Beef -- good

[Mike in Denver]

"A Rare Steak a Day Keeps the Cardiologist Away

by Chris Masterjohn

Red meat has been maligned for decades as an artery-clogging source of cholesterol and saturated fat. Yet a rare-cooked slab of quality red meat may just be your best defense against heart disease."

More at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/masterjohn2.html

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

I love beef --- a lot. The problem is it is hard to find really good beef. The beef I get at the major chains is at best OK. The expensive beef I get at the health food stores may be good for you, but I find it too lean and bland to strange tasting. The health food stores are good for poultry and fish but I'm not fond of their beef.

I have friends my age (60) who although in reasonably good health, have been conned into taking all sorts of pharmaceutical drugs, among which, Statin drugs to lower their cholesterol. They wont eat egg yolks, or red meat, and they take these poisons. Hell, I know people in their 40s who have never had a medical problem who, nevertheless, are on 5 or more medications to prevent the onset of imagined, potential, possible diseases. Sad!

I really like eggs, and pork too. In fact, I'm about to go fix a late breakfast -- Pork sausage (made it myself) and eggs, yolks and all. If I weren't so lazy I'd make some grits with butter. Yum!!

Enkidu

[Mike in Denver]

What's your LDL/HDL cholesterol, if you don't mind me asking?

I don't mind asking, but I really don't know. The last time I payed any attention was about 20 years ago. I ate a rich diet and the only number I remember was 190. I have no idea what the breakdown was. True I was fitter and thinner then, but now that I am not burdened by endless 70+ hour workweeks, I am getting back in shape. I do know my pulse and blood pressure. My resting pulse runs around 55 (always been slow) and BP (I measure it every Saturday morning) runs around 132/80. As I lose weight and get in shape my BP will drop. The last time I was thin and fit (about 10 years ago) my BP was typically say, 110/70.

I don't trust doctors and stay away from them. I've had a few really scary misdiagnoses and now I would let a doctor set a broken bone or possibly stop profuse bleeding, but nothing else.

My whole take on nutrition is exactly this: If a food was commonly used among my race 2000 (give or take) years ago, it is a good food. Otherwise, it is suspect.

Enkidu

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

I........
My whole take on nutrition is exactly this: If a food was commonly used among my race 2000 (give or take) years ago, it is a good food. Otherwise, it is suspect.

Enkidu

Beer is definitely ok then?

[Mike in Denver]

Beer is definitely ok then?


Oh! I forgot. My second rule of nutrition: Any food that starts with 'b' has four letters, the middle two of which are double 'e' is good.

Beef -- good.
Beer -- good.
Beet -- Hmmm! OK, I have to work on this second rule.

Enkidu

[Alex Linder]

Amen. You're exactly right.

The claim that red meat is bad for you is a Big Lie that has passed into popular culture, so we get the ubiquitous sitcom joke about "heart attacks" whenever a character bites into a hamburger.

Eggs are very good for you, too.

Not only that, even if these things weren't that good for you, they taste so much better than vegetables one would eat them for pure aesthetics. Vegetables don't fight back, whereas a steak will give your mouth a workout. Steak resists you, and feels good when you eat. Vegetables are enjoyable, and I like to eat them too, but they're enjoyable in a complementary and reduced way.

[ittybitty]

The claim that red meat is bad for you is a Big Lie

You are correct on that and about the eggs. Years ago they started saying eggs are bad, then it went to milk and so on. I have eaten eggs, meat and drank milk my entire life, and have never had any problems with my health. I have never had a weight problem, nor cholesterol.
I had a friend who was raised vegetarian, and has never had a bite of meat in his life. I will be damned if he isn't completly unhealthy looking. Out of shape, and his skin is very drab.
I remember years ago when they were reporting all of a sudden that milk was bad for your health, then all of a sudden "Got Milk". Everyone is back on the it's good for you, it helps you lose weight. Strange, isn't it?
I have always eaten whatever I want, and will continue to do so. I figure if you excercise and take care of yourself, then it's not that much of an issue.
And yes...Beer is good for you.

[Steve B]

You beef eaters will be. A friend of mine is a local cattle rancher. Most of his steers go to market but he keeps about 3 or four carcasses in a walk in refrigerated cooler he has at his house. Dry-aged beef! Yummm!!! He lets it age for about a month at a specific temp. The aging process evaporates the moisture from the muscle and creates a greater concentration of beefy flavor and taste. Also, the beef’s natural enzymes break down the fibrous, connective tissue in the muscle, tenderizing the hell out of it.

The downside of this is you lose a lot due to shrinkage and you have to trim the outside of the beef because it's rotten. But once you get to the tasty inside.....wow! You never had a steak like it! :cheers:

[Mike in Denver]

I remember years ago when they were reporting all of a sudden that milk was bad for your health, then all of a sudden "Got Milk". Everyone is back on the it's good for you, it helps you lose weight.

You can go to the vitamin stores and buy CLA tables to help you lose weight. Or, you can drink milk. CLA is plentiful in milk fat. If milk is so bad, why in the hell do I like a glass of cold milk so much. Asians and Blacks (see how polite I can be) have difficulty with milk. Generally, Whites do not. Our race has been raising goats and cows for many thousands of years. We would instinctively know by now if milk were bad for us. It is not.

Enkidu

[Fenrir]

We would instinctively know by now if milk were bad for us. It is not.

All the lactose intolerant whites whose bodies couldn't process the energy-rich milk died off. Evolution in action. Yes, it is best to simply trust instincts when it comes to food and ignore most of the fads and "experts."

A couple decades of nutrition science versus thousands of years of genetically developed instinct; trust instinct.

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

Oh! I forgot. My second rule of nutrition: Any food that starts with 'b' has four letters, the middle two of which are double 'e' is good.

Beef -- good.
Beer -- good.
Beet -- Hmmm! OK, I have to work on this second rule.

Enkidu

Beets are good too. I like peppers, onions, beets, cabbage, lettuces, spinach, various beans and legumes.

If I eat squash or yams they must be smothered in butter and brown sugar.

I like whole wheat bread too. A piece of brownberry cracked wheat toast, a nice ribeye off the grill, and some spinach salad, that's a meal for me. Maybe some blue cheese on the steak or chevre on the salad. I eat this meal at least once or twice a week. I have my 6 years old eating steak now too.

[Imperivm_Evropa]

Reminds me of this huge craze to stay away from milk. Hey, its not our fault the majority of the non-White world is lactose intolerant. Consuming things like eggs, red meat, and milk is what made us substantially larger and stronger than Northeast Asians, even though we had a similarly harsh climate. I do agree that if it was used by the race for so long, then its OK.

However, things like excessive beer or fatty meats should be controlled. Remember that they were consuming all of this and struggling to survive everyday, and exerting a tremendous amount of physical energy. Things are quite different today for our people....

[April]

My dad and brother run about 700 head of cattle on 5000 acres in the Sierra Nevada foothills.

What always cracks me up is when some granola idiot says that they only eat " free range beef"......

It is funny because virtually ALL beef cattle are raised "free range". It would be
economically impractical to raise them in little pens and feed them hay. If we did the price of beef would be 50$ a pound or more.

What these people are confused by is that after the cattle are gathered up from the open land and shipped to auction and sold they are held in large areas called "feed lots" for a few weeks until they are butchered. This period of time is but a short part of the life of a steer.

The average cow leads a pretty idealic life. She raises her calves and gets to nurse them until she either has another or decides otherwise. They get to roam around on large areas of land amidst the trees and wildflowers and the steers get shipped off at about 3 years old to be slaughtered. The bulls live pretty long lives and usually have about 50 cows to take care of if not more.
Compared to the life of a dairy cow who has to stand in their own shit 24/7 and have their calves taken away at birth and gets bred AI the beef cow has a pretty good time.

April

[JoeSixPack]

Man, you guys are making me hungry! :)

I'm gonna have to go shoot some rabbits or something, cause my wife is a vegetarian! :o

Mmm... Fresh Meat! :cheers:

[einzelwesen]

I will say that for a lot of people, excessive consumption of milk is one of the chief reasons why they are overweight. Not large, not strong, but plain old overweight.

For them, reducing the amount of milk they drink can be one of the best things they ever did for their health.

[Oy Ze Hate]

"A Rare Steak a Day Keeps the Cardiologist Away

by Chris Masterjohn

Red meat has been maligned for decades as an artery-clogging source of cholesterol and saturated fat. Yet a rare-cooked slab of quality red meat may just be your best defense against heart disease."

More at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/masterjohn2.html

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

I love beef --- a lot. The problem is it is hard to find really good beef. The beef I get at the major chains is at best OK. The expensive beef I get at the health food stores may be good for you, but I find it too lean and bland to strange tasting. The health food stores are good for poultry and fish but I'm not fond of their beef.

I have friends my age (60) who although in reasonably good health, have been conned into taking all sorts of pharmaceutical drugs, among which, Statin drugs to lower their cholesterol. They wont eat egg yolks, or red meat, and they take these poisons. Hell, I know people in their 40s who have never had a medical problem who, nevertheless, are on 5 or more medications to prevent the onset of imagined, potential, possible diseases. Sad!

I really like eggs, and pork too. In fact, I'm about to go fix a late breakfast -- Pork sausage (made it myself) and eggs, yolks and all. If I weren't so lazy I'd make some grits with butter. Yum!!

Enkidu

The incredible, edible egg. Chickens really are an underrated bird. Meals on talons, and they crap the most delicious delectables. What a masterwork of nature a chicken is.

[Oy Ze Hate]

I will say that for a lot of people, excessive consumption of milk is one of the chief reasons why they are overweight. Not large, not strong, but plain old overweight.

For them, reducing the amount of milk they drink can be one of the best things they ever did for their health.

Too much dairy is definitely dangerous. And don't forget all the by-products of cow's udders. You've got cheese in a thousand varities, sour cream, ice cream, cream cheese, buttermilk, butter, cottage cheese...and the list goes on.

Dairy-addiction is a big problem in the Kwa. And a major reason why AmeriKwans have obesity rates close to 40%.

And why is it an addiction? Because the high fat content TASTES SO GOOD. Most food sellers depend on the cow for alot of what they sell. Cows, they're what's for dinner.

It's a mystery to me why our brains register fat as so pleasurable to taste and consume. I've heard that when humans (whites) were evolving in cold climates, the brain made high-fat foods more pleasure-inducing so that the body would thereby fatten up a bit for the long cold winters and times when comfort food becomes scarce. Who knows?

[Subrosa]

The secret is keeping your overall cholesterol intake to a certain level. You need cholesterol so cutting it out completely is not a good thing. Your liver produces cholesterol and that is the one thing that can raise your levels, your own liver!

Just keep the overall cholesterol levels to a reasonable level, exercise and you won't have to worry about eating steak and eggs.

[einzelwesen]

What a masterwork of nature a chicken is.

And, their absolute preferred food, that they will eat and thrive off over any other food, is snails and slugs.

Too bad they're so bloody stupid!

On milk: as for myself, when I cut the amount of milk I drank and cheese I ate in half (with NO other lifestyle changes, more or less), I lost a good 15 kilograms over 3 months.

And I was never especially 'fat', and I never drank full-cream milk in the first place. So imagine what such a measure can do for people who are just plain old chubby, and do gulp down full-cream milk products with wild abandon.

And the very idea of eating so much dairy has become repugnant to me, now- it literally sickens me to think of it. So as it's possible for us to program ourselves* to eat fatty foods in quantities that may not be healthy for us, it's also possible to program ourselves in ways that are beneficial to us.

*: Under heavy outside pressure, of course, but at the end of the day a person is responsible for their own health.

[Imperivm_Evropa]

I will say that for a lot of people, excessive consumption of milk is one of the chief reasons why they are overweight. Not large, not strong, but plain old overweight.

For them, reducing the amount of milk they drink can be one of the best things they ever did for their health.

I agree with you. Drinking gallons of 2% milk isn't what I recommended. I do feel that a moderate intake of skim or lowfat milk is good for you though, or at least good for me. Consuming those types of food over thousands of years did change us physically through an evolutionary process. Compare the diets of Northeast Asians and Northern Europeans who share a similar climate. I really don't like to use our race's current physical condition as a representative or comparison to what the ancient European diet was.

[Toni]

I get my dairy from cheese, cream cheese, sour cream, yogurt and just the milk I use for cooking in other foods. My daughter likes chocolate milk (using white milk and chocolate syrup) and my son loves cereal and drinks the milk remaining in the bowl.

Word about shredded cheese...the companies use cellulose to keep the cheese looking nice so it doesn't stick together. I'm not a doctor but it seems to me that cellulose doesn't digest well and would not help digestion. Anyone, if you tried cooking with hand grated cheese compared to prepackaged one can tell the difference - hand grated taste "cheesier".

[Amalekite]

An excellent book about all the topics in this thread is Nourishing Traditions.

This well-researched, thought-provoking guide to traditional foods contains a startling message: Animal fats and cholesterol are not villains but vital factors in the diet, necessary for normal growth, proper function of the brain and nervous system, protection from disease and optimum energy levels. Sally Fallon dispels the myths of the current low-fat fad in this practical, entertaining guide to a can-do diet that is both nutritious and delicious.

Topics include the health benefits of traditional fats and oils (including butter and coconut oil); dangers of vegetarianism; problems with modern soy foods; health benefits of sauces and gravies; proper preparation of whole grain products; pros and cons of milk consumption; easy-to-prepare enzyme enriched condiments and beverages; and appropriate diets for babies and children.

http://www.newtrendspublishing.com/SallyFallon/

Also check out http://www.westonaprice.org/

[Mike in Denver]

An excellent book about all the topics in this thread is Nourishing Traditions.

http://www.newtrendspublishing.com/SallyFallon/

Also check out http://www.westonaprice.org/

I got this excellent book years ago. I think I'll go dig it up and re-read through it. It convinced me to go back to whole milk products, including real butter, and give up all bizarre modern alterations to food, for example, skim milk, and low fat milk.

I don't know if it is mentioned in Nourishing Traditions (I'll find out later, when I find the book,) but I think it was this book that convinced me to avoid excessive soy products. I only use small amounts of naturally fermented soy.

Enkidu

[Mike in Denver]

If anything causes "bubble butts," it is consumption of products made with bleached flour. This article uses the term, "white bread," but it is really the bleached flour that is the problem. You can get white flour that is natural and un-bleached.

White bread from bleached flour is worse for you than sugar.

Enkidu

---

http://www.campaignfortruth.com/Eclub/230605/CTM%20-%20White%20Bread.htm

"White Flour Contains Diabetes-
Causing Contaminant Alloxin


You may want to think twice before eating your next sandwich on white bread. Studies show that alloxan, the chemical that makes white flour look "clean" and "beautiful," destroys the beta cells of the pancreas. That's right; you may be devastating your pancreas and putting yourself at risk for diabetes, all for the sake of eating "beautiful" flour. Is it worth it? Scientists have known of the alloxan-diabetes connection for years; in fact, researchers who are studying diabetes commonly use the chemical to induce the disorder in lab animals. In the research sense, giving alloxan to an animal is similar to injecting that animal with a deadly virus, as both alloxan and the virus are being used specifically to cause illness. Every day, consumers ingest foods made with alloxan-contaminated flour. Would they just as willingly consume foods tainted with a deadly virus? Unless they had a death wish, they probably would not. Unfortunately, most consumers are unaware of alloxan and its potentially fatal link to diabetes because these facts are not well publicized by the food industry.

[Amalekite]

I don't know if it is mentioned in Nourishing Traditions (I'll find out later, when I find the book,) but I think it was this book that convinced me to avoid excessive soy products.

Yup, it's definitely the one!

I only use small amounts of naturally fermented soy.


Same here. :cheers:

North Americans eat way more soy than they're even aware of, since it's used in so much processed food nowadays.

[Mike in Denver]

Long article at http://www.thescreamonline.com/essays/essays5-1/vegoil.html

This is added information for me. I've long known that Canola oil and Soy oil were bad, and Coconut oil good, but have been using products with safflower and sunflower oils. It goes along with my, "If it was used 2000 years ago among my race, it is good."

I can't find my copy of Nourishing Traditions. I'll find it later. It sticks in my mind that there was something in it that I disagreed with. It may have been that Fallon supported the use of Canola oil. If so (and I could certainly be wrong -- I can't find the book,) she could be forgiven. My copy of her book was published in 2000 and the original copyright was, obviously, earlier than that. Canola oil use was, and remains, a fad approaching religious fervor. It is poison, don't use it. I do know that Sally Fallon has written articles recently against the use of Canola oil.

Read this below, just don't stop until you have read, “Wrong on all counts...” Then go to the above url and read the whole article. [Enkidu]
---
SATURATED FATS CAUSE HEART DISEASE. Unsaturated fats, especially polyunsaturated fats, balance hormones, strengthen the immune system, and prevent cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, arthritis, and all types of inflammation. Some polyunsaturated fatty acids are so important to health that they are called essential fatty acids, or EFAs — you literally can’t be healthy without them. Polyunsaturated vegetable oils are the safest fats for cooking, especially deep-fat frying, and they’re the key ingredients in healthful salad dressings. Canola oil, flax seed oil, soy oil, safflower oil, sunflower oil, and other polyunsaturated vegetable oils are today’s true health foods.

Right?

“Wrong on all counts,” says Ray Peat, Ph.D., a physiologist who has studied hormones and dietary fats since 1968. According to Peat, every one of the above statements is incorrect.
"

[Jenab]

Amen. You're exactly right.

The claim that red meat is bad for you is a Big Lie that has passed into popular culture, so we get the ubiquitous sitcom joke about "heart attacks" whenever a character bites into a hamburger.
Like North Korea came out with the notion that one small meal a day is healthy. It kept the poor, starving peasants the notion that the government was actually looking out for them.

Not only that, even if these things weren't that good for you, they taste so much better than vegetables one would eat them for pure aesthetics. Vegetables don't fight back, whereas a steak will give your mouth a workout. Steak resists you, and feels good when you eat. Vegetables are enjoyable, and I like to eat them too, but they're enjoyable in a complementary and reduced way.
The best steaks I ever had were grilled ribeyes that I had when I was a kid. Lately, I haven't been able to afford beef, so I've made due with pork roast and smoked ham. Come to think of it, I haven't even had those in a while. My protein has been coming from nuts, peas and beans for several weeks. I do have three smoked hams in the freezer, but I'm waiting for one of those 99-cents-a-pound specials before buying more.

Jerry Abbott

[ngrh8r]

I know it sounds kinda paranoid, but I can't help but think that the Juden are behind all this B.S. about beef,milk,eggs, etc. being bad for you. The kikebox(TV) makes it out like all protein-rich foods are unhealthy. As we all know, protein is essential for proper nutrition, especially building and maintaining muscle mass. Maybe the kikes have found yet another way to try and weaken us.

[Amalekite]

I know it sounds kinda paranoid, but I can't help but think that the Juden are behind all this B.S. about beef,milk,eggs, etc. being bad for you.

I often think that myself. :)

[Amalekite]

I can't find my copy of Nourishing Traditions. I'll find it later. It sticks in my mind that there was something in it that I disagreed with. It may have been that Fallon supported the use of Canola oil.

No, Fallon definitely doesn't support its use. She cites vegetable oils as likely being one of the major causes of heart disease. The only vegetable oils she recommends using on a regular basis are extra virgin olive oil and the tropical oils like palm and coconut. She says good quality flax seed, sesame, and peanut oil are acceptable in small quantities. Oils which people take medicinally like evening primrose and borage are OK as well.

There are a few things in the book I'm not convinced about. I'm not convinced that alcoholic beverages like beer or wine, as long as they're made according to traditional methods and used in moderation, are bad for you. I'm not convinced that chocolate, as long as it's pure (not full of sugar and additives) and eaten sparingly, is bad for you. I'm not convinced that eating pork is bad for you (Fallon doesn't flat-out say that pork is bad, just that it may be bad; I wonder what the ethnicity of the scientists who carried out those studies on pork might be?). While I agree that drinking water during a meal may interfere with digestion, saying that you shouldn't drink for a whole two hours after eating seems a bit extreme. That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

[Jenab]

I don't have any cows, but I have a pet goat who happens to be purple just now because I crushed some pokeweed berries and painted her fur with the juice. I now have the only purple goat in West Virginia, as far as I know.

I've been doing without meat for several weeks. Beans and rice are pretty good, if you mix in some salt, pepper, and cajun spice.

Jerry Abbott

[Steve B]

I don't have any cows, but I have a pet goat who happens to be purple just now because I crushed some pokeweed berries and painted her fur with the juice. I now have the only purple goat in West Virginia, as far as I know.

Jerry Abbott

And you did that because you want a full length purple wool coat ala huggybear? :p

[Amalekite]

Beans and rice are pretty good, if you mix in some salt, pepper, and cajun spice.

Tonight I had lentils and quinoa with a big slab of butter on top. Wasn't bad at all. :cheers:

[-LiveWire-]

Raw beef is the best. Make sure you wash the blood off your hands. :D

[Jenab]

Why did you do that, Jerry?
It was a whim. The goat had been annoying me for hours with her baaing - she thinks she can get an extra feeding if she baas long enough. So went out there to tell her she better shut up...and then I noticed that the pokeweed berries had ripened. I started smirking like Calvin does sometimes on the Calvin & Hobbs cartoon, picked the berries, and gave my goat a purple dyed coat.

Jerry Abbott

[centerfire]

I know it sounds kinda paranoid, but I can't help but think that the Juden are behind all this B.S. about beef,milk,eggs, etc. being bad for you. The kikebox(TV) makes it out like all protein-rich foods are unhealthy. As we all know, protein is essential for proper nutrition, especially building and maintaining muscle mass. Maybe the kikes have found yet another way to try and weaken us.
Yeh, it sounds really paranoid.

[April]

I don't have any cows, but I have a pet goat who happens to be purple just now because I crushed some pokeweed berries and painted her fur with the juice. I now have the only purple goat in West Virginia, as far as I know.

I've been doing without meat for several weeks. Beans and rice are pretty good, if you mix in some salt, pepper, and cajun spice.

Jerry Abbott


When my brother was little kid we had this huge oxen who was all white. We painted him blue with food coloring and my little brother ( he was about 4 years old) lead him in the parade dressed as Paul Bunyon, it was really cute.

[Dies Irae]

Not only that, even if these things weren't that good for you, they taste so much better than vegetables one would eat them for pure aesthetics. Vegetables don't fight back, whereas a steak will give your mouth a workout. Steak resists you, and feels good when you eat. Vegetables are enjoyable, and I like to eat them too, but they're enjoyable in a complementary and reduced way.
I've never quite read anything like this; seems reasonable, though.

[LUX]

The cholesterol-lowering scam will be appear as crazy as phrenology and blood letting within 50 years. Mecrk and Pfizer are today's cheif purveyors of this, yet another jew poison.

Normal cholesterol levels are now being defined as risk factors for cardiac disease and a host of other maladies.

In the mid 1990's a study on a psychiatric patient was reported in the New England Journal of Medicine to have consumed only boiled eggs, 25 of them each day for his nourishment for over 15 years. His total cholesterol was above 900mg/dL. Anything above 200 these days and a doctor will slap you on Lipitor. He had absolutely no signs of arterial disease. His liver seems to have adapted well to the high cholesterol intake.

You'll have to trust my qualifications, but listen to me: NEVER TAKE ANY OF THE STATIN CHOLESTEROL LOWERING AGENTS FOR ANY REASON.

"Continuing Education" in the healthcare industry began brainwashing practitioners in the early 1990's to believe that total cholesterol above 200 MUST be treated.

I will say I was actually privy to frank discussions from industry executives about the profit potential should every American with total cholesterol above 200 receive statin "therapy".

I smelled a rat then, and continue to preach against HMG Co-Enzyme A Reductase Inhibitors despite their increasing ubiquitousness.

[centerfire]

You'll have to trust my qualifications, but listen to me: NEVER TAKE ANY OF THE STATIN CHOLESTEROL LOWERING AGENTS FOR ANY REASON.


Well, the problem is that your qualifications are quite an important matter here. Now, you may be fully qualified to take the stance, but I will remain a little skeptical. No problem not wanting to give away personal info; I don't do it either. I am not an advocate of statin drugs, btw. I have no opinion one way or the other.

[LUX]

You are correct. My qualifactions matter with regards to my opinion. You'll find some hints embedded below. I'll give you no clues as to what I'm doing presently.

I'm speaking as a racial family member who would prefer that everybody on our side be as healthy as possible. The race that consumes synthetic organic chemicals such as the statins will not inherit the future. I have a conventional scientific/medical background coupled with jew-wise political instincts. I was privy to the bowels of calculating kikery with regards to the marketing of Lipitor in 1995.

I am of the opinion that the failure to take a statin drug has never resulted in a premature death.

As to divulging my qualifications, my job is always only a phone call away from being gone. I was given a written reprimand at my job at a major teaching hospital due to a co-worker snooping through my stuff. I had a habit of printing the "Letters to VNN", the Birdman's daily reads and news from WCOTC back in 2001-2002 and leisurely reading them, much as other employees read the morning paper.

I was guilty of "co-worker saw anti-semitic and racist printed material" and "Internet usage agreement violation". I eventually resigned a few months later as I sensed a threat that someone would notify those who can revoke my professional licensure.

I sat down with the department head and apologized for violating the Internet agreement, and managed to have a discussion about how our attitude was going to have to change to preserve our culture and civilized way of life. I never discussed politics on the job or complained when ostensible "Christians" brought their religion into the workplace. The "Christians" who listened to poisonous, offensive-to-my-White-sensibility popular music on Internet radio in our department.

Ironically, in the same meeting he issued the written reprimand, I got a considerable salary raise. I shit you not. That epitomized the illogical nature of any jewed institution.

[centerfire]

You have an interesting story, LUX. The fact that you were given a raise by people who knew that you're an awful antisemite is stunning. I'm surprised your job hasn't been sabotaged in some way. Any major medical school would be "lousy with Jews", as a guy named Oliver might say.

I don't think I'll have any need for statins any time soon, and by the time I reach the age at which people typically begin to take them, there will hopefully be a good replacement. I'll take your word into consideration.

Funny, I just recommended someone who chimed in on the Learning forum (calls himself Buddha :rolleyes: ) to read the Birdman site. I threw K. Mac. in there for good measure. I happened to agree with J. P. in his assessment of the "movement". I'm just waiting to be shot at with accusations of being a crypto-Jew or troll. Oh, well.

[centerfire]

The only other conclusion is you must be very, very good at what you do.


That was the conclusion that I drew as well.

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

Raw beef is the best. Make sure you wash the blood off your hands. :D

I had this Korean style steak tar tar once, it was essentially chopped sirloin with a raw egg, some horseradish and soy sauce. Pretty yummy. Beat the crap out of kimchee.

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

You are correct. My qualifactions matter with regards to my opinion. You'll find some hints embedded below. I'll give you no clues as to what I'm doing presently.

I'm speaking as a racial family member who would prefer that everybody on our side be as healthy as possible. The race that consumes synthetic organic chemicals such as the statins will not inherit the future. I have a conventional scientific/medical background coupled with jew-wise political instincts. I was privy to the bowels of calculating kikery with regards to the marketing of Lipitor in 1995.

I am of the opinion that the failure to take a statin drug has never resulted in a premature death.

As to divulging my qualifications, my job is always only a phone call away from being gone. I was given a written reprimand at my job at a major teaching hospital due to a co-worker snooping through my stuff. I had a habit of printing the "Letters to VNN", the Birdman's daily reads and news from WCOTC back in 2001-2002 and leisurely reading them, much as other employees read the morning paper.

I was guilty of "co-worker saw anti-semitic and racist printed material" and "Internet usage agreement violation". I eventually resigned a few months later as I sensed a threat that someone would notify those who can revoke my professional licensure.

I sat down with the department head and apologized for violating the Internet agreement, and managed to have a discussion about how our attitude was going to have to change to preserve our culture and civilized way of life. I never discussed politics on the job or complained when ostensible "Christians" brought their religion into the workplace. The "Christians" who listened to poisonous, offensive-to-my-White-sensibility popular music on Internet radio in our department.

Ironically, in the same meeting he issued the written reprimand, I got a considerable salary raise. I shit you not. That epitomized the illogical nature of any jewed institution.

Let's talk about drug companies. I know some Prussian-heritage people whose kin were involved in a well known drug mulitnational's founding and they grew rich, rich, rich, on a hundred years of stock appreciation. Now, they are totally politically correct but who knows what they were like before.

Bayer, Miles, Boehringer mannheim, you name it, the drug/reagent/ etc industry has had and still has Germans running all over the US for years. German chemists, ha, like IG Farben or the ones who figgered out how to gassify coal-- never been much on Jews. I wonder if deep down they're that much different today.

I also hear o'er the grapevine that there have been one or more executives at major drug related companies that on a personal level were complete nazis. They'd never let it out or lift their dicks to help us, but they believed like so many others who never say, that

"HITLER WAS RIGHT!"

[LUX]

Let's talk about drug companies. I know some Prussian-heritage people whose kin were involved in a well known drug mulitnational's founding and they grew rich, rich, rich, on a hundred years of stock appreciation. Now, they are totally politically correct but who knows what they were like before.

Bayer, Miles, Boehringer mannheim, you name it, the drug/reagent/ etc industry has had and still has Germans running all over the US for years. German chemists, ha, like IG Farben or the ones who figgered out how to gassify coal-- never been much on Jews. I wonder if deep down they're that much different today.

I also hear o'er the grapevine that there have been one or more executives at major drug related companies that on a personal level were complete nazis. They'd never let it out or lift their dicks to help us, but they believed like so many others who never say, that

"HITLER WAS RIGHT!"

Right now the good times continue to roll. The crypto-Nazis such as those you speak of and others who are spread out over every slice of American life you care to name face this reality: individually we have nothing to gain and a lot of earning power to lose by overplaying a losing hand.

We must watch for signs and be prepared for opportunities once hard times shuffle the deck. $3.30/gallon gasoline is a good start. Watch the dollar. Monitor the DJIA. Listen to reporting on bankruptcies/mortgage foreclosures.

[LUX]

Lest we stray even farther from Beef . . .

I found this over at John Bryant's and it illustrates a significant reality about health care.

Here’s some fascinating news in the world of medicine that really shows the drug racket -- the huge prescription drug scam taking place in this country today. Researchers sent a group of people, who said they saw the drug Paxil in a TV advertisement, into doctors’ offices. Many of these patients didn't even show signs of depression, but when they named the drug, 50 percent were diagnosed as having depression, and 55 percent were given a prescription for the exact prescription drug they named.
In fact, it turns out that when people named Paxil, they were more than five times as likely to be given a prescription for it than someone who didn't name it. This simple experiment demonstrates how many doctors are puppets of the pharmaceutical industry; they're glorified drug dealers.
I've been saying this for years, as have many others in the natural health community, but now this experiment clearly demonstrates it. Medical doctors claim to be scientifically trained. They claim to be rational people. They say that everything's a formula, so people are only given prescriptions that are medically necessary. But when a patient comes in and mentions the name of a drug, all that rationality and all that so-called scientific thinking gets thrown out the window. Over half the time, the doctor's just going to write out a prescription for the exact drug that the patient named, whether or not it is medically necessary. --NewsTarget

[Jenab]

I had this Korean style steak tar tar once, it was essentially chopped sirloin with a raw egg, some horseradish and soy sauce. Pretty yummy. Beat the crap out of kimchee.
Nothing beats a ribeye steak, salted and peppered, grilled over charcoal, sprinkled with soy sauce, served with seared onion & mushrooms, with mashed potatoes and fresh baby string beans on the side. Of course, it's been a while since I've eaten any such thing, but the memories from my childhood are still powerful.

[Steve B]

Nothing beats a ribeye steak, salted and peppered, grilled over charcoal, sprinkled with soy sauce, served with seared onion & mushrooms, with mashed potatoes and fresh baby string beans on the side. Of course, it's been a while since I've eaten any such thing, but the memories from my childhood are still powerful.

Are you on a vegetarian diet now? I tried it once about 15 years ago. Don't ask me why, just a lark I guess, but I lost all kinds of weight and felt weak as a kitten. I don't recommend for anybody.

[Jenab]

Are you on a vegetarian diet now? I tried it once about 15 years ago. Don't ask me why, just a lark I guess, but I lost all kinds of weight and felt weak as a kitten. I don't recommend for anybody.
I ate a couple of chicken drumsticks each day for three days last week, but they're gone now. I have three hams in the 'fridge, but I'm saving them for this winter. No, I'm not really a vegetarian. It's just hard to find affordable meat. Well, ok, I suppose that I could afford it if it were a priority, but it isn't. And anyway, meat will become a rare thing indeed a ways into the Apocalypse. Except for cannibals. So I'm a vegetarian-in-training, I guess.

I think the weakness thing only lasts for a few months, after that you start to feel okay again. Getting over meat is like getting over nicotine, maybe.

Jerry Abbott

[Steve B]

I ate a couple of chicken drumsticks each day for three days last week, but they're gone now. I have three hams in the 'fridge, but I'm saving them for this winter. No, I'm not really a vegetarian. It's just hard to find affordable meat. Well, ok, I suppose that I could afford it if it were a priority, but it isn't. And anyway, meat will become a rare thing indeed a ways into the Apocalypse. Except for cannibals. So I'm a vegetarian-in-training, I guess.

I think the weakness thing only lasts for a few months, after that you start to feel okay again. Getting over meat is like getting over nicotine, maybe.

Jerry Abbott

Pfftt! What kind of White man can't afford a good steak? It's a couple bucks per pound the "Apocalypse" notwithstanding. Are you joking with me? Chicken drumsticks are even cheaper. 59 cents a pound... You can get 20 of-em for 10 bucks. I don't understand. Are guys like you and Kievsky trying to be losers?

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

Jerry if you will take my copy of the Kunstler book on Peak Oil and read it and do a decent review for VNN main page by Christmas, I will send you some Omaha steaks as a gift. Whatchasay? My final offer.

[Bardamu]

... I will send you some Omaha steaks as a gift.

I had one of those last year, very tasty, course the wine helped too.

[Joe_J.]

I am a bit late to be in on the thread but I will stick my nose in it anyway.

I have been off of beef for over a year. Reason-hormones, BSE. I will eat organic beef if I can find some I can afford.

I just about live off of salad and show no ill effects. I work in a very physical job. I am 6'0" and 213lbs and in pretty good shape. I do eat chicken and lots of fish (oh vey, de mercury!) and the Boca soyburger stuff but most of my diet revolves around grains and vegetables. Hasn't hurt me or left me weak.

One added benefit is less gas. :p

Besides that, I am a preparer and it is not so easy to store meat for long term hunkering down.

[Amalekite]

Yeh, it sounds really paranoid.

I don't see how it's any more paranoid than believing the Holocaust was a hoax. I wonder how many VNN'ers believe the Holocaust was a hoax?

[Amalekite]

And anyway, meat will become a rare thing indeed a ways into the Apocalypse. Except for cannibals. So I'm a vegetarian-in-training, I guess.

Looks like your options will be to become a cannibal or die a slow death.

The Myths of Vegetarianism:
http://www.mercola.com/2000/apr/2/vegetarian_myths.htm

[centerfire]

I don't see how it's any more paranoid than believing the Holocaust was a hoax. I wonder how many VNN'ers believe the Holocaust was a hoax?

Do you not see how the idea that there is a Jewish conspiracy to break down the white population physically by convincing us to avoid eating protein-rich foods is pretty far fetched? How do they shield their own people from the same brainwashing? They encounter all the same propaganda we do, so they would have to secretly inform their population that these are great foods to eat, while keeping this information from reaching us, all the while telling the goyim that it's really bad stuff. Surely they would suffer the same effects as the rest of the population.

You're comparing (a) propaganda that leads all people to believe in an historical event to (b) propaganda that promotes that a certain racial group (whites or you may say all goyim) adopt nutritional practices that would weaken itself while the perpetrating group (Jews) adopt the opposite practice, even though both groups live in the same overall population and are subjest to the same media.

It's untenable. It's also quite early & I'm kinda hazy, but this will have to do for now.

[Amalekite]

It's untenable.

Study the history of water fluoridation - of how fluoride went from being universally recognized as lethal in the 1930's, to how it suddenly became 'good for us' in the 1940's/50's, taking note of all the Jewish players involved - and explain how you think it came to be that most Americans brush their teeth with a highly toxic substance 3 times a day. Why is it that nearly everything the media has said is 'good for us' in the past 60 or more years has often turned out to be an exact reversal of the truth?

There is no need for all or even most Jews to be 'in on it' for a conspiracy to have taken place. A conspiracy, almost by definition, doesn't involve many people. Where did the OP say that all Jews were in on it?

Do you think Jewish elites really care how many Jews suffer or die as a result of their skullduggery? I don't. First of all, I don't perceive Jewry as monolithic, as you apparently do. Saying that a group of Jews did something does not automatically mean that all Jews had knowledge of or participated in it. Secondly, Jewish elites have shown time and time again that they are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own to attain their goals, whatever those goals may be. Thirdly, why should I believe that everything Jews do is sane and rational? There is no logical explanation for why serial killers do what they do, yet, they exist.

I am not arguing that the scenario the OP suggested is the truth. I am merely stating that I find such a scenario plausible, maybe probable. The proof is in the pudding.

Anyone who believes the Holocaust is a hoax or that Jews orchestrate media campaigns to promote race-mixing among the gentiles has no business ridiculing someone for suspecting Jews are spreading disinfo on health matters.

[centerfire]

OK, Amalekite, you have given me quite a handful this time. It seems that this is going to be like the arguement I had with some others here in which I tried to explain that Western medicine, even as it is practiced today, is not evil or Jewish or trying to keep people sick for profits, etc. There are malpractice problems and corporate hanky-panky, so on, but It's the tradition of Europeans and it works. This is something many WN's simply cannot accept because they are so geared to believe in Jewish conspiracy.



Study the history of water fluoridation - of how fluoride went from being universally recognized as lethal in the 1930's, to how it suddenly became 'good for us' in the 1940's/50's, taking note of all the Jewish players involved - and explain how you think it came to be that most Americans brush their teeth with a highly toxic substance 3 times a day.
I have a friend who believes this. What do you think the advocates of fluoridation brush their teeth with? They have nonfluoridated water routed to their houses? They go out and buy spring water to brush their teeth with, cook with, bathe in, etc.? I have asked my own dentist about this, and he has no problem with using it. The man has a bachelor's degree in biochemistry, a DDS, has taught dentistry at medical schools, and is a highly regarded practitioner. He and thousands of other dentists, physicians, etc. are advocates of fluoridated water. Do you think they are so fucking stupid and uneducated that they are less qualified than you to make such a judgement? That they would willingly subject themselves to this menace just to perpetrate this conspiracy to make everyone sick or a zombie or whatever? I don't think so.


Why is it that nearly everything the media has said is 'good for us' in the past 60 or more years has often turned out to be an exact reversal of the truth?
I don't even know how to adequately address this. There is an awful lot of garbage spewed out by the media, yes. But you seem to be suggesting that because people in the media have spread that water fluoridation is good that it is therefore necessarily bad. I recall that the first time I ever heard someone question the safety of water fluoridation it was on television. I don't recall the show because it's been years, but it was some expose or other on prime time tv. I have also seen this elsewhere in the media.

There is no need for all or even most Jews to be 'in on it' for a conspiracy to have taken place. A conspiracy, almost by definition, doesn't involve many people. Where did the OP say that all Jews were in on it?

Here you completely misunderstand me. I am not a total fucking idiot. I understand what conspiracy is. I did not say that OP said that ALLLLLLLL Jews were in on it, and I, myself, did not suggest that ALLLLLLL Jews had to be in it. Here is what I asked:
How do they shield their own people from the same brainwashing?
That suggests to you that there is a limited number of conspirators. That is the "they" in the question who would presumably have some concern over the impact of their prop. on their own group.
Do you think Jewish elites really care how many Jews suffer or die as a result of their skullduggery?
Yes. It would be really stupid to spread propaganda that would damage the health of their own people.

I don't. First of all, I don't perceive Jewry as monolithic, as you apparently do.
I can't fucking believe this one. You're the one who is saying that Jews are plausibly wreaking havoc on the goy population by convincing us that imbibing deadly toxins and neglecting protein rich foods is in our best interest. I am saying that it sounds rather paranoid.

Saying that a group of Jews did something does not automatically mean that all Jews had knowledge of or participated in it.
I addressed this ^.
Secondly, Jewish elites have shown time and time again that they are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own to attain their goals, whatever those goals may be.
Any population engaged in warfare is willing to sacrifice a certain percentage of thier own to win the battle. This is hardly unique to Jews. But we're talking about poisoning huge populations and depleting their nutritional intake in such a way that it would be almost impossible for the perpetrators to prevent their own population from falling prey to the same propaganda. The idea, I guess, would be for the goyim to deteriorate by a larger percentage than the Jews. There are just too many ways for this plan to break down!


Thirdly, why should I believe that everything Jews do is sane and rational? There is no logical explanation for why serial killers do what they do, yet, they exist.
Jews say there is no sane or rational explanation for whatever the Nazis did; that they were just a mass killing machine and nothing more.
Spreading such propaganda as you state the plausibility of is really "out there." It's too irrational.

I am not arguing that the scenario the OP suggested is the truth. I am merely stating that I find such a scenario plausible, maybe probable. The proof is in the pudding.
The proof that Jews have been involved in conspiracy has been well enough established for me. Conspiracy is not all that extraordinary in itself. But this conspiracy, trying to get whites to deprive themselves of meat, eggs, milk, etc. so as to destroy us (maybe as part of a larger plan, I don't know) sounds paranoid to me. This is quite an extraordinary claim which deserves extraordinary proof. Your proof is exactly what is lacking in this pudding.

Anyone who believes the Holocaust is a hoax or that Jews orchestrate media campaigns to promote race-mixing among the gentiles has no business ridiculing someone for suspecting Jews are spreading disinfo on health matters.
The Holocaust story has a weak foundation as has been shown by Faurisson, Butz, and many others. Jewish involvement in media is enormous, and their active participation in promoting race-mixing well demonstrated in pornography, movies, tv, commercial ads, etc. Jews (a considerable percentage of them) are quite open about their desire for their young people to date and marry their own. Keep it in the family. I have heard several media campaigns over the radio and some in newspapers. I have never encountered such a thing for Jews to eat more beef. It may be out there, and maybe it's just under the radar, but I am skeptical about this one.

With all due respect, Amalekite, when someone encounters a claim that seems ludicrous on its face, that person has every right to question it. Ngrh8r stated that his assumption might sound paranoid, and I agreed with him; that assertion was a little more accurate than he may have intended.

Funny avatar, btw.

[Amalekite]

OK, Amalekite, you have given me quite a handful this time. It seems that this is going to be like the arguement I had with some others here in which I tried to explain that Western medicine, even as it is practiced today, is not evil or Jewish or trying to keep people sick for profits, etc. There are malpractice problems and corporate hanky-panky, so on, but It's the tradition of Europeans and it works. This is something many WN's simply cannot accept because they are so geared to believe in Jewish conspiracy.

This is an unfair assumption on your part. I never said anything about Western medicine being a Jewish conspiracy. You don't know shit about me or my beliefs and this is presumptuous on your part.

Please restrict your comments to what was actually said and not to what you assume was meant. Don't try to read my mind. Don't put words in my mouth. It's very annoying, and I'm not going to waste my time defending positions I never took in the first place. I'll give you the benefit of a doubt, but it sounds like you're building up and knocking down strawmen.

I have a friend who believes this. What do you think the advocates of fluoridation brush their teeth with? They have nonfluoridated water routed to their houses? They go out and buy spring water to brush their teeth with, cook with, bathe in, etc.? I have asked my own dentist about this, and he has no problem with using it.

When I was a kid, there was a rumor circulating my school that a certain girl had masturbated with a hot dog, that the hot dog had gotten lodged inside her, and that she had to go to the hospital to have it removed. There wasn't any evidence to support this story, but then again, there wasn't really any evidence against it, and so almost every student in the school believed (or pretended to believe) that it was true. Nothing the girl could say was enough to convince people of her innocence, and she was so embarassed that she stayed home for a week. Why did everyone believe this rumour? Because everyone else in the school believed it. Where had the story originated from? Who had spilled the beans on this? No one bothered to ask. Since it was already established as fact - I mean, it must be true since everyone believes it - then why bother questioning it? A few years later, the exact same rumor was circulated about another girl, and everyone believed it, apparently having forgotten about the previous instance and it's uncanny similarity. Do you see what I'm driving at?

The man has a bachelor's degree in biochemistry, a DDS, has taught dentistry at medical schools, and is a highly regarded practitioner. He and thousands of other dentists, physicians, etc. are advocates of fluoridated water. Do you think they are so fucking stupid and uneducated that they are less qualified than you to make such a judgement? That they would willingly subject themselves to this menace just to perpetrate this conspiracy to make everyone sick or a zombie or whatever? I don't think so.

Why don't you shut up and do a little research about this before you speak? Start here: http://nofluoride.com/

After you're done, try the following books:

- Slow Poisoning of America, by John E. Erb and T. Michelle Erb
- Murder By Injection, by Eustace Mullins
- Fluoride - Drinking Ourselves To Death, by Barry Groves
- Fluoride - The Aging Factor, by John Yiamouyiannis
- The Fluoride Deception, by Christopher Bryson

There's really no point in debating this issue further until you've stopped acting like a know-it-all and have actually done your homework.

I don't even know how to adequately address this. There is an awful lot of garbage spewed out by the media, yes. But you seem to be suggesting that because people in the media have spread that water fluoridation is good that it is therefore necessarily bad.

It's one of the most toxic subtances around, you babbling fucktard! Children have died after swallowing fluoride gel at the dentist's. Go to a drugstore and read the warnings on fluoridated products - why do you think those are on there? Do you think manufacturers put warnings telling people to call poison control center if their kids swallow toothpaste because they think it will help improve sales?

I recall that the first time I ever heard someone question the safety of water fluoridation it was on television. I don't recall the show because it's been years, but it was some expose or other on prime time tv. I have also seen this elsewhere in the media.

Again, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said the media was monolithic, or that Jews control the media absolutely. Or for that matter, that all Jews are pro-fluoridation.

Here you completely misunderstand me. I am not a total fucking idiot. I understand what conspiracy is. I did not say that OP said that ALLLLLLLL Jews were in on it, and I, myself, did not suggest that ALLLLLLL Jews had to be in it. Here is what I asked:

So who is the "they" you were referring to? The OP was referring to Jews. You don't think it's possible that a limited number of Jews could be spreading a few whoppers about health matters?

You then go on to contradict what you've just written above -

Yes. It would be really stupid to spread propaganda that would damage the health of their own people.

Again, you assume that Jews are monolithic and that a small group of Jews would never do anything that could hurt other Jews.

I can't fucking believe this one.

You'd better believe it. You've confirmed at least half a dozen more times in your reply that you perceive Jews as a monolithic group.

You're the one who is saying that Jews are plausibly wreaking havoc on the goy population by convincing us that imbibing deadly toxins and neglecting protein rich foods is in our best interest. I am saying that it sounds rather paranoid.

The key word is plausibly. So far, you haven't presented any evidence whatsoever - other than some flawed arguments - that the scenario is implausible.

I addressed this ^.

How did you address this? You still speak of Jews as though they are a monolithic whole, i.e. that any cabal of conspiring Jews must be working in the interests of all Jews and wouldn't ever do anything that could hurt other Jews.

Any population engaged in warfare is willing to sacrifice a certain percentage of thier own to win the battle. This is hardly unique to Jews. But we're talking about poisoning huge populations and depleting their nutritional intake in such a way that it would be almost impossible for the perpetrators to prevent their own population from falling prey to the same propaganda. The idea, I guess, would be for the goyim to deteriorate by a larger percentage than the Jews. There are just too many ways for this plan to break down!

Why do you insist on framing this as an "all Jews" versus "all gentiles" issue? You have a spasm when I say that you consider Jews to be a monolithic whole, and yet you keep making statements over and over that suggest you do consider Jews to be a monolithic whole. You just did it again, for crying out loud!

This is what I mean by "the proof is in the pudding": Fluorides are extremely toxic substances which do absolutely nothing for the teeth beyond causing dental fluorosis in children. Scientists, doctors, and dentists knew this well into the 1930's/40's. Up to that time, they were trying to find ways to remove fluoride from public water supplies, as it was correctly viewed as a nasty, undesirable pollutant. Then suddenly, in the 1930's/40's, great pains were taken to convince the public and to force the scientific/medical community to accept that not only was fluoride harmless, but that it was actually good for you. Problem is, there never was one iota of evidence to support this position, and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. One of the key players in the campaign to sell the public on fluoride was PR man Edward Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud and author of such illuminating works as Propaganda, Crystallizing Public Opinion, and The Engineering of Consent.

Now, if someone who should and probably does know better hands me a glass of poisoned water and tells me to drink it, it's not unreasonable for me to suspect he's trying to hurt me. Perhaps the fact that the person handing me the glass is a Jew is relevant, perhaps not. Beyond that, why the person is trying to harm me is anyone's guess. I'm not going to try to shoehorn all the facts into a "Jews vs. gentiles" race war paradigm like you insist on doing (or insist that I am doing). Sure, that paradigm has its merits, but it does not explain absolutely everything that takes place in our society. Insisting that every single thing the Jews do is some carefully planned and executed maneuver in a race war with clearly delineated sides is simplistic in the extreme.

You need to stop shitty-finger pointing at others and start thinking outside of the WN box yourself.

Jews say there is no sane or rational explanation for whatever the Nazis did; that they were just a mass killing machine and nothing more. Spreading such propaganda as you state the plausibility of is really "out there." It's too irrational.

This is a flawed argument. It assumes that everyone acts rationally, according to your definition of what is "rational". Many people would find your beliefs regarding the Holocaust and Jewish media control to be "out there", and would be unable to interpret the behavior which stems from these beliefs as being "rational". Many people would find your mistrust of Jews "paranoid".

The proof that Jews have been involved in conspiracy has been well enough established for me. Conspiracy is not all that extraordinary in itself.

The problem is, it is extraordinary. It is absolutely extraordinary that Jews could've pulled off a whopper like "the Holocaust" and kept it going for 60 years. It is so extraordinary, in fact, that most people will not even consider the possibility that it's a lie. After all, everyone believes it, all the experts agree that it happened, and after 60 years, surely someone would've come forth to expose it if it hadn't really happened. So it must be true, right?

This is why the Jewish "Big Lie" technique works so well - because most people find it easier to believe the lie, no matter how outlandish, than to believe anyone would lie to them with such effrontery.

But this conspiracy, trying to get whites to deprive themselves of meat, eggs, milk, etc. so as to destroy us (maybe as part of a larger plan, I don't know) sounds paranoid to me. This is quite an extraordinary claim which deserves extraordinary proof. Your proof is exactly what is lacking in this pudding.

"Foods high in cholesterol are bad for you." "Saturated fats are bad for you." "Red meat is bad for you." "Salt is bad for you." "Eat your chicken without the skin." "Fluoride is good for you." "Soy is good for you." "Margarine is good for you." "Mercury amalgam fillings are good for you." "Weighing 90 pounds is good for you." "Aspartame is harmless. (Thank you Donald Rumsfeld)" "MSG is harmless." "Vaccines full of mercury and contaminants are good for your children." "There is no difference between organic and commercially grown foods." etc. etc.

I see a pattern here. If it was just one or two things, I would brush them off as honest mistakes. But not when every claim is a precise reversal of truth, and not when that truth has been known for hundreds and even thousands of years (e.g. the Chinese have known for thousands of years that soy is harmful unless it's prepared in special ways; so why are health magazines, many of them edited and disproportionately staffed by Jews, full of ads for things like soy milk, etc? Sure, the Jews can always say they ran the ads because they didn't know better - Jews are never guilty of anything, are they?).

The Holocaust story has a weak foundation as has been shown by Faurisson, Butz, and many others.

Only if you're willing to discount thousands upon thousands of eyewitness accounts (including confessions from high-ranking Nazis), photographic evidence, chambers full of gold teeth extracted from victims, the findings of the Nuremberg judges, etc. The Holocaust really happened, my friend, and every respectable historian agrees with me. The historians have Ph.D.s - what are your qualifications? You must be some kind of a nutcase conspiracy theorist to believe the loony rantings of unqualified crypto-Nazis like Arthur Butz and Robert Faurisson over the solid reputable eyewitness testimony of Holocaust survivors.

Jewish involvement in media is enormous,

That's not true. You only notice Jews in the media more because you're a vicious, delusional anti-Semite. Most of the people in the media, as a matter of fact, are not Jewish. If there are slightly more Jews in the media than their numbers in the general population would suggest, it's only because they are more intelligent and talented than other ethnicities, and they were raised to value education and similar accomplishments more than other cultures. I think you're just jealous of Jews and their accomplishments, and so you try to make out that there is something sinister about their accomplishments when such is not really the case.

As far as media ownership, not all companies are owned by Jews. Sony is Japanese. Rupert Murdoch is not a Jew. Ted Turner is not a Jew. Even in companies with Jews at the helm, those Jews are still accountable to the stockholders. Those stockholders are mostly gentile, not Jewish.

Dude, you're really paranoid. You need to get your head checked.

and their active participation in promoting race-mixing well demonstrated in pornography, movies, tv, commercial ads, etc.

Funny, whenever I plunk myself down on the couch and pop a good skin flick into the VCR, I mostly see whites. The models in Playboy and Penthouse and Hustler are overwhelmingly white. And the publisher of Hustler, in case you didn't know, is Larry Flynt. Larry Flynt isn't a Jew. Interracial porn is still a niche market, and to the extent that Jews are involved in making porn, they are only giving the public what it wants. And it's not like gentiles are forced to buy this stuff - they buy it because it's what they're after.

The people on TV and in the movies are still predominantly white, and if producers have been introducing more non-white characters in recent decades, it's only a reflection of reality and the result of equal opportunity employment practices. You only have a problem with seeing blacks and other minorities on TV because you're an intolerant racist bigot.

As far as ads, it's only normal that companies want to sell goods and services to minorities who are moving up the social and economic ladder and have more money to spend. In addition to your irrational hatred of blacks and Jews, do you have something against the free market too?

Jews (a considerable percentage of them) are quite open about their desire for their young people to date and marry their own. Keep it in the family.

Yes, but not all of them. Perhaps not even most of them. What are you driving at? That Jews promote race-mixing among others while refusing to do it themselves? That's ludicrous. Lenny Kravitz is mixed and he's a Jew. You're just being paranoid.

I have heard several media campaigns over the radio and some in newspapers. I have never encountered such a thing for Jews to eat more beef.

Do you regularly read Jewish newspapers or magazines? Watch Israeli television? Frequent Jewish websites? Just wondering how much weight I should accord your opinion. If you know as much about this as you do about fluoridation, I'm not gonna give your opinion much consideration.

Not that I'm saying you necessarily would find campaigns promoting red meat in the Jewish media. I'm just pointing out your proclivity for speaking out on matters which you know nothing about.

It may be out there, and maybe it's just under the radar, but I am skeptical about this one.

You're allowed to be skeptical, just as most people would think that you're a paranoid nutcase for believing Jews control the media, promote race-mixing for others but not themselves, and have been lying about the Holocaust.

With all due respect, Amalekite, when someone encounters a claim that seems ludicrous on its face, that person has every right to question it.

You did more than question it. You asserted it was false. The burden of proof now rests on you.

Ngrh8r stated that his assumption might sound paranoid, and I agreed with him; that assertion was a little more accurate than he may have intended.

You're concerned with accuracy? Then don't use the word paranoid. Paranoia is a clinical term referring to a very specific condition. Paranoia is "a psychotic disorder characterized by systematized delusions, especially of persecution or grandeur, in the absence of other personality disorders."

What the OP probably meant was: "I can't prove it, and I don't want anyone to think any less of me for saying it, but I sometimes wonder if..."

That's not paranoia.

Calling someone paranoid is the same as saying they're mentally ill. In other words, it's a smear (unless the person actually is mentally ill, which I don't think is really the case here). As I've pointed out, if the OP is "paranoid", then so is nearly everyone at VNNF, and we should all go find some nice Jewish psychiatrists to prescribe us a rainbow cocktail of pills to help rid us of our collective delusions of persecution.

[centerfire]

I don't think I've ever been involved in such a bizarre debate. Your response was surreal. There are many points on which we simply misunderstand each other. You have several good points in there. Problem is it's really late and I am exhausted. Also, there are many points in which I am not sure whether you misunderstand me or you're just being humorous. I will look over this again tomorrow, when I'm not so sleepy, and see what caused this train wreck. But whatever the case, I will assume that I have misrepresented myself enormously. There are a couple of places I can see where there I think I did this.

Why don't you shut up
you babbling fucktard!

Come on! I didn't take your post or your position on this to be a personal attack. Where it may have seemed like it, I was being emphatic. Pipe down! I just reread your post. It's going to take a while for me to straighten this mess out. Some places I can't help thinking you're playing some kind of game, but I'll assume that you meant everything in earnest.

[Amalekite]

I don't think I've ever been involved in such a bizarre debate. Your response was surreal. There are many points on which we simply misunderstand each other. You have several good points in there. Problem is it's really late and I am exhausted. Also, there are many points in which I am not sure whether you misunderstand me or you're just being humorous. I will look over this again tomorrow, when I'm not so sleepy, and see what caused this train wreck. But whatever the case, I will assume that I have misrepresented myself enormously. There are a couple of places I can see where there I think I did this.

This was the part that especially irritated me:

What do you think the advocates of fluoridation brush their teeth with? They have nonfluoridated water routed to their houses? They go out and buy spring water to brush their teeth with, cook with, bathe in, etc.? I have asked my own dentist about this, and he has no problem with using it. The man has a bachelor's degree in biochemistry, a DDS, has taught dentistry at medical schools, and is a highly regarded practitioner. He and thousands of other dentists, physicians, etc. are advocates of fluoridated water. Do you think they are so fucking stupid and uneducated that they are less qualified than you to make such a judgement?

This paragraph is wrong on so many levels I wouldn't know where to start. And it does come awfully close to a personal attack. If your dentist brushes his teeth with Ajax, then it must be OK for everyone else to brush their teeth with Ajax, since he has a bachelor's in chemistry. Only a complete moron would dare to speak out against such a practice, since only a dentist with a bachelor's in chemistry could possibly have formed an intelligent opinion on the subject. That's the gist of what you're saying.

There really is nothing to debate here. You haven't researched the fluoride question at all, yet you feel qualified to say that I am full of shit on the matter. It couldn't possibly be that I disagree with your dentist, no, it must be that I'm wrong. Your posts reek of shitty-finger pointing, which is basically what I was trying to communicate in the first place.

Those who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones. Clear enough?

[centerfire]

Well, here's War and Peace. :p It's kind of hard to keep this dialogue from getting too unwieldy, but you posted some pretty pertinent questions, so I thought I'd honor them with some answers. I tried to organize it a little better. This is my attempt to make sense of what seemed to make no sense. I think there were several times when you were talking "up here" and I was talking "down there". I also admit to clumsily misrepresenting myself in a few places, so part of the confusion is my fault. You really have misunderstood me, though. Part of the problem, I think, is the forum, where it's kinda natural to assume the interlocutor is pretty radical in his views. I actually think we're almost on the same page, more than you seem to believe. Read through; I think I've answered your questions honestly and have clarified a few things, even if you don't still don't buy everything. And, nah, I was never at any point angry or going into spasms in this thread. A bit irritated a couple of times, nothing more. This is not mean spirited, just trying to shed some light.

Originally Posted by centerfire
OK, Amalekite, you have given me quite a handful this time. It seems that this is going to be like the arguement I had with some others here in which I tried to explain that Western medicine, even as it is practiced today, is not evil or Jewish or trying to keep people sick for profits, etc.
This is an unfair assumption on your part. I never said anything about Western medicine being a Jewish conspiracy. You don't know shit about me or my beliefs and this is presumptuous on your part.
Please restrict your comments to what was actually said and not to what you assume was meant. Don't try to read my mind. Don't put words in my mouth. It's very annoying, and I'm not going to waste my time defending positions I never took in the first place. I'll give you the benefit of a doubt, but it sounds like you're building up and knocking down strawmen.
Actually, I did not intend to imply that these were your personal assumptions. That post was a prediction as to where I thought this discussion could lead based on my previous experience with this kind of topic on this board. It's understandable that you would think I was lumping you in with the rest of them, though.

FLUORIDE

Originally Posted by centerfire
I have a friend who believes this...
When I was a kid, there was a rumor circulating my school that a certain girl... Do you see what I'm driving at?

I think I see what you mean. I was not saying, "I know a guy who believes this and I was subjected to the rumor mill." By mentioning my friend, I was simply saying that I have discussed this with someone I know who believes it, so I have broached the subject before. It was kind of a lame introduction.
It was interesting that you brought up the rumor about the girl. When I was in high school there was a redheaded girl with the same rumor spread about her. I didn't really believe it at the time. I hadn't thought of that since I was 15 or so. I had no idea that was a popular rumor to spread.
Originally Posted by centerfire
What do you think the advocates of fluoridation brush their teeth with? They have nonfluoridated water routed to their houses? They go out and buy spring water to brush their teeth with, cook with, bathe in, etc.?
OK, I was being a bit sarcastic here. This was simply a point of logic. There are and have been advocates of water fluoridation. My assumption is that the advocates of water fluoridation, from the earliest to contemporary, also use this deadly toxic substance in the way everyone else does.

Originally Posted by centerfire
I have asked my own dentist about this, and he has no problem with using it. The man has a bachelor's degree in biochemistry, a DDS, has taught dentistry at medical schools, and is a highly regarded practitioner. He and thousands of other dentists, physicians, etc. are advocates of fluoridated water. Do you think they are so fucking stupid and uneducated that they are less qualified than you to make such a judgement?
This paragraph is wrong on so many levels I wouldn't know where to start. And it does come awfully close to a personal attack. If your dentist brushes his teeth with Ajax, then it must be OK for everyone else to brush their teeth with Ajax, since he has a bachelor's in chemistry. Only a complete moron would dare to speak out against such a practice, since only a dentist with a bachelor's in chemistry could possibly have formed an intelligent opinion on the subject. That's the gist of what you're saying.
If it comes close to being a personal attack (whatever that means), then it is not a personal attack. Here you seem to be accusing me of "appeal to authority" fallacy. You also use the "Dad's refutation". "Son, would you jump off a cliff if ___ did?" No, no one would jump off a cliff just because ___ did! I read that arguement and was like, "WHAT???? No one would use Ajax to brush thier teeth even if a dentist did it because everyone knows that it's a harsh household cleaning fluid." Was a bad analogy, IMO. I rarely use the "Dad's refutation" because they are usually so ridiculous.

The dentist was brought up because he is a legitimate authority in the matter of fluoride, given that he was taught what it is in dental school and uses it every day on himself and his patients. You'd have a point of refutation if I'd brought up Jack Nicholson as an authority. My flaw was in assuming that you are not in some way a legitimate authority. You could be a chemist, dentist, work for the CDC for all I know, though I think you would have already mentioned it.
It's one of the most toxic subtances around, you babbling fucktard! Children have died after swallowing fluoride gel at the dentist's. Go to a drugstore and read the warnings on fluoridated products - why do you think those are on there? Do you think manufacturers put warnings telling people to call poison control center if their kids swallow toothpaste because they think it will help improve sales?

"Babbling fucktard"! OOOOK. I will take your word for the reports that children have died swallowing the gel. My reply to this is that there are substances we ingest, such as vitamins, that are highly toxic in large doses. Vitamin A comes to mind as particularly bad, yet it is necessary in trace amounts. So, even substances that are known to be toxic can not only do no harm but be beneficial at very small levels. And I believe vitamin manufacturers put warnings labels on their bottles.
There's really no point in debating this issue further until you've stopped acting like a know-it-all and have actually done your homework.
There really is nothing to debate here. You haven't researched the fluoride question at all, yet you feel qualified to say that I am full of shit on the matter. It couldn't possibly be that I disagree with your dentist, no, it must be that I'm wrong.
Here is where we get to the crux of the problem in this discussion. I readily agree that I know little about this topic and the other topic of there being a cabal to convince people that they should not eat beef, etc. so as to lead the masses to malnourishment. My position is that of a skeptic. These seem to be quite extraordinary charges, even if there are many people who give plausibility to them. There are far more who don't, including most authorities on the matter. I am not saying that you are absolutely wrong. You may indeed be correct, Amalekite. I brought the dentist up for reasons already stated. Look, you brought this up, so if you bring it up and I don't believe it, it is not up to me to prove that there is no flouride cabal. I'll look a little more into this one. If in time all your claims are revealed to be true, then I will gladly admit you were right. Until then I will remain skeptical because this seems implausible to me based on the nature of the claim. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

THE JEWS, MEDIA, CABALS...

Originally Posted by centerfire
I recall that the first time I ever heard someone question the safety of water fluoridation it was on television. I don't recall the show because it's been years, but it was some expose or other on prime time tv. I have also seen this elsewhere in the media.
Again, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said the media was monolithic, or that Jews control the media absolutely. Or for that matter, that all Jews are pro-fluoridation.
I was responding to this quote of yours:
Why is it that nearly everything the media has said is 'good for us' in the past 60 or more years has often turned out to be an exact reversal of the truth?
I was simply stating that your point of view (somewhat, that is, when they merely questioned whether fluoridation may have harmful effects) has also been in the media. That statement in no way suggests what you accuse me of putting into your mouth. You are actually putting things into my mouth. Although, if you read your statement again, it does seem you believe that the media is moving in pretty much lock step (maybe not absolutely monolithic but in that direction).

So who is the "they" you were referring to? The OP was referring to Jews. You don't think it's possible that a limited number of Jews could be spreading a few whoppers about health matters?

You then go on to contradict what you've just written above -

Again, you assume that Jews are monolithic and that a small group of Jews would never do anything that could hurt other Jews.

Here is a series of replies that are flawed based, in part, on an apparent oversight you made. Here is where I quoted myself in explaining that I don't think all Jews are in on anything:
Originally Posted by centerfire
Here you completely misunderstand me. I am not a total fucking idiot. I understand what conspiracy is. I did not say that OP said that ALLLLLLLL Jews were in on it, and I, myself, did not suggest that ALLLLLLL Jews had to be in it. Here is what I asked:
Quote:
Originally Posted by centerfire
How do they shield their own people from the same brainwashing?

That suggests to you that there is a limited number of conspirators. That is the "they" in the question[edit - the conspirators among the Jews] who would presumably have some concern over the impact of their propaganda on their own group.
The key is in understanding that I am not an advocate of the idea that Jews are behind the fluoride or beef-avoidance claims. What I am doing is saying if Jews (some, of course) are behind these things, then how would they(the conspirators) avoid the widespread nutritional damage to their own population? I think this is a perfectly reasonable question.

You'd better believe it. You've confirmed at least half a dozen more times in your reply that you perceive Jews as a monolithic group.
You still speak of Jews as though they are a monolithic whole, i.e. that any cabal of conspiring Jews must be working in the interests of all Jews and wouldn't ever do anything that could hurt other Jews.
Here I have tied a couple of your posts together and I think I see a problem. I do not believe that if some Jews (or any other group) are conspiring on behalf of their group as a whole, they are unwilling to sacrifice members of the tribe in order to attain their goals. That is probably a commonplace. Still, the assumption is that if Jews (or any other group) are behind water fluoridation or discouraging protein food consumption, then they are doing it for some kind of group advantage. That is the commonly understood assumption within WN circles. You may have something else in mind when you say these things are plausible, I don't know. Again, I am not an advocate of these things.


The key word is plausibly. So far, you haven't presented any evidence whatsoever - other than some flawed arguments - that the scenario is implausible.
I am not going to provide evidence for what I consider to be a ridiculous idea! If you think that it is plausible that Jews are conspiring to perpetrate water fluoridation and protien deprivation, then it is encumbent upon you to prove this poppycock. What you are doing is akin to asking me to prove a negative.

Why do you insist on framing this as an "all Jews" versus "all gentiles" issue? You have a spasm when I say that you consider Jews to be a monolithic whole, and yet you keep making statements over and over that suggest you do consider Jews to be a monolithic whole. You just did it again, for crying out loud!
First, I have never believed in anything so silly as an "all Jews vs. all gentiles" anything. That's way too sweeping a statement. My beliefs in this regard fall somewhat in line with that of Kevin MacDonald. Human populations, racial or ethnic, have had a tendency to compete for resources when in contact with one another. But that does not mean that they are all out to get each other, if that's what you believe I think. That's like saying "all lions vs. all leopards".

One of the key players in the campaign to sell the public on fluoride was PR man Edward Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud and author of such illuminating works as Propaganda, Crystallizing Public Opinion, and The Engineering of Consent.
That sounds familiar, now that you mention it. I have all three books you mentioned (in cheap facsimile versions). You can still get them, I believe. Very interesting stuff. I don't know quite what to think of Bernays. A lot of people seem to think of him as some kind of devil, but I'm not so sure. I would like to read more about his personal life. I think there's a bio out there somewhere.

This is what I mean by "the proof is in the pudding": Fluorides are extremely toxic substances which do absolutely nothing for the teeth beyond causing dental fluorosis in children. Scientists, doctors, and dentists knew this well into the 1930's/40's. Up to that time, they were trying to find ways to remove fluoride from public water supplies, as it was correctly viewed as a nasty, undesirable pollutant. Then suddenly, in the 1930's/40's, great pains were taken to convince the public and to force the scientific/medical community to accept that not only was fluoride harmless, but that it was actually good for you. Problem is, there never was one iota of evidence to support this position, and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

OK.
Now, if someone who should and probably does know better hands me a glass of poisoned water and tells me to drink it, it's not unreasonable for me to suspect he's trying to hurt me. Perhaps the fact that the person handing me the glass is a Jew is relevant, perhaps not.
I had to laugh out loud about this one. No, if someone is handing me a glass of poisoned water, I certainly wouldn't give a damn whether he's a Jew!
I'm not going to try to shoehorn all the facts into a "Jews vs. gentiles" race war paradigm like you insist on doing (or insist that I am doing). Sure, that paradigm has its merits, but it does not explain absolutely everything that takes place in our society. Insisting that every single thing the Jews do is some carefully planned and executed maneuver in a race war with clearly delineated sides is simplistic in the extreme.
I agree with you wholeheartedly here. There are many on this site who think this way. I am certainly not one of them, and if I have come across that way, I did not intend to.

You need to stop shitty-finger pointing at others and start thinking outside of the WN box yourself.
HOH!!! Man, you mentioned elsewhere that I don't know shit about you or your beliefs... I derived my assumptions about you from your initial posts in this thread regarding the plausibility of this stuff and the fact that you are a pretty active member of this forum. I seem to have misunderstood where you were coming from, at least partially. But, man, you have me figured all wrong! I think we have both been guilty of some pretty significant miscommunication and misunderstanding. I spend half my time here disagreeing with this one-fits-all type thinking.

HOLOCAUST

Originally Posted by centerfire
The Holocaust story has a weak foundation as has been shown by Faurisson, Butz, and many others.
That was a poor way of stating my position, so I cannot really fault you for deducing that I am a total Holocaust denying nut. What I really mean is that I have read articles (no books) by these and many other authors who question the Holocaust story. I have read dozens of such articles. Some of them seem highly questionable, but some do seem plausible. Given that I have come across those which seem to have good evidence and point out flaws in the Holocaust supporters' side, I think there are some real weaknesses in the traditional story. I really do not accept or deny it at this point, kinda agnostic about it. I have gone through school and was taught the same stuff you were, and I sought out these odd claims by Faurisson, et al with a high degree of skepticism. I still am skeptical of many of their claims. I in no way believe it all. I have just come across enough to give me some pause. I am certainly willing to read and hear those Holocaust denier debunkers. My mind is not at all closed on this subject. I have seen a lot of "paranoid" behavior on the Jews' side and maybe they have good reason for this. But if someone thinks my skepticism of the Holocaust story is delusional, then I can understand that, given the way we are taught to regard the subject as unquestionable. To make myself clear, I am skeptical about it, but I do not deny it. There is a difference.

MEDIA

This is why the Jewish "Big Lie" technique works so well - because most people find it easier to believe the lie, no matter how outlandish, than to believe anyone would lie to them with such effrontery.

I see a pattern here... so why are health magazines, many of them edited and disproportionately staffed by Jews, full of ads for things like soy milk, etc? Sure, the Jews can always say they ran the ads because they didn't know better - Jews are never guilty of anything, are they?).
Do you not see how someone would think you are a vicious anti-semite for stating such things? Maybe you're saying this in irony. If you are I didn't catch it.
The first paragraph refers to my stating that I've seen enough evidence that Jews have been involved in conspiracy, and you also stated that conspiracy is extraordinary. OK, what I meant when I said that conspiracy was not all that exraordinary was within an historical context. Pretty much all the revolutions in history were the result of some conspiracy or other. Thule & the Nazis and the founding of the U.S. are examples of non-Jewish conspiracies. There are corporate and governmental conspiracies and many others. It gets kinda muddy. My point being that Jewish conspiracy is not surprising in itself, because conspiracies happen, well, relatively often. People tend to think "nutcase" when they hear "Jewish conspiracy", though, because there are a lot of nutcases who espouse such things as well as other "conspiracy theories". I really am not one to go along with such things much, regardless of your impression of me.

Originally Posted by centerfire
Jewish involvement in media is enormous,...
and their active participation in promoting race-mixing well demonstrated in pornography, movies, tv, commercial ads, etc.
OK, that does sound pretty paranoid, doesn't it!!! :D I see it. Yeah, I've stated stuff like this elsewhere. Jews are highly overrepresented in electronic and print media (as well as other professions such as law, medicine, academia... to be fair), and I have come across a few examples of Jews (and gentiles) who are in the media who have admitted as such. Seems there was an article or book by a Jew that entitled something like Jews run Hollywood, So What?. I realise that most people who are in media are not Jews. Jews, however, by dint of their talents and a tendency to network with one another have come into a significant number of positions of influence within media. They are "movers" (to use a bit of Wall Street lingo) within that biz. By no means the only ones, just quite significant.
The race-mixing bit comes from their historical tendency to ragard filling lands in which they live with lots of ethnic and racial groups (except Israel). Yes, Israel has some diversity, but the goal is to keep it Jewish (it's their land, understandable). Jewish orgs. and politicians pushed very hard to overturn the 1924 (pro-European)U.S. immigration laws and enact the 1965 laws that resulted in the enormous influx of non-whites. It is this confluence of media representation and "multicultural" hustling that has me and others suspicious. Jews are certainly not the only ones involved in this, but they are conspicuous and very influential, not monolithic.


You only notice Jews in the media more because you're a vicious, delusional anti-Semite.... I think you're just jealous of Jews and their accomplishments, and so you try to make out that there is something sinister about their accomplishments when such is not really the case.
:rolleyes: Well, this "anti-Semite" epithet is the same as the "racist" epithet. There is a range within wich people fall under these headings. If you follow my posts over time, you will see that I fall way over to the mild end of the spectrum on VNN. You seem to think I am some sort of bigot. Again, I don't know how I came across as that extreme. You haven't seen the numerous encounters on this forum in which I challenge people who really are vicious and delusional anti-Semites. I am a big supporter of keeping Anima on the forum (though he can be a little irritating at times - who isn't?), and I would defend keeping Guy (the Jew that frightens some here) on board, free range.

As far as my feeling jealous of Jews - no way. They are a highly accomplished and intelligent people. Nothing wrong with that. I happen to be part of a group of people who have created great civilizations from India (if you want to put in a large scope) to Greece, Rome, and the West. So I have no reason to be jealous of them. I certainly do resent many of their group movements (Marxism, Frankfort School, and others) which have had what I consider to be very negative effects on the West.

Dude, you're really paranoid. You need to get your head checked.
If you read my explanations above, I think I have explained enough to refute this.
Funny, whenever I plunk myself down on the couch and pop a good skin flick into the VCR, I mostly see whites. The models in Playboy and Penthouse and Hustler are overwhelmingly white. And the publisher of Hustler, in case you didn't know, is Larry Flynt. Larry Flynt isn't a Jew. Interracial porn is still a niche market, and to the extent that Jews are involved in making porn, they are only giving the public what it wants. And it's not like gentiles are forced to buy this stuff - they buy it because it's what they're after.
Duly noted.


You only have a problem with seeing blacks and other minorities on TV because you're an intolerant racist bigot.
Goddamn, Amalekite, you're starting to sound like a fucking harridan here. Get off your high horse. I have a bit of a "racist" bone, but I am relatively tepid compared to a great many, dare I say the vast majority, on VNN.

As far as ads, it's only normal that companies want to sell goods and services to minorities who are moving up the social and economic ladder and have more money to spend. In addition to your irrational hatred of blacks and Jews, do you have something against the free market too?
That is certainly reasonable.


Yes, but not all of them. Perhaps not even most of them. What are you driving at? That Jews promote race-mixing among others while refusing to do it themselves? That's ludicrous. Lenny Kravitz is mixed and he's a Jew. You're just being paranoid.
My post was pointing out that there are ad campaigns put out by large and small Jewish organizations that explicitly implore young Jews to date and marry Jews. Nothing wrong with that. Jews are also big promoters of "multiculturalism", often the same Jews who want to "keep it in the family". I realise that there is a large number of Jews who are exogamous. Many involved in race-mixing, personally (Kravitz' father). My point is that they seem to be the only group who can get away with such outright ethnocentrism regarding dating and reproduction without being accused of bigotry. Any other group seems to automatically receive the "racist" epithet.
I really don't believe there is any sort of large scale conscious plan on the part of Jews to promote race-mixing. The race-mixing charge is more a result of the effect of their large scale support of multicultural movements. The open ethnocentrism (by no means all of them, just a conspicuous number) looks like a contradiction, esp. when they are so apt to defend it.


Do you regularly read Jewish newspapers or magazines? Watch Israeli television? Frequent Jewish websites? Just wondering how much weight I should accord your opinion. If you know as much about this as you do about fluoridation, I'm not gonna give your opinion much consideration.

Not that I'm saying you necessarily would find campaigns promoting red meat in the Jewish media. I'm just pointing out your proclivity for speaking out on matters which you know nothing about.
I have a fair amount of personal experience with Jews. Where I live there is a pretty large number of them. One of the oldest American Jewish settlements here. I worked for a year at a Jewish deli when I was 21-22 which was frequented by people from all 3 temples, so I know how they do vary considerably and are not monolithic. I've known them from going to Catholic school (several Jews attended, not unusual since it's open to anyone, is quite a good education for a great price). I knew a few in college and a couple at work. My parents have many Jewish friends and love them. I come from a very philo-Semitic family. I do not hate Jews. I am no expert but am pretty familiar with them.



You're allowed to be skeptical, just as most people would think that you're a paranoid nutcase for believing Jews control the media, promote race-mixing for others but not themselves, and have been lying about the Holocaust.
I am a skeptic, too much for my own good sometimes. If my skepticism seems contradictory among the topics which you and ngrh8r have brought up, I can understand your confusion. In a nutshell, I tend to be skeptical about a lot of things, esp. that which sounds outlandish to me. The Holocaust skepticism comes from the fact that I've seen some things which seem plausible enough to warrant some questioning of at least some of the story.

You did more than question it. You asserted it was false. The burden of proof now rests on you.
As I stated above, the "weak foundation" was not quite what I really believe. So, yes, I do have some reservations about it. No, I do not say that anyone who believes in it is absolutely false. Both sides have their own proof. I tend to lean a little on the side of some of the "deniers". I may come across evidence that will radically change my mind, though.



You're concerned with accuracy? Then don't use the word paranoid....
OK, here you're going on a tangent about my use of the word "paranoid". You do not need to teach me the technical definition of the word. I have a B.S. ( :rolleyes: ) in Psychology and spent a fair amount of time studying Abnormal Psych. Ngrh8r and I were using the term in its colloquial sense, not in the clinical sense. I was being cheeky when I agreed with his self conscious "paranoia". I know how he used it. No need to take me literally, there.