Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
billy
believe, within their Politically Correct ideological constraints,
Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race - as any look at
what is happening in the Pacific Islands and virtually everywhere in
Africa will attest.
It is ubiquitous.
It is as ubiquitous as Aggression; Competitiveness; The Desire to
Acquire; and all the other traits and instincts of human nature which
the Marxist-Socialist finds anathema to their ideological false
dream-world.
Racism stems simply from what one identifies and declares as "those
that are like me" and it is a feature of human nature to wish to
congregate with those who are of a likeness and can share the same
identity.
This is obviously nature ordained. Its useful function is to preserve
a distinctiveness and create diversity amongst any species wherever
that instinct is found.
Those who advocate its opposite - the "melting pot" - the final
homogenous and uniform human race - and use various means (such as
Race Laws) to force human nature into a mould it is not designed to
fit are doomed to frustration and disappointment - and even worse.
The disastrous experiment of the Soviet Union designed to fit people
in to an ideological mould not compatible with human nature
illustrates the travail such attempts at social engineering can
create.
Its 70 year experiment produced the opposite: The people on whom it
was imposed are now avidly acquisitive and competitive; and, worse of
all, ethnic and racial tension is rife and appears to be increasing.
Contrast this with the Capitalistic System which has wisely gone along
with the impulses of human nature - with the desire to compete,
acquire and accumulate - and the riches and democratic principles that
"natural" system creates.
As the Soviet Experiment in Social Engineering showed: Another aspect
of human nature is that if its instincts are denied or forbidden a
proper outlet, they become like the proverbial rubber ball in water:
The deeper it is pushed below the surface, the greater the force of
its re-emergence when the pressure holding it down is released or
pushed aside. And as we have seen: this can have violent and
unfortunate results.
So:
The lesson seems to be:
Do not frustrate or repress instincts but go along with them and let
them take constructive channels.
In the case of Racism, rather than trying to "drive it out" and
denying its existence by "mixing races" - to "prove" it is "not really
there" - this impelled by Holocaust Funk - let us praise the impulses
behind Racism as a means of and the prime force in maintaining
diversity.
So:
Let us praise those who wish to be with their own kind in their own
land.
Let us praise those who are proud of their Race.
Let us praise those who are proud of their Nation.
Let us praise those who are proud of their Culture.
Let us praise human instinct as "nature ordained" - which, when it is
allowed to flow along its constructive and creative channels, benefits
all people and maintains their uniqueness.
This instinct (which gives rise to all those attributes we should
praise) is the force which will maintain the diversity of people and
maintain the diversity of cultures.
Therefore, let us praise it.
And long may it persist and be allowed its proper course.
regards, billy
**********************************
Alan Fossey
endemic among proto-humans. That doesn't make them any better. Given
that we now have a conscious choice to be racist or not be racist, and
plenty of evidence to see the unpleasant outcomes of racism, we surely
have a duty as a species to make an effort to cohabit this planet.
Life's too short to spend any of it making someone else's life a misery
or to have someone else do it to you. Racism no longer serves a useful
purpose. Its corollary lies in the kill-or-be-killed instinct which was
a survival trait of early humans. It is no longer necessary except in
the kind of extreme conditions which 'Billy' no doubt longs for.
--
Alan Fossey
Super Ape
"billy" <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Contrary to what the guilt ridden Socialist-Marxist would have us
> believe, within their Politically Correct ideological constraints,
> Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race - as any look at
> what is happening in the Pacific Islands and virtually everywhere in
> Africa will attest.
Like Robert Mugabe, man
> It is ubiquitous.
> It is as ubiquitous as Aggression; Competitiveness; The Desire to
> Acquire; and all the other traits and instincts of human nature which
> the Marxist-Socialist finds anathema to their ideological false
> dream-world.
Like aggression, competitiveness and the desire to acquire, racism can be
suppressed and reasoned against. Try it.
> Racism stems simply from what one identifies and declares as "those
> that are like me" and it is a feature of human nature to wish to
> congregate with those who are of a likeness and can share the same
> identity.
> This is obviously nature ordained. Its useful function is to preserve
> a distinctiveness and create diversity amongst any species wherever
> that instinct is found.
Racism is a fear of people who do not look like yourself, but when you learn
about the person inside the exterior surface, and that is where you make the
decision on whether you like them or not.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation
where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content
of their character. " - Martin Luther King
> Those who advocate its opposite - the "melting pot" - the final
> homogenous and uniform human race - and use various means (such as
> Race Laws) to force human nature into a mould it is not designed to
> fit are doomed to frustration and disappointment - and even worse.
> The disastrous experiment of the Soviet Union designed to fit people
> in to an ideological mould not compatible with human nature
> illustrates the travail such attempts at social engineering can
> create.
> Its 70 year experiment produced the opposite: The people on whom it
> was imposed are now avidly acquisitive and competitive; and, worse of
> all, ethnic and racial tension is rife and appears to be increasing.
> Contrast this with the Capitalistic System which has wisely gone along
> with the impulses of human nature - with the desire to compete,
> acquire and accumulate - and the riches and democratic principles that
> "natural" system creates.
Look underneath the glitzy exterior and you still see abject poverty and
exploitation - For the decadence of the company President, there may be
millions of underpaid workers in workhouses, each with the desire to have a
better life, but the capitalists trample them underfoot, with the delusion
that being born into a privelaged lifestyle or happen on a chance situation
which made them rich off other people's backs, makes them superior to all
those who work for them. And their right-wing 'volunteer lackeys' support
the system which abuses them, and effort to divide the oppressed into groups
that hate each other, by skin, by behaviour, by nationality, to try and stop
these oppressed from rising up and overthrowing the capitalist system
worldwide.
> As the Soviet Experiment in Social Engineering showed: Another aspect
> of human nature is that if its instincts are denied or forbidden a
> proper outlet, they become like the proverbial rubber ball in water:
> The deeper it is pushed below the surface, the greater the force of
> its re-emergence when the pressure holding it down is released or
> pushed aside. And as we have seen: this can have violent and
> unfortunate results.
And the capitalists are ever pushing their luck.
> So:
> The lesson seems to be:
> Do not frustrate or repress instincts but go along with them and let
> them take constructive channels.
> In the case of Racism, rather than trying to "drive it out" and
> denying its existence by "mixing races" - to "prove" it is "not really
> there" - this impelled by Holocaust Funk - let us praise the impulses
> behind Racism as a means of and the prime force in maintaining
> diversity.
But what is good about racism? Surely this antagonistic behaviour is a waste
of resources!
> So:
> Let us praise those who wish to be with their own kind in their own
> land.
Let you praise the farmers slain by Robert Mugabe's mates
> Let us praise those who are proud of their Race.
> Let us praise those who are proud of their Nation.
> Let us praise those who are proud of their Culture.
Let you praise your wank-fantasy Hitler, the murderer and madman.
> Let us praise human instinct as "nature ordained" - which, when it is
> allowed to flow along its constructive and creative channels, benefits
> all people and maintains their uniqueness.
> This instinct (which gives rise to all those attributes we should
> praise) is the force which will maintain the diversity of people and
> maintain the diversity of cultures.
> Therefore, let us praise it.
> And long may it persist and be allowed its proper course.
> regards, billy
Let us look at a natural situation, with animals guided more by instinct
than what they have learned. Face it, they are pretty thick aren't they? You
put a male budgerigar and a mirror together and he will try to have sex with
it. You leave a light on at night and moths will be attracted to it. And you
have also heard of the situation a la "Rabbit in your headlights". Face it,
intellect leaves instinct for dust. Intellect brought us civilisation.
Instinct would have left us with stone tools.
Most animals run from fire. Human intellect allowed us to harness it. I'd
like to see you try and live without it.
J.steinman
a 15th century white German and founder of the protestant faith.Just like
all blacks they take from the white man and then moan about it.
Super Ape <its.su...@NOSPAMvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:ncR15.885$n32....@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Sid
"billy" <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Contrary to what the guilt ridden Socialist-Marxist would have us
> believe, within their Politically Correct ideological constraints,
> Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race - as any look at
SNIP RACIST BOLLOCKS
Racism possibly is an instinct locked into our subconscious along with fear
of wolves and the dark. BUT IT IS NOT HEALTHY.
When we lived in caves we had reason to fear the unknown, be it lightening
or the bloke from the cave on the other side of the hill.
My instinct is to hunt you down and kill then eat you. I will resist.
For one you would probably taste like shit.
Secondly Tesco's is still open.
pencil
ape,
in response to : "Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race"
you said : ""Like Robert Mugabe, man""
and i say : Yes, like robert mugabe
you suggest : ""Like aggression, competitiveness and the desire to acquire,
racism can be
suppressed and reasoned against. Try it.""
i enquire : "suppressed _and_ reasoned against"? You mean reason on its own
would not suffice? Pray tell me, how does one _reason_ with someone who's
determined to take away your belongings your country and your life?
you suggest : ""Racism is a fear of people who do not look like yourself..."
i reply : Fear? Where does fear come into it? Racism is the acceptance of
the reality that the races have different understandings of what is and what
shall be; anti-racism on the other hand is the denial of this reality with
the long term intention of destroying this difference - interesting paradox
that, don't you think?
you said : ""...but when you learn about the person inside the exterior
surface, ...that is where you make the
decision on whether you like them or not.""
i reply : Ah, that old liberal chestnut about judging every man as an
individual. We ignore group dynamics at our peril; a black man is a man but
he's also a black.
you quote : "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live
in a nation
where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content
of their character. " - Martin Luther King
i reply : The colour of the skin is an indication of character.
you wax lyrical : ""And their right-wing 'volunteer lackeys' support
the system which abuses them, and effort to divide the oppressed into groups
that hate each other, by skin, by behaviour, by nationality, to try and stop
these oppressed from rising up and overthrowing the capitalist system
worldwide.""
i correct : No. In fact the opposite is the case. The "useful idiots"
support the system which seeks to destroy the only force that can
successfully oppose it; the white man.
you suggest : ""And the capitalists are ever pushing their luck.""
i point out : But that's only half the tale...you forget the complimentary
international socialism.
you ask : ""But what is good about racism?""
i reply : It's necessary for survival.
you suggest : ""Surely this antagonistic behaviour is a waste
of resources!""
i reply : It's the attempt to destroy the races that's antagonistic
you say : ""Let you praise your wank-fantasy Hitler..."
i reply : Yawn. More liberal-speak...
you say : ""Let us look at a natural situation, with animals guided more by
instinct
than what they have learned. Face it, they are pretty thick aren't they? ""
i reply : A "*thick*" animal? Thick? Mmmm...
Intellect and instinct aren't mutually exclusive, they're complimentary
aren't they? But if one is more "necessary" than the other, then surely it
must be instinct? One cannot survive on intellect alone, but instinct will
always see you through.
'Droid
>
> Ah yes, Martin Luther King-A black man who took the name Martin Luther from
> a 15th century white German and founder of the protestant faith.Just like
> all blacks they take from the white man and then moan about it.
I doubt he much choice concerning his name.
'Droid
pencil
you shout: ""BUT IT (ie racism) IS NOT HEALTHY.""
i ask : why?
'Droid
It has a habit of ending in death for someone: the most unhealthy state there
is.
'Droid
Steve
>
> all blacks they take from the white man and then moan about it.
and I suppose the white man never took anything?!
Regards
Steve
Larry@home
Sid <s...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message news:8i9150$k2c$1...@gxsn.com...
well.
martin
There are clear differences in potential amongst the races. Denying this is not healthy.
It is not healthy for the individual denier, and it is not healthy for society as a whole.
If recognising racial differences makes me a racist, then I am one, and so are a lot of
other people.
billy
<J.steinman> wrote in message news:skftiq...@corp.supernews.com...
> Ah yes, Martin Luther King-A black man who took the name Martin
Luther from
> a 15th century white German and founder of the protestant faith.Just
like
> all blacks they take from the white man and then moan about it.
> Super Ape <its.su...@NOSPAMvirgin.net> wrote in message
> news:ncR15.885$n32....@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> >
> > "billy" <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
civilisation.
> > Instinct would have left us with stone tools.
> >
> > Most animals run from fire. Human intellect allowed us to harness
it. I'd
> > like to see you try and live without it.
> >
Stienman,
The intellect tells everyone that war is "not a good idea" but it has
been going on ever since mankind walked on two legs and will continue
to go on whilst mankind walks on two legs.
It is all due to the aggressive instinct; and if the intellect gives
the powerful message of "wrongness" about this activity, another part
of the intellect will translate it into a convincing "rightness".
For instance, in Kosovo, NATO dropped "humanitarian bombs" and people
like Robin Cooke the (Red Dwarf of Improved NuLabour who once pranced
around on Ban the Bomb marches) enjoyed the elation, excitement and
adrenaline flow of being on the "right" side.
The most popular films are those portraying war.
This is because the human race has the aggressive instinct which in
our long primitive past had a strong survival value.
If you take aggression from the human race you would not be talking
about the human race.
As I said in the conversation starter:
Recognise what we are and how we are composed. This way, people will
not do daft things like social engineering a mixed race society with
all its inevitable tensions.
The lesson from the Adolph H. business was: Do *not* mix races.
Certainly not to actively seek to mix them as we now do in this age
inflicted by absolute lunacy.
regards, billy
************************************
billy
"'Droid" <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3948181C...@netcomuk.co.uk...
Droid who always makes me Annoyed - because you always fail to see the
crucial point.
To illustrate:
I will insert the crucial missing point (shown in parenthesis) in your
above reply - which then proves the crucial point of the conversation
starter - as follows:
"It has a habit of ending in death for someone (if races are mixed -
as for instance in Fiji): the most unhealthy state there is. (This
potentially applies to all mixes.)"
regards, billy
**************************************
billy
"pencil" <pen...@hnlnmd.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8i92ar$t38$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>
> Intellect and instinct aren't mutually exclusive, they're
complimentary
> aren't they? But if one is more "necessary" than the other, then
surely it
> must be instinct? One cannot survive on intellect alone, but
instinct will
> always see you through.
>
>
***************************************
pencil:
Instinct is what makes us duck when we see an object hurtling towards
our face.
The instinct by-passes the reasoning faculty. It does not bother to
evaluate the object - such as whether or not it is hard or soft, sharp
or blunt, etc.
It operates on the basis of self-preservation and does not take
chances; and is one of the most useful and powerful instinct there is.
That is the example of individual self-preservation. But there is
always the need to belong to a group giving us the survival value of
security and identity (i.e. the gregarious instinct).
The group which can do this most effectively is one in which all
members share the same values, attitudes and beliefs (i.e. gives a
sense of solidarity).
Because of this there is the instinct for: "birds of a feather flock
together"; "like attracts like".
This is a healthy impulse towards forming an effective and viable
group.
A multicultural group with its many inbuilt and inevitable tensions
cannot provide the necessary ingredients - by definition.
It is as simple as that.
regards billy
**********************************
billy
> news:8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > believe, within their Politically Correct ideological constraints,
> > Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race - as any look
at
>
>
> SNIP RACIST BOLLOCKS
>
> Racism possibly is an instinct locked into our subconscious along
with fear
> of wolves and the dark. BUT IT IS NOT HEALTHY.
>
> When we lived in caves we had reason to fear the unknown, be it
lightening
> or the bloke from the cave on the other side of the hill.
>
> My instinct is to hunt you down and kill then eat you. I will
resist.
>
> For one you would probably taste like shit.
> Secondly Tesco's is still open.
>
>
Sid, who on his anger should put a Lid.
You *are* very cross, to the point of being murderous.
Those who lose their temper lose the argument.
So don't disgrace yourself. Address the argument.
regards, billy
************************************************
'Droid
Up to your usual trick oif inserting meaning into posts that was never intended.
I do wish you would stick to what people say, not what you think or wish them to
say. It doesn't require mixing for racism to cause problems and is generally
down to a small minority of people who are determined to cause trouble, either
due to feelings of inferiority or because they feel it is an easy route to
power.
'Droid
John Lee
<jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Contrary to what the guilt ridden Socialist-Marxist would have us
> believe, within their Politically Correct ideological constraints,
> Racism is not confined exclusively to the White Race - as any look at
> what is happening in the Pacific Islands and virtually everywhere in
> Africa will attest.
No-one believes that, Mr.
> It is ubiquitous.
> It is as ubiquitous as Aggression; Competitiveness; The Desire to
> Acquire; and all the other traits and instincts of human nature which
> the Marxist-Socialist finds anathema to their ideological false
> dream-world.
> Racism stems simply from what one identifies and declares as "those
> that are like me" and it is a feature of human nature to wish to
> congregate with those who are of a likeness and can share the same
> identity.
> This is obviously nature ordained. Its useful function is to preserve
> a distinctiveness and create diversity amongst any species wherever
> that instinct is found.
> Those who advocate its opposite - the "melting pot" - the final
> homogenous and uniform human race - and use various means (such as
> Race Laws) to force human nature into a mould it is not designed to
> fit are doomed to frustration and disappointment - and even worse.
> The disastrous experiment of the Soviet Union designed to fit people
> in to an ideological mould not compatible with human nature
> illustrates the travail such attempts at social engineering can
> create.
> Its 70 year experiment produced the opposite: The people on whom it
> was imposed are now avidly acquisitive and competitive; and, worse of
> all, ethnic and racial tension is rife and appears to be increasing.
> Contrast this with the Capitalistic System which has wisely gone along
> with the impulses of human nature - with the desire to compete,
> acquire and accumulate - and the riches and democratic principles that
> "natural" system creates.
> As the Soviet Experiment in Social Engineering showed: Another aspect
> of human nature is that if its instincts are denied or forbidden a
> proper outlet, they become like the proverbial rubber ball in water:
> The deeper it is pushed below the surface, the greater the force of
> its re-emergence when the pressure holding it down is released or
> pushed aside. And as we have seen: this can have violent and
> unfortunate results.
> So:
> The lesson seems to be:
> Do not frustrate or repress instincts but go along with them and let
> them take constructive channels.
> In the case of Racism, rather than trying to "drive it out" and
> denying its existence by "mixing races" - to "prove" it is "not really
> there" - this impelled by Holocaust Funk - let us praise the impulses
> behind Racism as a means of and the prime force in maintaining
> diversity.
> Let us praise human instinct as "nature ordained" - which, when it is
> allowed to flow along its constructive and creative channels, benefits
> all people and maintains their uniqueness.
> This instinct (which gives rise to all those attributes we should
> praise) is the force which will maintain the diversity of people and
> maintain the diversity of cultures.
> Therefore, let us praise it.
> And long may it persist and be allowed its proper course.
> regards, billy
>
> **********************************
The mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration of
the human species - it has occured for millennia. Inter-ethnic breeding is
the result of the natural attraction between two individuals. Forcibly
preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced social
engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and looks
decidedly brown.
J. Lee
--
"Coke-head takes axe to big bad wolf"
John Lee
<Raym...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
> There are clear differences in potential amongst the races. Denying this
is not healthy.
> It is not healthy for the individual denier, and it is not healthy for
society as a whole.
> If recognising racial differences makes me a racist, then I am one,
- yes, I think we've already gathered that.
John Lee
<jo...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
> Ah yes, Martin Luther King-A black man who took the name Martin Luther from
> a 15th century white German and founder of the protestant faith.Just like
> all blacks they take from the white man and then moan about it.
Are you the first J.steinman, or did you steal that name too?
abelard
<jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>"It has a habit of ending in death for someone (if races are mixed -
>as for instance in Fiji): the most unhealthy state there is.
fiji....fiji...is that the best you can manage...
>(This
>potentially applies to all mixes.)"
planetary collision applies potentially to all planets....
murder and suicide applies potentially to all persons...
(unless they can't find or reach th trigger)
go back and join your flock birdbrain...
web site at www.abelard.org - new, doc. on logic of ethics.
..also education, logic and more....over 400 doc. requests daily
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that I a big stick.
good people do nothing I trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
abelard
<jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>Because of this there is the instinct for: "birds of a feather flock
>together"; "like attracts like".
no birdbrain bonehead....the most likely reason is in order
to confuse predators....
for a starting point....try
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/5922/
>This is a healthy impulse towards forming an effective and viable
>group.
the brainless human herd....yes bonehead....
i can see that it would attract you...
time to gallop across the savannah with the wildebeest....
c'mon billy boy...your instinct is calling....
shame you got the brain of a wildebeest.....
the rest of us have a planet to sort out.....
>A multicultural group with its many inbuilt and inevitable tensions
>cannot provide the necessary ingredients - by definition.
>It is as simple as that.
as simple as bonehead...
abelard
<jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>Sid, who on his anger should put a Lid.
>You *are* very cross, to the point of being murderous.
>Those who lose their temper lose the argument.
>So don't disgrace yourself. Address the argument.
you have no 'argument' bonehead....
and even if you did, you would be quite incapable
of marshalling it in a coherent manner.....
you are a figure of mockery....
you are boring.....
go away again....please....
fly back to africa with your flock.....winter is coming billy boy....
Larry@home
John Lee <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:holster77-> The
mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration of
> the human species - it has occured for millennia.
Where and when has this taken place?
Inter-ethnic breeding is
> the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
I don't think anyone has disputed this.
Forcibly
> preventing either of the two is as unnatural
No it ain't, preventing two people from marrying or breeding has gone on for
millenia and has been practiced by all ethnicities amongst their own and
other races, check out Hindus, Sikhs, Moslems, or Indians Pakistanis.
Moslem Girl from Bradford was murdered by her brother and mother, who are
serving life sentences, for having a relationship with a Sikh youth.
Sikh girls are living in fear of death from their families, for consorting
with White, Black, Pakistani, boyfriends.
When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic races,
who objects with violence.?
as the forced social
> engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
>
> Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and looks
> decidedly brown.
>
> J. Lee
Sat in the corner with his head stuck firmly up his arse saying you are a
racist, until the coons came through the door and stole his PC and his PC.
'Droid
>
> John Lee <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:holster77-> The
> mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration of
> > the human species - it has occured for millennia.
>
> Where and when has this taken place?
>
> Inter-ethnic breeding is
> > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> I don't think anyone has disputed this.
>
> Forcibly
> > preventing either of the two is as unnatural
>
> No it ain't, preventing two people from marrying or breeding has gone on for
> millenia and has been practiced by all ethnicities amongst their own and
> other races, check out Hindus, Sikhs, Moslems, or Indians Pakistanis.
> Moslem Girl from Bradford was murdered by her brother and mother, who are
> serving life sentences, for having a relationship with a Sikh youth.
> Sikh girls are living in fear of death from their families, for consorting
> with White, Black, Pakistani, boyfriends.
> When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
> what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic races,
> who objects with violence.?
Once again this false assumption that no-one objects when other races are
rascist. That isn't the case. The reason it isn't mentioned much here is that,
as far as I can gather, all the rascists that post here are white, so naturally
it is white rascism that is most prominent. However, you and your compatriots
still bring up this accusation of hypocracy despite the fact that it is not the
case and is stated not be the case every time you bring it up.
'Droid
John Lee
<la...@fsn.com> wrote:
> John Lee <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:holster77-> The
> mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration of
> > the human species - it has occured for millennia.
>
>
> Where and when has this taken place?
Hehehe... Do you want a list of all the population migrations and
instances of ethnic mixing over the past 2000 years, or just a few
specific instances?
Or are you just being a bit thick?
> Inter-ethnic breeding is
> > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> I don't think anyone has disputed this.
>
> Forcibly
> > preventing either of the two is as unnatural
>
> No it ain't, preventing two people from marrying or breeding has gone on for
> millenia and has been practiced by all ethnicities amongst their own and
> other races, check out Hindus, Sikhs, Moslems, or Indians Pakistanis.
> Moslem Girl from Bradford was murdered by her brother and mother, who are
> serving life sentences, for having a relationship with a Sikh youth.
> Sikh girls are living in fear of death from their families, for consorting
> with White, Black, Pakistani, boyfriends.
Hold on a sec, a slight contradiction here
- you consider inter-ethnic breeding to be natural
- as well as the enforced prevention of the aforementioned
> When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
> what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic races,
> who objects with violence.?
I do not apply double standards. They are racist as well. The pathetic
core of your argument seems to be based on painting liberals as hypocrits,
accrediting false opinions to their name and putting words into their
mouths, because, to be frank, bullshit is the best response you can come
up with. Give it a rest.
> as the forced social
> > engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
> >
> > Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and looks
> > decidedly brown.
> >
> > J. Lee
> Sat in the corner with his head stuck firmly up his arse saying you are a
> racist, until the coons came through the door and stole his PC and his PC.
Oh yes, I like it, the wit, the intellect...
Bar two facts: - A Black person has never stolen any of my possessions
(yes, that's having lived in an area with a large Black population). - If
someone were to make off with one of my belongings, and whom happened to
have Black skin colour, I would not racially abuse them, as the colour of
their skin is about as relevant as the lenth in millimetres of their
left-hand index finger. Such stupidity is only reserved for the likes of
you.
Paul Haworth
>Dear Sir,
>There are clear differences in potential amongst the races.
<snip>
Since there is no evidence for these differences, on what basis do you
arrive at this conclusion?
Andrea Collins
<pa...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk> writes
Don't know TOO much about genetics , but always understood that the more
different the genes that are matched in a pairing, the more hybrid vigour there
is.
Therefore, in genetic terms, offstring from mixed race pairings should be
generally healthier & combine more potential of each side.....
--
Andrea Collins
'Droid
Yes and no. This can be the case, and has led to many of the best varieties of
crops and livestock. Most cattle and sheep are crossbred, for example. However,
it also has the potential to lead to inferior stock should the gene mix not
work. In general though, a population with a large gene pool will be healthier
than one with a small gene pool. Having said that, the gene difference in humans
is unusally small, seeming to indicate a bottleneck in human ancestry not too
long ago, and racial differences are therefore pretty much insignificant. The
entire human population has far fewer genetic differences than the large
majority of normal species in far more localised situations.
'Droid
BOEDICIA
>From: "billy" <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk>
>Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 13:23 EDT
>Message-id: <8ido22$qf4$3...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>
>
>
>Instinct is what makes us duck when we see an object hurtling towards
>our face.
>The instinct by-passes the reasoning faculty. It does not bother to
>evaluate the object - such as whether or not it is hard or soft, sharp
>or blunt, etc.
>It operates on the basis of self-preservation and does not take
>chances; and is one of the most useful and powerful instinct there is.
>That is the example of individual self-preservation. But there is
>always the need to belong to a group giving us the survival value of
>security and identity (i.e. the gregarious instinct).
>The group which can do this most effectively is one in which all
>members share the same values, attitudes and beliefs (i.e. gives a
>sense of solidarity).
>Because of this there is the instinct for: "birds of a feather flock
>together"; "like attracts like".
>This is a healthy impulse towards forming an effective and viable
>group.
>A multicultural group with its many inbuilt and inevitable tensions
>cannot provide the necessary ingredients - by definition.
>It is as simple as that.
I just received my usual batch of English newspapers. They get passed around
to those of us who do not receive them by mail. The first one I opened
contained a story about two young men
who were thrown off a bridge. One drowned, the other survived, kept afloat by
his rucksack. The photos of the killers
were also printed - black as the ace of spades.
Now we await the usual "well whites commit crimes as well" from the "not
all coloureds throw whites from bridges"
brigade.
BOEDICIA
>Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 17:14 EDT
>Message-id: <ra4lksstq0jhe9j4a...@4ax.com>
><jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>>Because of this there is the instinct for: "birds of a feather flock
>>together"; "like attracts like".
>no birdbrain bonehead....the most likely reason is in order
> to confuse predators....
In that case, due to the large number
of predators currently running wild in
the streets of Britain, maybe it would be a good idea for the locals to "flock
together".
>for a starting point....try
>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/5922/
Oh no, not another moronic webpage.
First Hitler, now Silicon Valley.
>>This is a healthy impulse towards forming an effective and viable
>>group.
>the brainless human herd....yes bonehead....
> i can see that it would attract you...
>time to gallop across the savannah with the wildebeest....
Oooo look who's talking - yak boy.
> c'mon billy boy...your instinct is calling....
>shame you got the brain of a wildebeest.....
>the rest of us have a planet to sort out....
The thought of a weirdo lke you sorting
out the planet is enough to start the
rest of the world praying for WW3.
>all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry the triumph of evil
is that I a big stick.
> good people do nothing I trust actions not words
> only when it's funny -- woger wabbit
Nurse ! Quick and bring a yak and if you
can't find a yak, bring a goose.
Fairy Cake will never know the difference.
BOEDICIA
>From: abelard <abe...@abelard.org>
>Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 17:14 EDT
>On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:23:36 +0100, "billy"
><jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>>Sid, who on his anger should put a Lid.
>>You *are* very cross, to the point of being murderous.
>>Those who lose their temper lose the argument.
>>So don't disgrace yourself. Address the argument.
>you have no 'argument' bonehead....
>and even if you did, you would be quite incapable
> of marshalling it in a coherent manner.....
>you are a figure of mockery....
Says the resident raving queen who
mocks "christianists" and those who read the "christianaist" bible, whilst at
the same
time defending the jewists who gave
the world The Communist Manifesto
and The Bolshevik Revolution.
>you are boring.....
>go away again....please....
>fly back to africa with your flock.....winter is coming billy boy....
First of all, Fairy Cake winter is *not" coming - Summer has hardly begun.
Secondly why would any white man or
woman want to fly to Africa where the chances are very good that they would of
get raped, which would no
doubt result in catching AIDS, and get chopped up in one's own home?
As for "flying", if anyone opened a window
in your hostel, *you* would have no
problem flying out. You really are bonkers
you know.
>web site at www.abelard.org - new, doc. on logic of ethics.
> ..also education, logic and more....over 400 doc. requests daily
From 400 docs. mostly shrinks.
> all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry
> the triumph of evil is that I a big stick.
> good people do nothing I trust actions not words
> only when it's funny -- woger wabbit
Nurse !! Quick, the needle, "he's" gone again.
BTW - Whatever happened tp "Roger"?
Ever since I tumbled him for the Bolshie yid that he is, he seems to have
gone
very quiet. I call it the "Turner" syndrome.
BOEDICIA
>Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 18:31 EDT
>Message-id: <wLRxMEAXx$S5E...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk>
>
>In article <8ic4pd$l0q$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, martin
><Raym...@btinternet.com> writes
>>Dear Sir,
>>There are clear differences in potential amongst the races.
>
> <snip>
>
> Since there is no evidence for these differences, on what basis do you
>arrive at this conclusion?
How about - Ist World good. 3rd World
hopeless ?
Paul Hyett
view. To keep the thread going, I replied -
>>
>> Therefore, in genetic terms, offstring from mixed race pairings should be
>> generally healthier & combine more potential of each side.....
>
>Yes and no. This can be the case, and has led to many of the best varieties of
>crops and livestock. Most cattle and sheep are crossbred, for example. However,
>it also has the potential to lead to inferior stock should the gene mix not
>work.
Natural selection would normally sort that out, the only difference
being that humans would hurry the process along by preventing inferior
stock from breeding, rather than letting it happen gradually.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham, England
billy
> In article <8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, "billy"
> <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
of
breeding is
> the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced social
> engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
>
> Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and
looks
> decidedly brown.
>
> J. Lee
>
J.Lee whose opinions are not worth a Pee:
The attempt to force upon the indigenous people of this country a
dangerous multicultural society *is* Social Engineering - backed up
with the force of pernicious Race Laws which seriously curtails our
freedom of speech and the right to choose or reject associations.
Part of this process is contained in Mad Macpherson's report in which
he declared we are all "Institutionally Racist".
However, he used the wrong term. It should be we are all - and that
means everyone - black, white, brown, pink or yellow - "Instinctively
Racists".
And that is the point I am making. And it is a healthy instinct as
part of the instinct of self-preservation.
regards, billy
******************************
billy
"abelard" <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:455lkskfm877gva74...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:23:36 +0100, "billy"
> <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>
>
> >Sid, who on his anger should put a Lid.
> >You *are* very cross, to the point of being murderous.
> >Those who lose their temper lose the argument.
> >So don't disgrace yourself. Address the argument.
>
> you have no 'argument' bonehead....
> and even if you did, you would be quite incapable
> of marshalling it in a coherent manner.....
> you are a figure of mockery....
> go away again....please....
> fly back to africa with your flock.....winter is coming billy
boy....
>
Abe Lard (who is always hoist by his own Petard):
You are exhibiting the same syndrome as "Sid, who on his anger should
put a Lid."
You are faced with a proposition which you do not like but cannot
refute: Thus the frustrated anger.
regards, billy
P.S. I see your comic-book English is still as bad as ever. In fact,
it appears to be getting worse.
*************************************
billy
> billy wrote:
> >
> > "'Droid" <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:3948181C...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> > > pencil wrote:
> > > >
> > > > sid,
> > > >
> > > > you shout: ""BUT IT (ie racism) IS NOT HEALTHY.""
> > > >
> > > > i ask : why?
> > >
unhealthy
> > state there
> > > is.
> > >
> > > 'Droid
> > **********************************
> > Droid who always makes me Annoyed - because you always fail to see
the
> > crucial point.
> > To illustrate:
> > I will insert the crucial missing point (shown in parenthesis) in
your
> > above reply - which then proves the crucial point of the
conversation
> > starter - as follows:
mixed -
> > potentially applies to all mixes.)"
>
never intended.
> I do wish you would stick to what people say, not what you think or
wish them to
> say. It doesn't require mixing for racism to cause problems and is
generally
> down to a small minority of people who are determined to cause
trouble, either
> due to feelings of inferiority or because they feel it is an easy
route to
> power.
>
> 'Droid
Droid who makes me Annoyed (because your arguments are always Void):
Here we go again: It is a few wicked men and it is all their fault.
It was Hitler and a few of his evil associates who made the innocent
German people behave in a way they did not want to behave.
What nonsense: have a look at all the films from that period. They
were with him to a man, woman and child.
They only disowned him when he lost.
And even up to then, the German Army and people fought to the last
bombed out ruin and never surrendered until it was forced upon them.
If their heart wasn't in it, they would have surrendered to the Allies
on the first landing at Normandy.
This "we have been led astray" is a cop-out. No leader has any chance
unless his "message" has popular appeal. So do yourself a favour and
drop the nonsense you seem to like to retain. See thing as they really
are.
If everyone did that, we might start to make sense of the world, and
us in it.
regards, billy
********************************
'Droid
> And that is the point I am making. And it is a healthy instinct as
> part of the instinct of self-preservation.
> regards, billy
We are human, and as such are the only species capable of overriding our
instincts, where they are unhelpful or detrimental. Self-preservation is a
useful and good one to maintain, but it has nothing to do with racism: that has
a lor more to do with the dominance, an instinct that is fine in the wild, but
leads to serious problem if unchecked in human society, just as the instinct for
procreation, one of the first to tackled by any society or religion. The point
is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a situation
that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control them.
Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
'Droid
'Droid
>
> >Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
> >Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 13:23 EDT
> >Message-id: <8ido22$qf4$3...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>
> >
> >
>
> >Instinct is what makes us duck when we see an object hurtling towards
> >our face.
> >The instinct by-passes the reasoning faculty. It does not bother to
> >evaluate the object - such as whether or not it is hard or soft, sharp
> >or blunt, etc.
> >It operates on the basis of self-preservation and does not take
> >chances; and is one of the most useful and powerful instinct there is.
> >That is the example of individual self-preservation. But there is
> >always the need to belong to a group giving us the survival value of
> >security and identity (i.e. the gregarious instinct).
> >The group which can do this most effectively is one in which all
> >members share the same values, attitudes and beliefs (i.e. gives a
> >sense of solidarity).
> >together"; "like attracts like".
> >group.
> >cannot provide the necessary ingredients - by definition.
> >It is as simple as that.
>
> I just received my usual batch of English newspapers. They get passed around
> to those of us who do not receive them by mail. The first one I opened
> contained a story about two young men
> who were thrown off a bridge. One drowned, the other survived, kept afloat by
> his rucksack. The photos of the killers
> were also printed - black as the ace of spades.
> Now we await the usual "well whites commit crimes as well" from the "not
> all coloureds throw whites from bridges"
> brigade.
Exactly right. What is your point? Are you saying that all coloureds do engage
in this activity?
'Droid
'Droid
Once again making up your own interpretation. It wouldn't be a route to power if
people didn't willingly join in. The problem occurs due to ignorance and often
incorrect education: that is certainly the route Hitler took. It is a lesson in
questioning what you know, and not to rely on one source.
And they were not all with him. There was a sizeable number of political
prisoners, as well as a communist party which was as bad as the Nazi party.
> They only disowned him when he lost.
> And even up to then, the German Army and people fought to the last
> bombed out ruin and never surrendered until it was forced upon them.
So all German troops fought to the death? What absolute rubbbish. There was even
an asassination attempt amoung the top officers to try and remove Hitler so that
peace talks could begin.
> If their heart wasn't in it, they would have surrendered to the Allies
> on the first landing at Normandy.
Now Normandy is the last is it? Up until that time, Hitler had appeared to be
very successful, except for a blip on the Russian front (as presented back
home). Given that they went along in the first place, why would they give up at
Normandy. But then of course all this is based on your erroneous interpretation
of my last post.
> This "we have been led astray" is a cop-out. No leader has any chance
> unless his "message" has popular appeal. So do yourself a favour and
> drop the nonsense you seem to like to retain. See thing as they really
> are.
Good advice. Take it.
As for popular appeal, look through history: that generally tends to go to the
man who is the best at propaganda. People will tend to accept what they hear and
if they only have access to one source of information that is what they follow.
That is why free speech is so important.
'Droid
'Droid
> >you are boring.....
> >go away again....please....
> >fly back to africa with your flock.....winter is coming billy boy....
>
> First of all, Fairy Cake winter is *not" coming - Summer has hardly begun.
Winter is still coming, irrespective of what season we are in now.
> Secondly why would any white man or
> woman want to fly to Africa where the chances are very good that they would of
> get raped, which would no
> doubt result in catching AIDS, and get chopped up in one's own home?
Most of us know that the chances of that happening are not 1 as you would have
everyone believe.
'Droid
Paul Haworth
<boed...@aol.com> writes
>>Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
I presume you're referring, in your own vulgar way, to the fact that
the "First World" is today wealthier and more technologically developed
than the "Third World".
If so, you misunderstand.
The statement in question asserted that there were "clear differences
in *potential*". You, however, are referring to actual differences in
*performance*, which is a different thing. You can only infer ability or
potential; ie. what a people may be capable of under optimum
circumstances, if you optimize their circumstances. But human societies
have evolved under very different conditions; environmental and
geographical. Therefore you cannot infer "potential" from an observation
of how societies have developed around the world.
There are many reasons, unrelated to *genes*, for the different
histories of, say, Western Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa.
abelard
>>Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
>>From: abelard <abe...@abelard.org>
>>fly back to africa with your flock.....winter is coming billy boy....
>
>First of all, Fairy Cake winter is *not" coming - Summer has hardly begun.
>Secondly why would any white man or
>woman want to fly to Africa where the chances are very good that they would of
>get raped, which would no
>doubt result in catching AIDS, and get chopped up in one's own home?
so...you've finally dared to show your flabby 'mind' again....
let me hope that you can do a little better this time....
bonehead wishes to belong to a herd or a flock....
are you sure wildebeest get aids?
still....i must admire your loyalty in coming to the
aid of bonehead...a lost cause if ever i saw one....
but he sure needs help.......even yours....
web site at www.abelard.org - new, doc. on logic of ethics.
..also education, logic and more....over 400 doc. requests daily
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that I a big stick.
good people do nothing I trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
abelard
>>Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
>>From: abelard <abe...@abelard.org>
>>Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 17:14 EDT
>>Message-id: <ra4lksstq0jhe9j4a...@4ax.com>
>
>><jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
>
>>>Because of this there is the instinct for: "birds of a feather flock
>>>together"; "like attracts like".
>
>>no birdbrain bonehead....the most likely reason is in order
>> to confuse predators....
>
>In that case, due to the large number
>of predators currently running wild in
>the streets of Britain, maybe it would be a good idea for the locals to "flock
>together".
well...at least a better attempt than bonehead....
not a difficult task....but impressive from you....
>>for a starting point....try
>>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/5922/
>
>Oh no, not another moronic webpage.
>First Hitler, now Silicon Valley.
variety sweaty....but indeed, it is not really 'girl' friendly....
try a knitting group....
>>>This is a healthy impulse towards forming an effective and viable
>>>group.
>
>>the brainless human herd....yes bonehead....
>> i can see that it would attract you...
>>time to gallop across the savannah with the wildebeest....
>
>Oooo look who's talking - yak boy.
learn from experts my dear.....
>> c'mon billy boy...your instinct is calling....
>>shame you got the brain of a wildebeest.....
>>the rest of us have a planet to sort out....
>
>The thought of a weirdo lke you sorting
>out the planet is enough to start the
>rest of the world praying for WW3.
good 'thinking' batty 'woman'.....
get all those herd animals shooting each other....
pencil
Sat in the corner with his head stuck firmly up his arse saying you are a
racist, until the coons came through the door and stole his PC and his PC.
Is that before or after he and his boyfriend are raped and macheted to
death?
pencil
""Since there is no evidence for these (racial) differences, on what basis
do you
arrive at this conclusion?""
You forget (for starters) the evidence before your very eyes!
pencil
generally healthier & combine more potential of each side.....""
In theory then, you'd expect the healthiest and most dynamic and creative
people to be of mixed race parentage...back to the drawing board!
Steve Glynn
> BOEDICIA wrote:
> >
> > >Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
> > >Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 13:23 EDT
> > >Message-id: <8ido22$qf4$3...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >Instinct is what makes us duck when we see an object hurtling towards
> > >our face.
> > >The instinct by-passes the reasoning faculty. It does not bother to
> > >evaluate the object - such as whether or not it is hard or soft, sharp
> > >or blunt, etc.
> > >It operates on the basis of self-preservation and does not take
> > >chances; and is one of the most useful and powerful instinct there is.
> > >That is the example of individual self-preservation. But there is
> > >always the need to belong to a group giving us the survival value of
> > >security and identity (i.e. the gregarious instinct).
> > >The group which can do this most effectively is one in which all
> > >members share the same values, attitudes and beliefs (i.e. gives a
> > >sense of solidarity).
> > >together"; "like attracts like".
> > >group.
> > >cannot provide the necessary ingredients - by definition.
> > >It is as simple as that.
> >
> > I just received my usual batch of English newspapers. They get passed
around
> > to those of us who do not receive them by mail. The first one I opened
> > contained a story about two young men
> > who were thrown off a bridge. One drowned, the other survived, kept
afloat by
> > his rucksack. The photos of the killers
> > were also printed - black as the ace of spades.
> > Now we await the usual "well whites commit crimes as well" from the
"not
> > all coloureds throw whites from bridges"
> > brigade.
>
> Exactly right. What is your point? Are you saying that all coloureds do
engage
> in this activity?
>
> 'Droid
I think the logic is something like,
Napoleon was white.
Bo is white.
Therefore Bo is Napoleon.
Steve
Steve
>
> "John Lee" <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:holster77-160...@du-018-0018.claranet.co.uk...
> > In article <8i8f95$1n2$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, "billy"
> > <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration
> of
> > the human species - it has occured for millennia. Inter-ethnic
> breeding is
> > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> Forcibly
> > preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced social
> > engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
> >
> > Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and
> looks
> > decidedly brown.
> >
> > J. Lee
> >
> ***************************
> with the force of pernicious Race Laws which seriously curtails our
> freedom of speech and the right to choose or reject associations.
How has *YOUR* freedom of speech been curtialed?
From your previous postings you seem to be say exactly what
you think! You do have the right to reject associations nobody
is saying that you have to mix - you just don't have the right
to stop other people.
> And that is the point I am making. And it is a healthy instinct as
> part of the instinct of self-preservation.
"self-preservation." - What do you fear? Have you been given
any reason to believe that you were in danger? If not what the
hell are you on about?
Regards
Steve
John Lee
<jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> "John Lee" <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:holster77-160...@du-018-0018.claranet.co.uk...
> > The mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous migration
> of
> > the human species - it has occured for millennia. Inter-ethnic
> breeding is
> > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> Forcibly
> > preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced social
> > engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social engineering.
> >
> > Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off and
> looks
> > decidedly brown.
> >
> > J. Lee
> >
> ***************************
> J.Lee whose opinions are not worth a Pee:
> The attempt to force upon the indigenous people of this country a
> dangerous multicultural society *is* Social Engineering
No. Where there is no government involvement, there is no social
engineering. Hence allowing the influx of peoples into this country cannot
be described as such - as the migration of peoples is as part of human
nature as any "basic instinct".
To enforce upon this country a dangerous monocultural society by
preventing the natural influx of peoples by government intervention *is*
social engineering.
> - backed up
> with the force of pernicious Race Laws which seriously curtails our
> freedom of speech and the right to choose or reject associations.
> Part of this process is contained in Mad Macpherson's report in which
> he declared we are all "Institutionally Racist".
> However, he used the wrong term. It should be we are all - and that
> means everyone - black, white, brown, pink or yellow - "Instinctively
> Racists".
At this point several billion put their hand up to excuse themselves from
this equation, and quietly leave the room.
> And that is the point I am making. And it is a healthy instinct as
> part of the instinct of self-preservation.
> regards, billy
What do you infer by the "self"?
John Lee
<pen...@hnlnmd.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Going fishing, are we?
Try again.
martin
Paul Haworth <pa...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:wLRxMEAXx$S5E...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk...
> In article <8ic4pd$l0q$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, martin
> <Raym...@btinternet.com> writes
> >Dear Sir,
> >There are clear differences in potential amongst the races.
>
> <snip>
>
> arrive at this conclusion?
The following article is endorsed by 50 professors...I refer you to sections 8 and 9 in
particular.
Establishment Science of Intelligence
Fifty professors at Universities throughout the U.S., Canada, and Britain have signed the
following statement concerning the generally accepted science of intelligence and
inter-race differences in intelligence.
You will be surprised at many of the conclusions and at the number and identity of the
signers, all of whom are listed at the end of the article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dec. 13, 1994 Wall Street Journal p A18
Mainstream Science on Intelligence
Since the publication of The Bell Curve, many commentators have offered opinions about
human intelligence that misstate current scientific evidence. Some conclusions dismissed
in the media as discredited are actually firmly supported.
This statement outlines conclusions regarded as mainstream among researchers on
intelligence, in particular, on the nature, origins, and practical consequences of
individual and group differences in intelligence. Its aim is to promote more reasoned
discussion of the vexing phenomenon that the research has revealed in recent decades. The
following conclusions are fully described in the major textbooks, professional journals
and encyclopedias in intelligence.
The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence
1. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the
ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn
quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic
skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for
comprehending our surroundings--"catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out"
what to do.
2. Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They
are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological
tests and assessments. They do not measure creativity, character personality, or other
important differences among individuals, nor are they intended to.
3. While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all measure the same
intelligence. Some use words or numbers and require specific cultural knowledge (like
vocabulary). Others do not, and instead use shapes or designs and require knowledge of
only simple, universal concepts (many/few, open/closed, up/down).
4. The spread of people along the IQ continuum, from low to high, can be represented well
by the bell curve (in statistical jargon, the "normal curve"). Most people cluster around
the average (IQ 100). Few are either very bright or very dull: About 3% of Americans score
above IQ 130 (often considered the threshold for "giftedness"), with about the same
percentage below IQ 70 (IQ 70-75 often being considered the threshold for mental
retardation).
5. Intelligence tests are not culturally biased against American blacks or other
native-born, English-speaking peoples in the U.S. Rather, IQ scores predict equally
accurately for all such Americans, regardless of race and social class. Individuals who do
not understand English well can be given either a nonverbal test or one in their native
language.
6. The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little understood. Current
research looks, for example, at speed of neural transmission, glucose (energy) uptake, and
electrical activity of the brain, uptake, and electrical activity of the brain.
Group Differences
7. Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level. The bell curves of
different groups overlap considerably, but groups often differ in where their members tend
to cluster along the IQ line. The bell curves for some groups (Jews and East Asians) are
centered somewhat higher than for whites in general. Other groups (blacks and Hispanics)
ale centered somewhat lower than non-Hispanic whites.
8. The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for
American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly
midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly
where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered.
Practical Importance
9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait,
to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes. Its relation
to the welfare and performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life
(education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social competence), and
modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness). Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of
great practical and social importance.
10. A high IQ is an advantage in life because virtually all activities require some
reasoning and decision-making. Conversely, a low IQ is often a disadvantage, especially in
disorganized environments. Of course, a high IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ
guarantees failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in our
society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.
11. The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life settings become more
complex (novel, ambiguous, changing, unpredictable, or multifaceted). For example, a high
IQ is generally necessary to perform well in highly complex or fluid jobs (the
professions, management): it is a considerable advantage in moderately complex jobs
(crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less advantage in settings that
require only routine decision making or simple problem solving (unskilled work).
12. Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in
education, training, and highly complex jobs (no one claims they are), but intelligence is
often the most important. When individuals have already been selected for high (or low)
intelligence and so do not differ as much in IQ, as in graduate school (or special
education), other influences on performance loom larger in comparison.
13. Certain personality traits, special talents, aptitudes, physical capabilities,
experience, and the like are important (sometimes essential) for successful performance in
many jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) applicability or "transferability" across
tasks and settings compared with general intelligence. Some scholars choose to refer to
these other human traits as other "intelligences."
Source and Stability of Within-Group Differences
14. Individuals differ in intelligence due to differences in both their environments and
genetic heritage. Heritability estimates range from 0.4 to 0.8 (on a scale from 0 to 1),
most thereby indicating that genetics plays a bigger role than does environment in
creating IQ differences among individuals. (Heritability is the squared correlation of
phenotype with genotype.) If all environments were to become equal for everyone,
heritability would rise to 100% because all remaining differences in IQ would necessarily
be genetic in origin.
15. Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence (by an
average of about 12 IQ points) for both genetic and environmental reasons. They differ
genetically because biological brothers and sisters share exactly half their genes with
each parent and, on the average, only half with each other. They also differ in IQ because
they experience different environments within the same family.
16. That IQ may be highly heritable does not mean that it is not affected by the
environment. Individuals are not born with fixed, unchangeable levels of intelligence (no
one claims they are). IQs do gradually stabilize during childhood, however, and generally
change little thereafter.
17. Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences, we do not know yet
how to manipulate it to raise low IQs permanently. Whether recent attempts show promise is
still a matter of considerable scientific debate.
18. Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable (consider diabetes,
poor vision, and phenal keton uria), nor are environmentally caused ones necessarily
remediable (consider injuries, poisons, severe neglect, and some diseases). Both may be
preventable to some extent.
Source and Stability of Between-Group Differences
19. There is no persuasive evidence that the IQ bell curves for different racial-ethnic
groups are converging. Surveys in some years show that gaps in academic achievement have
narrowed a bit for some races, ages, school subjects and skill levels, but this picture
seems too mixed to reflect a general shift in IQ levels themselves.
20. Racial-ethnic differences in IQ bell curves are essentially the same when youngsters
leave high school as when they enter first grade. However, because bright youngsters learn
faster than slow learners, these same IQ differences lead to growing disparities in amount
learned as youngsters progress from grades one to 12. As large national surveys continue
to show, black 17- year-olds perform, on the average, more like white 13-year-olds in
reading, math, and science, with Hispanics in between.
21. The reasons that blacks differ among themselves in intelligence appear to be basically
the same as those for why whites (or Asians or Hispanics) differ among themselves. Both
environment and genetic heredity are involved.
22. There is no definitive answer to why IQ bell curves differ across racial-ethnic
groups. The reasons for these IQ differences between groups may be markedly different from
the reasons for why individuals differ among themselves within any particular group
(whites or blacks or Asians). In fact, it is wrong to assume, as many do, that the reason
why some individuals in a population have high IQs but others have low IQs must be the
same reason why some populations contain more such high (or low) IQ individuals than
others. Most experts believe that environment is important in pushing the bell curves
apart, but that genetics could be involved too.
23. Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat smaller but still substantial for individuals
from the same socioeconomic backgrounds. To illustrate, black students from prosperous
families tend to score higher in IQ than blacks from poor families, but they score no
higher, on average, than whites from poor families.
24. Almost all Americans who identify themselves as black have white ancestors-the white
admixture is about 20%, on average--and many self-designated whites, Hispanics, and others
likewise have mixed ancestry. Because research on intelligence relies on self-
classification into distinct racial categories, as does most other social-science
research, its findings likewise relate to some unclear mixture of social and biological
distinctions among groups (no one claims otherwise).
Implications for Social Policy
25. The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy,
because they can never determine our goals. They can, however, help us estimate the likely
success and side-effects of pursuing those goals via different means.
* * * * * * *
The following professors-all experts in intelligence an allied fields-have signed this
statement:
Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota
Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota
John B. Carroll, U.N.C. at Chapel Hill
Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii
David B. Cohen, U.T. at Austin
Rene W. Dawis, University of Minnesota
Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve U.
Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota
Hans Eysenck, University of London
Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology
Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University
Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve U.
Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University
Linda S. Gottfredsen, University of Delaware
Richard J. Haier, U.C. Irvine
Garrett Hardin, U.C. Berkeley
Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa
Joseph M. Horn, U.T. at Austin
Lloyd G. Humphreys, U.Ill. at Champaign-Urbana
John E. Hunter, Michigan State University
Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College
Douglas N. Jackson, U. of Western Ontario
James J. Jenkins, U. of South Florida
Arthur R. Jensen, U.C. Berkeley
Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama
Nadeen L. Kaufman, Cal. School of Prof. Pshch., S.D.
Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University
Nadine Lambert, U.C. Berkeley
John C. Loehlin, U.T. at Austin
David Lubinski, Iowa State University
David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota
Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine
Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota
R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia
Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburg
Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London
Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A&M University
David C. Rowe, University of Arizona
J. Philippe, Rushton U. of Western Ontario
Vincent Sarich, U.C. Berkeley
Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia
Frank L. Schmidt University of Iowa
Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A&M University
James C. Sharf, George Washington University
Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University
Del Theissen, U.T. at Austin
Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve U.
Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington University
Philip Anthony Vernon, U. of Western Ontario
Lee Willerman, U.T. at Austin
What more evidence do you want?
When you consider black crime in Western societies, the dire performance of African
countries (apart from those with a significant white minority), and many other facts, what
more evidence is even possible?
Perhaps you should remember that your universal and seemingly bottomless altruism, which
is a sentiment characteristic of white culture, will more than likely not be reciprocated
by other races, and once we have relinquished control of our homelands, then white liberal
suckers like yourself will be shocked to discover the nature of the ethnic bonds that tie
us, and them.
(We read and hear about this now, in Zimbabwe, Fiji.)
Larry@home
. The point
> is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
situation
> that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
them.
> Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
>
> 'Droid
So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my instinct
Not to breathe, and drown?
When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore my instinct to duck,
because I am a human, and can control my instinct, Yea right!
Don't stop taking the pills, they ain't doing you any good, but it's better
than nothing.
abelard
<pen...@hnlnmd.freeserve.co.uk> typed:
of course he didn't really....the comment came from
andrea c....
but pencil can't yet use the software effectively......
i put it down to inferior breeding....
>""Therefore, in genetic terms, offstring from mixed race pairings should be
>generally healthier & combine more potential of each side.....""
this is the erudite commentary made by pencil.....>>
>In theory then, you'd expect the healthiest and most dynamic and creative
>people to be of mixed race parentage...back to the drawing board!
there is some evidence in that direction...
i don't know how good it is....and imv it
may well be due to getting ideas and views
from 2 cultures, rather than to a cross breeding effect.....
perhaps you should get your own drawing board out again....
and your crayons....
abelard
typed:
>
>Paul Haworth <pa...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:wLRxMEAXx$S5E...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk...
>> In article <8ic4pd$l0q$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, martin
>> <Raym...@btinternet.com> writes
>> >Dear Sir,
>> >There are clear differences in potential amongst the races.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Since there is no evidence for these differences, on what basis do you
>> arrive at this conclusion?
>
>Are you Blind Man?
>Have you not seen the preponderance of niggers on the race track, much more
>in evidence than white runners.
>Probably accounts for why there are so many Blacks running Mugging shops.
oh dear larry is back to irritation mode....
do get through your thick head....
you know nothing about genetics or biology.....
as like as not you cannot tell the difference between
a house sparrow and a tree sparrow....
you don't know the difference between a genera and a sub genera
.....or even if there is a difference....
you do not know what a hybrid is or what a race is.....
you are a fairly bright extremely under educated pub brawler....
why i'll just bet you don't know the differences between a yak
and a cow...or even if they are equivalent categories...
as you clearly have not the foggiest notion of what the word
race means....just why must you continually post your
meaningless aggressive bollox.....
get a life boyo....
you may be a world expert on the anal passage.....
please to stick to what you know....instead of insisting
on talking through it....
Steve
>
> 'Droid <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:394CABCE...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> . The point
> > is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
> situation
> > that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
> them.
> > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
> >
> > 'Droid
>
> So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my instinct
> Not to breathe, and drown?
> When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore my instinct to > duck,
> because I am a human,
YES - take it full in the face - you deserve it!!
Regards
Steve
Steve Glynn
"Larry@home" <la...@fsn.com> wrote in message
news:394d...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk...
>
> 'Droid <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:394CABCE...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> . The point
> > is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
> situation
> > that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
> them.
> > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
> >
> > 'Droid
>
> So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my
instinct
> Not to breathe, and drown?
> When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore my instinct to
duck,
> Don't stop taking the pills, they ain't doing you any good, but it's
better
> than nothing.
>
>
Sorry, Larry, but I don't quite understand your point (again).
Are you suggesting that if someone throws a punch at you then you should
stop to consider his race before ducking?
Sounds a bloody funny way of winning a fight to me.
Steve
tiny
news:394d...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk...
> 'Droid <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:394CABCE...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> > The point is that instincts are not automatically beneficial:
> > they evolved in a situation that no longer exists, and being
> > a human you should be able to control them.
> > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
>
> So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should
> overcome my instinct Not to breathe, and drown?
Great example, it is obvious the sitiuation 'no longer exists',
no one falls into water, so why are you stopping breathing?
> When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore
> my instinct to duck, because I am a human, and can
> control my instinct, Yea right!
The instinct is to fright, fight and flight. The trained response,
again obviously is to do a quick colour check, before
deciding if and what action to - too late, been hit.
> Don't stop taking the pills, they ain't doing you any good,
> but it's better than nothing.
Of course remembering not to take the coloured ones.
Rich Egan
> "Larry@home" wrote:
>
> > When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
> > what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic
races,
> > who objects with violence.?
>
> Once again this false assumption that no-one objects when other races are
> rascist. That isn't the case. The reason it isn't mentioned much here is
that,
> as far as I can gather, all the rascists that post here are white, so
naturally
> it is white rascism that is most prominent. However, you and your
compatriots
> still bring up this accusation of hypocracy despite the fact that it is
not the
> case and is stated not be the case every time you bring it up.
>
> 'Droid
Ok Droid , so where are the objections to anti-white racism ?
How many blacks etc have been put in jail for mking anti white
statements? Are you interpreting there absence from prison as a lack
of incidents ? What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
seeing it's culture permanently altered ? This would be a blessing to
them , but it's not happening. No What you are seeing is a concerted
effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
Rich
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Rich Egan
Steve Glynn <steve...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:8ijr0m$lct$2...@supernews.com...
> > . The point
> > > is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
> > situation
> > > that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
> > them.
> > > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
> > >
> >
> > So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my
> instinct
> > Not to breathe, and drown?
> duck,
> > because I am a human, and can control my instinct, Yea right!
> better
> > than nothing.
> >
> >
>
>
> Are you suggesting that if someone throws a punch at you then you should
> stop to consider his race before ducking?
>
> Sounds a bloody funny way of winning a fight to me.
A perfect example of willful ignorance if ever there was one!
Rich
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Steve
A perfect example of a bloody stupid question if ever there was one!
Regards
Steve
Steve
> > "Larry@home" wrote:
> >
> > > When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
> > > what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic
> races,
> > > who objects with violence.?
> >
> > Once again this false assumption that no-one objects when other races are
> > rascist. That isn't the case. The reason it isn't mentioned much here is
> that,
> > as far as I can gather, all the rascists that post here are white, so
> naturally
> > it is white rascism that is most prominent. However, you and your
> compatriots
> > still bring up this accusation of hypocracy despite the fact that it is
> not the
> > case and is stated not be the case every time you bring it up.
> >
> > 'Droid
>
> effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
> Rich
> Sic Semper Tyrannis
Well better not book a holiday then..... ;)
Regards
Steve
tiny
news:8il5gi$mpv$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
> Steve Glynn <steve...@lineone.net> wrote in message
> news:8ijr0m$lct$2...@supernews.com...
> > "Larry@home" <la...@fsn.com> wrote in message
> > news:394d...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk...
> > > When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore my instinct to
> > > duck, because I am a human, and can control my instinct, Yea right!
>
> > Are you suggesting that if someone throws a punch at you then you
> > should stop to consider his race before ducking?
> > Sounds a bloody funny way of winning a fight to me.
>
> A perfect example of willful ignorance if ever there was one!
The ignorance is the fool who associates instinct
and self defence with colour of the attacker.
Paul Hyett
considered view. To keep the thread going, I replied -
>
>why i'll just bet you don't know the differences between a yak
> and a cow...or even if they are equivalent categories...
I doubt Larry knows the difference between a woman & a sheep either! :)
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham, England
Sunil
Well, I certainly have not! Explain that if you will.
Sunil
--
'Keep Sunday Sexual'
abelard
<rich...@mindspring.com> typed:
> What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>seeing it's culture permanently altered ? This would be a blessing to
>them , but it's not happening. No What you are seeing is a concerted
>effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
america...
regards.
abelard
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> typed:
depends where 'he' looks....
'Droid
>
> 'Droid <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:394AC3DC...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> > "Larry@home" wrote:
> >
> > > When a whiteman objects to inter racial mixing, they are branded racist,
> > > what double standards do you apply, when it is a member of the ethnic
> races,
> > > who objects with violence.?
> >
> > Once again this false assumption that no-one objects when other races are
> > rascist. That isn't the case. The reason it isn't mentioned much here is
> that,
> > as far as I can gather, all the rascists that post here are white, so
> naturally
> > it is white rascism that is most prominent. However, you and your
> compatriots
> > still bring up this accusation of hypocracy despite the fact that it is
> not the
> > case and is stated not be the case every time you bring it up.
> >
> > 'Droid
>
I personally have objected to it many times here, although I am still being
accused of not making any comment on it. This applies to most people on my side
of the debate. The problem is that it is inconvenient for your side of the
debate to admit it as it rather ruins your view of us.
> How many blacks etc have been put in jail for mking anti white
> statements? Are you interpreting there absence from prison as a lack
> of incidents ?
The race laws apply to everyone,a dn frankly laws based on what people were
thinking are unworkable. As far as I am concerned it makes no difference why a
crime is committed: it should be punished the same way.
> What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
> seeing it's culture permanently altered ?
At the moment, not very many. Why? Becuase we pretty much managed that across
the world in the last two centuries. However, I believe Hawaii is still
experiencing a large amount of white immigration to give a specific example.
> This would be a blessing to
> them , but it's not happening.
A blessing for them? Then why not for us?
> No What you are seeing is a concerted
> effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
Crap. It is no more true than the white Empires were an attempt to eliminate
non-white races.
'Droid
'Droid
> . The point
> > is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
> situation
> > that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
> them.
> > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
> >
> > 'Droid
>
> So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my instinct
> Not to breathe, and drown?
When you fall in deep water I do indeed suggest you don't breathe. It is when
you do breathe in water that you will drown. I would suggest you wait until you
reach the surface again.
> When a nigger throws a fist at my head, should I ignore my instinct to duck,
> because I am a human, and can control my instinct, Yea right!
That is not what I said. When did 'not automatically beneficial' become 'never
beneficial'?
> Don't stop taking the pills, they ain't doing you any good, but it's better
> than nothing.
This coming from the person who thinks breathing underwater is a good idea
because then you won't drown!
'Droid
Carl Greatbatch
New Zealand??
abelard <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:06nsks8ghrsr8f0iv...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:58:35 -0400, "Rich Egan"
> <rich...@mindspring.com> typed:
>
> > What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
> >seeing it's culture permanently altered ? This would be a blessing to
> >them , but it's not happening. No What you are seeing is a concerted
> >effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
>
> america...
Steve Glynn
"Sunil" <sp...@bc.ic.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.95q.100061...@biochem.bc.ic.ac.uk...
for you!
Steve
Larry@home
for giving me Tabelard to play with.
> >Are you Blind Man?
> >Have you not seen the preponderance of niggers on the race track, much
more
> >in evidence than white runners.
> >Probably accounts for why there are so many Blacks running Mugging shops.
>
> oh dear larry is back to irritation mode....
> do get through your thick head....
> you know nothing about genetics or biology.....
Yes I do, you are a queer acting like a man, biology is of no use to you, as
you have no chance of procreating using your arse, and your genetic make up
has reached a dead end.
> as like as not you cannot tell the difference between
> a house sparrow and a tree sparrow....
The tree sparrow lives in trees and the house sparrow doesn't.
> you don't know the difference between a genera and a sub genera
> .....or even if there is a difference....
So you don't know either?
> you do not know what a hybrid is or what a race is.....
Hybrid is the loaf on the top shelf at the supermart innit?
Didn't schumaccer win the race on Sunday?
>
> you are a fairly bright extremely under educated pub brawler....
I can count on one thumb the number of times I have been in a pub this
century.
You are a pretensious prat, with pseudo intellectual leanings
You are right about one thing, I ain't an intellectual.
I daily thank my God for this.
>
> why i'll just bet you don't know the differences between a yak
> and a cow
Surely you would wish for any difference to be between a Bovine or a Yak,
ISTR that the term COW denotes the female of many species? Even members of
your particular deviance refer to one another as Cows.
...or even if they are equivalent categories...
>
> as you clearly have not the foggiest notion of what the word
> race means....
There is only one race, the human race, and no one has won it YET!
<>just why must you continually post your
> meaningless aggressive bollox.....
explain aggressive bollox.
> get a life boyo....
explain boyo
>
> you may be a world expert on the anal passage.....
explain passage
> please to stick to what you know
explain know
>....instead of insisting
explain insisting
> on talking through it....
explain it.
>
> web site at/
useless crap dumped.
Larry@home
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:59:47 +0100, Paul Hyett
> <pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> typed:
>
> >On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, abelard <abe...@abelard.org> stated this
> >considered view. To keep the thread going, I replied -
> >>
> >
> >I doubt Larry knows the difference between a woman & a sheep either! :)
A sheep is nice and cuddly and tastes good with mint sauce, a woman is nice
and cuddly and tastes just like anchovy.
>
> depends where 'he' looks....
>
> regards his face in the mirror and winces as it cracks.
>
Larry@home
Steve Glynn <steve...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:8ijr0m$lct$2...@supernews.com...
>
> "Larry@home" <la...@fsn.com> wrote in message
> news:394d...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk...
> >
> > news:394CABCE...@netcomuk.co.uk...
> > . The point
> > > is that instincts are not automatically beneficial: they evolved in a
> > situation
> > > that no longer exists, and being a human you should be able to control
> > them.
> > > Unfortunately most can't, so it seems.
> > >
> > > 'Droid
> >
> > So when you fall into deep water, you suggest I should overcome my
> instinct
> > Not to breathe, and drown?
> duck,
> > because I am a human, and can control my instinct, Yea right!
> better
> > than nothing.
> >
> >
>
Well I am sorry you feel unable to comprehend, may I suggest you read Droids
comments and assertations regarding instinct, and then read my assertations
in my riposte.
>
> Are you suggesting that if someone throws a punch at you then you should
> stop to consider his race before ducking?
No, that is what you are suggesting, hoping someway to elicit a cheap laugh,
at your low wit.
>
> Sounds a bloody funny way of winning a fight to me.
We won't win the fight, when we have a Homo secretary who is so frightened
of being called a racist, that he defies our country's laws and allows a
convicted Black rapist(remember the woman he raped was black) in to stage a
fight which has already been stopped in another country.
Larry@home
Andrea Collins
<la...@fsn.com> writes
"Just like anchovy"?????
Perhaps you should find some ladies that use soap & water a bit more often....
I mean "Tuna" I could JUST POSSIBLY ACCEPT....
--
Andrea Collins
Donald Fisk
>
>Ok Droid , so where are the objections to anti-white racism ?
>statements?
I don't know about 'put in jail', but Louis Farrakhan is a black racist
and was refused entry into the UK because of this.
>Are you interpreting there absence from prison as a lack
>of incidents ? What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>seeing it's culture permanently altered ?
North America, South America, Australia and New Zealand.
> Rich
Le Hibou
abelard
typed:
>
>abelard <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
>news:u8nskss4v0jrna69i...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:59:47 +0100, Paul Hyett
>> <pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> typed:
>>
>> >On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, abelard <abe...@abelard.org> stated this
>> >considered view. To keep the thread going, I replied -
>> >>
>> >>why i'll just bet you don't know the differences between a yak
>> >> and a cow...or even if they are equivalent categories...
>> >
>> >I doubt Larry knows the difference between a woman & a sheep either! :)
>
>A sheep is nice and cuddly and tastes good with mint sauce, a woman is nice
>and cuddly and tastes just like anchovy.
if we don't wash....for three or four days....
i s'pose you use taste because you are blind....
>> depends where 'he' looks....
>>
> regards his face in the mirror and winces as it cracks.
which...the face or the mirror?
abelard
typed:
>
>Paul Haworth <pa...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:wLRxMEAXx$S5E...@finsbury-park.demon.co.uk...
>> In article <8ic4pd$l0q$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, martin
>> <Raym...@btinternet.com> writes
>> >Dear Sir,
>> >There are clear differences in potential amongst the races.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Since there is no evidence for these differences, on what basis do you
>> arrive at this conclusion?
>
>The following article is endorsed by 50 professors...I refer you to sections 8 and 9 in
>particular.
you are being conned....
at least some of the 'professors' listed have close links to the
pioneer fund....
The Pioneer Fund was set up in 1937 to promote a segregationist
agenda. It has millions of pounds to dole out each year to
‘scientists’ who wish to pursue ‘research’ aimed at ‘proving’ that
various ‘races’ or groups are ‘inferior’. In practice, this is no
different from a lobby promoting cigarette smoking or the interests of
the car, gun or media lobbies. Truth and fact are not their
objectives. Their objectives, like Hitler’s are simply power. The
better their motives and methods are understood, the more likely
society can guard against their venal selfishness.
For a short run-down on the Pioneer Fund see:
http://www.isrp.org/article1/ar_pio.html
For further detail see Tucker.
Tucker, William H. The Science and Politics of Racial Research
1994;
1996, Univ. of Illinois Press, 0252065603
A treatment of the social determinants of ‘intelligence’ is available
in C. S. Fischer et al., Inequality by Design, 1996, Princeton
University Press, 0-691-02898-2.
This book attempts to debunk The Bell Curve, but ends up being quite
as lopsided, and more careless. It does, however, contain much
information and methods on thinking about this subject that is not
covered adequately (or at least in such high profile) in The Bell
Curve. Just as the Bell Curve tends to over-emphasise the genetic
contribution, this book tends to over-emphasise the sociological
contribution.
>Establishment Science of Intelligence
>
>Fifty professors at Universities throughout the U.S., Canada, and Britain have signed the
>following statement concerning the generally accepted science of intelligence and
>inter-race differences in intelligence.
>
>You will be surprised at many of the conclusions and at the number and identity of the
>signers, all of whom are listed at the end of the article.
no martin....what surprises me...is that you have the cheek
and dishonesty to post this sloppy drivel again...after i
have already cut it to ribbons for you.....
until this moment i had imagined you to be an honourable
if somewhat foolish poster....i see that i must revise my
opinion of you..
i shall repost my reply to your previous posting of this
sloppy article....
>Racial Differences in Intelligence:
>What Mainstream Science Says
the article is sloppy....i would not have been
prepared to sign it.....read this...
http://www.abelard.org/iqedfran/iqedfran.htm
>Since the publication of "The BELL CURVE," many commentators have
>offered opinions about human intelligence that misstate current
>scientific evidence.
what a revelation....now name sommat they get right!
>This statement outlines conclusions regarded as mainstream among
some
>researchers on intelligence,
>The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence
>Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other
>things,
after thirty years of studying the memory engram....
i am still not sure that it exists.....karl lashley....
> involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think
>abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from
>experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or
>test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability
>for comprehending our surroundings -- "catching on," "making sense" of
>things, or "figuring out" what to do.
'the' 'definition' is far from clear....
>Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests
>measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms,
>reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments. They do
>not measure creativity, character, personality, or other important
>differences among individuals, nor are they intended to.
you live in an aristotelian culture.....that has considerable
consequences....read....
http://www.abelard.org/category/category.htm
it effects the way you think....it effects your reasoning....
it effects your 'scientific' myths....
it effects the way you think about 'intelligence'......
the way you think about the world effects your behaviour....read...
http://www.abelard.org/ethics.htm
>The spread of people along the IQ continuum, from low to high, can be
>represented well by the BELL CURVE (in statistical jargon, the "normal
>CURVE").
imv, the beta curve is a better fit....
> Most people cluster around the average (IQ 100). Few are
>either very bright or very dull: About 3%
on the normal curve prediction that is nearer to 2%
the article does not refer to the flynn effect....in context....
a very serious omission....
>of Americans score above IQ
>130 (often considered the threshold for "giftedness"), with about the
>same percentage below IQ 70 (IQ 70-75 often being considered the
>threshold for mental retardation).
the concentration on groups says NOTHING about individuals.
>The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little
>understood.
true....read that sentence again....with care.....
note how such sentences are 'buried' and casually thrown away....
> Current research looks, for example, at speed of neural
>transmission, glucose (energy) uptake, and electrical activity of the
>brain.
note how this pretends to sciece....over riding the throw away
sentence...the reality remains....
WE DO NOT KNOW....
>Group Differences
>Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level. The
>BELL CURVES of different groups overlap considerably, but groups often
>differ in where their members tend to cluster along the IQ line. The
>BELL CURVES for some groups (Jews and East Asians) are centered
>somewhat higher than for whites in general. Other groups (blacks and
>Hispanics) are centered somewhat lower than non-Hispanic whites.
'races' and 'racial-ethnic' 'groups' are defined by individual
humans....
THEY DO NOT EXIST OUTSIDE THE HEADS OF THOSE
CHOOSING THEM......
>The BELL CURVE for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the BELL
>CURVE for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different
>subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and
>blacks.
note that there is no mention of the social relative conditions
of these 'groups'....
>The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100
>the BELL CURVES for Jews and Asians are centered.
well....that is convenient....
i just love that word 'exactly'.....
>Practical Importance
>IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single
>measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational,
>economic, and social outcomes.
does poverty cause drunkeness....or drunkenness cause poverty.....?
>failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in
>our society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.
it greatly favours richness also....
>The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life
>settings become more complex (novel, ambiguous, changing,
>unpredictable, or multi-faceted). For example, a high IQ is generally
>necessary to perform well in highly complex or fluid jobs (the
>professions, management); it is a considerable advantage in moderately
>complex jobs (crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less
>advantage in settings that require only routine decision making or
>simple problem solving (unskilled work).
the education of the poor is very much worse than the
education of the poor....ON AVERAGE
>Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting
>performance in education, training, and highly complex jobs (no one
>claims they are)
good....now lets see what the next sentence will be.....
>, but intelligence is often the most important.
yes dear....how 'often'?
>and settings compared with general intelligence. Some scholars choose
>to refer to these other human traits as other "intelligences."
ie...'we are scholars'......
>Source and Stability of Within-Group Differences
>Individuals differ in intelligence due to differences in both their
>environments and genetic heritage. Heritability estimates range from
>0.4 to 0.8 (on a scale from 0 to 1),
more usually about .4....but bringing in .8 'improves'
the feel does it not?
>of phenotype with genotype.) If all environments were to become equal
>for everyone, heritability would rise to 100% because all remaining
>differences in IQ would necessarily be genetic in origin.
true.....how are we too achieve 'equal' environments?
is your mummy going to shout at me while i occupy your skin?
now perhaps you will give me a clear instrumental definition
of iq.....ah yes....'it is what iq tests measure'!
>Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in
>intelligence (by an average of about 12 IQ points) for both genetic and
>environmental reasons. They differ genetically because biological
>brothers and sisters share exactly half their genes with each parent
>and, on the average, only half with each other. They also differ in IQ
>because they experience different environments within the same family.
so...perhaps you will explain to me....
why some 'identical' twins reared apart have show a variation
of more than 20 points......
and why iq scores in industrial countries are rising by
approximately 10 points per generation.
(sd 15-16...generation '=' 20 years)
>That IQ may be
note well....
> highly heritable does not mean that it is not affected
>by the environment. Individuals are not born with fixed, unchangeable
>levels of intelligence (no one claims they are).
good...very good....
>IQs do gradually
>stabilize during childhood, however, and generally change little
>thereafter.
yes, we know....most people stop education when the leave school...
>Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences, we do
>not know yet how to manipulate it to raise low IQs permanently.
i believe that i do.... there are other workers who also
believe that.....
>Whether
>recent attempts show promise is still a matter of considerable
>scientific debate.
great...let's hear you 'debate' it.....
but you ain't going to.....well?....are you?....
no....of course not.....
enuf already...i am getting bored....
billy
"John Lee" <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:holster77-180...@du-034-0182.claranet.co.uk...
> In article <8ii85j$aql$3...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>, "billy"
> <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > "John Lee" <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:holster77-160...@du-018-0018.claranet.co.uk...
> > > The mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous
migration
> > of
> > > the human species - it has occured for millennia. Inter-ethnic
> > breeding is
> > > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> > Forcibly
> > > preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced
social
> > > engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social
engineering.
> > >
> > > Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off
and
> > looks
> > > decidedly brown.
> > >
> > > J. Lee
> > >
> > ***************************
> > J.Lee whose opinions are not worth a Pee:
> > The attempt to force upon the indigenous people of this country a
> > dangerous multicultural society *is* Social Engineering
>
> No. Where there is no government involvement, there is no social
> engineering. Hence allowing the influx of peoples into this country
cannot
> be described as such - as the migration of peoples is as part of
human
> nature as any "basic instinct".
> To enforce upon this country a dangerous monocultural society by
> preventing the natural influx of peoples by government intervention
*is*
> social engineering.
>
> > - backed up
> > with the force of pernicious Race Laws which seriously curtails
our
> > freedom of speech and the right to choose or reject associations.
> > Part of this process is contained in Mad Macpherson's report in
which
> > he declared we are all "Institutionally Racist".
> > However, he used the wrong term. It should be we are all - and
that
> > means everyone - black, white, brown, pink or yellow -
"Instinctively
> > Racists".
>
> At this point several billion put their hand up to excuse themselves
from
> this equation, and quietly leave the room.
>
> > And that is the point I am making. And it is a healthy instinct as
> > part of the instinct of self-preservation.
> > regards, billy
>
> What do you infer by the "self"?
>
> J. Lee
>
************************************
J.Lee whose opinions are not worth a Pee:
You are a tiresome twit.
The "self" to which I refer is a "self" I have got and which you seem
to lack or not understand.
Perhaps you are a schizophrenic?
This self I have is the one I wish to preserve along with the
extensions of that self such as my family and those who I recognise
are of my own kind.
I have an instinct to preserve all this (you idiot without a sense of
self).
regards, billy
*********************************************
billy
"Steve" <sjd...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:394D2F...@yahoo.co.uk...
> billy wrote:
> >
> > "John Lee" <hols...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:holster77-160...@du-018-0018.claranet.co.uk...
> > > <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > The mixing of ethnic groups is as natural as the continous
migration
> > of
> > > the human species - it has occured for millennia. Inter-ethnic
> > breeding is
> > > the result of the natural attraction between two individuals.
> > Forcibly
> > > preventing either of the two is as unnatural as the forced
social
> > > engineering of the Soviet Union - heck, it *is* social
engineering.
> > >
> > > Yet again, Billy boy, your pseudo-scientific essay smells off
and
> > looks
> > > decidedly brown.
> > >
> > > J. Lee
> > >
> > ***************************
> > with the force of pernicious Race Laws which seriously curtails
our
> > freedom of speech and the right to choose or reject associations.
>
> From your previous postings you seem to be say exactly what
> you think! You do have the right to reject associations nobody
> is saying that you have to mix - you just don't have the right
> to stop other people.
>
>
>
>
> Steve
*********************************************
Steve (who - for the idiots of his kind - I Grieve)
I can still express my opinions - in anonymity - over the Internet.
However, in the light of the impending attempts to curtail this, I
wonder how long it will last.
The freedoms I have lost since the intrusion of aliens are legion.
This was expressed in a recent conversation starter headed "Should We
grieve - Because We Have Grieve."
In case you have must landed from the Planet of Prats, I will give you
and extract from the aforesaid topic:
It started with this pernicious poem:
"It's the way you patronise
The way you avert your eyes
The way you cannot disguise
Your look of horror and surprise.
The way you think, The way you stare.
It's in the language that you use
The way you express your views
It's in the way you get annoyed
And say I must be paranoid."
About which I remarked:
I am perturbed by the consequences of the poem's dangerous nonsense.
For instance:
An employer appoints what they consider the best candidate for a job.
The employer then finds one of the rejected candidates is taking him
to court for "racial discrimination" on the basis that the rejected
person is black and the successful one is white.
The employer finds that the onus is then on him to "prove" that the
rejection was not done on a "racial basis". He finds the long standing
principle of British justice is now reversed to the point that he (the
accused) is assumed guilty unless he can prove his innocence.
The accuser need not "prove" anything. All they have to do is to make
the accusation.
In law, now, an incident becomes a "racial crime" if the accuser "says
it is".
So:
The employer has to "prove" that he did not "look in horror and
surprise" when the candidate entered the room. He did not "avert his
eyes" during the interview. He did not "express his views" in a way
which is "unconsciously racist". He did not "stare" in an unacceptable
way. He did not "get annoyed" whilst interviewing a black candidate.
He did not "patronise" the black candidate.
(All this as part of the accusation made by the black candidate.)
What a bloody mess we are letting ourselves in for as a country, due
to "Holocaust Funk" which makes seemingly everyone "Ethnic-phobic" so
that they get into a funk at the thought of upsetting minorities and
are terrified of any reaction.
Those minorities ought to think themselves blood lucky they have been
allowed to live in this country. They should do what immigrant
minorities have done since time immemorial - before "Holocaust Funk"
set in:
They should behave themselves and prove their worth and not expect any
special privileges or protections.
That way, they may eventually earn respect and a willing acceptance.
The way it is going now, all they *will* get is more resentment and
anger directed against them.
If you are a black, tell the others: Tell them not to be so bloody
touchy, sensitive and aggressive.
The ones who Gobbels would be proud of is *not* people like me who
tell
the truth as it is - and is not afraid to declare it - but those like
the CRE who tries to bend a thousand years of British justice to suit
their mad ideology, which now deems people guilty until *they* can
*prove* their innocence.
And all this lunacy supported by Mad Macpherson, Ga-ga Grieves and
Jack the man of Straw - all of them suffering from Holocaust Funk.
regards, billy
P.S. In a free country (which this country was at one time - before we
got immigrants) I should be allowed to express my dislike of whosoever
I happen to dislike - regardless of who they are and where they come
from. I should be allowed to have "horror and surprise" and "avert my
eyes"
and "stare" and "express my views" in whatever way I choose. I should
be allowed to "patronise" whosoever I choose to patronise and
associate with whosoever I choose to associate with, and not associate
with those I dislike - whosoever they are and wherever they come from.
If, in the case of immigrants, they find this freedom too much for
their adaptive capabilities, they should return to a land where
everyone is the same as they are.
Then they would not have whatever problem this freedom to express
opinions and likes and dislikes creates for them.
No-one compells them to stay here.
If the "kitchen" is too hot, they should get out of it - or put up
with the heat as it is.
And if they start to create more "heat" by threatening to burn our
cities down, as they have done in the past, they should be deported.
(end of extract)
All the above examplifies the insiduous loss of freedom which we have
suffered since the mass importation of aliens and the intrusion of
race into a country which once did not suffer its dangerous tensions.
If you were to visit us more often from the Planet of Prat you would
recognise this.
regards billy
************************************
Gaz
"Donald Fisk" <hi...@enterprise.net.nospam> wrote in message
news:961464891....@news.enterprise.net...
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Rich Egan wrote:
> >
> >Ok Droid , so where are the objections to anti-white racism ?
> > How many blacks etc have been put in jail for mking anti white
> >statements?
>
> I don't know about 'put in jail', but Louis Farrakhan is a black racist
> and was refused entry into the UK because of this.
Farrakhan is not just racist, he, like Malcolm X, advocated the use of
violence against White People and Jewish business/land owners. A double
standard exists in the US media with regard to the reporting of Farrakhans
exploits.
Gaz
Donald Fisk
>The race laws apply to everyone,a dn frankly laws based on what people were
>thinking are unworkable. As far as I am concerned it makes no difference why a
>crime is committed: it should be punished the same way.
So supposing a woman kills her husband because she catches him
committing adultery, and another woman kills her husband by the
same method so that she can collect insurance money. Should
*they* be punished the same way? I don't think so.
That's not an argument for a specific offence of racially motivated
assault, or whatever -- it's an argument for trying to establish
the motives of the criminal, and the likelihood they'll reoffend,
in order to arrive at a more appropriate sentence.
>'Droid
Le Hibou
'Droid
>
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, 'Droid wrote:
>
> >The race laws apply to everyone,a dn frankly laws based on what people were
> >thinking are unworkable. As far as I am concerned it makes no difference why a
> >crime is committed: it should be punished the same way.
>
> So supposing a woman kills her husband because she catches him
> committing adultery, and another woman kills her husband by the
> same method so that she can collect insurance money. Should
> *they* be punished the same way? I don't think so.
Yes. Why is catching someone commiting adultery a reason for murder? Why should
she be treated differently than someone who does it for money. They are both
murder.
Or are you trying to draw a distinction between causing death unintentionally or
causing death with premeditation? They are different crimes.
> That's not an argument for a specific offence of racially motivated
> assault, or whatever -- it's an argument for trying to establish
> the motives of the criminal, and the likelihood they'll reoffend,
> in order to arrive at a more appropriate sentence.
Sentencing in this country is a joke. I see sentencing as a punishment, and as
such it should be consistent. Motive, beyond the basic level of premeditated or
accidental, is irrelevant. If you commit an action and you know the
consequences, then you should receive a punishment whatever the reason for that
action. The only exception I can think of is self defence or the defence of
someone else.
'Droid
Larry@home
>
> >The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence
> >Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other
> >things,
>
> >abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from
> >experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or
> >test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability
> >for comprehending our surroundings -- "catching on," "making sense" of
> >things, or "figuring out" what to do.
>
> 'the' 'definition' is far from clear....
>
Steve Glynn
"billy" <jo...@billy100.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8ioa0g$dmj$2...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
Is your description of a job applicant taking someone to court for racial
discrimination on the grounds that the potential employer "averted his
eyes", "stared", or whatever an account of something that has actually ever
happened? If so, what was the result of the case?
Steve
BOEDICIA
>Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 17:06 EDT
>Message-id: <8im1qr$6kn$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>
>0400, "Rich Egan"
>> <rich...@mindspring.com> typed:
>>
>> > What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>> >seeing it's culture permanently altered ? This would be a blessing to
>> >them , but it's not happening.
>Australia??
>New Zealand??
Naughty Captain Cook. How dare he
discover Australia? Why, if he had minded
his own business, the 2000 Olympics
could have been held in Kings Lynn
and the Abos could have been left alone
to build yet another better and faster boomerang.
>abelard <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
>> america...
Naughty, naughty Columbus. Why, if he
had minded his own business, by now
the U.S. could still be a beautiful landscape of wigwams and men in
feathered whatever running around
scalping each other instead of a nation
of art galleries, museums, fine Universities, great hospitals, libraries
and of course, that place called Hollyvood.
>> all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry the triumph of
evil is that I a big stick.
>> good people do nothing I trust actions not words
>> only when it's funny -- woger wabbit
Nurse ! Qvick, ze needle. Ze patient
has gone bonkers again, und it's not
funny.
BOEDICIA
>Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 16:21 EDT
>Message-id: <394E80D5...@netcomuk.co.uk
>Rich Egan wrote:
>> What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>>seeing it's culture permanently altered ?
>At the moment, not very many. Why? Becuase we pretty much managed that across
>the world in the last two centuries. However, I believe Hawaii is still
>experiencing a large amount of white immigration to give a specific example.
Its all that naughty Captain Cook's fault.
I forgot - did the natives eat him after they killed him?
>> No What you are seeing is a concerted
>> effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
>
>Crap. It is no more true than the white Empires were an attempt to eliminate
>non-white races.
That is a stupid remark even for you.
The whites did *not* kill the coloureds.
On the contrary they used them to work
their farms and as house servants. What'
would be the point of "eliminating" them
when they were needed for work?
I can see I will have to post my
"A Racial Program for the 20th. Century"
written by the head of the Communist
Party of Gt. Britain, again, whereby they
wish to "aid the negro ro rise to
promience in every field and thus be able
to intermarry with the whites.............."
Naturally in modern day Britain marriage
is considered passe, so the reds won't have to worry about a small detail like
that.
Just let them breed willynilly until Oxford Street resembles any High Street
in
Africa and where the whites are
considered fair game for rape and
chopping up.
BOEDICIA
>Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 21:02 EDT
>Message-id: <961464891....@news.enterprise.net>
>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Rich Egan wrote:
>>
>>Ok Droid , so where are the objections to anti-white racism ?
>> How many blacks etc have been put in jail for mking anti white
>>statements?
>I don't know about 'put in jail', but Louis Farrakhan is a black racist
>and was refused entry into the UK because of this.
Farrakhan was refused entry for the same
reason that David Irving cannot visit
Australia or Canada - because the jews said so. Ain't money and power great.
......>What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>>seeing it's culture permanently altered ?
>
>North America, South America, Australia and New Zealand.
Beautiful countries. Apart from So. America where the idiot Spanish
foolishly bred with the Indians, the other
nations are part of the 1st World and
have contributed many technical
advances to mankind, unless you consider the boomerang and didgereedoo
a blessing to civilisation.
Robert Henderson
<hi...@enterprise.net.nospam> writes
>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, 'Droid wrote:
>
>>The race laws apply to everyone,a dn frankly laws based on what people were
>>thinking are unworkable. As far as I am concerned it makes no difference why a
>>crime is committed: it should be punished the same way.
>
>So supposing a woman kills her husband because she catches him
>committing adultery, and another woman kills her husband by the
>same method so that she can collect insurance money. Should
>*they* be punished the same way? I don't think so.
>
>assault, or whatever -- it's an argument for trying to establish
>the motives of the criminal, and the likelihood they'll reoffend,
>in order to arrive at a more appropriate sentence.
>
>
sentencing for the excellent reason that there are a potentially
infinite number of motivations and that judgements between motivations
will be subjective. The introduction of racial aggravation into our law
is the thin end of a very broad wedge. English law, however, is very
strong on intent. If you perform an action which constitutes a crime
without intent, in many instances you would not be charged. RH
>>'Droid
>
>Le Hibou
>
--
Robert Henderson
abelard
typed:
>
>abelard <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
>news:1amukssov1a8nm8mv...@4ax.com...
>>
>> >The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence
>> >Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other
>> >things,
>>
>> > involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think
>> >abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from
>> >experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or
>> >test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability
>> >for comprehending our surroundings -- "catching on," "making sense" of
>> >things, or "figuring out" what to do.
>>
>> 'the' 'definition' is far from clear....
>>
>If this definition is far from clear, how would you improve it?
wow...a sensible probe....
the problem revolves around it being context dependent....
i am not going to be able to give you a more simple answer....
your posts often refer to 'common sense'....as if it is a clear
concept....it is not....
your common sense is capable of not being my common sense....
there was a survey of the 200 richest britons a few years back....
only about 6 of them had degrees....
iq is 'education' specific....iqs are steadily rising, probably
because of better education....
there is too much theory without practice....
and too much practice without theory....
advance and clear thinking requires both.....not one
or the other....
any intelligent taught 12 year old chess player can
destroy and untutored experienced old fellow....
simply because they have more facts/knowledge.....
common sense and wit are not enuf in a complex society....
blair has climbed the slippery pole of politics....yet he
fails to understand freedom....which is an essential for
civil progress....
you may be a good street fighter...but a karate expert
is liable to brush you aside like a fly.....
iq tests test a series of mental tricks...
those tricks are *clearly* teachable......
the 'case' 'made' in the article is simplistic...and ingenuous....
how far you wish to dig...i know not....
i have given references in my post.....
there is much more on my site....
the field is not simple....or it would not interest me....
there are not simple 'answers'....
abelard
>>abelard <abe...@abelard.org> wrote in message
>
>>> america...
>
>Naughty, naughty Columbus. Why, if he
>had minded his own business, by now
>the U.S. could still be a beautiful landscape of wigwams and men in
>feathered whatever running around
>scalping each other instead of a nation
>of art galleries, museums, fine Universities, great hospitals, libraries
>and of course, that place called Hollyvood.
and your point is?
i merely answered a question....
James Hammerton
[snip]
> you may be a good street fighter...but a karate expert
> is liable to brush you aside like a fly.....
That is a controversial statement. My opinion on the matter (as a
black belt) is that karate training will make you a better fighter than
no karate training, however a good street fighter will have experience
and from that experience may have learned skills that cannot be taught
other than through lots of street fighting.
Karate classes teach people how to punch, kick, block and evade
effectively, with a few simple throws for good measure (beyond black
belt they'll teach more sophisticated techniques such as more throws,
locks, holds etc). This is done by rote, with a bit of partner
practice, although most classes also contain a bit of "free style"
practice. Essentially this is a constrained form of fighting where
punches are pulled, and certain types of move barred (e.g. stamping
your opponent's knee, poking his eyes or a swift kick to the groin),
allowing you to practice putting (some of) it all together without
risking serious injury or death of the participants.
The experienced street fighter will have learnt how to survive and win
when someone wants to beat him to a pulp. This is not to be
underestimated. He'll fight dirty and will be able to take a few
knocks if he needs to.
2 ways of learning the same thing? Perhaps, but I would rather take on
a person trained in karate than an experienced street fighter (unless
the former also happens to be the latter). The former is less likely
to fight "dirty", and may have bad habits (from a self defence
perspective) from fighting opponents who aren't out to kill him and
who pull their punches. On the other hand, knowing what I do, in a
self-defence situation I think I'd cause serious damage to my opponent
(assuming my back doesn't give out...). If in such a situation, a
vicious attitude (don't faff about, hit hard, hit vulnerable spots)
combined with karate training probably is quite effective. But an
experienced street fighter will probably beat me, on grounds of having
taken a lot more shit than me and survived (I may land a few nasty
blows on him but he's used to that almost by definition!).
James
--
James Hammerton, Department of Computer Science, University College Dublin
WWW Pages: http://www.cs.ucd.ie/staff/jhammerton/
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~james
abelard
<Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> typed:
this fred
BROWN MUST DESTROY BLAIR (if labour to survive)
posted to upm only also could benefit from this post...
regards.
abelard
>>Subject: Re: Racism - A Healthy Instinct.
>>From: 'Droid <nm...@netcomuk.co.uk>
>>Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 16:21 EDT
>>Message-id: <394E80D5...@netcomuk.co.uk
>
>>Rich Egan wrote:
>
>
>
>>> What Non white nation is being invaded by whites and
>>>seeing it's culture permanently altered ?
>
>>At the moment, not very many. Why? Becuase we pretty much managed that across
>>the world in the last two centuries. However, I believe Hawaii is still
>>experiencing a large amount of white immigration to give a specific example.
>
>Its all that naughty Captain Cook's fault.
>I forgot - did the natives eat him after they killed him?
>
>>> No What you are seeing is a concerted
>>> effort to eliminate the white race through miscegenation.
>>
>>Crap. It is no more true than the white Empires were an attempt to eliminate
>>non-white races.
>
>That is a stupid remark even for you.
>The whites did *not* kill the coloureds.
>On the contrary they used them to work
>their farms and as house servants. What'
>would be the point of "eliminating" them
>when they were needed for work?
yes ducky....when!!
otherwise they were driven off their land....
sometimes they did not like that....so they attempted
to retaliate....whence they were eliminated....
'the only good indian is a ded indian'
you may have points to make....but do please keep it
clean and honest....
abelard
>advances to mankind, unless you consider the boomerang and didgereedoo
>a blessing to civilisation.
there are things to be learnt from aborigine culture...
abelard
<col...@andrea1.demon.co.uk> typed:
>Perhaps you should find some ladies that use soap & water a bit more often....
how would he sniff them out?
>I mean "Tuna" I could JUST POSSIBLY ACCEPT....
:-)
regards.
abelard
typed:
>abelard <abe...@abelard.org> writes:
>
>[snip]
>
>> you may be a good street fighter...but a karate expert
>> is liable to brush you aside like a fly.....
>
>That is a controversial statement.
i'll accept what you say up to a point....
my opinion comes from seeing a 2nd and 3rd dan
(and a 5th in akido) in action out of the gym....
their mental attitude is also relevant....none of them
are dedicated pacifists....except perhaps a bit the 3rd dan.....
they have also taken part in many competitions...again, less so
the third...
what impresses me most is the utterly casual manner in which
they 'deal with' idiots....
i have watched one of them develop over a long period.....
there was a sudden qualitative change somewhat after
1st dan when they suddenly seemed to 'catch on'....and
become fluent or 'flowing' in their movements....
what the 5th does just looks like magic to me....even after
talking it over with him in some detail.....people bounce off him
like teflon (violently)...and i don't even see him move.....
(japanese trained....he even describes it in strange terms...
i would be interested in your feedback....
web site at www.abelard.org - new, doc. on logic of ethics.
James Hammerton
> On 21 Jun 2000 13:34:00 +0100, James Hammerton <ja...@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
> typed:
>
> >abelard <abe...@abelard.org> writes:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >> you may be a good street fighter...but a karate expert
> >> is liable to brush you aside like a fly.....
> >
> >That is a controversial statement.
>
> i'll accept what you say up to a point....
>
> my opinion comes from seeing a 2nd and 3rd dan
> (and a 5th in akido) in action out of the gym....
One of things I haven't witnessed is someone using their martial
arts skills in a real fight, largely because I haven't witnessed a
real fight (school kids wrestling each other doesn't count).
> their mental attitude is also relevant....none of them
> are dedicated pacifists....except perhaps a bit the 3rd dan.....
Mental attitude is definitely relevant.
> they have also taken part in many competitions...again, less so
> the third...
> what impresses me most is the utterly casual manner in which
> they 'deal with' idiots....
On reflection, I do think that those who persist to get high dan
grades in martial arts do develop some impressive skills. I've seen
instructors who are able to deliver their techniques with such skill
you wonder how it is possible.
E.g. one of my instructors at the last club I trained with could
deliver full power kicks to the head with enough precision to simply
tap the side of your skull lightly (if that's what he wanted to do),
and do it again and again and again. I was once partnered up with him
to practice combination kicks and he delivered a roundhouse kick,
followed by a reverse roundhouse kick, followed by another roundhouse
kick in quick succession, all to the head, all full power, all just
tapping lightly, all of which were a blur to me.
The point of all this is that you *knew* that if he wanted to knock
your block off with his feet, he would do so quickly, powerfully and
with precision. With his hands he was quicker and faster still. He was
employed as a bodyguard outside of his karate activities. You would
*not* want to mess with him.
The casual manner you describe comes from lots of practice in learning
to observe the opponent and then when they attack (or when you decide
the moment is right to attack), just getting on with the job as it
were. I'm not sure I was ever good enough to make it look casual
though... This may be where the long term martial artist can get the
edge -- learning not only how to deliver techniques but how to "tune
in" to what the opponent is doing.
A martial artist who can do this is a formidable opponent. Just as the
best tennis players make it look easy, so do the best martial
artists. An experienced street fighter might also get to this level,
but the martial arts route involves fewer injuries...
> i have watched one of them develop over a long period.....
> there was a sudden qualitative change somewhat after
> 1st dan when they suddenly seemed to 'catch on'....and
> become fluent or 'flowing' in their movements....
Interesting comment. I remember people saying that when I finally got
my 1st dan (on the 3rd attempt), the difference wasn't so much in what
I was doing as in how I was doing it. Something seemed to have
clicked, and apparently I was more fluid in my movements, less
uptight. Mind you this was back in 1989, and my total training time
clocked up since then is about 2 years. I have the feeling that I was
only just getting to the interesting stuff when I stopped.
[snip]
> i would be interested in your feedback....
The people you describe all sounded very experienced (and probably
very well taught), both in terms of their grades and the competitions
they engaged in. When you persist in a martial art to the extent that
you've spent 15 years or more doing it, the chances are you've become
a formidable fighter. This is especially true if the martial art
includes a lot of specifically self-defence oriented training (as
opposed to competitions). 1st Dan is regarded as having achieved "basic
competence" in the art -- further study is most definitely needed to
achieve what you describe, unless you're a natural.
Robert Henderson
<abe...@abelard.org> writes
>On 21 Jun 2000 03:12:52 GMT, boed...@aol.com (BOEDICIA) typed:
>
>>advances to mankind, unless you consider the boomerang and didgereedoo
>>a blessing to civilisation.
>
>there are things to be learnt from aborigine culture...
>
> ..also education, logic and more....over 400 doc. requests daily
>-- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
> all that is necessary for I walk quietly and carry
> the triumph of evil is that I a big stick.
> good people do nothing I trust actions not words
> only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
--
Robert Henderson