David Duke is, on occasion, right about Jews and blacks.
RSF Group
death from above
> http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
Defilement and Death
of a White Girl
How Life Imitates Film
By David Duke
In Tyler Texas a pretty, young White woman, Jana Shearer, 21, met and
started dating a Black man by the name of Christopher McCuin. She
didn't worry about the fact that he was a multiple felon or that he
was Black, for during her entire life the media taught her that dating
Blacks is a very desirable thing, even a fashionable thing to do, and
like most young White girls today, she was saturated with the idea
that resisting the social and sexual advances of Black males was
tantamount to the greatest sin, that of racism. She gave into these
converging forces and now she is dead.
With her natural defenses stripped away, the innocent girl was easy
prey for the street wise McCuin. Ultimately, Jana paid for her media-
induced naivety with her life, even her very flesh. To quote the
Associated Press on January 9, 2008:
TYLER, Texas (AP) January 9, 2008 -- A man killed his girlfriend, then
filleted and cooked parts of her body before calling police to tell
them what he was doing, authorities said Sunday.
Christopher Lee McCuin, 25, called 911 on Saturday and told an
emergency dispatcher he had killed Jana Shearer, 21, and was boiling
her body parts at his mother's home, said Smith County Sheriff J.B.
Smith.
When authorities arrived at the home, they found Shearer's mutilated
body, one ear boiling in a pot of water on the stove and a fork
sticking out of some human flesh sitting on a plate on the kitchen
table.
Before the long campaign of Hollywood movies and TV production to make
race-mixing fashionable, quiet and decent young southern girls in
Texas would not have considered having a relationship with a Black
man, much less one with a criminal record. That was the time when love
for your heritage, and loyalty to it was something carried, as they
say, from generation to generation in the mother's milk. Almost every
White person recognized that there are intrinsic differences between
the races and that those differences were the natural order of things.
If that moral sense was still prevalent Jana would still be alive, and
that is also true for thousands of White women in the United States
and around the world who have been murdered or raped by Blacks.
Instead, over the past few years we have seen hundreds of thousands of
young White women endure beatings, abuse, drug addiction, disease
infection and murder at the hands of Black males.
Later in this broadcast I will tell you about a new film by Rick
Rosenthal called Greta, a film which depicts Blacks with criminal
records as very desirable boyfriends for White girls.
Yes, I can already imagine the response from the egalitarians reading
this, the media has conditioned their response. Like a mantra, those
of the living brain dead reading this are chanting, "there are good
and bad among all races," and " many White men have hurt White women
too." Admittedly, both those statements are true. There are good and
bad men in all races, and White men have committed crimes against
women too. But, those mantras don't change the damning fact of group
differences.
FBI crime figures show that Blacks are at least ten times more violent
than Whites and are far more likely to rape, beat, or murder women
than Whites are. In every nation on earth where crime records are
categorized by race there is a much higher crime rate for Blacks.
Here's the Shocking Proof:
37,460 Reported Black Rapes or Sexual Assaults on Whites -
Zero White sexual attacks on Blacks!
Some people wrote to me and cursed me out saying my facts on the huge
number of Black sexual attacks on White women could not be true. Here
is a screen shot montage of the most up-to-date crime facts direct
from the U.S. Department of Justice which monitors all types of crime
categorized by race of the offender and race of the victim.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus0502.pdf
As you can see, Black offenders committed 37,460 rapes or sexual
assaults against White women (shown by simply taking the percentage
from the total). The same chart shows that Whites committed 0 (zero to
less than ten) sexual attacks against Black women. (The number of
reported White sexual attacks on Blacks is so low it is statistically
0)
I got some letters condemning me for even publishing these government
figures. They accused me of being racist for simply publishing these
government reports,"It makes Black males look bad" they tell me. Isn't
it ironic that these people are so worried about how Black males might
look, but they aren't in the least concerned about the 37, 460 White
women who have suffered the terror and harm of rape and sexual abuse.
(In actual reality the number of Black rapes against White women is at
least double the Justice Department figure because those are just the
reported rapes). And these figures are just one year's attacks;
similar rates of attack of White women occur year after year.
Next time you hear on TV or read in the media how racist and terrible
White folks are to Black people think about the 37,460 White women who
are raped by Blacks and the fact that no nationally known political
figure (except me) even dares to mention it. If the numbers were
reversed and White men were raping Black women by the tens of
thousands, our cities would burn! But, we White folks are not supposed
to object to this horrendous attack on White women and girls. Heck, we
are not even supposed to know about it.
Blacks are also many times more likely to be users of hard drugs than
Whites, and thus influence young impressionable women to get involved
in life-destructive drugs as well.
Blacks are also many more times likely to have AIDS, gonorrhea,
syphilis, and other sexually transmitted diseases than Whites. I am
not talking about Blacks having a 50 percent greater chance of being
violent or disease ridden. That would be bad enough. Figures like "50
percent higher" are similar to the percentages used when discussing
rates of cancer or heart trouble associated with smoking.
Blacks are one thousand percent (10 times) more likely to be criminal
predators. A white teenage girl in the company of Blacks has on
average at least a 10 times greater chance of being beaten, killed, or
being infected with AIDS or other STD's. In terms of sexual disease
the dangers to White men and women are staggering, an 18 times greater
rate of HIV, 31 times greater rate of syphilis, and a 44 times greater
rate of gonorrhea. That is an amazing 1,800 percent, 3,100 percent and
4,400 percent higher rate respectively! However, don't expect the
Surgeon General to put ads on television warning young Whites about
the dangers of interracial dating and sex. Government and media are
far more worried about appearing racist than preventing hundreds of
thousands of lost or ruined lives!
Will interracial dating increase the rate of sexually transmitted
diseases in the community at large?
Interracial dating will certainly increase the rate of AIDS, syphilis,
herpes, gonorrhea, and just about every other sexually transmitted
disease.The CDC's HIV Surveillance study has been in progress from the
1980s until the present. When I first found the CDC data in 2000,
Black heterosexual males were about 14 times more likely to be HIV-
positive than White heterosexual men.It appears that the racial gap
has widened since then, to a Black to White HIV infection rate ratio
of about 18.6 for heterosexual males and 18.3 for females in 2004.
That assumes the US population ratio, White non-Hispanic to Black non-
Hispanic, in the 17-44 age group, was 5.639 for both males and
females.Incidentally, that same population ratio was 5.791 in 2001,
5.744 in 2002, and 5.691 in 2003.Furthermore, Blacks are 31.1 times
more likely to be infected with syphilis and 44.0 times more likely to
be infected with gonorrhea, as compared with Whites.
(Source: "Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 1997″; prepared by
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention; published
September 1998.) quote from Yahoo Answers!
At the San Francisco Zoo some men were recently mauled by a tiger. Now
I am sure that many tigers pose no threat to humans, some of them are
accustomed to human handlers feeding them, caring for them and many of
them have no desire to eat human flesh or attack human beings. A
person can truthfully say there are good and bad among both tigers and
men. There are obviously tigers who would not harm people, and there
are plenty of people who do hurt people. Still, I think most people
would not leave their child in a room with a tiger for an afternoon.
There are some individual tigers who would pose no danger to a human,
but there is obviously greater danger for the child with a average
tiger than an average human. If someone tried to put your child into a
cage with a tiger because he said that humans have hurt far more
humans than have tigers, you would think they were loony and
dangerous. It you tried to put your child in a cage with a tiger at
the zoo you would probably be charged with attempted murder.
Whether egalitarians want to admit it or not, there are dramatic group
differences in violence, drug use, and disease between Blacks and
Whites. These are differences that profoundly affect the safety and
well-being of Whites in a Black environment.
Of course, it is true that egalitarians blame Black violence, drug
use, and sexual disease rates on Whites. They say that the sharp
differences are all due to environment. That argument appears weak
when you discover that everywhere in the world where there are great
numbers of Blacks, even in nations where Whites have little influence,
there are similar high rates of violence, crime and disease. And, even
if the egalitarians would be right in saying that black violence, drug
use and disease are caused by environment rather than DNA, it does not
change the reality that Blacks are on average many times more
dangerous than Whites.
To take our tiger analogy further, arguing that people shouldn't take
into account high rates of Black violence, drug use and disease is
similar to someone saying to you, it's okay to put your child in the
tiger cage because the tiger's violent behavior is caused by the cage!
Whatever the cause, the fact remains that your child would be many
times safer with humans than with tigers. And the same fact is true
when it comes to Blacks, especially with young Black males.
No argument of heredity or environment can change the fact that
putting Whites in Black neighborhoods or Black schools or bars or in
Black relationships is a dangerous proposition. Millions of Whites
have paid dearly because of that fact. White children face hate,
intimidation, and violence in mostly Black schools where sexual, drug,
and behavioral norms are far different from those in White groups.
Many White elderly who once lived safely in their neighborhoods now
live in fear because integration transformed their neighborhoods into
slums of crime and drugs.
The controlled media tells us constantly of the evil of racial
"discrimination," yet they ignore the far worse human suffering that
accompanies forced integration. In the name of anti-discrimination we
have caused thousands of innocents to be murdered, millions to be
beaten, raped, or robbed. Millions of White kids have been doomed to
go to school where they face physical attacks and a terrible
educational environment. Who dares to speak up for those who have lost
the most basic of human rights, the right to life, to health, to
property, to heritage?
Rick Rosenthal of Whitewater Films has a soon-to-be-released new movie
called, Greta. The film stars Hillary Duff. She portrays an attractive
and wholesome-looking White girl who over the objection of her
grandparents has an interracial romance with a young Black man, Evan
Ross. The Black fellow is portrayed as having a criminal record but,
no matter, he has a "good heart."
Hillary Duff is an idol for millions of young White girls who follow
her movies and music devotedly. Many pubescent girls want to talk like
her, dress like her and be like her.
Here is a quote from one of the Hollywood blogs about the movie:
Pop singer Hilary Duff plays the title character in the interracial
teen romance Greta, which is shooting on location in New Jersey.
Duff's character is a waitress who falls for an ambitious cook (Evan
Ross) at the restaurant where they work. But as their summer romance
heats up, she has to overcome the concerns of her grandparents (Ellen
Burstyn, Michael Murphy) about her boyfriend's criminal past...
Rosenthal, who is described by friends as "extremely dedicated to the
Jewish community," told reporters that he is "very pleased with this
morality play for contemporary America."
Rosenthal must be very pleased indeed with his good example for young
White girls, get yourself a Black boyfriend, just like the idol you so
admire, and don't worry if he is a criminal, it's the cool thing to
do. After all, if Hillary Duff beds down with a Black boy it must
really be the height of fashion.
Of course, in the real world, dating a Black is often a very dangerous
thing that leads to tragic consequences. In the United States, almost
half of all young Black males are either in jail, on probation, or on
parole for criminal acts, and that's not counting many of the sealed
juvenile records or the ones who haven't been caught yet. The
undeniable fact is that the vast majority of them are criminal. It is
not racism, prejudice or hatred to point out this fact, anymore than
saying that tigers can be dangerous to people. This knowledge is
obviously important for White people who want to survive and have
their children survive and have well-being.
Miss Jana Shearer of Tyler, Texas was a victim of the predecessors of
Rick Rosenthal. Even before Rosenthal made a film encouraging White
girls to date Black criminals she was taught that it is right and good
to date Black boys. She thought she was doing something cool, even
noble when she dated Christopher McCuin. She was taught that his race
didn't matter, even his recent criminal record didn't matter, he
talked nice to her and seemed to have a "good heart." She was taught
that it would be evil of her not to be his girlfriend because he was
Black and had a criminal record.
So, she dated him, slept with him. And now, she is dead, and likely
some of her own flesh is now in his. And one more young girl is lost
to the nation, her family and her people.
In our society today it is considered insensitive and very racist to
even acknowledge these facts. The media tells us that it is evil to
hurt the feelings of Blacks by simply stating these alarming facts of
racial group differences. But which is really worse, uncomfortable
feelings because of discussing Black rates of criminality, or
thousands of White women who face the horrific pain of addiction, or
physical beating, abuse or murder, or who suffer the long and
horrendous death sentence of AIDS because they are brainwashed to see
interracial dating as desirable.
The media says it is racist to point out the facts of high Black
criminality. It is not racist, but absolutely normal for parents to
want to prevent abuse, murder, drug addiction, or disease of their
children. It is no wonder White parents have opposed forced
integration and forced racial busing of schools. They know that mostly
Black schools pose a far more dangerous and degenerate environment for
their children. Really would any concerned parent want their child to
be in schools that have a much higher rate of violence, drugs and
sexual diseases, where the violence, disrespect of women and sexual
degeneracy of gangsta rap are the dominant culture. Should White
parents be condemned for wanting to keep their children safe?
I have discussed in many articles the incredible level of Jewish
supremacy over much of the mass media. Hollywood is practically a
Jewish colony in the incredibly high percentage of Jewish producers,
directors and writers. Jewish writers such as Ben Stein and Neil
Gabler have boasted about Jews being only 2 percent of the American
population yet making up over 80 percent of movie and TV producers.
These are the men who own and who have the ultimate control over
movies and television, and they are complimented by similar numbers in
writing and directing. Neil Gabler's book, An Empire of Their Own,
says it all in its title. It is truly an "empire of their own," and
not our own.
The International Movie Data Base lists 1,445 Movies that feature
"interracial romance." These movies promoting White race-mixing are
produced, directed and written by Jews in an even higher percentage
than their overall domination of Hollywood.
In influencing young audiences, Viacom's Sumner Redstone (real name
Murray Rothstein) has non-stop music videos on MTV and other programs
promoting interracial dating and sex. Even Rothstein's cable network
for children, Nickelodeon, is saturated with pro-interracial
propaganda that promotes interracial dating from an early age and that
demonizes any White person who objects to it.
Rothstein is typical of the extremist Jews who dominate Hollywood and
the mass media. Yet, he is but one of the many Jews who are even more
over-represented in promoting interracial films than they are in films
and TV as a whole. And by the way, I should mention that Redstone
(Rothstein) is one of the biggest promoters of the Israeli "Jewish
State." That's not a multi-cultural or multi-racial state but a
"Jewish State."
The first major film promoting interracial romance was Island in the
Sun (1955), produced by the Jewish communist Rossen (born Rosen of
Jewish immigrant parents from Russia). In the sixties they heated up
their campaign considerably with Guess Who's Coming to Dinner,
produced by George Glass and Stanley Kramer, and written by William
Rose. In Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, a beautiful blonde White girl
falls for a Black man who happens to be a Nobel Prize-winning doctor.
Here's how the NY Times in 1991 describes the plethora of interracial
films in an article titled "A Kiss is Just a Kiss":
Jonathan Kaplan, the director of "Love Field," says that in test
screenings of his film, viewers have directly responded to what he
says is a "not highly charged or steamy" scene in which Michelle
Pfeiffer and Dennis Haysbert embrace.
But Hollywood could not ignore the enormous social changes of the
1960's. Sidney Poitier became the breakthrough black leading man.
Although the subject of the 1967 film "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner"
was interracial marriage, there was only one chaste kiss and an
offscreen wedding. And Mr. Poitier's character was a paragon (or
parody) of perfection: handsome, brilliant and a Nobel Prize winner.
By the early 1970's black paragons had given way to blaxploitation.
The redoubtable Jim Brown typified black power -- and for a brief
spell, interracial sex (though not marriage) flourished in movies.
Interracial couples were featured in such diverse films as "The Great
White Hope," "Mahogany," "Blazing Saddles" and -- with something to
offend everyone -- "Mandingo".... NY Times 1991
Every film mentioned by the NY Times was written by Jews. Most of the
Jews prominent in the making of these films were well known for their
support of the Jewish supremacist State of Israel. Stanley Kramer, the
same fellow who urges Whites to marry Blacks in Guess Who's Coming to
Dinner, purposefully made the first feature length movie filmed in
Israel, to do his best to support Israel, a nation dedicated to the
preservation of the Jewish people. Not only was his hypocrisy not
exposed by the media, but few have even had the courage to expose the
lies that the Jewish makers of race-mixing movies employed to
brainwash White people and women in particular. One film historian
writing for Scope put it pretty succinctly when he writes about The
Great White Hope:
When one looks closely at The Great White Hope in light of these
statements, it becomes clear that Ritt and scriptwriter Howard Sackler
selected, condensed, and fictionalized events from Johnson's life to
create a liberal, humanist fable about one man's fight against an
unfair system, and thereby to highlight racism in white America....
Portraying him as a monogamist and victim of racial prejudice, Sackler
ignored other parts of Johnson's life, particularly his philandering...
Sackler thus created a one-sided, romanticized account that stressed
Johnson's heroic aspects instead of following what actually happened
in the case of Johnson.
Scope online journal of film-Archive: Articles, November 2003-Muhammad
Ali, Jack Johnson, and the "Problem" of Interracial Relationships: A
Review of Martin Ritt's The Great White Hope (1970) Nicholas Naylor,
Brunel University, UK
So here we have a case where White women are being conditioned by a
film image of Black men as faithfully monogamous, sensitive, yet
strong and manly -- while in reality the actual character the movie is
based upon was himself a philanderer and reprobate. It is similar to
the race-mixing movies where OJ Simpson was portrayed for White women
as the ultimate in desirable mates. Commercials depicted OJ as very
desirable with White women chasing after him. In a popular made-for-TV
movie called Cocaine and Blue Eyes, Simpson plays a kind detective who
saves a beautiful, blue-eyed White girl from vile criminals, while in
the real world OJ Simpson is a bloodthirsty criminal who brutally
murdered his White wife.
In a "Blaxploitation" film starring Jim Brown, 100 Rifles, Jewish
producer Marvin Schwartz depicted Jim Brown as the strong and
desirable mate for leading White sex symbol Raquel Welch, while in
reality Brown was cited numerous times for beating White women and
once for throwing a German model off of a second story balcony (NY
Times March 28, 2002, Jim Brown, prisoner on his own terms). Black
violence against women is so pervasive it is common for the Black
stars in pro-interracial movies to have records of violent abuse
toward women while at the same time portraying kind and sensitive
Black lovers in the fictional, Jewish-created propaganda films.
As with the most effective propaganda, Jewish race-mixing films
started off slowly over the years with the unlikely scenarios of
gentlemanly, incredibly brilliant and successful Blacks. Much like the
once-portrayed OJ Simpson film and TV image. Now it has reached its
natural nadir in Greta where young White girls are taught that they
shouldn't even be wary of Black criminals.
Since the release of Guess Who's Coming to Dinner there have been a
plethora of Jewish movies touting the joys of interracial
relationships and showing the evil character of any boy or girl who
would refuse the sexual attentions of a potential Black bed partner.
Such films are being produced by the score, illustrated by movies such
as the 2007 hit, Hairspray, a vicious anti-White film where Whites are
portrayed committing sadistic violence against innocent Blacks, and in
which the leading White girl character runs off to the superior Black
culture and music in her school. The movie also depicts a very
beautiful blonde girl who overcomes prejudice to do the right thing
and have an affair with a Black boy. Hairspray was directed by Adam
Shankman, whose biography touts his "traditional Jewish upbringing."
As exampled by Rick Rosenthal, the Jewish-dominated Hollywood movie
and entertainment industry has long been at the forefront of promoting
White relationships with non-Whites, especially aimed at those they
see as the most susceptible to the race-mixing propaganda,
impressionable young girls. Many of these Jewish film and TV
producers, directors and writers do this while at the same time
supporting Jewish organizations that have programs against
intermarriage of Jews with Gentiles. Every major Jewish organization
has some kind of program to discourage Jews from intermarrying with
non-Jews.
Most of these same Hollywood Jews enthusiastically support the state
of Israel, a nation which even has laws where a marriage of a Jew and
non-Jew is not legally recognized. And for those who are still
ignorant on the subject, Israel's law is not even a purely religious-
based marriage restriction, but a genetic one. Religious Jews can
freely marry atheist Jews in Israel, but no Jew can legally marry a
non-Jew in Israel. A Jew in Israel is not defined ultimately by
religion but by descent! This fact may come as quite a shock to those
who don't know it. I hope that those of you reading this can guess why
you haven't heard about it. The same Jewish-dominated media has
purposefully kept it from your awareness, and for good reasons!
You might ask yourself some interesting questions. In the hundreds of
movies chronicling Jewish historical and contemporary conflicts with
other nationalities, why have you never seen Jews portrayed as the bad
guys and the Gentiles as the good ones. Have you ever seen a film
where the only really good Jews are the ones who side with the
Gentiles against their fellow Jews? Yet, isn't this theme found in
many films showing conflicts between Whites and non-Whites? Even
though famous Jewish histories say boldly that Jews dominated the
world wide slave trade for 2000 years and specifically the slave trade
of Africans to the Americas, why does the media only talk about
collective White guilt for slavery, and never about any Jewish
collective guilt.
It goes without saying that Hollywood from even before the days of the
Academy Award winning movie Exodus has been very supportive of the
Jewish community and of the Jewish supremacist state of Israel. Exodus
romanticizes the theft of Palestinian land (Palestinians owned 90
percent of of the land area that became "Israel"), and the brutal
suppression and terror committed against the Palestinian people in
creating the Jewish supremacist state of Israel. Have you seen any
movies showing how every major Jewish organization is bigoted and
racist because practically every one of them has programs trying to
prevent Jewish intermarriage with non-Jews. Yet, you probably couldn't
count the multitude of movies that portray White society as "racist?"
Have you seen any Hollywood films showing how Israel is a segregated
state, with segregated apartment buildings, segregated schools,
separate communities for Jews and non-Jews. The same Jewish-run media
portrayed the racially separate apartheid state of South Africa as the
paragon of evil. Why does segregated Israel get off the hook? Could
the identity of those who run the media give you a clue?
Have you seen any love stories that reveal the vicious hatred that any
Jew suffers in Israel who marries a Palestinian, and how marriage
between Jews and non-Jews is illegal? Everyone has seen the Jewish-
created film stereotype of the bigoted, unattractive and downright
evil White person who opposes the marriage of his son or daughter to a
Black. But, how often have you seen the media portray Jews who want to
preserve their heritage as evil bigots?
Movies such as Greta and Hairspray show how these Jewish supremacists
with their domination of media have made it fashionable for White
girls to have Black boyfriends in much the same way as they used
psychology to attract girls to certain brands of clothes. An example
of how far this sickness has gone is the Nushawn Williams case in
upstate New York.
Williams was a Black drug dealer and HIV carrier (court records prove
that he was fully aware of his AIDS infection). He was able to have
sex with at least 100 young White girls, some as young as 13 years
old, in a sleepy White community in Upstate New York. He got most of
them involved in drug addiction and he knowingly infected at least 11
young girls (almost all of them White) with the AIDS virus. Don't hold
your breath for any movies showing the depravity of this Black
criminal.
Officials Link Man to 11 Teen-Agers With H.I.V.
Published: October 28, 1997 New York Times
A 20-year-old man with H.I.V. (Nushawn Williams) has apparently
infected at least 11 teen-age girls in western New York with the virus
that causes AIDS, officials said yesterday, adding that the man -- or
his sex partners -- may have infected up to 50 other people.
Six of the girls, including a 13-year-old, were infected after the man
had been tested and told that he had H.I.V., officials said.
For officials in Chautauqua County -- a lakeside sanctuary 70 miles
south of Buffalo where crowds gather for podium-pounding oratory in
the summertime -- the disclosures signaled the worst health crisis they
have ever faced, shocking residents and officials alike. "I'd
characterize it as despicable," Sheriff Joseph Gerace said. "It's
horrifying."
Years before when interracial marriage and sex was considered a taboo
in our society, and before Hollywood made Blacks out to be sex symbols
in media, none of those young White women would have even considered
associating with a strange Black man on the street. And those 11 girls
(and countless others) would not be facing a long and agonizing death
from AIDS.
Race-mixing movies and TV shows led directly to the ruined lives of
these dozens of White teenage girls in rural New York, and you can be
sure that what happened in the Nushawn Williams case will happen
again, in fact it is certain that further tragedies much like this one
are occurring even as you read these lines. White women are
relentlessly being taught that black men are the most desirable mates.
Blacks are thrust into romantic leads in movies, rich Black sports
stars and entertainers are constantly shown with the most desirable of
White women. In addition to the positive image of Black males shown on
media, if a young White girl refuses a Black man's attentions she is
deemed racist and thus among the lowest of creatures. Her natural
defenses against such predators are stripped from her by Jewish
supremacists such as Rick Rosenthal.
Another disgusting aspect of this plague is pornography. Many forms of
the sickest porn have now become mainstream in the United States and
many college surveys show that it is now so pervasive that almost 9
out of 10 males and 2 out of 3 of girls have viewed triple-x rated
hard core movies or film clips. Modern porn is permeated with
interracial themes and the Black male and blonde woman is pervasive in
the genre. In my book, Jewish Supremacism, I quote an article in the
Jewish Quarterly by Jewish professor Nathan Abrams titled, "Triple
Exthnics." Abrams boasts how Gentile-hating Jews literally created the
triple X porn industry and how Jews have made porn mainstream. Abrams
goes on to quote leading Jewish pornographers who admit that their
motivation beyond the money involved is "an atavistic hatred" of White
Christians and our values. Certainly, this vile influence has also had
a role in the defilement of not only the White women seduced into this
filth, but also on the White men and women who are corrupted and
poisoned by watching it.
I began this broadcast with the story of Jana Shearer, 21, a White
girl who experienced the full and dubious joy of having a Black
boyfriend. She began to date a Black criminal, Christopher McCuin, who
later murdered her and actually cooked and apparently ate her flesh.
This Horrendous scene sounds like the Mau Mau atrocities of Kenya, but
can now be found in small communities like Tyler, Texas.
If Jewish supremacists such as Rick Rosenthal have their way, there
will be many more victims like Jana Shearer, naive young girls taught
that Black criminals make very desirable boyfriends. In addition to
the horrendous damage done to the great numbers of White women by the
promotion of this kind of behavior, interracial sex and marriage also
destroys the heritage and unique character of our people, a heritage
passed down unbroken for thousands of years, a precious identity that
we have the right to preserve. It is no accident that the biggest
promoters of race-mixing for Gentiles are Jewish supremacists who have
consistently promoted the purity of their own heritage for thousands
of years.
Nothing can show the unspeakable evil of the Jewish extremists more
clearly than their targeting of the precious young women of our race
for defilement and harm. Make no mistake about it, producers such as a
Stanley Kramer and Rick Rosenthal are thoroughly evil enemies of our
people responsible for terrible harm inflicted on thousands of
innocent young White women. And, as these children of our race are
destroyed, so is the precious genetic heritage passed down to them
from thousands of generations of the European people.
Our fight is not over some sort of intellectual theory of government
or economics.
Our struggle today is for the very survival of our people.
It is about stopping the horrible defilement and harm of millions of
our sisters and brothers.
Those of you who are still on the sidelines -
How long will you do nothing as the wonderful women of our race are
poisoned and defiled?
When will you devote far more of your time and money to survival of
your own loved ones, your own people?
Our fight is about the defense of the innocent, protection of our
children.
It is about enoblement of our people and complete rejection of the
debasement offered by the masters of the media and the dominators of
government.
It is about freedom and heritage, beauty and love.
It is a fight in which the best of us rededicate ourselves every day
of our lives..
Won't you join me in this worldwide fight for the truth?
Won't you stand up for your people?
Only by our actions today can we provide a bright future for our
children?
-david duke
The Hairy Hidden Hand of the White Man
> http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
Interesting, thanks. Loved BAD BOYS, hopefully Rick's latest is not as
vile as this article implies...
Certainly is true that whites bend over backwards to portray blacks,
as a group, as much more civilized/intelligent/virtuous, etc. than
they in fact are.
Frank R.A.J. Maloney
*PLONK*
--
Frank in Seattle
____
Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney
"Millennium hand and shrimp."
Treadleson
wrote:
> On Jul 18, 9:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
> Defilement and Death
> of a White Girl
>
> How Life Imitates Film
>
> By David Duke
>
> In Tyler Texas a pretty, young White woman, Jana Shearer, 21, met and
> started dating a Black man by the name of Christopher McCuin. She
> didn't worry about the fact that he was a multiple felon or that he
> was Black,
>for during her entire life the media taught her that dating
> Blacks is a very desirable thing, even a fashionable thing to do,
How uncanny that all the TV and movie and computer game media I've
watched portrays black men exactly the opposite: dangerous, violent,
untrustworthy, deceitful, unemployed and unfaithful. Ah--liberal film
and TV makers. How would the country get along with them?
> categorized by race of the offender and race of the victim.http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus0502.pdf
> if the egalitarians would be right in saying that ...
>
> read more ≫
Tom
In 50 years, the races will be so intermixed, racism will be non-
existent. So,when you're bouncing your mixed race grandchildren on
your knee, get back to us.
Tom
Nancy
"Tom" <drs...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c3075748-a678-49bc...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
Tom
50 years?
Don't thinks so. That's not even two generations.
Treadleson
> "Tom" <drso...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c3075748-a678-49bc...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 19, 9:01 pm, The Hairy Hidden Hand of the White Man
>
> <withba...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 18, 7:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
> > Interesting, thanks. Loved BAD BOYS, hopefully Rick's latest is not as
> > vile as this article implies...
>
> > Certainly is true that whites bend over backwards to portray blacks,
> > as a group, as much more civilized/intelligent/virtuous, etc. than
> > they in fact are.
> In 50 years, the races will be so intermixed, racism will be non-
> existent. So,when you're bouncing your mixed race grandchildren on
> your knee, get back to us.
>
> Tom
>
> 50 years?
> Don't thinks so. That's not even two generations.
As every American knows, every other American has a little Indian
blood in them. Right? Isn't that what everybody likes to say?
"Yeah, I'm part this and part that and I've also got some Cherokee
blood." Or "my grandmother on my father's side was half Chippewa."
It's usually said with pride. But it turns out to be wishful
thinking. A study came out not that many years ago stating that, no
no no--only a minuscule fraction of the population (other than
Indians) has any Indian blood at all. And just to think--I'd thought
that the kid I'd been bouncing on my knee was part Creek.
The Nice Mean Man
Run, run, run away, Frank. Whatcha so AFRAID of, Frankie-boy?
TNMM
The Nice Mean Man
> On Jul 19, 5:58 pm, death from above <cerebureaucr...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 18, 9:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
> > Defilement and Death
> > of a White Girl
>
> > How Life Imitates Film
>
> > By David Duke
>
> > In Tyler Texas a pretty, young White woman, Jana Shearer, 21, met and
> > started dating a Black man by the name of Christopher McCuin. She
> > didn't worry about the fact that he was a multiple felon or that he
> > was Black,
> .......
> >for during her entire life the media taught her that dating
> > Blacks is a very desirable thing, even a fashionable thing to do,
>
> How uncanny that all the TV and movie and computer game media I've
> watched portrays black men exactly the opposite: dangerous, violent,
> untrustworthy, deceitful, unemployed and unfaithful. Ah--liberal film
> and TV makers. How would the country get along with them?
>
I defy you to name any. They’d be immediately assaulted by activist
black groups if they did. As anyone can see with their own two eyes,
when it comes to TV commercials and shows, blacks are constantly
portrayed as the police, the caregivers and the misunderstood, while
the whites are typically portrayed as the thieves, the callous and the
tyrannical. Always and forvermore, blacks are THE VICTIMS. That’s the
truth, liberal mass media style.
The Nice Mean Man
The Nice Mean Man
The latest national census confirms that most people tend to marry
within their own racial group. Bi-racial marriages make up less than 6
percent off all marriages, if my memory serves. And that's bi-racial
marriages of all types. Not just black/white. What you say is a most
definite no-can-do. Mainly because most people really don't like the
‘other people’. They just pretend to in order to keep the dominate
liberal social establishment from squawking. Just like you do, more
than likely :)
The Nice Mean Man
Howard Brazee
<hither...@aol.com> wrote:
>The latest national census confirms that most people tend to marry
>within their own racial group. Bi-racial marriages make up less than 6
>percent off all marriages, if my memory serves. And that's bi-racial
>marriages of all types. Not just black/white.
The definition of "other race" has changed over time. English used
to talk about the "Irish race", for instance. In this country,
racists would categorize Italians and Polish differently.
LC
The schizophrenic nutcase "The Nice Mean Man" <hither...@aol.com> aka "J"
<Jvis...@live.com> and a host of others wrote in message
news:fba66aba-e783-49c1...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> Run, run, run away, Frank. Whatcha so AFRAID of, Frankie-boy?
Speaking of "running away", watch "TNMM" aka "J Young/IBen Getiner/Auric
Hellman/et al" run away from his big-talking, fast-walking challenge:
"TNMM/J/etc." on May 13th:
"I'll meet you Monday May 19th at the previously agreed upon place and time.
How will I know it's you? Or will you just avoid coming and then try to save
face by insisting you were there, but just couldn't be found?"
From: "J" Jvis...@live.com
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 12:42:44 -0400
Message-ID: <1s9602....@news.alt.net>
What a difference a week makes!
May 19th, Where's "J"?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaSi6BbVPKI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF0GWGPX7uQ&NR=1
Imagine...
Run, "J", run!
David Oberman
>> In 50 years, the races will be so intermixed, racism will be non-
>> existent. So,when you're bouncing your mixed race grandchildren on
>> your knee, get back to us.
>
>The latest national census confirms that most people tend to marry
>within their own racial group. Bi-racial marriages make up less than 6
>percent off all marriages, if my memory serves.
Newsflash: Mixing the races doesn't require marriage.
____
I will wage war against destiny!
-- Beethoven
Red Strange
> http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
No wonder so many white people make themselves so poisonous; they're
afraid of being eaten!
moviePig
> The Nice Mean Man <hitherand...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> In 50 years, the races will be so intermixed, racism will be non-
> >> existent. So,when you're bouncing your mixed race grandchildren on
> >> your knee, get back to us.
>
> >The latest national census confirms that most people tend to marry
> >within their own racial group. Bi-racial marriages make up less than 6
> >percent off all marriages, if my memory serves.
>
> Newsflash: Mixing the races doesn't require marriage.
Right... just a few godless folks leavin' their white wimmen out past
noon...
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Frank R.A.J. Maloney
Treadleson
> On Jul 20, 4:59 pm, Tom <drso...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 19, 9:01 pm, The Hairy Hidden Hand of the White Man
>
> > <withba...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 18, 7:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
> > > Interesting, thanks. Loved BAD BOYS, hopefully Rick's latest is not as
> > > vile as this article implies...
>
> > > Certainly is true that whites bend over backwards to portray blacks,
> > > as a group, as much more civilized/intelligent/virtuous, etc. than
> > > they in fact are.
>
> > In 50 years, the races will be so intermixed, racism will be non-
> > existent. So,when you're bouncing your mixed race grandchildren on
> > your knee, get back to us.
>
> > Tom
> The latest national census confirms that most people tend to marry
> within their own racial group.
Racial group? Weird term. The last time I checked, there was one
race--the human race. Do you mean skin color? Complexion? Because
the term "race" as you use it is meaningless. There is nothing to
differentiate one skin color group intrinsically from another except
one thing--skin color. Try to be more precise if you're making this
into a soap box issue.
Kingo Gondo
"death from above" <cerebur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:92609db1-9150-40e6...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 18, 9:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
>
>
> Defilement and Death
> of a White Girl
>
> How Life Imitates Film
>
> By David Duke
How long until you just skip over the preliminaries and get to Mein Kampf?
Actually, this article (to the extent I read it) is pretty funny. Mr. Duke
chooses some depraved sex/serial/wacko killer as his example. The odd thing
about those cases is that the typical profile is a white male, maybe 25 to
55--these are the guys turn into cannibals, kidnap, rape and murder children
(of both sexes), and become serial killers. Of course they are usually
socially maladjusted, and have tremendous anger issues.
In short, they pretty much match you, Gaza.
Holy shit.
(Note to self: Refrain from saying "eat me" to Gaza.)
death from above
wrote:
> "death from above" <cerebureaucr...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:92609db1-9150-40e6...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 18, 9:53 pm, RSF Group <aegisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>http://www.davidduke.com/general/jane-shearer-the-defilement-and-deat...
>
> > Defilement and Death
> > of a White Girl
>
> > How Life Imitates Film
>
> > By David Duke
>
> How long until you just skip over the preliminaries and get to Mein Kampf?
>
> Actually, this article (to the extent I read it) is pretty funny. Mr. Duke
> chooses some depraved sex/serial/wacko killer as his example. The odd thing
> about those cases is that the typical profile is a white male, maybe 25 to
> 55--these are the guys turn into cannibals, kidnap, rape and murder children
> (of both sexes), and become serial killers. Of course they are usually
> socially maladjusted, and have tremendous anger issues.
>
> In short, they pretty much match you, Gaza.
>
> Holy shit.
>
just look at black neighborhoods, africa, haiti, and etc.
while most negroes don't eat human flesh, they are crazy mofos. 50%
of black males are in jail or on probation for a FELONY. imagine
that.
Voltronicus
> Racial group? Weird term. The last time I checked, there was one
> race--the human race.
Now tell us what the meaning of the word "is" is.
> Do you mean skin color? Complexion? Because
> the term "race" as you use it is meaningless. There is nothing to
> differentiate one skin color group intrinsically from another except
> one thing--skin color. Try to be more precise if you're making this
> into a soap box issue.
There are physiological differences between the various races.
If you didn't have your head rammed up tight in your oh-so-politically-
correct ass, you would acknowledge that.
Notice I said only "differences" with no implication of superiority of
one race over another.
LMC Society
you're either ignorant or politically correct. i'll assume the
former. race is not species. there is only one human SPECIES but
many races. it's like there is only one dog/wolf/coyote species but
there are various races of dogs. (wolf, coyote, and all breeds of dogs
must be considered as being of a single species because they pass the
basic test of speciehood: the offspring of interbreeding is fertile.
horses and donkeys, on the other hand, are not part of one species.
though breeding a horse with a donkey creates a mule, a mule is
infertile. same is true of lions and leopard. the offspring of a lion
and leopard--known as leopon--is infertile. the offspring of dogs and
wolves or dogs and coyotes, however are fertile).
so, an mexican wolf, a european wolf, a german shepherd, a coyote, a
poodle, a daschund, etc are all part of a single 'dog' speices. but,
they are different. some dogs are faster--greyhounds are fastest.
among the dog family, the wolf and pitbulls are the most powerful.
collies are known for their hyper 'personality'. chihuahuas tend to
be highstrung and nervous. golden retrievers tend to be mellow. some
breeds are generally more shy than others. some are more intelligent.
they were all bred differently forces of nature and/or by man. if you
take a 100 pitbulls and mix them with 100 poodles, pitbulls will
become the alphamales of the community while poodle males will become
pussified betamales. there will be far more pitbull-on-poodle
violence than vice versa. there will be far more male pitbull-on-
female-poodle sex than male-poodle-on-female-pitbull sex.
and, we can see the same results in racial relations in the US. up
until the 60s, the natural racial dynamic in America had been
suppressed because whites stuck together and used social, economic,
and political means to keep blacks inferior as a group. but, ever
since those artificial barriers have been lowered,blacks have been
outbeating and outfucking honkeys. most fights between blacks and
whites have blacks whupping the slow white boy. more and more white
girls willfully choose black males because women worship power and
want to be with a strong negro stud than a faggotyass slow flabby
white boy. if the ONLY difference between whites and blacks is skin
color, we wouldn't have the kind of problems we see today. whites
fear blacks because blacks are stronger. whites worship blacks because
blacks are more badass, and funkier. lame white boys bow at the feet
of black athletes, bluesmen,and jazz masters.
so, what we are seeing is natural racism in action. nature is racist
in that it created different races under different conditions.
africa, with its hot climate and dangerous animals, created people who
are lean in fat, muscular, and aggressive. the cold climate in the
north created asiatics who are more prone to group activity and
consensus. and asians developed greater fat-to-muscle ratio because
fat was necessary for insulation. whites are somewhere in between.
now, white boys don't wanna face the truth because (1) it's depressing
(2) they've been indoctrinated that race is a myth and (3) that
speaking truth to black reality and power is evil and 'racist'.
also, jews wanna push forth DILUTOCIDE because they fear both the
black masses and white masses. blacks have routinely talked shit
against the jews in the name of black nationalism. and we know whites
did the same too. so, jews want stupid white trash to mix with stupid
black trash and become racially all confused. but, notice that jews
are not pressing for jewish-muslims interfuc*ing in israel. the only
kind of gentiles jews wanna fuc* are blonde shikses so as to prettify
the jewish race.
by the way, race has to be scientifically valid because there can be
no species-ization without race-ization. by this i mean that the
ancestors of chimps and ancestors of men were, at one time, only
different races that grew out of the same common ancestral root. They
had to first grow into different races before growing into different
species.
there is NO WAY POSSIBLE for an organism to deviate into two different
species. it can only deviate into two different races, and the races
can, in time, become two different species if isolated from eachother
for a long period of time.
take the polar bear which grew out of the brown bear. it's not like
the brown bear suddenly produced a separate bear species called polar
bears. what happened was some brown bears stayed in the arctic and
slowly evolved into a different race of a brown bear. in time, this
separate race of brown bear became a different species altogether.
so, there can be no new species without first creating new races. race
IS a scientific concept. it's only political correctness that
forbids us from saying so. so, the so-called 'highly educated'
people today should really be called 'highly indoctrinated'. if
education means being taught to think freely and seek the truth,
today's Liberal Eduation is not it. it's about indoctrination. it's
about correctness over truth, not truth over correctness.
to be sure, there have been many false racial theories--just check out
the Nazis. but, just because some radicals were wrong about race
doesn't mean that race is altogether nonexistent. that's like saying
that since Ptolemy was wrong about the solar system, the solar system
must not exist.
Treadleson
> On Jul 21, 11:55 am, Treadleson <treadl...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Racial group? Weird term. The last time I checked, there was one
> > race--the human race.
>
> Now tell us what the meaning of the word "is" is.
>
> > Do you mean skin color? Complexion? Because
> > the term "race" as you use it is meaningless. There is nothing to
> > differentiate one skin color group intrinsically from another except
> > one thing--skin color. Try to be more precise if you're making this
> > into a soap box issue.
> There are physiological differences between the various races.
> If you didn't have your head rammed up tight in your oh-so-politically-
> correct ass, you would acknowledge that.
> Notice I said only "differences" with no implication of superiority of
> one race over another.
Wait a minute. You must be speaking of the elongated nose among
whites and the flat nose of blacks. This is why you got on the board
to make your anti-black rant. Because of physiological differences.
Then by all means hate these people for their physiological
differences from you. Hold it. I think this is all because they can
physiologically kick your ass that you've got your panties in a wad
over this.
Good to see you're not claiming racial superiority anymore.
sween5
Oh shit, I that my indian blood would qualify me to open a casino!
>
> - Show quoted text -
Treadleson
....
> you're either ignorant or politically correct. i'll assume the
> former.
Getting personal, I see. That's usually a sign of fear or
desperation. How desperate is your argument. Let us see.
> race is not species. there is only one human SPECIES but
> many races.
Human race is an expression most people use to describe the set of all
people. Ever hear it? Race as you use it is an old, threadbare
social construct. With the breakthroughs in genome research,
scientists laugh at categorizing people this way. They look at human
genotypes, not races, and divide people by population. One doesn't
have to travel very far to see how quickly the old race construct
breaks down between populations within the Americas. Even by looking
it's hard to know who is who. In central Asia phenotypes often blur
into one another.
> it's like there is only one dog/wolf/coyote species but
> there are various races of dogs. (wolf, coyote, and all breeds of dogs
> must be considered as being of a single species because they pass the
> basic test of speciehood: the offspring of interbreeding is fertile.
> horses and donkeys, on the other hand, are not part of one species.
> though breeding a horse with a donkey creates a mule, a mule is
> infertile. same is true of lions and leopard. the offspring of a lion
> and leopard--known as leopon--is infertile. the offspring of dogs and
> wolves or dogs and coyotes, however are fertile).
> so, an mexican wolf, a european wolf, a german shepherd, a coyote, a
> poodle, a daschund, etc are all part of a single 'dog' speices. but,
> they are different. some dogs are faster--greyhounds are fastest.
> among the dog family, the wolf and pitbulls are the most powerful.
> collies are known for their hyper 'personality'.
People do not divide up into breeds, Mr. Murray. There isn't a hyper
human type than can be identified by color or ethnicity.
> chihuahuas tend to
> be highstrung and nervous. golden retrievers tend to be mellow. some
> breeds are generally more shy than others. some are more intelligent.
Some have British accents and enslave darker haired dogs, while other
dogs line up an especially hated breed and march them into special
"flea baths" at gunpoint only to later incinerate them in ovens. At
last count 6 million of one particularly religious breed was
annihilated by German Shepherds.
> they were all bred differently forces of nature and/or by man. if you
> take a 100 pitbulls and mix them with 100 poodles, pitbulls will
> become the alphamales of the community while poodle males will become
> pussified betamales. there will be far more pitbull-on-poodle
> violence than vice versa. there will be far more male pitbull-on-
> female-poodle sex than male-poodle-on-female-pitbull sex.
> and, we can see the same results in racial relations in the US. up
> until the 60s, the natural racial dynamic in America had been
> suppressed because whites stuck together and used social, economic,
> and political means to keep blacks inferior as a group. but, ever
> since those artificial barriers have been lowered,blacks have been
> outbeating and outfucking honkeys. most fights between blacks and
> whites have blacks whupping the slow white boy. more and more white
> girls willfully choose black males because women worship power and
> want to be with a strong negro stud than a faggotyass slow flabby
> white boy.
....
> if the ONLY difference between whites and blacks is skin
> color, we wouldn't have the kind of problems we see today. whites
> fear blacks because blacks are stronger. whites worship blacks because
> blacks are more badass, and funkier. lame white boys bow at the feet
> of black athletes, bluesmen,and jazz masters.
> so, what we are seeing is natural racism in action.
Social conditioning. Just as race is a social construct, so this kind
of behavior is socially conditioned and constructed. Without all the
theories and counter theories and court decisions and enslavement and
Jim Crow and media stories, whites and blacks in America would treat
each other in the way blacks and Hispanics treat each other or
Hispanics and whites. That is, pretty regular. By the way, how does
the dog thing mix with the badass funky bluesmen meeting lame white
boys? Do I get more lame if I am the offspring of white people? What
happened to being LESS lame and more the trailblazer adventurer nation
builder inventor pioneer Admiral if you came from whites?
....
> nature is racist
> in that it created different races under different conditions.
> africa, with its hot climate and dangerous animals, created people who
> are lean in fat, muscular, and aggressive.
How is that racist? It has nothing to do with racism.
> the cold climate in the
> north created asiatics who are more prone to group activity and
> consensus. and asians developed greater fat-to-muscle ratio because
> fat was necessary for insulation. whites are somewhere in between.
Nothing racist about it.
>
> now, white boys don't wanna face the truth because (1) it's depressing
> (2) they've been indoctrinated that race is a myth and (3) that
> speaking truth to black reality and power is evil and 'racist'.
.
I'm going to assume that you have some black blood even if it's just a
trace. Do you find that so depressing? Probably not. 2) Race is
non-existent as a way of classifying people, not a false myth. It is
inaccurate, serving no useful purpose to understand people. 3) The
main truth you could speak would be to acknowledge that the strength,
power, ingenuity of the USA is largely due to the mixture of different
ethnic, religious, and cultural groups.
....
> also, jews wanna push forth DILUTOCIDE because they fear both the
> black masses and white masses. blacks have routinely talked shit
> against the jews in the name of black nationalism. and we know whites
> did the same too. so, jews want stupid white trash to mix with stupid
> black trash and become racially all confused. but, notice that jews
> are not pressing for jewish-muslims interfuc*ing in israel. the only
> kind of gentiles jews wanna fuc* are blonde shikses so as to prettify
> the jewish race.
The reason this holds zero water is because in typical sloppy fashion
you mix unmixable things --skin color and religion/ethnicity--to make
this racist argument. To compare the marriage of a black person and
white person with the marriage of a Jew and Muslim is absurd. Yet
Jewish people marry Arabs all the time, thus rendering your point
lame.
....
> by the way, race has to be scientifically valid because there can be
> no species-ization without race-ization. by this i mean that the
> ancestors of chimps and ancestors of men were, at one time, only
> different races that grew out of the same common ancestral root. They
> had to first grow into different races before growing into different
> species.
> there is NO WAY POSSIBLE for an organism to deviate into two different
> species. it can only deviate into two different races, and the races
> can, in time, become two different species if isolated from eachother
> for a long period of time.
If all you're trying to show is that people of different ethnicities
and complexions and physical types exist world wide, no one will argue
the point. It's evident everywhere you look.
> take the polar bear which grew out of the brown bear. it's not like
> the brown bear suddenly produced a separate bear species called polar
> bears. what happened was some brown bears stayed in the arctic and
> slowly evolved into a different race of a brown bear. in time, this
> separate race of brown bear became a different species altogether.
> so, there can be no new species without first creating new races. race
> IS a scientific concept. it's only political correctness that
> forbids us from saying so.
Even politically correct people are fine with brown and black bears.
Even brown and black people. The racism comes in when one group
starts to believe it is superior to another group simply because of
skin color or ethnicity. Come on--you're white...you're smart enough
to know that.
...
> so, the so-called 'highly educated'
> people today should really be called 'highly indoctrinated'. if
> education means being taught to think freely and seek the truth,
> today's Liberal Eduation is not it. it's about indoctrination. it's
> about correctness over truth, not truth over correctness.
What you're talking about isn't even a PC question so it's useless to
keep erecting this straw man.
>
> to be sure, there have been many false racial theories--just check out
> the Nazis. but, just because some radicals were wrong about race
> doesn't mean that race is altogether nonexistent. that's like saying
> that since Ptolemy was wrong about the solar system, the solar system
> must not exist.
You seem to think there are behavioral differences between different
colored groups because of their color. That's pretty Nazi, Mr.
Murray.
death from above
> > race is not species. there is only one human SPECIES but
> > many races.
>
> Human race is an expression most people use to describe the set of all
> people. Ever hear it? Race as you use it is an old, threadbare
> social construct. With the breakthroughs in genome research,
> scientists laugh at categorizing people this way. They look at human
> genotypes, not races, and divide people by population. One doesn't
> have to travel very far to see how quickly the old race construct
> breaks down between populations within the Americas. Even by looking
> it's hard to know who is who. In central Asia phenotypes often blur
> into one another.
>
call it race, genotype, or population. the fact is certain groups of
people tend to have a set of traits distinct from others.
i agree 'race' is a term that's used very broadly. it's even used for
nationalities and even religions. and, 'racism' is used this way.
so, if someone attacks muslims, he's called a 'racist' when he's
really a 'religionist'.
but, whatever we call it--'race', 'population', 'genotype'--, there
are group traits that developed amongst a people over time in
isolation from other groups. you can call it whatever, but these
'racial' or 'genotypal' differences are not merely social constructs.
the differences really do exist. so, we can play with terminology,
but the fact remains that west africans share certain genetic traits
which are by and large absent from, say, mexicans. are they of the
same human species? yes, but they are two different peoples who
developed certain unique racial traits in isolation from one another.
> > it's like there is only one dog/wolf/coyote species but
> > there are various races of dogs. (wolf, coyote, and all breeds of dogs
> > must be considered as being of a single species because they pass the
> > basic test of speciehood: the offspring of interbreeding is fertile.
> > horses and donkeys, on the other hand, are not part of one species.
> > though breeding a horse with a donkey creates a mule, a mule is
> > infertile. same is true of lions and leopard. the offspring of a lion
> > and leopard--known as leopon--is infertile. the offspring of dogs and
> > wolves or dogs and coyotes, however are fertile).
> > so, an mexican wolf, a european wolf, a german shepherd, a coyote, a
> > poodle, a daschund, etc are all part of a single 'dog' speices. but,
> > they are different. some dogs are faster--greyhounds are fastest.
> > among the dog family, the wolf and pitbulls are the most powerful.
> > collies are known for their hyper 'personality'.
>
> People do not divide up into breeds, Mr. Murray. There isn't a hyper
> human type than can be identified by color or ethnicity.
Well, this can be said of dogs/wolves/coyotes as well. After all,
there are many mixed breeds, and no breed is 100% pure. So, we are not
talking of 100% negroes, 100% whites, 100% asians, etc. Even among
blacks, there are many different kinds. And, same can be said of
whites and asians. But, the larger point is that different races or
populations or whatever can be of the same species but can have
certain traits unique to each. Generally, when two populations are
separated over long periods--especially in vastly different
environments--, they are likely to become more and more different
until they may even grow into separate species. So, if whites and
blacks had been separated for a million yrs in very different
environments, they may have developed into separate species. Many of
the early hominids developed out of the same ancestor, but they not
only developed into different races but into different species. Many
scientists think that Homo Sapies and Neanderthals are separate
species of man.
>
> > chihuahuas tend to
> > be highstrung and nervous. golden retrievers tend to be mellow. some
> > breeds are generally more shy than others. some are more intelligent.
>
> Some have British accents and enslave darker haired dogs, while other
> dogs line up an especially hated breed and march them into special
> "flea baths" at gunpoint only to later incinerate them in ovens. At
> last count 6 million of one particularly religious breed was
> annihilated by German Shepherds.
Now, you're making a moral than a scientific argument. Science has
nothing to do with morality. We can and must apply morality to
science, but they are not the same thing. Scientific truth about man
and animals may be disturbing, but we can choose to discuss the truth
or preach morality. The fact is if you put 6 million chihuahuas with
6 million pitbulls, the pitbulls will commit genocide against the 6
million chihuahuas. That is how the animal world works. There's no
morality there.
And, we humans have wiped out 100s of millions of animals deemed
dangerous to us. And, we use our superiority in intelligence to
slaughter billions of animals to eat meat. Mankind has been genocidal
to animals deemed dangerous to us. Even to grow food, we kill off
animals that are a threat to agriculture. And, animals kill one
another by the bushel for the purpose of survival.
And, the Bantu stock people of Africa--bigger, meaner, and more
aggressive--have committed massive genocide against other racial or
ethnic stocks in Africa. Much of Southern Africa had been populated by
people who looked like today's Bushmen. But, most of them were wiped
out by the Bantus. Homo Sapiens wiped out the Neanderthals.
In much of America and Brazil, the physically stronger blacks have
been terrorizing and driving out non-blacks in what can be called low-
level ethnic cleansing--white flight was caused mostly be black crime
and violence. In Calfornia, Hispanics are fighting back and driving
out blacks. Though blacks are bigger and stronger than Hispanics,
Hispanics far outnumber blacks in California. Also, as Hispanics feel
no racial guilt toward blacks, they don't mind joining together to
whup the blacks. In many cases, 10 to 20 mexicans will jump a single
negro.
Now, should humanity act this way? I don't think so, but much of
humanity still thinks and acts this way. People naturally feel closer
to those who look, sound, and feel like themselves. But, that is a
moral issue, not a scientific issue.
The problem with the discussion on race is that there's too much
liberal moral do-gooderism getting in the way of genuine science. It's
good to call for peace, understanding, and social harmony, but one of
the reason why such has been elusive is because there are racial
differences.
Now, race CAN be a crazy social construct. Just look at the Nazis.
They had such funny dumb theories that they could not acknowledge the
humanity of Poles and Russians who shared much the same DNA. Nazis
were a people who did not want to get along with other people.
But, even well-intentioned liberal whites in the US have problems with
blacks. They fear the aggressive behavior and physical power of the
negro, especially since so many blacks are violence-prone. Also,
blacks are more likely to act up and act crazy because they know they
can kick the white boy's ass. So, blacks in a movie theater will make
all the noise they want in full knowledge that the white boy--liberal
or conservative--will not protest lest he have his ass kicked by
blacks after the movie. So, race as a false social construct can be
poisonous but equally dangerous is the notion is that race is purely a
myth. If race is purely a myth, just look at the crime stats in
communities where blacks co-exist with Vietnamese Americans. Though
they are of same economic status, the violence is 99 to 1 black on
Vietnamese. Why is this? It's because blacks tend to be taller, more
muscular, and more aggressive while your average Vietnamese is a short
skin and bones. Of course, there are short scrawny blacks, and there
are tall strong Vietnamese. But, there are far more likely to be funky
powerful negroes and short scrawny Vietnamese.
But, most Mexicans suffered oppression far worse than blacks. Only
300,000 blacks were brought to the US as slaves and they grew to be 35
million. In what is now the Latin Americas, there were estimated to
have been 65 million natives. European disease killed 60 million of
them!!! The rest were enslaved and made to work for centuries in vast
farms owned by white landlords. Their women were routinely raped,
which is how the mestizos came about. The same pattern happened all
over Latin America. Even today, most Latin American nations have
whites at top, mestizos in the middle, and indians at the bottom.
And, these have caused social problems. There is a legacy of slavery
and oppression in the Latin Americas. So, I would agree that racial
history in the US has something to do with current racial reality.
But, there is much more, and here we have to look at biology.
Your average Mexican is less problematic than a black to a white man--
in Mexico or in the US--because he's not physically powerful nor as
naturally aggressive as blacks. Hispanics can be a cultural,
political, or social problem to America but Mexicans, as individuals,
don't pose an existential or individaul threat to white Americans or
white Mexicans--despite the fact that white Hispanics had enslaved the
natives longer than whites in America enslaved the blacks.
Also, American whites treated Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans
horribly. 10% of Chinese-Americans who worked on the railroads
perished--this is almost Soviet Gulag statistics. And, their living
conditions were far worse than what blacks got in the same period. Far
more Chinese died in late 19th century America than all the blacks who
were lynched from 1850 to 1960. And, Japanese-Americans were racially
targeted, dispossessed, and imprisoned in WWII. And, there have been
anti-Asian stereotypes of all sorts. But, if some angry chink or jap
walked up to a white guy who's walking with his girlfriend, the white
guy would have 60/40 chance of whupping the yellow bastard.
But, if an angry black guy wanted to whup a white boy, the white boy
would have only 1/20 chance of winning. I've seen too many white/
black fights in Chicago to know. Blacks can easily kick white boy's
ass.
So, while there's some truth to history and society, biology cannot be
discounted as to why blacks are fearsome and whites are fearful. Sure,
we can say blacks act tough and shit because they are merely following
racial stereotypes. But, the stereotype of the tough black guy grew
out of racial reality. Jack Johnson kicked white boys in 4
continents.
Now, Asians too have a badass stereotype of the bruce lee shit. But,
just look at "Enter the Dragon". Minus Bruce Lee and Bolo, all the
Asians in the movie are pathetic scrawny dweebs.
This is why despite all the kung fu karate shit, the prevailing
realistic stereotype of the Asian-American is some computer geek.
> By the way, how does
> the dog thing mix with the badass funky bluesmen meeting lame white
> boys? Do I get more lame if I am the offspring of white people?
yes. whites produce less testasterone so their voices are not as
powerful as those of blacks. This is why black comediasn love to make
fun of the dweeby nasal white guy. Asians are even more nasal and
dweeby. Just check out jap rap or jap blues. It's even more pathetic
than white people doing it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99V2icgyNEw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6WvgxaaHMo
it's laughable. of course, there's no reason to use the negro
yardstick for cultural achievement.
indeed, most of the greatest artists have been 'lame' by black
standards. mahler, brahms, tchaikovsky, sibelius, john ford, akira
kurosawa, etc were not jiveass badass mofo but great artists.
> What
> happened to being LESS lame and more the trailblazer adventurer nation
> builder inventor pioneer Admiral if you came from whites?
by 'lame', i'm using the negro yardstick of hipness and coolness. in
most cases, being 'lame' is better than being badass. Most germans are
lame but Germany is a great successful nation. Most africans are hip,
badass, and wild and...well, just look at the state of africa. i'd
rather live in a neighborhood of 'lame' polite people than badass
jiveass mofos. so, 'lame' is good in my book.
>
> ....
>
> > nature is racist
> > in that it created different races under different conditions.
> > africa, with its hot climate and dangerous animals, created people who
> > are lean in fat, muscular, and aggressive.
>
> How is that racist? It has nothing to do with racism.
if you mean 'racism' as bigotry, then it's not racism. i use racism
to mean RACE + ISM. It simply means that races--or whatever you wanna
call it--exist, and that DIFFERENCES exist among races. since nature
produced different traits among the races, nature can be said to be
racist. if nature is anti-racist, it should have creatd all races the
same. but, nature favored some races to be stronger, some races to be
bigger, some races to be more extroverted, some to be more
introverted, some to be more intelligent(ashkenazi jews are the
smartest).
>
> > the cold climate in the
> > north created asiatics who are more prone to group activity and
> > consensus. and asians developed greater fat-to-muscle ratio because
> > fat was necessary for insulation. whites are somewhere in between.
>
> Nothing racist about it.
it's racist not in the pejorative sense but simply in the sense that
nature did not create all races equally. if 'racism' means belief
that races are not all equal, then nature is racist because it created
different populations with different traits.
>
>
> > now, white boys don't wanna face the truth because (1) it's depressing
> > (2) they've been indoctrinated that race is a myth and (3) that
> > speaking truth to black reality and power is evil and 'racist'.
>
> .
> I'm going to assume that you have some black blood even if it's just a
> trace. Do you find that so depressing? Probably not. 2) Race is
> non-existent as a way of classifying people, not a false myth. It is
> inaccurate, serving no useful purpose to understand people. 3) The
> main truth you could speak would be to acknowledge that the strength,
> power, ingenuity of the USA is largely due to the mixture of different
> ethnic, religious, and cultural groups.
>
i sho done luvs my watermelon and fried chicken so i mus hab some
black blood. but, since i's cants change no lightbulb, i sho must have
some polish blood. but, i sho wants to ride a horse and eat yogurt so
i mus have some mongol blood.
now, you say the strength of america is due to racial diversity. THAT
is proof of racism--the belief that not all races are equal. if all
races were equal, diversity would have no value. diversity is a plus
ONLY because races are different. So, in the area of science and high
tech, it's a plus for the US to have the smart jews. in sports, it's a
plus to have the strong negroes. the manhattan project was nearly all
jewish, and the US 100 sprint teams at the olympics have been all
black since as far as i can remember.
but, for every plus, there is a minus. the smart jews look down on us
and manipulate us in many ways. they've gained near total control over
the academia and media, the braincenters of america. and, for every
great negro athlete, there are 1000 black criminals roaming the street
to kick our ass. 50% of black males are or have been in jail. so,
for every jesse owens, we have to deal with a 1000 badass mofos in the
street.
> ....
>
> > also, jews wanna push forth DILUTOCIDE because they fear both the
> > black masses and white masses. blacks have routinely talked shit
> > against the jews in the name of black nationalism. and we know whites
> > did the same too. so, jews want stupid white trash to mix with stupid
> > black trash and become racially all confused. but, notice that jews
> > are not pressing for jewish-muslims interfuc*ing in israel. the only
> > kind of gentiles jews wanna fuc* are blonde shikses so as to prettify
> > the jewish race.
>
> The reason this holds zero water is because in typical sloppy fashion
> you mix unmixable things --skin color and religion/ethnicity--to make
> this racist argument. To compare the marriage of a black person and
> white person with the marriage of a Jew and Muslim is absurd. Yet
> Jewish people marry Arabs all the time, thus rendering your point
> lame.
>
but, there is a genetic basis for jewishness, and this has been
proven. this is because judaism has been an ethno-religion rather than
a credo-religion. a credo-religion is something anyone can believe in.
anyone can convert to be a christian or muslim or buddhist. but for
1000s of yrs, judaism was a blood religion. your mother had to be
jewish for you to be jewish. so, there is a genetic basis for
jewishness. of course in more modern times, reform judaism allows non-
jews to convert to judaism, but few do. so, judaism was a racial
religion.
Treadleson
wrote:
> So, we are not
> talking of 100% negroes, 100% whites, 100% asians, etc. Even among
> blacks, there are many different kinds. And, same can be said of
> whites and asians.
And this is exactly where your whole racial theory falls apart. There
is so much blending and blurring that the racial category was
abandoned. Everybody has traits of many groups and many ethnicities.
>But, the larger point is that different races or
> populations or whatever can be of the same species but can have
> certain traits unique to each. Generally, when two populations are
> separated over long periods--especially in vastly different
> environments--, they are likely to become more and more different
> until they may even grow into separate species. So, if whites and
> blacks had been separated for a million yrs in very different
> environments, they may have developed into separate species. Many of
> the early hominids developed out of the same ancestor, but they not
> only developed into different races but into different species. Many
> scientists think that Homo Sapies and Neanderthals are separate
> species of man.
This is abstract and theoretical. The real world is not like this.
>
>
>
> > > chihuahuas tend to
> > > be highstrung and nervous. golden retrievers tend to be mellow. some
> > > breeds are generally more shy than others. some are more intelligent.
>
> > Some have British accents and enslave darker haired dogs, while other
> > dogs line up an especially hated breed and march them into special
> > "flea baths" at gunpoint only to later incinerate them in ovens. At
> > last count 6 million of one particularly religious breed was
> > annihilated by German Shepherds.
>
> Now, you're making a moral than a scientific argument. Science has
> nothing to do with morality. We can and must apply morality to
> science, but they are not the same thing. Scientific truth about man
> and animals may be disturbing, but we can choose to discuss the truth
> or preach morality.
......
>The fact is if you put 6 million chihuahuas with
> 6 million pitbulls, the pitbulls will commit genocide against the 6
> million chihuahuas. That is how the animal world works. There's no
> morality there.
Except that in my example, the murders were committed by rational
people for their religious and political ideology. A pit bull doesn't
kill a chihuahua because he believes that the little dogs control
banking, contaminate culture, are Socialists and engineered the
Versailles treaty. So--in the case of humans it's all morality.
> And, we humans have wiped out 100s of millions of animals deemed
> dangerous to us. And, we use our superiority in intelligence to
> slaughter billions of animals to eat meat. Mankind has been genocidal
> to animals deemed dangerous to us. Even to grow food, we kill off
> animals that are a threat to agriculture. And, animals kill one
> another by the bushel for the purpose of survival.
> And, the Bantu stock people of Africa--bigger, meaner, and more
> aggressive--have committed massive genocide against other racial or
> ethnic stocks in Africa. Much of Southern Africa had been populated by
> people who looked like today's Bushmen. But, most of them were wiped
> out by the Bantus. Homo Sapiens wiped out the Neanderthals.
>
> In much of America and Brazil, the physically stronger blacks have
> been terrorizing and driving out non-blacks in what can be called low-
> level ethnic cleansing--white flight was caused mostly be black crime
> and violence. In Calfornia, Hispanics are fighting back and driving
> out blacks. Though blacks are bigger and stronger than Hispanics,
> Hispanics far outnumber blacks in California. Also, as Hispanics feel
> no racial guilt toward blacks, they don't mind joining together to
> whup the blacks. In many cases, 10 to 20 mexicans will jump a single
> negro.
....
> Now, should humanity act this way? I don't think so, but much of
> humanity still thinks and acts this way. People naturally feel closer
> to those who look, sound, and feel like themselves. But, that is a
> moral issue, not a scientific issue.
Birds of a feather flock together. Except that the feathers don't
even have to be skin type. For more than two thousand years people
have aggregated based on ideology and religion. This is how Muslims
and Catholics--to name just two--can happily have devout members that
cross every skin color and genotype.
> The problem with the discussion on race is that there's too much
> liberal moral do-gooderism getting in the way of genuine science.
What you're doing isn't scientific because it overlooks a huge amount
of empirical data and because it applies dog habits to humans who kill
each other for ethnic as well as ideological reasons. Surely you know
that Nazis usually needed a passport to know whether or not their
fellow European was Jewish. It wasn't self evident.
....
> It's
> good to call for peace, understanding, and social harmony, but one of
> the reason why such has been elusive is because there are racial
> differences.
The Shiites and Sunnis of Iraq are of the same "race" as you use it.
So were the Catholic and Protestant Europeans who slaughtered each
other in the wars of the Reformation.
.....
> Now, race CAN be a crazy social construct. Just look at the Nazis.
> They had such funny dumb theories that they could not acknowledge the
> humanity of Poles and Russians who shared much the same DNA. Nazis
> were a people who did not want to get along with other people.
> But, even well-intentioned liberal whites in the US have problems with
> blacks. They fear the aggressive behavior and physical power of the
> negro, especially since so many blacks are violence-prone. Also,
> blacks are more likely to act up and act crazy because they know they
> can kick the white boy's ass. So, blacks in a movie theater will make
> all the noise they want in full knowledge that the white boy--liberal
> or conservative--will not protest lest he have his ass kicked by
> blacks after the movie.
I get pretty nervous when the white baseball fans in the stadium
around me start yelling and whooping and throwing things and
threatening players on the field who are in a slump. Have you spent
anytime with white football fans in the parking lot? How many heavy
metal rock concerts have you gone to? My observation is that the
other white boys--liberal or conservative--don't protest this at all.
......
> So, race as a false social construct can be
> poisonous but equally dangerous is the notion is that race is purely a
> myth. If race is purely a myth, just look at the crime stats in
> communities where blacks co-exist with Vietnamese Americans. Though
> they are of same economic status, the violence is 99 to 1 black on
> Vietnamese. Why is this? It's because blacks tend to be taller, more
> muscular, and more aggressive while your average Vietnamese is a short
> skin and bones. Of course, there are short scrawny blacks, and there
> are tall strong Vietnamese. But, there are far more likely to be funky
> powerful negroes and short scrawny Vietnamese.
Is that what happened when black Americans were other in their
country, in Vietnam? I thought it was the Vietnamese kicking American
ass, black AND white. Who was scared there?
> ...
>
> read more »
Red Strange
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Treadleson:
Don't waste your time with this proto-fascist. Your argument is sound
but his absolute ignorance will never permit him to allow your logic
to penetrate his neanderthalish skull. Better to keep your powder dry
than to waste it trying to reason with white apes...
death from above
again, you confuse race with species. as long as there are only
different races, they can interbreed or become blurred. but, the
creation of different races is the first stage in the development of
new species. all humans are still of the same species. all non-
africans left africa only 80,000 yrs ago. and asians and caucasians
got divided up some 70,000 yrs ago, and, asians and american-indians
got divided some 30,000 yrs ago.
so, human races were not divided and isolated from one another long
enough to develop into separate species. but, development of different
races is the first step in that direction.
you agree that chimps and humans had the same ape ancestors. but, the
racial branch that eventually became the chimp and the racial branch
that eventually developed into man were, at one time, only different
races. there was much 'racial blurring' between the two. when the
ancestor ape of both the chimp and man first began to branch off into
different races, the various races had much in common--just as all
human races have much in common today. but, eventually, those races of
apes turned into different species of apes--chimps, oranguatans,
gorillas, gibbons, and the hominids that turned into man.
also, race is also no myth because it's somewhat harder for
interracial unions to lead to pregnancy than intra-racial unions.
a white and a white or asian and asian or black and black will have a
better chance at procreation than black and white, asian and black,
etc.
also, even if we are part of the same species and we have in common
all around the world, certain racial differences are quite marked and
significant. it's no wonder that little cuba produced more formidable
boxers than all of europe or white america. it's no wonder that little
jamaica produced more great runners than all of china and india with
combined population of 2.3 billion.
>
> >But, the larger point is that different races or
> > populations or whatever can be of the same species but can have
> > certain traits unique to each. Generally, when two populations are
> > separated over long periods--especially in vastly different
> > environments--, they are likely to become more and more different
> > until they may even grow into separate species. So, if whites and
> > blacks had been separated for a million yrs in very different
> > environments, they may have developed into separate species. Many of
> > the early hominids developed out of the same ancestor, but they not
> > only developed into different races but into different species. Many
> > scientists think that Homo Sapies and Neanderthals are separate
> > species of man.
>
> This is abstract and theoretical. The real world is not like this.
>
that's exactly how it happened.
>
>
>
>
> > > > chihuahuas tend to
> > > > be highstrung and nervous. golden retrievers tend to be mellow. some
> > > > breeds are generally more shy than others. some are more intelligent.
>
> > > Some have British accents and enslave darker haired dogs, while other
> > > dogs line up an especially hated breed and march them into special
> > > "flea baths" at gunpoint only to later incinerate them in ovens. At
> > > last count 6 million of one particularly religious breed was
> > > annihilated by German Shepherds.
>
> > Now, you're making a moral than a scientific argument. Science has
> > nothing to do with morality. We can and must apply morality to
> > science, but they are not the same thing. Scientific truth about man
> > and animals may be disturbing, but we can choose to discuss the truth
> > or preach morality.
> ......
> >The fact is if you put 6 million chihuahuas with
> > 6 million pitbulls, the pitbulls will commit genocide against the 6
> > million chihuahuas. That is how the animal world works. There's no
> > morality there.
>
> Except that in my example, the murders were committed by rational
> people for their religious and political ideology. A pit bull doesn't
> kill a chihuahua because he believes that the little dogs control
> banking, contaminate culture, are Socialists and engineered the
> Versailles treaty. So--in the case of humans it's all morality.
>
but, race had much to do with nazism. germans resented the fact that
jews were smarter and thus gained tremendous wealth and power. also,
it was because jews were smarter that they held non-jews in such
contempt and used them as guinea pigs in their radical experiment
called communism. also, it was because jews looked down on non-jews
that they felt no remorse in exploiting goyim. in the middle ages,
jews were among the main businessmen selling european slaves to the
middle east.
also, there was much sexual tension between jews and germans. germans
were more handsome than the jews, and short hairy jewish men lusted
after shikses, buying 'aryan' pussy with money and molesting and
raping countless german housemaids. Jews in hollywood still do this.
they use dimwit white shikses as sex slaves. jewish produces promise
all these girls careers in entertainment, make them suck jewish cock
and swallow jewish cum, and then get them addicted to drugs, and dump
them to the porno industry--also owned by jews. of course, we mean
leftwing and liberal jews as conservative and patriotic jews are good
people and respect goyim.
many germans looked like arnold schwarzenegger and ursual andress.
many jews looked like chico marx or ruth baird ginsburg. germans are
racially prettier and jews are racially smarter. both folks are
proud. pretty germans didn't want to be ruled by ugly smart jews, and
smart jews wanted to rule over 'dumb' goyim. we see the SAME pattern
in the US. hollywood is owned by jews and recruit shikses to act
skanky and to suck jewish cock.
blood and soil always proved to be more powerful than ideology or even
religion. russia and china were both communist but split apart.
people prefer to be united by blood and/or soil than for any other
reason. biology matters.
> > The problem with the discussion on race is that there's too much
> > liberal moral do-gooderism getting in the way of genuine science.
>
> What you're doing isn't scientific because it overlooks a huge amount
> of empirical data and because it applies dog habits to humans who kill
> each other for ethnic as well as ideological reasons. Surely you know
> that Nazis usually needed a passport to know whether or not their
> fellow European was Jewish. It wasn't self evident.
>
in many cases, it was hard to tell whether a person was jewish because
many jews had mixed with goyim. but, in most cases, jews were easy to
spot because of their hooked nose, sloping foreheads, and frizzy
hair. woody allen, alan dershawitz, the marx brothers, mel brooks,
etc, etc are unmistakably jewish. but, mixed race jews are harder to
spot. take paul newman, who looks like a cross between the very
jewish looking norman mailer and very goyish robert redford. his
mother was catholic.
> ....
>
> > It's
> > good to call for peace, understanding, and social harmony, but one of
> > the reason why such has been elusive is because there are racial
> > differences.
>
> The Shiites and Sunnis of Iraq are of the same "race" as you use it.
> So were the Catholic and Protestant Europeans who slaughtered each
> other in the wars of the Reformation.
>
but, religious and ideological differences can be put aside. racial
differences are harder to ignore. there was a civil war in russia,
spain, and china between the right and the left in the 20th century.
but, those differences have been resolved. today, all spanish are
spanish, all russians are russians, and all chinese are chinese. so,
ideologies can pass. but, race is a tougher matter. suppose americans
had brought over white slaves instead of black slaves. descendants of
masters and slaves--being of same race--would have blended in
together--just as descendants of masters and serfs in russia have
blended together. but, american whites enslaved a people of another
race, a people of a meaner, fiercer, and physically stronger race.
so, we have problems still to this day. ideology is all in the heads.
peoples minds can change. but, skin color, muscle tone, facial
structures, etc remain constant among racial groups. that is harder
to overcome, especially when the minority is large and hard to swallow
up racially into the majority.
> .....
>
> > Now, race CAN be a crazy social construct. Just look at the Nazis.
> > They had such funny dumb theories that they could not acknowledge the
> > humanity of Poles and Russians who shared much the same DNA. Nazis
> > were a people who did not want to get along with other people.
> > But, even well-intentioned liberal whites in the US have problems with
> > blacks. They fear the aggressive behavior and physical power of the
> > negro, especially since so many blacks are violence-prone. Also,
> > blacks are more likely to act up and act crazy because they know they
> > can kick the white boy's ass. So, blacks in a movie theater will make
> > all the noise they want in full knowledge that the white boy--liberal
> > or conservative--will not protest lest he have his ass kicked by
> > blacks after the movie.
>
> I get pretty nervous when the white baseball fans in the stadium
> around me start yelling and whooping and throwing things and
> threatening players on the field who are in a slump. Have you spent
> anytime with white football fans in the parking lot? How many heavy
> metal rock concerts have you gone to? My observation is that the
> other white boys--liberal or conservative--don't protest this at all.
all races can act crazy and horrible. just look at chinese during the
cultural revolution. just look at british soccer fans. so, i'm not
saying blacks are crazy and whites are sane. i'm saying black
craziness can be even crazier than white craziness. i've seen a lot
of crazy white people, but no folks be as crazy as blacks. even
blacks feel more intimidated by crazy blacks than by crazy whites.
> ......
>
> > So, race as a false social construct can be
> > poisonous but equally dangerous is the notion is that race is purely a
> > myth. If race is purely a myth, just look at the crime stats in
> > communities where blacks co-exist with Vietnamese Americans. Though
> > they are of same economic status, the violence is 99 to 1 black on
> > Vietnamese. Why is this? It's because blacks tend to be taller, more
> > muscular, and more aggressive while your average Vietnamese is a short
> > skin and bones. Of course, there are short scrawny blacks, and there
> > are tall strong Vietnamese. But, there are far more likely to be funky
> > powerful negroes and short scrawny Vietnamese.
>
> Is that what happened when black Americans were other in their
> country, in Vietnam? I thought it was the Vietnamese kicking American
> ass, black AND white. Who was scared there?
they fought with guns. even so, the kill ratio between US and
vietnamese was 1 to 100. for every american dead, 100 viets died.
and, i recall hanging around chicago when boat people kids were just
arriving in the late 70s. they got their asses kicked by blacks on
every block. of course, black brutality was never reported in the
news owned by liberal jews.
Guy Bannis
<ca69932b-0f1c-4e08...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
death from above <cerebur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> call it race, genotype, or population. the fact is certain groups of
> people tend to have a set of traits distinct from others.
You can stop right there. There is no such "fact."
death from above
> In article
> <ca69932b-0f1c-4e08-8fb0-ab5c7f9cb...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> death from above <cerebureaucr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > call it race, genotype, or population. the fact is certain groups of
> > people tend to have a set of traits distinct from others.
>
> You can stop right there. There is no such "fact."
you've just proven that higher education is simply higher
indoctrination. don't you see that you're just a teacher's pet of the
leftwing jew who lopped your balls off?
