Tired and liberal in Peckham - UPDATED 8th FEBRUARY

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 08 February 2007 01:30.

“Guns plague Peckham despite investment” complains the headline from an article on the BBC website written in the aftermath of a mini-catalogue of black violence in SE London.

The dilapidated flats might be gone, but the criminals who lurked have not - they just got younger.

Seven years after the death of 10-year-old Damilola Taylor in a stairwell in the North Peckham estate in south-east London, violence still plagues the area.

Replacing rows of rundown high-rise flats and maisonettes are 2,000 new homes, a new sports centre, a new leisure centre and award-winning library, thanks to a £290m regeneration investment.

Peckham, which has tried much to shake off its mean streets image in the last decade, has once again hit the headlines because of acts of violence.

The acts of violence have involved two fatal shootings and a stabbing, all performed with the tell-tale heedlessness of the black gang-killer. The familiar press references to the Met’s Operation Trident complete the picture.

That BBC headline has about it the melancholy of inevitability. For the Establishment hand-wringers, the investment-mongers, the blank-slate idealists this is bad, bad news. An awful suspicion hangs in the air. Can nothing break the black attachment to mayhem? I mean, if building them an award-winning new library and even filling the Bellendon area with posh street art by Zandra Rhodes and Anthony Gormley doesn’t transform them all into model citizens, what more will it take?

And beneath it all lurks the still darker, indeed unbearably dark and depressing possibility that the racist bastards were right all along: blacks are irredeemable, and all those enthusiastically right-on genuflections to the gods of diversity ...

If you’re looking for a real multi-cultural experience and a slice of authentic South London life, Camberwell and Peckham will be right up your street. Here you’ll discover multi-faith, multi-ethnic London at its rich, colourful best — charged with the energy of regeneration, investment and economic uplift.

... that seemed such a gas at the time will come back to haunt and humiliate everyone.

Everyone but the racists, obviously.

Well, maybe not quite everyone because here’s a brave article by Leo McKinstry, a former aid to Peckham’s MP, Harriet Harman. He, at least, can hold his head high.

He wrote the piece five long years ago. Obviously, it achieved absolutely nothing at the time. Now, it reads like one long reminder that there are no new lessons in matters of human nature.

In Peckham, there is no such thing as society

THE word “community” is one of the most over-used in modern Britain. Yet it can never have been more badly misplaced than in the hand-wringing debate over the death of Damilola Taylor.

Since the end of the trial last week, there have been continual references to the “community” on the North Peckham estate where the 10-year-old boy died. But community implies solidarity, shared identity, mutual concern. Such values have been entirely absent from North Peckham, where social breakdown, fear and aggression predominate.

It was this lack of any true community spirit, not police incompetence, that denied Damilola justice. By remaining silent, local people ruined the chances of an effective prosecution. That is why it is so grotesque to attack the police. “The whole community knows who did it. The police did not do a good job,” says the local “community leader” Gary Barnett, failing to explain why residents failed to share this knowledge with the authorities.

I have seen for myself how the absence of any communal feelings has destroyed the social fabric of this south London estate.

... The place certainly lived down to its dismal reputation. Throughout this concrete warren of despair, there were burnt-out flats, broken lifts, piles of rubbish, abandoned cars, used needles, and smashed windows. Vandalism and drug-taking seemed the two most popular activities on the estate. Because of the roaming gangs, the sense of fear was almost palpable.

... Many locals say that this intervention has achieved little. “You still have the same things going on, the stabbings, the stealing,” says Uanu Seshmi from one local project for “excluded children”. Indeed, despite the lavish spending, crime has worsened. The grim reality of Peckham is that you can change the buildings, but that will not change the people. All the high quality housing and shiny new computers will do nothing to break the cycle of fecklessness, irresponsibility and thuggery.

... There is an even more disturbing truth about Peckham which is rarely voiced. For decades, the political establishment has enthused about the “rich multi-cultural diversity” of modern Britain, but in north Peckham, where more than 70 per cent of the population is from ethnic minorities, the picture looks very different. In contrast to the propaganda spouted by liberal ideologues living in all-white neighbourhoods, Peckham exposes the darker side of mass immigration: gang violence, drug-dealing, muggings, shootings, and disruption in school.

It is time we stopped pretending multi-culturalism has been an unqualified benefit to society. In areas like Peckham, there is nothing “rich” about diversity.

In those five years, that 70% immigrant constituent of North Peckham will have increased substantially. The white natives have gone, and their, of course, so shamefully racist attitudes with them. In this corner of my country liberal post-colonial guilt and Jewish self-interest have won. But now there are no more excuses left for all those little things blacks get up to. What’s a hand-wringer to do? Carry on ignoring McInstry’s warning - “you can change the buildings, but that will not change the people” - and spend another £290 million? And another, like a high-roller on a losing streak?

My feeling is that the managerial Establishment will look for an answer in its own self-interest. It will try to produce some response that maintains its status, perhaps finding justifications for more thaumaturgy, more expenditure in new and hitherto undreamt of formulations of social concern (white responsibility for the absent black father?) and new definitions of deprivation (white responsibility for the paucity of black male role models?). It will certainly not give up now. It will require a righteous English hand to do the decent thing one day, and decapitate it.

UPDATE 8th FEBRUARY

It didn’t take long for the Kioskian philosophy to drip from on high. The Mother Theresa of Southwark, Camila Batmanghelidjh, has it off to a tee:-

There’s no point in blaming parents. The parental bond is so profound that if a parent is not taking care of their child, there must be something very wrong with their own emotional life. That’s not something that one can punish the parent into correcting. We’re talking about adults who have themselves been traumatised as children; parenting orders are simply not useful for this group. Parenting classes can, however, be useful for those who lack some basic skills but retain that fundamental emotional stability.

In the absence of the biological parent, civil society must become a corporate parent, and the problem is that the corporate parent is failing profoundly, so these children have no safety net. You can put any number of computers in schools and open any number of sports centres, but until the core services are improved, children will continue to behave in this savage way.

... One problem with the British way of thinking about these children is that, very early on, society places a moral responsibility for the control of behaviour on the child and absolves itself of parenting tasks. When children are perceived as moral agents there is a notion that they have free choice. So from society’s perspective, they choose to behave amorally and are therefore flawed - and because they are flawed, they are not to be liked or helped.

But these children have none of the emotional prerequisites to exercise choice. This is not about genetics but about poor environment, one which requires the most violent characteristics in an individual to become dominant in order to survive. It’s up to the powerful majority to stop cheating on these children’s care.

Got that? It’s up to you, oh powerful white majority, to be the remedialist “parent”. Or the “core service”, or whatever. So young master Cameron was right - get down to the drop-in centre and hug that hoodie. I trust you are keen and eager to start right away.

Tags: Immigration

Comments:

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:52 | #

The main reason why gullible liberals are surprised by their endeavours’ lack of success in civilizing Blacks is because they refuse to acknowledge the major role of genetic inheritance in behavioural patterns.

When the Peckham planners studied Marxist sociology at the Polytechnic (tautologically speaking), they did not and, perhaps, could not benefit from anything remotely resembling an education in the true sense of the word, thus leaving vast lacunae in their knowledge of how the world actually works.

Del-Boy Trotter could have organised his native manor in a better manner.

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:40 | #

I sincerely recommend anyone interested in the situation in Peckham, and other decayed south London sh*tholes such as Brixton, Stockwell, Battersea, Lewisham etc to read the bi-weekly local newspaper the ‘South London Press’, a real eye-opener and shocker, that lifts the lid on just what an unpleasant, hellish, hopeless society large swathes of London actually are, to all the sheltered souls and foreign individuals out there it’s certainly nothing like ‘Miss Marple’ or ‘Vicarage tea parties’.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:16 | #

Kenelm,

The South London Press is indeed a source of wonder, brimfull with multicultural gems.

I particularly wondered at the following little gem a year ago:-

He tortured me and threw my own blood in my face”

A RESTAURANT boss who ordered a man to drink a glass of his own blood during a horrific torture ordeal has been jailed for nine years.

Vietnamese Linh Le, 41, tied Joe Smith to a chair and jabbed him with a stun gun because he believed he was a police officer.

Mr Smith, 30, an Ivory Coast national who was looking for a false passport, was beaten and pistol-whipped until he was left with a fractured skull and a broken leg and arm.

Le told Mr Smith and his friend Peter Dennis they would be chopped into pieces and dumped in bin bags if a £10,000 ransom was not paid.

When Mr Smith begged for water he was handed a glass of his own blood by Le and two of his laughing heavies and told to take a sip at the New Saigon restaurant in the Old Kent Road.

This, dear friends, is the world that our political, corporate and cultural elites have created for us. Ought we not to give thanks for their fathomless wisdom and humanity, and in every waking moment - and the sleeping ones, too, if possible - celebrate its priceless gifts?

Surely God is a liberal.

Posted by Don Reynolds on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:31 | #

“But these children have none of the emotional prerequisites to exercise choice. This is not about genetics but about poor environment, one which requires the most violent characteristics in an individual to become dominant in order to survive. It’s up to the powerful majority to stop cheating on these children’s care.”

How about another possibility? Perhaps if these poor children were returned to their country of origin in Africa, or Asia, or Latin America, perhaps they would not notice how poor they truely are because they will be surrounded by millions more….equally deserving, just like themselves. Perhaps if we do not stop the invasion from Third World countries, there will ONLY be Third World countries on this planet, then EVERYONE with think of themselves as poor children. What will happen to all of your therapists, child welfare workers, psychologists, and bureaucrats then? Simple…..they will be roasted and devoured so stronger brutes can survive another day, procreate more poor children, steal and murder. Is that the future you have in mind? These people are not pets to be adopted from the local shelter.

Posted by Retew on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 10:29 | #

Guessedworker wrote;

Surely God is a liberal.

=========================================

Which cultural and political elite was responsible for the Kray twins and the Richardson brothers then in the 1960s?

Having said that, I would support this man’s deportation.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:57 | #

1960s London was a kind of Weimar, if that answers your question, Retew.

The West is reaching a point where it has a choice. The road ahead, the road commended to us (and for only us) by your people for example, will lead to first the taking from us of our homeland -this is already being accomplished through the underhand shift to a “community of values” - second the loss of our living space, third the destruction of our genetic integrity. All these evils, of course, proceed together.

This is what your kinsman Michael Walzer wrote of America (from On Genetic Interests):-

[t]here is no country called America ... It is a name that doesn’t even pretend to tell us who lives there.

... The United States is an association of citizens. Its “anonymity” consists in the fact that these citizens don’t transfer their collective name to the association.

... This committment [speaking now of protecting democratic freedoms rather than the nation or European ethnic group] is consistent with feelings of gratitude, loyalty, even patriotism of a certain sort, but it doesn’t make for fellowship.

... the hard truth about individualism, secularism, and tolerance is that they make solidarity very difficult.

... The United States isn’t a “homeland”, not, at least, as other countries are, in casual conversation and unreflective feeling. It is a country of immigrants”

Walzer the advocate of civic society, Walzer the Marxist intellectual, Walzer the Jew is, naturally enough, wrong about us in one significant respect. We are not wholly made of ideas that can be pumped into our bloodstreams like political narcotics. We cannot live in the way he wishes us to ... as perpetual immigrants in our own home. So we will not live that way. The Third World here leaves us no option. We are bound to return to ourselves, and sweep away all those who are of us as well as those who are not of us who bar our path to survival.

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:17 | #

Retew,
I know it’s a tired old cliche, beloved by the (very few) genuine Cockneys actually left in Bermondsey and the East End, but there is more than an element of truth in it namely, ‘The Krays only harmed their own’ - ie only used physical violence on other gangsters.
Back to a misty-eyed celebration of jellied eels, Bow Bells and all things Cockney, one particular action of the nasty young nogs who infest the former stamping ground of the almost extinct Cockney, is their nasty habit of pushing old aged pensioner women to the floor, severly kicking them- and then stealing their meagre pension money - which usually results in broken bones and the death of the said pensioner.
In the days when the ‘twins’ ‘ran the manor’, rest assured that this would NEVER EVER have occurred - the fate of any thug who stooped this low would have been too terrible to contemplate.

Posted by PF on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:30 | #

Responding to Retew:

“Which cultural and political elite was responsible for the Kray twins and the Richardson brothers then in the 1960s?”

Native criminality is a fact of life which we have to deal with- like a genetic defect we inherited from our parents, its part of us.

Imported criminality is a consequence of an unnecessary political decision- and hence elites can be seen as being partially responsible for it. To follow the metaphor, imported criminality is like giving yourself cancer by eating an Ethidium Bromide sandwhich.

And then there is you, the curiously removed third-party observer, who says- How can you blame your cancer on that Ethidium Bromide sandwhich you ate- after all, you inherited cancer-proneness from your parents.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:17 | #

From a timely article on gangs in Britain, printed in the Telegraph today:-

Gangs today, however, bear little resemblance to the likes of the Krays and the Richardsons, the most feared of the criminal families in the Fifties and Sixties. “For a start, Ronnie and Reggie courted publicity, they lived their flashy lifestyles through the newspapers,” says Clarkson. “Terry wanted infamy in the underworld, but not public recognition. The other big difference is that much of the old allegiances and codes of honour are falling apart because of the influx of foreign criminals.” On January 1, when Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU, a leaked cabinet memo revealed that 45,000 immigrants with links to organised crime would head for Britain.

No one knows the actual number who have arrived but it’s certainly true that many British crime families have joined forces with them. “Though often to their detriment,” says Clarkson. “The likes of the Adams organisation and McGraw have a long history of violence but even they find these foreign gangs chilling. The Adams gang, in particular, had links with the Russia mafia and Colombian drugs cartels. They found them hard to handle. They are way, way more vicious.”

Posted by Rnl on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:09 | #

In 1999, the (London) Daily Mail highlighted the Kray twins, Ronnie and Reggie, “of Jewish and Romany stock.” Both were imprisoned in the 1960s. Only Reggie survives, “the best-known gangster in Britain ... By 1963, through their networks of thugs and thieves, Ronnie and Reggie were lording it over London’s underworld and became figures in London society.”

http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/09crime.htm

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:40 | #

Another day, another operation for Operation Trident:-

The Metropolitan Police commissioner has called an emergency meeting after the third fatal shooting of a teenager in south London in less than two weeks.

A 15-year-old boy was found dead in his own home in the Fenwick Place area of Clapham North on Wednesday afternoon.

In addition to the usual report of firm and timely action (ie, meetings) from Sir Ian Blair, the BBC lavishes upon us the wisdom of, apparantly, a local schoolboy (a white one) who serves as a Labour councillor in Lambeth ...

I just do want to make the point that the vast majority of young people on the Fenwick Estate and in the entire area are decent young kids

... and of a non-white person called Claudia who appears to struggle along entirely by sucking at the teat of “the voluntary and the public sectors”:-

“Guns have gone from the domain of the crack cocaine dealers to now being an everyday accessory, a fashionable accessory, that young people want to be seen with, unfortunately. It’s become a lifestyle choice where it’s become part of a culture to be part of a gang.

“I think that’s what’s motivating young people, where a gun has become almost a status symbol demanding respect and power.”

Really, these “young people” are so decent and kid-like, and so demanding of respect and power, it’s difficult to see how Sir Ian will get to the bottom of it all without a very great number of meetings.

Still, we don’t mind paying for all this, do we?

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:53 | #

Isn’t it strange how the media fall over themselves in describing the murder victim, in every case, as ‘highly respectable’, ‘devoted christian’, from a ‘good family’, ‘hard-working’ and ‘intelligent’ etc etc.
The fact is, not even feral, trigger-happy young London blacks would risk capture and life imprisonmentin order to kill someone who was not at the very least complic it in some serious criminal activity.

Posted by Retew on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:03 | #

We don’t know that Kenelm, and I’m afraid I find such speculation about someone so young who has been killed distasteful. For all we know, it might just be that they fancied the same girl.

I agree we’re daft to be allowing so many foreign criminals to either come or stay here, but as for the Krays only “harming their own,” let’s not forget how they made their money - they ran a protection racket whereby anyone who failed to pay their “pension” (said to be about ?50 a week, a lot of money in the 1960s) would either have his business torched or beaten to a pulp.

Tell me honestly that London wasn’t a better place when they were put behind bars.

Posted by alex zeka on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:02 | #

Tell me honestly that London wasn’t a better place when they were put behind bars.

Oh it was, and it’ll be an even better place when all the criminals we’ve imported since are sent back to where they came from: a sort of self-created ethnic prison for them.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:55 | #

Retew,

One of our occasional readers is a very brave and interesting man who was involved at a senior level in policing the “gangland” of 1960’s Soho, and then moved into intelligence work against the black Marxist underground situated in and around Notting Hill (of whom Darcus Howe, formerly Owisru, was a prominent member). Both battles were, from a policing perspective, at least possible to fight. Now, with black “gang culture” excused by black activists overseeing the running of the Met, that is clearly not the case.

Joining up the dots one finds that Alex is, as so often, right. The Marxian Knot (like that - must use it in a post sometime) has to be severed with one ethnic blow. It cannot be untied through ineffectual right-wing micro-management.

Should socially responsible Jews interested in Western cultural survival not agree, or is the “value” of a deracinating and demographically shrinking host too great and tempting a prize?

Posted by alex zeka on Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:43 | #

I scarcely deserve such fulsome praise. You, and many others, created the guiding star, I merely follow it.

Posted by Bodkin on Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:16 | #

Hello people

I have been discussing the mayhem in South London with a mate of mine and I wondered if any of you people could help me out with a couple of things?

Firstly, can any of you direct me to any links which are ‘liberal proof’ and I mean by that not from the likes of Stormfront, that show a link between low IQ and criminality?

Secondly, can any of you verify (ideally, again via liberal proof links) or indeed, have any of you ever heard of of the following:

When Jamaica was granted independence, hard core criminals, in court for the 2nd or 3rd time were given the choice of either a long prison sentence or assited passage to the UK?

This comes from the book ‘Overcrowded Britain’ by Ashley Mote. Annoyingly Mr Mote does not provided any back up for this striking piece of info.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:21 | #

La Griffe might serve your purpose on (1). There is, in any case, a large body of work relating to prison populations, including studies throughout the West into the incidence of IQ, dyslexia and mental illness. The UK prison population has been little assessed for its IQ, but I am aware of estimates appearing in the press and generally ranging from IQ 80 to 85. Studies in America and elsewhere also cleave to a mean of around 1 SD lower than the general population.

Regarding (2), Ashley Mote is unlikely to have fabricated the story, but may not be able to reveal his source. I have not heard it before. Such a policy was said to have been employed in Cuba, of course, resulting in the emptying of the prisons and the rapid enrichment of Floridian society.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:58 | #

Depending on how you feel about Wikipedia.org

Practical validity of IQ and life outcomes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq#Practical_validity

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:48 | #

Retew,
You can disbelieve me or not, but I’ve been around long enough to know certain things:
1/. There are very few ‘good’ black people in existence (by good I mean morally upright).
2/. Those gunned downed in ‘mysterious circumstances were either:
(a) Police Informants.
(b) Drug Thieves.

Much is made in WN circles about a spposed low black IQ, well in situations that rely solely upon animal cunning and calculation such as criminal drug dealing, blacks have more ‘intelligence’ than Whites.
Believe me, they would not have wasted a bullet killing someone who was not a danger or an irritant to them.
Blacks are a very rutlhless people, displaying the same type of cunning and ferocity as exhibied by other apex predatory carnivores such as the shark or the big cats the meting out of violence and the threat of violence are the most basic primal force they understand - and this violence is instictively used in a measured way.

Posted by Englander on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:40 | #

There is nothing cunning about impulsively murdering people you fall out with.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:04 | #

And The hits go on ...

A man has been shot dead in London and three men have been injured in two separate shootings in Manchester.

The man, in his mid-20s, was found with fatal gun wounds in a car in Hackney, east London early on Saturday, and died in hospital.

His death comes days after three teenagers were killed in south London.

In Manchester, the three men are recovering in hospital after being shot in the two attacks, which took place in the Moss Side and Longsight areas.

Armed officers from Operation Neon were deployed on south London streets following the shootings there and have carried out searches of suspicious vehicles.

Following the killing in Hackney, police are searching for two black men seen making off towards Digby Road.

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said officers working under Operation Neon arrested three people during the patrols in south London.

Two were arrested on suspicion of driving a stolen vehicle and one on suspicion of possessing drugs.

Operation Neon, did you say?

Met unveils response to teenage shootings

The Metropolitan Police’s top officer has asked the Home Secretary to allow 17-year-olds to receive a minimum five-year sentence for gun crimes.

The announcement was made this afternoon following a meeting held by Sir Ian Blair in an attempt to address a wave of shootings involving young people in south London, including the killing of a 15-year-old boy in his own home in Clapham North yesterday.

The Met said they were hopeful that Sir Ian’s request for the minimum age for a mandatory five-year prison sentence for possession of firearms to be reduced to 17 would be accepted by John Reid.
advertisement

Sir Ian Blair also said a new temporary taskforce would be step up to co-ordinate the Met’s response to violent crime involving young people.

The Commissioner ruled out regular patrols by armed police officers, but said that they would use intelligence-led armed interventions’ codenamed Operation Neon - although the Met remained tight lipped this afternoon on exactly what that would entail.

Scotland Yard also said high visibility patrols would be increased in certain areas - but would not disclose which areas they would be.

The new taskforce will be led by Commander Paul Minton from the Territorial Policing Command.

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:38 | #

Guessedworker

Thanks. I came across La Griffe on this site a little while ago. It looks good although the stats are beyond my limited capabilities and unfortunately the only people I know who’d be able to verify them are both lefties. Besides, I am not sure if it is ‘liberal proof’ bearing in mind the subject matter he focuses on.

You mention estimates of prison IQ appearing in the press. Do you have any links to hand?

I can’t win an argument or get my point across by saying ” Ashley Mote said so, so it must be true” but thanks for reminding me of the comparable Cuban experience. I had forgotten about that.

Count Sudoku

Wikipedia is pretty ‘liberal proof’ although I understand the founder is a Zionist. Thanks for bringing wiki to my attention. It made me recall that the last time I looked there was a good bit on the Bell Curve on it.

Are any of you aware of the incidence of the MAOA gene amongst West Africans, West Indians, African-Americans or any similar evidence of genetic tendency towards violence and criminality in these groups?

I understand the MAOA gene is found amongst 60% of maoris but only 30% of whites and to an extent can explain aggressive, violent and risk taking behaviour.

Posted by Englander on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:51 | #

This might be of interest, Bodkin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6364343.stm

So the average IQ of a prisoner in a British jail is 87, with a quarter of prisoners having an IQ of under 80.

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:10 | #

Cheers Englander thats brilliant, that is exactly the sort of thing I’m after.

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Sun, 18 Feb 2007 16:13 | #

Englander,
The type of ‘cunning’ I’m describing is the most basic, primordial instinctive ‘cunning’ there is, and as such we must get back to pre-human origins and take the animal kingdom as our teacher, for example the fox has always been noted for his ‘cunning’.
We see it in the way the ‘alpha’ chimpanzee of the pack acts through intimidation and violence as an absolute dictator of the pack - ‘bullying’ in its true meaning, and as Freud conjectured the roots of the Oedipus complex in the young male pretender.
This type of animalistic, savage ‘barnyard’ bullying behavior the negro exhibits in abundance.

Posted by tina on Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:43 | #

I personally can’t stand those arrogant Australians over here ordering everybody around, and wish they would get out of London and take their bloody bikes with them!!

Maybe that would save a few lives.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:53 | #

You people make me sick. Talking about blacks and their tendency towards violence. If you look at anywhere in the world where there is poverty you will find violence and drugs and crime.

Anywhere in the world where people have not managed to come together and form solidity and power there is war and violence.

Britain and America itself would not be here if it were not for war and violence.

Slavery and white supremacy is still impacting black communities in America and Britain today.

You talk from your high chair like the evil man you are. Anyone with a sense of righteousness would want to help people in need of help.

Black British and American people have been through racism and slavery. It was the white man who deprived the black man of his freedom through brute force and evilness.

It was the white man who did not permit their black slaves to read or learn.

It is the white man who killed millions of Jews in their quest for white supremacy.

It is the white man who has created a class of people in Britain today that has no motivation to succeed. And yes a majority of black people in Britain do form an underclass (one that the white man has created).

Through racism the white man has given Black people no hope of success. It is racism that causes teachers to treat Black children differently. It is racism that causes Black children to receive far greater punishment for their crimes.

The problems of Britain’s Ghettos are a British problem.

Yes the white man owes its descendants of Black slaves. You owe
their children the education you deprived their parents, you owe them the decency and kindness that you did not bestow upon their fathers. You owe them respect as your peers when they educate themselves. You owe them the opportunities for a happy and fruitful life, as you would expect for your own.

And when the black man awakes from his sleep and realises that they have every chance their fathers never had you racist fools will be gone.

I as a mixed race man have experienced white racism I have felt first hand today THE WHITE SUPREMICIST bias view on black people. Even the non-racist white man has been conditioned to look unfavourably upon blacks and undermine the integrity and quality of his black peer. I have learnt to succeed amongst this racism I have learnt to gain the respect of the “conditioned” white man. I cannot wait for the day you racists are wiped from this earth. You are already a minority.

I will educate my young black brothers and will help pave the way for the next generation of black people. Yes they/we have been held back for many generations but your racist power is failing you.

I love today’s Britain and I love its ideals, it is great country and will become even greater when we deliver it from racism, irradiate the remnants of white supremacy and learn more about how to educate our youth.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:11 | #

Is the legacy of slavery the cause for 98% of inter-racial rape in America (the only Western country where figures are available) to be black on white? Or how about gang rape, for which there is no measurable incidence of white on black?

If you insist on making others responsible for your inate tendencies you infantilise yourself. You become a wilful, foolish child that cannot help itself acting in ways damaging to those around you.

Now, I make a practice of never debating blacks about white majority rights and interests. I’ve seen the quality of black debate on other fora, and I have seen enough interlopers here to know that nothing useful can come of it. So I will only urge you to apply the self-criticism and mature responsibility you would foist upon us to yourself and your own people.

Good luck with that.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:05 | #

What about the undocumented instances of rape on black slaves? Or the killing of any slave that sought to educate himself. Or the police brutality in America that still exists today. See: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=833329c647 for an example of the torture of a god fearing law abiding black man. And seeing as the police are supposed to be “the cream of the crop” this abuse speaks volumes for the so-called civilised white man.

What about serial killers and those who abuse children? Most of these are white. This fact alone disproves your foolish MAOA theory.

You do not argue with an educated black man because you are scared, you are scared of the truth. You are scared that the very foundations in place to motivate the white man/child are built upon history that is carefully selected to benefit and motivate white children while being detrimental to the motivation and identity of the black child.

In British schools we hear of various white men such as Napoleon et al but we do not hear of the great black people such as Jean-Jacques_Dessalines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Dessalines Thes.e things are changing though and it is these changes that will deliver the black man from his sleep.

Black children need everything that is in place in Britain for the white child and people are realising that. With this realisation will come change. This scares the bigot as they now start to loose their feeling of superiority.

There is this unspoken belief amongst the uneducated that the white man just one day decided to abolish slavery, but if you read history it was more a case of necessity.

Black people in Britain are in poverty, and as I said before: where there is poverty there exists drugs, violence and crime.

Please do not attempt bring up the violence in Africa as a justification to your claims of black tendency toward violence because we will just return to the same point: “where there is poverty there exists drugs, violence and crime”, look at Russia for a “White” example.

Even given the black on black shootings every year in England these crimes do not come close the atrocities that the racist white man has committed in this world.

I do not excuse crime. If a man kills or rapes then he should pay the price. And I personally hope that the people responsible for these crimes are punished appropriately.

It seems the bigoted white man does not want to own up for his ancestors crimes. I ask him to accept the crimes of his forefathers and forgive himself rather than live in denial. His own country is telling him he is wrong and even with that he can’t accept the truth.

You talk of interlopers? Britain and America were built on the backs of slavery. Britain’s economy would not be what it is today without the proceeds of slavery and the theft of land and riches.

What great deed has the white bigot done for him to assume sole rights to the riches of this world?

Britain has a duty to protect its economy and values I agree with that. As even with a history of slavery and the ever decreasing influence of the racist the core British people and their values have created one of the most safest and prosperous countries in this world. But Britain is moving toward being a truly multicultural society; you had better just accept that.

I have had the privilege to grow up in both the ghetto and middle class suburbs. I am by no means racist (I am mixed white/black) and my best friends are White, Black and Asian.

Forgive your ancestors, realise the truth and join the majority.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:34 | #

S. The regular posters on this board are not going to waste their time shooting down your nonsense. It’s already been done repeatedly. Sign up on The Phora and post your drivel. There are plenty of people there including myself who would be happy to pick apart your delusions.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:01 | #

Here is just as good a place as any. Start picking. Anyone who has replied so far hasn’t discredited my views.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:36 | #

S. This particular format is not particularly well suited for debate. Furthermore the regular posters here are of the highest intelligence, knowledge and ability to write. They have far better things to do and more important contributions to make than knocking heads with you. It would be like using one of a limited number of nuclear weapons on Grenada. Go to The Phora or even Stormfront. There are plenty of able people there to put you in your place.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 20:04 | #

To tell you the truth it is time I would rather spend on other matters. I have aired my views. People will read them. That is enough for me.

I will monitor this thread.

Some parting thoughts:

Britain is moving towards multiculturalism and you cannot stop it because it is the only way we can go.

People like me will ensure that black and disadvantaged white children are fed the knowledge they need to inspire them to do great things.

The racist/bigoted white man cannot claim ownership of the riches of this world nor the right to pursue a happy and prosperous life. That right should be and will be equal for all people irrelevant of race or religion.

Your work toward white supremacy and efforts to demonise black people will eventually be pointless.

Posted by Englander on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 20:39 | #

Yes. S, please post this to http://www.thephora.net/forum/
If you want to be heard, then let yourself be heard. If you are sure of your position then you won’t fear the debate that will follow.
Your arguments are really too basic to be worth the attention in the blog environment.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:56 | #

It is with your self-positioning you try to discredit what I say rather than just address the points.

What you seem to overlook is that my comments are not “too basic ” but just simply ideas that you would rather not address.

You would rather a school boy engage me in some playground dialogue as we can all excuse their ignorance and stupidity.

My points are valid and righteous and without agreeing to what I say you will be displaying your true ignorance; you are fearful of this.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:10 | #

“just simply ideas that you would rather not address”.

Please put away any notions of the superiority of your arguments. It is profitless for us to waste energy on you, since we are focussed on educating on our own people.

Posted by martin_uk on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:29 | #

1. In IQ tests administered in many parts of the world, black people
of African ancestry score lower than people of other races. In
particular, they score between 15 and 30 points below Asians and whites. The
reason is often given that the tests are culturally biased, but if
this were the case then one would expect more recent immigrants to the
USA to score worse than blacks, whereas in fact it has been found that
Vietnamese people, who emigrated to the USA in the 1970s, score
even higher than whites! In any case, the test designers have been at
it for many years, and the tests are used to separate the bright from
the not so bright in many spheres of human activity, such as
education, business, the armed forces, and so on. In other words, the
IQ test industry is a ‘heavy industry’, and it is most implausible
that such a professional occupation would still be using tests where
cultural bias plays a significant role. Furthermore, if the problem
was one of cultural bias, then it should be possible to devise a test
that was culturally biased in favour of blacks, whereas in fact all
the tests show pretty much the same result, a white/black gap of 15
points in the USA and 30 points in Africa.
2. In every advanced country which black people have made their home,
they have tended to suffer the same kind of fate as one would
associate with people of low intelligence. They are more involved in
crime, particularly robbery and petty theft, in substance abuse, have
greater rates of illegitimacy and one parent familihood, they have far
higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases, they are more often
unemployed or on benefits of one type or another, they make greater
demands on the social services. It has been argued that black
communities are in this condition because of white racism, but the
situation for blacks living in Africa, where there are few white
people to oppress them, is even worse, with widespread poverty and
even starvation.
3. Africa is the poorest continent on earth, and is always coming to
the West for aid. It is a continent that is mired in poverty, crime,
corruption, civil war, famine, drought, Aids. You name it! Again,
white racism has been blamed for this state of affairs; in particular,
the British Empire somehow managed to oppress the black population to
such a great extent, and partitioned Africa into states so
thoughtlessly, that the nations of Africa have not been able to
recover since, even until now. But if this were the case then we would
expect those African countries that were never part of the British
Empire to be somewhat better off than those that were part of the
British Empire. Instead we find that the opposite is the case, that
places like Kenya, Uganda, Ghana, all countries which were at one time
part of the British Empire, are in fact better off than places like
Somalia and Ethiopia, which never were part of anyones empire,
British or otherwise. Indeed, Liberia and Haiti have been black ruled
for hundreds of years, and they are again no better off for it.
Furthermore, if the British ruined the prospects for its colonies then
we would expect to see Hong Kong, which was under the ‘oppressive’
rule of the British for a longer time, to be mired in poverty and
famine too, whereas in fact Hong Kong is one of the wealthiest places
on Earth. The same expectation would apply to places like Singapore
and Malaysia, which are prosperous relative to the rest of the Far
East, but were also once British colonies. If these places were once
ruled by the British and are now richer than their neighbours, then
how can British rule be an explanation for Africas poverty? In
any case, the British left Africa forty or so years ago, and even if
we had left it in ruins, well, billions of dollars have been poured in
from all over the world since then, and the African nations are worse
off now than they were when the British left. Just contrast the
situation with that of Japan and Germany after the Second World War.
Both countries were utterly devastated by the war, yet within twenty
years both Germany and Japan were once again the most powerful
economies in their respective parts of the world, and have gone from
strength to strength ever since.
4. If blacks are as intelligent as whites and Asians, then when will
black intelligence reveal itself? When will the conditions be right
for black intelligence to be expressed? Where is the evidence that
blacks can, on their own, create an advanced technological society, -
is there any record of one, anywhere, ever? It seems that the white
Western countries, in particular the USA and the UK, have gone to
great lengths to include and accommodate blacks, what with affirmative
action, anti-racism legislation, the promotion of positive stereotypes
in the media, and so on, but over time the situation gets steadily
worse and worse. Does anyone really believe any longer that just one
last push, just one more law threatening to punish white people for
racism, or granting special privileges to black people, or one more
“fresh start”; initiative in Londons schools, is
really going to turn everything around? There are no black minority
communities living in places other than what would normally be
described as white countries, none in places like the Far East, or in
India, so it is impossible to tell whether they would have fared any
better in other non-white parts of the world, but from all the data
that is available, does anyone really think it is likely that they
would? Left to their own devices, Africans had few accomplishments to
their name. There is no record of any written language, or of even a
sailing boat, or two-storey building, African society was (still is)
primitive and its artefacts crude. In earlier times, when people were
not afraid to talk openly about racial differences, it was recognised
that the Africans were dull and unintelligent. Anyone who has had
close contact with black people over a length of time will know that
this perception is generally the correct one. Can one really imagine,
for instance, Heathrow airport operating efficiently if it were
staffed entirely (including the pilots) by blacks. (Just recently
Nigerian airlines was taken over by British Airways).

The evidence of black low intelligence is so overwhelming, and it ties
in so accurately with everything that we observe in Africa and in our
inner cities today, that it impossible not to make the connection. So
why is the manifestly obvious inference never made, why do people go
to any lengths to try to deny it?
Part of the reason must be a desire not to humiliate or hurt the
feelings of blacks. This is a kind sentiment, because it is
undoubtedly true that, rightly or wrongly, human value is closely
associated with intelligence. This response resembles our natural
inclination not to draw unnecessary attention to another
persons physical disability. But the difficulty with our
wishing to be polite, in this particular case, is that the only
alternative explanation for black failure then becomes that white
people are to blame, which is untrue, and whenever a society (or
individual, or animal, for that matter) believes or tries to believe
something that is false, then eventually it will strike against
reality and come to some kind of harm. As an example, white South
Africans and white Rhodesians always knew that blacks were not as
clever as whites and could not manage these countries like white men
could, so they ran them instead and the countries did rather well as a
result, so that the blacks were actually quite well off, better off
than elsewhere in Africa, and in fact South Africa had a problem with
other blacks wanting to get in from neighbouring states, - illegal
immigrants. The size of the black population in these countries
increased considerably during the years of white rule, because the
whites organised the building and running of farms, roads, and mines
and tapped into the natural wealth of these countries, and this
benefited everybody, black and white. Even neighbouring black
countries were able to buy the surplus of grain that was made
available. But now, as a result of white people losing all their power
and influence in these countries, Zimbabwe and South Africa are in
decline, white people are leaving, and relative abundance has been
replaced by famine and drought, which is damaging the whole of Sub
Saharan Africa. But would there have been famine or drought if the
whites had still been in charge? Imagine the international furore if
blacks had been starving in a white ruled African country? It is
indeed ironic that white ‘racist’ farmers were successful in feeding
millions of blacks, but left wing do gooders, by agitating for self
rule, are now the indirect cause of much black hunger. The reason is
that agitators for black self rule believed; or pretended to
believe - what happens to be untrue, - that blacks will run things as
efficiently as whites - whereas the white colonialists believed what
happens to be true, - that blacks are not as competent as whites.

The second objection to the argument that ‘we should not discuss these
things because we must not hurt the feelings of blacks’ is that the
only alternative explanation is that whites are the cause of black
failure, and since white people are the ‘accused’, then white people
have the right to a defence. It is a fundamental principle of natural
justice that whenever a person is accused of wrongdoing then they must
be allowed to defend themselves, no matter how heinous the crime is
that they are accused of. (Of course, the right to defend oneself
against the accusation of white racism causing black failure would
still exist even if white racism was indeed the cause of black
failure.) One cannot cite white racism as the cause of black failure,
and then forbid that white people should have the right to defend
themselves against this charge. That would be unfair and contrary to
natural justice. And if the defendants, white people, call upon
evidence, the facts assembled in 1,2,3,4 above, that might hurt the
feelings of the plaintiff, black people, then they should not have
brought the charge of ‘racism’ against whites in the first place.

Hence I conclude that it is reasonable that this line of argument -
the overwhelming evidence of low IQ as being the true cause of black
failure in Western societies, and of the continued poverty in Africa -
should be allowed to enter the debate. I also believe that the
argument is a compelling one and that white people indeed are not
responsible for black failure, and the true cause of black failure
lies in low IQ.

I will assume that if anyone responds to this post with name calling
(I think we all know what name I mean) then they will have
acknowledged that they have lost the argument.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:34 | #

“It is profitless for us to waste energy on you, since we are focussed on educating on our own people”

I can accept this point and will no longer pursue an argument on this forum.

As with yourself my efforts would be more justified when directed toward the appropriate audience.

My parting thoughts are:

The righteous should work not toward racial segregation but racial equality.

Do not try to demonise another race in order to benefit your own people.

Mixed race people are beautiful.

Posted by s on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:52 | #

Notice how all who could not formulate their own arguments speak up once someone who could even be bothered to do some research has published what they believe to be a winning argument.

I would ask all those who could not even formulate their own arguments to take a back seat.

How could I possibly reply to such a comprehensive post without first gathering my evidence and sources to support my claims? In the meantime I would ask martin_uk to cite his sources especially the results of the IQ tests he refers to in 1.

Much of your claim to Africa’s lack of civilisation and contribution to technology derives from your lack of study into the great African civilisations that made advancements in many sciences that even surpassed those of Europeans pre- colonialistation.

Your misinformation also derives from your forefather’s efforts to hide the true accomplishments of pre-colonial Africa.

I would say also that African’s would find the so called intelligence of the superior white man to be quite boring. This would be more due to cultural differences than any claim to inferior intelligence.

I would ask the intelligent white many to read recent bbc reports that show that black African girls are outperforming white boys in high school tests, and that also black and Caribbean boys and girls are outperforming whites on preschool tests.

I suppose that the ignorant schoolboys who believe Africans are a completely different species would also be quite hurt to discover that Africa is the birthplace of man.

Watch this post.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:55 | #

Thank you martin_uk, you saved the rest of us a lot of time and typing.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:01 | #

S, get it through your thick head. This is not a debating society. This is a place where our side learn from the masters. Martin_uk was nice enough to type out that answer yet any of the regulars could have done the same thing. They have more important things to do than knock heads with you. Go somewhere else if you want your beliefs discredited, or just shut up and read the multitude of articles on this site.

Posted by s on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:18 | #

And now the intelligent white man resorts to name calling?

The intelligent white man resorts to schoolboy remarks such as: “If you’re part English and part Negro, on the other hand, you’re an interspecies hybrid”.

Your beliefs are based on fallacies and derive from your false claim to white superiority. You hide the evil past of your/our forefather’s and demonise the black race in order to fuel racism.

Evil, pure evil.

Posted by Count Sudoku on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:20 | #

S, here are some articles on blacks you should find interesting.

http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Index-Others.html

Posted by s on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 02:51 | #

Your Eurocentric claims to white superiority are flawed. Even The most respected critics of an Afrocentric viewpoint of history betray your racist scholars.

You lay claim to all technological advancement in this world but the first real European civilisations were inspired by the Egyptians (Africans/Mediterranean). I quote:

“ Whilst acknowledging that the ancient Egyptian population was ‘mixed’, a fact confirmed by all the anthropological analyses, writers nevertheless speak of an Egyptian ‘race’, linking it to a well defined human type, the white, ‘Hamitic’ branch, also called ‘Caucasoid’, ‘Mediterranean’, ‘Europid’ or ‘Eurafricanid’. There is a contradiction here: all the anthropologists agree in stressing the sizeable proportion of the Negroid element—almost a third and sometimes more—in the ethnic [i.e. biological] mixture of the ancient Egyptian ‘population’, but nobody has yet defined what is meant by the term ‘Negroid’, nor has any explanation been proffered as to how this Negroid element, by mingling with a ‘Mediterranean’ component often present in smaller proportions, could be assimilated into a purely Caucasoid race.”

Jean Vercoutter,

Europeans lay false claim to the great Multicultural and mainly black civilisation of Egypt, where it is accepted that Greeks took much inspiration for building their nation.

Before the Greeks, barbarians (Europeans) et al were no better that the grass skirt wearing Africans. In fact they were technologically behind.

Studies have shown that black children score better on pre-school entry tests before they enter into the “white” schooling systems, where they are subjected to the foundations lay by whites to benefit white children.

Black children are just as intelligent as white children they are just not getting the proper education in a system designed for the advancement of whites.

Again Britain is moving toward being a truly multicultural society. Britain realises the need for a school system that benefits its minorities and are making drastic changes for this purpose. Live with it! Don’t hate blacks.

Posted by s on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 03:09 | #

By calling the Mediterranean element of ancient Egyptians white you would just as well be calling me white but you have done already called me an interspecies hybrid.

Looks like we will all be visiting Captain kirk and marrying jews.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 03:21 | #

“Don’t hate blacks.”

I don’t. I only hate people who are tedious and boring, and that goes for tedious, boooooring Negroes.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…...................................

Posted by Retew on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:56 | #

S, you’ll be welcome on this forum;

http://www.mootsf.org/

It’s a race debate forum run by antis but with people on both sides of the argument chipping in their views.

Posted by s on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:34 | #

The people that attend this forum try to present their information in an intelligent way, but are really just schoolboy racists that falsify events and make ridiculous comments about their fellow man.

You display your true ignorance by name-calling remember.

btw thanks Retew.

Posted by Retew on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:07 | #

You’re welcome :thumbs:

Posted by s on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:05 | #

The hypothesis that the ancient Egyptians were a predominantly “white” civilization was viable in the heyday of European colonialism, but is today regarded as (racist) pseudoscience. However, several neo-Nazi and racist groups such as Stormfront still hold this myth to be true, holding that ancient Egypt was a “Nordic desert empire.”[51] This view enjoys no support whatsoever among researchers of ancient Egypt for the simple reason that there is no evidence for it, and enormous evidence against it.

wikipedia

Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:27 | #

s, you should visit Tom Shelly’s website. He relishes informed debate with Blacks and their apologists.

http://niggermania.org/tom/niggerarguments/niggerargumentstext.htm

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:25 | #

Al Ross,

Some of the sources you people quote (if any) are ridiculous. This latest site looks like something built by a mentally retarded individual.

I mean who would take a site that looked like that seriously. It bears an uncanny resemblance to a UFO conspiracy site built by a seriously troubled backward schizophrenic whose only education, if any, is the discovery channel and other sites of a similar variety.

I mean at least when I give information it is from someone, or somewhere that has some credibility.

I will not post here any more, as I cannot be dealing with this backward dialogue.

Posted by Yuezhus on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:49 | #

What the fack, s, I’ll have a go demolishing your arguments if no one else will.

Much of your claim to Africa’s lack of civilisation and contribution to technology derives from your lack of study into the great African civilisations that made advancements in many sciences that even surpassed those of Europeans pre- colonialistation.

This is rubbish. Discovering iron smelting independently of the rest of the world is impressive, and the rhythmic folk music of West Africans is great, but other than that, I honestly can’t think of any other novel breakthroughs that haven’t already occurred among non-Africans during prehistory. The great ability of West Africans to innovate the rhythmic aspects of music is most likely a combination of a unique instinct and testosterone, although it is ad mirable. Heavy rock and thus metal music wouldn’t exist without it, for one thing.

There were no sciences in Africa south of the Sahara.

What about the undocumented instances of rape on black slaves? Or the killing of any slave that sought to educate himself

The thought of people, especially Europeans well into the Age of Enlightenment, engaging freely in slavery of other human beings disgusts me. It is inevitable for their to be incidences of master-on-slave rape if said slavery is widespread enough, and, much to my chagrin, it was in Europe, right up to the 19th century.

However, slavery has been practiced by many people in history, and indeed the first civilizations relied on them. I’m sure in ancient times, when rape was a common punishment for even mundane offenses such as breaking and entering, that master-on-slave rape much far more frequent, and more cruel, than the acts committed by Europeans.

Now then, if you agree that slavery and mistreatment of slaves was extremely common in primitive societies, what say you to the fact that sub-Saharan African societies, for whatever reason, were the penultimate example of primitivism, bested only by Australoid and pygmy cultures? Africans had barely entered the iron age, despite them having discovered iron thousands of years ago. The use of iron was fairly uncommon. People occasionally delved in subsistence farming here and there, but civilization never went beyond tribal affiliations and basic hunter-gatherer and bartering economics. And widespread slavery.

Yes, slavery, practiced frequently by at least half of your ancestors right up to modern times, and presently in some parts of Africa. The notion of European or Arab cronies ransacking villages and dragging away screaming, innocent African villagers away for slavery was in fact an extremely rare occurrence. Most of the slaves acquired were already slaves when Arabs or Europeans bought them, enslaved by the slavemasters of rival tribes.

Do not try to demonise another race in order to benefit your own people.

You hypocritical shite.

Do you honestly think that whites in Zimbabwe and South Africa, despite their higher wealth and possible slave owning ancestors, are not being demonised by blacks?

Before the Greeks, barbarians (Europeans) et al were no better that the grass skirt wearing Africans. In fact they were technologically behind.

Africans managed to independently invent iron smelting and gold working, whereas Celtic and proto-Germanic peoples had superior chariots to other people in that hemisphere, advanced sword/armour making techniques (at this point no where near Chinese quality, but still advanced and better than Roman/Greek efforts), sophisticated and extensive spoken literature, huge wooden road networks, well thought out local law and customs and twill weave.

I’m gonna leave it to you to search MR and find out if any more of your puerile points have been destroyed instantly. I could save you the effort and tell you: they have.

While I don’t condone what Al Ross just did (despite me spitting coke all over my keyboard upon reading), your hypocrisy is beyond comprehension.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:58 | #

s, the fact that Tom Shelly couches his verifiable info on Africans in the ‘black’ humour of which you disapprove doesnt alter the nature of the facts - intractable little devils unamenable to any rebuttals so far offered by you.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:24 | #

Let us not forget the abuse that the KKK and peoples of a similar ilk have bestowed upon our black American brothers.

The psychological impact of the abuse and crimes your forefathers have committed on the black population of America have caused many deep rooted psychological problems that somehow I do not think will ever be fully rectified.

Take a child: You abuse him over a number of year’s though psychological and physical means and he will grow up to be a troubled adult.

It follows that a troubled adult will most likely be ill equipped to bring up a child.

That child then facing the problems of racist America and its angry black population?

Take a large group of people: You subject them to a number of years of abuse murder and oppression and you plant the seeds of a troubled people.

Then you have the problem of those of us that do get out of the slavery induced ghetto mind frame and actually make the effort to forgive
America/Britain and work alongside its “conditioned whites” and the distrust that this causes amongst our people. See your very own William Lynch.

Let us not relate the problems of Africa to the problems of Britain or America. There are some instances where colonionisation and racism is to blame for some of the problems in Africa but the main problems are caused by famine, civil war and ongoing conflict over Africa’s natural resources. Not to mention the impact of the European market has on the value of said resources.

Take the Tootsies and Hutus of Rwanda it is the colonies that separated these into two distinct groups. The colonials created years of oppression that later led to deep-rooted problems and civil war. These problems are still present today.

Africa has its own problems and these are mainly caused over war and famine. This is something you Europeans are not adverse to right? Or is it just worse cause they niggas?

Black Americas problems are Black Americas problems.

Your forefathers sought to separate and demoralise black slaves, through their murderous and evil ways they sowed the seeds for today’s ghettos. See: William Lynch for an example of your evil forefathers approaches to black slaves.

Yes your forefathers did understand the powers of psychology (bravo) and like the evil men they were they used it to the detriment of their black slaves.

It was the white man that created the demoralised and angry people of today’s American ghettos through murder and torcher. Rather than own up to this you try to justify it with your inhumane claims to superiority.

You talk of black on white crime? Some (those less inclined to forgive and move on) would argue the possibility that some justice has been done when a white woman or white man is raped or murdered by a black man.

You cannot cover up your evil forefathers history.

Goodbye this is my last post.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:40 | #

I truly wish that the number of Whites raped and murdered by savage Blacks in the US since the government foolishly ended segregation in the 1960’s was as small as the number of Blacks treated likewise by the Ku Klux Klan during the whole of the 20th Century.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:56 | #

I understand that all races practiced slavery, but this does not take us away from the problems of European Slavery and its descendants of slaves within Britain and America.

We will leave the evil slave traders of other races for another discussion?

Yuezhus you sound like you have some intelligence so I will accept what you said on face value about the achievements of European races pre-Roman Empire. I do not aim to devalue the “good” elements of European history.

Lets not forget that Africans were trading with Europeans and Arabs for many years. Look at Timbuktu. You can also look at Great Zimbabwe and their advancements in architecture.

There is also evidence of impressive African advancements within Mathematics in the pre-colonial period.

It is a common myth amongst the bigots of this world that without whites Africans where uncivilised and unable to develop any form of civilisation: look at Ashanti, Zulu, Ethiopia, Mali, Shogay for examples of viable African states with more or less complete political and social structure

Also we have not unlocked much of the history of Africa so it is very wrong to take the Eurocentric standpoint that has been done for many years and assume the worst.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 03:04 | #

Perhaps s can enlighten us as to why, despite ‘racism’, Blacks enjoy a better quality of life in countries run by Whites than they do in self-administered mendicant hellholes like Haiti, Zaire et al.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 03:13 | #

In an attempt to assist the stupid Africans who are unable to look after themselves, this misguided woman has donated (wasted)millions of pounds :

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1352124.0.0.php

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 03:48 | #

Al Ross,

Again you prove to be an ignorant narrow minded being.

We cannot get away from the fact that the advancement of the British Empire and its colonies has generated a better life for its people.

Yes Britain has successfully created a stable and thriving economy.

Yes there are still countries that due to political/geographical/ecological reasons are now in poverty.

Do we forget that Britain and Europe are some of the better geographically situitated civilisations.

Maybe the Haiatian government have made some mistakes in governing its ecological recourses.

Europe is not without its mistakes. What about the Global warming that is threatening the world due to our industrialisation? We realise this threat but cannot directly resolve it as it will take years.

Maybe Haiti is still learning from its mistakes, maybe in 50 years they will manage to resolve their problems.

Britain has not always been as prosperous as it is today. It has not been without famine.

Comparing Haiti to Britain would be like comparing Microsoft to a start-up software house created by two final year graduates who are on course for many mistakes and set backs.

Also Haiti’s people are descendants of slaves. They do not have the privilege of the long learning curve that helped carve the British Empire we have today.

Maybe you should consider Haiti’s ecological, geographical, and political difficulties (on a national and International level). Rather than base your judgment on racial views such as those expressed by martin_uk.

An excerpt from Wikipedia:

In 1925, Haiti was a lush tropical paradise, with 60% of its original forest covering the lands and mountainous regions. Since then, the population has cut down all but 2% of its forest cover, and in the process has destroyed fertile farmland soils while contributing to desertification.[14] Erosion has been severe in the mountainous areas. Pictures from space glaringly show the stark difference in forestation between Haiti and the neighbouring Dominican Republic. Most Haitian logging is done to produce charcoal, the country’s chief source of fuel. The plight of Haiti’s forests has attracted international attention and has led to numerous reforestation efforts, but these have met with little success to date.

In addition to soil erosion, the deforestation has also caused periodic flooding, as seen on September 17, 2004. Tropical storm Jeanne skimmed the north coast of Haiti leaving 3,006 people dead in flooding and mudslides, mostly in the city of Gonaïves.[15]

Jared Diamond attributes many of Haiti’s political problems to its mismanagement of its ecosystems, particularly deforestation; see Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:19 | #

Haiti’s ecological difficulties must, surely be the partial responsibility of successive Mulatto-led governments which have run the country (into the ground) for the vast majority of the (almost)200 years since independence.

Of course the Mulatto elite were, tautologically speaking, part White (but mostly Black) and the presence of the superior genes of the former allowed them to dominate the low-IQ Black majority who hardly constituted the ideal nation-building stock.

In the matter of long learning curves, how long must such a curve be if it is to improve Blacks whose average IQ is 70?

Regarding accusations of ignorance, I must confess that the more I read, the more I realise the existence of lamentable lacunae in the my knowledge. I have, though, learned a lot from the commentators of MR, yourself excepted.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:25 | #

->Fred Scooby

Having nothing better to say he mocks my stance? Very nice. Why don’t you go back to your cowboy web resources, and pseudo history books and try to disprove what I am saying, or better still go find a religion and instil upon your sorry mind some sense of righteousness.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:30 | #

Al Ross

I pity you.

Can you please explain to me why it is then that black African girls are outperforming white boys in British schools?

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:37 | #

I am most certainly not one of you.

No, I represent the more moral, compassionate and informed kind of the British Society.

It pains you to see your sense of superiority decline as we approach a more sophisticated and compassionate age.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:50 | #

Why is it that one of the most intelligent and powerful women in America is Black?

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:57 | #

Either these women are demonstrating the most advanced/quickest form of evolution ever seen in mankind (scary). Or your IQ test propaganda just represents another form of the racist bigots meagre attempts at spreading unfounded and ill resourced psuedo-science.

Posted by ben tillman on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:03 | #

The righteous should work not toward racial segregation but racial equality.

I nominate this for stupidest comment of the month. Racial “equality”—whatever that might be—REQUIRES racial segregation. Without racial segregation, there can be no races.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:15 | #

s, you seem to be experiencing some difficulty with the English language. You made a comment on MR and I referred to you as a commentator. Perhaps you are linguistically more comfortable communicating in the untranscribed grunts and clicks of your Black forebears.

Your desparate canard about Black girls’ scholastic superiority to White boys is risible. Blacks wreck, degrade and pollute every White institution stupid enough to admit such savages and when Whites build a city like Detroit and Blacks inundate the place, ruination is as sure as Coons in a Crackhouse.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:21 | #

s, you must be referring to that hideous mutant Condoleeza Rice. Well she does have a good dollop of White blood to dilute the Negro stupidity and, although Blacks have a well-documented low average IQ, there are, axiomatically, a small percentage of the pests with high IQs and it is from this group that Rice’s Black gene input is undoubtedly drawn.

Posted by Matra on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:35 | #

Maybe Haiti is still learning from its mistakes, maybe in 50 years they will manage to resolve their problems.

I don’t know what the stupidest remark of the month was but that’s one of the funniest.

Comparing Haiti to Britain would be like comparing Microsoft to a start-up software house created by two final year graduates who are on course for many mistakes and set backs.

Haiti became independent very early in the 19th century. It’s almost as old as the USA. Would you like to compare its progress to younger countries such as New Zealand or the Rep. of Ireland?

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:56 | #

In English inner-city state schools the preponderately Leftist, female teachers apply their own anti-White-male affirmative action programme. It works this way : Continuous assessment is used in curriculum planning and counts for a great deal because it is less academically demanding and deemed more suitable to both the Black psyche and the female temperament, the latter performing less well in ‘do or die’ end-of-term examinations.

Also the mainly female (White) teaching staff ignore (and doubtless abhor) the EGI of their own group and, having studied ‘feminism’ at what passes for university these days, favour girls over boys, with the outcome being that the grades are the result of cultural bias.

Such scholastic perversion is designed to enable social engineering and has about as much to do with true education as Africans have to do with intellectual achievement.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:17 | #

Matra

I don’t know what the stupidest remark of the month was but that’s one of the funniest.

Your perspective on the world is undoubtedly quite ignorant and sick. You display the traits of an ignorant and desperate people.

Al Ross,
cultural bias you say? Lol rofl hahahahahahahahaha bet that really pains you.

Your propaganda will only fall on ignorant ears.

Goodbye.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:41 | #

More goodbyes than Cher. Have a Thirdworldfuxated day.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:20 | #

With reference to your very own ‘IQ and the Wealth of Nations’.

The cowboy resources you people use in your quest to prove white supremacy over blacks are just simply unsound.

In order to support your primitive stance, you even resort to propagating the unsubstantiated view that your own kind must be being culturally biased.

In true Eurocentric style you ignore hard facts and base your hypothetical propaganda on assumptions and questionable sources.

One argument I have is that the data used in your referenced IQ tests rely upon flawed and incomplete geographical sampling . Not to mention the countless assumptions and errors the authors in this book make. Also in true academia, publications must undergo some form of peer review before their truths can be accepted by the mainstream.

What follows is a comprehensive wikipedia extract that simply proves my point.

IQ and the Wealth of Nations’ was not peer-reviewed before publication but was published by a publisher of academic literature.

Several negative reviews have been published in the scholarly literature. Susan Barnett and Wendy Williams wrote that “we see an edifice built on layer upon layer of arbitrary assumptions and selective data manipulation. The data on which the entire book is based are of questionably validity and are used in ways that cannot be justified.”[3] They also wrote that cross country comparisons are “virtually meaningless.” Ken Richardson wrote “This is not so much science, then, as a social crusade. The Pioneer Fund of America, champion of many dubious causes in the past, will obtain little credit from having assisted this one.”[4] Thomas Nechyba wrote of “relatively weak statistical evidence and dubious presumptions.”[5] Astrid Ervik asked “are people in rich countries smarter than those in poorer countries?” and concluded that “the authors fail to present convincing evidence and appear to jump to conclusions.”[6]

Denny Borsbom (2006) finds that mainstream contemporary test analysis does not reflect substantial recent developments in the field and “bears an uncanny resemblance to the psychometric state of the art as it existed in the 1950s.” For example, it notes that IQ and the Wealth of Nations, in order to show that the tests are unbiased, use outdated methodology, if anything indicative of that test bias exist.[7]

Thomas Volken wrote that the study is “neither methodologically nor theoretically convincing.”[8] Although critical of the IQ data, for the sake of argument Volken assumes that the data is correct but then criticizes the statistical methods used, finding no effect on growth or income. Using the same assumption, Garett Jones and W. Joel Schneider report a strong connection between intelligence and economic growth.[9]

Lynn has been frequently criticized as a Pioneer fund grantee.

The figures were obtained by taking unweighted averages of different IQ tests. The number of studies is very limited; the IQ figure is based on one study in 34 nations, two studies in 30 nations. There were actual tests for IQ in 81 nations. In 104 of the world’s nations there were no IQ studies at all and IQ was estimated based on IQ in surrounding nations.[21] The number of participants in each study was usually limited, often numbering under a few hundred. The exceptions to this were the United States and Japan, for which studies using more than several thousand participants are available.

Many nations are very heterogeneous ethnically. This is true for many developing countries. It is very doubtful that an often limited number of participants from one or a few areas are representative for the population as whole.

Studies that were averaged together often used different methods of IQ testing, different scales for IQ values and/or were done decades apart. IQ in children is different although correlated with IQ later in life and many of the studies tested only young children.

A test of 108 9-15-year olds in Barbados, of 50 13-16-year olds in Colombia, of 104 5-17-year olds in Ecuador, of 129 6-12-year olds in Egypt, of 48 10-14-year olds in Equatorial Guinea, and so on, all were taken as measures of ‘national IQ’.[22]

The notion that there is such a thing as a culturally neutral intelligence test is disputed.[23][24][25][26][27] There are many difficulties when one is measuring IQ scores across cultures, and in multiple languages. Use of the same set of exams requires translation, with all its attendant difficulties and possible misunderstandings in other cultures.[28] To adapt to this, some IQ test rely on non-verbal approaches, which involve pictures, diagrams, and conceptual relationships (such as in-out, big-small, and so on).

One common criticism is that many of the countries with the best average scores are those where testing (e.g. American SATs, baccalaureate examinations) is a crucial aspect of the educational process, and that many of these tests (esp. the SATs) have been shown to be very similar to IQ tests. In these nations, because students study extensively for the high-stakes examinations, it is quite possible that IQ scores are higher because people are subjected to frequent examinations for which they prepare extensively.

There are also errors in the raw data presented by authors. The results from Vinko Buj’s 1981 study of 21 European cities and the Ghanaian capital Accra used different scaling from Lynn and Vanhanen’s. A comparison of the reported to actual data from only a single study found 5 errors in 19 reported IQ scores.[29][30]

As noted earlier, in many cases arbitrary adjustments were made by authors to account for the Flynn effect or when the authors thought that the studies were not representative of the ethnic or social composition of the nation.

One critic writes: “Their scheme is to take the British Ravens IQ in 1979 as 100, and simply add or subtract 2 or 3 to the scores from other countries for each decade that the relevant date of test departs from that year. The assumptions of size, linearity and universal applicability of this correction across all countries are, of course, hugely questionable if not breathtaking. Flynn’s original results were from only 14 (recently extended to twenty) industrialised nations, and even those gains varied substantially with test and country and were not linear. For example, recent studies report increases of eight points per decade among Danes; six points per decade in Spain; and 26 points over 14 years in Kenya (confirming the expectation that newly developing countries would show more rapid gains).”[31]

It is generally agreed many factors, including environment, culture, demographics, wealth, pollution, and educational opportunities, affect measured IQ. See also Health and intelligence.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:26 | #

Fred I would look to the recent findings of some of the “oh so respected” Chinese/Korean (super races as you would have it) scholars for evidence of the importance of peer review.

Fake chip research shocks China
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4771583.stm

S Korea’s ‘disgraced’ national hero:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4468812.stm

It follows that even the most respected academics findings must be questioned before the mainstream accept the results of their research.

Therefore using questionable and moot sources on matters as important and controversial as proving the superior intelligence of a race is downright criminal.

There is no doubt in my mind that much of the academia you reference is nothing but the result of the bigoted academics efforts to produce material in support of the white supremacist crusade. These academics draw upon thier biased minds to make unfair assumptions to support thier evidence.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:36 | #

Much of their findings were “peer reviewed” and published in academic literature.

It would then follow that we must ensure that those who actually perform the peer reviews and publications are they themselves not subject to the same biased and corrupted leaning.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:44 | #

An excerpt from your very own reference:

The peer review process aims to make authors meet the standards of their discipline, and of science in general. Publications and awards that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals in many fields. Even refereed journals, however, can contain errors.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:04 | #

Fred

From your recent post:
“Garrett served as a Director of the Pioneer Fund in 1972–1973”

I would question the scientific integrity of both Garret and The Pioneer Fund of America.

Wikipedi excerpt from “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” that challenges the integrity of the Pioneer Fund and noting its dubious causes.

“The Pioneer Fund of America, champion of many dubious causes in the past, will obtain little credit from having assisted this one.”

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:18 | #

Some views on some of the other Scholors of the Notorious Pioneer Fund of America

The views of Dr. Shockley and Dr. Jensen and their supporters, have come under attack recently from, among other sources, the Genetics Society of America, a leading professional organization. In July 1976 it published a statement of its committee on genetics, race and intelligence that was endorsed by nearly 1,400 members.

“In our views there is no convincing evidence as to whether there is or is not an appreciable genetic difference in intelligence between races,” it said.

“Well designed research… may yield valid and socially useful results and should not be discouraged. We feel that geneticists can and must also speak out against the misuse of genetics for political purposes and the drawing of social conclusions from inadequate data.”

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:19 | #

I must emphasise the following statement:

“We feel that geneticists can and must also speak out against the misuse of genetics for political purposes and the drawing of social conclusions from inadequate data.”

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:26 | #

Your Pioneer Fund of America must have many experts in the field of statistics (aprt from missing out the few lectures dealing with the importance of solid sampling methods) and must be quite familiar with the methods in which they may be misused to convince the majority by creating politically motivated propaganda and advertising.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:30 | #

1,400 against Garrett and his few learned friends.

Have a laugh.

Posted by Andy Wooster on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:30 | #

Not sure why you’re wasting any of your time with this idiot, Fred. He’s clearly a fanatical race-denier with very strong personal reasons for holding the position that he does.

At this late stage, it is virtually impossible to believe that anyone who argues against the notion that: 1. IQ matters and 2. is largely influenced by heredity is not either intellectually dishonest or an outright moron. The use of the term “Eurocentric” is an even more obvious sign of feeble-mindedness.

Posted by Andy Wooster on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:33 | #

to “s”: Please stop spamming the comments section.

Posted by Dan on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:52 | #

“S” does seem to know what he is talking about.

I am waiting to see if anyone can disprove what he says.

Is there any unquestionable information we can draw upon to support the notion that whites have a higher IQ than blacks?

Someone please put him in his place.

Posted by Andy Wooster on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:08 | #

To “Dan” (aka “s”)

Is there any unquestionable information we can draw upon to support the notion that whites have a higher IQ than blacks?

Is anything “unquestionable”, especially to fanatical dolts like you? And what about you? Can you provide any “unquestionable” information supporting the notion that blacks are, on average, as intelligent as whites? Where’s the positive case for your position?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:38 | #

Andy you’re right, I shouldn’t have replied to this person who is at the stage of demanding proofs of two-plus-two. Even if one wanted to bend over backwards and cite the details of all XXth-Century research starting with Sir Cyril Burt up through Rushton, Risch, La Griffe, and all the others working today, he’d get into questioning the statistical methods, the sampling methods, and so on, ad infinitum. And that’s leaving out the perfectly sound body of scholarly opinion preceding the XXth Century. “S” has to understand there are sort of prerequisites for discussing this topic, similarly to way there are prerequisites for taking college courses: without mastering the prerequisites you won’t be at the level at which you’re able to participate. He hasn’t mastered the prerequisites for this discussion at this site. Furthermore, he’s a nitwit, someone who may actually be incapable of mastering them.

Bye, “s.”

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:57 | #

“Where’s the positive case for your position?”

My position is to simply disprove your evil pseudo-science that is wholly based on flawed and politically motivated research performed by primitive and evil neo-nazis and that has led to racially motivated and inhumane acts such as the Holocaust.

The most fundamental point is that any objective and scientifically driven academic of commendable integrity can see your sources for the ill motivated, evil and racist driven propaganda they are.

Your primitive political and racial stance doesn’t have a leg to stand on in this sophisticated age. In fact if most of your beliefs were aired in mainstream society you would be deemed a criminal and subjected to the punitive chastisement of law.

You weak-minded individuals need to forgive your evil forefathers, find pride in the great things this nation has done, find pride in the great parts of your history including some of your great and moral ancestors and stop living in denial.

Determination of the validity of what had been presented in this argument will be left it as an exercise for the reader.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:04 | #

Have a laugh:

Your very own Sir Cyril Burt :

Over the course of his career Burt published numerous articles and books on a host of topics ranging from psychometrics to philosophy of science to parapsychology. It is his research in behavior genetics, most notably in studying the heritability of intelligence (as measured in IQ tests) using twin studies that have created the most controversy.

From the late 1970s it has been generally accepted that “he had fabricated some of the data, though some of his earlier work remained unaffected by this revelation.”[1] This was due in large part to research by Oliver Gillie (1976) and Leon Kamin (1974).[2][3] The possibility of fabrication was first brought to the attention of the scientific community when Kamin noticed that Burt’s correlation coefficients of Monozygotic and Dizygotic twins’ IQ scores were the same to three decimal places, across articles – even when new data were twice added to the sample of twins. Leslie Hearnshaw, a close friend of Burt and his official biographer, concluded after examining the criticisms that most of Burt’s data from after World War II were unreliable or fraudulent.[4]

In 1976, London’s Sunday Times claimed two of Burt’s collaborators, Margaret Howard and J. Conway, were made up by Burt himself. They based this on the lack of independent articles published by them in scientific journals, and the fact that they only appeared in the historical record as reviewers of Burt’s books in the Journal of Statistical Psychology when the journal was redacted by Burt. Some scholars claim the assistants have since been located.[5] Their existence, however, has never been substantiated.[citation needed]

In 1989 and 1991, two independent authors, Robert Joynson and Ronald Fletcher published books that argued the case against Burt was led by “carelessness and errors of interpretation.”[6] They argued that explanations exist that are at least as plausible as the guilty explanations for each of the points of concern, such as that the bombing of Burt’s University College during World War II caused Burt to have to sort out his previous data.

In 1995, Cambridge University professor of psychology Nicholas Mackintosh edited the book Cyril Burt: Fraud or Framed? (Oxford University Press), in which the contributors argued that “his defenders have sometimes, but by no means always, been correct, and that his critics have often jumped to hasty conclusions.”[7]

Scholar William H. Tucker argued in a 1997 article that, “A comparison of his twin sample with that from other well documented studies, however, leaves little doubt that he committed

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:07 | #

fraud being the last word in the last statement reading:

Scholar William H. Tucker argued in a 1997 article that, “A comparison of his twin sample with that from other well documented studies, however, leaves little doubt that he committed fraud FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD !!!!!

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:12 | #

Please post some more of your pseudo-scientists so I can further study how you came to your primitive conclusions.

Do you know what, I think we should study the “Racist” and their IQ levels because they really exhibit some of the most mundane neanderthalic tendencies.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:37 | #

Idea: Lets all (like ill equipped school boys) scoff at a statement designed to trigger a response from the reader rather than face up to the real issues of this debate.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:38 | #

I just had to post this letter:

To the Pioneer Fund:

With great excitement, I recently discovered your organization’s work for the betterment of mankind, through the applied science of racial research. As someone who has been investigating the disproportionately pathological tendencies of persons of European descent—whites in the popular vernacular—imagine my delight upon reading your Charter, which notes:

“The Pioneer Fund is committed to the proposition that people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds are, on the basis of heredity, inherently unequal and can never be expected to behave or perform equally.”

Gentlemen, I couldn’t have said it better; and given our mutual interest in racial differences, I feel certain you will be intrigued by my funding proposal.

Just as your group has lavishly financed those whose work demonstrates the intellectual deficiencies of blacks, so too is it critical to examine the reasons for the disproportionate drug use, binge drinking, and propensity for serial murder that are the hallmarks of the Caucasian population.

Although it has long been known that roughly 90 percent of serial killers in modern history have been white, only recently has evidence emerged to illuminate the epidemic of substance abuse in the white community.

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, whites are 11 percent more likely to have used drugs than blacks and 25 percent more likely to have done so than Hispanics.

What’s more, recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and the National Household Drug Abuse Survey indicates:

—White high schoolers are 4.5 times more likely than blacks to have used cocaine; 3.6 times more likely to have gotten high using inhalants, like paint fumes or Liquid Paper; twice as likely as blacks to have used heroin; and six times more likely to have used methamphetamine. In fact, there are more white high school students who have used crystal meth than black students who regularly smoke cigarettes;

—Whites are 43 percent more likely than blacks to drink alcohol and 27 percent more likely to binge drink than blacks (consuming five or more drinks at a time), with white youth more than twice as likely as black youth to binge;

—Whites are 74 percent more likely than blacks to binge drink regularly (at least five times monthly), and white youth are three times as likely to do so;

—In fact, there are more whites who binge drink at least once a month than there are blacks in the entire U.S. population!

And finally:

—According to a private study, white college students consume three times more alcoholic beverages weekly than black students, are 65 percent more likely to drink to the point of being hungover, and 71 percent more likely to drink ‘till they puke.

What’s more, these white behaviors put others at substantial risk:

—Whites are almost twice as likely as blacks to drive drunk, and 15 percent more likely to do so than Hispanics;

—Whites between 12-17, are 34 percent more likely than black youth to have sold drugs in the past year;

—The annual cost of white alcohol and drug abuse is approximately $200 billion in escalated health care and law enforcement expenditures, as well as lost productivity;

—White males are 24 percent more likely than black males to have carried a weapon in the last thirty days; and white males in high school are twice as likely as their black counterparts to bring a weapon to school.

Could these overwhelmingly consistent examples of white pathology be mere coincidence? Or might they indicate a genetic predisposition to such harmful activities? Surely, the latter possibility is strong enough to warrant a massive research effort to get to the bottom of these phenomena.

Of course, the liberals will insist there are environmental explanations for white drug and alcohol problems. One can imagine them trying to blame two-earner white families for being too busy with their dot-com startup or landscaping classes at Home Depot to give their children the nurturing needed to resist drugs. But as the Department of Health and Human Services data indicates, white kids are 27 percent more likely than blacks to receive anti-drug information from parents, and 24 percent more likely to receive similar information in school, yet they just can’t seem to put down their needles and pipes.

Though some will insist white alcoholism is environmentally-conditioned—what with happy hour at TGI Friday’s and Chili’s virtually entrapping white businessmen and soccer moms to get plowed on Micro-Brews and Flaming Margaritas—in the end, I feel confident that scientific truth will prevail, and whites will be forced to take personal responsibility for their behavior.

As for the methodology I will use to determine if there is a white genetic predisposition to substance abuse, I have written to Phillipe Rushton, of Ontario to ask for his assistance. Since you have generously underwritten Rushton’s work on black hypersexuality—which you’ll recall he demonstrated by going to a shopping mall and asking blacks, whites and Asians how far they could ejaculate—you will no doubt appreciate my desire to include him in this endeavor. I propose that Rushton return to the mall and ask blacks, whites, and Asians how many bong hits they can do without choking, and how many tabs of ecstasy they can take before their eyeballs roll back in their head and they begin to drool.

And with help from the folks at the Genome Project, it should be easy to find not only the substance abuse genes in Caucasian DNA, but also those correlated with other high-risk, mostly white, and I dare say, pathological behaviors, like bunjee-jumping, skydiving, and body-piercing.

Best of all, this research could directly impact public policy. Currently, in part because folks don’t know about disproportionate white substance abuse, law enforcement efforts are often foolishly targeted against blacks.

For example, although blacks are 14 percent of drug users, they are 35 percent of those arrested for possession, 55 percent of those convicted, and 75 percent of those incarcerated for drugs. In cities like Baltimore, Columbus and Minneapolis, blacks are anywhere from five to twenty times more likely to be arrested for drugs, though whites are the more likely users.

Even worse, the drug arrest rate for black juveniles has recently climbed by over 75 percent, while for whites it has fallen 34 percent, and black youth are 48 times more likely to be incarcerated for a drug offense than whites with the same record, even though evidence indicates whites will more likely re-offend.

By exposing pathological white substance abuse, my research could lead to a more efficient use of law enforcement dollars: instead of stopping cars driven by blacks, we could set up roadblocks leading into the suburbs, trailer parks, and gated communities where so many white addicts reside.

Sure, some will complain they’re being victimized for “Driving While White,” but like Dinesh D’Souza says, “rational discrimination applies the logic of predictive evaluation to racial groups,” and “is not premised upon assumptions of biological inferiority.” In short, it’s nothing personal.

Additionally, we could drug test all white college students receiving federal financial aid, and raid their fraternities and sororities, suspending all subsidies to those testing positive for narcotics, or those under 21 who have been drinking.

Unfair? Hardly: as D’Souza continues:

“...rational discrimination…can be fully eradicated only by getting rid of destructive conduct by the group that forms the basis for statistically valid group distinctions. It is difficult to compel people to admire groups, many of whose members do not act admirably.”

Although Dinesh was talking about rational discrimination against blacks by taxi drivers, it only seems fair to apply the principle consistently, as I’m sure you’d agree.

Though this research might inadvertently cause prejudice and discrimination against innocent whites, unfairly labeled deviant because of their group’s proclivities, the search for truth cannot be suppressed in the name of political correctness: facts are facts, and we must go where they lead, just as those intrepid scholars, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein did in The Bell Curve, many of whose sources were researchers funded by your courageous organization.

Yes, this is controversial. But my research would be in keeping with a Pioneer tradition, begun in the ‘30’s when your group’s founders imported copies of a Nazi propaganda film on race hygiene, for screening by American schools and civic groups.

Just as this film, “Applied Eugenics in Present-Day Germany,” demonstrated the folly of spending money to keep the Rhineland’s genetic defectives alive, so too could my research demonstrate the waste of pouring money into drug education in mostly white schools: after all, you just can’t get through to some people.

It may be that nothing can wean whites from their insatiable appetites for drugs and alcohol. If so, then just as your founder, Wickliffe Draper, once said blacks were “genetically inferior,” and “ought to be repatriated to Africa,” so too will you surely be brave enough to call for a full-fledged “back to Europe” movement, so as to rid the U.S. of millions of narcotized Caucasian parasites.

As one of your grantees, Richard Lynn says, it might even be necessary to “phase out” inferior cultures: a prospect that might apply to whites if they’re unwilling or unable to clean themselves up. Such is the price of progress.

So, I anxiously await your reply to my funding request. I have also contacted the Free Press (which published The Bell Curve and D’Souza’s The End of Racism), since they seemed the natural choice to publish my research, once it is ready to appear in book form. I have even proposed a title: either The ‘Saved By the Bell’ Curve—named after a Saturday morning television show, popular with white kids (probably because they’re stoned)—or the Bell-Bottom Curve: a satirical reference to the style of pants made popular in the late ‘60’s and early ‘70’s by whites (especially hippies and potheads).

I would appreciate any ideas you may have for the research or the title of this guaranteed best seller. Please respond quickly: the future of our country is at stake.

Sincerely, Tim Wise

Posted by Kulturkampf on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:06 | #

Tim Wise is quite the white basher, yet he’s white himself. That’s a puzzle I just can’t get my head around…

Even if Wise’s statistics are correct (a proposition about which I am very dubious), it’s telling that his description of white social pathologies is limited in the main to drinking and drug taking. Sure, they’re not very healthy activities, but is this all he can muster? Compared with the shocking rates of homicide, robbery, assault, rape and gang rape (along with low educational attainment, welfare addiction and single motherhood) displayed by black populations, ol’ Whitey’s weakness for weed and drink seems positively wholesome.

Wise is like the Guardian reporter who spent months undercover with the BNP, only to emerge with the revelation that Nick Griffin was trying to broaden his party’s appeal to the middle classes. Throughout the journo’s article and the missive above, each author thinks that he’s mounting a devastating attack against his target, but to the unbiased observer, it’s clear that he’s got very little real ammunition. But such is the case for anti-racists/anti-whites in general.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:33 | #

I think you will find that the letter is aimed at being quite an amusing highlight of the ridiculous and transparent nature of the Pioneer Fund, its scholars and the whole neo-nazi ideology.

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:53 | #

Can someone please explain to me why you continue to reference flawed and fraudulent sources in your claim for white gene superiority?

Posted by Aynoch'n'Ayli on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:02 | #

“Can someone please explain to me why you continue to reference flawed and fraudulent sources”

says the guy who apparently considers _Wikipedia_ the fount of all knowledge…

“in your claim for white gene superiority? “

Few here believe in white superiority, s; mostly they believe that just as subsaharan africans have countries to call their own, just as non-arab semites do, so also should those of us who originate from Europe or the I.O.N.A.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:15 | #

To anyone who may have read S’s comment on Burt, above: all results of twin studies reported by Burt had been confirmed many times over by the second half of the last century, and the accusation (first made in the 1970s by Marxist race-denier and race-replacement advocate Prof. Kamin) that Burt made up data in order to support preconceived conclusions has been refuted. Burt’s results stand.

100

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:21 | #

1] GT, in a previous article at MR, presented evidence that shows black serial killers are overrepresented, yet that evidence is suppressed.

2]Whites may carry guns more often however, For each age category, blacks and Hispanics had higher rates of violence than whites — involving a weapon and involving a firearm.

3]Whites may imbibe more alcohol, however blacks are much heavier users of mary jane. In addition, even though white men are heavier drinkers, especially as their incomes rise, blacks and Hispanics suffer much higher fatality rates while DUI.

They found that 76 percent of black drivers killed in
traffic crashes in California had been drinking, compared to only 56 percent of whites. Moreover, 53 percent of the blacks had BACs above a level of 0.15 percent compared to only 34 percent of the whites.

As recently as 1973, the drunk-driving arrest rate for black adults in the United States was nearly twice as high as that for whites, but since then the two rates have converged (Herd 1985).

Thus, in 1981 the DUI arrest rate among persons 18 years of age and older was 951 per 100,000 population for blacks and 917 for whites (Caetano 1984)

A recent analysis of recidivism patterns in Mississippi (Wells-Parker et al. 1988; Anderson personal communication 1988) suggests that blacks in that particular State are at higher risk of being rearrested for drunk driving than whites. The study found that 61 percent of black offenders under age 25 and 50 percent over age 25 were rearrested for DUI during the 6- to 9-year tracking period beginning in 1976. Recidivism rates for
whites in the same age groups were 46 percent and 41 percent, respectively. When the investigators controlled for other offender characteristics such as age, level of education,
and severity of drinking problem, the blacks were approximately 1.4 times more likely to recidivate than the whites.

http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/NN/B/C/Y/L/_/nnbcyl.pdf

While whites appear to behave in ways deleterious to their society, the same behaviour does not impact whites in the same way it impacts blacks.

101

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:22 | #

Wikipedia is just one of the sources I use, but seeing as it is a site that is open for review by many I consider it to be a reasonably reliable source.

“Few here believe in white superiority, s; mostly they believe that just as subsaharan africans have countries to call their own, just as non-arab semites do, so also should those of us who originate from Europe or the I.O.N.A.”

I cannot argue with that.

102

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:23 | #

Violent crime link

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/wuvc01.pdf

103

Posted by Kulturkampf on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:28 | #

Hmm, I did wonder if Wise was doing the decent thing by using per capita rates, for a honest comparison of whites and blacks; or whether he was using figures that compare the two groups without accounting for the fact that whites greatly outnumber blacks in the the US population. But to be so duplicitous would require real…what’s that word? Chutzpah?

I did understand that the letter was satirical, thanks! However, as Wise is using satire to make a political point, strongly implying that whites cause the same level of social problems as blacks, I wanted to address the claim of equivalence.

Btw, it’s inappropriate to identify eugenics as an exclusive relic of Naziism. In its heyday before WWII, eugenics was viewed as a serious science by intellectuals of all political stripes, including the luminaries of socialism (who also believed in phasing out other races).

104

Posted by s on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:28 | #

Leslie Hearnshaw, a close friend of Burt and his official biographer, concluded after examining the criticisms that most of Burt’s data from after World War II were unreliable or fraudulent.[4]

105

Posted by Count Sudoku on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:42 | #

This is the case that blacks have lower IQ and its genetic causes. The main argument is that even blacks adopted and raised by rich whites still have low IQ. In fact, their IQ has a strong correlation with their biological parents and none with their adopted parents.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/001132.html

106

Posted by Kulturkampf on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:43 | #

I cannot argue with that.

——————————————-

So, having put all talk of superiority and inferiority to one side, do you support the freedom of white countries to impose restrictions on non-white immigration in order to preserve their ethnic identity?

If I ever hear a member of an ethnic minority answer a straight ‘yes’ to this question, I will be genuinely impressed by their recognition of the golden rule (meaning that they have acknowledged that whites possess the right to ethnic self-determination that they instinctively claim for their own countries of origin).

107

Posted by Yuezhus on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:10 | #

S, scientists who deny a significant genetic basis for intelligence, and then accuse those who believe in hereditarianism of pushing an agenda are blatant hypocrites. An agenda is also being pushed by blank-slaters, one which is liberal and multicultural. Sophism, ad hominems, hypocrisy, attraction of media attention and refusal to peruse data properly abounds in these papers.

Here are some facts that should be known by you and other borderline-blank-slatist hypocrites.

The highest IQs (excluding Jews) in the world belong to NE Asians (Chinese people north of the Yangtze and East of Gansu province, Koreans and non-Ainu Japanese) and Europeans (Scandinavians in particular). And, surprise surprise, both of these regions have been the most technologically advanced throughout history. Socratic/post-Socratic and especially post-Aristotelian Hellenistic and Roman civilization rewrote the book on architecture, law, logic, philosophy and politics, which would forever influence Western civilization. Chinese civilization has been severely ahead of the rest in metallurgy for virtually all of history, and before the Renaissance has dominated the world in the realms of civilian/military technology, agriculture, astronomical instruments (the first mechanical clock, anyone?), naval architecture and even music if we count the Marquis Yi of Zeng bells, something everyone here should Google at least once. Greco-Roman painting and Song dynasty painting were the most brilliant the world had ever seen before the 1500s, being the only ones to anticipate perspective among other things.

Is this a coincidence? Hell no. Or, in your case, aw hell naw. Both of these peoples had evolved right in the midst of the last glacial maximum, have been the most intellectually productive and have the highest recorded IQ scores. Are you seriously telling me that these three factors don’t connect?

Native Americans are described as having an IQ around 85-90, roughly the same as Egyptians and Iraqis. It shouldn’t be a surprise that these two areas of the world have produced similar civilizations that, while producing monumental architecture, mostly using slave labour, haven’t exactly made significant advances other areas. What is intriguing, however, is that Native Americans managed to produce civilization without draft animals, nor significant amount of edible animals. Both Mesoamerica and South America and sub-Saharan Africa have that disadvantage, and also share similar climates. Why, then, have no indigenous civilizations appeared in sub-Saharan Africa? Are you seriously telling me that this is in no way related to the current status of Mesoamerica, the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa?

Blacks have certainly been victimized in recent history, but what about the Jews? They have surely been discriminated against, much longer than blacks I might add, and even got alot of their ethny killed at one point (shu’up, Friedrich!). This doesn’t explain why Jews, less than one percent of all humans, accounts for just under a third of all Nobel Prizes, a quarter of Turing awards, most of the media executives in the US, a disproportionate influence in government and the creation of Communism, Neoconservatism and lax immigration policy, in addition to the Cultural Revolution in the 60s. Why are Jews better off than whites despite being despised by practically everyone since they came into being? Why is the first Australian to win a Fields Medal a second-generation Chinese bloke, despite the White Australian policy having been in effect for such a long time?

The most likely explanation, by a long shot, is that there are substantial genetic forces at play, determining people’s neural makeup. I suggest you read up on Occam’s Razor.

108

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:43 | #

Kulturkampf,

A simple no. I for one am a mixed race man and the very notion of people making hardcore efforts in preservation of ethnic identity sickens me. These efforts can only be described as racism.

All men are created equal.

A country has a right to preserve its economy but the idea that an all white Britain is going to be any better than the Britain we have today is complete rubbish.

Now I believe that tight control over immigrants is needed but this control should be based on the economic state of the country and the prospective immigrant’s ability to become a productive member of society. It does the world no good if a prosperous country just accepts immigrants to the detriment of its economy.

I also believe that a country should not forget the needs of it natives (those who where born in that country) but should also recognise that its people do not have sole right to the riches of this world.

I also believe that the colour of a persons skin does not determine his nationality. I was born in Britain, I am British and Britain is where I belong.

Presenting Intelligence in the form of flawed IQ test results as a factor to claim superior intelligence over a race is just ridiculous. There are many Africans and Blacks that are highly intelligent (equal if not more so than their peers) and productive in Britain.

Presenting aforementioned IQ tests to support the idea that blacks are unable to succeed within the highest levels of society is just ridiculous.

Even if the IQ tests presented to me so far had any solid grounding there would still be insufficient evidence link the results to the success or failure of a nation or race.

A lot of the arguments in favour of these IQ tests have been based on blacks residing in America. Considering the history of black America and the obvious lack of education available for its black population for many years I would seriously question the results of these tests. Also the quality of education that black Americans receive is questionable and much of the abilities tested in the IQ tests I have read about are those that are developed through education.

If what you say had any truth the tests would indicate that certain individuals were born with a higher IQ than others. This is complete rubbish. It would also indicate that a persons IQ is something that would correlate to time (given the age element). This is also complete rubbish.

I do however believe that IQ “can” be defined and tested, but implementation of these tests would be unfeasible.

If this Hypothesis could be proved it would still only be a small factor when considering those that affect a nations growth.

109

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:52 | #

“If this Hypothesis could be proved it would still only be a small factor when considering those that affect a nations growth”

This would obviously depend on the skills tested and the variance in performance of groups involved.

110

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:04 | #

The ridiculous notion that s ‘belongs’ in Britain is as preposterous as the ‘right’ of a Mexican Mestizo or any other female specimen of Third World anthropoid refuse to fetch up illegally in the US, spit out a low-IQ mongrel, then watch fondly as the stupid American ‘birth-citizenship’ law takes effect to create yet another majority-resenting, so-called American.

111

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:26 | #

The very thing that I find very comforting is the fact that if you were to express this view in public I could have your sorry ass arrested under British law.

This is something you will never change.

“another majority-resenting, so-called American”

No, I am in fact a minority-resenting (minority in this case being ignorant racists such as yourself) British citizen.

I know these facts pain you. (ouch)

112

Posted by Count Sudoku on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:34 | #

Here’s something else to suck on you mongrel moron.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/007508.html

This story is remarkable and it is eerily familiar to the events of a 1963 federal court case that took place in Georgia, Stell vs. the Savannah Board of Education, as chronicled by Carleton Putnam in his 1967 publication Race and Reality (his sequel to his 1961 publication, Race and Reason). The case came about when parents of certain white children were preparing to challenge a court action requiring the desegregation of their schools. The plaintiffs in the case were certain blacks who were demanding desegregation, the NAACP provided representation. This was to be the case where Putnam and his allies were going to expose the false scientific data (Boas egalitarianism) that underlined the famous Brown decision which purportedly showed the manifest equality of whites and blacks.

At the beginning of the case, after a flurry of furious objections by the plaintiffs’ counsel, the judge made it clear that the scientific evidence would be heard. Over the course of two days, as Putnam tells it, the defense put up all their witnesses who methodically went through all the cold, hard scientific findings conclusively demonstrating the intrinsic psychological and physiological differences between whites and blacks. The counsel for the plaintiffs had no choice at this point but to sit back and take it. Their cross examination was minimal to non-existent.

Putnam noted that on the second day of testimony from the scientific experts, as the evidence began to take on a devastating cumulative effect, he noticed that right there, in the courtroom Constance Motley—co-council for the plaintiffs—was weeping audibly.

Of course, the subject of this particular case is very different from the one in Hazelton but they do have something very important in common. It’s amazing what power liberalism has over the mind and body. Humans are supposed to react positively to truth and yet liberalism had warped this poor woman to the extent that she could not control herself in a court of law. It is incredible really.

Hopefully the similarities end there. The defendants in Stell won the case but the decision was swiftly reversed by the appellate court, without even having glanced at the evidence.

113

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:37 | #

If must also pain you that given the increasing numbers of non-whites attending universities that your questionable pure white blood line will almost inevitably be tainted with the so-called lesser bloodlines of these immigrant races at some point in time.

114

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:45 | #

I am really upset by this ancient news.

115

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:47 | #

The funniest thing is that you people gloat over injustices and immoral acts. I as well as the majority of Britian (ime sure) pity you.

116

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:52 | #

You think that what happened there could happen in Britain in this age?

Not now, not ever!

Gone are the days where you bigots can use your exclusive (questionable) “education” to your advantage.
:(

117

Posted by Count Sudoku on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:12 | #

1. White Britons are leaving the UK in record numbers because they hate divershitty.

Immigration sparks white exodus from U.K.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/11/immigration_spa.php

2. As the U.K. continues to become more non-white, the shittier that country will become and even more whites will leave, assuming there isn’t an uprising first.

3. So enjoy your liberal cesspool while it is still relatively staying afloat.

118

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:22 | #

Considering (what you claim) the lesser races proclivity to violence (and of course their many supporters) an uprising would be ill advised. (I’m sure all those niggers with their guns and muscle would be quite an overwhelming force for the pen pushing and so called civilised lot of your kind).

There will never be an uprising so stop fantasising.

119

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:24 | #

Perhaps we owe s and his fellow interlopers a debt of gratitude for the fact that when real Brits catch sight of miscegenated misfits of his type, viz., the visually grotesque ‘shoe-bomber’, Richard Reid, infesting their nation, they would instinctively recoil and then, subconsciously at first, question the ludicrous Marxian superstition of multi-culturalism.

120

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:53 | #

New research, s, shows that biracial couples invest heavily in their children, EXCEPT FOR, Black-White unions.

I’m sure the parents of White/ Man-Ape offspring instinctively know that they’d be better off heading for Vegas than wasting money in a futile attempt to educate the low-IQ spawn of their misbegotten ‘relationship’.

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/070423_biracial_parents.html

121

Posted by Count Sudoku on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:57 | #

It’s hard to invest in a black-white offspring when the dark half takes off never to be seen again.

122

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 03:37 | #

“No, I am in fact a [...] British citizen.” (—s)

That may be accurate “on paper” but you aren’t and never will be an Englishman, Welshman, Scotsman, Ulsterman, Cornishman, or Manxman because a Negro is something fundamentally other than those.

What’s left?

You can’t be a Briton, however much the usual suspects may grant you that fictional “legal right” “on paper.” You have no basis for pretensions thereto by blood. What you can be is a Sub-Saharan, an East African, a Jamaican, a Haitian, and some others. You cannot be a member of a Euro race because ... well, you simply aren’t a Euro. Deal with it. An apple isn’t an orange, neither can it be an orange; nor is a square a circle. Tall isn’t short, night isn’t day, hot isn’t cold, black isn’t white, a Negro isn’t a white man.

123

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 04:23 | #

Niggers with ‘guns and muscle’, s, usually employ them in the enjoyable (for Whites) cultural pursuit of ‘Black-on-Black’ homicide, the only concern being that some passing Whites may, inadvertently, be injured, as Afreakans are notoriously hopeless shots - well they’re hopeless at any activity which taxes the cerebral mechanism.

124

Posted by Rnl on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 05:52 | #

s wrote:

Please post some more of your pseudo-scientists so I can further study how you came to your primitive conclusions.

You should learn to think more clearly.

Burt believed that intelligence is heritable. He may have fabricated evidence to support his belief. That proves nothing about whether intelligence is heritable. It suggests only that Cyril Burt was dishonest.

Fred Scrooby wrote:

Burt’s results stand

As Jensen and others have pointed out, if Burt did indeed fabricate data, he fabricated skillfully, since his fabrications were consistent with the findings of both prior and subsequent research.

Burt’s data on twins were scarcely the only prop under the heritability estimates psychometricians had been using. By the time Burt died, you could point to three other major studies of identical twins reared apart. One, based on data for American twins, had been published in 1937; another, a British study in which Burt played no part, was published in 1962; the third study, published in 1965, was done in Denmark. Taken as a group, they showed heritability estimates of over .70 - that is, their message was that over 70 percent of the variability in IQ is attributable to genetic factors. So Burt’s estimate of .77 was on the high side, but not by much.

Daniel Seligman, _A Question of Intelligence_ (New York: Birch Lane, 1992), 112.

125

Posted by Top on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 05:53 | #

“My position is to simply disprove your evil pseudo-science that is wholly based on flawed and politically motivated research performed by primitive and evil neo-nazis and that has led to racially motivated and inhumane acts such as the Holocaust. “

This does not sound like a black argument - it sounds very jewish to me. But then again, blacks have learned how to parrot jewish linguistic patterns when confronting whites. The lines of argument are always similar, if not exactly the same. It does not matter if it’s made by a jew, black, or a WN in parody. The lines of argument follow the same path.

There is a whole universe of aggressive psychology, directed by non-whites against whites, that vast majority of whites miss. They feel it, and sometime even know it, but they choose to ignore it or bury in their subconscious in order to keep the social glue. It’s our evolutionary tactic - that just happens to be a great weakness in a multi-cultural/multi-racial society.

When some whites finally choose to make a stand and confront this sort of thing (the psychological aggression) because it’s just too of hand - they often make the mistake of thinking it is really an ‘argument’. They think ‘logic’ can somehow prevail.

The key is to understand that it is not really about ‘logic’ per say as we understand it in math or science. It is about how non-whites learned to manipulate whites through linguist and behavioral techniques. Once a WN understands this core concept he/she can never ‘lose’ another argument. They come to understand that there are no logical arguments in this sort of thing- only aggression aimed at them. That is why ‘Nazis’ and communists jews cannot have a conversation - and they both know it.

We do not speak the same language when fighting over territory and resources!

Blacks are incapable of living peacefully in white societies unless they are kept in check by force. But really it’s not just blacks in white societies - it’s any race in another race’s society. That is why it is literally insane to import too many far-genetically removed people into societies. It is not stable. In the long term it will cause much violence and weapons of mass destruction will be used. It is not incorrect to say mass immigration is evil. Evil for whites and evil for everyone else.

A common language will not be found until we learn to address racial reality. Unfortunately the West is dominated by jewish/communist intellectuals when it comes to race. We were ready to take a step forward after WW2 - the window of opportunity was there - but the jewish/non-white intellectuals kept spewing their hatred of whites. They do not want peace. They want dominance. It is unacceptable.

Good fences make neighbors…. Anything else is aggression and deception. Those who do not give us space want our destruction - simple.

126

Posted by Aynoch'n'Ayli on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 08:34 | #

I see that s has failed to cross the Pons Asinorum of sincerity in racial matters; it remains only to remind everyone of Bob’s Riddle I suppose.

127

Posted by Yuezhus on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:13 | #

S, you must’ve looked past my post or refused to acknowledge it. If IQ tests are so wildly inaccurate, why do they seem to correspond to historical achievement? Please dwell on this and realize how unlikely it would be for the tests to be useless yet predict cultural sophistication at the same time! In addition, get it into your head that the higher visuo-spatial than verbal ability of Native Americans AND NE Asians is very unlikely to be due to fish-based diets and ‘hunter gatherer lifestyles’, as some supposedly agenda-free scientists claim, because many Native Americans today descend from people who started farming 5000 years ago and yet score similar cognitive profiles.

I for one am a mixed race man and the very notion of people making hardcore efforts in preservation of ethnic identity sickens me. These efforts can only be described as racism.

....!?!? What the hell is wrong with you?! In order for racism to exist, races and ethnic groups must exist. A lot of ethnicities today, such as Indonesians, Turks and Somalians, are the result of different racial groups having mixed in the past. If whites and blacks mixed together thousands of years ago in some part of the world and then remained in tact and endogamous up to the present day, they would indeed be an ethnic group with an ethnic identity.

Why do you even give a crap about oppressed peoples if you don’t believe in the preservation of ethnicity and race? Obviously we should have thrown all the slaves into a volcano or something after freeing them. To do otherwise would’ve been racist.

128

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:45 | #

I understand now why we must treat you people like sub-humans. You demonstrate the highest form of evil in this society. Your evil far surpasses that of any murderer or rapist. Equality does not apply to your kind.

All that you have proved to me is how deep-rooted your hate really is, and lengths your kind has gone to to publicise your misguided opinions. The only people you can even think of recruiting to your deteriorating cause are college dropouts, failing scientists with absolutely zero integrity and the uneducated who are susceptible to your lies and willing to accept what you say without having the common sense or scientific ability to see it for what it really is.

Even by your own admission, England and its people are one of the most intelligent peoples on this earth. It is with this intelligence that they seek to exterminate and criminalise you evil rodents.

I know - someone is going to come with a lame excuse as to why his or her kind is dying in the present world. Then they are going to try and rally up support by chanting Negro or mongrel, and in doing so demonstrate their affinity to exhibit behavioural characteristics of a mentally retarded primate.

You are a dying kind thank goodness.

129

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:59 | #

“Blacks in general (or en masse if you prefer) are unable to succeed at the highest level. It is the furthest thing from ridiculous. Now accusing America and England of somehow preventing them from succeeding for the last 50 years is what is ridiculous”

People don’t accuse America or England they accuse your kind “the racist bigots”.

Me a minority?

I bet there are more mixed race (race as defined by you) people in England then there are of racist bigots like yourself.

Is the reality of oppression too much for this ape to comprehend? The good thing is that you monkeys are being exterminated like the rodents you are.

130

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:18 | #

“Good fences make neighbors…. Anything else is aggression and deception. Those who do not give us space want our destruction - simple.”

Yep I personally love to see white bigots on the receiving end of airborne shit.

131

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:34 | #

“This does not sound like a black argument - it sounds very jewish to me. But then again, blacks have learned how to parrot jewish linguistic patterns when confronting whites. The lines of argument are always similar, if not exactly the same. It does not matter if it’s made by a jew, black, or a WN in parody. The lines of argument follow the same path.”

No it simply shows people fighting for the same cause.

One again you prove that your limited mind is unable to think above race. Who were the last peoples that thought like this? Let me think? Oh yeh! The Nazis! And we all know what happened to them don’t we. Many people from various different countries and races rallied together and shut them down! Bang! And like the nonsense that you spit about history and its likelihood to repeat itself we can all predict what will happen in the west with the racist bigot.

I’m sure the west (the majority who do not see race as an issue) is really upset about this.

132

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:45 | #

“No, I am in fact a [...] British citizen.” (—s)

That may be accurate “on paper” but you aren’t and never will be an Englishman, Welshman, Scotsman, Ulsterman, Cornishman, or Manxman because a Negro is something fundamentally other than those.

What’s left?

You can’t be a Briton, however much the usual suspects may grant you that fictional “legal right” “on paper.” You have no basis for pretensions thereto by blood. What you can be is a Sub-Saharan, an East African, a Jamaican, a Haitian, and some others. You cannot be a member of a Euro race because ... well, you simply aren’t a Euro. Deal with it. An apple isn’t an orange, neither can it be an orange; nor is a square a circle. Tall isn’t short, night isn’t day, hot isn’t cold, black isn’t white, a Negro isn’t a white man. “

Shame (FOR YOU) that this is only in the minds of an unfortunate minority.

133

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:51 | #

[qoute]S, you must’ve looked past my post or refused to acknowledge it. If IQ tests are so wildly inaccurate, why do they seem to correspond to historical achievement? Please dwell on this and realize how unlikely it would be for the tests to be useless yet predict cultural sophistication at the same time! In addition, get it into your head that the higher visuo-spatial than verbal ability of Native Americans AND NE Asians is very unlikely to be due to fish-based diets and ‘hunter gatherer lifestyles’, as some supposedly agenda-free scientists claim, because many Native Americans today descend from people who started farming 5000 years ago and yet score similar cognitive profiles.[/qoute]

Back again to your psudo-science. It is more valid to say that white OPPRESSION correlates to the achievements of blacks in history (England and America). You shoose to ignore social impacts on peoples academic performance yet use bigoted social arguments in support of your own cause. Those of you that wish to deny your evil past try to justify it with flawed scientific evidence.

134

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:58 | #

s and others,

We have a rule of civility here which it is in everybody’s interest to observe. So can I ask you, belatedly, to avoid the use of derogatory language? s has not described himself as a “nigger” and, though blacks do so themselves, I don’t think it is right to name him. Similarly, the “racist bigot” jibe is unacceptable, s.

135

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:27 | #

“We have a rule of civility here which it is in everybody’s interest to observe. So can I ask you, belatedly, to avoid the use of derogatory language?”

Noted

136

Posted by Yuezhus on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:27 | #

Back again to your psudo-science. It is more valid to say that white OPPRESSION correlates to the achievements of blacks in history (England and America). You shoose to ignore social impacts on peoples academic performance yet use bigoted social arguments in support of your own cause. Those of you that wish to deny your evil past try to justify it with flawed scientific evidence.

Gragh…

S, I was asking you a question, not presenting ‘science’ nor ‘pseudo-science’. The only evidence I mentioned were the IQ test results of Native Americans - including NAs descended from milenia old farming communities, such as the Inca and Maya, who neither hunt, nor gather, nor eat large quantities of fish - of which the visuo-spatial scores were higher than their verbal scores. This cognitive profile is similar to NE Asians, despite their higher IQ scores, and I presume it reflects common ancestry between Native Americans and NE Asians, as apposed to purely environmental influence or IQ tests being inaccurate.

Now, this is where you come in. Despite your petty accusations, I definitely do accept the impact of society on people’s abilities. I have reflected on why Russia has been historically backward compared to the rest of Europe, and why poverty-stricken Qing Dynasty China was a mere shade of the medieval Song Dynasty, the worlds biggest super power with a flourishing intellectual scene, escapement-using mechanical clocks and ships that rivaled early 19th century Europe’s. What you don’t seem to realize is that despite Ashkenazim Jews being severely oppressed for the first half of the 20th century, and despite Chinese in the Anglosphere living in squalid conditions, Jews win a third of all Nobel Prizes despite numbering less than 50 million worldwide, and a Chinese guy born in Australia is arguably the best mathematician in the world and one of the youngest and first Australian to win a Fields Medal (note to everyone: I’m not a believer in Chinese immigration to Australia). Does this mean that whites were even more suppressed than these two groups?! Subsequently, do you, then, believe that societal explanations are more important than genetic ones, even after what I’ve typed?

S, to say that X% of Nobel Prizes are won by group Y is not pseudo-science or science; it is elementary statistics. I’m not telling you if IQ testing is reliable or not, I’m asking you to reach a conclusion based on facts, the facts being the results of IQ tests in conjunction with history and statistics of Nobel Prize and Fields Medal winners.

By the way, you seemed to have gotten even angrier after my last post. Keep in mind I didn’t say that I wanted the slaves thrown in a volcano after they were freed; I was explaining the ludicrousness of believing that ethnicities shouldn’t be preserved through a sarcastic comment. ‘Kin hell…

137

Posted by Yuezhus on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:34 | #

and despite Chinese in the Anglosphere living in squalid conditions

Soz, everyone, this should be followed by: “...for the first half of the 20th century”

138

Posted by Ernest on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:15 | #

I’m sure the west (the majority who do not see race as an issue) is really upset about this.

You’ve obviously never heard of Don Imus?

139

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:29 | #

S, to say that X% of Nobel Prizes are won by group Y is not pseudo-science or science; it is elementary statistics. I’m not telling you if IQ testing is reliable or not, I’m asking you to reach a conclusion based on facts, the facts being the results of IQ tests in conjunction with history and statistics of Nobel Prize and Fields Medal winners.

Considering most if not all Nobel Prize winners are university graduates, and that University (up until only recently) in the UK was something that was only feasible for those whose parents had the money fund. I would consider what you say as b****it. We are only just seeing the first/second generation of blacks entering university in the uk and this is only due to the funding that is now in place for all children.

140

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:36 | #

“Intelligence is a false construct and is about who can manipulate facts. Anyone can manipulate facts, especially if you are taught to do so.”

141

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:24 | #

The ruinous and unwanted presence in Britain of miscegenated people like s illustrates the stygian depths to which my country has sunk and demonstrates the incontrovertible fact (itself as blindingly obvious and unsusceptible to Marxist sociological claptrap as racial IQ differences) that miscegenation is the most sincere and vomit-inducing expression of Negrophilia known to the pestilent perverts whose degraded sensibilities allow them to engage in this anti-human perversity.

142

Posted by s on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:19 | #

You’ve obviously never heard of Don Imus?

Yeh, he got fired!

143

Posted by Yuezhus on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:51 | #

Intelligence is a false construct and is about who can manipulate facts. Anyone can manipulate facts, especially if you are taught to do so.

Nice appeal to authority there, S. Is it not possible for the theory of blank-slatism itself to be borne out of severe manipulation of facts and people’s instincts? I believe it is, and I’ve already given plenty of evidence that you’ve either chosen to ignore, haven’t read, or cannot understand.

I’ve already addressed the university thing. I’d best add that clever people have have been know to rise out of poverty and have been able to send their offspring/grand-offspring to university. This is what happened in 19th century Europe, and Russia and China in the present, among other places.

The good thing is that you monkeys are being exterminated like the rodents you are.

Do any of us here, apart from you, want extermination of people, let alone monkeys? Since you don’t believe in preserving ethnicities, don’t you think you should refrain from tarring people with the Nazi Brush? I assume you supported the Nazi gassings, the Pogroms, the Armenian Genocide and Khmer Rouge regime?

Do clear off, there’s a good insufferable hypocritical Stalinist.

144

Posted by s on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 06:24 | #

“The problem with you s, is that you are an intellectual lightweight. Don’t bring up the Nazi’s! You would find Churchill and FDR just as offensive to your liberal sensibilities.”

Are trying to assume the high chair again? shame on you.

145

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:08 | #

If s requires further proof of Negro inferiority (though to the cognoscenti this constitutes severe and obvious information overload), Friedrich Braun’s estimable journal provides it :

http://www.thecivicplatform/2007/04/26/niggers-plan-event-for-niggers-who-killed-privilaged-whites/

146

Posted by Amalek on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:12 | #

Tim Wise is quite the white basher, yet he’s white himself.

He isn’t. He’s a Jew. (And Wise can’t spell Prof. Rushton’s forename correctly.)

Wise is a professional ‘anti-racism’ hustler and shakedown artist, like Morris Dees or Jane Elliott. He’s been making a good living out of stirring up white guilt at public expense since he came out of college: a Titus Oates of collective guilt-mongering.

His open letter to the Pioneer Fund is a ripe specimen of this Jew’s sophomoric hucksterism. It assumed that race realists believe that whites are exempt from all social pathologies, and goads the Fund for this. Since such an assumption would be un-Darwinian, the gibes are lame and innocuous; they reveal nothing but Wise’s unwillingness or inability to understand the principles of evolutionary biology and psychology.

There is no reason why white men should be afraid to finance studies which demonstrate that aspects of the behaviour of any subspecies of homo sapiens are dysfunctional. Unlike the overweening self-esteem of ‘black pride’, the proclaimed supremacy of the Chinese or the self-assumed ‘chosenness’ of Wise’s tribe, we have flourished and attained mastery by being capable of honest and dispassionate self-criticism. It has to do with our race’s superior altruism and empathy. We have conquered by understanding; for the past half-millennium we have proved more able to reproduce and extend our civilisation and sustain our mores in unfamiliar places than other races, because we have taken the measure of our resource-competitors more shrewdly than they have of us.

The Caucasoid pathology which most urgently demands study at present is not binge drinking or substance abuse, but why and how empathy and altruism—valuable in preserving the group—have spilled over and been extended, illegitimately and needlessly, to our biological competitors.

147

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:08 | #

The deleterious effect of Christianity (a religion tailor-made for the low. the inferior, the underman) on the White psyche has doubtless played a significant role in our suicidally insane altruism.

148

Posted by Voice on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:33 | #

Al/Amalek

This should go on the front page but Kevin McDonald has released an essay on why whites struggle with protecting themselves and their land area. Once their culture is subverted(Marxist race theory and Jewish media control) their high levels of conscientious and altruism make us ripe for race-replacement

Check this out.

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol6no4/MacDonald.pdf

I hope Guessedworker puts this on frontpage as it is a new breakthrough in understanding our current plight.

149

Posted by Retew on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:40 | #

Daniel J wrote;

QUOTE

also, don’t forget s, about the famous Indian guy who was educated in England for mathematics…

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Srinivasa Ramanujan? One of the greatest mathematicians of all time. We’re still now trying to understand and extend some of the results he produced.

However, *he struggled to make a Fellowship at the Cambridge College he was at because one of the staff there said he wasn’t going to have a black man as Fellow (there were also apparent doubts about his “mental state”)..

It might have been even worse had his time at Trinity not coincided with World War 1, a time when Cambridge’s numbers were depleted due to the war effort like the rest of the country.

OK, a question for the Americans here; I’ve just had a look at the website of The Bronx High School, one of the most academically successful high schools in America and a firmly multi-cultural school, with every race in New York apparently represented amongst its student body. Do you think it would be improved if it became an all-white school?

* From J E Littlewood’s “Miscellany”.

150

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:59 | #

Retew,

Does it select its intake?

151

Posted by The MR High School of Logic on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:31 | #

This thread has degenerated and has zero utility for any practical purpose.

“Do you think it would be improved if it became an all-white school? “

What’s “it?” I presume you mean the school. Does a school have interests? Does the building have interests, do the bricks have interests? Does the abstract concept of the school have interests?

No, people have interests - the students, faculty, and administrators of the school (and their families). The people who make up society have interests. Students who couldn’t make it into certain schools, but who would have benefitted had they “made the cut”, have interests also.

All the people have different interests - asking what’s “best” for “the school” is practically irrelevant. A school is the people who work and are educated there, that’s the point of “what’s best.”

I would ask: would the lives of white people be improved if they lived in an all-white society, including all white high schools?

I think the answer is yes, particularly when one balances out ALL types of interests, even those that the “common man” may be unaware of.

152

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:16 | #

“I would ask: would the lives of white people be improved if they lived in an all-white society, including all white high schools? I think the answer is yes [...]” (—MR High School of Logic)

Retew, I believe, attended the Birch Barlow High School of Logic, graduating with high honors. He was even, if I’m not mistaken, the recipient of that year’s “Godless Capitalist Extended Phenotype Award” in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the incessant questioning of the legitimacy of Caucasian EGI and the denseness and impenetrability of his skull as regards absorption of all common-sense notions of race even those already firmly acquired instinctively by the average kindergartner at age five.

153

Posted by Daniel J on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:07 | #

I couldn’t add anything more than MR High School of Logic except to state I already explained that this isn’t just about the f-ing economy for us!

Don’t you people get it?

This is about our people and the bonds that stretch across the centuries. It is about our traditions.

The superiority/inferiority garbage, along with the economics of Vinland are side issues.

The preservatory imperative is what is this all about and the morality of a people maintaining and reproducing its kind.

154

Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:29 | #

Does it select its intake?

Yes.

The Specialized High Schools of New York City are selective public high schools, established and run by the New York City Department of Education to serve the needs of academically and artistically gifted students. The Specialized High Schools Admissions Test (SHSAT) examination is required for admission to all the schools except LaGuardia, which requires an audition or portfolio for admission.

The Bronx High School of Science has a student body of about 2,800 students. Admission is based exclusively on an entrance examination, known as the Specialized High Schools Admissions Test (SHSAT),[8] open to all eighth and ninth grade New York City students interested in attending one of the specialized schools.

Currently, about 60% of the school is of Asian descent. The students are fairly evenly split between males and females.

In contrast, in the same neighbourhood;

Walton High School is a large comprehensive secondary school located in the Bronx borough of New York, comprising 1191 students.

The school is in the same neighborhood as the Bronx High School of Science and DeWitt Clinton High School. It is one of thelow-performing high schools in the city. Walton is operated by the New York City Department of Education.

Current ethnicity makeup

* Asian - 3%
* Black - 20%
* Hispanic - 78%
* White - 2%

155

Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:44 | #

The Bronx demographics:

The racial makeup of the borough was 35.64% Black or African American, 29.87% White, 0.85% Native American, 3.01% Asian, 0.10% Pacific Islander, 24.74% from other races, and 5.78% from two or more races. 48.38% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. 14.5% of the population were Whites, not of Hispanic origins.

Would the Bronx and even New York itself be better if more whites lived there?

In prohibition days, bootleggers and gangs ran rampant in the Bronx. Mostly Irish and Italian immigrants smuggled in the illegal whiskey. By 1926, the Bronx was noted for its high crime rate and its many speakeasies.

After the 1930s, the Irish immigrant population in the Bronx decreased as a result of better living conditions in New York suburbs and in other states. The German population followed suit in the 1940s. So did many Italians in the 1950s and Jewish-Americans in the 1960s. As the generation of the 1930s retired, many moved to southeastern Florida, west of Fort Lauderdale and Palm Beach. The migration has left a thriving Hispanic (mostly Puerto Rican and Dominican) and African-American population which continues to live in the Bronx to this day.

During the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, the Bronx went into an era of sharp change in the residents’ quality of life. Many factors have been put forward by historians and other social scientists. They include the theory that urban renewal projects in the borough (such as Robert Moses’ Cross-Bronx Expressway) destroyed existing low-density neighborhoods in favor of roads that produced urban sprawl as well as high-density housing projects. Another factor may have been the shift by insurance companies and banks to stop offering financial services to the Bronx and other working-class industrial areas (the “Rustbelt”) in favor of the booming suburbs in “the Sunbelt”—a process known as redlining.

For a period, a wave of arson overtook the southern portion of the borough’s apartment buildings, with competing theories as to why. Some point to the heavy traffic and use of illicit drugs among the area’s poor as causing them to be inclined to scam the city’s benefits for burn-out victims as well as the Section 8 housing program. Others believe landlords decided to burn their buildings before their insurance policies expired and were not renewed. After the destruction of many buildings in the South Bronx, the arsons all but ended during the tenure of Mayor Ed Koch with aftereffects still felt into the early 1990s.

Many factors put forward about the dramatic decline of the neighbourhood, except one, of course!

156

Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:01 | #

A Shift In Demographics at Elite Schools

Written by Elissa Gootman (NY Times
Friday, 18 August 2006

More than a decade after the city created a special institute to prepare black and Hispanic students for the mind-bendingly difficult test that determines who gets into New York’s three most elite specialized high schools, the percentage of such students has not only failed to rise, it has declined.

The drop at Stuyvesant High School, the Bronx High School of Science and Brooklyn Technical High School mirrors a trend recently reported at three of the City University of New York’s five most prestigious colleges, where the proportion of black students has dropped significantly in the six years since rigorous admissions policies were adopted.

[...]

Robert Jackson, the chairman of the City Council education committee, who is from Washington Heights, was more pointed in his criticism.

“The statistics clearly show that black New Yorkers are being shut out,” he said. “If we’re looking to be inclusive in the greatest city in the world, I would think that the chancellor and every educator has to ask themselves why is this, and what do we need to do to reverse that. Is it institutional racism or is it something else?”

[...]

Still, during 2005-6, blacks made up 4.8 percent of the Bronx Science student body, according to city figures, down from 11.8 percent in 1994-95, when the institute was created. At Brooklyn Technical High School, the proportion of black students has declined to 14.9 percent from 37.3 percent 11 years ago, and at Stuyvesant, blacks now make up 2.2 percent of the student body, down from 4.4 percent.

Hispanic enrollment has also declined at the three schools, as has white enrollment at two of the three although it has risen at Brooklyn Tech. At the same time, the Asian population has reached as high as 60.6 percent at Bronx Science, up from 40.8 percent 11 years ago. Dr. Alonso said he could not explain the numbers without more information about how many black and Hispanic eighth graders take the specialized high school exam, and how many may favor other top city schools that are smaller or closer to home. He said he would insist that the department start collecting such information.

“My immediate question is, this is a far greater variance than the data shows in terms of our test scores, so what is going on here?” he said.

Over all, Hispanic students are the largest group in the city’s schools at 36.7 percent, and black students are next at 34.7 percent. The 1.1 million-student system is 14.3 percent Asian and 14.2 percent white.

157

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:32 | #

Voice, thank you for the TOC link.

Retew, Srinivasa Ramanujan was given a government scholarship (by those wicked British colonialists) to attend one of the many schools in India which didnt exist prior to their arrival. He failed his exams and lost the scholarship - perhaps he was distracted by his 9 year old bride, an acquisition unique among his future fellow-diners at High Table.

He was a Tamil Brahmin, which means he was genetically distant from the Dravidian aboriginal Tamils of South India - a more accurate descriptor would be Tamil-speaking Brahmin as
race and language are, of course, not always synonymous.

In order to be elected a Fellow of Trinity, SR would have required the support of the majority of the Fellows and this he received.

I’m sure we will read more from you in your effort to cast a bad light on White actions.

158

Posted by Top on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 00:07 | #

The problem with S is that he is confused in so many fundamental ways when it comes to the issues we are discussing. He believes that he has the high moral ground when it comes to nationalistic/racial issues and that any other opinion is morally inadequate. This is typical of the anti-white strategy championed by jewish communists. This school of thought pushes the belief that whites are only morally right if they do what’s best for their biological competitors. It also decrees that any white who chooses to question this arrangement is evil and deserves to be banished/punished/physically eliminated.

Notice how S is always implying that he is above the issue of race and how it is only us bigots who choose to engage in any sort of discussions about the topic. Yet also notice how people like S live and breath the issue of race and do not hesitate to use it as leverage when competing in our society. Is it white people who have race-based organizations or is it non-whites? Is it white people who scream race all day long or is it non-whites?

What S does not grasp is that when we discuss race here at MR, we merely join the multitude of non-whites who do so everyday. Every western universtity has ‘intellectual’ departments dedicated to advancing non-white agendas, while whites have nothing. Non-whites are allowed to make statements that would be declared as racist by whites- it’s all part of their ethnic ‘pride’ movement after-all. S sets the racial standards for whites way higher than he would ever do for non-whites. Again, it comes down to whites being obedient and passive.

What S fails to talk about is where on earth - or in the universe - he would give whites the freedom to make their own decisions and to be themselves. In USA? No. In England? No. Germany? No Sweden? No. Where then? The problem with people like S is that he does not believe whites have the right to make their own decisions - especially when it comes to race. The only choice whites have in S’s mind is to become less white and to make life easier for non-whites. There is no other way.

How is that being fair or righteous? What makes S’s position so much better? For people like S race does not exist when it is to their advantage, but it does exist when there is something to be be gained. People like S have have no consistency to their arguments - they only push what they deem best for themselves. Societies cannot be built on such illusions. At some point the West will have to wake up.

159

Posted by Steve Edwards on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 06:30 | #

“The good thing is that you monkeys are being exterminated like the rodents you are.”

GAWD! Who taught this guy how to write? Next please!

160

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 16:31 | #

Don’t forget S, when the majority of white people decide to suddenly move when darkies move into their neighborhood en masse, those people are not “racist” like us. We are just a tiny minority.

161

Posted by s on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 16:35 | #

““The good thing is that you monkeys are being exterminated like the rodents you are.”

GAWD! Who taught this guy how to write? Next please! “

Shame on me, I should have preceded that statement by the term “Metaphorically speaking” removed the “The good thing is that ” and replaced “monkeys” with “rats”.

Well spotted.

162

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:50 | #

Are you going to start forcing whites to stay put when the darkies move into their neighborhood?

163

Posted by lex2tex on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:03 | #

“The white race is the cancer of human history.” — Susan Sontag.

Never have truer, braver, or more beautiful words been spoken to the pathological, planet-raping, Persons-of-Color-genociding hegemony that is white “civilization.” But fortunately, in terms of issues around it’s dismantlement, the day comes ever closer…

http://www.genderracepower.com/?p=275

164

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 20:08 | #

“Never have truer, braver, or more beautiful words been spoken to the pathological, planet-raping, Persons-of-Color-genociding hegemony that is white “civilization.” But fortunately, in terms of issues around it’s dismantlement, the day comes ever closer…”

Don’t tell us you damn bushpig, go tell this to white liberals.

165

Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 23:58 | #

The Chinese, lex2tex, are, even as you drool, taking over the resources of sub-Saharan Africa and you can rest assured that they wont waste time or money either attempting to maintain African birthrates or cure Negro pests through stupid humanitarian ‘aid’ programmes; nor, indeed, will their new Chinese masters try to foist Western democracy upon the backward savages who are far too stupid to operate a political system designed for Whites.

So, with regard to civilisational (to use the word loosely) dismantlement, it is that of Africans, thanks to the Black-despising Chinese, which is as certain as a Coon-free Mensa committee.

166

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 00:42 | #

When the other side’s velvet gloves come off revealing the mailed fists inside (as we’ve seen so glaringly in this thread with “s” and now lex2tex), our own guys’ comments have a way of ... skipping the formalities, shall we say?, and ... how to put this? ... getting down to brass tacks, shall we call it? Put another way, when these Euro-enviers show their true colors and start to sound menacing, we have a tendency to ... get right to the point.

I like that.

Nice set of comments in this thread, Al.

167

Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 01:57 | #

Thank you Fred. Coming from someone who obviously puts much thought into every post, that is indeed a compliment.

There is a sign on the lions’ enclosure at Dublin Zoo which bears the legend :

“These animals are very dangerous. When threatened, they defend themselves”.

168

Posted by lex2tex on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 15:05 | #

Those words are a parody of ethnic leucophobia—note “it’s” as genitive etc. Puzzling that Sue Sontag should be leucophobic, being white herself, but life’s full of little mysteries and where would we be without Sue’s own special little group of whites? No Marx, no Freud, no Derrida—I can hardly bear to contemplate it.

169

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 19:53 | #

“Puzzling that Sue Sontag should be leucophobic, being white herself,”

Sue Sontag is not white, she is a jooooooo.

“but life’s full of little mysteries and where would we be without Sue’s own special little group of whites?”

See, you answered your own question.

“No Marx, no Freud, no Derrida—I can hardly bear to contemplate it.”

Make up your mind, do you want to get rid of whites are not?

Anyway, the joooos have no intention of disappearing which is one reason why they created their little Apartheid state of Israel. They probably intend on ruling everyone but first they need your people’s wonderful genes to dumb down the white population even more

170

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 20:06 | #

Ive assumed that lex2tex is being ironic from his first post on.

171

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 20:14 | #

I don’t think so. I checked out its website for half a minute.

172

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 21:13 | #

OK, maybe but thats just a link, is it actually Lex’s site? That site is a case study in empowering our enemies, I didnt think he was endorsing it.

173

Posted by Count Sudoku on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:08 | #

Hmmmm, maybe you’re right. Perhaps I should spend a little more time reading that site. I checked for about 10 more seconds and concluded that it will probably make me laugh at how deluded some “people” are.

Comments:

Post a comment:

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Links

MR Central & News

Comments