Daily Archives: November 10, 2012

Disturbing Video About Pedophiles in California


Narrated for the BBC by Louis Theroux, one of my favorite broadcast interviewers. One thing I love about Louis is how he tries to relate amicably to anyone and everyone he interviews, no matter who they are or what they have done. I don’t know how he does it, but he does it very well. This is one thing that journalists need to learn how to do. If you don’t find some space to connect with the person you are interviewing, they simply will not cooperate.

In addition, anthropologists and linguists have to do the same thing.

When I was studying how to do anthropological fieldwork, I read a book called Globetrotting in Sandals, Culture Research Field Materials Guide. One thing they emphasized was how the anthropologist had to connect completely with those he was studying. You did this by simply totally and utterly accepting their way of living, no matter how awful, stupid or repulsive you might find it. Otherwise you aren’t going to be able to work with them well.

In this show, Louis goes to Coalinga State Hospital in California where the state has chosen to frankly warehouse sex offenders even after they have done their time in prison. The way this trick is done is to find them “mentally ill and in need of treatment.” Then they are socked away preventively as a danger to society in a mental hospital for the rest of their lives.

The problem is that this feint is not logical. The vast majority of sex offenders are not mentally ill in any real way. They get around this by diagnosing them with disorders like Pedophilia and “Coercive Paraphilia” (this is supposedly the mental illness that rapists suffer from). The latter is not even a diagnosis that actually has been proven to exist by psychological science. This confirms what anyone knows – that rapists aren’t nuts – they are simply criminals.

Pedophilia exists, but the vast majority of child molesters are not pedophiles. A true pedophile is primarily and only attracted to prepubescent children as their source of sexual attraction. They have been this way from an early age. They have little or no attraction to mature individuals. In general, they are incurable, and their attraction to kids will never go away.

The vast majority of those who molest children are not pedophiles. They are no more attracted to kids than they are to mature males or females, goats or inanimate objects. They have no particular desire or interest in having sex with children, and it’s not apart of their sexual fantasies. Instead, they are simply criminals. They take advantage of children sexually for a variety of reasons, possibly because they are an easy target.

DSM-5 has tried to open up a huge can of worms by creating a new diagnosis called Hebephilia which supposedly means someone who is preferentially or otherwise attracted to early adolescents. Since all normal males have some degree of attraction to girls that age (though lesser than the maximal response for females 16+) the very diagnostic category itself is dubious. Indeed, psychological science questions whether Hebephilia actually exists as a disorder.

A recent study have found that out of 28 rapists sentenced as mentally ill sex offenders (Paraphilia NOS was the grab bag dx in these cases) under these laws, 26 of them were simply criminals and only 2 had a Paraphilia NOS. So these laws are being seriously abused in an unconstitutional way.

I really doubt if most of the men in this prison are true pedophiles, but I can’t be sure.

Some other things bothered me about the show. The emphasis in therapy seemed to be on curing the men of their interest in children. However, if they are true pedophiles, their interest in children is incurable and will never wane. So why try to do the impossible? They are also subjected to regular penisthograph tests to gauge their attraction to children, once again under the assumption that such attraction is amenable to change in the first place.

In another part of the video, a man was confronted over refusing to take a polygraph. He said he didn’t want to take it because they were going to ask him about all the kids he molested. He didn’t want to talk about that because he had only been sentenced for a few molestations. Apparently there were many others that he had never been arrested for.

He was afraid that if he confessed to the other cases, new charges would be filed against him and he would have to go back to prison. It seemed a legitimate worry to me.

70% of the men in the hospital were not taking part in the therapy program, so they will never get out as long as they are recalcitrant like this. Even those in the therapy program rarely get out.

I have serious issues with not releasing and re-imprisoning folks after they have done their time on the basis of “dangerousness.” Down that road likes a slippery slope indeed.


Filed under Anthropology, California, Corrections, Crime, Cultural, Law, Law enforcement, Pedophilia, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Regional, Sex, USA, West

The Breast of the Web

Repost from the old site.

Breasts, tits, titties, boobs, boobies, knockers.

In Venezuela, they are called hangers.

I was talking to a woman from Venezuela once, and she kept asking me if I wanted to see her (Spanish word for hangers). Well, I looked up the word in my Spanish dictionary, and all I got was “hangers”. You know, the things you hang clothes on? It took me another 5-10 minutes or so of my half-assed Spanish to figure out that “hangers” means tits in Venezuelan Spanish slang. Haha.

Anyway, there is more to boobs than sex appeal. These organs are used to feed babies, and many women and girls have enormous complexes about them. How to prevent sag? What causes sag? At what age to breasts begin to sag and why? To wear a bra or not to wear a bra? Plastic surgery? Flat-chested women? Effects of pregnancy and breast-feeding on breasts? And on and on.

I remember once, when I was 20, I was having sex with an 18 year old woman.

“Nice tits,” I remarked while nuzzling one of them.

She cried out plaintively, “They’re too small!”. She obviously had a complex.

“But they’ve got a really nice shape,” I said honestly. And they did. Not too large, true, but perfect, round and firm.

Well, look no further than 007Breasts, everything you always wanted to know about boobs and then some. Written by feminists who oppose the commodification of breasts as only a sex symbol and nothing more, this site is the end-all and be-all of Tit Sites.

It’s especially useful for females who worry and wonder about their boobs. I didn’t find it particularly erotic, but then I’m 55, and maybe I’m hooked on porn boobs, which don’t look a heck of a lot like average boobs at all. I especially liked the galleries showing the many shapes and varieties of the human female breast at various ages and in various females.

They come in all shapes and sizes. Small and round, small and saggy, medium and saggy, medium and firm, skinny and long, fat and wide, fat and long, big and saggy, big and full, tubular, small little bumps, you name it.


Filed under Biology, Reposts From The Old Site, Women

What Is Zionism?

Repost from the old site.

I was visiting my Mother the other day (she lives 33 miles away) and she had just read some articles on my blog. She made some negative remarks about “Zionists”, at which point I informed her that she was a Zionist. She looked horrified, which is the way any decent person should look when accused of such a thing. I then patiently explained to her than anyone who supported a Jewish state in Palestine was a Zionist.

She looked disappointed. On further questioning, it turned out that she pretty much thought that the founding of Israel was a great big mistake and a crime – like the founding of the USA via the conquest of the American Indians. However, she said you can’t undo history, and people have to try to make do with reality as it is.

I then told her that her views were probably “non-Zionist” – that being someone who disapproved of the Zionist project, but that that we should live with the reality of it, as Israel is there, and it’s not going away. My brother, on questioning, also did not really know what Zionism is, and also qualified as a non-Zionist who thought we needed to deal with reality as it exists, not as it ought to be.

The views that they espouse – “That the creation of Israel was a mistake, but they are there, they’re not leaving, and we have to deal with that” – ought to rationally be considered by progressives as neither Zionism nor anti-Zionism, but non-Zionism.

In the course of my conversations with these two brilliant, highly-educated immediate family members, I realized that even the best and the brightest in the US did not really know what Zionism was.

So, with that in mind, I felt it was time for a post describing exactly what Zionism was and is, its history and its various forms. Obviously, this brief post will barely begin to nudge the edges of this subject, but still it ought to serve as a nice primer.

What is Zionism anyway? I see Zionism every day on the net. In a nutshell, most Zionists, but not all, argue that both the formation of the state of Israel and the settler-colonial project that created it were right, just and proper.

A principal Zionist argument (though not shared by all Zionists) is this:

  1. Jewish land, not Arab land – All of Israel is Jewish land. The Arabs have no right to any of this land.

Several arguments are used to defend this view:

  1. Historical– Jews had a continuing presence in the land for 3,000 years, so therefore it is their land. The Arab presence is illegitimate. When the Zionist project began, there were only a few Arabs in Palestine anyway, and they were the ancestors of Arabs who invaded Jewish land in 640 and have been occupying Jewish land ever since.Arabs never controlled Palestine anyway, and all Palestinians are Arab invading colonists who have no right to be there and need to go back to Arabia where they came from. Jews were completely in their right to reclaim their homeland after so many years in exile.This is one of the most vicious and wicked Zionist arguments, and it is extremely popular amongst the hardest of the hardline, blood-and-soil, organic nationalist types.One can argue that this is the philosophy that it is at the core of the mindset of the leaders of the Zionist movement from 1897 to the present. It is this argument, that, like most primordialist ethnic nationalist projects that rose out of Central and Eastern Europe in the 1800’s, is most similar to Nazism.On the other hand, all modern ethnic nationalisms (in particular Arab nationalism, Indian Hindu nationalism, Lebanese Phalangist nationalism and all of the ethnic nationalist projects that swept Central and Eastern Europe in the 1920’s and 1930’s) came from the same 19th Century core as Nazism, so it is somewhat unfair to single out Zionism in that regard.
  2. Religious – God gave the land to the Jews. It is Jewish land and will always be so. God watches over the Jews and Israel, and no one can mess with them. Anyone who messes with the Jews or Israel gets punished by God. This is obviously a favorite of conservative Zionists, though some secular liberal Zionists use it too, usually cynically in an effort to get Gentile Christians to go along with the project.
  3. Holocaust – Jews needed a safe haven in Israel due to the Holocaust, and it was ok to throw out the Arabs to get this haven. A favorite of liberal Zionists, many of whom are ignorant of the specifics of the project. When questioned, many of this type will insist that no Arabs were thrown out to make the Jewish state. Apparently the land was just empty or something.
  4. Freedom From Persecution – Related to the above. Jews have been persecuted everywhere they have been, so it is reasonable for them to have their own state where they can be safe. A favorite of more liberal Zionists. One of their favorite lines is that Zionism is “affirmative action for Jews”. Micheal Lerner of Tikkun is fond of that phrase.
  5. UN and League of Nations – These two organizations agreed to give away Arab land to Jews for a homeland at different times. Therefore, Israel is legitimate. Once again, a favorite of more liberal Zionists and folks who are fond of the UN and international law.
  6. Self-determination and National Liberation – All other ethnic groups have a right to self-determination on their homeland, and many have developed national liberation movements to obtain their nation-state. Zionism is the Jewish equivalent. This argument is a favorite of Zionist liberals and Leftists.
  7. British Donation – Britain gave the land – British land – to the Jews. Therefore, it is the Jews’ land. This one is also a favorite of more liberal Zionists, because it avoids the question of whether or not Israel is Jewish land.

A number of the National-Religious types (see arguments A and B above – they are typically combined into a highly toxic form called National-Religious Zionism) claim that the land of Israel extends from the Nile to the Euphrates. It encompasses most of Lebanon and Syria, all of Jordan, part of Iraq, all of the Sinai, part of Arabia and all of Kuwait.

There are actually a fair number of Zionists who feel that all (or some) of this should be reconquered.

When an aide to President Truman visited the Holy Land around 1947 to try to understand the Zionist-Arab conflict, he said that all of the Jews he met there held the Nile to Euphrates view. He also noted that they did not like to talk about it too much, and they seemed to want to keep it a sort of secret, as if they were afraid of the reaction of outsiders if they learned of the Zionist plans.

Despite super-liar and modern-day Crusader Daniel Pipes’ articulate lie, The Nile to Euphrates Calumny, Nile to Euphrates Zionists are not mythological, and I have run across them fairly regularly on the Net, especially lately.

Does Mr. Pipes feel that I have hallucinated all of these Greater Israel types? Were they all just Arab agents out to make the Zionists look bad? Inquiring minds want to know. Mr. Pipes or his supporters are encouraged to email me here to explain how it is that I keep running into these nonexistent phantasms.

A lesser view holds that “Eretz Israel” at least covers all of Green Line Israel, all of the West Bank, the Golan Heights and the Gaza Strip. Some also include the Sinai Peninsula (or at least a small part of it up to the Wadi Arish) and southern Lebanon to the Litani River.

A map demonstrating Zionist armed settler-colonialism in action. Note the progressive loss of Arab land to Zionist colonization. This was deliberate and planned from the very start. It all stems from the Zionist principle that all of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights is Jewish land and that the local Arabs are “squatting” on Jewish land and live there only at the whim of the Zionist owners.

Presently, the project is to make the remaining Arab enclaves so miserable that the Arabs will leave and then the Zionists can colonize their land.

This is a Minimal Greater Israel view and is very common. It was the “minimal view” adopted by the “progressives” of Left Socialist Zionism under David Ben-Gurion, the founder of Israel. It could logically be called Minimal Greater Israel.

Ben-Gurion’s ideological opponents, Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Zionists, held similar views, except that they typically claimed all of Jordan for the Jewish state also.

Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of the Revisionist Zionist movement. He authored The Iron Wall in 1923, in which he openly advocated a Zionist settler-colonial movement, to be implemented by armed force backed by an imperial power. The reason armed force was needed, he said, was because of inevitable Arab resistance. Before that, Zionism had been largely focused on buying out the Arabs’ land, then throwing them off the land and settling it with Zionists.


A poster for the Irgun Zionist armed guerrilla group. This was one of the three major armed Zionist guerrilla factions in Palestine. It focused on attacks against both the British and the local Arabs. Note that Irgun claimed that not only all of Palestine, but also all of Jordan, was Jewish land, to be cleansed of Arab “squatters”, and to be conquered by force (note the rifle).

Irgun dissolved after the founding of Israel, and since then Mainstream Revisionist Zionism has gone pretty quiet about claims to Jordan. Look carefully at the map to see that Irgun also claimed the Golan Heights for the Zionists.

I have recently met Zionist Jews on the Net who are still upset at the British and the League of Nations for “promising” all of Jordan to the Zionists in the early 1920’s, and then “going back on their word”. Actually neither party did any such thing, and such thinking is based on a misreading of the League of Nations Mandate.

In a recent interview, a leader of the Zionist Organization of America, a very powerful, very militant Jewish Zionist group in the US, noted with a twinkle in his eye that all of Jordan was actually part of Israel and implied that Israel should conquer it at some future time. The attitudes of ZOA fanatics are rampant amongst the neoconservatives who were associated with the Bush Administration.

The notion of Greater Israel, not some phony notions about buffer zones or security zones, is and was the real reason for the occupation and colonies in the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and the Sinai, and for the occupation of Southern Lebanon.

As you can imagine, this political project, Zionism, terrifies the Arabs and sends them into conniptions. My opinion is that Zionism is poisonous and that no people should have to put up with such a dangerous project, least of all the backwards Arabs.

There is a lot of nonsense about Greater Israel on the Internet, with devious Zionist sophists like Pipes holding that it is just a deranged, paranoid Arab fantasy. On the other hand, many anti-Zionists, especially Islamists, insist that all Zionists hold the radical Nile-to-Euphrates view.

As you can see above, that is not the case. The truth is that some Zionists do hold the Nile-to-Euphrates view, but the Israeli government does not, and most major Israeli political parties and political figures do not either.

The Minimal Greater Israel project described above is much more common and relevant. Anti-Zionists should focus on the minimal project for now and forget about the Nile To Euphrates project until we get some evidence that it amounts to more than the ravings of some Zionist radicals.

Anti-Zionism is a radical position, like Zionism. In general, not only do anti-Zionists strongly oppose the whole Zionist project, but they go usually so far as to say that, ideally, Israel has no right to exist, and should be dismantled in one way or another. The vast majority of Arabs are anti-Zionists in one way or another. If they tolerate Israel’s existence at all, it is only grudgingly.

Anti-Zionists differ on what should be done with the Zionist Jews who have settled in Israel.

Some say that all of those who themselves or whose relatives came to Palestine after 1917, when the Balfour Declaration was signed, have to go back where they came from.

This was the line espoused in the original PLO Charter of 1964 and continues to be espoused by some very radical Arab nationalist types, especially some Arab Communists.

Examples of organizations holding such views are NACAZAI (North American Congress Against Zionism and Racism), headed by Ziad Shaker AlJishi, a Palestinian refugee living in the US, and the the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) militants who run the Free Arab Voice website.

The FAV site is edited by Ibrahim Alloush and Mohammad Abu Nasr. Everyone associated with the FAV website is apparently a member of the political wing of the PFLP.

One of the editors takes the not-so-obvious nom de guerre of Nabila Harb. This pseudonym derives from Nabil Harb, an obscure PFLP cadre from the 1970’s who was part of a small PFLP cell that hijacked a Lufthansa airliner in Spain in an attempt to win the release of German urban guerrillas from the Baader-Meinhoff Gang.

The attempt failed when the plane was stormed by German Special Forces in Mogadishu, killing 3 of the 4 PFLP terrorists, but not before the cell had executed the captain of the plane in Yemen an act of gross criminality and stupidity.

The imprisoned members of the German ultra-Leftist group committed suicide right afterwards, effectively ending the existence of Baader-Meinhoff. But from its ashes would rise its successor, the much larger and more successful Red Army Faction.

However, unlike the PFLP, which is fairly heterodox and not necessarily extremely Arab nationalist anymore, the FAV is a hardline, pro-Saddam Arab nationalist site that is an excellent example of Arab Nationalist “Arab fascism” and “Arab Nazism”, as is NACAZAI. Free Arab Voice would be better characterized as a Palestinian Baathist site.

The 40 year old Dr. Alloush is a son of Palestinian refugees in Jordan. He is a Professor of Statistics and Economics at a university in Amman, Jordan. The mysterious Abu Nasr (a nom de guerre) is the author of the Iraqi Resistance Reports that can be found on the Internet.

The 59-year-old Nasr is a Palestinian who may have left Palestine after the 1967 war, may live somewhere in the West, and may have a PhD. He is fluent in Russian as well as English, which suggests he may have received education in the former Soviet Union. The PFLP was sending its higher-ranking cadres to the Soviet Union for education some years ago.

Alloush also runs an Arab nationalist list on the Net and a Yahoo group by the same name. Alloush has received some notoriety for appearing at a conference of Holocaust Deniers in Lebanon and endorsing their views. In fact, the FAV website foments Holocaust Denial itself. Both Nasr and Alloush are virulently anti-Semitic Arab Communists and excellent examples of “Arab fascism” and “Arab Nazism”, to their eternal discredit.

NACAZAI also holds Holocaust Denial views, in addition supporting the genocidal Khmer Rogue, being strongly pro-North Korea, pro-Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime and in favor of the genocidal ultra-racist Arab-Nazis in Sudan. FAV takes similar positions, except I don’t know how they feel about the Khmer Rogue.

Even worse, a virulently anti-Semitic, Nazi-like position statement by NACAZAI shows that the Zionists and neocons who rant about the anti-Semitic Left are not entirely incorrect. Such beasts do exist.

Other members of NACAZAI include John Paul Cupp, a Communist supporter of North Korea who lives in Oregon, and Kevin Walsh, a Communist white supremacist who was recently arrested in Arizona for threatening to kill President Bush and has been diagnosed as mentally ill under suspicious circumstances (I suspect he may be bipolar). Both Cupp and Walsh are virulent, Nazi-like anti-Semites.

The entire Left should distance itself from Cupp, Walsh, AlJishi, Nasr and Alloush, along with Arab Nazis and Arab fascists in general (which includes a large segment of the Arab nationalist movement) until they pull their heads out and quit preaching racism in the name of anti-racism.

I would like to point out that the ultra-radical views of Nasr and Alloush and some of their colleagues are not held by the PFLP leadership, which envisions a single state in Palestine for both Jews and Arabs (see the recent interview with top PFLP leader Leila Khaled, for example).

The view that all Jews coming after 1917 need to take off was recently reiterated by the late Sheik Yassin, spiritual leader of Hamas, who was assassinated by an IDF missile.

Another related view is held by others, including Ayatollah Khameini, spiritual leader of Iran, who has stated that ideally all of those Jews who themselves or whose relatives came to Palestine after the 1948 founding of the Israeli state have to go back where they came from. It is possible that Hezbollah may hold similar views, due to the close relationship of its leadership with that of the Iranian government.

Other Arab radicals say that Mizrachi Jews (Jews who lived in the Arab World) can stay in the region, but that Ashkenazi Jews, who trace their recent ancestry back to Europe, have to go home.

Many anti-Zionists (especially progressives and Leftists) believe that all of the Jews can stay in Israel, but that they must share the state and land with the Arabs and dismantle the Jewish state.

This view has been espoused by the leadership of the DFLP and PFLP leftwing Palestinian armed fronts, some members of the PLO, the Hamas Charter, an Islamic Jihad leader in an interview 13 years ago, and Libya’s Moammar Qaddafi, who proposed a state called Izratine.

This view has been quite popular with Palestinian Christians and secularists like Edward Said, Mazin Qumsiyeh and Ghada Karmi.

In general, the vast majority of anti-Zionists do not advocate killing all the Jews in Israel, though I have heard some Arab hotheads say that on the Internet. No Arab or Muslim armed group (including Al Qaeda) takes that position, to my knowledge.

Yet this is a staple of Zionist propaganda – that all anti-Zionists and armed anti-Israel groups are all intent on “carrying out a second Holocaust”. If it were true, it would be an excellent reason to support Israel, but there is little evidence for this.

Furthermore, there is a question of how killing 5 million Jewish residents of an industrialized society in a rapid manner in our day and age, given recent human historical memory, is even feasible.

That said, I do not think that Al Qaeda or the groups allied with them are good for the Jews, to say the least. I can’t prove they want to kill all of the ones in Palestine, much less all the ones on Earth, but I do not think these radicals have the best interests of the Jewish people at heart, to put it mildly.

The official Al Qaeda line is that after the liberation of Palestine by Islam, all of the Jews will have to leave. According to Al Qaeda, once the Caliphate is established on Muslim lands, all non-Muslims in these lands will have to either convert to Islam if they wish to remain in Caliphate lands, or leave if they do not convert. Those who will not convert or leave will have to be killed.

For the record, some of those associated with the British Al Qaeda fronts Al-Muhajiroun, The Savior Sect and Al Ghurabaa such as Omar Bakri Mohammad and Abu Hamza have made statements that all Jews on Earth must be killed.

Variations on Qaddafi’s one-state solution, described above, are called the one-state project. That is the position of this blog. There are many variations on this view. Some hold that ideally the region should be an Islamic state and that the Jews should have to live under Islamic Law. This position is held by Islamists and is strongly opposed by this blog.

It is interesting that Qaddafi’s Izratine was considered a slap in the face to Hamas, who apparently are not wild about living in a state with 5 million Jews.

Some high-ranking Hamas members have said as much, admitting that they have had enough misery from the Jews in the region and want a “divorce” from the Jews, hence the popularity of 2 states as an interim solution by some high-ranking pragmatists in the Hamas leadership.

Others hold that the single state should be a “secular state”, which is a great idea except that most citizens of such a state would be anything but secular. Many Arabs (especially Arab nationalists) insist that the single state be an Arab state and that Jews should live as a minority in such a state. Obviously, that view is not popular with Jews at all.

Does the two-state solution look feasible to you anymore? Me either. Note how the Separation Wall actually snakes far into the West Bank to include as many Zionist colonies as possible. Note also the Zionist theft of much of the West Bank (in dark green). The logical progression of history is rendering the 2-state solution a complete non-starter.

Others would grant Jews and Arabs some sort of local rule akin to Switzerland’s cantons. One proposal wants to make the single state a homeland for the Jews and Palestinians, two terribly persecuted peoples. This proposal would retain aliya rights for Jews while allowing all Palestinians to have their own sort of aliya.

It’s clear there are many versions of this single state project. The primary resistance to this project at the moment comes not from Arabs or Muslims but from the very real fears of the Jews in Israel. These reality-based fears will have to be addressed in any such single state solution.

As you can see, there is not much left of the 2-state solution, since Zionist colonialism has devoured much of what was to be the Palestinian state. The remaining Palestinian enclaves are nothing more than disconnected bantustans, surrounded by armed Zionist colonies, bases and roads for colonists. It’s like living in a home but being locked in only one room so you could not access the other rooms in the house.

Getting back to Greater Israel, the Internet is full of statements by Zionist fanatics fantasizing about Greater Israel. They are not made-up lies but instead are well-documented statements. Here is one by David Ben-Gurion (formerly David Green):

David Ben Gurion, Report to the World Council of Poale Zion (the forerunner of the Labor Party), Tel Aviv, 1938. Cited by Israel Shahak, Journal of Palestine Studies, Spring 1981.

“We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria, and Sinai.”

Keep in mind that this frighteningly fanatical statement was uttered by the founder of the state of Israel, a socialist, a liberal and a moderate. Note that his rightwing opponents were even more extreme. Note also that his rightwing Revisionist opponents were the forerunners of the modern-day Likud and Kadima Parties, not to mention the many smaller rightwing parties.


Filed under Anti-Zionism, Arab Nationalism, Arab Racism, Arabs, Colonialism, Conservatism, Ethnic Nationalism, Europeans, History, Iran, Islam, Israel, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Jews, Judaism, Left, Middle East, Middle Eastern, Nationalism, Neoconservatism, Palestine, Palestinians, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Settler-Colonialism, Terrorism, War, Zionism

The Most Sickening Photos on the Web

Repost from the old site.

There is some truly awful stuff out there on the web: Two Girls One Cup, Two Girls Fingerpainting, Two Girls One Finger, Four Girls Fingerpaint, Eight Girls No Cup, BME Pain Olympics, Kids in a Sandbox and Chechclear.

But the truth is there is much, much, much worse stuff out there than this. There are pics so horrible that people have had to go to emergency rooms afterwards with panic reactions. Reactions have mirrored cardiac events, rashes and gastrointestinal disorders. Psychological reasons have been many and varied. After seeing these pics, some have had insomnia, agoraphobic, anxiety and vomiting reactions.

So, I am warning you, if you do not think you can handle these pics, do not even bother to look at them! You have been warned!

This picture of a rabbit stealing a cookie is probably the most disturbing of them all. Here are some reactions: “When I first saw this pic the other day, I have to admit it messed up my sleep for a day, but I’m fine now…” “I ain’t looking at this pic till tomorrow cuz its night right now, and I don’t wanna f-g have nightmares lol.” “Yeah, I strongly suggest nobody looks at this pic!!!” “I almost puked when I saw that…and I was eatin’ sum chicken.”

Even worse, the furious housewife who baked the cookies killed the rabbit in cold blood with a meat cleaver soon after he committed this crime.

Here are some reactions: “This is one of my most f-d up things I have ever seen.” “Holy f-g s-t that is raw. I swear I just finished eating a tuna fish sandwich before watching this. TAKE EVERYONE’S WORD – DO NOT LOOK AT THIS IF YOU ARE WEAK.” Many similar reactions were reported after seeing this saccharine, sickening and idiotic photo of a dog supposedly praying in front of a holiday cake.

Here are some reactions to this sick photo: “I almost fainted from looking at that picture. Double f-g shock value. Not only was it painfully sad but gross!” “Jesus Christ that was terrible, and if you laugh at this pic, that’s just f-d up…”

This is a viral pic circulating around the Web on shock sites. Here are some reactions: “Wow, that was crazy. I’ve seen some internet pics, but that one was just too up close for me. I don’t even want to go outside anymore.” “Dude, I just saw that. Is that even real? Looked hella gruesome.”

What makes this pic all the more horrible is that the dog woke up soon after this pic was taken and ate the chick alive in one gulp. Truly awful stuff.


Filed under Animals, Cats, Dogs, Domestic, Humor

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

Repost from the old site.

This is one of the more hot-button issues surrounding the Israel/Palestinian conflict. The very issue has aroused horrible controversy on the heavily Jewish and Zionist-dominated Wikipedia, as you can see by the preposterous, typical allegations at the top of the page.

This is what Jewish activists do to any issue that criticizes the Jews or Israel – unleash a torrent of lawyerese garbage, threats, attacks, character assassination, logical fallacy, red herrings, ad hominem, diversion, phony comparisons, you name it.

The Zionist Jews on Wikipedia are up in arms over the Israeli Apartheid article and have been attacking it for over a year with everything they have. It’s amazing it is still up there.

But meanwhile, let’s examine the issue itself. Is Israel an apartheid state? Shall I count the ways? Thanks to the anti-Harry’s Place blog, Jihad and the City, for these facts.

1. Israel: A separation wall tears communities apart and steals land. Furthermore, inside the Green Line, abhorrent “Judaization” policies are pursued in Arab districts, which involve surrounding Arab areas with Jewish settlements.

South Africa: Bantustans were set up for the Black natives, comprising about 10% of the land, while the Whites stole almost all the rest (similar to Israel, where 93% of the land – mostly stolen Arab land – is reserved for Jews only) .

2. Israel: In West Jerusalem, Jews wait for government services in short waits in air-conditioned rooms. Arabs in the same area (East Jerusalem) must line up overnight in hopes of getting seen that day. When the office opens, they must wait outside for hours in the heat before they get the main gate, where they are endlessly grilled for what should be routine document examination. Many times, they go home with nothing.

South Africa: In Johannesburg, Whites, Coloreds and Blacks were sent to separate entrances of government offices and were given services or not depending on their skin color – Whites had the shortest wait, then Coloreds and last Blacks.

3. Israel: In East Jerusalem, Palestinians have strict regulations regarding who they can marry, where they can live, where they can go to school and where, or if, they can go to a hospital. Jews face no such restrictions.

South Africa: There were identical restrictions based on who one could marry, where one could live, attend school or go to a hospital. It was all based on race.

4. Israel: Palestinians in East Jerusalem, many of whom were born there, are nevertheless classed as immigrants with “permanent resident” status and are denied citizenship in Israel.

South Africa: Similarly, most of the Black population were denied citizenship in South Africa and were labeled as immigrants in the cities and states they resided in. Most were said to be citizens of the Bantustans, but many of them had never been to these Bantustans,

5. Israel: Israel is now the only Western country that denies building permits based solely on race.

South Africa: Construction permits were issued or denied with race being the only criterion.

6. Israel: Urban planning (Judaization) has had the goal of trying to eliminate Arabs from Israeli cities or relegate them to slums. This is especially true in East Jerusalem, where the gross inequality, a product of exquisite state design, grows each year.

South Africa: Similar to Judaization, the “group areas” policy had the effect of trying to make Blacks invisible by moving them away from White districts.

7. Israel: As noted above, through the Jewish National Fund (Jewish Microsoft billionaire and all-around jerk Steve Ballmer is a major contributor to the JNF) and the Israeli Lands Agency, Israel has reserved 93% of Israeli lands for Jews only. Much of this land was stolen Arab land, and the Arab owners were never compensated for it.

South Africa: 87% of South African lands were reserved for Whites (compare to the 93% figure above for Israel). The Population Registration Act lumped South Africans into racial classes that determined who would be permitted to live on White-reserved lands.

8. Israel: Israel has separate school systems for Jews and Arabs, ostensibly due to language differences, but actually as a cover for state-mandated discrimination in schooling. As an example, Jewish schools receive far more funds than Arab schools.

South Africa: Separate but unequal school systems were an essential part of the system, designed to siphon Blacks off into menial labor in the mines, factories and fields. The school system has yet to recover from this dual system to this day, though Apartheid has been history for over a decade.

9. Israel: Israelis who marry Palestinians are not allowed to bring their spouses to live with them inside the Green Line.

South Africa: Until the Komani Ruling in the mid-1980’s overturned the pass laws, these laws were used to break up Black families by preventing spouses living in rural areas to unite with their spouses working in urban areas.

10: Israel: Part of the dominant paradigm underlying Zionism is that the Jews are a people chosen by God and that their Holy Books justifies their racism and exclusivity. Many Israelis see their victories in four wars against the Arabs as meaning God sided with the Jews against the Arabs.

South Africa: Similarly, the Dutch Reformed Church also used the backwards, tribal and barbaric (Jewish) Old Testament to claim superiority for the Afrikaners. Based on their victory over the Zulus at Blood River, they believed that God had sided with the Whites against the Blacks.

11. Israel: The victimized population has been demonized as terrorists to justify the Apartheid policies. Israel blames the victims for the oppression that Israel hammers them with. Israel absolves itself of all charges of Apartheid and immorality by blaming the victim.

South Africa: The South African regime did the exact same thing, calling the Blacks oppressed by Apartheid terrorists and blaming the victims for the misery that Apartheid saddled them with.

12. Israel: Israel represents itself as the last outpost of civilization, democracy and Western Values on the frontiers of (Arab, African, Middle Eastern, Islamic = non-Western) barbarism and dictatorship.

Nevertheless, bizarrely, instead of being compared with the West that Israel aligns herself with, Israel demands to be compared with the backwards non-Western societies she is surrounded with and with which she is defending the West against. Chutzpah!

South Africa: South Africa also represented herself as a last outpost of civilization, Western values and democracy amidst Black African barbarism, backwardness, dictatorship and just general non-Western values.

Similarly, South Africa also refused to be compared with the West she aligned with and demanded to be compared with the backwards African societies that surrounded her and against whom she was defending the West.

13. Israel: Israel is building a network of parallel roads in the West Bank – one much superior road system for Jews, one vastly inferior road system for Arabs.

South Africa: South Africa maintained a very similar system of dual roads for Whites and Blacks.

14. Israel: The Security Wall is actually also intended to grab quite a bit of land from the Palestinians. Israel’s colonization policy in the West Bank has been all about grabbing the best land and most all of the water for the Jews and relegating the dregs to the Arabs.

South Africa: Similarly, Apartheid was all about grabbing the best land for the Whites and pushing the Blacks into the least livable and serviceable parts of the country.

15. Israel: The Israeli state, both inside and outside the Green Line, is continuously seizing, destroying and bulldozing Palestinian homes, fields, orchards, businesses and lands in order to give them to Jews or use them as “security buffers” to protect Jewish colonists from the people the Jews stole the land from.

South Africa: Although this went on to a much lesser extent in South Africa, there were population relocation programs that involved the destruction of Black property.

David Hirsch, a fave Zionist Jewish academic from Britain, is one of the point men in International Zionism’s war against the Israeli Apartheid meme. He is a professor of sociology at Goldsmith’s College at the University of London. He played a leading role in the reversal of the British AUT Teachers Union decision to boycott Israeli academics.

Although he is an ardent Zionist, curiously, he is also a specialist in genocide. No, he doesn’t advocate genocide, he supposedly opposes it. That’s the curious part.

International Zionism has unleashed the usual torrent of bullshit, nonsense, lies, dissimulation, sophistry, lawyer-speak, politician-speak, Pravda-style propaganda, and the usual Jewish avalanche of logical fallacy all in an attempt to fight off the notion that Israel is an apartheid state.

A good overview of this very clever silliness, in which all 15 points above are brushed aside in favor the numerous differences between Israel and South Africa, can be seen in the Wikipedia piece, which the Wikipedia Jews have now “protected from editing”. That means that no one can do any more work on the article until all the phony Jewish complaints have been resolved, if that ever happens.


Filed under Africa, Arabs, Blacks, Christianity, Education, Government, Israel, Jewish Racism, Jews, Judaism, Law, Middle East, Palestinians, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, Sociology, South Africa, Terrorism, The Jewish Question, White Racism, Whites, Wikipedia, Zionism

Is Israel a Racist State?

Repost from the old site.

Let’s look at this question from a strictly deterministic point of view, absent the avalanche of Zionist bullshit such a question usually provokes. Does Israel, or does Israel not, discriminate, as part of official Israeli state policies and not informal societal policies, against non-Jews?

Yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes!

We can argue like Jewish lawyers about the nature and degree of the discrimination, we can compare the shitty little country of Israel to all the shitty countries of various sizes she delights in comparing herself too, but none of that changes the bottom line.

In Israel, discrimination is written into the very existence of the state. If you support Israel, this is the Jim Crow garbage that you are supporting, de facto.

Let’s suppose the US was run like Israel.

Actually, it was for much of its existence. Indians only became citizens in 1920, the year women finally got the vote. Indians were put in boarding schools until recently. Discrimination against Hispanics, to a Jim Crow degree, was rife in the West.

So was open discrimination against Jews in all of the US. And the war against Jim Crow led to open warfare, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the loss of the US South by the Democratic Party as the racists left and went Republican.

Nevertheless, in 2012, we can still make an interesting comparison. Let’s pretend for a moment that the US is Israel. Thanks to Charley Reese for the theme:
Let’s say that the US is a White Christian state, and that this fact is written right into its Constitution. In fact, the US is defined not as the state of its citizens, but as the state of all White Christians everywhere on Earth. It’s Whitey Homeland.

Any White Christian anywhere on Earth can come to Whitey Homeland, the US, and automatically become a citizen. White Christian criminals wanted anywhere on Earth for any crime can flee here and we will protect them. Why? Because they are White Christians.

The White Christian homeland of the US was formed some time ago, when 80% of the non-White Christians were thrown out of the country in a war and their land was seized. Now, 93% of the US is reserved for Whites only, although 20% of America is non-White Christian. This 93% was purchased by an organization called the White Christian National Fund.

Its donors are Whites throughout the world who support the White homeland. Once the WCNF bought the land, they forbade the sale of it to anyone who was not a White Christian.

The non-White Christians who were evicted decades ago linger in refugee camps in Canada and Mexico, where they destabilize those countries and clamor for right to return, which the US refuses to grant. Almost all White Americans are living on land stolen from the non-White Christians, and many are living in homes that were previously lived in by non-White Christians.

In big US cities, a similar development reigned. White Christians were routinely approved for any development they wanted, while non-White Christians were usually denied all building permits, including merely refurbishing or adding on to a home.

Many US neighborhoods were designated, officially or not, as White neighborhoods. By official decree of the state, non-White Christians were forbidden by renting or buying land in these neighborhoods.

Many non-White Christians have refused to live the lands they and their ancestors have lived on for many years. US military jets fly over these lands and spray poison the non-White Christian crops. Non-White Christian towns on White lands are denied all government services.

When they still won’t leave, the US Army shows up in the non-White Christian village and gives the residents 10 minutes to pack up and leave. Then the Army bulldozers begin to destroy every structure in the town.

The US government, at federal and state levels, issues Whiteification Plans, meant to “Whiten” non-White Christian areas. This involves surrounding non-White towns with White towns in order to “Whiten” the area.

Just for a moment, imagine the reaction of every Jewish organization in the US, not to mention the Israeli government, if the US pursued such a course. Recall that the US government on all levels would brutally discriminate against Jews, who, though White, would be non-Christians, and subject to the full brunt of US government racism.

Does anyone doubt that Jews were be screaming about this racism til the cows came home? But then, why do these same Jews support the same racist nonsense in Israel?


Filed under Amerindians, Anti-Zionism, Christianity, Democrats, Government, Hispanics, History, Israel, Jewish Racism, Jews, Left, Middle East, Modern, North America, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, Republicans, South, US, US Politics, USA, White Racism, Whites, Zionism

The Invisible Hand of Starvation

Repost from the old site.

There are not many people in the US more dishonest than libertarians and Cuban exiles. Combine the two in one article, like this one here, and you get a perfect storm of prevarication and sophistry mostly in terms of selective fact-picking, lies of omission and failure to present a balanced picture.

Read an article like that, and you think that Batista’s Cuba was paradise and that Castro has destroyed a beautiful country. In fact, if you ask an average American about Cuba, this is probably what they will tell you.

The rightwing capitalist media in the US lies about few things more than Communism and socialism. There is almost nothing more threatening to them than a system that has seriously restrained the privileges of capital, so they pull out all the stops in terms of shameless lying in the Brainwash War to make sure this idea does not get too popular with Americas.

Not only do they want to kill the idea here, they want to kill it the world over. Every Communist country has had a devastating US-led blockade slammed on it, and at the same time, most either had some Contra-war waged against them or were forced to spend vast sums on their militaries due to continuous US threats of war against them.

Hence, we do not really know how well Communism works in praxis, since it has always been constrained by these devastating strangulations and threats.

As I said, the link by Humberto Fontana plus Thomas Woods appears devastating to Castro.

But let us not go down the list and pick apart and respond to each and every factoid.

Let us look at just one variable – nutrition.

The Cuban regime has recently reduced malnutrition in Cuba to 2%, about the level it is at in most 1st World industrialized states. This is the lowest level in Latin America. That is a reduction from the 40% malnutrition rate under the capitalist Cuba the exiles love so much (see below).

The US capitalist media continuously refers to Cubans, one of the most well-fed populations in Latin America (the second best-fed in the region in 1983)1 as “starving”. The people who were starving lived in Batista’s Cuba, when 40% of the population was malnourished.2

Various studies of Cubans and nutrition were undertaken in the 1950’s. In 1956, 91% of the rural agricultural worker population was malnourished. The average ag worker was 16 pounds underweight and stunted in height. 35-40% (depending on the source) of the total Cuban population was malnourished. This manifested in weak and small bones, low resistance to disease and general weakness and fatigue.

Even in a middle class school population, 9% were undernourished. Malnutrition was rampant amongst Cuban children, along with various vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Lack of calcium had actually warped the skeletons of 11% of Cuban kids.3. In a public hospital in Havana in the 1950’s, 92% of the children had deficient diets.4

The state under Batista renounced its responsibility to feed the people, hence the poor, the rural areas, non-Whites, and the less educated all had deficient diets compared to the wealthier classes, the urban dwellers, the Whites and the more educated.5

In reports in the US rightwing press about Cuba, one constantly hears how the Cuban diet is “bland” and how the people complain because, tragicomically, they do not get to eat beef often enough. To the naive American reader, that sounds pretty bad.

Yet let us look at the situation for the families of Cuban agricultural workers under Batista, 40% of the population.

The following foods were only rarely consumed (compare to the heartrending tragedy of the modern Cubans who are denied their precious “beef”):

89% rarely drank milk
93% rarely ate corn
96%   "        meat*
96%+           bread
98%            eggs
100%           vegetables

*Any kind of meat, not just beef.


1. United States, Central Intelligence Agency. The Cuban Economy: A Statistical Review, ER 81-10052/PA, March 1981, p. 45.

2. Handelman, H., Cuban Food Policy and Popular Nutritional Levels, Cuban Studies, July 1981, p. 129.

3. Valdés, Nelson P., Health and Revolution in Cuba, Science and Society, Vol. 35, No. 3, Fall, 1971, pp. 313-314.

4. Domínguez, Jorge, Cuba Order and Revolution, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978, p. 224.

5. Aballi, Arturo J., Distrofias infantiles en nuestro medio, Revista Cubana de Pediatría, Vol. 30, No. 9, September 1958.

Leave a comment

Filed under Americas, Capitalism, Caribbean, Conservatism, Cuba, Cubans, Economics, Health, Hispanics, Journalism, Latin America, Left, Marxism, Nutrition, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Reposts From The Old Site, Whites

World’s Greatest Art Project

Repost from the old site.

Art project of the year.

I wonder if she is trolling IRL.

If she’s serious, then I think maybe she has problems? This sort of stuff only makes sense if it’s a joke. If it’s a joke, it’s the best one of the year, and she’s as good as Andy Kaufman! I’m laughing so hard I can’t even type!

More like this!


Filed under Art, Reposts From The Old Site, Weirdness, Women