Multiethnic Separatism
Jim Bowery
I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love me
while they destroy my society, my community, my family and therefore my life.
Those who want to end "racism" by doing whatever it takes to make everyone
ignore phenotypes because "we all know genes just don't matter all that
much" will get everything that's coming to them. I'm sure they believe
in the same liberal paradise that I was raised to believe in as a
midwestern boomer with tv and academia supplanting local folk teachings.
But with age, learning and thought, I have come to reject that vision as a
confidence game -- albiet an unconscious one -- despite the fact that it
opens me to be called the modern equivalents of "satanic", ie: "Nazi" and
"racist" by the New Inquisition. I no longer believe in Martin Luther
King's dream because it is based on a fundmentally flawed idea -- and
that is the idea that genes just don't matter all that much. On the
contrary, genes do matter -- genes matter a lot more than middle American
boomers were raised to believe.
The question then becomes, how will people who believe as I do get
everything that is coming to us as well?
Those of you who still believe in MLK's dream -- please let those like
myself remove ourselves from your paradise with a guarantee of
noninterference from your governments. We will we allow you to erect
barbed-wire fences and guard dogs to keep us out of your paradise -- cut
off all communication so our pernicious, satanic, immoral, xenophobic,
racist, antisemitic, primitive, neonazi, supremacist, propaganda can't
contaminate your vulnerable youth -- and meet any boarder crossing with
death to the trespassers. Of course, this cut off of communication and
migration goes both ways.
We'd even accept any nationality, creed, race and religion (Orthodox
Hasidic and other "reactionary" Jews already have Israel so they need not
be included) so long as they agree to the basic idea that genes are a
primary social organizing principle and that sovereignty must reside with
genetic identity. We'd have to subdivide the "turf" according to such
principles -- without outside help or interference.
Can you we-are-the-worlders imagine the hilarious scene of neoNazis,
KKKers, Christian Identity types, folkish Asatru and other white devils
being fenced off in some place like the old Confederacy states with the
Nation of Islam, Native American separatists and other "racist" mud
peoples to work out our problems with each other absolutely bereft of the
traditional guidance of Jews, without which, of course, JudeoChristian
Western Civilization would not have been possible?
Oh, I know, many of you are more compassionate than to allow us to do such
damage to ourselves -- you are _so generous_ that you would forego the
enormous knee-slapping black-comedy that would result when we found all we
could do was kill each other because guys with last names like "Wiseman"
and "Goodman" weren't around dispensing their wisdom and goodness into
every home via state schooling and television. But, then I have to say, I
honestly believe a growing number of we crazies are getting so out of hand
that not only might we fail to appreciate the greatness of such generosity
-- we might hallucinate that it was actually the desparation of a
parasitic culture in the same old paternalistic guise -- and we might get
violent or something. Then not only would we hurt ourselves, but we might
hurt you as well... So maybe it would be best to just sit back, have a
good laugh and let the world learn a lesson in humility at our voluntary
expense.
To maximize the humor content, you'd have to make sure all we barbarians,
primitive tribalists and other losers had all the rope we needed to hang
ourselves, but good, for all the world to see -- otherwise they might
think there hadn't been a fair test of the idea of genetic social
organization. Furthermore the real purpose, which is to demonstrate the
natural mastery and wisdom of the Chosen People, might not be achieved.
I mean, after all, haven't all countries who excluded Jews eventually
begged for them to come in and help them achieve the same prosperity
achieved by their non-exclusionary neighbors?
SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
--
The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
Change the tools and you change the rules.
C
jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
> SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
You have two choices
1) Go out with a bang
or
2) Go out with a whimper
It makes no difference to us. Time is on our side.
--
"The events which transpired five thousand years ago; Five years ago or
five minutes ago, have determined what will happen five minutes from now;
five years from now or five thousand years from now. All history is a
current event"-John Henrik Clarke
Celebrate African History.
Jim Bowery
Daniel Hillman (dan...@panbio.com) wrote:
: Ok, Jim. How do "genes matter".
: Are you a geneticist?
This isn't the 60's, oh, my ancient enemy. Your inflammatory rhetoric only
contributes to the growing crisis.
trish
Hey Jim!
You must have been bored shitless when you wrote and spammed this little
mind-f__k of yours. Don't you have anything better to do?
> SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
Thomas G. Andrew, Jr.
It is not the 60's, but you still did not answer the man's question. Where
is your data?
Tom Andrew
Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote in article
<jaboweryE...@netcom.com>...
> Daniel Hillman (dan...@panbio.com) wrote:
> : Ok, Jim. How do "genes matter".
>
> : Are you a geneticist?
>
> This isn't the 60's, oh, my ancient enemy. Your inflammatory rhetoric
only
> contributes to the growing crisis.
>
>
Francis Farmer
In article <op67vl8...@remus.cs.uml.edu>, Andrew Hall
<ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu> wrote:
> >>>>> Jim Bowery writes:
>
> Jim> I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and
love me
> Jim> while they destroy my society, my community, my family and
therefore my life.
>
> Jim> Those who want to end "racism" by doing whatever it takes to make
everyone
> Jim> ignore phenotypes because "we all know genes just don't matter
all that
> Jim> much" will get everything that's coming to them. I'm sure they
believe
>
> Genes matter plenty, in individuals. The variation between
> two randomly selected individuals is orders of magnitude
> greater than the group variation you seem to spend your life (thus
> ruining it) fuming about.
>
> Have the courage to judge people as individuals, rather than
> as members of some group. Yes it is harder work, but it is
> morally right and will also yield far more accurate results.
>
> ah
> (Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)
As evident on this thread, each racial group prides itself on believing it
will attain the highest standard of living when the races are finally
separated into different geographic zones. This is important, and a sign
that racial identity is growing more and more important in everyday life
throughout the world. The friction between the races will grow ever more
heated unless action is taken to do what everyone secretly wants
anyway--SEPARATE THE RACES NOW.
What is the reason why white murder victims are killed 30% of the time by
negroes, while only 1.5% of negroes are killed by whites?
We must export our negro problem to Africa where they will not have to live
off the scraps from the white man's table.
Jim Bowery
Thomas G. Andrew, Jr. (tom...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: It is not the 60's, but you still did not answer the man's question. Where
: is your data?
And you didn't get the point. This is not a Talamudic or academic
debate. It is a difference of opinion on whether people should be
allowed self determination independent of your judgement of their
rationality.
Marc H. Pinsonneault
see the huge similarities between different groups as far greater than
the amount of pigment in their skin or the nature of their hair.
But if you're basically a loser, you need some way to feel superior
to other people. Rant all you want; your views are repulsive to the
vast majority of people. If you step over the line and advocate
violence you'll go to jail. Otherwise we'll just mock you.
cheers,
Marc Pinsonneault
> that racial identity is growing more and more important in everyday life
> throughout the world. The friction between the races will grow ever more
> heated unless action is taken to do what everyone secretly wants
> anyway--SEPARATE THE RACES NOW.
>
> What is the reason why white murder victims are killed 30% of the time by
> negroes, while only 1.5% of negroes are killed by whites?
>
> We must export our negro problem to Africa where they will not have to live
> off the scraps from the white man's table.
--
Remove nospam to get true email address.
trio...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, C wrote:
> jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
>
> > SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
>
> You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
>
> You have two choices
>
> 1) Go out with a bang
> or
> 2) Go out with a whimper
>
> It makes no difference to us. Time is on our side.
>
seek help...
Jenner
On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:59:05 GMT, jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery)
wrote:
: I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love me
: while they destroy my society, my community, my family and therefore my life.
When hate is all you know....
***
To reply by e-mail, remove the spam fodder (the **)
from my e-mail address.
http://shell.idt.net/~jenner29
***
Daniel Hillman
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> Daniel Hillman (dan...@panbio.com) wrote:
> : Ok, Jim. How do "genes matter".
>
> : Are you a geneticist?
>
> This isn't the 60's, oh, my ancient enemy. Your inflammatory rhetoric only
> contributes to the growing crisis.
>
> --
> The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
Jimbo, why didn't you post the "proof" that you e-mailed
me? Afraid that it would reveal the paucity of your thinking?
That's ok, I've posted it below.
Your letter to me says that blacks have
higher HIV rates. Then you go on to describe a
horrifying crime that occurred in NYC.
So again, I ask you: what connection is there
between a given set of genes and a given set of
behaviors?
-Dan
P.S. I didn't know that truth had anything to do with
what decade it is. BTW, your quote from Shockley is
from (gasp) 1968.
Jim' e-mail to me:
> ----unfortunately genes matter
>
> There are major differences between the races and until recently
> I did not believe so. But as part of my job I was involved in a Study of
> HIV rates. We found the white / black hiv rates differred not by sat
> 10%, or 50 % but 1500%.
> This lead my to ask Why?
>
> A summary of articles that are relevant from the net is given
> below
>
> > http://www.mankind.org/whitney.html
> > http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Library/Miller/paternal-provisio
> > n.html
> > http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/People/Rushton/rushtonr_k.html
> >
> >
> >
> > Professor Shockley's Experiment
> > Glayde Whitney
> > Florida State University, Tallahassee
> > One of the experiments that Professor Shockley suggested to the
> > National Academy of Sciences
> > at its Spring Meeting of 1968 ("Proposed research to reduce racial
> > aspects of the environment-
> > heredity uncertainty") has been conducted; the results are in.
> > The unfortunate truth that no one was particularly hoping for is
> > completely at odds with the revealed
> > wisdom of the egalitarian left: when black babies are adopted into
> > middle class bright white families
> > they grow up to function intellectually and emotionally like blacks.
> >
> >
> Ignoring reality leads to the following sad story
>
>
>
>
> The New York Times continues to report on the torture-murder of
> Jonathan
> Levin, a highly-regarded and totally dedicated teacher at William Howard
> Taft High School, in the Bronx. When I grew up in the Bronx, in the 40s
> and
> 50s, Taft was almost all white. It was not an elite school, like the
> Bronx
> High School of Science, so the proportion of Jews was much smaller
> (maybe
> half). Today it is almost all black and Hispanic.
> Jonathan Levin was the son of a billionaire, Gerald M. Levin, CEO of
> Time-Warner. For what were doubtless "idealistic" reasons, he chose to
> devote his life to teaching under-achieving third world kids in the
> Bronx.
> About a week ago, his body was found in his modest upper West Side
> apartment; he'd been tortured and then shot in the head.
> Police say that there is overwhelming evidence that his killers were
> two
> black youths, one a former student, Corey Arthur, the other a friend of
> Arthur's. Neither had any idea of how wealthy Levin was through his
> family.
> Evidence indicates that he was tortured in order to elicit his ATM
> password;
> $800 was withdrawn on his card, at the time of the killing, by someone
> who
> was obviously not Levin, according to the pictures on the security
> camera.
> Many of Levin's students were very upset and distraught over the
> killing.
> After numerous interviews with the students, a senior investigator
> stated:
> "I don't think Corey realized who [Levin] was. He was a white guy with
> money, a middle-class school teacher."
>
>
>
Jim Bowery
: Jim> I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love me
: Jim> while they destroy my society, my community, my family and therefore my life.
: Jim> Those who want to end "racism" by doing whatever it takes to make everyone
: Jim> ignore phenotypes because "we all know genes just don't matter all that
: Jim> much" will get everything that's coming to them. I'm sure they believe
: Genes matter plenty, in individuals. The variation between
: two randomly selected individuals is orders of magnitude
: greater than the group variation you seem to spend your life (thus
: ruining it) fuming about.
Believe me, I heard it all a very long time ago. Neither I nor any of the
people who believe as I do care to hear your worn-out sophistry yet again.
Daniel B. Holzman
In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>Believe me, I heard it all a very long time ago. Neither I nor any of the
>people who believe as I do care to hear your worn-out sophistry yet again.
>
>
> LET MY PEOPLE GO
I'm curious... if you're so hot to go, what's holding you back? Get
going already! DOn't let the door hit your ass on the way out!
--
Daniel B. Holzman -- Love does not subtract, it multiplies. -- All acts of love
and pleasure are Her rituals. -- An it Harm none, do what you Will. -- They
took my name and stole my heritage, but they didn't get my goat. -- The
word is all of us. -- Remember the Twelth Commandment and keep it Wholly.
Sanat Kumara
Jim Bowery wrote:
> =
> I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love m=
e
> while they destroy my society, my community, my family and therefore my=
life.
> =
> Those who want to end "racism" by doing whatever it takes to make every=
one
> ignore phenotypes because "we all know genes just don't matter all that=
> much" will get everything that's coming to them. =
> The question then becomes, how will people who believe as I do get
> everything that is coming to us as well?
> Those of you who still believe in MLK's dream -- please let those like
> myself remove ourselves from your paradise with a guarantee of
> noninterference from your governments. We will we allow you to erect
> barbed-wire fences and guard dogs to keep us out of your paradise -- cu=
t
> off all communication so our pernicious, satanic, immoral, xenophobic,
> racist, antisemitic, primitive, neonazi, supremacist, propaganda can't
> contaminate your vulnerable youth -- and meet any boarder crossing with=
> death to the trespassers. Of course, this cut off of communication and=
> migration goes both ways.
etc., etc., etc.
My Son:
Your concerns belie your true nature. Humans are luminous beings. Humans
are a curious combination of spirit, mind and matter. At the center lies
the mind. Some of us, like you do, find ourselves only concerned with
the matter aspect: the form, or physical side of life. =
You have become attached to the appearances of people, to the qualities
of the world around you based on the form. Your mind believes that human
beings behave a certain way or are not like you because of their
form--their appearance. =
Your disappointment with the world around you is because you believe the
form can provide you with happiness. You believe that if the changes
that have come to the physical world around you were halted or rolled
back to a previous time (people with different physical appearances were
no longer near to you) that you would find happiness, contentment, and
security.
Your misery, however will never be eliminated because happiness brought
about from forms can only be temporary. You constantly buy more and more
material goods, bring them home, and quickly tire of them. You meet a
beautiful woman, but can=92t seem to stay together, no matter how
beautiful she is.
You find yourself uncomfortable with people who don=92t look like you do.=
You find yourself isolating yourself from all people in your misery. You
end up being holed up in a city apartment or moving yourself out of
society completely to some very rural place where only people who look
like you live.
But still you are in misery. You can=92t pick up a magazine, you can=92t
turn on the television without seeing those people that don=92t look like=
you. No matter what things you acquire, you still have an emptiness. =
Your mind is so stuck in the physical side of things that you have
ignored the element which makes you a human. You are a human because of
your luminosity. Without that light you would be a rock. Or a river or
just a pile of dust. =
That luminosity is love. Love is humanity=92s virtue. All humans love. Al=
l
humans are a combination of love, mind and form. =
If you will turn your mind to thoughts of love, and away from thoughts
of form, you will regain that happiness you had as a child. If you turn
that love toward all humanity, you will find an inner joy that cannot
compare to the temporary happiness of an acquired =93thing=94.
Your Father,
Sanat Kumara
Jim Bowery
: > SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
: You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
I appreciate your self-knowledge and honesty.
J. Doe
OK. I'm game. Where do I send my money order? Or do you take Visa?
Marc H. Pinsonneault
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> Thomas G. Andrew, Jr. (tom...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> : It is not the 60's, but you still did not answer the man's question. Where
> : is your data?
>
> And you didn't get the point. This is not a Talamudic or academic
> debate. It is a difference of opinion on whether people should be
> allowed self determination independent of your judgement of their
> rationality.
>
> LET MY PEOPLE GO
force a lot of people to move against their will. You could at
least give us a clue as to what such a drastic solution is based on.
Other than bigotry, which certainly looks like your motive.
Marc Pinsonneault
>
> --
> The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
--
Remove nospam to get true email address.
trio...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Francis Farmer wrote:
> As evident on this thread, each racial group prides itself on believing it
> will attain the highest standard of living when the races are finally
> separated into different geographic zones. This is important, and a sign
> that racial identity is growing more and more important in everyday life
> throughout the world. The friction between the races will grow ever more
> heated unless action is taken to do what everyone secretly wants
> anyway--SEPARATE THE RACES NOW.
That would be catistrophic for all..
> What is the reason why white murder victims are killed 30% of the time by
> negroes, while only 1.5% of negroes are killed by whites?
It has to do with a lack of hope in the black community,
this exist in the white community but not to the same
degree... If a young man believes that he can not succede
in life why try..
> We must export our negro problem to Africa where they will not have to live
> off the scraps from the white man's table.
we should levae to then as we are not native to
this land...
Paal-Eirik Filssunu
trio...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
Jim Bowery said...
>
> > We must export our negro problem to Africa where they will not have to live
> > off the scraps from the white man's table.
..To which his Critic said:
>
> we should levae to then as we are not native to
> this land...
..To which I say:
IF YOU HAVE NO NATIVE LAND YOURSELF,[whatever it may be]
YOUR MIND WILL ALWAYS BE IN THE CLOUDS...
People may be 'Stateless',
but seldom are any 'Landless'
or lacking in Native rights
by birth..
Paal-Eirik
(Stateless North American:
been Native all my days..)
Jim Bowery
Andrew Hall (ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu) wrote:
: (cybe...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: >> jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
: >> > SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
: >> You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
: Don't look now, but he is mocking you. As do
: decent, sane people.
Wrong, Mr. Hall. I'm deadly serious in my statement to him. I do NOT
appreciate your LACK of self-knowledge and honesty.
LET MY PEOPLE GO
Jim Bowery
trio...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
: On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Francis Farmer wrote:
: > As evident on this thread, each racial group prides itself on believing it
: > will attain the highest standard of living when the races are finally
: > separated into different geographic zones. This is important, and a sign
: > that racial identity is growing more and more important in everyday life
: > throughout the world. The friction between the races will grow ever more
: > heated unless action is taken to do what everyone secretly wants
: > anyway--SEPARATE THE RACES NOW.
: That would be catistrophic for all..
Francis Farmer is confusing "send them back to africa" with "LET MY PEOPLE
GO". Those who can't see the difference between our proposals are hardly
worth addressing.
Jim Bowery
Daniel B. Holzman (hol...@xochi.tezcat.com) wrote:
: I'm curious... if you're so hot to go, what's holding you back? Get
: going already! DOn't let the door hit your ass on the way out!
Unlike "the wilderness" in which your forebearers wandered for many
years, there are no territories over which existing national
sovereignties do not exercise either declared or defacto sovereignty --
and there are no sovereignties that have a constitutional guarantee of
genetic identity as the locus of sovereignty except for the limited case
of Israel.
Jim Bowery
Daniel Hillman (dan...@panbio.com) wrote:
: Jimbo, why didn't you post the "proof" that you e-mailed
: me? Afraid that it would reveal the paucity of your thinking?
: That's ok, I've posted it below.
I sent you no letter. Figure out who actually sent you the letter and
correct yourself in public.
I'm not discussing, in this thread, the validity of my beliefs about genes
and human social organization. I am demanding my rights to self
determination and declaring my reasons for doing so. Your opinions and
questions about the nature of the basic human right to self-determination
are, however, welcome.
LET MY PEOPLE GO
Shayne O'Neill
>
> I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love me
> while they destroy my society, my community, my family and therefore my life.
Well that's you... Personally I'd rather live in a comunity where they
smile and love me all the while building a society where our differences
make us interesting rather than scary.... Pipe dreamer mabey, but I
ain't
the first.
> Those who want to end "racism" by doing whatever it takes to make everyone
> ignore phenotypes because "we all know genes just don't matter all that
> much" will get everything that's coming to them. I'm sure they believe
> in the same liberal paradise that I was raised to believe in as a
> midwestern boomer with tv and academia supplanting local folk teachings.
[Snip ...yada yada yada about 'Don't call me a racist 'cause I aint type
Jazz]
> "racist" by the New Inquisition. I no longer believe in Martin Luther
> King's dream because it is based on a fundmentally flawed idea -- and
> that is the idea that genes just don't matter all that much. On the
> contrary, genes do matter -- genes matter a lot more than middle American
> boomers were raised to believe.
Sure genes matter. I gotta bitch of an asthma gene I'd like to nail.....
Wouldn't mind a couple feet taller gene too... Whatever... *BUT*
To argue that Genes are what makes cultures tick......... Which I assume
is what you mean, (unless you have some sorta anti-asthma drive
mabey)....
is fundamentally flawed. Certainly physical characteristics, such as
skin
pigmentation between members of nominated cultures, can be attributed
largely
to genes is to be taken for granted, however Sociological aspects of
culture,
and variations in thinking between different cultures , I propose is not
at all attributable to genetics. People are Culturally constructed by
the
systems of meaning that people engage and participate in. Time and time
again, it can be demonstrated that behavioural 'norms' attributed
(usually
in ignorance of statistical data) to different cultures are behaviours
aquired through engagement of the dominant culture of the peoples and
also
aquired through the trusty ol' learning process (ie Don't cheat on
wife.. learnt through dating experiences younger age etc etc etc..)
An example of this can be taken from the debate on Ebonics. From my
under-
standing some school (who's name eludes me) decided that the 'dialect'
(or
whatever the word used) of english commonly attributed to African
American
folk was another language and had some sorta deep structural genetic
base.
Problem is;-
African decent folk in Brittain will generally have a distinctly british
speaking manner, and in Australia, where this humble little letter is
eminating from, almost all the African australian by birth or long
residency
I have *ever* known speak in a form no different from my own 'white'
accents and linguistic patterns. Moreover , a great many of these folk's
parents & grandparents *DID* originate from America and thus same
genetic
'stock'...
Language is a learned thing, and if the great many folks one encounters
speaks a certain way, particuly I would argue , if those people are ones
the speaker can identify as being one of 'us'.
As to the 'community destroying' genetic characteristics you imply, I
implore
you to investigate this consern, and you *will* find that criminality
and
behaviour deemed 'deviant' is quite universal across cultural groups.
Furthermore, to establish a causative connection between genetic makeup
common to 'racial' groups and this behaviour, first one must agree on
presisely *what* those differences scientifically are.
Sure we can go on colour... but mabey not, there is more than one
'variety' of
black person, and even more in the case of African America, we have a
culture
of people originating from quite a large area of Africa. Speech
patterns?
Nope... unstable reference, african australians and african americans
have remarkably different speech, but same gene makeup (well within the
reason of natural genetic variance ;). Behaviour. Nope. One would have
a hard time finding behaviours that ALL whites do, but not blacks, and
that
ALL blacks do and not whites... It's a useless pursuit that ultimately
don't work.
So this leaves me with 2 questions
1) Precisely how would you differentiate between sample groups of
ethnicitys
based on a genetic background.
2) The big one... Could you please email me the data confirming your
hypothesis
I'd love to see it, though I doubt I will. This is not a harassment,
this
is a scientific request, that I suspect will fail because of the
unstable
theoretical baseline. I assume you will post your data.
>
> The question then becomes, how will people who believe as I do get
> everything that is coming to us as well?
Grow old and die?
Senility cures conservatisim. Your beliefs are well and truly inprovable
and I challenge you to prove it. As a scientist. Show us the data, good
first sourced or well referenced second source data and I'll start
showing respect. Otherwise... you are making some big guesses here.
>
> Those of you who still believe in MLK's dream -- please let those like
> myself remove ourselves from your paradise with a guarantee of
> noninterference from your governments. We will we allow you to erect
> barbed-wire fences and guard dogs to keep us out of your paradise -- cut
> off all communication so our pernicious, satanic, immoral, xenophobic,
> racist, antisemitic, primitive, neonazi, supremacist, propaganda can't
> contaminate your vulnerable youth -- and meet any boarder crossing with
> death to the trespassers. Of course, this cut off of communication and
> migration goes both ways.
Martin Luthers 'dream' as as we all know was a difficult one, but still
one
worth aiming for. It was great because it included the 'opressor' and
thus
was indeed one of love and forgiveness.
May I suggest if you want to seperate from 'other' culture, you will
be disapointed. Ppl are different and interesting everywhere. If you
suggest
a new nation state inside the US, then mabey I suggest you read some
good
books and assess the probabilities of that.. Ie.. it aint gonna happen.
It ain't gonna happen... MONDO. I'd recoment getting used to it.
Multiculturalism ain't gonna hurt you. Heck, it makes life more
interesting,
so why on earth would any voter would want to end the new dialogues
between
the opressor and the opressed..... Not many? .. None?
You have already built your fence that hides you from the world. It's
inside
you. I suggest having a peek over your wall oneday. It should be a
pleasant
surprise just how interesting other ppls culture can be. Embrace it.
It's
good for you. Sure looks like you aint letting much in at all tho. I
suspect
that the education still is living outside of it.
>
> We'd even accept any nationality, creed, race and religion (Orthodox
> Hasidic and other "reactionary" Jews already have Israel so they need not
> be included) so long as they agree to the basic idea that genes are a
> primary social organizing principle and that sovereignty must reside with
> genetic identity. We'd have to subdivide the "turf" according to such
> principles -- without outside help or interference.
Plans plans plans.... wake up. It ain't gonna happen. Oh and by the way.
Since *WHEN* have genes been an organising principle outside the family
structure. You state that yet I'd doubt *any* sociplogist or
anthropologist
would agree. Scientific assertionms needs proof and nowhere in culture
do we see people organising on genetics at all. Show me the proof, this
little cultural studies student's a bit puzzled on this one.
>
> Can you we-are-the-worlders imagine the hilarious scene of neoNazis,
> KKKers, Christian Identity types, folkish Asatru and other white devils
> being fenced off in some place like the old Confederacy states with the
> Nation of Islam, Native American separatists and other "racist" mud
> peoples to work out our problems with each other absolutely bereft of the
> traditional guidance of Jews, without which, of course, JudeoChristian
> Western Civilization would not have been possible?
... leaving the remaining 99% who think it's a crock of shit going
"WHA?"
... Where do I fit in?
[more yada snipped]
Basically. Your assertion is not worthy of a spit without data, and
one thus suspects ignorance. Ignorance + hate = bad karma politics in my
books.
hmm.....
-------------
2 Theories on this post;
1: Troll
or
2: Ignorant. One suggests the local library here. Sure those books have
hard words, but mabey someone can read it for ya.
Shayne.
An Aussie citizen of the world.
Jim Bowery
Marc H. Pinsonneault (pin...@tinsley.mps.ohio-state.nospam.edu) wrote:
: No it is not. To enforce your ethnic cleansing you would have to
: least give us a clue as to what such a drastic solution is based on.
: Other than bigotry, which certainly looks like your motive.
That's a reasonable demand and to answer I'll simply say that my mention
of the Confederacy states was not a proposal but a literary device to
bring in imagery of the Civil War's failure to resolve the issue it was
meant to resolve. I apologize for being careless in that bit of prose. I
certainly would not want to see forceable relocations. Since the number of
people of all heritages who would want to live in the genetic separatist
territory would be so small (about 1 in 100 people) forced relocation of
others would be unnecessary as well as unethical.
There are plenty of territories that are so sparsely populated as to make
simple property purchase by attricion with appropriate covenants a viable
option to even eminent domain (let alone force). US (or whatever) law could
apply to all such unpurchased properties.
Furthermore, there are unused, unpopulated and unclaimed regions of the
oceans that could be guaranteed free of molestation by specious claims of
sovereignty by existing nations. Most of the ocean is virtually lifeless
desert that might be cultivated as a replacement for land-based
agriculture. Yes, this would present profound hardship, but would it
really be any worse than the 1 in 4 odds of dying within the first year
that the earliest New World settlers faced?
None of this requires anyone to be forceably relocated.
With these clarifications I stand by my claim that the issue is the right
to self determination rather than the validity of beliefs about genes and
social organiztion.
PS: You are welcome to call me bigot or anything else that you like.
You are not welcome to tell me and others like me how to live our lives.
Haim Guivon
In Article<339EF9...@panbio.com>, <dan...@panbio.com> >
So again, I ask you: what connection is there
> between a given set of genes and a given set of
> behaviors?
>
> -Dan
================================================================
A really important question, but I would rephrase it (to make
it more precise):
"What connection is there between a given set of genes
(genotype) *of an ethnic group* and a given set of behaviours?"
And the answer, my son, is written in the sun:
-----Nazism-----.
Which is not but the culmination of tribal hatred, which is as
old as animal life is.
And until we humans will not shed our bestial remainders, we
shall go on hating and killing people of different tribes.
Darwin at his best.
Haim
================================================================
Finn Harder
"Marc H. Pinsonneault" <pin...@tinsley.mps.ohio-state.nospam.edu>
wrote:
>> As evident on this thread, each racial group prides itself on believing it
>> will attain the highest standard of living when the races are finally
>> separated into different geographic zones. This is important, and a sign
> Only in your bigoted little corner of the world. The rest of us
>see the huge similarities between different groups as far greater than
>the amount of pigment in their skin or the nature of their hair.
> But if you're basically a loser, you need some way to feel superior
>to other people.
Why is everyone so hung up on race? Race is only the visible
characteristic of different cultures. Cultural differences are what
counts. Even within the same racial groups.
If you do not believe this, then just glance in the direction of Eire.
Or even in the direction of the Balkans. The streets of US of A.
Africa, the Far East.
In the majority of cases the conflicts is between different cultures
within the same racial groupings. For a really far out example of
this, look no further than to the Middle East. The conflict between
the Jews and the Arabs are not racial, but a conflict between
cultures.
If differences in cultures between members of one 'race/subgroup' can
inflame such strife, then just think what differences between
'races/subgroups' can explode into.
I wonder if those wh advocate such actions have their heads screwed on
right. (Maybe they are just screwed up)?
Regards
Finn
Daniel B. Holzman
>: I'm curious... if you're so hot to go, what's holding you back? Get
>: going already! DOn't let the door hit your ass on the way out!
>
>Unlike "the wilderness" in which your forebearers wandered for many
>years, there are no territories over which existing national
>sovereignties do not exercise either declared or defacto sovereignty --
>and there are no sovereignties that have a constitutional guarantee of
>genetic identity as the locus of sovereignty except for the limited case
>of Israel.
I'm sure that if you really wanted to leave, you could find an island
somewhere that isn't claimed. But the fact is that nobody is holding you
here, thus your plea to "LET MY PEOPLE GO" is addressed to no one. You
can leave any time you like.
Mark C. Chu-Carroll
Shayne O'Neill wrote in article <339F26B3...@carmen.murdoch.edu.au>..
.
>under-standing some school (who's name eludes me) decided that the
'dialect'
>(or whatever the word used) of english commonly attributed to African
>American folk was another language and had some sorta deep structural
genetic
>base.
>
>Problem is;-
>
>African decent folk in Brittain will generally have a distinctly british
>speaking manner, and in Australia, where this humble little letter is
>eminating from, almost all the African australian by birth or long
>residency
>I have *ever* known speak in a form no different from my own 'white'
>accents and linguistic patterns. Moreover , a great many of these folk's
>parents & grandparents *DID* originate from America and thus same
>genetic 'stock'...
I'd like to reinforce this point a bit.
First of all, a common rebuttal to this is to point out the weakness of
anecdotal
evidence. But in this case, verifiable anecdotal evidence is absolutely
perfect. We're
dealing with a case where someone is claiming that fundamental
socio-cultural
behaviors are *genetic* - intrinsically hardwired into our DNA. For Jim's
point to
be correct, those supposedly genetic sociocultural predispositions *must*
be
impossible to overcome; otherwise, his claim is critically flawed.
If *any* members of a group that Jim claims are genetically wired for a
certain behavior
don't exhibit that behavior, then his claim is clearly false.
And examples of this abound. Does Clarence Thomas (the extremely
conservative,
anti-affirmative action black supreme court justice) match the behaviors
that Jim
claims are part of the black genotype? Do Australian black people as a
group
match Jim's stereotype? Do American raised Chinese match some Chinese
behavioral genotype? (I can answer this one quite well, as someone married
to a Canadian born
Chinese woman. My wife definitely does not fit any stereotypical model of
Chinese behavior. Her behavior is as North American White as mine.)
>Language is a learned thing, and if the great many folks one encounters
>speaks a certain way, particuly I would argue , if those people are ones
>the speaker can identify as being one of 'us'.
>
>As to the 'community destroying' genetic characteristics you imply, I
>implore you to investigate this consern, and you *will* find that
criminality
>and behaviour deemed 'deviant' is quite universal across cultural groups.
>
>Furthermore, to establish a causative connection between genetic makeup
>common to 'racial' groups and this behaviour, first one must agree on
>presisely *what* those differences scientifically are.
This is another critical flaw with Jim's reasoning. The limited studies of
human genetics that have been performed so far show that the genetic
variance without a particular
racial group is *far* greater than the genetic variance between the races.
(That is,
if you identify the sets of genes that seem to be tied to each particular
racial group,
and identify the differences between those sets of genes, and compare the
size of
those difference to the average variance between individuals in a
particular racial
group, you'll find that the first set is vanishingly small in comparison to
the second.)
In order to support his theory, Jim needs to show that the very small set
of
genes that are tied to a particular racial group have an influence over
genetically
determined behaviors that outweighs all the non-racial genes and all of the
non-genetic influences on behaviors.
That's an *incredibly* strong claim. And Jim refuses to even attempt to
support it in any way. He just wants the rest of the world to give him what
he wants on a silver platter.
<MC>
Bloit Outcherass
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> C (cybe...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> : jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
>
> : > SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
>
> : You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
>
>
> The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
In my humble opinion, the two of you have way too much time on your
hands. Those who are productive don't sit down and take the time to spew
such garbage, much less cement it into a delusional schema of the way of
the world.
You are both clearly both paranoid and delusional. It is obvious to any
reasonable person that you are seriously mentally ill. What's next? Will
you throw in a Christ complex for our entertainment?
Get real or get help -- get help in any case.
Jenner
On Wed, 11 Jun 1997 18:28:43 GMT, jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery)
wrote:
: Believe me, I heard it all a very long time ago. Neither I nor any of the
: people who believe as I do care to hear your worn-out sophistry yet again.
It matters little as you and your ilk have less and less power over
the rest of the populace.
:
:
: LET MY PEOPLE GO
The only thing holding you and your ilk hostage are your own fears.
Marc H. Pinsonneault
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> Marc H. Pinsonneault (pin...@tinsley.mps.ohio-state.nospam.edu) wrote:
> : No it is not. To enforce your ethnic cleansing you would have to
> : force a lot of people to move against their will. You could at
> : least give us a clue as to what such a drastic solution is based on.
> : Other than bigotry, which certainly looks like your motive.
>
> That's a reasonable demand and to answer I'll simply say that my mention
> of the Confederacy states was not a proposal but a literary device to
> bring in imagery of the Civil War's failure to resolve the issue it was
> meant to resolve. I apologize for being careless in that bit of prose. I
> certainly would not want to see forceable relocations. Since the number of
> people of all heritages who would want to live in the genetic separatist
> territory would be so small (about 1 in 100 people) forced relocation of
> others would be unnecessary as well as unethical.
>
> There are plenty of territories that are so sparsely populated as to make
> simple property purchase by attricion with appropriate covenants a viable
> option to even eminent domain (let alone force). US (or whatever) law could
> apply to all such unpurchased properties.
like-minded individuals. MOVE and the Aryan Nation have done exactly
that. I think that the number of interested people is in the
hundreds, not the millions. But whatever.
You are not free to force a single minority to move because you don't
want them around. Period.
>
> Furthermore, there are unused, unpopulated and unclaimed regions of the
> oceans that could be guaranteed free of molestation by specious claims of
> sovereignty by existing nations. Most of the ocean is virtually lifeless
> desert that might be cultivated as a replacement for land-based
> agriculture. Yes, this would present profound hardship, but would it
> really be any worse than the 1 in 4 odds of dying within the first year
> that the earliest New World settlers faced?
I doubt that anyone would mind if you set up a floating colony in
international waters. Somehow I don't think that you'd get many
takers.
>
> None of this requires anyone to be forceably relocated.
>
> With these clarifications I stand by my claim that the issue is the right
> to self determination rather than the validity of beliefs about genes and
> social organiztion.
>
> PS: You are welcome to call me bigot or anything else that you like.
> You are not welcome to tell me and others like me how to live our lives.
Anyone who believes in racial separation is by definition a bigot.
So I think the word is apt.
And you can live your life as you like it, as long as you don't
infringe on the liberties of others in the process. That's democracy
for you.
Marc Pinsonneault
> --
> The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
--
Remove nospam to get true email address.
Jim Bowery
Jenner (**jenn...@mail.idt.net**) wrote:
: The only thing holding you and your ilk hostage are your own fears.
You forgot a few tens of thousands of nuclear warheads, biological
weapons, chemical weapons and a propaganda machine that Goebels would
have envied.
LET MY PEOPLE GO
Jim Bowery
Haim Guivon (gui...@netvision.net.il) wrote:
: "What connection is there between a given set of genes
: And the answer, my son, is written in the sun:
Why does the final scene in the movie "Conan the Barbarian" present
itself to my mind's eye when this man calls me his "son"?
Jim Bowery
Jenner (**jenn...@mail.idt.net**) wrote:
: It matters little as you and your ilk have less and less power over
: the rest of the populace.
We have _no_ power over society and I have herein requested no power over
society -- merely separation form a society that hates my minority opinion.
: : LET MY PEOPLE GO
Kevin Alfred Strom
Finn Harder wrote:
....
>
> Why is everyone so hung up on race? Race is only the visible
> characteristic of different cultures. Cultural differences are what
> counts. Even within the same racial groups.
>
> If you do not believe this, then just glance in the direction of Eire.
> Or even in the direction of the Balkans. The streets of US of A.
> Africa, the Far East.
>
> In the majority of cases the conflicts is between different cultures
> within the same racial groupings. For a really far out example of
> this, look no further than to the Middle East. The conflict between
> the Jews and the Arabs are not racial, but a conflict between
> cultures.
>
> If differences in cultures between members of one 'race/subgroup' can
> inflame such strife, then just think what differences between
> 'races/subgroups' can explode into.
>
> I wonder if those wh advocate such actions have their heads screwed on
> right. (Maybe they are just screwed up)?
>
> Regards
>
Of course, your main point is an excellent one. _Imagine_ what racial
conflicts can explode into, when mere _cultural_ conflicts are so bad.
Indeed!
All the more reason to favor the monoracial paradigm over the multiracial
one.
All the more reason to favor independence and self-government for each
people that _considers itself to be a people_.
All the more reason to draw the borders so that one race, one people, one
culture within each state is the rule rather than the exception.
Only thus can we eliminate the tragedy of racial conflict, dispossession,
and genocide.
With happy solstice wishes,
--
Kevin Alfred Strom.
mailto:ka_s...@ix.netcom.com
Resources on the Internet (Not all are affiliated with me; I speak only
for myself.):
Patriotic Education --
http://www.natall.com http://www.natvan.com
Exalted European Art --
http://www.telecall.co.uk/~synergy/gframing/cat1.html
An Incomplete Archive of My Usenet Posts, courtesy of the opposition --
http://search.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?people/s/strom.kevin.alfred/1996
Free Speech in Canada --
http://alpha.ftcnet.com/~freedom/
Politically Incorrect --
http://www.idir.net/~fenix/
Amateur Radio Operations on 3950 kHz --
http://www.usaor.net/users/ipm
Library of Yggdrasil --
http://www.88net.net/ygg/
Institute for Historical Review --
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg/
Nationalist Resource Page --
http://www.stormfront.org/
The Zundelsite --
http://www.webcom.com/ezundel/english/
The Incomparable Revilo Oliver --
http://www.natvan.com/FREESP/FREE9511C.HTML
Not A Speck of Cereal.
jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
[] I'd rather have people openly hate me than have people smile and love me
It's amazing how many ethnic groups could make this same claim.
[... remainder snipped and ignored ...]
----
"That's the trouble with you guys who are players. You don't write
anything that you can't play." -- Jerry Goldsmith to Pat Metheny
............................................................
Remove X's from my email address above to reply
chri...@microsoft.com -- Snohomish, WA. -- Studio Ponderous
[These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]
Shea F. Kenny
The following message from jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery), tested
positive for the threadmonella virus:
}Marc H. Pinsonneault (pin...@tinsley.mps.ohio-state.nospam.edu) wrote:
}: No it is not. To enforce your ethnic cleansing you would have to
}: force a lot of people to move against their will. You could at
}: least give us a clue as to what such a drastic solution is based on.
}: Other than bigotry, which certainly looks like your motive.
}
}That's a reasonable demand and to answer I'll simply say that my mention
}of the Confederacy states was not a proposal but a literary device to
}bring in imagery of the Civil War's failure to resolve the issue it was
}meant to resolve. I apologize for being careless in that bit of prose. I
}certainly would not want to see forceable relocations. Since the number of
}people of all heritages who would want to live in the genetic separatist
}territory would be so small (about 1 in 100 people) forced relocation of
}others would be unnecessary as well as unethical.
}
}There are plenty of territories that are so sparsely populated as to make
}simple property purchase by attricion with appropriate covenants a viable
}option to even eminent domain (let alone force). US (or whatever) law could
}apply to all such unpurchased properties.
}
}oceans that could be guaranteed free of molestation by specious claims of
}sovereignty by existing nations. Most of the ocean is virtually lifeless
}desert that might be cultivated as a replacement for land-based
}agriculture. Yes, this would present profound hardship, but would it
}really be any worse than the 1 in 4 odds of dying within the first year
}that the earliest New World settlers faced?
}
}
}With these clarifications I stand by my claim that the issue is the right
}to self determination rather than the validity of beliefs about genes and
}social organiztion.
}
}PS: You are welcome to call me bigot or anything else that you like.
}You are not welcome to tell me and others like me how to live our lives.
I can't believe that life for you has become so unbearable
that you find the need to go off to some undeveloped wilderness and
start civilization all over again. In particular, safe from the
hazards of associating with minorities.
It's clear something is driving you to neurotic thinking, so
what is it? What are these awful people doing to you or what have
they done to you, to make your life so unbearable?
I think the truth is, you are having some sort of difficulty
making a success out of your life and attribute this failure to
others. It's called scapegoating.
People don't see you as someone with a whole lot of skills, ie
positive attributes, and thus you don't extract from society what you
think you deserve. So, you look for negative influences, which you
then claim are causing your failure. That is called, making excuses.
Successs isn't really all that difficult, if you use the
correct principles. People having difficulty, are routinely found to
be using the wrong ideas. Fostering the wrong beliefs, or persuing
things for the wrong reasons.
What's interesting and positive proof of your neurosis, is
that you claim life in America is too difficult and you have to start
your own country. Which is a difficult task at best, and you begin by
complaining about not being able to deal with difficulty. Next you
propose to hash it out in harsh environmental conditions, with little
chance of survival, and can't even deal with social conditions, ie
cultural environments, which are largely perceptual and have little to
do with permanent reality, due to the fact you can simply choose not
to pay attention.
The reality is that skin color has absolutely nothing to do
with culture, or how a person views and persues life. It often does,
but that is a relative influence, stemming from others. It is a
learned behavior. It's relative to the value one puts to the problem.
However, if you'd deal with people on an individual basis, ie
the basis upon which this country was founded, you might find people
easier to deal with and simply feel better about them. It's a step
into the right direction. Heading off into the wilderness, is a step
in the wrong direction. Withdrawal, and descent into, psy-chosis.
Wake up, get a grip, and just try to be nice to someone for
once.
$hea F. Kenny (Graveyard chairman, Big Bucks rights committee)
Phd, $quiggly line theory
This has been, Lunar Network News
$ponsored by, A grant from The Moonbear Lunar Development Corp
Jenner
: As evident on this thread, each racial group prides itself on believing it
: will attain the highest standard of living when the races are finally
: separated into different geographic zones. This is important, and a sign
: that racial identity is growing more and more important in everyday life
: throughout the world. The friction between the races will grow ever more
: heated unless action is taken to do what everyone secretly wants
: anyway--SEPARATE THE RACES NOW.
:
: What is the reason why white murder victims are killed 30% of the time by
: negroes, while only 1.5% of negroes are killed by whites?
Actually, I'm of the informed opinion that our society would be much
better off without you and your ilk.
You are free to jump off a slow boat and populate the bottom of the
ocean.
: We must export our negro problem to Africa where they will not have to live
: off the scraps from the white man's table.
Racism, any racism, from anyone, is the problem -- not race.
Paal-Eirik Filssunu
Marc H. Pinsonneault wrote:
Anyone who believes in racial separation is by definition a bigot.
> So I think the word is apt.
> And you can live your life as you like it, as long as you don't
> infringe on the liberties of others in the process. That's democracy
> for you.
(I thought living one's life as one likes it without infringing on the
liberty of others was either (1) Freedom, (2) Separatism or (3) Solitude)
Democracy on the other hand is quite crowded....
It requires more than three people to function properly....
from **Robert's Rules of Mayhem**
[just a technical point there, otherwise you're doing well...]
>
> Marc Pinsonneault
>
> > --
> > The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> > The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> > Change the tools and you change the rules.
>
Jim Bowery
: like-minded individuals. MOVE and the Aryan Nation have done exactly
: that. I think that the number of interested people is in the
: hundreds, not the millions. But whatever.
Your perception of the state interventions are very different from a
great many people, not just those who believe in a genetic basis for
social organization.
You can assert these things all you want, but the fact remains that many
people do not percieve themselves as free to live as they choose in the
present society. They feel disenfranchized and oppressed -- many of
these people are folks like my self, but we are the minority of such people.
Now, is it up to YOU to decide for THEM whether they are allowed to free
themselves of what they percieve to be an oppressive regime?
This is the central question of self-determination and it is independent
of the question of whether or how genes matter.
If you address it, you will be speaking to the point rather than avoiding it.
Jim Bowery
Andrew Hall didn't do his homework:
Andrew Hall (ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu) wrote:
: >>>>> Jim Bowery writes:
: Jim> Andrew Hall (ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu) wrote:
: >> (cybe...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: >> >> jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
: >> >> > SO LET MY PEOPLE GO
: >> >> You won't get away that easy...you devils must become completely extinct.
: Jim> I appreciate your self-knowledge and honesty.
: >> Don't look now, but he is mocking you. As do
: >> decent, sane people.
: Jim> Wrong, Mr. Hall. I'm deadly serious in my statement to him. I do NOT
: Jim> appreciate your LACK of self-knowledge and honesty.
: Sorry if my meaning was unclear to you, but what I meant
: is that you, Jim Bowery, are being mocked. As is appropriate.
The first message that came up in a dejanews author profile of this man
(but there is plenty of evidence that his statement made to me is a
part of his consistently stated position -- go find a message that
supports your hypothesis):
Subject: Re: "C" molested while young
From: cybe...@hotmail.com (C)
Date: 1997/06/12
Message-Id: <cybersol1-ya023080...@news.csu.net>
Newsgroups: alt.flame.niggers
[More Headers]
In article <8654003...@dejanews.com>, Standi...@msn.com wrote:
> In article <8652117...@dejanews.com>,
> westsid...@msn.com wrote:
> >
> > Why does Cybersol1 go on so compulsively and repetitively about White
> > pedophiles? I guess a White guy played with his little thing when he was
> > young and he panicked when he realized he liked it. Surprised I got it
> > right "C"?
Not surprised...that you are as wrong as you usually are...you know how you
*said* you feel around Asian men...that's the way I feel around effeminate
white fags like yourself...if I wanted to I'd crush your throat with one
hand and take your wife.
> I believe there is a simpler explanation to Cybersoll's hate. You are
> correct that he is showing a pathological hate of whites.
I am showing a logical reaction to white hatred as you display here...the
reaction is compound in light of my education-I have learned that white
murder, rape, and general cruelty is not sporadic but is probably genetic.
>He says whites are born pedophiles. He talks in sexually explicit terms
about >violating White women and debasing White men.
I don't need to do any of this...sometimes I feel like the one being
exploited by white women's lust (men for that matter...spending hours and
millions of dollars to watch our beauty). White "men" debase themselves by
their behavior.
>He has apparently called DejaNews and had two posts where you answered in
kind >removed.
I wouldn't waste my fucking time!
>He can dish it out but he can't take it. But now to the simple
explanation. >Cybersol writes like an educated White. He has been raised
among Whites and >gone to school with them. And he is interested in race
issues. This all adds
> up to this-he understands that "The Bell Curve" is accurate.
Nice troll. How many hours did you spend going thru my refuge?
>He also understands that Rushton is correct and Blacks are less evolved.
And >he probably understands that pure Blacks in Zaire score 60 on
non-verbal IQ
> tests, Chimps score 30, and Whites score l00. Ergo, there is a good case
> for arguing that Blacks are closer to animals than to humans. I am not
> joking about this. And this is a hard burden for him and all Blacks to
> bear. Modern science is showing that they are an inferior and
> animalistic race. Standingjump.
You think you insults mean anything to this generation of African
Americans? I mean really, we look at dumb low level crackers like
yourselves and laugh. I playing with you boys...read you is like time
travel to the past.
--
"The events which transpired five thousand years ago; Five years ago or
five minutes ago, have determined what will happen five minutes from now;
five years from now or five thousand years from now. All history is a
current event"-John Henrik Clarke
Celebrate African History.
Jim Kalb
Please do not crosspost this stuff to alt.revolution.counter.
It should be easy to remove a.r.c. from the "Newsgroups" line with most
news software since it's at the end.
Thank you.
--
Jim Kalb (j...@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
Palindrome of the week: Egad, a base life defiles a bad age.
Jim Bowery
Bloit Outcherass ("GeataLifeLoser"@please!.com) wrote:
: In my humble opinion,...
: You are both clearly both paranoid and delusional. It is obvious to any
: reasonable person that you are seriously mentally ill. What's next? Will
: you throw in a Christ complex for our entertainment?
: Get real or get help -- get help in any case.
That's right... a profession that, without the support of double blind,
or even single blind control studies, that puts people in prison with
their "expert testimony" in courts, that receives health insurance
payouts, that accepts >$100/hour from "patients", that was founded by and
largely dominated by Jews, should receive large sums of money from me to
tell me how to view the world.
Sort of like academia, media and JudeoChristianity -- eh what?
LET MY PEOPLE GO
Jim Bowery
I think I see one of the fundamental issues coming to light here.
People are claiming that people like myself:
1) are perfectly free to go and set up our own society without
interference so long as we don't attack others.
and
2) are paranoid, delusional and incipient, if not actual, Nazis.
It's quite clear to me that 1 and 2 are inconsistent since there have
not only already been physical attacks on people who had
committed only victimless crimes (Ruby Ridge and Waco) but also
since international "policing actions" based on demonization of local
ideology have already taken place, as is the case with Israel's
preemptive strikes against nuclear facilities in the Arab countries.
How is it possible to calm the fears of Jews without subjecting one's
self to their presence in one's body politic?
This is not an idle question since Jews have made it clear through all
means possible that they perceive any such move toward independence from
them as one step away from another holocaust.
Jim Bowery
: Jim> Jenner (**jenn...@mail.idt.net**) wrote:
: >> The only thing holding you and your ilk hostage are your own fears.
: Jim> You forgot a few tens of thousands of nuclear warheads, biological
: Jim> weapons, chemical weapons and a propaganda machine that Goebels would
: Jim> have envied.
: I think you have just made Jenner's point very well.
Ruby Ridge and Waco are two of the more widely publicized examples that
you and Jenner belong in the society you have constructed -- and I don't.
Jim Bowery
Andrew Hall (ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu) wrote:
: Do you actually imagine that there are 2,600,000 Americans
: that share your twisted, unscientific ideas?
: Amazing.
This at the same time that someone else is saying that people with my
views are losing power over society. You Politically Correct folks
really should get your act together.
Jim Bowery
: somewhere that isn't claimed.
As I said, the claims of sovereignty are both explicit and de facto -- not
even the open ocean is exempt from naval piracy in the guise of the war
on drugs and terrorism.
I am addressing my demand for self-determination to Jews because it is
the Jews who so fear such independence that they claim any tribal
identity but their own results in genocide.
Aaron Agassi
evidency of degenneracy in monoculture. "Racial Purity" is just another
term for massive inbreeding. All that acruues are double recessive
gennetics, cultural stagnation, petty organized crime, poverty, drug
abuse including alchololism, acting out, judgemental bickering,
resignation, Agoraphobia, and dispair.
Jim Kalb
Would you do us a favor and if you continue this discussion drop
alt.revolution.counter from the end? I don't know why Bowery added it.
HEXX
**STOP THE THREAD I WANT TO GET OFF!!**
Sanat Kumara <ab...@cyberpromo.com> wrote in article
<339F0F...@cyberpromo.com>...
>My Son:
ERRR....
>Your concerns belie your true nature. Humans are luminous beings. Humans
>are a curious combination of spirit, mind and matter. At the center lies
>the mind. Some of us, like you do, find ourselves only concerned with
>the matter aspect: the form, or physical side of life.
YOU WOT??LUMINOUS??
>You have become attached to the appearances of people, to the qualities
>of the world around you based on the form. Your mind believes that human
>beings behave a certain way or are not like you because of their
>form--their appearance.
AS FOR DANIEL....
Daniel B. Holzman <hol...@xochi.tezcat.com> wrote in article
<5nmvgf$d...@xochi.tezcat.com>...
> In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
>
> --
> Daniel B. Holzman -- Love does not subtract, it multiplies. -- All acts
of love
> and pleasure are Her rituals. -- An it Harm none, do what you Will. --
They
> took my name and stole my heritage, but they didn't get my goat. -- The
> word is all of us. -- Remember the Twelth Commandment and keep it Wholly.
>
DRUG TAKING AND POSTING TO NEWSGROUPS IS NOT ADVISABLE.....
"H"
LONDON MASSIVE.
Jim Bowery
Shea F. Kenny ([Moonbear]@prostar.com) wrote:
: I can't believe that life for you has become so unbearable
: that you find the need to go off to some undeveloped wilderness and
: start civilization all over again. In particular, safe from the
: hazards of associating with minorities.
Wait a second, why do you think I titled the thread "multiethnic" separatism?
Reread the base message for a clue. I spoke of associating with people like
the Black Muslims and ancestralist Native Americans as preferable to
association with a white majority society which does not share our views
on the importance of hereditary social organization.
Jim Bowery
: It's amazing how many ethnic groups could make this same claim.
That's why I titled the thread "Multiethnic" separatism...
In my general proposal, I included all ethnic groups in the hypothetical
separatist territory, except Jews who already have Israel (and perhaps I
should reconsider that due to the fact that there are gene-oriented Jews
who do not accept the fact that Israel is a "Jewish" state -- and the fact
that many orthodox Jews are having qualms about the recent problems with
Nazi-like behavior of other orthodox in Israel). There is no paradox
here. The idea of genetic social structure is shared by people across
genetic groups. Naturally, these people will, when forced by the majority
to accept laws counter to their most cherished beliefs, become quite
hostile as will any persecuted minority.
Jim Bowery
Aaron Agassi (aga...@erols.com) wrote:
: There is every evidence of prosparity in cultural diversity, and every
: evidency of degenneracy in monoculture. "Racial Purity" is just another
: term for massive inbreeding. All that acruues are double recessive
: gennetics, cultural stagnation, petty organized crime, poverty, drug
: abuse including alchololism, acting out, judgemental bickering,
: resignation, Agoraphobia, and dispair.
Are those who disagree with your view of history and science obligated to
convert you before you will admit they have a right to self-determination?
Jim Bowery
Scoop (no-...@sonic.net) wrote:
: Quoth Jim Bowery:
: : Haim Guivon (gui...@netvision.net.il) wrote:
: : : "What connection is there between a given set of genes
: : : (genotype) *of an ethnic group* and a given set of behaviours?"
: :
: : : And the answer, my son, is written in the sun:
: :
: : Why does the final scene in the movie "Conan the Barbarian" present
: : itself to my mind's eye when this man calls me his "son"?
: Because you live in such a fantasy world that you can't answer a straight
: question no matter how often it's asked?
Bad guess. For gigabytes of prose on this issue, go to your local
library, altavista, dejanews and other sources. I have no interest in
discussing this issue in this thread yet again -- the time for talk is
gone.
All that is left is the divorce proceeding. I _do_ have an interest in
talking about how we can proceed to separate without Jews thinking they
have to destroy us as soon as we become successful.
Daniel B. Holzman
In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Daniel B. Holzman (hol...@xochi.tezcat.com) wrote:
>: I'm sure that if you really wanted to leave, you could find an island
>: somewhere that isn't claimed.
>
>As I said, the claims of sovereignty are both explicit and de facto -- not
>even the open ocean is exempt from naval piracy in the guise of the war
>on drugs and terrorism.
>
>I am addressing my demand for self-determination to Jews because it is
>the Jews who so fear such independence that they claim any tribal
>identity but their own results in genocide.
Somehow, I've managed not to hear this claim.
The fact remains that you are not held, and can leave at your leisure.
From the moment of your majority, you have self-determined to remain
where you are.
bankcot
Marc H. Pinsonneault
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> Marc H. Pinsonneault (pin...@tinsley.mps.ohio-state.nospam.edu) wrote:
> : You are free to buy land wherever you want and set up a community of
> : like-minded individuals. MOVE and the Aryan Nation have done exactly
> : that. I think that the number of interested people is in the
> : hundreds, not the millions. But whatever.
>
> Your perception of the state interventions are very different from a
> great many people, not just those who believe in a genetic basis for
> social organization.
>
> You can assert these things all you want, but the fact remains that many
> people do not percieve themselves as free to live as they choose in the
> present society. They feel disenfranchized and oppressed -- many of
> these people are folks like my self, but we are the minority of such people.
Disenfrachized because of what?
Because minorities live near them?
Because they cannot legally discriminate against minorities?
If your specific legal request is to eject minorities from some land
so that you can create a whites-only preserve, then that is a basic
violation of civil rights. Period. Think about the Golden Rule for
a moment.
>
> Now, is it up to YOU to decide for THEM whether they are allowed to free
> themselves of what they percieve to be an oppressive regime?
We have legal means of changing the system. You are free to propose
repealing the 14th amendment, passing amendments which ban
"race-mixing", or whatever else you want. There is no chance that
you will succeed, but you can try.
Again, I'm curious about what exactly is so oppressive. Since you
brought up separate racial homelands, is it living near minorities?
>
> This is the central question of self-determination and it is independent
> of the question of whether or how genes matter.
Your right to self-determination does not allow you to eject people
from their land because you don't like the color of their skin.
Marc Pinsonneault
>
> If you address it, you will be speaking to the point rather than avoiding it.
>
> --
> The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
--
bankcot
Jim Bowery
: Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
: >As I said, the claims of sovereignty are both explicit and de facto -- not
: >on drugs and terrorism.
: >
: >I am addressing my demand for self-determination to Jews because it is
: >the Jews who so fear such independence that they claim any tribal
: >identity but their own results in genocide.
: Somehow, I've managed not to hear this claim.
: The fact remains that you are not held, and can leave at your leisure.
: From the moment of your majority, you have self-determined to remain
: where you are.
Of course, and you can choose to leave a room when a man has a gun
pointed at you saying he'll shoot you if you leave -- a man with a
demonstrated history of having done so in the past.
It's all a matter of how one define's "freedom".
Not A Speck of Cereal.
jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
[] Reread the base message for a clue. I spoke of associating with people like
[] the Black Muslims and ancestralist Native Americans as preferable to
[] association with a white majority society which does not share our views
[] on the importance of hereditary social organization.
And what if the Black Muslims and Native Americans prefer to
associate themselves with the white majority society rather
than your white supremacy minority?
Daniel B. Holzman
In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
>: The fact remains that you are not held, and can leave at your leisure.
>: From the moment of your majority, you have self-determined to remain
>: where you are.
>
>Of course, and you can choose to leave a room when a man has a gun
>pointed at you saying he'll shoot you if you leave -- a man with a
>demonstrated history of having done so in the past.
>
>It's all a matter of how one define's "freedom".
People leave the United States on a daily basis. An hourly basis.
The Airlines make much money on this fact.
You've a right of free travel. It's your right to get on your boat, fuel
it up, and go off into the pacific or atlantic, as you choose. You can
do it right this very instant, in fact.
Just who's been shot for leaving the U.S.?
trio...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Jim Bowery wrote:
> Scoop (no-...@sonic.net) wrote:
> : Quoth Jim Bowery:
> : : Haim Guivon (gui...@netvision.net.il) wrote:
> : : : "What connection is there between a given set of genes
> : : : (genotype) *of an ethnic group* and a given set of behaviours?"
> : :
> : : : And the answer, my son, is written in the sun:
> : :
> : : Why does the final scene in the movie "Conan the Barbarian" present
> : : itself to my mind's eye when this man calls me his "son"?
>
> : Because you live in such a fantasy world that you can't answer a straight
> : question no matter how often it's asked?
>
> Bad guess. For gigabytes of prose on this issue, go to your local
> library, altavista, dejanews and other sources. I have no interest in
> discussing this issue in this thread yet again -- the time for talk is
> gone.
Translation: "I spread this shit too thick even for me!"
> All that is left is the divorce proceeding. I _do_ have an interest in
> talking about how we can proceed to separate without Jews thinking they
> have to destroy us as soon as we become successful.
fine dont let the door hit your ass on the way out, the
jews get the car, the house and the kids. you want to
seperate FINE go back to europe, I would rather live in
a land where we can try to lern from eachothers differences.
*******************************************************************
* Timothy N. Riordan _________ *
* Consultant Capen CIT SUNY@Buffalo |___ ___|\*
* Programmer OmegaTech Software \__| |\__\|*
* http://www.servtech.com/public/brasser/OmegaTech/ | || *
* Personal Homepage: www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~triordan | || *
* My opinions in no way represent either of my employers |_|| *
* \_\| *
*******************************************************************
Shea F. Kenny
The following message from jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery), tested
positive for the threadmonella virus:
}Shea F. Kenny ([Moonbear]@prostar.com) wrote:
}: I can't believe that life for you has become so unbearable
}: that you find the need to go off to some undeveloped wilderness and
}: start civilization all over again. In particular, safe from the
}: hazards of associating with minorities.
}
}Wait a second, why do you think I titled the thread "multiethnic" separatism?
}
}the Black Muslims and ancestralist Native Americans as preferable to
}association with a white majority society which does not share our views
}on the importance of hereditary social organization.
Well, ok. Still, you are only pretending it's the fault of
the current system that you can't get what you think you deserve from
it. There's no one preventing your hereditary social organizations,
by law at any rate. It's only culturally un-popular by most. The
thing is, it's only your attitude that's giving you problems. If you
spent as much time solving the problems that are really affecting you,
this stuff your spewing wouldn't even matter. So the question again
is, what's the real problem? What aren't you getting?
$hea F. Kenny (Graveyard chairman, Big Bucks rights committee)
Phd, $quiggly line theory
This has been, Lunar Network News
$ponsored by, A grant from The Moonbear Lunar Development Corp
Alan Miles
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> there are no sovereignties that have a constitutional guarantee of
> genetic identity as the locus of sovereignty except for the limited case of Israel.
Wrong.
Israeli citizens are Jews and Arabs. Many of the Jews are converts to
the religion. No genetics here.
I'm unaware of any nation that requires a genetic test for citizenship.
Germany, with its requirement of "German blood," comes close, but still
doesn't.
Alan Miles
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> People are claiming that people like myself:
>
> 1) are perfectly free to go and set up our own society without
> interference so long as we don't attack others.
No, you are free to work with the political process that a democratic
society has enacted or to live in isolation. "Living with the process"
includes, BTW, fighting to change the process. It doesn't include
forcing your views on the rest of us because you're self-righteous.
>
> people who had
> committed only victimless crimes (Ruby Ridge and Waco)
It's possible to think RR and Waco were mistakes but also to get woried
about the people in question amassing massive arms (Waco) or shooting at
neighbors and at police (Ruby Ridge).
> but also
> since international "policing actions" based on demonization of local
> ideology have already taken place, as is the case with Israel's
> preemptive strikes against nuclear facilities in the Arab countries.
How about the US's attack on Libya? Or Grenada? Or Argentina's
occupation of the Falklands? Or Iraq's invation of Kuwait? Or
Morocco's occupation of the Western Sahara? Or Indonesia's seizure of
East Timor?
Israel bombed a nuclear facility in Iraq, a nation that maintains a
state of war against Israel despite Israel's obvious willingness to make
peace (as witnessed by it's peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan).
You are obsessed with Israel's actions.
>
> How is it possible to calm the fears of Jews without subjecting one's
> self to their presence in one's body politic?
What?
>
> This is not an idle question since Jews have made it clear through all
> means possible that they perceive any such move toward independence from
> them as one step away from another holocaust.
Can soneone explain this statement to the rest of us?
Alan Miles
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> Bloit Outcherass ("GeataLifeLoser"@please!.com) wrote:
> : Get real or get help -- get help in any case.
>
> That's right... a profession that, without the support of double blind,
> or even single blind control studies, that puts people in prison with
> their "expert testimony" in courts, that receives health insurance
> payouts, that accepts >$100/hour from "patients", that was founded by and
> largely dominated by Jews
I can't resist pointing out that "Outcherass" said that Bowery should
get help.
Bowery rabidly leaped on the idea, I'm assuming, that this meant
psychiatry, and used the idea to further his antisemitism.
There was no suggestion of psychiatry here, only of help. "Help" can
come through family, friends, or clergy, after all.
Trish Simmons
Aaron Agassi wrote:
> There is every evidence of prosparity in cultural diversity, and every
> evidency of degenneracy in monoculture. "Racial Purity" is just another
> term for massive inbreeding. All that acruues are double recessive
> gennetics, cultural stagnation, petty organized crime, poverty, drug
> abuse including alchololism, acting out, judgemental bickering,
> resignation, Agoraphobia, and dispair.
I hope all in alt.native take special note of this...
For to many, not only does this ugly shoe fit, many remain proud to wear
it.
Paal-Eirik Filssunu
Alan Miles wrote:
>
> Jim Bowery wrote:
> >
> > This is not an idle question since Jews have made it clear through all
> > means possible that they perceive any such move toward independence from
> > them as one step away from another holocaust.
>
Alan:
The non-Heathen world [Jews, Christians, Moslems- the Big Three]
control the civil religious ideals of Europe, the Americas, the Near
East, and other lands.
In a nutshell, as has been posted by others on the topic of non-Jewish/
Christian/Moslem 'Power', the examples of the 'Big Three' dreading and
acting separately, or in concert, against religious and social
institutions different from their own is already theoretically known..
It all comes down to IF's...
On a nationalist scale (for starters), Canadians of English-language
culture in their hearts oppose an independent French-language Quebec.
They abhor the thought (within) of their familiar geography and
political structure being sundered by a gaping 'hole' called Quebec..
On a religious and cultural scale, Christianity in Europe and the World
as well as Judaism and Islam abhor any rivals who may tear their familiar
geo-political/religious world to pieces, or leave 'anomalies' which may
further challenge their 'comfy' perceptions of religious and social
empire.
In the Pacific, for example, the former Catholic Portuguese territory of
East Timor is being bombed and shot out of existence by a militant and
hostile Islamic Indonesia.
In Israel and the Occupied Territories, strange politics (Oslo Accord)
and ingrained Israeli-Arab hostility are shaking any reasonable attempts
at forming Palestinian Arab autonomy. It is much easier for Judaism and
Islam to clash rather than resolve intellectually the problems between
both major groups in that area...sad but true for all.
In Bosnia, Orthodox Christian Serbs will not tolerate an Islamic state in
the Balkans and have acted 'accordingly' to eliminate it and its people
thru outright warfare...
IF in northern Europe, and of the Nordic Council countries- Iceland,
Denmark, Sweden, Norway , decided one day to actually re-instate their
ancient heathen religion as a 'state religion', they would incur the
wrath of the 'Christian Democratic' European strata in Holland, Germany,
Italy , Spain and elsewhere simply because Europe's political structure
has gravitated around the Church for so long...
Ideas, values, customs, and precepts alien to Judeo-Christianity and
Islam are more ancient ways not seen as 'friendly' by the 'Big Three'.
I can only think of the extended ideologies of Judeo/Christian-Humanism
as being a roadblock to any and all reinstatements of 'non-Big Three'
religious beliefs and practices.
Judaism , Christianity, and Islam practice real, pragmatic politics
within the larger fluid market systems of the globe.
They would hate at any time to have to relinquish that economic,
ecumenical, and civil force of idealism by which many people are guided
today...
The heathen has no advantage except as a marginalized 'fringe'...
There is as of yet no tangible proof that heathen/'otherly' traditions
outside of Hindu India have any way of deflecting and overcoming
the 'Big Three's foundations of practical power in the world's countries.
Alan Miles
Paal-Eirik Filssunu wrote:
>
> Alan Miles wrote:
> >
> > Jim Bowery wrote:
> > >
> > > This is not an idle question since Jews have made it clear through all
> > > means possible that they perceive any such move toward independence from
> > > them as one step away from another holocaust.
> >
> > (Alan's Question):Can soneone explain this statement to the rest of us?
While your post is interesting, it doesn't explain the paragraph above,
which frankly is senseless.
Alan Miles
Daniel B. Holzman wrote:
>
> In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
> Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >: The fact remains that you are not held, and can leave at your leisure.
> >: From the moment of your majority, you have self-determined to remain
> >: where you are.
> >
> >Of course, and you can choose to leave a room when a man has a gun
> >pointed at you saying he'll shoot you if you leave -- a man with a
> >demonstrated history of having done so in the past.
> >
> >It's all a matter of how one define's "freedom".
>
> People leave the United States on a daily basis. An hourly basis.
> The Airlines make much money on this fact.
>
> You've a right of free travel.
This is ridiculous. Passports and visas exist for a reason and that
reason is to restrict travel. Most countries have Passport controls at
their exit points and regularly detain people.
While a noble goal, there is no such thing as free travel in the world
today.
> Just who's been shot for leaving the U.S.?
If you mean "who's been prevented from leaving the US?" then obviously
many people are detained at the border or are turned back at third-party
countries. FYI, US citizens can be arrested for travelling to, say,
Cuba. Free travel?
Paal-Eirik Filssunu
Alan:
Think about it...
An educated mind is a terrible thing to waste :)))
Best Wishes!
Paal-Eirik
Roger R. Bennett
jabo...@netcom.com (Jim Bowery) wrote:
>Daniel B. Holzman (hol...@xochi.tezcat.com) wrote:
>: In article <jaboweryE...@netcom.com>,
>: Jim Bowery <jabo...@netcom.com> wrote:
>: >As I said, the claims of sovereignty are both explicit and de facto -- not
>: >even the open ocean is exempt from naval piracy in the guise of the war
>: >on drugs and terrorism.
>: >
>: >I am addressing my demand for self-determination to Jews because it is
>: >the Jews who so fear such independence that they claim any tribal
>: >identity but their own results in genocide.
>: Somehow, I've managed not to hear this claim.
>: The fact remains that you are not held, and can leave at your leisure.
>: From the moment of your majority, you have self-determined to remain
>: where you are.
>Of course, and you can choose to leave a room when a man has a gun
>pointed at you saying he'll shoot you if you leave -- a man with a
>demonstrated history of having done so in the past.
>It's all a matter of how one define's "freedom".
Forgive me, Mr. Bowery, but I must interject here.
I've been following this thread for the past several days, and while
I'm not in total disagreement with respect to your ideals of
self-determination for all peoples, I fail to see where you have
proven that anyone "has a gun pointed at you."
I'm sorry, but I can't quite buy into the theory that we are
separated genetically, as the opposing side has, in my opinion,
disproven your arguement most eloquently.
Your analogy of the man with a gun confuses me. Who is this man,
why does he have a gun popinted at you, and where is the "demonstrated
history" you refer to?
Do your arguements have anything more serious than your rhetoric to
defend their merits? You have failed to provide facts and figures
here. I see nothing that convinces me in the slightest that there is
even a shred of validity to your claims.
What is not lacking, however, is your endless tirade of disjointed
thoughts, arguing endlessly on. While I have no doubt that you
sincerely believe in your ideals, I really must point out that you
lack credibility, mainly due to lame, unsupported claims with no
evidence to back them up. And then, of course, there's the "man with
a gun" analogy, which was the final straw which leads me to believe
that you are now arguing for the sole purpose of arguement.
We REALLY MUST get past the concept that one people is genetically
superior to any other people, or culturally, or economically. Until
we can put the sad shadow of racism behind us, ALL OF US, we shall
never be at peace.
And LET YOUR PEOPLE GO? The only one holding them prisoner is their
own misguided selves. They are shackled by their own fears, entwined
within the chains of misunderstanding, and secured by the Lock of
Mistrust. The keys that will set them free are trust, diligence, and
faith: They must trust in their own abilities, apply diligence and
hard work to learning and self-improvement, and have faith in
themselves and their ability to rise above their situations.
>--
>The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
> The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
> Change the tools and you change the rules.
This may be catchy, but it really makes no sense.
R.R. Bennett
Bel Air, MD
Keep your Damn Spam and Scams:
Commercial E-Mailers are NOT WELCOME!!
Jim Bowery
Alan Miles (ami...@interport.net) wrote:
: Jim Bowery wrote:
: >
: > there are no sovereignties that have a constitutional guarantee of
: > genetic identity as the locus of sovereignty except for the limited case of Israel.
: Wrong.
: Israeli citizens are Jews and Arabs. Many of the Jews are converts to
: the religion. No genetics here.
The law of return _does_ make reference to blood ancestry.
I said "limited" case of Israel -- that means it is not exclusively
blood-based but it does make reference to blood. Furthermore, the Union
of Orthodox Rabbis has made further steps in that direction and the
Orthodox, more than secular, Conservative or Reformed Jews influence
Israeli moral tone and policy.
: I'm unaware of any nation that requires a genetic test for citizenship.
: Germany, with its requirement of "German blood," comes close, but still
: doesn't.
Oh, those bad nasty evil Nazis again, eh? I was unaware that they had
any such "requirement" but I'd expect it to be on par with Israel's
ancestral provisions.
Jim Bowery
: [] the Black Muslims and ancestralist Native Americans as preferable to
: [] association with a white majority society which does not share our views
: [] on the importance of hereditary social organization.
: And what if the Black Muslims and Native Americans prefer to
: associate themselves with the white majority society rather
: than your white supremacy minority?
First answer me this: How did you translate "separatist" to "supremacy"?
Doesn't supremacy require a single sovereignty in which a particular
group exercises power over others? How can a separate sovereignty be
"supremacist" in anything but rhetoric?
heim...@concentric.net
Alan Miles wrote:
> It's possible to think RR and Waco were mistakes but also to get woried
> about the people in question amassing massive arms (Waco) or shooting at
> neighbors and at police (Ruby Ridge).
>
Hmmm, I would have tremendous difficulty in tying a thread between the
worry and the final actions taken at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Heimdall
Alan Miles
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> The law of return _does_ make reference to blood ancestry.
You are misinformed. The Law of Return offers automatic Israeli
citizenship of people of the Jewish faith. If you'd bother to read a
newspaper, you'd know that there is a huge controversy today over
whether Jewish Converts in the Reform and Conservative branches of the
faith should be considered "Jews" under the Law of Return. Even
Orthodox Israeli Jews accept conversions of people of any ethnicity for
the purpose of the Law of Return. In other words, anyone who converts
to Judaism, regardless of ancestry, is a Jew for the purpose of Israeli
citizenship. I don't know why this is so hard for you to grasp.
>
> : I'm unaware of any nation that requires a genetic test for citizenship.
> : Germany, with its requirement of "German blood," comes close, but still
> : doesn't.
>
> Oh, those bad nasty evil Nazis again, eh? I was unaware that they had
> any such "requirement" but I'd expect it to be on par with Israel's
> ancestral provisions.
I had no motive to evoke Nazism. Still, German law requires a blood tie
to the German people as a prerequisite for citizenship. This is why
Russians of German descent - who speak no German and have no cultural
tie to Germany, can become citizens overnight while Turks who were born
in Germany and who have spent their entire lives there, cannot become
citizens.
The example is notorious.
Bertil Jonell
In article <33A491...@interport.net>,
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote:
>I had no motive to evoke Nazism. Still, German law requires a blood tie
>to the German people as a prerequisite for citizenship. This is why
>Russians of German descent - who speak no German and have no cultural
>tie to Germany, can become citizens overnight while Turks who were born
>in Germany and who have spent their entire lives there, cannot become
>citizens.
It is *slightly* more complicated than that. "German blood" means
automatic citizenship, but it is possible to immigrate and become a
citizen without it.
What the germans have done is to institute a special cathegory called
'guest-workers', and those who come to germany as 'guest workers' can't
become citizens, no matter how long they've been in Germany, and neither
can their children.
*Theoretically* they could give up their 'guest worker' status and leave
germany and apply to immigrate as 'normal' immigrants, but in practice
they know that the germans wouldn't let them in again (neither as 'guest
workers' nor immigrants) if they did so.
>The example is notorious.
-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."
Rad
Real Name wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Why are you criticizing Tim Mcveigh?
>
> Your race should know better than anyone, what happens to everyone who
> comes to the attention of the government.
>
> Ken.
> [...]
> Rosie
You lose your chance to blow up people?
Rad
Teinwyn Arvel at Stead of Somewhere Else
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> All that is left is the divorce proceeding. I _do_ have an interest in
> talking about how we can proceed to separate without Jews thinking they
> have to destroy us as soon as we become successful.
>
Where on earth did you ever get the idea that Jews
A) think this; or B) have the power in this white,
middle class, protestant nation to do it even if
they *did* conceivably want to?
You say you're an "equal oportunity separatist,"
and you just want yourself and other separatists
to have a chance to practice what you believe, but
when you blame all this on "the Jews" you sound
like just another supremacist. Likewise when you
call the other separatist groups "mud peoples",
as you did in a previous post.
Which are you? Separatist, or supremacist in
separatists' clothing?
Teinwyn
T. Marie
This guy is a certifiable nut-case. I myself long ago once suffered from
paranoid delusions. They are impervious to logic! You might try an
emotional argument. But you will not get through until this guy allows
himself to become aware that there is something wrong with his thinking
processes and tries waking up from his disordered fancies. Neo-Nazi
Draugr-thinking such as Jewish "conspiracies" and "extermination" of the
"mud-men" has little to do with reason and a lot with giving your mind and
soul to chaos-fiends as their lawful prey. Many of our most basic crops
are threatened because we have allowed what were once thousands of
varieties to be reduced to less than a dozen. The human race would be in
an equally vulnerable position if it were restricted to just one variety.
Our enormous genetic diversity is one of our greatest strengths. It allows
us to live damn near anywhere and makes it impossible for any disease to
wipe us out. The whole "extermination of inferior races" thing like in the
"Turner Diaries" is as fundamentally demented as a scheme to exterminate
all flowers except white flowers. You really cannot reason with such
creatures, the best you can do is try to make them aware of their
condition. Eugene Smith
Jim Bowery
T. Marie (tma...@azaccess.com) wrote:
: This guy is a certifiable nut-case. I myself long ago once suffered from
: paranoid delusions. They are impervious to logic! You might try an
: emotional argument. But you will not get through until this guy allows
: himself to become aware that there is something wrong with his thinking
: processes and tries waking up from his disordered fancies. Neo-Nazi
: Draugr-thinking such as Jewish "conspiracies"
Not once have I mentioned anything about "conspiracies" so the
person who is impervious to logic and reality is the person who
refuses to read what I wrote about good intentions, love and
the real politicks of ethnic bias and instead projects fantisies
about "conspiracy theories" because it fits their world view
better.
: and "extermination" of the
: "mud-men" has little to do with reason and a lot with giving your mind and
: soul to chaos-fiends as their lawful prey.
Teinwyn libeled my statement and you picked up on it because it suited
your comforting fantasy.
T. Marie
I would say he is perhaps overdoing it. Everyone who works with different
breeds of animals is aware that there are well-defined inbred temperments
for each breed. If you study different families of humans, you will find
that different lineages tend to show these inbred temperments as well.
Some people seem haunted by a familial curse that they find very difficult
to overcome. With respect to races, especially on the level of different
folk-groups, these inbred temperments are widely assumed to show up. Here,
though, the effect of culture drowns out the effect of inborn temperment
and becomes dominant. Consider the Scandinavians, once the most aggressive
and warlike of peoples, they are now the most orderly and pacifistic. Is
the warlikeness or the pacifism the result of "inbred temperment"? As for
the question of the Africans and the Europeans, they seem more like each
other in temperment than to other races. Despite great outward differences
in appearance, traditional African cultures have many similarities to
prehistoric European cultures.
Eugene Smith
J. Doe <jd...@generic.net> wrote in article <33AB17...@generic.net>...
> So in other words, you're saying, among other things, that Dr. Leonard
> Jeffries contention that, from birth, black people are sun people (ie.
> warm, sociable, altruistic) and that white people are ice people
> (ie.cold, distant, cynical, distrustful) can't possibly be true?
>
Teinwyn Arvel at Stead of Somewhere Else
Jim Bowery wrote:
>
> T. Marie (tma...@azaccess.com) wrote:
> : This guy is a certifiable nut-case. I myself long ago once suffered from
> : paranoid delusions. They are impervious to logic! You might try an
> : emotional argument. But you will not get through until this guy allows
> : himself to become aware that there is something wrong with his thinking
> : processes and tries waking up from his disordered fancies. Neo-Nazi
> : Draugr-thinking such as Jewish "conspiracies"
>
> Not once have I mentioned anything about "conspiracies" so the
> person who is impervious to logic and reality is the person who
> refuses to read what I wrote about good intentions, love and
> the real politicks of ethnic bias and instead projects fantisies
> about "conspiracy theories" because it fits their world view
> better.
>
A clue for you: statements like the following are
indistinguishable from a "conspiracy theory," even if
you don't use the word "conspiracy" in them (if it
walks like a duck...)
Jim Bowery said:
> Among the more interesting and pernicious bits of hypocrisy of western
> civilization is the idea that:
>
> [snip]
>
> 2) that the grossly disproportionate influence by Jews on religion and
> mass media, usually via government license/scanction, is not an
> outrageous assault on other cultures with whom they supposedly
> "peacefully" coexist.
[back to original post]
> : and "extermination" of the
> : "mud-men" has little to do with reason and a lot with giving your mind and
> : soul to chaos-fiends as their lawful prey.
>
> Teinwyn libeled my statement and you picked up on it because it suited
> your comforting fantasy.
>
I most certainly have not libeled you! I *never* quoted
you as saying anyone should be "exterminated." I DID report
that you've used the term "mud-people" to describe "racial"
separatists with more vigorous melatonin production than
yourself. Which you have.
All *I* did was ask you how you can call yourself
"a separatist, not a supremacist" when you use terms
like that. (A question you never responded to, BTW.)
Before you accuse others of inaccurate quoting and
"libel", kindly please make sure your own hands are
clean.
Teinwyn (At lease he spelled the name right) Arvel
Ted Thompson
What is so totally ridiculous about arguments such as this is that there
are no "pure" races.
Think about it. Exactly what is a "white" race? There are phenotypically
"white looking" people but Black people can, and are part of this group.
Some phenotypically "Black looking" people really fall into the "white"
classification (Sicilians, Arabs, Sephardic Jews, other Meditteranean
groups).
Ted
Jim Bowery
Teinwyn Arvel at Stead of Somewhere Else (re...@compassnet.com) wrote:
: Jim Bowery wrote:
: > Not once have I mentioned anything about "conspiracies" so the
: > person who is impervious to logic and reality is the person who
: > refuses to read what I wrote about good intentions, love and
: > the real politicks of ethnic bias and instead projects fantisies
: > about "conspiracy theories" because it fits their world view
: > better.
: >
: A clue for you: statements like the following are
: indistinguishable from a "conspiracy theory," even if
: you don't use the word "conspiracy" in them (if it
: walks like a duck...)
: Jim Bowery said:
: > Among the more interesting and pernicious bits of hypocrisy of western
: > civilization is the idea that:
: >
: > [snip]
: >
: > 2) that the grossly disproportionate influence by Jews on religion and
: > mass media, usually via government license/scanction, is not an
: > outrageous assault on other cultures with whom they supposedly
: > "peacefully" coexist.
While it is true that this statement doesn't exclude conspiracy theory,
neither does it exclude other possible interpretations of events, such as
ethnic bias.
Taken in combination with my other statements, it is clear I'm talking
about ethnic bias.
: I most certainly have not libeled you!
You engaged in a reckless disregard for the content of my statements in a
way that was damaging to them and therefore to me.
: I DID report
: that you've used the term "mud-people" to describe "racial"
: separatists with more vigorous melatonin production than
: yourself. Which you have.
A perfect example of your reckless disregard for my actual statements.
Aside from the fact that I already answered this libel in another
post, which you _also_ recklessly disregarded, I'll ask you this one
simple question and see if you can answer it:
Taken in the context of the tone and message of my original post, why do
you think I mentioned "white devils" in the same sentence where I used
the phrase "mud peoples"?
Teinwyn Arvel at Stead of Somewhere Else
a small group of people who until very recently
in this country were victims of blatant discrimination
themselves have suddenly gained a "grossly dis-
proportionate influence" and commit "outrageous
assault"... and in another artical I pulled from Deja
News (your answer to a previous post of mine; it did
not show up on my server, so I apologize for saying
you never answered me. I did not "recklessly disregard"
it, honestly; I flat never saw it)
> > To Teinwyn:
> > Jews are the new dominant elite, not protestants.
How does the contention that a small and persecuted group has
suddenly become the dominant elite in a white/anglo saxon/
protestant controlled country *without* it immediately
implying a conspiracy theory? Only the most literal reading
of it would miss that innuendo.
Onward:
> : I most certainly have not libeled you!
>
> You engaged in a reckless disregard for the content of my statements in a
> way that was damaging to them and therefore to me.
>
> : I DID report
> : that you've used the term "mud-people" to describe "racial"
> : separatists with more vigorous melatonin production than
> : yourself. Which you have.
>
> A perfect example of your reckless disregard for my actual statements.
>
> Aside from the fact that I already answered this libel in another
> post, which you _also_ recklessly disregarded, I'll ask you this one
> simple question and see if you can answer it:
>
> Taken in the context of the tone and message of my original post, why do
> you think I mentioned "white devils" in the same sentence where I used
> the phrase "mud peoples"?
> --
Okay, here is the original quote:
> Can you we-are-the-worlders imagine the hilarious scene of neoNazis,
> KKKers, Christian Identity types, folkish Asatru and other white devils
> being fenced off in some place like the old Confederacy states with the
> Nation of Islam, Native American separatists and other "racist" mud
> peoples to work out our problems with each other absolutely bereft of the
> traditional guidance of Jews, without which, of course, JudeoChristian
> Western Civilization would not have been possible?
>
That was what I read originally.
The fact that you put it this way:
> other "racist" mud peoples
sure makes it sound like you think "mud peoples"
is a legitimate, purely descriptive term for the
people in question. I mean, you put "racist" in
quotes, to make sure we understood you didn't
mean it, and then right next to it appears [mud
peoples] with no quotes...acting like any other
normal descriptive word.
Also, "mud peoples" is a currently-used and highly
insulting term with a lot of emotional impact.
"White devils," on the other hand, is a quaintly
nostalgic term with no real power to insult (rather
like the terms "vile varlet" or "utter cad").
Also, I had not seen (in the reply of yours that
my server dropped) your statement that:
> > My reference to "mud peoples" was along side my reference to "white devils"
> > and was obviously within the context of demonstrating the point I made in
> > my opening sentence, that I and many other people of other ethnicities,
> > would rather deal with people who openly hate us than with those who have
> > "good intentions" and destroy us.
Okay, if you put it that way...(but if you don't think
whites are superior, why on earth do you hate non-whites?
What possible reason is there to hate people who are your
equals and who also have the same goals as you?)
Jim, perhaps you are sincere in what you say, but
the way you say things does not make that clear. If you
use the *language* of supremacists, you cannot blame
others for thinking you are a supremecist. To para-
phrase your sig, if you want to change the rules, you
need to change the tools.
And now, to answer the post I missed:
> To Teinwyn:
> Jews are the new dominant elite, not protestants.
You'll have to prove this assertion. Has it ever occurred
to you that what you think is a "Jewish bias" might simply
be the white protestant elite trying to "make nice" to a
group with a legitimate complaint, out of free-floating
guilt...and a desire not to *lose* their (the whites) own
control? When an elite group is losing its credibility,
the first thing it does is start conciliating, to make
itself look good, and to *remain in control of the process
of change*.
> My reference to "mud peoples" was along side my reference to "white devils"
> and was obviously within the context of demonstrating the point I made in
> my opening sentence, that I and many other people of other ethnicities,
> would rather deal with people who openly hate us than with those who have
> "good intentions" and destroy us.
It was *not* obvious within the text...see above...
though I concede that, after I saw this explanation,
a strictly literal re-reading made me see where
you were coming from.
> Your challenge to "courage" in the face of the cultural context of
> propaganda-programmed military might would be silly if it weren't so
> typical of the confidence game that has been played against my folk ever
> since the Roman Empire's first incursions.
> --
Why? By the laws of this country, if you offer
no direct harm to others and do not break the law,
the gov't cannot touch you. Yes, I know, this
guarantees nothing. But, if you: A) Conduct your
project openly with adequate media coverage;
B) Behave politely and refrain from overt insult
or hostility toward critics and law enforcement
officials; and C) (very important) *don't* collect
a large stockpile of highly destructive automatic
weapons and military armaments, there will be damn
little the law can do to touch you.
There are many Americans who seriously agree with
the idea: "I do not agree with what you say, but
I will defend to the death your right to say it."
If you are open, honest and courteous, you will have
all these people on your side. Some of them are
even in the gov't and the FBI; and some are even
Jewish. Your predjudicial bias and suspicion
prevent you from gaining these allies.
This is the courage I meant: to go ahead and do
what you think is right, even though you know it
isn't a safe thing. No one ever said freedom was
*safe;* just that it was worth striving for.
Teinwyn
Jim Bowery
Teinwyn Arvel at Stead of Somewhere Else (re...@compassnet.com) wrote:
: Jim Bowery wrote:
: > : > 2) that the grossly disproportionate influence by Jews on religion and
: > : > mass media, usually via government license/scanction, is not an
: > : > outrageous assault on other cultures with whom they supposedly
: > : > "peacefully" coexist.
: >
: > While it is true that this statement doesn't exclude conspiracy theory,
: > neither does it exclude other possible interpretations of events, such as
: > ethnic bias.
: >
: > Taken in combination with my other statements, it is clear I'm talking
: > about ethnic bias.
: >
: Er, no, it's really not. You're saying that
: a small group of people who until very recently
: in this country were victims of blatant discrimination
: themselves have suddenly gained a "grossly dis-
: proportionate influence" and commit "outrageous
: assault"...
The fact that you can't conceive of a way for people to rise to dominance
in any way other than through conspiratorial activity indicates a problem
not with my description of the phenomenon, but with your very limited
imagination. A culture can assault another culture without conspiracy.
Cultures are living systems that coevolve with humans -- they don't
conspire anymore than an ecosystem conspires when it spreads into a
habitable land area.
You claim this was all very sudden, and it in fact goes all the way back
to the Diaspora with the origin of JudeoChristianity. The US didn't
spring fully formed from the brow of Odin -- it was a product of
JudeoChristianity's ongoing struggle for Mediterranean dominance of
northern european cultures. Protestantism and the New World migrations
were desparation maneuvers by an indigenous people who were being
relentlessly assaulted, uprooted and culturally enslaved by Mediterranean
sophisticates. Go to a Native American reservation where the elders are
fighting for cultural survival against "Christianized" natives and you
will see a piece of what my northern european ancestors went through
centuries ago.
: > Taken in the context of the tone and message of my original post, why do
: > you think I mentioned "white devils" in the same sentence where I used
: > the phrase "mud peoples"?
: > --
[... nonresponsive deletia ...]
: Also, "mud peoples" is a currently-used and highly
: insulting term with a lot of emotional impact.
: "White devils," on the other hand, is a quaintly
: nostalgic term with no real power to insult (rather
: like the terms "vile varlet" or "utter cad").
You are obviously unaware of the fact that the Nation of Islam has used
the term "white devils" to describe the "white race" with just as great a
cultural visibility as the organizations such as White Aryan Resistance
have used the term "mud peoples" -- perhaps more so. If I am mistaken in
my opinion of your ignorance in this matter, then it is obvious that any
further interaction with you will be fruitless. Further, the tone of my
original posting makes it clear I don't take the underlying hostility
implied by these epithets very seriously on either side. We are being
set at each other's throats by the forces of big government and "we're so
persecuted we are the only authorized tribe" mentality and propaganda of
the Jewish culture. Doesn't it strike you as interesting that Jesus
Christ was Jewish, was innocent and victimized just the way Jews portray
themselves today?
: Okay, if you put it that way...(but if you don't think
: whites are superior, why on earth do you hate non-whites?
The only ethnicity it might be reasonble to think I "hate" from
my statements are the parts of the "white race" that imposed
JudeoChristianity on northern europeans and even that is misleading since
I am perfectly willing to see them live in peace with whomever desires
to coexist with them.
But really -- do try to be honest with yourself and look at my statements
without YOUR prejudices and see if you can actually find hatred of people
on the basis of skin color except under your very misguided presumption
that separatism is the same as supremacy and/or hatred.
: > To Teinwyn:
: > Jews are the new dominant elite, not protestants.
: You'll have to prove this assertion.
Culture determines the majority of what Winterlanders find moral and
valuable. As Tacitus said, in northern europe, morals work better than
laws and their enforcement. Jews and their Italian extended phenotypes
dominate Western culture and have done so ever since the Diaspora took
root in Northern Europe -- so much so that northern european tribal
traditions and indigenous religions were totally wiped out in favor of a
slave religion commonly called Christianity -- originating with the master
religion of Judaism. This became secularized until today the mass media
has replaced religious indoctrination among European Winterlanders.
Jews dominate the mass media, again, with their Italian junior
partners, and therefore the moral content of the culture to which
European Winterlanders have been enslaved for many hundreds of years:
The largest media conglomerate today is Walt Disney Company, whoese
chairman and CEO, Michael Eisner, is a Jew. The Disney empire, headed
by a man described by one media anlyst as "a control freak", includes
several television production companies( Walt Disney Television,
Touchstone Television, Buean Vista Television), it own cable network
with 14 million subsribers, and two video prodution companies.
As for feature films, the Walt Disney Picture Group, headed by Joe
Roth(also a Jew), includes Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures,
and Caravan pictures. Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by the
Weinstein brothers, who have produced such ultra-raunchy movies as the
"Crying Game", "Priests" and "Kids."
When the Disney Company was run by the Gentile Disney family prior to
its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome, family
entertainment. While it still holds the rights to "Snow White", under
Eisner the company has expanded into the production of graphic sex
and gratutious violence. In addition to TV and movies, the corporation
owns Disneyland, Disney World, Epcot Center, Tokyo Disneyland, and
Euro Disney.
Disney also sell annually well over a billion dollars worth of
consumer products:books,toys and clothing. In August 1995 Eisner
acquired Capital Cities/ABC, Inc, to create a media empire with annual
sales of $16.5 billion. Capital Cities/ABC owns the ABC Television
Network, which in turn owns ten TV stations outright in such big
markets as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Houston.
In addition, it has 225 affiliated stations in the United States and
is part owner of several European TV comapnies.
ABC's cable subsidiary, ESPN, is headed by president and CEO Steven
Bornstein, who is a Jew. The coporation also has a controlling share
of Lifetime Television and the Arts & Entertainment Network cable
companies. ABC Radio Network owns 11 AM and ten FM stations, again in
major cities such as New York, Washington, and Los Angeles and has
over 3,400 affiliates.
Although primarily a telecommunications company. Capital Cities/ABC
earned over $1 billion in publishing in 1994. It owns seven daily
newspapers, Fairchild Publications(Women's Wear Daily), Chilton
Publications(automotive manuels), and the Diversified Publishing
Group.
Time Warner,Inc, is the second of the international media leviathans.
The chairman of the board and CEO, Gerald M. Levin, is a Jew. Time
Warner's subsidiary HBO is country's largest pay-TV cable network.
Warner Music is by far the world's largest record company, with 50
labels, the biggest of which is Warner Brothers Records, headed by
Danny Goldberg. Stuart Hersch is president of Warnervision, Warner
Music's video production unit. Goldberg and Hersch are both Jews.
Warner Music was an early promoter of "gangsta rap"." Through its
involvement with Interscope Records it helped popularize a genre whose
graphic lyrics explicitly urge Blacks to commit acts of violence
against whites.
In addition to cable and music, Time Warner is heavily involved in the
production of feature films(Warner Brothers Studio) and publishing.
Time Warner's publishing division(editor-in-chief Norman Pearlstine, a
Jew) is the largest magazine publisher in the country(Time, Sports
Illustrated, People, Fortune)
Levin maybe the number one magnate if the planned deal with Turner
Broadcating System is completed.(Merger finalized as of 1996).
When Ted Turner, the Gentile media maverick, made a bid to buy CBS in
1985, there was panic in media boardrooms across the nation. Turner
had made a fortune in advertising and the had built a successful
cable-TV news network, CNN. Although Turner employed a number of Jews
in key excutive positions in CNN and had never taken public positions
contrary to Jewish interests, he is man with a large ego and strong
personality and was regarded by Chairman William Paley and other Jews
at CBS as uncontrollable: a loose cannon who might at some time in the
future turn against them. Furthermore, Jewish newsmam Daniel Schorr,
who had worked for Turner, publicly charged that his former boss held
a personal dislike for Jews.
To block Turner's bid CBS executives invited billionaire Jewish
theater, hotel,insurance and cigarette magnate Laurence Tisch to
launch a "friendly" takeover of the company, and from 1986 til 1995
Tisch was chairman and CEO of CBS, removing any threat of non-Jewish
influence there. Subsequent efforts by Turner to acquire a major
network have been obstructed by Levin's Time Warner, which owns nearly
20 percent of CBS stock and has veto power over major deals.
Thus, despite being being an innovator and garnering headlines, Turner
has nerver commanded the wealth and power to be a true media master.
Turner may have decided: "if you can't lick 'em join 'em". If TBS
merges with Time Warner, Levin will become Turner's boss, and CNN, the
only rival to the network news, will come under complete Jewish
control.(deal finalized)
Viacom, Inc, headed by Sumner Redstone(born Murray Rothstein), is the
third largest megamedia corporation in corporation in the country,
with revenues of over $10 billion a year. Viacom, which produces and
distributes TV programs for the three largest networks, own 12
television stations and 12 radio stations. It produces feature films
through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing
Its publishing division includes Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster,and
Pocket Books. It distributes videos through over 4, 000 blockbuster
stores. It is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks,
and video games.
Viacom's chief claim to fame, however, is as the world's largest
provider of cable programming, thorough its showtime, MTV,
Nickelodeon, and other networks. Since 1989 MTV and Nickelodeon have
acquired larger and larger shares of the juvenile television audience.
Redstone, who actually owns 76 per cent of the shares of Viacom($3
billiion), offers Beavis and Butthead as teen role models and is the
largest single purveyor of race-mixing propaganda to White teenagers
and sub-teens in America and Europe. MTV pumps its ... rock
and rap videos into 210 million homes in 71 countries and is the
dominant culural influence on teenagers around the world.
Nickelodean has by far the largest share of the four-to-11-year-old TV
audience in America and also is expandind rapidly into Europe. Most of
its shows do not yet display the blatant degeneracy which is MTV's
trademark, but Redstone is gradually nudging the fare presented to his
kiddie viewers toward the same poison purveyed by MTV.
With the top three, and by far the largest, media conglomerates in the
hands of Jews, it is difficult to believe that such an overwhelming
degree of control came about without a deliberate, concerted effort on
their part.
What about the other big media companies?
Number four on the list is Rupert Murdoch's News corporation, which
owns FOX Television Network and 20th Century Fox Films. Murdoch is a
gentile , but Peter Chernin, who heads Murdoch's film studio and also
oversees his TV production, is a Jew.
Number five is the Japanese Sony Corporation, whose U.S.
subsidiary , Sony Corporation of America, is run by Michael Schulhof,
a Jew. Alan J Levine, another Jew, heads the Sony Pictures division.
Most of the television and movie production companies that are not
owned by the largest corporations are also controlled by Jews. For
example, New World Entertainment,proclaimed by one media analyst as
"the premiere independent TV program producer in the United States,"
is owned by Ronald Perelman, a Jew who also owns Revelon cosmetics.
The chairman at New World, Brandon Tartikoff(formerly head of
entertainment programming at NBC), is a Jew. The best known of the
smaller media companies, Dreamworks SKG, is a strictly [Jewish] affair.
Dream Works was formed in 1994 amid great media hype by recording
industry mogul David Geffen,former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey
Katzenberg, and film director Steven Spielberg , all three of whom are
Jews. The company produces movies, annimated films,television
programs, and recorded music. Considering cash and connections that
Geffen, Katzenberg and Spielberg have, Dream Works may soon be in the
same league as the big three.
Two other large production companies, MCA and Universal Pictures, are
both by Seagram Company, Ltd. The president and CEO of Seagram, the
liquor giant, is Edgar Bronfman Jr, who is also president of the World
Jewish Congress.
It is well known that Jews have controlled production and
distribution of films since the inception of the movie industry in the
early decades of this century. This is still the case today.
Films produced by just the five largest motion picture companies
mentioned above - Disney, Warner Brothers, Sony,Paramount(Viacom), and
universal(Seagram) - accounted for 74 per cent of the total box-office
receipts for the year to date(August 1995).
The big three in Television network broadcasting used to be ABC, CBS,
and NBC. With the consolidation of the media empires, these three are
no longer independent, however, each was controlled by a Jew since
its inception:ABC by Leonard Goldenson,CBS by William Palley and then
by Laurence Tisch, and NBC first by David Sarnoff and the by his son
Robert. Over periods of several decades these networks were staffed
from top to bottom with Jews. The essential Jewishness of
network television did not change when the networks were absorbed by
other corporations. The Jewish presence in television news remains
particularly strong.
ABC is part of Eisner's Disney Company, and the executive
producers of ABC's news programs are all Jews. Victor S Neufeld(20-20)
Bob Reichbloom(Good Morning America), and Rick Kaplan(World News
Tonight).
CBS was recently purchased by Westinghouse Electric Corporation.
Nevertheless, the man appointed by Laurence Tisch, Eric Ober, remains
president of CBS News, and Ober is a Jew.
At NBC, now owned by General Electric, NBC News president Andrew Lack
is a Jew, as are executive producers Jeff Zucker(Today), Jeff
Gralnick(NBC Nightly News), and Neal Shapiro(Dateline)
THE PRINT MEDIA
After television news, daily newspapers are the most influential
information medium in America. Sixty million of them are sold(and
presumably read) each day. These millions are divided among some 1,500
different publications. One might conclude that the the sheer number
of different newspapers across America would provide a safeguard
against minority control and distortion. Alas, such is not the case.
There is less independence, less competition, and much less
representation of majority interests than a casual observer would
think.
The days when most cities and even towns had several independently
owned newspapers published by local people with close ties to the
community are gone. Today most "local" newspapers are owned by a
rather small number small number of large companies thousands of miles
away. The fact is that only about 25 per cent of the country's 1,5000
papers are independently owned; the rest have circulation belong to
multi-newspaper chains. Only 100 of the total number have circulations
of more than 100,000. Only a handful are large enough to maintain
independent reporting staff's outside their own communities: the rest
must depend on these few for all their national and international
news.
In only 50 cities in America are there more than one daily newspaper,
and competition is frequently nominal even among them, as between
morning and afternoon editions under the same ownership. Examples of
this are are the Huntsville, Alabama, morning News and afternoon
Times; the Birmingham, Alabama morning post Herald and afternoon
Herald-Journal - all owned by the Jewish Newhouse brothers through
their holding , Advance publications.
The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than the lack of
real competition among America's daily newspapers: it also illustrates
the isatiable appetite Jews have shown for all organs of opinion
control on which they could fasten their grip. The Newhouses own 26
daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as
the Cleavland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star -Ledger , and the New
Orleans Times-Picayunne;the nation's largest trade book publishing
conglomerate,Random House, with all its subsidiaries; Newhouse
Broadcating, consisting of 12 television broadcating stations and 87
cable-TV systems, including some of the country's largest cable
networks; the sunday supplement "Parade", with a circulation of more
than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines,
including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair,
Bride's, Gentlemen's Quaterly, Self, House & Garden, and all the other
magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group.
This Jewish media empire was founded by the late Sumuel Newhouse, an
immigrant from Russia. When he died in 1979 at the age of 84, he
bequethed media holdings worth an estimated $1.3 billion to his two
sons, Samuel and Donald. With a number of further acquisitions , the
net worth of Advance Publications has grown to a more than $8 billion
today.
The gobbling up of so many newspapers by the Newhouse family was in
large degree made possible by the fact that newspapers are not
supported by their subscribers, but by their advertisers. It is
advertising revenue - not the small change collected from newspaper's
readers - that largely pays the editor's salary and yields the owner's
profit.
Whenever the large abvertisers in a city choose to favor one newspaper
over another with their business, the favored newspaper will flourish
while its competitor dies. Since the begenning of this century, when
Jewish mercantile power in America became a dominant economic force,
there has been a steady rise in the number of American newspapers in
Jewish hands, accompanied by a steady decline in the number of
competing Gentile newspapers - primarily as a result of selective
advertising policies of Jewish merchants.
Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership and
management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising revenue
that their editorial and news reporting policies are largely
constrained by Jewish likes and dislikes. It holds true in the
newspaper business as elsewhere that he who pay the pipe calls the
tune.
Three Jewish Newspapers
The suppresion of competition and the establishment of local
monopolies on the dissemination of news and opinion have characterized
the rise of Jewish control over America's newspapers. The resulting
ability of the Jews to use the press as an unopposed instrument of
Jewish policy could hardly be better illustrated than by the examples
of the nation's three most prestigious and influential newspapers: The
New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.
These three,dominating America's financial and capitals, are the
newspapers set the trends and guidelines for nearly all the others.
They are the ones which decide what is news and what isn't, at the
national and international levels. They originate the news; the others
merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in Jewish hands.
The New York Times is the unofficial social, fashion, enterainment,
political, and cultural guide of the nation. It tells America's "smart
set" which books to buy and which films to see; which opinions are in
style at the moment; which politicians, educators, spiritual leaders,
artists, and businessmen are the real comers. And for a few decades in
the last century it was a genuinely American newspaper.
The New York Times was founded in 1851 by two Gentiles, Henry J
Raymond and George Jones. After their deaths, it was purchased in 1896
form Jones's estate by a wealthy Jewish publisher, Adolph Ochs. His
great-grandson, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., is the paper's current
publisher and CEO. The executive editor is Max Frankel, and the
managing editor is Joseph Lelyveld. Both of the latter also are Jews.
The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co.,33
other newspapers, including the Boston Globe, purchased in June of
1993 for $1.1 billion; twelve magazines, including McMcall's and
Family Circle with circulations of more than 5 million each; seven
radio stations and TV broadcasting stations; a cable-TV system; and
three book publishing companies. The New York Times News Service
transmits news stories, features, and photographs from New York Times
by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines.
Of similar national importance is the Washington,which, by
establishing its "leaks" throughout government agencies in Washington,
has inside track on news involving the Federal government.
The Washington Post, like the New York Times, had a non-Jewish origin.
It was established in 1877 by Stilson Hutchins, purchased from him in
1905 by John R McClean, and later inheireted by Edward B. McLean. In
June 1933, however, at the height of the Great Depression, the
newspaper was forced into bankruptcy. It was purchased at a bankruptcy
auction by infamous Eugene Meyer, a Jewish financier and former
partner of the infamous Bernard Baruch, industry czar in American
during the First World War.
The Washington Post is now run by Katerine Meyer Graham, Eugene
Meyer's daughter. She is the principal stockholder and the board
chairman of the Washington Post Co. In 1979 she appointed her son,
Donald, publisher of the paper. He now also holds the posts of
president and CEO of the Washington Post Co.
The Washington Post Co. has a number of other media holdings in
newspapers, television, and magazines, most notably the nation's
number-two weekly newsmagazine, Newsweek. In a joint venture with the
New York Times, the Post publishes the International Herald Tribune,
the most widely distributed English language daily in the world.
The Wall Street Journal, which sells 1.8 million copies each weekday,
is the nation's largest-circulation daily newspaper. It is owned by
Dow Jones & Company, Inc, a New York corporation which also publishes
24 other daily newspapers and the weeky financial tabloid Barron's,
among other things. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R.
Kann, who is a Jew. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and
publisher of the Wall Street Journal.
Most of New York' other major newspapers are in no better hands than
the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. In January 1993 the
New York Daily News was bought from the estate of the late Jewish
media mogul Robert Maxwell(born Ludvik Hoch) by Jewish real-estate
developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman. The Village Voice is the property of
Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of the Hartz Mountain pet
supply firm.
Other Mass Media
The story is pretty much the same for other media as it is for
televison, radio, and newspapers. Consider, for example,
newsmagazines. There are only three of any note published in the
United States; Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report.
Time, with a weekly ciurculation of 4.1 million, is publlished by a
subsidiary of Time Warner Communications, the new media conglomerate
formed the 1989 merger of Time, Inc, with Warner Communications.
The CEO of Time Warner Communications, as mentioned above, is Gerald
Levin, a Jew.
Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington Post
Company, under Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham. Its weekly circulation
is 3.2 million.
U.S. News & World Report, with a weekly circulation of 2.3 million, is
owned and published by the aforementioned Mortimer B. Zuckerman, who
also has taken the position of the editor-in-chief of the magazine for
himself. Zuckerman also owns the Atlantic Monthly and New York's
tabloid newspaper, the Daily News, which is the sixth-largest paper in
the country.
Or consider books. There are literally thousands of publishers in the
United States, and among these thousands are many with little or no
direct Jewish control; there are some which acutually dare to publish
books not approved by the Jewish Establishment. But all of the latter
publishers are very small, and their books seldom reach the great mass
of American who buy their reading material from drugstore news racks
or from chain store bookstores.
Among the giant publishing conglomerates, however, the situation is
quite kosher. Three of the six largest book publishers in the United
States, according Publishers Weekly, are owned or controlled by Jews.
The three are first-place Random House(with its many subsidiaries,
including Crown Publishing Group), third-palce Simon & Schuster and
sixth place Time Warner. Trade Group(including Warner Books and
Little, Brown)
As pointed out above, the Newhouse family owns Random House, and
Gerald Levin is CEO of Time Warner Communications, of which Time
Warner Trade Group is a division. Simon & Schuster is subsidiary of
Viacom ,Inc, of which the chairman and CEO is Sumner Redstone, as
already noted. Another publisher of special significance is Western
Publishing. Although it ranks only 13th in size among all U.S.
publishers, it ranks first among publishers of childern's books, with
more than 50 per cent of the market. Its chairman and CEO is Richard
Snyder, a Jew, who just replaced Richard Bernstein, also a Jew.
--
Kym Horsell
In article <01bc7e6a$058d22e0$2ff2...@azaccess.azaccess.com>,
T. Marie <tma...@azaccess.com> wrote:
>I would say he is perhaps overdoing it. Everyone who works with different
>breeds of animals is aware that there are well-defined inbred temperments
>for each breed. If you study different families of humans, you will find
>that different lineages tend to show these inbred temperments as well.
Now carefully show why this is "in bred" rather than being a
matter of socialisation during development. Culture occurs at
a (presumably, for now ;-) relatively simply level among animals.
Some lions are "taught" by their parents to start at the front
legs, some are "taught" to start at the rear.
Different practices
are seen in different areas, and are stable over at least decades.
Similar things are seen in other (at least) mammals. Elephants
need to be taught how to drink water with the trunk, how to
eat thorn-bushes, etc. If they aren't taught properly, of course,
they _can_ learn to do such things. But that isn't
"inherited knowlege" or "inherited behaviour", either.
In the extreme, SOME species don't even "know" how to MATE
unless they are shown how to do so (e.g. apes). If there was ever to be
a behaviour that we'd accept was an "inherited ability", SURELY,
THAT would be it!
When it comes to alleged "inherited characteristics" and (almost)
*especially* with "psychobabble" characteristics (as some would
spell it) in humans, things are far more murky.
E.g. we would find it easy to believe that the majority of
(random example) MD's have one or both parents in a medical
or allied professions. But, I hope, not too many would immediately
posit a "MD gene".
When it comes to alleged *racial* differences, there are numerous
counter-examples to commonly and historically-held (i.e. "inherited")
beliefs.
E.g. at one time it was believed that there may be genetic
dispositions to some forms of cancer. And this was believed to
be shown by the kinds of cancers different "races" were subject to.
E.g. people in Japan were, historically, not subject to high levels
of colon cancer, and this was believed -- from circumstantial
evidence -- to be an "inherited characteristic".
However, follow-up studies show that people whose parents were both
born in Japan, but who live in the USA, do not have distinguishably-different
patterns of colon cancer from "native" Americans. It is not currently
an accepted hypothesis that "genetic pre-disposition" (for we
must always remember that genes do not -- in generaly -- correlate
strongly with even the characteristics for which they are believed
to code) to be extinguished in one generation -- and the belief that
the evidence showed a "racial difference" existed , was abandoned.
Finally, as to the alleged inherited tempraments of animals.
I understand it is relatively well-known that a dometic
animal can be "fooled" into thinking they are of a DIFFERENT SPECIES
but (appropriate) early socialisation. I.e. a chicken can be
brought up to "believe" it is a dog, etc. So much for (at least)
the _simple_ idea that "behaviour" is "inherited".
--
R. Kym Horsell
KHor...@EE.Latrobe.EDU.AU k...@CS.Binghamton.EDU
http://WWW.EE.LaTrobe.EDU.AU/~khorsell http://CS.Binghamton.EDU/~kym