Are LGBTs Taking Over? II

Headquartered in Wasington, D.C., homosexuals run a parallel society seeking to increase their power and numbers – especially by influencing curricula. A major component of their agenda is building nests discriminating for LGBTs and against normals in replacements and hiring. Nest building occurs within governments, businesses, movements, professional societies, etc. As DC has become the city with the highest concentration of homosexuals in the world (15%), nest-building clearly resumed after Presidents Truman and Eisenhower largely shut it down by firing thousands of homosexual federal employees during the late 1940s through the 1950s.

In 1950, the US Senate’s Hoey Commission found that the “clandestine camaraderie” DC homosexuals had “necessarily brings to government people of homosexual tendencies. Even though you hire him as a janitor, he tends to bring in a fellow who might become chief of the division.” Indeed, “one homosexual can pollute a Government office” by enticing normal individuals into perverted practices and systematically hiring fellow homosexuals, thereby creating a clandestine network or nest within the government that operates outside standard channels.

Also in 1950, Harry Hay, a Communist gay and boy-lover, started the US gay rights movement along with other homosexual Communists by forming the Mattachine Society in Los Angeles. Of course, a case can be made that Alfred Kinsey started the gay movement in 1948 with publication of his Sexual behavior in the human male.

Every AI we have tested says homosexual nest building does not exist. And some, as Brave’s AI push back -- asserting LGBTs are the ones being discriminated against!

Brave’s” AI: Do LGBTs nest -- that is, hire-in LGBTs and replace straights with LGBTs?

“The search results do not support the claim that LGBT people systematically ”nest,” or conspire to take over offices by excluding straight individuals. Instead, the available evidence highlights pervasive workplace discrimination and barriers to advancement faced by LGBT employees, particularly transgender individuals and women.”

As the latest technological advancement, AI may accelerate the homosexualization of the West, as those who use AI assume they were told ‘the truth.’ So, what AI ‘believes’ (or is programmed to believe) is important. Somehow, its basic code ‘believes’ LGBTs are never the discriminators, always the victims, and that what homosexuals do for sexual pleasure--no matter how disruptive of others’ lives--is just fine.

Homosexual nest-building seems a reasonable explanation for DC having the highest density of homosexuals of any city in the world. Their growing presence appears to have been first noticed during the Franklin Delano Roosevelt administration. By the 1940s, gays were having sex in so many public places (even the park across from the White House!) that executive action was taken against them by Presidents Truman and Eisenhower. Gays populated the House and Senate buildings as well as the bureaucracy during Reagan’s term. The homosexual presence grew under Presidents Carter, Clinton, Obama, Biden, and Trump.

In 1937, Heinrich Himmler (second in command to Hitler) took note of est build, as did the Hoey Commission in 1950. These men did not care about homosexuality’s cause or cure, but whether it harmed the state. The professional societies that backed homosexuality as ‘normal’ and ‘socially useful’ in the 1970s consisted of counselors. The meetings where homosexuals wore bags over their heads or talked winsomely before them impressed the counselors as ‘talking like us’ and displaying little in the way of homosexual ‘mannerisms.’ Even if totally neutral on the issue, what a counselor knows is primarily what clients say. If he does studies on groups, he only knows what respondents let him know -- there is seldom a way to verify responses. Spying on respondents would be great if possible -- then you could compare actual facts with claimed ‘facts.’ In the few instances where verification was possible because I knew others who gave an independent report, the differences that emerged discouraged me from putting too much confidence into what I was told by my clients.

Himmler minimized professional counselors’ opinions: “I doubt that any place on the present inhabited earth has gained so much experience in the field of homosexuality, abortion, etc., as we have in Germany within the Secret State Police.” Unlike the Hoey commission members, Himmler did not merely interview homosexuals or hear them testify under oath, but wielded the power to bribe, torture, or even kill them (and possibly their associates). His opinions about homosexuals draw from a far richer reality than those who only know how activists perform, what clients tell them, or records of previous claims to other counselors. Undoubtedly, claims and demonstrations by clients are worth something, but modest compared to what Himmler could uncover. Interestingly, although no fan of Jews, he threatened the same penalty for practicing same-sex sex as their holy book. Himmler said homosexuality threatened the state:

Professional “X is homosexual and is not selecting on merit for the assessors that he needs for his office in the government. He will not choose the best lawyer, …[but] …the one who is also a homosexual. These people know each other with a glance across a room. If at a dance you have 500 men, within a half hour, they have mutually picked out those who have the same disposition as they. How that happens, we normal people cannot at all imagine.”

[X] recommends [the homosexual] to the director of the ministry for appointment. He praises him and justifies his recommendation in detail. The assessor is now hired, for it will never occur to the director of the ministry to ask for greater details and to examine the hiring more closely, because from the outset … he assumes that [X’s] recommendation is based on merit. The idea that the assessor has been recommended due to the similarity of his sexual predisposition does not enter the head of a normal man.

It does not stop with these two…[X] who is now a governmental official, will proceed on the same principle. If … you have a man with such a disposition in any position of authority, you are sure to find there three, four, eight, ten or even more men of a similar disposition; for one draws in another, and watch out if there are one or two normal men among these people; they are basically damned, they can do what they want but they will be ruined [by the gays.]”

Himmler fleshed out this summary by pointing to events regarding one of his officers. That these smart and accomplished men, relatively ignorant of homosexuality initially, worked in different countries 13 years apart, and using quite different methods of gaining information, would independently condemn homosexuality as dangerous, as well as note homosexuals’ recruitment efforts and nest building, lends considerable credence to these charges.

In general, it can be difficult to formally document a nest-building situation. If only one gay

works in an office or department, the process may not have started. If it is halfway through and

people have been displaced, and their slot filled with a gay, you would have to find out why each

person left their position and why a gay was hired in their place. If the process is completed, the

office will appear normal unless the gays are wearing their sexuality on their sleeves. Obviously,

whether the normal person targeted for replacement has been accused falsely or correctly of

some malfeasance sufficient for his removal, he might well be unwilling to testify. Either way,

investigators may have difficulty nailing down the truth. Himmler clearly had many advantages

over the Hoey Commission. If gays have worked out ways to do this cleverly, and one must

assume they have now, after decades of creating nests throughout the federal bureaucracy, and

with a bias in favor of homosexuals given DEI, we are in a bit of a mess.

So, what do the AIs cite as authoritative? "The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government" by gay activist professor Dr. David K. Johnson, published in 2004 by the University of North Carolina Press.

Note: “Persecution.” Not discriminated against, but persecution, as though anyone with any sense would agree. Yet homosexual acts were illegal across the US, so thousands of legislators over decades condemned homosexual activity. “Persecution” is an activist’s word. While Himmler named names, Johnson criticizes the Hoey Commission members for not. We do not know how many members wondered how many [possibly homosexual] heads of divisions hired the homosexuals fired from other offices, but the commission’s report emphasized that many who were fired found almost immediate replacement. Generally, American politicians refrain from saying things for which they might be sued -- unlike Nazi rules for high officials. Perhaps Presidents Truman and Eisenhower were so down on homosexuality because gays were having public sex in a park right across from the White House.

Western governments have been colonized and substantially influenced by the LGBTs, because they know how to take control of and direct a department. Homosexuals have formed hundreds of nonprofit NGOs (Non Governmental Organizations to provide services or advocate a public policy). Non-profit NGOs can get grants. Almost all governments use NGOs to house, medicate, feed, etc. in situations where it doesn’t make sense to create a new bureaucracy – e.g.,

for an epidemic or a natural disaster. If homosexuals nest within a government department that

uses NGOs, homosexuals can create precisely the kind of NGO wanted, fill it with other homosexuals, and then fund it – often budgeting it for years. This justifies itself and the NGO (USAID budgeted trans-related efforts in Nepal, not devices to alert to floods which might have saved thousands). Many, if not most, of the NGOs that were employed to “educate” about HIV were led by and filled with homosexuals. This involved so much government funding that an

epidemic that might have ended the gay movement became an enormous financial boon. AIs say

DC’s Human Rights Campaign (which is solely dedicated to gay rights) is the 12th largest US

NGO. The fact that 15% of adults in DC are homosexual suggests that the number of government homosexual nests and NGOs there is incredibly large.

Consider the Global Equality Fund, supported by our taxes through at least 2024:

A “partnership comprised of like-minded governments and private sector entities dedicated to advancing and defending … fundamental freedoms of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex persons … [supporting] initiatives spearheaded by human rights defenders and civil society organizations working to protect LGBTQI+ persons from violence and abuse, criminalization, discrimination, and stigma, and to empower local LGBTQI+ movements….

GEF Supporters: US government [$40 mil in 2024], Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Uruguay, John D. Evans Foundation, Booking.com, Deloitte LLP, Royal Bank of Canada, Hilton, Bloomberg L.P., Marriott International, the Thomson Reuters Foundation, and Out Leadership.” [US Dept of State GEF website, 1/20/2025]

Counter to the AIs’ claims, Himmler and the Hoey Commission examined a great deal of evidence and judged homosexuality ‘dangerous’ to and within the modern state. The Judeo-Christian tradition regards it as a threat, especially to boys. Pakistan and Afghanistan, unlike the US, UK, EU, Canada, etc., do not donate millions to LGBT NGOs <[a href="https://globalresourcesreport.org" rel="nofollow,noreferrer,noopener" target="_blank">globalresourcesreport.org details some of the harvest gays are getting.] These two countries have little interest in equality for women, while homosexuals capture ~1- 3% of the boys, and bugger them to ruin. But their gays also marry and help generate a fertility rate above 3. Consequently, these countries are on track to survive, even as the West’s fertility is below 1.5 and falling. If the West continues to support a movement that contributes toward lowering its demographic, at some point, it will be unable to resist being conquered by more fruitful countries.

That AI’s seem in service of DEI [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion] philosophy is hardly surprising given the same tilt of the major internet players – e.g., Google, META, Wikipedia, etc. But AI’s treatment of the homosexual issue tells us something about whether AIs will eventually turn on humanity as so many tech pundits are predicting. If AIs can be trained to protect LGBTs, why can’t they be trained to revere and protect humanity?