Nicolai Sennels is a Danish psychologist who has done yeoman work on Muslim immigrants. An article August of last year details the consequences of Muslim inbreeding (“Muslim Inbreeding: Impacts on intelligence, sanity, health and society.“) Sennels cites data showing that on average around 50% of marriages in the Muslim world are consanguineous, with predictable effects of low intelligence and mental and physical disorders. Consanguineous marriage is lower among immigrants to the West than in the immigrant-sending countries–e.g., 55% among Pakistani immigrants to Britain versus 70% in Pakistan. The consequences to Western societies are obvious:
Expenses related to mentally and physically handicapped Muslim immigrants drains the budget for other public services: “When cousins have children together, they are twice as likely to have a disabled child – it costs municipal funds dearly. Disabled immigrant children costs Danish municipalities millions. In Copenhagen County alone, the number of disabled children in the overall increase of 100 percent at 10 years. … Meredith Lefelt has contacted 330 families with disabled children in Copenhagen. She estimates that one third of their clients have a foreign cultural background.” (BT, 10/11 2003 Immigrants inbreeding costing one million.
Advertisement
On top come the expenses for Muslim immigrants who – because of different consequences of being born from blood related parents – are not able to live up to the challenges of our Western work market: Muslim immigrants and their descendants in Europe have a very high rate of unemployment.
The same goes for Muslims in USA, where the Gallup Institute made a study involving 300.000 people concluding “The majority of Muslims in USA have a lower income, are less educated and have worse jobs than the population as a whole.” (Berlingske Tidende, d. 3. marts 2009: Muslims thrive in USA.
The cognitive consequences of Muslim inbreeding might explain why non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the Danish army’s intelligence test than native Danes: “19.3% of non-Western immigrants are not able to pass the Danish army’s intelligence test. In comparison, only 4.7% of applicants with Danish background do not pass.” (TV 2 Nyhederne, 13/6 2007 Immigrants flunk army test.
It probably also explains – at least partly – why two thirds of all immigrant school children with Arabic backgrounds are illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system: “Those who speak Arabic with their parents have an extreme tendency to lack reading abilities – 64 percent are illiterate. … No matter if it concerns reading abilities, mathematics or science, the pattern is the same: The bilingual (largely Muslim) immigrants’ skills are exceedingly poor compared to their Danish classmates.” (Rockwool Foundation Research Unit, May 2007: Ethnic students does not make Danish children worse.\
These results are another indication of the fundamental differences between the West and the rest. As I noted several places (e.g., here), individualism is a biologically rooted tendency among Western peoples resulting from prolonged evolution as a Northern hunter-gatherer. When it comes to marriage, this implies tendencies toward monogamy, exogamy, the nuclear family, and individual choice of marriage partner based on personal attraction (love as the basis of marriage combined with sexual selection for physical beauty). Collectivist cultures tend toward arranged marriages with relatives, solidifying kinship relations within the extended family and maximizing parents’ relatedness to their offspring–at a huge cost, as Sennels documents.
The superiority of Western culture was obvious to our ancestors a century ago when the West dominated 85% of the globe. The prolonged assault on the West by the culture of critique has resulted in invasions by people who are dramatically different from native Europeans. In Europe people naturally gravitated to a world of friends and neighbors and exogamous marriages based on personal attraction when the costs of extended kinship relationships exceeded the benefits. But the fundamentally collectivist, extended family social structure so typical of the rest of the world seem to be deeply ingrained and not easily altered.
It’s interesting that consanguineous marriages were typical of historical Jewish society and prescribed as ideal in the Torah. For example, fully half of the marriages of the descendants of Mayer Amschel Rothschild were with first cousins, and the marriage of his youngest son to his niece was much commented on at the time. Consanguineous marriages were a prominent trend among the Jewish haute bourgeoisiethroughout the 19th century and into the 20th (W. E. Mosse. The German-Jewish Economic Élite 1820–1935: A Socio-cultural Profile. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1989, 161ff). The fact that such marriages have declined among Jews in Western societies does indicate that assimilation to individualist norms may occur over time.
It is something of a conundrum why Jews were able to maintain a very competent, high-IQ elite despite the tendency toward consanguinity. One might speculate that for Jews consanguinity did not occur at the same levels as is common in the Muslim world. Wealth and social status of marriage partners mattered greatly. During their ascendancy, the Rothschilds sought advantageous marriages with other wealthy Jewish families, only pursuing consanguinity after they had become the wealthiest family in Europe. Further, consanguinity co-occurred with eugenic practices for high intelligence and for a family history free of mental and physical disorders. (The ancestry of prospective marriage partners was a very serious matter.) For example, wealthy families were encouraged to marry their daughters to scholars. Such marriages would not only be eugenic for IQ but would also be exogamous. Thus the natural tendency toward consanguinity so apparent throughout the Middle East was considerably blunted among Jews.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
|
Scientists Say There’s Nothing Wrong With Cousins Getting Married:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/theres-nothing-wrong-with-cousins-getting-married-scientists-say-1210072.html
|
Graham you can’t win with that, Judges in Canada and Australia have stated in OPEN COURT to Ernst Zundel and Fredric Toben that ” THE TRUTH IS NO DEFENCE”
Truth is unattractive to those who have gone off the rails of reason.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/revealed-the-inbreeding-that-ruined-the-hapsburgs-1668857.html
Amusing contradiction in the same journal.
Interesting article, Graham.
The argument is sound and gets at the fact that cousin marriage didn’t really become a taboo because of concerns over infant mortality or birth defects, but rather as part of the Church’s policy of breaking up Europe’s old rural clans.
Interestingly the last places Europe’s old rural clans survived were areas of Scotland and Sicily, probably because the mountains in those places made it harder for centralized authority to be imposed.
That’s the key point here: Cousin Marriage was once common in rural Europe, but was squelched by centralized authorities who had an agenda.
To me that agenda was similar to that of Saladin when he set up the Mameluk system:
http://www.napoleon-series.org/military/organization/c_mameluks.html
You see the clans of the Middle East were a problem for Saladin in that his subjects weren’t individualists, they had ties to various clans who might at one time or the other have a problem with Saladin.
This made the subjects of Saladin problematic as bodyguards, so he got around it by having his bodyguards be Georgian and Circassians slaves who would’ve been separated from their familes.
And actually this was probably a better solution than the one authorities implemented in Europe.
In Europe the powers that were decided to overcome the phenomena of powerful extended families taking loyalty they thought due exclusively to Church and State by breaking up the clans.
They did this by banning consanguineous marriage, even forms of consanguineous marriage which involved individuals who were very distantly related.
This diluted the degree of genetic relationship between extended family members, leading to the eclipse of Europe’s clans by Church and State, and the rise of the uniform European individualism which gave birth to what we now call Liberalism.
One of the most important differences between Islam and Christianity is that that Islam tolerated powerful extended families whereas Christianity did not.
|
Cousins who tied the knot:
Jerry Lee Lewis
Jesse James
H G Wells
Edgar Allan Poe
Johann Sebastian Bach
Charles Darwin
|
Now, I want to say that I own a good-sized collection of music by Jerry Lee Lewis and I especially favored his country & western contributions. However, I’ve heard “The Killer” make a number of derogatory, envious, and downright resentful sounding comments about Elvis Presley that reflected what appeared to be a deep rooted jealousy by Lewis that Elvis achieved a far higher degree of fame and fortune, plus millions of more fans than he did during his career. Talent wise, Elvis was the obvious winner – but, did image have some affect, as well?
Did the public view Elvis in a more favorable light, perhaps? Aside from the sad tales that emerged after he died in the book by his former friends and entourage, there are very few people who knew or worked with Elvis who didn’t comment favorably on his Southern manners, respectful attitude towards the ladies, and his kindness and generosity.
What about Jerry Lee Lewis? Maybe he felt that he, and not Elvis, deserved the lead role in the movie ‘Kissing Cousins’?
This is why I strongly believe in legalizing limited polygamy, it occurs in some fundamentalist sects of Mormonism. Someone pointed out in an earlier comment in a different thread that Mormons are eugenic because the smartest and wealthiest Mormons have the most children, this trend is opposite in the rest of the White population. White Mormons should return to their polygamous roots.
Quote from I April 8, 2011 – 12:49 am | http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/04/glenn-becks-departure-another-victory-for-media-control-by-the-left/#comment-32936
“Yeah, you are probably right that Jews do view Mormons as a potential threat. There’s also a lot of hostility toward Mormons from ordinary Protestants. Mormons tend to be intelligent, due to eugenic practices (wealthier and more successful Mormons tend to have more kids, in contrast with the rest of the White population). If Mormons can maintain both their eugenic practices and their high overall birthrate, they will be a force to be reckoned with.”
Polygamy might be the only way we can breed out individualism and egalitarian DNA, and at the same time we can practice eugenics with this. Jews did the same thing over 3500 years, the smartest rabbis or Jewish scholars had the most Jewish children. The richest Jews gave money and daughters to Jewish scholars to have children.
White people are burdened with self-destructive egalitarian, altruism, individualism and fratricide genes. They’ll gladly murder their kin by the million, but a foreigner (no matter how hostile) is sacred. Even the “evil” Nazis couldn’t bring themselves to exterminate Jews. The Holocaust never happened (link in my username). I’m not advocating intensive polygamy because there has to be moderation to everything. I’m against promiscuity too. Polygamy is not comparable with promiscuity. Polygamy generally entails love, stability and family, promiscuity necessarily excludes those.
A genius scientist/doctor/scholar is ideal for high-investment parenting and should have more children to pass on his genes. Indeed, it would be an optimal evolutionary strategy for wealthy men to balance at 50/50: 1) helping their race and 2) invest in more biological children. Rich and privileged Jews give aid to the disadvantaged and destitute Jews; nonetheless, they still practice high-investment parenting.
I would ban homosexuality (sorry Greg Johnson and James O’Meara), pornography, ban promiscuity, ban indecent clothing, legalize prostitution, and legalize LIMITED polygamy (a male could have a wife and a maximum of 2 concubines/mistresses, if his annual income or net wealth is in the top 10% percentile or if he has a PhD or Master’s degree). This would ensure that only the brightest and smartest Whites pass on their genes. I would even subsidize prostitution. Men who copulate with attractive women on a regular basis are healthy men with clear heads. Masturbation is debilitating, degrading, and unnatural.
If we simply practice what I outlined above, elite Whites would overtake all elite Jews in about 3-4 generations. Can Whites abandon disastrous monogamy and exogamy to save our race?
I made a typo above, I would “ban pornography” too.
I want to legalize prostitution because that would give the dumb and poor Whites an outlet for sex so they don’t get frustrated.
This would quickly make our people more eugenic. Polygamist sects of Mormonism are the best for our race currently, except I would require that it only proselytize WITHIN the White race.
That’s all we have to do to defeat organized Jewry, to save the world from senseless wars in the Middle-East, to save humankind, to propagate our own race, it’s so simple.
I wouldn’t say there is Protestant hostility toward Mormonism, but, the founding mythos of Mormonism is a little space alienish.
The fact that Mormonism is a uniquely American religion has been its biggest saving grace.
That is a great idea and Martin Millard has long championed polygamy for Whites and it certainly can’t hurt but I fear the time is so late that it just doesn’t do it.
The Bolsheviks who run DC will probably go BOLSHEVIK in a true SEMITIC Chimpout once the Whites numbers get below a certain point.
Pax Europa:
The only way your version of population management coud occur would be through a strongman dictator. The closest we can come to it without a white nationalist somehow gaining power is to emulate the mormons, having lots of white babies. If you are past the baby age, do everything you can to help your grandchildren by supporting your own children’s kids. It is the natural and rewarding thing to do, anyway. Otherwise, help your relatives, or donate money to a large and probably struggling white family, doing so in a tax advantaged way via a friendly non profit.
If we don’t work our asses off to support our own families, we are worse than infidels, anyway.
I would even subsidize prostitution.
Do you mean you’d subsidize prostitution on a personal level?
Because if you mean you’d like to see some kind of Government subsidizing prostitution, I must say the idea of making a man pay in taxes the money which would then be used to tempt his daughter into whoring herself would be the height of perversity.
At least the way things are now the men paying the money into the prostitution industry are exactly the men who have no right to complain about their money being used to tempt women to whoring: specifically the men who use prostitutes.
At the same time I understand your general point. In many ways it would be easier to impose the desirable things you propose; like banning pornography, promiscuity, indecent clothing, and legalizing a limited form of polygamy; if it happened in the context of it being easier for men to access prostitutes.
But couldn’t that end be achieved merely by legalizing prostitution, as opposed to having it subsidized?
Men who copulate with attractive women on a regular basis are healthy men with clear heads.
Just to add a little balance to this statement, it should be noted that I certainly don’t think it’s healthy for attractive women to copulate with lots of strange men for money on a regular basis.
I want to legalize prostitution because that would give the dumb and poor Whites an outlet for sex so they don’t get frustrated.
I understand what you’re saying here.
One concern I have though is that if you advocate a combination of banning pornography, banning promiscuity, banning indecent clothing, legalizing a limited form of polygamy, and legalizing prostitution; it could lead to people saying: “That guy’s right! Let’s legalize prostitution!!”.
Then they’d forget about the other essential parts of your plan.
But maybe I’m underestimating people.
Probably the key is to do exactly what you’re doing here, only mentioning the prostitution part after going through the other aspects of your plan, thereby making clear that what you’re proposing is strongly intended to be taken as a package deal.
Another thing I should note is that pornography has more of a negative and demoralizing effect on Whites than prostitution probably ever could, so I would consider it a fair trade to ban pornography while legalizing prostitution.
Graham Wellington, you’re missing the point. In many cases the Muslim cousins who are marrying are themselves the offspring of consanguineous marriages, as were their parents and/or grandparents. There is no comparison to whites.
I suggest that the problems with Arabs is not so much inbreeding as it is out-breeding, mixing races. It stands to reason that humans were originally relatively small, inbred groups. According to E. O. Wilson if inbreeding is continued long enough the gene pool will be cleaned out of the negative factors. A very good reason not to allow the continued breeding of defectives.
I’ve seen reports that average iq ranges between 85 to 93 in Latin America. I would think the more primitive the people the lower the average iq?
Naturally removing the White folks from the Latin American iq equation would drive down the average iq.
But, marriage taboos among the indino population—I don’t have a clue?
It all depends who took the polls or who wrote the Islamophobic analysis. In reality – Muslims in the US, are among the top five highly educated non-White people. Chinese have made to the top for the last five years in education surveys.
Economically, both in the US and Canada – Muslims are at the bottom of the people on welfare or in jails for murders or other crimes.
the great majority of Muslims who immigrated to western countries – were the victims of western colonial and imperial regimes in their native lands, who are still acting as colonial agents in those countries.
In 2009 – European Interpol report showed that most of terrorist activities were carried out by the home-grown White folks than the immigrants. Muslims made only 6% of the known terrorists.
I wonder, how many readers would like if Pakistan expel its 16 million-stron Christian population and destroy country’s over 300 churches of Ahmadinejad expel 30,000 Iranian Jews and demolish country’s 12 Synagoges?
Let the Islamophobes check out Ernst ZÜNDE on Islam and Muslims.
http://radioislam.org/zundels/index.htm
Rehmat says,
“the great majority of Muslims who immigrated to western countries – were the victims of western colonial and imperial regimes in their native lands”
Is this true? I have heard this claim made before on this site, but it doesn’t seem to jive with the facts. The reason Muslims immigrated to the West is for the benefits and the jobs. They weren’t “running from imperialism into the arms of the Imperialists” as far as I can see. Does anyone have any information on this?
France had a policy to ally itself with Arabs several generations ago as a way of competing with the UK and the US. They deliberately sought them out. I don’t see any proof that they were running from their native lands as refugees due to Western actions. They were simply attracted to the much, much higher standard of living.
I’ve known many Jews who married their cousins.
Apparently it isn’t really an issue, I think Kevin M you would agree with me that the Jews have done quite well for themselves, in fact they are very near to eliminating the race that they feared the most.
I noticed you’ve gotten bit by the Islamophobic bug.
Islam is a world religion, as is Christianity, both have people of every race in their ranks.
The problem lies with tribal ethnics invading White homelands.
There is really little difference between the Qur’an and Christian’s New Testament, save a theological quibble here and there, both set up humane and just ways of dealing with one’s neighbors. Unlike the Old Testament with all that jews running over the hill and committing genocide on those whose land they coveted.
The bottom line is not folks idea of Heaven but rather genes.
I wander if the Jews perhaps lucked out with some genes that protect them from the ills of inbreeding. Or perhaps they inbred selectively enough and sporadically enough that they have been able to avoid some of the more debilitating effects of inbreeding. Of course, there are some very unique Jewish genetic diseases that indicate they have suffered some limited ills of inbreeding.
There is of course some very nasty cases of inbreeding amongst European nobility–the Hapsburg lineage being the most obvious example.
Both polygamy and inter-family marriages were practiced before the re-appearance of Islam in 610 CE. Islam put a limit on polygamy but kept alive the Hebrew traditions of marrying within family, but under certain conditions.
Yes – the major difference between the Gospels and Islamic Prophetc Traditions (Haddith) is the dogma of TRINITY. Holy Qur’an on the other hand, says that the most tolerant people among the non-Muslim societies, a Believer will find – would be Christian societies.
However, Islam doesn’t accept St. Paul’s interpretation of Jesus’s message – that Church is seperate from the White House.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/egypts-muslim-sisterhood/
“White people are burdened with self-destructive egalitarian, altruism, individualism and fratricide genes. They’ll gladly murder their kin by the million, but a foreigner (no matter how hostile) is sacred.
I think it’s a simple problem of getting mental illness induced in them from their television sets. It’s a mistake to let another people become your storyteller, entertainer/teacher. Especially a people that hates you. I think it’s a rather simple problem. Jews should not be allowed to be the teachers/storytellers for the White Gentile nations. Which means they should not own or control media interests in White nations, or have influence in the schools. We don’t have ‘fratricide genes.’ We simply let them sneak a few things past us up to now, unsuspecting. But the worst thing Jews have done, truly, is manipulated the White nations into wars against each other. Then they pick up the pieces. No more Jewish wars for the banker war pigs.
A modern day Theodosian or Justinian Code you mean, Mr. Lee? Just what Pound advocated. Keep ‘em out of banking, government, and schools and maybe our civilization can last 1300 years, like the Byzantine did, too. I believe Mullins backed this idea as well, instead of the ‘vertical expulsion’ idea that sees popular support nowadays. Cheers.
(Vertical expulsion: death.)
I think PaxEurope is a correct about a lot of things. Most of what he says, I agree with.
I noticed you’ve gotten bit by the Islamophobic bug.
How does criticizing inbreeding among a people amount to a “phobia”? I think you have been bitten by the social-engineering-by-word-coinage bug. (Criticism isn’t a phobia. Actual phobias are rare.)
There is really little difference between the Qur’an and Christian’s New Testament,
This is very offhand. The tone of each is radically different; the content is different, too.
save a theological quibble here and there,
Please outline the “quibble.” (Gross misresentation and simplification going on here.)
both set up humane and just ways of dealing with one’s neighbors.
I don’t recall that kind of content in the New Testament. You seem to be talking about the Old Testament instead.
The bottom line is not folks idea of Heaven but rather genes.
I would comment on that line but I am not sure what it’s saying. In any case, genes are inert matter. Genes come from consciousness; consciousness doesn’t come from genes. Maybe the subject of religion and heaven are beyond your scope at this time.
We are all seekers of our idea of heaven, here or there. “Ideas about heaven” (ideas about what gives human happiness) are what lofted White peoples to the heights (plus lofted their genes), and midwifed European culture itself. Ideas about genes didn’t. Moreover, it will be “ideas about heaven” (beliefs about the purpose of life and what benefits us) that will give proper valuation to genes. The Vedas, best source of knowledge about how heaven is known, teach that there is a moral and natural order, and that it is stupid and destructive to allow destruction of the races or racial mixing. However, only heaven (bliss, satisfaction, attainment, contentment) really attracts or inspires men. Not inert “genes.” John the Baptist summarized half the Vedas when he said to the gene-obsessed Pharisees: “You say you are sons of Abraham. God can raise up sons of Abraham from these stones.” Don’t be just a White Pharisee. Then we have no true advantage over the Jews. We should be the experts at heaven instead, both here and there. That’s, indeed, what we were for 20 centuries during our strength.
What Julian Lee just said is excellent. That’s why I suggested that we synthesize a new religion, maybe a slightly modified Christianity. Atheism is a degenerate construct. Mormonism is a good temporary religion for our people. Look at Mitt Romney, an extremely successful and wealthy White businessman, how many children does he have? FIVE CHILDREN.
That’s what we should be doing. Instead of the richest Whites having one or two kids, we should have 5 or more. Mormonism is probably the only worthwhile denomination of Christianity for White Nationalists. It’s great because Mormonism is one of the fastest growing sects of Christianity. Nevertheless, I am worried about their proselytizing of non-Whites.
World already has a new religion – It’s called ‘Holocaust’. In the West, it’s more sacred than Christianity or Islam.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/holocaust-is-new-jewish-religion/
How in hell does superstition help anyone? You religious nutters are beyond me. There is one simple equivalence : if you indulge yourselves with your brownies at the bottom of the garden. tooth-fairies and god-person-things, then you have no rational basis whatsoever for condemning a jew talmud-thumper who believes you to be cattle.
Religion is a rejection of rationality. With rationality gone we have nothing to save.
Oh, and so now do you derive any normative values (such as preserving your race) at all, Mr. fount-of-wisdom?
Discussions of religion are interesting, but does everyone realize it takes centuries to fundamentally change a culture’s religion? I don’t get the purpose of all this “we need to do blah blah blah with regard to religion” – this is pointless discussion with regard to White culture in the next, say, 100 years.
It’s like little kids sitting around playing a game of Risk, imagining they have the power to change a nations religion at will. I’m not religious, but we don’t need to pick a fight with Christianity. Nor do we need to have silly fantasies of replacing it with some pagan religion.
ADDENDUM:
I am, of course, an advocate for White racial affirmation, survival, and prosperity. However, when mere genes are counterposed against religion — perhaps the Aryan peoples’ true and greatest forte — it disgusts me. Most who do this have not seriously investigated Christianity much less religion generally. They fail to comprehend the role that vital, unifying religion played in the development of western prosperity. We did not rise to heights sans religion, and abandoning it will not strengthen us. Rather, we should seeker a profounder, more vital culture of religion than we had before. One that affirms racial identity and preservation would be a very small order, and would only assist the desires of “gene priests” all the more.
Off-topic, but are you the guy who made “Jew Talk”? That’s my favorite pro-White song out there (in terms of both lyrics and just being enjoyable to listen to). Nice work.
Jason Speaks – lol, another in-house idiot, eh1
“France had a policy to ally itself with Arabs several generations ago as a way of competing with the UK and the US”.
If the French occupation of Arab countries is “alliance” – then Europe’s unwanted kike thugs occupying Arab Palestine must be an “ally” of Arabs, right!
History of the Arabs
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/history-of-the-arabs/
I don’t think my question was an example of “house idiocy”, whatever that means. The link to your own site didn’t answer anything. The question still remains: Don’t most Arabs immigrate to Europe and the US because Arabs are drawn to the much higher standard of living they can have in the West, not because they are “fleeing bombs”. The standard of living in the Middle East was quite horrible before Europeans helped develop this bastion of low IQ people (and still remains pretty low even with massive oil wealth developed by Americans and Europeans).
It seems like you are particularly motivated to defend Arabs and Muslims while attacking Europeans. But that doesn’t prove anything with regard to why Muslims are immigrating to the West. Again, it seems to be because of the generous welfare states in the West that Muslims can enjoy.
Speaking of Muslims, and low intelligence, I have a question.
Why the f$*&^* (heck) do people cheer when Muhammed Ali is introduced in a public forum?
Because Ali was one of the greatest and bravest athletes of the modern era, perhaps? And, kid, even though you obviously don’t, decent people everywhere will always honour talent, courage, and intestinal fortitude overcoming adversity in the face of overwhelming odds no matter where it appears. Credit where credit is due, regardless. You obviously weren’t around in the 70′s. They’re not all buck n*ggers, you know. Check out “When We Were Kings” sometime, if ya wanna rumble. Cassius Clay was the Wayne Gretzky of boxing, baby.
Well, you asked.
This is your hero, old man?
From everyone’s favorite jewkipedia:
Indeed, Ali’s religious beliefs at the time included the notion that the white man was “the devil” and that white people were not “righteous.”
He has not ever apologized for that, has he?
Ali stated that “War is against the teachings of the Holy Qur’an. I’m not trying to dodge the draft. We are not supposed to take part in no wars unless declared by Allah or The Messenger. We don’t take part in Christian wars or wars of any unbelievers.”
If he was so great, why does he have those 5 professional losses? (5 more as an amateur?)
Rare for a heavyweight boxing champion in those days, Ali spoke at Howard University, where he gave his popular “Black Is Best” speech to 4,000 cheering students and community intellectuals after he was invited to speak at Howard by a Howard sociology professor, Nathan Hare, on behalf of the Black Power Committee, a student protest group.[18][19]
Your kinda guy, matthias?
Scooter, you’re not very honest. You and Ali have a lot of the same views, you just conveniently chose not to quote them, from the same ‘jewikpedia’ article you read. Why? Here’s the complete bit, with the parts you deliberately left out:
” Ali once stated, in relation to integration: “We who follow the teachings of Elijah Muhammad don’t want to be forced to integrate. Integration is wrong. We don’t want to live with the white man; that’s all.”[16](Isn’t that what you want, Scoots? To be seperate? No, you’re right, Ali is evil.) And in relation to inter-racial marriage: “No intelligent black man or black woman in his or her right black mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters.”[16](Isn’t that what you want also, Scoots? Stop miscegenation? If all US blacks held these views half our job would already be done. But Scoots is right, Ali is just evil!) Indeed, Ali’s religious beliefs at the time included the notion that the white man was “the devil” and that white people were not “righteous.” (Actually that’s a misquote. What he really said was “all jews and gentiles were devils”. He got it half right didn’t he? Hear him say it on youtube. He was a boxer, after all, not a professor. Many would agree with half that statement.) Ali claimed that white people hated black people.” (Again, more or less right.)
Next you take Ali to task for refusing to fight in the Vietnam war. Too bad tens of thousands of Whites didn’t follow his example. Too bad millions of Whites didn’t refuse to fight in WWI and WWII.
Another unforgivable crime of Ali’s: giving a black power speech. Oh, the horror! Only White Power speeches are OK, right Scoots?
Scoots claims he wasn’t great because he lost a few.
“Ali is generally considered to be one of the greatest heavyweights of all time by boxing commentators and historians. Ring Magazine, a prominent boxing magazine, named him number 1 in a 1998 ranking of greatest heavyweights from all eras.[50]
Ali was named the second greatest fighter in boxing history by ESPN.com behind only welterweight and middleweight great Sugar Ray Robinson.[51] In December 2007, ESPN listed Ali second in its choice of the greatest heavyweights of all time, behind Joe Louis.[52]”
Will someone please tell these professional sports historians that Scoots disagrees because Ali lost a few? Scoots knows better.
So to sum up, Mohammed Ali was a:
1. racial seperatist
2. anti-miscegenationist
3. anti-jew-war-ist
Hell, ain’t we all? And if he wasn’t in love with White people, who cares. Everybody hates everybody, we all know that. But Scoots’ original question was ‘why would anyone applaud Muhammed Ali’? I answered ‘because he was one of the greatest boxers of all time.’ It’s pretty simple. Would Scoots hold the great Ty Cobb to the same standards? Somehow, I doubt it. Hypocrisy makes anyone look bad. And now you may commence the ad hominems, kid.
I don’t know why anyone on this site would praise Muhammed Ali. He was primarily an anti-White, anti-American figure in the 60s and 70s. He was a symbol of anti-White activism. He also degraded other Black boxers who were at least good citizens as “Uncle Toms”. He was a jerk.
I think most Americans have forgotten how bad he was and just see an athlete who is sick and feel sorry for him.
You do know the difference between ‘praise’ and ‘facts’, don’t you? Guess not. Nobody ‘praised’ Ali. Sure, he may have been a jerk, but if some of the jerks who troll around here did half as much for their race as Ali did for his, instead of hypocritically worshipping some mythical jew every Sunday then playing internet mouthpiece instead of getting a life, maybe there’d be some Great White (Racial) Hope after all.
Ali would have been nothing without Jew promotion. I’m not sure exactly what he did ‘for’ his race other than promote even more counter-productive belligerence.
But I guess you and Ali have something in common. You share the Jew inspired hatred for the Church. You must really know how to break down white society. kudos!
Matthias:
I’ll bet you have many friends with your style of twisting someone else’s point. Where did I support fighting in Vietnam? I just pointed out in his own words his justification was from Allah or The Messenger, which was highly offensive to society even at that time. If he had said he didn’t want to fight in jewish wars, well, that would be a little more profound.
He didn’t speak against miscegenation against whitey, you will note. He wanted to preserve the black race.
He didn’t give a “black power” speech, he gave a “black is best” speech. Do you understand the difference?
Ali’s tone and defiance are understandable from his point of view, the tired and worn out myth about lack of black opportunity. I could see why the negroes like the guy, especially since they are so hateful towards whites. Hey, negroes still proclaim OJ was framed. Why you praise (yes, praise, reread what you wrote) him makes no sense to me.
Ever heard of Rocky Marciano – he never lost and beat Joe Louis. Knocked his ass out cold. That puts him ahead of Ali, in my book.
As Jason pointed out, the guy was an anti-white, anti American figure back when America was still a mostly white country, and Ali was helping to promote the policies we now see as an integral part of its destruction. Nevertheless, people feel sorry for him now. That makes more sense than your agressively rude comments.
Alth anus, pointing out that Jesus was a circumcised bar-mitzva’d yid is not “hatred’, it’s fact. You should pray to him a little harder. And the day you stand up in your church and cry White Power! juden, Raus! and tell the non-White congregants to p#ss off and take their filthy hands off of White women, like Ali did from a black perspective, then I’ll say you’ve got some guts. Somehow I doubt you will, and you’ll just keep quiet like the little church mouse you are. Way to go, ace. What would your pastor say? For shame, Christian!
Scoots, I never praised him, just recited facts. As for being aggressively rude, well all I can say is this:
The jew cries out in pain as he strikes you. Cheers.
Calling Ali “one of the greatest and bravest athletes of the modern era” amounts to praise, and not a fact, because it is an opinion.
I don’t see how that old Polish proverb (the jew cries out…) applies here, Mateo.
Professional sports historians, Sports Illustrated, Ring Magazine, ESPN et. al., have called him “one of the greatest” athletes of the modern era DUE TO HIS UNIQUE PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS which is not an opinion, nor praise, but FACT. His factual achievements earned him the title, not anyone’s praise. If you disagree, take it up with them, not me. I merely stated a FACT.
Calling Ali “one of the…bravest athletes of the modern era is not praise, nor an opinion, it is FACT. Please consider:
“The basketball player was very brave when he dribbled the ball.” No, he wasn’t. It does not take much courage to play basketball.
“The shortstop was very brave when he made a triple play and later hit a home run.” Again, that’s an opinion, or praise it is not fact.
“The prizefighter was very brave when he stepped into the ring to face the undefeated champion.” Fighters are courageous. The greatest obstacle a fighter faces when he steps into the ring is…fear. To overcome it they must have courage. And those who face the best fighters, the deadliest fighters, literally risk their lives by fighting. Every year professional fighters are either killed, maimed, or disabled by their professions. It is a risk they knowingly take. Would anyone dispute that bravery is not one of the most important weapons in their arsenal? I think not.
Scientists on Deadliest Warriors proved that the force of Chuck Liddel’s punches BROKE BONES. Would anyone deny that it didn’t take courage for any fighter to face a fighter that could kill a man with a blow from his fists?
George Foreman was such a killer. Ali would watch him train with the heavy bag. Foreman hit the heavy bag so hard he DESTROYED IT WITH THE FORCE OF HIS PUNCHES. Do you think Ali didn’t imagine what the force of those deadly blows might do to his body, his brain? Do you think it took courage to face such a man?
Foreman BROKE ALI’S JAW during the fight.
Ali fought round after round WITH A BROKEN JAW, literally risking his life.
Ali won the fight WITH A BROKEN JAW.
Raw. Courage.
Ali fought the deadliest fighters the world had to offer. Fight after fight. Year after year. He literally risked his life and paid for it with his severely disabling injuries he knew he was sustaining. Surely you would not deny that to face the deadliest fighters of the era for a decade took exemplary courage. Anyone who would compare such an athlete’s courage to that of a golfer or a lacrosse player is most assuredly a fool. Thus, to state that Ali was one of the ‘bravest’ athletes is not praise, not opinion, it is fact.
FACT.
Scoots, to be perfectly frank, if you are a dedicated WN, who struggles to set an example of what a true Aryan is, by breaking your ass everyday to better yourself, to create, sustain, and nurture a healthy White family, for our Race, our Nation, our future, or if you endeavour to achieve this aim, then you are my Brother, my Kinsmen, and I would risk everything I had to defend you and yours
against any threat.
When you fail to recognize true grit, true courage, regardless of the source, you diminish your own humanity and nobility. “Aryan” means noble after all. And I think you’re better than that. After all, you read TOO, don’t you?
You’re here, aren’t you? To recognize indomitablity in others is to cultivate it in yourself.
Kindest Regards,
M
Ali became a Muslim because he was a draft dodger and everyone knew that. He was a draft dodger because he hated White people and America and more or less said so. That is the reason he received so much praise from the official sports media. The Jewish Howard Cosell loved him for that very reason – Ali was a symbol of black violence and triumph over Whites. What Jewish sports writer wouldn’t love that?
People who put Ali on a pedestal and get emotional about defending him have always done so out of a sense of defending their anti-White hero.
Of course, it is almost impossible to talk about the “objective facts” oh his career, given that boxing has been so crooked for so long. Who can say what the truth is with regard to his so-called prowess. But as for why he is praised, loved and defended, there can be no doubt: He was a “strong black man” putting Whitie in his place.
Oh yeah, and as for the claim that Ali had “courage” because he kept fighting after suffering a physical wound, well if that is courage, then I guess pitbulls really have courage. They keep fighting after a wound too. And so have a lot of other boxers. I’ve seen guys in a bar keep fighting even though they were hurt — adrenalin often blocks awareness of pain.
It’s doubtful that the draft dodger Ali had any moral courage of any kind. He was puffed up as a anti-White warrior by the Jewish media. The anti-American draft dodger know shakes uncontrollably in some nursing home now I guess. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving jerk.
The only pedestal Ali or any other great boxing champion stands on was not put there by anyone’s praise or opinion, but by their own record of tangible accomplishments.
In Jason (pip)Squeaks world, the heart of Jack Dempsey was no better than an abused animal’s. John Sullivan was really a coward on adrenaline. Seriously?
Anyone who would say Rocky Marciano was no better than a drunk at a skid row bar is not only an idiot but a bigger jerk than even Muhammed Ali. What a sad, pathetic life he must deservingly lead.
Matthias, by your definition of courage, an averaged size quarterback in the NFL being charged by several 320 pound linemen aiming for a shot in the back have more courage than the boxer Ali, trained and ready to defend himself, standing toe to toe, and relatively even in weight with the other combatant..
Among negro athletes, surely OJ Simpson or Michael Vick rate equal in athletic ability, but as I have said and you clearly disagree with, opinions about courage and athleticism are just that, and reasonable people, as well as you, can disagree.
Many other magazines have held up other athletes as great, so who are we to argue?
Finally, although you are a white brother and we are fighting the same enemy, you are abusive and dishonest in your tactics, continually ascribing false statements and summations to others. Please stop doing that and lets work together to preserve the dying white race and the declining America for our children.
The Arabs are more clannish then we are in the West, that is a fact. As a group they have lower IQs – substantially lower, that is a fact too. Although we probably get some of the higher IQ Arabs here in the US and Europe. So, I think we should wish them well, be friendly where we can, but not have any illusions about them as buddies.
It is true that for the most part, it is not Muslims that try and get Christmas removed from our culture, it is Jews, especially Leftist Jews.
Come to Canada littlekid and find out that Arab youth have much higher IQ than the White youth. And as far Jews are concerned – looked around – the only leaders who are not licking their shoes – happens to be Muslims or other non-White.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/12/23/worlds-top-independent-leaders/
The facts don’t back up the assertion that Arabs have higher IQs than Whites. As I said, I am sure the West gets the sliver of Arabs with the highest IQ. But the low overall IQ of Arabs is well documented. It’s not their fault and it could change over the centuries, but right now it’s pretty low.
I’m not sure what your game is here: disruptor, pro-Arab guy, or what, but I just hope you aren’t seriously looking to low IQ Arabs as long term allies to Whites, especially White Advocates.
Most Muslims are pretty sold on the idea that Whites are evil “racists”.
In the East Asian Confucian traditional world,(China, Korea, Japan etc) while the clan was the anchor of the society, it was taboo to marry someone even with the same surname. This meant that marriage partners were sought outside the clan.
I am not sure what this article was about. Is this about race or religion anyways? I am not sure. Looks like race.
The problem with article like these it can be used by Jews and Asians to say well our IQ are high so why complain about us immigrating to West and exerting our influence there. Or then someone might say then let only Christians from Africa and Arab world migrate. It does not solve the problem.
Rehmat,
Your analogy is not correct. You equate calls to have non European immigration halted and recent immigrants deported as equivalent to Pakistan deporting all religious minorities. The propbelm is that these religious minorities are Pakistanis and share similar gene and culture with the majority religion(Sunni and Shia). The propbelm is Muslim immigrants to the West DON”T share culture and genes and history with the West.
Ethnicity matters here although this article today confuses me somewhat as I am not sure if the goal here is race or religion.
A couple of items only somewhat related to the article:
I am not familiar with Denmark’s immigration laws or with how strictly they are enforced. However, U.S. spending on social services is self-defeating. It attracts more poor immigrants. More social spending means more poverty in the U.S.
On the behavior of people of European ancestry, I once read the remark of a Jew who said non-Jewish whites have some sort of thing about animals. He said they all seem to have pets. That comment caught my attention.
A big contributor to the lower Arab IQ is the infiltration of Negroid genes among the Semitic Arabs.
For a long time, way before European colonialism and the European slave trade in Africans, the Negro slave trader par excellence was the Arab.
One of the largest Negro slave markets was in Basra, Iraq.
The population around Basra is heavily Negroid today, with the resulting low IQ.
The Arabs around Basra are Arabic to the same degree as Dominicans are Spanish.
It must be said that Arabs and Arabized Berbers, were also responsible for the little known white slave trade.
They kidnapped close to two million Europeans over the ages, raiding as far away as even Iceland.
That was not enough to counterbalance the lowering of the general IQ due to the mixing with Negro slaves.
Coincidentally, the same thing happened to the once great nation of Portugal: the importation and direct intermarriage with Negro slaves destroyed them forever as a great nation.
The percentage of Negro genes in the “white” Portuguese population is estimated at 10%.
See: Zanj revolt.
Frank Edwin Stone,
You’re wrong.
Mitochondrial DNA affinities at the Atlantic fringe of Europe.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12627534
A big contributor to the lower Arab IQ is the infiltration of Negroid genes among the Semitic Arabs.
I suppose this would depend on how you define the word “big”.
One problem with this idea is that Arab populations other than the Yemenis were found by 2003 study to carry ~10% mitochondrial DNA of sub-Saharan origin.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180338/
Even if the 10% of the non-Yemeni Arabs dna comes from sub-Saharan Africans, which seems very unlikely given that Middle Easterners seem to have much less sub-Saharan paternal admixture, the effect on the IQ of non-Yemeni Arabs wouldn’t have been all that large.
For example if the sub-Saharan Africans had an average IQ of 70 while the pre-admixture non-Yemeni Arabs had an average IQ of 100, a simple mathmatical model would estimate that the pre-admixture Arabs would only have had their IQ reduced to from 100 to 97.
It must be said that Arabs and Arabized Berbers, were also responsible for the little known white slave trade.
They kidnapped close to two million Europeans over the ages, raiding as far away as even Iceland.
Now this is true.
The slave trade you speak of was a big part of what led to so much conflict between Europeans and Middle Eastern Muslims.
Actually several Ottoman Sultans were the sons of Italian, Greek, or Georgian women who were kidnapped against their will by Muslims and then put in the Turkish Harem.
That was not enough to counterbalance the lowering of the general IQ due to the mixing with Negro slaves.
I doubt Black slaves had a significant effect on the IQ of any Middle Eastern Arabic country other than Yemen. I can’t find a valid estimate of how much Black admixture there is in an non-Yemeni Middle Eastern Arabic nationality where it would translate into a reduction of IQ more than two or three points at the most.
The study I referenced has a table showing haplogroup L at 9% in the Iraqis tested, 10% in the Bedouins tested, 15% in the Palestinians tested, 9% in the Syrians tested, 14% of the Jordanians tested, and 34% in the Yemenis tested.
So excluding Yemenis the Arabic populations with the most haplogroup L among the populations tested was the Jordanians with 14%.
From a base IQ of 100, 14% sub-Saharan African admixture would’ve brought the Jordanians down to an IQ of 96, or a decline of 4 points.
And that’s assuming that the amount of sub-Saharan dna in the Jordanians corresponds to the amount of mitochondrial dna they have of probable sub-Saharan origin, an assumption extremely unlikely to be accurate given the evidence that sub-Saharan gene flow into Arabic populations was disproportionately from females.
A post above stated that polygomy should be legalized because the smartest and wealthiest could afford to do so. I think this is a foolish statement because many moral degenerates are wealthy. Do you want them to have lots of kids while a moral man that is middle-class have none?
The polygamy idea is fantasy. As things stand, the underlying social and economic reasons for low white fertility would not be reversed by legalization of polygyny.
For all intents and purposes, wealthy men have unlimited access to females and reproduction as it is. Yet they still aren’t having large numbers of children.
In a sense wealthy men already can practice a form of polygyny … that is serial polygyny. It is illegal to have multiple wives at once, but a man can have several wives in a row and have children by each, trading up for a younger wife every 15-20 years (see Trump).
Of course, the main issue is not the mechanics of how Whites can once again assert themselves, the real quest is to legitimize White Advocacy and White culture explicitly to more Whites. Once that happens, the are many solutions to our problems. Worrying over how you establish this homeland or that public policy measure doesn’t really matter until we have more than a handful of internet guys discussing it.
To Pax EuroPa: If you believe that Mormons are the best among us(Whites) you are nuts. Fundamentalist Mormons are wack jobs. Comments like yours prove that White Nationalism in the West will go no where.
All Christians are wackjobs. That’s why I dislike Christianity, I made a few posts stating that Christianity is a problem for the West.
All Mormons are wack jobs. Mormons are extreme Jew worshipers, even compared to average Christards.
That’s not very helpful.
I see. So the truth isn’t helpful? I guess you prefer lies.
Your aspersions aren’t truth.
During my recent travels in Africa I have noticed that the lighter the skin of a native, the higher esteemed he or she is. Lighter skinned Africans in Africa have higher education and higher social rank. I also noticed that in many African countries local females do prefer a lighter skinned partner and if they have a chance they are even willing to be impregnated by a white traveler. The same females regard local black males as inferior savages. Talking to fellow European travelers I got the same feedback concerning the above. Once a black female is befriended, talk often ends up with her asking for seed for baby. At first I was thinking ‘entrapment’, but could not work out the why or how part. I can only think of eugenics.
Kind of sad that the same process happens in reverse in formerly white nations.
Ali , the greatest boxer ?
yes sure ,
How many people does it take to change a light bulb at a boxing match ?
None , the promoters will fix it .
While the relationship between lowered IQ and consanguinity is well established, I think Sennels’ article could have provided better analysis. His piece is based largely on another article in “Reproductive Health Journal” to which Sennels provides a link.
Sennels is rather selective with his use of the information in the RHJ piece. Notice first of all that while Sennels generalizes about Muslims, almost all his data is from a study of Arabs and Ansaris (Arab descended Muslims in northern India) and a brief, unlinked blurb about Pakistan in the Times of India. No information is provided on Iran, indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Bosnia, Albania, or the larger Muslim population of India. He also cites several Danish-language articles from Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper whose mysterious writer, Fleming Rose, launched the Muhammed cartoons with the very likely intention of further poisoning the relationship between Muslims and Christians. This is not a source in which I am willing to put a lot of faith.
Some interesting points from the RHJ article:
“Generally, the highest rates of marriages to close relatives are consistently reported in the more traditional rural areas and among the poorest and least educated in society [8]. Reports from some Arab countries have shown that consanguinity rates are lower in urban when compared to rural settings.”
“Unlike what is thought, consanguinity in the Arab World is not only confined to Muslim communities. Several other communities, including the Lebanese, Jordanian, and Palestinian Christian populations, have also practiced consanguinity, but to a lesser extent than Muslims [4-7].”
“Secular changes in the consanguinity rates have been noticed in some Arab populations. In Jordan [9], Lebanon [5], Bahrain [10], and among Palestinians [11-13], the frequency of consanguineous marriage is decreasing.”
So, what is the real linkage here? I would assess that the link is between consanguinity and–not Islam or even Arab identity per se–but desert tribal culture as it has developed among Arabs, Berbers, Kurds, Pashtuns, and South Asians for many millenia, long predating the advent of Islam.
Tribes fight one another. That’s just what they do. And the desert environment amplifies the winner-take-all, zero-sum nature of intertribal relations. Whoever controls the water lives (or rules); whoever does not, perishes or is reduced to peonage. Tribal cohesiveness evolves into an absolute, inviolable requirement. Hence the impetus to inbreeding.
It is not surprising that Christians, who have had, in the last century, more contact with the external world via immigration and affiliation with the west (think Lebanon) and more mobility in general, have developed lower rates of inbreeding. It is also unsurprising that non-oil-producing countries like Jordan, Lebanon, and Palestine who see lots of out-migration in search of work and general mobility have also seen drops in inbreeding rates.
Consanguinity is only one aspect of the debilitating effect that the unforgiving desert environment has had, over time, on its population. Islam, in fact, was deliberately conceived as–among other things–an antidote to the excesses of desert-aggravated tribal culture. It will be interesting to see whether the countries in question can overcome this and many other disadvantages imposed by their environment. I can’t say I’m altogether optimistic.
“Pax Europe:: “All Christians are whackjobs.”
That’s an absurd statement and a horrifically grotesque broad-brushing. Nobody who truly appreciated White Western heritage would say such a thing.
I do believe that “Z.O.G.” is also doing tribal work over at Incogman.com. At leasts his posts trashing Christianity (a favorite Jewish pastime) are the same and so is the username.
Julian,
You’re really a dishonest piece of work. Christians _today_ are certainly “whackjobs”. You are an excellent demonstration of the fact. There is nothing wrong with our christian heritage or christian ethics. The religion was just a disgusting stage in our evolution. You like your chamber pot, but perhaps you should plug the cakehole and let those of us who prefer indoor plumbing talk.
Darwin married his cross cousin. But what cousins they were!
Two great families, the Wedgewoods and the Darwins.
AFAIK the tradition in the most of the Arab world is to marry the parallel cousin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_and_cross_cousins
Hbd chick has some good posts on the important differences.
“I made a few posts stating that Christianity is a problem for the West.”
Your opinion of Christianity is juvenile and uneducated.
Christianity was the religion of the west for the twenty centuries during which western man rose to unmatched heights and authority.
Julian:
While the west prospered under moral Christian men, the US rose to great heights. With the decline of the white man and Christianity in the US since the late 1950′s, who among us can say the US hasn’t gone straight to hell? Now that the white man is no longer in charge, the US is 15 trillion in debt, and we have exhibit A for the efficacy of black rule – the city of Detroit. The future of America without the white man in charge will only decline.
If by Christianity mean the true followers of Jesus – then you’re wrong. His followers known as Nazarine, were killed by millions by Roman in the 4th century. What the world got for the last 16 centuries – is the Goyim followers of St. Paul.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/knowing-jesus-as/
Then you’re calling Adolf Hitler, Nietzsche, Edward Gibbon, Julius Evola, and Dr. Revilo P Oliver JUVENILE and UNEDUCATED? Most of these people even thought that Islam was a better fit for our race.
Please spare me the humor and read about why I oppose Christianity here: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/04/republican-party-shindig-in-san-mateo-county-throws-me-out/#comment-33137
Where to start? Adolf Hitler, whatever else he was, was a failure.
Nietzsche–let me preface this by saying that he was a brilliant philologist and that I read “Birth of Tragedy” once a year and gain some new insight into Greek drama with every reading–but in his own life he was psychotic and weak. His fantasies about ubermenschen were just that–what he wished he could be. He’s certainly not a role model.
Gibbon was an excellent writer, a fair linguist, and the first person to tackle the 1200 years from the crisis of the 3rd century til the Fall of Constantinople. Nevertheless, he was an irritable and bitter man who spent his days sitting on his grapefruit-sized testicles. There are many sources available now that he never saw.
All three of those men could be described as juvenile.
The late great chancellor was a huge success Athanasius. His country loved him and he brought them great prosperity. If the jew governments of the world destroyed him, how is that his fault? And is it not “juvenile” to talk about imagined testicles? And how did _five_ become “all three”?
Athanasius, should you not be ashamed of the way you expose a very small mind to your betters?
Oh, Hitler was a success? That is why Germany today is a pillar of tradition and an ethnic reservoir for Aryans?
Gibbon actually did have a disease that caused his testicles to swell up (http://www.answers.com/topic/hydrocele-testis)–needless to say, he had a unique outlook on life.
Your family obviously converted to Protestantism and commenced inbreeding early on, and it shows!
You’re a con-man who makes his living scamming people. You have no credibility.
With regards to Germany and it’s political history, I think the concept of “Teutonic freedom” is what should be remembered. England, America and Germany, along with other nations benefited from it. This concept has been forgotten because enemies of Whites and of freedom have preferred to emphasize the various failed socialist regimes in our history.
Sorry, make that Wedgwoods
The “goyim” followers of St Paul translates to the “non jewish” followers of St Paul. So what is your point?
I guess he’s endorsing the view of Friedrich Nietzsche that Paul was a Jewish plotter sent to undermine the European goyim.
The implication of his use of the word goyim is that the non-Jews who believe Pauline Christianity are “suckers”.
This is a common view among Muslims, for whatever reason they think Paul was a snake in the grass of some kind.
Yes, Christianity is a Jewish religion designed to control the goyim. And so is Islam.
MY experience of Muslims (almost) inbreeding? Once my aunt (my mother’s older sister) asked me to marry her son. My immediate response was laughing to her face (not very polite of me, I know), I said,”Do you want stupid grandchildren? Do you really want to risk that?”
Another cousin, married to her second cousin, said that it is better that we marry close to our own family, since there will be more close bond, etc. And look at her children (two boys who look like they jumped out of baby food commercials into real life, btw) they turned out just fine. In order to avoid complete filial ostracism, I just continuously replied, “Thank you, but no, thank you.” Over and over and over.
Yes, there are instances of inbreeding. But I think in an urban, well-educated segment of society, that is highly frowned upon.
I think what is relevant here is that both the Western and Eastern churches banned consanguineous marriages (to varying degrees). In the Muslim world marriage of first cousins is popular to this day. I’m sure you’re right that this isn’t the case in cities, but countries like Pakistan and even Egypt are still very rural.
Incidentally, if there are any posts of yours that I never replied to, it’s because I missed them.
“Incidentally, if there are any posts of yours that I never replied to, it’s because I missed them.”
Awww..you missed them? How sweet…LOL
*as in overlooked.
Did you dated your cousin? Here in Canada, many Christians and Jews don’t mind dating their distant cousins – but bigots enough to marry them. Once I asked that question to my young Jewish assistant engineer – and his response wa: “If one is only interesting in drinking milk, why should he buy the cow?”
“The war in the Middle East is not about religion at all. It is a fight over land hiding behind the cloak of religion. I doubt very seriously the primary motive for the Crusades was for rescuing the holy lands from Islam. I suspect the booty captured by “pious” European kings was much more to the point……,” Pastor Dr. Jim Rigby in The Radical Christianity.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/western-wars-on-islamic-world/
haha. No I have never dated, let alone considered marrying, my cousin.
What happened,Ath? Your dog ate your sense of humor?
@Rehmat: No, we were very brother and sisterly. I never considered any of my cousins as a potential marriage partner. LOL
The backstory was, my cousin was about to marry someone his mom didn’t like, and since she did not want to have her son run off to another island (this is Indonesia, after all) she asked me to marry him. To keep him in the family, so to speak. Her stated reason was that I will give him a sense of purpose, which I found to be even funnier. Me, a sense of purpose. If I had a real sense of purpose, would I be lurking around on an American nationalist site when I should’ve been out there, making money and stuff?
Ah, I guess I’m lucky to have you here to lighten my day.
Nicolai Sennel has written some interesting material concerning muslim mentality( he used to work with muslim prison inmates). Should be easy for those interested to find it by googling. Can provide a link to a nice interview though in which he briefely talks about his experiences.
http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/05/among-criminal-muslims/
Maybe the IQ of Jews today is significantly higher than it was for much of their history. In ‘The 10,000 Year Explosion’ Cochran and Harpending insist that the Jews of the Ancient world were not particularly intelligent and that there gains in IQ came between 800 to 1700 CE. Furthermore C&H say although Jews had developed high IQs by 1700 they did not show their intelectual superiority until recently because they were not part of mainstream culture. However this period was when inbreeding was greatest and therefore a partial or supplementary explanation could be that consanguineous marriages (including uncle/niece – yikes!) had adversely affected their IQ . It may be that since they abandoned consanguineous marriages Jews are more intelligent than they have ever been.
I wonder if the low average IQ in Israel has something to do with the non Ashkenazim Jews continuing to marry their relatives.
HBD chic says
Mormon Polygamy was appropriately introduced by its founder (excuse me that I cannot recall the name off the top-of-my-head) after he was undeniably caught pursuing a sexual relationship with a woman who was not his wife.
What is difference between polygamy and having a couple of girlfriends before or after marriage?
Under Jewish law – sex with a non-married woman is not considered ‘adultery’!
Isn’t it better for the society to have polygamy under which husband has to bear the expenses to raise the children – than the taxpayers to pay for millions of bastards left in streets?
Oh yeah, it was certainly better for Muslims to kidnap Christian women in the Balkans, Egypt, Spain, and Hindus in India for their harems! Society was much happier!
Why does anyone trust Jewish or Asian IQ data? Just look at Einstein and Freud. How many books, college courses, and seminars have been devoted to these two frauds to force them down our throats? Jews own the media and decide which books and authors get rave reviews and promoted and which ones get panned and banned. Jews control the academic curriculum. Our geniuses, great actors, directors, statesmen, etc. are created by jewish propaganda.
All you have to do to determine the amount of negro blood in someone is look at them. A mulatto is predominately black because white genes are recessive. The same holds true for IQ. When describing high IQ asians so-called scientists (so-called because scientists are supposed to be objective and not political propagandists) use the term ‘northern asian.’ Northern Asians is code for White or light-skinned Asians like the Japanese. I suspect the lighter your skin color the higher your IQ whether you’re african, asian, mestizo, whatever. I could be wrong but I’d like to see an IQ bell curve correlated to variations of skin color.
Jews and asians are highly competitive. They bust their butts to get that gpa. Competitiveness has nothing to do with intelligence but is a product of culture. They are driven by parents, teachers, tutors, cultural networking and reinforcement. No expense or advantage is spared because the goal is to dominate whites and only manifests in competition with whites. When left to themselves their societies reflect what they really are and explains why China was a primitive backwater for the last 5 thousands years, jewish ghettos degenerate cesspools, and Africa needs billions from white countries just to stave off mass starvation. For them competition with whites is a zero sum game. Non-whites are not bound by ‘white’ rules. The only rule against cheating is don’t get caught.
The problem for whites is we were “snuck up on.” We didn’t realize we were being competed against by every non-white race on the planet and that it’s not a game but a fight to the finish.
Amen Remain – now that we have so many of them here, is it any wonder US prestige and power continues to sink to new lows, and Detroit illustrates our dismal future without the white man in charge?
“And as you suggest, polygamy is the lot of those who fantasize of having a harem to dull the pain of not being able to get even one woman with a pulse in real life. ”
Could be , or it could be the lot of those who really really like lots of sex .
lol
My mother and my father were cousins. My mother didn’t know my father before she was told she would have to marry him. She accepted this as it was the custom in Algeria although she wasn’t happy with this arranged marriage. There is no physical or mental defect in our family. I have uncles who are journalists, one editor of an algerian newspaper, one of my aunts was a headteacher many were successful in their chosen field, uncles in the army including a commandant, in education, sports ect… 8 of of 10 of us were/still are primary school teachers, secondary and high school tutors and university lecturers one of whom is teaching economics in the university of Algiers and has 2 doctorates to his name and another also holds a doctorate in sports and tutor at another university. He also has written extensively about sports namely his favourie basket ball for which he trained many successful teams in the country. Som uncles’ were poets, writers, revolutionaries and have fought during the war of independance, one was a government minister, an embassador and my nieces and nephews very good looking as well as excellent at school. So what made you decide that intermarriage leads to defects? You are totally wrong.
You must also consider people in the past who lived in small europeen towns and countries like Ireland most of whom are related by marriage not just the muslims or the jews. Some of this comments are unfounded and downright racist and biased against people from others races. The old story and repeated tune. No less.
Why are you on this site?
And fyi, both the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches strongly frowned on consanguineous marriages (cousin marriages).
Athanasius, I am a White person who converted to Islam. I am proud to be White and Muslim. There are Whites of all religions, Christian, Buddhist, atheist (yes I believe atheism is a religion), Muslim, Hindu, scientologist, …
If you were really a white nationalist, you’ll realize that not all whites are christian or secular christians.
That doesn’t make sense.
Pax Europa: “Then you’re calling Adolf Hitler, Nietzsche, Edward Gibbon, Julius Evola, and Dr. Revilo P Oliver JUVENILE and UNEDUCATED?”
Those five fellows said “All Christians are whack jobs” did they?
No, I’m calling you juvenile for saying a juvenile thing, not what those fellows said. And uneducated, too.
As for the five fellows and whether they are “educated” about Christianity, I don’t recall any of them being devout Christians, and that is how one actually gets educated about Christianity.
As to Hitler, great as he was: I don’t recall Christian practice or metaphysics to ever be a big interest of his.
As to Julias Evola: I’m sure he’s a great guy, but if his commentaries on the Bhagavad-Gita are any indication (and they are quite shallow and miss mmuch important philosophical content of the B-Gita), my guess would be that his comprehension of Christianity is likewise flawed (and uneducated, not based on any personal experience).
As to Nietzsche, I know he had problems getting his mustache in his soup, but I believe his opinions on Christianity were the analysis of an outsider and one must be an insider at some point to be truly educated ab out a thing. Was he ever a church-going man? Did he partake of the great Bhakti-Yoga that is Christian mass? Did he ever try Christian mantra (rosaries) etc.? Most intellectuals like him analyze things at a distance.
And yet, my guess is every one of those five is actually more “educated” about Christianity than yourself, desultory as their study may be.
Julian Lee is a con-artist who makes his living as an “astrologer”, ripping off gullible people of their hard earned dollars:
http://julianlee.com/
Oy veh, it’s a living! hehehe
http://julianlee.com/services.html
About Julian Lee
Julian Lee is Mars-in-Gemini, Aries Sun trine Uranus 0.15 from exact,, born one of six children, of Lithuanian and Norwegian descent. He grew up in Des Moines, Iowa and moved to Alaska at the age of 29 based on an astrocartography map. He has dedicated his life to studying the mysteries of astrology, and especially the “laws of location.” He has been a full time professional astrologer specializing in Location since 1992, and has a world wide clientele. His clients include people inexperienced with astrology, professional astrologers, serious locational astrology mavens, and the famous. He is the author of The Geostel Brownbook for analyzing A*C*G style maps, and Signs Of Freedom, on getting free of astrological influences. He also has an e-book available, Gifts Of The Mystic.
hehehe
Muslim inbreeding, polygamy and solution to the demographic decline in the West. An interesting study by a Russian female Christian inter-faith writer.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/04/24/polygamy-and-wests-demographic-decline/
The old Christian-world’s claim that Jews were in the habit of abducting Christian children to perform their religious rituals by using their blood – has always been controversial. Most Jews call the allegation as much a ‘Jew-hating” libel as the Christians call the Holocaust ‘a Christian-hating’. However, under the western “freedom of expression” – When Jews produce anti- Christian movies like The Lost Tomb of Jesus, claiming that Jesus was never resurrected and that he had a sex partner and a child (sic) and the Da Vinci Code OR the anti-Islam Danish Cartoons and recent threats to burn copies of Holy Qur’an – are all okey but telling something which doesn’t follow the Jewish narration of world history – is ‘anti-Semitism’ and not kosher.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/from-blood-libel-to-organ-harvesting-2/
Muhammad Ali, the Champ and Malcolm X were not ‘anti-White’ but anti-Establishment which is, like most things in the West, is monopolized by the Jews. This was the main reason why they have been ‘Crucified’ by the mainstream media.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/malcolm-crucified/
The Jewish practice of tracing lineage thru the mother also allowed the Jews to diminish the effects of consanguinity. Under Jewish law, the offspring of a Jewish woman and a gentile man are considered Jewish. Thus, infusions of non-Jewish DNA into the tribe have occurred in every generation among the Jews in the Diaspora. This is a eugenics practice that is driven by the sexual selection choices of Jewish women.