PDA

View Full Version : David Duke


Pages : [1] 2

JohnAFlynn
12-14-2006, 02:01 PM
http://video.msn.com/v/us/dw.htm?m=us&p=truveo&g=e66c7367-2937-45eb-a17f-4cbd11e1f127

You have to sit through a 30 second commercial, but it is worth it. Rita Cosby finally has to cut the interview off abruptly because he's scoring too many points on her and she can't defend against him. :)

JohnAFlynn
12-14-2006, 02:15 PM
Here he is on Mossad sayan Wolf Blitzer's show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v2f-WC4cjo

Dr. Duke is a little less composed here than where he kicked Rita Cosby's ass, but that is probably because he got too emotional in shitting all over jew Blitzer at the beginning, at which point he was fairly unraveled but still managed to get some good shots at Blitzer, calling him "an Israeli agent" among other things, and making his points even while jew Blitzer is trying to talk over him. That's the main lesson to learn if you go on jewTV, talk over the interviewer to make your points and don't even worry about answering their questions, just get your own propaganda across whether it's responsive to their bullshit or not. Jew Blitzer thought he could demonize the Iran conference by associating it with Duke, and instead his audience learned that he was an interested kike who used to work for AIPAC. :rofl:

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 02:49 PM
Here he is on Mossad sayan Wolf Blitzer's show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v2f-WC4cjo

Dr. Duke is a little less composed here than where he kicked Rita Cosby's ass, but that is probably because he got too emotional in shitting all over jew Blitzer at the beginning, at which point he was fairly unraveled but still managed to get some good shots at Blitzer, calling him "an Israeli agent" among other things, and making his points even while jew Blitzer is trying to talk over him. That's the main lesson to learn if you go on jewTV, talk over the interviewer to make your points and don't even worry about answering their questions, just get your own propaganda across whether it's responsive to their bullshit or not. Jew Blitzer thought he could demonize the Iran conference by associating it with Duke, and instead his audience learned that he was an interested kike who used to work for AIPAC. :rofl:

Yeah, I watched both TV interviews live. Duke kicked ass big time. I couldn't believe they allowed him to say so much, including citing his website (davidduke.com) numerous times, and calling Blitzer a former employee of AIPAC and a zionist jew loyal to Israel.

Just imagine the courage required to do what David does. I sent him another $25.00 donation 2 days ago, and urge all WNs to send him a few bucks too;

David Duke
PO Box 188,
Mandeville, LA 70470

tel: 985-626-7714

Thanks John, for posting the video links. Incredibly persuasive performances by David, and oh so effective.

Jimbo Gomez
12-14-2006, 02:50 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in the mind of the average American, isn't there a bigger stigma on holocaustdenial than on working for AIPAC?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 02:58 PM
He looked like an idiot.

I'm sorry. Rita Cosby, as all interviewers do, made David Duke look STUPID!

Jimbo Gomez
12-14-2006, 03:01 PM
Scoring points with your own audience is easy. It's convincing the undecided that one needs to work on.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 03:09 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in the mind of the average American, isn't there a bigger stigma on holocaustdenial than on working for AIPAC?

Ha !!! In the mind of the average American, there's a bigger stigma on truth and reality than on Hollywood lies and fantasies.

You lied when you said David Duke looked like an idiot, and every honest person on here knows you lied. Youthful compusion. You oughta respect your own credibility a bit more than you do.

Hail David Duke, the greatest White man since Adolph Hitler. And in spite of the jewsmedia stigma.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 03:10 PM
Hail David Duke, the greatest White man since Adolph Hitler.
Yeah, an irish neo-nazi. Anyone see something backwards about that?

As I just stated in a pm to Bill, anyone who honestly believes David Duke has the intellectual ability to put out a strong interview or a good book seriously needs to be checked right into the local mental institution.

that guy
12-14-2006, 03:14 PM
I don't have time to watch the video now, but I will say this: It does not surprise me that Duke could score points against an anchor or a journalist. After all, these people (anchors and journalists) are (1) not trained to debate WNs, (2) they are often prettier than smart, and (3) they are usually way too PC to talk (or even THINK) frankly about racial or jewish issues anyway.

Contrary to what some netzis here might think, I doubt these journalists get any special training for dealing with people like Duke. He, on the other hand, has trained all his life for such opportunities. Let's see Duke come to the phora and debate people that have experience with his kind. I'm pretty sure he didn't say anything that hasn't been said by other netzis dozens of times here and on vnn, and let's face it, it's not like it's hard to respond to the netzis here.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 03:15 PM
Contrary to what some netzis here might think, I doubt these journalists get any special training for dealing with people like Duke. He, on the other hand, has trained all his life for such opportunities.
I know, its pathetic, he plans his whole life for confronting people in the media and he still looks like a blithering moron.

shanemac
12-14-2006, 03:19 PM
I can't seem to view the video... I just get a page that says loading.

Anyone else having the same problem?

Morpheus
12-14-2006, 03:26 PM
I can't seem to view the video... I just get a page that says loading.

Anyone else having the same problem?

Same here.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 03:29 PM
hint: don't use mozilla browser for this. IExplore works for me.

kultron
12-14-2006, 03:31 PM
First one doesn't work, but the second one isn't bad. DD is bringing out the taboos one by one. He takes it a bit far though, using too many Ad Hominems.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 03:34 PM
Rita Cosby finally has to cut the interview off abruptly because he's scoring too many points on her and she can't defend against him.
Yeah, that's exactly what it was. :rolleyes:

Geist
12-14-2006, 03:34 PM
If he is of Irish ancestry what the fuck was he doing in the Klan?

Daniel Shays
12-14-2006, 04:19 PM
If he is of Irish ancestry what the fuck was he doing in the Klan?
He's ethnically Scottish.

shanemac
12-14-2006, 04:19 PM
Yeah, the Rita Cosby video doesn't work with Firefox, but it works with IE. Zog must be pulling the strings at Mozilla.

Jimbo Gomez
12-14-2006, 04:19 PM
Ha !!! In the mind of the average American, there's a bigger stigma on truth and reality than on Hollywood lies and fantasies.

You lied when you said David Duke looked like an idiot, and every honest person on here knows you lied. Youthful compusion. You oughta respect your own credibility a bit more than you do.

Hail David Duke, the greatest White man since Adolph Hitler. And in spite of the jewsmedia stigma.


You goddamn drunk with your korsakoff syndrome, where did I say such a thing?

Der Sozialist
12-14-2006, 04:23 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in the mind of the average American, isn't there a bigger stigma on holocaustdenial than on working for AIPAC?

I doubt most Americans care actually, about the Holocaust that is. Americans [middle that is] attachment to Jews only extends to the rapture and the "war on Terror."

Jimbo Gomez
12-14-2006, 04:27 PM
Perhaps so, but nevertheless the association between holocaust denial and weird nazi types has to be there. It exists here and I can't imagine America is any different in that regard.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 04:54 PM
David Duke Rules.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v2f-WC4cjo

ivory bill
12-14-2006, 04:55 PM
..... I'm pretty sure he didn't say anything that hasn't been said by other netzis dozens of times here and on vnn, and let's face it, it's not like it's hard to respond to the netzis here.

Globus demonstrates that daily. The following collection of brilliant repartee comes from just one page of his oeuvre.
http://www.thephora.net/forum/search.php?searchid=457889&pp=25&page=2

Globus:

I'm not Jewish, but you are stupid.

The word is quit, stupid.

Or something, stupid!!

You not thinking is one of the few times you haven't lied, stupid.

What would you know about it, stupid?

I've told no lie.

But you need to get the brain first, stupid.

You're more likely to get a brain first, stupid.

Jesus was a Jew, stupid.

You not thinking is one of the few times you haven't lied, stupid.

What would you know about it, stupid?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 04:55 PM
We already have a thread specifically dedicated to the asskicking David Duke received.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 04:56 PM
We already have a thread specifically dedicated to the asskicking David Duke received.

Received? You mean GAVE. I know that's what you meant:D

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 04:57 PM
No I meant received.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 05:00 PM
BTW someone messed up the title of this thread.

It should be "David Duke looks like a retard in an attempt to advocate his cause." Anyone who who actually think David Duke is looking good in these debates is extremely desperate.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 05:01 PM
I dunno, Blitzer was speechless and Duke was able to speak easily about the Jewish conspiracy that's wreaking havoc on the US and the world. Duke gave Blitzer an ass wooping right from the beginning about using "former Klansman" 11 times before the introduction. Duke said, "You don't introduce former Communists as 'former Communist', right".

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 05:02 PM
He didn't provide one example where Blitzer interviewed a communist and didn't do that. As usual, he generalized. That's garbage.

He hedged on every major question.

I'm telling you, he looked bad.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 05:02 PM
David Duke for President of the United States of America. Our only hope right now.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 05:08 PM
God, Duke was able to bring up the talking points that thousands and thousands of WN's believe is truth. That's heartening for WN. We are celebrating.

The only thing I can say is that the mass media, CNN in this case, did allow for WN views to be aired. Whether it was is order to present Duke as an "extremist" kook or intelligent dissenter doesn't matter, the millions of CNN viewers will either take to his message or not. At least our views were heard and what I heard from Duke was music to my ears.

Jimbo Gomez
12-14-2006, 05:11 PM
Of course it was music to your ears. Like I said elsewhere; any buffoon can sweettalk his own audience. He needs to convince the general public of his views, and I doubt he has what it takes to do that.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 05:19 PM
God, Duke was able to bring up the talking points that thousands and thousands of WN's believe is truth. That's heartening for WN. We are celebrating.

The only thing I can say is that the mass media, CNN in this case, did allow for WN views to be aired. Whether it was is order to present Duke as an "extremist" kook or intelligent dissenter doesn't matter, the millions of CNN viewers will either take to his message or not. At least our views were heard and what I heard from Duke was music to my ears.

Here's the link to David's appearance on MSNBC. It's even better than his ass kicking of the kike Wolf Blitzer.



http://video.msn.com/v/us/dw.htm?m=u...f-4cbd11e1f127



http://www.davidduke.com/

JohnAFlynn
12-14-2006, 05:22 PM
BTW someone messed up the title of this thread.

It should be "David Duke looks like a retard in an attempt to advocate his cause." Anyone who who actually think David Duke is looking good in these debates is extremely desperate.

He looked very good in the Rita Cosby interview, and clearly dominated that. I'll concede, as I did in post #2, that he appeared a bit uneasy and flustered in the Wolf Blitzer interview. The title of the thread, was not, however, "David Duke Wipes the Floor With Wolf Blitzer."

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 05:32 PM
You goddamn drunk with your korsakoff syndrome, where did I say such a thing?

Oops. My mistake. I make one every decade or so. It was "Child Gott" who lied by saying Duke looked like an idiot.

And I'll have you know I don't drink more than a 6-pack a month. At 66, alcohol makes me shake next day, like a dog shittin razor blades.

Morpheus
12-14-2006, 05:34 PM
I don't have time to watch the video now, but I will say this: It does not surprise me that Duke could score points against an anchor or a journalist. After all, these people (anchors and journalists) are (1) not trained to debate WNs, (2) they are often prettier that smart, and (3) they are usually way too PC to talk (or even THINK) frankly about racial or jewish issues anyway.

Contrary to what some netzis here might think, I doubt these journalists get any special training for dealing with people like Duke. He, on the other hand, has trained all his life for such opportunities. Let's see Duke come to the phora and debate people that have experience with his kind. I'm pretty sure he didn't say anything that hasn't been said by other netzis dozens of times here and on vnn, and let's face it, it's not like it's hard to respond to the netzis here.

I agree that Duke has a tendency to come off better than he really is as this subject is his personal obsession and he is therefore more adept than the journalists and news anchors whom he debates.

If he were put on the Phil Donahue show and debated someone like Tim Wise or Rabbi Shmuley Boteach about Holocaust denial, Jewish Supremacy and Iran etc. I think he would not come off as smoothly.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 05:35 PM
Perhaps so, but nevertheless the association between holocaust denial and weird nazi types has to be there. It exists here and I can't imagine America is any different in that regard.

Gee, I wonder which ethnic group created that perception, and for what reason. Daaaa. . . .

Dr. Gutberlet
12-14-2006, 05:35 PM
What's wrong with Irish neo-NAZIs? And, Tom Metzger is the greatest white man since good ol' Uncle Adolf IMO.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 05:36 PM
What's wrong with Irish neo-NAZIs? And, Tom Metzger is the greatest white man since good ol' Uncle Adolf IMO.
um okay why don't we add jewish neo-nazis next

Leshrac
12-14-2006, 05:37 PM
I know, its pathetic, he plans his whole life for confronting people in the media and he still looks like a blithering moron.

I probably missed something, but what in debunking false affirmations and owning clueless reporters on live tv makes you a moron ? :confused:

that guy
12-14-2006, 05:38 PM
(2) they are often prettier than smart
To be fair, though, this could probably also be said about Duke.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 05:38 PM
Of course it was music to your ears. Like I said elsewhere; any buffoon can sweettalk his own audience. He needs to convince the general public of his views, and I doubt he has what it takes to do that.

The general Western public, within their own consciences, already know that their governments are deeply corrupt, Israel is a brutal apartheid state, and non-whites are flooding their formerly all-white countries. Whether the general public is moved to speak out about these issues after seeing David Duke is unknown at this point.

Jean-Marie LePen has gained more popularity in recent polls, so if it's any indication, the stigma of being openly white nationalist is slowly fading.

Dr. Gutberlet
12-14-2006, 05:40 PM
um okay why don't we add jewish neo-nazis next

I don't see the correlation. Can only Germans, Spaniards, and Italians be neo-NAZIs?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 05:41 PM
Spaniards and Italians CAN'T be nazis.

They can be fascist.

Hitler cared about greater germany. That means aryans only, with a few exceptions for people he declares honorary aryans.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 05:43 PM
I agree that Duke has a tendency to come off better than he really is as this subject is his personal obsession and he is therefore more adept than the journalists and news anchors whom he debates.

If he were put on the Phil Donahue show and debated someone like Tim Wise or Rabbi Shmuley Boteach about Holocaust denial, Jewish Supremacy and Iran etc. I think he would not come off as smoothly.

Duke applauds Louis Farrakhan for telling the truth about the jews, and for his book "Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews."

Who's side you or ?? The jews ?? If so, you're an Uncle Tom nigger. Simple logic.

If jews continue to rule America, it won't be long before you niggers are back in the cotton patch, with Chinese and Mestizo bosses.

Count Eustace II
12-14-2006, 05:44 PM
I thought David Duke look pretty composed during both interviews and used straight logic and fact in his arguments. Anchors in the mass media, like Blitzer, are surely equipped for handling "racists" like Duke. It just appears that CNN wanted to let David get on a rant in order to make him look irrational....but their gamble failed and Duke got his argument across quite eloquently.

Hail David Duke!

Dr. Gutberlet
12-14-2006, 05:47 PM
Spaniards and Italians CAN'T be nazis.

They can be fascist.

Hitler cared about greater germany. That means aryans only, with a few exceptions for people he declares honorary aryans.


Are we basing purely on phenotype? I know have seen many Italians and Spaniards who meet the requirement. More than a lot of Germans even, so...

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 05:48 PM
If you go by phenotype there are a few jews who meet the requirement (I realize nordic jews are rare but some do exist). You think this mattered to Hitler?

that guy
12-14-2006, 05:49 PM
Anchors in the mass media, like Blitzer, are surely equipped for handling "racists" like Duke.
koch, a 19 year old kid, does a better job here than most anchors do on TV (not that I saw the Blitzer interview, but I can pretty much imagine how it went..), so I disagree with you.

xxx
12-14-2006, 05:53 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in the mind of the average American, isn't there a bigger stigma on holocaustdenial than on working for AIPAC?


Americans couldn't careless about the holocaust. To most of them its just a footnote in history. They do care about their first amendment rights. They care about being dragged into a bloody quagmire in Iraq on the pretense of a lie. Aipac manipulating foreign policy would be of a far greater significance if it was ever to enter Joe and Sally Sixpacks consciousness.

Perhaps so, but nevertheless the association between holocaust denial and weird nazi types has to be there. It exists here and I can't imagine America is any different in that regard.

Just one in many of the circuses presented on the digital deceiver. Nothing special, and only these talking head shills want to attribute special reverence to the holocaust, even though millions of others died.

Morpheus
12-14-2006, 06:01 PM
Duke applauds Louis Farrakhan for telling the truth about the jews, and for his book "Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews."

Who's side you or ?? The jews ?? If so, you're an Uncle Tom nigger. Simple logic.

If jews continue to rule America, it won't be long before you niggers are back in the cotton patch, with Chinese and Mestizo bosses.

Simple logic would be for you to go back to school and get yourself an education
Miller, you are a walking stereotype.

The stupid White Supremacist routine does make for good comic relief though.

I am not in favor of Duke's racism nor Farrakhan's nor generalizing Jews as a hive minded entity the way you do, I deal with realistic scenarios when it comes to the world.

Thomas777
12-14-2006, 06:24 PM
Duke came off better here than he did in the Blitzer interview, but then again, its not too hard to come off as intelligent when you are being interviewed by Miss Piggy.

Unfortunately, the Holocaust Conference is being discredited by the mere presence of Duke, and he is aggravating this by attention-whoring all over CNN and MSNBC...but then again, that is the standard M.O. of David Duke for the past 20 years.

il ragno
12-14-2006, 06:38 PM
Duke came off better here than he did in the Blitzer interview, but then again, its not too hard to come off as intelligent when you are being interviewed by Miss Piggy.

http://www.speakeasy.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=11439&st=0&p=108247&#entry108247

Here's the Bad Taste Gene Simmons Item Du Jour, btw. And is it me, or is Rita Cosby the most slack-jawed news strumpet ever to climb Blowjob Mountain to her own show?


http://www.mk-magazine.com/news/archives/001414.php

DIMEBAG DARRELL To Be Buried In KISS KASKET


The family of slain DAMAGEPLAN/ex-PANTERA guitarist "Dimebag" Darrell Abbott has requested a "Kiss Kasket" for Abbott to be buried in, KISS bassist/vocalist Gene Simmons revealed during an appearance on Fox News' "The Big Story Weekend Edition with Rita Cosby" on Saturday (Dec. 11). The coffin features the faces of the four founding members of KISS, the KISS logo and the words "Kiss Forever". A transcript of Simmons' appearance on the program follows:

Rita Cosby: Gene, it's great to see you, my friend. I wish it was under better circumstances.

Gene Simmons: Thank you, thank you.

Cosby: Now, I understand there was something special. This just came down recently. Darrell Abbott's family requested something sort of special tied with your band. Tell us about it.

Simmons: Well, I wasn't really prepared to talk about it, but the family requested, as a personal issue between the family and the grieving people who are going to be there, to send a Kiss Kasket. We initially did it as a promotion. And you know, I think it meant a lot to Darrell when, you know - when he was alive, he gave lots of people great joy. I mean he had the band tattooed onto his chest. He was a major figure in rock and roll. He's going to be greatly missed. And the family wish - you know the one last wish they had was that he be buried in a Kiss Kasket. And I think it's a private matter for the family and the fans actually.

Cosby: No, and I think that's beautiful that that's happening, too, because I'm sure, it obviously, as you said, meant a lot to him. How big of a shock was this? You know this guy really was a legend and so well respected in the industry. How big of a shock was it to you, Gene, when you heard what happened?

Simmons: You know it's about as shocking as it can get. The unfortunate thing is that the media will tend to sort of look at the visuals, you know, the flying hair and the crazy look and all of the over- the-top stuff, which is what performing is all about. But people forget that underneath all of that, actually, Darrell was a very, very sweet guy, very upstanding, very quiet in his own way, immensely talented. PANTERA was a very, very important band. And I'm sure all the fans are going to miss him very much. I know I do.

KISS played at the stadium in Argentina and we invited PANTERA to join us. And it was one of the highlights of any of the tours we have ever played. Darrell was just a sweet guy.

Cosby: Gene, how vulnerable are you guys to fanatical fans like this mad man who did this horrible act?

Simmons: You know people often forget that the word "fan" actually comes from the word "fanatical". Most people are very nice. Most people respect your privacy. But here's no secret, most celebrities check into hotels under pseudonyms and the reason is not because I don't love the fans but because you've got to be able to keep everybody at arm's length because every once in a while you're going to get a nut job. The only justice, as far as I'm concerned is that this nut case is no longer around to do this to anybody else.

The unfortunate thing about the judicial system, if you'll allow me, is that, if he were caught, somebody would bring up the point he had a troubled childhood and that we should rehabilitate him. And I'm not a fan of that, I have to say. Whether he was troubled or not, if you resort to violence and you kill somebody, you should be taken off the face of the earth.

Cosby: No, and it is - absolutely, I agree with you. How do you protect yourself, Gene? I mean you talk about this balance - you got so many wonderful fans, you in particular, you know, folks - and you want to have that access, you want to have that one-on-one. But then there's that wild one all of a sudden who does something horrible. How do you find that balancing act?

Simmons: You've got to be able to separate the fact from the fiction, the stage histrionics from the private life. When you walk down the street, you've got to be aware that everybody is not necessarily your best friend and then - you know, sometimes somebody is going to have an ulterior motive, which is why when you check into a hotel, you have to do it under an assumed name. And when you go some place big and public and where there are lots of people, you've got to take security with you both for legal issues. I mean if I did something with this fist to somebody who was getting in my face - and I'm 6-foot-2. I'm not shy. If you get in my face, I'll take you out. You literally can't do that. You've got to be able to have a buffer, somebody else between you and somebody who's - you know who's being improper.

Celebrity is not everything that everybody believes it is. It is a precarious position in life. But, you know we do it because we love it.

Cosby: And Gene Simmons, we love you and thank you so much for coming here and talking about this. We appreciate it.

Simmons: I just want to say one last thing, which is.

Cosby: Yes, real quick if you could, Gene.

Simmons: Our hearts and our best wishes go out to the family. He was a great guy. He's going to be sorely missed.

Cosby: Thank you, Gene, very much, and he definitely will. And we appreciate you're coming here. Thank you, Gene, very much.

Fade the Butcher
12-14-2006, 06:46 PM
Duke came off better here than he did in the Blitzer interview, but then again, its not too hard to come off as intelligent when you are being interviewed by Miss Piggy.

How do you lose a debate with Rita Crosby?

Thomas777
12-14-2006, 06:56 PM
How do you lose a debate with Rita Crosby?

Duke excells at making himself look like an asshole...I believe he enjoys it. I mean look at the guy...he is some plastic-faced narcissist who likes coming off like some beleaguered "bad guy".

If Duke were not an attention-whoring ignoramus, he would have addressed the fact that the Conference is actually an allegory for Western hypocrisy with respect to secularism, "human rights", and Free Speech, and pointed out the negative ways in which the politicization of history affects present-day public policy. Instead, he wants to pander to the Glenn Miller/Don Black faction and cast himself as the anti-Zionist dragonslayer.

Rakhmetov
12-14-2006, 07:02 PM
I really hate how these pundits always talk over their guests. These cable news segments seem to be a contest of who can speak the loudest. This bias against Duke on these Zionist-whipped up cable news programs is so blatant.

Starr
12-14-2006, 07:02 PM
He did pretty well, but he should not have went on the defensive in the way he did in the beginning. he should have just staying completely calm and cool and just explained where he believed Wolf was wrong in what he said about him. Instead it appeared that he was ranting slightly which never comes across in a positive way.(that is what these interviewers are hoping for by pushing your buttons)

It is interesting with this conference going on, there have been a few different people on television that have been able to speak about certain things in a way people are not used to hearing. On foxnews last night they had the guy from the institute for historical review, but he didn't do well, at all. He had sent a tape in, and they played it on the air and he came across as almost embarrased. when they asked him what the conference was about, he stumbled on that and kept on dodging it by saying "you need to ask the organizers." One area where Hannity(I think it was Hannity)will come across bad to people possibly was that he kept on throwing in very distorted comments that Ahmadinejad has not made and when this guy tried to correct him, hannity kept interrupting him and not allowing him to do it.

Daniel Shays
12-14-2006, 07:06 PM
I loved the ad. Great example of the bourgeois concept of freedom.

http://www.chasefreedomnow.com/?CELL=6TRP&MSC=Z0061431

Thomas777
12-14-2006, 07:16 PM
I really hate how these pundits always talk over their guests. These cable news segments seem to be a contest of who can speak the loudest. This bias against Duke on these Zionist-whipped up cable news programs is so blatant.

The key is to not allow the moderator/interviewer to set the tone of discourse.

I have addressed plenty of hostile audiences and I had no problem articulating the salient points without straying outside of the scope, and I am certainly not Clarence Darrow or some great wordsmith.

The trouble is that these ideologues like Duke (and others) have some grand, epic, narrative running in their conscious mind at all times that they try to verbally shoehorn into their rebutalls at any opportunity...this is a piss-poor tactic.

It would have been very easy for Duke to score some heavy blows against Wolf Blitzer as well as Miss Piggy and he opted not to do so...in the former case, his ego took precedent and he just tossed around ad hominem and made unsubstantiated points that were well outside the scope of Blitzer's line of questioning, and in the latter case, he was just ill-prepared. Shoddy form...then again, I have read Duke's material and he is not very intelligent, IMO.

Helios Panoptes
12-14-2006, 07:32 PM
He looked like an idiot.

I'm sorry. Rita Cosby, as all interviewers do, made David Duke look STUPID!

I do not agree, but he did look dim. It had nothing to do with Rita Cosby, as she managed to look even more incompetent. There were many points she could have disputed, but didn't. I agree with Thomas that Duke seemed unprepared. He is not a strong orator.

Draco
12-14-2006, 09:07 PM
Points...

1) Is Rita Crosby a post operative transsexual?

2) What is wrong with Dukes right eye?

3) Yes, Duke came off as composed and kicked some ass. The point holohoax revisionism is criminalised is the greatest proof it never happened in my opinion.

4) Shame no one watches MSNBC except to watch pedophiles get busted

I'll watch the Blizter one when I have time.

WFHermans
12-14-2006, 09:09 PM
Calling Wolf Blitzer an AIPAC jew and a zionist is not being on the defensive. :)
Didn't see the interview yet though, just the first lines of the transcript.

Why do zionist jews often have nazi names I wonder. Wolf Blitzer, Krauthammer, Rumsfeld, Savage.

Isabella
12-14-2006, 09:22 PM
Rita Crosby is a good example to use when arguing that women do, in fact, have significant variation in intelligence, with Rita near the bottom of the distribution. :)

Starr
12-14-2006, 09:25 PM
It wasn't really what he said, neccessarily, it was how he said it. He just wasn't as composed as he should have been and that sort of distracts from what he is saying. Other parts of the interview were better, however.

Israel is a brutal apartheid state, and non-whites are flooding their formerly all-white countries

The latter will reach some people because they are seeing it with their own eyes, everyday. They probably won't care as much or view him as completely biased(which he is) on the former.

Nyx
12-14-2006, 09:29 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j6EWpItQX0

Nyx
12-14-2006, 09:31 PM
Damn it. I cannot play this video. Can someone put it on Youtube? Or is it possible to get a link to the video itself?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 09:33 PM
Why does everyone worship David Duke?

leondegrance
12-14-2006, 09:33 PM
I thought they both lost.

First Blitzer was overly antagonistic rather than an impartial interviewer, and Duke was very irritated, rather than being composed. Duke came across as a typical name-the-jew freak, and I think most folks will write him off as simply being "anti-semitic".

leondegrance
12-14-2006, 09:35 PM
Another point is that Duke is unable to defend the conference on its own merits because the conference was obviously a sham, and everyone knows it.

Hachiko
12-14-2006, 09:35 PM
3 David Duke threads in a row? Any chance of these getting merged? Starting to smell like VNN in here....:sick:

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-14-2006, 09:35 PM
3 David Duke threads in a row? Any chance of these getting merged? Starting to smell like VNN in here....:sick:
I second that. In fact, it was 4, as one of the interviews got posted twice.

Nyx
12-14-2006, 09:47 PM
Why does everyone worship David Duke?Who worships David Duke?

Daniel Shays
12-14-2006, 10:06 PM
The more Kane attacks Duke, the more I like him (Duke).

Starr
12-14-2006, 10:06 PM
If he were put on the Phil Donahue show and debated someone like Tim Wise or Rabbi Shmuley Boteach about Holocaust denial, Jewish Supremacy and Iran etc. I think he would not come off as smoothly.


Rabbi schmuley is a good debater? lol. He came across as a paranoid, unhinged overdramatic nut when he got into an argument with Bill Donahue from the Catholic league not too long ago.

Helios Panoptes
12-14-2006, 10:13 PM
Damn it. I cannot play this video. Can someone put it on Youtube? Or is it possible to get a link to the video itself?

Which browser are you using?

Der Sozialist
12-14-2006, 10:17 PM
The more Kane attacks Duke, the more I like him (Duke).
Kane has some sort of obsession with Jews. He has literally become a philo-Semite and refuses to even acknowledge that Jews are not European and the antagonism between Jews and gentiles.

As far I see it—there is no difference between Kane and Glenn Miller in this regard. Both are equally irrational about the JQ—they just picked different sides.

Daniel Shays
12-14-2006, 10:37 PM
As far I see it—there is no difference between Kane and Glenn Miller in this regard. Both are equally irrational about the JQ—they just picked different sides. Agreed and what's amusing is that they both consider themselves White Nationalists. WN is so dysfunctional...

Nyx
12-14-2006, 10:44 PM
Which browser are you using?I tried with all of my browsers. It's not the browser; it's Windows Media Player.

Nyx
12-14-2006, 10:45 PM
Kane has some sort of obsession with Jews. He has literally become a philo-Semite and refuses to even acknowledge that Jews are not European and the antagonism between Jews and gentiles. Jews are Europeans.

Helios Panoptes
12-14-2006, 10:45 PM
It's hard to believe, but Glenn Miller is actually a more interesting poster than Kane. While certainly no genius, he has a razor sharp wit in comparison. Kane is a dim bulb.

Vasily Zaitsev
12-14-2006, 10:53 PM
I've never seen Rita Cosby before watching this clip and I'm left wondering if she's hoarse for some reason or if she always sounds like that. If the latter, I'm sure s/he's a drag queen.

Duke just looked like a botox disaster.

And yes, I'm making those points and no others because this is the mentality of the average televitz watching drone.

Helios Panoptes
12-14-2006, 10:58 PM
Rita Cosby w/ normal voice: http://youtube.com/watch?v=sFUZJXQaex8

Nyx
12-14-2006, 11:04 PM
http://video.msn.com/v/us/dw.htm?m=us&p=truveo&g=e66c7367-2937-45eb-a17f-4cbd11e1f127The clip plays in Slow Motion with IE.

Starr
12-14-2006, 11:07 PM
Duke just looked like a botox disaster.

.

Plastic surgery gone wild. He was getting old and probably felt it was somewhat important to keep a sort of nice and youthful appearance, but in this case, it probably would have been best to allow himself to age.:(

Nyx
12-14-2006, 11:10 PM
What is the type of file for the video?

Der Sozialist
12-14-2006, 11:29 PM
Jews are Europeans.
Start a new thread and we can debate it. I am sure Kane will eagerly join in. :D

Nyx
12-14-2006, 11:32 PM
Start a new thread and we can debate it. I am sure Kane will eagerly join in. :DIt's already been debated. Genetically, Jews are as much as 55% European.

Der Sozialist
12-14-2006, 11:35 PM
It's already been debated. Genetically, Jews are as much as 55% European.
I will have to see that data but I don’t think that this is the case because that 55% almost definitely includes ~10% of Turkic influence which Jews obtained from Eastern-European populations.

Nyx
12-14-2006, 11:42 PM
I will have to see that data but I don’t think that this is the case because that 55% almost definitely includes ~10% of Turkic influence which Jews obtained from Eastern-European populations.No, what is meant is that they are up to 55% the same (genetically) as the host nations.

Der Sozialist
12-14-2006, 11:44 PM
No, what is meant is that they are up to 55% the same (genetically) as the host nations.
I am going to have see this sourced then—this is not inline with either the sources I posted nor that Ashkenazi Jews have remained relatively reproductively isolated until the 20th century.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 11:54 PM
Simple logic would be for you to go back to school and get yourself an education
Miller, you are a walking stereotype.

The stupid White Supremacist routine does make for good comic relief though.

I am not in favor of Duke's racism nor Farrakhan's nor generalizing Jews as a hive minded entity the way you do, I deal with realistic scenarios when it comes to the world.

Well at least you're an honest Uncle Tom nigger.

Glenn Miller
12-14-2006, 11:59 PM
Who worships David Duke?

I do !!! I do !!! Why ?? Because he deserves it.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 12:01 AM
Jews are Europeans.

Then why did Europeans from every European country kick their asses out ??

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 12:05 AM
Plastic surgery gone wild. He was getting old and probably felt it was somewhat important to keep a sort of nice and youthful appearance, but in this case, it probably would have been best to allow himself to age.:(

David is 55 or 56. But he's a fitness fanatic. Doesn't smoke. Lifts weights religiously, and bench presses 350 lbs.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 12:06 AM
It's hard to believe, but Glenn Miller is actually a more interesting poster than Kane. While certainly no genius, he has a razor sharp wit in comparison. Kane is a dim bulb.

And my charisma is exceeded only by my good looks, intelligence, and modesty.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 12:08 AM
It's already been debated. Genetically, Jews are as much as 55% European.

Hell, about half American niggers are too. So freakin what ??

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 12:31 AM
Kane has some sort of obsession with Jews. He has literally become a philo-Semite and refuses to even acknowledge that Jews are not European and the antagonism between Jews and gentiles.

As far I see it—there is no difference between Kane and Glenn Miller in this regard. Both are equally irrational about the JQ—they just picked different sides.

Are you sure his name isn't "Kahane"?

Nyx
12-15-2006, 12:37 AM
Hell, about half American niggers are too. So freakin what ??Half of American Negroids are not 55% white - it's closer to 20% (and, in the South, as low as 10%).

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 12:37 AM
It's already been debated. Genetically, Jews are as much as 55% European.

So are many niggers. Your point is?

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 12:40 AM
Half of American Negroids are not 55% white - it's closer to 20% (and, in the South, as low as 10%).

That's bullshit. I'd say that most niggers I have seen in the South have been some variation of mulatto.

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 12:42 AM
I started the original thread and it had a descriptive title that explained what the hell the thread was specifically about. Who the hell changed the title to the vague, all encompassing "David Duke"??? Designed to lower interest in the thread, I'd say.

:mad:

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 12:46 AM
Someone earlier in the thread posted a link to DD speaking to the Syrians. That seemed kind of silly to me, especially as the slogan he chose to beat to death was "No War For Israel." That doesn't seem like it would resonate with Syrians, as they are in no danger of being called into military service on behalf of Israel. That's a message for Amerikwans to hear, or Brits. He should have tailored his message to the audience better. "Let's go to war against Israel" would have been better.

Nyx
12-15-2006, 12:49 AM
That's bullshit. I'd say that most niggers I have seen in the South have been some variation of mulatto."What I have seen" is a poor substitute for "peer reviewed scientific studies suggest that".

Starr
12-15-2006, 12:59 AM
I started the original thread and it had a descriptive title that explained what the hell the thread was specifically about. Who the hell changed the title to the vague, all encompassing "David Duke"??? Designed to lower interest in the thread, I'd say.

:mad:


there were a few different threads around about Duke's appearance on different shows,etc. and it looks like they were merged into one, so a basic title, like "David Duke" summing up these different threads with the same basic subject, makes sense.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:01 AM
It's already been debated. Genetically, Jews are as much as 55% European.
Der Socialist is the most stubborn poster I know. Don't even try to debate with him.
Start a new thread and we can debate it. I am sure Kane will eagerly join in.
Why do you think its relevant to me whether or not you think the truth? Why should I exert massive effort to convince you it? What would I gain from that?
God is a dim bulb.
I had a lot of people laughing in that picture thread. Believe it or not, I can have a sense of humor, its usually a very mean one though.

Nyx
12-15-2006, 01:05 AM
I am going to have see this sourced then—this is not inline with either the sources I posted n or that Ashkenazi Jews have remained relatively reproductively isolated until the 20th century.It is perfectly consistent with this. The Ashkenazi Jews did have low rates of miscegenation. The gene inflow was about one percent per generation, but this accumulated over the course of several hundred years.

Helios Panoptes
12-15-2006, 01:06 AM
Der Socialist is the most stubborn poster I know. Don't even try to debate with him.

You are referring to the discussion in the Jared Taylor thread. You presented no evidence, he did. Why should he submit if you're not willing to exert the effort to make a well-reasoned case in support of your thesis? It was less his stubborness than that you did not argue effectively.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:06 AM
They had low mixing, but even low mixing over 1000 years is enough to change a lot.

maintaining 40% of your dna (in the most extreme cases, more non-jewish in others) is impressive for 1000 years, but it still doesn't mean that substantial mixture has not occured over a long period of time. Ashkenazis have not been completely assimilated, but they have been largely assimilated. Most groups would have been completely assimilated by now.

bardamu
12-15-2006, 01:09 AM
Duke did a great job. Hail Duke!

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 01:09 AM
Der Socialist is the most stubborn poster I know. Don't even try to debate with him.

Why do you think its relevant to me whether or not you think the truth? Why should I exert massive effort to convince you it? What would I gain from that?

I had a lot of people laughing in that picture thread. Believe it or not, I can have a sense of humor, its usually a very mean one though.

Uh oh !!! Did yaw'll catch that ?? He said he's a mean one. We better head for the hills, pronto. We've got a mean, anonymous, cyber space, net-warrior a stalking us.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 01:18 AM
It is perfectly consistent with this. The Ashkenazi Jews did have low rates of miscegenation. The gene inflow was about one percent per generation, but this accumulated over the course of several hundred years.

Who gives a shit? They all hate our guts. And they all either support, or remain silent about, the jewish genocide against the Aryan race.

The jew enemy is the jew enemy, no matter the percentage of it's kike genes. Let "God" sort um out.

Heil Hitler !!!

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:18 AM
Kane has some sort of obsession with Jews.
As far I see it—there is no difference between Kane and Glenn Miller in this regard. Both are equally irrational about the JQ—they just picked different sides.
I disagree with this for one reason. When I bring up jews, its usually as a response to someone else. Not always, and I have started a few polls about jews, but usually its debunking myths. I would rather people don't care about jews so much but people do care about jews and if I call a spade a spade when I view information that I see as inaccurate. Therefore I am constantly correcting people. But if people wouldn't make mistakes in the first place, I would not be talking about jews in response.

Der Sozialist
12-15-2006, 01:19 AM
They had low mixing, but even low mixing over 1000 years is enough to change a lot.

maintaining 40% of your dna (in the most extreme cases, more non-jewish in others) is impressive for 1000 years, but it still doesn't mean that substantial mixture has not occured over a long period of time. Ashkenazis have not been completely assimilated, but they have been largely assimilated. Most groups would have been completely assimilated by now.

Show me your source, just one, that puts the average Ashkenazi >50% European and I will concede that Ashkenazi’s are more European than Semite.

However, I been trying to find a source backing your claims and I cannot. I shouldn’t have to either considering you made me waste my time finding a source.

Either way, Kane, Ashkenazi’s are descended from Semites (whether they are 55% European or 45% on average) and Semite is not just a linguistic term.

Furthermore, on the Y-chromosome they are basically indistinguishable from other Semites.

But to another point, say Ashkenazi Jews are, on average 55% European—would you take a Mulatto that is 55% European?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:20 AM
But to another point, say Ashkenazi Jews are, on average 55% European—would you take a Mulatto that is 55% European?
That sounds like muad dib. You are comparing mediterranian dna to negro dna. Furthermore, there is no European race.

Take a hint though. I'm sick of debating this. I've debated it many times with many people. You say I'm obsessed. You are the one who keeps trying to get the last word.

Der Sozialist
12-15-2006, 01:24 AM
That sounds like muad dib. You are comparing mediterranian dna to negro dna.
Okay, a Moroccan that is 55% European?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:25 AM
That's a much better comparison. Yes, they would be much MUCH more acceptable than a mullato.

Der Sozialist
12-15-2006, 01:30 AM
That's a much better comparison. Yes, they would be much MUCH more acceptable than a mullato.
Show me your source, this is my last request. I spent 1 hour using :google: trying to verify your claim.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 01:41 AM
Okay, I have a few.

http://www.jogg.info/11/coffman.htm (this specifically talks about commonality between jews and other mediterranians in a small part of the article)

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Tay-Sachs_disease?OpenDocument
This debunks the tay-sachs is unique to jews myth.

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showpost.php?p=1516413&postcount=2

http://www.geocities.com/racial_reality/jews.html (by the way this root site clearly supports my mediterranian similarity thesis too)

http://www.conspiracyworld.com/index0096.htm

JohnAFlynn
12-15-2006, 01:47 AM
there were a few different threads around about Duke's appearance on different shows,etc. and it looks like they were merged into one, so a basic title, like "David Duke" summing up these different threads with the same basic subject, makes sense.

No. "David Duke Media Appearances" or "David Duke Speaks Out" would have been more accurate. Just plain "David Duke" is bland and does not describe the subject of the various threads that were merged.

Der Sozialist
12-15-2006, 02:07 AM
Okay, I have a few.

http://www.jogg.info/11/coffman.htm (this specifically talks about commonality between jews and other mediterranians in a small part of the article)

[lifted from his source]
Jewish mtDNA Results



[QUOTE]A Few Founding Mothers



Jewish maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) results are examined in depth in only two published DNA studies. In the first study, researchers examined nine different Jewish groups and compared their mtDNA to eight non-Jewish groups as well as an Israeli Arab/Palestinian population (Thomas et al. 2002).



Thomas discovered a common characteristic to almost all Jewish mtDNA – the high frequency of particular mtDNA haplotypes within the Jewish populations. In addition, Jewish mtDNA results displayed significantly lower diversity than any non-Jewish population tested as part of the study, yet was also characterized by greater differentiation between the Jewish groups as well as their hosts.


These unusual results suggested to the researchers that an extreme female-specific founder effect had occurred in the genetic histories of most Jewish populations. The founder effects had, in fact, been so severe that mtDNA frequencies in Jewish groups differed significantly from those seen in any of the non-Jewish populations.



As to the origin of these maternal founders, Thomas (2002) acknowledged that “in many cases, it is not possible to infer the geographic origin of the founding mtDNAs within the different Jewish groups with any confidence.” One thing, however, was clear to the researchers: the Jewish groups formed independently from each other around a small group of maternal founders. In other words, many of the Jewish groups did not share the same female ancestors. Furthermore, it appeared to Thomas that the founding of these maternal lineages occurred “immediately after the establishment of the communities or over a longer period of time.” Since haplogroup diversity was so low, female-specific gene flow from the surrounding non-Jewish community must have been limited once the original community was established.


Finally, Thomas (2002) noted that although Ashkenazi Jews were commonly believed to have suffered a sharp founder effect, the group had a modal haplotype frequency similar to their non-Jewish host populations (9% vs. 6.9%). While this could be evidence that no such founder events had occurred in this population, it could also indicate “that present-day Ashkenazic Jews may represent a mosaic group that is descended on the maternal side from several independent founding events.”



In the second Ashkenazi mtDNA study, Behar (2004a) attempted to answer the question of founder events among Ashkenazim posed by Thomas. Unfortunately, it could be argued that this entire study is directed at convincing the reader that “Ashkenazi populations as a whole are genetically more similar to Near Eastern non-Jewish populations than to European non-Jewish populations.”


In order to prove this, a complex analysis regarding “mismatch distributions” between Jewish and non-Jewish populations is performed. A careful reading, however, indicates that these mismatch calculations are based on a number of unfounded assumptions, including a shared common history of Pleistocene population growth between Jewish and Middle Eastern groups. However, since only a small percentage (10% - 20%) of the Jewish mtDNA is definitively stated to be of Middle Eastern origin in the study, calculations based on this assumption are questionable (Behar et al. 2004a).



Behar (2004a) attributes the obvious peculiarity of Ashkenazi mtDNA, namely reduced mtDNA diversity coupled with usually high frequencies of particular mtDNA haplotypes, to strong genetic drift rather than to independent founder events. Furthermore, Behar suggests the unusual Ashkenazi mtDNA results are due to a Jewish population bottleneck that occurred in the Near East. According to the study,



[o]ur computer simulations confirm that the frequencies of the zero and one class of the Ashkenazi mismatch distribution are significantly elevated over that observed for the sequences sampled from Near Eastern populations. This is a strong indication of a recent population bottleneck and further simulations suggest the data best fit a 200-fold reduction in size approximately 150 generations ago.



Behar (2004a) acknowledges that the rationale for such a bottleneck can be sustained only if supported by two major assumptions: “the Ashkenazim have not admixed with European host populations and that the mutation rate is 1.2 x 10-3 per sequence per generation.” However, postulating no admixture between Jewish and non-Jewish European host populations is both historically and scientifically untenable, particularly in light of Behar’s own Y chromosome results indicating extensive admixture.



A close inspection of Jewish mtDNA results refutes any argument for lack of maternal admixture with European populations. According to Behar (2004a), only four mtDNA groups account for approximately 70% of Ashkenazi mtDNA results. These haplogroups are K (32%), H (21%), N1b (10%) and J1 (7%). However, Behar indicates the origins of three out the four groups (H, K and J) are unknown. More importantly, he acknowledges that certain other haplogroups among the Ashkenazi – V and U5 in particular – appear to be of European origin, thereby negating altogether the assumption of no admixture. Finally, the slow mutational changes that occur within mtDNA are unlikely to be strongly influenced by population isolation and genetic drift occurring over a very short time span, as is the case with the Jewish Diaspora. Thus, there is a much greater probability that independent founder events occurring during the Jewish Diaspora rather than genetic drift are the cause of Jewish mtDNA variability and lower haplogroup diversity. However, it is also possible that both factors had an effect on Jewish mtDNA.



The origin of Jewish mtDNA Haplogroup K is unclear at this time. The most common haplotypes, as distinguished by HVR1 mutations, are as follows: 223T-224C-234T-311C (33%); 224T-234C-311C (24%); 093C-224C-311C (19%); and 224C-311C (16%). The first two haplotypes are almost completely restricted to Ashkenazi populations, perhaps an indicator of pronounced genetic drift (Behar et al. 2004a). Shen (2004) found that the majority of Ashkenazi K lineages also shared transitions at nucleotide positions 11470 and 11914, which are specific to clade K1a. Except for the Ashkenazi, this particular K1a motif has only been reported in one Palestinian, one Romanian, one Czech, and one Basque (Shen, et al. 2004). Because of their near absence in non-Jewish populations, the most common Ashkenazi K1a haplotypes can be used as indicators of Ashkenazi ancestry.



Behar (2004a) noted that mtDNA haplogroup N1b exhibits a significant lack of haplotype diversity, indicating a probable common ancestral origin for this group. Additionally, Ashkenazim results display only a single transition from the putative ancestral HVR1 haplotype (145A-176G-223T) which Behar (2004a) reports is almost completely restricted to Middle Eastern populations. The inference that N1b is of Israelite origin is further supported by the fact that this group appears to be spread throughout eastern and western Ashkenazim at almost equal frequencies (Behar et al. 2004a, Supplementary Material).



Behar (2004a) does state that certain other haplogroups – L2, pre-HV, U7, M1, and U1b- which appear at very low frequencies among Ashkenazim, may have either a Middle Eastern, African, or Mediterranean origin. Unfortunately, this does little to clarify the probable origins of these groups among Ashkenazim.



The haplogroups that comprise the remaining 30% of Ashkenazim mtDNA including the following: J (J*, J1, J2), T (T*, T1-T5), HV1, U6 (U6a*, U6a1, U6b), HV*, W, X, I, M*, U4, U1a/U1b, U2/U2e, U3, R (R*, R1, R2). Behar (2004a) lists their provenance as unknown. However, a close examination of mtDNA haplogroups J1 and J2, which comprise 7% of Ashkenazi results, reveal that they are common only among Eastern Ashkenazim (Behar et al. 2004a, Supplementary Material). Therefore, Ashkenazi mtDNA J can probably be attributed to Eastern European admixture. In fact, Shen (2004) notes that Ashkenazi J1 and T2b haplotypes have exact HVS1 matches with European groups, suggesting admixture.



Although it may initially appear that Ashkenazi mtDNA groups such as HV* and HV1 are Middle Eastern/Israelite in origin, the fact that both mtDNA groups are found almost exclusively among Eastern European Jews points to admixture as a more likely source of this ancestry. On the other hand, pre-HV1 and L2a are found in low frequency among both eastern and western groups and are more likely to be of Israelite origin (Behar et al. 2004, Supplementary Material).



Haplogroup U among Ashkenazim comprises 32 out 565 results, with U7 comprising 8 out of the 32 results (Behar et al. 2004, Supplementary Material). In a study on mtDNA in the Volga-Ural region, researchers found U7 to be typical of Middle Eastern populations, including Jordan, Kuwait, Iran and Saudi Arabia (Bermisheva et al. 2002). This lends support to Behar’s theory that U7 among Ashkenazi Jews. is of probable Middle Eastern origin. Shen (2004), however, is less certain about its origins, stating that “it is difficult to assess whether Haplogroups U7 and HV, as well as HVS-I haplotypes of the Ashkenazi K2, I, W, and U2 lineage, represent the original gene pool of the Jewish founders or are due to admixture with European populations.”



U2 among Ashkenazim appears to be of European origin, since the common haplotype resembles that seen in European populations (HVR1 motif 051G, 129C, 189C) (Behar et al. 2004a, Supplementary Material). Although Behar (2004a, Supplementary Material) suggested that Ashkenazi U1b was “Middle Eastern, African, or Mediterranean” in origin, this sub-clade is found at a low frequency only among Polish and Russian Jews; thus, European admixture is probably the source of this group among Ashkenazim. U3 among the Ashkenazi (2 out of 32) could be a genetic inheritance from Khazarian ancestors, given that the highest diversity of this subgroup is found in the Caucasus (Ossetia, Georgia, Armenia) and in Turkey (Bermisheva et al. 2002).



U4 is also probably European (1 out of 32), though the distribution of U5 is more complex, given that it occurs not only in European groups, but also in the Middle East and Central Asia. The fact that Behar (2004a) identifies Ashkenazi U5 as European in origin may indicate that the Jewish haplotypes more closely resemble those seen in Eastern European populations.



Bermisheva (2002) also explored haplogroup T, noting certain HVR1 haplotypes that are common among Finno-Ugric and Udmurt populations of the Ural region (126, 294; 126, 294, 296, 304; T1: 126, 294, 163, 186, 189). Ashkenazi T1-T5 (excluding T*) comprise 21 individuals out of 565 in Behar’s (2004a) study, some of which have identical or similar haplotypes to those found in Bermisheva’s samples.



Eastern vs. Western Ashkenazim



One important discovery made in Behar’s (2004a) study is the apparent differences in mtDNA haplogroup frequency between various Ashkenazi populations, particularly between eastern and western Ashkenazim. Behar divides the various Ashkenazi populations as follows: French Jews, German Jews, Austrian Jews, Lithuanian Jews, Polish Jews, Romanian Jews, Russian Jews, and Ukrainian Jews.



One apparent difference is that eastern Ashkenazim, particularly Polish Jews, appear to have as great a diversity of mtDNA haplotypes as Middle Eastern and European populations. Thomas (2002) had noted this feature in the Ashkenazi results in his own study. Some of these haplotypes do not appear at all among the western Ashkenazim. In fact, the western Ashkenazim display a remarkably low diversity of haplogroups and haplotypes, much lower than that seen in either eastern Ashkenazim or non-Jewish European/Middle Eastern groups. Haplogroups that appear in eastern Ashkenazi, but are rare to absent in western Jewish groups, include HV*, HV1, pre-HV1, J1, J2, U1-6, W, V, and certain sub-clades of H (Behar et al; 2004a, Supplementary Material).



This would strongly favor an independent founder hypothesis among these populations. It would appear that the Ashkenazim share a common set of founders of both European and Middle Eastern origin, while a separate group of maternal founders entered the population of eastern Ashkenazi communities sometime during the Diaspora.



The fact that some of these mtDNA groups are rare to absent in western Ashkenazi moving Ashkenazim absorbed a number of sepopulations argues in favor of a post-Diaspora European origin. Furthermore, many scholars believe that Eastern European Jewry has its genetic basis among the western Ashkenazim; Eastern communities were founded when Jews migrated from Germany and France after the 12th-13th centuries. Certain mtDNA haplogroups shared between the two populations, for example N1b and K, indicate that the eastern Ashkenazi communities do indeed share some common mtDNA genetic history with western groups, some of probable Middle Eastern origin. Yet it also appears that eastward parate European maternal founders once they settled in Eastern Europe. This absorption would explain a number of mtDNA haplotypes that Behar identifies as European in origin and are restricted primarily to eastern Ashkenazim, in particular, U5 and V. It may also explain the high frequency of mtDNA haplogroup J, as well as a number of H sub-clades, that are not present in the western groups. [/QUOTE]

This is an interesting selection but leaves too much variability to assess if Ashkenazi Jews are >50% European. But you provided a source, a very detailed one and for that I am grateful.

[QUOTE][url]http://www.stormfront.org/forum/show...13&postcount=2[/url][/QUOTE]

I hope you don’t consider this a source. I will read the last later.

Daniel Shays
12-15-2006, 02:15 AM
David is 55 or 56. But he's a fitness fanatic. Doesn't smoke. Lifts weights religiously, and bench presses 350 lbs.
Do you have access to his eHarmony profile or something?

Thomas777
12-15-2006, 03:16 AM
Do you have access to his eHarmony profile or something?

LMFAO

If Davey D is flat benching 350, than I am 18 inches swinging and leap tall buildings in a single bound.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 03:16 AM
Do you have access to his eHarmony profile or something?

No, just to his phone number: 985-626-7714.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 03:17 AM
LMFAO

If Davey D is flat benching 350, than I am 18 inches swinging and leap tall buildings in a single bound.

Whew !! Congratulations !!!

that guy
12-15-2006, 04:12 AM
LMFAO

If Davey D is flat benching 350, than I am 18 inches swinging and leap tall buildings in a single bound.
He must be using the same equipment that Pat Robertson uses.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 05:59 AM
I'll give you this, responding to the comparison between me and Glenn Miller. If I had to chose between WFHermons, Burrhous, Rusty Mason, Aryan Imperium, and possibly Mike (probably not as bad), Glenn Miller would be the least annoying of the name the jew crew. I'll give Glenn Miller credit that he does have a laid back friendly posting style.

Vasily Zaitsev
12-15-2006, 08:12 AM
David is 55 or 56. But he's a fitness fanatic. Doesn't smoke. Lifts weights religiously, and bench presses 350 lbs.

That doesn't explain his hellface.

Jimbo Gomez
12-15-2006, 09:03 AM
Who gives a shit? They all hate our guts. And they all either support, or remain silent about, the jewish genocide against the Aryan race.

The jew enemy is the jew enemy, no matter the percentage of it's kike genes. Let "God" sort um out.

Heil Hitler !!!


You don't believe in God so don't use His name in vain.

WFHermans
12-15-2006, 02:29 PM
I downloaded the youtube version of the Wolf Blitzer interview and David Duke did a good job against the hostile jew.

Thanks to Aistulf for making videos available here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB3mq7qzxDI). I download them under the Firefox browser with Downloadhelper (all free, find it with google or better with scroogle). I dislike commercials and the bad connection of the CNN-like sites and I want to keep the video before youtube kicks them off at the request of the zionists.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 02:58 PM
He must be using the same equipment that Pat Robertson uses.

David has always been a fitness fanatic. But prior to and during his time in prison, he began lifting weights and bulking up in earnest, for obvious reasons. And he continued in order to remain strong for self defense purposes.

My inside information btw, came from Jamie Kelso and others who work at Duke headquarters, whom I spoke with dozens of times on the phone, while placing orders for Duke pamphlets, which I've purchased and distributed ever since I got out of prison in 1990. Plus, I met with David, Jamie and other close Duke associates, during the 04 Duke Conference in New Orleans.

Believe me, David is no wimp.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 03:03 PM
I downloaded the youtube version of the Wolf Blitzer interview and David Duke did a good job against the hostile jew.

Thanks to Aistulf for making videos available here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB3mq7qzxDI). I download them under the Firefox browser with Downloadhelper (all free, find it with google or better with scroogle). I dislike commercials and the bad connection of the CNN-like sites and I want to keep the video before youtube kicks them off at the request of the zionists.

David, no doubt, did dozens of TV and radio interviews these past 2-3 days, and for stations all over the world. Last nite, he spoke live with Colmes (of Hannity and Colmes) on talk radio for about 20 minutes. The replay can be listened to on vnnforum.com (This Just In Forum). Also other media interviews.

Duke is the greatest White man since Adolph Hitler, in my judgment.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 03:08 PM
That doesn't explain his hellface.

David is 55 or 56 years old. After what he's been thru during 30-plus years of non-stop WN activisms, what do you expect, a young Clark Gable ?? Most men would look 90 by now.

Daniel Shays
12-15-2006, 03:09 PM
Duke won.

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/images/banners/DukeBlitzer1.jpg

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 04:19 PM
I have an opinion that Duke makes statements he couldn't back up if he was challanged. He may sound confident. But I think he's an opportunist who uses half-truths to imply things that aren't true. There's a perfect example of this. Blitzer totally desomated his ass when he pointed out all the government members were not jewish. He made Duke look like an idiot.

When I heard David Duke say "you can't handle me" I almost spit out my drink from laughing.

I think David Duke fans are just so desparate for airtime that David Duke could stand up and sing nursery rhymes and you would say he did a good job.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 04:46 PM
I have an opinion that Duke makes statements he couldn't back up if he was challanged. He may sound confident. But I think he's an opportunist who uses half-truths to imply things that aren't true. There's a perfect example of this. Blitzer totally desomated his ass when he pointed out all the government members were not jewish. He made Duke look like an idiot.

When I heard David Duke say "you can't handle me" I almost spit out my drink from laughing.

I think David Duke fans are just so desparate for airtime that David Duke could stand up and sing nursery rhymes and you would say he did a good job.

I'm hoping your unreasonable criticisms of Duke are motivated by your loyalty to Jared Taylor, and are due, in large part, to your young age.

Believe me, David can back up everything he says, and with incredibly extensive details he keeps stored inside his photographic memory bank.

As for Blitzer's counter point in naming non-jews in government, you must bear in mind that jews are less than 3 percent of the population. Gentiles are therefore over 97 percent.

David Duke fans are more than justified in applauding David's recent media victories.

Assuming you're a White gentile, I highly recommend you spend some open-minded time at davidduke.com. His book btw, "Jewish Supremacism" details the proofs of his allegations against the jews, mostly with sources and quotes from jews themselves. That book is the most compellingly persuasive expose of the jews ever written, in my honest judgment.

Think about it, will ya ??

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 04:47 PM
That's where you're wrong. I've been to www.davidduke.com and I'm not impressed. I have both of his books and I'm not impressed.

As for Blitzer's counter point in naming non-jews in government, you must bear in mind that jews are less than 3 percent of the population
Jews are successful people.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 05:08 PM
That's where you're wrong. I've been to www.davidduke.com and I'm not impressed. I have both of his books and I'm not impressed.


Jews are successful people.

But have you read them ?? Particularly "Jewish Supremacism".

Yes, Jews are successful. But so are all living parasites.

And be herewith informed, I'll not acknowledge much less respond to deliberately unreasonable people on this forum. So don't be too hard-headed. OK ?? Conceding personal errors in judgment and analysis, is no vice but signs of honor, integrity, and self respect. Never, ever chain yourself to beliefs you yourself no longer feel deep down, just to avoid losing face among cyber space acquaintances.

Nyx
12-15-2006, 06:21 PM
Show me your source, just one, that puts the average Ashkenazi >50% European and I will concede that Ashkenazi’s are more European than Semite.I heard it in a Pinker lecture.

Straight Satan
12-15-2006, 06:30 PM
At 66, alcohol makes me shake next day, like a dog shittin razor blades.

Yeah, that's what's known as the DT's.

Straight Satan
12-15-2006, 06:56 PM
David has always been a fitness fanatic. But prior to and during his time in prison, he began lifting weights and bulking up in earnest, for obvious reasons. And he continued in order to remain strong for self defense purposes.


Tom Metzger told a story of how he and other racists/WN's attended a meeting where the main speaker was Duke. This is back in the 70's or early 80's. Anyhow, they were sitting in the audience when the curtain on stage rose, accompanied by some dramatic music, and there was Duke in all his vainglory, shirtless, pumping iron. Weird!

Duke is the greatest White man since Adolph Hitler, in my judgment.

I wonder what he thinks about you...

what do you expect, a young Clark Gable ?? Most men would look 90 by now.

90? Nah. You don't even look 90 and you're a hard-bitten old drunk. Anyway they wouldn't look like the Portrait of Dorian Gray like he does. Duke has had so much surgery his head looks like it's made out of paper mache. He looks like a fucking puppet.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 07:02 PM
Duke won.

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/images/banners/DukeBlitzer1.jpg

Yeah, he's really something, ain't he ??

Are you really a Romanian communist ?? Tell me a little bit about why.

Romanians fought on the right side of WWII, btw. And no doubt, paid a high price to the USSR's jew-led bolsheviks, afterwards. Right ??

Dr. Gutberlet
12-15-2006, 07:31 PM
david duke once wrote a book about analingus:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke
Using the pseudonym Dorothy Vanderbilt, Duke published a self-help book for women, titled Finders-Keepers, in 1976. The publication gives advice to women regarding vaginal exercises, fellatio, analingus, and anal sex.[

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 07:53 PM
I want to see what an unbiased representative sample of the entire american population with racially separated results thinks about who won these debates.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 10:57 PM
That's garbage. You want to see a real man, look at Zell Miller taking on Chris Matthews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC24MfUehJ0
It gets good 3 minutes in.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 11:21 PM
That's garbage. You want to see a real man, look at Zell Miller taking on Chris Matthews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC24MfUehJ0
It gets good 3 minutes in.

Does that mean you support the war in Iraq ??

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 11:22 PM
No it doesn't. But I can disagree with someone but still enjoy their toughness.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 11:23 PM
I want to see what an unbiased representative sample of the entire american population with racially separated results thinks about who won these debates.

You mean you'd take the word of the lemmings ??

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 11:24 PM
No it doesn't. But I can disagree with someone but still enjoy their toughness.

Check. Yeah, old Zell showed some fire, alright.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 11:24 PM
You mean you'd take the word of the lemmings ??
No it means I'd analyze it. Not necessarily take it if I disagreed with it.

Glenn Miller
12-15-2006, 11:33 PM
No it means I'd analyze it. Not necessarily take it if I disagreed with it.

A poll would no doubt show that far more liberals and non-whites voted for Duke as having won the debate, than Christian and Southern whites who are more brainwashed by the jewsmedia, and who support the adage "my country right or wrong", not knowing that jews control the direction of the country.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-15-2006, 11:39 PM
Most people know jews have excelled in earning themselves positions in the media. But most people do not care.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 12:27 AM
Most people know jews have excelled in earning themselves positions in the media. But most people do not care.

That's partially true. But very few, less than 1 percent, know jews virtually control the system media completely, thru ownership, leadership and/or thru intimidation of White media gentiles.

And the jews didn't "earn" their media positions. Their positions were deliberately and discriminately given to them by big jews because they are jews.

You'll at least concede that jews control Hollywood, won't you ??

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 01:04 AM
You'll at least concede that jews control Hollywood, won't you ??
I'll say that they work for it, not necessarily that they "control" it. I don't see how this is a concession, its just a fact.

And the jews didn't "earn" their media positions. Their positions were deliberately and discriminately given to them by big jews because they are jews.
Can you thoroughly explain this with documented evidence, or is it just your theory? I'm definately going with the second lol. Blacks dominate the nba because they cheat? bullcrap. Russians and Canadians dominate hockey because they cheat. bullcrap. Some people have talents, its just how the world works.

Dances with Wolves
12-16-2006, 01:07 AM
I'll say that they work for it, not necessarily that they "control" it. I don't see how this is a concession, its just a fact.

God123123, shouldn't you be lighting the candles? :confused:

Dances with Wolves
12-16-2006, 01:08 AM
I'll say that they work for it, not necessarily that they "control" it. I don't see how this is a concession, its just a fact.


Can you thoroughly explain this with documented evidence, or is it just your theory? I'm definately going with the second lol. Blacks dominate the nba because they cheat? bullcrap. Russians and Canadians dominate hockey because they cheat. bullcrap. Some people have talents, its just how the world works.

You are most definitely a kid, or a jew. One of the two.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 01:08 AM
God123123, shouldn't you be lighting the candles? :confused:
I'm not jewish. Who told you I was jewish?

You're probably the 4th person to make that accusation.

You are most definitely a kid, or a jew. One of the two.
Neither

Dances with Wolves
12-16-2006, 01:09 AM
I'm not jewish. Who told you I was jewish?

That's good to hear. Otherwise the kabbalist jews would be cursing you right now for posting after sundown.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 01:15 AM
I see no evidence that jews were appointed to their positions just for being jewish and not on the basis of competency in their jobs. I won't take your word without evidence.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 03:54 AM
I'll say that they work for it, not necessarily that they "control" it. I don't see how this is a concession, its just a fact.


Can you thoroughly explain this with documented evidence, or is it just your theory? I'm definately going with the second lol. Blacks dominate the nba because they cheat? bullcrap. Russians and Canadians dominate hockey because they cheat. bullcrap. Some people have talents, its just how the world works.


The jewish magazine described below has been widely circulated among WN websites for many years. I tried to transfer the magazine cover, but for some reason, photos don't transfer onto this forum. After reading it, reasonable people never again deny that jews control Hollywood. Therefore, I won't expect you too.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The American Moment Magazine is subtitled, "The Jewish Magazine for the ¥90s". Its edition of Aug. 1996 carries the startling headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So What?" The author is the Jew Michael Medved who states:

"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
The article then describes how the Jew Michael Eisner, the Head of Walt Disney studios only hires "highly paid Jewish moguls" as producers such as Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Ovitz, Joe Roth (former head of 20th Century Fox). Medved emphazises the point that, "The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harboured anti-Semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions."

Medved continues: "Men and women of Jewish background enjoy a vastly disproportionate - if not dominate - influence in Hollywood." He adds that even studios which were bought out by the Japanese Sony Corp. and by the Australian Jew Rupert Murdoch, still had to hire, "a Yiddish team of long-time industry leaders in all the most powerful positions. When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal¥s legndary - and all-Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg and Tom Pollack."

Medved further writes that most of today¥s movie moguls graduated from Ivy League colleges, "where Jews are vastly over-represented - just as they are in Hollywood." He says that nepotism plays a role exemplified with Samuel Goldwyn Pictures being run by the son of founder Samuel Goldwyn and a third generation, Tony Goldwyn, is waiting in the wings to take over. He adds: "This dynastic tendency in American entertainment certainly is a factor in the continued prominence of the Jewish role."

Medved says that while polls show that Americans believe that Jews make up 10% of the population it is just 2,4%.

Marlon Brando¥s chief complaint was that the Jews are always depicted as kind, loving, humorous, do-gooders. Medved writes that, "Jewish writers and directors employ unquestionably flattering depictions of Jews for audiences to react with sympathy and affection."

Thus Jewish characters have become commonplace in prime-television in the US, as exemplified by such shows such as "The Nany", starring the loud-mouth Brooklyn Jewess Fran Drescher, "Northern Exposure" features Dr. Joel Fleishman, "Seinfeld" abounds with Jewish themes says Medved, "Quiz Show" has the Jew Rob Morrow as the lawyer, "Mad About You" has Paul Reiser as the filmmaker, "Friends" depicts David Schwimmer as the doctor. Other TV programs featuring obvious Jews in flattering situations include "Love and War", "Thirtysomething", "LA Law", "Home Front" and "Brooklyn Bridge".

Medved writes that resentment against Hollywood has increased:

"Poll after poll, taken over the past 10 years, shows that the public believes this industry is more firmly associated with Jews than any other business in the world. That it is almost universally viewed as a destructive force in our society should be of concern."
Medved says that such anti-Christian films as "The Last Temptation of Christ" by Lew Wasserman, "gives tactic approval to what most Americans consider as a damaging influence of the entertainment industry."

Medved ends with this statement, which should be a warning to all non-Jews:

"The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America¥s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates. The industry¥s informal patriarch, MCA chairman Lew Wasserman, wields tremendous personal clout in state and national politics. So do Barbara Streisand, Norman Lear and others."

Mentious
12-16-2006, 03:55 AM
I see no evidence that jews were appointed to their positions just for being jewish and not on the basis of competency in their jobs. I won't take your word without evidence.
That's naive. The brotherhood takes care of its own and knows whose hand to clasp for hiring and promotion. When Jew Michael Eisner became C.E.O. of Disney all the important Gentile execs were canned and replaced with Jews, in short order.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 03:57 AM
In response to glenn miller:
You see this doesn't really answer what I asked. I agreed that jewish people work for the media. What I'm questioning is can you prove they didn't earn their position? I don't see where specifically that it is proven that jews didn't.

You are basically saying jews got hired for being jews, not for being capable in their job field? You haven't proven that.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:00 AM
You are most definitely a kid, or a jew. One of the two.

He sure talks like a jew. His positions are apologetic towards jews, even unreasonable seeming. He says he's college aged, as I recall, though. So it's possible he's just a (shall we say) not-yet-jew-wise fellow, and one who is so captivated by Jared Taylor's positions on the jews, he feels compelled to badmouth everybody who isn't.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:03 AM
He sure talks like a jew.
Explain. How does a jew talk?

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:04 AM
In response to glenn miller:
You see this doesn't really answer what I asked. I agreed that jewish people work for the media. What I'm questioning is can you prove they didn't earn their position? I don't see where specifically that it is proven that jews didn't.

You are basically saying jews got hired for being jews, not for being capable in their job field? You haven't proven that.

But previous to my posting of the jewish magazine article, you denied that jews control Hollywood. Do you deny it now, after reading that article ??

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:06 AM
Explain. How does a jew talk? Apologetically for the interests of jews.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:06 AM
I deny that they "control." I didn't deny that they had most of the positions. Controlling implies that they use their power in a certain way and that they prevent others from entering.

If you and I wanted to go in the media business, and start our own company, jews couldn't stop us. They couldn't "control" us.

By your logic, blacks "control the nba." Not true. If you are white you can still be in the nba without the approval of blacks.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:09 AM
Apologetically for the interests of jews.
This isn't necessarily true. I only correct people when I think they are wrong. When I think jews are wrong I correct them too.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:15 AM
In response to glenn miller:
You see this doesn't really answer what I asked. I agreed that jewish people work for the media. What I'm questioning is can you prove they didn't earn their position? I don't see where specifically that it is proven that jews didn't.

You are basically saying jews got hired for being jews, not for being capable in their job field? You haven't proven that.

Well, of course, it's impossible to prove media jews were hired because they are jews. Just like it would be impossible to prove you hired only Whites because they are White. You could provide countless excuses to prove you didn't discriminate on the basis of race.

However, White employers are routinely investigated for racial discimination against non-Whites, and have been ever since the early 60's. Jews, on the other hand, are never investigated for racial discrimination against non-jews.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:18 AM
However, White employers are routinely investigated for racial discimination against non-Whites, and have been ever since the early 60's. Jews, on the other hand, are never investigated for racial discrimination against non-jews.
You make a good point, but most people rightly or wrongly see jews as a religion.

I think its made of two nationalities (sephardic and ashkenazi).

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:19 AM
I'm hittin the ole sack. We'll continue the debate manana. You're making reasonable arguments, at least for a young fellow not yet jew-wise.

Nyx
12-16-2006, 04:30 AM
David Duke on MSNBC
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SB3mq7qzxDI

il ragno
12-16-2006, 05:12 AM
If you, like me, flinch in disgust at Miller's Neanderthal attempts at "knowledge" and "scholarship" despite your own pre-existing suspicion of Jewish motives, don't worry - that's normal.

Miller's specialty is repelling ten to twenty white men for every one he lures in to his Web of Stupid. Then he'll haw-haw that this is his intention - he's just interested in A Few Good Men. All he needs to overthrow the government, put niggers on boats, and blow the boats up before they've left the harbor, is just - you got it - A Few Good Men.

Like they had at Waco.

Because he's a white field nigger, which is to say an attention whore happy to do looka-me end-zone dances and beat his chest, who's simultaneously the first rat off the sinking ship when it all goes south, the idea that it's better to make actual progress than to hoot and holler around a burning cross until you pass out dead drunk is alien to the Master Sergeant Retired.

Now let me ask a question: does the following statement sound consistent with a white patriot leader-of-men, or a culture-destroying turncoat Jew?

"The experience of seeing and fondling those thick bundles of money is one I'll never forget. I felt the desire to gather up the bundles in my arms, hug them to my chest, and hum and swoon."

Yeah. That's what I thought, too.

Mentious
12-16-2006, 05:50 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in the mind of the average American, isn't there a bigger stigma on holocaust denial than on working for AIPAC?
Yes, and a Jew-created stigma. By pointing out the racial and tribal interest of the "newscaster," Duke turned the tables to reveal who sets up these stigmas in the first place. It was beautiful.

Many Americans are intelligent enough to get some of that.

Leshrac
12-16-2006, 07:34 AM
For those who didn't see it, here's his one hour speech in belgium :)

http://radio.altermedia.info/images/duke_flanders.wmv

I was there :) The guy is cool and really has guts :)

Edit: Gotta get used to our strong beers tho, hihi :D

Agnostic Priest
12-16-2006, 09:28 AM
I am surprised the United states government allows David duke to get away with traveling back and forth to the middle east teaching arab nations how to name the jew. Especially with these new anti “terrorism” laws on the books. Now a days zog has legal authority to charge US citizens with treason if they disagree with the way Zog is controlling our government. Imo DD teaming up with the arabs is a risky bad idea. The majority of arab nations hate our guts, and given the chance they would kill us in a heart beat. If DD is not careful the arabs might throw him in prison, and threaten to chop off his balls if he dose not convert to Islam. Imo Wn leaders fighting to save our white race need to awake un awakened whites F arabs.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 02:53 PM
Yes, and a Jew-created stigma. By pointing out the racial and tribal interest of the "newscaster," Duke turned the tables to reveal who sets up these stigmas in the first place. It was beautiful.

Many Americans are intelligent enough to get some of that.


I've known David since 1982. He's the most driven, focused, capable, dedicated and courageous WN leader of the dozens I've known and had personal contact with all these decades, including Dr William Pierce whom I greatly admire and respect.

There's nothing phoney or selfish about David Duke. And all those here who badmouth him have agendas counterproductive to Aryan freedom and racial survival.

"He who has learned the jews, but refuses to warn his kinsmen of the jewish menace, is an accomplice of the jews, and an accessory to jewish enslavement and genocide of the White Race."

P.S. www.WhiteWay.org is an impressive cite. I may use 1 or 2 articles there in the next edition of my newspaper -
The White Patriot Leader. Amnesty International's article on Israel's sex slave trade is highly credible, also persuasive thus effective.

raskalnikov
12-16-2006, 03:02 PM
I see no evidence that jews were appointed to their positions just for being jewish and not on the basis of competency in their jobs. I won't take your word without evidence.

You don't believe in nepotism?

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 03:41 PM
If you, like me, flinch in disgust at Miller's Neanderthal attempts at "knowledge" and "scholarship" despite your own pre-existing suspicion of Jewish motives, don't worry - that's normal.

Miller's specialty is repelling ten to twenty white men for every one he lures in to his Web of Stupid. Then he'll haw-haw that this is his intention - he's just interested in A Few Good Men. All he needs to overthrow the government, put niggers on boats, and blow the boats up before they've left the harbor, is just - you got it - A Few Good Men.

Like they had at Waco.

Because he's a white field nigger, which is to say an attention whore happy to do looka-me end-zone dances and beat his chest, who's simultaneously the first rat off the sinking ship when it all goes south, the idea that it's better to make actual progress than to hoot and holler around a burning cross until you pass out dead drunk is alien to the Master Sergeant Retired.

Now let me ask a question: does the following statement sound consistent with a white patriot leader-of-men, or a culture-destroying turncoat Jew?

"The experience of seeing and fondling those thick bundles of money is one I'll never forget. I felt the desire to gather up the bundles in my arms, hug them to my chest, and hum and swoon."

Yeah. That's what I thought, too.

Well then, tell us how you'd feel if somebody gave you a cardboard box filled with $200,000 in 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100 dollar federal reserve notes ?? Hell, at least I was honest about how I felt. Geesscchhh. . . .

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 03:45 PM
You don't believe in nepotism?
No. You haven't proved nepotism.

Kriger
12-16-2006, 03:53 PM
Well then, tell us how you'd feel if somebody gave you a cardboard box filled with $200,000 in 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100 dollar federal reserve notes ??

I'd figure the money came from illegal immoral activities. I would want no part of it.

Some people do not care where the money comes from, as long as it is alot and basically free.

Some other people do not care where money comes from, whether it be two cents or $200,000.

Anyone that accepts money from illegal gains deserves whatever comes down on their heads for it.

Anyone that accepts money gained from illegal enterprise, whether it be drugs or robbery or porno is just a jew of another color/ or race.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:03 PM
Hey God123.., here's a quote from the jew Medved who wrote the article entitled: "Jews control Hollywood - so what?"


"The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America¥s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates. The industry¥s informal patriarch, MCA chairman Lew Wasserman, wields tremendous personal clout in state and national politics. So do Barbara Streisand, Norman Lear and others." (unquote)


Medved's expose is not denied by influential jews, at least not via the media where such a blatant lie would be evident to so many in-the-know people who would hear the lie and know who told it.

As you suggest however, it's virtually impossible for us to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that jews in the media got there because they are jews. Without a lie detector test, anyway. But as I said, the government does not investigate jew media bosses for discrimination against non-jews. And just as with the so-called holocaust, the jewsmedia and their gentile political whores would raise hell if there was a credible investigation into the degree of jewish influence on the mass media.

Btw, you are harmful to our efforts to EXPOSE THE JEWS, which means logically that as you are now, you're an accomplice of the jews therefore an accessory in the jewish enslavement and genocide of the White race.

So think about that.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:06 PM
I agree with basically everything you posted except for one thing...I'm not really about exposing jews...I'm about discussing RACE. If you want to expose jews, fine...but its not really what I want to do.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 04:18 PM
I agree with basically everything you posted except for one thing...I'm not really about exposing jews...I'm about discussing RACE. If you want to expose jews, fine...but its not really what I want to do.


Do you mean to say you agree that jews control Hollywood, but that you don't want to discuss jew Hollywood's promotions of race-mixing which contributes enormously to White race destruction ??? Or about Hollywood's 50 year campaign of inciting anti-white racial hatreds and violence among blacks thru movies like "Roots", "Mississippi Burning", "Ghosts of Mississippi", and all the other "hate Whitey" propaganda movies produced by jew controlled Hollywood ??

Btw, has Jared Taylor said anything about Duke's exposures of jews and/or Duke's appearance at the holocaust convention ?? If so, post his comments here, por favor.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:28 PM
Btw, has Jared Taylor said anything about Duke's exposures of jews and/or Duke's appearance at the holocaust convention ?? If so, post his comments here, por favor.
I mailed amren that going to iran was regrettable that he was willing to go so far just to spite jews, and Taylor wrote back and said he agreed.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 04:37 PM
You see, my theory is that as people become more racially aware, hollywood is going to fall by public demand. But people like David Duke are an obstacle to that process because they see hollywood as the main issue. It's an issue. But it isn't the main issue in my oppinon.

Hollywood exists because people either don't care or they support it. The first thing is to make people care about race. Then as public opinion changes, hollywood won't be "cool" anymore. I don't think ranting about jews helps this process, in fact, I think it hurts it.

I hope you also realize that there are jews out there, of course not most but a few, who agree with you about hollywood and race. To attack all jews alienates the few jews who would agree with you. You may say "so what? It's a small amount of people." But jews hold a lot of influence because they are intelligent and we can't afford to even lose the small amount of support we have from them because people like David Duke would rather talk about jews than actual racial issues. That's why I support amren's stance. We couldn't afford such an inefficient waste of human resources of support. No-one is denying that jews have a history of liberalism.

I support what Sam Francis said here. If you want to save the white race, you need to discuss race issues, not the jew issue. My problem with David Duke is that he brings up the jew issue in places where he isn't welcome. He was never welcome to do what he did in amren (although he did organize a cheering section to make it appear so). He needs to know his place. He thinks he has the right to tell eastern european nationalist how to run eastern europe. Honestly. He really needs to learn his place. An irish klan leader...give me a break.

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 05:43 PM
No it means I'd analyze it. Not necessarily take it if I disagreed with it.

In other words: "I'd trumpet it from the rooftops if it supported my position, and I'd debunk it if it contradicted my opinion."

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 05:47 PM
I'll say that they work for it, not necessarily that they "control" it. I don't see how this is a concession, its just a fact.


Can you thoroughly explain this with documented evidence, or is it just your theory? I'm definately going with the second lol. Blacks dominate the nba because they cheat? bullcrap. Russians and Canadians dominate hockey because they cheat. bullcrap. Some people have talents, its just how the world works.

Actually Whites are better at basketball than niggers. Just look at the most recent summer Olympics. Niggers dominate the NBA because NBA owners take niggers over their more skilled Eastern European fellow players because they know they'll get more favorable media coverage from the jewsmedia, and therefore, more fans, and ticket sales, than if they hired the Whites, even though they'd win. After all, who is more well-known among American "boxing fans" the Heavyweight Champion of the World, Vladimir Klitschko, OR washed-up nigger Mike Tyson?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 05:50 PM
Whites are better team players and more intelligent and better shooters, negros have quicker better reflexes.

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 05:50 PM
God123123, shouldn't you be lighting the candles? :confused:

LOL, or making himself a dreidel out of clay.

http://campusministry.georgetown.edu/images/dreidel.jpg

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 05:56 PM
Explain. How does a jew talk?

He never answers questions, only asks them, even in response to a question.

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 06:06 PM
I support what Sam Francis said here. If you want to save the white race, you need to discuss race issues, not the jew issue. My problem with David Duke is that he brings up the jew issue in places where he isn't welcome.

In other words, according to God123 (what a name!): "we need to discuss symptoms, not the underlying disease."

The difference between softsoap amren types like you "God" and jew-namers like me, is that your solution is Robitussin, while mine is antibiotics.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 06:07 PM
Well then if you look at the overwhelming areas of this thread I definately don't talk like a jew.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 06:14 PM
In other words, according to God123 (what a name!): "we need to discuss symptoms, not the underlying disease."

The difference between softsoap amren types like you "God" and jew-namers like me, is that your solution is Robitussin, while mine is antibiotics.
I don't believe the jews are the main problem...a real man admits that it is traterous elites. The jews are just a micro problem of a bigger macro-level trend of liberalism.

raskalnikov
12-16-2006, 06:19 PM
No. You haven't proved nepotism.


I haven't proved gravity either,yet I'm reasonably sure it must exist.

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 06:19 PM
I don't believe the jews are the main problem...a real man admits that it is traterous elites. The jews are just a micro problem of a bigger macro-level trend of liberalism.

"Traitorous elites" are a problem, but they are only traitorous, because they have betrayed us (Whites) in favor of the jews who paid them off.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 06:21 PM
I disagree. They want to grow the economy. It's not the jew.

And you haven't answered what about jews who agree with you and oppose multiculturalism?

JohnAFlynn
12-16-2006, 06:35 PM
I disagree. They want to grow the economy. It's not the jew.

And you haven't answered what about jews who agree with you and oppose multiculturalism?

Hedging their bets, they're. jew backstopping, distortion and misdirection. jews know that White Nationalism is a potential threat to them. Just as they infiltrated the major political parties years ago, and Hollywood and newspapers, etc., in order to control potential sources of threats to their power, they are now attempting to insinuate themselves into WN. They have taken over the BNP, they infltrated AmRen, Stormfront, and even, I contend, VNN. Beyond infiltration, another major purpose of this, is to provide argument fodder for goy tools such as yourself who will say shit like "what about jews who agree with you and oppose multiculturalism?"

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 06:39 PM
they infltrated AmRen
bullshit. Amren was designed and jews were welcomed from the beginning. There was no infiltration. If anybody isn't welcome, its people who oppose amren policy, and amren policy from the beginning without any infiltration has always been the same.

Nobody stole it. Jews helped BUILT amren. Infiltration implies it originally opposed jewish participation. It never did. Duke tried to infiltrate Amren.

Would you like to ask Jared Taylor if jews infiltrated amren or if they were welcome from the beginning? This can be arranged. Email him and he might respond to you. But I think both of us know what the answer is here.

From the very beginning, jews have supported amren. Jews are only 2% of the population but make up 5% of its supporters. Do you really think people like David Duke are welcome there? You aren't welcome, and don't even think about showing up if you cannot respect the founders of the organization.

Fitz
12-16-2006, 07:38 PM
... If you want to save the white race, you need to discuss race issues, not the jew issue. My problem with David Duke is that he brings up the jew issue in places where he isn't welcome. He was never welcome to do what he did in amren (although he did organize a cheering section to make it appear so). He needs to know his place. He thinks he has the right to tell eastern european nationalist how to run eastern europe. Honestly. He really needs to learn his place. An irish klan leader...give me a break.

Not being wanted or welcomed never stopped the Jews from pursuing their goals. They’ve wormed their way into leadership roles in most every major political party and organizations from the RNC and the NRA to the Sierra Club. JohnAFlynn is correct, they will take over at Amren too if they are able, and any serious effort or enterprise to halt immigration or save the White race from extinction will be smothered in the crib if they succeed.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 07:59 PM
they will take over at Amren too if they are able
Jewish individuals BUILT amren along with gentile individuals. You can't steel something that is already yours.

I don't think you get it. Jared likes racially concious jews and doesn't like people who constantly bash jews. He does now and he did 15 years ago when he started amren. I can prove it here.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/04/jews_and_americ.php
There will be no more disgraceful behavior of this kind if people who attend AR conferences bear in mind that Jews have a valuable role in the work of American Renaissance and are welcome participants and speakers. Anyone who thinks otherwise has the choice of staying home or keeping his views to himself.
Take a hint. Jews are welcome and always were welcome. David Duke was not.

and any serious effort or enterprise to halt immigration or save the White race from extinction will be smothered in the crib if they succeed.
bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Amren surely is much better than that "European American Unity and Rights Organization." What a joke that is.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 08:57 PM
Jewish individuals BUILT amren along with gentile individuals. You can't steel something that is already yours.

I don't think you get it. Jared likes racially concious jews and doesn't like people who constantly bash jews. He does now and he did 15 years ago when he started amren. I can prove it here.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/04/jews_and_americ.php

Take a hint. Jews are welcome and always were welcome. David Duke was not.


bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Amren surely is much better than that "European American Unity and Rights Organization." What a joke that is.

Young "God" sure seems smitten with Jared Taylor. And I suspect there are many young, better-education, White men who are just as smitten with Taylor's pro-White-but-don't-name-the-jew, organization. After all, it's the safest, the most palatable to the lemmings, and it's kosher approved by the jewsmedia, nowadays. I mean why confront both the jewish and race problems, when you can just confront the race problem, and have some jews helping you ?? Sure makes life easier, and you can still be popular among your fellow lemming peers because the jewsmedia won't badmouth your positions as much. And some will even applaud them.

But of course, there are those pesky jew wars to consider. Guess you'll just have to appease amren's jewish members and financial supporters by supporting the wars, or at least not harp on it much. But what the heck, that's a small price to pay for jewish approval and support of the group.

LOL !!! (more later)

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 08:59 PM
Taylor has written articles against the war.

Believe it or not only 52% of jews supported the war in its inception, but 62% of gentiles did. The broad areas of the jewish population are more strongly opposed to the war than gentiles, at least that is how it was at the beginning. Now there are a few jews who have loudly supported the war. But they are a minority.

Fitz
12-16-2006, 09:22 PM
I hope you also realize that there are jews out there, of course not most but a few, who agree with you about hollywood and race. To attack all jews alienates the few jews who would agree with you. You may say "so what? It's a small amount of people." But jews hold a lot of influence because they are intelligent and we can't afford to even lose the small amount of support we have from them because people like David Duke would rather talk about jews than actual racial issues.

Jews are intelligent, huh? You mean like those Jewish geniuses that convinced Bush and Rumsfeld that Iraq would be a minor skirmish? If you think superior intelligence explains Jewish dominance in American politics, you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about.

Believe it or not only 52% of jews supported the war in its inception, but 62% of gentiles did.

You really are naive. Jews were concerned from the outset that they could be blamed for the war if things went wrong, and so they let the gentiles appear to take the lead. But AIPAC had already done their work on those gentile congressmen and the Jews knew they could sit back, draw less attention and still have their way. Some Israelis however felt less constrained, and took responsibility for the Iraq war in the Jewish press.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 09:24 PM
Jewish individuals BUILT amren along with gentile individuals. You can't steel something that is already yours.

I don't think you get it. Jared likes racially concious jews and doesn't like people who constantly bash jews. He does now and he did 15 years ago when he started amren. I can prove it here.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/04/jews_and_americ.php

Take a hint. Jews are welcome and always were welcome. David Duke was not.


bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Amren surely is much better than that "European American Unity and Rights Organization." What a joke that is.

Here's Jared Taylor's article concerning his organization's position on jews. Also coupla dozen comments from his Aryan supporters, most of whom vehemently disagree. Lots quit, outright.



Jews and American Renaissance

AR Articles on White Racial Consciousness

Twelve Years of American Renaissance (Nov. 2002)

Race and the American Identity (Dec. 1998)

The Morality of Survival (Jul. 1995)

Morality and Racial Consciousness (Jan. 1995)

More news stories on White Racial Consciousness

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, May 2006


[This article appears in the forthcoming issue of American Renaissance.]

I started American Renaissance 17 years ago in order to awaken whites to the crisis they face and to encourage them to unite in defending their legitimate interests as a race. To these ends, AR has deliberately avoided taking positions on questions about which racially-conscious whites are likely to disagree. Some of these have been foreign policy, abortion, the role of homosexuals in a white consciousness movement, and whether Christianity helps or hinders our efforts. By taking no position, AR has served readers who may be sharply opposed on these questions but who agree on the central importance of race, and are committed to our survival.

AR has likewise taken no explicit position on Jewish matters. Readers have always included both Jews and people who believe Jews play no useful role in a movement that promotes white interests. It has been my intent to emphasize questions crucial to our interests and on which we agree.

To put it more accurately, AR has taken an implicit position on Jews by publishing Jewish authors and inviting Jewish speakers to AR conferences. It should be clear to anyone that Jews have, from the outset, been welcome and equal participants in our efforts. There has always been a minority in the AR constituency that has criticized me and AR for welcoming Jews, and there has been another minority that has criticized me and AR for not denouncing the first minority. These groups have generally treated each other with polite reserve, and expressed their bitterness only among themselves or to me—as was proper.

There are other divisions within AR. There are Christians and atheists, Democrats and Republicans, evolutionists and creationists, and advocates of different foreign policies. There has been tension within AR on these questions, but always good manners.

That changed at the most recent American Renaissance conference. At least one participant told a Jewish conferee that Jews were not welcome. One participant well known for strong views rose to denounce Jews as the historic enemy of the European people. Another called him “a f***ing Nazi,” and stormed out of the conference hall.

There will be no more disgraceful behavior of this kind if people who attend AR conferences bear in mind that Jews have a valuable role in the work of American Renaissance, and are welcome participants and speakers. Anyone who thinks otherwise has the choice of staying home or keeping his views to himself.

AR does not, on the other hand, have litmus tests for subscribers or conference participants. There will always be disagreement and debate in our ranks on many issues, including the role Jews may or may not have played in creating the crisis we face. Some people in the AR community believe Jewish influence was decisive in destroying the traditional American consensus on race. Others disagree.

Gentile whites—without help from anyone else—have repeatedly shown themselves capable of egalitarian excess. The French Revolution, the Clapham abolitionists, John Brown and his backers, the miscegenist enthusiasms of the Grimke sisters and other radical integrationists are all products of purely gentile delusion. Even if it were possible to prove that Jewish influence derailed what used to be a healthy American racial consciousness, that is a historical question not directly relevant to what we must accomplish now.

Today, even groups that openly resist Jewish influence are deeply liberal-egalitarian. In 2005, the Presbyterian Church angered many Jewish groups by voting to divest itself of stock in companies it considered to be supporting injustice against Palestinians. In 2006, the Church of England voted to do the same. These churches are prepared to ignore the wishes of many Jewish organizations, yet their members are as relentlessly suicidal on race as any group in either country. Whatever its origins may have been—and they are hardly exclusively Jewish—white ethnomasochism has a life and momentum of its own.

The role of Jews in a society, the morality of abortion, the influence of Christianity, the appropriate foreign policy, and the place of homosexuals should all be discussed openly in a free society, all in their appropriate places. AR is not that place. We cannot afford dissension that distracts us from our goal.

We have vital work to do. Our civilization, our way of life, even our continuity as a distinct people depend on whether we succeed or fail. It is a distraction from our proper work to hunt for culprits, to blame others for our own loss of will.

We may still be a small minority, but we have history, human nature, and morality on our side. Success for us lies in demonstrating that our views are right, healthy and moral—and that liberal-egalitarianism is wrong and immoral; not in trying to “unmask” it as a Jewish conspiracy.


Postscript

In light of the events described above, it was clear to me that a statement of some kind was necessary. Apparently, others thought so, too. In March I received a letter from several people associated with American Renaissance, insisting not only on a statement but on changes in editorial policy and in the organization of AR conferences.

AR has always welcomed advice, but condescending, shape-up-or-else letters are more likely to have the opposite effect of whatever may have been intended. The tone of the letter was one that would suggest that what appears above was drafted under pressure—so much so that some, in my place, would have written nothing at all.

One should not, however, let the mistakes of others deflect one from decisions already taken, and I believe AR’s position is now clear.


We are no longer accepting comments on this article.


(Posted on April 14, 2006)


Top Home Previous story Next Story Post a Comment Send This Page Search

Comments
Here, here. Mr. Taylor.

Sigurd

Posted by Sigurd at 5:10 PM on April 14


It is obvious the AMREN has treated Jews with great deference.

But don’t we often praise what we fear?

But it sometimes appear AMREN has an unrequited love for Jews.

Posted by Dennis at 5:19 PM on April 14


Good point. The BNP in England as I understand it have also taken an agnostic position when it comes to Jewish matters. I think to blame the current situation on some Jewish conspiracy is a misguided source of distraction from the essential idea that the white European culture is in great danger.

Posted by Chris at 5:32 PM on April 14


Mr. Taylor perhaps you could get some of the Jewish supporters to enlighten us on where they stand and what type of future they want in the U.S. I have read some of the Jewish posters on this sight and many seem to think the way we do. Please let some of them answer this question: What comes first the white race or the Jewish people? I am English and Scottish but if either group is for integration then they are my enemy. I feel all whites ( Italians, Germans, Irish,etc. ) are all one. It was the stupidity of white groups fighting each other that in part got us into this multicult nonsense. We need a united white force. Do you believe that the Jews will fight their own kind for a white world? I hope your right for ehnic loyalties we do not need.

Posted by Superwhite at 5:37 PM on April 14


To discuss the future survival of the White race and ignoring the corrosive influence of the Jews, is like discussing wine making without talking about grapes.

Posted by Excelsior at 5:44 PM on April 14


An important Traditionalist writer Lawrence Auster (Jewish-born Catholic, strongly pro-Israel) offers the following:

“Jewish people, far out of proportion with any other ethnic group, keep producing a fantastic number of leftists…. Any gentile country with a significant Jewish population needs to consider honestly this Jewish tendency and find responsible ways of restraining it. Ignoring it will only allow it to become more and more destructive (just as the Jewish left is destructive of Israel itself), leading ultimately to the growth of serious anti-Semitism on the part of the majority population.”

It is an important, welcome statement.

Posted by at 5:46 PM on April 14


Good for Mr. Taylor. That Jews have supported movements ranging from some of the first monotheists to atheists; from (early Italian) fascists to communists proves in no uncertain terms that Jews don’t suffer from ideological monisms any more than other whites. Getting side-tracked with elaborate conspiracy theories may be engaging, but it accomplishes nothing; it is indeed counterproductive to any political movement.

Why ostracize talented, hardworking people with whom we share common goals? Would it not be better to respectfully persuade, rather than to castigate, all whites who disagree with us?

It’s time to take out the trash.

Posted by at 5:48 PM on April 14


I can not believe that Mr. Taylor has written what he has in the “article” above. He is/has re-opened a can of worms.

I have been “studying” this topic of race for half a century. A common thread weaving in and out is the “Jewish” queston. Where do these people fit.

They are a self-proclaimed supremacist, segregationist and thus racist group. I do NOT find fault with this. As a white man who had dedicated his being to the preservation of “whiteness”, I too am a supremacist, segregationisnt and thus racist.

To be Jewish, you accept the laws and philosophy of Jews. They are “chosen” above all others. They are to remain separate from all others. They are not to mix or marry with others. They are forbidden to kill each other but ARE permitted to kill others.

I am an Athiest but am an expert in the Judaism. Judaism is a “religion” that can not co-exist with non-Jews any more than Islam can. They are both extremely similar.

My problme with the Jewish faith/creed/race/culture is that THEY CAN HAVE THEIR OWN HOMELAND, but I can not have mine.Thus, any person who claims to be “jewish” does not have the interest of the WHITE race at heart. If he is truely Jewish, he is saying HIS race/creed/tibe comes first.

I support Isreal’s right to exist.I suppot any African who want’s African-homelands. I suppot Mexicans who want California for Mexicans, if that be, but I want some part of this planet FOR WHITES ONLY.

No Jewish person will ever stand up and say this. Can Mr. Taylor think of ONE Jewish person who has said to him: “I want a home land for white only”.

Will any of these Jewish people, who Mr. Taylor want to “invite” ever say “If forced to choose, I will defend a white homeland before a Jewish Homeland?

I will support a Jewish homeland that says non-Jews may visit but may not buy property,vote, reside or own any media. Can you find me ANY Jewish person who will support a white nation that Jews may not reside, own property, own media or vote? Visit, fine, but then leave.

The reason for the restricition is that only whites should live and influence a white nation. Those of other races/creeds/tribes can not and do not have “whiteness” in their interest. They can not. They are not white.

If Jews wish to attend, listen and see what we are doing, fine. But if they want to join our movement, make them sign a pledge that they will dedicate their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honour” to establish a white homeland for white people.

MY RACE IS MY RELIGION. For Jews, their religion is their race is their religion.

It takes so little research to find the names of all those Jewish people who are behind and have led ALL major world events. Jews have no loyalty or concern to “nations”. Theyfinanced and led so much that was and is damaging to white interest. Please, the history books are full of proof.

How can you have a “whites only” nation if you will not even defend a “whites only” AMREN? Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Jewish people have nothing to say since they are not “white”.

To me, this “litmus” test applies to any one of the 300 plus denominations of Christianity where a “believer” believes in “racial equality” and “diversity” etc. (By the way, Jesus did not).

AMREN or the white “zionist” movement is for WHITES ONLY who hold all other aspects of humanity secondary. If your beliefs (be they Talmudic/New Testament/Koran) prevents you from “WHITES ONLY”, then you do not belong in the movement nor as an active participant in AMREN type organization. Go join your own that puts “whiteness” after some other interest of yours.

Posted by White Activist at 5:52 PM on April 14


While many Jews are liberal and among the movers and shakers that bring great harm to our society, many more are strongly conservative and outspoken on racial matters. For instance, if one goes to jtf.org you will find a website that hosts a weekly television program in New York City. The audio portion is available each week. This site and two weekly audio programs are a great eye opener.

I see no problem with these “torah true” Jews. The holocaust deniers on the other hand certainly serve to destroy their own credibility and do much harm to their valid ideas by embracing historical falsehoods.




Posted by ctr at 5:52 PM on April 14


“We have vital work to do. Our civilization, our way of life, even our continuity as a distinct people depend on whether we succeed or fail. It is a distraction from our proper work to hunt for culprits, to blame others for our own loss of will.”

RK: I think that pretty well sums up the entire point, and I’m in complete agreement with it.

To include all Jews in the same light as the radical ones, like the ADL and similar groups and radical leftist individuals who have a globalist agenda, when it is their desire to come into our camp, because they agree with us, is not only wrong it’s really not very smart.

Posted by Robert Kelly at 5:54 PM on April 14


Mr. Taylor, despite your welcoming attitude toward Jews, you have not won any friends at the JDL, AJC, ADL, or SPLC. I don’t know why you place them on a pedestal. Jews are under-represented in AmRen and have been over-represented in some of the most destructive, anti-White political and ideological movements of the 20th century. Even today, Jews are on the front lines of the treason lobby, helping organize Mexicans in one city or another([url]http://www.forward.com/articles/7589)[/url].

Mr. Taylor, Jews have their own language, culture, and ethnic lobbying organizations, just like Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. Jews, just like Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, need their own living space as well. Jews have a place in this world and it is not the White-Nationalist movement. I just wonder how long it will take for you to realize that.

Posted by Gary at 6:02 PM on April 14


Dear Jared:

The article, Jews and American Renaissance, is clearly about me.

I do NOT like jews. They have an agenda, they are coniving, and they are known as the historic enemy of the European people.

Thanks to the jews, Whites have the obstacles of affirmative action and a double standard of law enforcement. Have you been to Manhattan lately?

Each working day I walk from Port Authority to Societe Generale, and each day I think about a White oasis. I thought the American Renaissance Conference would serve that purpose. To quote an AR attendee, “now they [the jews] want to take this [the AR Conference] over.”

I have a subscription to your monthly publication. You can cancel my subscription and keep the money. Please do NOT give a penny, or dollar, of my money to the jews.

Perhaps I should continue my allegiance to the Hal Turner Show ([url]www.HalTurnerShow.com)[/url].

There is no good jew,

Michael Matthews
M.B.A.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 09:29 PM
Jews are intelligent, huh? You mean like those Jewish geniuses that convinced Bush and Rumsfeld that Iraq would be a minor skirmish? If you think superior intelligence explains Jewish dominance in American politics, you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about.
Would you like to view iq statistics of jews? We can do it.

You really are naive. Jews were concerned from the outset that they could be blamed for the war if things went wrong, and so they let the gentiles appear to take the lead. But AIPAC had already done their work on those gentile congressmen and the Jews knew they could sit back, draw less attention and still have their way. Some Israelis however felt less constrained, and took responsibility for the Iraq war in the Jewish press.
You are an idiot if you believe jews conspired to bias these polls. These are polls of the entire American population. There are a minority of jews involved in the administration and a minority of gentiles.

Most jews don't support this war and you are LYING if you say otherwise.

Glenn Miller
12-16-2006, 09:35 PM
Taylor has written articles against the war.

Believe it or not only 52% of jews supported the war in its inception, but 62% of gentiles did. The broad areas of the jewish population are more strongly opposed to the war than gentiles, at least that is how it was at the beginning. Now there are a few jews who have loudly supported the war. But they are a minority.

Yeah, but did he call the war by it's proper name: JEW WAR !!! And post his anti-war article here for analysis.

Publicly, lots of jews claim to be against the war, but privately the vast majority, and especially the big jews, do cart-wheels while celebrating it. Furthermore, it's the big zionist jews who count, not the porno peddlers and pawn shop kikes. The big jews control Congress and the White House, therefore the big jews are responsible for the GD war in the first place.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 09:37 PM
but privately the vast majority, and especially the big jews, do cart-wheels while celebrating it.
I can tell you from talking to jews that this isn't true.

Fitz
12-16-2006, 10:04 PM
You are an idiot if you believe jews conspired to bias these polls. These are polls of the entire American population. There are a minority of jews involved in the administration and a minority of gentiles.

Most jews don't support this war and you are LYING if you say otherwise.


I've noticed that every Jew recently interviewed from Elizabeth Holtzman to David Horowitz claims that they are against laws limiting free speech and imprisoning holocaust "deniers". But if all of these influencial Jews are against these laws, why do we have them in the first place and why do their organizations push for them to be expanded to other countries?

It's the same with the war in Iraq. They all claim that they are against the war now, but when they thought Saddam had WMDs threatening Israel they were not so opposed to it, just as now the majority of jews think something must be done with Iran in order to prevent another holocaust, LOL.

Then when that war has started, and another enemy of the Jews is scratched off their laundry list, the Jews will claim they were against that war too.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 10:21 PM
But if all of these influencial Jews are against these laws, why do we have them in the first place and why do their organizations push for them to be expanded to other countries?
This doesn't have anything to do with jews, it has to do with opposition of a former regime which took place in the geographical areas of Austria and Germany. We can talk freely and openly about the holocaust in America despite the jewish power you rant and rave about. So no, you don't have a good point there.

It's the same with the war in Iraq. They all claim that they are against the war now, but when they thought Saddam had WMDs threatening Israel they were not so opposed to it, just as now the majority of jews think something must be done with Iran in order to prevent another holocaust, LOL.
At the beginning of the war 52% of jews supported it, 62% of gentiles supported it. Consider yourself refuted.
Source, walt and mearsheimer...http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf#search=%22israel%20and%20us%20foreign%20policy%20walt%20mearsheimer%22
The bottom of page 31 refutes your obviously false claim.

Do you have any more bullshit?

Winston
12-16-2006, 10:56 PM
Jewish support for the Iraq war is pretty irrelevant and something of a strawman. It is the influential Jews that count.

Remember this article from years back?

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. "
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279&contrassID=2&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

"The Cult That's Running The Country"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/nc-wilson.html (salon.com)

"How Neo-cons influence The Pentagon"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/nc-lobe.html (asia times)

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 11:04 PM
Jewish support for the Iraq war is pretty irrelevant and something of a strawman. It is the influential Jews that count.

Remember this article from years back?

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. "
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279&contrassID=2&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

"The Cult That's Running The Country"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/nc-wilson.html (salon.com)

"How Neo-cons influence The Pentagon"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/nc-lobe.html (asia times)
Exactly, it isn't "the jews" like the protocols of the elders of zion would have you think, it is just elites. Gentile and jewish elites. Both worked together against non-elites.

Dances with Wolves
12-16-2006, 11:05 PM
Exactly, it isn't "the jews" like the protocols of the elders of zion would have you think, it is just elites. Gentile and jewish elites. Both worked together against non-elites.

Fact is kane, the jews across the board supported the war, while most goy did not.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 11:07 PM
Read post 210.

Face it. You're wrong.

Winston
12-16-2006, 11:08 PM
Fact is kane, the jews across the board supported the war, while most goy did not.


No they didn't. He has already shown you that this isn't true. Jews had very prominent roles when it came to influencing the president and manipulating the country into war, but the war did not have widespread Jewish support.

Fitz
12-16-2006, 11:51 PM
This doesn't have anything to do with jews, it has to do with opposition of a former regime which took place in the geographical areas of Austria and Germany. We can talk freely and openly about the holocaust in America despite the jewish power you rant and rave about. So no, you don't have a good point there.

So the laws against defaming the dead and denying the holocaust dogma aren't designed to protect the Jews? As I recall the Israeli Knesset voted to give itself global jurisdiction to prosecute holocaust denial committed anywhere on the planet. How is it again that this doesn't have anything to do with Jews?


At the beginning of the war 52% of jews supported it, 62% of gentiles supported it. Consider yourself refuted.
Source, walt and mearsheimer...http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf#search=%22israel%20and%20us%20foreign%20policy%20walt%20mearsheimer%22
The bottom of page 31 refutes your obviously false claim.

Do you have any more bullshit?

52% ( I still believe this figure is low) is a larger percentage than the % of Germans who supported Hitler in 1932/33. Jews only get touchy about shared guilt and group responsibility when it is applied to them. When they apply it to Germans or Palestinians they call it Jewish justice.



Jewish support for the Iraq war is pretty irrelevant and something of a strawman. It is the influential Jews that count.


There's probably some truth to that but I doubt it's very easy to distinguish between what the average Jew wants and the influential Jews want. And it's even harder to think of something that Jews in general support, that hasn't wound up being a political or cultural reality in America.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-16-2006, 11:59 PM
52% ( I still believe this figure is low) is a larger percentage than the % of Germans who supported Hitler in 1932/33. Jews only get touchy about shared guilt and group responsibility when it is applied to them. When they apply it to Germans or Palestinians they call it Jewish justice.

But why aren't you bitching about the 62% of gentiles who support it? HUH? Why not? I'm not suprised at the 52% figure, and it comes from Harvord.

And it's even harder to think of something that Jews in general support, that hasn't wound up being a political or cultural reality in America.
I'm sure it happens, but you don't hear about it, for that reason, because it is not a reality. That's a self-fufillling prophecy. If something does not become mainstream then WHY WOULD you hear about it?

So the laws against defaming the dead and denying the holocaust dogma aren't designed to protect the Jews? As I recall the Israeli Knesset voted to give itself global jurisdiction to prosecute holocaust denial committed anywhere on the planet. How is it again that this doesn't have anything to do with Jews?

First of all I don't and never have supported holocaust denial laws, but unlike you I understand why they exist.

The things you mentioned aren't relevant. Take stats 101. Correlation is not causation. Just because event a and event b occur doesn't mean event a CAUSES event b. Certain jewish organizations may support holocaust laws. But you can't say its BECAUSE of jewish activism that these laws exist. You can also be jailed for questioning things such as the armenian genocide. Furthermore, these laws have not succeeded worldwide, refuting your thesis of jewish power being the deciding factor. They've only succeeded in geographical areas relevant to the nazi regime, meaning the host populations are quite significant in administrating this phenomenon. Even if every jew opposed these laws, it wouldn't matter, they'd still exist.

Here's the question. Jews have power in America. Why aren't there holocaust denial laws in America? Could it be because the nazi regime did not fight on American soil? Did you ever think of that? I bet not. Because that irrefutable fact would go against the idea that a jewish conspiracy is culpable, and you find that to be inconvenient. So if jewish media power = holocaust denial laws, America clearly refutes you.

Dances with Wolves
12-17-2006, 12:23 AM
No they didn't. He has already shown you that this isn't true. Jews had very prominent roles when it came to influencing the president and manipulating the country into war, but the war did not have widespread Jewish support.

Opps my mistake. The war has widespread support in the jewish state.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 12:32 AM
Opps my mistake. The war has widespread support in the jewish state.
Just like not all german american supported the nazi regime, not all Italian americans supported the fascist regime, not all Japanese Americans supported the Imperialist regime, likewise, not all Jews support the Israeli regime.

The fact that they are not in Israel is in fact a declaration of defiance against Israel. Israel wants jewish people to go there. Furthermore, we are allied with Israel, but we were not allied with the aforementioned regimes. So that has an effect statistically. More German Americans would support Hitler if we allied with him and less Jewish Americans would support Israel if we didn't ally with them.

Fitz
12-17-2006, 01:25 AM
Furthermore, these laws have not succeeded worldwide, refuting your thesis of jewish power being the deciding factor

The vote in the Israeli Knesset did not fail, it passed. Israel holds holocaust denial committed anywhere on the planet to be a crime punishable in Israel.
At the same time George Bush has established an office within the US State Department to monitor global acts of anti-semitism, at the urging of Jewish lobbyists.

Questioning the holocaust can land you in prison in Canada, and I don't see how Canada is or was ever "a geographical area relevant to the nazi regime".
Holocaust memorial museums are splattered across America and this was never a "geographical area relevant to the nazi regime". Anti-hate legislation that would bring America closer in step with Western Europe and Canada is waiting in the wings and will probably pass with a return of the democrat majority.

The things you mentioned aren't relevant. Take stats 101. Correlation is not causation.

You can stick stats 101 up your tuchus. The causation is obvious to all but those who allow the Jews to think for them.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 01:30 AM
I disagree. The laws are there because most people either don't care or agree. It isn't just the jews, its a macro level trend and I see no evidence to counter this claim. Nobody goes to jail for questioning the Spanish Inquisition and Spanish actions taken against jews. There's a reason for that. The nazi regime is hated by both jews and gentiles but Queen Isabella is not. Those who question whether gypsies were killed are imprisoned...Is this a gypsi conspiracy?

You are dancing around this question...Why are there no holocaust denial laws in America? I take that as a surrender that you refuse to answer it.

The likely reason Canada has holocaust denial laws is because culturally Canada is more "european" then America is, and Canada listens to European countries whereas America tends to have a more "f*ck europe" type of attitude. This is the determining factor. It isn't jewry.

The causation is obvious to all but those who allow the Jews to think for them.
I never have and never will allow ANYBODY to think for me, and if you even knew 10% of what I was like would never even suggest such a thing. But you talked, so back it up. Prove to me how these laws are a direct result of jewish activism and only jewish activism. You are ignoring a big factor. Most people, jew or gentile, hate the nazi regime. If only jews hated the nazi regime, these laws would not exist.

Ahknaton
12-17-2006, 01:36 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke

Using the pseudonym Dorothy Vanderbilt, Duke published a self-help book for women, titled Finders-Keepers, in 1976. The publication gives advice to women regarding vaginal exercises, fellatio, analingus, and anal sex.[20] [21] The manual is no longer in print and hard to find; however, the Times-Picayune, a New Orleans newspaper, managed to find a copy and trace the trail of its proceeds to the original author via the publisher. Duke compiled information from various women's self-help magazines, and published the book to raise money for his activities, though the book turned out to be a flop.[12]
WTF?

Der Sozialist
12-17-2006, 01:42 AM
According to Behar (2004a), only four mtDNA groups account for approximately 70% of Ashkenazi mtDNA results. These haplogroups are K (32%), H (21%), N1b (10%) and J1 (7%). However, Behar indicates the origins of three out the four groups (H, K and J) are unknown.


First, I wanted to respond to some of these points but unfortunately, unforeseen events occurred on Friday that prevented me from accessing the internet on Friday and most of Saturday. Even now, I am pressed for time so I will only hit on the important issue—and that is the percentage composition of European genes in the Ashkenazi gene pool as extrapolated from your sources.

Since, the Y-chromosome has experienced very little European contamination—I will focus on mtDNA which seems to be the basis of contention.

One more note, I will be accessing the internet less frequently than before for the next couple of weeks but I should access it every night or so. So, if you respond be patient.

***
I am at a loss, from reading your sources, how you can come to the conclusion that Ashkenazi Jews are mostly European. It states clearly, in what I quoted, that the origins of the H, J, and K haplogroups are unknown—these combined compose of 60% of Ashkenazim mtDNA.

Furthermore, a more recent study (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380291)1 suggests that K might have very well originated in the Levant. Hence, this allows 40% of mtDNA Ashkenazi to be traced back to Israel/Palestine and if you factor into the considerable admixture from Central Asia/Caucuses that your source argues for—I think it is even a bit tenuous to say that Jews are mostly European on their maternal lineage—and that is where the most European gene inflow occurred.


In conclusion, the present study highlights the importance of a combined phylogenetic/phylogeographic strategy that includes complete mtDNA sequence analysis to accurately portray maternal founding events and to infer conclusions relevant to both shared ancestries and population-level effects that shaped the mtDNA gene pool in a given population. In the Ashkenazi Jews, this approach enabled us to reconstruct a detailed phylogenetic tree for the major Ashkenazi Hgs K and N1b, allowing the detection of a small set of only four individual female ancestors, likely from a Hebrew/Levantine mtDNA pool, whose descendants lived in Europe and carried forward their particular mtDNA variants to 3,500,000 individuals in a time frame of <2 millennia. This founding event(s), established here as a dominant mechanism in the genetic maternal history of the Ashkenazi Jews, is a vivid example of the founder effect originally described by Mayr (1963) 4 decades ago.

Winston
12-17-2006, 01:43 AM
I disagree. The laws are there because most people either don't care or agree. It isn't just the jews, its a macro level trend and I see no evidence to counter this claim. But if you want to link the legislation to jewry and only jewry, I need more evidence.

You are dancing around this question...Why are there no holocaust denial laws in America? I take that as a surrender that you refuse to answer it.

The likely reason Canada has holocaust denial laws is because culturally Canada is more "european" then America is, and Canada listens to European countries whereas America tends to have a more "f*ck europe" type of attitude. This is the determining factor. It isn't jewry.


America has freedom of speech written into the constitution. Holocaust 'denial' laws are not possible in the US at this time. That's the very simple and obvious answer to your question. Other western nations without such a strong barrier have succumbed to Jewish pressure for such laws.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 01:48 AM
America has freedom of speech written into the constitution. Holocaust 'denial' laws are not possible in the US at this time. That's the very simple and obvious answer to your question. Other western nations without such a strong barrier have succumbed to Jewish pressure for such laws.
The constitution didn't stop Abraham Lincoln from launching an unconstitutional war. The constitution didn't stop the patriot act either. For many years, you could not burn the flag despite the first amendment. You cannot yell fire in a crowded building, despite the first amendment. I'm sorry, but the constitution can be defeated unfortunately if the situation requires it.

The constitution is just a document. The real answer is the American attitude is different from the European and Canadian attitude. The attitude of a country is more important than how many jews are there.

Glenn Miller
12-17-2006, 02:39 AM
Hey God123, here's what Alex Linder said today after reading Jared Taylor's position paper on jews. Whatcha think ??



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jared Taylor is an intellectual beau geste. A scumbag in a suit. He relies on a gentlemanly demeanor and articulateness to fool those awakening from the lies of the Republicans. He gives them a new lie, a new false solution, to believe in. But verily I say unto you, If it doesn't draw attention to the jew, it draws attention away from it. In Jerry's world, blacks are responsible for their crimes, but not jews. Blame the rapid dog, not the jew that stays the Whites man's hand from shooting it.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 02:43 AM
I guess my thoughts are that I've heard similar comments before but I'm confident enough in my beliefs that the fact that others question them doesn't make me upset.

Glenn Miller
12-17-2006, 02:45 AM
I hear ya, but here's more Linder comments about Taylor, for your insights:




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Success for us lies in demonstrating that our views are right, healthy and moral—and that liberal-egalitarianism is wrong and immoral

Wrong. Our position has been demonstrated correct for a hundred years. Our problem is acquiring the power to smash the jewish apparatus that set up and maintains the System that oppresses us, not least through ownership and editorial control of the mass media that define racially-identifying Whites out of existence as haters. Jared would rather blame the Whites he ostensibly defends than face the truth. The parallels between jew-appeaser William F. Buckley and Jared Taylor cannot be denied and should not be ignored.

It can be demonstrated that jews produced the circumstances we are in, and it can be demonstrated that Jared Taylor knows this fact. The conclusion is that Jared Taylor deliberately conceals the role of the jew in directing our decline, lo these last 100 years. Jerry tells Whites to blame their ancestors (for what? treating people as individuals? playing straight? being honest?) rather than the jews who set up the discriminatory system we now labor under -- and then he turns around and blasts whites for their 'ethno-masochism.' Whites should be blamed for what they didn't do, but jews shouldn't be blamed for what they did do. In the wacky world of Jerry Taylor, this is good sense.

Who was it that taught Whites it is illegal to identify racially?

Horace Kallen and the ADL, Franz Boas and the AJC. Who redefined us as a nation of immigrants? The ADL. Who deliberately fosters the false meme that "diversity is our greatest strength"? Again, the ADL.

Jared Taylor knows this. He deliberately obscures it.

Jared Taylor is not a White nationalist, and his grouplet is a false front just like the John Birch Society.

Dances with Wolves
12-17-2006, 02:46 AM
Another Linder Truth:

Jews set policies that cause White misery. Jerry Taylor tells us to blame ourselves. Whites vote time after time against open borders, against affirmative action, desperately seeking to relieve jew-caused misery. Jew-controlled courts simply bat their votes away. You can blame yourself like jewlover Jerry wants you to, or you can face reality. The jew is the problem, and getting rid of the jew is the solution.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 02:51 AM
I don't think Jared Taylor is saying Jewish actions should be concealed, I think he's just demonstrating that its not all jews (so he accepts racially concious jews) and that its not only jews (so he bashes gentiles who are not racially concious).

Let's take a look at the supreme court...there are more Catholics than there are jews.
http://www.adherents.com/adh_sc.html
John Roberts
(Chief Justice) Catholic
Stephen G. Breyer Jewish
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Jewish
Anthony M. Kennedy Catholic
Antonin Scalia Catholic
David H. Souter Episcopalian
John Paul Stevens Protestant
Clarence Thomas Catholic
Samuel Alito Catholic
This poster you refer to is an idiot.

My response is that my position has not changed, and every day I lose more and more respect for people who scapegoat the jew because they are too weak to face reality. That's reality. Right above you. Look at it. Don't tell me about reality. F*cking idiots rant and rave and can't back up a d*mn thing.

Glenn Miller
12-17-2006, 02:58 AM
I guess my thoughts are that I've heard similar comments before but I'm confident enough in my beliefs that the fact that others question them doesn't make me upset.

I've got to hand it to you God123, you're an excellent debater. A bit deceptive though, and I have some doubts you genuinely believe in your points of view.

Tell me, what is your age and education level, if you don't mind divulging.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 03:00 AM
Since everyone is asking for my age I'll put it in my profile.

I'm a junior in college. 21.

I humbly accept the praise you give me for my debating skills.

Ahknaton
12-17-2006, 03:15 AM
Jared Taylor is an intellectual beau geste. A scumbag in a suit. He relies on a gentlemanly demeanor and articulateness to fool those awakening from the lies of the Republicans. He gives them a new lie, a new false solution, to believe in. But verily I say unto you, If it doesn't draw attention to the jew, it draws attention away from it. In Jerry's world, blacks are responsible for their crimes, but not jews. Blame the rapid [sic] dog, not the jew that stays the Whites man's hand from shooting it.
I don't think Linder realises how unintentionally humorous he sounds when he says stuff like this. Blaming Blacks for crimes committed by Blacks is common sense. They are not so enslaved to their base instincts and aggressive tendencies that they can't be held morally responsible for their actions just like anyone else.

However Blacks have been in America for centuries, and it wasn't Jews who let them in (although they did have a role in the slave trade). Immigrant crime is another story. If an immigrant group (such as Muslims in Sweden and Norway) is known to commit crime at vastly disproportionate rates, then allowing more immigration of that group can reasonably be expected to increase the crime rate. Therefore supporters of such a policy must bear some of the moral responsibility for rapes and murders that occur, along with the rapists and murderers themselves.

Glenn Miller
12-17-2006, 03:51 AM
I don't think Linder realises how unintentionally humorous he sounds when he says stuff like this. Blaming Blacks for crimes committed by Blacks is common sense. They are not so enslaved to their base instincts and aggressive tendencies that they can't be held morally responsible for their actions just like anyone else.

However Blacks have been in America for centuries, and it wasn't Jews who let them in (although they did have a role in the slave trade). Immigrant crime is another story. If an immigrant group (such as Muslims in Sweden and Norway) is known to commit crime at vastly disproportionate rates, then allowing more immigration of that group can reasonably be expected to increase the crime rate. Therefore supporters of such a policy must bear some of the moral responsibility for rapes and murders that occur, along with the rapists and murderers themselves.

Ha. Sorry, but you missed Alex's point:

Alex stated this: " In Jerry's world, blacks are responsible for their crimes, but not jews. Blame the rapid [sic] dog, not the jew that stays the Whites man's hand from shooting it." (unquote)

And your response to that was this: I don't think Linder realises how unintentionally humorous he sounds when he says stuff like this. Blaming Blacks for crimes committed by Blacks is common sense. They are not so enslaved to their base instincts and aggressive tendencies that they can't be held morally responsible for their actions just like anyone else." (unquote)


Your misunderstanding of Alex's statement is proven by your response. You made no point. But do try again.

Ahknaton
12-17-2006, 04:16 AM
Your misunderstanding of Alex's statement is proven by your response. You made no point. But do try again.
I understand Linder just fine. He is implying that Jews should be held responsible for crimes committed by Blacks, is he not? That is the implication of his rabid dog analogy.

He is equating Blacks with "rapid" (I assume he means "rabid") dogs, in other words as animals who can't be blamed for acting like animals. Supposedly, we should blame those who prevent us from protecting ourselves against them, rather than the animals themselves. This argument is flawed because a) Blacks are obviously more crime-prone than Whites, but not to the extent that they are morally absolved simply because "they can't help it" (in other words likening them to rabid dogs is stupid) and b) it's not the fault of Jews that Blacks are in America in the first place, nor is it the fault of Jews that Whites are unwilling to defend themselves against Blacks.

I doubt you would find much support for expelling or exterminating Blacks (the meaning of "shooting the rabid dog" unless I'm mistaken) even if there weren't Jews in America. I'd draw the line at exterminating them myself, as would most sane White racialists I assume.

Glenn Miller
12-17-2006, 12:00 PM
Since everyone is asking for my age I'll put it in my profile.

I'm a junior in college. 21.

I humbly accept the praise you give me for my debating skills.

Thanks for the info.

Assuming you are what you say you are, and have guts, then I'm confident you'll graduate quickly from Taylor's kosher White racialism 101 and enter into the world of jew-wiseness via VNN and davidduke.com. Guts will be your deciding factor, however. It takes very little to be a Taylorite racialist.

Winston
12-17-2006, 04:12 PM
The constitution didn't stop Abraham Lincoln from launching an unconstitutional war. The constitution didn't stop the patriot act either. For many years, you could not burn the flag despite the first amendment. You cannot yell fire in a crowded building, despite the first amendment. I'm sorry, but the constitution can be defeated unfortunately if the situation requires it.

The constitution is just a document. The real answer is the American attitude is different from the European and Canadian attitude. The attitude of a country is more important than how many jews are there.

I cannot disagree with your second paragraph, but I would suggest that this attitude exists in large part due to the constitution. I'm not American and I understand how sacred that document (or documents) is. I am aware that attacks have been made on the constitution and often there seems to be some hypocrisy in American life when it comes to freedom of speech, but if you understand America you must understand how highly freedom of speech is regarded and that laws which forbid certain types of speech are impossible, at least for the time being. That hasn't stopped Jews from trying, though.

xxx
12-17-2006, 05:34 PM
God 123
Gentile and jewish elites. Both worked together against non-elites.


How is this applicable to the war in Iraq? What was gained by these elites and what was lost by the non elites?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 05:37 PM
Elites make policy. You don't make policy. The American people, including the American jewish community, didn't vote on whether or not we go to war.

It's not why would they...they did. Motive is irrelevant. But to answer that, people with varying motives thought they had something to gain from this war and built up a coalition. That's how politics works.

xxx
12-17-2006, 06:17 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elites make policy. You don't make policy. The American people, inlcluding the American jewish community, didn't vote on whether or not we go to war.


Has there been a precedence of citizens voting to go to war?

It's not why would they...they did. Motive is irrelevant. But to answer that, people with varying motives thought they had something to gain from this war and built up a coalition. That's how politics works.

So if motive is irrelevant, why did you expand on it. Motive is key. That coalition was neocon, wasn't it? A pre-emptive war that had been planned, and sold to the people on the basis of a lie.

Anchorage Activist
12-17-2006, 06:26 PM
I'm not American and I understand how sacred that document (or documents) is. I am aware that attacks have been made on the constitution and often there seems to be some hypocrisy in American life when it comes to freedom of speech, but if you understand America you must understand how highly freedom of speech is regarded and that laws which forbid certain types of speech are impossible, at least for the time being. That hasn't stopped Jews from trying, though.

I'm glad you qualified your post with the last sentence, which I highlighted. There are two primary ways which the establishment seeks to circumvent constitutional freedom of speech in America.

1). Filing inflated or false criminal charges against those who hold unpopular political viewpoints. The most egregious example is the case against former National Alliance Chairman Shaun Walker and two of his cohorts, discussed in greater detail HERE (http://alaskapride.blogspot.com/2006/06/more-on-federal-railroading-of-shaun.html). To recap, the Feds have charged these three with civil rights violations over a couple of bar fights they were involved in nearly 4 years ago. The Feds allege they were trying to take over a Salt Lake bar and make it a "white" bar. However, neither the alleged victims pressed assault charges nor did the State of Utah file assault charges, so this leads me to believe the Fed charges are politically motivated. The trial, originally scheduled for August, has been postponed twice; first, until November, at the behest of the defense team, and now, a second postponement until January 2007. Meanwhile, their lives are on hold, with these charges dangling over their heads like a Damoclean sword. Chester Doles was likewise victimized with inflated "weapons" charges; he chose to cop a plea not because he was guilty, but because they threatened to jail his wife, leaving their kids without parental supervision, and because he did not have the economic resources to compete judicially against the Feds' limitless resources. The last consideration undoubtedly drove David Duke's decision to cop a plea in his case. The Feds can outlast you and outspend you.

2). The use of employers as "proxy enforcers" of political orthodoxy. Dan Schildhauer was fired from his job at Cabela's in 2003 (http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=443) for distributing pro-white literature in the local community OFF THE JOB. He was a model employee who never brought his politics on the job, but that did not matter to Cabela's. AmRen followers undoubtedly remember the case of former Allegany County ADA Michael Regan, who was fired from his job in March 2006 merely for attending an American Renaissance conference. And finally, David Pringle was forced by his new employer (http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=39427) to temporarily close his White Wire website as a condition of employment. At-will employers have and use extensive powers of economic coercion to enforce political correctness.

Even the administrators of the Phora, despite their otherwise laudable efforts to promote free speech, are not completely immune, as demonstrated when they banned Glenn Miller for "excessive flaming". :rofl: Miller simply told too many inconvenient truths and bested too many Phora regulars in debate.

So the war against the Constitution in America is not direct warfare, but a form of political guerrilla warfare where, instead of inviting the frog to jump into a pot of boiling water, we instead let the frog jump into a pot of ordinary water then turn up the heat afterwards.

Fitz
12-17-2006, 06:45 PM
123,

I realize that high school is very demanding these days, so when this article and others like it were first published you were probably too busy with the homecoming committee and the debate team to notice it.

Why American Jewish groups support war with Iraq

Usually allied with liberal causes, many American Jews support toppling Saddam Hussein. If there's a peace movement, it will have to get started without them.


By Michelle Goldberg

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/09/14/jews_iraq/index.html



So the black wagon came for Glenn in the night? From what I could tell he took as much abuse as he might have given out around here.

Vasily Zaitsev
12-17-2006, 06:46 PM
AlaskaActivist-

You're right on all counts about how the system can quell dissent.

Miller, however, was not a victim of this. He was banned because he was an awful poster.

And he never won any debates. TGM is, as the Catholics and some logicians like to say, "invincibly ignorant." His inability to process all but the simplest of points leads him to "stick to his guns" in every debate. Some people mistake this for integrity.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 06:49 PM
I realize that high school is very demanding these days, so when this article and others like it were first published you were probably too busy with the homecoming committee and the debate team to notice it.
False, I never even went to homecoming and never joined a debate team. But, I have opposed the war from day 1. In fact, I even wrote about this before it was popular. The stats have been laid out. 62% of gentiles supported the war. I'll ask again. Why aren't you complaining about that? Only 52% percent of jews did.

You aren't anti-iraq war. You're just anti-jew.

Kriger
12-17-2006, 06:53 PM
Miller got what he gave.

calvin
12-17-2006, 08:15 PM
Most jews don't support this war and you are LYING if you say otherwise……….
The stats have been laid out. 62% of gentiles supported the war. I'll ask again. Why aren't you complaining about that? Only 52% percent of jews did

If 52% of Jews supported the war, most Jews did, in fact, support the war. The reason that slightly more Gentiles than Jews supported the war was that the war was “sold” with a Gentile audience in mind. The pro-war activists played heavily upon the patriotic backlash that had swept America in the wake of 9/11. Patriotism, especially the flag waving, militaristic variety employed in this instance, is a conservative value, this variety of patriotism does not play well to a Jewish audience because Jews tend to be oriented more toward the left of the political spectrum. It seems to me that the Jewish audience, in respect of the invasion of Iraq, was largely ignorant of the ends and more inclined to be hostile to the means. The question that you should be asking is what percentage of the American Jewish population would have supported this war if Wolfowitz and his Zionist friends had been able to carefully explain to this audience that this war was necessary for the security of Israel?

Dances with Wolves
12-17-2006, 08:28 PM
False, I never even went to homecoming and never joined a debate team. But, I have opposed the war from day 1. In fact, I even wrote about this before it was popular. The stats have been laid out. 62% of gentiles supported the war. I'll ask again. Why aren't you complaining about that? Only 52% percent of jews did.

You aren't anti-iraq war. You're just anti-jew.

52% is a majority, no? Why are you saying "I" as if you are the first jew to be against the war? Careful kane, you'll slip up and give yourself away.

BTW, being anti-iraqi war is by definition anti-jew.

Dances with Wolves
12-17-2006, 08:29 PM
123,

I realize that high school is very demanding these days, so when this article and others like it were first published you were probably too busy with the homecoming committee and the debate team to notice it.



So the black wagon came for Glenn in the night? From what I could tell he took as much abuse as he might have given out around here.

Thanks Fitz, I was too tired to refute what Integrity was claiming the other night. That was one of the articles I had in mind.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 09:17 PM
If 52% of Jews supported the war, most Jews did, in fact, support the war. The reason that slightly more Gentiles than Jews supported the war was that the war was “sold” with a Gentile audience in mind. The pro-war activists played heavily upon the patriotic backlash that had swept America in the wake of 9/11. Patriotism, especially the flag waving, militaristic variety employed in this instance, is a conservative value, this variety of patriotism does not play well to a Jewish audience because Jews tend to be oriented more toward the left of the political spectrum. It seems to me that the Jewish audience, in respect of the invasion of Iraq, was largely ignorant of the ends and more inclined to be hostile to the means. The question that you should be asking is what percentage of the American Jewish population would have supported this war if Wolfowitz and his Zionist friends had been able to carefully explain to this audience that this war was necessary for the security of Israel?
So you make excuses for gentiles, but you don't make excuses for jews? Biased? You claim gentiles could be doing better, and jews could be doing worse. No. They are doing exactly as well as they are and you have no ability to project "could of, should of, would of" stuff. You know what "could of, would of, should of" translates to. It translates to "DIDN'T."

Why are you saying "I" as if you are the first jew to be against the war? Careful kane, you'll slip up and give yourself away.
I'm not saying "I as if I'm the first jew to be against the war." I'm saying I to refute the claim that I was busy attending homecoming meetings and debate clubs. Instead I was lobbying against the Iraq war.

I'm telling you for the last time I'm not jewish. I've reported your intentional misrepresentation.

Dances with Wolves
12-17-2006, 09:21 PM
Let's just say you are a philo-semite, k? Is that a better description?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-17-2006, 09:22 PM
No. I'm neutral on the jew issue. I critisize jews when I think they are wrong, and I complament them when I think they are right.

I don't think its good that 52% of jews supported the war. But you are whining about the spec in someone else's eye when there is a 62% beam in the eye of the gentile. It's completely hypocritical.