O'Reilly's Hypocrisy: Gun Ownership and Jon Hammer

Why did the U.S. spend money getting Jon Hammer out of jail? He must have been a bad enough person, the kind they need for torturing little kids. His Dad isn't any better. I just saw his Dad, talking about how he felt when his son was coming to him, describing his son as "all hunched up under a blanket." My son is hunched up, and it's because of torture done to him. I just wrote in a part of a story to him, by email, about a boy that goes with his mother across a bridge, who is cold and puts a blanket over his shoulders. It's not like my email isn't monitored or anything.

Is Jon Hammer Catholic? Because then we would have an idea about why such an effort was made to "rescue" him so he can go on to torture kids.

Bill O'Reilly uses his pulpit to rescue people like this, while deliberately ignoring torture of U.S. citizens he uses personally. He and his Irish pals have certaintly used my Dad, and then came out to torture him personally too. And it's not like he doesn't know who Mark is.

My Dad said, what do you mean, it's not good that he helped someone out of jail? And I said, yeah, selective service. My Dad said it was brought to his attention. Probably not. Probably, O'Reilly has known this man for some time and his Irish mafia does too. He didn't help out a stranger--he helped out a man who tortures kids, who knows the same people he knows. So they want to reward those who torture on their behalf.

Jon Hammer is a criminal. Mexico should have kept him. It was a good thing they did, by arresting him in the first place and they should have refused to release him. My guess is that, if he's Catholic, someone pulled the Catholic card, and got a Catholic official in charge, who serves Rome like O'Reilly. I mean, I'm sure some of the Mexican officials were Catholic and might have been decent, and knew he was a bad man, but O'Reilly made sure he got ahold of someone else. He used his entire show to get him out of jail. He even made a point of looking into the camera and saying, "We're getting you out Jon" before any U.S. official took action.

O'Reilly is a hypocrite.

What's hilarious, is he has shows about hypocrisy all the time.

First of all, he used his entire show and resources, to get one man out of jail, who is a murderer and child abuser, who has tortured children.

Secondly, he and his friend "Adam" can't keep their values straight either. Over a week ago, he had a show and talked with "Adam", a self-professed atheist, about how there should be a limit on how many kids a person can have. ?! Yes. Seriously. Both of them said, on record, that the government should be able to restrict the number of children U.S. citizens have. Oh, but guess what? It's selective restriction. The rich can have as many kids as they want, you know, people like Bill O'Reilly. People like Adam. But they both agreed, on record, that the United States government should be able to restrict how many kids "poor people" have.

Bill O'Reilly has so much hypocrisy, within himself, you cannot trust one single word he says. He can't keep anything straight, and then he pokes fun of others who he says are "hypocrites", like people who say "No Guns" and "It's Time for Gun Control" but then go on to act in extremely violent movies.

So how, exactly, does he reconcile his idea that he's a democratic Republican, with the idea that he and Adam have, of putting a child restriction on the poor. What this tells you, is that he's not an American--he's a Plutocratist. Plutocratists advocate for the rich, and those that torture for the rich. They want benefits for the rich and punishments for the poor.

He and Adam (the atheist) sat there and talked about a black man who had 9 kids. The man had kids by different women, and couldn't pay child support on all of them and he was put in jail over it.

Are you KIDDING ME?

So, let's see--Bill O'Reilly uses his pulpit to get a baby-killer out of a Mexican jail, which is where he should have stayed, but a man who is in jail over being poor, he is really to use as an example for why all poor people should be controlled by the U.S. government.

He and Adam were saying since the black man couldn't pay child support on them, he should have his "stuff put into the woodchipping machine." They joked about it,and laughed. What's scary, is that while they joked, they were also serious about it. They both agreed that the government should be able to block people from having kids. The idea was that if someone goes on welfare, since the government is paying for something, the poor person shouldn't be allowed to have kids. Additionally, if someone doesn't pay "child support" they can't have kids anymore. Of course, he and Adam have nothing to say about the benefits they receive from the government. They just get larger hand-outs. And, they use their pulpit to make threats to others about other things, with little news stories as allusions to what their mafia will do if people don't do as they say.

Does O'Reilly know James Whitey? I say he does. I say they were close pals. I also say, he's trying to get Chinese support from someone with his ideas about government control of private reproduction and family rights.

Only the RICH get to have a family, according to O'Reilly and the atheist Adam.

No one should be put in jail for inability to pay child support. If they actually make money, and choose to spend it in other ways, when they have plenty, that's one thing.

So O'Reilly is Roman Catholic. How proud the Church must be of him. Defender of the rich, and advocate of government control of families and reproductive rights. I'm sure O'Reilly thinks it's a good idea to organize affairs to seduce men to sleep with Catholic woman and then pay them a salary every month too. I mean, if they strategize to get Catholic woman to marry into families that have money, I'm sure they strategize to impregnate their women so a man has them on his payroll. And maybe he likes the idea of the government taking DNA and extorting women for eggs and sperm so they can have kids for their own intelligence, mafia, and rich groups. Take from the poor and give to the rich!

What a GREAT idea. Make sure the poor never get rich, is the scheme. Use torture.

So my Dad said what's wrong with helping a guy out who is in jail and I said, "I sent an email to the O'Reilly show and no one got back to ME." My Dad said it probably sounded crazy and I said, "No, it was short and business-like, and I asked for the names of 2 military men they had on their show." That was weeks ago, and I got no response. I said, "All I wrote, was that I had watched a show and couldn't find the names of the 2 military officials who were interviewed in their archives, and I gave them the date of the show and asked for their names."

No reply.

I said, "Usually, a media group will at least respond to something like that, if it's just asking about one of their shows." My Dad said someone probably looked me up and what I write about and said no.

So then, how impartial are they? They advocate for free speech for themselves, reproductive rights for themselves, and torture to benefit their own groups, but they have no regard for the rights of others.

As for hypocrisy? they claim to be Catholics which means they support the Vatican with their vows of allegiance to them instead of to America. So when the Vatican says there should be no birth control or that children are a gift from God, people like O'Reilly take that to America and make sure it's a benefit to Catholics, and no one else. The Catholic can have as many children as they want, but not a poor Protestant. CPS and the welfare system (the lower end, not the higher end of welfare, that O'Reilly benefits and splurges off of) is mainly serving poor Protestants. CPS doesn't take Catholic kids away from parents. They have Catholics who work for CPS and the police and FBI and CIA who take Protestant kids from their parents.

Why does the public have NO records from CPS about how they conduct business? It is supposedly a public organization and we have data from them, available to the public, that proves what income bracket they discriminate against, and which religion is discriminated against. Supposedly, of all the forms of discrimination in this country, discrimination against poor (temporary or not) is legal. You can't discriminate against gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, and disability, for many things, but torturing people to make them poor and keep them poor, and then abuse them, is legal. I have always said CPS discriminates against the poor, but I think if the statistics are revealed, we will also find it is practicing religious discrimination. That is grounds for a class action lawsuit. The Department for Child and Family Services is one of the most corrupt departments we have, and of all the programs that could be cut, this is the one that needs to be cut and abolished for good.

I looked up Adam Carolla for the first time and it's no surprise--he is from L.A. and a marijuana board. Carol Middleton's daughter Katie, the drug dealer, probably knows him.

On gun control, even O'Reilly talks about wanting new regulations. He says he's for the right to own guns and makes fun of hypocrites who want to ban it altogether, but I think he favors some regulations as long as Catholics are in the majority in the justice system and law enforcement and intelligence. That way, any Catholic has no problem getting a gun, but the rest? forget it.

I was being blocked from getting a gun or even taking a class, in Wenatchee. It was before my son was even born, and then after he was born. No one had any document from anyone saying there was something mentally wrong with me at that time. But they didn't want ME to even own a gun, while it was perfectly fine for them to torture and assault my son.

I am vegan now, and don't even eat meat, but I still believe in the right to own a gun and to self-defense. Self-defense is a right. When I am not a violent person, the only people who would not want ME to have a gun, are those who are torturing me or my son and worried I might find out, or someone would tell me and I'd know. Only the guilty would have something to fear and to hide.

Not only that, we are seeing a "shift" in the demand for gun control, because now, many of the rich who use their power to gain access and demand torture of other U.S. citizens, want to feel protected. They want to keep up the torture of other citizens and, if someone finds out about a person involved, and confirms it, or if someone catches someone in the outright act, they don't want someone to have a defense. They believe in oppressing the victims and preventing anyone from the right to defend themself if necessary.

There was media coverage about the guy who shot all these kids in CT, but no coverage over the guy who shot people in San Antonio, TX recently, who was then shot down by a woman who was carrying a gun.

Passing laws to take away citizen rights is going to be pushed by those who are already violating human rights, and who have a majority and feel their own groups and people will not suffer from the consequences. If they have the upper hand, they want to use it to pass laws to oppress those that might fight against human atrocities committed in the name of religion, greed, or politics.

I wondered, when I was in Wenatchee, why I was being blocked from taking a gun safety course there. I found out the man who led the class taught at the shooting range in East Wenatchee, and the group that had the flyers, was a gun shop across the street from the U.S. federal building.

Gun ownership is a sign of responsibility. It's not always necessary, but it's not a bad idea either. And as for those who commit crimes, one black man said to O'Reilly, "Crime happens in every neighborhood, even yours."

O'Reilly said, "Not in MY neighborhood." Yes, it occurs in O'Reilly's neighborhood and it's called "white collar crime". Whitey-collar crime. And um, WHY is O'Reilly trying to do favors by complementing the Chinese government and saying child restriction laws are a good idea? Could it be that the U.S. Energy Department is run by a Chinese man? Let's not offend those who torture for O'Reilly's names sake. Oh wait, Adam Carolla advocated for it too and he's into pot in L.A. Go figure. If you have to pander to the Chinese government, someone is on the inside torturing U.S. citizens as a favor for others who want to oppress select groups of individuals.

Hmmm. It's not like, between Leon Panetta, Martin Dempsey, and the Chinese Energy man, they don't have a motive to suck up. I think his name is Steven Chu, and Steven Chu married a woman who studied in England. He was born in America, but he's not American. He's sitting on documents about torture and knows about Pentagon and aerospace defense operations. So when the Catholics need a guy from China to cover their backs, and torture little kids for them, they say nice things, about what a great idea it is, for a government to practice child restriction laws.

I'm thinking of a photo I saw of a bunch of Chinese officials celebrating something, just awhile back. It might have something to do with English Hong Kong deals. If England works with people to oppress my family, and Catholics in this country, it's a business arrangement for the British controlled Hong Kong. I remember a photograph several months ago, of some Chinese leaders and businessmen making a toast and drinking something red in crystal or clear glasses, and it had Middleton written all over it.

Let me find that article or news about the black man whose "stuff" (penis) Adam and O'Reilly said they wanted in the woodchipper. It was over paying child support to a man with 9 wives.

O'Reilly doesn't use his pulpit for torture or gang-banging or anything.

I found part of the transcript: Adam Carolla: I think we should put his junk (penis) into the wood chipper.

Oh, and it's 9's children by 6 wives. I found part of the transcript (http://dimeforscale.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=22488&start=150) and I'm posting it here. I will also post a photo of the man whose junk (penis) they said should go into the wood chipper. It's not the "woodchipping machine" but "the wood chipper".

He sort of looks like a black man who is fairly new to town, that started working at The Black Horse (computer company) about 3-4 months ago. He has the same shape face and similiar features and is bald with the same shape head, and he's very tall and a big man. I don't know how big this guy is, from the photo, but they have a strong resemblance.

Transcript:


This is a RUSH transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," December 10, 2012. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET!
O'REILLY: Thanks for staying with us. I'm Bill O'Reilly. In the "Rolling' With Carolla" segment tonight, we've got three hot topics, beginning with the rich paying their fair share in taxes.
Adam Carolla joins us now from Los Angeles. Before we get to that, you know, you're kind of looking like a slim Mr. French with that beard. You know, Sebastian Cabot. It's very dignified, Carolla, wow. I'm telling you.
ADAM CAROLLA, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Very timely, very timely reference.
(LAUGHTER)
I'd like to think of myself as a fat James Brolin, not a thin Sebastian Cabot. But that's just me looking at the beard as half-thin.
O'REILLY: You know, I think, with that beard though, you could go to Taco Bell and they might hire you now because of just the presence behind the counter.
(LAUGHTER)
CAROLLA: Thanks for the plug for my book, Bill.
O'REILLY: All right, fair share. You're a rich guy now -- fair share in taxes. Now, I think, your state is up to about 14 percent state income tax.
President Obama wants to raise it up to about 40 percent Federal. That's 54 percent. If he knocks out the deduction for state income taxes which he wants to do, you'd be paying 54. What's fair.
CAROLLA: Well, first off, we should stop saying, "tax the rich," and say, "tax the successful." Because I'm not rich, I'm successful. And rich is easy to tax because that's just the guy who inherited daddy's money, whose dad was the Monopoly man and he lives up on the hill.
I'm successful, you're successful because we worked our tails off. And it's harder to take money away from people that work very hard for it.
And it's very easy to say, "Tax the rich." But, really, it should be "Tax the successful." But I've done the math.
O'REILLY: Yes, Miller says that, too. And Miller is mad. I mean, he's angry about it because he's saying, "Look, I'm getting targeted, me, Dennis Miller, because I have achieved something."
So, it's really, it is taxing the successful. But it's also taxing achievement. And, to some extent, rewarding non-achievement what it is.
CAROLLA: I get along with Dennis great. I saw him just the other day. Unfortunately, our beards started fighting, so we can't be in the same room anymore.
O'REILLY: Yes, you've got to take it away. Absolutely.
CAROLLA: I can do some quick math for you. Because the Federal budget is $3.8 billion, or I should say, trillion dollars, I know that the population is about 314 million --
O'REILLY: Right.
CAROLLA: -- people in the United States, so your fair share, I mean, everyone needs to pay $12,076. I have two kids and a wife at home, so my nut would be $48,304. That would be my fair share.
Now, I'm willing to round up to $48,500 and then be heralded as a hero in my community, right.
(LAUGHTER)
O'REILLY: No. You've got to pay more.
CAROLLA: No? Bill, it's really like this --
O'REILLY: And here's why -- and here's why you've got to pay more --
CAROLLA: -- it's like gas is $3 a gallon. The average person pays $3 a gallon for gas. Some people get gas for free. I pay $30 a gallon, and I'm a schmuck?
I'm supposed to be looked down upon. How about we take the people that don't pay anything for gas and get them to pay something for gas because we all drive the same roads.
O'REILLY: We can't. That's too judgmental. This is a good example of where we are. Put this guy's picture up. Corey Curtis, Racine, Wisconsin, father of nine.
All right, there's Corey. Father of nine, OK. He's behind in his child support by $100,000. He's got six mothers on the nine children. And a judge in Racine, Wisconsin has ordered Mr. Curtis not to have any more children. And it's Judge Boyle.
Now, I know, the ACLU is going to come up and go, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait, wait!" But who's supporting those nine children that this guy won't support. Carolla and O'Reilly and Miller. Here we go.
CAROLLA: That's right.
O'REILLY: That's what's supporting them, right here. It's about responsibility. I mean, we have every color, every religion doing this kind of stuff.
But, in this country, the Corey Curtises of the world -- and I'm so happy this Judge Boyle held him accountable.
They, basically, like they skate through life, "Yes, I'll have nine kids by six different women and I won't pay for them. Hey, see you later. I'm going to the saloon or I'm going to the game."
And who's going to pay? Here we are. Hey. Hi.
CAROLLA: Not only are we going to pay today, we're going to pay tomorrow and the next day when these kids get into trouble and get into the system because they didn't have a father figure to discipline them.
So, it's not just how much -- it's not the lunch we're paying for today, it's prison and rehab and unemployment that we can look forward to in the future because that, statistically, is where these kids are heading.

O'REILLY: Absolutely. And that's why society has got to stop with this sympathy and crying. There are some people who do need help. Those children certainly do.
And I'm more than happy to help those children. But, that guy, he should be in jail some place.
CAROLLA: No, his junk should be put in a wood chipper. And, Bill, can I just say this.
O'REILLY: Yes.
CAROLLA: We don't judge enough as a society. We look down more upon on smokers than we do deadbeat dads. And that's not a good thing.
O'REILLY: All right, Adam Carolla. And, by the way, tomorrow, we will be in Washington where I'll be talking with Charles Krauthammer about what he thinks is fair taxation.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2 ... z2EktAyl31
********************************
So Adam Carolla wants to be Mayor of Los Angeles and he's a huge pot fan. He is connected to James Rosen. Adam Carolla married Lynette Paradise (Lynette Carolla). Lynette Carolla, if this is the same one, shares a blog with Alison Rosen and show called "For Crying Out Loud": http://cryingoutloudshow.com/. If this is the same Rosen that grew up in Brooklyn, New York, next to James Rosen from Brooklyn, New York, these people all know eachother. http://www.mylife.com/c-2198583054
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rosen_(journalist).

So when Adam Carolla was making these comments, I believe he was featured at a U.S. Navy Base on the same day or soon thereafter. So yeah, by the way, Adam Carolla's mother is Hungarian descent, and the woman Kathy, who lives here and is a psychic, and cleans for The Black Horse, is hungarian and one of my former housemates was hungarian. According to other sites, he was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and then grew up in California. http://www.superiorpics.com/adam_carolla/. So we have another potential dirty Laura Laundry person. Also, there are other sites that say his mother's maiden name was Novello, not McCall, but anyone could check.

Adam Carolla is a criminal. Which is not very surprising, given the others I've identified as being part of the same group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Carolla

Oh, and right about the time I was losing my hair, Adam Carolla was making a comment about a "thinning beard". Not a big deal by itself, but contained with his other comments, it's odd.