"Don't ask, don't tell" and rape

Posted on December 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

The Left is full of contradictions.  For example, their ongoing outcry about the alarming prevalence of rape stands in stark contrast to their total silence regarding the fact that, of all groups, black men are the most likely to rape.  Leftists have ideological reasons for distorting rape statistics.  They manipulate them to fool the public.  For example:

The Criminal

  • The average age of a rapist is 31 years old.2
  • 52% are white.2
  • 22% of imprisoned rapists report that they are married.2
  • Juveniles accounted for 16% of forcible rape arrestees in 1995 and 17% of those arrested for other sex offenses.2
  • In 1 in 3 sexual assaults, the perpetrator was intoxicated — 30% with alcohol, 4% with drugs.3
  • In 2001, 11% of rapes involved the use of a weapon — 3% used a gun, 6% used a knife, and 2 % used another form of weapon.2
  • 84% of victims reported the use of physical force only.2

2)  U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Statistics. 1997 Sex Offenses and Offenders Study. 1997.

The U.S. Department of Justice, from whence RAINN* got their data, includes Hispanics as “white” when they are perpetrators – but as “Hispanic” when they are victims.   So, in fact, far less than 52% of rapists are white.  The table also neglects to mention that 52% is considerably less than the 66% of the population that whites comprise.  It would have been far more useful to include a statistic on black perpetrators – but, of course, they would never do this.  Thus, their data is misleading on several levels.
Are leftists truly anti-rape?  They say they are.  And yet they refuse to recognize the elephant in the room: black rape.  Furthermore, they support open homosexuality in the military.  Now it appears that even the Pentagon has taken this stance.  Has common sense completely been thrown out the window?  While it is true that the U.S. military is now a volunteer force, economic realities often leave young people few alternatives.  In any case, military personnel are stuck with each other for better or for worse.
Men in prison are also stuck with each other – and  prison rape has been an ongoing problem for years.  Is the Left aiming to create similar conditions in the military?  As it stands, there is already a rape problem in the armed forces.

What does it tell us that female soldiers deployed overseas stop drinking water after 7 p.m. to reduce the odds of being raped if they have to use the bathroom at night? Or that a soldier who was assaulted when she went out for a cigarette was afraid to report it for fear she would be demoted — for having gone out without her weapon? Or that, as Representative Jane Harman puts it, “a female soldier in Iraq is more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire.”

One wonders what sort of person would not have predicted such an outcome.  Obviously, if young women are put in close quarters with young men in the military, there are going to be problems with rape.  And yet this is exactly what the Left has been demanding all these years.  When they demand that openly gay people be accepted into the military, I get the impression that they want men to be raped by other men.  In their twisted world view, this would be a form of payback – just as leftists believe it is payback when white school children are tormented, threatened and murdered by their black classmates.  According to the Left, all whites must suffer for the sins of a few long ago.  So too, as many men as possible must be made to suffer for the sins of other men.
* Naturally, RAINN’s website includes a “donate” option and a “join us” option – but no feedback options of any kind.
Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites, immigration/ Hispanics, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 3 Comments

The Tatar Tot Princess

Posted on December 1, 2010 by jewamongyou

When the Tatar king met a Hottentot heiress,
their union together made the Tatar Tot princess.


Tho’ blessed with wealth, privilege and toys in profusion,
she suffered from pangs of ethnic confusion.


As she grew in stature and turned into a woman,
her search for a suitor was fraught with frustration.


She fell for a Xhosa, who seemed a good fit,
but it soon became clear, they just didn’t click.


A tall Hindu man offered a lot,
but his parents objected, for she had not a dot.


An Afrikaner was handsome and kind and adoring,
but much to her dismay, she found he was boering.


Memories from the Steppes came back to her father,
the King of the Tatars knew what was best for his daughter.


Wisdom of yore told him just what to do,
the husband of his daughter – must be a Jew!


So the Tatar Tot princess was dunked in the water,
she accepted the commandments and studied the Torah.


She moved to Jerusalem, to a frum neighborhood,
where she lit Sabbath candles and ate kosher food.


With the passage of time, her good name spread,
and her quest for a husband came to a head.


So if you encounter, in the Holy Land,
women whose buttocks are especially grand.


– Do not be alarmed, and do not scream,
for descendants of the princess are what you have seen!

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 1 Comment

Yemenite reading of the Torah

Posted on November 30, 2010 by jewamongyou

Somebody posted this link, on a Yahoo Hebrew group that I follow.  It’s a good example of (San’ani) Yemenite Hebrew.  Note that after each verse, another man reads the “Tarjum”, or Aramaic translation.  Traditionally, it is a child who reads the Tarjum.  Also, the reading is somewhat embellished:
Yemeni reading of Bereshith, the first book of Moses

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | Leave a comment

The mulatto industry

Posted on November 30, 2010 by jewamongyou

Wherever there is a demand, enterprising individuals and companies come forth to fill that demand.  This is the basis of the free market.  People are willing to pay for goods and services.  But there are also artificial needs.   When government dictates that automobiles must meet certain emission standards, companies (or thinly disguised government agencies) materialize to provide testing and certification for automobiles.  When politicians create war, plenty of bids are forthcoming to manufacture ever more deadly weapons.  Millions of attorneys owe their livelihoods to the vexing web of rules and regulations we call “the Law”.
So it is with diversity.  Government demands that large businesses keep certain quotas of “minorities” in their hiring.  Even when there may be no specific law stating that such and such number of blacks must be hired, nevertheless a de-facto law exists where companies risk expensive lawsuits if they do not comply.  Powerful entities, such as the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP stand ready to enforce these quotas.  Companies live in fear of them.
Though most will deny it, it is obvious to all but the most dense that pure* blacks do not generally make the best employees.  (If they were better employees, or even just as good as whites – but with the added benefit of “diversity” – then companies would not need to be forced to hire them; they would do so on their own to enhance their own profits.)  I have seen this in my own experience; the truth is obvious for all to see – but none dare speak it.  So, it is in a company’s best interest to avoid hiring blacks.  I’ll point out the obvious and note that some pure* blacks are excellent employees – but, like so many other things in the business world, this is a numbers game.
How do companies reconcile their best interests with the demands of government in this case?  The answer is mulattoes.  A mulatto tends to be more intelligent, hard-working and agreeable than a pure* black.  The “one-drop rule” is helpful here; even a person whose great great grandfather was black can consider himself “black” and help his company fill its quota.  So, by “mulatto”, I include quadroons, octaroons etc. for this purpose.
The very same government that created the artificial need for blacks, also takes advantage of this same loophole.   Many “blacks” who occupy higher government offices are mulattoes.  Collin Powell, Eric Holder and, of course, Barack Obama are all mulattoes.  Of course, when it comes to membership in Congress, higher intelligence is not a requirement.  The only qualification for becoming a Congressman is to win a popularity contest.  But, for appointed offices that require actual thought and planning, while including high visibility, mulattoes are the perfect fit.  Unfortunately for us, in their quest to prove their blackness, mulattoes are often the greatest haters of whites.
Mulattoes in government mean more oppression for whites.  Mulattoes in business, useful as they are for keeping companies out of trouble, are still affirmative action hires.  Therefore, they will tend to be of inferior quality compared to whites and they will tend to lose money for those businesses.  These losses are passed on to us in the form of higher prices for everything.
Affirmative action, and the quotas it entails, increases the price of products and services – but it cheapens the people who most often buy them.  Within this caste-system, mulattoes command a higher price than whites or blacks.

*by “pure black”, I mean somebody whose ancestry is overwhelmingly black African.

Posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites, miscegenation, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 12 Comments

Another victim of multiculturalism

Posted on November 29, 2010 by jewamongyou

An 18 year old Oregon mother has been murdered by the black lowlife she had foolishly associated with.  Allyson Rachael Archibald was described as “always trying to be nice to people“.  Perhaps she was trying to be nice when she accepted the advances of the black thug named Robert Darnell Boyd, ten years her senior.
The mind of a teenager is not yet fully developed.  This is why teens need adult guidance.  In a healthy society, her parents would have been able to raise her in such a way that she would not have become a single mother.  They would also have been informed enough, and their daughter receptive enough, to teach her the dangers of sociopath men.  They would have steered her away from black men; that it is best to leave them for black women.
But ours is a defective society.  So much so that, even after her murder, we find her relationship with Boyd being described thusly:

…Archibald and Boyd arrived together at a party at Killitz’s home Saturday night.  She said she had seen them together a couple of times before but had never spoken to Boyd.  She said other friends characterized Archibald and Boyd as the “perfect couple” who seemed happy together.

How will Allyson’s orphaned son be raised?  Will he ever become aware of his mother’s murder within the context of ongoing genocide or will he be taught that her death was just a random tragedy?

The “perfect couple”

Posted in miscegenation | 19 Comments

"Racist" posts in MSM comment sections

Posted on November 27, 2010 by jewamongyou

I just read about a pretty young woman who was murdered in Pennsylvania.  Presently, the prime suspect is her boyfriend.  This sort of thing happens all too often.  As long as there are young men who are jerks, there will be young women who are attracted to them.
As most readers of this blog are aware, many thousands of whites and Asians are murdered by blacks each year.  There is no need to lie, deceive or distort the truth in any way.  There is no need to make rash assumptions publicly.  And yet, each time Yahoo, or some other organ of the MSM, publishes a sordid tale of crime, the morons come out in force to post comments such as “this must have been the work of a nigger” or “serves her right for dating a nigger“.  Typically, these comments include many capital letters and are in poor English.
As it so happens, the primary suspect here is white.  It did not take much effort for me to clarify this.  One would think that the authors of the aforementioned vacuous comments could have done the same before revealing their ignorance to the world.  For a long time, Yahoo did not allow any comments – probably because of such posters.
The way I see it, there are two possibilities:  a) The people who post the comments are sincere – but too hot-headed and angry to do their homework.  Or b) Leftists are posting the comments in order to discredit the legitimate concerns of white advocates and race-realists.  My guess is that it is a combination of the two.
How would a parent, who had lost his child to a drunk driver, feel if the same treatment were given to drunk driving.  For example, every time somebody died of unknown causes, hundreds of comments would appear blaming “those damn drunk drivers!”  Would this not have the effect of cheapening legitimate concerns?  Such a parent would be, justifiably, very angry.
I am angry and y’all should be angry.  Please visit the Yahoo article linked to above  (and similar articles) and post intelligent, well-written, comments denouncing the fake racialists.  Those who write such ignorant and inflamatory comments are not in our camp.  They are not our friends and they do harm to our cause.

Posted in examples of propaganda, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 5 Comments

Terrorism for the future…

Posted on November 24, 2010 by jewamongyou

… and how the T.S.A. might respond to new threats:
1)  The “eyeball bomber”.  This psycho cyclops’ prosthetic eye is actually a bomb.  T.S.A. requires that all passengers prove their eyeballs are real and, if not, remove them for inspection.
2)  The “cavity bomber”.  This insidious insider hides explosives in his rectum or vagina.  T.S.A. requires cavity searches for selected passengers.
3) The “hair strangler”.  This hip harbinger of death uses his hair to strangle other passengers.  T.S.A. imposes a maximum hair length for all passengers.
4) The “fingernail stabber”.  This unmanicured maniac stabs other passengers with his unusually long fingernail.  T.S.A. inspects everybody’s fingernails to make sure they are neither too long nor too sharp.
5)  The “morbid obesity smotherer”.  This abdominal abomination uses his immense body weight to smother other passengers.  Nobody can hear their muffled screams.  T.S.A. requires restraints for all morbidly obese passengers.
6)  The “chicken bone jabber”.  This patron of poultry makes sure the chicken in his carry-on meal has sharp bones in it – which he uses to jab other passengers to death.  T.S.A. bans poultry on all flights.
7) The “peanut butter poisoner”.  This nutty nuisance sneaks small quantities of peanut butter into other passengers’ food – knowing that some of them will be allergic to peanuts.  T.S.A. trains special teams of dogs to sniff out peanut products, which are now banned on all flights.
8) The “newspaper swatter”.  This bookish bastard folds a newspaper in a certain way and uses it to dispatch other passengers. T.S.A. bans newspapers, magazines and books from all flights.
9)  The “dangerous diabetic”.  This sneaky sicko may indeed be diabetic – and he’s got the papers to prove it – but the “insulin” he carries around is actually anthrax, which he injects into unsuspecting passengers.  T.S.A. requires the testing of all medical substances and supplies at the security checkp0int – at a cost of billions of dollars.
10)  The “wheelchair warrior”.  This disabled devil removes a detachable component of his wheelchair and uses it as a weapon to slay fellow passengers.  T.S.A. bans all outside wheelchairs from flights, instead providing their own “government-approved” versions – at tremendous cost.
If safety is our number one concern, just how far are we willing to go to ensure it?

Posted in libertarian thought | 8 Comments

"Science" at The Kellog School of Management

Posted on November 24, 2010 by jewamongyou

Sometimes I am left flabbergasted at what passes for “science” among leftists.
The Kellog School of Management recently did a “study” that was intended to reveal which approach is best in educating children, a) a colorblind approach that de-emphasizes  racial differences and focuses on our similarities or b) an approach that emphasizes diversity and draws attention to inequalities.
The conductor of the research, Evan P. Apfelbaum explains:

“However, our research suggests that exposure to colorblindness can actually reduce individuals’ sensitivity to meaningful racial differences. And as a result, when discrimination does occur, individuals with a colorblind mindset often fail to see it as such.”

In a perfect world, social engineers would not be allowed to experiment on children to test the efficacy of their indoctrination techniques.  But, alas, this is not a perfect world:

In their experiment, the researchers explored the effects of promoting a colorblind approach to diversity among 8- to 11-year-old students. First, students reviewed different versions of a multimedia storybook. Half received a colorblind version and the other half received a version that framed diversity as a value. In both stories, the narrator championed racial justice, but the colorblind version encouraged the minimizing of race-based distinctions, whereas the value-diversity version encouraged readers to embrace these differences.

What did Apfelbaum mean by “discrimination”?  Not surprisingly, it is only white on black discrimination that is considered “discrimination”:

After the storybooks were read, the students listened to three stories featuring varying degrees of racial bias: a control story in which a white child was marginalized by his white schoolmate’s contribution to a school science project; an ambiguous story regarding a white student’s exclusion of a black student from his birthday party; and an explicitly biased story describing a white student’s unprovoked assault of a black student in a soccer game.

Here are some of the assumptions made by the researchers:
1)  One white student marginalizing another white student is not worthy of special concern.  Picking on another child because of his height or freckles is not as serious as picking on him because of his race.
2)  Not inviting a black student to a birthday party could/ should be considered “discrimination” and cause for concern.
3)  An unprovoked attack, by a white student on a black student is certainly due to racism.  The victim cannot simply be a random “wrong place, wrong time” target of aggression.
4)  The perpetrators of (white/black) racial discrimination are always white while the victims are always black.
According to the authors, it is a “decline in sensitivity with severe consequences” when the group that viewed the “colorblind” presentation detected racial discrimination less often than the group that had viewed the “diversity” presentation.  It is left unstated how we know, for a fact, that the latter two hypothetical stories were due to racism.
What we have here might qualify as “research” but only insofar as it is to sharpen the tools of childrens’ indocrination.  The researchers are training children to detect racism in every inconsiderate or violent act perpetrated by whites against non-whites.  It is an example of the early brainwashing of whites to believe that it is more evil to be mean to a black child than to be mean to a white child.  Also, it is an example of the brainwashing of blacks to believe that every slight or misfortune they may suffer in life is the result of racism.  If this is not child abuse, I do not know what is.
When these children get older, the brainwashing continues.  They had already been taught that there are no “random” acts of cruelty against “people of color” by whites – but the newspapers and television teach them that almost every act of cruelty by “people of color” against whites is “random” and “not a hate crime”.  Since they are raised, from an early age, to accept this blatant double standard, most of them will never recognize it for what it is.
Some of them do notice the double standard and suddenly they see it all around them every day.  They notice other things too – like the very Jewish sounding name of the researcher above.  They become angry and they often become radicalized.  It is easy to become radicalized when one suffers constant oppression and no official organs recognize one’s plight.  Unfortunately, becoming radicalized and angry is synonymous with becoming hysterical for many people.  When others see a hysterical person, his views suffer diminished credibility.  Herein lies one of our primary challenges: to remain angry enough to do constructive things – but not so angry that we come across as hysterical.

Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites, nurture vs. nature and I.Q., racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 8 Comments

Botswana persecutes its Bushmen

Posted on November 23, 2010 by jewamongyou

Botswana is often cited as one of the more civilized nations of Africa.   It now comes to light that the government of Botswana has been waging a campaign of brutality against the Bushmen, who have been living in the Kalahari Desert since time immemorial.  Denied the right to hunt for survival, they are also refused food and water from the government:

‘The government refuses to provide us with food rations but will not issue us with hunting licences… If we want to eat meat we must hunt without a licence… When we are caught, we are often beaten up by the wildlife scouts’…

It troubles me when government or industry violates the rights of endangered peoples.  Whether they are technologically advanced or primitive, have high or low average I.Q.’s, have customs strange to us or familiar – they have the basic right to be left alone on their ancestral lands.
While whites have been blamed for many genocides, the fact of the matter is that no race cares about other races as much as whites* do.  I think we can add this to the list of “stuff white people like“: other races’ survival.  Granted, it might only be so that whites can continue to study them and bask in their exoticness.  Nevertheless, it still falls under the category of “helping other people” and this is a good thing as long as it does not cause harm to our own people.
How many black African organizations are there for the promotion of native American languages?  How many Mestizos hold protests for the rights of Tibetans?  How common is it for for Australian Aborigines to rally against the abuses suffered by the Copts in Egypt?  We may find small indigenous groups joining forces against common foes in order to maximize their results but this is clearly a matter of self interest.  Whites – more specifically educated whites – are passionate about the welfare of other races and ethnic groups even when there seems to be nothing to gain for themselves.
For some whites, this concern for other races has been twisted and mutated so that it threatens their own survival means the ultimate destruction of their own irreplaceable minority ethnicities.  The Gates of Vienna has an exceptional article about the latest insanities of the Swedish government.  It is attempting to disguise its genocidal plans by making it look like its main concern is the Sami (also known as the Lapps) and their autonomy.  What will become of the Sami once Muslims rule Sweden?  What bleak future do the Welsh people, and their language, have when Asians and Africans rule Britain?  The answer is that both groups, and all other vulnerable European minorities, will end up like the Bushmen – marginalized, persecuted and rushing toward extinction.
So yes, I feel concern for the Bushmen, so long as they remain in Africa and are not overrunning white lands.  This is a healthy, natural, concern.  It is a concern I also feel toward the Sami, the Welsh – and the Swedes.
* For this purpose, “white” includes Jews and some other provisionally white peoples.  Maybe even the Japanese.

Posted in pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 6 Comments

Congress hat ban – silly, but not sexist

Posted on November 22, 2010 by jewamongyou

Florida rep. Frederica Wilson loves her hats, and she wants to wear them in Congress.  Unfortunately for her, there is a long-standing rule against wearing hats in Congress.

“It’s sexist,” Wilson told the Miami Herald’s Lesley Clark. The chamber’s hat ban “dates back to when men wore hats” Wilson explained, “and we know that men don’t wear hats indoors, but women wear hats indoors.

Generally speaking, I have little sympathy for members of Congress; they are the ones most responsible for relieving us of our liberties.  If Wilson were a mere mortal, like the rest of us, and she were complaining about one of the myriad burdens placed upon her by law-makers, those law-makers would reply, “doing (fill in the blank) is not a right, it is a privilege.  If you do not wish to (fill in the blank), then don’t (fill in the blank)”.  Examples would be having insurance while driving or subjecting oneself to searches at the airport.  Nobody is forcing us to drive or fly (in theory).  Likewise, being a member of Congress is not a right, but a privilege.  If she must wear her hats, then let her resign.
On the other hand, the ban is a silly one.  Is it sexist?  I don’t think so.  It might have been sexist a hundred years ago, when it specifically targeted women (who were wont to wear their hats indoors).  But how many female members of Congress were there a hundred years ago?   There were none.  So it was not the hat rule that was “sexist” but the public that refrained from electing female congressmen.  In my view, the public had no business electing anybody to the position of curtailing their freedoms.  As Mark Twain so eloquently put it, “”No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.”  Refraining from adding females to a gang of criminals is an odd form of sexism.  Was the old Italian mafia also sexist for their dearth of female bosses?
So we see that, even in the old days, any description of the no-hat rule as “sexist” is rather tenuous.  These days, American society knows no distinction between females and males when it comes to wearing hats indoors.  Therefore, the rule is certainly not sexist today.  Both genders are equally affected by the ban.  The fact that Wilson happens to be female does not make the rule sexist.
If Congress does take the time to rescind the ban on her behalf, it would be an outrage – which we can add to their long list of previous outrages.  Such an action would show that they care far more about the inconveniences suffered by one of their own than the inconveniences suffered by the man in the street.  If they find the time to accommodate Wilson, then surely they can find the time to accommodate the rest of us by removing any number of the ridiculous laws that often make our lives miserable.

Posted in libertarian thought | 4 Comments