Austrian Father Who Locked Sex Slave Daughter in Basement for 24 Yrs – New Details Emerge

More details have emerged in the story coming out of Amstettin, Austria, of the father who now admits he locked his daughter in the dungeon like basement of his home for 24 years and that he committed “incest” with her.

The Sins of The Father

Josef Fritzl

Josef Fritzl admits he not only locked his 19-year-old daughter Elisabeth in a homemade dungeon, but that he also “fathered” seven children with her acting as midwife.

According to the Austrian Times, Josef warned his daughter and the three children sentenced to remain below, that the cellar-dungeon was booby trapped. Police took this threat seriously as Josef was a qualified electrician as well as a retired engineer in construction who had wired several electronic locks on his property.

Josef’s background as a retired engineer who worked in construction may explain how he was able to build a secret set of rooms in the basement of the family home, a gray concrete villa in Amstettin, Austria. The hidden entrance to the dungeon was so “secret” that supposedly even his own wife and Elisabeth’s mother had ‘no idea’ that downstairs in the cellar was her imprisoned daughter and three of her children.

A son-in-law who lived in the house for 3 years said he had been in the cellar on one occasion and that it was filled with junk, that he had “no idea that a few metres away this family were living”.

Elisabeth

According to the Austrian Times, at age 19, Elisabeth, working as a waitress at a local service station, was reported missing to the police by her mother on August 29, 1984.

For more on this story, read “Austrian Father Who Locked Sex Slave Daughter in Basement for 24 Yrs – New Details Emerge” at DBKP.com.

ALSO: “Real Life X-File: Mans Keeps Daughter Locked Away as Sex Slave for 24 Years” at DBKP.com.

by LBG

Death by 1000 Papercuts.

Environmental Horror Stories: Before Climate Change, There was The Population Bomb

“The Population Bomb” was the “Global Warming” of 1968.

“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…”

–Paul Ehrlick, The Population Bomb (1968)

Try this one on for an environmental doomsday scenario: a disaster of epic proportions is threatening Earth. It is man made in nature. In ten years–ten years!–life as we know it will be radically changed for the worst. And if mankind doesn’t do something right now, it will soon be too late.

Oh, and how do we know that the disaster is big, bad and scary?

A scientific consensus has developed which supports it. Scientists are scared, so everyone else better be prepared to hunker down for doom, too.

Global warming? Nope.

Try “the population explosion”. The year was 1968 and the World Wide Web was still over 20 years away in the future. That’s when Paul Ehrlich released his best-seller, “The Population Bomb”, and seemingly overnight, population control was all the rage.

Americans were peppered with stories of global doom, in a world stripped of food and resources by an exploding, out-of-control population.

Then, as now, the prescription was more government control and regulation.

Be responsible! Quit having children! Better yet: put the government in charge of how many children a woman can have.

The Population Bomb (1968) is a book written by Paul R. Ehrlich. A best-selling work, it predicted disaster for humanity due to overpopulation and the “population explosion”. The book predicted that “in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death”, that nothing can be done to avoid mass famine greater than any in the history, and radical action is needed to limit the overpopulation.

Ehrlich wanted government action and he wanted it now–before the earth reached the point of no-return. As with most environmentalist morality tales, the instrument of Mother Earth’s destruction would be humans living their lives.

To radical environmentalists, or socialists masquerading as environmentalists, it’s always the same equation: Humans are the root of all evil.

The Population Bomb became one of the best-selling environmental books of all time. Its main message was that continued population growth would place tremendous stress on natural resources and the environment. He predicted that, as a result, society would face war, famine, pestilence, and general calamity. Ehrlich asserted that only drastic governmental measures could curtail the impending disaster. He suggested a national Department of Population and Environment to police population growth and, in some instances, order mandatory sterilization. He expressed strong opposition to the antiabortion doctrines of the Catholic Church and the profit motive and aggressive consumption of the free enterprise economic system.

National Department of Population? A population czar? Mandatory, government measures? Radical government takeover of what had previously been private decisions?

Beginning to sound familiar?

It should–if the reader has been following the suggestions of the global warming crowd.

Ehrlich and his supporters insist that his predictions came true, but that the effects of his predictions go largely unnoticed because world food production exploded faster than the population.

That spin is partially true: Norman Borlaug’s “Green Revolution” in the 1960s did push food per capita to the highest levels in the history of mankind. But what Ehrlich and the rest of his scientific consensus don’t say is that birth rates in much of the world have fallen off dramatically.

Birth rates have fallen so far so fast that parts of the world, particularly Europe and Japan are experiencing “baby busts” that no country has ever recovered from previously.

Today about half the world lives in nations with sub-replacement fertility. That is, births are not equaling deaths and migration, so the country will lose population in the future.

Want to read more? “Enviro Horror Stories: Before Global Warming, There was The Population Bomb” at DBKP.com.

by Mondoreb
images:
* DBKP
* Hoover Institute
* telegraph
Sources:
* Enviro Horror Stories: Before Global Warming, There was The Population Bomb


DBKP/Death by 1000 Papercuts
Also posted at DBKP at Blogger.

UFO Images Through History? You Be the Judge!

Bonaventura Salimbeni’s “The Glorification of the Eucharist” painted in 1600 can be seen in the Church of San Pietro in Tuscany. No one knows why Salimbeni chose to paint this object which resembles a Russian Sputnik satellite into his rendition of the Holy Trinity.

Since we’ve yet to be graced by an “official” UFO visit then we have to rely on pictures, photos, or film, usually “top-secret” and “confidential” of alleged UFO sightings. We decided to post a few “UFO” photos, a painting from 1600, a UFO webcam, and a film of an alleged 1969 UFO crash in the Sverdlovsk region of Russian from the documentary, “The Secret KGB UFO Files”.

Aside from the fact that the makers of the documentary claim the film came in original KGB canisters and “testimony” from a “credible” former KGB operative, in the end it’s up to our own visual assessment of the film. Was there something in it or about it that made the viewer come away with the impression that the film is an elaborate hoax, the real thing, or something that could go either way.

Enterprising UFO watchers have enlisted the help of a local “UFO” Cam you can download onto your PC. Unless some hardy citizen is perched above the cam dangling a small scaled model of a UFO attached to fishing line, we think it’d be hard to fake a “UFO” sighting.

Photographer Steve Mera of Manchester, England, says he was a UFO skeptic too until one day he and several friends spotted this UFO. Mera used a Canon 300D to take photos of the unusual UFO shaped like a silver dog toy. Source – Rense

Mera stated that he would take a lie detector test to prove the photos are real.

We’d like to point out that cynics claim that if UFO’s were real we’d see more videos or photos of them. We disagree. Most of us don’t carry around a camera or video cam on the oft chance of capturing a UFO and if we did happen to have one, try getting a decent shot with the wrong lens, lighting, ect., it’s nearly impossible.

“Photo” from UFO News

We’re not sure what the source was for this photo nor the date it was purportedly taken. We thought the UFO resembled a giant ceramic tile pot.

Hoax or the ugliest UFO ever photographed?

After browsing through dozens of “UFO” photos which all seemed to be modeled on variations of the flying saucer, we ran across this one which we dubbed “the flying washtub”. We find the idea of this particular photo being a real UFO kind of cool, imagining a visit from Hillbilly aliens from a nearby galaxy.

Are there UFO’s out there shaped like flying dog bones, ceramic pots, and flying washtubs or are these photos hoaxes perpetrated upon the public? What about the top-secret KGB video of a UFO crash in Russia? And just what was the strange object the painter Salimbeni inserted into his 1600 painting? Was Salimbeni introducing expressionism into his work centuries before other artists or was this an object he himself had observed or was Salimbeni just plain bonkers?

We’re not sure what the UFO climate was like in Tuscany at the turn of the century in 1600. Would Salimbeni have been censored if he swore on a stack of Bibles he had witnessed a UFO? Which brings up another point about UFO photos. People who claim they have a photo of a UFO, even if it were real, risk being called a kook or a fabricator. The photographer of the flying dogbone UFO was adamant he’d take a lie detector test to prove his innocence.

Taking a photo of a UFO would be close to impossible, must less a “great” photo of one, after all, how often do UFO’s show up (we’re not sure if they ever have but just in case) and most of us don’t have a camera or video cam on hand to capture that UFO “magic” moment. If we did happen to have our camera, UFO’s are notorious for taking off at blinding speeds. Try getting a getting a decent shot with a digital camera, much less the right lens for an object too far away and with bad light. The obstacles in taking a great UFO shot are daunting and rarely overcome. If you do manage to get a good “UFO” shot then you run the risk of being labeled a kook or a liar trying to pull a hoax if you go public.

Which leaves us to opine, if the aliens landed and made formal introductions, allowing themselves to be interviewed by Entertainment Tonight, Larry King, and the Today Show, most of the UFO mystery-conspiracy guys would lose their mystique.

We want first dibbs on an interview with the alien crew of the Flying Washtub.

By LBG

Image – Flying Washtub
Image – The Glorification of the Eucharist
Image – UFO News
Source – Secret KGB UFO Files

<!–
ch_client = “mondoreb”;
ch_type = “mpu”;
ch_width = 468;
ch_height = 60;
ch_non_contextual = 1;
ch_default_category = “81″;
var ch_queries = new Array( );
var ch_selected=Math.floor((Math.random()*ch_queries.length));
if ( ch_selected

Death by 1000 Papercuts.

Radical Islamists: New Politically Incorrect Disguise?

Top Secret Video Shows How

Is this the video the Clinton’s didn’t want you to see?

We doubt it.

We obtained what might be a strategy video by the Clinton campaign.

88 seconds that could change the world.

Or not.

by Mondoreb
hat tip: E Hancock, FreedomPhoenix


DBKP/Death by 1000 Papercuts
Also posted at DBKP at Blogger.

Rules of the Road: Riding Shotgun

Everything You’d Ever Want to Know:
Riding Shotgun

Jed always rode shotgun

“Shotgun!”

How many car trips have begun with that memorable word? The correct answer is undoubtedly “countless” or “how many stars are in the sky?”

This article concerns all things riding shotgun: definition, history, origin, rights, privileges, duties and rules.

DEFINITION

Just so there’s no disputes about the definition of ’shotgun’, here’s a good one:

The term “Shotgun” refers to the front passenger seat of an automobile. “Calling Shotgun” is the act of claiming the position of Shotgun for one’s self. As this position is the most coveted of all positions when riding in a car, the following list of rules has been created to ensure that Shotgun can be acquired in a fair and equitable manner by any passenger of an automobile.

For readers wanting a second opinion, here’s the Wikipedia version

To ride shotgun is to sit in the front passenger seat when riding a car or other vehicle, a phrase commonly heard in the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Due to the influence of American popular culture it is also heard in several European countries such as Iceland, Ireland, Denmark and the United Kingdom, as well as other countries with large English-speaking populations such as South Africa and Israel.

ORIGIN

Where did the term “riding shotgun” originate?

The first known reference to “riding shotgun” in print occurred in Western pulp fiction in the March 27, 1921 issue of the Washington Post’s “Magazine of Fiction,” in a story entitled “The Fighting Fool” by Dane Coolidge. It was used to refer to riding as an armed guard in the front of a stagecoach, next to the driver (this would usually have been on the left, as stage drivers traditionally sat on the right, near the brake).

Historians have been unable to find a use of the term “riding shotgun” in the actual time of the Old West, when the terminology actually used was riding as “shotgun messenger.” The use of the phrase in print to refer to automobiles occurred in 1954 simultaneously with the TV series Gunsmoke, which became extremely popular, and used the terminology of riding shotgun nearly weekly.

RULES

There are many local variations of the rules below. But the basic rules, like truth, beauty and hope, always remain the same. It’s good to get the ground and local rules in place before any important–or incidental–trip.

OFFICIAL RULES of Calling Shotgun 1) The first person to yell “SHOTGUN” gets to ride in the front seat. 2) The remaining back seats may be divvied up in the same manner by being the first to call “back right seat”, etc.. 3) The word “shotgun” must be loud enough to be heard by at least one witness. If no witness is to be found, or in case of a tie, the driver has the final word. After all, it is most likely his car. (note: if it isn’t his car, and the owner is present, the owner’s decision is final. Owner must be sober, however, or he will defer his judgment to the driver.) 4) Early calls are strictly prohibited. All occupants of the vehicle (including the driver) must be outside of the building and directly on the way to the vehicle before shotgun may be called. Under no circumstances may a person call shotgun inside a building. For sake of simplicity, a garage is considered to be outside. Parking structures and detached garages are always considered as being outdoors, even if they are underground. 5) A person may only call shotgun for one way of a trip. Shotgun can never be called while inside a vehicle or still technically on the way to the first location. For example, one can not get out of a vehicle and call Shotgun for the return journey. 6) Being as how everyone is created equal, men have the same right as women to the front seat of the car. i.e. women don’t own the front seat. 7) One is allowed to ride shotgun as many times as he can call it, but for himself only. No one can call shotgun for their slower friend, unless the friend has a speech or mental handicap that prevents them from calling it for themselves. The driver has final say in all ties and disputes. The driver has the right to suspend or remove all shotgun privileges from one or more persons.

Read the rest of “Riding Shotgun: Rules, History, Duties of Riding Shotgun” at DBKP.com

by Mondoreb
Sources:
* Riding Shotgun: Rules, History, Duties of Riding Shotgun


DBKP.com – Bigger, Better!.
DBKP at Blogger

Mother Unfit Parent Due to Christianity, Alleges Lesbian Ex

Forty years ago can seem like light years in cultural terms.

Forty years ago, the story of a Vermont lesbian who wanted to take a child away from her biological mother–because the mother was a Christian–would have been unbelievable.

Janet Jenkins, part of a now-sundered lesbian twosome, has alleged that because of Lisa Miller’s (the biological mother) Christian parenting practices, Miller is no longer is a fit mother. Jenkins is seeking full custody of the child.

Miller and Jenkins were a couple before Miller left the relationship and became a Christian. Now, the Virginia Supreme Court has to rule if 6-year-old Isabella, Miller’s child, is to be ripped away from her and custody given to Jenkins.

Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, said the impact of the decision will reach far beyond the important determination of the future for the child in question, also impacting states’ sovereignty and the values on which Christian parents make decisions.

Staver said that the wrong ruling could set Isabella up to be “paraded as a political trophy of the homosexual community in Vermont”.

“This case is exceptionally important because the future of [the child] Isabella hangs in the balance,” he said. “Her future will be to either remain with her biological mother, Lisa Miller, or potentially be ripped away from her mom and placed in a lesbian household… This case is also important because states must also have the sovereign authority to maintain their marriage policy as the union of one man and one woman, while rejecting same-sex unions. Virginia’s Constitution compels the state supreme court to not recognize out-of-state, same-sex marriages and civil unions.

“But if Virginia loses its sovereignty, then the sovereignty of every other state is put in jeopardy,” he said.

Vermont’s Supreme Court already granted parental rights and visitation to Jenkins. Mother and daughter live in Virginia and Miller has gone to the Virginia Supreme Court to defend her right to raise Isabella as she sees fit.

“This hearing will determine whether a lesbian woman who is Lisa Miller’s former partner will share custody of Isabella, Lisa’s daughter,” wrote Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues at Concerned Women for America. “The woman is neither an adoptive parent nor is she biologically related to Isabella. In fact, she’s a total stranger to the little girl.

“Isabella, who is now 6 years old, hadn’t seen this woman since she was 17 months old. This case could have national ramifications and will help decide whether states like Vermont and Massachusetts get to export their radical new definitions of marriage and family around the country,” Barber said.

The relationship ended when Miller became a Christian and claimed Jenkins was abusive. Miller, who says she is no longer is a lesbian, lives with her daughter in Virginia.

This story also at DBKP.com, “Lesbian Ex: Mother’s Christianity Makes Her Unfit Parent“.

Lower courts in Virginia have ruled Miller is the sole parent and the Virginia Marriage Affirmation Act bars recognition of civil unions. The Vermont Supreme Court, however, reached across state lines to demand that Miller allow Jenkins visitation.

Jenkins alleges that Miller’s Christianity is unhealthy and harmful to Isabella.

“That’s true. Janet Jenkins, in court documents in Vermont, argued because Lisa prays for her daughter and her well-being, and even prays for Janet, that in fact that is not in the best interests of Isabella. She [Jenkins] says because Lisa prays for her daughter, and tells her she’s praying to do God’s will, Janet has taken the position that … Christianity is harmful to children,” Staver told WorldNetDaily.

DBKP regular pat sums up the whole case:
“The woman attempting to gain custody is not the mother in any sense, nor does she pay child support. The ‘bad’ parenting alleged is the practice of Christianity. The Vermont Court asserts authority over both parties because a ‘civil union’ was contracted there. The birth and residency of the child was never in Vermont. This case appears to be set up to void traditional ‘best interest of the child’ standards in favor of ‘whatever a gay person wants’”.

Forty years ago, the idea that a lesbian could seek to declare a mother unfit because of the desire to raise her daughter as a Christian would have been laughable.

It would be laughable still, if it weren’t for the unrelenting legal push for increased rights and privileges for “lifestyle” choices. Once a particular “lifestyle” is given favored status, what logic would prevent other “lifestyles” from gaining legal standing?

Pedophilia already has its champion in NAMBLA. It’s only a matter of time until the North American Man Boy Love Association files suit, alleging discrimination against its “lifestyle”.

Or long-suffering farm animal lovers file suit, seeking to extend legal protections to bestiality.

That this discussion is even taking place is viewed by some as a sign of our country’s “progressiveness”. We see it as a sign of our culture’s degeneration.

Forty years ago, the Vermont Supreme Court would have explained to Janet Jenkins that there is a reason for civilization’s disdain for her “lifestyle”–and most of the reasons had to do with the well-being of children and society at large.

Forty years ago, America would not have been in danger of having a few states with radical courts force their decisions on the rest of the country.

Forty years ago sometimes seems like forever in cultural terms.

by Mondoreb
hat tip: pat
image: pregnancy
Sources:
* Lesbian Ex: Mother’s Christianity Makes Her Unfit Parent
* Lesbian Demands Custody of Christian Mom’s 6-year-old


DBKP/Death by 1000 Papercuts
Also posted at DBKP at Blogger.

Jimmy Carter, Hamas: Carter Terror Experiences Not Good

Iran Hostage Crisis, Tehran, 1977

Ex-President Jimmy Carter organized a Tea Time with Terrorists when he met with Hamas officials last Tuesday at a reception in Ramallah. Carter also announced his intentions to meet with exiled Hamas political chief, Khaled Mashaal, in Damascus, Syria on Friday. Carter was in the West Bank meeting with Hamas officials, part of a series of planned meet-ups between the ex-president and Hamas officials in what he describes as discussions towards a “final peace agreement”.

We decided to put together a short list of Carter’s accomplishments as President: signing away the Panama Canal, signing a treaty with Soviet Russia shortly before they invaded Afghanistan, and the colossal inept bumbling of the Iran Hostage Crisis.

Ex- President Jimmy Carter lays a wreath at the tomb
of Yasser Arafat, April 15, 2008

Carter defended meeting with the terrorist group Hamas, stating that their involvement was necessary for a “final peace agreement”:

“Since Syria and Hamas will have to be involved in the final peace agreement, they ought to be involved in the discussions leading up to… peace.”

Carter also met with Nasser al-Shaer, a senior Hamas official at a reception, organized by the Carter ’s office in Ramallah. According to USA Today, al-Shaer was greeted by Carter with a hug and kisses.

He gave me a hug. We hugged each other, and it was a warm reception,” Shaer told the Associated Press. “Carter asked what he can do to achieve peace between the Palestinians and Israel … and I told him the possibility for peace is high.”

While Carter is meeting up with Hamas we thought it might be fun to take a little trip down memory lane in regards to Jimmy Carter’s presidency to gain a clearer perspective on Carter’s proclivity for “peace” at all costs.

We begin with September, 1977, with Carter signing away the Panama Canal.

Read the rest at DBKP.com: “Jimmy Carter and Hamas: Tea Time With Terrorists“

by LBG
Source: Jimmy Carter and Hamas: Tea Time With Terrorists

Record Roller Coaster To Open At Cedar Point Ohio This Summer

Roller coaster enthusiasts are a breed apart.

They live for the thrill of the sudden twists and turns that make others puke.

This summer, they will have a new destination to head to: Cedar Point in northcentral Ohio is opening the Top Thrill Dragster. A record-breaking height of 420 feet and record-breaking speed of 120 mph promise roller coaster zealots the ride of their lives–until the next record-breaking coaster comes along.

Cedar Point might use this last pic as a publicity poster–if they weren’t a family amusement park.

by RidesAPaleHorse
notes: Mondoreb
images/source: Ohio Record Roller Coaster 420 ft High 120 mph Down


DBKP/Death by 1000 Papercuts
Also posted at DBKP at Blogger.

It’s 1984 in Maine: Visual Sexual Aggression Another Name for Thought Crime

It’s 1984 in Maine

New Bill in Maine Makes “Visual Sexual Aggression” a Crime

It might be 2008 in the rest of the USA, but in Maine, it’s 1984.

A new bill in the Pine Tree State would make it a crime to peer at children in public. It’s been asserted that some legislators can justify making any action a crime–as long as they add the magic words “for the children” to the mix.

This Maine bill adds proof to that assertion.

State Rep. Dawn Hill, D-York, is the head cheerleader for a bill only a fan of police state actions could love.

Or a police chief.

Her involvement started when Ogunquit Police Lt. David Alexander was called to a local beach to deal with a man who appeared to be observing children entering the community bathrooms. Because the state statute prevents arrests for visual sexual aggression of a child in a public place, Alexander said he and his fellow officer could only ask the man to move along.

“There was no violation of law that we could enforce. There was nothing we could charge him with,” Alexander said.

So that’s the problem: police could only ask the man to “move along”. The man had not committed a crime–at least outside of Maine.

In the movie, “Vanilla Sky”, the state had a police crime squad which busted into people’s home and prevented “pre-crime”: crime that hadn’t happened yet, but which was foreseen by a committee of mutants who had the power to see into the future.

Maine doesn’t have any prescient mutants that is known, but one suspects that Ray Dawn Hill or Police Chief Alexander would volunteer for the position. “Pre-crime” is their concern.

As long as it’s “for the children”, arresting someone who is denounced for “visual sexual aggression” is positively an advance in crime prevention for the determined duo.

Ray Dawn Hill will be watching you–to make sure you don’t watch children

So, besides consoling each other with “there ought to be a law” talk, what steps did Maine’s finest criminal minds do next?

[Alexander] attended a talk with Hill a week later and brought the case to her attention. Hill pledged to do what she could, Alexander said, and the result was a change through the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee in the House, which made the law applicable in both private and public places.

Alexander said he’s grateful Hill was willing to take up the cause, and is hopeful the measure will clear the Senate.

“I’ll be pleased that we were able to identify this flaw and take steps to rectify it,” he said.

What are others saying about this bill? Where does it stop?

Read “<a href=”Coming Soon: Thought Crime, Maine-Style“>Coming Soon: Thought Crimes Maine-Style” at DBKP.com.

by Mondoreb
hat tip: pat
Source:
* Coming Soon: Thought Crime, Maine-Style

New Democrat Magazines?

Click on images to enlarge.

The Mainstream Media’s almost totally liberal, so what’s three more among a cast of 1000s–of magazines?

Don’t hold your breath.

by Mondoreb
images: mondoreb


DBKP.com – Bigger, Better!.
DBKP at Blogger