text:
"Topaz" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
it

[snip]

it

You are adding to it now. If there isnt a way to avoid it? You would refuce
the tratment and insist on a male doctor? Or you would casrt aside these
principles iof it meant sving your child?

so you believe Muslims marry children.

Well check it out. You have the references. go and look at the Hadiths.

So what?

[snip]
"well
acceptable?

But this is based on the thesis that "some people are more equal than
others" that there is a  "master race". there is no evidence to support this
thesis!
The "leave the thinking up to your betters and follow us with blind faith"
isnt really wht you believe is it?
[snip]

the

Another unfounded assertion!

So you are saying if a black man hates jews and you hate jews then that
black man is your friend?

If you had evidence which said that giving equal rights to women resulted in
LESS divorce would you agree to such rights?

Yes.

I note "almost"? But if she files for divorse it is because she has the
grounds to do so isnt it?

so the one with grounds i.e. the agrieved party should not get anything and
the one committing the adultery should? Next i supposte if ui steal form you
I should get to keep the money because you complained about me stealing?

remove

I dont think you answer it above. where?

No she doesnt necessarily. A doctor does about four years in college and
about three in practice in the EU . Thats seven! Or she does an undergrad
(in a non medical say a science field) and then she goes to postgrad medical
school in the US. A nurse does about four years (if they do a degree in
nursing) and then goes into practice. One can do a PhD in nursing i.e. a
doctorate.

But ou are now argueing based on QUALIFICATION and not on GENDER! Why
shouldnt a woman with the qualification get the job?

So now a doctor isnt a "manly" job? so other than police and army what is
"manly"?

Iwill leave thiordd world aside for this wher it is obvious.
You may well believe this. I did. It isnt true. In December statistics in
Ireland (now a higher GDP per capita then the US) confirmed the gender
imbalance in pay.

[snip]

DEAD LINK! Have you the source stats? I can produce counter evidence.

means

No i stated that women have ground if the man is an adulterer. You already
admitted above that it is mostly the women have grounds!

I staed the WOMAN divorces maybe because the man has a new woman. Why should
he be allowed to do that? he is the one leaving her and taking up with
someone else. So she has grounds to divorce him. If the woman is abusing the
man and children he could get grounds and get the children and the house.
Mothers dont usually abuse children.

TO

And when faced with this men still take the chance and lose the house. their
problem!

it.

fine.good. I wont press it then. Finished.

Hadiths

Ah! But there is a big difference between Muslims and Christians on this.
Most Christians dont believe the Bible the Bible is literally true i.e. that
the world was created 6000 years ago. they are not fundamentalist on teh
scripture. Except for some crionks in the US. But Muslims DO look upon the
Koran as literal truth. and the Hadiths are central to Islam as well. Well
to most (Sunni) Islam.

This is WRONG! The "flat earth" idea was a nienteenth century idea pushed in
the US! Christians never adopted the idea of a flat Earth!

You are confusing it wuith the heliocentric/geocentric hypothesis and maybe
the geokenetic one(i.e. the Earth moving). This was more of a peripathetic
philosophy (i.e.that of  Aristotle ) which was adoped into the Church by
Thomas Acquinas. It was academics and not necessarily holy men or
spiritualists that took on these greek philosophies as ecclesiastical
issues.

[snip]

Thats the best you have to offer? Because... i think so???
Some people think the world is flat!

All deals are aggressive?

proof
Apparently you are not so you must not be a US citizen.

Not necessarily. I agree you point to an interesting double standard i.e.
how can the US support an aparthied state when it claims to oppose that? I
must tale not of this future debates with others. It is a really valid
point!
thank you,
But the US is chock full of double standards in foreign policy anyway isnt
it?
Vatican.

It DOES compare! The Madics were the richest family in the world! But it
isnt a question of scale. Why wont you believ ein a Christian cabal but you
believe in a jewish one?

Even

Media TNC's control the media.

observers.

So you think that Bush saying "we know about WMD we have the evidence" was
actually caused by a jewish conspiracy?

this isnt an academic site! It is a holocaust denial site. Where are the
original statistics from?
http://www.oilempire.us/holocaust-denial.html
A site that was an early participant in 9/11 truth movement but devolved
into promoting a variation of the "no plane" at Pentagon and the bizarre
claims that there are no natural limits to petroleum production. Its
webmaster prefers the term "Holocaust Revisionism" to "Denial" - and admits
that perhaps 1 to 3 million Jewish people were killed by the Nazis. However,
that requires one to still deny much of the Holocaust, although it is less
overtly offensive than claiming that almost no one was killed.
Jerry Russell wrote:
The Holocaust -- lots of references at
http://www.911-strike.com/holocaust-dialectic.htm; several lines of
demographic proofs of conspiracy at
http://www.ety.com/tell/books/jgjewstats/jgstattoc.htm
rebuttal:
This "ety" website praised by Jerry Russell (911-strike) is really obscene.
Denying gas chambers is about as obnoxious as denying depleted uranium in
Iraq, the Pol Pot genocide, the Armenian genocide by the Turks (an
inspiration for Hitler's Holocaust), and countless other atrocities.
[snip]

in
an
1946.

Conference.
Jewish
estimated
of
are
i.e.
my

Who is Seneca?

you
neo
Irving
"rooting
definition
I

IHR is a revisionist site and has been shown up as not teling the truth!
Please find a proper source.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2711holocaust.html - Holocaust on Trial, a
PBS documentary about David Irving's libel lawsuit, PBS Airdate: October 31,
2000
 www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2050069,00.html
The Guardian, February 5, 2000
This is how [David Irving] approaches the entire topic. He dismisses the
evidence of the witnesses' own eyes: whether Jew or Nazi, they made it all
up. He sets a standard of proof for his enemies which no human event could
ever fully satisfy. And this is a challenge not only to Deborah Lipstadt.
... If Irving is able to dismiss the testimony of tens of thousands of
witnesses, where does that leave history? If we can't know this, how can we
know that Napoleon fought at Waterloo or that Henry VIII had six wives? How
can we know anything? [emphasis added]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving

seemed

Oh so it is him?

Yes it IS! I

I had no idea that it would lead to extermination in any literal sense.

means he admits ity happened but didnt think it litterally meant
"extermination" at the time.

be a

Yes he can! As above. He is admitting it happened but claiming he knew
nothing about it at the time. In fact how can he admit it happened (which he
id whn shown the pictures of it) if he believed it didnt? In fact he is
claiming he accepts it happened but that he didnt play any part in it.

Yes way! He was not executed and liked in Spandau prision ultil 1987.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Hess
Hess had a privileged position as Hitler's deputy in the early years of the
Nazi movement but was increasingly marginalized throughout the 1930s as
Hitler and other Nazi leaders consolidated political power. Hitler
biographer John Toland described Hess' political insight and abilities as
somewhat limited and his alienation increased during the early years of the
war as attention and glory were focused on military leaders along with
Hermann Gï¿½ring, Joseph Goebbels and Heinrich Himmler....
Hess's strange behaviour and unilateral proposals quickly discredited him as
a serious negotiator (especially after it became obvious he did not
officially represent the German government). Taken by surprise, Hitler had
Hess' staff arrested, then spread word throughout Germany that Hess had gone
insane and acted of his own accord.
Cross
gold.
[snip]

politician.
fighting
party
So what? There is evidence that they killed people there as well as part of
a plot to rid the world of "undermenchen".
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/p
ressac0011.shtml
[Auschwitz State Museum Archives reference BW 30/43, page 24. This document,
held in the "October Revolution" Central State Archives in Moscow was sent
by this body in 1964-65 to the Warsaw Central Commission for the
investigation of Hitlerite crimes in Poland, which sent it under a covering
letter of 30th October 1968 to the Vienna assize court to be part of the
evidence in the trial of the Auschwitz Krematorium "architects", former SS
officers Walter DEJACO and Fritz ERTL. This trial was held from 18th January
to 10th March 1972 and ended with the acquittal of the accused. The
documents sent by the Poles to the Austrians were scarcely used by the
"experts", which explains the astonishing verdict of not guilty, in
particular for Dejaco.]

This inventory indicates that the equipment installed for "Leichenkeller 1 /
Corpse cellar [morgue] 1" included:

ï¿½     "1 gasdichte Tï¿½r / 1 gas-tight door," AND
ï¿½     "14 Brausen / 14 showers",

two items that are strictly INCOMPATIBLE with one another. This
incompatibility constitutes the fundamental proof, for it is clear that:

Proposition A: A gas-tight door can be intended only for a gas chamber.

Question A:  Why does a gas chamber have showers in it?

Reply A: Incomprehensible. Proposition A must be formulated differently for
a logical reply.

Proposition B: A room fitted with showers is a place where people wash
themselves.

Question B: Why does the only entrance to the shower room have a gas-tight
door?

Reply B:  Incomprehensible, Proposition B must be formulated differently for
a logical reply.

Which sends us back to proposition A, question A, reply A, proposition B,
etc. The reasoning is in a vicious circle which cannot be broken. The only
way to escape the illogicality is to bring complementary proof demonstrating
that one of the propositions IS INCORRECT. This can he done by means of the
following arguments:

ï¿½The average area covered by a shower head, calculated on the basis of the
drawings for the two shower installations at the Stammlager, the reception
building (BW 160) and Block 26. and for those at Birkenau, BW 5a, 5b. and
the Zentral Sauna (BW 32), works out at 1.83mï¿½

ï¿½On this basis. Leichenkeller 1 of Krematorium III, with a floor area of
210m2, should have 115 shower heads.

ï¿½In fact only 14 were planned and we know that they were FITTED, because
seven wooden bases to which similar shower heads were fitted are still
visible in the ruins of the ceiling of L-keller 1 of Krema II.

ï¿½On one of the copies of the Krematorium II/III inventory drawing 2197, that
from the Soviet "October Revolution" central state archives, water pipes are
shown supplying the 3 taps of Leichenkeller 1 and the 5 of Leichenkeller 2,
but none are connected to the "showers", This is paradoxical because on this
version of drawing 2197 even the lamps are drawn and on various other
drawings showing shower installations the shower heads are necessarily shown
and the associated pipework usually appears also.

ï¿½It can only be concluded that these are DUMMY SHOWERS, made of wood or
other materialls, and painted, as stated by several former memhers of the
Sonderkommando

This inventory is absolute and irrefutable proof of the existence of a gas
chamber fitted with dummy showers in Krematorium III.

These dummy showers were not placed there by chance, or for purposes of
decoration, but with a very precise purpose: to mislead the people entering
Leichenkeller 1 / gas chamber l, a misrepresentation implying the deliberate
intention to cause them to die by inhaling a deadly gas.

These Krematorium inventories. drawn up when the buildings were completed,
also provide an almost incredible supplementary proof: mention of the device
for introducing Zyklon-B into a Leichenkeller. The second document
[Documents B and B'] [Auschwitz State Museum Archive reference BW 30/43,
page 12, also from a Soviet source] contains a flagrant error on the part of
the SS man who filled in the form.

The first line indicates that in the basement of Krematorium II, "Raum I,
Leichenkeller / Room I, corpse cellar" was fitted with:

 ï¿½"16 Lamp o. Kug, u. Tel. Feuchtsicher / 16 lamps other than globes,
waterproof" and
ï¿½"5 Zapfhï¿½hne / 5 taps".

The second line shows that "Raum 2 / room 2", idem. [Leichenkeller] was
fitted with:

ï¿½"10 Lamp o. Kug. u. Tel. Feuchtsicher / 10 lamps other than globes.
waterproof"
ï¿½"3 Zapfhï¿½hne / 3 taps",
ï¿½"4 Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung / 4 wire mesh introduction devices" and
ï¿½"4 Holzblenden / 4 wooden covers."

AUSCHWITZ:
Technique and operation
of the gas chambers
Jean-Claude Pressac
ï¿½ 1989, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation
Page 429

[snip]

See document above about air tight doors.
alt.revisionism

It was Morghus who I believe has been trashed on usenet.

logistics
with

Bush isnt a jew. there are no jews on the Supreme court afaik.There are few
jewish generals, mayors, police commissioners etc.

It would be unlikeley.
For what reason? But let us assume they did.

Yes . So what is your point?

Not really since to imagine that Syria could blame Egypt one could imagine
Syria could do it without detection.
And also if THe Us attacked to fined terrorists they would soon find out the
real terrorists.

Well why didnt the US invade Saudi Arabia then?

Yes. And got control of middle east oil in the process.

Btu Iraq didnt attack the US!

I just told you in reality Iraq didnt attack. But the Us has sent aid to
human rights abusing Saddam.

Buy most of the 9/11 attackers were Saudi! Bush is big pals of the sauds.

[snip]

Upi sold them to Iaq and then accused Iraq of terrorism.

Well duke is not much of a source for me either.

opinion
a
you
sanctioning

happen

If you read them you should be able to gie a two sentences of commentary in
each stating the relevance ahd wher it is in that reference.
If you dont I will snip it as a cut and paste without relevance.

[snip more cut and paste]
counter
the
snip

wife
wrote.
women
without

And jackboots? and clubs?

O i see. You dont want women thugs?
Only skinheads and nazi MALES can be thugs in your perfect world?

then
if

Which is why ther should be more men in the force. But not NO women. Just
less.

Which

So if one discriminated and finde there arent enough in one job they should
employ more of them.


author: Topaz

subject: Re: Re: Re: Denial of holocaust and of women in the workplace

text:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:26:22 -0000, "Beacon" <[email]>
wrote:

 The Muslim wrote things like this:

Reliability of Source. Most of the narratives printed in the books of
hadith are reported only by Hisham ï¿½Tehzibu'l-Tehzib, one of the most
well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the
traditions of the Prophet, reports that according to Yaqub ibn
Shaibah: "He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are
acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq"
(Tehzi'bu'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-'asqala'ni, Dar Ihya al-turath
al-Islami, 15th century. Vol 11, p. 50). It further states that Malik
ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported
through people in Iraq: "I have been told that Malik objected on those
narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq"

Other Muslims will gladly accept this. They have to, like Christians
realized that the modern view of the solar system, just has to be
accepted. There is no choice.

Here is your version:

 Muslims are bad people because they believe in their holy book and it
looks  like there is something bad in this book.

Here's how it really is:

 Muslims are good people. But they have a holy book and looks like
there is something bad in it. Becoming bad people is not an option. So
they have no choice but to find some other way out of this problem.

 We agree that Muslims have to do something. Your option is that they
scrap their whole religion. My option is that they agree with the
Muslim quoted earlier. It's unfortunate that there seems to be
something wrong with their book. But you are saying they are
fundamentally bad people. That's what I disagree with.

 This is not recognising the difference to the required degree.

 It would be better is Muslims were in power rather than the Jews and
the feminists. But of course power won't be given to just any Muslims.
They would have to be the right kind of Muslims to even have a chance.

 No offense but horses also did a lot of work. The advanced nations
were run by Whites.

 Here's a longer answer then:

(an interview with William L. Pierce)

WLP: The economy will become worse in that the average White family
will work longer and harder for a smaller reward, for fewer of the
necessities of life, for less security, for a meaner life style than
before. The average standard of living, in other words, will continue
to decline, just as it has in during the past few years. And this is
something which absolutely did not depend on the outcome of the recent
election. Both Clinton and Bush have been supporters of globalizing
the US economy. They both have been boosters of the New World Order,
in other words. They both support the removal of trade barriers with
Mexico, for example, which will accelerate the export of American
industry and American jobs to Mexico, simply because wages are much
lower there. The effect of this, of course, will be gradually to raise
wages in Mexico, while they are pulled down in the United States. But,
then, that's the whole rationale behind the push for globalization,
the push for the New World Order, isn't it? Equalize living standards
around the world. Lift up the poor non-Whites in the Third World and
drag down the rich Whites. Give everyone a fair share of industry and
the wealth which goes with it. Break down national and racial
barriers. Homogenize the world, economically, racially, culturally.
That's the idea which has been pushed inexorably and unceasingly by
the controlled media ever since the Second World War. The controlled
media have made this idea of globalization fashionable; they've made
it a Politically Correct idea, and therefore no one in the controlled
political establishment in this country, whether Democrat or
Republican, dares oppose it.
KAS: So it's this bipartisan push for a global economy which leads you
to predict that the US economy will continue to decline, no matter
which party is in the White House?
WLP: That's one of the reasons, and it's an important reason, but
there are also others. There is the continuing, unchecked flood of
non-White immigration into America, for example. There's the continued
policy of favoritism shown to non-Whites in university admissions, in
the awarding of scholarships, in hiring, and in promotions. And
there's the growing burden of supporting an unproductive and largely
non-White welfare class. All of these reasons for future economic
decline are thoroughly entrenched, they're long-term, and they're
bipartisan reasons. Which is to say that they're Politically Correct,
and so neither the Democrats nor the Republicans dare do anything
about them. Can you imagine either a Democrat or a Republican
proposing that we cut off all non-White immigration into the United
States and try to restore America as a White country? ... There's no
more chance of that than there is of either a Democrat or a Republican
President announcing that the New World Order is a scheme intended to
reduce the White American worker to the same level as the Mexican peon
and the Chinese coolie and that we'll have no part of it. And because
there's simply no chance that the controlled political establishment
in this country, Democrat or Republican, will address or even admit
the existence of the fundamental reasons for the declining living
standard of Americans, I can predict with complete confidence that the
economy will continue to decline, over the long run. There are various
paper-shuffling tricks, of course--fiddling with interest rates,
changing the tax structure, rearranging the Federal budget--which can
make temporary changes in the economy, apparent changes, but they
can't cure this contry's real economic problems.
KAS: That's interesting. But you know, the so-called economic
"experts" that we hear on the controlled media disagree with you
completely. They tell us that this recession is just a little anomaly,
a little readjustment, and that over the long run everything is rosy.
They say that the globalization of our economy is helping America by
allowing us to export more of our products. They say that non-White
immigration is boosting our economy by providing us with needed skills
and eager workers. Here's a recent issue of Business Week; the
headline on the cover says, "The immigrants: how they're helping the
U.S. economy." Are the media experts wrong?
WLP: Yes, they're wrong, and what's worse they know they're wrong.
They're deliberately lying to us, deliberately misleading us, just as
much as the politicians are. It doesn't take a genius to see what's
happened to the economy of this country since the Second World War.
The experts rave about the benefits the new World Order is bringing to
us by allowing us to increase our exports. But the cold, hard reality
is that globalization has brought us an enormous trade deficit. The
fact is that it has wiped out whole industries in this country and
exported them overseas: the consumer electronics industry, for
example, or the machine tool industry. The fact, not the theory, is
that millions of Americans are being forced to switch from high-paying
jobs in manufacturing and basic industry to low-paying service jobs.
The fact is that before the Second World War most American families
needed only one wage earner to keep them comfortable and secure; wives
and mothers could stay at home and take care of their families. Today,
of course, most mothers have to work outside the home. The fact is
that our economy isn't getting better and better; it's actually
getting sicker and sicker.
KAS: You keep referring to the changes which have taken place in the
economy since the Second World War. Why is that? What does the war
have to do with it?
WLP: The Second World War really has everything to do with it. It was,
after all, an ideological war, one could almost say a religious war, a
war between two fundamentally different world views. On one side were
the believers in quality over quantity, the elitists, the believers
that White people, Europeans, are more progressive, are better able to
maintain and advance civilization, and should hold onto their position
of world mastery. On the other side were the believers in quantity
over quality, the egalitarians, the believers in racial and cultural
equality, the people who thought it was wicked for the United States
to remain a White country, wicked for White Britain to have a world
empire, wicked for White Germany to be allowed to smash communism,
wicked to permit nationalism to triumph over internationalism. And the
fact is that the egalitarians won the war. After the Second World War
White Americans could no more justify keeping hordes of hungry,
non-White immigrants out of their country than Englishmen could
justify hanging onto the British Empire. They had cut the moral ground
right out from under themselves.
KAS: Of course, that's not the way it was presented to Americans back
in the 1940s. We were all taught that we went to war to keep America
free, that we were fighting against tyranny, that we were fighting on
the side of decency and justice.
WLP: Nonsense. We were fighting on the side of the folks who marched
the entire leadership stratum of the Polish nation into the woods and
murdered them. And the people who control our news and entertainment
media knew that too. When the German Army discovered those huge pits
full of murdered Polish officers and intellectuals, they called in the
world press to look at the evidence. But the controlled media kept it
quiet, so that we would keep fighting on the side of the murderers.
After the war they blamed it on the Germans. And there was nary a
squawk from the controlled media when we turned the surviving Poles,
and the Hungarians, and the Balts, and all the rest of the Eastern
Europeans over to the same gang of cutthroats who had butchered
Poland's leaders in 1940. Of course, it made sense in a sick sort of
way. After all, murdering a nation's elite is an egalitarian act.
After you kill off the most intelligent, the most able members of a
nation the ones who're left will be more nearly equal.
KAS: And easier to control.
WLP: Yes. But the point is that, the reasons given to the American
people for getting into the war against Germany were all spurious. It
was not a war to keep America free. Americans weren't in the slightest
danger of losing their freedom to the Germans. It was, as I said, an
ideological war. It was a war about what kind of ideas would govern
the world. It was a war about whether we would be proud and White and
strong, or whether we would feel guilty about the fact that Mexican
peons aren't as well off as we are. And we lost the war. That was a
real turning point in the fortunes of our race and our nation. The
loss of the Second World War is the real reason for the decline of the
U.S. economy--and of our social life, our cultural life, and our
spiritual life. Before the war we had a White country, a country
determined to stay White. After the war we no longer had that
determination. Instead we had the vague feeling that it aws wrong of
us to want to stay White. After the war when the controlled media
began pushing for so-called "civil rights" laws and for opening our
borders to the Third World, it was just a continuation of their push
to get us into the war on the side of the people who had made Poalnd a
more "equal" country by slaughtering her leaders at the killing pits
in the Katyn woods. We don't really have time today to trace the whole
process of the breakdown of America after the war, but we can look at
a few examples which more or less tell the story. We've been talking
about the economy, but it's really our whole society which has been
corrupted by the war, by the ideology for which the war was fought.
Think, for example, about what life is becoming for the millions of
White Americans who still live in our cities, especially those cities
with a large minority contingent. We are no longer the masters in our
own land, and we are paying the price for that decline in status.
Crime has soared enormously in our cities and made life a daily
nightmare for millions who cannot move away. Even for those who live
in the suburbs and only must work in the cities during the day, crime
has become an ever-present constraint, a burden, a limit to their
lives. City streets which once were safe for White women and men, by
night as well as by day, are now like minefields where we must proceed
with caution and be always on guard. We know who makes our streets
unsafe. We know against whom we are obliged to bar our windows. We
know whom we must fear if our cars run out of gas or break down at
night. And these are the same people whose welfare support imposes
such an intolerable burden on our strained economy. And it is
interesting that the government cannot solve our crime problem for
exactly the same reason that it cannot solve our economic problem: it
cannot address the causes; it cannot even admit the existence of the
causes, because those causes are Politically Incorrect. Just as the
government economists talk about interest rates and budget adjustments
but dare not speak of the effects of globalism on our economy, the
sociologists talk about "poverty" as the cause of urban crime, but
dare not mention that crime in America today is above all else a
racial problem. Or look at what our schools have become, or look at
popular entertainment. You know what the purpose of a school should
be? It should be not just to pound facts into the heads of children so
they can earn a living; it should be to mold them into good citizens.
It should be to teach them about their roots, about their ancestors,
about their race. It should be to give them a sense of identity, a
feeling of solidarity with their people, a feeling of appreciation for
the civilization which their people created. It should be to teach
them the values and customs which are peculiar to their people. But
most of the schools in America's cities cannot do these things. They
are not even permitted to try to do these things, because these things
are all profoundly racist, the controlled media tell us. The only kind
of school which can teach meaningfully about roots and identity is a
school which is racially homogeneous, but such schools were outlawed
by our government after the Second World War, because they are
contrary to the principles for which that war was fought. When our
kids turn to drugs today, when they learn anti-White rap lyrics from
the television, when they think Magic Johnson is a hero and say upon
meeting a friend, "hey, man, gimme five," we're paying the price of
the war. I said a few minutes ago that the worst aspect of the
breakdown of America was not what's happened to our economy, but
what's happened to our spiritual life, to our morale, to our idealism,
to our character. White Americans haven't become more stupid in the
last 50 years. Most of the people listening to this program understand
exactly what I'm saying. They didn't really need me to point it out to
them. They can see it for themselves. It doesn't take a genius to
understand why our schools aren't working or why the New World Order
will hurt Americans as the price of making Mexicans and Chinese more
prosperous. But it does take just a tiny bit of courage to stand up
and say these things when we've had it drummed into our heads that we
always must be Politically Correct. The people listening to this
program have for years been watching America being torn down. They
have seen the effects of egalitarianism, of liberalism on our society.
They have seen one liberal program after another make things worse and
worse, and they have listened to the controlled media and the
controlled politicians tell them that what's needed to fix things is
more of the same. And they've thought to themselves, this is crazy.
But they've been afraid to say that out loud. They've been afraid to
say, "Hey, look, Joe, the emperor doesn't have any clothes on." And
it's my considered opinion that this timidity, this willingness to go
along with every new insanity imposed on us by the media and the
politicians, even when we know it's unnatural and immoral and
destructive of everything worthwhile--this is a spiritual failure.
This spiritual failure, this willingness to tolerate evil, is a more
serious matter, in my eyes, than our economic decline. When we are
able to heal ourselves spiritually, we'll be able to heal ourselves
economically and socially, but not before.
KAS: Is this spiritual failure entirely the fault of the American
people? You've repeatedly referred to the controlled media as the
principal promoters of the ideology which is at the root of our
problems. Aren't they to blame? Aren't the people who control the
media responsible for what's happening to America? And, by the way,
who are these media controllers?
WLP: Well, I think we all know who wields more control over the news
and entertainment media than any other group. It's the Jews. And, yes,
they deserve a great deal of blame. But not all the blame. Perhaps not
even most of it. After all, they're only acting in accord with their
nature. They're doing what they always do when they come into a
country. We shouldn't have let them do it. We should have stopped them
when they were taking over Hollywood 75 years ago. We should have
stopped them when they began buying up newspapers back before the
Second World War. After the war we shouldn't have let them get
anywhere near a television studio. But we didn't stop them, and the
blame for that really lies with those who have set themselves up as
our political leaders. They sold us out. They sold out America. They
sold out their race. When our kids are exposed to the godawful,
anti-White rap musicals from MTV, should we blame the Jewish owner of
MTV, Mr Redstone, or should we blame the politicians in Washington who
let him get away with it? Personally, I'd go after the politicians
first.
KAS: I see your point. Tell us, Dr Pierce, do you think there's any
hope that White Americans ever will go after the politicians who are
betraying them? Do you think they ever will regain enough spiritual
strength to stand up and say, "Hey, the emperor is naked"?
WLP: I do. I believe that one day they'll be shouting it from the
housetops. More people are angry today about what their government is
doing to America than at any time since the Second World War. As time
passes their numbers and their anger will grow. That is inevitable,
because the policies of the controlled media and the government are
making America an unlivable place. The condition of the economy helps
too. I would really be worried if I thought that the politicians could
patch up the economy enough to lull people back to sleep. But I know
that they can't. I know that conditions can only become worse and
worse under the policies which come from Washington, regardless of
who's in the White House. And this is what gives me hope for the
future. When the pain becomes great enough, anger and frustration will
overcome the fear of being Politically Incorrect, even for the most
timid White American.

 In this case it is the cause.

No one is saying Jews are not intelligent. But they parasites not
workers:

The Real Cost Of US Support
For Israel - $3 Trillion
By Christopher Bollyn
9-19-3

While it is commonly reported that Israel officially receives some $3
billion every year in the form of economic aid from the U.S.
government, this figure is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many
billions of dollars more in hidden costs and economic losses lurking
beneath the surface. A recently published economic analysis has
concluded that U.S.  support for the state of Israel has cost American
taxpayers nearly $3 trillion ($3 million millions) in 2002 dollars.
"The Costs to American Taxpayers of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:
$3 Trillion" is a summary of economic research done by Thomas R.
Stauffer.  Stauffer's summary of the research was published in the
June 2003 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
Stauffer is a Washington, D.C.-based engineer and economist who writes
and teaches about the economics of energy and the Middle East.
Stauffer has taught at Harvard University and Georgetown University's
School of Foreign Service. Stauffer's findings were first presented at
an October 2002 conference sponsored by the U.S. Army College and the
University of Maine.
Stauffer's analysis is "an estimate of the total cost to the U.S.
alone of instability and conflict in the region - which emanates from
the core Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
"Total identifiable costs come to almost $3 trillion," Stauffer says.
"About 60 percent, well over half, of those costs - about $1.7
trillion - arose from the U.S. defense of Israel, where most of that
amount has been incurred since 1973."
"Support for Israel comes to $1.8 trillion, including special trade
advantages, preferential contracts, or aid buried in other accounts.
In addition to the financial outlay, U.S. aid to Israel costs some
275,000 American jobs each year." The trade-aid imbalance alone with
Israel of between $6-10 billion costs about 125,000 American jobs
every year, Stauffer says.
The largest single element in the costs has been the series of
oil-supply crises that have accompanied the Israeli-Arab wars and the
construction of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. ï¿½?To date these have
cost the U.S. $1.5 trillion (2002 dollars), excluding the additional
costs incurred since 2001,ï¿½? Stauffer wrote.
The cost of supporting Israel increased drastically after the 1973
Israeli-Arab war. U.S. support for Israel during that war resulted in
additional costs for the American taxpayer of between $750 billion and
$1 trillion, Stauffer says.
When Israel was losing the war, President Richard Nixon stepped in to
supply the Jewish state with U.S. weapons. Nixon's intervention
triggered the Arab oil embargo which Stauffer estimates cost the U.S.
as much as $600 billion in lost GDP and another $450 in higher oil
import costs.
"The 1973 oil crisis, all in all, cost the U.S. economy no less than
$900 billion, and probably as much as $1,200 billion," he says.
As a result of the oil embargo the United States created the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to "insulate Israel and the U.S. against the
wielding of a future Arab 'oil weapon'." The billion-barrel SPR has
cost U.S. taxpayers $134 billion to date. According to an Oil Supply
Guarantee, which former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger provided
Israel in 1975, Israel gets 'first call' on any oil available to the
U.S. if Israel's oil supply is stopped.
Stauffer's $3 trillion figure is conservative as it does not include
the increased costs incurred during the year-long buildup to the
recent war against Iraq in which Israel played a significant, albeit
covert, role. The higher oil prices that occurred as a result of the
Anglo-American campaign against Iraq were absorbed by the consumers.
The increase in oil prices provided a huge bonus for the leading oil
companies such as British Petroleum and Shell, who are major oil
producers as well as retailers. The major international oil companies
recorded record profits for the first quarter of 2003.
The Washington Report seeks to "provide the American public with
balanced and accurate information concerning U.S. relations with
Middle Eastern states." The monthly journal is known for keeping close
tabs on the amount of U.S. taxpayer money that goes to Israel and how
much pro-Israel money flows back to Members of Congress in the form of
campaign aid.
The journal's website, www.wrmea.com, has an up-to-date counter at the
top that indicates how much official aid flows to Israel. While the
counter currently stands at $88.2 billion, it only reflects the
minimum, as it does not include the many hidden costs.
"The distinction is important, because the indirect or consequential
losses suffered by the U.S. as a result of its blind support for
Israel exceed by many times the substantial amount of direct aid to
Israel," Shirl McArthur wrote in the May 2003 issue of Washington
Report.
McArthur's article, "A Conservative Tally of Total Direct U.S. Aid to
Israel: $97.5 Billion - and Counting" tallies the hidden costs, such
as interest lost due to the early disbursement of aid to Israel and
funds hidden in other accounts. For example, Israel received $5.45
billion in Defense Department funding of Israeli weapons projects
through 2002, McArthur says.
Loans made to Israel by the U.S. government, like the recently awarded
$9 billion, invariably wind up being paid by the American taxpayer. A
recent Congressional Research Service report indicates that Israel has
received $42 billion in waived loans. "Therefore, it is reasonable to
consider all government loans to Israel the same as grants," McArthur
says.
Support for Israel has cost America dearly - well over than $10,000
per
American - however the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been extremely
costly for the entire world. According to Stauffer, the total bill for
supporting Israel is two to four times higher than that for the U.S.
alone -
costing the global community an estimated $6 to $12 trillion
http://www.rense.com/general41/trill.htm

"I was listening to a speech that he gave in Sweden. You can listen at
the
Url below if ya want. http://www.davidduke.com/

Anyway, the guy made an analogy that sums it all up.

He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest
crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.

He then went on to say: Haiti is rich in natural resources, they have
great weather, beaches etc.. Yet its a murder, rape capital of the
world. etc, etc.

He went on to say: If we were to take all of the people from Haiti &
Move them to Iceland, Well, they would soon die.

Take those from Iceland and move them to Haiti and within one
generation Haiti would be paradise on earth.

He explained it better than I did. But you should get the gist of the
Iceland / Haiti analogy. Better yet, listen to the Stockholm speech
and hear it for yourself.."

Tommy

 In Jewish controlled countries there are no words to express what I
am saying. I use the words closest in meaning to what I want to say.

The villain of 1984 proclaims, "The whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow
the range of thought." He concludes, "The Revolution will be complete
when the language is perfect."

"I have made the connection between the wholesale cultural ruination
of my own society and the press...and the entire public media.
Television networks, newspapers, and most noticeably, Hollywood...are
all powerful 'mind opinion' forming promulgators to the masses.  The
naive, the uneducated, the less involved, and simple minded, and those
simply unaware...all see and hear from these mediums and are
'influenced' to THINK in certain ways.  Rupert's FOX network was a
counter balance to what had become a jadedly biased liberal media, but
then his success has brought on new forms of yellow journalism.  It
seems we are corrupted from all sides now.
Just as one example, A fella named Norman Lear brought us a succession
of sitcom televions shows that greatly influenced our way of thinking
about traditional culture.  Archie Bunker became icon for the bumbling
bigoted white male.  Contrasted against such images were characters
like Benson, a black man whose only wisdom in an otherwise bumbling
white Governor's cabinet, saved the day time and again.  And thusly,
these kinds of subliminal messages being sent across our airwaves to
susceptible minds, began to embrace the idea of multiculturism and
exchange our images of who wore the white hats versus who wore the
black hats.  White society has been constantly incriminated ever
since.
But this was just one example, more visible.  Norman Lear was Jewish
of course.  But if one looks around, they see inordinate ownership and
high positions of responsibility behind all these powerful
institutions...who are Jewish.
And my culture has been ruined just in my lifetime.  A board of
education state of affairs report in 1955 stated that the major
problems in high schools of that day were 'tardiness, homework not
being turned in on time, and waste baskets not being emptied'.  That
same report 3 decades later, reported the major problems in high
school then were 'teenage pregnancy, drugs, and gangs bringing weapons
to school'.
Who is responsible for this deteriation?  My own search to find
answers seems come back to the Jews as well...but also a new world
neomarxism called Cultural Marxists.  Today's Secular Progressive
liberal is influenced by institutions that now have been permeated
with this new world 'super rationalism' that alienates itself from
anything that was once human.  But I'm quite convinced that most of
this change has not been 'honest, and free',  but structured and
orchestrated."
tooly

http://www.nationalvanguard.org       http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org     http://www.ihr.org/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html     http://www.nsm88.com/


author: Beacon

subject: Hey Topaz how does this fot with the concept of a white master race?

text:
Topaz would claim white people are better than blacks and more inclined to
civil behaviour. One can take that as read form his comments on "African"
countries.

Now in the US more black people are in prision i.e. black people are more
likely to commit crime that will be detected and they will end up in gaol.

In prision theredore one would expect that if one takes ANY subgroup e.g.
auto theft murder that there would be a majority of blacks.

So how do you explain the following:

http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats2.htm#Recidivism

where we find:

      Links to and statistics summarized from the
      U.S. Department of Justice
      Bureau of Justice Statistics

      Link to updated BJS statistics on Sex Offenders

      Two-Thirds of Sex Offenders in State Prisons
      Victimized a Child

      Released March 3, 1996 (202/307-0784)

      For offenders imprisoned for violent crimes against victims younger
than 18 (1991):

Inmate interviews in 277 prisons in 45 states, conducted during 1991,
revealed:

...
Almost 70 were percent white!

Topaz. how is it that child molesters are mostly white? Im mean considering
more blacks are in jails 70 per cent is a HUGE majority isnt it?

How come? What race theory of yours explains this?


text:
"Topaz" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
fundamentalists)
the
be
says"

You are quoting someone's opinion of reporting on someone./ But I have
already given you the actual opinion of the two most trusted Hadits
themselves! Not sources abouyt them but the actual material! And I have
given several other Hadiths.

[snip]

But as I have explained to you tyhe idea that the Christian tradituion and
the Bible are literally true isnt the main thing in christianity. Muslims
however believe the Koran was TRANSCRIBED i.e. litterally translated by the
word of God. Big difference!

Never said that! where did I? I said they claimed their written tradition
was literal truth. Like Biblical fundamentalists do!

So you are saying Islamic literature is WRONG! How then can you claim to
subscrine to Islam which is fundamental on the literature? there is an
inherent contradiction isnt there?

and

I didnt suggest this! Where did I?

Nor did I suggest this! Where did I?

the fact is YOU made the claims and YOU cant support them can you?

I nevert said they were! where did I? I gave you material and you concluded
something is wrong with their book. One can NOT be a muslim and say the book
is wrong!

Adding to it now arent you? I on the other hand was quite clear from the
start. Tho point I made was not that we cant distinguish between men women
disabled catholics etc. the point is that they have equal rights as people.
you wanbt to give women blacks jews etc. LESSER RIGHTS than white men. I
dont suppost you happen to be male? Or white? Do you?
Do you know what "bias" means?

example.

This ISNT answerring what I just asked you is it?

Like nmot being black or women? lol.

So you equate horses to blacks? you are saying not just LESSER RIGHTS but
the same rights as a working animal has?

[snip cut and paste]

Pasting large tracts doesnt show you have a point. Please make your case and
quote from the source (give citations to the source as well). Just cutting
and pasting isnt making a case. It does not display comprehension or
interpretation. I would give you a D minus for that!

Ill try again.
Correlation of genetic phenotypes is not indicative of a causal factor in
economic GDP.

[snip]

What is an "honorary white"?

economy.

But your point was about all first workld countries being white. Is Israel
"white"?
[snip]

doesent shoew Israeli gdp per capitsa makes it third world does it?

that
[snip]

More cut and paste and no counter argument.


subject: Re: Hey Topaz how does this fot with the concept of a white master race?

text:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:16:25 -0000, "Beacon" <[email]>
wrote:

I don't admit this is true. There could be some twisting of the facts
or unknown factors.

But on average Blacks are genetically less intelligent than Whites. I
didn't say they were genetically less nice people. "Niceness" is
probably mostly cultural. The media tells Blacks that Whites are
oppressing them and that is why many of them are hostile. But that
could be media induced rather than genetic.

 Your question has nothing to do with the fact that we should have a
nation for White people. We should preserve the White race because
Whites are on average more intelligent and because we should just like
the looks of the White race. Child molestors should be shot.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org       http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org     http://www.ihr.org/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html     http://www.nsm88.com/


subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Denial of holocaust and of women in the workplace

text:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:26:39 -0000, "Beacon" <[email]>
wrote:

  The majority of Christians want to be decent people but this is in
their holy book:

"When I was getting involved in Catholicism I recall a portion from
"Acts" where the Apostles are telling people to sell all their worldly
goods and give their money to the "church" (classic cult behavior
right from Jim Jones).
One couple, the man withholds some of the cash so he has  something to
live on. The apostle in question points at him and the guy drops dead.
His wife comes by later in the day, the apostle tells her that her
husband was killed because he didn't give every last penny to the
church, and then he kills her in the same manner. How Christ-like of
him!ï¿½
Abracadabra

   What poeple actually do is the main thing. The Muslim said that
most other Muslims say that is the way things were in 600 AD but not
for today.

 It is many of the Christians who want to help bring about an
Armagedon and the "end times" that are the real problem.

 And if Muslims were in power we wouldn't have this:

GAY MILITANT INTENT:   OUR KIDS


author: Phillip

text:
"Beacon" <[email]> wrote in message
news:6129f$45cf51d1$59643124$[email]...
[...]

The irony of your debate is that you are attempting to argue theology
against a person who stressed for you that his motives in subscribing to
Islam are not the belief in God (where every creature of God is equal) but
the desire to take revenge from a social/political system that marginalized
his opinion (about the necessity to have a pure White race).

Similarly Europe is converting to Islam, not because of belief in God, but
because of the scores of crushed souls who got marginalized under the past
century of secular excessiveness and socialist indulgence.

http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8FD54E7F-56C5-49A0-B60A-89A67426F3B3.htm

Family fragmentation, social alienation and public corruption are often the
primary reasons that new converts accept Islam.  It is partly about revenge
of a system that discarded their opinion and dismissed their participation
when they lived under it (similar to the first Muslims in Arabia under the
elites of Qurayish) and partly about finding a cohesive collectivist system
where its political elites are not the worst in morality of its population
(as the current political system in the West has been producing elites who
are at the lowest end of any standard of morality).

Islam is a collectivist system that will work perfectly in collecting the
crushed souls that result from the excessive actions of individualistic
societies of the West.  These excessive actions can be religions (such as
the priesthood in some Christian traditions that causes a revolt over
Christianity)  or the secular/atheist excessive practices of the political
elites that rendered the public schools and services in major urban centers
almost frightfully to any family who wants to raise children away from
drugs, violence and sexual immorality.  Against those excessive Islam offers
the obvious remedy in a puritanical collectivist system.

For some other groups, such as socialists (who ticked off from George Bush)
or White clan members such as Topaz (who ticked of the system that does not
seem to respect their wishes) the motive for accepting Islam is revenge on
account being marginalized.   They (socialists and white racists) do not
care for faith in God. So why argue theology with each other?

Islam is the Satan of revenge and collectivism.  The danger awaits Europe is
similar to the fate that befell Qurayish for rejecting and alienating
Muhammad and his followers.  So when you read on the news that a German
minister expressed his fear of the danger to Europe from the increased
conversion to Islam, one get to understand what does that danger mean.   It
will be revenge time; by the leaders of the Islamic collective (who are not
German but most likely in Mecca, Turkey and Iran) who hold the strings to
mobilizing the new converts to street protests (similar to Muhammad's gang
of intercepting the trade caravans of Qurayish) as we have seen in the
latest uproar over the caricatures of Muhammad ("The Terrorist").  Do not be
surprised if you find Topaz standing there in the demonstrations :-)  He
does not believe in God nor in Muhammad yet he wants a piece of the revenge
too :-)

God Bless You,

Phillip


text:
"Phillip" <Phillip@God's Country.ca> wrote in message
news:REJzh.938248$5R2.871312@pd7urf3no...

[snip]

marginalized
[snip]
Bush)
not

Im not. I am attempting to expose inherent contradictions in his position.
[snip]
not
be
revenge

food for thought which points out either another contradiction or blatent
bias in Topaz' position.


author: Al Smith

subject:
Re: Hey Topaz how does this fot with the concept of a white master
 race?

text:
The Germans weren't wrong about everything, not by a long shot.
Their idea of creating a superior race of human beings through
selective breeding was a good idea. It would have eliminated
weaknesses and genetic diseases, and would have produced a race of
stronger, healthier, more intelligent human beings.

This is such a good idea, such an obviously good idea, that we
must ask ourselves why it is so reviled and reflexively rejected
in our societies?

Could it be that Jews, who control the media in the West, and
therefore control public opinion, fear the creation of a race of
superior whites? There is little doubt that such a selectively
bred race would quickly become superior to all other human groups
in all areas, including the Jews. Is that the real reason why the
concept of a genetically selected "super race" has been so
violently rejected?


author: JBgarbuz

text:
"Al Smith" <[email]> wrote in message
news:DkkAh.70728$Oa.65078@edtnps82...

In fact, Lebensborn children, i.e., children born in Himmler's project to
have SS men breed with good specimens of
Aryan femininity, didn't produce any extraordinary results. In any case, the
knowledge gained from the Genome project
has yielded greater ability to fight disease at the genetic level without
having to breed people like cattle or race horses.

Production of superior whites would then be outsourced by WASP CEOs to
produce them in Chinese factories at cheaper cost, and then the Chinese
would pirate the knowledge to produce superior Chinese people.


subject: Re: Re: Hey Topaz how do

text:
Far from being "evil," eugenics is actually the most beneficial and
humane discipline ever devised by the mind of man. In fact, eugenics
is the only viable long-term solution to all our social problems. As
I said on this program in 1993, eugenics is the only way to a better
world. Science has shown us that genetic structure is by far the
greatest determinant of intelligence, character, and behavior.
Unfortunately, those with the best genetic inheritance tend to have
the fewest children-and those with the lowest intelligence,
lowest potential, and worst character tend to have the most
children. This leads to a genetic deterioration of the race that
gets worse with each passing generation. No amount of education, no
laws, and no increase in the power of the police or of the state can
counter this degeneration.

Eugenics is simply the idea that we should humanely use our social
policies to encourage as much as possible the birth of children with
good genetic qualities and to discourage as much as possible the
birth of children with poor genetic qualities. Some of this could be
done with the more advanced techniques of modern reproductive
science, such as allowing surrogate mothers to carry genius-level
children in large numbers or encouraging the voluntary use of egg
banks and sperm banks to propagate the best children that our race
can possibly produce.

But most eugenics would be simple and basic and just good common
Senseï¿½ there could be endless variations on the theme of tax
deductions, tax credits, and interest-free loans extended to
families of good genetic inheritance to encourage them to give the
priceless gift of their children-most of whom will grow up into
highly-evolved creative problem-solvers-to our society. How can
that be "evil"?

It's not evil. It's really the ultimate good. After a few
generations of eugenics-after a few generations of ten times the
number of problem-solvers and culture-creators being born, and a
tenth of the number of problem-makers and culture destroyers being
born, we would have a very different world indeed. An infinitely
better world.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org       http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org     http://www.ihr.org/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html     http://www.nsm88.com/


subject: Re: Re: Denial of holocaust and of women in the workplace

text:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:53:52 -0000, "Beacon" <[email]>
wrote:

This only proves that people can believe whatever they want. Muslims
can also get out of jams if  they want.

In both the two existing disinfectant buildings at Auschwitz-Birkenau
Concentration Camp in Poland, there is irrefutable visual and forensic
evidence that zyclon B cyanide had been used to kill lice which
carried deadly typhus. The blue markings inside and outside through
twenty six centimetres of brickwork are still there today sixty years
after the end of WWII.

In the alleged gas chamber at No. 2 crematorium there is NO visual or
forensic evidence of zyclon B cyanide ever being used.

 Maybe some Muslim fringes do this but not the mainstream.

During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32  showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect  that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"
Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas chamber"
which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually built by the
allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
Brian Harmon <[email]> wrote in article
<[email]>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V.  Krema I is a
reconstruction,  this has never been a secret.  Kremas II-V are in
their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <[email]> wrote in article
<[email]>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully
admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at Auschwitz
was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no physical
evidence that the Germans had gas chambers.  No bodies of people who
died from gas have been found. The Communists were the first to enter
the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists didn't blow up
the buildings? Then they could claim that these demolished buildings
used to be gas chambers.
But then the believers will say the Germans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992], the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death, Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three
days, he and Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture
Hoess into making a "coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions
of Death, p. 237], he and the other interrogators put the boots to
Hoess the moment he was captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face
four times to get Hï¿½ess to reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order signed by Hï¿½ss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his
body.  He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where
it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Hï¿½ss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his
throat. Hï¿½ss tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Hï¿½ss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I
took my orders from Himmler.  I was a soldier in the same way as you
are a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning.  The snow
was swirling
still, but the blanket was torn from Hï¿½ss and he was made to walk
completely nude
through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>

An article in the British newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with  a Nazi war criminal-We kept him awake until he confessed,"
October 17, 1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case
of Rudolf Hoess included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at
Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein.  "They brought him to us when he
refused to
cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war.  He
came in the winter
of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls
Mr. Jones.  Two
other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hï¿½ss in his cell
to help break
him down for interrogation.  "We sat in the cell with him, night and
day, armed with
axe handles.  Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help break down
his resistance," said Mr. Jones.  When Hï¿½ss was taken out for exercise
he was made
to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the bitter cold.  After three
days and
nights without sleep, Hï¿½ss finally broke down and made a full
confession to
the authorities.
</quote>

The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped, as  document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral
deposition Hoess made for the  IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it
had been extracted from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.
The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions of
Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.


text:
replies to soc.cultire.iraq

"Topaz" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
continued
was
that
that
things
with
remain
first
back.

It shows that the argument you claimed was written was NOT written as you
claimed!
It shows you are wrong!
you quoted the New Testament in reference to the Church demanding
peoples money.
You were wrong!

seculariusts
region/county
over
rather

So what? There is plenty of evidence the holocaust happened. You just hate
jews and you would do the holocaust all over if you had a chance wouldnt
you?

I won't go over the evidence you have already been shown.

killed
know
demanding
I
you
FALSE
same
5 I
own
Muslims

There IS! You have been shown some of it. Even arch holocaust deniers like
Irving now admit they were wrong and the holocaust happened.

[snip long and winding tract with no relecvance - tery posting the source
and just a few lines and you interpretation]

jews

So YOU define it then? You remind be of the Simpsons

Moe: The immegwants! I knew it! Even when they said it was the bears I know
it was the immegwants!

So you cant say he isnt holy? that tree fallin gin the woods just fell on
your philosophy!

mean

But you have been SHOWN where people married children! While most countries
have laws afgainst it some have child marriage absed on shiria law!
You know the law. The one you want introduced as a step to your arien
nation.

Trying to sidestep andf change the subject wont ahelp your position.

If something is wrong in what I say then point iut out. But here we are
talking about YOUR claims.

In that country it IS the mainstream because it is accepted by the law of
that country! Just as your white nation would be a fringe if it ever came to
be! that would not mean they were not capable of making laws. Of course if
one of the laws was "kill jews in this couontry on sight" OTHER nations
might think that is  causus belli.

gay

I wouldnt worry about them. I would just make people aware and let them make
up their own minds. If most of the world wanted to be gay they would be! the
vast majority dont! Just as the vast majority dont want to be Nazis like
you. Im not worried about Nazis talking over the world either but I am
concerned that people know who they are and what they think and how they try
to spread it.
it.
show
released

are you not interested. I certainly was. But I dont believe white people are
better than others. YOU DO! so im not as concerned as you.

I have thought about it though. MNaybe it is about decadence. When people
get wealthy and lazy they indulge themselves in vice. White people in
america may be in this position compared to others. One solotion would be to
give all their wealth away to non whites and to the manual labout jobs the
non whites are doing. This might eliminate the white child abuser
altogether! thats called irony by the way.

You cant justify doing wrong to prevent another wrong. Two wrongs do not
make a right!
what

There was but he severly reduced it.
One could do similar today. Make it illegal for women to work for example.
Or deport or execute allthe unemployed!
Certainly it would eliminate unemployment.
Modern theory says you should have about 5 per cent anyway as people change
jobs.
In fact where I live we have doubled the workforce over the last fifteen
years to two million workers and had five per cent or lower.
Most of the new workers are Eastern European (many are you know those slavs
you group in with gypsies homos and jews) and africans.
They keep the economy going and we get all the better jobs. But their
children will do better if they stay here.

Deporting or exterminating all foreigners would collapse my economy!

I dont get most information from the media. I go to proimary sources,
journals, research papers etc.
I suppose jews control the lasw of mathematica ns physics as well???

you
cut
words?

Wher are the principles in a one page format?

were
http://www.noontidepress.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=35&products_id=3
57
[snip]
Dealt with that in earlier poet . I wont go over it.

position

Because they hate jews and gypsies and I dont?

[snip long tract without commentary ]
on
past
dont

Im not making the claims.YOU are!  dont have to defend anything.YOU do!

you?

What I am up to is beside the point! YOU made the claims YOU support it!

and
i

Most of them white in the movie?
Buy the way we dont need movies. people already KNOW it is wrong!

and
something

You deny any evidence fot the holocaust and you wont go and check actual
evidence showing a mojoprity of child molestiors are white?

So jews can be nazis?

Show me evidence which counters:

1. Child marriage in muslim countries and Mohammad being married to a six
year old?
2. White people being the majority of child molestors in US prisions?


author: TUKA

text:
Beacon wrote:

Personally, I would never ask that question. I don't care who did what
centuries ago -- I want to know what the people who follow the religion
are doing now.

You completely misunderstand me.

The failure of Muslims is that they have over a billion adherents
who have accomplished nothing collectively. They are a drag on the
world. There are no world-class universities or companies founded
by and operated by Muslims. Muslim-run companies produce no world-
class products, and almost no products that can be exported outside
their region.

Of the world's score of conflicts, Muslims are involved in almost
all. They fight with everyone and get along with no one, even
themselves as Shiites and Sunnis are increasingly at each other's
throats.

The Muslims are a disgrace in every way.

The Jews and Christians have accomplished much more, with much
smaller numbers in the case of the Jews.


text:
"TUKA" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
[snip]
Topaz
in
sex

Then you dont understand the difference between tradition and ritual.
Christians celebrate The Eucharist today not because it it a meaningless
ritual but because it is central to their faith!
If one can ask how Jim Jones claimed to be a disciple of God and yet
sexually abused his converts against Gods will then one is pointing to a
valid problem with his theology.

nor do you seem to understand the importance of Hadith or tradition in
Islam!

than

Wrong!

wrong!

So what? and wher is your evidence to support this?

So what ? Protestants and chatholics are as well in places.

In you unsupported opinion!

But the jews are constantly at war like you described?
And they are building a wall right down the middle of their country! Hardly
a "normal" mode of operation is it?


text:
"TUKA" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
[snip]
Topaz
in
sex

So you dont care what the founding fathers did and the framing fo the US
constitution?

than

By being a billion people who believe the same thing that in itself is
something. i mean one caould say the same of democracy. Not all of them are
in NATO (if NATO is an accomnplishment) the US doesnt subscribe to
international law for its military. People constantyly berate the UN as a
joke. I mean the same can be said but personally I wouldnt agrere with it.

And the UN?

Again I might point out the huge historic contribution of Illamic and Arabic
scholoars to Western civilisation.

But I have posted links to Muslim Universities. One is older than any in the
US or Eurpoe and is a world ranked University!
You are clearly WRONG!

this is a very ignorant comment. You are arguing from ignorance. You are
claiming they dont have scholars. I hove pointed to a wealth of scholarship!
You seem to think that like the Maoist Kymer Rouge civilisation didnt begin
when your chosen group got into power.

Eh? Oil is exported isnt it? Figs dates loives etc. Indeed the main trading
blocks of EU NAFTA and the asian bloc embargo the cheaper stuff from outside
and that is why they don't import.

The Us have been involved in about a HUNDRED conflicts over the past century
or so (excluding WWI and II)!

If the US or UK INVADE a muslim country you can chaklklk it up to the
muslims  can you?

And protestants and catholics didnt?

Yeah like the Atomic Bomb and biological and chemical warfare? I suppose
others can only try to catch up eh?


text:
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.religion.islam.]
On 2007-02-15, Beacon <[email]> wrote:

No, it is not. They don't believe the same thing -- it just looks like
they do because they are not allowed to talk freely.

Merely one aspect of the myriad accomplishments of the west.

What does that have to do with anything?

Whoop-de-do.

Ranked how and by who? As far as I can tell no Muslim-run university
shows up on any objective top 100 list.

No, I am not. Considering that there are 10 Israeli universities clearly
better than any Muslim university, and 100 or more western and Asian
universities better than same,  YOU are wrong.

Bullshit. A wealth? A pittance.

More red herrings, trying to distract from the issue at hand. Did I
ever claim that there were no minuses? Of course not.

Commodities all, not products.

By Muslim-run companies? And oil operations in the Mideast are almost
exclusively run by Westerners employed by Muslim owners.

What about now? As with all Muslim supporters, you have to talk in terms
of centuries.

When they fly airplanes into skyscrapers and kill a few thousand people,
sure can.

Nope. Not like that.

More red herrings to distract. Of course there are bad things and good
things to be pointed to everywhere -- just lots more bad things than
good in the case of the Muslims.

I repeat -- the Muslims are a disgrace in every way. Their best
people understand this, of course -- try reading the literature of
their reformists.

Before he was coerced into taking the Muslim party anti-Western line,
Mathathir said:

    Muslims spent too much time fighting themselves, neglecting the
    pursuit of knowledge and creation of wealth, said the Malaysian
    leader, known for his straight-talking ways.

    "If I may be permitted to say, we Muslims and our countries are
    not very Islamic. We cannot even regard each other as
    brothers," he said.

    "To be very crude the fate of the Muslims of today is of their
    own making."

    Mahathir said Muslim education had concentrated too much on
    religious dogma, neglecting worldly subjects such as science,
    mathematics and philosophy.

    The world's 1.3 billion Muslims needed to arm themselves with
    knowledge and skills to enrich their countries and defend
    themselves, he said.

    "They missed the Industrial Revolution completely. And now they
    are going to miss the Information Age," said Mahathir, whose
    country's economic success is admired in much of the Muslim
    world. Mahathir has brought Malaysia to the front rank of
    developing countries, while trying to raise the economic and
    social status of the Malay Muslims who make up two-thirds of the
    multi-cultural nation's population.


text:
"TUKA" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
is
their
religion
having
"failure"?

they believe in a single God. (so do christians and Jews who also have sub
groups)

they believe Mohammad was a prophet of God.

a
it.

Like the hanging Gardens of Babylon and the Great Pyramids of Giza were in
the west were they?
teh Library of Alexandria?

http://www.adc.org/index.php?id=247
The Arab civilization brought together Muslims, Christians and Jews. It
unified Arabians, Africans, Berbers, Egyptians, and the descendants of the
Phoenicians, Canaanites, and many other people. This great "melting pot" was
not without tensions, to be sure, but it was precisely the tension of this
mixing and meeting of peoples that produced the vibrant and dynamic new
civilization, the remarkable advances

...Indeed, during the Dark Ages of Europe, much learning was preserved for
the world through the Arab libraries in the universities of Morocco (Fez),
Mali (Timbuktu) and Egypt (al-Azhar). From this period of Arab influence,
new words such as orange, sugar, coffee, sofa, satin, and algebra filtered
into the languages of Europe and eventually into our own. New discoveries
were made in the sciences and arts which improved the life and condition of
Man, and thousands of Arab contributions have become an integral part of
human civilization.

http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/activity/rosen_islamic_science/
http://www.imarabe.org/ang/perm/mondearabe/theme/docs/4.html
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/980422/1998042208.html
http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/Introl1.html

That is a "western achievment" is it?as opposed to "a drag on the world"?
Arabic

which ou denied! You are given a host of examples and all you can say is
"whoop de do"? It seems that human history must have completly bypassed you!
But you made a claim about NO UNIVERSITES etc. and then when shown you are
entirely WRONG all you have is "whoop de do"?

Not much of a strong position you are in now is it mr whoop de do?

the

Most "lists" are made by chinese but for your information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morocco
The University of Al Karaouine, in Fes, is considered the oldest university
in the world and has been a center of knowledge for more than 1,000 years.

http://www.webometrics.info/university_by_country_select.asp

Lists over 300 african Universities.

You can find several Muslim countries with universities here:
http://www.webometrics.info/university_by_country_select.asp?cont=asia_all

You claim wasnt about numbers it was baout having NO Universities. I mean in
the top 100 of the above ranking ther are three UK universities Edinburgh
Oxford and Cambridge! there are about 80 to 85 Us based ones! that doesnt
mean the Uk doesnt have world class research or does not contribute to
knowlegde does it?

in fact Israel has 21 in that list . i have no idea how many are int hte top
100. I would guess you might fingd one or two in the top 200. that does not
mean Israel hasent good scholors.
scholarship!

You have the list of Universities and the list of historic achievments. go
and check them up.

Many arabs are world leaders in the horse breeding and the meat business.

begin

You miss the point entirely. Pol Pot wanted to reprogramme and brainwash
people. he did so by removing all of history and saying forget the past the
world begins nowe and we can forget about history. this is day one and we
record history from now. It didnt work! you cant say "forget the
renaissance" or the Arabic contribution to it!

REfined oil is a commodity? and enriched uranium is a product?

Are race horses a commodity?
http://www.alibaba.com/catalogs/4/Textiles_Leather_Products.html

How about carpets? Arabians are famous for them!

http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=2045
http://www.bilaterals.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=120
http://www.bilaterals.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=137

Iti s just plainly silly to say "blacks or muslims or arabs contribute
nothing to the world"

outside
century

Iti  YOU who mentioned "the worlds score of conflicts". You might be aware
that in the last century there were two WORLD WARS. BOTH were Western powers
against each other. I kept it to the last century becaust the US is only
around for a short time so it is pointless to argue about the Us 1500 years
ago isnt it?

You wish to score conflicts based only on current ones? Over what period.
The last five years which witnedded the largest ever invasion force on the
surface of the planet (almost all US but with maybe 5 per cent UK) i.e. NON
arabic!

So why didnt you invade Saudi Arabia? Most of the 9/11 guys were Saudi
arabian. Iraq was AGAINST al queda!

Oh I think you had metter learn some history. Plantation of Munster.
Cromwell in Ireland. Northern Ireland. Salem witch trials. Witchfinder
general. Bartholemew massacre. Hugonauts. James II and WilliamIII. Elizabeth
I and Philip of Spain. There is a very very long list. the Italian
Inquisition. the spanish inquisition.

Not really. You said jews and christians had acomplished more. One one
country has used the atomic Bobm. It wasnt a Muslim or Arab one!

You keeping score then? so haw many bad things equate to using the atomic
bomb and name them?

Try reading the literature of the christian reformation? so what?

Yes the fundies want to first unite islam before they take on the west.

But as regards missing the industrial revolution. Ireland was never a modern
country one could say. It went form early industrial to post modern. It
never had heavy industry so to speak. it isnt necessary to have that today.


text:
On 2007-02-16, Beacon <[email]> wrote:

You call that an accomplishment?

When you have to go more than two millenia to find something, you are
really pressed.

I repeat -- Muslims by comparison to any other group, are a complete
and utter failure in today's world.


author: Neil Kelsey

subject: Theism is a neurosis?

text:
SInce I've been active in this ng for the past few months I've really
struggled with the question of intelligence.  Can I safely say that theists
are defending a postition (god exists) that is not only obviously incorrect,
but astoundingly absurd? So I've been thinking maybe they don't have a
certain level of intelligence to be able to understand that the arguments
against god are so vast and the arguments for are so weak that it becomes
like the Yankees vs the Red Sox. Case closed, it doesn't even seem like an
argument anymore. But I am REALLY not comfortable with levels of
intelligence as an explanation for the eprsistence of theism. (I'll say it
again, I'm not claiming to be anything special, but some of you atheists are
dynamite writers and really clear thinkers). I never did think it came down
to intelligence but let me ask you this:

Is being a theist is either a form of neurosis or a form of psychosis?

A neurosis, according to my OED, is "a relatively mild mental illness that
is not caused by organic disease, involving symptoms of stress depression,
anxiety, obsesssive begaviour, hypochondria) but not a radical loss of touch
with reality. Well, the last part may not fit, but that is supposed to be
compared with psychosis, which also occurs amongst the theists (and everyone
else).

Anyway, take this "Immortalist" guy who is posting below, or "Seeker of
Truth." They are obviously both intelligent, to some degree. But to me they
have one thing in common with Raytard, or Atheist Bruiser, or Chris whatever
his name is, in that what they realy seem to be arguing is that they are
smarter than everyone else. I think with some of them it is a full blown
divinity complex (I don't know if that term exists, but it seems
self-explanatory. I can define what I mean by that if anyone wants),
egomania, and intellectual insecurity. They cannot bear to agree with
mainstream thinking, not because mainstream thinking is wrong, but simply
because it would make them one of a crowd, and they therefore could not be
identified as the geniuses they want to be seen as. I have a brother like
this, which is why I think about it. In his case, he is brilliant, went to a
school for gifted students, still holds a local age group record for the 100
meters sprint, chicks dug him, and he treated everyone like shit. Everyone
grew up, and decided they didn't like being treated like shit, and abandoned
their hero worship of my brother. And he became iincreasingly extreme in his
thinking, to the point now (he's 40+ years old) where he is a devotee of the
Urantia book.

http://www.urantia.org/

You cannot get more insane than the Urantia book. You could try, but it
won't work. It's sort of the sequel to the Bible, and it involves Jesus as
an alien bureaucrat. Anyway, I'm fairly polite, I love my brother, and I
spent a lot of time listening to him describe (passionately) what Urantia
was all about. I was diplomatic, but I clearly was not going to accept this
book as my life guide, so he became furious. To the point of violence. To
the point where I had to call the police. Now I think my brother is beyond
simply neurotic, I'm pretty sure he is an undiagnosed manic=depressive, but
the point is that he is another example (I think) of "Immortalist" or
"Seeker of Truth." That is, they argue theism as if they have a special
insight that mere mortals cannot possibly have, which is a lot like what
Jesus did. Jesus claimed to be the son of god, and a lot of people gobbled
it up. I think these people want to be worshipped in the same way that Jesus
was.

I know there are more categories of theists, I'm thinking of those millions
of people who are born into it and don't really question things, so they
keep going to church because they always did. They're often pretty sweet.
But I guess what I am wondering/hypothesizing is if the theist thinkers and
defenders are either neurotic or psychotic.


author: Bobby D. Bryant

subject: Re: Theism is a neurosis?

text:
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:14:55 +0000, Neil Kelsey wrote:

IMO you should make a distinction between theists in general and those who
come here posting idiotic arguments to support their views.


author: Ostap Bender

subject: Re: Theism is a neurosis?

text:
Neil,

It is possible to argue about the existence or non-existence of God
until cows come home and beyond.  I doubt that either side would
change its position based solely on soundness of logical argument of
the other.

For a theist, the existence of God is beyond argument, it is simply a
matter of experience or faith.  One knows that God exists.  One may
even try to formulate this experience.  Unfortunatly, it is not always
possible to adequatly express this knowledge, and the fact that many a
religious belief are infested with and enveloped in superstitious and
primitive religious dogmas doesnï¿½t help sharing efforts.  Matters are
immensly more complicated for those who are in the initial stages of
acquired faith.  People do get threatened and react violently when
their beliefs are challenged.

Few have faith and peace of mind to co-exist with those whose position
is the direct opposite.  If you want to know more about what is going
on inside a theistï¿½s mind, try to find one of those individuals.  You
will be surprised as to what you may discover.

Best of luck,
Ostap

"Neil Kelsey" <[email]> wrote in message news:<z9Ccd.31279$qU.31204@clgrps13>...


author: Barrabus

subject: other boot

text:
(Reading about this Conservative ("feudal robber barons that think
employees are merely a poor substitute for slaves") attempt to
rip off some of the ordinary working person's overtime pay,)

What are those countries that have "national strikes"? Italy? France?
I was just wondering why that sort of thing never happens in the US
when the public has the bad judgement to elect a Republican majority
that immediately tries to roll back labor, social services, environmental,
pension, consumer protection, workplace safety, etc reform (ie to de-evolve
federal public service).

If no freight moves, no planes fly, no trains roll, lots of cash registers
are not open, etc, a lot of this kind of noise from the Conservatives
goes away in a hurry (their advertising paymasters, at least the ones
with large domestic investments, start to lose serious money).

(Firemen, police, and emergency medical personnel can make their own
 call; no one would look askance at them for deciding to work anyway
 during a national strike for public safety reasons.)

The "United" States; what irony.


subject: Re: other boot

text:
OTOH, if you look at the ratio of worldwide trade
in material goods per day vs currency trades per day,
businesses that ship actual goods around are "only a hobby".
A week's interruption in freight movement nationwide and
through the ports wouldn't even show up on the P&L
radar of whoever owns the bulk of the currency being traded.

But it does draw the voting public's attention
to whatever behavior in their elected representatives
the strike was provoked by. That doesn't get you anything
immediately (doesn't significantly affect the fortunes of
those most able to contribute to Republican advertising
funding), but it may sway some of the less suggestible
voters at the next election, the majority of whose economic
interests are after all congruent with those of organized labor.

(The trick is probably getting them to remember
what the issue was when the actual election rolls
around, by which time election news and campaign
speeches have achieved the popularity of advertising
popups and email spam for most of them.)

Conservative policy includes lots of Bad Things (tm)
in my view, but the economic problem is that constant
pressure to move the tax and government spending policies
toward "small government" while at the same time migrating
jobs off-shore to countries with cheaper labor is bound to produce higher
unemployment.

If government spending doesn't replace
those jobs, nothing else will. (The recipients of all this Bush administration
largesse can only use so many $1000
gold-plated toasters, after all.)


subject: Re: other boot

text:
(I know I'm the only one posting on
this thread, but just for completeness,
...)

I don't think protectionist tariffs really
solve the jobs export problem, simply
because the US is not the only market
for the products produced by cheap foreign labor. My intuition is that
manufacturers would export their
production plants anyway, pay any
import tariffs that are enacted here
on what they sell in the US, and still make the extra profit on their exports
to other countries that don't have any competitive
domestic operations in those markets
to protect.

And with all due respect, "creation of
new industries that will create new
jobs here" is pie in the sky. "It has
happened before" doesn't tell us anything
about the rate at which that is happening
now or will happen in the future, while
we definitely know that a lot of manufacturing jobs (and some kinds
of service jobs that depend on telecomm
or datacomm) are leaving now and that this trend shows no signs of slowing.

I think a tax-funded public employment
safety net makes more sense than
gambling on the creativity of entrepreneurs
or trying to inhibit imports. When you need it, you don't get huge disruptions
in the employment rate that would otherwise result (like we see already in a
lot of
other countries with depressed economies and that we saw here during the Great
Depression), and when you don't need it,
it simply costs less. Some of the cost in either case is mitigated by lower
unemployment insurance costs for employers (none if the program is
structured and sufficiently funded to find something useful to do for anyone
that wants a job nationwide).

People would still take private sector
jobs when they can get them, because
the federal jobs would not be upwardly
mobile (no way to get a raise based
on value to the company accrued
through experience on the job in a
federal jobs program).

Electing people who think "the economy"
is the value of their stock portfolio is not going to get you serious concern
for the unemployment rate. The only time they care is on election day, and if
they can convince you that not having a job is really your own fault, as far as
they are concerned that "solved the problem" (which was getting elected, not
getting
you a job).


author: *Anarcissie*

subject: 10.2%

text:
Looks to me like spreading funny money around can't
generate employment.  No employment, no wages; no
wages, no consumption; no consumption, no business;
no business, no employment.  But you knew that already.

We may be reaching the end of the funny-money era,
although it would not surprise me if our lords and masters
and their tame geniuses gave it another shot or two
regardless of the lack of positive results.  They
probably don't know what else to do.

So, how much further will the funny money go, and
then what's next?


subject: Re: 10.2%

text:
On Nov 6, 2:15 pm, "*Anarcissie*" <[email]> wrote:

I just got back from Serbia, and picked up a nice set of 1993-series
Yugoslavian banknotes with denominations ranging all the way up to
500,000,000,000 dinars.  The 1993 series lasted three months before
being replaced by the 'revalued' 1994 series which chopped 9 zeroes
off, and still suffered from hyperinflation so bad it was replaced a
month later with a new dinar that was pegged to the Deutsche Mark.
The current Serbian dinar is unpegged to other currencies, but seems
to be relatively stable for the time being.

Then there is my own experience with hyperinflation as a kid growing
up along the border with Mexico.  I watched as that country's economy
collapsed, and the corrupt ruling party began printing pesos to pay
the bills, causing hyperinflation (though not nearly as bad as
Yugoslavia) which destroyed the life savings and wages of average
Mexicans (the fabulously wealthy ruling elite was unaffected, since
they kept most of their wealth in hard-currency offshore accounts).

The ruling party's favorite trick was to give away 'free' money to
purchase political support at election time, then print new money to
replace it, causing the net purchasing power of the people to decline
so they wound up being worse off than before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_dinar


author: Rod Speed

subject: Re: 10.2%

text:
Anarcissie wrote

Corse it can, it obviously depends on how its spread around.

And avoiding another great depression or worse certainly prevents the
unemployment rate hiking to the levels we saw in the last one or worse.

There is always employment, even during the great depression.

While say 25% were unemployed, thats still 75% employed, getting wages.

Never happens. Even when some countrys lost a word war that didnt happen in those countrys.

Never happens. Even when some countrys lost a word war that didnt happen in those countrys.

Its just cloud cuckooland stuff, nothing like what actually happens in the real world.

Nope, in fact there is a hell of a lot more funny money around than there was before
those clowns completely imploded the entire world financial system, AGAIN.

We dont have any of those anymore in the great democracys.

What they have done has been quite effective.

Damned sight more effective than anything you yourself have proposed.

For as long as it takes.

World economys will recover, just like they always do.

And we wont need another world war to get that this time, you watch.


author: Michael Coburn

subject: Re: Whining about unemployment and  promoting dollar idiocy

text:
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:15:51 -0800, *Anarcissie* wrote:

The rightarded seem to lack for any solutions at all.  Lots of spinning
and whining and not even a hint of any solutions to the problem.  Very
similar to health care.  Nothing in the way of positive policy.  Just
whining.

The American dollar must be devalued much further than is the case right
now.  There is no other solution to the problem of middle class decay in
the United States.  We are the only country in the G20 that has a large
trade deficit.  And that deficit is because the American dollar is still
far too strong.  Jobs will not return to America until we stop the glut
of free trade by a combination of minor protectionism and dollar
devaluation.  That same devaluation if accomplished via increased wages
and social welfare will also fix the Housing/credit problem.  Bailing out
banks is not the solution.  Bailing out manufacturing of any kind is
advisable and so to are minor tariffs and policies that insist on
stimulus money being used to "buy American" (or at least to buy NORTH
American).


author: phil scott

subject: Re: 10.2%

text:
On Nov 6, 1:15 pm, "*Anarcissie*" <[email]> wrote:

look to history for that answer.... its a repeating cycle.. for a
superb long cycle discussion
(260 year life cycle of nations)  see Dr Ravi Batra's book    the
comming depression 1990

we are in the final phase of that cycle,... collapse from the last
peak  (we just went though that 15 years ago,   runs about 20 years,,,
with the final implosing taking just days,

the book plots the drivers for these long cycles,,,  human nature,  we
start strong, get fat and lazy then corrupt, the elect idiots, then
ruin our currency with corruption then attempt to recover by war and
seizing others assets land or oil etc.... then the counter attack on a
three hundred sixty degree perimeter takes the nation out.   loss of
empire, though the nation itself still sits in the same land

Phil scott


subject: %10.2

text:
On Nov 6, 6:24 pm, Michael Coburn <[email]> wrote:

Inflating the money seriously would generally tax those on
fixed incomes and those with savings accounts and the
like tied to currency values, that is, poor people.  I suppose
this would loosen up a certain amount of value, but I can't
see that it would fix the large structural problems caused
by deindustrialization and years and years of inflated
credit.  One might also want to recall the results of the
inflation in Germany in the 1920s -- there is no particular
reason to believe that, if the savings and pensions of the
working and middle classes are wiped out, they will take
the blow passively.

There is also the problem of the huge debts owed to
foreigners which must be refinanced from time to time.
If a policy of strong inflation goes into effect, the interest
rates won't be pretty.