* “You don’t have to report this,” said my friend. “Think like a Jew.”
* An Iraqi Jew tells me his father taught him that you can always trust a Muslim in business.
* If you say you are a progressive in El Salvador, they immediately assume you’re Jewish and a communist.
Jen Kuznicki writes: If Starbucks wants us to talk about race, let’s start with why they don’t have Starbucks Coffee Houses in some of America’s cities that are mostly black, or have had a racially charged history?
My friend looked up various cities, and found that there are no Starbucks Coffee Houses in many of them.
Places like Highland Park, Michigan, which is at the center of Detroit, is inhabited by a population that is 94 percent African-American. Or in Benton Harbor, Michigan, which is almost 90 percent African-American. There is not a Starbucks in either town.
There is not a Starbucks in East St. Louis, Illinois, in which 98 percent of the population is African-American. Nor is there one in Gary, Indiana, whose population is 85 percent African-American.
The recent remembrance of the march on Selma, Alabama had the president walking down the street with many people who fought for civil rights, but once again, Selma doesn’t have a Starbucks. Neither does Ferguson, Missouri.
Here is the point, if Starbucks wants to have a conversation about race, perhaps they should explain why they are not accessible to most of those they claim to advocate for and champion. If being of a different race than white is higher on their list of desirables, why isn’t Starbucks putting their money where their mouth is?
WP: “Critics were also quick to point out that, though 40 percent of the company’s baristas are minorities, the leadership team Schultz is at the head of is overwhelmingly white.”
How come there is no limit to how much Jews such as Jeffrey Goldberg can dump on Gentiles? You can’t hate Gentiles too much. There is no limit. You can vent about them all day long and nobody will call you a hater. It won’t hurt your career. Goyim are just pinatas for these Jews who never bothers to ask if different groups might have different interests and there might just possibly be things Jews have done that have caused other groups to hate them just as some Jews have reasons for hating blacks, Christians, Muslims etc (to the extent that some Jews do hate these groups).
That Muslims hate Jews does not mean Muslims are evil and Jews are good. It just means they have clashing interests. I suspect that Jews on average have about as much animus for Muslims and Christians as Muslims and Christians have, on average, for Jews. There’s lots of hate to go around. The more passionately you identify with your group, the more likely you are to hate other groups. That’s the nature of in-group identity. It does not make those with a strong in-group identity bad. People with weak to non-existent in-group identity, such as WASPs, are not necessarily good. They don’t gain an evolutionary group advantage for not making distinctions between in-groups and out-groups.
If the rough and tough game of life in the multiracial multicultural West, success will usually go, all things being equal, to those with a strong in-group identity.
For some time, I’ve been pointing out that the more ethnocentric American Jews, individuals who tend to be hard-headed conservatives by nature and schmaltzy liberals by nurture, are the key potential swing constituency on issues like immigration policy. And the ice is starting to crack perceptibly, if subtly.
Of course, you to still have to often wade through an enormous amount of anti-gentilic rage to get to what’s really bothering these swing pundits. For example, Jeffrey Goldberg’s giant cover story in The Atlantic is full of expressions of ethnic animosity against Christendom — e.g.:
Is It Time for the Jews to Leave Europe?
By Jeffrey Goldberg
… The resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is not—or should not be—a surprise. One of the least surprising phenomena in the history of civilization, in fact, is the persistence of anti-Semitism in Europe, which has been the wellspring of Judeophobia for 1,000 years.
– before Goldberg finally gets around to … oh, yeah, the real problem is now the Muslims.
As William Saletan implies in Slate, much of Goldberg’s article seems intended to serve as angry filler to establish his bona fides as a good gentile-hater so he can eventually quote Marine Le Pen at length on what needs to be done. Saletan writes:
So let’s turn the question around. How can we help Jews stay in Europe? What’s the best way to reassure a French Jew that she can keep both her country and her religion?
Goldberg’s article doesn’t explicitly answer that question. But it does illuminate the structure of the problem. Once you understand that structure, you get a general idea of how the problem could be solved. You also begin to see how much worse things could get if we try to solve it in the wrong way.
In the article, the person who comes across as understanding the problem most clearly is Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s National Front. She says anti-Semitism watchdogs in her country have been looking the wrong way. They’re on guard against old-style Nazism. “While they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed,” she tells Goldberg, “an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”
Goldberg’s reporting bears out her point.
Comments:
* Yeah, lots of stage setting in that piece. All of it meant to remind us that somehow European Christians are to blame for the current woes of the Jews…
It would probably be a waste of time to note that the auto‑da‑fé was used against Christian heretics, and that the Inquisition’s purview was restricted to Christians….
And, of course, the real threat to Europe’s Jewry comes from Nazi-Islam…..
And let’s not forget the coming Catholic-Muslim alliance against the Jews….
* Well to be fair the Inquisition spent a lot of time going after crypto-Jews, i.e. Jews who were forced to convert in 1492 and their descendants, many of whom did in fact practice Judaism in secret. Technically they were Christian heretics, but a lot of it was still about the Jews. That and the laws of limpieza de sangre, forbidding descendants of Jews from various positions, even if they were baptized.
* Yes, but Jewish Jews were beyond the authority of the Inquisition. Only Jews who had converted to Catholicism were vulnerable.As for being “forced to convert,” that’s somewhat inaccurate. Only Jews who wanted to stay in Spain had to convert.
* “The resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is not—or should not be—a surprise. One of the least surprising phenomena in the history of civilization, in fact, is the persistence of anti-Semitism in Europe, which has been the wellspring of Judeophobia for 1,000 years.”
Well then, why didn’t Jews just leave? Europeans didn’t force Jews to stay in Europe. And Europe is not the original land of Jews.
So, if white Christians were so awful, why didn’t Jews in Europe just go to the Middle East, Asia, or Africa where all those wonderful non-whites would surely have welcomed them with open arms?
Jews bitch so much about Europeans and white Americans, but they never wanna live anywhere but in white nations. Why?
Mr. Goldberg, tell your European Jews to leave. No one is stopping them from doing so. And since you Jews profess to love blacks so much, please go settle in black Africa and have your daughters marry black men. Besides, Jews say immigration is so wonderful. Okay, then I suggest all European and American Jews become immigrants in Africa. Yay!
* Perhaps it is time for Jewish Europeans to realize that they are finally on the European team. It’s what they always wanted, until Theodor Herzl got justifiably sick and tired of waiting.
Again, when you focus on a common enemy, it is easy to unite. This time around, it wouldn’t be a bad thing for all Europeans to do.
* In Europe maybe just maybe because Muslims don’t like Jews all that much.
But as most immigrants to the US are non-Muslim, it will never be an issue here.
After, Goldberg asks ‘should Jews leave Europe?’, not ‘should Jews leave America?’
If anything, the European situation could be seen as an argument FOR diversity from the Jewish viewpoint.
After all, suppose Europe were mostly Muslim. Jews would be in big trouble. It’s because Europe is still majority white that Jews feel safe. Diversity is good for Jews.
Indeed, suppose Europe were all white. White might unite against Jewish elites.
So, Muslims(and other immigrants) are useful in making white obsess about blacks and Muslims than about Jews.
Besides, the perception that Muslims are hurting Jews have made Europeans more protective and supportive of Jews. In a way, Goldberg is playing for sympathy by using the ‘diversity’ card. “Help! Help! Muslims are hurting us! White folks, please save us!”
And white Libs, white Cons, and even ‘far right’ figures like Le Pen are siding with Jews. (Never mind Jews had supported massive immigration to Europe.)
Sailer and LePen seem to be hoping for the same thing. When will Jews, with all their talent and money, see the light and come over to the Right?
I say ENOUGH ALREADY. These people are not to be trusted. Even if they do come over, it will be temporary than permanent or in good faith. Once the threat passes, they’ll go back to their old ways and play dirty tricks to do whatever is good for Jews.
* Immediately after the Charlie Hebdo shooting in January, Netanyahu said French Jews were in danger, and urged them to move to Israel where they could be safe. After the Denmark shooting in February, he said Jews were also in danger in Denmark and urged them to move to Israel for their own safety. Then in March he stood before Congress and basically said that every Jew in Israel is on the verge of being murdered by Iran. And nobody bats an eye.
* Maybe it might be time for them to leave. The experiment of diversity might have backfired on them, but maybe not.
McDonald argues that Jewish insecurity lead to creating the ethic of multiculturalism to combat a racially and religiously unified Europe and America.
Jews have followed an evolutionary path of marginally assimilating, maintaining a clannish superiority and sense that transgressions against Gentiles don’t really count. There was a famous case of an orthodox Jew that refused to break Sabbath and allow his phone to be used to phone for medical help when a non-Jew had been involved in an accident. But he would have been allowed to do so had a Jew been hurt. And Jewish scholars upheld that he was correct under Jewish doctrine. And this marginal assimilation has enraged non-Jews for centuries and is the basis for antipathy towards the sect.
The idea of “A man on the street and a Jew in the home” actually means “assimilate just enough to not provoke the ire of the Goyim yet remain clannish and exclusionary with other Jews. Morality and consideration offered to Jews is foolish and unecessary in dealing with Gentiles.”
A Christian, ethnically European populace is a threat to Jewish security so better to promote Diversity, Multiculturalism to reduce, and even eliminate this unified environment to lessen this threat to Jewish non-assimilation. This has been the mission of Jewish academics throughout the 20th century and is the dominate dogma of our time. By crushing Christian religious dominance and cohesion, and replacing it with secular, materialist values, tolerating ever more alternative lifestyles, Jews become more “invisible”, at least “less visible”.
The hope is by creating this consumerist hedonism where nothing is forbidden except intolerance then when immigrants arrive that they become co-opted into the swirling melting pot of western permissiveness, that they abandon whatever religious attitudes that are dangerous to Jews.
And unfortunately for Jews in France, Muslims have resisted this phenomenon. To see native born children of Muslims actually revert to a more stringent faith than their more secular immigrant parents is very dangerous to Jews and is an unintended side effect of the diversity experiment.
As the post on “The Browning of America” shows, the special protected status of Jews in Europe comes under contest when more and more immigrant groups lack the guilt of the holocaust that French whites have.
* Is the Sailerowicz Strategy worth it?
Hasn’t that been the basis of the GOP since the 80s or even the 70s?
On the premise that…
1. Wasps lost their fire and will
2. Wasps lost their moral authority(as Jews used slavery and Holocaust to smear all whites, even Americans who defeated Nazis)
3. Wasp elites married pretty dumb women and produced the likes of George W. Bush and Dan Quayle
…. the brilliant idea was that the GOP would get a second wind by attracting
Jews as
1. Highly energized and talented new elites
2. People with the highest moral authority due to Holocaust
3. Natural Conservatives since they are bound to be rich and successful.
Therefore, in order to win over Jews with all that money, talent, and moral capital,
the big shining idea was to give them everything they want.
So, what happened?
1. Even GOP swallowed MLK and Mandela cult.
2. GOP has been totally complicit in the oppression and destruction of Palestinians, a totally innocent people.
3. Wars for Israel that messed things up royally beginning with the Gulf War(that didn’t assuage Jews in their never-ending Golf War against Wasps)
4. Turning a blind eye to Jewish crookedness on Wall Street, Las Vegas, and Hollywood, therefore ruining the GOP brand as the whore party of plutocrats.
5. Bending over to ‘gay marriage’ embraced and pushed by even Neocons.
6. Never-ending hysteria about Iran(which is funny since Jews endless berate conservatives for their ‘anti-communist hysteria’ in the 50s).
7. War on Russia, a long-suffering nation that went through hell in the 90s not least because of Jewish collusion to form new oligarchs at the expense of Russians. The total messing up of Ukraine.
8. Banning of Neoconfederate symbols.
Well…
Has it worked? After all that pandering to Jews, 80% of Jews voted for Obama and gave us Holder, Kagan, Sotomayor, ‘gay marriage’, amnesty, and etc.
Do we exist simply to be abused like an idiot wife? How much more BS and abuse can we take from these people?
I say ENOUGH ALREADY. I say form ANY alliance to break Jewish power.
Do not waste hospitality on people like Goldberg and Nuland. They are vile creatures.
American Conservatives continuing to bet on the Jews would be like Putin putting his trust in Nuland and Gessen in the hope that, gee, maybe they’ll learn to love Russia and Christianity.
I mean come on.
* I was watching the very first episode of the Larry David HBO series. And he is doing stand up comedy. And he says about Bill Clinton:
“What? Does he think he is gonna get a blow job from a Jewish woman and then get off scott free?”
It’s funny.
So leave it to a Jewish girl to turn one blow job into a career. I suppose Great Neck wives have been doing that for decades.
* No contradiction. Israel restricts (quite properly) Muslims as they are not in Europe, and has Jews armed as they are not in Europe. Absent Iran wanting to nuke Israel, the threats Israel faces are quite manageable by … being armed and making ones self a hard target. Iran’s threats to Israel are part of a larger ambition to over-awe and overthrow the Gulf regimes and bring that low-cost production off the world market. Therefore US interests (cheap gas, you can still drive your car) and Israeli interests (they don’t get nuked as an example) are inter-twined and mutually reinforcing. The whole point is moot — Obama is hell-bent on Iranian nukes to stick it Whitey and make Substitute Mommy Val happy. With likely a joint Israeli-Saudi nuke strike (via Pakistan, Saudi’s nuke carry-out joint) on Iran.
But don’t worry. Right after mandatory voting and shower timing penalties, the Lightworker will sort everything out.
——————————–
This brings out a larger issue. Steve it is not or even mostly Jews who drew the EXACT WRONG CONCLUSION from the Holocaust. The Holocaust happened because:
*An insane, mostly gay (Hitler was gay, gay, gay NOW!) and fringe element took over a strong state with no other institutions than the Army which was filled with mediocrities, all the charismatic ambitious guys being killed on the Western Front.
*Said Army did not act decisively while it still could to forestall disaster (Gen. Sisi has assuredly not made that mistake with Morsi). [His speech on fixing the Jihad part of Islam is worth reading.]
*The rest of Europe was disarmed to use money to buy goodies and votes, and hoped Hitler would fight Stalin (he teamed up with him for years).
*Opportunities for stopping Hitler when he was weak were squandered, leaving him strong.
However the lessons: have a weak, not powerful state, have lots of intermediary institutions, have a strong military that does not take guff from charismatic pols or allow them to run riot, act decisively against threats when they are small — all those did not sit well with a war weary, feminized European public. Who felt the Holocaust happened because there were not enough hugs or something. Or hate speech codes. Most Germans did not vote for Hitler, did not like the Holocaust, but were not going to commit suicide to save Jews either. A few did (the White Rose people).
Goldberg does have a point: Catholic France (Dreyfuss), Southern Germany (the base of the Nazis), were very anti-Semitic, though not of course France. Both England and Spain kicked out Jews. Anti-Jewish sentiment was strong in Poland (Catholic) and Russia/Ukraine (Orthodox). Against that Protestant Denmark and Orthodox Bulgaria worked hard to save as many Jews as they could. So Goldberg’s point is mixed but he does historically have one in part. But only in part.
The problem is the innate pacifism and feminized behavior of modern Europeans, of which European and American Jews are part and parcel. You could read the same thing from say, any one of a dozen Gentile FT or WSJ or NYT writers. All of whom abhor fighting, military service, love a strong state, with weak militaries, and control of every aspect of (White people only) social behavior.
Israel would be no different, save hundreds of millions of Muslims around them intent on killing every last one of them. Something about constant Jihad focuses the mind on survival not Religion. Of Which Goldberg is a fervent convert — to Post Christian PC.
* Jews seem to think they have the God-given right to inhabit everyone else’s countries, and then compete with the natives for dominance, and then expect perfect tolerance. Kinda like they’re supremacist bigots, or something.
* If National Review or any mainstream Conservative outlet were to hire Sailer or someone like him, you bet all the neocons will call for blood and scream BURN THE WITCH, BURN THE WITCH.
And the likes of Goldberg would lead the charge.
So, why does Sailer still hold onto the fantasy?
It’s like Diane Selwyn in MULHOLLAND DR dreaming that ‘Rita’ is her friend when, in fact, Camilla (on whom ‘Rita’ is based) dumped her big time?
Time to wake up. Dream is over.
* Maybe Jews should ask themselves why some people don’t like them — they never really seem to do that. Jews are the original ‘We din do nuffins!’ people.
* Who ever thought it was a great idea to concentrate media, publishing and cultural commentary in Manhattan and run almost all our information and ideas through that one cluster of people, with their odd kinks and obsessions?
They really can’t be bothered to understand that the FN comes out of the grand schism in French political life caused by the Algerian War and the fact that the aboriginal, indigenous French don’t much like having their homeland taken away. The evidence is overwhelming that the FN is not the party of Vichy nostalgia but that doesn’t seem to matter. Just last week the Socialist Prime Minister of France was in a tizzy because a city with an FN mayor decided to rename a street in honour of an army officer involved in the Algerian War and the failed coup against de Gaulle.
Why would the FN celebrate a hero of the French Resistance who was sent to Buchenwald? I guess I’ll have to wait for Jeffrey Goldberg or Leon Wieseltier to figure it out and let me know.
* Yeah, if they won’t save White people, maybe space aliens will. Because apparently the idea of us being on our own side is a non-starter.
* According to interviews and reports in Berlin papers they are mostly hardcore leftists flocking to multicultural/leftist Berlin which they sort of don’t consider to be Germany proper–Berlin is hip as is eg Barcelona. Low living costs compared to back home, cheap rents above all. They can afford to have family here… maybe back (or wherever) later when things change, eg when Bibi has to leave office–they hate him. Jews get German passports or residence permits easily due to post-WWII regulations, it’s easier than in other European countries. One Berlin Israeli posted his supermarket bill on facebook, showing how one particular brand of yogurt popular in Israel was three times cheaper over here. Caused quite some anger, he got called sell out and traitor.
* The Jews are loath to give up the Nazi holocaust card because it the single biggest chit they have ever had with humanity.
* An easy way to understand the difference between Jews and white gentiles is: Jews kick white gentiles’ asses; white gentiles kiss Jews’ asses.
Now that is surely an oversimplification, but the witless white gentile needs to start somewhere, and starting here is going to prove far more fruitful than starting with the assumption that Jews are powerless and oppressed.
* W most likely was just a puppet president. The real power in the administration was in the hands of Dick Cheney, the Israeli/neoconservative intelligentsia and oligarchs, the Goldman Sachs crowd (Paulson, etc.), and the CIA/FBI/military. W was nothing more than a front man. Anyone who’s listened to the man speak or debate can’t help but be shocked at his shortcomings. No way was that man in any type of decision making role.
Of course, Barack Obama isn’t much better. The men pulling his strings are his Jewish advisers (Axelrod, Plouffe, Rahm Emmanuel), the CIA/FBI/military Deep State, Wall Street (Summers, Geithner), and a few Democratic-aligned oligarchs. Obama is a much better speaker than W and somewhat more intelligent, but I really doubt he’s running his administration.
There’s evidence to suggest the Obama and his parents might’ve worked for the CIA in the past. If we assume this to be true, then maybe Obama’s rise was engineered by the Deep State. That could explain how a relatively undistinguished state senator quickly rose from obscurity to become the Illinois Senator and the the Democratic presidential front runner. Maybe the Deep State connected him with financiers and talented political organizers, while also manipulating news coverage and party bosses.
Eisenhower warned about the growing influence of the Deep State “military-industrial complex” during the end of his presidency. After JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy of various Deep State figures (Ruby, Oswald, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, E Howard Hunt, David Morales, Cord Meyer) and later RFK, Deep State took control of the presidency. LBJ was obviously a CIA collaborator in the JFK assassination, Nixon was involved in the assassination too, and Gerald Ford helped with the Warren Commission cover up. Bill Clinton helped with the CIA cocaine trafficking through Mena, Arkansas, when Clinton was governor of the state. W’s father was former CIA director. Our government was pretty much been run by Deep State collaborators since JFK’s assassination.
John T. Reed writes: There are two intellectually-honest debate tactics:
1. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts
2. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic
Intellectually-dishonest debate tactics are typically employed by dishonest politicians, lawyers of guilty parties, dishonest salespeople, cads, cults, and others who are attempting to perpetrate a fraud. My real estate opponents, in general, are either charlatans or con men. As such, they have no choice but to employ intellectually-dishonest tactics both to prove that I am wrong and to persuade you to buy their products and services. My coaching opponents are generally not charlatans or con men, but many are quite political. Other coaches denounce me because I denounced some approach they use and they cannot admit they were wrong. Those who dislike my military views are also career politicians notwithstanding their claims to be “selfless servant warriors.”
Here is a list of the intellectually-dishonest debate tactics I have identified thus far. I would appreciate any help from readers to expand the list or to better define each tactic. I am numbering the list in order to refer back to it quickly elsewhere at this Web site.
Name calling: debater tries to diminish the argument of his opponent by calling the opponent a name that is subjective and unattractive; for example, cult members and bad real estate gurus typically warn the targets of their frauds that “dream stealers” will try to tell them the cult or guru is giving them bad advice; name calling is only intellectually dishonest when the name in question is ill defined or is so subjective that it tells the listener more about the speaker than the person being spoken about; there is nothing wrong with using a name that is relevant and objectively defined; the most common example of name calling against me is “negative;” in coaching, the critics of coaches are often college professors and the word “professor” is used as a name-calling tactic by the coaches who are the targets of the criticism in question; as a coach, I have been criticized as being “too intense,” a common put-down of successful youth and high school coaches. People who criticize their former employer are dishonestly dismissed as “disgruntled” or “bitter.” These are all efforts to distract the audience by changing the subject because the speaker cannot refute the facts or logic of the opponent.
Changing the subject: debater is losing so he tries to redirect the attention of the audience to another subject area where he thinks he can look better relative to the person he is debating, but admits to no change of subject and pretends to be refuting the original on-subject statement of his opponent
Questioning the motives of the opponent: this is a form of tactic number 2 changing the subject; as stated above, it is prohibited by Robert’s Rule of Order 43; a typical tactic used against critics is to say, “They’re just trying to sell newspapers” or in my case, books—questioning motives is not always wrong; only when it is used to prove the opponent’s facts or logic wrong is it invalid. If my facts or logic are wrong, my motive may be the answer to why. But let’s cut out the middleman of why my facts or logic are wrong and just point exactly what the error is. Pointing out the suspicious motive only indicates there is no error, just an attempt to insinuate an error by innuendo.
Citing irrelevant facts or logic: this is another form of tactic Number 2 changing the subject
False premise: debater makes a statement that assumes some other fact has already been proven when it has not; in court, such a statement will be objected to by opposing counsel on the grounds that it “assumes facts not in evidence”
Hearsay: debater cites something he heard but has not confirmed through his own personal observation or research from reliable sources, e.g., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s allegation that a Bain Capital investor whom he refuses to name told him that Mitt Romney has not paid any taxes for ten years.
Unqualified expert opinion: debater gives or cites an apparently expert opinion which is not from a qualified expert; in court, an expert must prove his qualifications and be certified by the judge before he can give an opinion
Sloganeering: Debater uses a slogan rather than using facts or logic. Slogans are vague sentences or phrases that derive their power from rhetorical devices like alliteration, repetition, cadence, or rhyming; Rich Dad Poor Dad’s “Don’t work for money, make money work for you” is a classic example. In sports, coaches frequently rely on cliches, a less rhetorical form of slogan, to deflect criticism.
Motivation end justifies dishonest means: debater admits he is lying or using fallacious logic but excuses this on the grounds that he is motivating the audience to accomplish a good thing and that end justifies the intellectually-dishonest means
Cult of personality: debater attempts to make the likability of each debate opponent the focus of the debate because he believes he is more likable than the opponent
A healthy Muslim, Arab, Palestinian is going to dislike, perhaps even hate, Jews because there is a Jewish state in a land he believes belongs to his people, and because this tiny Jewish state so vastly outperforms his own countries. Rather than live with that shame, he will rationally prefer to live in contempt, dislike, hatred and conspiracy theories. Low IQ peoples such as Arabs and blacks (Arabs average about 85 on IQ tests, American blacks the same) love conspiracy theories because they explain their low achievement by blaming outsiders. Any low-achieving group is going to love explanations for their failures that blame out-groups.
Imagine you are an Arab and there’s this Israel in your midst and it is a thriving country supported by the world’s biggest power — the United States of America. You will want to do everything you can to make the lives of Jews miserable. It is totally in their self-interest for Muslims to rally against Israel on college campuses and to press for divestment from Israel. I wonder if any Arab or Muslim who does not support this is, perhaps, sick. He’s lacking in group spirit. He does not identify with the welfare of his people.
That does not mean he should live his life so obsessed about hating Jews that he can’t enjoy his wife, kids, friends and community and a walk in the park. His Jew hatred should not rationally cause him to commit criminal acts against Jews if there’s a likelihood of getting caught and punished. Why should he ruin his life just to hurt a Jew? Yes, I know some Muslims will, and it is probably in Islamic interests for some Muslims to go suicidal against Jews, but most Muslims have lives to lead beyond hating Jews. But it makes sense to me that Muslims as a group dedicate themselves to harassing and hurting Jews.
If Israel is the Jewish state, which it is, then Jews around the world will bear the brunt of the anger of people who hate Israel. All Jews become targets in a new way because there’s a Jewish state on land that Muslims and Arabs regard as their own.
Different groups have different interests and these interests clash. Strongly identifying in-groups such as Jews, blacks and Muslims are inevitably going to have distrust, if not a burn, against outsiders.
Ryan Bell:
“Low IQ peoples such as Arabs and blacks…”
WHAT? You must be joking. You’re implying they’re less intelligent.
I don’t think I’ve ever encountered such blatantly racist views. Wow!
You’re delusional.
There’s no such sin as racism. If there were, somebody would have mentioned it prior to the 20th Century, and yet every moral tradition, prior to the past 120 years, is strangely silent about this supposedly horrible thing called “racism.”
I would think you would know that is not a valid form of argument. There are only two valid ways of arguing. One, is to point out errors in fact. Two, is to point out errors in logic. Name calling is not an honorable argument.
Ryan Bell: “I don’t have time for that. This is such a basic idea. So shocking to see someone deny something so obvious. Nobody called cancer ‘cancer’ until they did. Doesn’t mean there wasn’t cancer before.”
Chaim Amalek The Torah does not use the word “racism”, which is a recent invention, but it does have something to say about prejudice involving marriage of a Black woman (an Ethiopian) to a high status Jew, Moses. See Numbers, Chapter 12:
1 And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.
2 And they said, Hath the LORD indeed spoken only by Moses? hath he not spoken also by us? And the LORD heard it.
3 (Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.)
4 And the LORD spake suddenly unto Moses, and unto Aaron, and unto Miriam, Come out ye three unto the tabernacle of the congregation. And they three came out.
5 And the LORD came down in the pillar of the cloud, and stood in the door of the tabernacle, and called Aaron and Miriam: and they both came forth.
6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?
9 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against them; and he departed.
10 And the cloud departed from off the tabernacle; and, behold, Miriam became leprous, white as snow: and Aaron looked upon Miriam, and, behold, she was leprous.
11 And Aaron said unto Moses, Alas, my lord, I beseech thee, lay not the sin upon us, wherein we have done foolishly, and wherein we have sinned.
12 Let her not be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother’s womb.
13 And Moses cried unto the LORD, saying, Heal her now, O God, I beseech thee.
14 And the LORD said unto Moses, If her father had but spit in her face, should she not be ashamed seven days? let her be shut out from the camp seven days, and after that let her be received in again.
15 And Miriam was shut out from the camp seven days: and the people journeyed not till Miriam was brought in again.
16 And afterward the people removed from Hazeroth, and pitched in the wilderness of Paran.
27 mins · Like
Luke Ford There was no halacha that developed out of that to say you should not notice racial differences. No great rabbi has ever written a sefer against racism. The idea is laughable.
9 mins · Like
Christoph Donnellan Races differ in many respects and the idea that intelligence is equally distributed amongst all human population groups aka races, is what is truly delusional.
3 mins · Unlike · 1
Chaim Amalek It is one thing to “notice” racial differences, which is fine, and quite another to say “You should not have married that Ethiopian woman because, well, she’s black.” One perfectly plausible interpretation of these verses is that God turned Miriam into a whiter-than-white leper for criticizing Moses’ interracial marriage to an Ethiopian.
2 mins · Unlike · 1
Christoph Donnellan As for Arabs, though, one must make distinctions. I do not think the average I.Q. amongst Lebanese, Syrian, or Palestinian Christians, is only 85. Yemenis, Saudis, Egyptians, etc. might be different.
2 mins · Unlike · 1
Luke Ford All strong in-groups tend to have hatred for out-groups. That has nothing to do with IQ.
21 hrs · Like · 1
Christoph Donnellan Not necessarily outright hatred but suspicion and disdain, at the least.
21 hrs · Unlike · 2
Ryan Bell I thought for sure I’d read you the decrying the horrors of anti-Semitism
21 hrs · Unlike · 2
Scott Cameron Is this why the mizrahim dislike the ashkenazim?
21 hrs · Unlike · 2
Nathan James · Friends with Ryan Bell
” Low IQ peoples such as Arabs and blacks love conspiracy theories…”
go back and read that again.
21 hrs · Like · 1
Alex Trivunovic Be honest Ryan Bell. Has this possibility never occurred to you?
16 hrs · Unlike · 1
Luke Ford Different groups have different gifts.
10 hrs · Like · 1
Luke Ford “Anti-Semitism” is simply a slur thrown at people whose group has clashing interests with Jews.
10 hrs · Like · 2
Ryan Bell Which possibility, Alex?
10 hrs · Like
Luke Ford Ryan, do you regard every people in the world as having identical gifts? Or do different peoples have different gifts, on average? For instance, the Japanese and Australian aboriginees strike me as two people with distinct gifts. Having different gifts does not make you less valuable to God or to the world, it just might mean your people are not a great fit with certain countries. For instance, Jews were not a great fit in Europe in WWII.
10 hrs · Edited · Like
Alex Trivunovic The possibility that different groups of people are different in some fundamental ways.
10 hrs · Unlike · 1
Ryan Bell No, certainly not the way you’re conceiving of it. Your blindness to your own biases is staggering. I’m not going to do your research for you but suffice it to say, the whole notion of IQ is dubious at best as a measure of anything useful. Race is social constructed. In other words, race is not a biological category. The assumptions behind the supposed correlation between race and intelligence are always made from a white, western perspective (no shock that rich white people with too much time on their hands would conclude that poor black people are too stupid to be their equals). Finally, the opportunties afforded people to learn and acheive their human potential are not spread evenly. If you think my child’s performance on a standandardized test and a black child her same age in south LA has anything to do with the color of their skin you’re delusional. And I’m not saying that as a put down. I’m being serious.
10 hrs · Like · 2
Ryan Bell
10 hrs · Like · 1
Bob Anthony · Friends with Ryan Bell
wow, luke, you really are a bigot, arent you? how do you sleep at night? you could double your iq and still come up with a two-digit number.
10 hrs · Edited · Like
Alex Trivunovic I am not rich, Ryan. I also don’t come from a high IQ ethnic group, so intelligence studies wouldn’t benefit me in any way at all. On the other hand i have been on this earth for almost 37 years, and have lived in many different countries. I came to very similar conclusions based on my own experiences with many different types of people. Also, declaring a discussion to be over whenever it suits you kinda tells me that you don’t have much of an argument and would rather all this went away. It won’t.
Luke Ford Name calling is not an honorable form of argument Ryan Bell. You should know better as someone who has received a lot of abusive names as a result of your own search for truth.
8 hrs · Edited · Like · 1
Luke Ford It’s interesting how race realists in this thread feel no need to hurl abuse at their adversaries but our opponents are not able to argue in an honorable way.
8 hrs · Like · 1
Alex Trivunovic As Fred Reed once said: Those who have arguments, make them. Those who don’t, call you names.
8 hrs · Unlike · 2
Alex Trivunovic Ryan and his friends are talking about this thread on his page. You should check it out, Luke. They’re genociding straw men over there.
8 hrs · Unlike · 1
Luke Ford Good to see reasoned discourse on the internet.
8 hrs · Like · 1
Alex Trivunovic From what i can gather, all we have to do is check our privilege, and things will become clear. Also, one of them accused you of holocaust denial, which is reasonable based on your earlier statements.
8 hrs · Unlike · 1
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
Luke, I’m as appalled at what you write as Ryan. While racism is real, race is not.
7 hrs · Like
Luke Ford As you probably know, that is not an argument. Do you have a point to make aside from your feelings?
7 hrs · Like
Alex Trivunovic Race is indeed real. See video above.
7 hrs · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
I’m stating a scientific consensus. To you that may not qualify as a syllogism, but until I see mainstream science reverse itself on that point, I’m not about to go with the outlyers.
7 hrs · Like
Alex Trivunovic Aage Rendalen is a Norwegian name, so you should be familiar with Harald Eia and his series.
7 hrs · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
I am and I have watched it. Give me a quote from Eia himself in which he says that race is a biological reality. You won’t find it.
7 hrs · Edited · Like
Alex Trivunovic You don’t think any good points are made in that episode?
7 hrs · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
Absolutely, it’s a good series.
7 hrs · Unlike · 1
Alex Trivunovic Obviously, reasonable people can differ on a wide variety of issues, but i’m not sure how you can watch that episode and come away thinking that race doesn’t exist. Differences in skin colour are visible evolutionary adaptations, why would there not be other adaptations beneath the skin?
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
What we do have are different cultures that often coincide with different physical traits. Birds of a feather have always flocked together for protection and community. Some cultures, such as the Jewish, has attributed enormous status to learning and literacy and Jews have excelled way out of proportion to their percentage of the population. You see the same with some Asian cultures. In the US, the biggest difference between blacks and whites is not skin color, but culture, and culture has a huge influence on performance, be it sports, arts or academics.
7 hrs · Unlike · 2
Alex Trivunovic I agree, culture has an impact on how people behave. Where does culture come from? I think it is reasonable to posit that it is very influenced by our genetic makeup, which is a product of evolutionary adaptation. Hence, race exists. It is the sum of all of our genes that have been molded by our ancestral environments.
7 hrs · Unlike · 1
Luke Ford Aage, stay with us a while. We need your voice of reason.
Luke Ford Aage, how are you enjoying the vibrancy of Norway’s third world immigrants.
7 hrs · Like · 1
Alex Trivunovic Below the belt, Luke.
7 hrs · Unlike · 1
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
Luke, I have lived in Virginia since 1999, and a lots has happened since I left, but as far as I can tell, Norway has had far more problems with its homegrown blue-eyed terrorists than Somali refugees. No doubt you have heard about this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik
Aage Rendalen · Friends with Ryan Bell and 4 others
Any immigrant community from the developing world is going to be a mixed bag. Some of them, like orthodox Jews praise God that they were not born women, and act accordingly. Others are reduced to depend on hand-outs, just like the wealthy in this country. And yet others are set to become the future leaders of the country. Humanity itself is a mixed bag, made up of the good, the bad and the ugly. Outward physical features are not much of a clue as to which category people fall into. That’s why I’m more surprised than shocked at your white supremacy doctrine. I’m sorry you should end up holding such disgraceful views.
33 mins · Edited · Like
Luke Ford You throw around a lot of slurs. You’re good at calling names. When did I ever say whites were supreme? I guess you can just make stuff up.
37 mins · Like
Luke Ford ” Some of them, like orthodox Jews praises God that they were not born women, and act accordingly.” How is that exactly? I guess they’re raping and pillaging?
36 mins · Like
Luke Ford I want the same things for all peoples equally — self-determination and freedom of association.
35 mins · Like
Aage Rendalen · Friends with Ryan Bell and 4 others
Even Palestinians afflicted with low IQ?
32 mins · Like
Luke Ford IQ has nothing to do with somebody’s worth in the eyes of God and man. Palestinians should have everything I want for my group and this whole discussion started because I said that a healthy Palestinian/Arab/Muslims has rational reasons to dislike Jews and to want to make their live difficult. Different groups have different interests. If I were a Palestinian, I’d be cheering on every attack on Israel.
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
I just watched the hit piece on Norway you posted. This is the first time I’ve seen anybody suggest that immigrants were to blame for being massacred by a blue-eyed neo-Nazi Norwegian. What it does get right is that violent rape is primarily committed by men from cultures that denigrate women, but that’s like discounting frat house rapes committed by natives since it didn’t take place in some dark back alley. And the much discredited idea of no-go zones where sharia rules is just made up. What is true is that Muslim fundamentalists are just as obnoxious as fundamentalists everywhere, including those who hurl stones at cars driving on Shabbath.
26 mins · Like
Luke Ford Rape is committed by men from every culture when they have the opportunity and believe they can get away with it.
25 mins · Like · 1
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
“IQ has nothing to do with somebody’s worth in the eyes of God and man.” This reminds me of the controversy the prophet of your childhood was involved in when she wrote that some races of men were the result of “amalgamation between man and beast”. When she was roundly condemned for these views, in the 1860s, Uriah Smith, family friend and editor, replied that it was no problem that hottentots and “digger” Indians had animal blood in their veins because as long as they had a drop of Adam’s blood, they were okay with God.
22 mins · Like
Luke Ford When you’re not throwing slurs, you make a lot of good points. You are a credit to your race. The more I learn about 19th Century Europe, the more comfortable I feel with its worldview.
22 mins · Like
Luke Ford Every strongly identifying in-group has distrust and negative feelings about out-groups. You think Hottentots think whites are wonderful? You think Jews think goyim are great? You think Muslims are thrilled with non-Muslims? You think SDAs are filled with respect for non-SDAs?
21 mins · Like
Luke Ford A lot of black thinkers have had similarly negative views about ice people (whites). That’s a universal pattern, it is not unique to whites.
20 mins · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
Luke, you’re dancing around my ‘slurs.’ You can’t write somebody off as intellectually deficient and then turn around and say that that’s no problem, what’s 15 points of IQ among friends.
19 mins · Edited · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
As for jingoism, I didn’t know we had any disagreement on that score.
Luke Ford Many of my friends have more than 15 IQ points on me. I don’t mope around because of it. I’ve never scored above 130 on an IQ test. “Then say that’s no problem.” It’s no problem for some things, it’s a big problem for other things. Certain tasks strongly need a high IQ, other tasks not so much. Blacks have many gifts that non-blacks lack such an easy spontaneity, charisma, a gift for improvisation. Non-blacks could never have come up with jazz or rap. I don’t think blacks mope that they’re not Japanese and vice versa.
17 mins · Edited · Like
Luke Ford A lot of hard subjects in school were too much for me and I cheated to pass. I wish I had a higher IQ.
15 mins · Like
Aage Rendalen · 5 mutual friends
Oh, come on! You can’t be that much of a retrograde, Luke! You know as well as I that within every population group there is a great deal of genetic variety. There are going to be blacks far more intelligent than you and me and there are going to be those who perform worse than us. That goes for all groups of humans. I’ll read your next post, but then I’m finished with this topic. Still can’t believe you speaking as if from a compound in Idaho.
10 mins · Like
Luke Ford Aage, you’re a mentch. You should have a good Shabbos.
10 mins · Like
Christoph Donnellan Why do some seemingly intelligent people insist that races have equal intelligence when history, common sense, direct contact, and experience, screams, ‘no, they do not.’ Because, they don’t like the thought or the possible implications.
Christoph Donnellan Race isn’t real but organ transplant donors and recipients are typed by race and ethnic origin. lol. One of a thousand ways race is real.
4 mins · Like
Christoph Donnellan I could see these old liberals saying to themselves, ‘but, but…it could hurt someone’s feelings.’ ”These people suffered through history, so owe them this or that…’
Christoph Donnellan I recall many years ago being in a college anthropology class where the instructor nervously addressed the issue of race for about 10 minutes or so of our entire course. She adamantly stuck to ‘race doesn’t really exist’ line, but then later on, discussed her work as a forensic anthropologist and talked about how she identified homicide and accident victims remains by sex, age, and race! How bout’ that!
Dr. Sally Satel writes for the New York Times Sunday Magazine in 2002: “In practicing medicine, I am not colorblind. I always take note of my patient’s race. So do many of my colleagues. We do it because certain diseases and treatment responses cluster by ethnicity. Recognizing these patterns can help us diagnose disease more efficiently and prescribe medications more effectively. When it comes to practicing medicine, stereotyping often works.”
Hollywood Jew Writes: My favorite Bar Mitzvah was held at a racetrack. It was conservative/reform, of course. The father, a senior banker with Goldman Sacks, replicated the chariot scene of Ben Hur, with the following change. Instead of racing horses, which would of course have been beyond the skill of most of the middle schoolers present (but not all of them), we mounted the backs of large black men, mostly ex-cons in need of the money. They carried us they raced around the track, and we would beat them with whips to spur them on. Many a wager was placed that day on which boy’s “shvartze” (we used that term in a very affectionate way back then) would win. At the end of the race, each shvartze received a gift of fifty crisp US dollars and a donation was made to the United Negro College Fund, so the kids learned the importance of racial tolerance. And it all worked! As adults, all of us kids, now men, tolerate black people. Just so long as they do not live in our neighborhoods.
Every week I trade work with a Network Spinal Analysis practicioner. I find the work invaluable. He told me last night, “Trust your passion.” I started letting go of unnecessary tension and my breath freed up and I got a ton of release, just from those three words. I heartily recommend NSA to anyone. I can’t explained what it is, but it seems amazing. My best explanation is that since I started going about six months ago, I’ve found my spine. I am much more fierce in pursuing what I believe in. I’m less of a wimp.
I don’t know, but I suspect there’s been a change in my blogging.
Playing defense is largely a matter of size and quickness. Blacks overwhelmingly man the speed positions in the NFL, particularly on defense.
My favorite football team, the Dallas Cowboys, signed defensive end Greg Hardy this week. ESPN: “Some fans will recoil that their team brought in a player who was accused of assaulting and threatening to kill an ex-girlfriend last spring.”
These are the qualities I would want in a defensive end, just like I would want my pornographer to be a convicted sex offender. I would not want these qualities in my rabbi, however.
Football is a destructive violent game and I want destructive violent people playing for my team.
The New York Times reports: “Many law school deans, bristling from criticism that they are replenishing their ranks with less academically qualified students as the number of law school applicants has fallen sharply, began to openly question the mechanics of the bar exam.”
I suspect that on average, smarter people are turning away from law as a profession and less smart people are charging into it.
According to the July 2014 test results of the California State Bar, 69% of whites passed, 38% of blacks, 52% of hispanics and 58% of asians.
Blog post: Bar Passage: California, the state that administers the most bar exams, reports pass rates by race. For July 2011, the pass rates for first-time test-takers were:
White test-takers: 75.4%
Asian test-takers: 67.3%
Hispanic test-takers: 55.3%
Black test-takers: 45.7%
Other minority test-takers: 59.0%
California allows graduates of unaccredited law schools, as well as apprentices who “read the law,” to take the bar exam, but those differences do not account for the racial disparities. The same California report breaks down bar results by educational preparation–with the same racial patterns in each group.
New York, the nation’s second-largest administrator of bar exams, reports similar racial disparities in bar passage. A study reviewing New York’s July 2005 exam reported the following pass rates for first-time takers:
Caucasian/White test-takers: 86.8%
Asian/Pacific Islander test-takers: 80.1%
Hispanic/Latino test-takers: 69.6%
Black/African American test-takers: 54.0%
* It would be hilarious if someone from Steve’s readership could conduct a street-level social science experiment by getting hired by Starbucks and, you know, talking about race with customers who just want to buy coffee, but talk about race from a totally non-creationist way.
Countdown to getting fired.
* “I’d like a mocha frappucino please, and the Bell Curve has never truly been debunked.”
* I’ve decided to ask the barrista, if she puts a racial message on my coffee cup, to write three things and then to guess what it means: 85, 35,000, and 52%.
I will then ask them to match those numbers to the number of white women raped by blacks, percentage of all homicides by blacks and, of course, the average black IQ. That should get the dialogue moving along nicely.
* I’ve been waiting for someone to discuss the race relations caught in this cell phone video from a day or two ago:
It looks like a black lady attacking a young white girl and her even younger brother for being white. The white girl keeps asking what she did.
Maybe there is more to this clip that I don’t understand, but it looks to me like racial violence incited by Holder.
If videos of racist comments are the top news at Google News and other news sites for hours, this deserves more than just liveleak.
Maybe it did get more attention somewhere, too, but I didn’t see that.
Maybe we can discuss it at Starbucks.
* This will go over sooooo well. Because if there is one thing that the upwardly aspiring yuppie soccer moms who frequent Starbucks want, its a lecture on how racist they are, by a pierced and tattooed twenty something who is an indie alt-rocker and drug addict in their spare time.
Finally, the guy who came up with the Edsel and the guy who came up with New Coke are breathing a sight of relief. They are not the most boneheaded corporate moves any more.
* Maybe they can show their commitment by opening up a shop in Ferguson. You can talk with the Baristas from behind bullet proof Plexiglas.
* Billionaire Schultz sure wants a lot from his $9.50 p/hr employees. I suppose he’s supplied them with crib sheets containing talking points and wise sayings. A couple local stores of theirs that I go to employed college students for a long time but in the past year I noticed a turnover in staff, going from college types to Hispanic and black workers with no higher education. I figured the managers decided on a new business model, that of hiring people with less options and thus less likely to be able to trade up. They’re pleasant enough serving coffee but really don’t seem the type to be able to impart much. Also, be careful of what you say; you don’t want someone spitting in your coffee.
* I bet I am the only person posting here who actually, often worked in “food service” although, back-in-the-day it was called: busing tables, waitressing, hostessing, cocktail waitressing, cashiering, etc. We also had to Windex-down all the surfaces & microwaves at the end of the shift….stock up the ketchups, s& p’s, napkin stacks, etc.
I worked throughout my teenage years, summer jobs, in between crappy corporate jobs I quit in NYC in the 80′s and early 90′s – it did finance some wonderful trips roaming the world; paid for tuition; bought a car I still have with that waitressing money, BUT, I had few, very rare, very good restaurant-owner-bosses as well…who would never have asked their employees to do something like what Starblachhh is trying to persuade their employees to do. They would not even insist we wear Halloween costumes on our shifts. They knew this was just a stepping-stone job and we were young & mercilessly rudderless…especially if you were younger than 32 (ok, I’ll be kind tonight). Also, our bosses in “food service” always assumed we were gonna GTFO as soon as a “real job” was within sight. One world-class NYC business owner actually encouraged his employees to go for that audition, interview, option as long as we covered the shift at his business. What a mensch. I still see his face even if he is long gone when I drink Jaegermeister.
The annoying thing is, most “food service workers,” baristas, bartenders, cocktail waitresses don’t really wake up every day thinking they are gonna “tweak” their walk-in customers to think about “saving the world,” in this case, starting spontaneous discussions about race, of all things. It is unfair, plain unfair. Most baristas are middle-class kids who are today’s indentured servants: saddled by high student debt/living in an expensive city where their hopeful, dream-job exists, in between their shift hours at a restaurant they are too embarrassed to name on date night/too embarrassed to tell their parents that after High$$$ PrivateU, they can’t get a “real” job with a degree in psychology/comparative literature/criminal justice/art (ouch, that’s SOOO personal), political science, etc., etc., etc. I love saying that ever since Yul Brynner said that!
It is unfair because it assumes the chump (that was me, often) that needs the job at a Starwhatever, must feel 100% genuine about hawking their wares combined with a condition, to a customer; basically cajoling a reluctant customer into talking. I must have worked at The sad-sack/bitter restaurant in NYC because the last thing my “tables” wanted, was for me to be cheerful and ask them how they were…and, if I thought engaging them to talk about what they thought about Mayor Dinkins, Koch, Prince, or Tompkins Square was gonna get me a better tip or lead them into a constructive conversation about race, well, they would have walked out instead.
I feel sorry for the employees of Starbucks who will feel coerced on some level, to go along with this idea. For the most part, people who show up at bars or coffee shops don’t want their consciousness raised, they want coffee or a drink, but silence most of all. A lot of “food service” customers don’t want to be disturbed, like bears in the wilderness…they really are there for the coffee and a refuge from their head exploding from other stuff happening in their very private lives. Most people do not like to bear their souls and say stuff unless they are wasted, crazy or both.
So, the sad part is, these Starbucks employees will feel compelled to do this because their supervisor is watching, their franchise owner wants to know the stats….and, they don’t want to lose this “stepping stone” job that is paying for their share of a $3000-a-month, 1 bedroom apt they share with 3 other people, and, probably cats & dogs & ferrets & old Halloween/Mardi Gras stuff.
* Okay, Senorita Barrista: Let’s talk about [this] in which one Urban-American named De’asia Watkins, 20, decapitates one 3-month old female Janiyah. And why black lives matter so very much.
* Why don’t they just screen interracial porn and see if anyone wants to talk about that?
* Steve Sailer: Here’s a question: Is working at the airport a black thing in general?
It is at LAX.
Maybe white people moved out of airport adjacent neighborhoods under the flight paths of noisy 1960s jets, so the airport is the convenient big employer for the blacks who moved in?
* “Two lattes please.”
“Yes sir. What size?”
“One small and one large. Sorry, my mistake, one White Crime Rate and one Black Crime Rate.”
* I’d be happy to discuss my experiences.
I’ve lived in Chicago 11 years now. Been robbed twice, once violently beaten during the robbery. Caught another guy trying to break into my apartment. Within two months of coming to the U.S. from Spain my girlfriend was also violently attacked and robbed.
What do all these crimes have in common?
* Michael Brown and the clerk at Quik Mart probably had their own racial dialogue:
C: Sir, those cigarillos don’t belong to you. You have to pay for them.
MB: Who you talk’n to Mother $#%$er?
C: Please Sir.
MB Get out of my way you little punk.
C: I will call the police
MB: Yah, what can they do?
Somebody needs to write a play.
