Infectobesity is obesity caused by infectious disease. 

Obesity has skyrocketed in the last 20 years along with other mystery diseases such as autism.  (This cannot be attributed merely to age related obesity as the populations ages since it is known that boomers had vastly higher rates of obesity at the same stage of life than did the silent generation (those born in the 1930s).)

Infectobesity is yet another area where horizontal transmission within high population density ethnic groups may have evolved virulent pathogens to which those ethnic groups are more immune than the ethnic groups with which they compete for resources in the age of mass migration.

One of the more insidious aspects of obesity as virulent phenotype is that it can reduce cognitive function.  The mechanisms are varied.  To quote Deborah Gustafson, PhD, of Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Göteborg, Sweden and also the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee:

Obesity is related to ischemia, hypertension, and cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases. These conditions contribute to an unhealthy vascular system, and therefore, to a higher dementia risk.  Obesity may also increase the secretion of cortisol, which could lead to atrophy.

  Moreover, glucose metabolism directly affects cognitive function since it is the brain’s fuel, and there is evidence that some viruses known to cause obesity also cause insulin sensitivity, resulting in fat cells eating glucose that should be available for brain function.

Most insidious of all is that infectobesity, as with all stealth infections, can be horizontally transmitted by ambulatory vectors.

PS: This brings to mind yet another question to ask those tolerant of H-1b visas such as Ron Paul:

If it is discovered that advocates of the H-1b visa program managed to overcome the objections of the majority of the population to said program only to subject that population to vicious diseases such as autism, obesity and most vicious of all, cognitive decline, how do you propose to indemnify the population subjected, without their consent, to your experiment in human ecology?

“The white majority has rights, damn you.”

That’s my short response to all the activists in academia who are guiding the process of white annihilation, physical and moral.  We know the nature of these creatures, and their politics.  We know their terms: if we do not accept to self-annihilate as “supremacists”, as “the privileged”, as “oppressors” but, instead and simply as the people of the West, insist upon our free life, our nature, our rights, our interests, then, automatically, these “educators”, these human dross, label us “haters”.  They allow no resting place to us.  The venomous, reptilian energy of these people knows no stop, nor anything but the prosecution of its own special hatreds (pdf):-

Definitions and Descriptions of Racism

WHITE SUPREMACY: White supremacy is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of oppression of continents, nations and peoples of colour by white peoples and nations of the European continent; for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power and privilege.

WHITE (as in “white people”): The term white, referring to people, was created by Virginia slaveowners and colonial rulers in the 17th century.  It replaced terms like Christian and Englishman (sic) to distinguish European colonists from Africans and indigenous peoples.  European colonial powers established White as a legal concept after Bacon’s rebellion in 1676 during which indentured servants of European and African descent had united against the colonial elite.  The legal basis of white separated the servant class on the basis of skin color and continental origin.  The creation of “white” meant giving privileges to some, while denying them to others with the justification of biological and social inferiority.

WHITE PRIVILEGE: A privilege is a right, favour, advantage, immunity specially granted to one individual or group. and withheld from another

White privilege is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of: (1) preferential prejudice for or treatment for white people based solely on the colour of their skin color and/or ancestral origin from Europe; and (2) exemption from racial and/or national oppression based on skin colour and/or ancestral origin from Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Arab world.

And two pages on, to put the knife in:-

A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system.  The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.  By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination.

REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give ‘preferential treatment’ to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as ‘reverse racism.’

A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called “blaming the victim”). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent.

And on page 8, to close every escape route:-

READ MORE...

Tom Sunic has asked me to post his latest piece, which he describes as “very neutral”, and which appeared originally at David Duke’s site yesterday.

GW

Jews happen to enjoy a privileged place in the Western world, with their entire past portrayed as a story of suffering at the hands of their non-Jewish enemy. There are tons of well documented books on the psychology of Judaism, which also examine the genesis of the concept of anti-Semitism and its multiple verbal distortions in daily political discourse. The word “anti-Semitism,” unlike words “anticommunism,” or “antifascism,” does not reflect political beliefs or critical views of the Jews. This term is exclusively used as a lexical label to depict a person’s grave mental illness. As a perceived medical or judicial illness, anti-Semitism must never be debated; an anti-Semitic patient must not be a partner in scholarly duels; his sick views must not be the subject of academic inquiry and counter-inquiry. As an element of medical pathology, anti-Semitism must only by treated by doctors, preferably by Jewish psychoanalysts, or legally, by a prosecutor in court.

The word “anti-Semite” will likely be studied one day as a telling example of distorted political discourse, i.e. as a signifier for somebody who advocates the reign of demonology. “Many world-known Jewish authors, haunted by the either real or surreal specter of anti-Semitism, consider it a sickness, which enables them to avoid any form of introspection.” 1 How does one dare critically talk about the predominance of the Jews in America without running the risk of social opprobrium, or, as in Europe, of landing into jail? While it is a common place for the vast number of white Euro- Americans to crack jokes in private about Arabs, Mexicans, Africans, or for that matter deride their fellow Gentile citizens, without looking over their shoulder, a critical comment about the strong influence of Jews in America, even when that comment is founded on empirical facts, is viewed as a grave insult to Jews.2 If a serious European and American scholar or a politician ventures into this forbidden field, his gesture is interpreted as a sign of an agent provocateur, or worse, as a sign of somebody who decided to write his obituary. Such a schizophrenic climate of self-censorship in the West will sooner or later lead to dramatic consequences for both Jews and Gentiles. The lack of healthy dialogue can last for a century or so, but feigned conviviality between Euro-American Gentiles and Jews cannot last forever and remained based on distorted perceptions of the Other and how this Other should behave. Mendacity carries the germ of a civil war. The entire Western history, particularly since World War II, has abundantly proven that distorted self-perceptions, as well as the romanticized perception of the “Other,” if based on negative wishful thinking, lead to war and chaos. Eventually, both Jews and Euro-American Gentiles will be pitted into an ugly clash from which there will be no escape this time.

READ MORE...

It has come to my attention that Ziopedia’s editor has sent out a link to an article arguing that Ron Paul is a CIA asset who serves as controlled opposition.  Reading over the linked article there is only one substantive argument:

“He only voted no, when it had no effect on the passing of the bill. He even voted in favour of the critical hate bill…”

No bill number is given.

I found the only plausible bill to be HR 1592, for which the roll call was:

Yeas 237
Nays 180
Not Voting 16 (including Ron Paul)

Ron Paul did miss that vote, but it had no effect on the outcome whatsoever since the Yeas beat the Nays by an amount greater than the number Not Voting.

Moreover, it is rather strange to expect that Ron Paul, the “CIA Spook”, would deliberately avoid a vote of “No” when not only would his vote would have no impact on the outcome but when he came out with the following public statement about the bill:

Unconstitutional Legislation Threatens Freedoms

May 7, 2007

Last week, the House of Representatives acted with disdain for the Constitution and individual liberty by passing HR 1592, a bill creating new federal programs to combat so-called “hate crimes.” The legislation defines a hate crime as an act of violence committed against an individual because of the victim’s race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Federal hate crime laws violate the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power.  Hate crime laws may also violate the First Amendment guaranteed freedom of speech and religion by criminalizing speech federal bureaucrats define as “hateful.”...

Devon, that English county of idyllic villages, haunting sea-cliffs and wild, empty moorland, might not seem at first to be a cauldron of white racism (is there any other kind?).  But that’s all wrong.  We racist whites simply lack the insightful wisdom and beautiful souls of those good men and women of the Rural Racism Project, south-west.

Soon after the publication of the Inquiry report into the death of Stephen Lawrence, the Monitoring Group began to receive an almost daily torrent of calls from black and ethnic minority people living in rural areas. The experience of the callers was similar. They had been subject to racist abuse on a daily basis, sometimes for many years, and despite reporting their suffering they had received no support from anyone. It was almost as if the needs of the BME population in these rural had been abandoned.

...  The Rural Racism Project, based in Plymouth, aims to pioneer a range of specialist services to meet the needs of those living in predominately rural areas who are distressed or are suffering because they have been victims of racial violence, abuse, or harassment within their local community. The project will be used to provide and deliver a unique, innovative and radical region-wide programme of ‘racist incident victim support services’ for individuals, families and isolated community groups situated within the geographical counties of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Somerset, including those districts administered by single unitary authorities.

The Project is based in Plymouth and covers the areas of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset.

And this ... is what ... they do:-

‘Racism’ protests over the high street hanging black mannequins

A chain of fashion stores has been accused of racism over a window display of black mannequins hanging from the ceiling.  Branches of All Saints are featuring headless dummies, with chains attached to the neck, dangling with their feet a few inches off the floor.

Police arrived at one branch, in Exeter, to investigate claims that the display was offensive and the Rural Racism Project says it has been “inundated” with complaints calling for it to be removed.

Spokesman John McKenzie said: “These disturbing displays are reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan and the lynching of black people in America.  The chains used to hang the mannequins also bring to mind slavery and some of the complainants have commented on this.  The overall effect is extremely ominous.

“It is unacceptable and we have received many calls from both black and white people who find it offensive.  But the retailer’s attitude has been that the stores are all making a profit, therefore it cannot be offending too many people.”

A spokesman for All Saints confirmed that the display was used at 28 of its 29 stores nationwide.

She added: “The models are not black – they are grey.

Well, quite.  Or as John Cleese once said, “This is an ex-parrot .”

The MEChA wildfire story should not have got on to the page, so it’s been taken down.  I didn’t believe it, but didn’t question the source.  It’s annoying to give a leg-up to this kind of thing.  On the other hand, the thread it spawned is interesting in its own right, and should stand.

A strategy of violence, where this has occurred in Europe and the Americas, seems to require a deep communal affront at some historical injustice.  Whether that really exists in the south-west today is doubtful.  But it might do in time.  It’s one thing to replace the white population.  It’s another to achieve the political ends that the Chicano students want - particularly to replace the old power elite.

Sorry for the misdirection, but please continue to post on the thread.

For those of you who are disgusted by sites like GNXP, and aren’t familiar with R. A. Fonda’s work, you might like looking at his site:

http://rafonda.com/

I won’t put too many words in his mouth but he’s basically been holding the line on the multiregional hypothesis against the out of Africa hypothesis.

To clarify this:  He isn’t denying that the genus Homo, from which humans evolved, originated in Africa.  He’s saying that any such “out of Africa” scenario is far more ancient, and more distantly related to modern humans, than is posited by the out of Africa hypothesis normally bandied about, and that modern humans are much more a product of “plural lineages” possessing far more genes from far more ancient, locally-evolved populations than is predicted by the out of Africa hypothesis.

If the multiregional hypothesis is true, and a reason why it is so resisted in the theocracy’s seminaries mislabeled “academia”, is that it would mean race mixing is a more risky experiment than we have heretofore been taught, and that preservation of races is also more important.

Instead of regressing to narrow xenophobia, it is time to build on the Human Rights Act. The aim of our British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities will be to clarify and explain the obligations which come with rights

Jack Straw, writing in the Telegraph subsequent to Gordon Brown’s speech on Thursday announcing this forthcoming Bill of Rights and Duties.

Because liberty as it is pursued today contains not a single seed of European survival, I spend a good deal of my thinking time trying to undermine its centrality to political life.  The problem, of course, is that Man is not perfect, and the least perfect of men seem to proliferate among those ambitious for power.  Some restraint on power, then, is essential for an equitable life.  In feudal Germany there was the Comitatus.  In our time there is democracy, and there are the Bills of Rights.

But democracy has spawned a traitorous, internationalist power elite that authors all our political misfortunes.  It denies us recognition of who we are or what unites us, so thereby it can remove from us ownership of that true guarantor of survival: our homelands.

In Britain, as Jack Straw states, this treachery is to be codified in a redefinition of the rights enshrined in the English constitution since the Bill of Rights of 1689.  Crucially, this redefinition will be cast from the Human Rights Act 1998 - specifically, one expects, from the qualifications to Article 10 on freedom of expression and to Article 11 on freedom of association and assembly, and from Article 14 on prohibition of discrimination.

This will be a highly positive (or governmentally prescribed) dispensation of rights, there being little or no sign of the negative rights enshrined in America’s Bill of Rights.  Straw’s reference to responsibilities is perfectly clear.  Big government will coerce us to deny our true self as the people of England, and to be, instead, the MultiCult.  This is a duty to die – eagerly if possible or, at worst, unknowingly.

Keen to discover more about our forthcoming new duty I consulted the words of the Prime Minister Who Is Not Tony Blair, as they were spoken at the University of Westminster, Thursday 25 October 2007, and appear now on the Labour Party website.

The speech is quite refreshingly free from the usual political-aspirational double-talk.  It makes a serious play for academic learning but, happily, is a little too self-serving and reverse-reasoned to succeed.  Its historical references are there solely to represent British history as the midwife not only of liberty but all the exotica of postmodern tolerance.  Everyone from John Milton to Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sachs gets pulled into the effort.  Thereby the dour son of the manse steadfastly dilutes the heady, 70% proof intoxicant of real liberty - after all, drunkards tend to be free with their tongues, and freedom of speech is something no postmodern Prime Minister can allow.  He establishes to his own satisfaction, at least, that England is the home of happy anti-racism and, naturally, we all want much more of it.

Here, in his own words, is how he picks his path to that goal:-

READ MORE...