| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Elemenatal_1" |
| Date: |
10 Feb 2006 11:53:35 AM |
| Object: |
The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
Muslims are in a frenzy over the cartoons because it exposes them, their
ideology, and their "prophet" as the violent entities that they are. They
simply are mad that their hoax, farce, and lies are being exposed to the
free world in an effective way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush.
Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish embassy
in the rain from a nearby mosque. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
.
|
|
| User: "JWood" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
10 Feb 2006 03:49:23 PM |
|
|
Elemenatal_1 wrote:
Muslims are in a frenzy over the cartoons because it exposes them, their
ideology, and their "prophet" as the violent entities that they are. They
simply are mad that their hoax, farce, and lies are being exposed to the
free world in an effective way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush.
Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish embassy
in the rain from a nearby mosque. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
They're bullies plain and simple - no need to over-analyse.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "scorpion53061" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
10 Feb 2006 01:25:11 PM |
|
|
I am not understanding why people are saying such things. Even if you were
right, the cause of peace, of the one true God, the church or the well being
of others is not served.
It is a contradiction of both sides of these faiths regardless of where you
stand on the issue.
--
Get a powerful web, database, application, and email hosting with KJM
Solutions
http://www.kjmsolutions.com
"Elemenatal_1" <elemental1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2s4Hf.40730$1e5.787551@news20.bellglobal.com...
Muslims are in a frenzy over the cartoons because it exposes them, their
ideology, and their "prophet" as the violent entities that they are. They
simply are mad that their hoax, farce, and lies are being exposed to the
free world in an effective way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush.
Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish embassy
in the rain from a nearby mosque. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "mudboy" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
10 Feb 2006 01:05:35 PM |
|
|
The only truth I got from the reaction to this cartoon is this: Muslims hate
anything and anyone non islam. I'm getting the sense that in their eyes, we,
in the west, are less than human. Because of the Muslim reaction to this
cartoon, I really feel like I'm staring at the end of a gun barrel; there's
a sense of threat here. When I'm watching these protests on the news, I only
sense hatred coming from the Muslim world. I'm sure I'm not the only person
feeling like this.
"Elemenatal_1" <elemental1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2s4Hf.40730$1e5.787551@news20.bellglobal.com...
Muslims are in a frenzy over the cartoons because it exposes them, their
ideology, and their "prophet" as the violent entities that they are. They
simply are mad that their hoax, farce, and lies are being exposed to the
free world in an effective way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush.
Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish embassy
in the rain from a nearby mosque. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denmark is Great!" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
10 Feb 2006 06:18:14 PM |
|
|
I loved one interview where the nutjob Muslim screamed that the cartoonists
were trying to make them look like extremists. Then shouted "They must be
killed!"
LMAO!
"mudboy" <no_email@no_email.ca> wrote in message
news:6u5Hf.5138$J%6.358382@news20.bellglobal.com...
The only truth I got from the reaction to this cartoon is this: Muslims
hate anything and anyone non islam. I'm getting the sense that in their
eyes, we, in the west, are less than human. Because of the Muslim
reaction to this cartoon, I really feel like I'm staring at the end of a
gun barrel; there's a sense of threat here. When I'm watching these
protests on the news, I only sense hatred coming from the Muslim world.
I'm sure I'm not the only person feeling like this.
"Elemenatal_1" <elemental1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2s4Hf.40730$1e5.787551@news20.bellglobal.com...
Muslims are in a frenzy over the cartoons because it exposes them, their
ideology, and their "prophet" as the violent entities that they are. They
simply are mad that their hoax, farce, and lies are being exposed to the
free world in an effective way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush.
Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish
embassy in the rain from a nearby mosque. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rune B" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
10 Feb 2006 07:02:36 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:18:14 -0500, "Denmark is Great!"
<FOAD@sandniggers.com> wrote:
I loved one interview where the nutjob Muslim screamed that the cartoonists
were trying to make them look like extremists. Then shouted "They must be
killed!"
LMAO!
Behead those who say islam is violent!
--
WWJD! What Would Jack (Bauer) Do?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
11 Feb 2006 12:43:15 PM |
|
|
Tiptoeing around Our Problems
By Dr. William Pierce
"We've been talking about the very dangerous situation in the Middle
East recently, just because so much is happening there, and
undoubtedly we'll be talking about it much more in the future. For
that reason I want to make very clear what my motives and sympathies
are, lest I lead anyone astray and be thought a hypocrite for doing
so. First, regarding Palestine: although my sympathies definitely lie
with the Palestinians rather than with the Jews, it is not horror at
what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians that motivates me. What
motivates me is horror that my country is being used by the Jews in
their war against the Palestinians. If America were not involved at
all in the Middle East I still would sympathize with the Palestinians
and I would wish that they could be successful in driving the Jews
into the sea and annihilating the abomination that is Israel, but that
conflict between Jews and Palestinians would not be a major concern
for me. At least, my
concern there would be dwarfed by my concern for problems more
directly involving my own people in America and in Europe and in
southern Africa.
Even now, with money and weapons being supplied by America and used to
slaughter Palestinians, my concern is much less with monsters like
Ariel Sharon who are doing the slaughtering than it is with the filthy
creatures among my own people in America who are collaborating with
Jews here to keep the weapons and money flowing to Sharon -- and are
ready to do whatever else the Jews require of them here or abroad.
So when I tell you about Jews in occupied Palestine shooting
Palestinian children, and disapproval and anger are evident in my
voice, what I really am angry about is that the American people, my
people, are being used for this murderous activity. I am angry that
America's whole foreign policy has been perverted to serve Jewish
interests at the expense of American interests. I am angry that
America's political system has been perverted to ensure that we always
have so-called "leaders," whether Democrat or Republican, who are
dependent on the Jewish media or Jewish money or both for their
election and consequently will do the bidding of the Jews. I am angry
that our whole government is riddled with Jews -- Jews in our Defense
Department, Jews in our State
Department, Jews in our Immigration and Naturalization Service, Jews
in our Justice Department, Jews in the President's speech-writing
staff - who really set the policies of our government behind the
scenes, while the politicians are out front in the spotlight making
speeches and kissing babies - and doing as they're told by the Jews
behind the
scenes.
Did you know that it was a Jewish speechwriter, David Frum, who put
the phrase "axis of evil" in George Bush's mouth to justify America's
ongoing war against Israel's enemies? Did you know that a clique of
Jews in the Defense Department and among George Bush's foreign policy
advisers are the people actually running the so-called "war on terror"
in Afghanistan: a war that they intend to expand to Iraq and any other
Middle Eastern country that gets uppity, in order to make that part of
the world safe for Israel at American expense? Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld is a front man for his nominal subordinates, Deputy
Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Deputy Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; and George Bush's official foreign
policy adviser, Condoleezza Rice, helps him meet his Black quota for
the Cabinet, but it is the Jew Richard Perle, chairman of Bush's
Defense Policy Board, who gives him his foreign policy directives.
As I've said on more than one occasion, George Bush is a feckless
nincompoop who couldn't come up with a defense policy or a foreign
policy on his own if he had to -- which is why he's President. The
real policymakers behind the scenes certainly don't want a man in the
White House who has ideas of his own, because those ideas might
conflict with theirs.
And it is nothing but empty sophistry to make a distinction between
Jews in Israel, such as Ariel Sharon and Simon Peres, and the Jews in
Mr. Bush's administration formulating his policies or the Jews
controlling our mass media. They all are Jews, and that's what really
matters.
There are many knowledgeable Americans besides me who think that it's
not a good thing to have Jews using America to advance Israel's
interests at the expense of America's interests. They know how the
system works: how the Jews exert their control through money and media
and a well-entrenched network of Jewish operatives, such as Wolfowitz
and Feith and Perle. And many of these knowledgeable Americans also
understand how Jewish subterfuge and deceit work: they understand that
the Jews throw up a lot of smoke to conceal their control and make it
appear that they have much less influence than they actually do.
Despite this degree of understanding that many knowledgeable Americans
have, there seem to be very few who are willing or able to draw the
necessary conclusions. What I keep seeing are comments about the need
to get the so-called "peace process" going again in the Middle East,
and how there are hardline supporters of Israel who are obstructing
the "peace process" because they think that it will give too much to
the Palestinians or will compromise Israel's security, or whatever.
These knowledgeable Americans seem to believe that if we could just
get around the Jewish hardliners somehow -- if we could just
neutralize Jews such as Wolfowitz and Feith and Perle; if Ariel Sharon
could be replaced by a "moderate" Jewish prime minister -- then the
"peace process" could proceed, America could gradually reduce its
involvement in helping the Jews keep the Palestinians repressed, and
eventually Israel no longer would be using America, and everything
would be rosy. And so these knowledgeable Americans expend all of
their wit and energy in these trivial pursuits.
Listen! Do you know what the most hopeful aspect of the conflict
between Jews and Palestinians is now? It is the ongoing radicalization
of the Muslim masses throughout the whole Middle East. The
collaborator governments in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Saudi Arabia are
terrified of the reaction they see among their own people to what
Ariel Sharon is doing to the Palestinians. When Sharon's Jewish troops
shoot Palestinian children, Muslim mobs riot, and governments that now
collaborate with the United States quake. Ariel Sharon is the best
thing that has happened in the Middle East in the last 54 years.
The Palestinian tactic of suicide bombing is being denounced by every
politician and every media spokesman over here now. It's nothing but
terrorism, they all say. There's no justification at all for suicide
bombing, they tell us. Of course, whenever you hear that sort of
unanimity from the politicians and the media people you should be
suspicious. In fact, suicide bombing is the best tactic for the
Palestinians to use now, because it provokes the Jews to step up
reprisals. And the reprisals radicalize the masses in every country in
the Middle East. If just one of the collaborator governments falls,
the spines of all the rest will be stiffened, and the Bush government
will be far less likely to find collaborators for building its
so-called "coalition" to do the will of the Jews in the Middle East.
Suicide bombers now hardly put a dent in the population of five
million Jews in occupied Palestine, and Sharon's bloody reprisals
hardly put a dent in the overall Palestinian population. But if
conflict of this sort continues until just one collaborator government
is overthrown, that ultimately will be worth more than ten thousand
successful suicide
bombings in which only 20 or so Jews are killed each time. In the long
run there can be no real peace in the Middle East and no end to
America's shameful role there -- and no future for the Palestinian
people -- as long as there is an Israel. There seems to be a better
understanding of these things among knowledgeable Palestinians than
among knowledgeable Americans.
Shallow thinking and the pursuit of trivial goals is even worse among
knowledgeable Americans when it comes to domestic problems. They
really do not want to grasp these problems with both hands and deal
with them in a forthright way. Look, for example, at what uncontrolled
immigration has done and is doing to America. And what do
knowledgeable Americans propose to do about that? Very little, really.
They make much of the fact that several of the al-Qaeda hijackers who
carried out the September 11 attack were in the United States only
because of very lax immigration policies, and so that's a good reason
for tightening up the policies.
How about simply rounding up all illegal aliens immediately -- all 12
million of them -- and booting them and all of their offspring out of
the country without further ado?
Oh, no, no, no! We can't do that! Why not? Well, the media never would
stand for it. The media would be all over anyone who even proposed a
mass expulsion of illegal aliens. They would denounce any political
leader who tried to do that as a "racist" and a "neo-Nazi." And so
knowledgeable Americans, who understand the immigration disaster quite
well, continue tiptoeing around it, afraid to do or even say anything
really significant about it: terrified even to think about really
radical solutions that might actually end the problem. And it's the
same with the rest of our domestic problems. Lots of people understand
these problems and are worried about them, but they won't tackle them
in any
significant way. They let the Jews -- the Jewish media and Jewish
money and the entrenched Jewish network -- have their way, for all
practical purposes.
Why? Why are the Jews permitted to get away with all of their
destructive policies and activities without being challenged or
opposed in any significant way? Part of the reason is that the Jews
are very powerful, and therefore many people are afraid to cross them.
They're afraid of the sort of media reaction I just mentioned in
connection with immigration. Everyone understands that the Jews stick
together and will viciously attack anyone who opposes them. It's the
old story, so aptly expressed by the late-16th-century writer, Sir
John Harington. Harington wrote: "Treason doth never prosper: what's
the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Today the
Jewish power structure is
prospering, and none dare oppose it or even call it what it is. Well,
that's only part of the reason Jews are permitted to get away with so
much. There's more to it than that. There's a mystique the Jews have
built very carefully around themselves and nurtured diligently. It is
a mystique of piety and injured innocence. It is a mystique that says
to the Gentile world: "We are a gentle and inoffensive race, and
because of this everyone hates us. We're smart and we work hard and
achieve success, and because of this everyone hates us. We are a
highly moral and ethical race, and because of this everyone hates us.
We are a very talented race, with many gifted members, many geniuses,
and because of this everyone hates us. We are a very altruistic race,
a race of philanthropists who only want to make a better world for
everyone, and because of this everyone hates us."
Many simpletons among the lemmings simply accept these claims at face
value. Many knowledgeable people, however, who can see through these
claims to the real Jews hiding behind them, still hesitate to
challenge them. Part of the Jewish mystique is the so-called
"Holocaust." In its most simpleminded form the "Holocaust" story is
the claim that the
Germans hated the Jews for the reasons I just mentioned -- for their
gentleness and their success and their morality and their talent and
their altruism -- and because of this hatred roasted six million of
them during the Second World War in "gas ovens," to use one of the
Jews' favorite "Holocaust" phrases.
Actually, the "Holocaust" is a very powerful part of the Jewish
mystique. The Jews crafted the "Holocaust" story with great care and
great effort -- well, actually not with as much care as they might
have used: it's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, but still it is
sufficient to make most people, even those who understand what Jews
are really like, hesitate to attack them. People don't want to be seen
as bullies. They don't want to be seen as so insensitive that they
would criticize the Jews, who already have suffered so much, poor
dears, at the hands of anti-Semites.
In several past broadcasts we've looked at a number of the lies and
exaggerations and distortions that make up the "Holocaust" story.
There are a number of good books available on the subject from the
sponsor of this broadcast, National Vanguard Books, including Norman
Finklestein's excellent book The Holocaust Industry, which I discussed
in an earlier broadcast. The point is that despite the lies, despite
the fact that many knowledgeable Americans are aware of the lies, the
"Holocaust" still serves its purpose for the Jews. People are afraid
of the image conjured up by the "Holocaust."
Perhaps it's that American life is too soft... Whatever the reason,
many otherwise knowledgeable and hardheaded Americans just can't
entertain the idea of rounding up the Jews and getting rid of them,
even when the situation is as urgent as it is in America today. And
really, in the long run that is the only way to solve the Jewish
problem.
The Germans understood that, back in the 1930s, and they had the
courage and the foresight to act on their understanding. Unlike
Americans today, they had an honest government concerned above all
with the survival, welfare, and progress of the German people, and
they began doing what was necessary, forcing the Jews to emigrate
wholesale from Germany beginning in 1933. And because of that the
Jewish propaganda machine has attacked the Germans so viciously, has
so blackened and demonized their image, that today even knowledgeable
people are afraid to be associated with that image. They are afraid to
say that the Germans were right, that the Germans were justified, and
that we need to do the same if we are to survive. So, as I said, the
"Holocaust" story, despite its
glaring discrepancies and lies, still serves as a shield for the Jews;
it still protects them from criticism.
Well, mostly. In parts of Europe not quite as poisoned by Jewish
propaganda as America is, the shield has slipped a bit. A large
British department store chain, Selfridges, has yielded to demands
from anti-Israel demonstrators and has removed from its shelves
products marked "Made in Israel." Last week the second largest
supermarket chain in Norway, Coop Norge -- which is to say, Norway
Coop, announced its decision to boycott all Israeli imports. That
decision was not the result of pressure from anti-Israel demonstrators
but was based on the feeling by Coop Norge management that it would be
immoral to continue supporting the Israeli economy by selling Israeli
imports under the
present circumstances. That is a step forward, though it is a long way
from what is needed.
The Jews, of course, immediately began waving their "Holocaust" story
around, and now, as the boycott movement catches hold in Scandinavia,
they are trying to portray themselves as injured innocents being
attacked once more by "anti-Semites." They are comparing the growing
Scandinavian boycott of Israeli products to the German boycott of
Jewish merchants in the late 1930s. Certainly, a boycott of Israeli
products is a good thing, and the fact that such a boycott is even
thinkable by big businessmen today is a sign that the Jewish mystique
-- and in particular the Jewish "Holocaust" story -- is becoming a bit
shopworn. It no longer has the hypnotic power that it once had -- at
least, in some parts of the world. And I suppose that we should be
happy about that. The unfortunate fact remains, however, that in
America the Jews still have their money and
their media and their entrenched network of bureaucrats, and even if
the "Holocaust" story has lost some of its charm in Europe, it still
keeps most knowledgeable Americans intimidated.
Knowledge isn't enough. Courage and boldness also are necessary.
Honesty and forthrightness are necessary also. Tiptoeing around the
critical issues of our time isn't enough. Tiny reforms in our
disastrous foreign policy and in our disastrous immigration policy and
in a dozen other disastrous policies aren't enough. We need to stop
apologizing to the people who are destroying us and go full bore at
destroying them instead.
Instead of being hypnotized by the "Holocaust" story we need to look
with clear eyes at why there was a need for action against the Jews in
Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. The Jews' claim today that the Germans
were suffering from collective insanity and had no reason for trying
to get the Jews off their backs is as phony as George Bush's claim
that
Osama bin Laden had no reason for attacking America on September 11.
Wherever Jews go they corrupt and destroy. That is their nature,
always and everywhere. Let us be thankful to the Palestinians who now
are making such terrible sacrifices to help the world see what the
Jews are like. And I suppose we also should be thankful to Ariel
Sharon for demonstrating so forthrightly to the world what Jews are
like.
Let us hope that the conflict between Jews and Palestinians
intensifies and lasts long enough to wake up many more of our people
around the world and fill them with disgust at America's continuing
support for the Jews. Let us hope that it lasts long enough to bring
about the overthrow of every collaborationist regime in the Muslim
world. Let us hope that it brings about an airtight oil embargo
against the United States and shuts off the lights in every shopping
mall and every sports stadium in America long enough for the lemmings
to become restless and begin asking questions. Let us hope that it
makes the efforts of every fool and every traitor who is striving for
a resumption of the so-called "peace process" so obviously futile that
these efforts no longer have the power to deceive anyone.
Ultimately, of course, we must not depend on the Palestinian suicide
bombers or on Ariel Sharon's murder squads to do for us what we should
be doing for ourselves. Ultimately we must stop tiptoeing and begin
marching boldly and forthrightly toward solving our own problems."
Thanks for being with me again today.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list-request@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
11 Feb 2006 01:30:08 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
[copy-and-paste diatribe deleted]
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed him.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: The Religious Cancer of Racism
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:37 -0600
From: Alric Knebel <alric@[cableone.net]>
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dean T" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
12 Feb 2006 02:20:30 AM |
|
|
"Alric Knebel" <alric@[cableone.net]> wrote in message
news:11useq1a1o0g177@corp.supernews.com...
Topaz wrote:
[copy-and-paste diatribe deleted]
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed him.
Topaz is an idiot. It wouldn't have been hard to show him as one. Good for
you that you bothered.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
12 Feb 2006 06:25:00 AM |
|
|
Dean T wrote:
"Alric Knebel" <alric@[cableone.net]> wrote in message
news:11useq1a1o0g177@corp.supernews.com...
Topaz wrote:
[copy-and-paste diatribe deleted]
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed him.
Topaz is an idiot. It wouldn't have been hard to show him as one. Good for
you that you bothered.
I just want other people to see that line of logic I used, especially
about the IQ of whites carrying people like this. When I live, the
dumbest people think like this guy, and they're consumed with their own
racism. The only thing they've got is their pride in being a member of
the white race, and that they're on the fringes doesn't matter to them.
THEY'RE WHITE. They've got at least that going for them.
--
Alric Knebel
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
12 Feb 2006 07:06:09 PM |
|
|
Who's to Blame for the Affirmative Action Fiasco?
By Hugh Murray
Searching for employment in the late 19th century, many Irish
immigrants in America encountered the sign, "NINA" (No Irish Need
Apply). Today, their descendants face much the same discrimination. Of
course, now, it is not limited to the Irish - for in America men are
routinely denied jobs, promotions, contracts and scholarships because
they are of Irish, Italian, English, German or general European
heritage. Worse, not only is this discrimination government sponsored,
it is performed in the name of "Equal Opportunity." How did this come
about? Why do the media prefer to ignore it? Who fostered this
discrimination against white men?
In high school a white boy may be denied entrance into special
programs because he is not a preferred minority; or, in some cases, he
may be denied because he is not a girl. There are scholarships
available, but many cannot be awarded to a white male (for example,
Bill Gates of Microsoft was recently lauded by the media for
establishing a billion-dollar scholarship program - one in which
recipients are restricted to blacks only.) When the teen applies to
university, the administration will admit "basically qualified"
minorities, but reject better-qualified whites. When applying for
jobs, the same discrimination occurs. If the teen finds employment,
special, on-the-job training for promotion may be denied him as it is
reserved for minorities, even if they are lesser qualified and have
been on the job a shorter period of time. Once hired, he may be
required to attend "diversity training" sessions, in which he is
supposed to confess his alleged guilt of racism and sexism.
How did this systematic discrimination arise?
What did it mean to forbid discrimination? From the early days of the
20th century through 1964, most liberals were clear as to what this
meant-show no bias against or preference for a person because of his
race, sex, religion etc. This was the dominant view. But in the debate
over the civil rights bill in 1964 some opponents declared that if
passed, it would lead to, among other things: racial quotas and racial
balance in the workplace, preferences for blacks over whites in
employment, promotion, bank loans etc.
But, in Congress, the debate went otherwise. No senator who favored
the civil rights bill spoke up for quotas, "positive integration,"
racial balance or preferences for minorities above whites. Quite the
contrary.
How then did a law which promised to end discrimination by outlawing
discrimination against any individual, a law that promised preferences
for no group, which agreed to retain testing to reject unqualified
applicants-how was this law subverted into its opposite? Here the role
of Alfred Blumrosen is crucial. Blumrosen was among the zealots
working for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission who did not
want the agency to function as created.
Alfred Blumrosen was instrumental in this and other shifts. He was a
professor at Rutgers University who became the EEOC's liaison chief
for federal, state and local agencies, and he admitted that his
"creative" reading of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was "contrary to
the plain meaning." But why worry? By 1965 when the Bank of America
instituted quota hiring under a euphemism, "the standard refrain of
the EEO bureaucracies, [was that] affirmative action [AA] had nothing
to do with racial quotas. That was illegal." Unfortunately, that
deceptive refrain is still heard today.
The goal of Sonia Pressman, another ideologue in the EEOC, was "to
document large disparities in employment patterns, [so] that
discriminatory intent might legally be inferred." ...the EEOC sought
to impose quotas while not calling them such because quotas were
clearly illegal. The agency sought to break the law.
Blumrosen and Pressman pushed the EEOC to defy the Civil Rights Act of
1964 by imposing quotas, demanding racial balance in the workplace and
giving preferences to blacks over whites. Essential to the Blumrosen-
Pressman campaign was the collection of statistics to show "disparate
impact," how minorities were underutilized, employed in a smaller
proportion in various occupations to their numbers in the general
population.
Blumrosen was set upon "selectively enforcing" the civil rights act by
using disparate impact theory and proportional representation only
when it affected others. (More accurately, Blumrosen was "selectively
malenforcing" the civil rights law, imposing quotas for
underrepresented blacks, using quotas to curb whites; for women,
against men; but never for gentiles and against Jews.)
Of course, had the EEOC sought to restrict Jews as it has white men,
the storm of protest would have cast "disparate impact" theory into
the dustbin of history. Thus, the role of Blumrosen and his allies in
the media, academia etc., was to create a false target - the
"overrepresented," "privileged" and "oppressive" white male. According
to the EEOC, the statistics proved just that. However, the statistics
proved otherwise. The partial statistics used by Blumrosen were simply
the effort to deflect criticism to another group instead of the one
most overrepresented, privileged and oppressive - his own.
By not asking the religious question on the EEOC questionnaires, the
EEOC created a scapegoat of the white male. Once smeared as
"privileged" and "oppressive," the non-privileged, working-class and
poor whites began to pay the price for the "moral" system of
affirmative action by being legally discriminated against and denied
equal opportunity.
The proportional test, the liberals' test of all tests, when applied
to the religious clause of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, shows Jews to
be the most privileged and oppressive of people in America. The fav-
orite test of liberals reveals white men to be less privileged than
the Jews. Why does not The New York Times, the EEOC, NBC, CBS or ABC
report that statistic? The media remain silent on the issue of Jewish
privilege while simultaneously exposing every time white men are
somewhat overrepresented. Why the silence regarding Jews? A glance at
the ownership of the media just might have something to do with this
disparity in exposing "privilege." And if any individual in the media
dared to expose some Jewish privilege, there would be a thunderous
assault upon that individual's "bigotry." However, daily, reporters
write of white male privilege, but almost no one denounces this anti-
white bigotry.
Once smeared as privileged, the non-privileged middle-class, working-
class, and poor whites pay for the "moral" system of AA by being
legally discriminated against and denied equal opportunity. But then
the history of America since the 1960s is often the record of wealthy
liberals using the law to curb and oppress blue-collar whites, because
the blue-collar folk are deemed privileged, prejudiced and provincial.
Therefore, such blue-collar whites deserve to be passed over in
scholarships, jobs and promotions; the blue-collar crowd should be
shunted aside, and instead the "pets" of the elite should be elevated:
the children of illegal immigrants, of wealthy minorities and the
daughters of rich liberals. And this is done in the name of morality,
fairness, and justice.
In summary, the great hoax concocted by Blumrosen and his
collaborators in the media, academy, and government is "white male
privilege." Most white men are not privileged. Those who are, often
support AA because it is no loss to them - their children will not
require a scholarship, an entry-level job, a position as policeman or
fireman, or a promotion. It is the poor and middle-class whites who,
denied equal opportunity, must pay with thinning wallets and shrunken
dreams for the "morality of diversity" imposed by the wealthy, liberal
elite.
Even if every CEO in America were a white male, that would be no
reason to discriminate against a poor, white teenage boy seeking a
scholarship and give it to a lesser qualified girl or minority. "White
male privilege" is a social construct created by liberals. They have
used their power in government, media, and academia to deny equal
opportunity to white men, to undermine and stigmatize America's
working class, and to immobilize with guilt the white middle class.
America does not suffer from white male privilege and oppression; it
staggers beneath Jewish privilege and oppression.
Excerpted from article found at:
http://www.barnesreview.org/Nov__Dec_2001/Who_s_to_Blame_for_the_Affirma/wh
o_s_to_blame_for_the_affirma.html
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
13 Feb 2006 03:20:19 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
[copy-and-paste diatribe deleted]
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed him.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: The Religious Cancer of Racism
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:37 -0600
From: Alric Knebel <alric@[cableone.net]>
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
--
_________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
15 Feb 2006 06:03:46 AM |
|
|
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
It wouldn't be a good idea to have a nation just of intelligent
people. What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
deport the child?
We should have a nation for White people. Besides being intelligent
Whites are also very good looking. The Chinese have China, there are
Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a nation for Whites.
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art.
Except I didn't say anything about it being the only real art. It
is an example of real art while modern art is simply garbage.
In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists,
Except that that never happened.
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Remember the story about the king with no clothes?
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
15 Feb 2006 06:32:28 AM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
I remember once in another newsgroup you said one of the dumbest things
I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the only real
art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other artists,
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence. Clearly
people who can comprehend it, as I do, will disagree.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
17 Feb 2006 08:36:46 PM |
|
|
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
Whites are also very good looking. We should preserve the White race.
There is no group that is trying to have a nation just for intelligent
people. But White Nationalism already exists. This is what we want. So
now non-Whites and liberals are trying to talk us into wanting
something else. It's obvious where they are coming from. The Chinese
have China, there are Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a
nation for Whites.
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art.
Except I didn't say anything about it being the only real art. It
is an example of real art while modern art is simply garbage.
In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists,
Except that that never happened.
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Remember the story about the king with no clothes?
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
18 Feb 2006 07:28:17 AM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
I remember once in another newsgroup you said one of the dumbest things
I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the only real
art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other artists,
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence. Clearly
people who can comprehend it, as I do, will disagree.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
12 Feb 2006 07:03:14 PM |
|
|
by Kevin Alfred Strom
....The May 18th meeting of the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (or AIPAC for short) in
Washington, DC... AIPAC is the most
influential lobby in Washington, and is totally focused on
maintaining and increasing American taxpayer support for Israel,
both financial and military, and in destroying all critics of
Israel or of Jewish supremacism...
When Bush ascended to the AIPAC podium, flanked by leading Jewish
supremacists on both sides, behind him was a huge new flag
design, probably 50 feet long, consisting of American stars and
stripes interspersed with huge Stars of David. Bush, interrupted
by wild applause and several standing ovations from the Zionist
audience which included Ariel Sharon, referred to the leading
Jewish supremacists on the platform by their first names:
"I'm honored to be here at AIPAC, thank you for such a warm
welcome. It's good to be with so many friends -- friends of mine
and friends of Israel. ...I want to thank Amy for her leadership.
I appreciate you taking time to serve a cause that -- in which
you believe deeply. I want to thank Bernice for her willingness
to serve, as well. I've known Howard for a long time. He's
effective. I want to thank the AIPAC board -- AIPAC board members
for their friendship and leadership. I'm honored to be in the
presence of my friend, the Ambassador from Israel, Danny Ayalon.
I appreciate you being here, Danny."
How cozy. The president went on in this vein for about forty
minutes, acting more like an Israeli cabinet minister than an
American president. He congratulated himself for his unwavering
support for Zionism, justified the horrible terror-war being
waged on Israel's behalf in Iraq, and engaged in some
saber-rattling against other Muslim states that don't want to
have a government supervised by Jews.
Bush also repeated the catch-phrase that has a hidden meaning to
Jewish supremacists, the phrase I've spoken about before on
American Dissident Voices -- "committed to the security of Israel
as a Jewish state," which is repeated almost word-for-word again
and again by Israel's sycophants and Capitol Hill puppets. and
which means much more than seems. [
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=1282 ] The words 'as
a Jewish state' are crucial: they mean support for Israel as a
racial state for one people alone, something that the Jewish
power structure denies to every White nation -- yet White
politicians must express their "commitment" to Israel. Bush
stated:
"The United States is strongly committed, and I am strongly
committed, to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state."
Identical to the catch-phrase, with only the addition of the word
'vibrant.' Bush is not committed to America as an American state
-- in fact, he supports amnesty for illegal invaders.
All that is to be expected from Bush, considering his dependence
on Jewish favor, Jewish money, and Jewish media for his election.
But what I found most chilling about Bush's groveling speech
before his masters was this section, in which he makes reference
to a recent meeting of the so-called Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which is working with American
and European governments to outlaw free speech by "monitoring"
and outlawing criticism of Jews [
http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/053103.txt
http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/062803.txt ]:
"The Jewish people have seen, over the years and over the
centuries, that hate prepares the way for violence. The refusal
to expose and confront intolerance can lead to crimes beyond
imagining. So we have a duty to expose and confront
anti-Semitism, wherever it is found. Some of you attended a very
important event in Berlin last month, the International
Conference on Anti-Semitism. You understand that anti-Semitism is
not a problem of the past; the hatred of Jews did not die in a
Berlin bunker. In its cruder forms, it can be found in some Arab
media, and this government will continue to call upon Arab
governments to end libels and incitements. Such hatred can also
take subtler forms. The demonization of Israel, the most extreme
anti-Zionist rhetoric can be a flimsy cover for anti-Semitism,
and contribute to an atmosphere of fear in which synagogues are
desecrated, people are slandered, folks are threatened. I will
continue to call upon our friends in Europe to renounce and fight
any sign of anti-Semitism in their midst."
[ http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-1.html
]
You'll notice two things here: 1) Bush is conflating negative
feelings about Jews, and 'rhetoric,' with actual violent acts and
a supposed 'atmosphere' that 'creates' them, thus setting the
stage for the legally-required 'monitoring' of all critics of
Jewish power and the criminalization of the free speech of these
critics, and 2) the redefinition of criticism of Israel or
Zionism, making them into just another form of so-called
"anti-Semitism," so they, too, can be 'monitored' and eventually
criminalized. Both of these are something that Jewish pressure
groups worldwide have been pushing hard for recently, and Bush
promised to give them exactly what they want.
Meanwhile, at yet another meeting, John Kerry, who is actually of
Jewish ancestry himself, tried to out-promise Bush with his
protestations of love for Zionism and hatred of any who would
criticize Jewish supremacism. At a meeting last month of the
crime-linked Jewish spying operation and pressure group, the
'Anti-Defamation League' (ADL) in Washington, Kerry said the
following:
"...what ADL stands for is what I would like to fight for. ...And
after last week's [OSCE] conference in Berlin, we celebrate 55
countries that came together who have pledged to intensify their
efforts to combat anti-Semitism and to spread tolerance. ...And
we still know that anti-Semitism, notwithstanding the meeting of
55 countries, has been growing, and demands global leadership in
order to stand up against it. ...Across the Atlantic we've seen a
new wave of anti-Semitism, masking as anti-Israel sentiment, and
it's creeping its way across Europe and the Middle East. ...The
people of Israel should also know that for the entire 20 years
that I have been in the United States Senate, I'm proud that my
commitment to a secure Jewish state has been unwavering; not even
by one vote or one letter or one resolution has it wavered. And
as president, I can guarantee you that that support and that
effort for our ally, a vibrant democracy, will continue. ...The
security of Israel is paramount."
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerryadl.html ]
Ladies and gentlemen, you cannot have more than one paramount
value. If a certain thing is your highest value, that means that
all other things are of lesser or no value. Kerry says "The
security of Israel is paramount." Not the security of the United
States. Not the security of our children's future. Not the
security of Western civilization or its founding race. None of
these are paramount to Kerry, or for that matter Bush or any of
the bought politicians. The Jewish state alone is paramount. (In
one of those coincidences that is simply too funny to have been
made up, I note that Kerry's 'liaison with the Jewish community'
is a person named Jay Footlik.)
As for Ralph Nader, he himself, like Kerry, is not entirely White
(though he's not Jewish) and he cannot be expected to articulate
the interests of White Americans. He has approached Middle
Eastern issues with more objectivity than Kerry or Bush -- he
recently referred to Kerry as "part of the Washington puppet show
on the Israeli/Palestinian matter" -- and he would restrict some
of the worst abuses of the open-border maniacs for rational
economic reasons...
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerry.html ]
And what of that OSCE conference on 'anti-Semitism' to which both
Kerry and Bush referred in such glowing terms? Attended by
representatives of 55 nations, many of them dependent on
US/Zionist favor for their economic survival, it marked the
agreement of those governments to 'root out' all criticism of
Jews, continue their efforts to criminalize such criticism, and
begin the most extensive internal surveillance and spying
operation ever known, to be directed against their own citizens
suspected of being aware of the issue of Jewish supremacism.
According to the New Jersey Jewish News, at the conference
"European governments acknowledged that much of the current
anti-Semitism revival hides behind criticism of Israel.
....Several congressional participants praised the work of the
conference, but warned that the meeting is only the first step in
combating a problem that continues to grow."
One of those US Congressmen attending the event was New Jersey's
Republican Representative Chris Smith, who said "When national
leaders fail to denounce anti-Semitic violence and slurs, the
void is not only demoralizing to the victims, but silence
actually enables the wrongdoing. Silence by elected officials in
particular conveys approval - or at least acquiescence - and can
contribute to a climate of fear and a sense of vulnerability.
....we hope the results of this conference will serve as a
blueprint for serious and hopefully bold action. Our words here
in Berlin, however, must be repeated at home with frequency,
passion, and tenacity and matched - and even exceeded - by
deeds."
Laszlo Kovacs, the foreign minister of Hungary, told the OSCE
meeting "There can be no tolerance of extremist hate speech. We
will not tolerate it in parliament, in meetings, on the streets,
squares or football stadiums." By "extremist hate speech" they
now mean criticism of Israel, Zionism, or Jewish power. They do
not mean and will not punish Jewish supremacists when they
declare their hatred of White people or others, nor will they
punish the Jewish funding and promotion of policies which are
leading directly to genocide of the European race.
Another attendee was Democratic Congressman from Maryland Ben
Cardin, who declared "We ended up with a document that
acknowledges the importance of national leadership in fighting
anti-Semitism, and which commits nations not just to gather
information about the problem but to take action based on that."
The article continues: "As a result, OSCE members will share
information on the spread of anti-Semitism and 'best practices'
for combating it. Member nations agreed to invest in educational
and law enforcement programs aimed at reducing hate crimes and to
appoint a roving OSCE envoy to help members 'develop specific
strategies.'"
Jewish spokesman Mark Levin said of the OSCE meeting "The bottom
line is that members states of the OSCE are now committed to
monitoring and hopefully implementing programs to counter
increasing anti-Semitism..." Levin also said that America must
also monitor and 'combat' critics of Jewish power: "It was clear
we have a lot to look at in our own backyard, including using
education, law enforcement, and the Internet to combat new forms
of hatred." With every questioner of Jewish policy now put in the
'anti-Semite' category if Jewish groups so declare, Levin and
Foxman are going to be very very busy in the near future.
[ http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/50604/wldadl.html ]
[ http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/040523124619.zfxkfwap ]
They may have to 'monitor' the halls of Congress. In the U.S.
Senate, Senator Ernest Hollings is about to retire -- and from
the secure position of never having to worry about reelection
again, Mr. Hollings has decided to come clean, at least
partially, on the nature of Jewish power in Washington. (By the
way, Hollings' designated successor has been chosen by the
Democratic Party: Inez Tenenbaum, the Democratic state education
superintendent. No more worries about South Carolina Senators
spilling the beans for a while, anyway. [
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/printLondon20040525.shtml
] )
Hollings' remarks included the following: "They [the Israeli
military] are coming in there [Palestinian refugee camps] with
U.S. equipment, U.S. gun helicopters, U.S. tanks that are
bulldozing. That is our policy. That is the reason for 9/11. ...I
think, frankly, we have caused more terrorism than we have gotten
rid of. ...I can tell you no President takes office--I don't care
whether it is a Republican or a Democrat--that all of a sudden
AIPAC will tell him exactly what the policy is... I don't
apologize for this column. I want them to apologize to me for
talking about anti-Semitism. They are not getting by with it.
....Now we have killed almost 800, maimed for life thousands of
others. Are we going to just continue on?"
[ http://hollings.senate.gov/~hollings/statements/2004521A35.html
]
Good question, Senator Hollings. My question is: Why did it take
you dozens of years to tell us the truth about Jewish domination
of Washington? Other establishment figures have, perhaps
reluctantly and hesitantly, revealed the truth about who has led
us into the war: Middle East expert General Anthony Zinni has now
stated that the purpose of the war was Israel's security, and
that Jewish neocons -- naming Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz,
Lewis Libby, Richard Perle, and Elliot Abrams -- were the ones
pushing for war from the beginning.
[ http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13549 ]
In parallel with the OSCE efforts in Europe, Jewish efforts to
suppress criticism are right now on track to be made into law in
the US Congress: H.R.4230 is a bill to "To authorize the
establishment within the Department of State of an Office to
Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, to require inclusion in annual
Department of State reports of information concerning acts of
anti-Semitism around the world, and for other purposes."
The bill states that "It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the
United States should continue to vigorously support efforts to
combat anti-Semitism worldwide through bilateral relationships
and interaction with international organizations such as the
Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); (2)
the United States delegation to the OSCE conference in Berlin
should advocate for the appointment of a High Commissioner on
anti-Semitism; (3) the President should direct the United States
Ambassador to the United Nations to introduce in the most
appropriate forum in the United Nations a measure condemning
anti-Semitism; (4) the Secretary of State should establish a
permanent office in the Department of State to monitor and combat
anti-Semitism; and (5) the Department of State should thoroughly
document acts of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incitement that
occur around the world."
[ http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR04230:@@@P ]
It does indeed seem that there are meetings, meetings everywhere
-- in Berlin, in Washington, in the halls of Congress itself. For
the most part, these are meetings of liars and faceless
bureaucrats eager to accept Jewish money and keep their jobs by
doing what they are told.
Meanwhile, we're having some meetings of our own. Last month,
National Alliance members participated in the Institute for
Historical Review revisionist conference in Sacramento, which we
helped rescue from cowardice and Jewish censorship efforts. Just
one week earlier, we held the largest-ever National Alliance
Leadership Conference in the newly-constructed William Pierce
Memorial Hall in the beautiful mountains of West Virginia. And
just a few days ago, the New Orleans European-American Conference
gathered together Alliance members and supporters, members of
other groups, and individual activists from around the world to
meet in cooperation in setting lofty goals, putting in place a
'zero tolerance' policy on violence or lawlessness often
instigated by provocateurs, and distancing ourselves from
irresponsible elements by setting a high moral tone in our
efforts to secure a future for White children. The ideas in the
New Orleans Protocol, as it is called, are those that the
National Alliance has been promoting for years. The New Orleans
Protocol will have historic significance as we advance toward our
vision: a nation for White people, where the government is
responsible to us alone, where our interests -- and not the
interests of a foreign nation like Israel -- come first.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of
ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list-request@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
13 Feb 2006 03:24:08 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
--
_________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
12 Feb 2006 07:02:12 PM |
|
|
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed
him.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: The Religious Cancer of Racism
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:37 -0600
From: Alric Knebel <alric@[cableone.net]>
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
It wouldn't be a good idea to have a nation just of intelligent
people. What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
deport the child?
We should have a nation for White people. Besides being intelligent
Whites are also very good looking. The Chinese have China, there are
Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a nation for Whites.
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art.
Except I didn't say anything about it being the only real art. It
is an example of real art while modern art is simply garbage.
In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists,
Except that that never happened.
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Remember the story about the king with no clothes?
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: The Mohammad Cartoons - The Truth Hurts |
13 Feb 2006 03:30:30 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
