I expected the LaRouche (Lyn Marcus) meeting to be concerned with the muddle yeast problem, and the 'piss process', but the group was immediately subjected to Holocaust Studies 101 for the umpteenth time. The jews obviously believe we are very stupid since they feel a need to tell us their tale of woe, day after day, decade after decade. After offering the obligatory bowing and "amen", the remainder of the time was spent on disjoint topics, mainly about how to raise finds for the 2004 presidential bid of ready-to-drop-dead Lyndon. I did enjoy a bright moment.
John (am I betraying a confidence here?) rambled on about the great Voltaire which preceded his talk on the "species" of human equality and how we are all soul borthers. Since I recently put a bit of Voltaire on this site, it was fresh in my mind. Being in an advanced state of over-the-hill senility, impotency, general decay and baldness, the time proximity was sufficient Otherwise I would have forgotten about it. (Sometimes I temporarily forget what I have said and spiteful people immediately use this to denounce me for 'breaking my word'. I hope this mention doesn't precipitate an accusation of 'violating a confidence'.) Anyway, I mentioned that Voltaire said Blacks and Whites belonged to different species. A momentary silence followed. The one Black male nodded his smiling head in approval but the Whites scurried about like roaches when the lights are turned on. John, the spokesman, the former dairy farmer who enjoyed breaking the tails of his cows, quickly bellowed something about Voltaire being a victim of his ignorant times – The Age of Enlightenment.
There were a few moments spent on the PITA "veggie" assault upon milk supplies. Commissar Hillary declared it "domestic terrorism". Perhaps a ATF assault upon suspicious looking farm hands is in the making. I understood that 7 dairy farms had penicillin dumped into the milk. John, a believer that animals are little other than animated rocks placed on earth by God for man's amusement and consumption, went on by describing anyone who objected to the manner in which any animal was treated, were obviously "insane".
As we parted, the Black male described his grandchildren and ended with, "If I hadda messed with a White woman, I'd not now be proud of havin' Black grandchildren. Genes do count." I was surprised but I do know that his sentiment is not unique nor in a minority. If he were White, we could have lynched him for blatant "racism".
BTW, the Roachite solution to over-grazing, over-farming, over-population and over-anything, is to increase industrialization and once the planet looks like bumper to bumper buzzards on a carcass, we can populate Mars. It looks like Lyndon favors White flight too.
As Eric points out, honkies will feel compelled to drag the muds to Mars with them and for those who couldn't make it in the beginning, they will be given the technology to join us later. And then where? Venus? Mongo?
Until White people realize as did Dr. Oliver in his What We Owe Our Parasites, we will be chained to a ever-increasing mud load which we be our demise as a race. And when we go, so does the parasite. 'Tis a far, far better thing we do when we reach for that can of Raid.
First, I asked if she knew the little light skinned blonde girl which just left the register with her mother. She said she did and then I mentioned that the little girl had negro blood. "How can that be? She's Puerto Rican. Look at her. She's White." I mentioned that I agreed she had some White features but the flared nose and kinky hair definitely pointed to Africa. I then gave a short talk on hair structure and other characteristics which defined the "races". The young woman went into a trance and became very quiet.
After waiting on a few more tables, she confessed that she was Portuguese, and according to what I told her, might also have negro genes. "Quite possibly," I replied. To myself, the answer as to her attraction to muds was realized.
Behavior reveals genes and genes determine behavior. If we can catch humans in a non-acting mode, it would be very informative and leave little to guess about.
It dawned upon me rather quickly the first time I told my daughter "No. That's hot." This was in reference to the times I carried her down the hall past a wall lamp which she found surprisingly interesting. She always reached to touch it. One day, I replaced the bulb with a smaller one and tested it for heat. I wanted to make sure that it was warm enough to produce considerable discomfort when held, but not enough to cause skin injury or anything lasting. Once in place, we again went down the hall, she in my arms. The inevitable reach was cause for me to pause and say, "Hot... hot." I allowed her to grasp the bulb which she quickly released. Tears sped to her eyes. After an affectionate kiss, I repeated, "Hot... hot." She never reached for that bulb again and later when she was walking, the word "hot" was sufficient for her to stop dead in her tracks when she approached the in-use oven.
Needless to say, the little bean learned very early what "no" meant. That's why I never had to raise my voice nor repeat myself. There were no arguments – ever. As a teen, the need for the idiotic practice of "grounding" was completely absent. Almost always, this involves the breaking of some previous allowance. Property was not used as some sort of chain which one could yank his kids to and fro. Speaking of arguments, I never knew what "sibling rivalry" amounted to. It's probably some jew concoction – a euphemism for 'undisciplined'. Our family consisted of a fistful of girls and boys, and not one disagreement ever was noticed. Come to think of it, dad was a man of his word and we were taught the meaning of "no". If fact, we often heard his "no" even when he didn't say it.
My daughter and I often compare notes about our upbringing. We both thought childhood a little restrictive but thanked God for it when we reached the age of 22 or so. It took me until 30 before I caught on, but I admit, I am a slow learner.
For those in need of a nameserver "webhost", my recommendations are:
(1) Copy, copy and copy any material from sites you enjoy and wish to see continue. What you read today might not be there tomorrow. This allows any axed hate factory (will FAEM be next?) to call upon a vast audience as a sort of widespread archive.
(2) Check those who offer web space and see if they allow "adult content". Many of these are Chinese operations and I have yet to learn of any oriental who gives two-shits about "God's chosen". Only braindead Christians and their jew buggering companions are concerned about that. There are a few Mexican and Asian Indian companies and often they host anti-Cementic material.
(3) "Free" web space is not worth the time to enroll. The free part is paid by advertisers and "hate" is not good for business. You'll get dumped quicker than a nymphomaniac's latest lover.
(4) The next time you notice some yid bellyaching, note were his car is parked and make sure you have a full bladder.
Yes, many, many "hosts" are of the "chosen" variety and all think in terms of $$$. Old Jake never complained about people calling him a kike, as long as they bought from him. One jew outfit loved to host "hate" sites because it was easier for them to keep track of what was said. Speaking out against the jews should not be something to fear. It has a great effect as jews ARE sensitive to public opinion and will pull in their horns if they think it will benefit them. They want to milk you dry and if their herd gets a little restless, they'll stop milking – temporarily.
Remember that nameservers simply do not have the time to monitor, or even check, material which is on their wagons. Most simply do not care as long it does not interfer with $$$ harvesting. (Quality control of any kind in America is now the customers' responsibliity.) It is nearly impossible and they rely upon complaints from masochistic malcontented aholes who are not happy that others do not view the world as they do. They want to control your life. I hope you have a muscular middle finger and the balls to use it.
Don't get caught up in this legality nonsense. The law is followed only when it benefits your enemies – who control most courts anyway. When the law cannot nail your hide, they'll simply ignore it. This is a jewish system and don't forget it. You lost your country a while ago, remember? Please do not take this to mean I advocate breaking the law. I do not, and neither does Maguire or Eric. I am not Martin Luther King and neither are you. You cannot violate "unjust laws" with impunity.
The next time some divorced man, or especially a woman, explains the reason for their divorce, listen carefully for the slightest admission that they might have had something to do with it. "Me? I was just standing there, minding my own business, when my husband belted me in my mouth." – "He was a monster, you know, my husband. Our son accidentally ripped all of the pages from my husband's cherished collector's novel, autographed Samuel Langhorne Clemens 1884, and my husband suddenly demonstrated his emotional immunity by yelling at the child. How could any sensible woman live with such an abusive man?" – (Why is all deliberate destruction committed by a child excused as "an accident"?) – "I thought she liked being dragged to the bedroom by her hair."
All people have some breaking point and it differs. Some get very upset when another puts scratches in the paint of their new car. Others might use the damage as an excuse to buy another one. You never know what that point is, but it is there. All abuse has its cause and it's not always the most obvious. A man abused verbally by his wife just might reach a point where his fist becomes useful. He then appears to be the culprit and she'll be very generous in explaining that to you. I knew of a fellow who worked his ass off to support his family yet his wife used credit cards to their maximum, as a child in a candy store. I was surprised that he didn't take her for a midnight boat ride. If I were a judge, I'd dismiss the charge of murder and offer him restitution, deducting 10% as a fine for not paying more attention to where he deposited his sperm.
Years ago, when we were sane, there was a defense called "crime of passion". It was a considerably lesser version and often the convicted served little sentence. Today, we are expected to "tolerate" all sorts of things under the guise of civility. Negative emotional expression is a no-no. A man finding his wife in bed with another, often left two motionless bodies in the bed, and the courts, more often than not, supported the action. This has always been true of any cohesive society for the strength of the family is the pillar of the strength of the community. The Yasa below, is not unique.
Road rage, air rage, twat rage, rage rage, and its sundry variations, demonstrates clearly that someone's tolerance level was exceeded. People do not "blow their cool" for no reason whatsoever. If we fail to tolerate goats and goat shit in our dining room, then we are labeled as some sort of uncontrollable idiot who needs to be confined for public safety. Our enemies require us to behave like sheep – it makes the blood-sucking easier – and endeavor to eliminate contrary emotions, which serve them not, by public ridicule or passing laws against it. This basically is an assault upon men who Nature has provided with strong survival emotion. Hate being the most powerful. Law can only suppress it mildly and in few cases. The assault on "hate" and "abuse" has its roots in a hatred for men – especially the more dangerous White variety. They don't like cages very much and make very poor slaves.
Your Judeo-taxdollars at work.
The was a Palestinian boy, and his toys, in the Jenin refugee camp. I guess objecting to the exercise of jew blood lust would be an act against God. Right?
Look at the bright side. He just might have grown up to be a terrorist. Our abortion mills remove a lot of future terrorists, don't they?
The writer then suggests similar suits be filed against TV as a whole and perhaps labeling TV sets with a "hazard" warning.
The youngster mentioned above was obviously unfit to survive in any real world and would have been mama's dependent for life. I'd love to learn where big bad dad was hiding out. Ten to one, the male chauvinist pig was not around.
You see, whether women or members of the other species, we might be using the same language, the same words, but the way they are handled within the mind depends more upon biology than upon education. (Did I betray a confidence here?)
Why does a society allow people like this to live, much less cater to them? During the 1960s, young kids had enough guts to tell the heckling jews (at a Rockwell speech) to shut their moldy mouths. You peek through a keyhole, do not like what you see, and then complain about the result of your intrusion. Is this what we are now calling freedom, here in America? How long do you think people like this would have lasted in America 1850?
The Louisville Courier-Journal, 07 October 1992, ran an article from the New York Times News Service describing some of the margarine shenanigans and the "possibility" that eating such stuff would contribute to heart disease.
On the personal level, I do not modify my behavior to coincide with any current result (fad) of some lunatic "study". Men are very fallible and I trust the judgment of any dirt farmer far more that I would any Ph.D. from Cornell whose area of specialization was dirt moving, especially since he probably never held a shovel in his life.
I am down on all soy bean products and it is not because of some result printed by the goofs at Tufts University who claim it is "good for you". Because billions of Yellow people eat this crap does not mean it's good for White folks. We are of another species and the foods which work best for us are the result of a long period of specialized eating.
White man. Learn to use your own mind instead of relying on someone else to do your thinking for you. How do you spell sheep?
Every once in a while I read through my diary, not to wallow nor glory in past emotional episodes, but to remind myself of the presence of gods in my life. I describe not the details but enter only the brief comment necessary to engage my memory. The count of such entries is quite short. It would be pointless, and fruitless, to ever attempt to explain these entries to anyone since most people I have contact with have a very shallow feeling for things deeply spiritual. They spend their lives giving lip service to something they choose not to understand.
My most recent entry is dated April 5, 2002.
Here's Sharon's answer to Bush on withdrawal and to the Bowel movement to the Middle East;
"Israeli Troops Enter More Towns"
"One man said eight of his relatives, including a pregnant woman, were crushed when Israeli bulldozers demolished a Nablus home."
"The demolition killed Samer Shobi, 49, his pregnant wife, Nabela, 40, and the couple's three sons: Abdelallah, 8, Azam, 6, and Anas, 4, the man said. Also killed was Shobi's 85-year-old father, Omar, and his two sisters: Fatamah, 55, and Abeer, 36, said Mahmoud Shobi."
Powell was always just a Steppen Fetchit in cammies. His fake reputation was a creation of Jewish media, like Martin Luther King's before him. He is now being uncreated by the same agencies.
Unlike their ZOG rulers the American people understand how to bring Sharon to heel:
Poll: Americans Support Cutting Aid to Israel
"The Time/CNN poll found that 60 percent of Americans favored the aid cut off if an Israeli troop withdrawal does not take place immediately."
"As for Arafat, 59 percent of Americans consider him an enemy of the United States, 62 percent think he's a terrorist and 90 percent believe he cannot be trusted, according to the poll."
"Sharon's standing is better. One quarter of the respondents consider him an enemy of the United States, (interesting number after all the 'Israel key ally' lies spread non-stop for 40 years) 20 percent say he is a terrorist and 65 percent do not trust him. The poll found that 65 percent of Americans think Bush is doing a good job handling foreign policy, a significant decline from the 80 percent favorable rating he had in December 2001, three months after the Sept. 11 attacks."
"Fear of terrorism has declined. Last September, 45 percent of the poll respondents identified terrorism as the main problem facing the United States. That number declined to 25 percent in December and 21 percent this week."
The broader polling picture has some lessons for the White Wing. Lesson A1 is that neither crusades or jihads are playing in what's left of Peoria. These true American reactions are the same as those of Washington and Jefferson. The limit of my pro-Palestinian sentiment is reached with a complete cut-off of US aid and comfort to the evil Zionist enterprise and a strict application of new Neutrality Laws to all future American dealings with the "Arab-Israeli" conflict.
Translated this means: Use Israeli behavior to highlight Zionist-Jewish hypocrisy and lies but do not personally get involved with Islamic groups. Getting involved with foreigners and especially non-whites to support your domestic political activities ain't cool. That kind of double-dealing is the Jews' specialty, not ours. All we have to do to be pro-European is leave off killing them periodically.
This next quote should prove to all except imbeciles that we in fact live under a Zionist Occupation Government:
"But the administration has made clear it has no plans to threaten key ally Israel with a cut in its $3 billion (this is a grotesque understatement of Israel's annual receipts from ZOG-USA) in annual aid. Even if it did, a strongly pro-Israel U.S. Congress likely would oppose the move."
How does it happen that a position supported by 60% of Americans, and which is of some importance to relations with key Arab oil states and to white Europeans, doesn'teven find a voice in the 'representative' Washington government? With 60% public support surely at least 100 (less than 25%) Congresscritters could be found to co-sponsor a bill? Or at least 25 Senators? Yet we see zero (-0-). Whyizzyat perfessors of political science? Huh? How can that be if ZOG doesn't really exist as ya'll assure us? How can that be if Jewish control of the media is just a figment of our imaginations?
"Key ally" my Hal Turner. This is no alliance between two countries in pursuit of a common goal. The Special Relationship between Israel and America is that of the vampire to the host. And once these parasites have you sucked you dry Judeo-American, they will betray you without a moment's regret. They will however pour buckets of filth over your heads to justify themselves for their betrayal. It's exactly how these people behaved with the South Lebanon Army two years ago and it's how they'll behave later with you.
The paranoid always believes that whatever comes down the pike is something personal in his regard. Suppose you addressed a LaRouche meeting with, "Last night a fellow told me he urinated on Lyndon's rose bed." If that fellow were in the audience and was paranoid, or ego-centric to a warped degree, he might berate me for violating a confidence. Given the right audience, perhaps all would feel that way since all were guilty.
It would be hard for me to understand how the above general statement represented a betrayal of anything. Watch the TV "healers" at work. They appear to be receiving messages from outer space when they gawk at the wide audience and say, " I sense someone in the room is suffering a migraine. It appears to be a woman, Yes, a woman... she is having difficulty with her job... yes, yes, the Lord is revealing all to me... there..." The babble, and fishing, goes on until someone believes that Pastor Hogbucks is talking about them! As for myself, if I am not addressed personally, on a name basis, then I assume that it is not me the fellow is talking about. I'd love to hear from readers who think this position is not logical.
Generalizations are generalizations even when they contain specifics. Unless those specifics include time, dates and names, then what personal information is actually revealed? None, for only you and the other party know about the event. Therefore no confidence was betrayed. Only a person incapable of rational thought could see it otherwise.
I know of a man who confided in me relative to a burglary he committed. For what reason, I shall never know. Perhaps he felt so clever – the crime was never solved – that he was compelled to brag to me. I printed this in a hard-copy issue of FAEM in 1992, I believe. He read the article, laughed and even today never once accused me of violating a confidence. I printed no names, dates or other real data. In fact, the reader had no way of knowing if I were not simply fabricating for the purpose of illustration. Aren't all novels written in the format of fact? The proof that no confidence was betrayed is the fact that he never ended up in jail. You see, only he and I knew the details of that petty bit of mischief and even today I still cannot say that what he told me was even true in the first place. There was a burglary, of that it is certain, but I had no proof that he did it. Bob was always exaggerating his exploits, one way or the other. Even assuming that mentioning "Bob" was "betraying a confidence", then I could ask how many Bobs are there running around? How many people actually read my monthly FAEM anyway? Of those who did, how many cared?
I always assume that what is said on a one-on-one basis might possibly be confidential, but things mentioned in a group – that means myself and at least two others – cannot be considered confidential. Secrets exist only between two people. Period. There may be group conspiracies, but never group secrets. To me, a confidant is ONE person, not a stadium of participants nor even a family of two gassing over a dinner. You might not agree with my definitions, but that's what they are.
1. An adulterer is to be put to death without any regard as to whether he is married or not.
2. Whoever is guilty of sodomy is also to be put to death.
3. Whoever intentionally lies, or practices sorcery, or spies upon the behavior of others, or intervenes between the two parties in a quarrel to help the one against the other is also to be put to death.
4. Whoever urinates into water or ashes is also to be put to death.
5. Whoever takes goods (on credit) and becomes bankrupt, then again takes goods and again becomes bankrupt, then takes goods again and yet again becomes bankrupt is to be put to death after the third time.
6. Whoever gives food or clothing to a captive without the permission of his captor is to be put to death.
7. Whoever finds a runaway slave or captive and does not return him to the person to whom he belongs is to be put to death.
8. When an animal is to be eaten, its feet must be tied, its belly ripped open and its heart squeezed in the hand until the animal dies; then its meat may be eaten; but if anyone slaughter an animal after the Mohammedan fashion, he is to be himself slaughtered.
9. If in battle, during an attack or a retreat, anyone let fall his pack, or bow, or any luggage, the man behind him must alight and return the thing fallen to its owner; if he does not so alight and return the thing fallen, he is to be put to death.
10. Hunters who let an animal escape during a community hunt is to be beaten with sticks and if severe, he is to be put to death.
11. In cases of murder, the murderer must pay a fine. Mohammedan – 40 golden coins ; and for a Chinese – one donkey.
12. The man in whose possession a stolen horse is found must return it to its owner and add nine horses of the same kind. If he is unable to pay this fine, his children must be taken instead of the horses, and if he have no children, he himself shall be slaughtered like a sheep.
13. Those who hurt each other and do not forget offences completely, or respect old people and beggars, shall be put to death.
14. A man who chokes on food must be driven out of the camp and immediately killed; and whosoever puts his foot on the threshold of the tent of the commander of an army shall also be put to death.
(This guy, like Chaka Zulu, sounds like a Nazi to me. RF)
The stock market is a psychological structure. The euphemisms went through an evolutionary transformation. The original panic was labeled a crash. Later, the crash was called a depression. Recently we called depressions, recessions but recessions were renamed corrections. Today, corrections are known as dips.
12 sheenies killed? O my. Time to pray. Well folks, few seem to remember the carnage called WW II. Iwo Jima, a Pacific island much smaller than Israel, was the scene of a killing spree where 22,000 Japanese were killed or captured. The Americans suffered 21,000 casualties with 7,000 dead during that month of fighting. If I recall, the Japs were out-numbered about 6:1. But Americans and Japanese are not real humans and so their loss is no big deal. Just ask any jew.
Today's "higher education" seems to be a mixture of party and useless study material. B.S. oxymoronic courses such as "Ubangi culture" would never come into existence any more than would studying the sex life of a daffodil, as a matter of general procedure. All individual pursuits, if deemed harmful to the general well being, would be harshly, and swiftly, dealt with. The "pursuit of happiness", resulting in harmful or disrupting activity, would end with a pursuit to make sure that the individual's "happiness" be short-lived. There is no form of life on this planet which allows one member of a group to act against the interests of the others. The Gore statement, "It's every man for himself," would be the last sound such people would ever hear.
Our free-for-all society is now reaping what the permissive, and tolerant, liberal winds have sown. What will be left is hard to predict, but if anything can be salvaged, it will be up the the White males of today who bear, in absolute frustration, the burdens of remaining true to an idea and ideal. Those who do not work, shall not eat. The young and the elderly exempted.
Love, to me, is not a state of wishful thinking which appeases some guilt following an intimacy not far removed from kennel estrus. Yolanda was an exceptional beauty who was in one of my social studies classes. I was quite taken by her looks and did spend some coffee time with her. My attraction grew due mainly to her active mind. During the final exam, I noticed she was cheating. My growing love was not thereby affected, but my subsequent behavior was. I never bothered to contact her again.
This sort of disengagement does have its price and I often laid awake at night unable to sleep. My conforming thought remained that the present road was bumpy but the other road led straight off a cliff. I am not of the opinion that I could achieve where those before failed. A woman who confesses intimate details about a past husband is one you should part company with, for the same will eventually happen to you. We all like to believe that we are so special that the other person will miraculously discharge their life's bad habits and "change". I pointed out to one young lady that her current love was notorious for lying to his parents, teachers and all sundry. Her response was, "I know, but he tells me the truth because we are in love." O yah. Sho' 'nuff.
My father remarked that beauty lasts for only a decade or so but lifetime trust is required for any relationship worth its salt. Thus I measure the good, the bad and the ugly. Thus I built my list of "factory rejects" – shiny paint but faulty mechanism.
Again, my many thanks to the readers who submit items I insert.
Any website featuring Benjamin Freedman's 'Facts Are Facts', body-slamming "Judeo-Christianity", "Pharisees", Zionism and espousing our view of the Federal Reserve Corporations is worth a second look. Contrary to some blockheads' weird dreams, the coming White North American Republic will neither outlaw Christianity or set up a state religion of Odinism. Consequently Christians like these working to completely de-Jewify and de-Rapture Cult the churches ought to be of supreme political interest. The director, C.E. Carlson, recently returned from a visit to the Gaza Strip. Mr. Carlson's report of Israeli cultural conditions (abortion clinics, gambling casinos, widespread vice, welfare state-ism) is especially interesting. It sounded like the Gold Coast of Florida to me.
I was especially attracted by Mr. Carlson's emphasis on establishing "local zones of control" and the importance of local leadership in the struggle.
The faster the blightwing learns to effectively cooperate with such groups in pursuing common goals the sooner all white Americans win.
Sudan, Oil, "Chinese Troops" and Osama bin Laden
Q. "Any info on Chinese troops and oil in the Sudan?"
A. Yes. It's true. What's not true is that "700,000" Chinese troops are 'based' in a desert country of 36,000,000.
Fact 1: See http://www.mbendi.co.za/indy/oilg/af/su/p0005.htm for a backgrounder on the Sudan oil concession and the major players. Oil and gas potential is quite high. A major oil field came online in 1999. Sudanese oil exports went from 600,000 tons in 1998 to 7.2 million tons in 1999.
"Current players in Sudan include GNPOC, Lundin Oil (IPC Sudan Ltd), Petronas, Sudapet, Gulf Petroleum Corporation (GPC), China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), National Iranian Gas Company, OMV, Royal Dutch / Shell, and Talisman Energy. TotalFinaElf are reportedly looking to return to their concession in the Bor Basin and are listed as being the most likely partners to Petronas in their permit for Block 5B."
People with more curiosity are invited to research the ownership of the other companies more deeply, and especially Talisman Energy. Talisman, a Canadian company, is the largest stakeholder in GNPOC with 25%.
Fact 2: Every extractive industry in Africa, Central Asia and South America now requires protection by a combination of mercenary troops ("security consultants") and paid-off local chieftains. In the Sudan the state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation is part of the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC) consortium. The Chinese oil field workers in the Sudan are known to have been armed and have occasionally had to beat off tribal attacks. Some or all are probably Peoples' Liberation Army military engineers in plain clothes. Given Chinese participation in the consortium Chinese security forces were undoubtedly the cheapest alternative. Western mercenaries from outfits like Executive Solutions and Sandline are much more pricey.
Again we see the recurrent nexus between Osama bin Laden, Chinese interests and oil. Osama and al-Qaida were based in the Sudan from 1991 until 1996.