I support the worker. I support the unemployed worker.
I don’t support human trash and bums.
I support the worker. I support the unemployed worker.
I don’t support human trash and bums.
I just purchased this book off of ebay. I have a decent understanding of human genetics and race – a much better understanding than neo-nazis or race deniers – but I think this book will take me to the next level. Hopefully someone who reads this blog entry will follow the same path.
L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza and his collaborators Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza have devoted fourteen years to one of the most compelling scientific projects of our time: the reconstruction of where human populations originated and the paths by which they spread throughout the world. In this volume, the culmination of their research, the authors explain their pathbreaking use of genetic data, which they integrate with insights from geography, ecology, archaeology, physical anthropology, and linguistics to create the first full-scale account of human evolution as it occurred across all continents. This interdisciplinary approach enables them to address a wide range of issues that continue to incite debate: the timing of the first appearance of our species, the problem of African origins and the significance of work recently done on mitochondrial DNA and the popular notion of an “African Eve,” the controversy pertaining to the peopling of the Americas, and the reason for the presence of non-Indo-European languages–Basque, Finnish, and Hungarian–in Europe.The authors reconstruct the history of our evolution by focusing on genetic divergence among human groups. Using genetic information accumulated over the last fifty years, they examined over 110 different inherited traits, such as blood types, HLA factors, proteins, and DNA markers, in over eighteen hundred, primarily aboriginal, populations. By mapping the worldwide geographic distribution of the genes, the scientists are now able to chart migrations and, in exploring genetic distance, devise a clock by which to date evolutionary history: the longer two populations are separated, the greater their genetic difference should be. This volume highlights the authors’ contributions to genetic geography, particularly their technique for making geographic maps of gene frequencies and their synthetic method of detecting ancient migrations, as for example the migration of Neolithic farmers from the Middle East toward Europe, West Asia, and North Africa.Beginning with an explanation of their major sources of data and concepts, the authors give an interdisciplinary account of human evolution at the world level. Chapters are then devoted to evolution on single continents and include analyses of genetic data and how these data relate to geographic, ecological, archaeological, anthropological, and linguistic information. Comprising a wide range of viewpoints, a vast store of new and recent information on genetics, and a generous supply of visual elements, including 522 geographic maps, this book is a unique source of facts and a catalyst for further debate and research.
If this is true, then Stalin was truly a grandmaster strategist.
We recently received an e-mail from someone inquiring about Lavrenti Beria, People’s Commissar of Internal Affairs from (NKVD) Nov. 1938- June 1953. This particular question had to do with the pervading thinking that Beria was a traitor to the USSR by seeking to re-establish capitalism in the constituent Soviet republics.
Though unmercifully slandered by Khruschev and other revisionists following his ousting in June 1953, Lavrenti Beria remained one of the Soviet Union’s most energetic leaders carrying forth the banner of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism.
Unfortunately, history has been slow to exonerate the legacy of L.P. Beria, including among man a Marxist with favorable views towards the Soviet Union.
But in considering Beria’s resume, it’s difficult to reconcile this irrational distaste (bordering on outright hatred) with the view of a man who committed his life to the building and construction of socialism first in his native Georgia, then Transcaucasia, and finally throughout the entire USSR.
It matters little that Beria has been subject to the routine vitriol from the foreign (and modern Russian) bourgeoisie. That much goes without saying, and is equally in line with the hostile attitudes dumped on J.V. Stalin and other Soviet leaders. However rotten Beria may appear in the pages of the bourgeoisie’s slanted and ideologically driven historiography, why then, and under what pretexts, does the Left continue to despise Lavrenti Beria?
Clearly, the accusations that Beria was an agent of foreign capitalist intelligence is absolutely ludicrous. Following Beria’s illegal seizure at the hands of Zhukov and other senior Soviet military officers at the behest of Khruschev et al., the conspirators began circulating these and other nasty rumors to justify their acting against a fellow comrade and Politburo member. Among the other charges leveled against Beria was the time-old accusation that he had served as a counter-intelligence agent for the Azeri nationalist Musavat Party. But this accusation is also without merit, having been debunked as early as the 1920s by an investigation by the Communist Party of Transcaucasia; which found that Beria was in fact acting as a double agent for the Bolsheviks in pre-Soviet Georgia (nonetheless, the charge lived with Beria throughout his life).
The accusation that Beria attempted to undermine Soviet power following Stalin’s death is equally left wanting of hard evidence. The pragmatic moves to adjust and modify certain policies were representative of Beria’s overwhelming realism that predominated in his views of foreign, and to a large extent, internal affairs. His colleagues and later jailers accused Beria of attempting to restore capitalism – but that’s, again, is simply not true. Beria clearly understood that his own political fortunes were inextricably linked with socialism and the Soviet system – and that nothing he did would have ever enabled him to survive (politically, and possibly physically) if capitalism were restored. Beria’s actions then can best be understood by a realistic appreciation of the new challenges facing the Soviet Union following the death of its greatest leader, Josef Stalin.
For Beria, the policy changes pushed forth between the time of Stalin’s death and his arrest were a means of securing, not destabilizing, the Soviet Union. Beria, unlike many of his contemporaries, was able to appreciate that the loss of Stalin would signify a need to re-assert Soviet power in a different way, particularly in light of the changing dynamics following the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany at the conclusion of World War II and the rise in Western hostility and provocations marking the onset of the Cold War. True, many of Beria’s tendencies and activities following Stalin’s death may qualify him as a revisionist; but that’s, at the very least, disputable. What is unequivocally true, though, is that Beria was in no way, shape or form a traitor or counter-revolutionary.
It is important to note that the person who is making these comments is not “a figurehead” or “a representative” of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Still, this is an interesting article and worth posting. Long ago, I warned other posters that anti-imperialism cannot be reduced simply to anti-Americanism. There are different types of nations, even if they all oppose America.
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) – A radical cleric called Saturday for the creation of a “Greater Iran” that would rule over the entire Middle East and Central Asia, in an event that he said would herald the coming of Islam’s expected messiah.
Ayatollah Mohammad Bagher Kharrazi said the creation of what he calls an Islamic United States is a central aim of the political party he leads called Hezbollah, or Party of God, and that he hoped to make it a reality if they win the next presidential election.
Kharrazi’s comments reveal the thinking of a growing number of hard-liners in Iran, many of whom have become more radical during the postelection political crisis and the international standoff over the country’s nuclear program. Kharrazi, however, is not highly influential in Iran’s clerical hierarchy and his views do not represent those of the current government.
Kharrazi’s comments were published Saturday in his newspaper, Hezbollah.
He said he envisioned a Greater Iran that would stretch from Afghanistan to Israel, bringing about the destruction of the Jewish state.
He also said its formation would be a prelude to the reappearance of the Mahdi, a revered ninth-century saint known as the Hidden Imam, whom Muslims believe will reappear before judgment day to end tyranny and promote justice in the world.
“The Islamic United States will be an introduction to the formation of the global village of the oppressed and that will be a prelude to the single global rule of the Mahdi,” the Hezbollah newspaper quoted him as saying.
Besides Israel, he said the union would also destroy Shiite Iran’s other regional adversaries, whom he called “cancerous tumors.” He singled out secular Arab nationalists such as members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party in Iraq, as well as followers of the austere version of Sunni Islam practiced primarily in Saudi Arabia that is known as Wahabism.
Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab nations have watched Iran’s growing regional clout with deep concern.
The growing voice of hard-liners like Kharrazi has deepened worries even if it appears unlikely such a divisive figure would win the 2013 presidential election.
Still, even President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday that he expects the government which follows his to be “ten times more revolutionary.”
I understand that this is only a charge – and not a conviction. Still, this shows how reactionary certain elements of society are.
ABU DHABI // An 18-year-old Emirati woman has been charged with having sex outside of wedlock after reporting that she was raped by six men, Abu Dhabi’s Criminal Court was told yesterday.
The men, only two of whom were in court yesterday, are charged with raping LH in the back seat of one of the defendant’s vehicles. Both men pleaded not guilty, while L H, who has been taken into custody, also pleaded not guilty to the charges against her.
The woman and one of her male Emirati friends, HA, went for a drive in his vehicle on May 2, prosecutors said. The charges allege that because she had agreed to be in the car, the two had, therefore, met to have sex. According to court records, HA, 19, called five of his friends – four Emiratis and one Iraqi – and invited them to join him.
Prosecutors said that after HA and the woman had sex in an unknown location in Abu Dhabi, the five men met up with them. At that point, the charges say, the men all raped her in HA’s car.
The woman later contacted police and said she had been raped by six men, including HA. It is not known when she reported the attack.
The Abu Dhabi Judicial Department Forensic Unit declined to discuss whether the woman had been examined after the incident for evidence of rape.
HA has been charged with rape. The only other defendant in court, an Emirati with the same initials, was also charged with rape. The other four men are being tried in their absence.
The woman has been in custody since she reported the incident. She and the two defendants in court yesterday are being held without bail.
Chief Justice Saeed Abdul Basser twice asked her: “Did you have sex with these men?”
“No,” she replied.
It was unclear whether the judge was referring to consensual sex or rape.
The woman was not represented by a lawyer and no members of her family were in court yesterday.
All of the defendants are older than 18 and are being tried as adults.
This is an article that I found interesting enough to post. There is not really much more for me to comment.
How much longer will the American public tolerate the anti-white rhetoric coming from the mouths of liberal politicians and the pen of the media?
Over the past few months, CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post and Democrat politicians, including former President Clinton and others, have questioned the legitimacy of the Tea Party movement because, as they say, it is “too white.”
To them, such “whiteness” is evidence of “racism.” They are attempting to drumbeat into the American consciousness two principles: one, that political speech and positions vocalized primarily by white people is, basically, invalid; and, two, opinions emanating from non-liberal white people is motivated by racism.
Throughout the entire healthcare debate, liberals assigned “racism” to those opposed to the massive overhaul. In fact, the opposition among the middle class had nothing to do with “hidden racism” but was a neutral and understandable desire to maintain for themselves the liberty to choose their own doctor, the fear of diminished quality care, the horror of being over-taxed to a degree that leaves little disposable income for working parents for their own family, and the bedrock, historic American belief of self-responsibility.
Similarly, those wanting closed borders and an end to illegals entering the country and blithely living off taxpayer largess are accused of “white racism.” when the underlying reason has to do with protecting themselves from crime, rape, murder, property damage and the closing of schools, hospitals and other essential services due to local and state bankruptcy born of the expenses of subsidizing illegals.
The left is trying to muzzle its political opposition by brainwashing us into accepting their mantra that non-liberal whites are racist. Our reply in proving that we are not racist has been to show that blacks are among Tea Party members. To be sure, that is important, but, by so doing, we are capitulating to the premise that by itself “white” opinion is somehow invalid.
Nowhere in the Bill of Rights is found a footnote or asterisk that freedom of speech or assembly is conditioned on its racial diversity, its “un-whiteness.” Our answer to those who ask “how many blacks, Muslims, or Hispanics are members of your group, should be: “It doesn’t matter, what matters is the cogency of our argument.”
We should have enough confidence to answer: “The problem is not with our beliefs, rather with those who do not share our core American values or are unwilling to gather and associate with a group overwhelmingly white”.
Freedom of speech and assembly should not be based on a quota system. Will we now have a situation in speech, like that in hiring, that requires 12% black or 11% Hispanic or 2% Muslim for that speech to be politically valid and acceptable?
What started out years ago as inclusiveness of others has dangerously degenerated into an exclusion of speech and validity if exercised by the white community. Obsessive identification with minority-group views has led to, among elite liberals, a complete indifference and callousness to the feelings and yearnings of the majority white population.
Truthfully, this has always been the goal of liberal multiculturalism. Its intention was never to simply open up our society but to close down those representing the historic ethos and values of America: the white middle class.
For the liberal left, other cultures are not simply to be admitted but should reign supreme—a tyranny of the minority over the majority, orchestrated by white liberals, and minority power brokers, wishing to subdue the majority standing in the way of their political and cultural hegemony, and feeling righteous doing so out of a conviction that non-liberal white people are racist and must be stomped down.
The truth is that many in the liberal community preaching to us about racism are, themselves, bigots against white Christians, labeling them red-necks, un-educated, racists, and simpletons. No one calls them on their bigotry since it’s difficult to conceive that those always touting civil rights and diversity are imbued with their own bigotry. Their never-ending indictment of American society as racist cloaks what is their own variety of bigotry.
The crusade of the liberal establishment to sew into the collective consciousness a belief that whites are inherently racist and “extremist” was displayed in the media’s endless speculation about a “white male” as the perpetrator during the first hours of the Times Square terrorist incident and yet played down the Moslem origin of the actual terrorist when so discovered. Even Rep. Jerold Nadler (D.-N.Y.) and Mayor Michael Bloomberg alluded to a white person “angry over the healthcare bill.” In the liberal mind, white people are closet Timothy McVeighs. It is a subtle bigotry that the American public dare not allow seep into their world view. It is a presumption which must be decried as racism against the white majority.
This belief is so ingrained that after the discovery of the Pakistani terrorist, Mayor Bloomberg warned that: “No reprisals and backlash against the Pakistani community will be tolerated.” Why the need to make this warning given that since 9/11 and numerous Islamic attacks since then, there have been no burnings of mosques or backlash riots against Islamic communities?
Instead of liberals admiring the majority, white community for their monumental restraint and fairness, liberals continue to peddle to “white America” how our evil impulses must be continually reigned in. President Obama has often delivered this very same message, and in a weekly radio address appealed to “Blacks, Muslims, Latinos and women to coalesce into standing behind his hopes and agenda for America”.
The reason for this never-ending liberal portrayal of “racist and extreme white-male America” is to intimidate us into silence. The left knows that the only thing standing in the way of their complete takeover of American government, culture and values is disenfranchising the legitimacy of the middle class. America is unique and different than other countries that are divided into a ruling class and a recipient class, with a very weak middle class. Americanism, on the other hand, comes from a prosperous, self-assured and vigorous middle class.
Liberals cannot out-rightly condemn the middle class. They have decided to strip it of its self-confidence and legitimacy by categorizing it as “white,” with all the orchestrated belittlement and demonization of whiteness we are now hearing. The economy is being transformed in such a way that entrepreneurship and small business, the backbone of the middle class, is being thwarted. An impoverished middle class is an impotent class. The elites are engaged in the destruction of the historic American ethos and value system embodied in the American majority. They want to convince us that “white values” are dangerous. What we have here is nothing less than cultural ethnic cleansing.
In my opinion, too many people exaggerate the ability of the internet to do damage to someone’s real life reputation.
The internet is pretty discredited as a medium when compared to professional source.
Note to Washington…When creating propaganda, first remember that Sunni Fundamentalism (Al-Qaida) is not Shia Fundamentalism (Iran) and that neither are Ba’athism (Iraq).
WASHINGTON (AP) — Al-Qaida operatives who have been detained for years in Iran have been making their way quietly in and out of the country, raising the prospect that Iran is loosening its grip on the terror group so it can replenish its ranks, former and current U.S. intelligence officials say.
This movement could indicate that Iran is re-examining its murky relationship with al-Qaida at a time when the U.S. is stepping up drone attacks in Pakistan and weakening the group’s leadership. Any influx of manpower could hand al-Qaida a boost in morale and expertise and threaten to disrupt stability in the region.
U.S. officials say intelligence points to a worrisome increase in movement lately.
Details about al-Qaida’s movements and U.S. efforts to monitor them were outlined to The Associated Press in more than a dozen interviews with current and former intelligence and counterterrorism officials, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter.
The relationship between Iran and al-Qaida has been shrouded in mystery since the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, when many al-Qaida leaders fled into Iran and were arrested. The Shiite regime there is generally hostile to the Sunni terrorist group, but they have an occasional relationship of convenience based on their shared enemy, the U.S.
U.S. intelligence officials have tried wiretapping and satellite imagery to watch the men. The CIA even established a highly classified program – code-named RIGOR – to study whether it could track and kill terrorists such as al-Qaida in Iran. Results have been mixed. Monitoring and understanding al-Qaida in Iran remains one of the most difficult jobs in U.S. intelligence.
“This has been a dark, a black zone for us,” former CIA officer Bruce Riedel said. “What exactly is the level of al-Qaida activity in Iran has always been a mystery.”
That activity has waxed and waned, officials said. Sometimes the men could travel or communicate with other operatives. Other times, they were under tight constraints and the U.S. considered them to be out of commission. There was no obvious pattern to the movement.
The departures began in late 2008 as the U.S. stepped up international efforts to sanction Iran for its nuclear program. Saad bin Laden, one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, was allowed to leave the country around that time with about four other al-Qaida figures.
Since then, U.S. intelligence officials say, others have followed. One former CIA official familiar with the travel identified the men as moneymen and planners, the kind of manpower al-Qaida needs after a series of successful U.S. drone attacks on al-Qaida’s ranks. But a senior counterterrorism official said the U.S. believes anyone who has left Iran recently is likely to be lower-level.
A major concern among U.S. officials is that this movement foreshadows the release of al-Qaida’s “management council,” including some of al-Qaida’s most dangerous figures.
Most recently, the concern focused on Saif al-Adel, an Egyptian-born confidant of Osama bin Laden who is on the FBI’s most wanted list in connection with the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In the past year or so, intelligence officials circulated a bulletin saying al-Adel, one of al-Qaida’s founding fathers, was traveling to Damascus, Syria. The U.S. is offering a $5 million reward for his capture.
The Damascus connection ultimately was disproved but, underscoring the difficulty of monitoring the men, U.S. intelligence officials are divided on whether Saif has been allowed to travel in the region. The senior counterterrorism official said there’s no clear evidence Saif has left Iran.
“Regardless of where he is, we haven’t forgotten about him or stopped looking for him,” said Don Borelli, the assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s terrorism task force in New York. “He’s a most-wanted terrorist and we intend to find him.”
The roster of al-Qaida figures in Iran is something of a who’s who for the terror group. One is Abu Hafs the Mauritanian, a bin Laden adviser who helped form the modern al-Qaida by merging bin Laden’s operation with Ayman al-Zawahiri’s Islamic Jihad. Al-Qaida’s longtime chief financial officer, Abu Saeed al-Masri, has been held there. So have bin Laden’s spokesman, Suleiman Abu Ghaith, and Mustafa Hamid, an al-Qaida trainer with a terrorism pedigree that spans decades.
Several members of bin Laden’s family also have been under house arrest.
All fled into Iran after al-Qaida’s core split up after the 9/11 attacks. Bin Laden led some confidants toward the mountainous border with Pakistan. Al-Adel led others into Iran, which has historically allowed al-Qaida members safe passage through the country.
Iran arrested the men in 2003 and has held them as both a bargaining chip with the U.S. and as a buffer against an al-Qaida attack.
Using spy satellites, the U.S. has monitored vehicles in and out of the compound where the al-Qaida operatives have been held. U.S. officials have gleaned some information about the men through intercepted Iranian phone conversations and e-mails. But generally, the U.S. has only limited information about them.
If Iran were to release any of the major al-Qaida figures, it would be a violation of a United Nations resolution. A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said Iran is well aware of U.S. concerns that they not be released.
Late in President George W. Bush’s administration, the CIA began developing a broad and lethal counterterrorism program, RIGOR, that targeted an array of terrorists in different countries. Part of the program examined the possibility of finding and eliminating al-Qaida inside Iran, former intelligence officials said.
They described the program as a feasibility study. One aspect was to figure out whether the CIA could slip spies into Iran to locate and possibly kill al-Qaida figures. RIGOR was separate from an earlier program involving contractors from Blackwater Worldwide.
RIGOR existed on the books for about two years but never progressed any further. CIA Director Leon Panetta canceled RIGOR last year. A U.S. official familiar with the program said a list of specific targets had not yet been identified when the program was nixed.
U.S. officials realized that things in Iran were changing in the waning days of Bush’s administration when Saad bin Laden crossed into Pakistan. The administration took the unusual step of announcing bin Laden’s move and freezing his assets. As many as four others were believed to have been with him.
“This served in large part as a symbolic act to remind both Iran and al-Qaida that we are watching this relationship,” said Juan Zarate, Bush’s former deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism. “We were concerned operationally about his movements, which was another reason for the designation.”
In July, intelligence officials revealed that Saad bin Laden was probably killed in a drone airstrike. Intelligence officials suspected he was traveling with Abu Khayr al-Masry, an Egyptian who had also been held in Iran. Officials believe al-Masry – an al-Zawahiri deputy – is alive and in Iran.
At the time, officials didn’t believe bin Laden’s departure was an isolated event.
Indeed, it wasn’t.
Since Saad bin Laden left Iran, other al-Qaida figures have followed, current and former officials say. They are suspected to be taking smuggling routes heading toward Saudi Arabia or the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan. Last fall, top CIA officers received intelligence reports suggesting the release of several al-Qaida members from Iran, according to a former CIA official.
One of the men placed a phone call to a relative in Saudi Arabia. The call was made from Baluchistan, a western Pakistan province bordering both Iran and Afghanistan. It is known as a transit point for al-Qaida operatives.
But even when they have known that al-Qaida had traveled, U.S. officials say they have rarely understood the purpose.
The activity comes as Iran allowed Osama bin Laden’s daughter Iman to leave the country in March and settle in Syria. Details are murky.
“Clearly, there’s something going on on the Iranian front,” said Riedel, the former CIA officer who is now a Brookings Institution scholar.
Some experts believe that anyone from al-Qaida freed to leave Iran must be returning to the battlefield. Others believe that, with al-Qaida families left behind, terrorists may actually be working for Iran, gathering intelligence or passing messages before returning to Iran.
Either way, it’s being noticed. Clare Lopez, a former CIA officer and a senior fellow at Center for Security Policy, says it’s not a good sign.
“Movement like this doesn’t augur well,” she said.
Here is a very controversial thread which takes a sledge hammer to the backbone of both old school Nazism and modern “Slav-including” fake Nazism. Both typologies are bankrupt. The idea of “Aryans” and “Semites” as racial categories is a false idea. It makes no difference whether Slavs are Aryans; the system is bankrupt!
Overnight, I was simultaneously repped and thanked by a Syrian-Armenian, so it is good to see that people of different backgrounds recognize the strength of my argument.
Southern European “white nationalists” like to identify themselves with Northern Europeans and act as if they share nothing with other Mediterraneans. There’s nothing more hilarious then reading some Italian or Greek writing on race forums that he/she can’t stand the fact that Jews and Gypsies are “non-whites.”
Let’s use this thread to debunk once and for all the idea of a “European race” and a “Semitic race” divided by some bold line drawn on a map by Stromfront or the Apricity.
The first line of evidence is that European “aryans,” despite their language, cluster closer to Semites then they do to Indians/Iranians/Pakis regularly and consistency.
The next line of evidence is that Europe was formed by multiple migrations, but both the Paleolithic and Neolithic migrations were tied to the near east.
Haplogroups are not perfect, but they clearly point to a Mediterranean link between the continents.
Finally, Jews repetitively cluster closer to Europeans and Turks than they do to Arabs. In some cases (but not always), they cluster closer to Northern Europe than some Southern Europeans do and physical appearance also is less exotic.