that" class="tumblr_blog">this-blog-is-no-longer-active</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>//OOC Post//</p> <p>//I’d like to remind everyone that skin color cannot be changed. I was born white and I will stay white. My headcanon for Tamika is African-American, but because I am white, I won’t be cosplaying that any time soon.</p> <p>I’d like to tell you all a short story.</p> <p>Before I found my way to this url, there was another white Tamika cosplayer on it. Some of you may remember her. She looked like this:</p> <p><img alt="" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/60cef0a11575b15d6de92e5afdde1201/tumblr_inline_mx7ekxktfv1stbo89.jpg"/></p> <p>While I didn’t originally connect this url with her, I remember hearing briefly about her through a <a href="http://the-female-voice-of-night-vale.tumblr.com/post/71486171129/are-you-serious-right-now">supportive post</a> on my dash and checking out her blog. She struggled so much with the hate messages that she eventually deleted her blog.</p> <p>Only a short time after taking this url, I received a message from her. She warned me to be careful because she didn’t want the same thing to happen to me. Not a week later, I began to receive messages like those pictured above.</p> <p>I sometimes feel ashamed to be part of a fandom that is so often represented by people like this. How can anyone think that this is okay? We may not be POC, but before anything else, we are people. Do we deserve hatred because of our skin color? Does that make you better than someone who sends hate to a POC cosplayer?</p> <p>Food for thought.//</p></blockquote> <p>Ugh people piss me off so much. WTNV is a friggin&rsquo; RADIO SHOW. You can cosplay as any character you damn well please. All the races are up to headcannon anyway. SJWs need to take a breath.</p>
Food, Radio, and Soon...: Anonymous asked you
 I'm so tired of seeing everyone whitewash poor Tamika! Please cosplay her
 accurately or don't at all.
 Anonymous asked you
 isn't tamika black?
 Anonymous asked you
 you'd be pretty cool if you weren't white. there are so many white characters
 you could cosplay, so why can't you let poc stay poc?
 Anonymous asked you
 Why are you whitewashing Tamika Flynn?! Not cool
<p><a href="http://this-blog-is-no-longer-active.tumblr.com/post/83940379339/ooc-post-id-like-to-remind-everyone-that" class="tumblr_blog">this-blog-is-no-longer-active</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p>//OOC Post//</p>
<p>//I’d like to remind everyone that skin color cannot be changed. I was born white and I will stay white. My headcanon for Tamika is African-American, but because I am white, I won’t be cosplaying that any time soon.</p>
<p>I’d like to tell you all a short story.</p>
<p>Before I found my way to this url, there was another white Tamika cosplayer on it. Some of you may remember her. She looked like this:</p>
<p><img alt="" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/60cef0a11575b15d6de92e5afdde1201/tumblr_inline_mx7ekxktfv1stbo89.jpg"/></p>
<p>While I didn’t originally connect this url with her, I remember hearing briefly about her through a <a href="http://the-female-voice-of-night-vale.tumblr.com/post/71486171129/are-you-serious-right-now">supportive post</a> on my dash and checking out her blog. She struggled so much with the hate messages that she eventually deleted her blog.</p>
<p>Only a short time after taking this url, I received a message from her. She warned me to be careful because she didn’t want the same thing to happen to me. Not a week later, I began to receive messages like those pictured above.</p>
<p>I sometimes feel ashamed to be part of a fandom that is so often represented by people like this. How can anyone think that this is okay? We may not be POC, but before anything else, we are people. Do we deserve hatred because of our skin color? Does that make you better than someone who sends hate to a POC cosplayer?</p>
<p>Food for thought.//</p></blockquote>

<p>Ugh people piss me off so much. WTNV is a friggin&rsquo; RADIO SHOW. You can cosplay as any character you damn well please. All the races are up to headcannon anyway. SJWs need to take a breath.</p>

<p><a href="http://this-blog-is-no-longer-active.tumblr.com/post/83940379339/ooc-post-id-like-to-remind-everyone-that" class="tumblr_blog">t...

Bad, Beautiful, and Butt: VICTORIA'S SECRET Love My Body Campaign Dove Real Beauty Campaign <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://burdenedwithgloriousassbutt.tumblr.com/post/99732326769/avidita-itsleightaylor-rozahathawaylove">burdenedwithgloriousassbutt</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://avidita.tumblr.com/post/99248561898/itsleightaylor-rozahathawaylove">avidita</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://itsleightaylor.tumblr.com/post/83627323332/rozahathawaylove-dottingpetals-lie-t0-m3">itsleightaylor</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://rozahathawaylove.tumblr.com/post/83580259106/dottingpetals-lie-t0-m3-forever-reblog">rozahathawaylove</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://dottingpetals.tumblr.com/post/83478512437/lie-t0-m3-forever-reblog-the-victoria-secret">dottingpetals</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://lie-t0-m3.tumblr.com/post/32752725234/forever-reblog">lie-t0-m3</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>forever reblog</p> </blockquote> <p>the victoria secret models don’t even look human??</p> </blockquote> <p>The Victoria’s Secret models worked their butt off to look like that, so don’t degrade people on their hard work. All the women in this post are beautiful.</p> </blockquote> <p>THANK YOU</p> </blockquote> <div>Literally shut up</div> </blockquote> <p>It is literally the Victoria Secret model’s job to look like that and it is a <em>full time job. </em>Every single woman pictured here is absolutely gorgeous. Don’t be an asshole.</p> </blockquote> <p>There is one thing every woman in these pictures has in common: They all look good in their underwear. Sorry but I&rsquo;m just as skeptical of Dove&rsquo;s &ldquo;real beauty&rdquo; campaign. It seems to be mostly based around lying to and deluding women, as well as preying on gullible ladies with bafflingly low self-esteem. Have you ever seen some of their commercials and experiments? The whole thing comes off as &ldquo;don&rsquo;t worry ladies! We know you all think you&rsquo;re hideous hags with zero self-worth, but Dove (the almighty cosmetics company) is here to save the day! Don&rsquo;t let magazines tell you who you are, let US tell you who you are! And please don&rsquo;t get so self-confident that you don&rsquo;t feel like you still need our products to be beautiful! That&rsquo;d be bad&hellip; Also men don&rsquo;t have problems with their self image and they aren&rsquo;t dopes who<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGDMXvdwN5c"> think a sticker makes them confident </a>and then are shocked to find out that it&rsquo;s just a sticker :D&rdquo; The message of all these campaigns is the same: physical beauty is all that matters and you should follow our company&rsquo;s particular definition of it.</p>
Bad, Beautiful, and Butt: VICTORIA'S SECRET Love My Body Campaign

 Dove Real Beauty Campaign
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://burdenedwithgloriousassbutt.tumblr.com/post/99732326769/avidita-itsleightaylor-rozahathawaylove">burdenedwithgloriousassbutt</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://avidita.tumblr.com/post/99248561898/itsleightaylor-rozahathawaylove">avidita</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://itsleightaylor.tumblr.com/post/83627323332/rozahathawaylove-dottingpetals-lie-t0-m3">itsleightaylor</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://rozahathawaylove.tumblr.com/post/83580259106/dottingpetals-lie-t0-m3-forever-reblog">rozahathawaylove</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://dottingpetals.tumblr.com/post/83478512437/lie-t0-m3-forever-reblog-the-victoria-secret">dottingpetals</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://lie-t0-m3.tumblr.com/post/32752725234/forever-reblog">lie-t0-m3</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>forever reblog</p>
</blockquote>
<p>the victoria secret models don’t even look human??</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Victoria’s Secret models worked their butt off to look like that, so don’t degrade people on their hard work. All the women in this post are beautiful.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>THANK YOU</p>
</blockquote>
<div>Literally shut up</div>
</blockquote>
<p>It is literally the Victoria Secret model’s job to look like that and it is a <em>full time job. </em>Every single woman pictured here is absolutely gorgeous. Don’t be an asshole.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is one thing every woman in these pictures has in common: They all look good in their underwear. Sorry but I&rsquo;m just as skeptical of Dove&rsquo;s &ldquo;real beauty&rdquo; campaign. It seems to be mostly based around lying to and deluding women, as well as preying on gullible ladies with bafflingly low self-esteem. Have you ever seen some of their commercials and experiments? The whole thing comes off as &ldquo;don&rsquo;t worry ladies! We know you all think you&rsquo;re hideous hags with zero self-worth, but Dove (the almighty cosmetics company) is here to save the day! Don&rsquo;t let magazines tell you who you are, let US tell you who you are! And please don&rsquo;t get so self-confident that you don&rsquo;t feel like you still need our products to be beautiful! That&rsquo;d be bad&hellip; Also men don&rsquo;t have problems with their self image and they aren&rsquo;t dopes who<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGDMXvdwN5c"> think a sticker makes them confident </a>and then are shocked to find out that it&rsquo;s just a sticker :D&rdquo; The message of all these campaigns is the same: physical beauty is all that matters and you should follow our company&rsquo;s particular definition of it.</p>

<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://burdenedwithgloriousassbutt.tumblr.com/post/99732326769/avidita-itsleightaylor-rozahathawaylove">burd...

America, cnn.com, and Facebook: The grossly mislead graphic liberals are using to compare Benghazi to embassy attacks under Bush. 2002 -U.S. Consulate In Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked 10 Killed 2004 -U.S. Embassy Bombed In Uzbekistan 2 Killed, 9 Injured 2004 Gunmen Stormed U.S. Consulate In Saudi Arabia 8 Killed 2006 Armed Men Attacked U.S. Embassy In Syria 1 Killed 2007 Grenade Launched Into U.S. Embassy In Athens 2008 - Rioters Set Fire To U.S. Embassy In Serbia 2008 Bombings At U.S. Embassy In Yemen 10 Killed 2012 US embassy in Benghazi, Libya attacked 4 Kille REPUBLICANS BECOME OUTRAGED AND SUDDENLY CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF AMERICANS ABROAD. NOW THEY DEMAND INVESTIGATIONS <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/50370330271/gop-tea-pub-liberals-use-grossly-misleading" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://gop-tea-pub.tumblr.com/post/50344100938/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list">gop-tea-pub</a>:</p> <blockquote> <h1><strong><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush">Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush</a></strong></h1> <p>The graphic pictured above is getting passed around quite a bit on Facebook lately and it gets posted by liberals whenever the subject of Benghazi comes up. The graphic above with a list of attacks below, supposedly points out that many more people were killed in embassy bombings and shootings under Bush than the 4 who were killed in Benghazi under President Obama. The comparison is made as if somehow sheer numbers excuses a cover up, issuing stand down orders and <a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/ambassador-susan-rice-on-sunday-talk-shows-lies-for-obama-administration/"><strong>lying about the cause</strong></a> of the Benghazi consulate attack.</p> <p>In effect what liberals are saying when they post this graphic is, “Well yes, we know Obama lied about Benghazi, covered up the truth and made up a story as to what caused the attack, but Bush is way worse because there were more embassy attacks and more people died under his watch.” Sadly, this is simply part of the “blame Bush for everything that happens to Obama” mentalities of both liberals and Obama himself because not a single one of these attacks when looked at closely, even holds a candle to what happened in Benghazi. And in fact, with one of the attacks listed below, even though it has 371,000 references in Google, <strong>we can’t find any evidence the attack even happened</strong>. All references in Google search seem to be the same list that liberal blogs just blindly copied, passed around and then mindlessly published without checking a single reference. <strong>So much for liberal facts!</strong></p> <p>Liberals also like to point out that either 52 or 54 people were killed (depending on what sources you read), but when looked at these attacks more closely only 1 person who died was an American. That person was U.S. Diplomat David Foy killed in Pakistan in March 2006. All other deaths were either brave embassy guards who were killed in the line of duty defending the safety of embassy employees, or they were innocent bystanders killed in the crossfire or bomb explosions.</p> <p>We also have the list that somewhat goes with the inaccurate graphic and is posted over at Daily Kos, which I will never link to (but you can <strong><a href="http://thelastofthemillenniums.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/under-obama-there-have-been-2-embassy-attacks-and-4-deaths-under-bush-there-were-11-embassy-attacks-and-52-deaths/">find it here</a></strong>) , with the title “If diplomatic attacks are a sign of weakness, Bush was the weakest of all.”</p> <p>In reality this list is weak because everything on it pales in comparison to Benghazi. Yes, real people with families and loved ones died in these attacks, but in no case was there <strong>any controversy</strong> surrounding them as there is in the Libya attack and in no embassy attack under the Bush Presidency was there any attempt to cover-up what happened or was there blame placed on something that turned out to be patently false. The sheer level to which Obama has gone to hide the facts of this attack is like <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/10/top-gop-senator-says-obama-could-be-impeached-over-most-egregious-cover-up-in-american-history/"><strong>nothing we have ever seen</strong></a> in the United States of America.</p> <p>Read below as we destroy both the list and the graphic at the top of this post:</p> <p><strong>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.</strong></p> <p>Unlike Benghazi, <strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi_consulate_attacks">this attack</a></strong> happened outside the walls of the consulate and yes, twelve people were killed and 51 injured, all Pakistanis. I cannot find any reports of Americans amongst the injured. And we aren’t sure how this attack matches up with the graphic above because there were 12 people killed, not 10.</p> <p><strong>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia - Truck bomb kills 17.</strong></p> <p>This one is only on the list found at Daily Kos and the link to the list above and we especially love this example because we can’t find a <strong>single credible reference <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22February+20%2C+2003%22+%22truck+bomb%22">anywhere in Google</a></strong> <span><strong>that this attack ever happened!</strong></span></p> <p><strong>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.</strong></p> <p>Two policemen were killed in this shooting <strong>outside</strong> the consulate and <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/28/karachi.shooting/http://"><strong>according to CNN</strong></a>, “none of the staff inside the compound at the time were injured in the attack.”</p> <p><strong>July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan - Suicide bomber kills two.</strong></p> <p>Two Uzbek policemen were killed<strong> <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3940019.stm">outside the embassy</a></strong> of both the countries of Israel and the United States. <span>US and Israeli officials said none of their staff were among the casualties.</span></p> <p><strong>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia - Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.</strong></p> <p>This is the only attack on this list and referenced in the graphic where the walls of the embassy were breached and personnel inside were killed, but once again, the graphic and the reference above from The Daily Kos don’t match. Four security guards and five staff were killed, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/dec/06/saudiarabia.usa"><strong>none were Americans</strong></a>. By our math, 4 plus 5 equals, 9, not 8 as listed in the graphic and 5 as listed in the reference above.</p> <p><strong>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat directly targeted by the assailants.</strong></p> <p>This is the only attack where an American diplomat, not an Ambassador like Christopher Stevens, was actually killed. Tragically, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi_consulate_attacks"><strong>David Foy was specifically targeted</strong></a> outside the embassy when a massive car bomb went off in the parking lot behind the consulate as he arrived for work.</p> <p>Isn’t it interesting that the only embassy attack where an American was killed under Bush and they don’t include it in their completely inaccurate graphic above. You would think they would want that one in there.</p> <p><strong>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria - Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.</strong></p> <p>Here we go again, another attack listed where not only were no Americans killed, <strong>no Americans were even injured</strong>. Yes, sadly one brave <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/12/AR2006091200345.html"><strong>Saudi security guard was killed</strong></a> doing his job as militants tried to storm the embassy compound. Once again, the embassy wall were never breached and all American personnel inside remained safe.</p> <p><strong>January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece - A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured</strong>.</p> <p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/world/europe/12cnd-greece.html"><strong>Another embassy attack</strong> </a>that liberals try to point out in some way is equal to what happened in Benghazi, Libya. While this is a serious event that targeted one of our embassies, it took place early in the morning when a grenade was launched into an empty embassy building. Again, no one was killed or injured.</p> <p><strong>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey - Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.</strong></p> <p>Yet another case where embassy security sadly died, but died in the line of duty. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_consulate_in_Istanbul_attack">Three Turkish National Police</a> officers were killed defending the embassy. All Americans inside remained safe.</p> <p><strong>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen - Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls’ school instead.</strong></p> <p>Though there are reports by liberal websites of 2 being killed at a girl’s school near this embassy when mortars were fired at it but missed, the official <a href="http://yemen.usembassy.gov/wmfeb2210.html"><strong>US Embassy website in Yemen</strong></a> says that there were only injuries.</p> <p><strong>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen - Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.</strong></p> <p>You liberals might what to get your facts straight on this before you post such drivel. How many were killed? The graphic says 10 and the quote above says 11. Actually there weren’t 10 people killed, there were 19, six attackers, six Yemeni police, and seven civilians. And guess what, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_attack_on_the_American_Embassy_in_Yemen"><strong>absolutely zero Americans were killed</strong></a> or injured in that attack.</p> <p>Even though some members of the Yemeni security forces were killed, they did exactly as they were supposed to do, they defended the embassy and saved the personnel inside! And liberals are pointing this out as a sign of weakness? Having security forces do their duty and die during a battle is weakness?</p> <p><strong>2008 - Rioters set fire to US Embassy in Serbia - (Only listed in graphic above)</strong></p> <p>Rioters did break into the embassy in this attack and one person was killed, <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/serb-rioters-set-fire-u-s-embassy-protest-kosovo-independence-article-1.310104"><strong>a rioter when they got trapped</strong></a> in a part of one building they had set on fire. All American personnel were safe and accounted for.</p> <p><strong>There are also 2 more attacks</strong> going around the net that liberals are trying to paint as Bush’s fault, but once again, neither even remotely holds up to scrutiny as anything even compared to what happened in Benghazi. The first is an attack on what liberals are trying to call the American consulate on January 22, 2002 in Calcutta, India where 5 policemen were killed. In reality it was not the consulate , but an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_attack_on_American_cultural_centre_in_Kolkata"><strong>American cultural center</strong></a> that was attacked.</p> <p>And the final one going around the net is in relation to the bombing of 2 Bali nightclubs on October 12, 2002 when a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings"><strong>third much smaller device</strong></a> detonated outside the United States consulate in Denpasar, causing only minor damage.</p> <p>There you have the graphic and the list, <strong>including one attack that never happened</strong>, which liberals use to whine and ask why there was no outrage when Bush was president and embassies were attacked. Bush did plenty of things wrong, but he did not lie to all of the country, assisted by a willing press, in order to try and cover up the deaths of 4 Americans.<br/><br/><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/"></a><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/">http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/</a></p> </blockquote> <p>Well done.</p></blockquote>
America, cnn.com, and Facebook: The grossly mislead graphic liberals are using to
 compare Benghazi to embassy attacks under Bush.
 2002 -U.S. Consulate In Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked 10 Killed
 2004 -U.S. Embassy Bombed In Uzbekistan 2 Killed, 9 Injured
 2004 Gunmen Stormed U.S. Consulate In Saudi Arabia 8 Killed
 2006 Armed Men Attacked U.S. Embassy In Syria 1 Killed
 2007 Grenade Launched Into U.S. Embassy In Athens
 2008 - Rioters Set Fire To U.S. Embassy In Serbia
 2008 Bombings At U.S. Embassy In Yemen 10 Killed
 2012 US embassy in Benghazi, Libya attacked 4 Kille
 REPUBLICANS BECOME OUTRAGED AND
 SUDDENLY CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY
 AND SECURITY OF AMERICANS ABROAD.
 NOW THEY DEMAND INVESTIGATIONS
<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/50370330271/gop-tea-pub-liberals-use-grossly-misleading" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://gop-tea-pub.tumblr.com/post/50344100938/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list">gop-tea-pub</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<h1><strong><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush">Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush</a></strong></h1>
<p>The graphic pictured above is getting passed around quite a bit on Facebook lately and it gets posted by liberals whenever the subject of Benghazi comes up. The graphic above with a list of attacks below, supposedly points out that many more people were killed in embassy bombings and shootings under Bush than the 4 who were killed in Benghazi under President Obama. The comparison is made as if somehow sheer numbers excuses a cover up, issuing stand down orders and <a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/ambassador-susan-rice-on-sunday-talk-shows-lies-for-obama-administration/"><strong>lying about the cause</strong></a> of the Benghazi consulate attack.</p>
<p>In effect what liberals are saying when they post this graphic is, “Well yes, we know Obama lied about Benghazi, covered up the truth and made up a story as to what caused the attack, but Bush is way worse because there were more embassy attacks and more people died under his watch.” Sadly, this is simply part of the “blame Bush for everything that happens to Obama” mentalities of both liberals and Obama himself because not a single one of these attacks when looked at closely, even holds a candle to what happened in Benghazi. And in fact, with one of the attacks listed below, even though it has 371,000 references in Google, <strong>we can’t find any evidence the attack even happened</strong>. All references in Google search seem to be the same list that liberal blogs just blindly copied, passed around and then mindlessly published without checking a single reference. <strong>So much for liberal facts!</strong></p>
<p>Liberals also like to point out that either 52 or 54 people were killed (depending on what sources you read), but when looked at these attacks more closely only 1 person who died was an American. That person was U.S. Diplomat David Foy killed in Pakistan in March 2006. All other deaths were either brave embassy guards who were killed in the line of duty defending the safety of embassy employees, or they were innocent bystanders killed in the crossfire or bomb explosions.</p>
<p>We also have the list that somewhat goes with the inaccurate graphic and is posted over at Daily Kos, which I will never link to (but you can <strong><a href="http://thelastofthemillenniums.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/under-obama-there-have-been-2-embassy-attacks-and-4-deaths-under-bush-there-were-11-embassy-attacks-and-52-deaths/">find it here</a></strong>) , with the title “If diplomatic attacks are a sign of weakness, Bush was the weakest of all.”</p>
<p>In reality this list is weak because everything on it pales in comparison to Benghazi. Yes, real people with families and loved ones died in these attacks, but in no case was there <strong>any controversy</strong> surrounding them as there is in the Libya attack and in no embassy attack under the Bush Presidency was there any attempt to cover-up what happened or was there blame placed on something that turned out to be patently false. The sheer level to which Obama has gone to hide the facts of this attack is like <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/10/top-gop-senator-says-obama-could-be-impeached-over-most-egregious-cover-up-in-american-history/"><strong>nothing we have ever seen</strong></a> in the United States of America.</p>
<p>Read below as we destroy both the list and the graphic at the top of this post:</p>
<p><strong>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.</strong></p>
<p>Unlike Benghazi, <strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi_consulate_attacks">this attack</a></strong> happened outside the walls of the consulate and yes, twelve people were killed and 51 injured, all Pakistanis. I cannot find any reports of Americans amongst the injured. And we aren’t sure how this attack matches up with the graphic above because there were 12 people killed, not 10.</p>
<p><strong>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia - Truck bomb kills 17.</strong></p>
<p>This one is only on the list found at Daily Kos and the link to the list above and we especially love this example because we can’t find a <strong>single credible reference <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22February+20%2C+2003%22+%22truck+bomb%22">anywhere in Google</a></strong> <span><strong>that this attack ever happened!</strong></span></p>
<p><strong>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.</strong></p>
<p>Two policemen were killed in this shooting <strong>outside</strong> the consulate and <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/28/karachi.shooting/http://"><strong>according to CNN</strong></a>, “none of the staff inside the compound at the time were injured in the attack.”</p>
<p><strong>July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan - Suicide bomber kills two.</strong></p>
<p>Two Uzbek policemen were killed<strong> <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3940019.stm">outside the embassy</a></strong> of both the countries of Israel and the United States. <span>US and Israeli officials said none of their staff were among the casualties.</span></p>
<p><strong>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia - Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.</strong></p>
<p>This is the only attack on this list and referenced in the graphic where the walls of the embassy were breached and personnel inside were killed, but once again, the graphic and the reference above from The Daily Kos don’t match. Four security guards and five staff were killed, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/dec/06/saudiarabia.usa"><strong>none were Americans</strong></a>. By our math, 4 plus 5 equals, 9, not 8 as listed in the graphic and 5 as listed in the reference above.</p>
<p><strong>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan - Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat directly targeted by the assailants.</strong></p>
<p>This is the only attack where an American diplomat, not an Ambassador like Christopher Stevens, was actually killed. Tragically, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi_consulate_attacks"><strong>David Foy was specifically targeted</strong></a> outside the embassy when a massive car bomb went off in the parking lot behind the consulate as he arrived for work.</p>
<p>Isn’t it interesting that the only embassy attack where an American was killed under Bush and they don’t include it in their completely inaccurate graphic above. You would think they would want that one in there.</p>
<p><strong>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria - Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.</strong></p>
<p>Here we go again, another attack listed where not only were no Americans killed, <strong>no Americans were even injured</strong>. Yes, sadly one brave <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/12/AR2006091200345.html"><strong>Saudi security guard was killed</strong></a> doing his job as militants tried to storm the embassy compound. Once again, the embassy wall were never breached and all American personnel inside remained safe.</p>
<p><strong>January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece - A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured</strong>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/world/europe/12cnd-greece.html"><strong>Another embassy attack</strong> </a>that liberals try to point out in some way is equal to what happened in Benghazi, Libya. While this is a serious event that targeted one of our embassies, it took place early in the morning when a grenade was launched into an empty embassy building. Again, no one was killed or injured.</p>
<p><strong>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey - Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.</strong></p>
<p>Yet another case where embassy security sadly died, but died in the line of duty. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_consulate_in_Istanbul_attack">Three Turkish National Police</a> officers were killed defending the embassy. All Americans inside remained safe.</p>
<p><strong>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen - Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls’ school instead.</strong></p>
<p>Though there are reports by liberal websites of 2 being killed at a girl’s school near this embassy when mortars were fired at it but missed, the official <a href="http://yemen.usembassy.gov/wmfeb2210.html"><strong>US Embassy website in Yemen</strong></a> says that there were only injuries.</p>
<p><strong>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen - Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.</strong></p>
<p>You liberals might what to get your facts straight on this before you post such drivel. How many were killed? The graphic says 10 and the quote above says 11. Actually there weren’t 10 people killed, there were 19, six attackers, six Yemeni police, and seven civilians. And guess what, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_attack_on_the_American_Embassy_in_Yemen"><strong>absolutely zero Americans were killed</strong></a> or injured in that attack.</p>
<p>Even though some members of the Yemeni security forces were killed, they did exactly as they were supposed to do, they defended the embassy and saved the personnel inside! And liberals are pointing this out as a sign of weakness? Having security forces do their duty and die during a battle is weakness?</p>
<p><strong>2008 - Rioters set fire to US Embassy in Serbia - (Only listed in graphic above)</strong></p>
<p>Rioters did break into the embassy in this attack and one person was killed, <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/serb-rioters-set-fire-u-s-embassy-protest-kosovo-independence-article-1.310104"><strong>a rioter when they got trapped</strong></a> in a part of one building they had set on fire. All American personnel were safe and accounted for.</p>
<p><strong>There are also 2 more attacks</strong> going around the net that liberals are trying to paint as Bush’s fault, but once again, neither even remotely holds up to scrutiny as anything even compared to what happened in Benghazi. The first is an attack on what liberals are trying to call the American consulate on January 22, 2002 in Calcutta, India where 5 policemen were killed. In reality it was not the consulate , but an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_attack_on_American_cultural_centre_in_Kolkata"><strong>American cultural center</strong></a> that was attacked.</p>
<p>And the final one going around the net is in relation to the bombing of 2 Bali nightclubs on October 12, 2002 when a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings"><strong>third much smaller device</strong></a> detonated outside the United States consulate in Denpasar, causing only minor damage.</p>
<p>There you have the graphic and the list, <strong>including one attack that never happened</strong>, which liberals use to whine and ask why there was no outrage when Bush was president and embassies were attacked. Bush did plenty of things wrong, but he did not lie to all of the country, assisted by a willing press, in order to try and cover up the deaths of 4 Americans.<br/><br/><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/"></a><a href="http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/">http://www.isthatbaloney.com/liberals-use-grossly-misleading-graphic-and-list-to-compare-benghazi-to-other-embassy-attacks-under-bush/</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Well done.</p></blockquote>

<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/50370330271/gop-tea-pub-liberals-use-grossly-misleading" class="tumblr_blog">redblooded...

Animals, Bad, and Blessed: Your core values tell you "thou shalt not kill" but your killing machine says "Shut up God, this is 'Merica!" Pew pew <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://moofles.tumblr.com/post/41734084815/gop-tea-pub-proudgayconservative-well">moofles</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://gop-tea-pub.tumblr.com/post/41733882076/proudgayconservative-well-actually-it-says">gop-tea-pub</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudgayconservative.tumblr.com/post/41731987426/well-actually-it-says-thou-shalt-not-murder-the">proudgayconservative</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>Well actually it says “thou shalt not murder”, the hebrew word does not translate as kill.</p> <p>There is a distinct difference between “kill” and “murder” even in our modern day legal system.</p> <p>If I kill a man who is attempting to murder or rape or rob me, that is not murder. That is self-defense. Which is exactly why (along with hunting and sports) that most gun owners own weapons.</p> <p>Congratulations for showing your stupidity again!</p> </blockquote> <h2>Exodus 22:2-3</h2> <p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Exodus 22:2-3</strong>  <sup>2</sup> “If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.   <sup>3</sup> “<u>If the sun has risen on him</u>, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">There are two cases here. In the first case, if someone breaks into your home at night, and you kill him, you are not held guilty of murder. You are not deserving of capital punishment. You do not need to flee to a city of refuge to preserve your life. The understanding is that at night, it is dark, and if someone has invaded your house, they do not announce if they are there merely to steal jewelry and tools. In the dark, you have no way of knowing if someone is coming to kidnap, to rape, or to murder. You are thus blameless if the criminal is killed in that situation. The passage does make it clear that if a man is breaking in at night with the intent of theft <em>or worse</em> (rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.), the defendant can righteously defend himself with lethal force to prevent the commission of the crime).  </p> <p class="MsoNormal">In the second case, it says “if the sun has risen on him”, and you kill the intruder, you are guilty of his bloodshed.  The understanding is that in daytime, there is light, and you can discern the intentions of the home invader. The crime in question here is theft (“if the <strong>thief</strong>”). It is not legitimate to kill someone who is merely stealing your property. In creating civil laws, we see here that not all crimes are worthy of death.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In the daytime, it is assumed that the intention of the intruder can be discerned. If he is a thief, he may not be killed by the defendant. However, if the intruder is there to commit a different crime—assault, murder, kidnapping, rape, etc.—different laws/rules would apply. Though the crime of theft is not worthy of death, kidnapping was worthy of death (Exodus 21:16, Deut. 24:7) as was murder.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Matthew Henry writes: “…if it was in the day-time that the thief was killed, he that killed him must be accountable for it, unless it was in the necessary defense of his own life. … We ought to be tender of the lives even of bad men; the magistrate must afford us redress, and we must not avenge ourselves.” <br/><br/></p> <h1>Possession of weapons and skills with weapons a good and useful thing</h1> <p class="MsoNormal">Having looked at a number of passages that deal with weapons and self-defense, let’s spend a little time discussing Scripture’s view of owning weapons and being skilled in their use. The imagery of weapon use and skill at weapons use is often employed in Scripture, and it is often portrayed as a positive or desirable thing. The Lord’s might is something good, and it is often depicted using martial terms (Zec. 9:14, Psa. 7:13, 18:14, 21:12, 64:7, Hab. 3:11, Deu 32:42, 2 Sam 22:15). The Scriptures are a sword (Eph. 6:17; Heb 4:12). A sword comes out of the mouth of Christ (Rev. 1:16, 2:16, 19:15).</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Possession of weapons is never discouraged in Scripture. In fact, in 1Sam 13:19ff, it is negatively reported that no spears or swords were found in Israel because of the Philistines:</p> <p class="MsoQuote"><strong>1 Samuel 13:19-22 </strong> <sup>9</sup> Now there was no blacksmith to be found throughout all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, “Lest the Hebrews make swords or spears.”…  <sup>22</sup> So it came about, on the day of battle, that there was neither sword nor spear found in the hand of any of the people who were with Saul and Jonathan. But they were found with Saul and Jonathan his son.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let’s look at two verses from the Psalms:</p> <p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Psalm 144:1</strong> Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:</p> <p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Psalm 18:34 </strong>He teaches my hands to make war, So that my arms can bend a bow of bronze</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Skill and ability to use weapons here, whether literal and/or metaphorical, is positively portrayed in these verses.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Further, we have accounts of David, not a soldier, not a law enforcement officer, but a youth, employing ranged weapons skillfully (with God’s help) against bears and lions. This is domestic use of lethal weaponry, non-military use, with non-military training. The weapons used by young David are not “kiddie” slingshots. They are powerful enough to kill a bear and lion—in today’s market, we’re talking about a .44 magnum, not a .22, in the hands of someone too young to be in the army.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">We might be tempted to think that was just for dealing with animals that could threaten sheep. But aren’t <em>humans</em> worth even <em>more</em> protection than sheep?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">We understand that according to Scripture, in matters not of worship or church government, whatever is not forbidden is permitted. I’m not making a claim that ownership of weaponry for the purpose of self-defense is <em>required </em>of the believer. It is not required, but it is <em>permitted</em> by Scripture.</p> <h2>Perspective</h2> <p class="MsoNormal">Fourthly and finally, keep the right perspective on this. Though we see sanction and even a qualified directive from Christ to possess personal weapons, we must remember three points. First, in the remainder of the New Testament, we have no further examples of believers taking up the sword. Secondly, the emphasis in the remainder of the New Testament is decidedly <em>not</em> geared toward the issues of physical self-defense or righteous use of lethal force. Rather, we see more emphasis on Godly living, suffering affliction and persecution for Christ, and grasping the precious doctrines of Christ and the Gospel.  Thirdly, possession of weapons and acquiring the skill to use them in self-defense is permitted but not <em>required</em> by Scripture.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Believers should be conscious that personal self-defense is legitimatized by the Scriptures, just as the use of construction tools, cooking tools, transportation tools are legitimized by Scripture. And these matters of self-defense should hold in our minds and in our affections the same position as those other legitimate, but transitory, matters.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The tendency in some circles is to make the topic of self-defense of <em>primary importance</em>. Though heavenly beings do battle and render judgments with the sword, in the perfection pictured in both the garden of Eden and in the Heavenly city, the <em>primary</em> activities are fellowship with God, fellowship with His people, singing in worship, and living in peace.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><em>That</em> is our destination.<br/><br/>And there ya go. The Biblical explanation in short. The Bible also states that we are to obey the laws of man.</p> <h3><a class="bibleref" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A1-5&amp;version=ESV">Romans 13:1-5</a><span class="note"> </span></h3> <p>Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. <br/><br/><br/>You asked for it with your little contrived picture. You got an answer I am sure you will try and construe. Try being the key word.<br/><br/>Check mate. Try again with a new game.</p> </blockquote> <p>oh <em>snap</em></p> </blockquote>
Animals, Bad, and Blessed: Your core values tell
 you "thou shalt not kill"
 but your killing
 machine says
 "Shut up God,
 this is 'Merica!"
 Pew pew
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://moofles.tumblr.com/post/41734084815/gop-tea-pub-proudgayconservative-well">moofles</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://gop-tea-pub.tumblr.com/post/41733882076/proudgayconservative-well-actually-it-says">gop-tea-pub</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudgayconservative.tumblr.com/post/41731987426/well-actually-it-says-thou-shalt-not-murder-the">proudgayconservative</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Well actually it says “thou shalt not murder”, the hebrew word does not translate as kill.</p>
<p>There is a distinct difference between “kill” and “murder” even in our modern day legal system.</p>
<p>If I kill a man who is attempting to murder or rape or rob me, that is not murder. That is self-defense. Which is exactly why (along with hunting and sports) that most gun owners own weapons.</p>
<p>Congratulations for showing your stupidity again!</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Exodus 22:2-3</h2>
<p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Exodus 22:2-3</strong>  <sup>2</sup> “If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.   <sup>3</sup> “<u>If the sun has risen on him</u>, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are two cases here. In the first case, if someone breaks into your home at night, and you kill him, you are not held guilty of murder. You are not deserving of capital punishment. You do not need to flee to a city of refuge to preserve your life. The understanding is that at night, it is dark, and if someone has invaded your house, they do not announce if they are there merely to steal jewelry and tools. In the dark, you have no way of knowing if someone is coming to kidnap, to rape, or to murder. You are thus blameless if the criminal is killed in that situation. The passage does make it clear that if a man is breaking in at night with the intent of theft <em>or worse</em> (rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.), the defendant can righteously defend himself with lethal force to prevent the commission of the crime).  </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the second case, it says “if the sun has risen on him”, and you kill the intruder, you are guilty of his bloodshed.  The understanding is that in daytime, there is light, and you can discern the intentions of the home invader. The crime in question here is theft (“if the <strong>thief</strong>”). It is not legitimate to kill someone who is merely stealing your property. In creating civil laws, we see here that not all crimes are worthy of death.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the daytime, it is assumed that the intention of the intruder can be discerned. If he is a thief, he may not be killed by the defendant. However, if the intruder is there to commit a different crime—assault, murder, kidnapping, rape, etc.—different laws/rules would apply. Though the crime of theft is not worthy of death, kidnapping was worthy of death (Exodus 21:16, Deut. 24:7) as was murder.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Matthew Henry writes: “…if it was in the day-time that the thief was killed, he that killed him must be accountable for it, unless it was in the necessary defense of his own life. … We ought to be tender of the lives even of bad men; the magistrate must afford us redress, and we must not avenge ourselves.” <br/><br/></p>
<h1>Possession of weapons and skills with weapons a good and useful thing</h1>
<p class="MsoNormal">Having looked at a number of passages that deal with weapons and self-defense, let’s spend a little time discussing Scripture’s view of owning weapons and being skilled in their use. The imagery of weapon use and skill at weapons use is often employed in Scripture, and it is often portrayed as a positive or desirable thing. The Lord’s might is something good, and it is often depicted using martial terms (Zec. 9:14, Psa. 7:13, 18:14, 21:12, 64:7, Hab. 3:11, Deu 32:42, 2 Sam 22:15). The Scriptures are a sword (Eph. 6:17; Heb 4:12). A sword comes out of the mouth of Christ (Rev. 1:16, 2:16, 19:15).</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Possession of weapons is never discouraged in Scripture. In fact, in 1Sam 13:19ff, it is negatively reported that no spears or swords were found in Israel because of the Philistines:</p>
<p class="MsoQuote"><strong>1 Samuel 13:19-22 </strong> <sup>9</sup> Now there was no blacksmith to be found throughout all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, “Lest the Hebrews make swords or spears.”…  <sup>22</sup> So it came about, on the day of battle, that there was neither sword nor spear found in the hand of any of the people who were with Saul and Jonathan. But they were found with Saul and Jonathan his son.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s look at two verses from the Psalms:</p>
<p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Psalm 144:1</strong> Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:</p>
<p class="MsoQuote"><strong>Psalm 18:34 </strong>He teaches my hands to make war, So that my arms can bend a bow of bronze</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Skill and ability to use weapons here, whether literal and/or metaphorical, is positively portrayed in these verses.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Further, we have accounts of David, not a soldier, not a law enforcement officer, but a youth, employing ranged weapons skillfully (with God’s help) against bears and lions. This is domestic use of lethal weaponry, non-military use, with non-military training. The weapons used by young David are not “kiddie” slingshots. They are powerful enough to kill a bear and lion—in today’s market, we’re talking about a .44 magnum, not a .22, in the hands of someone too young to be in the army.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We might be tempted to think that was just for dealing with animals that could threaten sheep. But aren’t <em>humans</em> worth even <em>more</em> protection than sheep?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We understand that according to Scripture, in matters not of worship or church government, whatever is not forbidden is permitted. I’m not making a claim that ownership of weaponry for the purpose of self-defense is <em>required </em>of the believer. It is not required, but it is <em>permitted</em> by Scripture.</p>
<h2>Perspective</h2>
<p class="MsoNormal">Fourthly and finally, keep the right perspective on this. Though we see sanction and even a qualified directive from Christ to possess personal weapons, we must remember three points. First, in the remainder of the New Testament, we have no further examples of believers taking up the sword. Secondly, the emphasis in the remainder of the New Testament is decidedly <em>not</em> geared toward the issues of physical self-defense or righteous use of lethal force. Rather, we see more emphasis on Godly living, suffering affliction and persecution for Christ, and grasping the precious doctrines of Christ and the Gospel.  Thirdly, possession of weapons and acquiring the skill to use them in self-defense is permitted but not <em>required</em> by Scripture.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Believers should be conscious that personal self-defense is legitimatized by the Scriptures, just as the use of construction tools, cooking tools, transportation tools are legitimized by Scripture. And these matters of self-defense should hold in our minds and in our affections the same position as those other legitimate, but transitory, matters.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The tendency in some circles is to make the topic of self-defense of <em>primary importance</em>. Though heavenly beings do battle and render judgments with the sword, in the perfection pictured in both the garden of Eden and in the Heavenly city, the <em>primary</em> activities are fellowship with God, fellowship with His people, singing in worship, and living in peace.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em>That</em> is our destination.<br/><br/>And there ya go. The Biblical explanation in short. The Bible also states that we are to obey the laws of man.</p>
<h3><a class="bibleref" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A1-5&amp;version=ESV">Romans 13:1-5</a><span class="note"> </span></h3>
<p>Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. <br/><br/><br/>You asked for it with your little contrived picture. You got an answer I am sure you will try and construe. Try being the key word.<br/><br/>Check mate. Try again with a new game.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>oh <em>snap</em></p>
</blockquote>

<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://moofles.tumblr.com/post/41734084815/gop-tea-pub-proudgayconservative-well">moofles</a>:</p> <blockquo...