New York Times Thinks Speech Is Violent, Not ANTIFA Or Muslim Terrorists

Leftist Protesters chase and beat people at UC Berkeley – YouTube


When Is Speech Violence? – The New York Times, a major war crime publication wonders is language can kill.  Yes, it certainly can!  Of course, the New York Times is blaming everyone but themselves and their allies and buddies of talking violence.  Hell’s bells, the left including the NYT celebrates not just talking about killing Trump and his family but praise people who enact this on stage in New York Central Park!  They think this sort of violent junk is ‘art’ and therefore, good.  But talking back at liberals is a crime, using words liberals don’t like is evil and those people should be punished.


Imagine that a bully threatens to punch you in the face. A week later, he walks up to you and breaks your nose with his fist. Which is more harmful: the punch or the threat?


Each one is different.  One can be arrested for making a threat but the punishment is much more severe if one uses force.  This is why ANTIFA should be disbanded and eliminated.  They are very, very violent.


The answer might seem obvious: Physical violence is physically damaging; verbal statements aren’t. “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”


Oh, words do hurt a lot!  But the cure is to LAUGH at the words.  Ahem.  Not kill the person saying stuff.  Thin skinned people don’t belong in politics.  For example, I really loved my alternative name in NYC: The Housewife from Hell.  The media giants and politicians who called me that were horrified when I was totally happy with that new name and still, today, love it.  I hope it is engraved on my gravestone.


On the other hand, if someone is easily hurt when people talk wrong, they should live in a safe home with doors shut and windows covered.  Or they can grow up and learn how to take control of words tossed at oneself.


But scientifically speaking, it’s not that simple. Words can have a powerful effect on your nervous system. Certain types of adversity, even those involving no physical contact, can make you sick, alter your brain — even kill neurons — and shorten your life.


I once got involved in a case where one drunk said to another drunk in the street, ‘I’ll kill you dead’ to which the other said, ‘I will kill you deader.’  One of them we arrested.  Not because of the words but because the ‘kill deader’ one stabbed the other in the chest, killing him nearly instantly.


Your body’s immune system includes little proteins called proinflammatory cytokines that cause inflammation when you’re physically injured. Under certain conditions, however, these cytokines themselves can cause physical illness. What are those conditions? One of them is chronic stress.




Lisa Feldman Barrett, a professor of psychology at Northeastern University, is the author of “How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain.”


So, she does the ‘psychology’ thing.  Obviously, this pampered protected female never fought with weapons or bare hands, she never jumped criminals or played medieval war games while wearing armor.


The words I used when fighting were, ‘You are under arrest!’  It used to work but thanks to stupid liberals, criminals now fight off cops and anyone else as much as possible, they don’t surrender easily anymore.  Now, naked force has to be used, and then liberals complain when major force is used.  They want us all to talk nice except virtually no liberal talks nice at all, they issue orders and can be as obscene or cruel as possible and we are to stay silent and obey them with no objections.


Silly geese.  Life is all about fighting.  This female writing this editorial is teaching young people with little life experience, how to think.  Rats.  They will be as worthless as she in examining what ‘reality’ really is.  She is going to learn the hard way that violence is ten thousand times worse than mere words.


The words, ‘I am going to kill you deader’ don’t kill, it is prelude to the knife being plunged into the chest.  Dummy.


Filed under .money matters

9 responses to “New York Times Thinks Speech Is Violent, Not ANTIFA Or Muslim Terrorists

  1. Lou

    Off topic, as I cant find the thread with other Arkancides,

    Is this guy still alive?

  2. Mewswithaview

    Speaking of violence there are 4 major famines in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, and Yemen that are linked with US foreign policy I don’t see the NYT calling for an end to the actual sponsoring of violence through weapons sales, training and sponsorship of militias a trend that the Trump administration has so far continued and encouraged.

  3. How can he change that? His choice for running the Pentagon was shot down by the media and both parties when they saw that it might change things. Blaming him for not changing any status quo issues is wrong. HE TRIED. He definitely wanted no confrontation with Russia.

    What came of THAT? Oh, he was hounded mercilessly by the elites, the power brokers, international conspirators, Congress, nearly all the mainstream media, etc.

  4. Mewswithaview

    I don’t disagree with you he has been stymied by the deep state and he has been reduced to fighting in a sandbox with CNN. Both Flynn and Bannon the main non-interventionists going into his campaign have been sidelined and the movement to extract the US military from it’s slow grinding defeat has been halted. I believe the small branch of the military behind Flynn recognises defeat is coming. More American troops continue to be sent to Iraq and Afghanistan. Is this 2003 or 2017?

    Trump needs to deal a blow to the Neocons yet he can’t even bring that senile old fool John McCain and his lackey Lindsey Graham to heel. What we see is provoking Russia through NATO aggression, war games, and missile placements being ramped up. Aggravating relations with China by contesting their claims to the South China Sea islands and openly supporting Taiwan has the potential to create dire unintended consequences and then there is picking a senseless fight with North Korea. Trump now owns that problem and the defeat that goes with it.

  5. How, pray tell, can Trump do any of this? The entire power structure is, at this point in time, utterly up in arms against him. They still have considerable power…TO DESTROY.

    He is battling an army of lunatics who are sending loud messages that they intend to kill him. He is very brave. I am stunned at how brave he is.

    But they will take him down. What will voters who wanted Trump do at that point in time? We shall see. I suspect they may fight back instead of retreating even further.

  6. Mewswithaview

    He remains popular with his base and he can mobilise them when they share a common objective. Meanwhile the Pentagram wants more money.

    Pentagon study declares American empire is ‘collapsing’
    View at

  7. Jim R

    .. collapsing, so they want more money to make it collapse faster!

  8. We are protecting counties that ALL run trade surpluses with the US. This is insane.

  9. Lou

    8–and paying for sea lanes to be safe for Asia Inc to ship us finished goods. [that are not that ‘good’].

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s