|Ironic, in'nit...||GWB||6/26/12 1:02 PM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Mitchell Coffey||6/26/12 2:24 PM|
On Jun 26, 4:02 pm, UC <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Anything descending from the minds of Mulders and Vermeeren will most
likely be shown untrue soon enough. I'm more concerned about that
website-for-the-lobotimized you found under a rock somewhere.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||GWB||6/26/12 2:28 PM|
I stumbled across it...don't recall how...
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/14/12 11:04 PM|
"Now genetic tests of Hitler’s biological relatives show that he most likely
had “sub-human” Jewish and African genes." Note that only "sub-human" is
between inverted commas.
"Jewish genes"??????? "African genes"?????????? These "conservatives who
love amerika" are truly demented scumbags. Zieg heil and god bless america.
So, no UC (if you're still out there somewhere) it's not ironic; it's a
steaming pile of cow dung.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/15/12 1:58 PM|
On Jul 14, 11:04ï¿½pm, Attila <jdkay...@gmail.com> wrote:> "Now genetic tests of Hitlerï¿½s biological relatives show that he most likely
> had ï¿½sub-humanï¿½ Jewish and African genes." Note that only "sub-human" is
> between inverted commas.What is a steaming pile of cow dung, genetics or your characterization
From the "about" page on the website:
"You are a visitor to our blog, so you should be courteous and civil.
A sure way to offend is to insult your host. Rude trolls will be
rebutted swiftly and mercilessly. Blasphemies, obscenities, threats of
violence, and bigotry of all kinds will be promptly deleted.
There are good and bad people in every race, ethnicity, gender, and
sexual orientation. No group has a monopoly on either good or evil,
including Jews. Comments with bigoted references to ï¿½Jewsï¿½ will be
replaced with the word ï¿½Martiansï¿½ because it makes as much sense to
blame all the worldï¿½s ills on Jews (or another biological group) as it
is to blame Martians! There are good and bad in every race, ethnicity,
culture, creed, and gender. To generalize about and condemn all
members of whatever race, ethnicity, culture, creed, and gender is
rank bigotry. This blog focuses on the behavior of individuals and we
are opposed to all behaviors that are contrary to Godï¿½s law and the US
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/15/12 9:56 PM|
>> "Now genetic tests of Hitler’s biological relatives show that he most
>> likely had “sub-human” Jewish and African genes." Note that only
>> "sub-human" is between inverted commas.> including Jews. Comments with bigoted references to “Jews” will be
> replaced with the word ”Martians” because it makes as much sense to
> blame all the world’s ills on Jews (or another biological group) as it
> is to blame Martians! There are good and bad in every race, ethnicity,> are opposed to all behaviors that are contrary to God’s law and the US
All well and good, Glenn but quote mining from my posts ain't too nice. I
deliberately put inverted commas around "conservatives who love america".
This is the name (or subtitle) of the website cited by the OP. I believe it
was clear from my post I was referring not to "all conservatives" but rather
the people producing the above-mentioned cow dung on that website. I hope
that clears things up and next time you might try reading with a bit more
care before hopping on your extremely high horse.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/16/12 12:10 AM|
"Attila" <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Fascinating. You've just quotemined yourself , since you spelled america with a
Not only that but now you present evidence that you are aware of the this fact.
Caught red-handed. Tsk-tsk.
>And I didn't say you were referring to all conservatives. I questioned whether
you were criticizing conservatives.
There is no way you can stretch that to be quotemining your sarcastic self.
With your "note" about "sub-human" being within quotation marks, focusing on
"these conservatives" and the spelling of America with a "k", it is not
unreasonable to suspect that you have problems with American conservatives in
general, although perhaps not every single conservative on the earth.
"The people" on the website did not "produce" the original news story, and the
quote I provided is from that website, incidentally owned by the author of the
article. "Sub-human" is what the Nazis claimed about Jews, not what the website
owner or the author of the original article claimed. The "about" page is not
indicative of "amerikans" or of those who would regard Jews as sub-humans. The
article is not "cow dung" with respect to genetics either. There has been
respectable research with regard to the subject.
I suggest that you take your own advice about taking more care before spitting
all over people.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/16/12 4:32 AM|
Bad me, bad bad bad. You caught me dead to rights, Glenn. I changed a c to a
k. Guilty as charged.
I do my best to practice what I preach, Glenn. Let me set the record
straight: I put "sub-human" in inverted commas precisely to show that was
NOT, repeat NOT, what I was angry about nor what the writers of the website
were claiming. Let me urge you again to try to read for comprehension,
Glenn, a tough skill but one you could acquire through practice. The ideas
of of Jewish genes and African genes were not put in quotes by the writers
of that website and it was my reading that the the author of the website was
presupposing that Jewish genes and African genes really exist. This is why
they were followed by a considerable number of ??????'s in my post and it
was what I was objecting to. I hope that clears things up.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/16/12 9:31 AM|
Even if it does clear it up, I don't expect Glenn to admit it. You
did your best. Don't waste too much time over his pokes and jabs.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/16/12 12:00 PM|
Thanks for that. I did try my best. Oh well, on to the next windmill to tilt
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/16/12 1:04 PM|
Actually Jillery is not completely off-base. I often let opponents get the last
word, even, perhaps especially, when they think they "clear up" their position.
You did clear up your position, although it was clear from the very start. And I
agree that you did your best. Had your post been the end of the sub-thread, I
would have let it lie. As to who is "poking and jabbing", I'll leave you with
what you said, that the conservatives on the website are racist "Nazi" demented
scumbags because they referred to DNA as "genes":
You are nothing more than a pukey little atheist twit that doesn't follow their
own advice. Not everyone who reprints the original article is a demented scumbag
that merits a Sieg Heil, nor are all who refer to differences in DNA "Jewish
genes" or "African genes". Even an idiot would know that. A quick search of
those words in quotemarks or a search to find all the news outlets and blogs
that reprinted the original article would clear up any misgivings about "the
conservatives" on that particular website, even to an idiot. And it appears from
a reading of your several responses above that an average idiot is more likely
to actually think and do some research before making nasty gurgling sounds as
I gave you the opportunity to really clear up your position, as I do with most
everyone, my first attempt was in the form of a polite question and different
perspective of the website author, my second attempt to help was more forceful
and evidential. You've only become more abusive and have provided no support for
your claims. You had your chance. And you blew it, while making yourself look
like a complete ass. I would have left it that way and let you have the last
word, which was more of the same empty bullshit, had you not decided to talk
"behind my back".
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/16/12 2:16 PM|
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:00:44 +0200, Attila <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote:
That's the right attitude. There always another idiot around to
ignore what you write.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/16/12 2:34 PM|
"jillery" <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I have to agree on that. Even an idiot would scratch his head at
"These guys are Nazis because they say Hitler might be Jewish."
You apparently did not.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/16/12 3:42 PM|
Thank you for your reply.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/16/12 10:20 PM|
One last attempt. You certainly are a silly, old grumpy-puss. Try and
lighten up a bit. It's all quite simple once you calm down a tad and tone
down the stream of invectives. Just as you are wrong about me being an
atheist, you are wrong about what I said. I was objecting to the notion of a
"Jewish gene" and an "African gene". There are plenty of biologists around
quite prepared to stomp on me more effectively than you ever could dream of
doing, if I am wrong. I seriously doubt that that there exists a "Jewish
gene" as an analytic expression since the term "Jewish" is not well-defined.
If "Jewish gene" is used synthetically as in "Jew's Harp" then that's
another kettle of fish.
Moving on to African genes, maybe you're unaware of it but Africa is a
rather large place. I know this from personal experience having worked there
for a number of years. If you travel about (I've been mainly to West Africa,
but also numberous trips to North Africa and Southern Africa) and observe
the enormous physical diversity of the population it seems absolutely absurd
to claim there exists a gene common to all and only this population. Again,
I throw myself at the mercy of the competent biologists on this ng. If they
tell me that there exists solid evidence for such an "African gene", present
in the bulk of Africans, north, south, east and west, I will make a public
apology. But my dear angry Glenn, will you do the same if the shoe is on the
Try and cheer up and bring the spirit of Wallace and Darwin into your heart.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/17/12 12:18 AM|
Get over yourself, you don't impress me nor do you affect me. I just call em as
I see em. And just for your information, I regard apologies of little value. You
likely are already keenly aware of your mistake. Nowhere in your attempts to
enlighten me have you included support for your contention that the
"conservatives" are scumbags that deserve to be regarded as Nazis. And now that
I have made you aware of the fact that the article has been pasted all over the
Internet, as well as the fact that not everyone who refers to "genes" is racist,
you claim that you were "objecting to the notion". In reality, you were
objecting to use of the terms in a racist fashion. That last is quite
significant. And you saw fit to include "conservatives" in your association with
what you considered racist language, which is also significant. They are
significant because you haven't provided support for your contentions, nor even
provided any substantive argument in support. In short, you think you can
dismiss your slander and not be accountable to it, and practice deceit in your
defense of that.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/17/12 4:33 AM|
> Get over yourself, you don't impress me nor do you affect me. I just callWow, that's impressive.
> And just for your information, I regard apologies ofWow, a tough guy.
> You likely are already keenly aware of your mistake. NowhereMaybe it's because I never made such a claim. But I guess you gotta go with
your gut on that one.
You're a bit slow on the uptake there. I objected to "Jewish genes" and
"African genes" and (obviously) not to genes in general.
> In reality, you were objecting to use of theI see you are very very sensitive on the subject of conservatives. Hmmm.
Interesting. bye bye.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/17/12 11:04 AM|
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:20:05 +0200, Attila <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>subhuman-races/If you're interested in a reply to your expressed POV, rather than an
argument invented by someone else, I have something to offer.
UC has a bad habit of posting cites without descriptive text or
commentary, as he did above. Other than the topic title, I have no
idea why he bothered to post this one. UC also has a bad habit of
making bald assertions. For these reasons, I didn't even bother to
click on his link. Perhaps UC thought it ironic that Hitler had
Jewish genes. Or that he thought it ironic someone else thought it
ironic. Or that he thought it ironic a conservative web site posted
this information. I'm betting I'll never know what he had in mind,
and it doesn't bother me a bit.
Based on AOTA, my tuppence is I would not have replied the way you did
for the reasons you gave. If you had identified links to the Tea
Party, or screeds on Obama's Birth Certificate, or rants that Obama is
a Socialist Muslim Atheist, you might have had a case, but you still
wouldn't have connected it to UC's post.
OTOH I would not normally have replied to your reaction, as both your
point and any possible point UC might be making isn't of interest to
If you mean the word 'Jewish' has multiple meanings, I agree. It can
refer to a person's religion, nationality, culture, historic
ethnicity, in any combination. In the case of Jewish genes, only
ethnicity makes any sense. There are many Jewish ethnic groups, the
two largest being the Ashkenazim and the Sephardim. It's an
historical fact these groups lived as small isolated minorities for
hundreds of years. There were strong pressures, both external and
internal, to marry within their group. So it's not surprising these
ethnic groups today have some distinctive genetic characteristics,
just as with any other small isolated population, some of the most
well-known relating to hereditary diseases.
Of course there's no such thing as *an* African gene, but several
genetic studies talk of African genomes. Svante P��bo's group has
done extensive studies of genes from people around the world. One of
his conclusions is that African populations have more genetic
diversity than non-African populations. So there are distinct
differences, and if your genome contains some of those differences,
chances are you have recent African ancestors.
Svante P��bo talks about this here:
About 6 minutes into his lecture, he says, out of approx. 3 billion
nucleotides in each of our genomes, he identified almost 39 million
positions with different nucleotides among his samples of 185 Africans
and 184 non-Africans. And of those almost 39 million positions, there
is not one where the same nucleotide exists in all Africans and not in
all non-Africans, and vice versa. However, when he relaxed his
criteria from 100% to 95%, he found 12 positions. From this, he
concludes the differences we see between African populations and
non-African populations are the result of different combinations of
many different genes. And the differences we see are for those
features which are most directly affected by the environment, skin
color, hair texture, body proportions, etc.
Of course, I'm no expert, so you don't have to fall on your sword just
because I present a technical disagreement.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/17/12 11:56 AM|
jillery wrote:I'm with you on that one. Calling "Fellowship of the Minds - Conservatives
who Love America" conservative is somewhat of an understatement. Have you
actually looked at it? If not, I certainly would NOT recommend it.
>Sorry but all those things you mentioned are exactly what is contained in
that website. I'm starting to lose the thread here. UC is the OP but has not
participate in the discussion at all. It seems to be Glenn who was gravely
offended by something but it doesn't appear to be anything I actually said.
If you're curious read the messages look at the website and form your own
conclusions. I am just very surprise that notions like "Jewish genes" and
"African genes" pass muster on an ng full of biologists. If you disagree (in
point of fact) with anything I said, I'd appreciate the corrections.
Otherwise, I think your instincts were correct. Thanks for the feedback.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Steven L.||7/17/12 12:03 PM|
On 7/15/2012 2:04 AM, Attila wrote:This "demented scumbag" thinks you're subhuman filth.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/17/12 1:08 PM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/17/12 1:46 PM|
Of course you do. ;)
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/17/12 1:57 PM|
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:56:46 +0200, Attila <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>"Now genetic tests of Hitler?s biological relatives show that he most
>>>likely had ?sub-human? Jewish and African genes." Note that only
>>>"sub-human" is between inverted commas.As I said, I didn't even click on his link. No, I didn't look at it.
Thank you for the warning.
Hmm. All the things I disagreed with what you said, you snipped out.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||GWB||7/17/12 2:16 PM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/17/12 2:35 PM|
> Steven L. wrote:
"Zieg heil and god bless america. So, no UC (if you're still out there
> > This "demented scumbag" thinks you're subhuman filth.He has good reason to. On the other hand you did not and do not have reason to
say what you did, and haven't even had the decency to admit it. Hiding behind
(among other things) feigned surprise that others have not criticized the
notion of identifying an individual's genetic ancestry doesn't provide you with
a free pass. You should expect no less than condemnation.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/17/12 9:46 PM|
> "Attila" <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> Steven L. wrote:
>> > On 7/15/2012 2:04 AM, Attila wrote:
>> >> UC wrote:
>> >>> http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/hitler-had-genes-
>> >> subhuman-races/
>> >> "Now genetic tests of Hitler's biological relatives show that he most
>> >> likely had "sub-human" Jewish and African genes." Note that only
>> >> "sub-human" is between inverted commas.
>> >> "Jewish genes"??????? "African genes"?????????? These "conservatives
>> >> who love amerika" are truly demented scumbags.
> "Zieg heil and god bless america. So, no UC (if you're still out there
> somewhere) it's not ironic; it's a steaming pile of cow dung."
>> > This "demented scumbag" thinks you're subhuman filth.
>> Of course you do. ;)
> He has good reason to. On the other hand you did not and do not have
> reason to say what you did, and haven't even had the decency to admit it.
> Hiding behind (among other things) feigned surprise that others have not
> criticized the notion of identifying an individual's genetic ancestry
> doesn't provide you with a free pass. You should expect no less than
Not feigned, Glenn, genuine. But if you want to defend "Jewish genes" and
"African genes" I'm sure your, uh, leader would be proud of you. Are "Aryan
genes" equally sacrosanct? I wouldn't want to cause offense. Have a nice
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/17/12 10:10 PM|
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:56:46 +0200, Attila <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:20:05 +0200, Attila <jdka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>"Now genetic tests of Hitler?s biological relatives show that he most
>>>>likely had ?sub-human? Jewish and African genes." Note that only
>>>>"sub-human" is between inverted commas.>>> If you're interested in a reply to your expressed POV, rather than an
>>> argument invented by someone else, I have something to offer.
>>> UC has a bad habit of posting cites without descriptive text or
>>> commentary, as he did above. Other than the topic title, I have no
>>> idea why he bothered to post this one. UC also has a bad habit of
>>> making bald assertions. For these reasons, I didn't even bother to
>>> click on his link. Perhaps UC thought it ironic that Hitler had
>>> Jewish genes. Or that he thought it ironic someone else thought it
>>> ironic. Or that he thought it ironic a conservative web site posted
>>> this information. I'm betting I'll never know what he had in mind,
>>> and it doesn't bother me a bit.
>>I'm with you on that one. Calling "Fellowship of the Minds - Conservatives
>>who Love America" conservative is somewhat of an understatement. Have you
>>actually looked at it? If not, I certainly would NOT recommend it.
> As I said, I didn't even click on his link. No, I didn't look at it.
> Thank you for the warning.
>>> Based on AOTA, my tuppence is I would not have replied the way you did
>>> for the reasons you gave. If you had identified links to the Tea
>>> Party, or screeds on Obama's Birth Certificate, or rants that Obama is
>>> a Socialist Muslim Atheist, you might have had a case, but you still
>>> wouldn't have connected it to UC's post.
>>Sorry but all those things you mentioned are exactly what is contained in
>>that website. I'm starting to lose the thread here. UC is the OP but has
>>not participate in the discussion at all. It seems to be Glenn who was
>>gravely offended by something but it doesn't appear to be anything I
>>actually said. If you're curious read the messages look at the website and
>>form your own conclusions. I am just very surprise that notions like
>>"Jewish genes" and "African genes" pass muster on an ng full of
>>biologists. If you disagree (in point of fact) with anything I said, I'd
>>appreciate the corrections.
> Hmm. All the things I disagreed with what you said, you snipped out.
I guess you don't mean from my first post on this thread? That one that
caused such offense. Now I'm really mystified. I think all the other posts
simply expressed shock and disbelief at the idea of "Jewish genes" and
"African genes" and that the object of my outburst was the authors of this
website who call themselves "Conservatives who love America". You can't
really understand my anger w/o looking at the website which caused it. Here
are some samples:
On the Olympics
> Now, they are pandering to the comforts of queers and lezzies, and turning
> their backs on a heterosexual married couple!
> There is no ‘National Pride’ in the Olympics any longer. Now it’s ‘Gay
> Pride’ and big money.
> Married Olympians Can’t Stay In Same Room – Homosexuals Can
> They can take that flaming torch and shove it up their flaming gay …..
"300 Blacks raid Florida Walmart"
> The headline on Drudge Report and on WOKV.com says “Flash Mob Overruns
> Northwest JAX Walmart.”
> What the headline and the brief story below the video leave out is one
> word that should precede “flash mob.”
> That one word is “Black.”
> It was a Black flash mob that overran that Walmart in Jacksonville,
Florida. And let’s stop calling it a flash mob. Instead, let’s call it by
the correct descriptive term: “flash riot” or just plain “riot” and
B. Reader's comment
> Ken | July 17, 2012 at 7:01 am | Reply
> Niggerz on the rampage!!!
C. Readers comment
> Big Mike Erie | July 17, 2012 at 7:45 am | Reply
> OweBaMao Bin Lying’s people doing what subhumans do….steal, pillage, and
you know, destroy everything moral and right !
Do you really need me to go on? There's loads more where that came from.
>>Otherwise, I think your instincts were correct. Thanks for the feedback.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/18/12 1:23 AM|
That's right, I do mean what you snipped out. The part about Jewish
and African genes. Putting the offensive "sub-human" aside, there are
genomes associated with ethnic Jews and Africans. And Europeans,
Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native-Australians, and Native-Americans,
and even more finely-divided ethnic groups. Humans use the same genes
which follow the same genetic rules as the rest of all life on Earth.
If that were not the case, then population genetic would be
Which isn't the same thing as saying there is a single gene which
makes any human different from any other human, anymore than there is
a single gene which makes you different from your parents. If there is
any one thing you take from population genetics, it should be that all
humans are a single species. The superficial differences people
react to so emotionally are the result of less than 1% difference
among the genes of seven billion plus individuals. I'm sorry if any
of that offends you.
Nope. I didn't even want you to get started. Political discussions
are generally regarded as off-topic on T.O., but if that's the way you
want to go, UC doesn't seem to care.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||J.J. O'Shea||7/18/12 7:31 AM|
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:28:32 -0400, UC wrote
> On Jun 26, 5:24ï¿œpm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchell.cof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 26, 4:02ï¿œpm, UC <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Anything descending from the minds of Mulders and Vermeeren will most
>> likely be shown untrue soon enough. I'm more concerned about that
>> website-for-the-lobotimized you found under a rock somewhere.
>> Mitchell Coffey
> I stumbled across it...
This I believe, as stumbling is your usual mode of locomotion. Well, that,
and slithering, as you lack a backbone, not being a vertebrate, and you have
to use your tentacles or whatever to move around on land. (So, are you a
hard-shelled invertebrate, like a crab or a cockroach, or a soft-skinned one,
like a slug or an octopus? Enquiring minds wanna know.
> don't recall how...
Oh, I'm sure that you found it while looking for more of your fav
skull-cracking kiddie porn. Pervert.
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||GWB||7/18/12 8:00 AM|
On Jul 18, 10:31�am, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:> <uranium-90a18255-9b33-4152-a2fe-93bc0e79d...@g5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>):
> > On Jun 26, 5:24�pm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchell.cof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jun 26, 4:02�pm, UC <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote:Is anyone here an anthropologist?
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||J.J. O'Shea||7/18/12 9:49 AM|
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:00:36 -0400, UC wrote
>>> On Jun 26, 5:24ï¿œpm, Mitchell Coffey <mitchell.cof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 4:02ï¿œpm, UC <uraniumcommit...@yahoo.com> wrote:Why would that be of any interest to you? You're an invertebrate. And a
perverted one at that.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/18/12 10:03 AM|
None of that offends me. I have absolutely no problem with and indeed firmly
believe everything you have said on the genetic side of the issue. There may
be problems on the genetic side but certainly nothing of an offensive
We are talking about a correlaton here between a genetic variable (presence
or absence of a specific genome) and and the defining non-genetic properties
of a given group, in this case called "Jewish". Both sides of this
correlation are problemmatic so there is plenty to discuss on the biology
side and on the ethnicity side of the issue. The genetic side relates to the
genome Haplogroup E1b1b or perhaps E1b1b1. I can go on with this story with
the promise that absolutely no politics are involved. I'll stop here and not
bore you any further. But I'm happy to continue if such is your wish. The
question interests me but there's no reason it should interest you.
That's not at all the way I want to go. This altercation doesn't even
involve UC. It's Glenn and now Steven L. who are pushing this line.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/18/12 10:52 AM|
Not really but my first gig was a cross-appointment in a department of
anthropology because at the time there was no instruction at the
undergraduate level in my field. Will that do?
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/18/12 2:32 PM|
You seek a promise I have neither the power or authority to provide.
After all, T.O. is a public forum. I can promise your posts on those
lines will have my interest.
Good for you. Don't let kneejerk reactionaries distract you.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/18/12 6:41 PM|
> > Married Olympians Can't Stay In Same Room - Homosexuals Can
> > They can take that flaming torch and shove it up their flaming gay ...
> > ~Terry> > OweBaMao Bin Lying's people doing what subhumans do..steal, pillage, and
> you know, destroy everything moral and right !Please do, just one reference that existed before your first post to the OP on
the 14th that could be seen as providing you with more ammunition than just the
You've noticed no doubt that your references above were made by commenters and
not website authors, except for the one about "black" needing to be added to a
headline, days after your spiel about conservatives.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/18/12 6:48 PM|
Neither the article or anyone here has been talking about "defining non-genetic
properties of a given group".
And there is no correlation between that and "genes".
Please do go on with both, genetics and politics, as it pertains to the OP
article. As you know, the main subject was Hitler and the Nazi's "pure super
race", and nothing about Jews or black people being inferior or subhuman.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/18/12 7:37 PM|
So X remarks that Hitler's "pure blood" was not so pure, and you come along
screaming that X is a Nazi, and then claim ignorance of an established science
to support your assertion and call me a Nazi for challenging you. Of course I
gave you opportunity to educate yourself, and we see now that you are not quite
so ignorant of genetics.
I also gave you the opportunity to judge whether anyone who "defends" the notion
of "Jewish genes" and "African genes" are Nazis by googling the phrases to
educate yourself. You apparently determined not to do so and ignored the advice.
Now here you are, armed with no more than when you began, calling me a Nazi and
challenging me to "defend" "Jewish genes". Are you crazy? Why in hell would I
defend such a thing were I a Nazi, or an anti-semite?
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||GWB||7/18/12 7:39 PM|
On Jul 18, 9:48ï¿½pm, "Glenn" <glennshel...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Attila" <jdkay...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > jillery wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:56:46 +0200, Attila <jdkay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:20:05 +0200, Attila <jdkay...@gmail.com> wrote:> > >>>>> commentary, as he did above. ï¿½Other than the topic title, I have no
> > >>>>> idea why he bothered to post this one. ï¿½UC also has a bad habit of
> > >>>>> making bald assertions. ï¿½For these reasons, I didn't even bother to
> > >>>>> click on his link. ï¿½Perhaps UC thought it ironic that Hitler had
> > >>>>> Jewish genes. ï¿½Or that he thought it ironic someone else thought it
> > >>>>> ironic. ï¿½Or that he thought it ironic a conservative web site posted
> > >>>>> this information. ï¿½I'm betting I'll never know what he had in mind,
> > >>>>> and it doesn't bother me a bit.> > >>> As I said, I didn't even click on his link. ï¿½No, I didn't look at it.
> > >>> Thank you for the warning.> > >>>>> for the reasons you gave. ï¿½If you had identified links to the Tea
> > >>>>> Party, or screeds on Obama's Birth Certificate, or rants that Obama is> > >>>>Sorry but all those things you ï¿½mentioned are exactly what is contained
> > >>>>in that website. I'm starting to lose the thread here. UC is the OP but> > >>> Hmm. ï¿½All the things I disagreed with what you said, you snipped out.
>> > > That's right, I do mean what you snipped out. ï¿½The part about Jewish
> > > and African genes. ï¿½Putting the offensive "sub-human" aside, there are
> > > genomes associated with ethnic Jews and Africans. ï¿½And Europeans,
> > > Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native-Australians, and Native-Americans,> > > and even more finely-divided ethnic groups. ï¿½Humans use the same genes
> > > which follow the same genetic rules as the rest of all life on Earth.> > > humans are ï¿½a single species. ï¿½The superficial differences people
> > > react to so emotionally are the result of less than 1% difference> > > among the genes of seven billion plus individuals. ï¿½I'm sorry if any
> > > of that offends you.> > genome Haplogroup E1b1b or perhaps E1b1b1. I ï¿½can go on with this story with
> > the promise that absolutely no politics are involved. I'll stop here and not> > >>caused such offense. Now I'm really mystified. I think ï¿½all the other
> > >>posts simply expressed shock and disbelief at the idea of "Jewish genes"> > >>> There is no ï¿½National Prideï¿½ in the Olympics any longer. Now itï¿½s ï¿½Gay
> > >>> Prideï¿½ and big money.
> > >>B.
> > >>> Married Olympians Canï¿½t Stay In Same Room ï¿½ Homosexuals Can
> > >>> They can take that flaming torch and shove it up their flaming gay ï¿½..
> > >>> ~Terry> > >>> The headline on Drudge Report and on WOKV.com says ï¿½Flash Mob Overruns
> > >>> Northwest JAX Walmart.ï¿½
>> > >>> word that should precede ï¿½flash mob.ï¿½
> > >>> That one word is ï¿½Black.ï¿½
>> > >>Florida. And letï¿½s stop calling it a flash mob. Instead, letï¿½s call it by
> > >>the correct descriptive term: ï¿½flash riotï¿½ or just plain ï¿½riotï¿½ and
> > >>ï¿½looting.ï¿½
>> > >>> OweBaMao Bin Lyingï¿½s people doing what subhumans doï¿½.steal, pillage, and
> > >>you know, destroy everything moral and right !> > > Nope. ï¿½I didn't even want you to get started. ï¿½Political discussions
> > > are generally regarded as off-topic on T.O., but if that's the way youMy self-summary
I was chatting with a friend about people's online expectations which
lead to thoughts about creative profile construction which lead to
thoughts about how to be yourself yet still be able to fit into the
wish list presented by prospective mates. On the flip side of that how
will your wish list manifest itself in a real person.
What someone desires in a mate can tell you an awful lot about them.
Some men want beautiful, athletic, blonde, even tempered, no baggage,
childless, discreet, gives mind bending blowjobs. Extra points for big
tits. He should just stick to his blow up girlfriend.
Other men want a great cook, witty conversationalist, stylish dresser
who looks great in 4" heels, beautiful, knows what she wants, an even
tempered woman who swallows. I can afford to buy you the finest set of
tits. Wants an ornament to show off who will need nothing in return
except the honor of being with him.
Or..... down home country girl who likes to stay at home every night
serving sandwiches and beer to his buddies, shares his dream of
someday owning a doublewide, and gives awesome blowjobs........ Extra
points for big perky tits. This one is self explanatory and he
obviously doesn't realize that "big" and "perky" rarely refer to the
same set of authentic tits.
We all have some of these attributes but along with them comes a need
for flattery, the need to not always take care of someone, the need to
have someone to yell at on occasion. And even the most even tempered
of us have a few days each month when our hormones cause us to turn
into something resembling an inbred hillbilly with knife skills and
don't you dare think you can hide, but it might be a good idea to make
sure anything that can be used as a blunt instrument is stored in a
friends garage or a locked storage shed.
The women are pretty universal in what they want. Tall, athletic, and
handsome.... good provider, great sense of humor, handy around the
house, can cook, do his own laundry, financially secure, well endowed,
never leaves the seat up, showers her with flowers and gifts, gets
along with her parents, intelligent, strong, confident, flexible,
cerebral, honest, well endowed, affectionate, passionate, sensitive, a
little bit of a bad boy, trustworthy, responsible, understanding, no
baggage, childless, can go all night long. Extra points if you're well
endowed. Honey, I'm sorry to tell you, this one is gay.
A single man will have a few of these qualities but most of them want
to be taken care of, they will not remember that it is the two month
anniversary of your first kiss, only 1 in 100 will know what to say if
you ask "do these jeans make my butt look fat?", and they all become
confused and scared when we have our minor monthly mood swing.
How to describe yourself when creating your profile can be a real
challenge. Be sure to liberally pepper your profile with any of the
qualities listed above. In addition if you like Taco Bell you can add
that you are a conniosseur of fine foreign cuisine. If you have set
foot in any state other than the one of your birth you can say you are
well travelled. The only way to have a truly honest description of
yourself is to have your best friend write it for you although they
are sure to mention something about a rash as payback for that time
you sent them a case of erection cream for Christmas.
I have decided that the only way to fit the mold created by someone
looking for the perfect mate is to never actually meet in person. No
one is ever as witty and charming as they appear in a few paragraphs
that took hours (or days) to write. In person you actually have to
speak spontaneously. Nope, you can't backspace and rephrase so you
don't sound like a dork. You are a dork. We are all dorks. At least
when compared to all these composed, flawless personalities that
populate the internet. Mates have to think the fact that you fart or
drool while sleeping is "cute". Relationships are about compromise,
tolerance, and forgivness. You can think he's an inconsiderate ass if
he leaves the seat up, but eventually you have to tolerate it. You may
have to compromise and turn the garage into "your space" so that you
can keep your favorite recliner that has duct tape holding one arm
together. You will have to forgive him for losing his ability to speak
when a pretty girl walks by because he will do the same thing when you
walk naked in front of the TV while he's watching football. You will
have to forgive her for throwing that vase at your head because it
will be her crying while she oh so gently mops the blood off of your
Cupid has a real sense of humor and likes to visit when you least
expect it. You will find that really falling in love is accompanied by
a sudden flight of all your ideals about your perfect mate. You may
find that you don't mind back hair after all. Or that the fact that
one of her nipples points north while the other points south is sexy.
That extra 10 lbs just makes them softer. That he becomes a mindless
drooling hard-on every time you bend over is endearing. That her moods
keep things from becoming stale even if you never know "who" you will
wake up with each morning.
Me? I'm just hanging out, meeting people, making friends. Someday
cupid will show up and I'm curious about who he will decide on. I'm
hoping it will be a complete surprise and a wonderful journey in
What Iï¿½m doing with my life
My life is pretty quiet. Working, enjoying my adult children,
Iï¿½m really good at
Anything I set my mind to.
Favorite books, movies, shows, music, and food
Books - I'll read just about anything but I am not into cheap
romances. I just bought myself a Kindle which I love.
Movies - Shawshank Redemption - District 9 -
TV - Weeds, Dexter, Fringe.
Music - Alternative - Rock - Classic Rock.
Food - I am a foodie. It would be easier to list the things I don't
like. I don't like mustard, cumin, or garbanzo beans.... the rest is
The six things I could never do without
My 3 children
I spend a lot of time thinking about
The state of the world, politics (really I hate politics but I can't
seem to get it out of my head these days), what book to read next
(anyone have a good suggestion? I read anything).
On a typical Friday night I am
At home with my feet on the coffee table reading a book.
The most private thing Iï¿½m willing to admit
I am Manic Depressive. I faithfully take my medication so have very
few problems with it.
Oddly it seems that my weight is a bigger issue than my mental health
so even though I chose the correct body type no one looks at that....
Let me reiterate that I am fat. No it does not show in the picture but
I am fat fat fat. 210 lbs at 5'3". As I am here to make friends I
don't mind chatting with guys who would never date me but please do
not ask me out to lunch thinking that i have overestimated my weight,
I have not and it is a waste of my time to show up only to have you be
disappointed and looking for an excuse to leave. If my weight is an
issue then say "Hey you're not my type but I loved your profile,
thanks for the laugh". I'm a big girl, I can take the truth.
Iï¿½m looking for
Guys who like girls
Who are single
For new friends
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/18/12 9:27 PM|
If you're are interested follow the subthread of this thread with Jillery.
The genenome in question is called Haplogroup E1B1B.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/18/12 10:03 PM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/18/12 10:15 PM|
1. I think you have real problems of reading comprehension.
2. The website called "Fellowship of the Minds" supplied by UC is actually a
blogsite run by a single individual calling himself Eowyn. The comments are
from his devoted followers.
3.As for the dates, it never even occurred to me that they would be an
issue. Do you seriously think that I would make up posts and send them to
that site just to win a point? I'm beginning to think that either (a) you
are just winding me up in which case. Well done ha ha di ha. or (b) you have
serious mental problem. Seek help.
I assume that you have an internet connection and are as capable of coming
up with articles/comments dated before 17 July 2012 as I am. In the surely
vain hope of ending this tedious and not altogether pleasant excercise,
here's one dated August 9, 2011 on the subject of Islam.
> Kyle | August 9, 2011 at 10:42 am | Reply
> The difference is Muslims still hate and will always try to spread your
> satanic fanaticism all over the world. NOT HERE!! NOT EVER! I for one will
> never bend a knee or submit to your allah. And you notice that I don’t
> capitalize allah. Because whatever allah is, it is not holy. Any god that
> has subjects that kill in order to spread its message isn’t a god worth
> believing in. Do yourself a favor and read the Bible. Educate yourself.
> There is only one true God and he is the God of Abraham and Isaac and of
> the only one true Messiah, Jesus Christ.
> Hispanic Students Disappear as Alabama Gets Tough on Illegals
> Posted on October 1, 2011 by Dr. Eowyn | 13 Comments
Here's the link; you'll particularly enjoy the map.
I'm sure there are better examples but I'll leave it to you, if you're
interested, to find them.
Like most Blogs articles, are arranged in inverse chronological order so I
didn't have to dig very far to come up with the racist garbage about which
you can only complain about the date?!?!
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/18/12 10:51 PM|
There are also contributing authors who are not commenters. You seem to be
suffering from a lack of comprehension combined with a taste for red herring. I
do not doubt that commenters are "followers" yet they are not Eowyn, nor did
they write the article.
Why did you dream up the idea that I thought you would have made posts to the
blog? It's all in your head, a mental problem so to speak. No, I simply wanted
to see any articles or comments made before you accused them of being Nazis on
the 14th, to see what evidence you had. The thought that you might have made up
posts to support your position never occurred to me. And if I had entertained
the thought I would have determined that it couldn't be proven, so would be
useless to accuse you of it. Your paranoia is showing.
>What racist garbage? They hate Muslim fundamentalism and are opposed to the
religion. And illegal mexican's country is Mexico. If you have better examples
you should post them. You've likely stretched your search to the limit. And the
closest you can get to them being Nazis is this? Tsk.Tsk. Oh, I almost
overlooked your paranoia about my questioning your reasons for calling them
Nazis three days ago. Tsk.Tsk.Tsk.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/18/12 10:53 PM|
Promise? No, only a sign of interest. I just have a morbid fear of starting
one of these interminable ego-boosting boring threads of no interest to
anyone but the OP.
All right then. I'm going to start a new thread on the issue of the
biological and ethnological bases for a "Jewish gene". I'll call it "The
Haplogroup E1b1b Question". This UC thread is a bit tainted by now so let's
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||jillery||7/19/12 12:07 AM|
True dat. Good luck.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/19/12 3:47 AM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/19/12 3:57 AM|
Oh, I have no problem calling them nazis today, Glenn. If you want more
examples look for them yourself. I doubt there's anything you would object
to though. Regarding "Muslim fundamentalism", here's your leader's take on
"There’s a shadow growing within the United States.
It is the medieval darkness of Radical Islam (there is no moderate Islam)
seeping across the borders into America."
Hmm Keep America Pure. Who does that remind you of? If you recall the film,
I'd suggest you follow Dr. Strangelove's lead and keep a firm grip on your
right wrist with your left hand. ;) Have a nice one.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/19/12 6:01 AM|
My but you are the conceited type. Perhaps you do sincerely believe that this is
an example of racism. I suspect that you are capable of much higher levels of
self-delusion than this, so it is not surprising that you would associate me
with those you label as Nazis. In a real way our poster Ray has a kindred spirit
in you, though he calls those who disagree with him atheists instead of Nazis.
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Glenn||7/19/12 6:35 AM|
|Re: Ironic, in'nit...||Attila||7/19/12 6:58 AM|
Thank you for your interest. Have a good one. :)