|
|
Oh for G-d’s sake: insane miscegenation propagandaInteresting new book out this week Breeding Between the Lines: Why Interracial People are Healthier and More Attractive
Alon Ziv, Alon Ziv, why is that name pinging my Jewdar? A member of the group least likely to miscegenate (with the world’s highest mean IQ as a direct result) persuades the rest of us to miscegenate in an insightful, revolutionary, readable and downright fun book. Yay, more jewish psyops. Addendum by J Richards Svy, I simply have to add a few things to this entry, and I don’t think you would mind. Here is the cover of the book by Alon Ziv.
Is the mixed race woman a match for white beauty?
Alon Ziv has to be insane if he believes that the broad-nosed and masculine mixed-race woman looks better. Can people in their right mind believe that attractive white women can be improved upon if non-whites are absorbed into the white gene pool? In addition, data from random and population-based sampling show an across-the-board increase in health problems among mixed-race offspring, apparently related to increased odds of the disruption of the autonomic nervous system; psychosocial explanations are readily ruled out by the data, and the link cites plenty of literature documenting outbreeding depression, i.e., one cannot asume that hybrid vigor always holds. Ziv should also read about craniofacial morphology in mixed-race individuals, white-Native American mixes to be more precise, and note that canonical variates analysis revealed a canonical root, explaining 36% of the variance, that made the mestizos deviate from shape variables in between whites and Native Americans. 52% of the 52 shape variables deviated from the mathematical average shape of the parent races, and here is the money shot:
The developmental patterns talked about above are mathematical averaging based upon the expectation from quantitative genetics, i.e., additive genetic variation, and morphological integration of different parts of the skull, whereby different parts of the the skull effectively behave like a single unit, i.e., a change in one part corresponds to changes in other associated parts. Note the term “interesting;” this term is an euphemism for some loss of morphological integration in the skull resulting from race mixing, i.e., some solid evidence that yes indeed, races exist among humans, and also that humans races—at least the two considered and by extrapolating from genetic distances and skull shape comparisons, any combination of races—are sufficiently distant so as to result in disruptions of co-adapted gene complexes and subsequent increased odds of anomalous outcomes in mixed offspring, which again is confirmed by Udry’s study linked to above. On his home page, Ziv writes that although nutritional improvement accounts for a big part of the Flynn effect, he believes that increased outbreeding has played an important role, too. Well, here is 30 years of the Flynn effect in Spain, and it is clear that the majority of the increase has been in the lower half of the bell curve, with a spectacular change in the 1st percentile and very little change in the 99th percentile of the IQ range.
How would Ziv explain this? An inverse relationship between socioeconomic status and outbreeding? Keep in mind that the lowest class people would generally be among the least geographically mobile. Alon Ziv, I’d love to see you address systematic data such as above. See if you can find, on average, better looking mixed-race women than the Nordic women here; I can include non-Nordic attractive white women, too, if necessary, and here is the criticism of Gillian Rhodes’ absurd study that you might have cited in your book. I will delete any “anti-Semitic” comments to make it comfortable for you, even set up a separate entry with clear instruction that no anti-Semitic comments are allowed, but I doubt that you would take up this challenge. I will probably get a copy of your book and see whether you have any decent data in it, but I seriously doubt that there is any such thing in it. Update: Book review posted here. Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on Tuesday, August 22, 2006 at 09:06 PM in Anthropology, Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests, Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity, Psychology, Race realism, That Question Again Comments:2
Posted by Andy on August 22, 2006, 10:42 PM | # This is bothering me: I used the phrase “practice what he preaches” in consectutive sentences, making me sound like an idiot. I vow to proofread my posts from now on before submitting them. 3
Posted by ben tillman on August 23, 2006, 12:42 AM | # Alon Ziv, Alon Ziv, why is that name pinging my Jewdar? This bit by Sarah Silverman seems apposite: Well, Kevin, I guess the most important event of this past week was, of course, the wedding of my sister, Susan Silverman, to Yosef Abramowitz. It was a really neat wedding, too, you know, ’cause they took each other’s last names and hyphenated it. So now my sister’s name is Susan Silverman-Abramowitz. But they’re thinking of shortening it to just “Jews.” 4
Posted by Al Ross on August 23, 2006, 01:53 AM | # The name Susan Silverman rings a bell for those who have read the formulaic and ultra-PC detective novels of Robert B Parker. Needless to say, the hero, Spenser, has a Black ‘best-buddy’ (Hawk), and the above named Jewess for a girlfriend, thus making the Parker novels amusing for their irony value and little else. 5
Posted by Alexei on August 23, 2006, 04:21 AM | # S.I., I don’t believe you’re serious about Jews being unlikely to miscegenate. American Jewish leaders complain that the outmarriage rate is close to 50%. Also, the experience of Soviet Jews is not only a story of emancipation but also of outmarriage. On the contrary, intragroup marriage, including cousin marriage, led to a high percentage of the mentally and genetically ill among the Ashkenazim. 6
Posted by ben tillman on August 23, 2006, 04:46 AM | # “American Jewish leaders complain that the outmarriage rate is close to 50%.” They’re lying, Alexei. 7
Posted by Alexei on August 23, 2006, 05:11 AM | # If they are lying, Russia is still a valid example. Children of mixed marriages are greatly overrepresented among Russia’s educated and successful. 8
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 05:28 AM | # Do people here need more evidence that Sailer is a turd? Steve, if you are reading: you’re a turd. Three brief comments on this book (which Sailer, who, by the way, previously cited miscegenation as the solution for racial problems): 1. One can quote J Richards’ dissection of the Gillian Rhodes study, as well as the subjectiveness of “attractiveness.” This latter point is underscored by the cover picture of this book - is that supposed to be an example of an “attractive” mongrel?” The woman is, by my standards, incredibly grotesque - I can see black women who are better looking, and that’s not saying much. Please. Then there is that other example of “inter-racial beauty” - Devon Aoki - who to my eyes looks like a distorted space alien. 2. Richard Udry’s article (discussed by J Richards on MR) plainly shows that mixed race children and adolescents have more, not less, physical and mental problems. Are Hispanics or African-Americans healthier than white Americans, even when controlling for income, etc? No, they are not. There is in fact NO hard evidence that broad race-mixing enhances health. 3. I seem to doubt that any of these analyses actually try to “balance the books” and look at the potential negatives of race mixing: the immense damage to parental kinship and EGI, the disruption of (in some cases practically useful and/or aesthetic) combinations of gene frequencies, the fact of having children phenotypically distinct from parents/grandparents, dilution of culture, and the demographic effects on a race (whites) who are suffering from displacement migration and low birthrates. Do the illusory benefits compensate for these negatives? The effects on genetic relatedness have to come first and foremost. In the case of European-African mating, the offspring would be relatively less related to each parent than to a random co-ethnic! In the case of a mating between Europeans and East Asians (or Amerindians, as the case is with the origin of many Hispanic groups), the grandparents would be less related to the grandchildren than to a random co-ethnic (as per the genetic data and Harpendings’ formulae). And that doesn’t even consider the further question - not covered by Salter - about genetic structure, which may well amplify these negative effects to a large degree. Why is this ignored? By the way, the lead story in this month’s AR (which is only Part I of two) is a searing indictiment of the stupidity of citizenism, given its implications. But, then, we always *knew* citizenism was stupid, after all, look its originator. Alexei - the issue of Jewish intermarriage is one that I commented on *twice* on this blog, giving links, statistics, and a formula for calculating relative assimilation. Even IF the Jewish intermarriage rate is ~50%, that is still indicative of a resistance to intermarriage, given the relative proportions of Jews/Gentiles in the population, and, adjusted for population, is much less than white gentile ethnic groups in America. Another point: most Jewish intermarriage is with (higher-class) white gentiles, not with non-Caucasian peoples. Thus, Jews encourage, for example, white-black mating, while resisting intermarriage themselves, and, when they do intermarry, it is with the more intelligent and attractive representatives of the same broad race to which they belong. That’s the point. 9
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 09:16 AM | # For those so-called “race realism pundits” who question the parental kinship problem, let’s plug in Cavalli-Sforza’s data into the parental kinship formulae. English-Bantu Fst = 0.2288 0.2288>0.1716; the parent is, relatively, genetically more similar to a random co-ethnic in an English vs. Bantu comparison, than they are to their own child. English - S. Chinese (Fst = 0.1152), at the level of grandparents And, this does not even consider the factor of genetic structure, nor does it factor in that many phenotypically relevant genes have a greater inter-population Fst as measured by neutral markers. Non-existent “advantages” from inter-racial mating do not compensate for the known diminishment of genetic kinship. As much as some “conservatives” hope that inter-racial hybrids would make good “citizens”, the data cannot be ignored. 10
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 09:21 AM | # And a point made here before: if Sailer’s ‘anti-racist’ buddies believe that ‘most genetic variation is within, not between, groups’, then it would seem that ‘hybrid vigor’ would be best achieved by intra-racial rather than inter-racial mating. After all, gee, isn’t that 85% of the variation more than the 15%? However, if, in order to promote miscegenation, they admit that - random gene sharing aside - the major genetic variation is between racial groups, then the concepts of ethnic genetic interests and parental kinship come to the fore. They cannot have it both ways: stressing intra-group variation when they want to delegitimize race, and then stressing inter-group variation when they want to invoke some mythical ‘hybrid vigor’ for the admixed. 11
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 09:37 AM | # Is this an example of inter-racial attractiveness: http://breedingbetweenthelines.com/ J Richards, can we have a phenotypic analysis please? How about side-by-side comparisons with unmixed white women? Or, even unmixed Asian women - I’ll pick someone like Lucy Liu over this grotesque hybrid, if forced to make such a choice. When is Mr. Ziv going to preach the advantages of inter-racial marriage (i.e., not marriage to white gentiles) to Jews? After all, given all the recessive genetic disorders of the Ashkenazim, injecting, for example, African bloodlines would do wonders for them and their competitiveness, won’t you think? 12
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 09:46 AM | # From Ziv’s website: ” * After 18 holes, Tiger Woods probably smells better than his competitors.” JW: “Probably.” Very scientific. Even if true (is Ziv planning to sniff Tiger?), the importance of this is…? “* Julia Roberts was more likely to have an orgasm with Benjamin Bratt than with Lyle Lovett.” JW: “More likely.” Very scientific. How about this - it is “more likely” for a Jewish ‘scientist’ to twist scientific data, and ignore genetic kinship, to promote miscgenation, than it a gentile scientist. “* Odds are, Lenny Kravitz lost his virginity earlier than most rock stars.” JW: “Odds are.” Very scientific. “Odds are” that Ziv approves of inter-racial marriage (for *us*, not *them*), and wrote his “book” with that a priori agenda. “These bizarre, sensational statements sound like they were ripped from the headlines of The National Enquirer, but they are grounded in solid scientific research.” Really? Tell that to Udry. “What do Tiger Woods, Benjamin Bratt, and Lenny Kravitz have in common? Their interracial heritage. This mixed ancestry gives them better genes and stronger, healthier, better-looking bodies.” Evidence? What is the evidence that those individuals actually have “better genes?” That they are “stronger” than the average person in their own field? Healthier? That they are considered “better-looking?” Propaganda aside, would women consider Woods “better-looking” than white golfers of similar age? Is Bratt considered better-looking than Pitt? How many women would swoon over Lenny Kravitz, compared to white musicians of the same age and status? Liar. However, given Ziv’s ancestry, “liar” may be redundant. 13
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 10:34 AM | # History gives us some examples of populations that are derived from inter-continental admixture: Latin America, Central Asia, South Asia, and North Africa. Are these regions noted for their great health, attractiveness, physical prowess, or accomplishments? No. Even more to the point, the individuals from these regions who seem to make the biggest impact with respect to vigor or attractiveness – in entertainment (e.g., Bollywood, Brazilian supermodels, Mexican news anchors) or in sports (Pele, Zidane) – are at either end or the other of the racial spectrum of their respective nations; highly admixed people, for some reason, are not floating to the top. Let’s look at baseball. In his updated Historical Abstract, Negro-League worshipper Bill James lists the 100 top baseball players of all time, and he includes Negro Leaguers, thus making it acceptable to include the pre-integration era for study. Of course, we do not have genetic data for these players, but based on ancestry and physical appearance (when such is known), we can make reasonable approximations. The top ten players of all time are either white or dark-skinned (and presumably, predominantly African) blacks. The same holds for the top twenty. In the top thirty James includes Negro League star Turkey Stearnes, whose racial background is unknown to me. So, that is one possible highly admixed person in the top 30, and that’s “possible.” The next ten – white or dark-skinned black. The next ten has another Negro League star, Mule Suttles, of unknown racial background. So far, that’s two out of 50 that *may* be highly admixed. The next ten includes a known mulatto – Roy Campanella – as well as Negro League star Smokey Joe Williams, whose racial appearance I do not know. One definite, and three “maybes” out of 60. The next ten contains Negro League star Cristobal Torriente, who I know was admixed, as well as Rod Carew, a black Panamanian whom we can charitably call admixed. So far, three out of 70, and 3 “maybes.” Of the next ten, we can consider Alomar and Clemente to be admixed – 5 out of 80. The last 20 contain 3 players who are probably admixed, and one who may be. So, the most charitable estimate is that 8 out of 100 are significantly admixed, and 4 may be. Wow, so impressive. Please note that I am not counting Ted Williams as admixed, since his “Mexican” mother was apparently predominantly, or fully, of Spanish and Basque descent; his father, I believe was Welsh. The greatest players since integration have been predominantly white or dark-skinned blacks, although of course the Dominican mulattoes Rodriguez and Pujols now have to be ranked high. There is no clear evidence however, that mixed race players are in any way superior to those who are unmixed. As well, shouldn’t the racially mixed breed with other racially mixed people, to maintain their wonderfully diverse genepool? Assimilating the admixed into the white majority population would dilute their ever-so-superior genes with the ever-so-blandly homogenous genes of whites. Can’t have that. The admixed can breed among themselves and create the healthy super-race: as in Mexico, Brazil, Central Asia, North Africa, India, etc. Good luck. 14
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 10:40 AM | # “Sailer is a clown for promoting this.” Unfortunately, he is not a clown, but a more dangerously anti-white specimen. Some here think that Sailer’s anti-whitism is just “squik-ink” to cover his race-realism; I think the opposite, like his buddies at GNXP, Sailer’s race-realism is the “squid-ink” to cover his multiracialist agenda. 15
Posted by WJG on August 23, 2006, 10:56 AM | # On Holliday says… “Another point: most Jewish intermarriage is with (higher-class) white gentiles, not with non-Caucasian peoples. Thus, Jews encourage, for example, white-black mating, while resisting intermarriage themselves, and, when they do intermarry, it is with the more intelligent and attractive representatives of the same broad race to which they belong.” Though I have nothing to base my agreement on other than anecdote (which I have seen time and again), I do agree here, which is then one more reason to see what a serpent Jewry is. They lure our best away from us with their ill-gotten gains. Then our best not only lift their inbred genetics up (I am not an IQ fetishist like most MRers), but they then have cover to sell themselves as White when it suits their purposes (commerce), else Jewish (pity points). As you say elsewhere, why doesn’t the Master Race, which feeds us this poison, prove this theory of hybrid vigor by mating with Bantus rather the cream of the Aryan crop? They won’t because they know this is all hooey for the Goy cattle. Also, Rabbi Ziv’s cherry picking of successful hybrids like Tiger Woods is lame. For every Tiger there are scores of obese and indolent African-Americans with varying degrees of White “vigor” in their blood. 16
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 12:31 PM | # The Ethiopian ‘Jews’ in Israel present an excellent opportunity to improve the Jewish stock there, as do the Arabs living in Israel, as well as the Asian guest workers (conversion can take care of any religious difficulties and, anyway, many Israelis are secular, so, I’m so sure they won’t mind) there. What is needed is to have every Ethiopian paired off with an Ashkenazi, and to have the Jewish population physically assimilate through intermarriage (which would need to be legalized because, for some reason, it is currently not legal) the Arab and guest worker population. Hybrid vigor would boost the quality of the Jewish Israeli population. In order to improve numbers, Israel could give tax breaks – using American taxpayers’ money of course – to inter-racial couples to have more children. In America, miscegenation holds the key to a) improve the genetic quality of the Jewish population, b) reverse Jewish demographic decline, c) fix the broken Jewish-black consensus, while reaching out to other people of color, and d) stopping the black drift toward Islam. Thus, what America’s Jews should do is: Only a vicious and hateful anti-Semite would wish to deprive the Jewish people of the same genetic improvement that Mr. Ziv encourages for us. Indeed, since John Ray and Lawrence Auster both tell us that anti-Semitism is an unalloyed evil, we here at Majority Rights need to help the Jewish people and do everything we can do promote racial admixture – and the resulting hybrid vigor – between Jews and people of color. It is the right thing to do. 17
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 12:45 PM | # “Is this an example of inter-racial attractiveness: http://breedingbetweenthelines.com/ J Richards, can we have a phenotypic analysis please?” My own analysis: *extremely” unattractive and sickly looking. A masculinized face, with manly jaw, receding forehead, what looks to me to be traces of brow ridges. A shapeless, putty like nose, and grossly over-thick lips. An overall “bride of Frankenstein” appearance - a cobbling together of racial traits from different groups, with a complete lack of ‘morphometric integration’ - and an appearance which does more than anything else to refute the “thesis” of the book on which the picture appears. In point of fact, looking at the real-life admixed people one encounters - rather than made-up celebrities (often with plastic surgery) - it is notable how “unattractive” they appear. That includes Eurasian hybrids of NW Europeans and NE Asians, often with grossly mismatched features: a NW European jawline coupled to wide NE Asian cheekbones, slanted eyes coupled to a straight narrow nose, a complexion often darker than that of either parent, and features (eyes, nose, and mouth) often mis-sized (usually too small) for the distorted melon of a head. Hybrid vigor, my ass. 18
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 12:48 PM | # The brow ridges can be seen in the full picture from the book’s cover. And I can note she is prognathous as well, with a forward-thrusting jaw, to go with the thick lips and shapeless, grotesque nose. Gee, now, isn’t that every normal white person’s dream of an “attractive” and “healthy” daughter or granddaughter? 20
Posted by JB on August 23, 2006, 12:56 PM | #
she looks like a female Vin Diesel
21
Posted by Count Dooku on August 23, 2006, 12:56 PM | # If someone could post a recent pic of OJ’s daughter when she was arrested for assault, they would be doing us a great favor. She looks more like OJ than her brother does. 22
Posted by JB on August 23, 2006, 12:57 PM | # Alon Ziv will give a speech at Dutton’s Beverly Hills this coming Saturday Aug 26 at 7:00 pm “The author signs, presents and reads from his new book, Breeding Between the Lines: Why Interracial People are Healthier and More Attractive, at a champagne reception and discussion.”
http://maps.google.com/maps?oi=map&q=447+N+Canon+Dr,+Beverly+Hills,+CA+90210 23
Posted by JB on August 23, 2006, 01:02 PM | # surely this jew will be invited to do a lot of TV, radio and newspaper interviews first whites were supposed not to discriminate and pretend that everyone is the same, i.e. men all have testicles and women all have breasts therefore we’re all the same you see ? and allow millions of our human “brothers” to settle in our lands but now jews are overtly telling us that it would be a good thing if we discriminate against our own race. Gee I thought discrimination was bad. I’m so confused… I’m going to turn to Oprah for advice…
Alon Ziv bio:
24
Posted by ben tillman on August 23, 2006, 01:28 PM | # It is pretty amazing that someone would choose that cover girl to advertise the book. It calls to mind Yggdrasil’s review of the movie A Clockwork Orange: http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12032&goto=nextoldest 25
Posted by Alon Ziv on August 23, 2006, 02:31 PM | # I’m the author of Breeding Between the Lines Given the multiple anti-semetic comments I’m probably wasting my time posting here, but a received an email tipping me off to this thread so I thought I’d chime in. You’ll be happy to hear that I address many of your concerns in the book. I encourage you to read it before you bash it. Specifically: 1. I do discuss IQ and take a look at why it is consistently rising (the Flynn effect). Read the book; make up your own mind. Alon Ziv 26
Posted by Count Dooku on August 23, 2006, 03:09 PM | # How about you go preach your anti-White propaganda to the Jews first and when we see them fall for it (yeah right), then we’ll consider looking at it. 27
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 03:41 PM | #
I refer you to On Holliday’s excellent posts in this thread: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/irreconcilable_differences/#comments
American jewish leaders lobbied to keep jews off the census forms, and now they enjoy cooking up whatever figures suit them.
There were trade-offs, but seeing how jews are the world’s most successful group I don’t think they’re crying into their pillows at night about it. 28
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 03:56 PM | # “I’m the author of Breeding Between the Lines Given the multiple anti-semetic (sic) comments I’m probably wasting my time posting here” First set the stage by dismissing us as “anti-Semites”, so as to avoid dealing with the fact that you are promoting genocide and that your “facts” are ass-backwards. By the way, I hope your book was spell-checked by a competent editor, since you obviously are incapable of spelling at a high-school level. “ but a received an email tipping me off to this thread so I thought I’d chime in.” Gee, I wonder who it was who tipped you off? Citizen Lerch or Brown Sahib? “You’ll be happy to hear that I address many of your concerns in the book.” I doubt that. I doubt you actually understand, or care, what the concerns are. “I encourage you to read it before you bash it.” Sure, the next time I’m in a bookstore, and am in the mood to read trash, I’ll look through a copy. Don’t think I’m going to spend money and actually buy your promotion of genocide. I look forward to seeing “Salter, Frank” listed in your index. “Specifically: 1.I do discuss IQ and take a look at why it is consistently rising (the Flynn effect).” First, unlike most here, I am relatively unconcerned about IQ. A people’s worth to itself is not measured by someone’s ranking of their phenotype on a hierarchical scale. However, since IQ is of some importance I may note that: a) The Flynn effect, whatever its cause, is leveling off, and b) the Flynn effect is observed in the absence of inter-continental miscegenation. Further, as has been discussed on this site before, I fail to see how mixing is going to raise the IQ of the white population, since the only groups with higher average IQ are Jews and Asians – Jews being too few in number to appreciably alter white IQ, and the difference between white and Asian IQ is so small one would need complete panmixia to raise the IQ of the resulting Eurasian mongrel population to a degree that is a fraction of one SD. Not quite worth genocide, I think, particularly since Asians have proved, despite their high average IQ, incapable of the same creativity as Europeans. With respect to the idea that outbreeding per se, in general, can raise intelligence, inter-continental mating is not necessary. “2. I do discuss Jews and the the (sic) fact that historically their intermarriage numbers are very low. Many here have been quick to call me a hypocrite, but I encourage intermarriage among all groups.” Let us know when you lecture Jews in America and Israel to intermarry with colored peoples. I await their response. Elliot Abrams in particular should appreciate that. You may “encourage intermarriage among all groups”, but the practical point is, only some groups are vulnerable to the effects of miscegenation. Since it is only western societies that have become multiracial, the encouragement of intermarriage is genocidal to those peoples. China, Japan, Africa, etc. will remain the same as always. The more ethnocentric of Jews will remain as always. The promotion of intermarriage will be destructive only to those peoples who no longer live in homogenous homelands and who are exposed to alien peoples with whom admixture is possible. And we know who those are. But, hey, if you are sincere, get Israel to change their “law of return”, get them to legalize Jewish-gentile marriages, and get them to stop making guest workers sign pledges not to have sex with Israelis. Get to work, Ziv. Why proselytize to the already-converted? Further, I find it interesting that a person who writes a book about the alleged advantages of intermarriage, states that he encourages such intermarriage. Scientifically disinterested? Of course, Ziv the liar will tell us that first he discovered the great advantages of intermarriage, and then, and only then, did he become an advocate for such admixture. Forgive me for suspecting that first came the commitment to promote admixture and then came the distorting and obfuscating attempts to justify it. “3. Increasing parental-kinship is only one goal of evolution.” Evolution has a goal? What kind of “scientist” are you? Evolution has no “goals”, moron, it is a non-anthropomorphic process. However, people may have goals, and the pursuit of adaptive behavior, in promoting genetic interests and racial preservation, are worthy goals. Promoting genocide, as is *your* agenda, is an unworthy goal, and has already been designated as a “crime against humanity” by international tribunals. “There are others that are equally important.” Sure. If you are a hate-filled Middle Easterner, burning with the urge to mongrelize the European peoples out of existence, certainly other goals are important, as you so demonstrate. “Cloning would allow for 100% transfer of your genes to the next generation, but sexual reproduction evolved because the genetic variation it provides is incredibly powerful.” In case you haven’t noticed, intra-ethnic, intra-racial endogamous matings are also performed by sexual reproduction, and hence derive the same benefits from recombination as do exogamous mating. The people of Korea do not reproduce by asexual fission. The fact that sexual reproduction and a certain amount of genetic variation are adaptive does not logically imply that ever greater amounts of genetic variation, and ever greater disruption of co-evolved gene complexes are adaptive as well. That is an argument that only the mendacious, or stupid, would make. Which one is it, Ziv? And, by the way, have you noticed that speciation, including behavioral barriers to mating between related, and cross-fertile, subspecies (and, in some cases, species) is also part of “evolution’s goals”, and this “goal” of evolution (as you so crudely put it) is ill-served by mixing between the subspecies. In other words, the existence of sexual reproduction does not in any way, shape, or form implies that crossings between subspecies are always adaptive. “If parental-kinship were our only concern than your ideal mate would be your sibling or your parent.” Strawman alert! Who is advocating incest, idiot? Obviously, many animals (including humans) have evolved restraints against incest because of the maladaptive consequences. However, there is – and I assume even you have the cognitive ability to recognize this – a big difference between incest and someone marrying an unrelated co-ethnic, or, as happens in America, cross-ethnic breeding within the same continental race. It is not an “either/or” thing – it is not “maximize parental kinship at all costs, even incest and recessive genetic disorders.” It is to maximize parental kinship to the degree practically possible and desirable, and to avoid unnecessary damage to parental kinship and genetic interests, damage most often observed with mating across continental races. There is sufficient genetic variation within (the larger) European ethnic groups, and, for sure, among the multi-ethnic European-American population, to safely avoid problems with inbreeding. The choice is not “marry my sister or marry the African swinging from the nearest tree”, but a choice between marrying unrelated co-ethnics or co-racials of a different, but relatively closely related ethnicity, and marrying someone of different race – the latter choice having devastating effects on kinship and genetic interests, and disruptive of the gene complexes and resultant phenotypes that characterize parents, their families, and their ethnies. And, for what? To smell as good as Tiger Woods on the golf course? Want to help people with inbreeding problems? Encourage Ashkenazi Jews to marry Africans and African-Americans, that’ll decrease the genetic load in no time. Persons of European descent do not require such “assistance.” Just because *your* Ashkenazi ancestors inbred at the most intimate levels (including uncle-niece marriages) does not imply that other groups manifest the same array of disturbing recessive genetic disorders. “Which I don’t think you’re advocating.” Strawman alert! On the other hand, I do know what you are advocating. “Read the book; make up your own mind.” My mind is made up that you are guilty of promoting genocide, and, by any objective standard, the crime committed by this book is worse than what Julius Streicher was hanged for at Nuremburg. I hope that at some point in the future, legally convened tribunals – acting on the premise of “universal nationalism”- will hold trials of those who have attempted the destruction of mankind’s genetic diversity. By the way, who made the choice of the incredibly grotesque, shockingly unattractive, Vin Diesel-in-drag cover model for the book, and what unholy mixture of ethnicities created such a dismal specimen? 29
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 04:03 PM | #
That was my first thought as well.
That was my second thought.
That’s an excellent point, and one I’d not considered.
I made statements like that in the past, but stopped believing them a while ago. I do still think he’s an immensely useful writer.
Ah, but why not go where you’re most needed? Start where your advice is least heeded, with American jewry and Israel. How do you square Ethnic Genetic Interests with your views and work, Mr. Ziv? 30
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 04:07 PM | # Btw, Mr. Ziv, I commend you on actually showing up here and replying, rather than pretending you’re “above it all” as seems to be the usual behavior (not that everyone’s heard of MR, mind you 31
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 04:14 PM | # http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/officialtext.htm See article II, c and d. In my opinion - and I cannot see how it is not objectively supported - the promotion of intermarriage, particularly among groups that are demographically threatened, falls under the class of creating conditions that would at least partially destroy the group *and*, in particular, would contribute to a climate of propaganda that imposes a situation that would prevent births of the group. There is one group worldwide that is below replacement level in reproduction - peoples of European descent. Further diminishment of their numbers by the promotion of miscegenation, particularly when facts are distorted/obfuscated to that end - would fall under IIc-d. The only problem is that the current globalist regime is hostile to the European peoples, and so overlooks such crimes against humanity. We can only hope that some future regime makes up for these omissions. 32
Posted by Count Dooku on August 23, 2006, 04:23 PM | # On Holliday…I do believe you just kicked ass. 33
Posted by Mark Richardson on August 23, 2006, 04:26 PM | # Svy, I agree with you that this is an excellent argument made by On Holliday: “And a point made here before: if Sailer’s ‘anti-racist’ buddies believe that ‘most genetic variation is within, not between, groups’, then it would seem that ‘hybrid vigor’ would be best achieved by intra-racial rather than inter-racial mating.” The contradiction in so clear and fundamental. It’s worth hammering the opposition on this, imo. 34
Posted by Andy on August 23, 2006, 05:14 PM | #
Mr. Ziv—this is your publisher’s teaser for your book:
Serious, scholarly works are not promoted in this manner. This sounds like an advertisement designed to appeal to the people who buy celebrity-obsessed tabloids like Us Weekly or People. Your novel sounds like sensationalistic, tabloid-esque trash. And what do you say to Sailer:
You seem to confuse intraracial breeding with inbreeding, a devastating error that would greatly undermine your entire thesis. So, in conclusion: I have determined that your book is a sensationalistic, tabloid-esque work that makes a massive fundamental error in logic. I won’t be purchasing a copy. 35
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 05:22 PM | # Svigor, from the standpoint of genetic interests, inter-continental mating is “good” only to the extent that the benefits outweigh the costs, and the only way this occurs if it results in an increase in the relative proportion of distinctive genetic information in future generations. This has been discussed here previously, see my previous posts on ethnic genetic interests. Now, even if we accept Salter’s naïve, atomistic view of gene frequencies, there are serious problems with the outmarriage option. In this simplistic view, one could calculate the number of children necessary to offset the loss of parental kinship/ethnic genetic interests. But one runs into the practical issue that there is no evidence that mixed race couples have more children than endogamous ones, or that this is a stable long-term strategy in a world beset with overpopulation and limited ecological resources. Even more disturbing is that, given migration patterns, the net global gene flow is unidirectional, and thus, given such unidirectional gene flow, the net genetic interests of whites are harmed by intermarriage, regardless of the numbers of children produced (which, as stated, are likely the same as with the endogamous). And, there is no evidence that there are more grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc. with exogamy, or that this is a stable strategy or that it compensates for the lesser kinship (and once again, unidirectional gene flow). So, even with the most charitable, optimistic model for adaptive exogamy, it falls short, from the white perspective (but it does have advantages for expanding ethnies whose own homelands are demographically secure). However, once we consider genetic structure, an important set of genetic information that constitutes crucial genetic interests, the costs of exogamy increase dramatically. An English-Bantu couple may have a dozen children (unlikely, no?), and more than compensate for individual gene frequencies, but none of these children will even remotely reproduce anything similar to the ancestral genetic structures (and resulting phenotypes) found in the parents. One wonders if any number of children could compensate for the dramatic loss of parental structure found in offspring of widely genetically variant parents, and the novel linkage disequilibrium found in the hybrids, totally alien to the parents’ chromosomes and that of their co-ethnics. But, even we set a number, mixed race people are not having that number of children, nor is it a sustainable strategy – and never mind that once again, the alteration of genetic structure is unidirectional. Tiger Woods is not a superman making 40 children, and people with his genetic structure are not being produced in Africa or in Thailand, but only in white, western nations. Thus, there simply is not any compensation sufficient to make up for the loss of this distinctive genetic information. It is not possible, and even if possible, is not practical, and is not occurring. Even if inter-continental human “hybrid vigor” is real, it is a phenomenon subtle enough so as to be not immediately obvious and one that requires Mr. Ziv to write a book (with a cover model demonstrating the opposite point) attempting to convince us it exists. Sorry, any “vigor” sufficient to compensate for the enormous loss of kinship and genetic interests would be so obvious that everyone would take it for granted, and everyone would be clamoring to miscegenate. It just isn’t so. These “advantages” are either illusory or created by the left to justify admixture or, if real, are of a nature as to obviously not justify said admixture. Possibly, hybrid vigor may be of benefit where genetic distance between ethnies is small – such as within Europe – and the consequent loss of genetic information is minor enough (although still real and of interest/concern) so that positive attributes of the offspring can compensate. What can compensate for offspring that is less like their parents than a random co-ethnic? What can compensate for children who look nothing like their parents? Where are the mixed couples churning out enormous families of supermen, rather the troubled adolescents described by Udry? The whole thing is a crock – inter-continental mating is obviously maladaptive. 36
Posted by James Bowery on August 23, 2006, 05:23 PM | # In other threads regarding the evolution of beauty I’ve asked if there is an objective measure of beauty upon which to ground arguments. I’ve received no adequate answer so let me propose one: The price commanded by hookers and/or the wealth of husbands of “trophy wives”. Find what correlates with those monetary metrics and you might have some start. As things stand, arguments are primarily posturing. 37
Posted by James Bowery on August 23, 2006, 05:45 PM | # Being from an agricultural background—Iowa in fact—hybrid vigor is something of recognized practical value. However, there are three things that I doubt “Ziv” has covered in his book—not that I really care whether he has except insofaras it is genocidal to promote hybrid vigor in the absence of freedom of association: 1) In all but terminal cross breeding programs (meaning the lineages are all doomed) the breeder herds are female hybrids rotating between male purebreds. Usually at least 3 purebred male lineages are kept for this purpose. 2) Much of the promotion of hybrid vigor was propaganda by the agribusinesses that wanted to sell seeds that could not be used more than one growing season due to hybrid sterility. 3) There is a good amount of evidence that, in humans, interracial hybrids actually exhibit more health and behavioral problems than intraracial purebreds. 4) A cursory glance at the standards of beauty that sell tickets to movies indicates Nordish, if not Nordic, women are in higher demand than any other. While this may not be ideal as an objective measure it is clearly more objective and reproducible than the metrics used by various “beauty scientists”. 38
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 05:51 PM | # James, the trouble with hybrid vigor in the context of Ziv’s audience is that it means “hybrids have vigor,” when, as I understand it, the term means “when hybrids have vigor.” 39
Posted by On Holliday on August 23, 2006, 06:39 PM | # To summarize: looking at ultimate (genetic) interests it simply is not practically (or even theoretically, if we consider genetic structure) possible for alleged “hybrid vigor” to compensate for the loss of parental kinship/genetic interests. The issue is not one of *gross* maximization of kinship, but *net*, adaptive maximization. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that compensation occurs, and, with unidirectional migration and small family sizes in the west, it just is not possible. But, what about proximate interests? First, ultimate interests should trump proximate ones. But even if we consider proximate interests, Ziv’s case falls flat. One would think that a book that promotes the ideal of inter-racial beauty would have as its cover model someone other than a vomit-inducing “transvestite Vin Diesel” type. Unfortunately, given the proclivity of inter-racial “beauties” such as Berry and Carey to have plastic surgery, one assumes that using one of these would be too mendacious even for Ziv. Devon Aoki looks like a space alien, and I guess that Mr. Bratt, Mr. Woods, or Mr. Kravitz don’t quite make the grade. Further, James Bowery is correct, in that it are unmixed white women, particularly those of Northwest European ancestry, who are considered the ideals of feminine beauty. Billy Joel did not marry Ms. Diesel, nor did Aaron Spelling or Steven Spielberg, or any other members of Mr. Ziv’s tribe looking for trophy wives. With respect to health and physical prowess, the overall data do not support mixed race superiority. Even if Ziv spins out the Udry data (and I’ll need to see if it is addressed), that data stands as a reminder that the case is not cut and dried. Hybrid incompatibility is a possibility. Further still, parents: 2) yet, all else being equal, parents prefer that their offspring (their *own* offspring, once again valiung kinship) look like them - Rushton has shown that grieving for dead children is more intense for those family members after whom the child most resembled. I would think then that, just focusing on proximate interests, a parent may prefer a more plain child that looks like it is their child, to a “inter-racial beauty queen” that looks nothing at all like the parent or anyone in their family. Besides, which, it is unlikely that a mixed race child would be that attractive in any case. Once again - a politically motivated crock. 40
Posted by JJR Apologist on August 23, 2006, 07:07 PM | # Not long ago I read of a study (perhaps here at MR, perhaps at gnxp) that demonstrated an effective population size of only ~1,200 individuals is necessary to avoid inbreeding depression. Since modern nationalities and ethnicities number far greater, that by itself should kill the miscegenation-is-necessary-to-avoid-recessive-disorders lie. 41
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 08:28 PM | #
Nope. 42
Posted by James Bowery on August 23, 2006, 08:50 PM | # Holiday wrote: Further, James Bowery is correct, in that it are unmixed white women, particularly those of Northwest European ancestry, who are considered the ideals of feminine beauty. Billy Joel did not marry Ms. Diesel, nor did Aaron Spelling or Steven Spielberg, or any other members of Mr. Ziv’s tribe looking for trophy wives. If only Ziv’s fellow tribesmen would read his book and be conned by it to the same extent that others will be. One thing I failed to mention about the rotational cross breeding programs, which also applies to the terminal cross breeding programs, is that you don’t use your best female purebreds for them. You keep them in reserve to maintain your purebreeds. You can afford to stud out your best purebreed males—though that is within the context of a high r strategy—not K strategy. Ziv’s philsophy is bad even from the standpoint of a proponent of heterosis since he doesn’t care to preserve the purebreeds by reserving the best of their females to the best of their males for perpetuation of those purebreeds and indeed would not bother protecting the parental investment potential of the best of the purebreed males. In short, Ziv and his ilk are lousy at human husbandry for all their pretentions. 43
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 09:18 PM | #
This points to the fact that Ziv’s promotion of miscegenation for anyone but jews is hypocrisy; jews don’t suffer from the bad advice they give the way other people do. That’s essential to jewish race-destruction policies, whether it involves self-deception or not. 44
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 23, 2006, 09:25 PM | # And yes, anyone honestly promoting human husbandry via miscegenation would propose ethnostates to preserve the pure stock, particularly EuroChristian ethnostates since they’re so much more needed. This is just common sense - it is obvious that a race can mix at will, and that once mixed it cannot go back to its previous state. Common sense demands caution given the speculative nature of Ziv’s assertions. Chance of Ziv doing so in his book: zero. 45
Posted by Jeugenics on August 23, 2006, 09:33 PM | # This points to the fact that Ziv’s promotion of miscegenation for anyone but jews is hypocrisy Jews including high-grade nordic women in harems certainly improves their gene pool—breeds out the bulbous hook nose, the frizzle-haired greasy look, and nervous disorders. Jewish women with euro-derived blonde hair and gracility are attractive, while pure jewesses are uniformly repulsive (that by the way is another reason why their outmarriage rate masks the social pressure to marry endogamously—it’s difficult to believe jewish males would actually marry jewesses of their free will if they weren’t commanded to by yahweh. 46
Posted by AD on August 23, 2006, 10:25 PM | # So what should we be aiming for? The white-black-indian hybrid society a’la Brazil or more like the white-asian hybrids of turkmen/kazak/etc/istan central Asia or perhaps the black-arab Janjaweedville of north Africa? Which is our civilizational goal? Either way it’s guaranteed to be a high IQ utopia of supermen/women! What i don’t understand is why they currently immigrate to where we are rather than the other way around. And what’s with “white flight” once they get here? Doesn’t whitey know what’s best for him/herself? Anyway, whatever. If whitey won’t voluntarily sign up for project-miscegenation, i’m sure this book, coupled with unprecedented(and currently unwanted,tsk) inward flow of brown ubermensch, will eventually leave him/her no options. Here’s to a world of brown everymen! 47
Posted by Count Dooku on August 23, 2006, 10:47 PM | # Why would and did communists who want to destroy America push for multiculturalism, mass non-white immigration and miscegnation in America? Hmmmmm. 49
Posted by Alexei on August 24, 2006, 04:49 AM | # On Holliday—I think I understand your arguments about intermarriage now, and I agree that Jews, at least in Eastern Europe, tend to marry “high-quality” non-Jews. But I cannot share your apparent animus and would not rush to condemn the author of a book I have not read. If anything, Alon Ziv should be commended for showing up here despite having been called, together with his presumed kin, a liar. If a book advocating interracial marriage for genetic reasons makes it into the mainstream, it will soon be taken for granted that race actually matters on the genetic level, and this will play straight into your hands: the subject will no longer be taboo in polite society. The publisher’s teaser is in very bad taste, but that may be due to the stigma attached to the subject. 50
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 05:59 AM | # Alexei, By my interpretations of genocide - which are based upon an objective “one definition for all people, rather than special treatment for some” reading of established international conventions - Ziv is promoting genocide. Further, as I have explained *in detail* it is simply *not possible* for inter-continental admixture to be genetically adaptive. As James Bowery says, it is a principal of accounting that one looks at debits and not only credits. Balancing the two makes it impossible - and I stress *impossible* for any illusory “hybrid vigor” to compensate for loss of genetic kinship. Let me know when Tiger Woods has his 40th child. Even further, the arguments Ziv has made here, conflating ethnic endogamy with incest are the height of mendacity. I have no reason to reconsider my characterization of his character. Even further, for a “scientist” to say that evolution has “goals” means he is either an idiot, or contemptuously believes that *we* are idiots. All reason enough for “animus.” “The publisher’s teaser is in very bad taste, but that may be due to the stigma attached to the subject.” Wrong. The establishment approves of, and promotes, miscegenation. There is no “stigma” in promoting the same thing overtly promoted by the news and entertainment media. The teaser is in “bad taste” because the only arguments that can be made in support of intermarriage is that Julia Roberts is “more likely” to have an orgasm with an admixed man, or that Tiger Woods stinks less on the golf course. The reason that is so, I have already explained. It simply is not possible that inter-racial mixing is adaptive. One could as well write a book saying one could drive a car to Jupiter. “will soon be taken for granted that race actually matters on the genetic level..” Guys like Risch and Wade are more useful, and honest, in this regard. Of course, there is a point - either “there is no such thing as race and we are all genetically equivalent”, or “there are races that genetically differ, hence, illusory hybrid vigor.” If the latter, then..EGI. 51
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 06:04 AM | # JR, If you can get a hold of the book as well, that may be useful. It is stunning that Ziv - or his publishers (I assume Ziv had some say in it) - chose such an obviously and grossly unattractive female to “demonstrate” inter-racial attractiveness. I mean, even if a WN was allowed to choose, with the expressed objective of discrediting the book, he couldn’t have made a “better” choice. I guess Ziv will be looking for a different picture for a second edition - possibly a celebrity with plastic surgery to make them look more white. 52
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 08:11 AM | # Julius Streicher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Streicher The point - Streicher was not a member of the military or SS, he was never accused of actually killing any person, or planning/organizing such killing. He was in no way involved in the planning and/or execution of German war aims, or any “duplicity” in foreign policy. No, Streicher was indicted, convicted, and executed solely on the basis of his writing and speeches, which were viewed as creating a climate in which genocide became possible; “incitement” to genocide. Genocide is defined by international convention in a particular way, which includes, as stated above, full *or partial* destruction of a group, as well as creating conditions that *prevent births of that group.* Ziv’s writings can be reassonably construed in resulting in prevention of births of persons of European descent (or actually, of other descent as well, but other peoples are not demographically threatened), which would result, at least, in the partial destruction of the group. Therefore, there is a solid legal precedent for Ziv’s book to form the basis of an indictment by a putative future, legally convened international tribunal dedicated to pursuing justice with respect to globalist tyranny, promotion of replacement migration, miscegenation, and other demographically destructive trends. Of course, like the Nuremburg defendants, individuals like Ziv would be allowed defense counsel, etc. and the process would follow the rules and precedents set down by both Nuremburg and the Hague. Israel’s trial of Adolf Eichmann can also be considered as precedent as well. Many individuals who are today leading figures in business, politics, media, etc. may find themselves indicted. This is of course merely theoretical and most likely and unfortunately, will never come to pass. But it is important to understand, at least in theory, that there is no reason for Streicher to have been indicted, while not considering the modern purveyors of genocide. 53
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 08:15 AM | # Could Ben Tillman, or anyone else with a solid legal background, comment whether, in theory, the precedents set forth by Nuremburg, combined with the definitions of genocide, would cover an indictment for crimes against humanity for “Breeding Between The Lines?” Given the anti-white and pro-admixture establishment, this is only an exercise in theoretical international law, but I am just wondering if, in principle, the promotion of miscegenation could be considered an indictable offense. 54
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 08:39 AM | # http://breedingbetweenthelines.com/book.htm So, in essence, if a little bit of intra-continental heterozygousity is good (not proven, by the way), then a huge bit of inter-continental admixture is better, and will “unleash the potential of the genes.” Sure. Unfortunately, this has already been tried in many areas of the world, and has been an abject failure. The Hawaii data does not prove that inter-racial admixture is necessary for higher IQ (and is just one study that may be tainted by assortative mating, or by the non-representative nature of the white and yellow population of that island). It *may* suggest that a degree of outbreeding may boost IQ - and such outbreeding could be obtained by looking farther afield for mates within the race of even within the same ethnicity (different geographic regions of the same nation). Whatever Ziv claims, his mixing agenda will take place only in those nations that have racial diversity, and those nations are those which were, previously, white, western nations. It are the peoples of European descent who have to be sacrificed for Ziv’s schemes, his speculative “unleash the potential” nonsense - creating more Brazilian slums in America and Europe, while the racially homogenous Chinese rise to world-wide superpower prominence. Really, now. There are two possibilities. One, Ziv is sincere in his beliefs, which means that this is another example of destructive Jewish messianism, trying to build the world “into a better place”, and doing so in a manner which “just happens to” fit in with Jewish interests. For example, Trotsky and the other Jewish Bolsheviks. On the other, he is insincere, and is trying to trick whites into admixture by false promises of a superman brown race to be produced by endless admixture. Either way, the man and his idea should be eschewed, ridiculed, and refuted. So no to genocide and say no to Ziv - another semitic lunatic or fraud attempting to sell a false bag of goods. Remember communism? Do we need more “gifts” from these people? let them keep their “world-improving” messianistic complexes to themselves. 55
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 09:02 AM | # “Alon Ziv has to be insane if he believes that the broad-nosed and masculine mixed-race woman looks better.” No, JR, I don’t think he is insane. One possibility to consider is that he knows full well that his cover model is ugly and he *wants* to mongrelize whites to resemble that woman. In that case, the motivation would be hatred - a feswtering hatred of 2000 years standing - plus the practical motivation of “removing the competition”, so to speak. There is also the “sour grapes” phenomenon - a member of an ethny noted for its unattractivess, recessive genetic disorders, and overall poor health, would be incited to a jealous rage when confronted by members of the same broad race, but who are characterized by better looks, a healthy lack of genetic load, sound health, and a culture based around Faustian aesthetics. I mean, the Dershowitz/Anne Frank/Mad Albright physical types must be maddened by the comparison - what way better to ease the psychic pain that to use their verbal skills to convince the hated aesthetic ones to ruin themselves through miscegenation. 2000 years of “persecution” avenged, and a Vin Diesel-looking mongrel race to lord it over. Good work, Ziv! 56
Posted by rustymason on August 24, 2006, 09:06 AM | # “Sailer is a clown ... ” Enough said. This multiculti, jew-day-o-phile, wolf-in-sheep’s clothing has tested my patience long enough. 57
Posted by ben tillman on August 24, 2006, 10:38 AM | #
It fits squarely within the language of Canada’s genocide statute: 318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. (2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely (a) killing members of the group; or (b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction. (3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General. (4) In this section, “identifiable group” means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin. [R.S. c.11 (1st Supp.), s.1.] 58
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 11:54 AM | # Ben, thus I assume that Ziv’s work would be indictable under: “(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.” Let’s look at this. Persons of European descent - whites - are characterized by a set of genotypes and phenotypes that are *lost* with inter-racial mixture. That’s physical destruction. “Conditions of life” would include propaganda designed to promote said physical destruction; for example, promotion of miscegenation. “Deliberately inflicting”, Ziv admits he is encouraging intermarriage. Therefore, the only reason why Ziv is not being indicted is that the current interpretation of genocide law is prejudiced against whites, in that harm to whites will not be considered genocide, regardless of intent or outcome. *Objectively*, however, putting aside the establishment’s biases, Ziv would seem, at least to my understanding and Ben’s, to be, at least indictable, if not convictable, under extant law. 59
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 12:01 PM | # An example of hybrid outbreeding depression: Nat Genet. 2006 Jan;38(1):68-74. Epub 2005 Nov 10. Related Articles, Links A variant of the gene encoding leukotriene A4 hydrolase confers ethnicity-specific risk of myocardial infarction. Helgadottir A, Manolescu A, Helgason A, Thorleifsson G, Thorsteinsdottir U, Gudbjartsson DF, Gretarsdottir S, Magnusson KP, Gudmundsson G, Hicks A, Jonsson T, Grant SF, Sainz J, O’Brien SJ, Sveinbjornsdottir S, Valdimarsson EM, Matthiasson SE, Levey AI, Abramson JL, Reilly MP, Vaccarino V, Wolfe ML, Gudnason V, Quyyumi AA, Topol EJ, Rader DJ, Thorgeirsson G, Gulcher JR, Hakonarson H, Kong A, Stefansson K. deCODE Genetics, Inc., Sturlugata 8, IS-101 Reykjavik, Iceland. Variants of the gene ALOX5AP (also known as FLAP) encoding arachidonate 5-lipoxygenase activating protein are known to be associated with risk of myocardial infarction. Here we show that a haplotype (HapK) spanning the LTA4H gene encoding leukotriene A4 hydrolase, a protein in the same biochemical pathway as ALOX5AP, confers modest risk of myocardial infarction in an Icelandic cohort. Measurements of leukotriene B4 (LTB4) production suggest that this risk is mediated through upregulation of the leukotriene pathway. Three cohorts from the United States also show that HapK confers a modest relative risk (1.16) in European Americans, but it confers a threefold larger risk in African Americans. About 27% of the European American controls carried at least one copy of HapK, as compared with only 6% of African American controls. Our analyses indicate that HapK is very rare in Africa and that its occurrence in African Americans is due to European admixture. Interactions with other genetic or environmental risk factors that are more common in African Americans are likely to account for the greater relative risk conferred by HapK in this group. 60
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 04:13 PM | # “Hybrid Vigor” in mixed race Hispanics: http://news.galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=5d3fde1ef9036805 Very vigorous, very vigorous. 61
Posted by Lowe on August 24, 2006, 04:20 PM | # Ziv was of course correct in assuming he assuming he was wasting his time addressing the commentariat of this site. Yet he tried anyway, demonstrating his typically Jewish naivete and good will (not that I necessarily agree with his thesis, btw). I find it sad that this site has devolved from being a conservative, race-realist site into being primarily a home for Jew-bashers. Oh well, there´s still Steve Sailer. There’s definitely a lot of room in the market of ideas, however, for race realists who are not hateful bigots. As far as the substance of the post goes: what evidence does the poster have that Jews are “the group least likely to miscegenate”? If having children with persons outside your group is defined as miscegenation, then Jews have a very high rate of miscegenation indeed. In fact, some of the Ur-mothers of the Askenazim were non-Jewish. The list of contemporary half-Jewish celebrities is very long, as a quick perusal of this site (www.halfjew.com) will demonstrate. Jews have been mixing with non-Jews throughout the centuries, and now more than ever, with “mixed” results (pardon the pun) - quality offspring and assimilation, but also a reduction in numbers and dilution of identity. But then, for many of the posters here, Jews marrying outside of their tribe constitutes theft and is to be condemned. Jews marrying within their tribe is unbearable ethnocentrism, and is also to be condemned. Thus, no matter what the Jews do, they are to be condemned. This is called anti-semitism. As far as the 50% outmarriage figure dismissed so contemptuously here: Within my circle of acquaintance the Jewish outmarriage rate is considerably higher than that. The only Jews I know who are married to other Jews are religious, and religious Jews are a minority within Jewry. They may become a majority in the future, since they are the ones most intent on holding onto their Jewish identity, while secular Jews let go of their traditions and breed their Jewishness out of existence - something that whites, a much larger group with a much smaller outmarriage rate, need not fear, by the way. 62
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 05:01 PM | # “Ziv was of course correct in assuming he assuming (sic) he was wasting his time addressing the commentariat of this site.” The only reason Ziv wasted his time is because he is unable to defend his thesis against the refutations of both J Richards and myself. “Yet he tried anyway, demonstrating his typically Jewish naivete and good will (not that I necessarily agree with his thesis, btw).” I do not consider the promotion of white genocide to be “goodwill”, but I do agree that it is “typically Jewish.” “I find it sad that this site has devolved from being a conservative, race-realist site into being primarily a home for Jew-bashers.” This is incorrect. In fact, I try to avoid the JQ, but here we see a textbook case - is anyone surprised that a book promoting the “benefits” of miscegenation was written by someone named “Alon Ziv?” That was just as surprising as Noel Ignatiev being Jewish. Whew! - never saw that one coming. The point being that these attacks on white racial interests need to be analyzed, and if there is an ethnic component to them, we are not going to censor ourselves to please you. “Oh well, there´s still Steve Sailer.” Who promotes miscegenation as well. BTW, Sailer has claimed to be part-Jewish. Another surprise? “There’s definitely a lot of room in the market of ideas, however, for race realists who are not hateful bigots.” Like Sailer, bigoted against white preservation? Now to the “meat” of your comment. Twice on this blog I have provided a) links from Jewish sources, and b) quantitative analysis of ethnic intermarriage patterns to conclude that: 1) The 50% rate is likely an over-estimate Now, if you wish to consider your personal, anecdotal evidence to be more convincing, so be it, but I doubt others here will be impressed. Quantitative analysis coupled with surveys from Jewish sources say that you are wrong. Then we have: Are you a member of the tribe, because this, along with your other comments, is wonderfully mendacious. Note how you conflate ethnic outmarriage within a broad race to racial ourmarriage across continental racial divides. This seems a bit, shall we say, unfair - unless of course you believe that the racial gulf between Jews and white gentiles is similar to that between whites, blacks, Asians, etc. (if you wish to make that argument, be my guest). However, if we consider Jews to be a Caucasian “white” (if not European) ethnicity, then your statement is, of course, false and misleading. ALL white gentile ethnic groups in America have higher ethnic outmarriage rates than Jews, and I doubt you have any evidence whatsoever that Jews marry non-Caucasians to a greater extent than do white gentiles. Therefore, the point remains: whites gentiles outmarry to a greater extent than Jews, both quantitatively (percentage that outmarry) as well as qualitiatively (genetic distance of spouse when outmarriage occurs). 63
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 05:07 PM | # corrections: racial ourmarriage across continental racial divides.
qualitiatively (genetic distance of spouse when outmarriage occurs). “qualitatively…” 64
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 05:11 PM | # More on “hybrid vigor”: http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/courses/EEB320-2005/news/DG301.html Note the link to the original paper, and note the bit on “epistasis.” The introduction of European genetic material into a predominantly African genome is *harmful* to the African-American populations, unless of course Ziv wishes to convince us that heart attacks are an example of vigorous good health. 65
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 05:14 PM | # Epistasis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistasis The implications for outbreeding depression should be clear. 66
Posted by On Holliday on August 24, 2006, 07:04 PM | # I did a rather crude, yet informative bit of data crunching. I took from the ABD site ABD 2.5 data for percent non-Caucasian ancestry (non-“Indo European”) for several areas of Europe, as well as North Africa, Turkey, Puerto Rico, Mexico,and India, and then did a scatter plot of that against national IQ, using available data (using, for, example, Sweden for Northern Europe, Egypt for North Africa, an IQ of 110 for Ashkenazi, merging Portugal and Spain for Iberia, etc.). The trendline formula: y = -0.3595x + 101.26 In other words, the greater the admixture, the lower the IQ. The same would hold true for Asia, as the higher-IQ regions (e.g., China and Japan) have significantly higher percentages of East Asian genetic background than to the lower-IQ regions of Southeast Asia. The verdict of history marches onward. 67
Posted by rustymason on August 24, 2006, 07:24 PM | # The lying snake who wrote this book also said, above, that Jews are continuing to get smarter. What did he mean by that? 68
Posted by rustymason on August 24, 2006, 07:31 PM | # BTW, Ziv, thanks for reminding us why people hate Jews so much. It’s been an entire 8 hours since I was guilted by the holyhoax on the radio this morning. 69
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 24, 2006, 11:56 PM | #
Lol, ah jewish fantasy, every visit is like Wonderland!
The link to the document providing context at Yggdrasil’s site is unfortunately dead, temporarily I hope.
Jews need some bashing, so jew-bashing is a moral imperative.
Lol, yes, because the language of the left dovetails so with race-realism! Please look up bigot in the dictionary - jew-boosters conform to the definition far more than jew-bashers, generally.
Please read the thread.
No one here begrudges jewish inmarriage (and few begrudge jewish outmarriage), we begrudge jewish hypocrisy. You’re not really paying attention. Actually, I don’t even begrudge jewish hypocrisy! I expect it. All I do is draw attention to it, so I’m a hateful bigoted psycho (for wanting my people to emulate jews).
The proof is in the pudding, and I’m from Missouri. 70
Posted by Stanley Womack on August 25, 2006, 01:38 AM | # Lowe says above, “This is called anti-semitism.” You may be interested to learn that, at our annual meeting in July, our members voted unanimously to declare “anti-Semite” to be a slur against European Americans, as a naming based on a claim of supremacy on the part of those doing the naming of someone not in their group, and as a supremely contemptuous naming like “goy,” “gentile,” and “shicksha.” Feel free to cite this declaration. To see it, go to: http://www.ResistingDefamation.org/sub/slurs9.htm A stigma needs to be applied to the supremacists and contemptuous persons hurling “anti-Semite” at philosophical or ideological opponents. ============================= On Holiday says above, “My mind is made up that you are guilty of promoting genocide, and, by any objective standard, the crime committed by this book is worse than what Julius Streicher was hanged for at Nuremburg.” We have a Julius Streicher Award on our web site. Only one awardee so far, but On Holiday is completely correct that persons leading us so astray deserve prosecution for their crimes. You can see our reference at: 71
Posted by Hey Ziv! on August 25, 2006, 05:49 AM | # Very important: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreeding_depression Note how in the first generation of hybrids things look “best”, inbreeding depression is most attenuated, and outbreeding depression is not so bad. But, with further generations, the negative effects of outbreeding depression accumulate, making outbreeding a long-term disaster. (note that even Stoddard noted that the first generation of mestizos didn’t seem that bad, but with further generations became atrocious.) This is of course consistent with the *long-term* failures of heavily admixed populations, contrasted with Ziv’s mendacious focus on the F1 generation - the Hawaii IQ data or celebrity attributes. It is consistent with the African-American deCode genetics data as well (see above). Of course, Udry concentrated on the F1 generation as well, and found significant mental and physical problems even there. So, to summarize: 1) Any “hybrid vigor” via admixture would be a factor primarily, or only, in the first generation (F1) of mongrels. 2) Even here, the record is mixed, as there is no consistent evidence that this first generation will be in fact better (see Udry). 3) Regardless of what occurs with the first generation, with continued mixing, outbreeding depression increases, rapidly decreasing the fitness of the hybrid population (see: Latin America, African-Americans, North Africa, Central Asia, India). 4) All of this comes with a *devastating cost* to parental kinship and genetic interests. So, we should destroy our race, reduce our kinship and genetic interests, create hybrids that look nothing like us - all for possible small levels of “hybrid vigor” in the first generation, followed by degeneration in following generations, making us worse off than we started. “good will” - indeed. The burning hatred behind this book is on display for all to see. -On Holliday 72
Posted by On Holliday on August 25, 2006, 07:19 AM | # The verdict of history: http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/stoddard/rtc_1-05.html In other words, Ziv’s vision for the white world. 73
Posted by PurpleBuffaloHunter on August 25, 2006, 08:37 PM | # The trashy teaser is clever, it is aimed specifically at low to mid range IQ white women (those women that love Oprah). It sounds like a womens weekly magazine. It promotes half caste men as more attractive and better lovers. 74
Posted by David B on August 26, 2006, 04:43 PM | # As I notice that Frank Salter’s ‘Bantu’ example is mentioned above, I would point out that his argument is fallacious. I explained the fallacy here: [accidental pr0n link removed - Svy] Of course, there are other arguments for and against interracial mating, but at least we should try to clear the definitely false ones out of the way. 75
Posted by David B on August 26, 2006, 04:46 PM | # Oops, I didn’t notice the warning. I’ll try again: http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003447.html 76
Posted by On Holliday on August 26, 2006, 05:39 PM | # No, David B, it is your “Salter’s Fallacy” which is itself fallacious: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/a_defense_of_frank_salters_to_defense_of_us/ “Of course, there are other arguments for and against interracial mating, but at least we should try to clear the definitely false ones out of the way.” I agree. Which is why your stupidity should be cleared out of the way. 77
Posted by On Holliday on August 26, 2006, 06:00 PM | # Ooops, wrong thread, Here it is: The fact that the Bantu partner in an English-Bantu mating also loses the same *individual* parental kinship as the English partner does not magically “cancel out” the fact that the English individual has in fact lost parental kinship compared to what they would have had if they had mated endogamously. In comparing parental kinship, the loss is relative to either: That is the basis of comparison, parental kinship is looked at, at the level of the individual. Intermarriage also effects the genetic interests of all co-ethnics - including the intermarried person themselves - and this (which can be considered an issue separate from parental kinship per se) is addressed below. David B’s alleged “Salter’s Fallacy” deals only with EGI and not parental kinship, and it is wrong in any case. “In Part III: Intermarriage Fallacy David presents a two-group (English-Bantu) population model to demonstrate that the proportions of distinctive genes remain the same after intermarriage. He also asserts that the loss of kinship on one side of the intermarriage divide is counterbalanced by an equal loss on the other side; given the relative nature of genetic interests, intermarriage would thus result in no loss of genetic interest. Discuss. Putting aside for the moment questions about patterns of gene frequencies (below), David’s analysis does not take into proper consideration the following two essential factors:- 1) The fixed carrying capacity of each nation (an integral part of Salter’s thesis discussed, for example, on pages 61-63 of his book), and 2) The effects of unidirectional migration. So, for #1 we can talk about the number of “English gene equivalents” in an English population at any given time. However, England has a fixed carrying capacity. Let us say for example it is 150 million. Whether those 150 million are of pure English stock or of mixed English-Bantu stock makes an enormous difference to the genetic interests of the current English population and to each individual Englishman. Population cannot increase infinitely. If the 150 million people are “pure” English (and of course diploid), then that’s 300 million sets of “English” genes (300M/2 = 150M). If the 150 million are English-Bantu hybrids, then there are 150M “English” genes and 150M “Bantu” genes. If we say that the carrying capacity is 300 million, or 1 billion, or any number short of infinity, the same holds. As regards #2 there is one-way gene flow from non-white nations to England. So, it is NOT the case that a miscegenating Englishman is boosting his fitness by “preventing” the births of pure Bantus in a reciprocal fashion. In Africa, pure Bantus are still being born without the threat of immigration and genetic dilution, and these will fill the carrying capacity of their territory in sub-Saharan Africa. Meanwhile, there is unidirectional migration of Africans to the UK, where they dilute the genetic interests of the native English ethny. Intermarriage in the UK may prevent the birth of pure Bantus in the UK, but the presence of Bantus in the UK represents an excess of Bantu genetic interests above and beyond the store of undiluted genetic interests in their homeland. In other words - and this is crucial - intermarriage in the UK represents a positive net expansion of Bantu genes. They are not being prevented from producing pure Bantus - they have every opportunity to pursue a national ethnic strategy in Africa. The people who are really being prevented from producing “pure offspring” are the English, for it is their territory that is being invaded. Since the flow of people (and genes) is not reciprocal, then the effects of intermarriage are not reciprocal. It is the native ethny of the mixed state who are being prevented from maintaining their representation of the world-wide population. The alien ethny both maintains their representation in their homelands and expands their genes in someone else’s territory. Ultimately, the Bantu genes are, on a world-wide basis, expanding, while those of the English are declining. How on earth is there any reciprocity in that? As regards the interests of an individual Englishman, the same holds. By intermarriage, he loses parental kinship compared to endogamy, and he also loses relative genetic interest not only compared to endogamous co-ethnics and non-ethnics but also to exogamous non-ethnics, because of the asymmetrical nature of gene flow as described above. Let us use another simple model of population and immigration to summarize these points. Take two populations A and B who live in their respective nations AX and BX. Let us assume that AX and BX both have a carrying capacity of “12 genetic-population units”. We start with the condition that AX has 4 A units and BX has 8 B units. Two B units migrate from BX to AX; typical unidirectional migration. Both nations now have 6 population units; BX is “pure” 6 B, while AX is 4A and 2 B. Let us assume no further immigration, and that in AX both ethnies have ~ equal growth rates (a very conservative assumption). Both nations then reach carrying capacity. BX will have 12 B units. Given proportional growth, AX will have 8 A and 4 B units. Obviously, this unidirectional migration has harmed A’s interests, in that they have suffered a decline in their population compared to what it would have been (12A) without the migration of B. The worldwide genetic representation of A has been diminished, while B has benefited by increasing its genetic representation over and beyond the capacity of BX alone, from 12B to 16B.” 78
Posted by On Holliday on August 26, 2006, 06:05 PM | # And: “According to classical Salterism, the damage to A will be the same, in a strictly genetic basis, regardless of whether the two groups in AX had remained endogamous after the B migration event, or whether there was intermarriage. The same number of individual “genetic units” from each group would be present. However:- 1) An interest in patterns/combinations of genes and gene frequencies yields a gross decrease in fitness comparing exogamy over endogamy. On a worldwide basis, A suffers more than B, because B is still present in undiluted form in BX. 2) Even given classical Salterism, exogamy hurts A’s interests by decreasing the organic solidarity of the A group. Imagine that endogamy was maintained. Group A could rally around a historical A identity and pursue group interests vs. B. They could promote repatriation of B, separation, or some other political-social movement to attempt to restore/maximize A’s interests over that of the B newcomers. They could attempt to out-breed (eg, going against the assumption above), maximizing A gene frequencies. But once admixture occurs, a heavily hybridized population cannot extricate A interests away from that of B. Families would be mixed, genomes would be mixed, and whatever pure A’s remain would have a limited potential to recruit sufficient numbers of other pure A’s to their side in the struggle against B interests. Some pure A’s would have admixed family members, etc. Given sufficient intermarriage, the interests of the two groups would become so intertwined that it would be impossible for the original interests of group A to be pursued. Thus, even with classical Salterian theory, endogamy is to be preferred because it allows the native ethny to strategize on a group-centered basis to salvage genetic interests. Group B, secure in their original homeland, can afford to dilute A’s interests and group solidarity via intermarriage. The effects - genetic and socio-political - of intermarriage are not reciprocal because the migration is not reciprocal. This holds regardless of whether the migration was voluntary (immigration) or involuntary (slave trade). David B is also a bit inconsistent about all of this. Salter considers intermarriage from both the familial and ethnic dimension. If we focus on the family, it is clear that endogamy is superior, in that it boosts relative parental kinship. But ah! … we are told by David that we must also consider the effects of mate choice on others. Very well. Why stop at the “spare English woman” or the local Bantu immigrant “prevented” from producing pure Bantu offspring? If we need to consider the effects on others, in the context of ethnic genetic interests, then we need to consider effects on the entire ethnies, no? And given realities of unidirectional immigration, the effects on others of intermarriage is always to lower the fitness of the net receiving ethny and to boost that of the net “contributing” immigrant ethny. You can’t have it both ways, indeed!” There is more, you can look at the link. 79
Posted by On Holliday on August 26, 2006, 07:22 PM | # The distinction between EGI and parental kinship, from the perspective of inter-racial mating, is important enough to illustrate by contrasting a theoretical model with the real world. Let us assume that the entire Earth was one, borderless unitary nation state, composed only of English and Bantus. We will further assume that the relative proportion of each ethny within the state is somehow fixed and stable. An English-Bantu mating takes place, producing offspring. Under these conditions, does this mongrelization result in a loss of EGI for individuals of either ethnic group? No, because the “loss” is reciprocal within this demographically stable nation state. With EGI, we compare the relative proportions of one group (and their genes/genetic structure) to another. Does each parent exhibit a loss of parental kinship? Yes, most definitely - as long as endogamous mating is possible and takes place somewhere within the species, parental kinship will *always* be lost, regardless of the type of nation state, ethnic demographics, or any other consideration. With parental kinship, the relative comparison of genetic interests is not between groups, and it is *not* between the two parents. Rather, *for each parent*, it is the difference in parental kinship between endogamy and exogamy. Unlike EGI, parental kinship is not a “zero sum game” in which the loss of one group’s EGI is balanced by the gain of another. If we consider 4 people - an English man and woman and a Bantu man and woman - if these are paired off endogamously, *all* gain parental kinship compared to if they had mixed exogamously and vice versa. If the couples match with each other inter-racially, *each* one of the four will lose parental kinship, for the comparison is not between the mates or between the couples, but between the potential parental kinship possible under the two scenarios. Getting back to EGI: consider if we take away the stipulation of demographic stability, and introduce the possibility of ethnic breeding competition within the state. Assume that now the Bantus are outbreeding the English. Here an inter-racial marriage would be a net loss to English EGI, as it further diminishes breeding competition between the English and Bantu stocks. This leads us to the “real world.” Here there is no stable, unitary state, but a multiplicity of nation states, and a wide variety of demographic conditions - some ethnies are expanding, some are declining. Some are net exporters of their surplus population, others suffer from replacement immigration and low native birth rates. Here, the parental kinship situation stays the same - always a loss for all parties with inter-racial mating. However, in the real world of unidirectional migration and the Third World influx into the West, intermarriage also leads to a net global loss of EGI for western populations, as their peoples and genes are being displaced by both purebred aliens and native-alien hybrids, while, at the same time, the aliens enjoy homogenous nation states in which they can fill to carrying capacity with their own peoples. 80
Posted by Stephanie UK on August 26, 2006, 08:08 PM | # Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it should not be defined by one mans opinion. 81
Posted by Al Ross on August 26, 2006, 09:02 PM | # Cliche-ridden ignorance is at the fingertips of Stephanie and should not be interdicted by troublesome scientific evidence. 82
Posted by karlmagnus on August 26, 2006, 11:19 PM | # I like Jews and find Ziv’s model attractive in a mud-wrestler kind of way, but his thesis is cuckoo (But Ziv, thank you for responding, and don’t assume even those among us who are anti-Semites are unthinking anti-Semites, as distinct from anti-Semites who have arrived at their position after lengthy research and study.) Moderate genetic diversity is necessary to knock out recessive diseases and get diverse new genes in, but any animal breeder will tell you that as you go further apart the fertility of the result and its hardihood declines—that’s why mules don’t have baby mules. Whether races are far enough apart for that effect to kick in is as yet unclear, but I rather suspect they are—Latin America is a dreadful example of what happens when two racially distant populations interbreed. The principal need is not to promote interbreeding, but to inhibit breeding altogether, particularly among Third World racial types (whose fertility is so much higher than the civilized Italians and Japanese) so we can get back to the planet’s stable population level of 1 billion. The other argument is sociological; from the last 50 years experience there can surely be no question that High Fences Make Good Neighbors. 83
Posted by David B on August 27, 2006, 04:34 AM | # I have read with trepidation On Holliday’s ‘refutation’ of my own ‘refutation’ of Salter’s treatment of interracial mating. What terrible error has he found? Well, none that I can see. He tacitly concedes (by not defending it) that the argument actually used by Salter, and refuted by me, *is* fallacious. If Salter’s argument were valid, it would be valid even if factors such as migration rates were reciprocal. On Holliday then raises a variety of other reasons for objecting to interracial mating, which I won’t discuss. Contrary to the impression given, I am not strongly either for or against interracial mating, for the reasons I gave here: On one technical point which I don’t think I’ve discussed previously, I should record my agreement with On Holliday. It is true that, due to previous inbreeding within the population of a geographical area, people will be somewhat more closely related to their offspring (as measured by coefficients of genetic relationship) if they mate with someone from their own ethnic group than from a different ethnic group. So what? They will be even more closely related to their offspring if they mate with their siblings, but this is not generally recommended! The balance of advantage, in fitness terms, between inbreeding and outbreeding, is a complex subject, but I am not aware of much evidence that interracial mating causes any loss of fitness. 84
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 06:19 AM | # David B, I didn’t expect you to have the grace to admit that you are wrong, but you are. We don’t live in a fantasy theoretical model world, such as the model I presented. We live in the real world, in which unidirectional migration and defined national territories exist. True enough, Salter could have stated that effects of inter-racial marriage on EGI were conditional; however, he probably took it for granted that the reader was able to put the section on inter-racial marriage in the context of the rest of the book, which deals with issues of migration. Obviously, anyone from the “Please accept GC and Razib as Americans” blog is unable to grasp siuch “nuances.” Further, in David B’s attacks on Salter, I saw no realization of the crucial difference between parental kinship (which David B sort of admits now can be a factor, but “so what?”, see below), and EGI. I note that Salter’s section on inter-racial marriage was *primarily focused on parental kinship, NOT EGI*. That there is less kinship with outmarrying is undeniable, and some people may view that with an attitude different from “so what?” Further, Salter’s discussion of inter-marriage and EGI does in fact touch on practical aspects, such as reduced organic solidarity of the group and “dual loyalties” of inter-racial persons and their parents with respect to competing ethnic loyalties.
I have already answered the question of “mating with siblings” with my answer to Ziv, above. Apparently, moronic minds “think” alike, and both Ziv and David B apparently “think” it appropriate to equate ethnic or racial endogamy with incest. No, and as I have stated, incest is generally avoided in the human species (and many others), and with good reason. However, one does not have to marry a person of a different race to avoid inbreeding depression, a random (non-familial) co-ethnic, particularly one from a different geographic location would do the trick, and would, obviously, a person of the same race but different ethnicity. David B’s “so what?” indicates his lack of understanding. Yes, “so what”” if your child is genetically less similar to you than to a random co-ethnic! So what! How about abandoning your own child for that of a stranger? So what?! Just because your own child (assuming you are not stupid enough to inter-racially outmarry) shares more of your genes than a stranger’s child, why favor him/her? Indeed, the stranger’s child may be “healthier and more attractive.” What stupidity. Then he says he knows of no evidence that inter-racial mating reduces fitness, after admitting that parental kinship is reduced. In the absence of any evidence for compensation for this reduced kinship - and there is none - then it follows that fitness is reduced, if by fitness we mean a reduction in relative genetic representation in the next generation - not Ziv’s “Tiger stinks less on the golf course and Benny Bratt is better at giving actresses organsms.” Evolutionists and population geneticists would define fitness in reproductive and genetic terms. David B, not having the grace to admit that you are wrong, and that the only utility in your attacks on Salter is to expose your own juvenile attitude toward the man (e.g., equating him to Dr. Strangeglove), you can go away now, back to the blog of Razib mocking Finns and linking to inter-racial pornography. 85
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 06:35 AM | # “What terrible error has he found?” That is has no connection whatsoever to the real world. In the real world, inter-racial marriage reduces the EGI of western peoples. “Well, none that I can see. “ Look harder. “He tacitly concedes (by not defending it) that the argument actually used by Salter, and refuted by me, *is* fallacious.” No. “If Salter’s argument were valid, it would be valid even if factors such as migration rates were reciprocal.” Now, that’s *really* stupid. It is *obvious* that in the particular restricted model I presented - a single state with fixed demographic proportions, that effects of EGI will be reciprocal. David B thinks he is some sort of genius in pointing out that in a specific, unrealistic circumstance, an assertion (ie, mixing reduces EGI) does not hold - even though it holds in virtually *every* other circumstance, including that of real life. If David B were honest - and not a tool for the genetic interests of alien bloggers - he would admit that the “fallacy” that he “discovered” is theoretical only, limited to a specific set of circumstances that do not exist in the real world. If he were honest, he would admit that in the world in which we actually live, and that which Salter was writing about, inter-racial marriage significantly decreases the genetic interests of whites. If he were honest, he would admit that Salter’s primary objective in discussing inter-racial marriage was to evaluate the fitness portfolios of parents, and this is negatively impacted by the loss of parental kinship. If he were honest, he would admit that a loss of parental kinship, uncoupled to any compensation that results in a net increase in genetic representation for the parents, results in a loss of fitness. If he were honest, he would admit that there is no evidence that such compensation exists and, would admit that, given the additional concern over genetic structure, it is unlikely that such compensation *could* realistically exist, given the novel LD generated with inter-racial mixing, and the loss of native co-adapted gene complexes. If he were honest, he would admit that his “so what”” attitude may not be shared by other people if such people actually were told about the loss of parental kinship. If he were honest, he would admit that an attitude of “so what?” reduces the fitness of the uncaring individual vs. those individuals and races that do act as if they DO care about conserving parental kinship. But, alas, he is from “Gene Expression”, and putting “honesty” and “Gene Expression” in the same sentence inevitably leads to an oxymoron. 86
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 12:25 PM | # David B’s logic: An assertion has no utility unless it is true in all conceivable circumstances. If one can imagine any possible scenario where the assertion is not true – regardless of how unrealistic and unlikely the scenario is – then the assertion must be rejected as a fallacy and it has no utility. Hmm, very interesting. Let us take as a sample assertion the statement: “The average height of all children of parents over 6’ tall will be greater than the average height of all children of parents under 5’6” tall.” That seems to be a reasonable assertion, and one that can be confirmed by measurements of real people. But, alas, one could think of a scenario where it would not be true. Assume, for example, that society suddenly begins the practice of giving large doses of growth hormone to the children of the shorter parents, and forces the children of the taller parents to subsist on a low-protein, near-starvation diet. Under those conditions, the short parent’s children may grow taller than the tall parents’ children. An unlikely, artificial scenario? Nothing to do with reality? For sure, but it is theoretically possible, so, according to David B’s “reasoning”, we must consider our initial statement a “fallacy.” After all, just because it fits perfectly well with the real world, and any realistic possible situations, we must “clear it away”, because in someone’s fantasy model, it doesn’t work. Er, no. Salter’s concept of EGI is a tool that allows people to evaluate what choices will be more adaptive (increase genetic fitness) under different circumstances. That intermarriage may have no effect on EGI in certain specific imaginary circumstances does not change the reality that Salter’s EGI concept allows us to discern effects of intermarriage on the genetic fitness of real people in the real world. It should be clear what the obfuscatory agenda of David B is. His masters at GNXP can give him an “A” for effort; but we give an “F” for actual content – and honesty. 87
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 12:26 PM | # My reference to English-Bantu intermarriage earlier in this thread concerned parental kinship only, not EGI. Curious then that David B attempted to delegitimize my comments on parental kinship by bringing up the alleged “Salter’s Fallacy” concerning intermarriage and EGI, which is a separate topic. That is even more curious since David B has admitted here that differences in parental kinship are real, albeit, in his opinion, of little importance (“so what?”). If parental kinship differences are real, then why the attempt to dismiss comments on parental kinship by implying that such comments are related to an alleged fallacy concerning a different topic? Two possibilities: 1) David B, in mendacious fashion, attempts to confuse the readership by bringing up an alleged fallacy about EGI, hoping the readers are unable to discern the difference between EGI and parental kinship. Hence, they would just throw their hands up, mutter “that guy Salter is wrong”, and disregard the comments about parental kinship, even though David B’s objections, by his own later tacit admission (“I agree with Holiday, but…”), have nothing to do with parental kinship. 2) David B is too stupid too recognize the differences between parental kinship and EGI, and confuses the two, unless it is constantly pointed out to him. The readership, I hope, now recognizes the distinction between the two concepts, and better understands that David B is a completely unreliable source for analysis of the work of Frank Salter. 88
Posted by EC on August 27, 2006, 12:45 PM | # From Alon Ziv’s website: And no, he is not interracial. Mr. Ziv’s hubris in writing this “tome” on what we should do and the whys of it is quite telling, given his lack of interraciality. He cannot fall back on an excuse of being unaware of scientific data, if he valued accuracy and honesty, due to his scientific background based in neuroscience and biology. So, with that said, we are left wondering (not really) how he can spew forth such odious bilge. The maxim of “good for thee, not for me” amongst the Chosen continues to ring true here. His proclamation that “everyone” should interbreed, including his own tribe, is more than a bit hollow. The same level of hollowness as when that vermin, Ignatieff, voices his affirmation to abolish not only white culture and race, but Jewish as well knowing full well that one is under a universal assault while the other is under a universal defense. Why not opine to abolish Martian culture and race? It holds as much weight. I will become a supporter of Mr. Ziv, in his right to write and say whatever he wants only and not in following his recommendations, if he would simply pull his book off the market in the western world and strictly offer it in Israel. As someone stated above, the Ethiopian Jews need a little loving and intermixing too, so start there. Once he has shown that he is committed in his beliefs for ALL, then I can support his right to say it. At least then I would be convinced in his honesty. That is not what we have at present where the book is offered up as confirmation to the (again taken from above) Oprah loving, mid to low IQ masses. This whole thing smacks of condescension and hypocrisy when all the major Jewish organizations are screaming “Jews are dying out”, “Jews need to marry Jews and have more children in order to propagate the race”. What we have Mr Ziv basically saying is that we need not follow the hysterical calls by his elite in order to save and propagate OUR race, but to listen to him and his unscientific PC pablum as we spiral toward our demise. Good for thee, not for me, indeed. BTW, it’s great to see JW and JR posting more regularly again. Come on JW, start blogging again! Your addition is immeasurable. 89
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 12:58 PM | # Hey now guys, EGI just *must* be wrong, we don’t want you to get all worked up by: We certainly need *hundreds of thousands* of these ‘cognitibe elitists.’ What? They are different from us? 90
Posted by EC on August 27, 2006, 12:58 PM | # David B’s logic: An assertion has no utility unless it is true in all conceivable circumstances. This is the same “logic” the race deniers used for eons in order to “disprove” the existence of race. They would gaggle on asking “what is the one thing that is unique to one race and not another”? Considering even speciation cannot hold up to such intense and unrealistic scrutiny, we must all be equal to slugs. Certainly many anti-racists are. 91
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 01:01 PM | # “We certainly need *hundreds of thousands* of these ‘cognitibe elitists.’” You see! I mis-spelled “cognitive!” For shame! Several thousand Indian immigrants are certainly needed to make up for the ‘cognitive’ shortfall. And England must need several million to compensate for David B. 92
Posted by Ben Tillman on August 27, 2006, 02:36 PM | # “...any animal breeder will tell you that as you go further apart the fertility of the result and its hardihood declines—that’s why mules don’t have baby mules.” Indeed, Karl. And how do ligers and tigons fare? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/05/2/l_052_02.html
94
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 03:59 PM | # From Ziv’s website: “Alon Ziv went on to perform cutting edge research in the field of neuroscience.” Very well, but if you do a PubMed search for “Ziv A”, you do *not* get papers indicative of “cutting edge research” in neuroscience, or anything else. You do get a number of mediocre papers - which are likely mostly (or totally) from other people with the same name (mostly from Israel, by the way) doing work which is not “cutting edge.” I know that members of middleman minority groups are intrinsically well-versed in (baseless and overblown) self-promotion, but it certainly would have helped if Ziv would have provided some sort of independent reference so that one can confirm that he did indeed perform “cutting edge research.” As far as one can tell, he doesn’t have any expertise whatsoever to discuss topics related to the biological consequences of inter-racial mating. And no, asking Woods’ caddy how Tiger smells after a round of golf does not constitute the level of expertise required. 95
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 04:08 PM | # “Book Description This book combines sex, race, health and genetics in a daring new theory.” No. Promoting miscegenation in a society whose establishment openly promotes such mating, and which worships Tiger Woods as if he were a god, is not an example of “daring.” More “daring” would be a book describing the negative consequences of inter-racial mating, from parental kinship to physical appearance to outbreeding depression, etc. “Written with accessible, direct prose…” Good to know it was prose and not poetry. Hopefully, it is quite not as “accessible” as Ziv’s semi-literature comments here. “..anecdotes, analogies, and examples from human and animal studies…” Of these, the one most relevant are human studies. Of which, the Udry study described on this blog by J Richards is the most telling, and which refutes Ziv’s thesis. “...it is sure to spark debate in a massive way. “ Certainly not in the mainstream media or in academia. Can one cite an example of a criticism of this book - and, as demonstrated here, criticism is warranted - outside of sites such as Majority Rights? Even the ever-so-controversial and “honest” Steve Sailer had nothing negative to say about it other than that inbreeding depression is probably not a problem in America. Sort of like saying that the major problem with 9/11 is that your favorite daytime TV shows got pre-empted that morning. 96
Posted by On Holliday on August 27, 2006, 04:12 PM | # “semi-literature comments: semi-literate I also want to commend Karl Magnus for his sensible comments earlier in this thread, both on the inadvisability of mating across wide genetic divides and - to my surprise - this: “But Ziv, thank you for responding, and don’t assume even those among us who are anti-Semites are unthinking anti-Semites, as distinct from anti-Semites who have arrived at their position after lengthy research and study.” Mr. Ziv should consider - and I say this in all seriousness and without rancor - that his own behavior contributes to the “anti-Semitism” that he deplores. 97
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 27, 2006, 05:59 PM | # Yes, I wondered if Karl’s evil twin might’ve absconded with his laptop. 98
Posted by karlmagnus on August 27, 2006, 07:42 PM | # Don’t lump me in with JJR, let alone the various trolls. I’m moderately philo-Semitic, but am also perfectly happy to accept that there are rational arguments in the other direction, and that most MR posters have thought through them. I find the unthinking US support for Israel unattractive, especially when Israel does something as stupid and morally wrong as its invasion of Lebanon. If they wanted to invade somewhere, why not Syria?—Lebanon after the Cedar Revolution was potentially part of the solution, and deserves an equal respect for its people to Israel’s. MR throws light on various subjects from an entirely different angle to either the MSM or the US right-wing blogs, most of which are still wittering on in support of the failed Iraq policy, and in any case are suffienctly religious and conventional as to be completely unreliable about genetics. It’s thus valuable, though I credit information here with about as much credibility as the Washington Post—probably not made up, but you want a second source. Better than the NY Times, though. Is there any more info on the “civilsation gene” that appeared 8000 years ago? —if that’s confirmed it blasts HUGE and welcome holes through conventional wisdom. 99
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 27, 2006, 08:51 PM | # Hell, if jewry-as-model makes someone mildly philo-Semitic, then I qualify. If someone claims to be an insectophile, shouldn’t he want to turn over rocks and show the little buggers - and describe their habits - to the whole world? Wouldn’t obscurantism about bugs indicate insectophobia?
Because the Alawites might topple and the Shiites would then take over? 100
Posted by Getafix on August 27, 2006, 11:20 PM | # [Because the Alawites might topple and the Shiites would then take over?] It would be the Sunnis in Syria’s case. The Alawites are a pseudo-Shiite sect, who have generally shown no hesitation to smack down Sunni activism. 101
Posted by JB on August 29, 2006, 03:15 PM | # I’ve found the perfect mate for Ziv :
I can only imagine all the vibrancy, the strength, the intelligence, the nice odor and the mastery of all things sexual that his mixed race children are going to have. In a few generations Africa’s problems would disappear if Alon, Schlomo, Moshe, Ari and all the others would move to Africa to produce mixed-race children with the natives. 102
Posted by On Holliday on August 29, 2006, 03:39 PM | # Nice picture JB, but I don’t think Mr. Ziv will be interested. You see, he wants *you* to mate with that. Ziv et al will stick to “Jdate” 103
Posted by On Holliday on August 29, 2006, 03:45 PM | # Apparently, there other of Ziv’s co-ethnics have a “problem” with respect to promoting white-colored inter-racial mating: http://interracialfamilycircle.org/Library/Outside/10102.htm It seems to be a deep-seated urge - possibly genetic? Perhaps Diaspora Peoples are selected to promote miscegenation among the host peoples, to disrupt the hosts’ biological and cultural homogeneity, and make the host a better fit for the “guest” ethny (another name may come to mind, starting with the letter “p”). 104
Posted by Desmond Jones on August 29, 2006, 04:13 PM | # Strangely, IFC admits to some interesting anomalies:
105
Posted by ben tillman on August 30, 2006, 12:50 AM | #
“Parasite” or “pathogen”? 106
Posted by On Holliday on September 05, 2006, 05:02 AM | # See here, Sailer critiques Ziv: One wonders to what extent the “great man” was prompted to do so by sharp critiques here and elsewhere, and, more to the point, to what extent his arguments were influenced by others. Of course, Steve “I’m allergic to EGI” Sailer won’t mention that, but read below. Now, Sailer *has* read Ziv’s book (countering an argument made by some here), so we can put that aside. Sailer makes arguments typical to what we have seen in this thread, including citing the DECode genetics data on hybrid incomptability. But there are some useful new things: 1) Cochran’s and Harpending’s claim that there is NO evidence that inter-racial couples have a statistically greater number of children than do endogamous couples. Therefore, the loss of parental kinship is being “compensated” by *nothing.* That, and not Tiger Woods’ body odor, is what is meant by “fitness.” Therefore, it is clear that inter-racial couplings *reduce* fitness by decreasing parental kinship without any compensatory fitness advantages. 2) the vaunted increase in IQ seen in Hawaiian Eurasians is only two points - which is ~ 1/7 of a SD! Putting aside whether or not that is a real effect, parental kinship should be ruined for a 2 point increase in mean IQ? Sailer is afraid to mention parental kinship or EGI, but we here are not. Thus, Ziv tells us that we should ruin our parental kinship and EGI for illusory, tiny, “hybrid vigor”, or, in some cases, outright hybrid incompatibility - and that there are no observed compensatory changes in fitness at all. Thus, Ziv’s “advice” is a net negative. Could one expect anything different from an individual named “Alon Ziv?” By the way, Ben, the word I was thinking about was “parasite”, but “pathogen” works as well, and in the case, of Ziv, much better. 107
Posted by Bo Sears on September 05, 2006, 03:32 PM | # Steve sailer posted on this same issue on VDARE today at:
108
Posted by Bo Sears on September 05, 2006, 03:35 PM | # I guess this posting was lost. Steve Sailer’s views on this topic were aired again today by Peter Brimelow at VDARE: http://www.vdare.com/sailer/060904_interracial.htm Not a word about immigration reform. 109
Posted by On Holliday on September 06, 2006, 05:51 AM | # At GNXP, David B - in order to “annoy certain people” - is claiming that Vivien Leigh got her “dark looks” from being an Anglo-Indian mongrel. The facts on Leigh and her alleged “dark looks” (sic) can be observed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivien_Leigh As if Leigh’s ancestry has any bearing on the adaptive value of inter-racial mating in any case. One could imagine David B meeting Razib/GC: Razib/GC: “bend over!” (apologies to Chevy Chase) 110
Posted by brock stevens on September 19, 2006, 07:45 AM | # I’m pretty positive that Alon is not Jewish, but is Turkish (either Christian or Muslim). Moreover, he’s hardly PC - he dedicates Chapter 4 to showing why race is not a social construct. 111
Posted by Guessedworker on September 19, 2006, 08:22 AM | # Brock, According to the website Behind The Name both Alon and Ziv are Jewish first names. No other origin supplied. 112
Posted by ben tillman on September 19, 2006, 05:20 PM | # “Alon” is Hebrew for oak: Regarding the different categories of Jewish names, they can be classified in general as follows: i. Biblical names - i.e., names mentioned in the five books of the Torah, in the Prophets, or in the Holy Scriptures; ii. Talmudic names - i.e., names originally found in the Talmud and Midrashim; iii. Names found in Nature - in the animal world, some of which also appear in Scripture, such as Chava, Rachel, Devorah, Tziporah, Yonah, etc. There are also names from the animal kingdom not mentioned in Scripture as names of people, such as Aryeh, Zev, Tzvi; such names originated with the blessings of Yaakov and Moshe, who applied the names of various living things to the Tribes of Israel; iv. Names found in Nature - in the plant world, some of which also appear in Scripture, such as Tamar, etc. Other such names are Shoshana, Alon, Oren, Oranah, Aviva, etc. v. Names that include the Name of G-d within them, and names that express thanks to G-d; vi. Names of Angels, that have been adopted as human names; vii. Secondary names, that occur jointly with the primary name, though occasionally they occur alone. 113
Posted by ben tillman on September 19, 2006, 05:23 PM | # Ziv is Hebrew for “Radiance, brilliance or light of God.” Ziv is also the name of the second month in the Jewish calendar, the month of celebration of Israel’s Independence. 114
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 19, 2006, 05:57 PM | # Vivien Leigh was white. David B. is thinking of Leigh’s contemporary Merle Oberon, known since her death to have been of mixed race (and often said to have been a great beauty, with which I personally disagree):
115
Posted by JB on September 20, 2006, 11:47 AM | # another study on multiracial offsprings concludes they have more psychological problems than the non-mixed : http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/09/problem_behavio.php
116
Posted by Angelhair on January 28, 2007, 02:27 PM | # This book is total garbage. The development of races is a precurser to the development of new species. A race naturally achieves a balance between genetic diversity and genetic disorder. Too much diversity gives rise to disorders. The higher level of genetic diversity between mates of different races is enough to increase the rate of genetic mutation and that means a higher risk for random genetic disorders in mixed-race offspring. Otherwise you still end up with poorer appearance and lower intelligence. As a white man, my only purpose in life is to have a hand full of beautiful healthy white kids. The thought of “breading outside the lines” just makes me sick as does the sight of white men and women who have. I guess they lack the biological imperative to preserve their heritage for their children, or perhaps it is so weak in them that is has been easily supressed by moral idiology, social conformity and/or the integrationist seductions of pop culture. 117
Posted by n on January 28, 2007, 08:37 PM | # So many ignorant narrow minded people on this forum, what a joke! Besides the girl on the front page of his book is not a great example. However its clear that the further the gene pool is spread the more intelligent the people are. If you have a close-nit community where people are related then you will find abnormalities, incest, ppl with downs syndrome and lower IQ levels. Take a look at the royal family you hicks! 118
Posted by Bud White on January 28, 2007, 09:05 PM | # “However its clear that the further the gene pool is spread the more intelligent the people are.” Then how do you explain the Jews??? 119
Posted by JB on February 02, 2007, 11:11 PM | # here’s Alon Ziv pushing his bs on TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RWP8Pws9mw
120
Posted by ben tillman on February 03, 2007, 12:15 AM | # Thanks for the Youtube link—now we can infer he’s a queer Jew: “No, theriouthly—it’th bathed on thienthe!” 121
Posted by Guessedworker on February 03, 2007, 02:41 AM | # It is not necessary to post a link. Just say: “google AlonZiv R Richards” and scroll down a couple of places to the majorityrights entry. 122
Posted by JB on February 03, 2007, 12:23 PM | # even better : we should make a semi-video (audio + still pics) about Alon Ziv’s bs and post it on YouTube. Richard’s review of the book could be converted into this semi-video. That would be a better way to promote MR than simply post a comment (I still can’t for some reason). There are video debates going on on YT with replies listed under “Video Responses”. Usually the debates are petty so our replies would raise the bar much higher 124
Posted by JB on February 03, 2007, 04:27 PM | # There may be a maximum length on the movies. I was thinking about making the major points against Ziv by reading parts of Richard’s article and posting pictures in the background (i.e. Klum & Seal’s little biracial troll) 125
Posted by Guessedworker on February 03, 2007, 06:33 PM | # I imagine JR would wish to write or edit the script. Matt Nuenke is interested in doing some film. If you would like me to put you in touch with them both just let me know. 126
Posted by Englander on February 03, 2007, 06:47 PM | # “Klum & Seal’s little biracial troll” I look forward to seeing the result of your efforts but please leave this sort of thing out of it if you want the video to have any persuasive power at all. 127
Posted by JB on February 05, 2007, 01:17 AM | #
I’m not sure I follow you. This
is a very good argument against race mixing 128
Posted by Englander on February 05, 2007, 07:55 AM | # First of all, the kid doesn’t look so bad. Let’s wait until he’s older until we pass judgement. Secondly, it is the tone of the comments that would be off-putting to people. Nobody likes to see a small child or baby criticized. Thirdly, anyone reading it would immediately think of any number of attractive mixed people that they either know personally or who are celebrities. I’m not fan of them but mixed race celebs are currently in fashion and the selection of one mixed child who you happen to find unsightly will not convince anyone when they can think of numerous examples of attractive mixed people. 129
Posted by JB on February 05, 2007, 11:32 AM | #
let’s turn that around : how many racially mixed people have you personally seen and consider good looking ? I myself can only think of only one and she was half-white/half-japanese. I’ve recently seen children who were 1/4 black & 3/4 white and they were the ugliest humans I’ve seen in person. I’ve seen wholly black men and women that I would consider better looking than these children. The mixed race celebs you refer to are promoted because they’re not really ugly and they can be the poster boys and girls of race mixing propaganda unlike the ones you can see in the real world just as characters played by Denzel Washington or Morgan Freeman can be sold - to whites - as a symbol of the good decent african-american always doing his best unlike the blacks in the real world. 130
Posted by JB on February 05, 2007, 12:10 PM | #
this one is a bit too ‘plastic’ for my taste. these ones are more beautiful
131
Posted by Englander on February 05, 2007, 01:03 PM | # I do feel that the beauty of the white race has been somewhat undersold in this thread and others, with the author’s taste for rather uninteresting blondes leaving readers underwhelmed. I also think that the entertainment industry is not making use of the best our race has to offer, and I sometimes wonder if this is deliberate. 132
Posted by JB on February 13, 2007, 04:09 PM | # there’s a Myspace page dedicated to Ziv’s book http://www.myspace.com/breedingbetweenthelines and Ziv has a page too : 133
Posted by Sue on April 11, 2007, 01:59 PM | # Svyatoslav( the owner of this blog, please post his photograph here? Hitler was neither blonde nor blue eyed, yet he wanted to cleanse the world of non-blonde and blue eyed people. You are not one like him, are you? Prove it by posting your photograph. 134
Posted by *smirk* on May 11, 2007, 09:51 PM | # I actually forced myself to read through most of the garbage on the page so that I could actually make relevant rebuttals, but I am honestly not going to do it systematically, would take far to long. While not reading the actual book that spawned this “intellectual debate” I would only hope that the main idea behind it is looking at the genetic consequences of breeding over a long period of time only within a race based on the “home land” of said genetic “race” and giving a non socio-economic look at the advantages of fresh genetic strains made from the overlapping of genetic material derived from different races to get the general phonotypical traits. A good example of such would be a pure bred Japanese female. Typically short, prone to having to wear corrective eye wear, bad teeth, smaller breast, smaller gluteus maximum, in general speak a short, gnarled toothed, figureless almost ambiguously built human being. While the majority of white males in the current still are under the influence of WWII/Korean War vets who have spread rumors about the beauty and sophistication of Japanese girls…. In fact its propaganda which is perpetuated by ignorant, anime obsessed “Otaku” who look at Jap AV models and believe that almost every Japanese woman looks like such….. in the reverse it would be people looking at pop singers and movie actresses and thinking every female of any race represented by these people have THAT look here in America. It is the fact that the representative pure bred or “F.O.B.” (fresh off the boat) asian is the result of only breeding within that race which by comparison to the land mass of other races’ “home lands” is small and by now is running thin on fresh genetic crosses, truly diminishing returns, especially in an island nation such as Japan and Okinawa. I have also found that many “Asian Beauties” are in fact a mix of pure Asians of Chinese, Japanese or Vietnamese origin and a western European or African-American cross. Why IQ was injected here I have no idea, time and time again it has been proven that IQ is not at all based on race, it is not nature it is almost wholistically nurture when healthy individuals are considered , to say otherwise is to reduce oneself to the stupidity of the average southern red-neck. Honestly the white women featured here were rather boring and bland save for one or two, neither of those being the generic blondes, some of them who also had rather masculine Aryan square jaws which I would not cross with ever. I can think of multiple pure breed uglies and mix breed beauties, multiple mix breed atrocities and pure breed goddesses. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but at the same time I have personally worked with individuals who have published studies on universal attractiveness and it was found that it was easier to get universally attractive looks in mixed breed children with a strikingly high approval rating for pure bred western European women of great breeding, north African women of great breeding, arab women of mix with north Africans and/or eastern Europeans of good breeding and almost universal acceptance of African-american/eastern European mixes and asian/eastern European/African American crosses. When it comes to physical prowess and health to ignore the fact that what can only be classified as a sub race, that being “African-American”, is the result of selective breeding and therefore often superior in natural physical abilities is foolish. While great examples of Aryan individuals can be brought up, those individuals are in fact in the minority and often took far more resources and far more time to be competitive with their African-American counter parts. Remember, African slaves were chosen for their physical and biological endurances to replace native Americans who failed as slaves due to their lack of physical power and their complete lack of biological resistances to white illness. After their initial introduction African blood lines were mixed with south American blood lines in areas such as Brazil, then later with Spanish and French (African-American Creole) blood lines to produce a generic African-American race which is the reason for said “races” diversity in skin color and features. Basically slavery created a monster. It was a genetic breeding program that released as Chris Rock called it “super slaves” its proof being African American dominance of physical activity, mainly sports. Now adding in sociology and a few hundred years of the playing field being leveled we have the ability to tie higher education to the African American blood line as well as that of asian, arab and most recently Mexican blood lines, thereby weakening “Aryan Superiority”. It was interesting to me to see “Can people in their right mind believe that attractive white women can be improved upon if non-whites are absorbed into the white gene pool? “ under the pic of the white female as any good southern red-neck will tell you that a white blood line is “tarnished” or destroyed with the inclusion of another race. Indeed there is some truth to this as white genetic phonotypical traits have a tendency to be recessive while those of other races, especially African/African-American are dominant. In other words sociologically and genetically the white blood line is absorbed into the other race’s gene pool, NOT the other way around. In fact be it not for white father driving the point home with white daughters not to race mingle, ESPECIALLY with blacks, the white race would honestly be lost to other races. Lets face it gentlemen its all about fear. The white race is in fact fragile, mixing with any race other than “pure” (laughable, especially in North America) white bloodline will result in a hybrid which is sociologically and genetically not white but hybrid and for ease of identification (and to the lamentation of bigots) that of the other race. Nothing terrifies the majority of whites more than darker skinned races not only because of the majority of weak individuals in the “white” race (there are plenty of strong ones, just that the average white is not) being physically afraid of typically stronger dark skinned individuals but also because of the underlying and subconsciously understood fact that motivates it. White kids are infatuated with black and asian culture anyone who is not blind can see this, white kids are not at all interested in white culture which has honestly become…... well nothing. Honestly Irish, Scotish, German and Italians tend to hold on to their culture the hardest in the “white” races but many people do not realized that Italians are a bastardization of Aryan and North African (Moore invasion and interbreeding – Moore being synonymous with ETHIOPIA) meaning that is not a tan… they are in fact a “black” race. Because females tend to seek out alpha males for sexual encounters, inter-racial couples are on the rise, this is nothing new, its just becoming more and more wide spread as it becomes more and more acceptable in all of the races involved. All you can do is try to instill these thoughts in your white females….. but honestly it will not matter, unless this thought process is forged in hatred there is a great possibility she will be approached and accept and in all actuality approach a member of another race at some point. How do I know? I am myself a African-American/Spanish/French/Viet hybrid with a long term relationship with an American-Indian/German/Spanish hybrid living in the southern united states. I am 6’2”, 245 pounds, own two successful businesses and have lived in predominately white areas and attended predominately white schools. I have never approached a white female, never had to, they were all to eager to approach me, regardless of what their fathers may have wanted. I was in fact at one time engaged to a black/jewish hybrid. This is the way of the world, this is the way of the future. The point is mixed offspring on average have more pleasing features than the average representatives of “pure” examples. Your small sampling of society should in no way, shape or form be used as a rebuttal to any studies unless you have truly polled and researched outside of your immediate surroundings and the racially protective mindset instilled in you by family members or friends of family members. On average the basic point of this book can be easily observed in society. At the risk of sounding anti-Semitic…… American jews are most likely one of the physically and biologically weakest races and tend to be passed up in regards to beauty comparison by all other races. There are seldom examples of jewish physical prowess or examples of them winning mainstream beauty contests and thus could gain a lot on those levels from crosses with other races. Typically a cross between a jew and a member of the “white” race is done so between individuals who would be unable to attract what would be deemed an attractive or physically superior specimen of any race….. its just the way it is, not at all being anti-Semitic 135
Posted by *smirk* on May 11, 2007, 10:10 PM | # “Svyatoslav( the owner of this blog, please post his photograph here? Hitler was neither blonde nor blue eyed, yet he wanted to cleanse the world of non-blonde and blue eyed people. You are not one like him, are you? Prove it by posting your photograph.”
Hitler felt the Aryan race was superior and wanted eradication of all others while not being of that race….? does that make sense to you? Does it make sense that he would say this while aligning himself with not only Russia before mistrust drove these two nations to war with each other, but also the Italians (genetically crossed whites with ethopians or “moors”) or the japanese which could not be farther than pure Aryan. Do you think that the Japs would team up with someone who said this? What you have done is taken the propoganda that was instilled in you and taken it as “Bible” truth, you never researched at all objectively. You never read what he was saying, you never got someone to translate his speeches. I have not every read or heard Hitler say that he wanted the eradication of all non Aryan races and I challange others to show authentic, unrefutable evidence of such, as a matter of fact I will pay for it. I could go more into this, but it would be attacked by close minded individuals who have not researched it, or supported by the wrong types who have likewise never researched it. Hitler came into power and was supported by the german people for certain reasons, go find fact based examples of what they were before you talk about this period of time please…..... Hitler is and was completely differant than Himler and almost polar to the neo-nazi. 136
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 02:15 PM | # lol, the white woman there is so tanned, looks mixed with mongoloids and negroids 137
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 02:21 PM | # lol the site is certainly not racist. it’s quite PC if compared to more free speech site like bastardly.com… does any body have a pic of alon ziv?? is he fat stupid, old man??? 138
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 02:34 PM | # seen his pic on his site, not ugly,,,, interesting….why? 139
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 02:46 PM | # to mr ziv: do you have pig nose, slanty eyes, kinky hair, small penis,flat face, thick lips,coarse skin,??????.... you remind me of my shit….you should get mixed youself, especially with negroids 140
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 03:09 PM | # nice post jb!, that woman is now reserved for ziv.. if he really marries any african woman, he is genuine, if not he is a totally fuckin’ fake hypercrite 141
Posted by uuu on May 14, 2007, 03:40 PM | # Englander is right, the real white classic beauties are underused 142
Posted by Bell on August 27, 2007, 10:05 PM | # You people are totally sick and need to die off…please God!!! 143
Posted by Jessica on September 07, 2007, 04:32 AM | # As a white female I found this all very interesting, especially some comments from some of the men. I think some people have to remember from a genealogical scientific stand-point that technically there is no 100% “pure blood” race. Just because someone’s parent’s are both Caucasian or Asian doesn’t mean that they do not have descendent’s who were of a different ethnicity at some point, considering that all 6.6 billion people on earth originated from a single group of a few ten thousand, or to be more recent, all the mixing that has been done over the past 500 years. 144
Posted by Ann on September 27, 2007, 02:58 AM | # No offense but after reading a lot of your blog, you just seem racist. All this talk about “white beauty” and how superior it is—has it ever occured to you that the variation of beauty is going to be different across all races? And then there’s your comments on Indian women that I take offense. You say and post things with a deliberate intent only to claim that you aren’t trying to be racist, but you are. What’s wrong with you? Do you really expect people whose ancestry from more humid and hot climates to have the slim nose you want? You really think you’re comparing apples to apples? I don’t really agree with Alon Ziv but I definitely do not agree with you. The model on the book cover isn’t the most aesthetically pleasing, but neither is that trashy looking porno wannabee you chose. Here are much better examples: http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/1/3/6/0/13560631-13560634-slarge.jpg Norah Jones. Oh I’m sorry, is her nose too broad for you? http://eur.i1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/xp/premiere_photo/20050906/16/4250386022.jpg Kate Bosworth. Hopefully she’s white enough for you?
http://www.wahindia.com/photo.php?p=2888&a=233&i=87 Yes, she’s Indian, sorry her nose isn’t broad for you to rip on.
145
Posted by Ann on September 27, 2007, 03:34 AM | # My my look at this: a pakistani woman with a “nordic nose” Will that be too much for you? 146
Posted by Count Sudoku on September 27, 2007, 03:34 AM | # Dear Ann, I hope I speak for most posters when I say that yes we are a bunch of racists. “Racism” is a Marxist term used to silence into accepting their own displacement and eventual genocide through race mixing. Furthermore, to clarify things I hope most posters agree with the following sentiments… http://westernsurvival.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_archive.html I have begun, among my white friends, to acknowledge that I am a racist. I 147
Posted by Count Sudoku on September 27, 2007, 03:39 AM | # As for the good looking non-white women. They are good looking to the extent that they resemble white women. 148
Posted by Lurker on September 27, 2007, 05:04 AM | # Ann - in your last posts you scored some points - against your own argument! As the Count points out. Norah Jones is a nice looking girl, she is half Indian (and of course half European) so why did you choose her? Does the fact that you had to choose a European looking girl as good looking not tell you anything? That Pakistani girl, yes shes pretty and yes she could pass as European. So to reiterate. Youve wheeled out two girls who who are supposed to represent the attractiveness of non-whites but why is it that they look white? Or are you going to say thats just a conincidence, that their attractiveness actually resides in other features? 149
Posted by Lurker on September 27, 2007, 05:35 AM | # Jessica - I think some people have to remember from a genealogical scientific stand-point that technically there is no 100% “pure blood” race. Actually we are told to remember that all the time, but it would be helpful if you could post a link or two to the definitive research that has ‘proved’ this once and for all. For myself I find that it seems not to be geneticists or biologists etc who have ‘proved’ this but people whose speciality seems to lie more in the realm of sociology and the like. Which is odd, you wouldnt go to a sociologist for biological pronouncements on fish or frogs or apple trees would you. This ‘proof’ often seems to rest on philosophical/semantic nitpicking eg red & blue can be mixed to make purple, therefore the existence of purple proves there is no category ‘red’ or category ‘blue’. Lets imagine me and Ann are married. Me: “Ann darling, while you are down at the shops can you pick me up a red T shirt and a blue one” Ann: *Sighs, rolls eyes* “Oh thats right, typical man, how many times have I told you there is no such thing, so just how I am supposed to know which is which mister know-it-all?” Me: *Resigned* “OK love just get me two ‘purple’ ones then.” 150
Posted by Tommy G on September 27, 2007, 09:16 AM | # “Features and skin tone are just a one-letter difference, respectively, in all the letters in a humans genetic code…”—Jessica Jessica, ethier your ignorant of the facts, or your deliberately trying to mislead. The truth is that small variants in the genetic code result in large differences in both phenotype and non-phenotype between racial groups. From the article Genetics of Race: “Everyone has heard the fashionable view that race is not a valid biological concept but is, instead, a suspect sociological category. The implication is that racial distinctions are a form of superstition, that there is no justification for wanting to preserve races, and that replacement of one group by another represents no genetic loss. More specifically, it implies there is no reason for whites in Europe or America to resist displacement because we are, in effect, being replaced by ourselves. Clearly, the main motive for promoting a view so contrary to common sense is “anti-racism,” but there is one biological fact on which the race-deniers build their argument: This is the oft-cited observation by Richard C. Lewontin of Harvard that there is far more genetic variation within human racial groups (about 85 percent of the total) than between them (about 15 percent). This is true, and scientists were surprised when this fact first came to light. There have since been many outrageous misinterpretations of Prof. Lewontin’s findings, with some people even claiming that because there is more genetic variation within than between human groups, whites are genetically more similar to blacks than to other whites…”
151
Posted by Fr. John on September 27, 2007, 10:08 AM | # “Alon Ziv has to be insane…” Well, that should have been obvious from the start. Reading DOCTOR Kevin MacDonald’s seminal analysis of the Jews [by an impartial non-Jew], clearly shows that, Jews, as a race, ARE more insane than other races. Perhaps it comes from all that ‘in-breeding.’ Therefore, Ziv should take the admonishment, “Physician, heal thyself” to heart. Oh, he’s NOT going to do that? Truely, ‘ye are of your father the devil, who is the Father of lies. And the deeds of your father, ye WILL do.” - Gospel of St. John, Chapter 8; [Christ, to the Pharisees, before they Crucified Him] Only a race that is insane, would crucify their God. ‘Nuff said. 152
Posted by Tommy G on September 27, 2007, 11:39 AM | # “Therefore, Ziv should take the admonishment, “Physician, heal thyself” to heart. Oh, he’s NOT going to do that? “ All disciples of the “Son of Perdition” will surly reap their just rewards on Judgment Day. Ziv still has time to change his evil ways and redeem himself. 153
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 27, 2007, 08:39 PM | # This is a good thread — I just reread it. I was going to cite a few outstanding comments by On Holliday but his comments in this thread are all so good, and there are so many good ones by James Bowery, Svigor, and others, that one really has to sit down and just read or browse the whole thread. It gives a glimpse of the blogging medium at its best. If there were Pulitzer Prizes for blogs, this thread is one of a great many reasons MR.com would richly deserve one. 154
Posted by EWD on September 28, 2007, 01:23 AM | # HA. If you look closely at the face of the woman in the book, the skin is almost perfect. Compare that to the skin of the white woman in a bikini posted after. 155
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 28, 2007, 08:25 AM | # Then marry her for her skin, EWD. Don’t force us to. We like the white woman in the bikini better — skin and all. 156
Posted by angel on October 03, 2007, 06:51 PM | # May God correct your erroneous thinking. May God grant you more wisdom….more knowledge in the very near future. If you cannot tell, Asians make up 1/5 of the world population- Chinese people to be exact. India houses more than 1billion people. They’re almost in say….a population race with China. Europe is far behind the both of those. So, what is this “majority” you speak of. Yes, if we’re going by majority rule, then the Chinese should be considered the standard of beauty and brains. I feel sorry for you….that you could be so wrapped up in yourself to think that you’re the best that God’s made. I pity you, that you cannot embrace the richness of all that God has made. I pity you that you cannot comprehend the beauty of the age that we live in. In times gone past, the world was so disconnected it was very rare to see anyone outside of your own race or culture. But you have this great opprotunity to see….to see that you are not the best the world has to offer. I’m not even sorry for saying that… your words, soaked in hate and soaked in ugliness prove it. May God have mercy on you for your idle words. For your hateful words. For your lack of understanding, may He have mercy! But I also pray that you’ll be informed by the spirit of Love that you are a part of the problem in this world. You’re not being a solution- you’re being part of the big, ignorant, dangerous problem. 158
Posted by Landulf II on October 04, 2007, 04:52 AM | # > My my look at this: a pakistani woman with a “nordic nose” Will that be too much for you? It’s useless arguing with these useful idiots, really. 0 + 0 = 1 Yeah, right. Makes a lot of sense. http://www.indianmodelagency.com/uploaded/model/260907011550.jpg Another “nordic nose” for you. *yawn* 159
Posted by biggeur on October 07, 2007, 08:49 AM | # Only thing attractive about the blonde model is her breasts (or that you can see them). Take away those and she is no more attractive than the woman on the cover of Alon Ziv’s book. They’re different model comparisons too, The blonde woman belongs in playboy (bikini & sprayed with water), while the brown woman is more generic model. So if the original poster is trying imply sex appeal, then he should compare his nordic princess to the likes of melyssa ford, esther baxter, nicole ricca, and the thousands of other black/mixed/latina video girls. Anyway, I agree that there is something unique that goes on in the mixing of widely distinct races, like between negroids and caucasoids. Something more so than just the offspring being an intermediate blend all-rounder i.e. strengths of the white race and the black race combined. While the article attempts to focus on what negative incompatibilities, it ignores positive traits. Mulattoes (1/2 black 1/2 white mixes) & mulattoids (all negroid-caucasoid blends, beyond first generation), tend to be highly energetic, mentally and physically, and exhibit strong technical and creative traits. This usually occurs despite the circumstances of their parent’s social-economic background (most grow up in low-income single parent families, yet miraculously manages to attain a good education, turn the tide, and make something of their lives, in contrast to their socially disadvantaged black and white peers in the neighborhoods they grew up in). yes, indeed a fascinating topic. 160
Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 07, 2007, 11:12 AM | # Smalleur does the kindness of alerting readers already in his second sentence that he’s a nitwit, sparing them the chore of reading the entire waste of otherwise perfectly good electrons. 161
Posted by kathy on October 07, 2007, 08:16 PM | # I’m white . I don’t even think the woman in the pic is all that pretty . In my opinion , you must have very low standards as to what you regard as beauty ! 162
Posted by kathy on October 07, 2007, 08:21 PM | # I was referring to the white woman . She’s not that good-looking and definately not ” hot ” ! She just has nice breasts ( not sagging ) . So what ? Many mixed people do , too . 163
Posted by Svigor on October 07, 2007, 10:11 PM | # No offense but after reading a lot of your blog, you just seem racist. You say that like it’s a bad thing. What do you do with proud “racists,” who can’t be bullied with your scare-labels; make mean faces? 164
Posted by Svigor on October 07, 2007, 10:26 PM | # As for my appearance/phenotype/whatever, you’ll just have to take my word for it: light skin, blue-green eyes, blond hair. Kathy, I’m not sure about non-blacks, but blackness is inversely correlated with “nice” breasts. I defy you to find photos of five “very” black women with “nice,” full , natural breasts. (I won’t niggle over “fullness” or “blackness,” I promise). 165
Posted by Svigor on October 07, 2007, 10:29 PM | # Oh, and anyone who thinks the white woman at the top of the page isn’t much prettier than the mulatto girl is clearly a nimrod. Makeup and lighting and photography fool a lot of nimrods. 166
Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 07, 2007, 10:39 PM | #
Great title, by the way! That title is one of the best titles of any log entry I’ve seen posted at this or any site. (And the entry itself was of course first rate.) 167
Posted by Landulf II on October 08, 2007, 06:18 AM | # Did you notice the forum this “biggeur” guy is pushing ? : http://raceandstuff.phpbb-host.com/ Disgusting. Check out this counter-Mengele and his plans for Humanity:
Whoa, those guys can’t be for real. 168
Posted by Count Sudoku on October 08, 2007, 06:35 AM | # “May God correct your erroneous thinking. May God grant you more wisdom….more knowledge in the very near future.” Right back at you. “If you cannot tell, Asians make up 1/5 of the world population- Chinese people to be exact. India houses more than 1billion people. They’re almost in say….a population race with China. Europe is far behind the both of those. So, what is this “majority” you speak of. Yes, if we’re going by majority rule, then the Chinese should be considered the standard of beauty and brains.” Probably the majority of people in white countries. We aren’t really concerned with what non-whites think but AFAIK they essentially agree with us. Why do you think Baywatch was so popular outside white countries? BTW, if you do some research, you’ll find that there is a market in China and India for skin lighteners and in China cosmetic eye operations to make women’s eyes more round. Now why would that be? http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/09/one_of_bollywoo.php “I feel sorry for you….that you could be so wrapped up in yourself to think that you’re the best that God’s made.” I pity you, that you cannot embrace the richness of all that God has made. I pity you that you cannot comprehend the beauty of the age that we live in. In times gone past, the world was so disconnected it was very rare to see anyone outside of your own race or culture.” I’m beginning to pity and feel sorry for myself knowing that in one respect my ancestors had it so good over me. “But you have this great opprotunity to see….to see that you are not the best the world has to offer. I’m not even sorry for saying that… your words, soaked in hate and soaked in ugliness prove it.” We see plenty and we don’t like it at all. “May God have mercy on you for your idle words. For your hateful words. For your lack of understanding, may He have mercy! But I also pray that you’ll be informed by the spirit of Love that you are a part of the problem in this world. You’re not being a solution- you’re being part of the big, ignorant, dangerous problem.” No, you are part of the problem. A fool who has been brainwashed to celebrate the genocide of your own race. A fool who has bought the lies of a corrupted Church that deviates more from the truth and its original teachings with every passing year. I suggest you investigate So you can see how you’ve been mislead. 169
Posted by Imiin on October 12, 2007, 08:49 PM | # Well the blonde has alot of make up on, and still I am very taken in by the brown girl even though I do not personally think she is beautiful… I can say the same for the blonde though. Maybe if you picked two similar subjects with similar facial structures, this is like comparing Ernie to Bert regardless of race. 170
Posted by Lazy Oliphant on October 24, 2007, 07:41 PM | # Whoever posted that picture of the bleach-blonde chick needs to know that her penciled brows, bad teeth and dumb look aren’t so attractive. No competition with the cover girl I’d say. lol and Angelina Jolie evidently disagrees with you about the whole thick lip thing not being attractive. And about the allegedly heavy Black brow thing, I’ve seen similar traits in just about all races. It’s not that they have significantly thicker brows, it’s that the upper part of the nose is shallower, as is consistent with the majority of the world’s population, and that testosterone levels influence most traits associated with being male. Look it up. 171
Posted by VLC on October 26, 2007, 01:07 AM | # Jessica:
bigger:
I recall reading a thread on MR about all the mental problems of mixed race children. Either here or on Amren.com 172
Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 26, 2007, 08:35 AM | #
Just goes to show how generous and self-sacrificing the Jews are, that they’re not snapping all the mulattoids up for Israel and making that country’s population a super race. No, they’re leaving all the ‘ttoids for other countries, altruistically passing up the chance to vastly improve themselves so that others may have that same chance. What unselfish people the Israelis are! Always thinking first and foremost of the other guy! 173
Posted by jaimee on October 30, 2007, 06:43 AM | # In response to the blog at the top. majority rights? Do I get these rights? I’m way hotter than that blond chic and I’m chinese and french. Besides some of the most beautiful women in the world like supermodel Gisele Bunchen from Brazil are mixed. The girl in that picture don’t make as much money as a supermodel for as white as she is she doesn’t appear tall or gorgeous just typically white. Most beautiful women have more qualities than the a skinny tall bridged nose that make them gorgeous though I dought the writer behind this site has seen beautiful women in the flesh… pictures of girls on the internet doesn’t count….. Brazil and Canada are hot spots for model companies to go “searching” for the feminin ideal because there is so much mixture. Mixture of all those minorities into something not white! Go hang out in Brazil and see if any beauitful woman will sleep with you and your racist ideas and bogus statistics. I don’t know if this website was a backlash to politically correctness, something I hate too, but it’s not very good i don’t get the point, it seems offensive to women and not white people and white people. and I think it’s governed by someone or some people who are really afriad of losing some pride they never earned based not on who they are as individuals but on how they or he can dramatize racism issues that are not coherent with…..THE MAJORITY of society!!!! 174
Posted by Rose on November 03, 2007, 02:02 PM | # Biased picture!!! Looser! Of course a model in a bikini looks perfect!
Here is a Latin in a bikini .. and here boobs are real!
wait theres more lets compare
175
Posted by Megan on November 06, 2007, 04:24 AM | # Uh oh guys! Your “white beauty” has no nipples! Now this CAN’T be good for evolution! 176
Posted by Gabrils protege on November 07, 2007, 02:40 AM | # I am posting this to address the person who came here claiming to be the author of this book and more specifically something he stated. [Quote Alon Ziv] - Many here have been quick to call me a hypocrite, but I encourage intermarriage among all groups. [Quote] To put it simply Alon, you and everyone else who espouse miscegenation are racists of the worst kind, as although you and others like you, coax both yourselves and others into believing what you aspire toward is somehow righteous and noble so to speak, the reality is that you hold contempt for difference, and encourage hatred of diversity by striving toward destroying it, I have read a few parts of your book but really (and lets be blatantly honest here) it is nothing other than social marxist propaganda, and not really worth reading. In any case though Alon, your hatred for human biodiversity and the fact that you aspire toward destroying it makes you the worst kind of racist, worse than any neo Nazi, black power activist or KKK member ect ect, none can match your hatred for difference, you and your ideals represent the epitome of racism, and this cannot be refuted, regardless of how convincing your charade of anti racist is, you and those like you are the enemy of all races and cultures, the enemy of the world. 177
Posted by Carmella on November 07, 2007, 04:52 AM | # I must say, i thought i was stumbling upon the summary of a good book when this assinine partially neo-natzi bullshit showed up. To basically break down the pages of steaming crap worth of useless statistics, and your extremily bias views of whats beautiful and whats not( that i couldnt hold a straight face to finish)...there was hard to find anything of actual truth(just your angry, frustrated rantings…im sorry your angry that mixed races are better then you in just about everything. Exept spouting bullshit; you cut the cake). Just to let you know, Your not God, your opinion doesnt matter anymore than anyone elses. So stop waisting your breath on insisting that Nordic women are more attractive then any mixed woman…actually, go ahead..im sure thousands of men are kicking back laughing their asses off at you. Go ahead, settledown with your boring, bonethin, pencil nosed, flat assed , purely white breed sorry excuse for a woman, Atleast your happy. wean out the ugly ones for the good men! you have a purpose in life. I also pray that one day that your unfathomable poor eye sight will be corrected in future technology if possible. The least you could have done to boost your statement would be to actually find GOOD looking pictures of white women when comparing them to amazing beautiful mixed…didnt help you much. I also loved how you showed some of the ugliest pictures of other races, but failed to show what White trash lookes like…there is such a thing as an ugly white person. You are trying to correct fallicous statements but you are only creating more…adhominems and circular reasoning. Hope you get even 20% of men to agree with you on this…good luck. I am danish norweigen and african american and a model at that! i have dated nothing but WHITE men! American and european. I really do hope one day you realize that there are beauty’s from every part of the world. Whether they be milk white, tan, or black…and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I pitty you, i really do… 178
Posted by Tommy G on November 07, 2007, 07:40 AM | # “Go ahead, settledown with your boring, bonethin, pencil nosed, flat assed , purely white breed sorry excuse for a woman”—Carmella Yeah yeah yeah!!! Go ahead, Carmella, try to make yourself feel better by denigrating white women; but the fact is, 90% of negroe men would gladly crawl a mile on broken glass right past a bunch of fat assed, bootlip, ‘black beauties’ in order to get to one of those “sorry excuses for a women” you speak of. Why do you think that’s so, Car[mula]? 179
Posted by sinead barnes on November 25, 2007, 06:16 PM | # Okay… I’m mixed raced, I have about 6 different races in my blood that i know of… I’m also a 19 year old student so am a little too busy to write an essay like the rest of the people on this… But i just wanted to say comparing the busty fake so called ‘white blooded girl’ who was caked in make up, with drawn on eye-brows and fake dyed blond hair and fake boobs and no clouthes on, fake tanned and probobly wearing contact lenses, is not a fair comparison to the natural average looking book cover girl. Who ever wrote that she can’t be improved is missing the point that the book cover girl didnt need lip implants fake hair boobs and eye brows. Not to be vain but i have an average intellegence and am far better looking than the blond. That doesnt meen all mix raced people are and it doesn’t meen i’m smarter or better looking than all white blooded women. This whole thing is frankly an idiotic debate and a little raced. 180
Posted by ip on December 18, 2007, 08:40 PM | # The blond is not attractive, neither is the mongrel. They’re equally disgusting, but one uses makeup to make it look better. 181
Posted by Tommy on December 18, 2007, 09:46 PM | # The blond is not attractive, neither is the mongrel. They’re equally disgusting, but one uses makeup to make it look better. Posted by ip on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 at 12:40 AM | # Let me guess….. You’re a faggot, right? 182
Posted by AppleB on December 23, 2007, 08:48 PM | # You can’t be serious. There are perfectly mixed people who also appear white as snow. Saying that mixed people look better or worse says nothing, since mixed people can look like anything. This girl is 1/4 negro, her mother is mulatto her brother is 1/4 white…
183
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 23, 2007, 09:57 PM | #
That’s interesting if true, AppleB. I’d need evidence before I’d believe it though. 184
Posted by potpourri on December 24, 2007, 08:24 PM | # Consider mixed race people, such as Heather Locklear and Carly Simon are born exhibiting the phenotype of the woman above, I’d say that the mixed race woman is definitely a match of a full blooded Nordic woman. Heather Locklear is part African Slave, Lumbee Indian and European. Carly Simon is part Afro-Cuban, Jewish and some other things. There are mixed race woman throughout the Americas who look like the woman above. 185
Posted by potpourri on December 24, 2007, 08:50 PM | #
This woman has a black mother and white father Adrianna Lima of African, Native American and Caucasian extraction Miley Cyrus is part Native American Toris Amos is part Cherokee Cher is part Cherokee Jade Goody is 1/3 Black, these are her kids Carol Channing is part African-American Ana Beatriz Barros is a Brazilian model of mixed race 186
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 24, 2007, 11:46 PM | # I consider AppleB’s and Potpourri’s comments to be roughly ninety-five percent bullshit. Stop spamming the site. 187
Posted by Nat on January 09, 2008, 12:02 AM | # Just came across this thread. Got a bit bored by the end its so long. Doing an essay about represenations of race and doing some pointless google search. To me the claim that ‘mixing’ of races makes more healhy people etc.. makes sense because in genes the further away the better right? ( I am no scientist but shagging your sibling course muttation?) is that not very simple. I mean you may produce some evidence to suggest this isnt true but opposites and difference attract. The tone of this website seems really ignorant. Because to me race terminology is bull sh*t . Its all about culture and origin, I am not denying the differences but as you will know if everyone traces back their own family tree they will discover a mix of different countries, ethnicities, from when the people move around etc… so this whole superiority and fear of ‘mixing’ wtf? we are all the result of mixing. one race. the human race. different cultures. so different ideas and opinion. different power structures. but not different races. if im going of the mark tell me lol 188
Posted by Nat on January 09, 2008, 12:20 AM | # Didnt see those other peoples responses who agree with me. Well done! I mean you habe your preferences but seriously this website is full of people who feel like they are losing their precious ‘white’ race. thats frankly hilarious. why don’t you go back in time and stop all the different conquerers from moving around the world and mixing and raping with each other. 189
Posted by Landon on January 09, 2008, 08:45 AM | # Dude. Mules are a f1 class hybrid. thats like mating a human with a closely related neanderthal. You cant use a mule as an example of the negative affects of interacial breeding. If you DID happen to talk to a breeder (namely a dog breeder) you would find out that hybrid dogs actually do live longer and have less health problems (consistantly)... I have one friend that breads pitts and another that breads ridgebacks. Also, this idea that hybid humans have wider noses is retarded. They dont all do. And from my experience (i run a couple clubs in hollywood, california) the mixed race males and females attract more attention on average than do pure bred caucasion… in fact a moderately attractive mixed female will get the same attention as an extremely attractive female… Its simple biology… deeper gene pool = a more healthy person. There is nothing that can disprove that. We are all the same species but have lived in different geographies and have our own specific immunities and physical advantages(and disadvantages). Not to say that total mixture of races is a good thing… A fully intergrated mixture of races on a global level would essentially create ONE race. Which makes the gene pool very shallow… which means one epademic could wipe out the entire race. Remember, the goal of nature is to create the longest living and durable creature… not the one with biggest eyes, smallest nose or highest jump vertical (unless those traits will help with every day survival). So judging whether a race is of a higher quality based on societal standards is silly. Over all it doesnt matter. You all have an obvious lack of experience with cultural diversity and Have not studied science to a level of objectivity… you quote and read facts that suite your puroposes… I’m a graduated physical chemist in case youre wondering…. Over all in three generatinos it wont matter cause most of the people in this world will be of mixed decent and will be healthier for it. However, there will more than likele be a plague of somesort that will kill off a third to half the population in the next 200 years (statistically speaking that is) Oh, and if you go back and read the case study you talked about with hybrids having psychological and/or nerve related problems, you’ll most likely find that the study was done on a very specific type of hybrid and that the scope of the study is not one that can be used on a ‘general’ view of ineratial breeding… 190
Posted by Landon on January 09, 2008, 09:03 AM | # Oh yeah BTW… Im of mixed decent (hawaiian, chinese and half scottish) and I absolutley LOVE blonde white blue eyed girls. but its because i was raised around extremely attractive mixed race girls and my mother is white (Freudian thingy) It doesnt change the fact that I would have much healther and fit children with a half black girl. Its hard to look at the world through others eyes. but if you cant do it then you shouldnt really open your mouth… but it is a free internet so alas we shall have to search through your arguments for the ever expanding ignorant points you shall make. Tommy whoever up there… your gross use of racist language to describe colored women is proof that whatever comes out of your mouth is not worth listenig too. 191
Posted by Landon on January 09, 2008, 09:17 AM | # jesus, read Count Sudoku’s entry up top… He actually gives references to help the “misled” after he states that he believes he knows the ‘original teachings’ of ‘THE’ church….. Wow! Is there such a thing as an oximoronic statement?... or maybe just moronic. Even the Pope doesnt know what the “original” teachings were. Constantine destroyed 80% of the “original teachings” to create Catholocism… AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrGGGGGGGGggg…. I SEE STUPID PEOPLE….................. 192
Posted by Nat on January 09, 2008, 01:24 PM | # Jessica: what past 500 years of mixing are you talking about? Racial segregation was the law in most white countries a hundred years ago. - Now whose being a dumb ass? After replying in a tired state last night and thinking about this subject more, I think that it is important for humans to label themselves, as definition is part of identity. Unfortunately the negativity that comes with over plays…I seriously think that being worried about losing your precious white race is a losing battle. Sorry. but since the Europeans in the recent conquering history started this whole thing off by creating their ‘empires’ and ‘imperalism’ what we have now is the aftermarth. 193
Posted by S. B. on January 20, 2008, 04:00 PM | # I love my mixed race baby - but why does she feel so alien?’
She didn’t mean to be rude. But it was a comment that struck me with the force of a jab to the stomach. Immediately, I was overwhelmed by a confusion of emotions. I felt protective, insulted, worried, ashamed, guilty, all at once. The reason? My lovely, wriggly, smiley baby is mixed race. Now, I think of myself as pretty ‘right on’. My home is on the border of the London Republic of Hackney. I’ve been to the Notting Hill Carnival, even if I found the music a bit loud. Yet now I realise what a ‘white’ world I inhabit. I am white and I have two sons from my first marriage who are both milky complexioned and golden haired. My twin sister, who I spend a lot of time with, has a Danish partner. As a consequence, she has two boys who are also pale skinned and flaxen haired. Into this positively Scandinavian next generation, I have now injected a tiny, dark-skinned, dark-haired girl. To say she stands out is an understatement. My colouring and that of my children has never really been an issue before. However, three years ago I met the man who became my second husband and who is the father of my daughter. Although born in the UK, his parents came from India in the Sixties. This makes him British-Asian and our daughter mixed race. There is another more PC term for the plump little bundle I strap to my front. She is ‘dual heritage’. It’s a bit trendy, but I quite like it. It implies a pride in coming from two cultures, rather than the less attractive connotations of ‘mixed race’. The usual time something is labelled ‘mixed’ is when it’s a packet of nuts and they’ve bulked out the luxury cashews with cheaper peanuts. I’m not sure I want my daughter to be regarded as an adulterated version of some pure original. Still, it is the most accepted description. The truth is, whatever the label, the fact there is a label proves that my daughter’s conflicting parentage matters. At the more frothy end of the scale, mixed-race children are regarded as pretty dolls — white kids with a nice tan. When I was pregnant and people asked me about the child I was having, and I explained her father was Indian, they would often coo something along the lines of: “Ooh, she’s going to be beautiful!” as if I was discussing a new rose, made from an exotic cross-breeding programme. On a less benevolent level, mixed-race children can receive a hostile welcome from both white and black communities. Being neither one thing nor another may get you on the cover of Vogue, but it isn’t an easy way to make friends. But this is 2007, surely things are more enlightened than that? I hope so, but I fear not. One reason for my fear is my own mixed reactions to my daughter. Don’t get me wrong, I love her. She is the child I didn’t think I’d have after my first marriage broke up. She is the only granddaughter in our family and we all dote on her. But when I turn to the mirror in my bedroom to admire us together, I am shocked. She seems so alien. With her long, dark eyelashes and shiny, dark brown hair, she doesn’t look anything like me. I know that concentrating on how my daughter looks is shallow. She is a person in her own right, not an accessory to me. But still, I can’t shake off the feeling of unease. I didn’t realise how much her looking different would matter and, on a rational level, I know it shouldn’t. But it does. Evolution demands that we have children to pass on our genes, hence the sense of pride and validation we get when we see our features reappearing in the next generation. With my daughter, I don’t have that. Do black fathers who marry white women and then have paler-skinned children feel my sense of loss? Or maybe Chinese mothers or Middle-Eastern grandparents grieve when they see a child they know to be their own, but whose features don’t reflect that? I worry that, as my daughter doesn’t look like me, people will assume she is adopted. After all, it’s all the rage in showbiz circles. Madonna famously scooped up a black child when she wanted to be a mother again and Angelina Jolie appears to be assembling a ‘pick ‘n’ mix’ of kids from different countries. It’s all very United Colours of Benetton, isn’t it? In the real world, I fear for my daughter’s sense of self. She has a tiny foot in two cultures. How will she negotiate a path between the two? I worry that my sons will feel less of a kinship with their sister because she is different, although there is no sign of that. As for myself, there is an inescapable status issue to address. White women who have non-white children are stigmatised as ‘Tracy Towerblocks’ living on benefits, most of which they spend on lager and fags. Even if I don’t fit this profile, my daughter’s difference definitely points out the fact that my children come from two different fathers. If I wanted to pass us off as a nice, neat nuclear family, she would blow my cover at once. But it is more than that. I am frightened, frightened of others’ reactions to her, as well as my own. I didn’t think of myself as racist and yet my daughter has shown me a side of myself about which I feel deeply uncomfortable. Even admitting to having mixed feelings about her not being blonde and blue eyed, I feel disloyal and incredibly guilty. I know the obvious comment is that I must have known how a child of our union would look when I married an Indian man, but it is a wise woman who thinks that far ahead when she falls in love. I didn’t think about any of this before I got pregnant. I wanted to have a baby. Her colour and culture were immaterial then. But self-flagellation is not useful. I have more pressing concerns. I am now the mother of a ‘black’ child, even if she is more the hue of weak tea than espresso. This is a role for which I am utterly unprepared. Part of me thinks I should be playing sitar music to her in her cot, mastering pakoras and serving them dressed in a sari, but that would be fantastically fake coming from me. When she was born, pale but with lots of dark hair, I asked the midwife if her eyes would stay blue. ‘Asian genes are very strong,’ she said in what I took to be an ominous tone. No more Brady Bunch kids for me. The midwife has been proved right and every day my baby’s eyes get a little darker. Even so, when she looks up at me as I feed her, my heart melts. My love may not be colour blind, but hers is, and that is truly humbling. Picture of Ms. Turner: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/07_01/lowriturnerDM_228x705.jpg Sad, isn’t it? S.B. 194
Posted by S.B. on January 20, 2008, 08:53 PM | # http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/07_01/lowrnicolDM0607_228x593.jpg 195
Posted by Count Sudoku on January 20, 2008, 10:33 PM | # “jesus, read Count Sudoku’s entry up top… He actually gives references to help the “misled” after he states that he believes he knows the ‘original teachings’ of ‘THE’ church….. “ Let’s talk about what the Church taught less than 100 years ago. It was against race mixing. http://spiritwaterblood.com/index.php/blog/comments/C17/ Is Interracial Marriage Scriptural? 05 Apr 2007 0 Comments In order for neo-Babelists to make their lies plausible, they scour the Bible for examples of interracial marriage. The examples typically offered are Rahab, Tamar, Asenath, the “Ethiopian” wife of Moses, Ruth, the Shulamite woman, and Naamah. Most of their proofs fall flat, but the Bible certainly does record cases in which the Shemite, Japhethite, and Hamite lines cross. The Bible also records instances of adultery, murder, and theft, but an instance does not justify a principle. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard that Moses married a black woman, therefore interracial marriage is acceptable. Moses was a man, and he sinned, and his sins kept him from entering the Promised Land. We must ask what God requires of us. But first, let us consider the examples presented to us. According to Genesis 6:9, Noah was “perfect” in his generations. This is not a reference to his moral fortitude but to his heredity and ancestry. The Hebrew word toledoth (“generations”) is defined as family history, and the word tamim (“perfect”) means without blemish, just as a sacrificially pure animal is described as being without blemish. Noah was unique at a time when the lines of Seth and Cain were engaged in miscegenation that led to the destruction of the world. The post-Flood chosen line diversified very slowly. Abraham married his half-sister. Abraham’s brother Nahor married his niece, and these were the grandparents of Rebekah. Isaac was specifically forbidden from marrying a Canaanite and was paired instead with Rebekah, his cousin. Abraham commanded his chief slave, “I want you to swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you will not get a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I am living, but will go to my country and my own relatives and get a wife for my son Isaac” (Gen. 24:2-4). This was centuries before the law of Moses was given, and Abraham did not mention a word about theological belief or godly fidelity (his relatives were pagans), but exclusively limited the search to kith and kin. His daughter-in-law would be chosen from no other people. From Isaac and Rebekah came Esau and Jacob. Faithless Esau loved the Canaanite women, but Jacob married his cousins. In Hebrews 12:16, Esau is called a fornicator, and the conventional understanding is that his disobedience lay in wedding himself to unbelievers. But in Romans 9:13, Paul writes that God hated Esau from the womb. The problem was not that an unbeliever married unbelievers but that Esau was a miscegenist. - snip - “Wow! Is there such a thing as an oximoronic statement?… or maybe just moronic. Even the Pope doesnt know what the “original” teachings were. Constantine destroyed 80% of the “original teachings” to create Catholocism… “ See above. “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrGGGGGGGGggg…. I SEE STUPID PEOPLE…..................” Welcome to my World. BTW. since you are so certain that being a mongrel is beneficial, please make sure you only mate with other mongrels or at least other non-whites. 196
Posted by Count Sudoku on January 20, 2008, 10:37 PM | # And as for Rose’s and Potpourri’s pictures of attractive supposedly mixed women, as I have said before in such circumstances, they are attractive because they could pass for white. 197
Posted by Robben Salter on January 25, 2008, 12:39 AM | # Here’s the deal… Sexual selection states that ‘attraction happens on a individual basis’
you can learn more about that through a study of memetics.
I find plumped women, skinny women, hour glass women, all attractive. If we we’re all blonde, blue eyed people, everyone would like identical. 198
Posted by Robben Salter on January 25, 2008, 12:42 AM | # My last post had a lot of typos, my bad. 199
Posted by Guessedworker on January 25, 2008, 03:29 AM | # Robben: If you’re devoted to a single gene pool (you share a cultural meme of racism) you may not be able to clearly see how beautiful a person is outside that cultural meme. you can learn more about that through a study of memetics. 1. Congratulations on the correct, essentialist usage of the word “racism”. I don’t think you meant to escape from the dishonest Jewish-nationalist emphasis that pervades its usage today, but strictly-speaking you just did, until ... 2. You mentioned “cultural meme”. It is, of course, genetics - and specifically group adaptiveness - which drives the appreciation of beauty. There are at least three genetic modus operandii in this:- a) the identification in a prospective mate of group-specific adaptive traits, b) the application of averages for the group’s physical phenotype as a corrective against maladaptive excess in any given feature, c) the identification of certain, usually non-visual features which indicate the prospective mate’s possession of different or enhanced desease immunities, so as to maximise the health of offspring. The cultural superstructiure that is built on top of adaptive preferences is not without meaning. Images impress the suggestible, and we are all suggestible to some degree. But the foundations for the appreciation of beauty in the opposite sex really are genetic, and the J-N version of racism has absolutely no bearing on that. 200
Posted by Svigor on January 26, 2008, 01:10 PM | # If we we’re all blonde, blue eyed people, everyone would like identical. If we were all black-haired, brown-eyed, brown-skinned people, everyone would look the same. Where’s the fun in that? That’s what Ziv is about: a world with two kinds of people; Jews, and black-haired, brown-eyed, brown-skinned everypeople. McWorld. No thanks. Only those who love their own more than the other will survive. The rest will be boring, same, coffee-colored everymen. And no, you blithering idiots, “the widest gene pool possible” isn’t ipso facto good. Read the post and the comments you halfwits. 201
Posted by Svigor on January 26, 2008, 01:14 PM | # Tell me, oh MTV philosophers, does even one of you know what speciation is? If every organism went by your Redstone-inspired fantasy of global panmixia, speciation would grind to a halt. And yes, white women are far more attractive than non-white women, any particular photos notwithstanding. 202
Posted by anyl on January 26, 2008, 11:32 PM | # I think the indo-european woman that you show, definatly look better with semetic mixed race qaulites, for example the white woman you show, MINUS THE BIG (FAKE?) TITS THAT YOU ADDED, definatly have to much Indian traces to there faces (minus blonde and blue eyes) whilst if you look at southern european woman who have more Semetic qualities, are much more beautiful than the northern european facial structure not to mention that northern europeans are more prone to cancer than anyother race… i think when humans coined the term shallow, it must have been for a reason… 203
Posted by Lurker on January 27, 2008, 01:14 AM | # Anyl - Northern Europeans are more prone to cancer than any other race. Really? What all types, or do we just have higher mortality rates, what exactly? You are obviously knowledgeable on the subject. Guess that doesnt cancel out the fact that we are also more prone to invent the internet you just used, or the computer you need to access it, or the photography you commented on. Or the phone/cable system you connected up with, or harness the electricity needed to power it all. In fact not just prone to but the only people to do so. 204
Posted by Fr. John on January 27, 2008, 11:10 AM | # I think the fact that there exist still in this world, those of us self-aware Caucasian/Christians who detest the ugliness [and utter non-privileged Divine position] of those not being White/Christian, is what rankles the Jews and the Utopians out there. As another has said, It’s the ‘race queers’ and sex queers’ that are envious, not OUR supposed ‘racism’ or ‘DWEM’ selbsthass. http://www.spiritwaterblood.com
But then, they crucified Christ, too….and look where it got them. 206
Posted by landon on February 01, 2008, 12:49 AM | # “Let’s talk about what the Church taught less than 100 years ago. It was against race mixing. ” -Sudoku -wow, you actually used the bible as a legit reference to the validity or in-validity of interacial breeding… not much use for science or current history where you come from is there. I cant tell if you need psychological help or a gas chamber… Do the world a favor and get fixed. Your children will just end up frusterated and insecure due to there limited intellect… just like you obviously are. 207
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 01, 2008, 02:03 AM | #
An immigration moratorium plus a workable repatriation scheme will do nicely, thank you. (You’ll find people on our side aren’t hard to please ...) Oh and I almost forgot — ironclad guarantees henceforth of freedom of association and freedom of speech. Give us those and there’s nothing more in the whole universe we could want. The problem, of course, is that precisely those are what constitute the battleground — the other side forbids us to have them, perceiving with one-hundred-percent accuracy that the day we get them is the day the clock of its final demise starts ticking ... 208
Posted by Lurker (Mk1) on February 01, 2008, 01:40 PM | # Landon - “Your children will just end up frusterated and insecure due to there limited intellect” I know we all make mistakes typing but in the context of your post…well, what can I say? Interesting that you imply intellect might be inherited, you might want to think about where that line of thinking could lead. 209
Posted by Fr. John on February 01, 2008, 05:45 PM | # Sudoku- Constantine did not ‘create’ Catholicism. I believe YOU, possibly, one of the ‘stupid people’ you said you see…been looking in the mirror? The Catholic Faith was ‘created’ at Calvary, confirmed on Easter Sunday, codified by Pentecost, and given historical credence via the Apostolic documents known as the New Testament. You state that even the Pope doesn’t know the ‘original’ teachings. Following that train of thought, instead of dismissing their position, doesn’t your statement rather corroborate the Thesis of the Reformation, rather than render the statements from http://www.swb.com irrelevant? OF COURSE WE KNOW THE TEACHINGS. It’s in the Holy Scriptures. The West has had them as foundational documents over and over again, from Constantine’s declaring Christianity to be an ‘official’ faith of Rome, to Justinian’s Institutes, to Magna Carta, to the fact (clearly articulated in a University Study over twenty years ago) that “... the 1986 study at the University of Houston, [found] at least sixty-four percent of our American Constitution is derived either from the book of Deuteronomy or from commentaries on the book of Deuteronomy. The ‘natural born’ clause was contiguous with the traditional canon and common laws; moreover, it is a mirror reflection of the biblical Law back of them.” http://hearth—stone.blogspot.com/2008/01/rex-according-to-lex.html What is religion doing on a forum such as this? RECLAIMING HER RIGHTFUL PLACE, you temperocentric moron! The modern thing known as a ‘nation-state’ is an organic outgrowth of the Clan and Tribe imagery and praxis of Biblical Israel. It’s only the irreligious multiculturalists who deny that vision any verity. Are you one of them? Then why be surprised we don’t disagree? So, please don’t pretend to be ‘frusterated’ as you said. Which, coincidentally, is NOT the Roman Church. On that, perhaps, you and I might agree…. but for totally different reasons. 210
Posted by Landon on February 01, 2008, 11:18 PM | # “Interesting that you imply intellect might be inherited, you might want to think about where that line of thinking could lead” -Lurker yeah, typo’s… I wasnt taking the comment too seriously so I was being a Lazy writer here. So in reiteration… As to the comment; I did not mean to imply that intellect is inherited… It is learned obviously. But a persons ability to process information and is developed mostly in their early childhood… While learning to apply information is developed later (mom was a child therapist) THUS, If the person I was addressing were to raise children then statistacally they (the children) will almost always learn to process information very similar to those that raised them (I assumed this to be obvious before)...whice MEANS the children would learn to assume that their (the childs) ideas were more correct than others simply because it was their own idea and the ideas of others were not worth listening to and worse, that the bible is the best source of historic fact and reference for current events… Like the person addressed. I believe in culteral diversity but I am also an advocate for people having to earn a multy layered breeding license (one that tested emotional stability and development along with intellect) to breed… having the more educated (and emotionally aware) producing more children would be very beneficial but highly unlikely. 211
Posted by Landon on February 01, 2008, 11:34 PM | # “The Catholic Faith was ‘created’ at Calvary, confirmed on Easter Sunday, codified by Pentecost, and given historical credence via the Apostolic documents known as the New Testament” -sudoku The ‘Holy Scriptures’ are for the weak minded who have trouble copeing with everyday hardships and want an excuse to keep on working jobs they hate for an authority that taxes them (emotionally as well as financially). Im simply stateing this without any interest in discussing it further. You all keep on fighting over symantics. I’ll continue my life of hedonistic self indulgance with mongrels as well as pure bread blonde haired blue eyed girls that seem to really like the way I look for some reason or other…. 212
Posted by Landon on February 01, 2008, 11:39 PM | # Oops.. Sorry Fr. John… a bit of confusion on my part in that last message. I do believe however that Constantine did first commission the Catholic Religion. Obviously other people fully instigated it… So its sorta symantical… Sudoku is just out of touch (kinda feel bad for him/her) I agree with your stance on everything else though 213
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 02, 2008, 12:03 AM | # I guess the site’s attracting Down’s patients now. 214
Posted by Landon on February 02, 2008, 12:13 AM | # oops again… sorry… Fr. John, I still know for a fact that the Vatican Library has copies from other unmentioned ‘apostles’ That taught Christian beliefs before the commissioning of the Catholic church. So I guess I could have been more specific in saying “not even the Pope knows ALL of the original teachings.” Basic understanding of Roman tactics on social order and human behavior would suggest a high likelyhood that the current ‘scriptures’ are anything but original… but it is a free world so believe what you will. In all Seriousness, Science without religion is meaningless and religion without reason is just as meaningless and ultimately directionless. Its ignorant to think otherwise. The validaty of Catholic beliefs are dodgey not because of the integrity of its beliefs but because of its actions. The Catholic church has been like an abusive parent thats been telling its children to ‘watch out for monsters’ so that their children never realize that they would be happier without them. The ‘children’ would also be a bit wealthier as well… Holy Scriptures my @$$... I do believe in the reality of Machiavelli and the necessity for its application so Catholicism has my full respect in that regard. People want to be manipulated and the Catholic church is by far the best at it. good job 215
Posted by Landon on February 02, 2008, 12:20 AM | # ‘I guess the site’s attracting Down’s patients now.’ Posted by Fred Scrooby on Saturday How remarkably insightfull… I took a peek through most of your replies and you have absolutely nothin intellectually pertinent to say in your rebuttals… Thats astounding…. Really, how DO you do it Freddy oh pal. The consistantcy is uncanny 216
Posted by Lurker on February 02, 2008, 12:53 AM | # Landon, you are priceless old chap! Fred is clear in what he says, whereas your ramblings leave me quite confused. 217
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 02, 2008, 01:02 AM | # He’s also in serious need of a spell checker. 218
Posted by Landon on February 02, 2008, 02:14 AM | # Fred is clear to you because you all have grown up with the same racist belief system… I have no intention of trying to be clear to fred, sudoku or lurker… Logic is a reasoning tool and non of you have the ability to reason logically or objectively, Otherwise it would have been quite clear that I was making a proof by contradiction… Fred is an exception in that he is obviously a scholar and very up to date on his religious history and facts. Much respect to him for that. I would hope so considering his occupation. However, the fact remains that the current scriptures are not complete or at all original. Revisions and occurances of editing and deletion have been well documented if you’de care to look (I’m assuming not). THUS, its not possible to claim the ‘Holy Scriptures’ as original… A simple fact that negates many of the teachings of the church. Im not sure where all the other stuff Fred goes on comes from. More signs of unobjective thinking… ...But in reply to his argument anyway; the whole arugment by Fred about our constitution being based on the church is moot. America is a very new country without the history needed to judge interacial breeding or religious solidarity adiquately. Our constitution has NOTHING to do with the validaty of any religion. In fact, every religion shares a common structure to ALL social orders instigated by any society in history dating back to Alexander the great. Not to mention that our colonial ancestors were protestant not catholic (I dont see much difference but the church does). On top of that, many of our fore fathers that created the constitution were masons and did not believe in the popagation of one religion over another. Its obvious that Fr. Fred is used to lecturing the uneducated and unaware… Get em while they’re young aye? In all due respect. Fr. Fred based his argument with elegance and with a novel integrity which i did not. He is a scholar and should be commended as such. Religion, philosophy and history is polluted by many intelligent scholars that had a biased, subjective and unwavering one sided view; Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Caligula, Nero, etc… Sudoku and Lurker? your comments are as vague and uninsightful as ever 219
Posted by Guessedworker on February 02, 2008, 07:11 AM | # Landon: “I did not mean to imply that intellect is inherited… It is learned obviously.” Evidence? (That, of course, would be a first). “the whole arugment by Fred about our constitution being based on the church is moot.” It goes a lot wider than the Constitution. The modern notions of equality and justice are secular distillations of Jewish and Christian principles. “In all Seriousness, Science without religion is meaningless and religion without reason is just as meaningless and ultimately directionless.” No, science is based on falsifiability, not faith. Being falsifiable in its claims, liberalism IS faith, however. What race are you, Landon? If European, why do you not support the genetic survival of Europeans, with all that implies? 220
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 02, 2008, 07:19 AM | # Landon, the pen name of the correspondent claiming to be a priest is Fr. John. (Dunno why I told him that ... probably should’ve left him in his confusion.) 221
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 02, 2008, 02:50 PM | # First off, I didn’t grow up with any “racist” beliefs. I was a typical aracial white lemming until my mid 30s which was when I started working with large numbers of “minorities” and began to expericence the “joys of diversity” first hand. Contrary to the beliefs of clueless liberals, it isn’t separation that leads to “racism” but forced integration. Second I am not and have never claimed to be an expert on religion. Fortunately Fr. John shares my views and is much more knowledgable about the subject. And Third, the World isn’t going to “grow”, it is going to turn more and more into shit and the reason why will become more and more apparent to more and more white people. 222
Posted by Landon on February 02, 2008, 06:02 PM | # Wow, non of you addressed the argument I was trying to make. Good job. To Guessedworker - the evidence is in just about every psychological study written on child development… go read one or two. Human intellect is created through communication. Its practically a physical law of human development. If you dont know it then too bad for you. It branches off from there but it begins with the environment a child is raised in and how that child is communicated with. this blog is not important enough to find references for the inept and/or lazy and post them. If you wanna know for yourself go read a book on child devolopment… i.e. Goleman, Liben, whoever… there are countless authors. To Fred Scrooby - thank you for pointing out an embarrassing mistake. I was actually creating a reply to one of your comments before I read Fr. John’s and decided to comment on his and got the two names mixed. That sounds totally rediculous and simple but its the truth anyway. To Sudoku - you have admitted your own ignorance on the subject and have my respect for that but ultimately you are a frusterated and angry person that has a limited ability to process information objectively… Which was my only point made to you in previous postings so I’ll leave you to yourself. As to my Heritage, I am hawaiian, chinese and scottish (half scottish) with my scottish side coming from brazil. I tested about 160 on an IQ test (at 23 y.o.) and have three tech degrees and a history minor. My mother is VERY white and much of my family is from europe. Make whatever assumptions you wish with that info. BTW, I cant STAND lower class ‘minorities’ (ironic since caucasion is the minority race world wide). The african american culter is fucking shit and should be dealt with harshly… as well as the islamic an much of the muslim cultures… BUT THE DISCUSSION WAS ON ‘GENETIC’ DEVELOPMENT NOT ‘SOCIAL’ DEVELOPMENT. The increase in crime and lowering of behavioral standards is a SOCIAL disorder not a genetic one. Most of the mixed race fatherless mongrels that i cant stand that cant function in society because of their UPBRINGING are genetically superior in a physical sense and typically score higher on a devopmental test that rates IQ AND EQ simply because the have to relate to more than one type of racial class…. It was fun debating moot points with the emotionally underdeveloped but Im goin to go back to traveling to different countries and interacting with different cultures when im not making a very solid productive living at a job that I love (while making sweet love some of the prettiest white women you could imagine… seriously, Im from LA and you wouldnt believe the caliber of females that run around here but its nothing compared to Australia or Iceland Tootles Gents.. LoL 223
Posted by Landon on February 02, 2008, 07:34 PM | # Dear *smirk*... Scrooby - I hope youre a very young person (early teens). Because your replies are so asenine and juvenile that I would have to start feeling sorry for you if you were any older… And i REALLY dont wanna start feeling sorry for you. 224
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 02, 2008, 09:42 PM | # Obviously spelling isn’t included as part of IQ tests otherwise you would be in double digits instead of 160. Anyway, believe what you want. If you want to live in some diversity rainbow fantasy go for it. Millions of darkies are counting on you to provide them the good life. And if you believe like a good liberal that the environment is to blame for the failings of minorities feel free to spend all your money giving them a better one. Just have the common courtesy to allow us unfortunate troglodytes to separate politically and physcially to wallow in our own misery. 225
Posted by onlooker on February 02, 2008, 09:50 PM | # 160 IQ minus common sense = an irritating asshole. 226
Posted by Lurker on February 02, 2008, 10:38 PM | # Landon - I didnt grow up with the same racist belief system. Im not even sure what a ‘racist’ is anymore. Probably only what a liberal/leftie says it is. I dont bear any ill will to other races, I just what mine to survive and not have to operate under a double standard. Like the good Count I grew up as a nice little liberal until a few years ago until certain realities began to intrude and I began to notice the manifest contradictions in the liberal world view. People commenting here grew up all over the world, the only common ideaology we have all been exposed to is liberalism. 227
Posted by Al Ross on February 02, 2008, 11:23 PM | # Landon’s being a pitiable product of miscegenation might elicit some sympathy were it not for his puerile belief in racial egalitarianism, itself the inevitable outcome of a jarring clash of heredities. 228
Posted by Landon on February 03, 2008, 05:41 PM | # Im a Liberal now? Thats news to me… Wow, your brain is really malnourished…. :-( so sad… Try eating bananas. The Potassium helps with brian development and function. Again… non of you have addressed the issue of the blog or even came close to addressing the points I made in my last post… namely the genetic affects of race mixing and the CONFUSION you all seem to have regarding social stimulus vs genetic stimulus on social behavior… The best you came up with was an attack on my spelling (Sudoku), personal isolated experiances to a select group of ‘minorities’ that contain about .001 percent of the population (Lurker), and a tirade of insults that have absolutely no basis in fact and is simply the opinion of one person (on looker, Al Ross). As per IQ (Sudoku) your IQ is a measure of a brains performance on every level of the thinking process. Spelling is included on the formal tests… I did not do to well on the spelling but still managed to score what I did… Lucky for me spelling is barely classified in most IQ tests because its such a poor measurement of a persons thinking process. Basically, spelling is regurgitation not thinking. Much like the biblical facts you so seldomly used to inadequately prove past points (Sudoku) At least you have the internet to make you feel like your opinion matters to anyone else… Hopefully you will vent enough frustration here so that you minimize any road rage on the street or attitude to minorities that are taking your jobs because they work hard and you just complain about how hard you have it and how the world sucks. LoL Try using a reasoned LOGICAL argument to insult me… Not playground insults you learned in junior high. PLEASE!!!!!!!! I’m on here for mental sparring not mental babysitting. 229
Posted by Landon on February 03, 2008, 05:55 PM | # I vote republican BTW… you guys have absolutely no control over the subjective rhetoric that you dribble out. You hear an objection and your brain and mouth start firing off “DANGER.. LIBERAL… DANGER… LIBERAL” Get a grip would you… or maybe a formal education. I dont care if you disagree but really… try and stick to a point. Better yet, try and think of a point before you debate one. Eat Bananas… Seriously. Potassium is good for your brain and bananas have potassium. 230
Posted by Landon on February 03, 2008, 06:01 PM | # Sorry, that was unfair to assume you have no education… I meant to say ‘get a formal DEGREE or if you do have one then start using it’. A basic logic and advanced reasoning class would really do wonders for you. Even if you still decided to keep the same view point on racial mixing then at least you’d stop making assumptions and develop a point better… 231
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 03, 2008, 06:06 PM | # Hey I get it now, Landon’s a spoof! He’s skillfully imitating some kind of severely mentally-retarded ‘gloid-‘groid-‘zoid mix with the intention of actually proving extreme racialism’s rightness by furnishing everyone with living proof of exactly that which it warns against. Pretty brilliant! 232
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 03, 2008, 07:29 PM | # If you do some research you’ll find that the offspring of black/white parents have lower average IQ scores than the offspring of white/white parents. Now you can come up with all the environmental excuses you want but the simplest and most likely explanation is genetics. Especially since blacks have much lower average IQs and IIRC black/white offspring have an average IQ approximately halfway between the white and black average (which I’m sure is just a coincidence). As for being liberal, at this forum we are mainly concerned with racial matters and your views on these issues are those of a flaming liberal like Hillary Clinton or John McCain. And as for my experiences with .001 of the World population, it’s funny but my experiences are shared by other white people in a whole bunch of different countries. I guess that’s a coincidence as well. As for your IQ, anyone can claim anything and you’ll be judged on what you write and how well you write it and you write like a fucking retard on both scales. I hope your IQ really is 160 because then I won’t feel so bad in the likely event I would score lower. Seriously, a lot of intellectual heavy hitters post on this site and they don’t want to waste their time dealing with your nonsense. Go sign up at “The Phora”. There’s lots of nasty racists there who will be more than happy to mentally spar with you. 233
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 06:45 AM | # You just disputed my point by calling me names and telling me that IN YOUR OPINION your “experiences are shared by other white people in a whole bunch of different countries.” Wow, you really hit your point home. I didnt know that claiming “other people think the same” was such a brilliant resource that can be used to support a written argument. I’ve read the studies of a number of organizations and colleges about the average IQ of mixed race children vs pure bred children. I did a paper on the subject for a history class. nearly all of the studies you are talking about that found a lower average IQ for half black/half white children were shown to be non applicable due to improper case selection. Basically, they were missing one or more focuses on geographical, environmental, social and/or educational similarities. The over all difference in IQ between races was negligable and the cases where there was a significant difference could always be traced back to a communicatory influence at a young age or a case of survival (raising ones brothers and sisters or struggling to find food and etc.) Sudoku - I’ve gone over my postings and except for the few typos I miss from time to time and my casual ‘text like’ style I cant find any grammatical or contextual problems with my writing. I even had a friend of mine check out the blog and she says the same thing (she’s was a literature major) and since It seemed to work for my college professors (I doubt youre more critical than they are) I’m really wondering what it is youre hiding by trying to attack my ‘retarded writing’ instead of creating a counter point to my arguments…. maybe a lack of confidence in your ability to reason? hmmmm? Fred Scrooby - More of the same simpleness… ‘yawn’ ...Still waiting for a structured and pointed argument that has an inkling of objectivity guys. Come on, I know you have it in you… 234
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 06:56 AM | # Oh yeah… and one studyon child development I read (one of moms) found that a mixed race child having to learn to relate to two different racial peer groups created dendrite connections that later on allow for multitasking skills and faster and more creative information processing… This same thing could be mimicked in pure bred children as well but was less likely due to the less likelihood of a pure bred child not gravitating to his/her own group. Its still a fact that genetic mixing whether it be between dark and fair skinned or fair and fair skinned of different origin promotes a deeper gene pool and thus a PHYSICALLY healthier and more aesthetically symetrical child (‘more’ meaning in relation to the parents)... read *smirk* for more info. 235
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 07:09 AM | # Two famous bad spellers…. Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin. I’m not too worried about my lazy spelling… 236
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 07:55 AM | # Sudoku - for arguments sake lets analyze your extremely undeveloped point… you said that many other people from many other countries feel the same. Well, my .001 percent population figure was based on an americans exposure to minorities. other countries have MUCH less exposure due to less populations. so if we take 100 of your supposed counties and even allow for a .001 exposure to minorities in smaller countries and multiply this by another 50 to account for multiple locations in each country (basically fifty people with the same view in each country) then we would have 5% of the population that you have information on…. Thats 5% IF you know and talked to 50 people in 100 countries…. DOUBTFULL. Its more like .05% of the population… - Gotta love math aye? 237
Posted by onlooker on February 04, 2008, 08:53 AM | # IQ is inherited. Nurturing plays a significant role in the development of a child’s natural ability, but the natural ability is determined by the genes the child inherited. It’s really that simple! 238
Posted by Guessedworker on February 04, 2008, 09:26 AM | # Landon, I am, I suppose it’s fair to say, an intellectual of humble pedigree. I belong to the circle of thinking people here who, in IQ terms, reach (well beyond me, let it be said) into the domain populated, to use Count Sudoku’s terminology, with “heavy-hitters”. So, along with many regular MR readers, I am quite familiar with the expert, even inspirational, application of logic. Let’s try some. Fact One: You vote Republican. Fact Two: You make a claim to high intelligence. Fact Three: You evidently accept without question the standard American interpretation of “liberal” as “radical-leftist”. In other words, you are content with the ordinary. You make no attempt to intellectualise the groundings, scope and dynamic of liberalism and therefore, we must presume, find in the Republican Party, which you support, no sign of NEO-liberalism. In consequence, one may conclude that you have simply not developed an understanding or critique of the Enlightenment project and your Party’s role within it. Much less have you developed a critique of our critique of the fundamentalist neoliberal conception of markets or of the hubristic neglect of the human need for kind. In other words, you do not think. Which, to be sure, is unusual in one of such intellectual gifts. If you really were a high intellect, you would perforce analyse that which is before you. Some eruption into your political discourse, even it is refined and reduced for our convenience to sublime simplicities, would be inevitable. There is none. So what are we to suppose but that you are a transparent fraud endeavouring to score cheap points against Ole Whitey to feed a gnawing sense of inferiority? I won’t waste any more of my time on you. The others here may do so if they wish, but I doubt if they will think it worthwhile. 239
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 04, 2008, 12:53 PM | # I would say that “other white people who have been around blacks share my opinions” is much better than “I’m the only white person that has had these experiences so just take my word for it and ignore what everyone else says.” As for those studies for children, the big IQ differences don’t happen until people are older as blacks mature faster but hit the wall sooner than whites. As for your writing style, it seems to have improved greatly with your last post so I’m glad the abuse I have directed towards you seems to have paid off with better writing on your part. Your previous posts gave me the impression that you were an immature teenager. As for mixed raced children being “healthier” Study: students of mixed race suffer more health problems - Noteworthy News A new study that involved surveying 90,000 adolescent U.S. students showed that those who considered themselves to be of mixed race were more likely than others to suffer from depression, substance abuse, sleep problems, and various aches and pains. Conducted by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the National Institutes of Health, the investigation found that adolescents of mixed race were more likely to have other health problems as well. “It did not matter what races the students identified with, the risks were higher for all of them if they did not identify with a single race,” says Dr. J. Richard Udry, principal author of a paper on the work appearing in the November issue of the American Journal of Public Health. “It did not matter what races the students identified with, the risks were higher for all of them if they did not identify with a single race,” says Dr. J. Richard Udry, principal author of a paper on the work appearing in the November issue of the American Journal of Public Health. “Most of the risk items we assessed may be related to stress, and so we believe being of mixed race is a source of stress,” Udry says. “From this work, we cannot identify further the sources of that stress. More research is needed to identify those sources and possibly suggest programs that might help biracial adolescents.” The new findings derive from data compiled as part of the UNC-based National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, the largest and most comprehensive survey of teen-agers ever conducted in the United States. 240
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 10:25 PM | # Guessedworker, Logic is a mathematical process and when applied to writing is anything but inspirational. Consequentially, Logical arguments are straight forward and very ‘dry’ with many repetions of specific points… example: x = a, a = s.. is s = x? = Yes (see how x, a and s are repeated?)... your attempt at logic is the same subjective bs that many supposed scholars try and pawn of as logic when really its everything but…. you said “I am quite familiar with the expert, even inspirational, application of logic.” well… Fact three in your post has no logical relation to my postings or the previous to fact. If you saw a logical relation you didnt point it out so your ‘logical’ statement is false and/or unusable. Then there’s your coclusion after that “you are content with the ordinary”, you just blurt this out with out any logical modification or reference to the previous facts… again, this makes your statement false or just plain unusable (logically speaking)... the thing about logic is when a specific statement is said to be true then when you find a false modulation within that statement then the entire statement is then false. But youre a fan of true ‘expert’ logic so you already know this of course. As per my voting republican… I’m an american and a constitutionalist. I just see the most benefit on the republican side currently. Extreme Left wing liberals are just as dense as you all. Your Extreme, one sided and absolutist views are simply an emotional crutch to help with whatever insecurities you carry that frustrate you and make you feel powerless as an individual, while those “Lefties” (Whom frustrate me as well) are a focus for venting that frustration. Much like the failing german economy during WWII and Hitlers focus on Jews. Hmm, maybe you should start looking inward to find whats bothering you instead aye? Just a thought… Sudoku, Yes, the first statement is better than the second (sorta) but ultamately not enough to carry your absolutist statements… Now, as per the study… I stated that discrepencies on health and IQ are a social (environmental) issue and not a genetic one (because thats the object of this blogs point… Remember?). Your study just proved my point completely and better than I would have. My point still stands about the lack of case specification however. Case in point… find the studies done on how someone with a shallower gene pool will react to the same social stress that a mixed race person of the same age and sex. You will find that a mixed race person will deal with the imposed stress longer and with less health defects… however, even if there was not a study done (which there has been) then the fact that your posted study did not take into account that angle negates any direct relation and/or application said study has on your point of view. As per my writing. You do realize that your quips and jabs at me are a sign of your frustration and actually help boost confidence rather than not dont you? Good effort guys… Im proud of you 241
Posted by Landon on February 04, 2008, 10:39 PM | # oops… add “does” after “...that a mixed race person of the same age and sex.” Sudoku - I just had to point this out since it was one of my remarks to you earlier and you did the same thing again. Your study was carried after you say “As for mixed raced children being “healthier”.” I believe this is intended as your opening statement and point. You didnt end this with a conclusion and this opening statement is vague and open ended… Again, try and develop a point to make a point. If you had then you would have probably caught that your study actually helped make my point rather than disprove it… 242
Posted by Count Sudoku on February 05, 2008, 12:27 AM | # I wasn’t aware anyone here was an absolutist or didn’t concede that environment does play a role in human development. As for Hitler, I doubt anyone here agrees with him 100% but most of us do agree he was right about the Jews. That it just happened to be a Jew that wrote the book that was the basis of this thread is by no means a coincidence and is part of the typical Jewish behavior that has led to them being expelled from dozens of countries over the years. 243
Posted by Al Ross on February 05, 2008, 01:34 AM | # When reading Landon’s dreary drivel, we must bear in mind that his racially diverse progenitors lacked the genetic knowledge to foresee the baneful consequences of their acts. 244
Posted by rachel on February 06, 2008, 03:36 AM | # Ziv’s claims are incedibly ridiculous. He did indeed “cherry-pick” a few attractive celebrities who have spent lots of money and countless hours improving their physique and appearance, and who also happen to be of mixed ancestry. There is no need to promote interracial breeding, but exclusive breeding is not really “better” than interracial breeding. Genes, traits, physiques- do they really need to be a big concern for procreators? We are human, not canine. Survival of the fittest does not really apply to a human civilisation. Woody Allen is not the fittest of any kind of breed, and I’m sure he has plenty of provisions for the next few winters. I’m a little surprised this book’s theories deserve so much debate. 245
Posted by Guessedworker on February 06, 2008, 05:48 AM | # Rachel, It’s the duplicity in them that deserves debate. You write: “Genes, traits, physiques- do they really need to be a big concern for procreators?” They are a big concern for the political, business and cultural elites and leftist academics who are rushing the European peoples into panmixia. Our big concern is that this is unnatural, unwanted, immoral, oppressive and, by any measure, genocidal. Does that help? 246
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 06, 2008, 10:47 AM | #
The Jews see a need to promote it. A world in which all Euros are become racially mixed (and Jews remain the same) is sort of a dream world for the Jews. The Jews are passionately in love with that idea and seek to promote it at every opportunity. Anyone with any doubts as to how ideal that would be is called a “fascist” by Jews. That’s almost the definition of the word “fascist,” in fact: having doubts about how ideal that would be. The Jews aren’t explaining why they’re in love with the idea of forcing all Euro-race peoples to undergo racial mongrelization. Others have to fill in the blanks as best they can, using deductive and speculative reasoning. No Jew has stepped forward and said, “Here’s why Jews want all Euros racially mongrelized”: they prefer to keep everyone guessing.
They’re not “theories” so much as a depiction of sort of a Jewish dream world. It’s the putting on paper of one of the central Jewish fantasies: all Euros to be racially mongrelized. Looking back over the past two hundred years you’ve seen this fantasy promoted time and again by Jews, the exact same Jews who want the diametrical opposite for their own tribe, namely, no mixing. This is one reason it’s suicidal insanity for Euros anywhere to allow Jews to acquire power over their countries: Jews will sooner or later use that power to force the destruction of the Euros, and that includes their destruction in the most final way possible, their racial destruction. Jews hate Euros. Letting them have power over Euros is like letting the Taliban have power over Israel: the Taliban will seek to destroy Israel and the Jews will seek to destroy Euros. What Alon Ziv is doing in bringing out this book is completely understandable in the above terms. 247
Posted by Svigor on February 06, 2008, 02:54 PM | # Landon, a 160 on an Internet/back-of-cereal-box IQ test translates into a 90 or so on a real IQ test. If you don’t know that science is supposed to be falsifiable, and you have any sort of degree, you should give it back and demand a refund. As to my Heritage, I am hawaiian, chinese and scottish (half scottish) with my scottish side coming from brazil. My condolences. 248
Posted by Svigor on February 06, 2008, 03:00 PM | # As for the rest of that bilge, who in God’s name has time to refute it all? I don’t go sifting through piles of shit to sort and catalog the types of turds, either. E.g., my racialist upbringing. Ha! My dad was racially aware, and brought me up racially aware, like millions of other southern white males, but if he were alive today my politics would blow his doors off. E.g., the nurture-IQ crapola. Twins studies Landon, twins studies. Read ‘em and weep. (oh, LOVED the reference to “EQ” btw, good for a laff) 249
Posted by Svigor on February 06, 2008, 03:16 PM | # Rachel, there are lots of healthy, rational arguments against race-mixing. First and foremost is Ethnic Genetic Interests (EGI), which you can investigate to your heart’s content here at MR via the search function. Then there’s the fact that we just don’t know how much of European success is owed to genes; not the best environment in which to throw caution to the wind and start shooting craps, is it? Then there’s the simple conservation argument, which says even if race-mixing is okay, there should be a substantial living space set aside for “pure” groups, not an enforcement of race-mixing and only race-mixing as we have today (but, your comparison between man and animal in your post doesn’t inculcate much hope that you’ll get this point, since you seem to be implying that man is beneath the beasts in importance). 250
Posted by Svigor on February 06, 2008, 03:18 PM | # Landon, are you the same troll from Sailer’s blog, and now Amren? If so you’re in the right place, and will receive the no-holds-barred ass whipping you need so badly (rhetorically speaking of course). 251
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 03:21 PM | # Here you all go… an objective study that is unbiased and takes into account cultural AND genetic factors… Asians have the highest IQ then whites then mixed then black… I’ll post an article on attractiveness after this
A 60-page review of the scientific evidence, some based on state-of-the-art magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of brain size, has concluded that race differences in average IQ are largely genetic. The paper, “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability,” by J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario and Arthur R. Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley, appeared with a positive commentary by Linda Gottfredson of the University of Delaware, three critical ones (by Robert Sternberg of Yale University, Richard Nisbett of the University of Michigan, and Lisa Suzuki & Joshua Aronson of New York University), and the authors’ reply. “Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause,” write the authors. The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001. “Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables,” said Rushton. “Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That’s why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence.” The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa. Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test. The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities. Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races. Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks. Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89. Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race “Colored” population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100. IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages—Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100. Race Differences in Other “Life-History” Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians. Race Differences and the Out-of-Africa theory of Human Origins. East Asian-White-Black differences fit the theory that modern humans arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and expanded northward. During prolonged winters there was evolutionary selection for higher IQ created by problems of raising children, gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, and making clothes. Do Culture-Only Theories Explain the Data? Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or “Head Start” programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict. In their article, Rushton and Jensen also address some of the policy issues that stem from their conclusions. Their main recommendation is that people be treated as individuals, not as members of groups. They emphasized that their paper pertains only to average differences. They also called for the need to accurately inform the public about the true nature of individual and group differences, genetics and evolutionary biology. Rushton and Jensen are well-known for research on racial differences in intelligence. Jensen hypothesized a genetic basis for Black-White IQ differences in his 1969 Harvard Educational Review article. His later books Bias in Mental Tests (1980) and The g Factor (1998), as well as Rushton’s (1995) Race, Evolution, and Behavior, show that tests are not biased against English speaking minorities and that Black-White-East Asian differences in brain size and IQ belong in an evolutionary framework. http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/ ->(this is the full article, i dare anyone to read it 252
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 03:27 PM | # oh, the article above is at http://www.news-medical.net/?id=9530 This (below) is an article about a Psychological study done on a racial attractivenes…. the ‘Hapas” took it down.. Hapa is half/quarter asian with white… I’m hapa so i guess this concludes my part in this discussion and blog. Actor Keanu Reeves and supermodel Devon Aoki have more in common than fame, fortune and good looks—both are also part Asian. Known in popular culture by the Hawaiian term hapa (meaning “half”), people with mixed Asian and European origins have become synonymous with exotic glamour. In Hong Kong and Singapore, half-Asian models now crowd runways once dominated by leggy blondes. In the elite world of Asian fashion, half-Asian is the new white. The trend may seem little more than an effect of 21st century globalization. As more individuals of mixed descent achieve fame (think Norah Jones and Tiger Woods), it seems natural that society would embrace the mixed look. Media exposure, however, doesn’t fully explain the perception of hapa beauty. Eurasians may possess genetic advantages that lead to greater health and, as a result, enhanced attractiveness. That’s according to a study, the first to find that hapa faces are rated as more beautiful than European or Japanese faces. Researchers say the finding may extend to other racial mixes as well. The experiment by Gillian Rhodes, a psychologist at the University of Western Australia, found that when Caucasian and Japanese volunteers looked at photos of Caucasian, Japanese and Eurasian faces, both groups rated the Eurasian faces as most attractive. These visages were created by first digitally blending a series of faces from each race into “composites” to create average, middle-of-the-road features typical of each race. Past studies show that “average” features are consistently rated as more attractive than exaggerated features—such as an unusually wide forehead or a small chin. The finding that Japanese and white subjects preferred mixed-race faces was surprising because, earlier in the same study, most volunteers rated their own race as more beautiful than others. That is, white people typically prefer whites when choosing an ideal image of beauty; blacks prefer blacks; etc. So why might hapas be considered particularly beautiful? Evolutionary psychologists say it’s because Eurasians and other mixed race individuals appear healthier. Humans, like other animals, look for markers of good genetic health in their quest for a reproductive partner. Take facial symmetry, for example: Studies show that, whether they know it or not, people prefer individuals with evenly spaced eyes and other signs of congruence. In evolutionary terms, these markers are associated with healthy conditions in the womb. Infants exposed prenatally to toxins or pathogens may develop facial irregularities and asymmetry. The human brain may be wired to avoid these overt cues of lackluster health, says R. Elisabeth Cornwell, a psychologist at the University of Colorado. “The signs of beauty are the signs of health,” she says. Rhodes’ findings seem to fit this paradigm: Participants in her study said the Eurasian faces appeared healthier, too. Similarly, evidence suggests that half-Asians’ diverse genetic ancestry would enhance health. According to evolutionary psychologist Randy Thornhill, at the University of New Mexico, “If you hybridize two genetically diverse populations—another way of saying you cross races—then you create more genetic diversity in the offspring.” Genetic diversity, or heterozygosity, is associated with a lower incidence of some diseases. Genetic diseases, such as hemophilia and Tay-Sachs, occur when a person inherits two copies of a defective gene. This is more likely to happen in isolated populations with little genetic diversity.
Which features radiate both health and beauty? One may be the appearance of the skin. In a second experiment, Roberts found that women rated close-up photos of heterozygous males’ skin as healthier than close-ups of homozygous males’ skin, and these judgments correlated with ratings of overall attractiveness. Ostensibly, evidence that Caucasians and Asians prefer mixed race faces counters a major tenet of mating theory: that we are drawn to partners who resemble ourselves, such as those with similar hair and eye color. So does this new research explain the popularity of Brazilians, who frequently have blended racial heritage, as fashion models? That remains to be seen. Says Rhodes: “If a preference for mixed-race faces occurs for many different mixes, we could be more confident that it is tapping into something fundamental about human perceptions of attractiveness.”
253
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 03:30 PM | # Svigor - Try and come up with something intelligent to say would you.. “YAAAAAAAAAAAWN” 254
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 03:36 PM | # In case youre too slow to understand where im coming from Svigor… the use of attacking anothers argument with subjective and emotional insults such as “crapola” and “millions of other southern white males” is NOT a very good way to get a point accross…. Just thought I’d let you know so you would have a decent shot at not making anymore of an ass of yourself when trying to debate… LoL 255
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 03:50 PM | # Sudoku - Read your article.. it states that health problems are related to an inability to relate to any one race… thats ENVIRONMENTAL. not genetic… ok… my last two articles prove everything i could possible say to you all. Any replies that do not reply directly to those articles will be ignored due to an obvious ignorance that permiates this site. I would suggest SOMEONE go find an educated fellow purist so that you all can stop looking like southern hillbillies and get a point accross in an objective manner. PLEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAASSSEE! 256
Posted by Landon on February 20, 2008, 04:07 PM | # Svigor - EQ is “Emotional Quotient” - a relatively new term in psychological studies but a well founded and used one that was originally derived in the process of finding out why certain people with high IQ’s had serious emotional problems… Wow, you really struggle with your inferioritiy complex dont you. What happened? Daddy get fired by a jew and come home to beat you and mom? Pissed off that the jewish kids have all the money and all the white girls wanna go play with him cause he has a mercedes? Get over it already. Go work and get an education and stop complaining about how the worlds going to shit… Whites are the minority and in the next century you hillbilly rejects will be cleaning the pools of the mexicans that work their asses off. Try going to a top ten or even top twenty university or college and maybe you wont feel so overwhelmed by your inability to keep pace with the more intelligent of society. Hell, maybe if you take a psych course you’ll come up with a way to separate your ideas from daddys… 257
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 20, 2008, 07:36 PM | # There is a rebuttal to the Rhodes study linked at the top of the page. However, even we accept the hypothesis that hapas are more attractive, no where is the fitness benefit addressed, especially in light of the recent Icelandic study, reviewed on the front page by JW Holliday entitled Kinship and Fertility.
Sailer dubbed it Darwin’s sweet spot.
Where’s the hybrid vigour? 258
Posted by Fred Scrooby on February 20, 2008, 08:02 PM | # Someone could make a fortune by packaging Landon’s comments and selling them as an emetic — completely corner the emetic market, put ipecac right outta business! 259
Posted by onlooker on February 21, 2008, 09:08 AM | # “ Whites are the minority and in the next century you hillbilly rejects will be cleaning the pools of the mexicans that work their asses off.” LOL! Doesn’t Landon remind you of the character: Kahn Souphanousinphone, from King of the Hill? I can just hear Kahn’s voice scolding Hank in those exact words. 260
Posted by Doc on February 26, 2008, 01:53 AM | # Just to offer an observation…your white beauty up there has bleached hair, over-tanned and sun-damaged skin (not to mention evident stretch marks on her breasts), green contacts, and also, she’s almost certainly had a nose job. I should know—I’m a plastic surgeon. The bridge looks constructed, and not even that well. She’s pretty enough, I admit, and I won’t say anything about her in comparison to the girl on the cover of Ziv’s book, but I can comment this way: For you to compare her to a woman who has obviously NOT had much (if any) work done to enhance her natural beauty seems to me a bit strange, as there is no basis for comparison. Without her makeup, the caucasian girl has deeply flawed and aging skin and dull hair. Most white women do. I should know about that, too—I’m a white woman. This is mostly the result of over-tanning and poor diet, but the dishwater blond/mousy brown hair is just what comes of the “melting pot” culture in the USA. You might even use this to support your point, I guess, since true blond hair is watered down and washed out in very few generations. If you want to put up a picture of a “white” beauty, by all means do so, but please find an example worthy of your point. Most—if not all—women with natural blond hair are also pale-skinned. Most women who can tan do not have blond hair. If they do, it’s usually dyed, to one degree or another. You can see your girl’s roots, so I know I’m not mistaken in this case. Here is an example of a nordic blonde: http://img71.photobucket.com/albums/v215/Itbit/icelandic.jpg Just. an example, but you get the drift. If you want to promote the idea that racial mixing is ugly, at least choose to post an example of a girl who is not racially mixed. The girl in my photo is Icelandic, a country which has, due to its isolated location, and extremely low incidence of racial mixing. I would venture to say we don’t see many women who look like this in America, but she is most certainly “white,” whatever your definition. 261
Posted by Landon on February 26, 2008, 12:14 PM | # Fred Scrooby - Again, your complete lack of ability to come up with an intelligent rebuttle is amazing… It really is. I’ve tried giving you pointers on how to construct an argument in previous comments but your commitment to ignorance is almost inspiring. You should apply with Al Qaeda. They apprieciate that sort of commitment. Desmond - uh….. your study talks about how many children in-bred people have had statistically… not about their health or attractiveness. While your basis of third cousins mating could definately mean that third cousins are more attractive to one another (something I doubt the person who did the study was claiming) It could very well be that most people tend to stay within their communities and third and fourth cousins are far enough apart to breed affectively but still ‘in the family’ so they are exposed to one another more frequently. You comment has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said or what the blog is discussing. Steve Edwards - First, Im not sure where you were going with the whole me thinking the world is goin to shit angle. I was telling OTHERS to stop complaining about the world going to shit because I DONT THINK IT IS. I was being sarcastic… we do that sort of thing on the west side. Onlooker - Really? you watch King of the Hill huh? I cant stand that show…. But I guess you can relate to it so its understandable… LoL. Youre embarrassing yourself and you dont even know it… Now THAT takes talent. LoL. 262
Posted by Landon on February 26, 2008, 12:29 PM | # BTW, You should all listen to Doc… A white woman talking about a subject involving white women. It may just be me but I think she has the upper hand in the ‘experience’ catagory if not the objective one as well. P.S. Someone PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAASE come up with an reply/argument that is constructed and supported. Stop with the emotional banter. I have a beautiful blue eyed dirty blonde haired white girl friend for that. I want to ‘DEBATE’ (look it up). 263
Posted by Landon on February 26, 2008, 12:46 PM | # Steve Edwards (again)- “Complaining” is definately between recognition and action… But where does “thinking” and “self realization” come into it? Hmmmmmmmmm… Ponder, ponder.. How does one ponder when reacting. THEY DONT. 264
Posted by onlooker on February 26, 2008, 02:17 PM | # “you watch King of the Hill huh? I cant stand that show….” Yes I do. I especially like laughing at Kahn. “Youre embarrassing yourself and you dont even know it… Now THAT takes talent. ” And you’re embarrassing yourself by behaving like a cartoon character and YOU don’t even know it. Kahn Souphanousinphone is cast as the stereotypical obnoxious, condescending Asian geek. You, Landon, portray that stereotype to a tee. 265
Posted by Landon on February 26, 2008, 07:25 PM | # Onlooker - LoL, its a good thing you dont have to see me cause it’d just make you more insecure with yourself. But yes, i was a geek and still am a nerd. Thus the three degrees and high level income. But in compassion for your obvious cognative shortcomings I’ll state the obvious in hopes that you will stop making an @$$ of yourself… You are embarrasing yourself because 1)You made a comparison between me and a CARTOON involving red neck hicks that are the BOTTOM of the food chain. This is stating that if I’m the Smarty pants asian then you are a low level hick. 2) No matter how I am coming off to you (hicks), it is still a fact that I am using substatiated and constructed arguments while you make references to a “white trash” cartoon that you did not deny relating too. THUS, it can be ASSUMED that you are white trash. Care to continue…? 266
Posted by Landon on February 26, 2008, 07:29 PM | # oops.. I meant “substantiated” not “sustatiated” 267
Posted by onlooker on February 26, 2008, 08:46 PM | # “LoL, its a good thing you dont have to see me cause it’d just make you more insecure with yourself.” You’re right, Landon, I’d better concede defeat. After finding this rare photo of you, I’m too insecure to continue. P.S. Did you dye your hair blond in order to better your chances of picking up white chicks? http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_02/Tiny2BAR1202_800x1136.jpg
268
Posted by Landon on February 27, 2008, 05:02 AM | # HAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHA…. good try, I’m hawaiian/chinese/scottish…. not indian… you would of known that if you had read my comments. again, your use of base amusement to compensate for lack of intellectual content is extremely overt. I’m not even sure what your pictures are supposed to imply since I already stated that im quarter chinese quarter hawaiian and half scottishe… your picture doesnt even make sense. Youre a total and absolute moron. Thank you for pointing it out for me. LoL….......... 269
Posted by onlooker on February 27, 2008, 08:34 AM | # “I’m hawaiian/chinese/scottish” Well, with such a combination of those genes, that explains why you look like you do in the above picture. But Landon, are you sure you’re telling us the whole truth about your entire genetic makup? I’d swear I see some Pygmy in you. As far as your obnoxious, condescending behavior goes. My theory is your mother accidentally/on purpose dropped you on your head a few too many times when you were an infant; thus, resulting in permanent damage to your orbital frontal cortex. You know, the part of the brain that regulates the planning behavior associated with sensitivity to reward and punishment. That’s the most rational explanation as to why you continue to post on this site and invite contempt and ridicule onto yourself. 270
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 27, 2008, 10:56 AM | # Landon, Ziv’s book is about hybrid vigor, “An organism’s genetic capacity for survival or growth.” You fail to demonstrate hybrid vigor. The issue of beauty is one of tendentious ambiguity at best. However, vigor can be demonstrated scientifically and neither you nor Ziv provide any evidence to support the assertion of human interracial vigor. The Icelandic study demonstrates the adaptiveness of third and fourth cousin marriage. You provide no evidence for a greater adaptiveness for interracial marriage. 271
Posted by ECO on March 07, 2008, 10:20 PM | # What the fuck? Enough of this puritan white shit. Ever heard of the ‘out of Africa theory’ when homo sapiens made it out of africa to either breed with (or kill off) the Neanderthals? That’s right, we all probably came from Africa so quit you holier than though crap. Before you start trying to claim that I’m upset because I’m from an ethnic group other than white, think again. I’m white and ancient English, I have a surname that goes back to before most people had one in England. 272
Posted by Lurker on March 08, 2008, 12:08 AM | # “I’m an ecologist and I know more than anything that there is strength in diversity” What like an ant colony where the entire population are descended from the queen, are all sisters in fact. OK not a good example, no diversity there. Bees, no, termites, no, wasps no, no no, all bad examples! They are all evolutionary failures anyway, probably about to die out due to a lack of diversity anytime now, probably in the next half an hour or so. What about China, a billion people and all of them er…Chinese, guess thats not a good example either. Lets have some solid real-world examples of this working diversity please. “we all probably came from Africa” So? Whats that got to do with anything? “I’m white and ancient English, I have a surname that goes back to before most people had one in England” - so youre either stupid, misinformed or a traitor to your own people, which one then? 273
Posted by Daniele on March 11, 2008, 01:44 PM | # in responese to your nonsense about the broad-nosed what-not who exactly do you think you are disrecting my people like that, you wish you had someone as beautiful as her, i dont care if you have preference i dont what to read your racism, as for can she compete HELL YESS, that white woman is ugly and fake 274
Posted by Lurker on March 11, 2008, 02:34 PM | # Daniele, or is it Danielle, consistency not your strong point is it love? Who are you addressing in your incoherent comment above? As for racism, we let you use our internet dont we? I’m beginning to think thats something that should be addressed one day. 275
Posted by GT on March 11, 2008, 05:23 PM | # Come now, Danielle. Man chin? We can’t tell if the girl on the book cover has breasts, much less if they’re fake. Imagine her with bleached blonde hair framing that horse’ nose and lantern jaw. Not a good fit, imo. Besides, the roots would appear too dark. Still, I see she applied eyebrow liner, lipstick, and make up just like blondie. Clearly the girl on the book cover is prettier than I am, but she doesn’t touch blondie with a ten-foot pole. I think you’re jealous. 276
Posted by Evans on March 11, 2008, 06:19 PM | # Man if you can say with a straight face that your sample of Nordic beauty is more beautiful than say.. Halle Berry or Paula Patton (both of whom are mixed), then I might think there’s a chance you might actually believe what you’re saying. 277
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on March 11, 2008, 07:47 PM | # Someone could make a fortune by packaging Landon’s comments and selling them as an emetic — completely corner the emetic market, put ipecac right outta business! You leave Landon alone! Anyone with shoes like that has problems enough. Seriously though, he’s great. We want for ourselves what everyone else has for themselves, and Landon’s here to screech about how we’re not allowed. A poster child for the racism inherent in opposing self-determination only for whites…what’s not to like about that? Then the gook goes on to babble about “hicks” and such, too stupid to know that he’s playing our game. You can’t buy that kind of endorsement. What the fuck? Do try and make an effort to at least familiarize yourself with who and what you’re opposed to (my guess is I could argue “your” position better than you can) before running off at the mouth; no one here cringes when you screech “racist!” The “bastard” part had more sting. I’m an ecologist and I know more than anything that there is strength in diversity, both in communities of organisms and species populations. Reeeally. That’s interesting. Please do educate us - what is this strength to which you refer? Might as well go ahead and balance whatever you come up with against all the weaknesses (e.g., Putnam) before you respond, because we certainly will. Ceteris paribus, diversity usually isn’t strength, at least not in an ipso facto sense. E.g., a football team composed of a random, diverse sampling of the population probably won’t do too well against a football team composed of jocks. However, we are all one race, the human race, that’s just one species for all you tards who clearly have no idea. Maybe you could take a break from your groundbreaking work in ecology to brush up on your English; words can have multiple definitions, and “race” is one that does. Why play semantic games when it’s obvious to any fool who looks that race-realists mean “population group” when they say race, and not “species”? This is the kind of mindless drek race-realists are forced to deal with in their opponents. I’m surprised more of us aren’t dying of boredom. “There’s only one race, the human race.” Gee, never heard that one before. One species because we can all breed with a human of the opposite sex from anywhere in the world to produce viable offspring. Erm, you seem to be operating under a flawed definition of species and/or race. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
[emphasis added] By that definition, what are commonly referred to in humans as races are probably closer to species, since in the wild Europeans would not have been likely to let Africans into their gene pool, and vice-versa. But, I’m content with race. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology) According to that definition, what race-realists call races manifestly are. More remedial reading (note carefully the criteria): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies Unless of course you start fucking your sister or cousin which is what you all seem to be leaning towards. I expect better from a man of your education. Is this the best you can do? (btw, my tone is sarcastic, but I’ve actually had knuckle-dragging “anti-racists” tell me incest is the upshot of race-consciousness; wtf?) Enough of this puritan white shit. “Puritan white shit”? Where’d you get your education - back of a cereal box? Bazooka bubble gum wrapper? Ever heard of the ‘out of Africa theory’ when homo sapiens made it out of africa to either breed with (or kill off) the Neanderthals? Doesn’t that imply that Europeans interbred with Neanderthals, and Africans did not? But I don’t see your point; all life on Earth evolved from a common, single-celled ancestor. and That’s right, we all probably came from Africa so quit you holier than though crap. Don’t ecologists learn just a bit about evolution and genetics in school? We all evolved from where the lightning struck the soup, too; so what? As for holier than thou, you’re the one here jockeying for moral status…better take a screen cap and go show it to your pencil-necked friends. Before you start trying to claim that I’m upset because I’m from an ethnic group other than white, think again. I’m white and ancient English, I have a surname that goes back to before most people had one in England. Does it really matter? You’d be wrong if you were a two-headed Martian. Man if you can say with a straight face that your sample of Nordic beauty is more beautiful than say.. Halle Berry or Paula Patton (both of whom are mixed), then I might think there’s a chance you might actually believe what you’re saying. I wish I had a share of Berkshire Hathoway for every time I’ve had some twit of a racist throw Halle Berry at me (go to Stormfront.org and run a search for her name). First of all, please find a new example. Halle’s all worn out by the work you lot put her through. Second, she’s had rhinoplasty, breast implants, and has to mow her brow and lip hair regularly (not picking on the girl, just pointing out the obvious - she’s certainly not hard on the eyes, especially after all that work). Third, one example just isn’t persuasive to the numerate. I’ve seen plenty of pig-ugly mixed people. Your one example is as persuasive that mixed people are as attractive as whites, or moreso, as my naming a white more attractive than Berry (a trivial task) would be that whites are as attractive as mixed people, or moreso. What’s really funny about this exceptions-are-rules thing is that “anti-racists” don’t see the irony; their strawman for us is that we apply a few examples to the whole, and that makes us evil/stupid/lowlife bigots/haters/murderers, then they turn around and apply one example to the whole when it suits their purposes. 278
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on March 11, 2008, 07:52 PM | # P.S., to the genius ecologist (who saw fit to inform of his job for God knows what reason - to imply that his job description makes him correct?), what do you know about speciation? Please tell us what speciation in humans might look like (i.e., what the results of ongoing speciation in humans might produce). Try not to squirm as you do. 279
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on March 11, 2008, 07:59 PM | # Most textbooks define a species as all the individual organisms of a natural population that generally interbreed at maturity in the wild and whose interbreeding produces fertile offspring. Hell, by that definition human races aren’t the same species right now, since they don’t “generally interbreed.” 280
Posted by Guessedworker on March 11, 2008, 08:05 PM | # Jeez, Svi, haven’t you an ounce of pity in your whole body? 281
Posted by GT on March 11, 2008, 08:39 PM | # Looks like Scrooby might have some competition when it comes to flaying numbskulls. Very enjoyable! 283
Posted by me on March 12, 2008, 02:22 AM | # look at this link http://www.bartcop.com/jessica-alba-cameron-diaz.jpg haha shes hotter than ur white girl…and all i did was google “mixed” 284
Posted by Englander on March 12, 2008, 10:21 AM | # As thorough as the kicking of anti-racists and mixed race supremacists has been in this thread, I think we were let down since the start with the choice of White models. 285
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on March 12, 2008, 11:40 AM | # Yes, the trouble is women from the age of an honest, feminine standard of beauty lived when photography and full-spectrum cosmetics were far less advanced (Madeleine Carroll, Nancy Coleman, Olivia de Havilland, Rhonda Fleming, June Haver, Rita Hayworth, Rochelle Hudson, Carole Landis, Joi Lansing, Vivien Leigh, Joan Leslie, Gene Tierney, etc.). Of course, there were some in the age of color photography, like Brigit Bardot (obviously more attractive than Berry or Alba), Natalie Wood, etc. Now we a lot of “exotic” masculine types, like Jennifer Garner, with a few standouts like Emmanuelle Beart here and there. 286
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on March 12, 2008, 11:43 AM | # Make that Brigette Bardot. If anyone on that list deserves to have her name right it’s Dame Bardot. 287
Posted by Englander on March 12, 2008, 12:36 PM | # I find that these days, the most beautiful White actresses are in smaller television roles. 288
Posted by me on March 21, 2008, 03:46 PM | # oh shut up and admit she is hotter already…don’t pull “White women are not well represented ” out of your butt. 289
Posted by Guessedworker on March 21, 2008, 04:15 PM | # “Sex evolved to mix genes with different people.” Oh dear. I take it you are the result of miscegenation, then. The genesis of reproduction is a rather deep subject. I don’t think you have the plumbed the depth of it, somehow. Go back to the beginning. Read the post. Better yet, read Darwin. Learn about adaptiveness and its local relevancy. But, please, don’t come here with your pathetic “wisdom” and try to score some sort of easy knock out. Now, goodbye. 290
Posted by me on March 21, 2008, 06:20 PM | # you are an idiot. You haven’t actually answered a single thing, only dismissed me randomly. I have read Darwin, not that he is an expert seeing that he lived before people knew anything about genetics. No I am not mixed, by your definition, which only takes in to account social racial bounderies and not genetic ones. 291
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 21, 2008, 08:50 PM | #
All right, may I try to answer you instead of just dismissing you as you feel GW did? Here goes:
No, the most charitable thing that can be said about the mulatto girl’s looks compared to the Euro girl’s is she’s very plain. Sorry, that’s the politest language one can come up with to help her out; it only goes downhill from there. Species hybridization between Euros, who on average look more like what humans are considered to look like, and True Negroes, who on average look less like what humans are considered to look like and more like what chimpanzees are considered to look like, can neither enhance the Euro norm nor leave it unaffected. It can only detract from it.
But that’s so only within universally-acknowledged limits. Outside universally-acknowledged limits objective plainness and objective prettiness come into play. Quasimodo for example was objectively unpleasant to view, and Esmeralda the opposite: no subjective taste is valid which is perverse enough to find Quasimodo handsome and Esmeralda ugly. So the subjectiveness of what is attractive and what isn’t applies only within certain boundaries: it doesn’t apply without limit.
Not if it keeps a single prospective Heidi Klum from going ahead with the worst mistake of her life.
But the premise is false: most people don’t prefer mulattoes’ looks. (If they did, moreover, obviously it wouldn’t be because mulattoes “looked different.” A person whose head has been run over by a truck looks different but no one prefers his looks solely on that account. Both the Elephant Man and Elizabeth Taylor in her prime looked different, so the fact that one was repulsive and the other attractive must have an explanation other than merely “looking different.”)
A human-chimp hybrid may well be possible but what’s possible may not be what’s desirable.
This is the Jewish “race-is-a-social-construct” blueprint-for-Jewish-victory. 292
Posted by me on March 23, 2008, 01:23 AM | # thank you fred…for a real answer. well I think you have just proved my point that it is subjective because I think the white girl above is kind of plain compared to the mixed one…despite the fact that she has more clothes on. The white girls nose looks all weird…it is pinched and upturned and you can see her nostrils and all, and her lips look thin and unkissable. Not that she isn’t pretty in general. In fact, if it weren’t subjective, you wouldn’t have to worry about race mixing at all would you? It just wouldn’t happen because your so called “more human” Euros (erm…how are they more human?? There aren’t that many of them, so it seems kind of random for them the ones that get to be the most human) wouldn’t condescend to breeding with normal people anyway. However, if they mixed, only the best genes would stick around and the bad ones would die out. I’m east indian not jewish. Mixed by caste and region. 293
Posted by Devin on March 23, 2008, 01:47 AM | # im not white, but im all for not race mixing. I guess it depends on what you call superior. Hasn’t history shown that european people are more aggressive than other people? I guess they evolved that in the harsh climate. When you take any kind of animal, and breed it to be tamer, it gets darker, and if you breed it for fighting, it gets lighter. Breeders observed it. Something about two genes being physically close together on the chromosome, making whites have faster metabolisms for the cold but also whiteness and agressiveness as a side affect. Also they are stockyer and thicker, similar to what neanderthals evolved. If they get mixed with us we will get more of those agressive genes and the world will get even more violent than it is. But maybe the agressiveness will be diluted, i dont know. We should just try to run our economies without them and shut them out and keep them seperate. Without china’s products and african materials they probably will run out of resources and kill each other. 294
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 23, 2008, 09:38 AM | # To the Subcon commenter signing as “me”: If inappropriate numbers of the unlike are kept from coming into a country the country’s race won’t change identities. Populations universally tend naturally and strongly not to want inappropriate numbers of the unlike entering and to filter immigration accordingly. Populations, therefore, naturally arrange things so as to keep their race from losing its identity and this completely apart from the state of knowledge of modern genetic sciences: it’s a strong natural tendency stretching back in time and as strong today, which will normally guide a population in setting immigration policy unless thwarted. It’s being thwarted in today’s Eurosphere by an alliance of interests including capitalists in search of cheap labor, Jews (who can be a very powerful and influential group, often getting their way when they really put their mind to it) wishing to destroy their age-old Euro rivals by race-mixing them out of existence, and one or two other factors. This alliance is imposing an unnatural state of affairs on the Eurosphere peoples/races/ethnocultures, a state of affairs which undoes natural barriers every population automatically erects against, in effect, loss of communal race by race-mixing due to excessive entry of the unlike. Now, you may say if the people didn’t want to mix there’d be no mixing regardless of immigration. But part of the reason people instinctively look askance at high immigration of the unlike may be because they see the threat of loss of race, the barrier to loss of race through race-mixing being precisely the one racial communities naturally erect at the level of entry, preventing large numbers of the unlike from coming in: instinctively a population’s members reject such large-scale entry. They’re not denying that once ingress has taken place loss of communal race is the threat. But this instinctive partly race-protective preference against large-scale ingress is what is being deliberately overridden in the knowledge that once successfully overridden the race will be jeopardized. You say if the population didn’t want to mix it wouldn’t, but it also didn’t want this protective barrier overridden yet it was overridden. Why? That’s what we’re asking at this site. What many fans of this site oppose is the imposition from the top down of this unnatural state of affairs on Eurosphere populations: they wish this to end and the people once again to be able to set immigration policy. Since October of the year 2000 when I first began following this, every public opinion poll has shown 70% to 80% of the American people want less immigration yet the powerful interests refuse to give them what they want and have set up a régime wherein expression of popular opinion on this subject gets punished. Is what we’re asking so terrible? As we see it, our race is threatened with going out of existence. 295
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 23, 2008, 11:38 AM | # (“Subcon” is short for “Indian Subcontinental” the way Euro is for European, and encompasses Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Indians, and Bangladeshis. It gets around the awkwardness of either needing to know if the person talked about is Indian or Pakistani (or one of the other two) or saying “Indian or Pakistani,” or “Hindu or Pakistani,” or “Hindu or Moslem,” some such. It’s a term of convenience. I add this explanation because someone here once took it for some kind of slur, which it isn’t at all.) 296
Posted by me on March 23, 2008, 01:42 PM | # I was wondering what subcon meant ... Well I personally think the only way for a race to totally cease existing is by genocide, like with the native americans. Can you name any influential race in history that has lost its culture just by mixing? Do you think there are that many genetically pure black people left in america? Unfortunately for your cause, however, total cultural preservation is quite impossible. You can’t just freeze time, and preserve European culture in a little snowglobe or something. There was a time when Europe was relatively barbaric and China was advanced and civillized. China took the attitude that it had nothing to learn from hairy white cavemen. There are works preserved that show China commenting on white men’s “barbaric” physiognamy. The result was that Europe learned things from China, China did not learn things from Europe, and china was conquered. Japan, on the other hand, learned from conquering Europeans and became a world power, despite being a puny little island. Even without any outside influence, culture changes so much from generation to generation that you won’t ever preserve white culture as you see it today, no matter how much you isolate it. Unless you want to live like the Amish, of course. So while I can’t argue against your wish to cling to whiteness, I can tell you it isn’t practical. If your ancestors went by your thinking, they wouldn’t have invaded anyone and would still be stuck in their tiny so called “continent”, most likely under Oriental/Islamic/African rule. Europe has always been an adapting and changing culture, so even the wish to stop changing is betraying your culture. Anyway, I know from your previous post that you think non whites are physically inferior, so you can’t say that this is just a site for innocent self preservation. The logical consequence is that you should treat your own race better than other people. If you go on with this thinking, surely other races will pick up on it and use it against you one day. 297
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 23, 2008, 03:02 PM | # Thank you for your very thoughtful comment, “Me.” I’m a big admirer of the Subcon races, by the way, and I find your women among the world’s most beautiful. 298
Posted by me on March 23, 2008, 07:12 PM | # Scrooby, I still don’t see how any of this makes whites more human or white culture more worth clinging to, although I am encouraged by the agreeing tone of your posts. Also ( sorry, im going to use your compliment against you :D ), you probably know that according to traditional European historians, the entire “subcon” race is a result of the mixing between a conquering Aryan people and and culturaly advanced dark skinned Dravidians. I don’t really think it was as simple as that, although I am sure Indians have genes common with Europeans, since many indians have green eyes and dark red hair. In india there is no clear skin color cut-off, we all mix and flow into each other freely. So we subcons are all a mixed race. So unless you believe we are actually all whites who evolved dark skin in the heat or something, you admire a genetically mixed race as advanced and beautiful… 299
Posted by onlooker on March 23, 2008, 07:56 PM | # me, Please be advised: Scrooby speaks for himself. He isn’t a spokesman for MR (at least I hope not!). His opinions are his own. He isn’t representative, or typical of those in the white preservationist movement. Scrooby represents himself and only himself. 300
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 23, 2008, 08:15 PM | # “Scrooby, I still don’t see how any of this makes whites more human or white culture more worth clinging to” (—“me”) I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying, exactly. We would wish Euros not changed into another race. We’d like them to stay the race(s) they are. That’s the main thing. If special interests such as influential Jews keep our borders open (change our race) against our repeatedly expressed desires, that’s wrong. Preserving the race is what’s most important to us and comes ahead of preserving the culture. Our race and culture are far from flawless but we like them and don’t want them changed into another race or another culture. That said, we appreciate other races and other cultures. “Also [...] the entire ‘subcon’ race is [said to be] a result of mixing between a conquering Aryan people and culturally advanced dark-skinned Dravidians. [...] So [...] you admire a genetically mixed race as advanced and beautiful…” But “admiring” isn’t “wishing to change into.” I’m sure that you: 1) admire the Chinese race; 2) don’t wish to be changed into the Chinese race. What we’re against is that certain forces are actually, as we speak, in the process of deliberately changing Euro people into other races using immigration as the main method. The ones doing it are an alliance consisting of factions each with its own reasons for wanting Euro-race peoples to be changed racially — some (certain kinds of socialists and others) believe that will promote world peace, some (lots of Jews) simply can’t stand Euro peoples on the basis of traditional ethnic prejudice, some (certain Christians) believe God wants Euros changed racially or he frowns on resistance to it, some (capitalists) want cheaper more docile workers and employees, and view non-Euros as more docile and willing to work for lower wages, and so on. You may find it hard to believe that they’re doing it, deliberately attempting to change the Euro race into something else. Believe it. They’re doing it. That’s what we’re protesting. When a crime is huge enough it’s hard for people to believe it’s actually being committed. That’s part of the reason people are reluctant to believe the race-replacers are doing what they’re doing. If people see it’s happening at all, they tend to think it’s happening all by itself. It’s not. That’s what we’re saying. 301
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 23, 2008, 08:18 PM | # As Onlooker says, I certainly don’t speak for everyone at this web-site. I’m only a commenter here. 303
Posted by me on March 24, 2008, 03:01 AM | # Out of curiousity, onlookers, do you think Scrooby is more racist/pro white or more liberal/multiculturalist then most people fo this cause? Scrooby it is all very well to defend your race. Indians do it, african americans do it, everyone does it. That is a more complicated issue that we can discuss in later posts. But you are going way way beyond that. You are actually denigrating other races. You said earlier… Species hybridization between Euros, who on average look more like what humans are considered to look like, and True Negroes, who on average look less like what humans are considered to look like and more like what chimpanzees are considered to look like, can neither enhance the Euro norm nor leave it unaffected. It can only detract from it. ...How can you claim to admire and respect other races when you are calling people chimpanzees? What features to Negroes have in common with chimps that Euros do not? Chimps are more robust, short & stocky, light skinned, thin lipped, and more hairy, all of which are technically Euro features, not Negro, not that that I think any comparison with a race isn’t ridiculous and random. Name one thing that is less silly and superficial as the comparisons that I have made that physically link Negroes to chimps. The logical way to keep “chimps” from breeding with the precious Euros is to keep them down and exploit them, and make sure they are of a class below Euros. And if you do that, you are commiting the equal and exact crime that you accuse “socialists” and “capitalists” and “lots of Jews” of doing. 304
Posted by Guessedworker on March 24, 2008, 05:22 AM | # “The logical way ...” No, you are proposing the solution for us, then condemning it. The logical way is separation. Logically, to achieve that, we have to dispose of the forces that stand in its way. They are many in number, and Fred alluded to some of the more salient ones in his 12.15 comment. Understand that here we write about our peoples’ battle for life itself. If you oppose life for Europeans, say so. If not, cease raising objections. 305
Posted by blog tragic on March 24, 2008, 05:46 AM | # me,
From the recent Science paper on human genetic population structure. By the way, chimpanzee skin color darkens with age. And, chimpanzees tend to be long-limbed, small brained, and prognathous, not European features. Are you aware of Joel Irish’s work on African dentition? 306
Posted by onlooker on March 24, 2008, 09:33 AM | # “Out of curiousity, onlookers, do you think Scrooby is more racist/pro white or more liberal/multiculturalist then most people fo this cause?” I consider myself more of a classical liberal (a Jeffersonian liberal) who doesn’t hate or wish ill on others races. I simply love my own race and the culture it produced more than any other. I desperately want to preserved it. I beleive Scrooby shares those same sentiments. I vehemently reject your connecting the word “racist” with pro-white, eg., racist/pro-white. That implies being pro-white is somehow synonymous with hate and bigotry; conversely, liberal/multicultural connotes the essence of goodness. That’s what I call ‘inverted reality’. If you really want to discuss this topic in a meaningful way, you must first define your terms. me, please explain what following terms—in your own words—mean to you. 1- racist 2- pro-white 3- liberal 4- multicultural 307
Posted by me on March 24, 2008, 12:50 PM | # onlooker- I used a slash merely to provide two terms for the benifit of whoever was speaking - one positive and one negative. If I had only said “pro-white” I would have been favoring people who think your views are alright. If I had only said “racist” I would be favoring people who thought you were racist. I wasn’t making a connection between the two, and didn’t realize it could be interpreted that way. My apoligies. Blog Tragic-Don’t blind me with science, explain properly what that obscure sentence means…don’t make me google all that…at the very least give a link to the paper, if its in the public domain. My source is SNPs- A mutation where one “letter” of the DNA strand is changed to another, and there is NO other change in that area, making it rare. AAFs- By the context of your sentence, I assume this means the SNP’s that chimps have that humans do not. Correct me if that is wrong, but since you didn’t cite anything… Ok now explain what procedure was used to find these SNP’s and AAFs. In humans, SNP’s give a shaky indicator of origon, and give insight into your paternal ancestry. Please inform me how accurate ancestry tests are, Tragic… now, if certain human populations have SNP mutations that others do not, it can be said that the SNP is unique to the population. So SNP’s are found by comparing differences between two populations. Now, there are many more “races” of Chimps then there are races of humans, meaning they are more genetically diverse species than us. But we don’t want Chimp racial differences, we want the SNP’s of the who species. Problem is, there is no such thing as an SNP for a whole species! Becaused SNP’s can only be found by comparing two populations. But suppose you decided to go ahead and compare the one letter differences betwen a human and a chimp. (Is that what they did? They must have gotten a LOT of noise from all the non-SNP mutations.) What race of human are you going to use to get your SNP’s? The person you use to compare will be the person with 0 ancestral alleles (since AAP’s will be defined as SNP’s that the person does not have). Then, the furthur genetic distance there is between you and said person, the more AAP’s you have. I can go on and on but I am just demonstrating how shaky your one line of unexplained jargon is. I am not even going to mention that my source says SNP’s only trace back a few thousand years, not billions. guessedworker, the condition of people with your viewpoint is not one of power. You can’t just legalize so called seperate and equal apartheid. So tell me, how do you plan to keep other people out of white neighborhoods, away from white workers, and in a position that they cannot marry white people, without harming and depriving them? 308
Posted by Guessedworker on March 24, 2008, 01:38 PM | # Me, In every society outside the West the “condition” of people with our views is exactly one of power . Self-estrangement and ethno-masochism are peculiar only to European Man in his Western homelands. So what are you asking for? That we accept this, and give succour to those who profit from our children’s disinheritance? No. We must find the means to reverse the crime that has been committed against us. There is no honourable alternative. 309
Posted by me on March 24, 2008, 04:40 PM | # Guessed Worker What on earth are you talking about? The whole world is in a mad rush to imitate the west. Look at china and japan. Even in India. Businessmen wear your shirts and ties, fashion is basically whatever people think America is doing. The entire history of the British empire is about disinheriting people of color. The entire foundation of America is built right on top of native americans, and is stained with black slavery. I suppose you think all the above is lies and propaganda…forget it. I am not asking for you to give any “succor”. I am asking you to accept that there is nothing wrong with not being white, and that if you think someone is out to get you, you can go after the individual, and not the whole race. 310
Posted by me on March 24, 2008, 04:46 PM | # By your logic, Guessedworker, each race should strive to bring down every other. In every society outside the West the “condition” of people with our views is exactly one of power . Self-estrangement and ethno-masochism are peculiar only to European Man in his Western homelands. Basically what your saying is that your view is alright when you have it but wrong when others have it. If this is true, then every non-white is perfectly justified in hating white people and bringing them down. Do you beleive that as well? I doubt it. Byt what other conclusion can be drawn when “every other” society doing something is an excuse to do it yourself. Especially when it isn’t even true of every other society, but even otherwise. 311
Posted by Guessedworker on March 24, 2008, 05:44 PM | # me, You are not, repeat NOT reading what is said here. The genetic preservation of my people is not dependent on the non-preservation of any other. Self-preservation is not a supremacist issue, got it? The entire non-Western world IS nationalist in respect to genetic preservation. Name me one people anywhere outside the West that is contentedly suiciding itself. Naturally, you can’t. Do try to understand at least the basics of what we are saying, because it is extremely tiresome to converse with you otherwise. 312
Posted by me on March 24, 2008, 06:46 PM | # ok ok…so you are only worried about genetic preservation. Since you don’t think I understand, I won’t argue but instead ask you basic questions for now… 1) Who is “profiting” by the mixing of European genes with other genes and how? 2) How are these misterious people forcing you to mix your genes in the first place 3) What possible harm is there in absorbing other genes? 4) Since when do non-Caucasians refrain from race mixing, religious extremists and backward smalltown village places excepted? 5) Are other races inferior to whites? do they have no good things to contribute? 6) Why do you think mixing will eliminate whiteness? If a white and a black mix, the white genes are still present. 7) Why is there more value in pure whiteness then in diversity? 313
Posted by onlooker on March 24, 2008, 07:12 PM | # This is for, “me” http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/what_is_the_west_part_i/ http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/what_is_the_west_part_ii/ 314
Posted by Guessedworker on March 24, 2008, 07:46 PM | # 1. Here is an introduction to the principal party benefitting from the destruction of the tie between blood and soil in the West. Of course, they are not the only ones, as Fred Scrooby has explained. Jewry, the left, the Church, the state machine etc have congruent interests. But the will of the power elite is the key determinant and it is for internationalism - the globalisation of its own reach. 2. The process is one of race-replacement, not simply race-mixing. It is a highly coercive process, of course. I assume you understand that the demonisation of all opposition as Nazis, fascists, racists et al is coercion. Likewise the legal, moral, social and professional constrictions on speech and association. Likewise the singular point of view which issues from the political, cultural and educational Establishments. 3. African genes are “good” for non-Africans? How? Really, don’t be idiotic. Read the post to this thread, and the more detailed, related post under “miscegenation” on the left side-bar. 4. The issue with respect to racial dilution is that the West is under massive assault from the Third World, enabled and encouraged by our elites. The homelands of Third World peoples remain inviolable in this process, however. Check the arguments in this respect under “ethnic genetic interest”. 5. Re-phrase the question and ask it of Japanese and Han Chinese (you are Han, yes?). Ask it of Jews. If you look with a clear eye, you will find that Europeans are the most individualist and least ethnocentric of all peoples, and the most given to out-group altruism. Why, then, do you associate European self-preservation with supremacism? 6. Study the EGI.pdf. Then read the Geneva Convention on the Punishment and Prevention of Genocide. Follow that up with the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. You will begin to understand the justice of that of which we speak. 7. Same answer as (6), plus this, if it will help you:- The value of our being to us is greater than the value of anothers’, just as that others’ being is more valuable to them than ours. Kinship outweighs otherness, whether at the filial or ethnic level. Diversity is the destruction of kinship - and thereby the destruction of the first purpose in life: genetic continuity. Put another way, if your house is on fire would you save a completely alien and unknown child before your own? 315
Posted by onlooker on March 24, 2008, 08:17 PM | # “Re-phrase the question and ask it of Japanese and Han Chinese (you are Han, yes?).” GW, the Chinese are proving to be the WORST enemy the West ever had….other than ourselves of course (I’m speaking of the left). http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21723520-2703,00.html 316
Posted by me on March 25, 2008, 01:13 AM | # I was kind of hoping for different answers… 1) so fantastical does it seem that my own kind - men of like background and tastes - truly desire to nullify our common blood for ... what, really? Reading your link I discovered this question at the end, which is the one I was hoping to get answered. I already knew you think the elites want to dilute your blood, but WHY? 2) How can you call coercion something we all genuinely beleive? (except for you). No one has killed you for beleiving as you do, although I’m sure many would like to. I’m talking about real, physical coercion to do something, not intellectual encouragement to beleive in something. 3) Surely you know this is a very debatable point, and that your view is at odds with the accepted one, and that I can’t be called idiotic for not taking this website’s word for it. 4)Fine…but lets not forget that Europe imposed its rule and culture on much of the third world. 5) I’m not Chinese and I don’t know how you got that idea, I am an East Indian and I have been living in America for the past ten years. And with my own clear eyes I have seen that quite a few white americans (not all) tend to be cold and distant toward me, and make racist jokes, while almost all black americans and latinos tend to be accepting of me and simpathizing with my struggles. So my eyes are either astonishingly unclear and biased or you only see one side of the story, while I see another. 6)ok i’ll do that later no time just now 7) Then other races should also follow this logic and work for their own interests and against yours, no? Why not just work for the good of humanity and forget all this race stuff? 317
Posted by Guessedworker on March 25, 2008, 03:40 AM | # 1) That is the mystery of the age. There have been various answers proposed. Any mainstream journalist of quality will tell you that, post-war, a deep aversion to nation and a growing faith in the agency of internationalism arose among the West’s political class. It is frequently noted that the political class considers patriotic sentiment to be contemptible. At a deeper level, all six categories of elites themselves are products of and are dependent upon the global liberal milieu. As a class, their privileges are threatened by any threat to liberalism. The ties between people and land, if expressed politically in the West (not necessarily elsewhere), are the foundation of the only significant potential threat. Further, liberalism itself has a built in tendency to migrate leftward, since it cannot endlessly restate the same formulations of its founding principles - as, for example, religion can. At a physical level, then, we can see how actors on the left who were always internationalists and pacifists and, of course, pro-communist/anti-fascist, were increasingly incorporated within the political class. And then we can also consider the Burnhamesque explanation for the class - managerial and without reliance upon, or interests in, the rights of inheritance. Deeper still, from a sociobiological perspective, there is an eternal incentive at the level of mate competition for men to cleave to power structures. If Nationalism replaces liberalism, the same creatures who cling to the present structure will re-invent themselves to cling to the new one. Consider the re-emergence of the post-communist apparatchiks as liberals after 1989. All these and many other explanations have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of elite treachery. Regardless of which, if any, is correct, the elite exists, and it is a what it is. 2) What are you talking about? No one politically sane and responsible believes that the West must cease to exist for the sake of brown and black people. The coercion is in their inability to organise against it, or even speak against it. If you are living in the West you will scarcely ever receive a truly straight answer from any of us. Don’t believe what you are told. Between ourselves and in private, we do not speak as we do in your presence. If we can establish between ourselves that it is safe to do so, we speak sincerely. 3) No, it isn’t debatable. Debate is prevented. Why, because the sociobiolosts and psychometricians are correct, and must be suppressed. 4) Ask yourself how you would be treated in Japan, China or Israel. Remember, you are aggressing on white Americans’ living space, and harming their genetic interests. They have the moral right to exclude you. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are tolerated at all. 7) Because we want to live, like all other peoples. If you and the tens of millions of other interlopers would leave our living spaces, there would be no need of any explicit concentration on the politics of race and ethny. You pressage such a need yourself. 318
Posted by onlooker on March 25, 2008, 07:27 AM | # THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX. One of the main reasons why whites should not mix their genes with non-whites. http://altongansky.typepad.com/imaginationwork/2007/07/serendipity.html 319
Posted by Guessedworker on March 25, 2008, 10:34 AM | # Onlooker, I will post that on the main page. Terrific. 320
Posted by me on March 25, 2008, 02:14 PM | # First you expect me to beleive that there is a conspiricy among white elites to do away with other whites…Then you expect me that there is a counterconspiricy against these elites to save whites, so convenienly enough none of this invisible struggle reaches my ears. I’m sorry but you are mildly schizofrenic. It doesn’t help your case that both of these conspiricies are orchestrated by white people, who think of other poeple as pawns in their game. You are also full of contradictions. First you say… Then you say… you are aggressing on white Americans’ living space, and harming their genetic interests. They have the moral right to exclude you. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are tolerated at all. AND you contradict your unbacked assertion by your own words. You don’t go after individual white elites, you go after a whole race. Do you think you are more individualistic and less ethnocentric then I am!? I have an Indian freind who has lived in Japan and says that although it is hard to assimilate, because there is no immigrant culture, people treat you just fine. What I think is, you are completelu disconnected from reality and will beleive anything that backs your views. Anything that doesn’t is conveniently discarded as liberal propaganda. The fact that I can have this discussion with you at all should be proof enough that I am just as human as you are and roughly just as intelligent. 321
Posted by onlooker on March 25, 2008, 03:00 PM | # “First you expect me to beleive that there is a conspiricy among white elites to do away with other whites…” Not a conspiracy, it’s ipso facto an official public policy. The elites aren’t trying to hide what they’re doing. It’s all being done, legally, out in the open. 322
Posted by onlooker on March 25, 2008, 05:51 PM | # me, As a side note: I believe East Indians are nothing more or less than darker skinned Caucasians. When I tell that to the Negroes whom I work with, they get violently angry. They want to beleive East Indians are of the Negroid race. Heck, some of them even insist Italians are black…. What say you? 323
Posted by me on March 26, 2008, 05:34 PM | # As for the anti-immigation link you posted, all I can say is that America has always been a country of immigrants, and these immigrants have always faced opposition. First people didn’t want the Italians and the Irish here, then they didn’t what the Chinese and the Japanese here, now they won’t want the Mexicans here, and it looks like soon they won’t want the Indians here. It isn’t a new conspiricy or a liberal trend, it is just history repeating itself. You are simply the next backlash to the next wave of immigration. Indians are not Negroes, and they are not Caucasions, they are just Indians. And the whole concept of a “black” race is flawed, because there is so much diversity in who we call the “black” people that they probably contain within the population both European and Asian and Indian genes. I can understand why the black people get mad. You are just making every succesful dark skinned population white to exclude them. But both they and you are wrong. Indians are just Indians. Since you feel the need to group us, this chart from the Wikipedia Race article might interest you… http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Rosenberg2007.png I speak with the disclaimer that with cluster analysis, when a diverse population is grouped as one race, the subraces will look like noise and cancel. From this chart Indians do share many European genes (and some Chinese ones), but they are mostly their own race. The different castes are all the same race, in red. You can see the more or less gradual change from Indian cultures to European, as you go into Pakistani muslim cultures. There is a sharp cutoff, where there begin Middle Eastern Islamic groups, which are almost entirely Blue, more than the Russians, but still have many Vedic genes. For some reason, there are only 5 groups in the orange region, two of them pygmies, a genetically diverse group which would defy cluster analysis, but Anyway, the point is that this chart shows that there is no race cutoff, and genetic groups differ quite a bit from social ones. So it doesn’t matter what race Indians are, their dark skin will always be a stigma because of people like GuessedWorker and they are forced to choose racial sides to fit in. 325
Posted by onlooker on March 26, 2008, 05:49 PM | # “Indians are not Negroes, and they are not Caucasions” Indians are of the Caucasoid race. So are Arabs, Persians, and Afghans. 326
Posted by captainchaos on March 26, 2008, 08:08 PM | # Me: “...their dark skin will always be a stigma because of people like Guessedworker and they are forced to choose racial sides to fit in.” And having choosen racial sides I dearly hope they will leave White countries and return to the land of their origin. 327
Posted by me on March 27, 2008, 12:13 AM | # fuck off chaos don’t make smart ass comments, at least say something interesting. onlooker…See thats why the black people are mad at you…you only want them to be Caucasiod because they are an advanced culture. Don’t you see all the red in the chart? Haven’t you seen our facial features? But ok thats fine I don’t really care who you group us with, I am more interested in your answer about what I said about immigration…maybe you didn’t see it because of the giant picture i will repost it… As for the anti-immigation link you posted, all I can say is that America has always been a country of immigrants, and these immigrants have always faced opposition. First people didn’t want the Italians and the Irish here, then they didn’t what the Chinese and the Japanese here, now they won’t want the Mexicans here, and it looks like soon they won’t want the Indians here. It isn’t a new conspiricy or a liberal trend, it is just history repeating itself. You are simply the next backlash to the next wave of immigration. 328
Posted by onlooker on March 27, 2008, 09:17 AM | # “onlooker…See thats why the black people are mad at you…you only want them to be Caucasiod because they are an advanced culture.” You have it backwards. Blacks want Indians to be classified Negroids because they desperately want to attach themselves to a more advanced culture than from that of whence they’ve come. Who can blame them? Negroids know they’re inferior to every other race on the planet and they’re not at all too happy about it. They lash out in various ways, both politically and physically. Nowhere on earth do Negroes get along with other races. They can’t even stand living amongst themselves. Anyway, contrary to what your chart seems to indicate, the vast majority of Indians are Caucasoid. http://adaniel.tripod.com/aryans.htm P.S. Google: Indians are caucasian. You’ll find plenty of info that supports my contentions. 329
Posted by Desmond Jones on March 27, 2008, 03:09 PM | # ...America has always been a country of immigrants, and these immigrants have always faced opposition. First people didn’t want the Italians and the Irish here, then they didn’t what the Chinese and the Japanese here, now they won’t want the Mexicans here, and it looks like soon they won’t want the Indians here. It isn’t a new conspiricy or a liberal trend, it is just history repeating itself. You are simply the next backlash to the next wave of immigration. All countries are country’s of immigrants. The East African Dravidians usurped the land settled by the Austro-Asiatics in India. However, most except Western lands reject receiving mass migrants from distant lands. Israel, Mexico, India, China, Japan, and Korea to name a few recognise the impact of mass migration on their founding people.
India has always been a country of immigrants, and these immigrants have always faced opposition. First people didn’t want the Dravidians or Greeks here, then they didn’t what the Indo-Aryans and the Muslims here. They never wanted the British here. And now it looks like they don’t want Bangladeshis here. It isn’t a new conspiracy or a liberal trend, it is just history repeating itself. You are simply the next backlash to the next wave of immigration. At least be consistent. 330
Posted by Desmond Jones on March 27, 2008, 03:31 PM | #
332
Posted by me on March 30, 2008, 07:06 PM | # Because, Lurker, need I point out the obvious, the United States is freer than India, more for-the-people, more open to change, less corrupt, and more openminded. Desmond, same. And if you do not assume I agree with everything India does, you will not find me inconsistant. When did I say India was exempt from the hstorical cycle? (And by the way, your examples are bad. We didn’t wan’t the muslims because they came as invaders, not immigrants, and we accepted the British openly as traders until they decided they wanted to rule over us…and we were on such high moral ground that time that we pretty much convinced them to leave.) Whatever the political between India and Bangladesh, the majority of the people do not discriminate between Indians and Bangladeshis, because if they did I’m sure I would have known about it, being half Hindu Bangladeshi. And Bangladesh is primarily occupied by Hindus. The reason the Muslims are fleeing to India is probably that India is more muslim friendly. And their is no racial difference, the only way you can tell the difference is by the language or accent. And lets not forget who’s fault it is that these countries are split up in the first place. And lets also not forget that the USA is not economically damaged by immigration, only racially and culturally changed. Onlooker…fine we are caucasion if you say we are…it’s difficult and pointless to argue this, and I don’t have any problems being called Caucasian for as long as I live in this country… it would make my life easier if other whites thought so too. But keep in mind this makes all the radical Islamic groups Caucasian too. Actually onlooker I haven’t ever met a single black person who thought I was black…were you talking to black muslims or something? I think Etheopia was once pretty advanced…anyway you STILL haven’t defended your immigration link, although I see other people have valiantly taken up the cause mostly by accusing India. 333
Posted by me on March 30, 2008, 07:17 PM | # err onlooker you still aren’t off the hook for defending your immigration link but I clicked your other link and even it admits the Aryan/Dravidian thing is shaky at best. 334
Posted by Desmond Jones on March 30, 2008, 08:41 PM | # And by the way, your examples are bad. We didn’t wan’t the muslims because they came as invaders, not immigrants, and we accepted the British openly as traders until they decided they wanted to rule over us… Invaders, immigrants, rulers…in the end we’re all just members of the human race, right? Good God man, where’s your humanity? Why don’t we set aside the divisions? Or maybe your hypocrisy knows no bounds. It’s ok for India and Indians to shun the “other” but not Europeans. How convenient for your little theory. Whatever the political between India and Bangladesh, the majority of the people do not discriminate between Indians and Bangladeshis, because if they did I’m sure I would have known about it, being half Hindu Bangladeshi. Obviously you’re ill-informed, because that’s exactly what’s happening.
Sounds familiar. 335
Posted by onlooker on March 30, 2008, 09:12 PM | # >>>“Onlooker…fine we are caucasion if you say we are…it’s difficult and pointless to argue this, and I don’t have any problems being called Caucasian for as long as I live in this country… it would make my life easier if other whites thought so too.” Are you dense? I’m not saying Indians are Caucasians, the scientists are. Can you understand that? The physical anthropologists, et al., can (or at least did, before PC politics polluted the science). If you think you’re having it rough because of how you perceive you’re looked down upon by Whites, try living and raising your kids in a Negro neighborhood. Maybe that’s the life experience you need in order to shock you into reality. By the way, most Whites are unaware of who or who isn’t a Caucasoid. Most Whites don’t think in terms of race. Unlike all other races of the world, Whites lack a racial conscious That’s one reason why EURO-Caucasians are declining in just about every measure.
>>>“Actually onlooker I haven’t ever met a single black person who thought I was black” Congratulations! P.S. me, After reading you posts, I’m left wondering ... are you acually a Negro playing a game here by posing as an Indian? In any event, you sound too sympathetic towards Negroes, yet are unquestionably averse towards Whites. 336
Posted by onlooker on March 31, 2008, 03:39 PM | # “I’m not saying Indians are Caucasians, the scientists are.” (from my above post) Well, I was partially wrong. India is quite a mixed bag when it comes to race: Analysis of mtDNA Suggests a Proto-Asian Origin of Indians MtDNA HVR1 genetic distances between caste populations and Africans, Asians, and Europeans are significantly different from zero (p < 0.001) and reveal that, regardless of rank, each caste group is most closely related to Asians and is most dissimilar from Africans (Table 1). The genetic distances from major continental populations (e.g., Europeans) differ among the three caste groups, and the comparison reveals an intriguing pattern. As one moves from lower to upper castes, the distance from Asians becomes progressively larger. The distance between Europeans and lower castes is larger than the distance between Europeans and upper castes, but the distance between Europeans and middle castes is smaller than the upper caste-European distance. These trends are the same whether the Kshatriya and Vysya are included in the upper castes, the middle castes, or excluded from the analysis. This may be owing, in part, to the small sample size (n = 10) of each of these castes. Among the upper castes the genetic distance between Brahmins and Europeans (0.10) is smaller than that between either the Kshatriya and Europeans (0.12) or the Vysya and Europeans (0.16). Assuming that contemporary Europeans reflect West Eurasian affinities, these data indicate that the amount of West Eurasian admixture with Indian populations may have been proportionate to caste rank. http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/11/6/994 337
Posted by silver on April 01, 2008, 03:23 AM | # is Indian or Pakistani (or one of the other two) or saying “Indian or Pakistani,” or “Hindu or Pakistani,” or “Hindu or Moslem,” some such. It’s a term of convenience. I add this explanation because someone here once took it for some kind of slur, which it isn’t at all.) That would be me. “Negro” is not widely considered neutral term (even if it is quite appropriate) and when I found it being casually bandied about along with “Subcon,” and given general tendency to deprecate others here, I assumed that the latter was a slur, too. As for ‘me,’ cutting to the chase, the only reasoning you’re having a debate is to attempt establish a line of reasoning which would safeguard your right to remain in the US, or, when you get down to it, to live among whites (I don’t think you’d have much use for a “US” consisting of only negroes). And the only reason you wish to live among whites is to enjoy the prosperity, legal standards, and atmosphere of easygoing ‘tolerance’ they have created; aside from that, culturally and racially, they are as alien to you as you are to them. When I speak of “whites,” I mean NW Europeans; alternatively known as “Nordics,” “Teutons,” “Aryans,” or “Germanics.” You’re not so different to Italians or Croats who attempt to substantiate their “white” credentials so as to proffer a basis for living among nords but would otherwise like to be left the hell alone to make money and fraternize at their respective communities’ social clubs. Neither in your case nor in theirs is there any real knowledge of or identification with the nordic man’s history, ideals or “way of being,” and there is certainly very little in the bargain for the nordic man himself. The same, let it be known, was also true of myself. The views propounded by the likes of Guessedworker can be heartrending, of that there is no doubt. Ultimately, however, liberation is found therein. 338
Posted by me on April 01, 2008, 05:50 PM | # wow which is it…am I “averse to whites” or “justifying my white credentials” now… Onlooker ... this is actually disapointing. I told you again and again I don’t give a damn about what you think you know scientists know about who is white and who isn’t. I am not dense, I just don’t really care about that because, unlike you, I realize it is a complicated subject that neither of us is qualified to discuss. I also realize that even if I were qualified, you would not listen to me because you would beleive I was corrupted by PC politics. So clearly there is nothing to be gained from arguing. You have completely ignored the topic we ARE qualified to discuss, which is your post on immigration, which doesn’t seem defendable in the face of my argument, unless you want to exclude germans and irish from your special white circle. Instead, you go off on irrelevant tangents, like whether I am Indian or not. What offensive thing have I said about whites? I am not averse to whites, I am averse to people who think like you, which is why I am here trying to understand your (to me)twisted thoughts. If I was black my argument would only be strengthened because thats just one more intelligent black to add to the list (Or would you then call me stupid instead of “thoughtful”). If you are a genetic anthropoligist, please enlighten us. Otherwise, lets drop the issue of Indian race and move on. Scroll up, re-read my arguments against your “it is happening right now” immigration post, and give me a proper answer to defend your conspiricy theory. 339
Posted by onlooker on April 01, 2008, 07:00 PM | # “Scroll up, re-read my arguments against your “it is happening right now” immigration post, and give me a proper answer to defend your conspiricy theory.” AGAIN, I HAVE NO “CONSPIRICY THEORY” about immigration. It is the official policy of the Government to import non-White third worlders. That’s not a conspiracy. The link I provided clearly spells that out. http://www.numbersusa.com/index I beleive it’s imperative we, Whites, maintain a White majority in the USA. If we can’t maintain White majority, the sublime culture we produced will most assuredly slide right down into squalid/primitive third worldism. Just like most, if not all, non European cultures of the world. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Roark’s address to the Jury in “The Fountainhead” by Ayn Rand >>“The creator thinks; the parasite copies. The creator produces; the parasite loots.”<< Generally speaking, Whites are the creators, while non-whites are parasites. Reality validates that statement! That’s why I want an immediate halt to ALL non-White immigration into White Nations. I want ALL illegal Aliens deported immediately. I want the deportation and repatriation of all non-white citizens who are on government assistance back to their homelands. I want ALL Muslims deported. How’s that for a start? 340
Posted by onlooker on April 02, 2008, 09:34 AM | # The rise and fall of White America. White America peaked in 1965, and went downhill from there. Pay special attention to the last paragraph; the one that explains what happened between 1990 to 2005, (New Robber Baron Tradition). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HISTORY OF TRADITIONAL LEVELS OF U.S. IMMIGRATION 1776-1976 250,000/yr. Average
1880-1924 580,000/yr. Average 1925-1965 180,000/yr. Average 1965- 1989 500,000/yr. Average 1990-2005 1,000,000/yr. Average SOURCE: NumbersUSA Education & Research Foundation from federal records 341
Posted by me on April 03, 2008, 05:57 PM | # siiiiigh…but what your not getting is that most of “white” america isn’t white at all, because there have always been immigrants, and there always will be, and they will come by themselves, and it’s NOTHING NEW. Or maybe you do get it and don’t care…? No one is importing immigrants in, they are just coming. onlooker, all that is fine, but it has nothing to do with race, and a lot to do with a lot of poor unskilled workers coming in. I disagree with but do not morally oppose you not wanting immigration for economic reasons, but for racial ones. The same Asians that came in for cheap foreign labor then are now part of the middle class. And besides, without that boost to industry, America would probably be much less developed today. erm…Generally speaking, Whites are the creators, while non-whites are parasites. ok ... I suppose you want to deny the existance of slavery, the parasitic imperialism of the British Empire, and the conquest of all Native American land. But I won’t hold you, the modern white American, accountable for that,the way you hold modern colored people accountable in your last post. Oh, but I almost forgot… 44% of…what was that big number again? China may utterly disregard its citizen’s rights, but it is clear who is the parasite here. Not in terms of economy, because China no doubt benifits on paper, but in terms of each man and woman and child sweating it out in a factory. Don’t act like your ancestors built America out of sweat. They built it by conquering and exploitation of other races and poor whites. You can try to say you are superior,more intelligent, whatever you want, but never accuse foreigners, or the poor, of being parasitic. 342
Posted by you on April 03, 2008, 06:23 PM | # Yeah, you’re right, White people are parasitic pieces of shit. Perhaps you would like to disentangle yourselves from us now? 343
Posted by onlooker on April 03, 2008, 08:10 PM | # “Don’t act like your ancestors built America out of sweat. They built it by conquering and exploitation of other races and poor whites.” My ancestors were poor whites who helped build this country. Non-white immigrants are currently destroying it. “never accuse foreigners, or the poor, of being parasitic.” Foreigners and the welfare-class are parasitic! Especially the non-white welfare-class. Ever hear the term “Welfare Queen?” http://www.amren.com/Reports/Hispanics/Hispanics.htm http://www.amren.com/newstore/cart.php?page=color_of_crime Furthermore, Negroids are the dumbest and least aesthetically pleasing people on the planet. Negroids are the most violently dangerous too, followed closely by Mestizos. I can provide more statistics to prove it. That said, I am generally against hate of other races: 344
Posted by Peter on April 04, 2008, 01:48 AM | # onlooker how can you be so mean!? I am not a parasite…I am in university and want to contribute to Western society. No promise of 72 hunks in the afterlife is going to make me go back to the Middle East (yes i put a gay twist to it) where i was born or India - my ancestral homeland. I love living in Canada. I enjoy all the freedoms and opportunities for intellectual growth/stimulation. I hate admitting this but i wouldn’t feel too “safe” in a black neighborhood/place. Damn! The Caucasian part of my ancestry is talking now… I am not pleased with this increasing trend of race mixing and “Black” people in the West. They can be quite violent and “animalistic” at times. I like Peace, Respect, Decency, Intellect etc… onlooker i am amazed that your including Indians (me included) into the Caucasian group when other bloggers here such as Guessedworker and JRichards so fervently deny that and get very upset about the thought of it. They are similar to the many other “white people” who look down on anything “dark”... anyone from South Europe to India. Silver thanks for pointing out what i was thinking before about this site. It is for Nordic interests and not Caucasian. Aesthetically although i find good looking people in all races. If i were to choose between a good looking Black, Oriental or White guy (3 races scheme!). I would without hesitation pick the White guy. Anyways Good night everyone sweet dreams! All the best! 345
Posted by onlooker on April 04, 2008, 12:25 PM | # “onlooker i am amazed that your including Indians (me included) into the Caucasian group when other bloggers here such as Guessedworker and JRichards so fervently deny that and get very upset about the thought of it.” I can’t speak for for GW or JR, but I beleive we are at least close to being in accord when it comes to defining who is or isn’t “Caucasoid.” Caucasian is certainly an ambiguous term. Refer to my post and the link I provided on Monday, March 31, 2008 at 07:39 PM | # http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/11/6/994 And the link MR provides: 346
Posted by Desmond Jones on April 05, 2008, 02:44 AM | # Lebron, the “angry black man” James is featured on the cover of Vogue with femme fatale super model Gisele Bundchen.
Leibovitz, now there’s a familiar name. Wasn’t she…let’s see…oh yea, the alleged lovers of Susan, “the white race is a cancer”, Sontag. These folks just never give it up. They are relentless. 347
Posted by me on April 06, 2008, 06:40 PM | # Peter isn’t indian, he is just posing as one to prove your point! A native Indian would swear desi women were the most beautiful, and an immigrant named “peter” wouldn’t put down blacks. Oh no I am such a hipocrit now srry onlooker… ...onlooker if your ancestors were poor you almost certainly have african american blood. Raping plantation owners werent the only ones who mixed genes. Even if your blond and blue eyed. Here read this you will find it interesting. Are you poor now, onlooker? its a lose-lose thing, if you are poor you are a wellfare sucker, if you are rich you are a parasite. Obviously the only thing you use to excuse yourself is that you are white, which you don’t even know for sure. How many generations have you kept track of? Have any pics of ur great great grandparents? maternal and paternal? There should be 16 of them. And if they look white, know that they still might not be! 348
Posted by onlooker on April 06, 2008, 06:51 PM | # “Peter isn’t indian, he is just posing as one to prove your point! “ All Indian males are like “peter.” 349
Posted by me on April 06, 2008, 06:55 PM | # AHAHAHHAHAH desmond jones THEY are relentless?!?! They are being accused of racism against blacks for making Lebron look like King Kong carrying away a white women. Only a racist see a King Kong reference. But whatever, they just wanna sell magazines. YOU on the other hand, manage to find out the most obcure…erm I mean the REAL racism here! Lebron + Gizele—-> photographed by Leibovitz—-> possibly lover of Susan Sontag, who wrote that white race is cancer You are a relentless hero! How could anyone else EVER notice how racist Vogue was by hiring that particular photographer who was a lover of that women to take an photo of a black man and a white women! Clearly Vogue is trying to get all white women raped by echoing nazi propaganda themes! Someone has too much time on their hands…go get a real job. 351
Posted by me on April 06, 2008, 07:00 PM | # onlooker I love how you zero in on the most insignificant parts of my posts and ingnore parts that are inconvenient to you or that you cant answer… 353
Posted by onlooker on April 06, 2008, 07:11 PM | # onlooker what the hell does that mean? It was just a cheap insult. “if you are rich you are a parasite.” Yeah right! Your nigger logic isn’t going to fly around people who acually produce. 354
Posted by me on April 06, 2008, 09:21 PM | # onlooker quite messing with me you are the one that said rich elites were causing all the problems not me. I do not think rich people are parasites, that is something you said that I am throwing back at you. And I produce too. And for the last time im not black. And you still avoid all questions you can’t answer. And you haven’t said why black people aren’t human. ok you seemed at least articulate earlier but now your just being dumb… 356
Posted by Desmond Jones on April 06, 2008, 09:53 PM | # Only a moron believes the lies of a racist/sexual agenda in the movie King Kong.
What might Rosen, Leibovitz and Susan Sontag have in common? It’s not Cooper who is promoting “insane miscegenation propaganda”. 357
Posted by me on April 06, 2008, 10:27 PM | # you don’t get irony do you Desmond? I was making fun of them as well as you. Only a racist person would think there was an agenda. 358
Posted by Peter on April 06, 2008, 10:42 PM | # For onlooker ... regarding your statement that all Indian males are like Peter i hope you weren’t implying what i think you were. I “know” how you feel about gays. For me ... haan main Indian hee hoon agar koi aur sawal ho to pooch leegiye. oh Mera naam jaan kar kya kare gai? Akash. Aakhari naam batana zaroori nahi samajhta. Now the rest in English. Secondly are you telling me most Indian people “like” Black people? You will be the first i know. Ok now i am not saying Indians want to go out and harm them but all Indians i know don’t like Black people because like my aunt said most of them are loud, uneducated, dress “indecently” and involved in criminal activities such as drugs, gangs etc… The neighborhood i live in is a mix of Black, Indian, Sri Lankans and some Whites. The last three are rarely involved in any crime in the area. Although increasingly there are more Tamil gangs. Its only the black people mostly male gangs and hard to believe but a few female gangs that create trouble. They always tend to congregate in large numbers and whenever they go to the mall (community mall) the security guards trail them. They create such a scene (are very loud and swear words fly left and right) and make decent families nervous. I can imagine families with children don’t want to be around “black” gangs who are swearing at each other and always ready to resort to fist fights with other blacks over territory, drugs or whatever else. I am sure me you must have experienced such people if you live in the US. With all that said i do not hate Black people and am aware there are some that are educated and decent BUT there are not many. As well in some rare cases among these black gangs i see one or two Latino and/or white guy(s). Also i am talking about my own personal experiences in the neighborhood i live and i live in Toronto the fifth largest city in North America and probably the most multicultural after New York? Also answer me this how many Indian parents would want any of their children to be married to black people? I have never met/known one. Indian girls seem sensible enough to stick with their own race same cannot be said about white girls. Indian girls might marry an Indian guy who is not “good looking” but has resources - money, good family, education etc. BUT these white girls many good looking ones too associate/have children with “not good looking” (and i am being polite) loser black guys that do drugs, are on welfare, have other women (white girls) on the side…in short have nothing to offer these women other than sperm. Seriously what is wrong with these girls? I have been tempted to study this phenomenon thats how prevalent it is here in Toronto. No Indian parent would want their daughter to be “associating” with or marrying most Black guys. I acknowledge somewhere it might occur but none to my knowledge. Oh my I really let it all out!!! I hope i didn’t bore you people but i did provide a different perspective….of a gay (proud and open about it) 24 year old Indian Undergrad University of Toronto student who is against race replacement and “racism”. Did i forget to add i am beautiful :D In conclusion, All the best to everybody! Best Wishes! I am actually beginning to like you all minus the homophobes and some “wierd” cases. I am in the majority! Yipeee 359
Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 06, 2008, 11:35 PM | #
Very well stated by Peter. 360
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 09:06 AM | # >>“For onlooker ... regarding your statement that all Indian males are like Peter i hope you weren’t implying what i think you were.” My statement about all Indian males are like peter was a bad joke. Sorry about that. >>“I “know” how you feel about gays.” Actually, peter, I’m TOLERANT of most gays and lesbians (I beleive they were born that way), but I’m defiantly NOT PERMISSIVE of their perverse sexual practices. They really need to practice abstinence ... or at least go back into the closet. I hope that clears it up for you how I THINK about gays? All the best to you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>“onlooker quite messing with me you are the one that said rich elites were causing all the problems not me.” The elites ARE causing the genocide of the white-race. Elitists are not just confined to avarice international capitalists. Being rich doesn’t necessarily equate to elitism; not all elitists are rich, but all elitists wield power. The vast majority of elites who are employed in academia, advertisement, the entertainment industry, government etc., are “modern liberals” or Pomos. Modern liberals” beleive in the “Whites as a Cancer” myth. Therein lies the problem for the future existence of the white-race. Capeesh? Capisce? Understand? http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/the_inverted_world/ 361
Posted by Peter on April 07, 2008, 01:14 PM | # Hey onlooker i like the “All the best to you.” part…Thats my style btw! I notice me hasn’t responded yet. Kyoun chup kyon ho gaye? Also me let me explain i don’t want to make you feel that i am “siding” with “Whites”. There are many Whites/gora loog here that don’t like us Indians but why should that mean that i have to “side” with Black people or Asian people? Because we think White people are “racist” towards all? My God I am awaiting more interesting topics on race and race replacement ...as well anything to do with gays hehe 362
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 02:00 PM | # I advise you to wise up, Peter. http://catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0088.html 363
Posted by Peter on April 07, 2008, 02:31 PM | # Excellent! A Christian website talking about “Health risks” of being homosexual…Nothing new there. Actually i haven’t read it all but i just wanted to point out that don’t you think a “Christian” website talking against homosexuals or other aspects of “non agreement with Christianity” such as abortion, premarital sex etc is not the “best possible” source? 364
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 03:26 PM | # “Some can argue that its Christianity’s message of “Love one another” “Love thy neighbor” etc. that is causing race replacement,” Some can argue that, but they’d be wrong. Traditional Christianity never encouraged RR i.e., genocide. It’s acually the heretics, the cultural-Marxists, who infiltrated the Church and are preaching secular humanism…. Those are the Christian impostors/deceivers who are misleading their flock in order to get them to beleive that race is only a social construct; therefore, miscegenation is in accord with God’s plan. Miscegenation between a white and a non-white always results in genocide for the white. I doubt God created the various races only to have foolish men and women practise their genocidal social experiments. Social experiments which are resulting in the destruction of the very racial diversity He created. BTW, Does the term “the long march through the institutions,” mean anything to you? Are you familiar with the Frankfort school? How about Antonio Gramsci? http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive/12-07-04.asp Why am I waisting my time? 365
Posted by Peter on April 07, 2008, 04:02 PM | # onlooker i can actually quote verses from the Bible and get into this whole argument with you but i don’t believe thats what we want? So anyways Thanks again for the info and if you feel your wasting your time ... you know what to do. 366
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 04:47 PM | # “The Bible is clear cut about homosexuality right? Then why do i see Churches with rainbow signs (to encourage gay people to attend) and whats more homosexual pastors!?” Do they condeme the practise of homosexuality and admonish those who engage in it to repent of their evil practices and be saved? Or are they heretics preaching false Christianity condoning the repulsive, sinful, practise of homosexuality? Go back and reread my post. As far as what Jesus looked like? It really doesn’t concern me. 367
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 04:57 PM | # “Do they condeme” ( from my post) UH-OH! I misspelled another word. I meant condemn. 368
Posted by Peter on April 07, 2008, 05:26 PM | # I am going to be leaving/going out soon so i am going to “bypass” reading that link for now and respond to it later. I am actually majoring in Sciences and my knowledge of Sociological terms/theories is limited but i am going to learn! Anyways this will be all for now. Why do you ignore my other comments yet only talk about religion? AHA Your a Christian! I knew it. 369
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 06:18 PM | # Hasn’t history shown that european people are more aggressive than other people? No, but European aggressiveness is closer in historical propinquity, and contiguous with the development of a European historical consciousness which invites the illusion that Europeans (a nebulous grouping in this context) have been more aggressive than, say, the Han or the Incas. European nations have, it is true, spread themselves farther over the globe, so that at most one can say they have been more far-seeing and successful in their aggressiveness. I guess they evolved that in the harsh climate. And the Assyrians devoted themselves to gardening and poetry owing to their harsh climate, I suppose. When you take any kind of animal, and breed it to be tamer, it gets darker, Only if you breed it with a nigger. But maybe the agressiveness will be diluted, i dont know. You truly do not. Without china’s products and african materials they probably will run out of resources and kill each other. Because before the advent of outsourcing to China, and the exploitation of mysterious “African materials”, whites were stocky, aggressive savages living out in the cold. Right. 370
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 06:34 PM | # I have been tempted to study this phenomenon — that’s how prevalent it is here in Toronto. You’ll find plenty about it right here, and on related sites such as heretical.com and in the writings of Prof. Kevin MacDonald. Simply put, whites are more weltoffen, or “world-open”, to make use of the very apposite German term. In sociobiology this is called exogamy, though in its present manifestation as one-way genetic flow from white to black via white females, it is better called Jewish mindfuckery, i.e. Jewish manipulation of the gullible, exogamous white female — first through “liberation”, then through sexual “revolution” and pop culture, finally into the lap of the eager, enfranchised silverback. Moreover, there was the inevitable psychic component of living in proximity to the exotic other, in this case the silverback, to tempt white women — and the Jews, having destroyed social boundaries, brought such dirty little fantasies to open, shameless fruition; and last but not least, the likewise inevitable psychic component of perverse signaling, i.e. the white female purposely going over to the blacks to anger/confound the white male, whom the Jews have tamed and prohibited from treating the white female with the sexual disdain she so richly deserves, and which she now seeks in the negro savage. I’m not too good at summary, but that’s every major point in a nutshell. 371
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 07:00 PM | # but notice North African Islamic cultures (like Mozabite) are almost completely European, That is an interpretation based on the political identity of the groups near which the Mozabite is found: it does not make Mozabites “European”, nor does it indicate aught of their observable physiology. By this logic, the Druze would equally qualify as “Europeans”. At most that cluster serves to remind that such European groups as the “French”, the “Italian”, the “Sardinian” and the “Tuscan” contain, as should be obvious to anyone, a good deal of non-aryan genes.
And this proves you have absolutely no experience in any social science. So it doesn’t matter what race Indians are, their dark skin will always be a stigma because of people like GuessedWorker Ha. Got news for you: Indians themselves are obsessed with skin color and always have been. If you ever go to Bombay, read the local papers — the personals are replete with appeals for “light-skinned” girls to marry. “People like GuessedWorker”, as should seem logical to anyone with their eyes not set on reverse telescope, have absolutely no effect on Indian notions of race and skin-color. Hindoos were worrying themselves to pieces about ???? and ethnic distance long, long before Europeans even possessed the word ‘race’. Sure, you’ll read that caste doesn’t have anything to do with race, etc., but only because Indian nationalism made the upper-castes ashamed of themselves. Besides, there’s muuuuch more to race than skin color — indeed, there’s much more to skin color than the two categories ‘light’ and ‘dark’. If you’ve ever ACTUALLY SEEN a Marathi and an Oriya, you’ll know what I mean, but I’m quite sure you haven’t and don’t. 372
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 07:22 PM | # For real though, what is this even about — which of those bitches is hotter? Frankly the mixed specimen appeals to me much more than the bimbo, and I’m rather sick of seeing that photo passed from site to site to prove just how hot & perfect white bitches are. Why is this glassy-eyed, empty-headed, impish whore with a huge forehead and penciled eyebrows constantly adduced as proof of white genetic superiority? can’t someone just log onto MySpace and find a couple pics of some real white bitches? There are literally thousands upon thousands available, yet all we ever see is this stupid worthless bimbo, the ecumenically desirable Aryan barbie doll. 373
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 07:55 PM | # “For real though, what is this even about — which of those bitches is hotter? Frankly the mixed specimen appeals to me much more than the bimbo” I agree but that’s not saying Nordic women aren’t amongst the MOST beautiful on the planet. That “mixed specimen” appears to be of the Mediterranean caucasian category. Not a Mulatto. She in no way resembles a Bantu. 374
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 08:07 PM | # Mm, I disagree. Doesn’t look exactly Med to me — close, but the lips definitely stray into the negroid. I’ve seen plenty of mulattas who look exactly like that girl. Not saying I wouldn’t hit it, of course. “Nordic” makes me think of tall, brawny, sporty Scandinavian girls, not fairylike Aryan girls generally. 375
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 08:27 PM | # ” close, but the lips definitely stray into the negroid.” Yeah, I guess you’re right. The bottom lip tips the balance. 376
Posted by onlooker on April 07, 2008, 08:52 PM | # “Not saying I wouldn’t hit it, of course.” Beware! Alon Ziv is an EVIL genius. He picked a girl for the cover of his book specifically designed to tempt any normal man, of any race, to lust after her! What kind of a mortal man could resist those bedroom eyes? 377
Posted by haramzada on April 07, 2008, 09:05 PM | # She can gooien my spies anytime, Alon Ziv be damned: I don’t need a Jew to make me want to bang comely half-castes. 378
Posted by Peter on April 08, 2008, 12:29 AM | # Oh no Haramzada has taken over! 379
Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2008, 12:42 AM | #
No, you don’t.
Yes, there is. Any American can terminate your “rights” if he chooses. 380
Posted by onlooker on April 08, 2008, 08:53 AM | # >>“onlooker i can’t believe your agreeing with haramzada which translates to “Bastard child” in Hindi.” I already knew that. I looked it up a few days ago when I first seen his handle. Language: Khowar - Expression: haramzada - English Translation or Definition: a bastard. LOL
No, Peter, queers always have it WRONG in the “END.” Sickeningly wrong. 381
Posted by haramzada on April 08, 2008, 08:54 AM | # You seem to be Indian? No, but Indian culture, past and present, is one of my main interests. My handle comes from Urdu — you will occasionally hear it in northern India, but is not Hindi at all. The terminal -zada is Persian, and haram is of course Arabic ?ar?m, ‘forbidden’. 382
Posted by Peter on April 08, 2008, 02:08 PM | # haramzada then you must be Pakistani, I don’t know what your talking about. The term is commonly used in North India where i am from. I guess it came in with the Mughal rule. 2 Corinthians 6:14 I am sure people like you would interpret the last part of this verse to mean Whites (light) vs Blacks (darkness). You and other Christians forget that all the divide between people in the Bible was based on believers and non believers NOT race. Read Acts 8 verses 26-40 if you can. 383
Posted by haramzada on April 08, 2008, 02:56 PM | # haramzada then you must be Pakistani, Or I, you know, take an interest in these languages. The term is commonly used in North India where i am from. I guess it came in with the Mughal rule. And what did the Mughals speak? 384
Posted by onlooker on April 08, 2008, 03:18 PM | # >>“I am sure people like you would interpret the last part of this verse to mean Whites (light) vs Blacks (darkness). You and other Christians forget that all the divide between people in the Bible was based on believers and non believers” So you’re a mind reader too? Wow, you’re really “special,” aren’t you? >>“Umm also a little thank you for making me go back and open the Bible. I have nothing but good “thoughts” about it. Jesus was the best!” “thoughts”? Jesus WAS the best? God cannot be forever mocked! 385
Posted by Peter on April 08, 2008, 04:09 PM | # My God you Pakistanis just know how to “pick” on Indians. Ok baba onlooker awwww your so sweet! Thanks for calling me special 386
Posted by me on April 08, 2008, 07:47 PM | # wow you guys post too much “Peter”/Akash: I don’t know, you come from a different indian community. My grandmother had never seen black people before she visited America but she got along with them fine when she came for a few months. People at my temple are not predujiced. Well some are a little, but equally to blacks and whites. I can see that you are ideologically opposed to the racists like onlooker but you clearly are predujiced. all Indians i know don’t like Black people because like my aunt said most of them are loud, uneducated, dress “indecently” and involved in criminal activities such as drugs, gangs etc… The neighborhood i live in is a mix of Black, Indian, Sri Lankans and some Whites. The last three are rarely involved in any crime in the area. Although increasingly there are more Tamil gangs. Its only the black people mostly male gangs and hard to believe but a few female gangs that create trouble. They always tend to congregate in large numbers and whenever they go to the mall (community mall) the security guards trail them. They create such a scene (are very loud and swear words fly left and right) and make decent families nervous. I can imagine families with children don’t want to be around “black” gangs who are swearing at each other and always ready to resort to fist fights with other blacks over territory, drugs or whatever else. I am sure me you must have experienced such people if you live in the US. ...How many indians do you know? Do you have a temple? Your family isn’t all Indians. If you KNOW about drugs and gangs, you can talk about it, but think how unrealistic it is to beleive that more than 5% of blacks and latinos join gangs, which is what you make it sound like. Ok this is just inexcusably full of double standards. They don’t “congregate”, they go with freinds and family and people they know, to the mall, together. Do you never see Indians “congregating”? Don’t you go to the mall with Indian freinds? ——- more later i g2g, srry to cut off mid post 387
Posted by me on April 08, 2008, 08:28 PM | # ok back. As I was saying, peter… It is fine to look down upon people who swear, but if you loook at the people who do you will probably see that they are young. Didn’t you swear when you were young? (well if you lived in India when you were young you probably didn’t but if you were here in the US) As for the marrying thing, Indian people don’t generally want their daughters marrying blacks OR whites. Sons seem to get whatever they want of course. But we are talking about Indians IN AMERICA right? And those parents usually give up on the desi husband anyway. Most don’t have anything against a black man IF he is educated and rich. The Indians who still control their childs marriages are generally very poor people, because even in India people don’t do that as much anymore. Haven’t you watched Bollywood ALWAYS portraying that badly? Your preference for white ...men?... is probably just an attraction to people who are different. I have some of that going on too, because most of the Indian people I see are family freinds or relatives, so Indian girls usually fall into the just freinds category, but there are exceptions. And I admit to trusting Indian women and men more at first. But I don’t prefer white or black women over each other. You on the other hand seem to have put yourself on some kind of black-white spectrum, with blacks being low and whites being high. If you are going to put yourself on a spectrum, at the very least put yourself on top… 388
Posted by you on April 08, 2008, 08:40 PM | # me, If you want to ask Peter out on a date I suggest the direct approach would be more effective. 389
Posted by onlooker on April 08, 2008, 08:41 PM | # “You on the other hand seem to have put yourself on some kind of black-white spectrum, with blacks being low and whites being high. If you are going to put yourself on a spectrum, at the very least put yourself on top… “ Oh yeah, put yourself on top…. http://www.amazon.com/Fine-Balance-Oprahs-Book-Club/dp/140003065X 390
Posted by me on April 08, 2008, 09:15 PM | # onlooker - HAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahaha thats hilarious. But you are doing just that you know… you - i now deduct that white people not only can’t dance, but also can’t make real jokes, except for onlooker who must be part of the population with Indian admixture and so had just enough humor to post a funny link… 391
Posted by Peter on April 08, 2008, 09:37 PM | # I am so happy to hear from you me….nice talking to a co ethnic sometimes….Here are some of my replies “Didn’t you swear when you were young?” Yes me i am gay and “Aesthetically speaking” I have seen good looking people of all races but i am not attracted to East Asian or African males. What do you mean by this spectrum thing? I never said White people are superior. OMG its you…after reading the last sentence here i hope you realize that your more my “type” than me. So may we? LOL you made me laugh. I know you intended to make me feel bad but it didn’t work! 392
Posted by onlooker on April 08, 2008, 09:58 PM | # Me, you know, all of us Caucasoids could get along just marvelously if it weren’t for the Jews causing divisions. 393
Posted by VLC on April 10, 2008, 02:31 AM | # I didn’t know where to put this but I thought this was good sarcasm, in case you haven’t seen it
394
Posted by Olga_NYC on April 10, 2008, 05:07 AM | # WOW Holy Shit I agree. That girl is ugly. What about Jessica Alba, though? She’s pretty good looking (and mixed). 395
Posted by haramzada on April 10, 2008, 07:36 AM | # I agree. That girl is ugly. You mean the blond, right? Because her features are disproportionate, and the rest of them garish and fake. The mulatta, on the other hand, is very evenly beautiful, with the exception of the slightly too-negroidal lips. I’d bet she has a nicer body, too. 396
Posted by onlooker on April 10, 2008, 01:46 PM | # haramzada, or VLC What do you think of this African Queen? Oh, BTW, she’s Jewish too! http://movies.msn.com/movies/galleryfeature/fabulousand50?photoidx=20 397
Posted by Peter on April 10, 2008, 02:03 PM | # Ha ha ha your funny onlooker. She is a good actress but you can’t be serious? comparing young to older women… 398
Posted by onlooker on April 10, 2008, 02:17 PM | # No, Peter, I’m not being serious. That picture of Whoopi Goldberg reminded me of VLC’s post on Thursday, April 10, 2008 at 06:31 AM I thought his was hilarious! 399
Posted by Peter on April 10, 2008, 02:49 PM | # If race mixing can produce the likes of her then i am happy :D 400
Posted by Peter on April 10, 2008, 02:51 PM | # In case it didn’t work 401
Posted by mon on April 11, 2008, 10:41 PM | # Oh dont be ridiculous, look at: Gaby Espino These girls and many others are waaaayy more beautiful than the picture of the old-lady lookin face, trashy lookin girl you put up… 402
Posted by pat on April 11, 2008, 10:45 PM | # THAT GIRL IS VERY UGLYYYY!!!! I MEAN THE BLONDE ONE… C’MON I’VE SEEN BETTER. LETS GET REAL PEOPLE, ITS NOT ABOUT THE SKIN COLOR OR THE RACE OR EVEN THE ETHNICITY ANYMORE!!! ITS ABOUT FACIAL PROPORTIONS/FEATURES. IVE SEEN INCREDIBLY GORGEOUS BLACK GIRLS AND ASIAN GIRLS. AS WELL AS HIDEOUS WHITE GIRLS. ITS ALL ABOUT THE FACE… NONETHELESS, LATIN GIRLS ARE SPECIALLY AND PARTICULARLY ATTRACTIVE SINCE THEIR RACE IS VERY MIXED: BLACK, INDIGENOUS AND EUROPEAN ANCESTRY…. PRICELESS 403
Posted by Lurker on April 11, 2008, 11:55 PM | # Mon, lets go through your list shall we; Gaby Espino - Looks to be almost all European Eva Mendes - Looks to be almost all European Natalia Oreiro - Looks to be almost all European Amelia Vega (Miss Universe) - Looks to be almost all European I think what youve done is assume that because they are latinas that they are the product of mixed ancestry, and to some extent they may be but its clear that, overwhelmingly, most of their ancestors are white. So where does that leave your argument exactly? Then there is; Halle Berry - At least half white, plus plastic surgery. Zuleyka Rivera (Miss Universe) - Looks to be almost all European, but possibly some other ancestry as well, clearly European dominates. These are all attractive women and I suspect they get a lot of that from their European genes. For your argument to stand up youve got to show that on average mixed race women are better looking than unmixed (in this case white) women. Where are all the latina beauty queens who are of mostly indian & black origin for instance, surely you can post a few names for us. “Everyone knows mixed races are more attractive and healthier, inbreeding is actually dangerous, when people get confined on reproducing only with “their kind” their kids risk being less healthy than if they were the offspring of parents from different races” Well if you mean brothers marrying sisters but how is that the main ethnic groups have survived for thousands of years with interbreeding only at the fringes but now in only a couple of generations their genes have all gone to seed? If you are really concerned about this inbreeding why are you so sure its white people who need the benefits of massive outbreeding? What about China, the worlds largest population and almost totally devoid of alien genes getting in? Arent you worried about them, they are missing out on all the benefits after all. Try popping along to a few chinese websites and suggesting it. If you dont want to experiment with China, what about Israel, much smaller - an ideal test bed, much more inbred too, surely they would benefit from your proposals more than Europeans? Try popping along to a few jewish websites and suggesting it. 404
Posted by Guessedworker on April 12, 2008, 06:30 AM | # I think, Lurker, you have the measure of their arguments. Up, down, sideways ... doesn’t matter. But I don’t think they know it, or are ever going to know it. I don’t think any of them can see that they are really saying:- 1) European people must miscegenate their genes as soon as possible into Carnisium Mysterioso, 2) It would be such a good idea because Lavinia LaToit, the well-known Costa Guatamalan actress/model/celebrity/rich man’s plaything/rapper’s ho (delete as applicable) is “hotter” than Julie Andrews in that Alpine singing thing. Point no.1 is genocide, of course. Zivists everywhere, welcome to the annuls of Nuremburg. Point no.2 is hypocrisy. No surprise there, then. Well done, Lurker. Keep up the good work. 405
Posted by haramzada on April 12, 2008, 08:34 AM | # Eh, it suits you to say so. I’m sure there are plenty of threads elsewhere talking about just how mixed she looks, or something like that. Where are all the latina beauty queens who are of mostly indian & black origin for instance, surely you can post a few names for us. How about Syesha Mercado? Fairly typical Cuban-type mixed beauty. And you know, she has a stellar rack.? The truth is that there are plenty beautiful specimens of mixed race—but there is an almost ecumenical prejudice in favor of lighter women, for obvious reasons. This should not be taken to mean I agree with Ziv or Peter, that mulattas are more beautiful than beautiful shiksas, of course; this would just be illogical. 406
Posted by Peter on April 12, 2008, 01:41 PM | # Lurker this is my personal take on it. I must apologize if i offend anyone… http://images.askmen.com/galleries/actress/mallika-sherawat/pictures/mallika-sherawat-picture-1.jpg 407
Posted by Peter on April 12, 2008, 01:42 PM | # Forgot to mention I think she is gorgeous! Personally i think she looks better than the two women posted here. 408
Posted by tony on April 15, 2008, 06:51 PM | # Yeah, the darker woman is better looking, despite the “larger” nose. She’s a damn sight better than the peroxide blonde, plastic boob, bleached/capped teeth, contact lens green eyed white lady. (and, yes, I’m a cracker). While inbreeding will accentuate bad traits, like diabetes or hemophelia, it will also accentuate good/beneficial traits. Also, most of us are white, black, mongoloid, etc. due to inbreeding. Too much inbreeding can actually cause genetic problems, and an infusion of new genetic material every few generations is beneficial. 409
Posted by Peter on April 15, 2008, 11:15 PM | # tony….Yes the mixed girls looks better but the white girl does not have Contact lens, fake boobs and probably her hair is real too. Your right about the teeth though. What do you think about the Indian 410
Posted by Jess on April 27, 2008, 09:26 PM | # I have to laugh at the ones who are claiming the first one is more attactive, because if the “Nordic” girl had her same clumsy features, those who are in favor of mixing would be pointing out her big shapeless nose, or her small unremarkable eyes, and strange protruding mouth. Instead, they are saying the girl in the second picture has fake hair color, eye color, skin color, and fake breasts. Now there hair color could well be highlighted or streaked blonde, but I doubt the tan is fake since it isn’t remarkably dark, or orange, which would indicated a fake tan. It is hardly difficult for whites turn that color in the sun. Nor is it unusal for whites to have eyes her color. Only non-whites think it rare to have blue or green eyes, however for whites it is far from rare. As for her breasts, they aren’t even exceptionally big, and do not have that implanted look, or the tell-tale crevices along the sides or top, that often indicate implants. As for the other girl being fully dressed? All I see is skin down to b the shoulders and chest. She could easily have been photographed nude. But she is far from attractive. Not even remotely so. 411
Posted by Peter on April 28, 2008, 11:19 AM | # Hello Jess! 412
Posted by Jess on April 28, 2008, 11:10 PM | # The Indian mixed woman is obivously more attractive than the woman from the cover of the book. But I do not think the woman from the book cover appears mulatto. Rather her features look somewhat Semitic, perhaps Jewish or Middle Eastern combined with maybe some Hispanic admixture, if there is also Black in the mix, it doesn’t show through that much. As for myself I have no problem with blondes whatsoever, not blonde myself, but have a few blondes in my family, and DO find many blondes to be very attractive. Hair color isn’t everything with me however. Though I do see that why those who are in favor of mixed races would have a preference for dark hair, since that is most likely what you will get from a mixed woman. But always beautiful? No !!! 413
Posted by Jess on April 29, 2008, 04:50 AM | # Also, I have to add that the Indian mixed woman definitely appears to have breast implants, unlike the blonde 414
Posted by Peter on April 29, 2008, 12:17 PM | # Hey Jess! 415
Posted by katatonic on May 08, 2008, 06:54 PM | # all I care is to know the name of the white model in the picture linked above. What’s her name? 416
Posted by Geddi on May 13, 2008, 07:46 AM | # This is all very sad and silly. JEWS ARE NOT A RACE > THEY ARE FOLLOWERS OF A RELIGION! This said, intelligence is a tricky thing to comment on, as Einstein is now believed to have been Asperger’s Syndrome and yet we all know how clever he was. There are countless examples of mixed breeding, intermarriage, cross pollination bringing about stronger, healthier and ‘better’ results. There are also, perhaps equally, as many failed examples where the crossing has produced weaker, shorter, less healthy progeny, and so the argument goes on. The writer of the first or second comment on here hit the nail on the head, albeit quite accidentally I believe, his opinion is that the bleached blonde, over made over girl with the blank expression is far more attractive than the smouldering natural looks of the darker girl. I entirely disagree with him. I am a white male of 45 and am straight. Beauty is entirely subjective, not objective. Intelligence has yet to be tested properly as all intelligence tests so far devised have some form of pre-determined education assumed. Having said this, it is generally accepted that Ashkenazi Jews are a few IQ points higher than any other group. In a previous post, someone has pointed out that inbreeding was a problem with many disorders being apparent in this group due to inbreeding. Breed with who ya love. Simple aint it! 417
Posted by Guessedworker on May 13, 2008, 08:32 AM | # Geddi, Are you Ashkenazic? Would you agree that the Ashkenazim cluster genetically? You should. It is perfectly acceptable to understand Jews as a collection of perhaps rather close ethnicities, and indeed inevitable that ethnicity applies since the acknowledgement of Jewishness follows the maternal line. IQ testing is extremely robust. It measures young children who have not received the benefit of a long education. So what you are saying, I guess, is that it is culturally biased. But it measures black Americans alongside white, and anyway psychometrists go to extreme lengths to eliminate cultural bias for testing. The same results emerge. In plain fact, there is simply no evidential basis on which the mean IQ of Pygmies, say, is the equal of that of the Ashkenazim. It is perverse to cling to the meme of the tabula rasa. Human difference is a product of the EEA in the capacities of the brain as it is in every other aspect of the body. On the objectivity of beauty, there is good evidence to show that people’s tastes actually lean towards the averages for their own ethnies. Anyone with any understanding of natural selection would know that adaptive traits, not maladaptive traits, are the ones that are selected. Completely maladaptive traits for, say, a cold climate will not, on average, probably prove attractive to a member of a cold-climate ethny. Nobody here objects to someone falling in love with a person of another race. What is highly objectionable is the commendation that Europeans should miscegenate themselves away. That’s a genocidal idea. Period. 418
Posted by Agalloch on May 18, 2008, 12:07 AM | # @ Peter: You seem to paint all the Muslims with one color i.e. desire for suicide bombing in order to get 72 virgins. I see that you have homosexual tendencies so that is why you replaced virgins with hunks. I have seen more smart Pakistani/Indian students than white guys. It is a separate story that how many “whites” won Nobel Prizes. If we allot resources for education to Pakistan in the same proportions as they are being alloted in the US, Canada and the UK, we will see that most sharp minds will emerge out of the Subcontinent. Our 1 hour study is equal to 4 hours of studying by white folks I have talked to and interacted with (there were at least 15) ... how do you explain that 419
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 12:40 AM | # Agalloch, if we’re that stupid too bad for us, but regardless, we don’t want our race replaced by yours or anyone’s: we’ll just have to muddle through somehow without Paki intellectual assistance, studying four hours for every one hour you guys study, judging by what you tell us. OK, that’s a price we’re willing to pay in order not to be race-replaced. What’s hard to understand? We’ll do it: we’re willing to put in four hours of studying for every one hour you guys put in, if it means our race will survive. Also, we don’t mind tiny numbers of you immigrating. What we object to is entry of race-replacement volumes of you guys (or of Chinamen, Negroes, Mexicans, Arabs, Maghrebians, Turks, what-have-you). That shouldn’t be hard to understand either — is it? To me it looks as simple as pie. Now, it’s not your fault — you guys aren’t “letting yourselves in,” so to speak, race-replacement advocates among ourselves are doing it, letting you guys in in wildly inappropriate volumes. They’re the ones we’re really mad at. 420
Posted by Lurker on May 18, 2008, 12:41 AM | # Agalloch - so these sharp minds of the subcontinent, you are saying they are 4 times more intelligent than white folks. Thats a bold statement, so given that many from the subcontinent already receive what they tell us is a good education they are just about to dominate science, research and engineering then? No more copying anymore, its all going to be original work. Whens this going to start then, tonight? Tomorrow? Three weeks time? I demand a timetable! And these “whites” who won Nobel prizes, perhaps you might mean Jewish? Who were they really,Indians & Pakistanis? So really all along them wily white folks have been stealing your work. You would be better off staying in the subcontinent then and keeping it all for yourselves. 421
Posted by Peter on May 18, 2008, 01:35 PM | # Agalloch lol I did not mention that in this post. Anyways I “know” Muslims. I was born and raised in a Muslim country and lived in a few for 17 years. I know what an average Muslim thinks like. I lived in Pakistan where children are taught they have two enemies….Israel and India. Even Muslim kids as far as Indonesia are taught to hate Israel even though they or their ancestors may have had nothing to do with them. Fred Scrooby and Lurker my Darlings you both fail to understand again. Its not us “Subcons” that are marrying your women or men. The vast majority of us keep to our kind…as you already might know. So how are they coming into this discussion of race replacement? when its the Black population that you need to worry about, specifically Black men propagating with White women. If the issue if of them increasing in population then refer to my comments below. Just a curious Q Why should we be blamed if your women are not reproducing? choosing to be with other White men? I read somewhere that the birth rate of some of these developing countries is low…low enough that if the population is not increased by immigration there will be an overwhelming number of elderly people vs young….hurting the economy, increasing taxes, increasing the retirement age etc etc. And Please don’t tell me that this low birth rate is only happening in North America, Uk etc. It is also happening in two countries which are very interesting (for me to mention). Italy and Japan. Italy has a low number of foreigners compared to other countries in Europe…I am not sure of the exact figures but 5 % of the total population? Anyways in the end Agalloch….If your a Muslim Pakistani i am sorry if i offended you. But i don’t hate you or any Muslim…not enough to wish death upon them. Now what kind of neighbor would i be if i did? *hint hint* 422
Posted by Peter on May 18, 2008, 01:43 PM | # Geddi your exactly right about Jews!!! that its a religion not race. 423
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 03:10 PM | # Peter, 1) the racially unlike shouldn’t be admitted in race-replacement volumes without at the very least a clearly-worded referendum first, put to the people (the original white native people, obviously, NOT a mixture of the original whites and the non-white newcomers brought in precisely in the hope of creating a new and politically irreversible fait accompli) using language ordinary working folk can understand, language which sets out in simple clear wording all that such a policy portends for them and their posterity — indeed, portends for the nation itself as an entity — financially, socially, economically, demographically, racially, religiously, culturally, quality-of-life-wise, what their grandchildren can be expected to look like physically, and so on: all of it, in all its details. 2) Regardless of whether or to what extent Subcontinentals (that word, in no way meant as a slur, gets around having to put “Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, and Sri Lankans” each time one isn’t being more specific) are marrying whites now, with time intermarriage will occur and maybe the people, sensing that very fact, didn’t want open borders for precisely that reason among others, so why was it not put to them in an honestly-worded referendum?; 3) as I saw it put not long ago by some new organization or web-site, I forget which: Euro nations should be allowed to enjoy the benefits of limiting the population volumes in their own communities and nations without fearing that the moment they succeed in doing it the capitalists will flood the place with the racially unlike on grounds they’re not reproducing themselves adequately. Maybe they want a less densely populated country? If so, that’s their perfect right without the place getting changed into Sub-Saharan Africa, China, or Arabia through population transfers being forced down their throats by those in control. 4) If, in a country that’s limited its own birth rates, national economic adjustments of this or that variety must be made due to the lopsided age pyramid threatening to place excessive burden on the relatively fewer young adults as they’re taxed to support the relatively many elderly, that’s better — those adjustments are better — than importing race-replacement volumes of the racially unlike in hope of solving the retirees problem by “making up the young population shortfall.” Japan is doing it, partly by concentrating on robotics and largely also by having a national-socialist-type intertwining (yes, national-socialist-type, just as Israel, China, and many other places have and National Socialist Germany had under Hitler) of government, industry, labor, and economic planning and policy. It’s working there, and no matter what relatively minor strains they’re going through as a result of their birth rate decline, overt race-replacement as the Eurosphere has been subjected to would be far worse for them, and they evidently grasp that since they’re not doing it despite pressures on them, certainly largely exerted by foreign Jews who adore getting everyone except Jews race-mixed, to do so. 424
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 03:36 PM | # As for white girls taking Negro boyfriends, that’s certainly partly because Eurosphere governments have been busily brainwashing them to do so since WW II (brainwashing which is probably largely, in turn, a result of behind-the-scenes élite Jewish influence and pressures exerted) and, as goes without saying, the non-stop Jewish media blitz brainwashes them to do so (Hollywood, MTV, TV sitcoms exported round the world, and other Jewish media influences (magazines, book publishing, the fashion world). That needs to end and until it ends I want to see a Star of David clearly visible around the neck of every white woman depicted in the Jewish media as lusting after, shagging, pregnant by, bearing the baby of, co-habiting with, slobbering over, dreaming of, getting orgasms from thinking about, marrying, idolizing, or what-have-you, a Negro, Mexican, or other non-Euro male. We’ll see how long it lasts then, with all such women clearly identified as Jewish. It won’t last a microsecond, not the least of reasons being all the Jewish Defense League car bombs going off under the cars of any Jewish producers or directors who created any such stuff — and probably Mossad car bombs too: they’d bump these producers off quicker than they did Gerald Bull. No populations males on earth would put up with that except gelded Euros. 425
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 03:37 PM | # Gelded or ... infected (search for “gordian worm” in this site’s search feature ....) 426
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2008, 04:59 PM | # Love it when people imply that anything other than miscegenation constitutes inbreeding depression (what they really mean by “inbreeding,” I suppose). That isn’t stupid or anything. Have they ever heard of outbreeding depression? Of course not! These people couldn’t handle basic dog breeding (by basic I mean “how to get an APBT”), but they know the ins and outs of breeding people. Ah well, the good news is women are more racially discriminatory than men when it comes to breeding. We can afford to lose all these “exotic”-obsessed males. For the clueless: continental-level race is orders of magnitude away from anything resembling inbreeding depression, know-nothings. Genophobes - *yawn* 427
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 18, 2008, 05:02 PM | # Posted by Peter on Thursday, April 10, 2008 at 06:51 PM | # Lol, no airbrush teams or paint-sprayer makeup there. Move along, move along. I bet the legs, upper lip, and space between the brows looks great sans depilatories, heh. I don’t mean to dump on the girl, but if you’re going to put our women up against those of other races you’re obviously going to lose. Badly. 428
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 05:31 PM | #
Amen to that! I’m glad someone brought that up! Euro women aren’t the only ones who need to procreate within the race, folks. How about Euro men! Nothing personal if someone’s already got a non-white sweetheart, and God bless you and may you find great happiness together! But for Euro men who are still looking, your racial sisters are the world’s most beautiful — why in hell are you looking elsewhere than at the most beautiful women in creation, your natural partners, the women who were made for you and you for them? OK, OK, white women these days are too women’s libbish? First of all, not all are: look some more, you’ll find one to your liking who isn’t. The non-women’s-lib ones are out there in droves. And if women’s lib is the sole imperfection in the one you’d otherwise be thinking of, in many cases you can rid her of that. It’s called being a man. (Check out Petrucchio in Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew. Yes yes he was wacko but look what he was dealing with — and he pulled it off: see? It can be done!) That stuff in her will melt away like the Wicked Witch of the West in the shower. It’s similar to “Dr. Laura” (radio talk-show host Laura Schlessinger) who told how she used to be a big women’s libber until she had her baby. She said when she had her baby, for the first time in her life she realized there was something in this world far more important than her personal needs and desires, and “all that radical feminism stuff suddenly just fell off me like so much dandruff,” were her exact words. There’s stuff that can get worthwhile women out of that women’s lib crap, stuff like babies, real love, and real men acting like real men. That women’s lib crap in many cases is because the girl is confused. If you think she could be the one for you but for that, unconfuse her by acting the way a man should act (hint: which is NOT the way men who are sympathetic to women’s lib act — men like that just frustrate the gals even more, and get them even more into it). Often enough you’ll succeed. 429
Posted by Peter on May 18, 2008, 05:37 PM | # Svyatoslav My Darling i am not upset at your comment. You sound like another J Richards to me. There are more pics of the girl down below. Did i say she has no make up/professional help? to me she looks better than both the girls posted (White and Mullato). Oh yes yes lets bring the body hair aspect into this…A White woman can have more hair on her body than an Asian man. So must i assume White women are more masculine? My God i hate doing this but…uhm Persian/Greek/South European women anyone….hairiness uhm…. So Svy please don’t bring this stupid comment of body hair into the discussion. Anyone can tell you Caucasians are the “hairiest” race. If you really want a hairless woman…may i suggest an East Asian woman? I would be ok if you had just said you don’t find the dark skin of the Indian girl attractive. Simple as that 430
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 05:54 PM | #
There may be some truth to that observation of Peter’s, but the reality is just the opposite: Western women who have lots of babies are the ones who preserve their youth into old age the longest. And the ones who breastfeed lots of babies longest are the ones who get the least breast cancer of all women. 431
Posted by Peter on May 18, 2008, 06:05 PM | # Hey Freddie! 432
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 06:17 PM | # She looks very feminine and beautiful, Peter. But “beauty is as beauty does,” so I only hope she’s that way in real life too. Thank you for your kind words. 433
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 09:08 PM | # The following comments of mine from an old thread are related to my 7:10 PM comment above, points #3 & #4:
434
Posted by torgrim on May 18, 2008, 11:57 PM | # Fred, “I trust we can all see the criminality of the opportunists who have done this epocal crime.” Oh yes! See it and see it well! And many more everyday are awakening to this criminal behavior. I will not forget the constant din from the “anti war” morphed into the “Ecology Now”, propagandists for population control…btw, both are were/are noble goals…but the ignoble opportunists obviously had other intentions…. I do not want to live in a land that is filled up, congested, paved over and teeming with foreigners! The areas where Euro-folk live look different for a reason…we do better, our fitness or lack thereof is a direct result of coming from remote country, wild areas, open steppes, mountains, places that challenge. Not a waterhole in a desert or a tropical clime. In both of the latter topographys, villages/city states are the norm of settlement, with high population density and extreme competition for resources. The populations, from city/urban dwellings, have selected for intense competition, and all the game playing that the “Bazaar Culture” suggests. 435
Posted by Lurker on May 19, 2008, 04:43 AM | # Interesting idea Torgrim, never thought of it like that before. 436
Posted by torgrim on May 19, 2008, 01:43 PM | # Lurker, Actually, the ideas are from James Bowery. My input is confirmation, through life experience and in my words. 437
Posted by Peter on May 25, 2008, 01:36 PM | # This is in response to Fred Scrooby This is my observation in University of Toronto. In the Arts/History/English department there is a disproportionate number of White students compared to Black and Asian. Now if you go to the Medical Sciences what will you generally see? Most of the students are either Asian or Indian. So these are the future Doctors/nurses that will be taking “care” of the aging population in the coming years. 438
Posted by Evan on August 03, 2008, 08:29 PM | # Are you serious? lol. And so to whom are certain features less desirable? Perhaps you know little of sociology and the way we are socialized. That goofy looking barbie doll you put in the post is hardly some showing of the all great euro beauty. Can beauty be so narrowly defined? I think not. And it depends on who’s defining it. I personally find brunettes of euro origin far more attractive than blonds. Blonds are extremely overrated. I love how we pick and choose what select traits are good and bad. Why is it that left handedness is sometimes looked down on for being the minority while blond hair and blue eyes are not? There is nothing genetically wrong with left of ambidextrous people. Its all a social construction. Why are Brazilians ranked so high on many people’s list of the most beautiful people on the planet? You might not agree. Even I might not agree, but it is a testament to how beauty and its definition is largely relative. The whole health thing I havent looked into and therefore cannot form a complete rebuttal. I do know very healthy interracial people just like any other people. The fact still remains that we are all a part of the same species where our genetic variation is greater within groups than between groups. There are so many studies on this that it can make your head spin. We do not create mules. We create fertile offspring and thats where we leave it. Almost everything after that is sociology. 439
Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 03, 2008, 11:49 PM | # You’ve memorized your lessons very well, Evan. A+. (God I can’t believe the mileage Lewontin and Gould have gotten out of that crap. Every mental midget on the planet knows about it and spouts it. Did they put it in the dialogue of that TV series starring the Down’s patient some years ago? How come all the ‘tards know about it?) 440
Posted by silver on August 04, 2008, 12:03 AM | #
(2) They’re not familiar with what the average mixed-race Brazilian looks like, or if it’s an attractive mixed-race Brazilian, they’re not aware that it’s the European genes which makes that person attractive. (3) They’ve seen some near-naked “Carneval” dancers, slim near-naked bodies typically fooling one into seeing more beauty in the face. 441
Posted by Englander on August 04, 2008, 07:12 AM | # (4) Brazil is the plastic surgery capital of the world. Yes, Rio even has Hollywood beat there. (5) The climate and culture mean that the beaches are a focal point where everyone gathers and the best looking people parade themselves where tourists see them. In the West we have better things to do, like working. 442
Posted by ATKM on August 05, 2008, 07:22 PM | # Latin America period is the plastic surgery capital of the world. It is the social norm. 443
Posted by A. on September 06, 2008, 03:17 AM | # sorry, but I NEVER read something more literally dumb and unsubstantial than the acticles on your site. A bunch of racist idiots, so what? 444
Posted by Adam on December 11, 2008, 09:19 PM | # What an idiot. The White race is by far the most attractive race there is, I sadly know many none Whites who agree. Interracial sex makes me feel ill. The White race is demographically screwed. 445
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 12:21 AM | # as an asian female, many jews have told me i’m bigoted for wanting to marry only into my culture. is that so? 446
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 12:23 AM | # am i antisemitic if i say i dont want to marry a jew cuz his culture is very differnet from mine, and i’m not comfortable with their culture and i want to maintain my own? or if i said i’d rather marry a white guy than a jewish guy, am i still being racist/bigoted? 447
Posted by Captainchaos on December 13, 2008, 01:06 AM | # newgirl: “am i antisemitic if i say i dont want to marry a jew cuz his culture is very differnet from mine, and i’m not comfortable with their culture and i want to maintain my own? or if i said i’d rather marry a white guy than a jewish guy, am i still being racist/bigoted?” The Jews are abject hypocrites. Racial purity for them but mongrelization for everyone else. Procreate within your own race and be proud of your race. That is the way to go. 448
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 11:15 AM | # captainchaos: The Jews are abject hypocrites. Racial purity for them but mongrelization for everyone else. Procreate within your own race and be proud of your race. That is the way to go. why do they want this? i don’t get it.
also, i wouldn’t want to marry the jews cuz they often come from broken families and are screwed up. they have so much divorce, infideltiy and even sexual abuse. look at jerry springer, dustin hoffman, woody allen, goldie haughn, harrison ford, larry king, barbara walters, aaron spelling, joe lieberman, michael douglas, kirk douglas,steven spielberg, william schatner, etc. moreover, jerry seinfeld had an affair with an underaged girl when he was at least 35 years of age, actress yasmine’ bleeth’s mother, carina married a jewish guy and they got divorced, actor henry winkler’s wife was married before him, and the guy i work with says he was the only one in his family who wasn’t divorced until 3 years ago, and one of my jewish clasmates said her father ran out on her when she was 3, i’ve met 2 israeli guys who openly cheat on their wives and one of them threatened to harm a girl whom he didn’t like, and my israeli girlfriend was going through a divorce with her abusive, cheating american jewish usband, and two of her cousins were divorced, and so was her american-jewish friend, and said that infidelity is rampant amongst them. and don’t forget their dominanice in porn, like with ron jeremy, nina hartley, heidi fleiss, etc. and let’s not forget elliot spitzer and ari fleischer in the CIA leka case, nor michael douglas’s son who did drugs and was always stoned. did u know thi? thus, i prefer my own only, but if i had to choose between white guys or jewish guys, it’s white guys, for white guys don’t cheat as much as jews do. many women go for them cuz they have money, but just b/c they have money, does it mean they’re better? nope. 99% of them are players, or are narcissistic or selfish and can’t give women the securty they need. why does the media glorify them anyway? 449
Posted by Captainchaos on December 13, 2008, 12:44 PM | # newgirl: “why do they want this? i don’t get it.” Cohesive group strategies out compete ‘groups’ that are really a collection of deracinated individuals. The Jews know this, so they seek to affirm their own group cohesion (an important part of which is the integrity of their genetic similarity [i.e., their peoplehood]) while encouraging the disintegration of the cohesion of other groups. That is how the Jews come out on top. “will there be more geentic defects?” There will be no more genetic defects in your people than there have historically been if you continue to marry within your group. Your people have made it this far, they will continue on in that vein if you do what is necessary to secure their survival - which is what you want. There are at least two racial sub-groups that adhere to your culture, as you say, both are worth preserving. Act accordingly. 450
Posted by Lurker on December 13, 2008, 02:00 PM | # Sawrference to this at Steve Sailer’s: The Robert Lappin Charitable Foundation, now out of business due to the Jewish crook who funded it being arrested and the money cut off. Check out the mission statement. It starts:
Imagine that in North America or Europe but with the word ‘Jewish’ replaced with ‘white’ or ‘European’. I would expect the police to be knocking on the door very shortly afterwards. 451
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 13, 2008, 02:11 PM | #
Or the orgasms they need. According to Alon Ziv (guess what ethnicity Ziv is ...) only Negro men can give Caucasian women the orgasms they need. Of course, being (fill in the blank) ________ , Ziv didn’t aim that at Jewish women, only Euro women (and, presumably, other races of women). So, Euro women and Subcontinental women can only get the orgasms they need from Negro men. Jewish women apparently don’t need Negro men to get their best orgasms, so they must be able to get them from Jewish men, as well as Euro men and Subcon men. Since no other women can do that, we’re forced to conclude that Jewish vaginas are somehow different. 452
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 02:23 PM | # captainchaos, Cohesive group strategies out compete ‘groups’ that are really a collection of deracinated individuals. The Jews know this, so they seek to affirm their own group cohesion (an important part of which is the integrity of their genetic similarity [i.e., their peoplehood]) while encouraging the disintegration of the cohesion of other groups. That is how the Jews come out on top.’ but why? what have we done to them? and why to us indians and nepalis? what did we specifically do to hurt the jews? i don’t care if other people of different races/religions/colors marry, for it’s none of my business, but shouldn’t the jews also respect my beliefs? “There will be no more genetic defects in your people than there have historically been if you continue to marry within your group.’‘ but nepali is a slight different ethnic groups(in terms of language and a bit of culture) than indians are, so if my future progeny does get their genes, eventually, won’t they also get nepalese genetic defects? makes sense? the jewish person who told me this also said it’s ‘shallow to want to marry someone from the same culture, based on the presumption that both our ancestors ate the same kind of food and dressed the same way, and may even be a pretext to bigotry. isn’t her reasoning stupid? i mean, culture isn’t just the past, it’s the present way of life too. i mean, guyanese and trinidadian indians live totally different lifestyles than indians from india, or indians raised in western countries, so should i marry them just b/c my religion is the same as theirs is? would an italian marry a croatian just b/c their religion is the same? another jewish guy seemed to be upset that he couldn’t find an indian or nepalese woman to date and marry, and said we always marry our own only. i said it’s in all cultures, not just ours. but i can’t say the same to his race, the jews(yes, they ARE a race, in the words of Benjamin Netanyu), just b/c they control the medias and anything remotely different to them results in anti semitism, when in reality, they’re the most racist people on this planet. did u know that they don’t even consider black jews, the ethiopian jews, to be their own kind? yes, that’s true. askenazi and sephardic jews also dislike each other. they’re so screwed up, they discriminate against their own kind, yet they try to teach others tolerance and complain when we also want to marry only our own? what baloney. jews are hypocritical jerks. sorry if i sound anti semitic, but if they can insult me, why can’t i do the same to them? they call non jewish people goyim, or cattle, and they call non jewish women shiksas, or abomination. many orthodox jews are taught at yeshivas that buddhism is evil just b/c in their opinion, we worship idols. I know cuz one orthodox guy told me! why? buddhism is NOT evil. on the side note, what do others think of the fact that i mentioned how jews often have messed up families as shown by their high divorce rates? judge judy sheindlin, and jerry sheindlin all were divorced and married twice, and so was bob saget from full house(he has a dirty potty mouth for comedy too). once more, i respect people of all cultures, but hypocrisy and insulting my faith is when u cross the line, jewish or not! anyone else got any opinions? 453
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 02:36 PM | # why would ziv not include jewish women but only white women instead? makes no sense to me. we all know jews are big on porn, to why not have them on too? if people agree on what i said on how jewish men cannot presumed to be good just b/c they have money, why is it that the media always glorifies them? jerry seinfled is highly respected, when the things he has done shows clearly that he is not a good role model, like dating 17 year old shoshanna lonstein when he was in his late thirties. this is borderline child abuse/molestation. why don’t people condemn him? sick. on the other hand, non jewish men are put down, especially asian men. why? i think men of other races can sometimes be better than jewish men, so can white men. israeli men are know for cheating, as many israeli women told me this. moreover, they traffic slavic women into israel for prostitution too., did u know? 454
Posted by cladrastis on December 13, 2008, 02:52 PM | # Newgirl, Have you looked at the banner on this website? It’s called “Majority Rights” with a graphic depicting the outline of Europe. Obviously, most of the commentariat here know the game Jews play; we know their roles their, their strategies, and most of their lies. We are concerned with preaching to our own; we really don’t care what you do. That’s for you to decide yourself and amongst your own people. If you choose to join the multicult and procreate with E. Asians, Polynesians, Negroes, or Jews, that’s your prerogative. We want our own people to acknowledge and understand the brainwashing that has taken place in the West, so that we can reverse the damage that has been done and save the genes that created 98% of our civilization. Feel free to browse this website and read the posts - many of them are applicable to all ethnic groups acting to promote their own self interest. But don’t waste our time or space on this thread bemoaning racism or offensive material that occasionally pops up here. Cheers! 455
Posted by Captainchaos on December 13, 2008, 02:59 PM | # newgirl: “but nepali is a slight different ethnic groups(in terms of language and a bit of culture) than indians are, so if my future progeny does get their genes, eventually, won’t they also get nepalese genetic defects? makes sense?” Marry an Indian and not a Nepali then. “but why? what have we done to them? and why to us indians and nepalis? what did we specifically do to hurt the jews?” The Jews have undergone evolutionary selective pressures that genetically dispose them towards the subversion of their host societies so they can gain mastery of said societies. They really can’t help themselves. That may suck, but that’s the way it is. “the jewish person who told me this also said it’s ‘shallow to want to marry someone from the same culture, based on the presumption that both our ancestors ate the same kind of food and dressed the same way, and may even be a pretext to bigotry.” Now you know what White Nationalists say is the truth from first hand experience. Don’t be afraid of the Jews. Tell them what a bunch of filthy hypocrites they are and that they have no business telling your people what to do. Tell them to shove it! “many orthodox jews are taught at yeshivas that buddhism is evil just b/c in their opinion, we worship idols. I know cuz one orthodox guy told me! why? buddhism is NOT evil.” White Nationalists want what you want, to preserve our people and culture. The Jews won’t be satisfied until all peoples and cultures are mixed together - the death of diversity. We are the true respecters of diversity. 456
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 13, 2008, 03:48 PM | #
Well, it’s both stupid and smart at the same time, smart if it gets the Euros to self-destruct, stupid if the blowback from that Euro self-destruction harms the Jews more than Euro existence did. If you sit by a lit candle on a summer evening you may see a moth or two repeatedly fly too close the flame, singeing their wings and antennas, even burning themselves up. Yes it’s stupid on the moths’ part but not if you have that gene they have that makes them do it, in which case you can’t help it. You just keep doing it for no reason, because you have the gene. Jews have that gene, the exact same one as moths. It’s the first case of a human and an insect having the same exact behavioral gene. No one knows how the Jews got it; it must go way back in evolution.
This guy wanted to shag a Subcontinental girl, hun. In no way was he thinking of marrying one. (Obviously he won’t just blurt that out or he’ll never score.)
That’s correct.
That’s one of their more intelligent positions. Less moth-like.
What’s wrong? Hey let’s not blame the Jews even when for once they’re making complete sense!
As I told you, the guy wanted to shag you, honey. Wake up. Marriage was the furthest thing from his mind, not even remotely on the radar screen.
You go, girl!
I don’t know the statistics on their messed-up families — but any country that harbors a lot of them will soon be on the fast track to becoming a messed-up country.
Because Ziv’s whole schtick as a Jew is to get Euros miscegenated. Jews are not his target, Euros are. Look at it this way: If you’re a Jew, and if for you the Euro race is a problem, then, to paraphrase Stalin, “No race, no problem.”
Three guesses who runs the media.
Yes we did know (and we wish we didn’t: it’s pretty sickening). You’re preaching to the choir. But it’s nice to see a gal so well-informed as yourself. The Jews may have to think up new strategies: too many goys are onto their tricks. 457
Posted by newgirl on December 13, 2008, 05:06 PM | # Fred Scrooby what makes u think he only wanted sex? he said he was looking for one of our girls to marry and seemed upset that we don’t marry out. How can u say that? moreover, many jews i met tried to target asians like chinese too for mixed marriage, so it’s not u alone, is it? whites are not persecuting jews anymore, so why do they target u? i don’t see any reason for it. If whites want to preserve their own, fine, i respect that. I don’t care. the whites or european peoples can do whatever they want. I respect people all over, as long as they don’t hurt me. How do whites know about the jews’ games but colored people(of east indian or nepali ancestry) do not? moreover, they are also targeting asians now. a lot of them are starting to go to thailand and cambodia to traffic women to israel for prostitution too. my friend’s in tourism in asia so he told me this. many israelis go to many asian countries and rape local girls or do porn there. sick. they prey upon innocent 3rd world kids. i guess they’ll prey upon colored women(us) next, right? captainchaos, “Don’t be afraid of the Jews. Tell them what a bunch of filthy hypocrites they are and that they have no business telling your people what to do. Tell them to shove it!’‘ i wanted to at that time, but if i did, i’d get in trouble for anti semitism. what about that, eh? in our culture, we’re taught to not to tell others how to live their lives, hence we don’t bother people of other cultures, but i don’t like being targeted, and yet i can’t do anything about that cuz they took over the media. “White Nationalists want what you want, to preserve our people and culture. The Jews won’t be satisfied until all peoples and cultures are mixed together - the death of diversity. We are the true respecters of diversity.” fine, no problem from the people of my culture. but, please don’t think buddhism is a bad faith like they do. we don’t want to be attacked b/c of that, okay? the orthodox jews might be next danger to us buddhsits and animists and other indigenous asian faiths if they gain too much power. 458
Posted by proudgypsy on December 13, 2008, 07:26 PM | # newgirl, don’t be upset if jews despise your race. they do that to mine, the gypsies, as well as others. why care for people who’re worthless and not so good anyways? Maybe it’s jealousy that makes the jews jealous. I’m sure a lovely, beautiful person who deserves much better than the jews. like u even said, just cuz they have money, doesn’t mean they’re better. I too am aware of how they easily divorce and come from broken families. one jewess said she’d leave her husband in a second if she got a chance with someone as handsome as david hasselhoff. she didn’t care about her kids, only about satiating her sexual needs., she was serious too, not joking. if a jewess can say this, imagine what jewish guys must be like. infidelity is high amongst jews in the US and israel,(since i know many of these people well), and abuse too. those orthodox jewish men can really be demanding of their women, i know that well. money can’t bring true happiness. thus, don’t feel bad about yourself. most people don’t like jews either, so it goes both ways. do u want to marry them and have huge problems with their families? be cheated on too, do u want that? better stick to your own, like i am, instead o walking down the aisle with them, knowing full well in the end, that there’s only a 50% chance of happily ever after. one irish guy i know said he dated a jewish girl and all she cared about was herself, and after he dated 4 more, he found a pattern. most non jewish women are more loving, giving and kind than these vermin she-wolves. they’re MUCH more superior than these hooked nose, banana-faced dogs. I have little respect for a community like this, especially. when so many of them are in porn. not all of the jews are bad, but overall, i’m not fond of them b/c of their superiority complex in thinking ‘they’re god’s chosen people.’ if they were chosen, they’d believe in kindness, truth, faithfulness, compromise and care. that would keep their families together, and not have so much cheating. one thing though: how do they say 50% of jews are marrying out when most jews i know say they only want to marry their own? How do they come up with that? and how do they say their race is dying out when orthodox jews have so many kids? Anyone know? 459
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 13, 2008, 07:47 PM | # Looks like the comments by “newgirl” and “proudgypsy” have been penned by the same person. I had the faint feeling at first that “newgirl” wasn’t genuine but didn’t listen to my instincts and went ahead and replied. Mistake. 460
Posted by fred scrooby on December 13, 2008, 09:06 PM | # fred scrooby, what are you tlaking about? i was only trying to help somebody, that newgirl. What’s wrong with that? Stop accusing me. I don’t know that person, and it’s not right to accuse somebody. This is the thanks I get? I know a lot about many different cultures becuz i’m a sociologist and I’ve lived in Europe, canada, and the US. Moreover, I read a lot too. You don’t even know me. So, don’t pass judgements. I don’t know newgirl, neither do you, and who knows if she is napalese or Indian or whatever? Point is, I was just trying to help make her feel better, becuz I too have been discriminated against. 462
Posted by Dave Johns on December 13, 2008, 09:26 PM | # Anyone that is darker than a brown paper bag is not to be trusted. 463
Posted by Dave Johns on December 13, 2008, 09:37 PM | # newgirl, Take your Antichrist buddhism and shove it up your ass! 464
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 09:50 PM | # White people are so inferior it’s unbelieveable and ludicrous. On the one hand, they bitch about their race being outbred by all minority people, like me, African Americans. Some of them are so petrified, they have to go and fuck their own sisters just to try to keep their pathetic race from dying out and because they can’t get chicks for shit. On the other hand, they say that blacks can’t get chicks. hey, if blacks can’t get chicks, why are you pathetic losers shaking in your boots from th fear of losing your race? lol. Go figure. 465
Posted by Dave Johns on December 13, 2008, 09:59 PM | # ccmp, Niggers, if left to there own devices, would starve to death .. or, at best, revert back to the stone age. Thank your lucky stars, nigger, that there are IDIOT white liberals that support your sorry asses! 466
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:01 PM | # If there’s one thing whites have in common with Jews, it’s that both these races suffer from insecurity, inferiority and that’s why they both deserve each other. I’ve lived in the ‘hood all my life, and never seen any of my homeboys or girls act this way. Whites and Jews definitely are the most inferior of all the races. 467
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:08 PM | # “Niggers, if left to there own devices, would starve to death .. or, at best, revert back to the stone age.” Yeah, yeah, which is why we’ve survived with no help from you whatsoever, even today. When you Eurotrash fucks were fighting war after war in your shitholes, we blacks were building nice monuments and making important discoveries in math and science, whihc, without, you all wouldve been decimated. And i’m a parasite? LMAO! That’s why I paid thousands of dollars in taxes last year so that tons of white people would be able to live off the dole. Whites do make me laugh my ass off. The entertainment I get from whites is too much to handle. I love it. And you want white pride? bring it on then. Bring it on to Africa, Asia, South America or even the Middle East, since you white pride FORESKIN heads won’t give me a one-on-one fight even if your lives depended on it. You need to be in groups to protect your sorry hides. So, come on down, crackers. See what’ll become of your SISSy white pride in our homelands. Come on losers. I’m waiting. Come on you cowards. Don’t hide. We all are waiting for you. 468
Posted by Dave Johns on December 13, 2008, 10:25 PM | # It’s easy to contorl niggers. All white people need to do is to offer you boot-lips crack cocaine and some bling. “Your people” are a joke ... “but your peoples’ suuuuuure can dance”! LOL 469
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:27 PM | # One thing is definitely true about whites(especially white men): small brains, small dicks, small breasts, but HUGE egos. They need to constantly brag about themselves in order to feel good. Why? because they’re the most inferior of all the races. They are under the illusion that so many minorities want to marry them and breed with them. Who’d want to breed with a bunch of alcoholic, arrogant, cheating losers with no personality, just liek your cousins the dumbass Jews! You all have so much in common with each other. I know my homegirls who’re educated and smart don’t go near you. Only uneducated, stupid, grotesque black girls with no self-esteem go for white guys. 470
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:34 PM | # And it’s SO easy to control whites. Just give them pussy, and they’ll be going down on you like the Niagra falls. YOUR people are worse than dog shit, but they sure know how to fuck someone. In fact, they’ll fuck anyone with a dick or pussy. Ever been to Paris? all you’ll see there are white whores/gigolos who’re waiting to screw the first person they see. Your mommy was a hooker there too, I’m sure. When she was pregnant with you, she got penetrated by so many cocks that they hit your teenie little head so hard you got migranes. She did all this just because she couldn’t pay the bills. She even said to me ‘don’t step on the family heater’ when I stepped on a cigarette at your shack, AKA your home! Drugs? in Amsterdam and Brussels, all they did was smoke Hashish or pot at school to keep their pea-sized minds off of pedophilia, poverty and their FUGLY cheating hookers-for-wives, as that’s what you whites are all good for and have nothing more. HAHAHHA! OWNED CRACKERS! 471
Posted by Dave Johns on December 13, 2008, 10:49 PM | # To bad ccmp is tramped in the prison of his black skin. It must be hell. Better him then me. 472
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:50 PM | # Whites are the most beautiful of all the races?! WTF? That’s the funniest thing I ever heard of. I’ve seen trolls look better than that swamp thing whore, FAKE blonde, boob-silicon job tramp I saw in that picture. She looks like a typical white cracker whore. Give my regards to 42nd street, sweetheart. Say hi to your sister and mother for me there too. Even if you crackers are the ‘sexiest’ or most beautiful of all the races, do you seriously think that’s gonna get you anywhere in life? You’re in for a rude awakening if you do. You are in for a real treat when you complete high school, but can’t make it at college because your mind is busy with marijuana, cars and fucking, so you are expelled and have to look for a $2 an hour job cleaing bathrooms. Then, all your ‘sexiness’ melts faster than X-mas snow. And this is ONLY IF you can graduate high school. Since you can’t write a coherent sentence nor can you even do simple arithmatic, you can barely even make it past the nineth grade. As for your ‘superior white beauty,’ it’s all bullshit. Your white tramps have to have rhinoplasty, silicon breasts, hair dyes, artifical tans, a whole counter full of cosmetics, and lip surgeries to get the fullness they all crave and the ‘look’ that they all want. Some ‘beauty! You white cream cheeks cracker sorry excuse for men have to use cock pumps, viagra, plastic surgeries to fix your ugly noses, and to go to the gym just to get even one tricep, because God knows you’re too weak to even lift up a tiny ant. Yeah, you’re so hot. NOT! 473
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 10:55 PM | # Cramped? That’s the lamest thing I’ve ever heard. Come one, give me a better comeback. You really think I’d actually want to look like a pale-faced loser with lips thinner than thread like you white crackers rather than a dark, strong black hunk with the complexion of midnight and which helps prevent from pre-mature aging unlike pale skin with freckles that makes you crackers look like a bag of wrinkles by age 35? The joke’s on you crackers now. You’ve got to be kidding me. I’m laughing my ass. Seriously, you give me so much entertainment. How can I possibly hate whites after the fun that they give me now? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! CRACKERS! 474
Posted by ccmp on December 13, 2008, 11:09 PM | # Yes, you whites are all a bunch of bald, fat and ugly white losers that white woman laugh at…hopefully someone kills you all one day and dumps your worthless white shit bodies off a cliff where your parents and siblings jump off too. I know you think you’re “strong killers.” And by ‘killers’ you mean thearmy of white cracker cyber nerds will fight by beating people at online gaming. White cream cheese crackers can’t fight for shit, and if you dont like it here then fuck off you ass-faced faggots. Watch UFC you inferior IQ white trash motherfuckers. Asians and blacks win all the time. Don’t us blacks kick your asses liek we do everyday in this country, or make Asians beat you like they did in the last great war in Hanoi. 475
Posted by silver on December 14, 2008, 02:00 AM | # ccmp, I’ve tried really, really hard in my life to like and get along with blacks. If anyone ever felt a “jewish” drive, an all-consuming drive, to be an anti-racist, it’s me. But it’s as if 99% of you have had some sort of genetic mission implanted in you to make the feat all but impossible. Yet, for all that, I still happen to find it rather depressing that fate has made it so that people I’d much rather not dislike make it so easy for me to dislike them. Anyway, apart from such storied difficulties, whites—especially the nordic variety—happen to wish to survive as a race. And that would be the case even if the rest of us behaved like angels (which we certainly haven’t). That’s the real issue here. Wanting your race to survive, and demanding that it take the steps required for it to survive, don’t require hatred at all, yet the damned thing somehow manages to come to the fore every time. As crazy as it sounds, if you’re black, it’d actually be very much in your interest to pay attention to the sorts of issues raised and discussed at sites like this. Miscegenation and immigration, I’m afraid, won’t work out nearly as nicely for blacks as you’ve been led to believe. Hispanics, unlike whites, are quite open about their disdain for blacks. When hispanics move in, blacks suffer. In no hispanic country are blacks treated as well as they are by whites in America. Colombia is some 20% black, yet the blacks, for the most part, have been shunted off into their own province in the southwest of the country, and along the Atlantic coast; which is to say they’re not liked or wanted. There’s little reason to believe a Hispanicized USA would behave much differently, no matter what lip service today’s hispanics pay to “antiracism,” which is that’s just a weapon they wield to beat off whites who object to their growing presence. in Latin America mulattoes, which is to say blacks with significant Caucasoid blood, routinely look down on their darker bretheren, and that’s what you can expect to occur in coming generations in America. Would that really be a positive development for African-Americans? What kind of an existence would that entail? The black experience in America has been sorrowful, yet that experience gave rise to a positive black identity racially conscious whites can only look at with envy. Is it really worth losing that identity—and the above trends absolutely ensure it will be lost—for the sake of humiliating the hated white man—a paltry, fleeting, symbolic gesture future generations of deracinated, and increasingly despised, blacks will derive no benefit from? A byproduct of successful white nationalism would be an opportunity for blacks, proud, positively identified blacks like yourself, to finally properly—not symbolically—take charge of your destiny and that of your people. Surely that is a more attractive option than the dismal future promised by genetic submergence and dispossession by people who, as I said, only pretend to like or tolerate you? Agree or disagree, but these are questions worth seriously pondering. 476
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 10:23 AM | # Silver, when did I say I want racial miscegnation? I want to keep to my own kind only, as do most people, which DOES usually happen. I could care less if whites do that. Fuck, it’s better, as I don’t want to taint my Negro blood with those of loser crackers who just try to mess you up. When you say blacks are always a threat to the survival of whites, that shows the egos whites have, when the majority of Nordics, Slavs, Germans, etc still stick to their own kind. Like I said, whites have small dicks, but HUGE egos. You think you’re all that and every minority person wants to fuck and breed with you. Nothing could be further from the truth. You’ve big egos and are insecure at the same time, which I love, since you crackers give me the best entertainment. The REAL reason for why you whites are ‘being outbred’ is because most of you are inpotent and infertile,(hence the use of Viagra and cock pumps more than any other race), and because you won’tt ake the responsibilities of marriage and instead just want to fuck around and use girls like boy toys. Plus, you losers were always a minority in histroy. Get a clue. Yeah, I’m truly a parasite. Either way, keep your fear, that’ll keep you away from my beloved black race. Shake in your boots and tremble with fear, white man. Your end, may be quite near! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 477
Posted by Dave Johns on December 14, 2008, 10:43 AM | #
Yeah, as opposed to you ape-faced losers. Eg. Oprah Winfrey with makeup: http://www.tv.com/oprah-winfrey/person/3747/viewer.html?ii=7&grti=104&gri=3747&flag;= Oprah Winfrey without makeup: http://www.roumazeilles.net/news/fr/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/gorilla.JPG But hey, it’s not your fault. All we ask is to stay away from us. Hell, we’ll pay you shitskins a generous sum of money to move to Africa. But you parasitical coons won’t do it; you people are smart enough to know that left to your own devices you’ll soon be running around naked cannibalizing one another. 478
Posted by Darren on December 14, 2008, 12:12 PM | #
So aren’t we on the same page then? Why are you here with a hostile attitude when you could be making an entreaty as some kind of Black Nationalist?
We wouldn’t want that either
Who said what? Can you quote it please so that we can respond to you reasonably?
This has been my position - most of us stick to our own race. I don’t think miscegenaton itself (due to the numbers) is a danger to the white race (others here are free to disagree), but rather a danger to the idea of having independent cultures and nations. Mixed-raced individuals tend to have an identity crisis and come out against the idea of people maintaining separate cultures and identities.
Please, don’t sterotype yourself as a black obsessed with “muh dik”.
I am fairly confident that this isn’t the position of anyone, or at least most here.
I am not sure what your source is for the claim of impotence (though surely, as we are the majority, we will probably have, by the raw numbers, the largest claims of it) and penis pumps (likely a figment of your “muh dik” obsessed imagination). As for our relationship problems - sadly, yes, we do have a problem with broken familes, and people who are obsessed with sexual experience rather than creating functional familes. BUT, as a black, you should be far more worried about the much, much more pitiful state of black marriages and families than the comparitively small problems we have (and should address). http://racerelations.about.com/od/parentingrace/a/outofwedlock.htm
Well, thats a different take than most blacks I have talked to who blame whitey for everything wrong in the world. 479
Posted by Captainchaos on December 14, 2008, 01:11 PM | # BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Muh dik! Hey, bro? Does yo pimp hand be strong, un shit? Don’t be hatin’. White boyz is in the game too. Meet “Mr. White Folks”: Vanilla Mac of Pimps! 480
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 01:28 PM | # Oh, and like that white tramp up there will look much better without her foundation, lipstick or botx? Give me a break, cream cheeks. You made no snese. If you know that most whites only marry other whites, then how can your pathetic cultures die out? Miscegnation happens only rarely(thank God). You whites DO have small brains, this proves it. Better to look like an ape than an ass-faced white donkey like you crackers look like, you donkey-faced defformed white trash losers. I hope you crackers wear a bag over your butt-fugly faces, for if you don’t then I’d gouge my eyes out like Sam Neil in Event Horizon. I only come here to poke fun at the insecure, INFERIOR OF ALL RACES white losers who’re petrified of being outbred, and I also make fun of other minority black bitches who date white trash crackers. In fact, you’re so inferior that you’re not even fit to live in a countries full of rapists that wear 70’s track suits. You whites would know about rape since you many of your Eastern European brotherss rape Muslim girls just as a way to “Take back your pride” after years of being the Ottoman Sultan’s number one court jester. Honestly,whites are responsible for most of the world’s problems. In fact, we’re in deep shit now no thanks to that monkey-faced cracker, George W. bush and that nonsesne Iraq War. Let’s not forget Richard nixon and Watergate. Whites are so artificial and inferior, they steal other people’s ideas and try to claim them as their own. Whites are nothing but thieves and pimps. The Chinese invented gunpowder, you cracker fags stole it and call it your own. Cai Lun invented paper in about 105AD and same thing, western monkeys stole it. Chien shiung wu devised an experiment for parity conservation which is the most important experiement in the Manhattan project, and hello? Who stole the credit? Yes, pale face white donkies!
481
Posted by Captainchaos on December 14, 2008, 01:52 PM | # Nigga, you is trippin’! Go get yo fist-salute power swerve on elsewhere, fool. Da White man got da Mac Power Game locked, nom sayin’. White man got mad secret skills and knowledge that always put him on top, give it up. LOL! 482
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 02:58 PM | # Secrets, that’s that lamest comment I ever got! Secrets? maybe that’s why you’re under the Jews’ control. The only ‘secrets’ you have are on how to fuck a girl and how to rape or molest a 7-year-old child. 483
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 03:06 PM | # “Da White man got da Mac Power Game locked, nom sayin’.”
By the way, if women want good sex or orgasms, they go for black men, not the 2,000-lb white loser who’s so fat he hasn’t seen his flea-sized wanker in years and the only action he’s had is with barbie dolls because he can’t get chicks for shit. Even your white women are tired of you. If you crackers were so great, your own squirrel would be at home fucking you instead of burning their bras and having feminist movements for decades. 484
Posted by Dave Johns on December 14, 2008, 03:46 PM | # “The Chinese invented gunpowder, you cracker fags stole it and call it your own… “ Those Chinese folks are pretty creative; however, nothing compares to African Innovation. Oh, and by the way, what self respecting white-man would ever marry a negro woman? It’s repulsive to even imagine waking up in the morning and the first thing you see is a woman that looks like Buckwheat staring you in the face. Ghastly! 485
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 05:53 PM | # “Oh, and by the way, what self respecting white-man would ever marry a negro woman? It’s repulsive to even imagine waking up in the morning and the first thing you see is a woman that looks like Buckwheat staring you in the face. Ghastly!” Well, apparently, the fact that so many in the past and some now in germany who do it says it differently. I wish more of you crackers did avoid our women. We don’t want our future progeny to come out as deformed, half-breed, donkey-faced, breath-reaking lab chimps like you white losers. We couldn’t imagine waking up in the morning and seeing such a grotesque creature from another galaxy! HAHA. Moreover, don’t make me laugh if it’s anyone forcing you to be with minority it’s YOU lab-deformed chimps.it’s you creepy white guys. You always show up at functions for blacks and have that ‘stalkerish’ look in your eyes. Hell I bet you talk the way John Nash from a Beautiful Mind talks to girls ” Um if possible I would like intercourse with you” too bad he’s socially inept but a brilliant genius and you’re just a useless piece of garbage that needs to role play as girl in order for some company other than your dominant hand.In Eastern Europe, many of your women are running away from shitty Slavic men. If I went to Russia or Eastern europe I would be beaten up because your women would throw themselves at me and in Russia they even had a law to penalize women who marry another race to counteract how women were finding Chinese, black men men more attractive.(That’s pretty fucking sad cause they’re not even American Chinese it’s damn farmers). So who forces themselves to go for minorities now, donkey- chimps?.... Obviously, ass-faced white losers! 486
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 06:12 PM | # You think YOU crackers invented everything? well, like I said before, since YOU losers control a lot of the media, you can say whatever you want, when in reality, we all know you losers are half-breed losers with no talents or skills. You even take the novel, “The Three Muskateers” and claim it as your own when in reality, Alexandre Duma, a black man, wrote it. Either way, in the end, we blacks have the last laugh, since Obama rules over YOU! You didn’t want to see our faces, but now, you’ll have to see our asses, as your demise is sure to come. Let me give you crackers some history too: Africa had civilizations that had been constructing irrigation systems, monuments and chariots (intially from the Mideast) before the last remnants of the last ice age had fled. Dynastys had come and gone, while Europeans were still living in small family groups of 8-10 people per village (and these villages were very rudimentary). During the Byzantine period of history, Africa and the mideast (also called the Near East) had been so succesful that the grains and timber were over harvested to supply the Europeans that now began to rise in the Mediterranean. The hills became unstable due to the depleted timber and the landscape we see today would have looked drastically different. Rome specifically, relied so heavily on the African grains that Roman garrisons could not be spared in Alexandria when Romes northern borders were being challanged ca. 40 AD. To retain control of the port town Alexandria (next to Egypt) was to rule the world. The idea that all And here’s a list of things WE blacks invented, which you crackers always refuse to acknowledge because your ego is killed and you’re forced to commit suicide when you know it:
Henry Blair Sarah Boone Mark Dean - Microcomputer system with bus control means for peripheral processing devices (1984) Dr. Charles Drew - Established Blood Banks all over the world (1940) Dr. Patricia Bath, an ophthalmologist from New York(1988) W. Johnson - Egg Beater (1884) Frederick Jones J. L. Love - Pencil Sharpener (1897) Elijah McCoy - Automatic Lubrication System for railroads and heavy machinery (1892) Jan Matzeliger - Automatic Shoe Making Machine that revolutionized the making of shoes (1883) Alexander Miles - Elevator (1888) Garrett A. Morgan Norbett Rillieux - Sugar Refining System that revolutionized the making of sugar (1846) W. H. Sammons - Hot Comb (1920) Lewis Temple - Toggle Harpoon (1848) Dr. Daniel Hale Williams - First Open Heart Surgery (1893) Granville Woods J. T. White - Lemon Squeezer (1896) As I always say, once a white cracker, ALWAYS a white cracker! 487
Posted by cladrastis on December 14, 2008, 06:43 PM | # My stars! If you give a negro an edyukashin, who knows what he be sayin’. I sure am glad we’re being outbred by this clever and inventive race. Watch out Jews and Japs, you’ve got some real competition now! Yesterday sub-Saharan Africa, tomorrow, THE WORLD! And I’m sooooo glad they finally discovered Dumas perre was a quadroon - every race needs its role models (maybe they’ll find Pushkin’s dirty little secret one of these days). 488
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 07:03 PM | # ” I sure am glad we’re being outbred by this clever and inventive race.” Thanks. It’s better than being outbred by a bunch of alcoholic, wife-beating, cheating, can’t-do arithmetic-for-shit cream cheeks crackers who’re responsible for sexual exploitation of women, violence and children misbehaving and getting out of control at school. That latter piece of gratitude also I give to white crackers. Without them, we wouldn’t have the misbehaving, recalcitrant, fucked up kids at schools that eventually become drop outs that we have today. Horray for white crackers! I salute you all! 489
Posted by ccmp on December 14, 2008, 07:06 PM | # “And I’m sooooo glad they finally discovered Dumas perre was a quadroon - every race needs its role models (maybe they’ll find Pushkin’s dirty little secret one of these days).” Better than horny, butt-faced, FUGLY, stupid, lab-faced chimp cracker whiteys like Bill Clinton or JFK. Wow, you crackers sure are sfull of morally-sound folks. Go back to fucking your whore mommies, which is the ONLY thing you know best, inferior, slimy pieces of geese shit. 490
Posted by Dasein on December 14, 2008, 07:10 PM | # I’m curious what the average White admixture is for successful or inventive Blacks. ccmp, these inventions don’t sound very earth-shattering. Egg beater? ‘Improvement’ to the ironing board? Lemon squeezer? Toggle harpoon? Are these in your Black top 20? Good news: the good doctor (Bath) was the first African American woman to receive a patent for a medical invention. Bad new: the year was 1988. Are you joking around? 491
Posted by n/a on December 14, 2008, 08:04 PM | # I’m shocked anyone was actually taken in by this weak troll—that’s literally the worst impression of an “African American” I’ve ever seen. (Trollage notwithstanding, I’ll go ahead and drop a link to Black Invention Myths.) It took me about 30 seconds with Google to find ccmp’s real identity. These comments were posted by “swtang78” on YouTube:
I’m not going to bother to go back and compare styles, but it wouldn’t surprise me if swtang is also “Celtic Princess” (who I had believed was a subcon). YouTube profile for swtang78:
Impreza Forums profile:
Email address: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) 492
Posted by Dave Johns on December 14, 2008, 08:06 PM | # Blacks were also pioneers in the junk food industry, they brought us peanut butter and potato chips. Why, with all the resultant diseases caused by consuming junk food, it has manifested itself into a boon for the medical sector of the economy! And let’s not forget the noted chemist: Antoine “Fleetwood” Sparks. He invented crack-cocaine. The crack industry has blossomed into multi-billion dollar operation. It continues to thrive within all inner city slums in America; which in turn, provides employment opportunities for the citizens. Good job homies! 493
Posted by Dave Johns on December 14, 2008, 08:22 PM | # I have to agree with n/a. I’ve been around blacks all my life and never heard them talk in the vernacular ccmp uses. He sounds like a smart assed Oriental weasel. “Slimy pieces of geese shit”??? That is NOT what blacks talk like. Good detective work, n/a! 494
Posted by newgirl on December 14, 2008, 08:47 PM | # Why are people so racist? it’s not right. we should be nice to all people, regardless of color. 495
Posted by newgirl on December 14, 2008, 08:48 PM | # The world should stop all this fighting. we should all be friends. 498
Posted by newgirl on December 14, 2008, 08:54 PM | # Whites sould not behave this way. If they do, whay makes them better? they’re just like other racist jerks. 499
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 14, 2008, 09:42 PM | # Newgirl and Proudgypsy must also be SWTang then. Good detective work by n/a. (Something tells me Tang is also homosexual. Just a feeling from his wording here and there. Could be wrong of course.) 500
Posted by Dave Johns on December 14, 2008, 10:32 PM | # “Something tells me Tang is also homosexual.” I’ve found most people that are anti-white, are either Jews, or homosexuals. Moreover, many are virulent anti-Christian atheists. Rosie O’Donnell, for example, comes to mind. 501
Posted by whiteprideforever on December 15, 2008, 11:09 AM | # All these fuckers are anti-white jerks. Just ignore them. White pride forever. If it’s brown, flush it down! 502
Posted by whiteprideforever on December 15, 2008, 11:14 AM | # I wish the Nazis finished what they’d started. God bless the late saint hitler. He worked to save our race. 503
Posted by Daniel on December 16, 2008, 12:20 AM | # Ok, I’m a certified blond-haired, blue-eyed white guy and I think that this site is complete bullsh*t. I’ve been attracted to all sorts of girls, and I find mixed race asian/white and latin-american/white to be the most beautiful of all. And don’t even go on about how I just say that because I can’t get a white girl (like you did to another guy who commented your blog complaining about non-white women representing Scandinavian countries in some beauty pageant). I’m young (just turned 18), good-looking, I have a nice car, and I keep in shape (surf, lift weights etc.). I have always had my pick of girls and I have dated more white girls than any other race- probably because they are the most available to me, seeing as I live in a mostly white area. Don’t tell me that I’m an anomaly- I’m pretty sure all my white friends feel the same way I do, more or less. And don’t even think about calling me a Jew… I was raised Episcopalian, and I’m just as suspicious of them as the next guy. Dont get me wrong, I think that white girls are really hot, but they tend to have their flaws just like all the other flavors- and they definitely do not have a monopoly on good-looks. The Pros and Cons of White Girls: Also, I don’t neccessarily find Nordic white women to be the hottest white women out there. Slavic and Mediterranean white women gives them a good run for their money (think Petra Nemcova and Monica Bellucci). One of the hottest girls in my school is half asian and half white:
Lol, if race mixing produces the likes of Adriana Lima (who is a mix of white, AmerIndian, Japanese, and Caribbean Black), then I really can’t see myself objecting to it And don’t tell me that I’m only attracted to them because they are part white. Here are some pure asian cuties that I’d love to get with (I would post some African-American girls or some Latinas… but I can’t be sure that they don’t have some white admixture):
I don’t see anything “primitive” or masculine about them. You’re wasting your time with this site. No matter how many unflattering pictures you post, diagrams you draw, and degrading adjectives you throw together- you will never convince anyone who hasn’t already convinced themselves on the matter. Nothing you do here will keep this woman from being freaking gorgeous, or white guys like me from wanting her.
You praise sexual selection, but that is one of the main causes of miscegenation. You need a new hobby, my friend. Btw, I don’t find either the girl on the cover of the Jew’s book, or the blonde in the pic you posted to be particularly attractive. The mixed girl has nice lips, but her nose is too big and she’s boring and sort of masculine. The blonde girl has nice eyes and tits, but her lips are so thin, she has a manly face-shape (forehead & chin), her eyebrows are drawn on, and she looks trashy. You should post pics of better white girls if you’re going to pretend to convince anyone. 504
Posted by silver on December 16, 2008, 01:51 AM | #
Well it doesn’t, I’m afraid. You’ve picked what is likely the very best example of such a mix and that alone should tell you how often such results can be expected to occur—almost never. Of course, you also have to consider that she’s supremely unlikely to pass on such beauty to her offspring, since there is an overwhelming likelihood that her Indio, Asian and African genes will recombine in a fashion more in line with what the average of such mixes produces (ie nothing to write home about).
The purpose of the site, in a minimal sense, is to raise awareness of the issues at hand, not to prevent from finding women of other races attractive. The political aim of this site is to secure an existence for (northerly) whites, and it provides a variety of arguments to that end. One of those is to ask northerly Europeans (but the argument logically extends to other ‘at risk’ types, too—such as S. Europeans) to consider what they’ll be losing by miscegenating themselves out of existence. That won’t convince everyone (it doesn’t seem to have begun to convince you), but that’s not to say the argument is completely without merit. In fact, the argument goes much farther. It’s really saying that not only will northerly Europeans find themselves swamped and dispossessed by people who largely don’t like them or their way of life, look at what else they’ll lose in the process. Times being what they are, I doubt anyone would attempt to persuade you not to bang Asians if you have a thing for them. I’m recently returned from a sojourn in Thailand, as a matter of fact. Not bad people. Not bad women. But, meh, I had the pick of them but I had to look long and hard for something that really stirred my loins. I’m sorry. I haven’t the slightest wish to offend them or their ways, but to lose my sort (I’m a rather obvious S. European—a little out of place here, but very much a sympathizer) to them would be an incomparable tragedy in my eyes. Friend, have your fun with them, but why not spare a thought for your own kind too? It’s not evil to have an ultimate preference for your own kind; you can quite easily enjoy a warm feeling towards many an other in the process. (Hell, I’d hardly be here shaking you by the lapels demanding you hate me! Lol.) 505
Posted by silver on December 16, 2008, 02:43 AM | #
It quickly deteriorated, but that first post sounded pretty authentic—enough to get me, anyway. Then again, I have very little experience with blacks. I tried talking to them when I arrived in America but gave it up pretty quickly. (Might have more soon, though: some refugees (probably) just moved into a rental across the street from my parents. Bastards. This is the best area in this small city.) Some blacks can hold a conversation, though. I don’t know why you insist on jumping down their throats with nigger this and nigger that whenever they make an appearance. What I said is undeniably true: they’d be far better off independent than treated like shit by hispanics. That’s a point very much worth reinforcing.
God, if I were black I’d openly laugh myself silly at these sorts of claims, and recommend everyone else do too. If that isn’t a spoof, it’s by far the funniest thing I’ve read all week (actually, it is even then). 506
Posted by n/a on December 16, 2008, 03:01 AM | # I’m a certified blond-haired, blue-eyed white guy No, you’re not. You’re a (dyed-blonde, brown-eyed) non-white girl. This is blatantly obvious to me, and Gender Genie agrees:
you will never convince anyone who hasn’t already convinced themselves on the matter So what are you doing here? Who exactly are you trying to convince? Yourself? 507
Posted by n/a on December 16, 2008, 05:02 AM | # It quickly deteriorated, but that first post sounded pretty authentic—enough to get me, anyway. For me, about every single note was off. “they bitch about their race being outbred by all minority people, like me, African Americans” The first sentence was bad. This one is even less convincing, for reasons I won’t enumerate. “On the other hand, they say that blacks can’t get chicks” No one says this. Major giveaway we’re dealing with an Asian and someone who doesn’t live in the U.S. “I’ve lived in the ‘hood all my life, and never seen any of my homeboys or girls act this way.” This might have barely scraped by as authentic American negro diction . . . in 1989. “cream cheeks”, “dinky” Again, obviously not from America. At this point, I googled “cream cheeks”[an extremely unusual (dumb) insult I’d never seen before]+“white men” and immediately located the earlier posts by swtang78. Incidentally, I also found an swtang78 photobucket account, which I’ll post since t-boy has chosen to continue spamming this site. “Shake in your boots and tremble with fear” as “asian stud” ccmp/newgirl brandishes an AK. Real name Billy Widjaja? Plate number: 481 JTU (Queensland) 508
Posted by Daniel on December 16, 2008, 06:34 PM | #
Hey, you seem like a reasonable guy, but I can’t agree with you that race-mixing only produces an Adriana Lima every one in a blue moon. There are plently of gorgeous-looking mixed chicks out there, I just posted a whole bunch of pics of them. At my school there are a lot of asian/white hybrids and most of them are really hot. Alot of actresses and models are mixed to (Jessica Alba, Megan Fox, alot of those other Brazilian Victoria Secret models, etc.). I have no problems with people who don’t want to date outside their race- everyone has their preferences. A friend of mine only dates blondes, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But don’t give me crap for liking what I like. When it comes down to it, it’s all subjective anyway. Certain people like certain looks- to each his own and all that. I got to say that I haven’t really looked over all of this site, but, from what I’ve seen, it’s a whole bunch of bullsh*t about trying to “prove” somehow that Nordic white women are superior to all other varieties of women. This simply isn’t true. In my personal experience, Eurasian and white/latin-american mixes do it for me. Of course, if a hot white girl came my way, I wouldn’t hesitate. I’m only 18, so I don’t really think too much about who I’m going to marry and breed with yet. I think it’s safe to say though that race isn’t going to be an issue- of course, she has to fit the criteria of being hot, smart, fun to be around, a good screw, and a good person. I guess want someone that will blow my mind, that I’ll be in love with. I’m kind of mushy like that. As for sympathizing with White Nationalists- I do on some points. I think that affirmative action is hypocritical and just plain stupid. I’m sick and tired of the NAACP and all of those other bullsh*t organizations- they have long since worn out their purpose. I hate how it’s considered racist if I show any sort of pride in my white heritage (my Biology teacher tried to open a German-language club at my school, but was barred by the administration- that really pissed me off). And I hate the double-standard that allows blacks to say things that they would be publicly shunned for saying if they were white. But this whole movement looses me with the talk of expelling decent, productive non-whites from their homes… and with all the delusional talk of non-white and mixed women not being on a par with Nordic women. And with all of the talk of superiority and Nazi sympathizing. Can I ask you a question though, I read somewhere in another blog on this site that Noridc white women are supposedly superior to Southern European women. I’m just wondering if you believe that (Monica Bellucci, come on!). 509
Posted by Daniel on December 16, 2008, 06:55 PM | #
LOL, I expected you guys to accuse me of being a Jew, not a chick. “The Gender Genie”- lmfao… Sorry to disappoint you but I am a guy, and a really white one at that- well, I’m German/Belgian with some Italian in there… so I’m not sure if that means I’m tainted or something. I’m here cause I’m bored- which is generally why anyone does anything on the internet. I guess what I’m trying to do is let all of you know that you’re not convincing anyone, just trying to spare you the wasted effort 510
Posted by Daniel on December 16, 2008, 11:42 PM | # Alright, I’m back and I did some more searching and found even more pics of hot non-white and mixed girls (best search I ever did). Some of them are from my school.
I know a sexy girl when I see one and bullsh*t when I hear it… and I’m calling you on it. Also, black girls aren’t the monkeys you make them out to be, either. I’m usually not really that into them, but I’d be lying if I said that there wasn’t some really attractive ones out there.
The last one is pure african and she’s not bad-looking at all. 511
Posted by silver on December 17, 2008, 12:38 AM | #
You’re clearly a very perceptive young man (if indeed a young man is what you are).
Well, it’s an empirical question, isn’t it? One best answered by empirical methods. Those are hard to come by when it comes to this sort of thing, but attempts have been made. femininebeauty.info contains plenty of insight into what makes for the kinds of beauty most of us are moved by—at least when we’re not being manipulated by media creations (Jennifer Lopez a hottie, for example—are they serious?).
That’s really only the tip of it, I’m afraid. The reason sites such as this exist—rebarbative as they can be at first glance—is a fuller appreciation and understanding of the issues you only touch on above. One reason racialist boards/blogs can appear more extreme than they really are is that the existence of what is only elsewhere debated (the propriety of affirmative action, the value of diversity, the heritability of intelligence and intelligence’s role in human outcomes, for example) is here taken for granted as having been decisively demonstrated, and the debate consists of measures that might turn around the status quo. Beyond that, much of what we can broadly call “racialism” actually provides a great deal of insight into the human condition (ie into reality itself), the sort of information that is, by now, routinely suppressed and demonized because it fails to accord with the objectives of multiracialism/multiculturalism (itself a sham deal if there was ever one). It would behoove anybody who can stomach it to plow through the kinds of issues racialists deal in because a by-product is almost certain to be a greater and more comprehensive understanding of the world we live in, to say nothing of being attracted by racialist political stances themselves.
You’re not wrong to feel that way. There are various historical reasons for why the above is, or too often seems to be, the case, but it doesn’t have to be that way. My view is that the issues raised are simply too important to leave to what I suppose you imagine (and not always wrongly) hate-filled “nazi” types. With respect to race-mixing, it’s simply a question of survival: A race either breeds with its own or it eventually (and sooner than you think) becomes extinct. That extinction, contrary to what virtually every mainstream organ insists, is not a trivial matter; for many reasons—many of which are discussed here and elsewhere (the archives of amren.com are a goldmine)—it would be momentous, and, properly understood, not to anyone’s benefit, in spite of short-term appearances to the contrary. If you are as bored as you claim, why not take some time to familiarize yourself with the material? Whatever you are (nordic, mixed-white, or even asian or black), true understanding of a phenomenon is always superior to glib media portrayals. If you’ve made it this far, to where you know there is much that you don’t know, there’s little sense in turning back now. 512
Posted by Daniel on December 18, 2008, 12:09 AM | #
Rest assured, I’m a (white) guy. I posted pics because I like to back up what I say- and those pics can’t be argued with. You’d have to be gay not to find those girls attractive.
I say again: I have developed a preference for mixed-race women from experience. It doesn’t get much closer to empiricism than that. There are alot of Eurasians and mixed Latinas at my school and I think it’s safe to say that most of them are on the far end of the hotness scale (I’ve posted some pics of them), and I doubt you can attribute that to coincidence, so don’t try. I agree with you about media creations and about Jennifer Lopez (she never did that much for me)- but I’m going to have to call you on that steaming pile of horsesh*t that is femininebeauty.info. It’s even worse than this site. I actually lolled at the “attractive women” section. In what universe would these women ever be considered hot?
All of the women posted were amateur-nude models, most bland and some even nasty. It seemed like a bad joke. And I hate how sites such a these never give women of other ethnicities a fair shake, always posting National Geographic-type tribespeople as their best representatives… it’s ridiculous. If you’re going to convince anyone, you’d better try for at least some semblance of objectivity. The site maintains that non-european facial features are “robust” and therefore “masculine.” Although it’s true that finer facial features are more feminine and attractive… I still find the sharp, prominent jawlines, rectangular faces, and undersized lips of alot of the women (touted as “feminine” on the site) to be quite manly. Nice, fulll lips are “robust” but I identify them as one of the tell-tale features of a woman’s face. There was even one blog which tried to convince people that Adriana Lima was masculine (please!). Lima is a freaking goddess, and she definitely blows all of those boring amateur “glamour models” right out of the water. Lol, am I honestly supposed to prefer those women to these?
I’ll concede that most high-fashion models and even many supermodels are masculine and not terribly attractive. But I find the greater part of the women shown on that site equally unappealing. I agree with the author of the site that there should be more models with faces and figures like Veronica Zemanova, Keeley Hazel, and Crista Nicole; but, aside from that, I think most everything else he says is garbage. 513
Posted by Daniel on December 18, 2008, 12:10 AM | # That’s really only the tip of it, I’m afraid. The reason sites such as this exist—rebarbative as they can be at first glance—is a fuller appreciation and understanding of the issues you only touch on above. One reason racialist boards/blogs can appear more extreme than they really are is that the existence of what is only elsewhere debated (the propriety of affirmative action, the value of diversity, the heritability of intelligence and intelligence’s role in human outcomes, for example) is here taken for granted as having been decisively demonstrated, and the debate consists of measures that might turn around the status quo. Beyond that, much of what we can broadly call “racialism” actually provides a great deal of insight into the human condition (ie into reality itself), the sort of information that is, by now, routinely suppressed and demonized because it fails to accord with the objectives of multiracialism/multiculturalism (itself a sham deal if there was ever one). It would behoove anybody who can stomach it to plow through the kinds of issues racialists deal in because a by-product is almost certain to be a greater and more comprehensive understanding of the world we live in, to say nothing of being attracted by racialist political stances themselves. You’re not wrong to feel that way. There are various historical reasons for why the above is, or too often seems to be, the case, but it doesn’t have to be that way. My view is that the issues raised are simply too important to leave to what I suppose you imagine (and not always wrongly) hate-filled “nazi” types. With respect to race-mixing, it’s simply a question of survival: A race either breeds with its own or it eventually (and sooner than you think) becomes extinct. That extinction, contrary to what virtually every mainstream organ insists, is not a trivial matter; for many reasons—many of which are discussed here and elsewhere (the archives of amren.com are a goldmine)—it would be momentous, and, properly understood, not to anyone’s benefit, in spite of short-term appearances to the contrary. If you are as bored as you claim, why not take some time to familiarize yourself with the material? Whatever you are (nordic, mixed-white, or even asian or black), true understanding of a phenomenon is always superior to glib media portrayals. If you’ve made it this far, to where you know there is much that you don’t know, there’s little sense in turning back now.
In my boredom, I have ventured to look into a several White Nationalist sites. I still go to stormfront.org every now and then for a laugh. I have noticed it usually comes down to white racists and antis vehemently debating eachother’s heavily deluded viewpoints. Their quite different approaches to Ancient Egypt illustrate my point perfectly: white racists hold that it was a thoroughly white civilization (“The mummy of Ramses II has red hair!”), while antis insist that it was black (“Because it’s in Africa…duh!”). Don’t get me wrong, every now and then a voice of reason does chime in, but it is largely ignored. I am aware that there are inherent disparities between the races, that race is by no means a “social construct” (as multiculturalists and race-deniers would have everyone believe). I have looked into the research on IQ, brainsizes, etc… but I still see nothing troubling about sharing a homeland with productive, law-abiding non-whites. Infact, I place just as much value in them as I place in productive, law-abiding whites—which is more than I ever would in white delinquints, or delinquints of any race for the matter. I do not see the logic behind doing otherwise. I have since come to the conclusion that, for the most part, it all boils down to culture rather than race. Western culture is superior to all other cultures on the face of this earth because it is conducive to progress. Those who adopt it thrive. Besides this, I have done some of my own genetic research. It has been proven by the Human Genome Project that the genetic variabiliy among individual humans is far greater than that between the human races. In other words, though it is likely some races may be generally more intelligent than others, there will always be members of the “smarter race” who are less intelligent than their racial norm and members from the “dumber race” who are more intellgent than their racial norm. The consequent messy overlapping renders it impossible to make accurate assumptions about people’s mental capabilities based on race. This FACT is made evident by the legions of blacks and hispanics (usually considered by most racialists as being of a less intelligent stock) who achieve a higher education and who excel at their (more prestigious) professions. It annoys the sh*t out of me when racialists point to generalizations and disregard the (quite substantial) exceptions… just as much as it annoys the sh*t out of me when antis point to I will procrethe exceptions to undermine what is generally true. I will procreate with a girl that I love, with whose genes I want combined with mine and passed on to my children. Ultimately, I view people as individuals rather than as spokes in a racial wheel, so race will not be an issue. I feel in no way obligated to take a white girl for a wife, if that’s what your trying to get at. I’ve said my peace… I’m off to go and look into the site archives that you suggest. 514
Posted by Janice Ma on July 29, 2009, 02:49 AM | # It is amazing some of the comments one finds here. Some of these are well written and scholarly. Others show a lot of hate, bitterness, and a twisted viewpoint toward their fellow humans. To point to certain features on people and describe these as grotesque or malformed, whatever, just shows such a meanness of spirit. It shows you’re not truly interested in any kind of scientific discourse on the subject. You just want to kick a few people around. So why don’t you stop bothering the rest of us—and leave. Secondly—do you really think that white women was THAT pretty? I thought she was rather large and certain features were rather masculine. Is that YOUR IDEAL? If it is, all I can say is, well, everyone has their own ideal of what is the prettiest. They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Also there are a lot of features on white people that one could pick on if one truly wished to. Things like blotchy pale skin, bumpiness and unevenness about their features and bodies….does anyone really wish me to continue this? This is just ridiculous! Now, myself, I’ve always recognized a very wide range of beauty. I am honestly & naturally broad minded enough that there are many types that I find very good looking. The type I prefer is the Eurasian but that is easily explained. My kids are half Chinese. But the woman that I think are the best looking in the country are the mixed white/black women such as the oldest daughter of the family in the sitcom The Fresh Prince of BelAir. Is there anyone out there who would truly deny that she’s gorgeous? Angelina Jolie is part Native American. Is there anyone who doesn’t think that she’s beautiful? Mixing generally softens features, particularly in women and this softening makes them more attractive to the male. Haven’t some of you men ever learned anything? Myself I am from a family that has always married out. I am Native American, from 2 lines, English, Welsh, German, Scots and Jewish. Needless to say, no one in my family has ever for many generations resembled any of their siblings. My husband is Chinese. My (soon to be ex—thank god) son-in-law is Dutch (science researcher). His brother is married to a Chinese girl. His uncle is married to a Chinese girl. I have a Japanese nephew-in-law and a half Japanese, half Chinese great niece, black cousins and Mexican cousins. In the medical and scientific community that many of these people and our relatives live in, I have seen SO many mixtures. If you’re trying to stop it, it’s a losing battle—especially with asians and whites. Chinese fit in with white culture so easily. There’s not really that much difference. It adds a few fun decorative holidays. What religion they do have is very unobtrusive. They’ll even add yours if you want. And then come the babies. Eurasian babies are almost every time adorable. The parents would have to be very UGLY (unsymmetrical ) and even then they’d still probably be better looking than the parents. Don’t forget; Chinese have, on the average smoother skin than white people (smaller pores), prettier, more elegant looking hands. So do blacks. Chinese are skinnier, smaller boned and have smaller feet. So do I believe in hybrid vigor? Ha! Of course! I live it! And thanks to my daughters hefty income, I live it quite well! And that’s just another thing that hybrid vigor can do for you! So good!!! 515
Posted by Jonathan on August 17, 2009, 02:01 AM | # That “white” girl in the original post isn’t even full white…HAHAHAHAHAHA Jessica doesn’t like you using her picture either. 516
Posted by miscegenation on November 21, 2009, 12:44 PM | # I totally agree with Daniel. We’ve seen all sort of supremacists here: white, black, asian, references to jewish supremacism… and all I can do is to give the finger to all such people. but one point has been left out for the entire thread: if all those people have their way, what happens to individual freedom? The freedom to procreate with who we want, and to associate with who we want? Is the preservation of this nebulous thing called ‘white genes’ really worth restricting our own freedom for? Turn down people we feel love and attraction towards? Are we people, or are we breeding stock, who form relationships purely to make sure their children have the ‘right’ characteristics? If white/jewish/muslim/indian/black nationalists really want to further their own race, they should go and have 10-15 children like people in poor countries, instead of getting upset by people who love freedom to cross racial boundaries. 517
Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 21, 2009, 01:35 PM | #
In the post-Jewish set-up to come, you’ll retain the right to do all that in Soweto, Durban, Port Moresby, Guinea-Bissau, and …. wait, what have I left out? …… oh yes, Brazil! Almost forgot Ashley Montagu’s favorite country (his favorite in second place that is, after his first-place favorite, the National Socialist apartheid state of Israel).
White genes “nebulous”? I’m afraid they’re very real and well defined. What’s more, science only makes them realer and better defined with each passing month. Looks like you’ve got some catching up to do. Science is leaving you further and further behind.
No, don’t do that. Marry them but in Soweto. (Then either stay in Soweto permanently or set up house, you and she together, in Port Moresby.) See? You can still have it all! (You just can’t have it all here — you’ll have to go to certain other places for some of it. Sorry. Oh and you’ll have to stay there. But you can have it all, definitely!)
People and it was precisely people’s wish not to have open borders and the whole race-replacement régime shoved down their throats that was overridden by the overlords. We’re not concerned so much with individuals who desire to have mulatto children (actually, we’re not at all concerned with individuals per se, individuals as individuals) but mainly with whole races: we don’t want government-enforced race-replacement. The people have a right not to be race-replaced. The people are right to question what the overlords are doing to them.
Just as your freedom to throw a punch ends where my nose begins, your freedom to cross racial boundaries ends where your genocide of my race begins. Put that in your “freedom to cross racial boundaries” pipe and smoke it. 518
Posted by miscegenation on November 22, 2009, 10:29 PM | #
there won’t be such a thing. Just like there won’t be a Communist Utopia. People won’t willingly abandon their rights for a principle that to most means very very little indeed. Some would, but most would not. That’s not how a human mind works. On top of that, most regimes that attempt to control people’s s sexuality eventually fail. And in the age of the Internet and of freedom of information, such a society would be even more doomed to failure than before. In any case, you are the one with the problem, you move if you don’t like me miscegenating.
they are nebulous in that they mean little to us in day-to-day lives. And by ‘us’ I mean the average Joe on the street: clearly they mean lots to you. But you are outweighed by people like me, who will defend human rights against anything. And yes, this includes White human rights as well.
Isn’t this what uncle Joseph Stalin was so fond of? Deporting people and exiling people? Nice example you have there!
ah, this is exactly where the USSR failed! They thought they could treat people as a herd, act in terms of ‘common good’, sacrifice the few ‘for the good of many’. It really doesn’t work like this. People are not a herd, they are individuals, with feelings, and opinions, and rights, and you cannot just force segregation on them in this way. You cannot reduce people to breeding-stock, to mere carriers of genes. People have far far too much pride for that.
ooh, I can argue like this too. Your freedom to have segregation ends where the interference in my personal life begins. Sorry. but you didn’t address my point. Why are the 10% of whites who miscegenate a problem for you and the 90% of whites who do not have enough children to keep your race above replacement levels not a problem? If you have a problem, don’t attack others, DO something about it YOURSELF. Go and find a white girl and make 50 babies! But leave me and my freedom alone, mmmkay? 519
Posted by OJ Simpson on July 21, 2010, 04:23 PM | # Wow, sure are a lot of sheeple and “dead ender” NW’s in this thread. 520
Posted by hmmmmm on January 03, 2011, 07:58 PM | # So much is wrong with this forum… 521
Posted by daniel on February 05, 2012, 01:42 PM | # wow, I better get a different name..didn’t realize there was another plain daniel posting on MR - views I totally disagree with, no less. The White women are much, much finer than the mixed Asiatic things posted here. 522
Posted by DM6 on March 04, 2012, 10:04 PM | # Funny how I have never heard of increased health problems among mixed people from any serious study. Hmm, this entire page scares propaganda. 523
Posted by Ugh on March 11, 2012, 06:39 AM | # Outbreeding depression doesn’t exist within humans. Next entry: Huge increase in immigration to Britain Previous entry: Time For The “Anti-Genocide Party”? |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. UK Dissertations Help commented in entry 'A small anecdote and some reflections on race and culture' on 05/25/12, 02:14 AM. (go) (view) Roof Leaks commented in entry 'YOBS' on 05/25/12, 01:16 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/25/12, 12:41 AM. (go) (view) pletcheroka commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/25/12, 12:36 AM. (go) (view) Graistetrisog commented in entry 'Top Wog embraces his Inner Englishman' on 05/25/12, 12:19 AM. (go) (view) BomeDeddell commented in entry 'ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT: Government's Own Data Point to a Cost-Effective Strategy' on 05/24/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) indernMix commented in entry 'ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT: Government's Own Data Point to a Cost-Effective Strategy' on 05/24/12, 09:42 PM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 04:44 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 03:20 PM. (go) (view) grecian commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 03:10 PM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:04 PM. (go) (view) Salvatore Quinto commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/24/12, 12:47 PM. (go) (view) Classic Sparkle commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 12:07 PM. (go) (view) Cobus commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 05/24/12, 10:14 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 09:49 AM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 08:54 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 07:41 AM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 07:18 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 06:53 AM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/24/12, 06:48 AM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/24/12, 06:47 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 06:32 AM. (go) (view) Guest commented in entry 'The Torment of the Mulattoes' on 05/24/12, 06:17 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/24/12, 03:05 AM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:31 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:08 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 09:13 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'Indian beauty' on 05/23/12, 12:52 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 12:45 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/23/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:43 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 11:32 AM. (go) (view) Mellaba Pechios commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:55 AM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
She is mixed btw
... Have fun being followers regurgitating the words of the more intlligent of hill-billies like Fr. Fred. It wont carry you very far but it will definately keep you in a state of bliss while the world around you grows beyond you… for the sake of the world may your sperm count lower and any offspring you have run away from home at an early age. L
Posted by Andy on August 22, 2006, 10:37 PM | #
Sailer is a clown for promoting this. What are the odds that a book about the supposed benefits of interracial marriage touches on IQ? I’d say that they’re very slim.
I enjoy the joke in the post’s title, by the way.
On the book’s website Ziv proclaims that “no, he is not interracial” himself. I wonder what his parents would think of this book. I also wonder if Ziv practices what he preaches and eschews prominent-nosed females in favor of darker shades of woman. Does Ziv practice what he preaches or is this just advice for us crackers? Inquiring minds want to know.