Saturday, August 04, 2007

More slippery Leftist talk about race

The conclusion of a recent article by Matthew Syed in "The Times" is as follows: "The conclusion is unavoidable: those who invoke race as an explanation of real and perceived differences between humans have an agenda that is other than scientific"

How does he arrive at that conclusion? By pointing out, quite correctly, that there are well-known differences WITHIN races. West Africans are better at sprinting and East Africans are better at long-distance running, for instance. So therefore, he thinks, in a breathtaking overgeneralization, all talk of race is misleading.

That is an old quibble, however. While it is true that statements such as "Blacks make the best sprinters" are much less precise than they could be, they are nonetheless true statements -- as are other generalizations about race -- such as: "African-Americans commit violent crimes about 9 times as often as white Americans". Such statements are simple statements of fact and saying that anyone who utters such statements "has an agenda that is other than scientific" is just indulging in the usual fact-ignoring Leftist abuse.

Insofar as I can find any logic at all in Syed's pontification, I think he may be pointing out that what is true of any group is not necessarily true of all members in that group. I know of no-one who would dispute that, however, so Syed's attack is an attack on a straw man.

Syed also seems unaware that the usual racial classifications are well-reflected in the DNA of the people concerned. See e.g. here and here.

From his surname, I suspect that Syed is a Muslim. So let me give him another generalization to chew on: "The statements of prominent Muslims are not notable for their reliance on logic". That statement is of course a generalization and, as such, does not preclude some prominent Muslims from being very logical -- but Syed is clearly not one of those.

******************************

ELSEWHERE



Leftist rag TNR (Truth Not Required) has now admitted that their Scott Thomas Beauchamp was not even In Iraq when his alleged tales of horror occurred. See here and here and here. Gateway Pundit thinks he has just qualified as the next Senator from Massachusetts.

Britain's dangerous Keystone Cops: "Two years have elapsed since the de Menezes shooting. Since then the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has conducted two inquiries -- at a combined cost of 600,000 pounds -- and concluded that only one man can be held to account. None of the firearms officers who pulled the trigger has been charged with any offence. The surveillance officers who changed the police log to try to cover up their mistakes have not been reprimanded. The operational commanders who gave the order to shoot have, so far, not faced any disciplinary action. But the IPCC says that Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, head of Special Operations at Scotland Yard, should be disciplined. Mr Hayman must be held to account for failing to tell Sir Ian Blair, the Commissioner, that there was mounting evidence that police had shot an innocent man. He is also accused of deliberately misleading the public by providing contradictory accounts of what he knew in press briefings."

Do Dems finally understand the collateral effects of taxing the "rich"? : "Back in the hot summer of 1990, Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell proudly engineered the infamous "luxury tax," a nasty little tithe on everything from furs to jewelry to yachts. Democrats were proud: Not only were they throwing new dollars at the Treasury, they'd done it by socking it to the rich. The wealthy, in the words of then-House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt, would finally pay "their fair share." Within a year, Mr. Mitchell was back in the Senate passionately demanding an end to the same dreaded luxury tax. The levy had devastated his home state of Maine's boat-building business, throwing yard workers, managers and salesmen out of jobs. The luxury tax was repealed by 1993, though by the look of today's tax debate, its lessons haven't been forgotten. Top Democrats are working to implement a new class-warfare tax strategy, only this time they're getting pushback from those in their party who fear the economic consequences"

Sarkozy to vacation in the USA: "France's President Nicolas Sarkozy would not have to stray far from the Champs-Elys‚es to find a summer holiday spot most Americans can only dream of. A castle in the Loire valley. A country estate in Provence. A villa on the French Riviera. But non. Sarkozy, his country's celebrated new leader, is planning to get some rest and relaxation on the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee. Wolfeboro -- a popular vacation destination for countless Bostonians -- is buzzing with excitement about his visit.... Wolfeboro, which bills itself as the oldest summer resort in America, takes great pride in its natural beauty and low-key sensibility, and over the years the town has drawn rich and famous people from all over the world -- including Mitt Romney, who owns a summer home a few minutes by boat or car from Appe's mansion. Adam Gopnik, who has written extensively about French politics and culture for The New Yorker and in his own books, said yesterday it would be "a huge mistake" to think Sarkozy idealizes America, but he said the new French president appears to want to "drain the drama" from relations between the two countries. Asked about the prospect of Sarkozy's visit, Gopnik said he did not know whether Sarkozy had any political purpose in his trip, but if he did, it might be to make it seem "completely normal and unfreighted that a French president could vacation in America."

The empty vessel runs at the mouth and then realizes it: "Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons in any circumstance. "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama said, with a pause, "involving civilians." Then he quickly added, "Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table."

Fighting drones now in Iraq : "Danger Room reports that modified Swords bomb-disposal robots with M249 machine guns mounted on them are now in Iraq. In development the units were somewhat sluggish in responding to commands which made them dangerous for use. The problems have apparently been solved."

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN.

List of backup or "mirror" sites here or here -- for readers in China or for everyone when blogspot is "down" or failing to update. Email me here (Hotmail address). My Home Pages are here or here or here

****************************

"Why should the German be interested in the liberation of the Jew, if the Jew is not interested in the liberation of the German?... We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time... In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.... Indeed, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism over the Christian world has achieved as its unambiguous and normal expression that the preaching of the Gospel itself and the Christian ministry have become articles of trade... Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist". Who said that? Hitler? No. It was Karl Marx. See also here and here and here.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party".

****************************

2 comments:

Lisa Richards said...

A LENIN AMERICA IN HIGH HEELS AND PANTSUITS

BY LISA RICHARDS
June 13, 2007
“I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society. I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none. There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed. Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.” Hillary Clinton, May 29, 2007.
The above comment is the absolute definition of socialism bordering on communism. Karl Marx’s Socialism was a communist government system that forced all citizens under it to “Share” their benefits or profits from what each person individually worked hard to earn. No one was allowed to earn more than the other; getting rich was a privilege not allowed.
Marx hated the English language and the American system of capitalism, laying out the “Communist Manifesto” in 1848 to enable the workers to have more control over the bosses of industry. Marx wanted mob or majority rule—whoever has the most say wins.
If the mob says no one can earn over a certain amount, and if one does, one must split up the earnings and share. Therefore, what one earns and owns belongs to one’s fellow countrymen.
Thus Soviet company bosses, or CEO’s, were never allowed to make a profit above what Marx deemed rule of law or punishment was ensured with arrest and imprisonment.
Marx’s entire ideology was a way to destroy every vestige of the American ideology system of self-made money, wealth and acquiring all one wanted to obtain and develop for one’s individual self and the prosperity of the nation, from entering Russia and the new Soviet Union. Communism and Socialism are the absolute hate of all that is good and right in the world; including God and capitalism.
Distribution of goods, including everyone’s personal financial belongings, forces every person to become identical and exact to each citizen; giving up equal amounts of one’s share to each citizen for perfect equality with no individualism laid out by the U.S. Founding Fathers who believed everyone had the right to the privilege of individual gain.
For 73 years, communism controlled Soviets in a prison of socialist shared control. But the sharing of the people’s money was not given to the people; money and property were given to the politicians who hated people having control and the betterment of the individual self. Anyone who stood up against the communist system was executed during Stalin’s years or simply disappeared during the Khrushchev and Brezhnev years.
Now Hillary Romanov Clinton wants the United States to become a “shared” community where we the people must share our paychecks, bank accounts, savings, stocks, bonds, property, etc, with low-income Americans already living off middle and upper-class Americans by way of welfare taken through state and local taxes.
The United States is not a “Sharing” nation; the United States is a Constitutional Republic based on individual capitalistic wealth created by each individual person. One can become as wealthy as one so desire’s to become if one chooses that path. Under the Hillary System, only the low-income and illegals will benefit; they will be allowed to take everything from those who worked hard to build a financial future for their family; the wealthy will pay the punishment of appropriation for reparations.
On May 29, 2007, Madame Clinton admitted she wants to “pair growth with fairness” in order to indemnify big corporations do not succeed in getting bigger. She claims she wants Middle America to grow, but not the hand that feeds Middle America by giving Middle America jobs to climb the ladder and grow oneself to prosperity; in other words, goodbye big money and big corporations who supply jobs and provisions to America.
Hillary Clinton is fine with wealth and prosperity so long as no one but Democrats and Clintons are allowed to make and have all the wealth; the rest of us can open up our bank accounts and homes and split up everything we own, “Sharing” it with able-bodied welfare leeches who refuse to work for a living and need never work as long as Democrats and bleeding hearted liberals exist.
On hillaryclinton.com, Former Secretary of the State Madeline Albright declared “Hillary Clinton will not need on the job training to be America’s head diplomat;” she already has the experience it takes to run this country.
True; Mrs. Clinton ran America for eight long years under the guise of her rapist husband she used as a front to gain the New York Senate seat and now the attempt to con America into handing her the keys once again to the people’s house, and this time, personal property.
Democratic female supporters flock to Hillary rallies fawning over the idea of finally having a woman running for president; and there we have the problem of why Madame Romanov is so popular; women want a female president so bad, they don’t care that the woman is a socialist/Social Darwinist promoting mass distribution of their wealth.
Nor do the dumber-than-mud-for-brains women care when Hillary states: “let’s set a goal for Universal Healthcare,” which is socialism-run medicine determining who can have medical attention and who is too old to deserve the care.
On Hillary’s site, she declares to an audience of ding-bat women who deserve the jokes men make about women: “This is an election for yourselves…and I will always support you.”
For a moment there I thought Porter Wagoner was going to leap up on stage looking for Dolly Parton.
Hillary’s supporters are brainwashed imbeciles who think its kind to share their wealth and belongings with the poor who refuse to get off their lazy back-sides and work. Oh how wrong it is for the poor to work when the rich have so much they should hand over.
Again; the Bolsheviks coerced a Soviet labor structure upon the people with policies that took wealth from the rich and dispersed it to the politicians rather than the people they claimed to champion. Either choice was wrong. Lenin and his compatriots called themselves the liberators of the workers and peasants, denouncing the low pay received by those groups. Lenin and the Bolsheviks became the owners and takers of the workers profits; Lenin believed the people should never make above a certain amount, whereas, he, the leader, should earn as much financial wealth as he desired.
The Soviet people were enslaved to a communist government which denounced capitalism, the accumulation of wealth, and freedom of the individual person.
“War Communism,” the term for the compulsory communist system created by Lenin, was enforced by him as his way of ensuring totalitarian rule upon the people, their lives, and the nation.
Welcome to the world of Hillary Romanov Clinton and the possible, horrendous future of America if that woman with her policies is allowed to become President of the United States.
Thomas Jefferson is officially lying face down.
Copyright 2007 Lisa Richards

Lisa Richards said...

WHY DIVERSITY IS DANGEROUS

BY LISA RICHARDS
July 4, 2007

Many Americans consider it wonderful to have diverse communities, schools, workplaces, clubs, organizations, etc. Having an equal amount of blacks to white to Hispanic students in schools is called fair ratio; having an equal amount of blacks, whites, and Hispanics in many corporations is mandatory and a grievous offense if not carried out. It does not matter if there are stupid idiots in any of the three groups so long as the Crayola culture box is complete.

The days of hiring the smart guy, be he black, white or any race, are gone in lieu of a United Colors of Benetton America where everyone is equal even if they lack brains and skills.

Ebonics, the language of ghetto retards, is recognized as an official black American language despite the fact it’s really the dialect of lazy idiots who refuse to enunciate words they bottle out of learning.

Even U.S. towns are disallowed American-ness; there must be foreign communities to accommodate Europe and the third world. And forget all American country clubs; no, there must be Italian clubs, Irish clubs, Polish clubs, Jewish clubs, etc; yet when some non-integrated southern schools want all black or all white proms during prom season, the media—liberal and conservative—go berserk calling the two group’s racist toward one another. Never mind the fact the proms take place at black schools and white schools and the kids are not racist because their schools are not racially mixed; the towns are expected to accommodate Americans insulted by all black or all white schools by combining the proms, making them interracial—don’t you love that phrase—so the prom “appears” fair to every race in America.

That black boy better ask that white girl to dance if he doesn’t want the ACLU and wimpy Americans slitting their throats over the fact the black boy only dates black girls. How dare he; doesn’t he know its mandatory law every race must intermarry nowadays whether they like it or not? How else can America be a happy nation unless everyone gets along and we create a one-world race of confused humans? Never mind letting people be people who simply get along with one another because they like one another; multiethnic integration with absolute separation, and the term ethnic communities, is the only way to stop America from ever going back to an American culture.

The entire multicultural broo ha ha is all about accommodating liberal’s hatred toward America’s founding.


Since the fateful 1960’s it’s considered wonderful to have Hispanic communities for Hispanics, Asian for the Asian and ghettos for the blacks. Ghetto is the expression for modern day plantation. It is necessary to separate humans into multicultural categories if America is to realize how horrible white skin truly is. Living amongst the great Satanists of pale-facedom is evil at best. Of course if American whites sincerely desire happiness, they will never call themselves American; rather they will identify themselves by their ancestor’s origination nation and live in “Irish,” “Italian,” “German,” “Polish,” neighborhoods catering to a foreign ancestry America’s ancestors ran from to become American.

When foreigners arrived on U.S. shores, many congregated to neighborhoods with only their language and culture because they were new to America; ultimately, this caused a separation from other Americans and created division. To liberals, the hate between Irish and Italian neighborhoods was great. How wonderful for people to beat the crap out of each other over a foreign nation’s cultures those people no longer belonged to. What a wonderful way to raise children.

Then came the 1960’s introduction to celebrations of foreign cultures and the absolute denunciation of America and the white skin color.

Puerto Rican Day Parades are a must, but Columbus Day Parades are racist; United Negro College Funds are mandatory; the thought of a white college fund is blasphemy; Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday must be celebrated; Washington and Lincoln can go to hell for being white; Thanksgiving in Plymouth, Massachusetts is evil even though Squanto’s tribe and William Bradford’s Mayflower colony were the best of friends their entire lives. To celebrate that friendship might bring white and tribal Americans together as Americans and we don’t want that now do we?

The truth is diversity is racism at liberalism’s worst.

In Texas, one can find diversity bordering on insanity. There are areas hell-bent on being so “diverse,” Spanish is its official language. No one speaks English including American Hispanics living in these Texas towns. That is absolute proof people of these racist-toward-America areas hate America, its people and culture. But that’s fine with liberals who believe America should be, and is, a nation of diversity.

Diversity is separation any way you slice it; it has created a nation bordering on insanity.

What is even more ludicrous is our fellow American Jamestown tribes are not allowed to have their tribal languages, the first languages of the U.S. before English. Spanish is not the native language of the U.S., nor is it the founding language of the United States of America. The United States federal government refuses to recognize Jamestown, Virginia’s tribal languages as American languages. These are the original Americans who lived with the very first settlers inside the Jamestown forts; but they are Americans, not Hispanics, and that is a sin punishable by taking from them and giving to illegals and legal welfared Hispanics who claim Spanish is the true language of the United States.

When one hears the word diverse, one thinks, oh how nice, we have so much culture. Wrong; diversity separates races and allows people of races, who hate the white race, to give America the finger for being a nation founded by white Europeans.

Now diversity has allowed a more dangerous culture to enter; Islam and its Muslim followers.

Europe has battled Islamic culture for 14 centuries, witnessing proof diversity is a dangerous clash of cultures which should never be allowed to take hold of another country’s heritage. Yet Europe, wimpy and liberal as it also has been, allowed itself long ago, to be overrun to the point of riots, bombings, massacres and complete Muslim takeover of areas in each country. Now Europe is facing constant death upon its citizens as a result. The lack of the death penalty in Europe allows Islam to carry out its coup d’é•tat plan for the destruction of the non-Islamic world.

Islam’s coup de grâce on the U.S. on 9/11 is the direct result of a culture clash and its ethos trying to destroy the world, making way for its own philosophy. Rather than denouncing Islam as evil, President Bush continues to state Islam has been hijacked by radicals trying to destroy a great religion. Bush tells Americans to be tolerant toward the religion of death; that its culture is a great and its people are good. And little Red Riding Hood had a nice picnic with a kindly old wolf who loved her granny.

9/11 was a perfect example of how treacherous diversity is. One nation can not become many cultures of many nations; the U.S. is E Pluribus Unum, Out of many, one; not the opposite liberals have enforced upon Americans as a way to instill hate toward the United states and every American’s true culture, heritage and philosophy—America.

Everything happening in America right now, illegals and their supporters marching in pro-Mexico /pro-illegal parades, Hispanics who demand Spanish-speaking, bilingual schools in the U.S., illegals demanding amnesty and citizenship; companies such as Home Depot forced to care for and hire illegal aliens; illegals granted rights to loiter American streets for jobs rightfully belonging to American citizens; Islam demanding women keep their grim reaper outfits on for American driver’s licenses photos; Islam demanding prayer for Muslims in U.S. schools; Islam demanding no Christian or Jew wear a cross or Star of David in public, are all examples of what a multicultural culture does to a nation; it destroys it’s foundation and eliminates the future.

The U.S. is one society, one way of life in one nation with the English language as official. English is the language of success, not Spanish. If one chooses to hold on to Spanish versus assimilating to the etymological semantic of the U.S., that person will never raise above two dollar an hour under-the-table-pay backroom jobs.

Americans better worry about those repudiating to assimilate; they are doing so in order to take over America and turn it into Mexico. If that were not the case, why not come to the U.S. legally, learn the language and fully become the American culture? Because those who negate hate America and everything it stands for except welfare checks.

America is quickly loosing her identity to nations demanding Americans cater to foreign ways. Americans are not allowed to criticize the obnoxious cashier talking to fellow cashiers in Spanish; to do so is racist; Americans are not permitted to disapprove nor censure any employee who can not speak English to the patron; to do so is white supremacy.

Liberals love the appropriation of foreign cultures annexing America; it means the end of the hated white man and intolerable Christian foundation of the United States founded by the aberrant white men white liberals are ashamedly descendants of.

If any American dare speak out against Hispanic culture, Islamic occupation hell-bent on destruction for occupation of the U.S. heritage, riots start. If one is white, one must be ashamed and extinguished from existence for the fact white men built society and economic means for all.

Of course my saying the above is considered white supremacy; never mind multiculturalism creates riots causing death and destruction; all that matters is everything non-white, non-English-speaking, and non-Christian hijack, conquer and secure the United States, turning America into a rioting, chaotic, out of control and economically ruined Europe.

Copyright 2007 Lisa Richards