Friday, February 23, 2018

Quantified JQ: Grasping ZOG by the Horns ANATOLY KARLIN

Are you an anti-Semite? Wonder no longer! Take the poll here:
Am I an anti-Semite? The SPLC and RationalWiki both seem to think so. But there are also those who believe I am a hasbara shill, or even Jewish myself. Either way, I don’t appear to be a particularly enthusiastic philo/anti-Semitic propagandist – of the 1,200+ posts to date at my archive, only about 15 are actually mainly about Jews (and I hope this will be the last one for some time).
Percentage anti-Semites according to the ADL (i.e. believe in 6+/11 of popular stereotypes about Jews).
Fortunately, the ADL has attempted to make at least a minimal attempt at quantification. You qualify as an anti-Semite if you answer Probably True to six or more of the following questions:
  1. Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in]
  2. Jews have too much power in the business world
  3. Jews have too much power in international financial markets
  4. Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust
  5. Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind
  6. Jews have too much control over global affairs
  7. Jews have too much control over the United States government
  8. Jews think they are better than other people
  9. Jews have too much control over the global media
  10. Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars
  11. People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave
In this post I will try to systemically answer each of these statements, but before I finalize my excommunication from ZOG, there’s a couple of caveats that I wish to make.
First, many of these combine an observation – often a statistically correct one – with a normative judgment. Of course Jews have many more billionaires and elite journalists per capita than any other major ethnicity. Is this good or bad – or even more ambiguously, “too much”? Difficult to say. For a committed blank slatist, the answer should be “Probably True”. Hence, the “anti-Semitism” of the more honest and consistent Leftists. Then again, knowledge of race differences in IQ, and the correlation of IQ with economic success, explains most if not all of the residual. But even though it annuls many of the more extreme anti-Semitic arguments, this form of argumentation is itself racist – and ironically, it was overwhelmingly Jews, e.g. Franz Boas, Leon Kamin, Gould, Lewontin, etc. – to a degree disproportionate even to their IQ advantage – who developed the modern blank slatism that tabooed such perspectives (although I have mixed opinions about his work, I think Kevin McDonald demonstrates this pretty conclusively). In other words, it was the Jews themselves who torpedoed the single most succinct and powerful argument against anti-Semitism; hence, also, the “anti-racist” IQ denialism amongst some of the more overt anti-Semites. Very amusing and ironic.
Read More:

FEDS REPORT DIVERSITY-VISA IMMIGRATION FROM AFRICA EXPLODED. From 29% of program's total to 50% during Obama years.

Immigration from Africa to the United States under the diversity visa lottery program exploded over the last two decades, surging from 29 percent of the program’s total immigrant population in 1995 to up to 50 percent during the Obama years, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
The report, “Diversity Immigrants’ Regions and Countries of Origin: Fact Sheet,” by immigration policy analyst Jill Wilson, explains the purpose of the program was to “provide an avenue for immigration from countries other than the major sending countries of current immigrants.”
In 1995, 47 percent of the program’s immigrants were from Europe and 17 percent from Asia, with fractional amounts from other locales.
In the most recent year for which reports are available, 2016, just 24 percent were from Europe and 31 percent from Asia.
 Enacted in 1990, the program accounts for about 5 percent of all immigrants.
Six global geographic regions are defined, and the law limits each country to no more than 7 percent of the total.
Read More:


The purpose of the recent "Black" Cheddar Man story was all too evident. 

Telling us that the oldest known inhabitant of the British Isles was Black was an obvious way of promoting a multicultural society of open borders and cheap labour, a combination that clearly suited the interests of the capitalists and landlords. It also had some synergy with the recent engagement of Prince Harry to a "Black" divorced actress.

Another obvious point was that the story was tied to a Channel 4 TV documentary about Cheddar Man. The publicity that it generated was a great way of boosting ratings for a dull documentary that would have otherwise struggled to attract advertising revenue. 

These facts made the Alt-Right justly suspicious of the so-called "science" involved in the story. Although, even if Cheddar Man had been Black, it would have meant nothing, merely showing that modern Britons had evolved skin more adapted to their environment or come along at a later date and replaced more primitive early inhabitants like Cheddar Man -- probably violently.

Now it seems that our suspicions were justified with an increasing number of scientists casting doubt on the "Black" Cheddar Man narrative, as reported by the highly respected New Scientist magazine (paywall):
"A Briton who lived 10,000 years ago had dark brown skin and blue eyes. At least, that’s what dozens of news stories published this month – including our own – stated as fact. But one of the geneticists who performed the research says the conclusion is less certain, and according to others we are not even close to knowing the skin colour of any ancient human."
The problem with Cheddar Man is that the main researcher on the project, Susan Walsh at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis -- yes, I've never heard of it either --was using a highly speculative model that was attempting to "predict" someone’s eye, hair, and skin pigmentation solely from their DNA. 

This unproved new method suggested that Cheddar Man may have had "dark" skin, which Channel 4's PR then spun to the media as  " definitely black." 

There are additional problems with Walsh's model in this case, as it has only ever been partially demonstrated with fresh DNA.

Read More:

Who Is The Aggressor In Syria?

Banned again from Facebook

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Kids: Then and Now by Fred Reed

OK, so why is the country falling apart? Specifically, why are kids blowing each other away? America has become a source of wonder the world over with its Columbines and hundreds and hundreds of dead in Chicago and Baltimore and its burning cities and riots. Other advanced countries don’t do these things.
America didn’t either until recently.   Why now? Something has changed, or some things. What?  People under under forty have never seen the country when it was sane. Let me point out things that have changed, at risk of sounding like a boilerplate cadger: “By cracky, wen I was a boy, we could amuse ourselves for hours with just a piece of string and a couple of sticks.” Let’s compare today with the Fifties and Sixties. I mean this as sociology, not nostalgisizing.
I think that a combination of social changes have led to tremendous stress on today’s kids that my generation did not suffer. To wit:
In my rural Virginia school, there was no racial tension. We were all white: teachers, students, parents.
The black kids went to their own school, Ralph Bunche. We had virtually no contact with each other. There was no hostility, just no contact. The academic gap didn’t exist in the absence of contact. Inintegration would prove cruel when it came. and the black kid s sank to the bottom. The causes can be argued, but the fact cannot.
There was no black crime to speak of or, as far as I knew any black crime. Certainly blacks did not shoot each other, or anybody. Neither did we. The reasons I suspect were similar.
Divorce was extremely rare, so we all had parents. Whether it is better that unhappy couples stay together or that they divorce can be argued, but they then did stay together. It made a large difference in outcomes if one accepts the statistics. The welfare programs of the Great Society had not yet destroyed the black family, which I speculate accounted in part for low crime.
Read More:

Jared Taylor Cannot Win with Facts and Reason Alone - Vision of Future trumps View of Reality - Richard Spencer’s Vision Needs to Smoke Less Crack

There are two prominent figures in the alternative sphere of the rightist spectrum. There is Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer. 

Jared Taylor makes good sense backed with facts and logic on a host of issues, but he lacks the vision thing. After all, Moses didn’t manage to lead all those Hebrews out of Egypt just by noticing facts around him. He inspired his people with the vision of a better tomorrow and the Promised Land. He promised them the laws of God on the conviction that God, the one and only God, was on their side. Without such prophecy, neither the mythical Moses nor the historical Muhammad could have achieved what they did. We may learn a lot from someone who points to things around us and gives a factual analysis of every item. But we aren’t likely to be inspired by him or look to him for The Truth, the one that lends meaning, purpose, and direction to our lives. Rather, it is the man who points to the distant horizon and speaks of the great future that inspires people and make them want to follow him. He is the prophet who is far-sighted, whereas the ‘factualists’ are short-sighted. 

We need all the fact-based people we can find as they get things done in the world, but the future is made by those who lead the people to ‘another’ world. This another world could be literal in the sense of discovering or conquering a distant territory. Or it could be a vision of how our own land could be transformed into something far greater. 
Now, Jared Taylor does have a passion and objective of sorts. He is passionately committed to his own race, culture, and heritage. And he looks forward to a world where whites will be safe and secure in identity and posterity. But it doesn’t excite or inspire because the Taylor’s vision of a good society is all about the A-B-C’s of stability. If he could have a Father-Knows-Best-like society for his own people, he would be content, and that would be that. Such a society would certainly be nice, but it’s not visionary enough to inspire masses of white people to view it as their Promised Land. To inspire the masses, the vision must be more than something nice or something-that-had-been. It has to be something that has yet to be, something so great, wondrous, and glorious. It needn’t be something as fanciful(and ridiculous) as Wakanda, but the vision has to be powerful enough to turn people into zealots and true believers who are willing to kill and die for this vision. 

Read More:

My First Day as CIA Director By Ray McGovern

Former CIA analyst and founder of Veterans Intelligence Professionals for Sanity Ray McGovern, in this tongue-in-cheek article, outlines steps he would take on Day One as CIA Director to get to the bottom of Russiagate.

By Ray McGovern

Now that I have been nominated again – this time by author Paul Craig Roberts – to be CIA director, I am preparing to hit the ground running.

Last time my name was offered in nomination for the position – by The Nationpublisher Katrina vanden Heuvel – I did not hold my breath waiting for a call from the White House. Her nomination came in the afterglow of my fortuitous, four-minute debate with then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, when I confronted him on his lies about the attack on Iraq, on May 4, 2006 on national TV. Since it was abundantly clear that Rumsfeld and I would not get along, I felt confident I had royally disqualified myself.
This time around, on the off-chance I do get the nod, I have taken the time to prepare the agenda for my first few days as CIA director. Here’s how Day One looks so far:
Get former National Security Agency Technical Director William Binney back to CIA to join me and the “handpicked” CIA analysts who, with other “handpicked” analysts (as described by former National Intelligence Director James Clapper on May 8, 2017) from the FBI and NSA, prepared the so-called Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of Jan. 6, 2017. That evidence-impoverished assessment argued the case that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his minions “to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton.”

Reihan Salam: Decolonizer Of The American Right

In July of last year, our Dear Leader penned a piece asking the question, “Is there a more notable Conservative Wunderkind than Ross Douthat?” Your author has risen to answer this challenge and present for your reading pleasure, none other than Douthat’s own co-author, co-liberal, and we’re-just-chums-I-swear guy friend Reihan Morshed Salam. Salam has had something of a more illustrious career in the last year than Douthat—a nimble Abbott to Douthat’s bumbling Costello, he has somehow managed to whirl his intellectual dervish away from landmines like Douthat’s Final Solution to the Trump Question. He is intelligent as only a shrewd man of Asia can be, quick on his feet and steeped in a penetrating understanding of the Western world far more profound than the most introspective Sahib. Reading the American conservatives commenting on him and his work, your author kept calling to mind the hagiographies appearing in the liberal British press when a young South Asian attorney decided to stage a little protest over Indian passports in South Africa.
No doubt, Salam would find the comparison to Gandhi somewhat flattering, and many of you may be scratching your heads at the wisdom of making it. Suffer your author for a moment to protest: were the Liberal elites in London writing with foresight about the brilliance of Mahatma Gandhi, or were they merely fetishizing this young Mohandas Gandhi’s attempt to imitate their Liberal Order? Too struck with mystical fascination to recognise a budding politician exploiting a developing situation because of his youth and complexion, White Liberals often make this error—certainly when considering the talents of South Asians in particular (why else do we have yoga studios in every American metropolis?), and likewise they impute (sometimes literally) magical qualities to any number of dark-skinned people. Gandhi, of course, eventually got religion, and later got shot, forever etching his visage into the sainted halls of the History of Great Men. Salam has not yet shown sufficient mystical powers to achieve a similar end.
So the National Review can be proud of their “seditious fakir”, and the intent of this examination is not to diminish Salam or his abilities, but rather to remove the stars (or redness) from our eyes and consider precisely what he does believe and why the Neoliberal Elite have become so enamoured with him—it is not solely because he is brown (though that’s a bonus for them). Rather, it is because he displays an unrivaled ability to repeat their tired, debunked, and increasingly suspect doctrines with a sort of airiness and youth that fills them with hope for their post-colonial World. This is where Salam will increase as Douthat decreases: Douthat cannot decolonize himself, he cannot “complicate” the conservative message, for two reasons: first, he can never be the subaltern Salam represents and, second, he simply doesn’t have Salam’s intellectual prowess or agility. All Douthat can do is continue to look fat and absurd in the eyes even of Middle-Class Catholic America as he grasps at ways Trump can still lose the nomination for the presidency. To be sure, Salam has allowed himself to get sucked into the mire of the Never Trumpism screed in many of his recent submissions, but he has maintained social relevance and exploited what he calls “systems of mobility” with far greater aplomb than Douthat has managed. After all, nothing is sexier on the coastal catwalk than a young, single, brown conservative who talks very fast and is hip to Millennial ironies (he has referred to himself—born in 1979—as a Millennial, which is laughable at best). He is a knowing, willing tool whereby the Neoliberal Academe of the Outer Party participates in the process of decolonization—that is, the deconstruction—of the whole Western World which the Inner Party has gutted of its cultural and social supports. In a close reading of his writings, Salam reveals that he is a man deeply shaped by his personal history as a second-generation Bangladeshi immigrant, his academic training at Harvard and Chicago, and his engagement with chiefly neoconservative (Mt. 11:15) intellectuals, that has produced what is certainly the face of Neoliberalism as it passes beyond Fukuyama’s end of history.

Read More:

Zionist-Saudi hype set to overwhelm Iran's call for 'security networking'

MOSCOW - The Iranian foreign minister took part in a Russian-hosted forum on regional security, the Valdai Discussion Club, on Monday, fast on the back of his attendance at the Munich Security Conference the day earlier.
Many observers at the MSC said Mohammad Javad Zarif had been pressed between two anti-Iran speakers, namely Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Juberi, both of whom did not miss a breath to shout their anti-Iranian propaganda.
There, Netanyahu aired a new episode of his Iran shows, a metal plate which he claimed was part of an Iranian drone downed recently by Israel. The most famous of Netanyahu's Iran shows may be his drawing of a bomb he claimed was nuclear and under development by Iran during his address to the UN in 2012.
Jubeir also did not fail to depict Iran as the one and only cause of concern in the region, leveling at the country whatever accusations he could think of.
Despite all such hard talk, the top Iranian diplomat followed his path of diplomacy, saying after the successful conclusion of the nuclear deal with world powers, his country quickly put forth a proposal to tackle regional issues via dialogue and inclusive participation. He noted that although some regional players failed to consider this security network proposal, it remains "the only game in town" since hard approaches have all come to nothing so far.
In his Monday address in Moscow, Zarif elaborated on what Iran finds of much greater preference over military solutions to the ongoing regional issues. "Insistence on military solutions is a dead-end," he insisted, inviting regional players to stop "making wrong choices such as supporting Saddam Hussein or the Taliban, al-Qaeda, ISIS, or Nusra" and then “instead of looking at the results of their actions” taking the easiest way, namely blaming Russia or Iran.
“We need to establish a new mechanism for security in the Persian Gulf region," he said. "I believe we have to abandon the old ideas.... Collective security, alliance formation, bloc formation have all been led to the production of enemies.... We need to change that logic based on two fundamental concepts. First, we need a strong region, not a strong man in the region.... All of us need to work together in a strong region. Second, we cannot forget our differences. We cannot forget disparities of size and power.... What can we do so that the smaller powers are not afraid of the big powers? Using the old metaphor, we need a network. We need security networking rather than security alliances. We need to move. Security alliances are based on zero sum approach.... And we have done that for a much long time.
Read More:

When Will We Have the Guts to Link Fatherlessness to School Shootings? BY SUSAN L.M. GOLDBERG

Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz poses for a mugshot photo after being arrested February 14, 2017 in Parkland, Florida
Now that the gun control advocates have had their fifteen minutes of fame, let’s start focusing on the real issues impacting the rise in school shootings since that infamous day in Columbine in 1999. Issue number one that no one in the mainstream media or government wants to acknowledge: fatherlessness. Specifically, the impact of fatherlessness on the boys who grew up to become school shooters.
Dr. Warren Farrell, author of the new book The Boy Crisis, explains:
Minimal or no father involvement, whether due to divorce, death, or imprisonment, is common to Adam Lanza, Elliott Rodgers, Dylan Roof  and Stephen Paddock.
In the case of 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, he was adopted at birth. His adoptive dad died when Nikolas was much younger, and doubtless the challenges of this fatherlessness was compounded by the death of his adoptive mom three and a half months ago.
The rate of mass shootings has tripled since 2011. We blame guns, violence in the media, violence in video games, and poor family values. Each is a plausible player. But our daughters live in the same homes, with the same access to the same guns, video games, and media, and are raised with the same family values. Our daughters are not killing. Our sons are.
But boys with significant father involvement are not doing these shootings. Without dads as role models, boys’ testosterone is not well channeled. The boy experiences a sense of purposelessness, a lack of boundary enforcement, rudderlessness, and often withdraws into video games and video porn. At worst, when boys’ testosterone is not well-channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most destructive forces. When boys’ testosterone is well channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most constructive forces.
As Terry Brennan, co-founder of Leading Women for Shared Parenting, notes:
72 percent of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers; the same for 60 percent of all rapists.
70 percent of juveniles in state institutions grew up in single- or no-parent situations
The number of single-parent households is a good predictor of violent crime in a community, while poverty rate is not.
Yet, despite the growing number of experts, pundits and commentators drawing attention to the impact of fatherlessness on school and community safety, the post-attack discussion inevitably reverts back to gun control. Instead of spending so much as fifteen minutes on fatherlessness we are forced to endure the same salacious headlines, the same provocative tweets, the same tired old memes about the evils of guns as if somehow a cold piece of metal convinced yet another boy to become a mass-murderer. We ignore the lack of adequate mental health services, the failure of law enforcement to effectively intercede, and the sickening impact fatherlessness has on each one of these tragic cases. Why? Because it is easier to ban a hunk of metal than it is to right systemic cultural wrongs.

THE REVOLT AGAINST THE MASSES. Fred Siegel on the long history of liberal elitism.

The revolt against the masses
Fred Siegel has New York in his bones. He grew up there, lives in Brooklyn, and even played a part, as an adviser, in the election of Rudy Giuliani as mayor of New York in 1993. His writing, too, long focused on urban politics, from The Future Once Happened Here: New York, DC, LA, and the Fate of America’s Big Cities (1997), to The Prince of the City: Giuliani, New York, and the Genius of American Life (2005).
But his 2014 book, The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Has Undermined the Middle Class, worked on a far broader canvas. Indeed, it was nothing less than an attempt to rewrite the history of American liberalism. He recast liberalism, long seen as the product of the New Deal and Progressivism, as the product of an intense postwar disillusionment with American mainstream society. So liberalism, from that moment, was seeded with a strong elitist sentiment, a sentiment that easily turned into distaste for the masses: a distaste for their economic aspirations; a distaste for their political proclivities; and a distaste for the ‘culture industry’, which was said to hold them in thrall. It was a powerful narrative. The Revolt captured the emergence and triumph of something like a liberal clerisy – an elite that ruled American political life while wilfully estranging many Americans in the process.
But that was 2014, and a lot has happened since then. So Sean Collins decided to catch up with Siegel, who is also a journalist, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and a scholar in residence at St Francis College in Brooklyn, and find out what he makes of the state of American liberalism today, shocked as its proponents seem to be by Trump, and what appears to be a revolt of the masses.
Sean Collins: In Revolt Against the Masses you write that certain features of liberalism today – including looking down at the masses, scepticism towards democracy and a questioning of the merits of the American way of life – have been ‘an integral and enduring element of American liberalism’ since the 1920s. Many today will acknowledge that liberals have a problem with working-class support, and they are not all that keen on democracy when it produces a ‘wrong’ result (like Trump). But people might be surprised to learn from your book that these aspects of liberalism have a long history. Why do you think this anti-masses and anti-democratic strain – which you see as a feature, not a bug of liberalism – is so essential to defining liberalism?
Fred Siegel: People assume that modern American liberalism begins with the New Deal. Or sometimes they say it begins with Woodrow Wilson’s wartime governance. Neither is true. Liberalism begins as a reaction, from a sense among liberals that they have been betrayed by Wilson. People who called themselves progressives would end up calling themselves liberals because they see Wilson’s wartime behaviour, in which he allowed anti-war opinion to be mercilessly suppressed, as contrary to their beliefs. The initial creation of liberalism comes with the creation of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) in 1920. This, to me, places liberals on the side of the angels.
Read More:

A Requiem for America’s Pastor

When we consider it, the Billy Graham tapes with Richard Nixon – wherein America’s Pastor discussed the Jews having a “stranglehold” on America, and a plan to destroy it – condemn his soul.

Assuming that the Christian religion is real – and I have no reason to believe that it is not – and a man is judged after his death – that part in particular I have a very easy time believing – then Billy Graham will be judged on the fact that he knew the Jews were at the root of America’s destruction, and failed to tell the people.
This is unforgivable.
Virtually the entirety of white America listened to Billy Graham for many decades. At any point, he could have come out and explained the Jewish problem in a way that they could understand it. This is not something difficult – after all, the entire history of the Church before the last hundred or so years was anti-Semitic. The Bible itself is anti-Semitic. It should not be difficult to explain the Jewish problem to Christians.
Billy Graham passed up the opportunity to alert this entire country of the cancer that is eating it out.
Read More:

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Wakanda Blockbuster Is This? by Steve Sailer

Stalin famously had a buzzer installed to let his sweating henchmen know when it was finally safe to stop applauding the Great Leader without fear of being sent to the Gulag.
In this era when it’s nearly mandatory to greet each new black cultural product as effusively as if it were a cross between the Five Year Plan and a Special Olympics gold medalist, it’s difficult to tell the frauds, such as Kehinde Wiley, the self-promoting Photoshopper culpable for Obama’s humiliatingly incompetent official portrait, from the sincere mediocrities, such as Ta-Nehisi Coates, from the competent professionals, such as Ryan Coogler, director of the vastly overhyped but not-bad movie Black Panther.
Coogler, the young black director of the fine Rocky franchise movie Creed in which Apollo Creed’s son enlists the aged Rocky Balboa as his trainer, benefited from the Marvel superhero factory’s usual quality control. Plus, he was granted a $200 million budget rather than Marvel’s typical $150 million budget. And he was allowed to make more of a stand-alone movie than the usual Marvel Universe pictures, which are often mostly just a way to get from, say, Point P to Point R in studio boss Kevin Feige’s vast master plan.
Still, Black Panther is more interesting than entertaining, being short on humor and star power.
Of course, one reason it is interesting is that it has brought out hilariously delusional statements from the respectable press about how the existence of Wakanda proves Trump wrong. For example, The New York Times proclaimed:
To the politically minded, the Wakanda of ‘Black Panther’ offers an almost too perfect rebuttal to President Trump’s comments in January in which he referred to African nations with a disparaging expletive.
I mean, does Norway have vibranium-powered flying cars like Wakanda does?
Unfortunately, while Black Panther has its strong points, it’s still just a comic-book movie.
Read More:

Coming To Wakanda

ONLY CATASTROPHE Can Reduce Inequality

PAT CONDELL’s latest video on Youtube censorship has been censored by Youtube

Think of the Youtube of today as the Nazi book burners of the last century.

Read More:

Now They've Crossed the Line

Buried Beneath the Rubbish

The negro is so obviously divergent from and inferior to the other races that it seems like a waste to even point out their predictable failure, pathology and idiocy. Then I remember that I live in a country where the media jew is constantly promoting the laughable myth of the cool, intelligent and highly sexually desirable (hint, hint shiksas) tar creature and there's actually a significant number of Whites who believe this ridiculous kosher illusion. So here we are, talking about giant piles of garbage in the Heart of Darkness. Left to their own devices, freed from the evils of muh slavery and muh colonialism, we can observe the 60 I.Q. and complete inability to connect basic cause and effect in action.

At least 17 people died after being buried alive in a 50ft-high pile of garbage when the filth fell on top of their homes in Mozambique.

The only difference is "skin color." It's just a White that got left in the oven for too long. We're all equal and interchangeable labor units for the semitic globalist bazaar. We hold these truths to be self-evident...

Heavy rains triggered the partial collapse of the huge mound of waste which crashed on top of seven houses in the Hulene neighbourhood in the outskirts of the country's capital Maputo.

We can now add "rainfall" to the list of things that are "racist."

The impoverished area sat right beside a landfill site and authorities fear more bodies are buried beneath the rubbish.

Nigga bodies (Ah!) trapped in a vile hell of their own creation. Dig through the trash to try to find the hominid trash. How many million should we put you down for, Luxembourg?

 This picture wasn't taken in Calais, believe it or not.

The huge pile of waste rose to the height of a three-story building, according to reports, and the collapse happened at around 3am on Monday.

Another triumph of negro engineering. No wonder these genetic aliens are recruited as "human calculators" for our space missions. Back in The Mother the pyramid (of vile waste) building continues. 

Just How Bad Is Sugar For Your Heart And Body? Sugar is important for us... in small doses.

Still nibbling Valentine's Day goodies? Munching packaged cereals, pancakes or muffins for breakfast? Enjoying a lunch of processed meats and bread, sweetened pasta sauce, or even a salad drenched in dressing?
Sugar makes all of these foods delicious. It is also an important energy source for our bodies. It's what we use when we're doing vigorous activities and it's the primary source of fuel for our brain. We need it.
The problem is, many of us eat far too much sugar. And we eat it in its simplest, processed form.
This excess of sugar in our diets increases the risks of health conditions such as obesity, insulin resistance, diabetes, atherosclerosis, high blood cholesterol and hypertension.
How our body digests sugar
Our bodies are designed to digest sugar in its naturally occurring form found in fruits, vegetables and whole grains. In these foods simple sugar molecules are joined together in a chain.
Our small intestine cannot absorb sugar in the form of a carbohydrate chain (commonly known as starch), so these foods are slowly broken down, with one sugar molecule cleaved off at a time before it can be absorbed.
This is like taking a long train and removing one box car at a time.
When we eat sugar in its simplest form, such as sucrose (a combination of a glucose and fructose molecule), there is no chain to break down. So instead, a flood of sugar is released into the bloodstream all at once. We often feel this as an energy rush.
Read More:

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

The Harvard letter

One of the flaws of liberalism is what you might call the "autonomy contradiction". There is a problem in making autonomy - a freedom to choose according to my subjective wants - the highest good. What if my want is a non-autonomous good? Liberalism then either has to accept the fact that I choose other than autonomy or it has to limit my autonomy and prevent me from choosing this good. In the end, liberalism is likely to reach a point at which it says "you can choose anything you want, as long as you choose liberal autonomy" - which is not very "autonomous" at all.

There was an example of this last year when Harvard University acted to restrict students from joining single sex fraternities and sororities. These organisations are not even university groups, but are off campus private associations. Even so, the Harvard authorities decided to punish students who are members of these groups by limiting their leadership and scholarship opportunities.

The fact that Harvard liberals dislike single sex groups is not surprising. If what matters is that we are autonomously self-determined, then liberals have to make our sex not matter, as that is something that is predetermined. If sex is something that is not allowed to matter, then it will be thought wrong to discriminate on the basis of sex (in the literal sense of the word "discriminate" - the ideal will be a situation in which people won't make distinctions between men and women, particularly in a social context). There will be a fear that if there is any discrimination, such as the existence of single sex clubs, that it might lead to a discrepancy in life paths or life outcomes ("inequality").

Read More:

Why Are Some Countries Less Corrupt Than Others? And Why Are They Anglo?

Harvard ethics blog:
Independent of the econometric methodology applied, we consistently find:
Immigration from corruption-ridden countries boosts corruption in the destination country.

Read More:

Newspaper in 61% Black Rocky Mount, North Carolina Dares Publish the Truth on Homicide in City: All Victims/Suspects Black

Rocky Mount, North Carolina is a 61 percent black, 32 percent white city, and is part of the so-called Raleigh/Durham "Research Triangle." 

It's elected/appointed leadership is almost entirely black

Home to 57,000 people, it's also home to a black population uniquely violent when compared to the white minority. [Homi­cide vic­tims all black men, Rocky Mount Telegram, 2-4-18]:
Every victim of the 16 homicides last year in Rocky Mount was a black male.The Telegram does not usually note the race of victims in its crime accounts. But when the results are as stark as this, the issue of who the homicide victims are deserves to be examined. The large number of black residents who died at the hand of another in the city amounts to what some residents refer to as a slaughter of black men.

How many cities, large or small, in the United States could see the newspaper serving the citizens of the community print the exact same headline (conveniently failing to note all the suspects are also black, or, in the Rocky Mount Telegram, burying this racially provocative truth)?



It's not a Rocky Mount problem. It's a black problem, courtesy of genetics incompatible with western civilization.

Read More: