I’m sure by now everyone has heard about James Lee, the homeless Korean-American man who, inspired by Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth and enraged that his ideas for cable programming were rejected, stormed the Discovery Channel’s headquarters in Maryland, bandied a weapons, and took hostages. He might have been carrying a bomb.
Lee’s central demand was that the Discovery Channel revamp its primetime lineup.
We should be cautious reaching any sweeping conclusions about bizarre cases like one, regarding environmentalism, Asian immigration, or what have you. Lee was what people, before our age of therapy, called a lunatic. Sane people are all alike; every insane person is insane in his own way.
That said, commentators and activists love to latch on to sensational news stories like this one for the sake of their own pet projects (much as the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, by another crazed Korean, was turned into a call for gun control.) My sense is that the Discovery Channel Gunman will lend himself to many a “You know what that leads to…” argument.
Despite my general antipathy towards his profession, I've become a fan of German Central Banker Thilo Sarrazin, who appears never to have gotten the memo of about public officials speaking the truth on race and immigration. Herr Serrazin first came to the world's attention when he mentioned that replacing ethnic Germans with Turks and Arabs will make Germany "stupider." He has since criticized free-loading Muslim immigrants, as well as Islam itself. And he's now taken on an even bigger taboo:
By Michael WoodheadMail Online30th August 2010A leading member of Germany’s central bank has caused outrage by claiming that Jews are identified by a particular gene.
Thilo Sarrazin, who is on the board of the the Bundesbank in Frankfurt, said in a newspaper interview: ‘All Jews share a certain gene. Basques (Spanish separatists) have particular genes, that distinguishes them from others.’
German’s Jewish community today reacted with horror and accused him of anti-Semitism and attempted racial profiling.
‘Whoever tries to define Jews by their genetic make up succumbs to racism,’ said Stephan Kramer, secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany.
Without dwelling on the "certain gene" comment, it's worth pointing out to Stephan Kramer that the Israeli state and its university system has taken no small interest in mapping the Jewish genome and proving the genetic similarity of the various Jewish groups in the diaspora. I'm sure he is well aware of this fact, though he apparently doesn't want to allow any Germans to talk about it.
Paleocons and other traditionalists have been saying this for decades: Westerners are more altrusitic and trusting than other kinds of people. Now there is science to prove this. The article mostly concentrates on the Western bias inherent in most kinds of behavioral psychology, but the results are particularly amusing.
Dr. Henrich and co-authors Steven Heine and Ara Norenzayan argue that life-long members of societies that are Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic — people who are WEIRD — see the world in ways that are alien from the rest of the human family. The UBC trio have come to the controversial conclusion that, say, the Machiguenga are not psychological outliers among humanity. We are.
"If you're a Westerner, your intuitions about human psychology are probably wrong or at least there's good reason to believe they're wrong," Dr. Henrich says.
....
Others punish participants perceived as too altruistic in co-operation games, but very few in the English-speaking West would ever dream of penalizing the generous.
Remember this the next time some clown advocates for some ridiculous government welfare program.
Recent genetic evidence has given some credence to old rumors about Adolf Hitler that dogged him throughout his life.
The TelegraphBy Heidi Blake24 Aug 2010Saliva samples taken from 39 relatives of the Nazi leader show he may have had biological links to the “subhuman” races that he tried to exterminate during the Holocaust.
Jean-Paul Mulders, a Belgian journalist, and Marc Vermeeren, a historian, tracked down the Fuhrer’s relatives, including an Austrian farmer who was his cousin, earlier this year.
A chromosome called Haplogroup E1b1b1 which showed up in their samples is rare in Western Europe and is most commonly found in the Berbers of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, as well as among Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.
"One can from this postulate that Hitler was related to people whom he despised," Mr Mulders wrote in the Belgian magazine, Knack.
Haplogroup E1b1b1, which accounts for approximately 18 to 20 per cent of Ashkenazi and 8.6 per cent to 30 per cent of Sephardic Y-chromosomes, appears to be one of the major founding lineages of the Jewish population.
Knack, which published the findings, says the DNA was tested under stringent laboratory conditions.
"This is a surprising result," said Ronny Decorte, a genetic specialist at the Catholic University of Leuven.
"The affair is fascinating if one compares it with the conception of the world of the Nazis, in which race and blood was central.
“Hitler's concern over his descent was not unjustified. He was apparently not "pure" or ‘Ayran’.”
It is not the first time that historians have suggested Hitler had Jewish ancestry.
His father, Alois, is thought to have been the illegitimate offspring of a maid called Maria Schickelgruber [sic] and a 19-year-old Jewish man called Frankenberger.
A simple Google search reveals that much has been made about these allegations. I’m no Hitler scholar, but my impression from reading Ian Kershaw’s biography was that the rumors of the Führer’s Jewish ancestry were mostly bunk.
Writes Kershaw,
The most serious speculation about Hitler’s supposed Jewish background has occurred since the Second World War, is directly traceable to the memoirs of the leading Nazi lawyer and Governor General of Poland, Hans Frank, dictated in his Nuremberg cell while awaiting the hangman.
Frank claimed that he had been called in by Hitler towards the end of 1930 and shown a letter from his nephew William Patrick Hitler (the son of his half-brother Alois, who had been briefly married to an Irish woman) threatening, in connection with the press stories circulating about Hitler’s background, to expose the fact that Hitler had Jewish blood flowing in his veins. Allegedly commissioned by Hitler to look into his family history, Frank reportedly discovered that Maria Anna Schicklgruber had given birth to her child while serving as a cook in the home of a Jewish family called Frankenberger in Graz. Not only that: Frankenberger senior had reputedly paid regular installments to support the child on behalf of his son, around nineteen years old at the birth, until the child’s fourteenth birthday. Letters were allegedly exchanged for years between Maria Anna Schicklgruber and the Frankenbergers. According to Frank, Hitler declared that he knew, from what his father and grandmother had said, that his grandfather was not the Jew from Graz, but because his grandmother and her subsequent husband were so poor they had conned the Jew into believing he was the father and into paying for the boy’s support.
Frank’s story gained wide circulation in the 1950s. But it simply does not stand up. There was no Jewish family called Frankenberger in Graz during the 1830s. In fact, there were no Jews at all in the whole of Styria at the time, since Jews were not permitted in that part of Austria until the 1860s. A family named Frankenreiter did live there, but was not Jewish. There is no evidence that Maria Anna was ever in Graz, let alone was employed by the butcher Leopold Frankenreiter. […]
[A] number of different Gestapo inquired into Hitler’s family background in the 1930s and 1940s contain [no] reference to the alleged Graz background. Indeed, they discovered no new skeletons in the cupboard. Hans Frank’s memoirs, dictated at a time when he was waiting for the hangman and plainly undergoing a psychological crisis, are full of inaccuracies and have to be used with caution. With regard to the story of Hitler’s alleged Jewish grandfather, they are valueless. Hitler’s grandfather, whoever he was, was not a Jew from Graz.
Perhaps Hitler was a quarter Jewish after all -- which would have made him a German according to the Nuremberg Laws, by the way -- or had a Jewish relative on another branch of his family tree. This controversy is certainly fascinating, though I don’t know what it actually tells us about the Second World War, National Socialism, or Hitler’s rise to power.
The story will, no doubt, be picked up on by anti-racists and race deniers. The new critique against the Bell Curve and similar argument will be, “But how can you say that race exists when the ultimate Aryan Übermensch, Adolf Hitler, was part Sephardic Jewish?” That such a claim is logically incoherent won’t stop people from making it. As a friend wrote me via email, the “notion that you can determine such things as Jewish ancestry using DNA testing doesn't square well with ‘race does not exist.’”
The Washington Post has an unintentionally funny headline “Gun-toting soccer moms a scary thought in D.C. area, but not out west.” It turns out that what’s good for Sharon and Cheryl isn’t necessarily what’s best for Shaniqua and Shantay.
PHOENIX -- In the red rock and sand of the Arizona desert, just past the retirement villages and golf greens that have made this sun-worshipping city famous, sits the biggest public shooting range in the United States.
Not far away are the Wal-Marts where Arizonans pay Sun City retirees to wait in line when a new ammo shipment arrives, lest the supply run out. Residents have the right to carry handguns openly, and starting last month residents who have no criminal records and are at least 21 also are able to carry concealed weapons just about anywhere, without the bother of getting a permit.
The full embrace of firearms is just as fervent to the north in Montana, where nearly two-thirds of all households have firearms. Montanans feel so strongly about their right to own guns for hunting, fending off grizzlies and -- if it comes to it -- fellow humans that lawmakers passed a measure last year that challenges the federal government's authority to regulate guns made and kept in their state.
This is the gun culture of the American West, and it is from here that the latest challenge to the District's firearms laws has come. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) have proposed a law that they say would sweep away overly stringent regulations imposed by the D.C. Council after the Supreme Court struck down the city's 32-year ban on handguns.
Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) said the McCain-Tester bill could gut the District's regulatory powers, including laws that are stricter than most states about keeping guns away from people with records of domestic violence. He also said the law shows a disregard for the realities of the District, where guns mean drive-bys, holdups and intimidation more than sport, tradition and the American way.
"The national debate about guns just misses that they are very different cultures," Mendelson said of the District and much of the rest of the country. "It's like a psychology, a mind-set, as to how people as a group think about guns."
What does one say to this kind of journalistic malpractice? We should at least be happy that they’re admitting that it’s the quality of the population which determines how much crime there is, not the gun laws. On the other hand...come on! The lie by omission is so blatant that one thinks it must smack awake the most mindless Huffington Post-reading and PBS-watching liberal. Maybe the author here is a crypto-white nationalist who wanted to make it as obvious as possible without spilling the beans and getting fired. If so, job well done.
The housing bust hasn’t been bad for everybody, as the Wall Street Journal tells us.
HENDERSON, Nev.—When Shawnetta Newburn left her drug-infested St. Louis neighborhood in search of a better life for her family in Las Vegas, she didn't expect to live in a house with frills worthy of a McMansion.
But Paradise awaited.
That's the name of the gated community where Ms. Newburn, a single mother who makes $10.50 an hour as a pawn-shop cashier, rents a three-bedroom townhouse with soaring ceilings, a gas-fueled fireplace and an oversize walk-in closet in the largest bedroom. The master bath even includes an enclosed toilet room, a feature popular in mini-mansions.
"The only time I ever saw that was on TV or something," she says during a tour of the approximately 2,000-square-foot home. "I never thought I'd have anything like this." The development has a kidney-shaped swimming pool.
Her previous apartment in St. Louis resembled public housing, she says, and her three sons were crammed into one bedroom. After her refrigerator caught fire, her landlord replaced it with an outdated brown model. She now has gleaming-white appliances.
Ms. Newburn can thank the housing bust. She participates in a government program for low-income families that subsidizes about half of her $1,400 monthly rent. The program, known as Section 8, has for decades put families in functional but basic homes and apartments, sometimes in less-than-desirable communities.
But overbuilding during the housing boom has left so many homes available that landlords, desperate for renters, are wooing Section 8 recipients, whose government subsidies, delivered electronically, guarantee the landlord gets paid. As a result, Section 8 recipients suddenly have a housing smorgasbord...
The change marks one of the most dramatic shifts since the 1974 creation of Section 8, nicknamed after its location in the U.S. Housing and Community Development Act. The $18.1 billion Housing and Urban Development program offers more than 2 million families the chance to live outside of housing projects. Recipients pay a certain percentage of their income, typically no more than 30%, each month.
What’s most dangerous about this development is that it could lead to Section 8 housing being an attractive option for white people. The main reason whites don’t take advantage of government programs for the poor as much as they could is because living off the government has usually meant you had to dwell amongst blacks. If it becomes possible to use your voucher to move into a decent area one of the biggest disincentives to going on Section 8 is removed. Theodore Dalrymple in his articles and books has shown what happens to lower class whites when welfare becomes a realistic option.
It must be said that these programs are a drop in the bucket when it comes to the national budget. As much as these stories may anger us, we have to remember that what government spends on “defense,” over fifty times that thrown at Section 8, makes this program seem like pocket change. The Journal has no problem with that.
The Anglosphere tippeth over.
9th August 2010Just one in ten babies is born to a white British mother in some parts of the country, figures reveal.The statistics - based on NHS monitoring of the ethnicity and nationality of patients - show a sharp contrast in the backgrounds of new mothers in urban and rural areas.
While white British mothers accounted for just 9.4 per cent of all births in one London health trust, the figure was 97.4 per cent of all births in Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust.
The birth statistics reflect how mothers described themselves, not the ethnicity of the fathers or the babies.
Across all of England's 150 NHS Trusts there were 652,638 deliveries last year, around six out of ten of them to women who called themselves white British.
But in some trusts serving rural areas more than 95 per cent of mothers fell into that category.
These included Northern Devon with 97.4 per cent, Co Durham and Darlington with 97.1, and Northumbria with 96 per cent.
At the other end of the spectrum, in North West London Hospitals NHS Trust, which covers Harrow, just 9.4 per cent of mothers were white British. Another inner city trust - Sandwell and West Birmingham - had 16.5 per cent. And a little over one in four new mothers were white Britons at Guy's and St Thomas' hospital in central London.
The proportion of mothers of white British origin at Bradford Teaching Hospitals trust was 34 per cent.
(As of 2001, only two percent of marriages in Britain were interracial, so the Mail's statistics regarding White motherhood accurately reflect the coming demographics of the Kingdom.)
Serious discussion of the reality of genetic differences seldom reaches a mass audience, much less the largest one in talk radio, but Rush Limbaugh gave 20 million Americans a lesson in human biological diversity last Thursday.
On August 5, Limbaugh delivered the monologue “Life is Not Fair.” He was so pleased with the result he posted a transcript on his website. It revisited one of his favorite topics:
I've made the point throughout my career, the undeniable truths of life, many monologues on this program, that life is not fair by definition. Life isn't fair. I mean, it just isn't, and there's no way that you can change certain aspects that make life unfair to make them fair. Life is not equal.
He recounted economic, moral, and genetic disparities to show it is life, not the U.S. Constitution, that is unfair. Among his examples were professional sports stars:
Athletes are another thing. Champions are born. They are not made in the weight room. They are not made on the practice field. It's honed and it's practiced and it's improved, but champions are born. If you can't run a 4.2 40, nobody can teach you how. If you can't throw a baseball 100 miles an hour, nobody can teach you how. It's not fair. Some people can and some can't. It's not because the Constitution or the country's unfair.
Rush isn't speaking as a novice. He worked for the Kansas City Royals, lost his post on Monday Night Football for non-PC comments, and attempted to purchase the St. Louis Rams only to be blocked on the basis of lies about race. Rush knows sports.
You Sir, have just won a Darwin Award!
A note to aspiring Palestinian Game Theorists: Bedding Jewesses in the Middle East's only democracy by intimating that you're one of the Chosen can have bad consequences.
The TelegraphBy Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
20 Jul 2010A Palestinian man has been convicted of rape after having consensual sex with an Israeli woman who believed he was Jewish because he introduced himself as "Daniel".
A court in Jerusalem has made international legal history by jailing Sabbar Kashur, a 30-year-old delivery man from East Jerusalem, for 18 months.
He was convicted of "rape by deception" following a criminal trial that has drawn criticism from across Israel.
The court heard accusations that Mr Kashur misled the woman, whose identity has not been disclosed, by introducing himself with the traditionally Jewish name during a chance encounter on a street in central Jerusalem in 2008.
After striking up a conversation, the two went into a top-floor room of a nearby office-block and engaged in a sexual encounter, after which Mr Kashur left before the woman had a chance to get dressed. It was only later that she discovered Mr Kashur's true racial background, lawyers said.
Although conceding that the sex was consensual, district court judge Tzvi Segal concluded that the law had a duty to protect women from "smooth-tongued criminals who can deceive innocent victims at an unbearable price"
"If she hadn't thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have co-operated," Mrs Segal said as she delivered her verdict.
A conviction for rape by deception on the grounds of racial misrepresentation is believed to be internationally unprecedented, according to British legal experts.
AltRight Information Service
Most Popular
- Most Read
- Most Commented
-
Golden Dawn Sheds Light On Itself
By Dimitrios Papageorgiou -
Race War?
By Andy Nowicki -
Rethinking Colonialism
By Siryako Akda
