Curious liberal with questions about you guys!

[MikeTodd]

Originally Posted by (not a clan chief) Steven L. Akins

The jury is still out on this one:

here they voted to convict

[varg]

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/may...ace-after-all/

Geneticists are uncovering another level of human ethnic diversity: It may not be which genes we have so much as the way they behave that accounts for our differences. Using the International HapMap Project, which catalogs human gene variants across populations, University of Pennsylvania researchers Vivian Cheung and Richard Spielman first collected the gene sequences of a particular white blood cell from 82 Asians and 60 people of European descent. Then, using microarray chips, they measured expression levels of those genes.

What they found was surprising: Although which genes were present didn’t differ dramatically between the Asians and the Europeans, their expression did. And that expression was governed by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)—one-letter changes in DNA*—in nearby regulator regions that determine how much of a gene’s product is made. Overall, 25 percent of the genes seem to show different levels of expression in Asians versus Europeans, and SNPs in regulatory regions probably account for much of the difference. In the case of one gene, researchers found that Caucasians expressed it at 22 times the strength that Asians did.

All this is important not because of what it tells us about traits like hair color but because it will help explain why certain ethnic populations are more susceptible to complex, gene-influenced diseases like hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus, says Cheung. Differences between populations in gene expression have not been well characterized before. “This should allow us to identify genetic reasons why some diseases are more common in one population than in others,” she says.

There isn't a single race gene but they've found that certain genes are more expressed than others in the different races.

[MikeTodd]

Originally Posted by James Hawthorne

I remember a bleeding heart liberal like Jill, who wanted her daughter to feel the full 'enlightenment' of the multiracial society. So she moved her and her daughter to a predominant black neighborhood. Guess what happened, her daughter was raped and murdered by, yes you guessed it NIGGERS !

I would say I hope she lives a long and miserable life consumed with guilt but if she is truly a committed liberal she would carefully, studiously, avoid drawing the "wrong" conclusions in this object lesson.

[OTPTT]

Originally Posted by Jill

Basically it means that, as a society, we attach a lot of meaning to race. For example, some might take a black person's physical appearance to mean that they will inherently act a certain way or like certain things, whenever there's nothing that physiologically mandates that.

You're wrong or misunderstand. It's their genetic makeup that determines their behavior and the behavior of all races is fairly predictable.

For example, you can count on black looting and engaging in criminal activity just about any time and especially during natural disasters. Hurricane Katrina for example. The Japanese didn't engage in that same destructive behavior during Fukushima because their genetic makeup is wholly different from the African. Neither did the Whites in Nashville during the flooding a couple of years ago; nor do Whites loot and rampage during hurricanes in the South. This I know from first hand experience.

Negroes rape, rob, pillage, and murder though. I chased four of them off just before they were going to break into a local business and loot it when the power was out during Hurricane Katrina, and this wasn't in New Orleans.

Whites are even further removed in terms of civilization and lack of criminality on the whole when compared to non-Whites of all races.



Regarding negro crime here are the FACTS:

Crime Rates --
* Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
* When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
* Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
* The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.
--Color of Crime, Race, Crime, and Justice in America Second, Expanded Edition, 2005.
http://colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html

Interracial Crime --
* Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
* Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
* Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
* Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.
--Color of Crime, Race, Crime, and Justice in America Second, Expanded Edition, 2005.
http://colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html

Just so you know, the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI does not distinguish between Whites, Hispanics, Arabs, or Jews. According to them all of these mentioned races are "White." If they were actually separated and their crime rates distinguished, Whites would have rates of crime so low as to not be reportable. But they can't have that. It would be too obvious and actually confirm most of our arguments regarding race, violence, etc.

The system isn't interested in the scientific method, but rather Jewish communist political correctness.

In passing, I'm a survivor of TWO violent attacks by blacks (one in which my skull was fractured, and one where I was strangled unconscious, robbed, and left for dead), and one attempted armed robbery. There won't be a fourth.

You just keep believing there's no difference between the races and that blacks are just Whites with black skin color and you're going to wind up dead. FACT.

[DiCarlo]

Originally Posted by Jill

Actually, I live in a very safe AND predominately black (about 60:40) neighborhood in Chicago.

Famous last words by the naive. You, as a White woman in such a situation, are in extreme danger, and you don't even know it. Imagining things are different is only wishful thinking. Some nigger's eyeing you up for more than just a date. There are many, many, gruesome results for naive women such as you. You've been warned.

Basically it means that, as a society, we attach a lot of meaning to race.

Well, why do you query Whites about it then? We don't have a NAAWP. While there is La raza, there is no La Alba group. We have no AIPAC and hundreds of other jew organizations that run interference for jews. What's that Muslim organization? CAIR? So, you see, you aim your criticism at Whites, who have no political organization to appeal to, to help them, in case of trouble. These other groups are fully empowered over Whites. Whites are blamed for every problem known to man by the jewsmedia. Only Whites will be accused of hate crimes. Didn't you ever notice. So, ask a nigger, if he can communicate in other than ebonics.

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Jill

Do you really think that posting a picture of one unfortunate-looking black person is going to persuade me?

The meaning we attach to race is a social construct.

All that means is we judge creatures by how they act.

We like butterflies because they are pretty and dance around in the air.

We hate cockroaches because they spread disease and look nasty.

We fear wasps because they sting.

No different with black and whites. The attitudes toward them are based on the way they generally behave.

I notice you have not dared respond to the evidence we put forward directly challenging your bogus theory that crime is caused by poverty. Whites in Appalachia are poorer than virtually all blacks - yet they commit less crime. Same thing with whites in the Great Depression.

How do you account for that, since you claim poverty causes crime, not inherent racial differences?

Then you say, oh it's because white society hurts blacks.

We provide you a dozen ways whites are discriminated against and blacks are helped with free money, media coverup of their crimes, special scholarships.

We refute your point. You refuse to address it.

A lot of Appalachians live in West Virginia, right?

How are West Virginians treated in the media - and rural whites in general? Are they not mocked as toothless, inbred, sister-fucking rednecks? Despicable trailer trash? You know they are.

Yet they still commit less crime than blacks.

You say crime is a function of poverty and social disrespect...we demonstrate that the lowest in this society are white rednecks in West Virginia, and yet their crime rates are lower than blacks.

So, we answered your questions. The ball is in your court to explain why your theory fails to account for reality.

I have a questions of my own: do you believe that skin color is the only physical difference between whites and blacks?

[MikeTodd]

Even if she survived being buck-raped she will rationalize it somehow by blaming a combination of herself and 'society' and not the poor, poor, poverty stricken 'muh dik' of the much put upon "African-American".

[Zenos]

Oh great, a liberal white female. The worst person to even attempt to have a conversation with. The most gullible creature on the planet.

[ernst blofeld]

She claims to live in Chicago, in a magical neighborhood that's 60% Black with very little crime.
Even most guilt ridden White liberals know enough to keep as far away as possible from Black areas, which is why Chicago is the most segregated major city in the U.S.
Explain to us how poverty causes blacks to rape white women in such a staggering disproportionate ratio than other racial groups?
Does she really blame black underachievement in Chicago schools, and everywhere else for that matter, on oppression/slavery/poverty?
This Jill sounds like someone who will regurgitate on cue what some text book or sociology professor says about blacks and can't accept the testimony of her own eyes and ears when she walks amid this violent and repulsive race.
If you indeed live in Chicago and haven't noticed a stark difference between black behavior and whites I doubt any facts we state here can overcome your conditioning.
Hell, I'm surprised she hasn't quoted from jew Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel yet.

[Alex Linder]

No matter what blacks do, the illogical illiberal blames white attitudes for their behavior.

Her mind is not open to factual explanations.

[Alex Linder]

Sampler of some of the fun going on around Chig town in recent days...

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t...ight=chig+town

[Angel Ramsey]

Here's another one for you, Jill. Explain this sick shit to us.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=144097

[cillian]

There are more than twice as many poor Whites than poor blacks in America.

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/prof...p?rgn=1&ind=14

Yet there are more blacks in jail than Whites.

http://www.project.org/info.php?recordID=174

If poverty caused crime, you would see more Whites in jail.

[ernst blofeld]

I'm surprised by you Cillian, don't you know that the reason for more blacks being in jail is because of our racist justice system??
If only the Carr brothers had been given a fair trial they would be free
and leading productive lives in society!

[Breanna]

Originally Posted by Jill

What I don't understand, however, is how this justifies slavery, lynch mobs, genocide, etc. Do you think that these things were just, or you find fault in them, too? Do you simply believe that races should be separate to protect unique cultures, or do you legitimately belive that whites are "better"?

I believe that these types of violence are the natural expressions of competition between organisms. How can they be wrong or immoral? Is it wrong or immoral when non-human animals compete, kill, and destroy each other?

Besides if you are opposed to genocide why do you not oppose the current genocide of the white race? We are the only ones threatened with extinction.

[Alex Linder]

Understand, as she says, she's not denying racial crime disparity, she's trying to explain it as a product of white attitudes rather than black behavior.

The little girl doesn't understand that just as she has the poverty-crime thing backward (poverty doesn't cause crime, crime causes poverty) she has the white-attitude/black-behavior thing backwards.

White attitudes don't cause black behavior. Black behavior causes white attitudes. Because you see, little girl, they're not just white attitudes, they're the attitudes all people experience when they encounter blacks: Arabs, Indians, Koreans, even recently Chinese. They all sound like racists, even though they never had any interaction with blacks before. The only common denominator is black behavior.

The attitudes towards blacks, which are exhibited by all races through all time, are the product of black behavior, which itself is a product of black nature - the genetics of the creature.

[Rick Ronsavelle]

Crime and poverty both caused by black genes. . .

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle

Crime and poverty both caused by black genes. . .

The only thing poverty causes is wealth. Because it sucks being poor! Poverty is a spur to change things, to improve your material conditions.

Niggers aren't poor because they don't have money, as stories yesterday showed, they have more purchasing power from welfare and other benefits than whites do who work. Yet all the money does is run through their hands, because they are so genetically stupid they can't conceive of the future, and spent whatever they have immediately on booze, rims, flashy clothes and drugs.

[Harry Bowler]

Repeat this over and over until you understand:

'Race is not a social construct. Society is a racial construct.'

Genius springs from race. Culture springs from race. Behaviour springs from race.

Groid males have, on average, smaller brain cavities (1), along with more testosterone (2, 3), than White males. We would expect such creatures, on average, to be less intelligent, less creative, more violent, and more impulsive, than White males. It turns out that this is what we find in reality.

Historically there have always been some sacred (yet false) beliefs held memetically by the mainstream of respectable society, and rooted in an unscientific idealism, against which contrary thought is deemed heresy or even treason. Do you seriously believe that we happen to live in the first era free from such self-imposed smokescreens?

The ultimate heresy of today is not spherical Earthism, or Heliocentrism, or univocal generation. It is racialism. Racialism looks at the facts, and draws conclusions based on is rather than ought. I doubt that you've read David Hume, a fine White man and an excellent philosopher, but he discusses this distinction at length - a distinction vital not only to meta-ethics but to science - and, for that matter, to any lucid and reliable interpretation of the real world.

Inevitably, some of these conclusions are unpleasant. They point to circumstances contrary to our own best interests, and contrary to the best welfare and future of the world. The facts, after all, once we understand the is-ought distinction, must include not only cherry-picked data - the rare Bill Cosbys, so notable for their being exceptions, but the harsh and much more common reality of stories like the one that follows - stories which illustrate, to paraphrase Hobbes, the solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short lives to which we would all be subjected without White civilisation.

White civilisation is as natural to Whites as a beaver dam is to a beaver, or the horror below is to abos:

Man caught eating baby, say villagers

PORT MORESBY: Residents of a Papua New Guinea mining township say they found a man with a history of drug abuse eating his newborn son during a sorcery initiation ceremony.

Police said people on the outskirts of the town of Tabubil, in Western Province, woke on Thursday to the screams of the baby boy.

Confronted with the sight of the father allegedly eating his child, an angry mob chased him to the police station, where he was detained after a short struggle.

Police said the discovery was too late to save the baby, who later died of his injuries.

Sergeant Demas Tapea said officers had detained a man and his wife.

''It is a very disturbing incident,'' Sergeant Tapea said. ''The community is upset, angry, but there is also a lot of fear and anxiety because there is a belief in sorcery or witchcraft.''

He said the man was known to police.

''Locals are saying the man was carrying out a sorcery ritual, or initiation, to become part of some sort of special society,'' he said.

''The suspect has a long history of drug abuse … A few years ago, he went crazy in what we believe was due to the effects of drugs.''

In 2009 it was estimated that 50 people were killed in sorcery-related murders in isolated communities.'

http://www.smh.com.au/world/man-caug...205-1ahny.html


1. 'Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race'. Rushton, J. Philippe; Ankney, C. Davison. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, Vol 3(1), Mar 1996, 21-36. doi: 10.3758/BF03210739.

2. Studer, L.H., Aylwin, A.S., & Reddon, J.R. (2005). 'Testosterone, sexual offense recidivism, and treatment effect among adult male sex offenders'. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 171-182.

3. Kubricht WS 3rd, Williams BJ, Whatley T et al. 'Serum testosterone levels in African-American and white men undergoing prostate biopsy'. Urology 1999; 54: 1035–8.

[Breanna]

Originally Posted by Jill

Thank you for not outright refusing to answer my questions. And I have been reading through other posts. I'm afraid, however, that I still don't understand why. Is it because you feel that other races are more likely to commit crimes, or do you have other reasons?

They are ugly and disgusting and I can't stand to be around them. I hate being sexually harassed by nigger bucks reeking of jungle musk. I want to be able to walk around outside without having to worry about being robbed or raped, and without having to look at the eyesores of modern civilization. I want my children and grandchildren to be white and beautiful forever and I want them to have countries all of their own.

Originally Posted by Jill

Whites are in a position of power. In the U.S., we are the majority, and this society is designed to benefit us. Our position of power and privilege means that minorities are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action programs are meant to compensate for this socially-imposed disadvantage--NOT to attack or victimize whites.

Even if this were true (and it isn't) what would be morally wrong about the founders of a nation having preferential treatment towards their own kind? Is it wrong if the government of China is mostly Chinese? Should hiring for jobs in an African country be rigged so that non-Africans are given preferential treatment? If there was a socially imposed disadvantage (and there isn't) why would we owe anything to the other races to have to help them? If whites founded the USA why is it wrong for them to set up society to benefit themselves? I just don't understand what's wrong with that. If people don't want to hire niggers voluntarily why should they have to be forced to?

Originally Posted by Jill

Do you not know what species means?
The ability to produce biracial fertile offspring means that we actually are the same species...

Is the ability to produce wolfdog hybrids enough for scientists to classify wolves and dogs as the same species?