My Thoughts for the Last 12 Years Made Into Music Mockumentary

Shit Be Like All Cra Cra in Mke

Fox 6 News Headline: 
"Acting out Ain't Gonna Solve Nothing:" Sisters of a man shot, killed by police encourages peace

At approximately 3:30 p.m. on August 13, 2016, a Milwaukee police officer shot and killed 23 year old Sylville Smith during a traffic stop. From the time the officer emerged from his vehicle to the time he shot Smith, 25 seconds transpired. A brief foot chase had ensued, and Smith was seen (later confirmed) to have a gun in his hand. After initially running, he turned toward the officer. The officer fired two shots, hitting Smith in the arm and head.

Riots erupted.

An officer was hit in the head by a brick, causing a major loss of blood. Several police cruisers were set on fire or completely smashed. Rioters set fire to a BP gas station, an O'Rielly Auto Parts store, BMO Harris Bank, and a beauty supply store. All were totally destroyed. Random gunfire kept firefighters from attending to the buildings. A grocery store was looted. Rioters then turned to attacking journalists and photographers. On Sunday night a 19 year old white man was shot in the neck and could only be carried to safety by Policemen using an armored assault vehicle.

At a community gathering on Sunday, two of Sylville Smith's sisters spoke to the community with cameras rolling:

“At the end of the day, acting out ain’t gonna solve it. Ain’t gonna solve nothing for Sylville. The city went crazy (Saturday) night over Sylville. We tired of it. We tired." 

~ Kimberly Neal, sister of Sylville Smith

“I lost my brother. I can’t get him back. Never. Never. That’s pain. I can’t look him in the eye no more. Burning down shit ain’t gonna help nothin’! You’re burning down shit we need in our community. Take that shit to the suburbs! Burn that shit down! We need our shit, we need our weave! I don’t wear it, but we need it.”

~ Sherelle Smith, sister of Sylville Smith 

Sylville Smith's sister Sherelle encourages "protestors" to burn the suburbs @Cernovich @CassandraRules @rooshv pic.twitter.com/prxR2prcUV

— DeeconX (@DeeconX) August 15, 2016

Back to local news coverage. Good ol' selective editing is alive and well, eh @Fox6Now?

At 9:20 p.m. Sunday night, Fox6News published an online article which quoted Sherelle Smith as saying only “I lost my brother. I can’t get him back. Never. Never. That’s pain. I can’t look him in the eye no more."

And that ..."in the eye no more" would be where Fox6News stopped the quote. Authors Madeline Anderson and Katie DeLong chopped that lil part about how suburbs would be a better place to burn shit down. Madeline and Katie did manage to throw in the article how the sisters "encouraged peace in Milwaukee." Which technically could be construed as being true. Er. Uh. 70%-ish or so true. Maybe? And stuff? If you're a Clinton and the word 'is' has multiple definitions?

What about that other 30% of the truth that was withheld? Can the young lady authors please share that with us?

Nope.

C ho p q   uote. Q   uo t  e   ch o p.

I used to think that the Wayne's World drive through ordering thing was funny. Well...who am I kidding? I still think it is.



So Fox6News authors Madeline and Katie, my advice is to keep that selective editing bullshit for the cinema. Editing out the full truth isn't gonna help the truly downtrodden in this world, the ones that 'keep it real.'

One more thing, what the fuck is wrong with you? Knock off the puppet show. Your journalism smells like shit.

Have a nice day.

Progressive Nirvana: It is No Longer Acceptable to Claim "Unintended Consequences"

Arrested for not wearing a helmet.

Isn't it odd how the same totalitarian lefties that passed this helmet law (and other laws) are, at the same time, not able to figure out that this will create more interactions between the police and the population? Yes, totalitarian lefties, police are actually required to go out and enforce your nirvana agenda.

What would be the alternative to enforcing the law once its passed? Are police not supposed to carry out the law? Are they supposed to receive the orders to enforce a helmet law and then decide, on their own, "no, I'm just not going to enforce this one." What if officers were given guidance to not enforce the helmet law in minority neighborhoods, while officers of a more affluent precinct were directed to continue enforcing the ordinance? Or vice-versa? The law is supposed to be blind and enforced objectively.

Double standards just don't seem to lead America to a very nice place. The world over they've never led any society at any point in history to a nice place. The suggestion that there should be a deliberate unequal application of the law due to top-down social caste tinkering is dangerous.

Any attempt to legislate nirvana will inevitably result in more police interaction with citizens. And more interaction inevitably means more potential for negative interaction, at least if the laws of statistics apply. People tend to push back when they feel they are overly bothered by government:

The extent to which there are dishonest law enforcement officers (overzealous district attorneys, anyone?), there is currently too much room afforded in the United States to legally maneuver against citizens. Laws are used too much as a weapon; a big fat playbook to oppress and one that is only getting thicker. Add progressives are the culprit for much of the thickness (Progressive Republicans, too).

Extreme example: Eric Garner in New York. Killed by a policeman. Originally pulled aside for questioning over suspicion of selling loose cigarettes. Who cares if he's selling loose cigarettes?

Progressive Policies Fail Our Most Capable Minority Populations, not Thugs

40+ years of failed progressive policies have led to this.

No amount of additional money will fix inner-city schools that have fallen into the type of chaos depicted in the video. Make no mistake, the video is not an isolated incident - it is not merely anecdotal evidence.

No amount of anything, save for discipline and force, will rescue schools from this type of student behavior. Continuing to pour more money into educational budgets or social welfare programs will not fix the educational problem in our inner cities.

That is because it is not an educational problem.

This is reality: we have a morality problem. We have a breakdown of the family problem. And we have a lack of black fathers in the inner cities problem. Anyone who doesn’t understand that is in some state of mental delusion via blind allegiance to party politics.

Perhaps the saddest part is that the inner-city students who are bright enough and well-behaved enough to succeed in society (and there are plenty of them) are currently being robbed of opportunity by students who are disgustingly unruly and threatening in the classroom. And the progressives are letting it happen.

By encouraging policies that allow misbehaved students remain in the classroom and by largely refraining from taking out serious punishments against minority students in order to avoid publishing disproportionate disciplinary statistics, discipline in the classroom has reached epidemic levels. The progressive god of education apparently wears no blindfold when it comes to addressing injustice. So the theory goes, immediate action for disruptive and threatening behavior first must take into account an individual's melanin levels – only then can the appropriate punishment be dealt out. But justice for the bright, well-behaved black student – they don’t get any. They’re threatened by the same thugs that threaten teachers – they get called ‘white’ when they attempt to learn and prosper in schools.

Besides spending more money and adding to the Nation's $20 trillion debt (that's $20,000,000,000,000), the progressive narrative is always to blame white privilege as though it explains the failure rate of young inner-city minorities. Progressives have always and will always continue to perpetuate the notion that young minorities are victims and therefore their rage against society is justified. It is how they've won for elections for 40+ years, and why in most major urban areas in the U.S. there is never an alternative to Democratic Party candidates for political office.

And so, because their future political power rests on continuing to deliberately obfuscate a clear definition of what is right and what is wrong, progressives are incapable of solving the problems which currently plague inner-city schools. I think progressives are more hierarchical in organization than people realize. The followers of progressive ideology do not deviate much (if any) from the marching orders they receive from party leadership. And the leadership doesn't want to solve the problems of inner cities, because their re-election depends upon a climate of racial divisiveness and bad outcomes. And somehow bad outcomes are continually blamed on Republicans, even though the bad outcomes come from areas for which the progressives have been in control for 40+ years.

For progressives, it's all about keeping a compass heading of 'max class and race warfare' and a throttle setting of 'max hatred and envy.'

I think we have reached a point where we are basically out of time and options to successfully address the divisive problems which currently plague our inner-cities. Any remaining hope can only be found by being honest and frank about the realities we face. Part of that is articulating, with high amounts of detail, how progressives are destroying the potential of minority populations of great character.

Character of Our Nation

Marine Corps Force Integration Plan – Summary

Background

Since the Secretary of Defense fully rescinded the Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule (DGCDAR) in January 2013, the Marine Corps Force Integration Plan has been the Service’s deliberate, measured, and responsible approach to better understand all aspects of gender integration while setting the conditions for successful policy implementation. Central to this historic research effort has been the clear recognition that the brutal and extremely physical nature of direct ground combat, often marked by close, interpersonal violence, remains largely unchanged throughout centuries of warfare, despite technological advancements.

The precursor to the full DGCDAR rescission was the Department of Defense lifting of the co-location restriction in February 2012, which enabled female service members to co-locate with ground combat units that had a high probability of engaging in direct ground combat. The lifting of that restriction has been an unquestionable combat multiplier for our Marine Air Ground Task Forces (MAGTF) serving throughout the world. As an agile, adaptable, expeditionary force that task organizes as a rule, our MAGTF commanders now have the widest latitude to employ the fullest capabilities of their force. Leveraging the talents of every Marine without restrictions throughout the depth and breadth of what are increasingly more complex operating environments enables a more capable Marine Corps.

The Marine Corps consists of 7.6% female Marines within the Active Component and 7% of the Total Force. Today, female Marines are eligible to serve in 315 of the 337 primary military occupational specialties. Female Marines have performed superbly in the combat environments of Iraq and Afghanistan and are fully part of the fabric of a combat-hardened Marine Corps after the longest period of continuous combat operations in the Corps’ history. Moreover, visits with numerous allied militaries throughout this past year, designed to better understand their experiences in successfully integrating female service members into ground combat occupations, point to the fact that female Marines are clearly among the most combat experienced servicewomen in the world.
Research & Planning

The 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, the last extensive examination of gender integration within U.S. ground combat units, concluded in its formal report:

“A military unit at maximum combat effectiveness is a military unit least likely to suffer casualties. Winning in war is often only a matter of inches, and unnecessary distraction or any dilution of the combat effectiveness puts the mission and lives in jeopardy. Risking the lives of a military unit in combat to provide career opportunities or accommodate the personal desires or interests of an individual, or group of individuals, is more than bad military judgment. It is morally wrong.”

In light of that report, the Marine Corps recognized the need to conduct a deliberate and comprehensive research effort to base future recommendations on quantitative data to the fullest extent possible.

As part of its Force Integration Plan, the Marine Corps commissioned and/or reviewed a number of studies, employing both internal Marine Corps agencies and external/civilian research entities. This far-reaching and fully integrated research and analytical effort has significantly increased the Marine Corps’ understanding of the requirements associated with service in ground combat occupations and units. The Marine Corps holds as an axiom that all Marines, male and female, are equal and possess the same strong character demanded of United States Marines. Therefore, these studies principally focused on those unique physical and physiological demands of service in ground combat occupations and units, while also analyzing the more intangible yet all-important aspects of unit cohesion and morale.

Concurrent with this unprecedented research effort has been detailed planning to ensure the successful integration of female Marines into previously closed ground combat arms occupations and units. This deliberate planning effort, which has spanned the past year, has been guided by previous Marine Corps gender integration experiences and informed by visits to a number of allied militaries in an effort to better understand successful implementation strategies. A key component of this planning has been the development of a Long Term Assessment Plan designed to provide a detailed, quantitative assessment of female integration over time. This assessment, which includes regular formal reporting to senior Marine Corps leaders, will also inform in-stride policy adjustments, as required.

At the heart of this research effort was the analysis of female Marine volunteer performance at ground combat arms entry-level, military occupational specialty-producing formal schools. The results from the Training & Education Command entry-level training research provided insights into relative propensity among new female Marines to serve in various ground combat arms occupations, as well as relative success and injury rates and causes, by gender. Since the programs of instruction at these formal learning centers necessarily focus on basic individual tasks, this research alone was unable to answer the broader questions: “What does it actually take to do the job in the operating forces within these MOSs?” and, “What is the impact, if any, of female integration in ground combat arms units on collective task performance under conditions that most closely approximate combat?” Because formal congressional notification requirements precluded simply introducing female Marines into previously closed ground combat units to answer the above broader questions, it was necessary to build a unit designed specifically to conduct such research – the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force (GCEITF).

Considerations

In analyzing the results of the research and analysis, the primary consideration throughout has been to understand any impact on the combat effectiveness of Marine ground combat units. Based on the unique role the Marine Corps fulfills within the Joint Force and in the security of the nation, the benchmark of achieving the “most combat effective” force has remained the unwavering focus. With this primary consideration, the Marine Corps has analyzed factors such as speed and tempo, lethality, readiness, survivability, and cohesion – critical components to fighting and winning in direct ground combat.

The Marine Corps’ capstone doctrinal publication, Warfighting, has served as the operational lens for the assessment of research results, particularly passages such as:
“Of all the consistent patterns we can discern in war, there are two concepts of universal significance in generating combat power: speed and focus. Speed is rapidity of action. It applies to both time and space. Speed over time is tempo – the consistent ability to operate quickly. Speed over distance, or space, is the ability to move rapidly. Both forms are genuine sources of combat power. In other words, speed is a weapon.”

A second consideration in assessing research results has been the health and welfare of the individual Marine. The Marine Corps recognizes the extreme and, in some cases, increasing physical demands of direct ground combat as well as the unchanging differences in human physiology between males and females as an essential element of its responsible approach to gender integration. Moreover, the Marine Corps has a solemn obligation, as outlined in one of Chairman Dempsey’s five guiding principles, to “set each [Marine] up for success with viable career paths.”

Tied directly to the previous considerations is the imperative of managing the talents of the force – today and into the future. The importance of leveraging the talents of each individual Marine to the fullest extent possible within our Marine Air Ground Task Forces cannot be overstated – assigning the right Marine to the right job with the appropriate skills and qualifications. The Marine Corps fights as units; therefore developing and maintaining the most combat effective units must always be at the forefront of any contemplated institutional change.

In viewing the results of research through these three inter-related lenses – combat effectiveness, the health and welfare of individual Marines, and talent management – the Commandant of the Marine Corps has been afforded unprecedented quantitative information in support of fielding the most combat effective units. This will ensure that the Marine Corps remains fully capable of fighting and winning on today’s and tomorrow’s extremely complex and challenging battlefields.

Summary of Research Findings 

1. Combat Effectiveness

• Overall: All-male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69% of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews. Gender-integrated teams performed better than their all-male counterparts on (2) events.
• Speed: All-male squads, regardless of infantry MOS, were faster than the gender-integrated squads in each tactical movement. The differences were more pronounced in infantry crew-served weapons specialties that carried the assault load plus the additional weight of crew-served weapons and ammunition.
• Lethality: All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.
• Male provisional infantry (those with no formal 03xx school training) had higher hit percentages than the 0311 (school trained) females: M4: 44% vs 28%, M27: 38% vs 25%, M16A4w/M203: 26% vs 15%.
• All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.
• All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman's carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who "evacuated" the casualty).

2. Health and Welfare of Marines

In addition to performance, evidence of higher injury rates for females when compared to males performing the same tactical tasks was noted. The well documented comparative disadvantage in upper and lower-body strength resulted in higher fatigue levels of most women, which contributed to greater incidents of overuse injuries such as stress fractures. Research from various U.S. and allied military studies reveal that the two primary factors associated with success in the task of movement under load are 1) lean body mass and 2) absolute VO2 Max. Findings from the physiological assessment of GCEITF males and females conducted by the University of Pittsburgh’s Neuromuscular Research Laboratory include:

• Body composition: Males averaged 178 lbs, with 20% body fat: females averaged 142 lbs, with 24% body fat
• Anaerobic Power: Females possessed 15% less power than males; the female top 25th percentile overlaps with the bottom 25th percentile for males
• Anaerobic Capacity: Females possessed 15% less capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with the bottom 50th percentile of males
• Aerobic Capacity (VO2Max): Females had 10% lower capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with bottom 50th percentile of males
• Within the research at the Infantry Training Battalion, females undergoing that entry-level training were injured at more than six-times the rate of their male counterparts27% of female injuries were attributed to the task of movement under load, compared to 13% for their male counterparts, carrying a similar load.
• During the GCEITF assessment, musculoskeletal injury rates were 40.5% for females, compared to 18.8% for malesOf the 21 time-loss injuries incurred by female Marines, 19 were lower extremity injuries and 16 occurred during a movement under load task.

3. Talent Management

The Marine Corps Recruiting Command has significantly increased the number of female accessions, both officer and enlisted, to unprecedented levels over the past few years. The Marine Corps must continue to attract, develop, and retain highly talented female Marines to meet current and future challenges throughout the range of military operations.

• Female enlisted accessions have increased to 10.8% in 2014, an ~4.5% increase since 2008
• Female officer accessions have increased to 11.6% in 2014, an ~ 5% increase since 2008
• Female officer applicants represent a growing percentage of applications received each year, increasing from 8.9% in 2010 to 13.7% in 2014
• Infantry Officer Course graduation rate between May 12 – Apr 15: 0% of 29 females as compared to 71% of 978 males
• Infantry Training Battalion graduation rates between Sep 13 – Jun 15: 144 of 401 female volunteers (36%) as compared to 5448 of 5503 males (99%)
• Artillery Cannon Crewman Course: 12 of 14 female volunteers (86%) as compared to 226 of 263 males (86%)
• Tank Crewman Course: 5 of 7 female volunteers (71%) as compared to 67 of 68 males (99%)
• AAV Crewman Course: 5 of 7 female volunteers (71%) as compared to 106 of 113 males (94%)

VICE News Founder Shane Smith Talks with ISIS Fighter from Canada

https://news.vice.com/video/islamic-state-member-warns-of-nyc-attack-in-exclusive-interview-the-canadian-jihadist

The following statements were made by video phone by Canadian ISIS fighter Farah Shirdon (aka Abu Usamah Somali). He spoke to VICE News via Skype from Mosul, Iraq on September 23, 2014.

Even though they were made during the same interview, each statement - one and two - has a distinct narrative. Each details the nature of what ISIS considers an acceptable end-state for its current operations. Each has very distinct voice. As you will notice, the statements are altogether quite different when compared to one other.

1

“The reason [we’re fighting], you know – we’re tired of oppression. All those threats that I made, put that all aside, we don’t want, you know, no one likes fighting….if you leave us alone, we’re going to leave you alone. We’re tired, you know, I don’t want to fight, I want to be at home with my family. But why am I here? No one is asking that question…..Give us our freedoms. We want Sharia Law, just leave us alone..

If you come to me, I will come to you. Attack me, and we will attack [you]. I swear to you [President Barack Obama], you kuffar (infidel), I swear to Allah, we will fight you until the end. It doesn’t matter who comes after you, we’ll keep fighting you, and keep fighting you. I know so many people, thousands upon thousands that are living in the West, that are ready right now to make an [terror] operation. Why don’t you leave us alone? [You] back up, and we’ll back up.”

_____

2

“These kuffars (infidels), if they have a problem with us, and they seem to be attacking us day and night, but they don’t understand that Allah is on our side….these apostate regimes don’t seem to understand….Whatever regime attacks us, we will attack them. We love being under attack. I want martyrdom. Every single time I see a plane over my head, I become very happy. I think, ah, maybe this will be the time that I will go, and I will meet my Lord. But I wonder what this [prisoner of ours] Iraqi pilot – this apostate – I wonder what he thinks right now. And I wonder what the thousands of prisoners from the West that we have, that we will have to behead. I wonder what their families think. Only Allah knows…

“The only time we will stop is when the White House has a black flag over it. The only time we will stop is when we paint the White House black, God willing. We will stop when we behead leaders of the kuffars (infidels), thanks to Allah. And when we turn his children into our slaves, then maybe we will stop. Maybe. When we crucify Benjamin Netanyahu for his war crimes, then maybe. We want to fly the Islamic State flag over the White House.”

As I pointed out earlier, neither of these statements is like the other.

In the first statement, an ISIS fighter claims that his army is fighting for their freedom to be left alone.

But the second statement is much, much darker. In that statement, the fighter insinuates that the goal of ISIS is actually much broader - that it wishes to dominate the current global superpower and has plans to tactically decentralize in order to accomplish its goal.

So which is it? What really is the strategic intent of ISIS?

Right now, Progressives are markedly muted in regards to ISIS, save for a few extremes. I believe that an increasing number of Progressives will, in the coming months, begin to tie-in the ultimate old relic of old relic narratives: that the West forced ISIS to behave as they are, and that the West needs to reform its exploitative ways. Indeed, I sense that there is a new relativism abound, and it will passionately attach itself to this issue. With ISIS as the new chapter to their greater struggle, I believe Progressives have the potential to become more viscous than ever, particularly in their verbal attacks against President Obama, who may well continue escalating operations (although his committed posture has been weak so far) against ISIS.

Passionate Progressive ideologues will talk of the injustices of the Sykes-Picot agreement, the evils of capitalism, and various failed foreign policies going back several administrations. They'll continue to perpetuate the notion that the West is ultimately to blame for the current catastrophe in the Middle East, just as they have for the last twenty years.

While Sykes-Picot and all those other things are certainly very interesting, and quite  relevant, does it collectively explain the atrocities currently underway by the hand of ISIS? Does ISIS appear to simply be fighting to correct for perceived wrongs of the past, such as Sykes-Picot, and will they bury the hatchet once they achieve this limited goal?

Well, that depends on which quote from above, number one or number two, that is presented to the audience.

At the end of the day, my wish is to get others ready to see what is happening in our society. Should a reasonable person encounter a 'relativist' in their daily lives who tries to play the 'morally superior card' of desiring to appear neutral on the topic of the ISIS cause, the reasonable person needs to make sure the full story is being told. Or at least, make sure everyone involved in the conversation is willing to listen to the full story and all available evidence on the matter.

Of these 'morally-superior beings,' many of them do not want to discuss things in full detail. If the issue is pushed, a very likely course of action pursued by Progressives is to start dealing out character assassination and other personal condemnations. They often use of terms such as 'Islamaphobe' in responding to an otherwise logical debater. This means that they reached a conclusion on the matter at hand at some previous date, and have since closed themselves to the totality of evidence currently available on the issue.

Troubling as it may be, Progressives with this type of fixated ideology elevate their need to maintain an emotionally-charged viewpoint over calmly listening to pertinent evidence.  They simply love their theory more than the science of testing and coherently debating their theory with peers. Sadly, this mentality has never led human kind to a very good place.

Any truly civilized person would go looking for new evidence to inform their opinion. They would ask, 'If ISIS is successful, what kind of world will it be for Muslims who disagree with ISIS?' As responsible citizens, they might also ask, 'What would it be like for women to live under ISIS rule?'

I believe Progressives are citizens. Good people have died ensuring this status for them. But the problem is that they don't see themselves as mere citizens. They've been fed the party line for so long they've begun see themselves with elevated elite status. They've totally committed to the collectivist cause and seek continual social recognition for their sacrifice. Their world consists of an ice cream cone licking itself, satisfying itself only, and then everyone watching applauds. Repeat.

But I don't think Progressives truly feel free to think on their own, mainly out fear and resulting social backlash should they chose to 'go it alone' on a particular issue. As a result, they bury themselves inside their minds. They find ways to justify the notion that anyone not as 'committed to the cause' as themselves must be a lesser being. From an outsiders perspective, I see Progressives not as elite citizens, but as serfs who merely exist to please their chosen power structure. They're no more open-minded than a white Southerner in 1960 raising hell about a black man being served a chocolate malt at the next bar stool.

Arrogance like this - people like this - and their overwhelming hatred of America should be clearly seen for what it is. If unreasonable hatred is intellectualized and wins out as the battle-cry of a generation, it means anti-progress for humanity. That is a recipe to create monsters whose wishful end will justify all means available to achieve it. Once theoretical hatred of capitalism and Western society become more important than disavowing other, more lethal monsters than themselves, we're in real trouble as a society.

The good news is that there is an abundance of good information available as to the long-term intent and strategic goals of ISIS. The interview clip above is one of those sources, but there are several other, more thorough sources that delve much deeper into the issue. A reasonable person just needs to do a half-assed job of looking, and they'll find what they need to form an opinion.

If I were make a recommendation, I'd say that the best way to understand ISIS is to not to rely on traditional reporting at all. On the contrary, simply find information sources who are willing to step aside and let ISIS make their remarks, at length, with no edits, and then broadcast it to the world. All the viewer needs to do is sit back and listen. That is obviously the best way to learn.

VICE News is at the forefront of good information; a great place to start learning is here: http://youtu.be/AUjHb4C7b94 There are also a good number of links on the right-hand side bar of this page, namely the Middle East Media Research Institute.

In conclusion, ISIS either represents the victims of Western oppression or they are a purveyor of totalitarianism that will stop at nothing to conquer those that oppose it - even fellow Muslims. If Progressives claim moral superiority by advancing the notion that ISIS is the former, challenge them for evidence, while forcing them to comment on the abundance of evidence which overwhelmingly suggests ISIS is the latter.