Monday, June 30, 2014


On Thursday’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” State Sen. Chris McDaniel, the Republican candidate in last Tuesday’s GOP primary that fell just shy of defeating long-time incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS), reacted to the outcome.

McDaniel laid out his Republican credentials and questioned why some within his state’s Republican Party had gone to such lengths to for Cochran.
“It was shocking,” McDaniel said. “I’m a two-term state senator. I’ve been a Republican since I was 13-years old. I’ve paid my dues. I’ve gone door to door. I’ve given money. I considered these men and woman to be my friends and colleagues. But desperation and the quest for power pushed them somewhat over the edge. And Tuesday evening the Republican primary in Mississippi was not decided by Republican voters. It was decided by 35,000-40,000 Democrats. That’s unprecedented and extraordinarily unusual.”
He also claimed he had evidence of more than 1,000 voting irregularities in just one county and pointed to the desperate tactics Cochran employed to get Democrats out to vote for him.
“It’s not so much a recount,” McDaniel continued. “We’re looking to the issue of whether or not people who participated in if June 3 Democrat Primary crossed over into the Republican Primary this Tuesday night. We’ve found more than 1,000 examples of that in one county alone. So, we’ve found widespread irregularities of ineligible voters. They should not have been there in the first place. And they were pushed there. This is what's shocking, Sean. They were pushed there be an overt action, an aggressive action on the part of Sen. Cochran’s campaign that was filled with race-baiting, lies, distortions. He literally ran the latter three weeks on food stamps. He ran on voter suppression and he ran on pork. Mississippi is a conservative state and one would think that our party was a conservative party. This proves otherwise.”
As far as the tactics themselves, McDaniel condemned them and said that was his justification for pursuing further action questioning the outcome.
“It's absolutely despicable,” he added. “They did everything in their power to embrace liberal Democrats. But think about that for a second. If we have an agenda as conserve conservatives, which is to fight with principle … to be strong open courageous and they say they're going to fight the liberals in Washington but they embraced the liberals in Mississippi just to win the election. It's the worst style of politicking I can imagine. They did it. They’ve gotten away with it so far. That’s why we're looking at voter irregularities.”
McDaniel went on to add that he did not know if he would support Cochran in the November general election.

Read More at:

The Reality of Student Debt Is Different From the Clichés

The deeply indebted college graduate has become a stock character in the national conversation: the art history major with $50,000 in debt, the underemployed barista with $75,000, the struggling poet with $100,000.

The anecdotes have created the impression that such high levels of student debt are typical. But they’re not. They are outliers, and they’re warping our understanding of bigger economic problems.

In fact, the share of income that young adults are devoting to loan repayment has remained fairly steady over the last two decades, according to data the Brookings Institutions is releasing on Tuesday. Only 7 percent of young-adult households with education debt have $50,000 or more of it. By contrast, 58 percent of such households have less than $10,000 in debt, and an additional 18 percent have between $10,000 and $20,000.

The College of Charleston campus in April. Student debt is rising, but the problem is often exaggerated.Starting Out Behind: Q. and A. About Student DebtJUNE 25, 2014
“We are certainly not arguing that the state of the American economy and the higher education system is just great,” Matthew Chingos, a Brookings fellow and one of the authors of the new analysis, told me. “But we do think that the data undermine the prevailing sky-is-falling-type narrative around student debt.”

Read More at:

John Derbyshire On JayMan—A Righteous Jamaican-American

A year and a half ago I wrote here about my personal blog roll: the blogs I go to more or less regularly in search of inspiration. I included potted reviews of the blogs.
Bloggers come and go. They say all they have to say; or they take a more demanding day job; or start a new hobby; or fall in love; or, I suppose (gulp), are gathered unto their fathers. As always says in its fundraisers, in the long run it’s very hard to writeunless you’re paid for it.
New ones come up, though; so from time to time I’ll give you an update.
Of bloggers unmentioned in that November 2012 column, the most interesting one is JayMan. I don’t think I knew his blog at the time. At any rate, I feel sure that if I had known it, I would have included it.
JayMan has blogged at since September 2012. Before that he was for a year or so at one of those white-on-black sites that make your eyes hurt. Before that, he says he was at, though I can find no trace. He seems not to have slowed down at all across his blogging career, keeping up an average seven or eight posts a month, though with lulls and spurts. Interestingly, JayMan is multiracial, describing himself as “a second generation Jamaican-American of Black, White (English), and Chinese descent.”
JayMan writes about human nature, with particular attention to human differences. As such he has particular appeal to Us of theCold Eye. That is to say, he’s a stone empiricist who scoffs at happy talk and wishful thinking about human nature, and goes to the research studies. Just a brief digression here on the nature and content of those studies.
We are now at the point in our understanding where it is beyond dispute that all the interesting traits of human behavior,intelligence, and personality are heritable to some degree.
Read More at:

The Downside of Oxytocin

I’m with Robert Sapolsky. I may not be as high-minded as he is, but I too cannot resist “a feeling of malicious, chortling pleasure” when I see someone or something with “a reputation for saintly purity tarnished by warts and blemishes.”

Whose reputation has recently been tarnished? Why, the pituitary hormone: oxytocin.

Oxytocin is a human binding hormone. When women climax they produce extra oxytocin. The result: they feel closer to their lovers. When women give birth their bodies produce oxytocin—presumably, the hormone facilitates childbirth. (The world itself comes from Greek words that mean: swift birth.)  Oxytocin also promotes lactation and maternal instincts.

Sapolsky does not mention that the hormone is associated with women. The male body also produces it, but oxytocin seems to be responsible for the fact that women are, supposedly, more cooperative, more caring, more loving and less competitive than men.

When certain people say that if women ruled the world there would be peace everywhere they are, in part, basing their conclusions on the power of oxytocin.

Further research has outlined some of oxytocin’s other benefits.

Sapolsky summarizes them:

Oxytocin facilitates the formation of mother/infant bonds and of male/female pair bonds. Among humans, couples who are administered oxytocin (versus a placebo) have fewer intense fights, and the men rate their partners as more attractive and spend less time looking at other women.

The hormone's reputation got even better. Studies found that oxytocin lessens stress and anxiety; fosters trust, cooperation, forgiveness and generosity; and makes people more attuned to others' emotions. True believers in oxytocin proclaimed it the "love hormone" in some scientific journals. It seemed that if oxytocin were dumped in the water supply, everyone would lie down between lions and lambs.

Think of it: science has discovered a love hormone, an empathy hormone… drop it in the water supply and the Age of Aquarius will dawn on the earth.

Read More at:

WAR OF THE RISING SUN by Eric Margolis

As we near the grim anniversary of World War I, let us remember the first great war of the blood-soaked 20th Century.
Shortly before midnight on 8 February, 1904, Japanese destroyers and torpedo boats launched a surprise attack on the great Russian Pacific naval base at Port Arthur. Located at the tip of Manchuria’s strategic Liaodung Peninsula, the port provided Russia with its only ice-free deep water harbor on the Pacific Ocean.
Three hours later, Japan formally declared war on Russia. A similar surprise attack, followed by declaration of war, occurred on 7 December, 1941 when Japan attacked the US Pacific naval base at Pearl Harbor. The example of 1904 seems to have been lost on Washington, or purposely ignored.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Japan and Imperial Russia were locked in bitter rivalry to control the vast, resource-rich region of Manchuria, then a semi-independent Manchu state, today China’s most northern region. Russian railroads were being driven down from Siberia to Mukden, Dalny and Port Arthur, all three newly built Russian cities.
Japan had offered to recognize Russian control of Siberia in exchange for Russia’s agreeing to Japanese rule over Korea.
But St Petersburg balked at making any deal with the upstart Japanese, whom it considered inferior, an arrogant attitude it would soon regret.
Japanese forces under Gen. Baron Nogi fought their way down the Liaodung Peninsula and laid siege to Port Arthur (today Lushun) in which was trapped the bulk of Russia’s Pacific Fleet, including five battleships.
Nogi began launching human wave attacks against the eastern line of Russian forts that guarded the port. These powerful forts and attendant field works were built atop very steep hills that are difficult, as I found, to climb even in peace time. Port Arthur’s 50,000 Russian defenders, mostly from tough Siberian rifle divisions, were armed with quick-fire artillery, machine guns and lots of vodka.
The Russo-Japanese War saw the first widescale use of machine guns, barbed wire, hand grenades, toxic gas, searchlights – all scourges of World War I, 12 years later.
Read More at:

Saturday, June 28, 2014

The lost miracle of Russia’s medieval sword makers

The sword has always carried a special status in Russia. It was passed on as a symbol of power, vows were sworn on it, and it even served as currency. Above all, the sword was a formidable weapon, and the perfection of the medieval Russian masters in its creation had few rivals.

Russian chronicles are heavy with references to swords. Russian Princes’ men-at-arms were buried with their trusty blades, and Prince Svyatoslav of Kiev famously cast his sword into the Dnieper River to deny it to the enemy. Slav swords were prized around the world. Arab scribes rated them alongside Frankish examples above any other type in Europe, and Eastern admirers even believed Russian swords to be “miraculous", possessed of magical powers. Russia was the first country in Europe after Charlemagne’s medieval empire to set up the organized production of blades. Bearing the individual blacksmith’s mark of quality, the Russian sword was typically around 40 inches (100 cm) long, its blade measuring 2-2.75 inches (5-7 cm) wide and 0.25 inches (6 mm) thick.

Read More at:

Gary Oldman Becomes a Pariah by Kevin MacDonald

Moment-Hollywood (1)
You have to wonder what Gary Oldman was smoking during his Playboy interview — the one where he defended Mel Gibson and said that Jews “run” Hollywood.
So they persecute. Mel Gibson is in a town that’s run by Jews and he said the wrong thing because he’s actually bitten the hand that I guess has fed him—and doesn’t need to feed him anymore because he’s got enough dough. He’s like an outcast, a leper, you know? But some Jewish guy in his office somewhere hasn’t turned and said, “That fucking kraut” or “Fuck those Germans,” whatever it is? We all hide and try to be so politically correct. That’s what gets me. It’s just the sheer hypocrisy of everyone, that we all stand on this thing going, “Isn’t that shocking?” [smiles wryly] All right. Shall I stop talking now? What else can we discuss?
It seems like every few years a Hollywood celebrity comes out and states the obvious—Marlon BrandoWilliam CashOliver StoneRick Sanchez, Mel Gibson, and now Gary Oldman. The list includes not a few Jewish commentators as well, including Joel Stein in the LA TimesManny Friedman writing  in the  Times of Israel, Ben Stein (see below) and this issue of Moment.
The LA Times, on the other  hand understands how the game is played. Every year around Oscar time they put out editorials and articles bemoaning the “overwhelmingly white male membership of the academy” and that “film, TV diversity doesn’t look like America’s.” Then the next year, they do it all over again because nothing changes.
Some bastions of “White power” are not to be seriously contested.
Read More at:

European Style Going Out of Fashion at Ballot Box By Joel Kotkin

The recent political earthquake in Europe has great implications for the United States, both internationally and domestically. The unpopularity of European Union institutions produced record-breaking votes for a motley assortment of anti-establishment parties across the Continent, suggesting it’s time to stop looking across the Atlantic for role models as Europe’s dismal prospects have inspired the lowest levels of political support in several decades.
Many of the parties that did best in the May 25 multinational balloting for the European Parliament – from Greece’s Far Left Syriza party to Britain’s oddball United Kingdom Independence Party and France’s historically racist National Front – are hardly ideal candidates for responsible governance. Yet, despite their many blemishes, these and other anti-EU parties fed on growing distaste for the 28-nation EU’s sprawling, largely unaccountable bureaucracy blamed for, in the words of one British group, “undermining” liberal democracy in these countries.
This suggests that it’s time for Americans to stop looking across the Atlantic for role models. For decades, American gentry liberals have seen the EU as a superior mode of governance. Jeremy Rifkin’s 2005 book, “The European Dream” – and a host of similar tracts that all assert European superiority – now may seem absurd on their faces, but it’s doubtful many EU boosters, here and abroad, will let facts get in their way.
Read More at:

Annual Dog Meat Festival Continues to Divide Chinese Public

Workers are unload dogs from a truck at Binjiang Road in Yulin.
UK’s The Guardian article on June 18th, original title: Chinese City Criticized over Dog-Meat Festival. In a small city of Southern China, city residents were preparing to hold an annual dog-meat festival, however, animal rights organizations have been strongly condemning this unsafe and inhumane activity.
[Note: The Chinese article itself is a Chinese translation and paraphrasing of the original English article published by The Guardian. Translating it back to English shows how things can change when translated multiple times.]
For the city residents of Guangxi Yulin, it’s a kind of tradition to eat dog meat onsummer solstice. Many people cherish Yulin’s dog-meat culture which increases the sales on dog-meat hotpot and strong grain alcohols.
Animal rights organizations have pointed out that, every year, 10,000 dogs are slaughtered during dog-meat festival and that many of them are even electrocuted, burned, or skinned to death. According to pictures posted online, many dogs were skinned, hanging from hooks, and many dog’s corpses were piled up on the side of the road. In China, dog-meat is considered a nutritious food in winter. For the treatment of illnesses on such as the circulation of blood, doctors would even prescribe dog-meat consumption as prescriptions.
In order to stop the dog-meat-eating activity, animal rights activists have taken many measures such as releasing open letters and having protests. An open letter released by a NGO in Hong Kong pointed out that many of the dogs that were slaughtered during the dog-meat festival were stolen. They were transported to Yulin in filthy, overcrowded trucks, which greatly increased the risk of them carrying rabies and other infectious diseases. But according to Yulin officials, all the dogs used at the dog-meat festival were bred by local farmers.
Read More at:

The New Sins Of ‘Nonjudgmental’ Millennials. Millennials are like the Moral Majority, except genderqueer.

The New Sins Of ‘Nonjudgmental’ Millennials
One of the greatest theological dialogues of the last 500 years is found between St. Thomas More and William Tyndale, the former a giant of the Catholic Church and the latter one of the more significant figures of the early Protestant Reformation. Tyndale’s translation of the Bible into English, and his work The Obedience of a Christian Man, was controversial and problematic enough that More, one of the fiercest critics of the Reformation, was compelled to respond. Tyndale responded with an “Answer” to More’s “Dialogue,” to which More responded with a “Confutation” of Tyndale’s “Answer” (the titles alone are worth reading). The tracts are rich with conviction, both utterly sure of their interpretation of the Word of God as it is revealed to humanity, both certain the other is not merely factually incorrect but sinning, going against the will of God to the detriment of the other’s eternal soul.
There’s not much of that going around these days. If you speak to the average 20-something or Millennial about the concept of sin, you may be treated to a kind of quasi-Unitarian dismissal of the concept, a sort of uncomfortable rejection of the notion of ecclesiastical proscription in any sense: “I’m very spiritual,” you’ll hear a lot, “but not religious.” What this looks like in practice is generally a dismissal of accountability towards any higher power, or at least towards any rules He might impose upon His people: It is, after all, 2014.
Yet the Millennials, having sloughed off the religious notions of their parents and grandparents—at least one-third of Generation Yers are more or less without religion—have taken it upon themselves to adopt a new set of mandates and dictates to guide their lives. Call them the “new sins,” a number of commandments by which one might stay on the narrow way. The old interdictions now cast aside, a new series of injunctions must be obeyed: and like most religions and denominations, adherence to these commandments is held sacrosanct, any deviation from them fairly blasphemous. Religion may be out for a large number of Millennials, but its vacuum has been more or less filled.

Read More at:

Friday, June 27, 2014

Of the Bureaucrats, by the Bureaucrats, for the Bureaucrats. The naked self-interest of the government-worker class. By Jonah Goldberg

For understandable reasons, the IRS scandal has largely focused on the political question of whether the White House deliberately targeted its opponents. To date there’s no evidence that it did. That’s good for the president, but it may not be good for the country, because if the administration didn’t target opponents, that would mean the IRS has become corrupt all on its own.
In 1939, Bruno Rizzi, a largely forgotten Communist intellectual, wrote a hugely controversial book, The Bureaucratization of the World. Rizzi argued that the Soviet Union wasn’t Communist. Rather, it represented a new kind of system, what Rizzi called “bureaucratic collectivism.” What the Soviets had done was get rid of the capitalist and aristocratic ruling classes and replace them with a new, equally self-interested ruling class: bureaucrats.
The book wasn’t widely read, but it did reach Bolshevik theoretician Leon Trotsky, who attacked it passionately. Trotsky’s response, in turn, inspired James Burnham, who used many of Rizzi’s ideas in his own 1941 book The Managerial Revolution, in which Burnham argued that something similar was happening in the West. A new class of bureaucrats, educators, technicians, regulators, social workers, and corporate directors who worked in tandem with government were reengineering society for their own benefit. The Managerial Revolution was a major influence on George Orwell’s 1984.
Now, I don’t believe we are becoming anything like 1930s Russia, never mind a real-life 1984. But this idea that bureaucrats — very broadly defined — can become their own class bent on protecting their interests at the expense of the public seems not only plausible but obviously true.
The evidence is everywhere. Every day it seems there’s another story about teachers’ unions using their stranglehold on public schools to reward themselves at the expense of children. School-choice programs and even public charter schools are under vicious attack, not because they are bad at educating children but because they’re good at it. Specifically, they are good at it because they don’t have to abide by rules aimed at protecting government workers at the expense of students.

Read More at:

1. South Africa's Black Serial Killers - The World's Deadliest 2. Remembering South African Victims of Multiple Homocides

sunette bridges

Please be sure to click like on our new facebook community page - EKP South AFrica, Exposing the

Genocide, so we can continue to fight the good fight. Also be sure to leave a comment at the bottom of

this page before leaving us today

Liberals tell us we need to understand why people like Moses Sithole-a man that murdered and raped hundreds of

women, perpetrate acts of violence. How their inhuman existence is responsible for their hatred of humanity. A non-

black man makes an off colour remark about women, and he is labelled a misogynist. A black guy beats and rapes

a hundred women to death, and feminists grant him victimhood status.


Remarkably, the left and their media mouthpiece tried their utmost to make us feel sorry for Moses Sithole. This, in

spite of the fact the man murdered scores of innocent people in Atteridgeville, Boksburg and Cleveland between 1994

and 1995-as well as the fact that his anger stemmed from the rape laws, the Leftist SA institutions introduced! The

hypocrisy & contradictions were astounding. Imagine a white guy raped and killed women because he was upset at being

falsly accused of rape, as was the case in the Sithole murders. Do you think the left would try and elicit sympathy for him?

In case people have forgotten the case, "Sithole baited women by offering them jobs at a children’s home in Benoni. Most
of his victims were strangled with their own clothing, such as belts and underwear. He was arrested in 1995 when he was
trying to obtain a firearm from a family member. During the arrest Sithole attacked an undercover police officer with an
axe and was shot three times. A recording of conversation Sithole had with his fellow inmates while he was in prison
revealed his motives to the court. Sithole hated the sort of black women the ANC empowers, so much, that he could not
stop himself from killing at least four a month. The tapes revealed that Sithole’s dislike for women came from being falsely accused of rape in 1989 and serving four years in prison.

Still ,the left tried their damndest to perpetuate the lie, that poverty and his 'life experiences as an underprivileged black male' were behind his hatred. They ducked the fact that 90% of all rape allegations made by black women in South Africa are deemed false.  It appears, Sithole hated black women because the white man was mean to him.

Sadistic violence has NOTHING to do with poverty or any other social ills. It has to do with a certain segment of the population's disregard for human life, and another, even more evil segment of the population's, decision to facilitate it. In Sithole's case, his anger was in fact, a DIRECT result of the ANC government's policies.


As much as we might not like to accept it - angry blacks are being given a free pass by their liberal enablers and our oppressors, to rape, kill, abuse, dishonour and insult our decency at every opportunity. Some are even being encouraged.


The numbers do NOT lie. From the US to SA, black on non-black violence is at an ALL TIME high. Black on black violence is even higher! 


Who's facilitating the violence? Encouraging blacks to attack us in the streets?


It's the same people that ignited the fire of racial hatred in the US after the Trayvon Martin shooting. The LEFT.


The left make their livelihoods from societal discord. It's their bread and butter. Without it, they have nothing. Right now in Brazil, there are literally thousands of leftist anarchists terrorising tourists that are visiting their nation for the World Cup. You might have read about the British tourists that were attacked by anarchists last week. The majority of the men and women enabling acts of violence against our respective societies are-and it saddens me to say this, white, upper middle class liberals.


These people thrive on our misfortune and are a bigger menace than the blacks running wild because of them. They fill black men, already rife with rage and savagery, with the notion that their hatred and blood lust, is somehow our doing. They empower men like Moses Sithole, and the brutes that perpetrated the Walkerfield farm murders. They inspire their rage, not only justifying it, but blaming us for their hatred. In fact the media tried to spin the Walkerfield murders against the victims. I have seen loads of comments made by leftists BLAMING the Viana family for the crime. That's how deluded these people are.


Read More at:!south-african-multiple-homicide-epidemic/c10bb