Last fall, James Watson, the father of DNA, spoke the unspeakable, saying that blacks are intellectually inferior. In a conversation with The Root Editor-in-Chief Henry Louis Gates Jr., Watson clarified his views about race and genetics. Read what he says now — and why Gates regards him as “a racialist.”
James Watson has long assumed a certain special status among American scientists. The molecular biologist was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962, along with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins, for, as the Swedish Academy put it in its announcement for the prize, “their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material.” Watson and his British colleague Crick are remembered popularly for identifying the elegant and unexpected “double helix” three-dimensional structure of deoxyribonucleic acid, commonly known as DNA. Watson’s important contribution to this uncanny discovery was to define how the four nucleotide bases that make up DNA—guanine (G), cytosine (C), adenine (A) and thymine (T)—combine in pairs to form its structure. These base pairs turn out to be the key to both the structure of DNA and its various functions. In other words, Watson identified the language and the code by which we understand and talk about our genetic makeup.
I have been among those who have long held Watson in high regard for several reasons. First of all, the discovery of DNA’s three-dimensional structure was counterintuitive; it was an ingenious act of deduction, using models made of cardboard and paste with an exacto knife and a straight edge. How Watson and Crick, working at the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, became the first scientists to identify this elusive structure is the stuff of drama, especially when we recall that Watson was just 25 years old when he and Crick published their findings in the journal Nature on April 25, 1953.
Though Watson would tell me during our recent interview that he had a rather low IQ, as proof that IQ tests aren’t really that important, he enrolled at the University of Chicago when he was merely 15 and earned his B.S. in zoology there in 1947 at the age of 19 and a Ph.D. in zoology from Indiana University at age 22. He was 34 when he won the Nobel Prize. Not too shabby for a guy with a “low” IQ.
Watson’s youth and a certain absent-minded professorial quirkiness made him an American hero, the symbol of American enterprise and intelligence. What’s more, unlike Crick, or Einstein, say, Watson was an American born and bred: His discovery, coming at the height of the Cold War, would be hailed as attesting to American genius and the unrivaled potential of the free market system versus communism. The intrigue over allegations that Watson and Crick made unauthorized use of the seminal work on X-ray diffraction by Rosalind Franklin, a brilliant scientist who died before the Nobel Prize committee made its decision, only made Watson’s story all the more titillating.
And Watson—never camera shy or publicity averse—contributed to the power of his own myth first by writing “Molecular Biology of the Gene,” a 1965 textbook that, updated, remains enormously popular today, and, three years later, “The Double Helix,” an account of the dramatic story of his discovery that also contained startling and scandalous revelations of petty tensions, jealousies and rivalries among scientists whom we all had assumed were motivated primarily by the pursuit of truth. Watson’s book did nothing less than deconstruct the myth of the scientist as secular saint, laboring away in a laboratory for knowledge’s sake at the service of mankind. (One scientist summed up Watson’s view of the scientific profession as “with malice toward most and charity toward none.”) But Watson’s account also made his quest to determine the structure of DNA gripping and exciting, one of science’s greatest and most compelling triumphs. Though he was a professor at Harvard University at the time—he taught there from 1956 to 1976—the Harvard University Press refused to publish the book because of its tell-all nature. A commercial press published it instead, it became a best-seller and Watson’s celebrity only grew.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Look at whom the US denies residency
We want the Americans to know to what kind of a country they sent us back to.”Wentzel Herbst said: “I’ve had to go through another hijacking and, this time, my children were with me.”
Herbst had been in the car with his brother-in-law, Jimmy Watson, when Watson was killed during a hijacking just more than a week ago.
Wentzel, his wife, Carol, and their children, Deiran, six, and Tegan, three - who were born in the United States - were visiting the Watsons in Delmas.
Three years ago, the family was refused asylum in the US, after being there for six years and had to return to South Africa.
They had applied for asylum in the US because of the crime situation in South Africa.
Just before they left for the US, Wentzel had been shot in the back during a hijacking.
Wentzel and the children went to buy food for the family who had gathered in Delmas after they had heard that Watson’s daughter, Sharon Knoetze, had died in a car accident seven hours earlier.
Carol said: “My children are traumatised. They got such a fright when they saw the violence of the hijacking and when their father yanked them out of the car so quickly.
Wentzel said: “When we said we feared for our safety in South Africa, the Americans thought we were joking and said that South Africa was a perfectly safe country to go back to.”
Carol said: “If it were just me and my husband, it wouldn’t be that bad, but the children don’t know how to process it.”
When they came to South Africa, they were totally American.
“We had to teach my son (who was four at the time) not to talk to strangers because they could steal Mommy’s handbag.
“Since we’ve been back, many of our things have been stolen.”
She said of her son: “He can’t sleep at night - he said he was scared of baddies and that was before the hijacking.
Her daughter had struggled to fall asleep at night since the hijacking.
The American embassy would not comment on specific cases, but according to documentation on requirements for asylum seekers, crime wasn’t one of the criteria.
The fact that the children were born in the US did not make a difference to the status of the parents.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Obama pastor’s theology: Destroy ‘the white enemy’
‘If God is not for us and against whites … we had better kill him’
Barack Obama’s suddenly radioactive pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has defended himself against charges of anti-Americanism and racism by referring to his foundational philosophy, the “black liberation theology” of scholars such as James Cone, who regard Jesus Christ as a “black messiah” and blacks as “the chosen people” who will only accept a god who assists their aim of destroying the “white enemy.”
“If God is not for us and against white people,” writes Cone, “then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community.”
Wright has not talked to media since video segments of his sermons over the past decade surfaced last week – including one in 2003 in which he encouraged blacks to darn America in God’s name. But in a 2007 interview replayed on the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity and Colmes” show Friday, he repeatedly fended off Sean Hannity’s questions with an appeal to authority, asking if the host had read any of the books of Cone, professor at New York’s Union Theological Seminary, or Dwight Hopkins, professor at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School, notes the Asia Times columnist who writes under the pseudonym Spengler.”
Obama, who has spoken of his pastor of more than 20 years as his mentor and moral compass, “wants to talk about what Wright is, rather than what he says,” notes Spengler, by referring him as a “respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago.”
But Spengler says “that way lies apolitical quicksand.”
Cone, he points out, was the most prominent theologian in the “black liberation” school in the 1960s, teaching that Jesus Christ himself is black.
The theologian explains:
Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.
Rather than viewing God as a sovereign being who does as he wills according to his purposes, Cone insists God must do what we want him to do, or we must reject him.
What the black community wants, Cone says, is for God to assist in its goal of destroying “the white enemy.”
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community… Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
‘I reject outright’
As WND reported yesterday, Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago has removed from the “About Us” page of its website a section outlining its radical belief system for blacks.
Obama issued a statement Friday referring to the taped statements from sermons, saying he strongly condemned and denounced “some inflammatory and appalling remarks [Wright] made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.”
Despite having been at the church for two decades, Obama said he was not in attendance when Wright made any of the statements and never heard such talk in private conversations.
"Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy," Obama said. "I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."
Late Friday, Wright stepped down from his formal role in Obama's campaign, as a member of his African American Religious Leadership Committee.
Stamp of approval
Spengler pointed out that in his response to Hannity, Wright "genuinely seemed to believe that the authority of Cone and Hopkins, who now hold important posts at liberal theological seminaries, was sufficient to make the issue go away."
"His faith in the white establishment is touching; he honestly cannot understand why the white reporters at Fox News are bothering him when the University of Chicago and the Union Theological Seminary have put their stamp of approval on black liberation theology," Spengler says.
It's possible, Spengler continues, that Obama "does not believe a word of what Wright, Cone and Hopkins teach."
"Perhaps he merely used the Trinity United Church of Christ as a political stepping-stone," he writes. "African-American political life is centered around churches, and his election to the Illinois state Senate with the support of Chicago's black political machine required church membership. Trinity United happens to be Chicago's largest and most politically active black church."
It seems unlikely Obama would identify with the ideological fits of the black-power movement of the 1960s," Spengler says.
"Obama does not come to the matter with the perspective of an American black, but of the child of a left-wing anthropologist raised in the Third World. ... It is possible that because of the Wright affair Obama will suffer for what he pretended to be, rather than for what he really is."
Barack Obama’s suddenly radioactive pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has defended himself against charges of anti-Americanism and racism by referring to his foundational philosophy, the “black liberation theology” of scholars such as James Cone, who regard Jesus Christ as a “black messiah” and blacks as “the chosen people” who will only accept a god who assists their aim of destroying the “white enemy.”
“If God is not for us and against white people,” writes Cone, “then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community.”
Wright has not talked to media since video segments of his sermons over the past decade surfaced last week – including one in 2003 in which he encouraged blacks to darn America in God’s name. But in a 2007 interview replayed on the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity and Colmes” show Friday, he repeatedly fended off Sean Hannity’s questions with an appeal to authority, asking if the host had read any of the books of Cone, professor at New York’s Union Theological Seminary, or Dwight Hopkins, professor at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School, notes the Asia Times columnist who writes under the pseudonym Spengler.”
Obama, who has spoken of his pastor of more than 20 years as his mentor and moral compass, “wants to talk about what Wright is, rather than what he says,” notes Spengler, by referring him as a “respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago.”
But Spengler says “that way lies apolitical quicksand.”
Cone, he points out, was the most prominent theologian in the “black liberation” school in the 1960s, teaching that Jesus Christ himself is black.
The theologian explains:
Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.
Rather than viewing God as a sovereign being who does as he wills according to his purposes, Cone insists God must do what we want him to do, or we must reject him.
What the black community wants, Cone says, is for God to assist in its goal of destroying “the white enemy.”
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community… Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
‘I reject outright’
As WND reported yesterday, Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago has removed from the “About Us” page of its website a section outlining its radical belief system for blacks.
Obama issued a statement Friday referring to the taped statements from sermons, saying he strongly condemned and denounced “some inflammatory and appalling remarks [Wright] made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.”
Despite having been at the church for two decades, Obama said he was not in attendance when Wright made any of the statements and never heard such talk in private conversations.
"Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy," Obama said. "I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."
Late Friday, Wright stepped down from his formal role in Obama's campaign, as a member of his African American Religious Leadership Committee.
Stamp of approval
Spengler pointed out that in his response to Hannity, Wright "genuinely seemed to believe that the authority of Cone and Hopkins, who now hold important posts at liberal theological seminaries, was sufficient to make the issue go away."
"His faith in the white establishment is touching; he honestly cannot understand why the white reporters at Fox News are bothering him when the University of Chicago and the Union Theological Seminary have put their stamp of approval on black liberation theology," Spengler says.
It's possible, Spengler continues, that Obama "does not believe a word of what Wright, Cone and Hopkins teach."
"Perhaps he merely used the Trinity United Church of Christ as a political stepping-stone," he writes. "African-American political life is centered around churches, and his election to the Illinois state Senate with the support of Chicago's black political machine required church membership. Trinity United happens to be Chicago's largest and most politically active black church."
It seems unlikely Obama would identify with the ideological fits of the black-power movement of the 1960s," Spengler says.
"Obama does not come to the matter with the perspective of an American black, but of the child of a left-wing anthropologist raised in the Third World. ... It is possible that because of the Wright affair Obama will suffer for what he pretended to be, rather than for what he really is."
Friday, March 14, 2008
"A FEMALE MANIFESTO" ~ White Female Tells The Truth
A FEMALE MANIFESTO
By June Griffin
To Whom It May Concern:
I, June Griffin, an American woman, am mad at the Blacks. This morning after reading the Scriptures and thinking of all that has happened to our nation in the last 50 years, I reached the firm conclusion that of all the entities which are used by a licentious and alcohol-dealing press, that people calling themselves Blacks are the worse fools and pawns.
You have made yourself a tool of that union organizer Baptist preacher, Michael King alias Martin Luther King, who set an example before you of one who can sin openly, provoke the police by his uncomely behavior, laying in the streets, and when he reacts, use his white ACLU lawyer to sue for his legal fees to be paid out of my taxes. The ACLU take away my right to teach little children the Bible, post the Ten Commandments and every normal practice which we have had since this nation was civilized in 1620.
See Title 42 USC 1988 - proviso in the so-called 'civil rights act.'
You have followed after vile comedians who drew awful mental pictures of those who stood by the Bill of Rights which Almighty God who created you gave to our forefathers. You have called those who stood by the Bill of Rights and their traditional practice of historically showing their State flag - those you have called by the non-word 'racist' and made them feel guilty for doing what is normally and traditionally American.
Your music is awful, for instead of the beautiful hymns which our forefathers taught you in Methodist Sunday Schools, you have turned to the filthy and unclean authors of confusion from New Orleans and called it a good sound.
Your laws are oppressive. The Affirmative Action which has forced and
intimidated good employers into bankruptcy rather than give in to the tyranny has swelled the government bureaucracies to the breaking point, with its attendant MANDATED ECONOMY..
Your labor union organizers, including government employee unions, have
so corrupted the Democratic Party until what good people might be left want to flee in horror. Now you are looking to another union organizer whose middle name is Hussein or to a woman whose licentious husband debauched the holy name of President of the United States, while she did nothing to restrain him, neither denounced his unspeakable behavior.
Your so-called integration is nothing more than a segregated voting block and a combine of collectivists.
Your leaders have brought no salvation by the American standard. Where is the individual among you who would stand up and say: "I hold to the pillars of this Republic. I will stand by the Ten Commandments, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, so help me, God." And while public schools are now the stronghold of Darwin, Freud and Marx, and white teachers have to hide to say a simple prayer, your schools in black neighborhoods boldly pray when they want to and proclaim whatever they want to, unmolested. Where is the equality in this?
To add to all these transgressions, you have now joined yourselves with
the clarion cry of the Bolshevik: "Minority Rule" which includes the lawless invader, the alien from Mexico who breaks down our immigration walls, helps himself to your socialistic food stamps, hospital care and we are to 'push one for Spanish.'!.
All these things you have liberty to do and we have taken them. You are free to do whatever you please.
Why didn't you listen to the Julia Browns in the 1960's who tried to warn you about your polluted leadership and Bolshevik leaders?
The licentious press is saying that it was women who voted for Hillary Clinton. HOWEVER, do not include me, an American woman, in your push to be a part of the minority-majority. I have given my life that your children may hear the Gospel and be saved from their sins. My work traveling the whole State of Tennessee against the Bolshevik ACLU for our God-given right to post the Ten Commandments cost you nothing. I did not sap off the IRS and their jaded tax-exemptions. The work was done out of pure love for the God of our Fathers and Godly people paid for this out of their own pockets.
I have sought to do business with the Black people and have suffered long with them, often enduring their late payments, accepting their excuses and praying with them to be prospered to pay their mortgage. I have been tolerated in their shops because I wanted them to prosper as private owners. A church of black people welcomed me to their pulpit when I urged them to beware of the sodomite laws which will bring upon them the worst diseases. And going from one black church to another warning them about the evils of voting for lottery.
Furthermore, I have traveled with other godly American women as far away
as Buffalo, New York and Atlanta, Georgia to bring testimony before the Pew Foundation that all of us may enjoy a Social Security rebate of full payment with interest, and make this system voluntary. Did your partial press ever publish one word of this potential windfall and liberty? When I rescinded my so-called 'social security number' in order to give liberty to untold millions who are slaves of this system and to show them the power of God to take care of us in our old age, what was my reward? Title 42 USC 666 took away my right to drive, work, fish or hunt
without giving a social security number, all at the hands of your jaded benefactor, so-called "Health and Human Services."!!!!! And my privately-funded lawsuit in Chancery Court brought down the wrath of the entire Department of Safety on my head. Why, why, I say? Why should good people live in jeopardy of their God-given liberties? You are not exempt from these liberties? Where were you? I have not done these things in a corner.
Enough is enough. If you are going to join another mob to out-vote the traditional majority, don't include me in your Diversity Club of blacks, Hispanics, sodomites, Orientals and whatever collectivists want the groupie coverage. Leave the women out of it and particularly leave me out of it.
I am a woman. An American Christian and a woman. I want to be prospered in my business. I want to run my home and drive my car without your forced safety devices and mandated economy. I refuse to be promoted or favored because God made me a woman. To do so would demean my own abilities and skills and destroy my incentive. I will not be destroyed by your unholy collective. To do so would be to fly in the face of what the Lord gave me, Bible Rights, the Bill of Rights, and liberty unheard of in the history of the world.
What will I do with my anger? I am not going to speak to you except as a
group. There is an old true saying:: the exception proves the rule. If you want to come out from the collective of deluded women and stand for what is good and right, and leave me out of your minority-majority, then we will be friends and fight evil together.
As for the rest of you, I am mad at you and I am going to tell my Heavenly Father on you. I will do as the woman in the eighteenth chapter of the Gospel according to Luke. I will go before Jesus Christ the Righteous Judge and ask Him to avenge me of my adversary. And to sanctify Godly women to the place of honor and holiness which such Christian women deserve. And I will continue to preach and teach Americanism.
Will not the Judge of the Whole Earth do Right?
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
German children tired of the holocaust
German youth are experiencing "Holocaust fatigue," the head of the German delegation to an international organization of Holocaust education and remembrance said Monday.
"German children tend to show Holocaust fatigue," said Dr. Benedikt Haller, the German Foreign Ministry official who serves as special representative for relations with Jewish organizations and issues relating to anti-Semitism.
The remarks came just a day before the official opening in Berlin of the office of the Task Force on International Cooperation on Holocaust Education Remembrance and Research, a group intended to foster cooperation on Holocaust remembrance activities throughout Europe. The organization, which was conceived a decade ago and has thus far operated informally, will comprise 25 countries around the world, including EU states, the US, Argentina and Israel.
In remarks to a group of Israeli journalists, Holocaust instructors and American Jewish leaders, Haller, who will serve as the head of the German delegation to the international Holocaust body, stressed that "Holocaust fatigue" was not a reason to stop teaching the Holocaust in German schools.
"The Holocaust has a very strong place in our national curriculum and it is not going away or [being taken] out," he said. "This is not a reason to take it out of our curriculum."
Haller attributed the "over-infusion" of Holocaust education to a new generation of German educators who revolted against the generation of their parents and grandparents who had kept silent about the mass murder of six million Jews.
"A whole generation of teachers were interested in refuting their parents and telling people the truth," he said.
"It's quite natural that the commitment was not the same with their students [which] for them was a strange and brutal story of [their] grandparents," he said.
The German official suggested that in their zeal to teach the story of the Holocaust, some teachers of the "committed" generation "overdid it a little." Haller made his frank statements after noting the "tremendous amount" of Holocaust literature and research in Germany which, he said, he has long given up trying to keep up with.
He cited a German newspaper caricature published on the 60th anniversary of Hitler's rise to power that depicted a German in a bookstore, surrounded and oversaturated with books about the Holocaust.
The official's remarks were later criticized by American educators as inappropriate.
"As spokesman for such an elite group in Europe as the task force, he has to be at the forefront of encouraging Holocaust remembrance, and not discouraging it," said Bernita M. King, history professor at Miami Dade College. "He should be the biggest cheerleader of Holocaust remembrance," King said.
"This is the wrong message to send out when there is so much more work that needs to be done," said Susan Myers, the executive director of the Holocaust Museum Houston. "With anti-Semitism on the rise, this is not the time to slow down," she said.
Haller's remarks come as the number of elderly Holocaust survivors continues to dwindle.
"This is not the message that you want survivors to hear as they are in their twilight years," Myers said.
"As the child of a survivor, it is perplexing to hear that there is a fatigue not only about the Holocaust but about anti-Semitism," said Sylvia Wygoda, executive director of the Georgia Commission on the Holocaust.
A representative of the New York-based American Jewish Committee, Los Angeles Chapter Executive Director Seth Brysk, said that Haller was "reporting on a phenomenon that exists in the country."
"There is evidence... which indicates that there is Holocaust fatigue in Germany, but it's unclear to what extent," William Shulman, president of the New York-based Association of Holocaust Organizations and a member of the US delegation to the task force, said in a telephone interview.
Other German educators said that German teens were highly informed about the Holocaust, but stopped short of saying they were "oversaturated" with Holocaust education.
"Many come with the attitude 'we know already everything,'" said Dr. Norbert Kampe, director of the Memorial and Educational Site at the House of the Wannsee Conference, a lavish villa in suburban Berlin where top SS officials met in January 1942 to discuss the extermination of the Jews.
The inauguration of the new Holocaust memorial office on Tuesday will be marked by an address by German Federal Foreign Minister Dr. Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
"It is quite fitting that the office should open in Berlin, the place where the Holocaust was planned and executed," Haller said. "This is an important step for Holocaust commemoration in the future."
"German children tend to show Holocaust fatigue," said Dr. Benedikt Haller, the German Foreign Ministry official who serves as special representative for relations with Jewish organizations and issues relating to anti-Semitism.
The remarks came just a day before the official opening in Berlin of the office of the Task Force on International Cooperation on Holocaust Education Remembrance and Research, a group intended to foster cooperation on Holocaust remembrance activities throughout Europe. The organization, which was conceived a decade ago and has thus far operated informally, will comprise 25 countries around the world, including EU states, the US, Argentina and Israel.
In remarks to a group of Israeli journalists, Holocaust instructors and American Jewish leaders, Haller, who will serve as the head of the German delegation to the international Holocaust body, stressed that "Holocaust fatigue" was not a reason to stop teaching the Holocaust in German schools.
"The Holocaust has a very strong place in our national curriculum and it is not going away or [being taken] out," he said. "This is not a reason to take it out of our curriculum."
Haller attributed the "over-infusion" of Holocaust education to a new generation of German educators who revolted against the generation of their parents and grandparents who had kept silent about the mass murder of six million Jews.
"A whole generation of teachers were interested in refuting their parents and telling people the truth," he said.
"It's quite natural that the commitment was not the same with their students [which] for them was a strange and brutal story of [their] grandparents," he said.
The German official suggested that in their zeal to teach the story of the Holocaust, some teachers of the "committed" generation "overdid it a little." Haller made his frank statements after noting the "tremendous amount" of Holocaust literature and research in Germany which, he said, he has long given up trying to keep up with.
He cited a German newspaper caricature published on the 60th anniversary of Hitler's rise to power that depicted a German in a bookstore, surrounded and oversaturated with books about the Holocaust.
The official's remarks were later criticized by American educators as inappropriate.
"As spokesman for such an elite group in Europe as the task force, he has to be at the forefront of encouraging Holocaust remembrance, and not discouraging it," said Bernita M. King, history professor at Miami Dade College. "He should be the biggest cheerleader of Holocaust remembrance," King said.
"This is the wrong message to send out when there is so much more work that needs to be done," said Susan Myers, the executive director of the Holocaust Museum Houston. "With anti-Semitism on the rise, this is not the time to slow down," she said.
Haller's remarks come as the number of elderly Holocaust survivors continues to dwindle.
"This is not the message that you want survivors to hear as they are in their twilight years," Myers said.
"As the child of a survivor, it is perplexing to hear that there is a fatigue not only about the Holocaust but about anti-Semitism," said Sylvia Wygoda, executive director of the Georgia Commission on the Holocaust.
A representative of the New York-based American Jewish Committee, Los Angeles Chapter Executive Director Seth Brysk, said that Haller was "reporting on a phenomenon that exists in the country."
"There is evidence... which indicates that there is Holocaust fatigue in Germany, but it's unclear to what extent," William Shulman, president of the New York-based Association of Holocaust Organizations and a member of the US delegation to the task force, said in a telephone interview.
Other German educators said that German teens were highly informed about the Holocaust, but stopped short of saying they were "oversaturated" with Holocaust education.
"Many come with the attitude 'we know already everything,'" said Dr. Norbert Kampe, director of the Memorial and Educational Site at the House of the Wannsee Conference, a lavish villa in suburban Berlin where top SS officials met in January 1942 to discuss the extermination of the Jews.
The inauguration of the new Holocaust memorial office on Tuesday will be marked by an address by German Federal Foreign Minister Dr. Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
"It is quite fitting that the office should open in Berlin, the place where the Holocaust was planned and executed," Haller said. "This is an important step for Holocaust commemoration in the future."
When the American dream becomes a nightmare
When 22 Year old, University of North Carolina student, Eve Carson set out her successful platform to be elected as Student body President she made a number of pledges as to what she would do to promote diversity.
Amongst other things she promised to make more of a concerted effort to express the ways in the student body were committed to diversity, and extend diversity focused events throughout the year, rather than limiting them to a single “Diversity Week” as had previously been the case. In addition she promised to set additional funds aside specifically for diversity related projects.
Of course as in most US (and UK) Universities a commitment to diversity is all but obligatory for anyone seeking election to any student body, however, as Eve appeared to go out of her way to be photographed with ethnic minority students during her campaign and is understood to have been a supporter of US Presidential hopeful Barrak Obama, whom she can be seen meeting in this recent picture, it seems that Eve Carson's commitment to the cause of diversity was a genuine one.
Sadly, Eve Carson was to pay a high price for the diversity she sought to celebrate and promote, in the same week that we in Britain saw the conviction of Karl Taylor for the murder of Kate Beagley
America was horrified by violent deaths of two beautiful female students, in circumstances so similar that some in the press initially speculated as to whether the two crimes were linked. One of those two young women was Eve Carson, the other was 18 year old Auburn University student Lauren Burke, both women had been shot, and both appeared to have been the victims of car-jackings.
Another apparent similarity between the two crimes is the race of the people suspected of their murder, on the same day as 23 year old African American Courtney Larrell Lockheart was charged with the murder of Lauren Burke. Police in Chapel Hill North Carolina issued photographs of the person whom they were seeking in connection with the murder of Eve Carson, the pictures issued by the police clearly showed a young African American male, who was apparently driving Eve Carsons's car and who had allegedly used her AMT card.
The slayings of Eve Carson and Lauren Burke bear a chilling similarity to another awful crime, notorious across the internet, but still largely suppressed by the US media, which happened just over a year ago, the car-jacking and violent rape and murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom in Knoxville Tennessee.
Although Eve Carson clearly had some interaction with her killer before her death, and was alive long enough to be forced to reveal her ATM card PIN number, let us hope that neither she nor Lauren Burke suffered the terrible deaths which Channon and Christopher did. Accounts differ as to the degree of the brutality, and whether both suffered sexual mutilation at the hands of their five African American killers, however, the details which are confirmed reveal a horror which no innocent young couple should ever have to suffer.
Christopher was repeatedly raped, in front of Channon, by the four male members of the gang, before being shot and his body set on fire, we can only pray that, unlike our own tragic Kriss Donald, Chris Newson was dead before the flames engulfed his young body. Channon was kept alive longer than Christopher, being used as a sex slave for four days during which she was repeatedly beaten, sodomised and raped before being forced to drink bleach, after which she was murdered and her body dumped in the garbage.
As I said, the murder of Channon and Christopher are well known across the internet, however, elsewhere, it has only so far been reported in the local Knoxville press. Compare that to the vicious murder of James Byrd Jnr htt. at the hands of three drunken white men. As with Stephen Lawrence in Britain, Byrd's murder became a cause célèbre in America, a hate crime which to this day, ten years later, is repeatedly referred to in the press, on both sides of the Atlantic. Whereas details of the Christian Newsom murder is suppressed, and when it is mentioned said to be motivated by theft rather than hate.
There is a reason for this, for the US media the Byrd case, and the recent case of Megan Williams, allegedly kidnapped, tortured and raped, although not killed, by her hillbilly boyfriend, his mother and some trailer trash neighbours, are the equivalent of an alien space ship crashing into Manhattan, it only has to happen once in order to prove all the alien abduction claims true. The same would have happened with the infamous Duke Lacrosse case if it had not turned out to be a huge hoax. (The US media continues to seek that one single elusive white on black gang rape, which will become the case of record forever used to support the pretence that most most interracial sexual violence is perpetrated by whites, they haven't found it yet, but they keep hoping.)
Just like Britain, crimes committed by whites are the isolated incidents, which the media always claim black on white crimes are, whilst the vast majority of interracial crime, including violence, rape and murder are committed by blacks, and, just like Britain, the media hides the fact and pretend it is the other way round. It is difficult to find an official racial demographic specifically relating to car-jacking, however, I suspect that the US media would be hard pressed to find any incidents where young black women, or black couples had been car-jacked and murdered by whites but I am sure they are trying.
People argue that this is due to greater levels of black deprivation and higher levels of poverty, however, again they will be telling lies with statistics, it is certainly true that a higher percentage of the black community, around 26%, live in relative poverty, compared to around 8% of whites, however, presenting statistics based on individual racial group, is the same trick our government and theirs play with the hate crime figures, as it ignores the fact that blacks only account for 12% of the US population, (approx: 38 million) whereas whites are still over 63% (approx: 237 million) hence in numerical terms there are over twice as many whites living in relative poverty than blacks. Hence, if deprivation were the reason, one would expect to see far higher levels of such crimes being committed by whites than we do.
The big difference between the the US and the UK, however, is in terms of numbers, bad as black on white crime is in Britain, thankfully, so far we have not yet reached levels comparable to those in America. As in South Africa, some refer to the rate of black on white murders as an unspoken genocide, and it has been estimated that if whites murdered blacks, in ten years there would be over ten thousand more dead blacks than all the US troops who died during the Vietnam war.
The rates of black on black crime, are even worse and it is a little mentioned fact that roughly as many black men were murdered by other black men in 2005 as were lynched by white racists between 1870 and 1965.d
It is troubling to note that we are seeing a similar trend in Britain, you only have to look at the pictures of the 26 teenage murder in London alone, to see that they are overwhelmingly black
although the media does not say so, we can be sure that none of the black victims were killed by white assailants, because if even one had been our media would most certainly let us know.
The fact that we are seeing similar trends here is reason to be more than concerned, as they say, where America leads Britain will follow, we already share spiralling levels of ethnic crime, together with a government and a media which seeks to hide the true figures. At the moment this is a much safer country than America, partly due to different gun laws, but, as we see daily on our news screens, more and more guns are finding their way onto the streets, and they are being used. With mass immigration that can only increase. How long will it be before we share more with America than a special relationship?.
N.Y. Gov. Spitzer in sex scandal; pimp said to hold Israel passport
New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, touted in the past as the first potential Jewish U.S. president, found his political career on the brink of collapse Monday after he was accused of paying for a romp with a high-priced call girl, in a prostitution ring allegedly led by a man found with an Israeli passport at his home.
The Associated Press reported that U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger ordered Mark Brener, 62, of Cliffside Park, N.J., to be held without bail after the passport and $600,000 in cash were found in his apartment.
Brener's lawyer, Jennifer Brown, said her client was a U.S. citizen who had lived in the United States for 20 years.
The scandal Monday drew immediate calls for his resignation after a news
conference in which a glassy-eyed Spitzer, his shell-shocked wife at his side, apologized to his family and the people of New York.
"I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard I expected of
myself," said the 48-year-old father of three teenage girls. "I must now
dedicate some time to regain the trust of my family."
He did not discuss his political future and ignored shouted questions about whether he would resign. And he gave no details of what he was apologizing for.
Spitzer, a son of Jewish Eastern-European parents, grew up in Riverdale, N.Y., and was a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law.
Spitzer was clearly examining his legal options following the break of the scandal; a spokesman said the governor had retained the Manhattan law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton & Garrison, one of the nation's biggest.
Spitzer was caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet in a Washington
hotel room the night before Valentine's Day with a prostitute from a call-girl business known as the Emperors Club VIP, according to a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is still going on.
The governor has not been charged, and prosecutors would not comment on the case.
But an affidavit based on the wiretap told of a man identified as Client 9 - Spitzer, according to the law enforcement official - paying $4,300 in cash, some of it credit for future trysts, some of it for sex with a petite brunette, 5-feet 5 inches (127 centimeters), and 105
pounds (48 kilograms), named Kristen.
The scandal came 16 months after Spitzer stormed into the governor's office with a historic margin of victory, vowing to root out corruption in New York government in the same way that he took on Wall Street executives with a vengeance while state attorney general.
But his first year in office was marred by turmoil, and the latest scandal raised questions about whether he would make it through the week.
Lawmakers call on Spitzer to resign
"He has to step down. No one will stand with him," said Rep. Peter King, a Republican congressman from Long Island. "I never try to take advantage or gloat over a personal tragedy. However, this is different. This is a guy who is so self-righteous, and so unforgiving."
Democratic Assemblyman John McEneny said: "I don't think anyone remembers
anything like this - the fact that the governor has a reputation as a reformer and there is a certain assumption as attorney general that you're Caesar's wife. It's a different element than if you were an accountant."
Democratic Lt. Gov. David Paterson would become New York's first black
governor if Spitzer were to resign.
The allegations were outlined in papers filed in federal court in New York.
A defendant in the case, Temeka Rachelle Lewis, told a prostitute identified only as Kristen that she should take a train from New York to Washington for an encounter with Client 9 on the night of Feb. 13, according to the complaint. The defendant confirmed that the client would be paying for everything - train tickets, cab fare from the hotel and back, mini bar or room service, travel time and hotel.
The prostitute met the client in Room 871 at about 10 p.m., according to the complaint. When discussing how the payments would be arranged, Client 9 told Lewis: "Yup, same as in the past, no question about it - suggesting Client 9 had done this before.
According to court papers, an Emperors Club agent was told by the prostitute that her evening with Client 9 went well. The agent said she had been told that "the client would ask you to do things that ... you might not think were safe ... very basic things, according to the papers, but Kristen responded by saying: I have a way of dealing with that ... I'd be, like, listen dude, you really want the sex?"
The next day, Spitzer testified before a congressional subcommittee about
regulations on the bond industry.
The ring arranged sex between wealthy men and more than 50 prostitutes in New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Miami, London and Paris, prosecutors said. Four people accused of helping to operate the ring were arrested last week.
The club's Web site displays photos of scantily clad women with their faces hidden. It also shows hourly rates, with prices set according to each woman's ratings, which range from one to seven diamonds. The highest-ranked prostitutes cost $5,500 an hour, prosecutors said.
"I have acted in a way that violates my obligations to my family and violates my, or any, sense of right and wrong," Spitzer said at the news conference. "I apologize first and most importantly to my family. I apologize to the public, whom I promised better."
The case began as a financial investigation by Internal Revenue Service
agents, and at some point was referred to the public corruption unit of the U.S. Attorney's office, authorities said. It was not clear from the
authorities whether Spitzer was a target of the investigation from the start, or whether agents came his across his name by accident.
Prosecutors compiled statements from a confidential source and an undercover officer and examined more than 5,000 telephone calls and text messages and more than 6,000 e-mails, as well as bank, travel and hotel records.
The four people arrested were charged with violating the Mann Act, a 1910
federal law against crossing state lines for purposes of prostitution.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, noted that
prostitution customers are often not charged, and said charges against Spitzer might be unlikely.
"Especially if he resigns, he may just be left alone. It may be that the public is satisfied by his resignation as governor," Tobias said.
Spitzer clashed with Wall Street executives throughout his two terms as
attorney general. Among other things, he uncovered crooked practices and
self-dealing in the stock brokerage and insurance industries and in corporate board rooms, and went after former New York Stock Exchange chairman Richard Grasso over his $187.5 million compensation package, calling it unreasonable.
He soon became known as the Sheriff of Wall Street. Time magazine named him Crusader of the Year, and the tabloids proclaimed him Eliot Ness.
His campaign slogan during his run for governor was Day One Everything
Changes. But his term as governor has been fraught with problems, including an unpopular plan to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and a plot by his aides to smear his main Republican nemesis.
Spitzer had been expected to testify in front of a state commission he had created to answer for his role in the scandal, in which his aides were accused of using the state police to compile travel records to embarrass Senate GOP leader Joseph Bruno.
His cases as attorney general included a few criminal prosecutions of
prostitution rings and tourism involving prostitutes. In 2004, he took part in an investigation of an escort service in New York City that resulted in the arrest of 18 people on charges of promoting prostitution and related charges.
The Associated Press reported that U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger ordered Mark Brener, 62, of Cliffside Park, N.J., to be held without bail after the passport and $600,000 in cash were found in his apartment.
Brener's lawyer, Jennifer Brown, said her client was a U.S. citizen who had lived in the United States for 20 years.
The scandal Monday drew immediate calls for his resignation after a news
conference in which a glassy-eyed Spitzer, his shell-shocked wife at his side, apologized to his family and the people of New York.
"I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard I expected of
myself," said the 48-year-old father of three teenage girls. "I must now
dedicate some time to regain the trust of my family."
He did not discuss his political future and ignored shouted questions about whether he would resign. And he gave no details of what he was apologizing for.
Spitzer, a son of Jewish Eastern-European parents, grew up in Riverdale, N.Y., and was a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law.
Spitzer was clearly examining his legal options following the break of the scandal; a spokesman said the governor had retained the Manhattan law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton & Garrison, one of the nation's biggest.
Spitzer was caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet in a Washington
hotel room the night before Valentine's Day with a prostitute from a call-girl business known as the Emperors Club VIP, according to a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is still going on.
The governor has not been charged, and prosecutors would not comment on the case.
But an affidavit based on the wiretap told of a man identified as Client 9 - Spitzer, according to the law enforcement official - paying $4,300 in cash, some of it credit for future trysts, some of it for sex with a petite brunette, 5-feet 5 inches (127 centimeters), and 105
pounds (48 kilograms), named Kristen.
The scandal came 16 months after Spitzer stormed into the governor's office with a historic margin of victory, vowing to root out corruption in New York government in the same way that he took on Wall Street executives with a vengeance while state attorney general.
But his first year in office was marred by turmoil, and the latest scandal raised questions about whether he would make it through the week.
Lawmakers call on Spitzer to resign
"He has to step down. No one will stand with him," said Rep. Peter King, a Republican congressman from Long Island. "I never try to take advantage or gloat over a personal tragedy. However, this is different. This is a guy who is so self-righteous, and so unforgiving."
Democratic Assemblyman John McEneny said: "I don't think anyone remembers
anything like this - the fact that the governor has a reputation as a reformer and there is a certain assumption as attorney general that you're Caesar's wife. It's a different element than if you were an accountant."
Democratic Lt. Gov. David Paterson would become New York's first black
governor if Spitzer were to resign.
The allegations were outlined in papers filed in federal court in New York.
A defendant in the case, Temeka Rachelle Lewis, told a prostitute identified only as Kristen that she should take a train from New York to Washington for an encounter with Client 9 on the night of Feb. 13, according to the complaint. The defendant confirmed that the client would be paying for everything - train tickets, cab fare from the hotel and back, mini bar or room service, travel time and hotel.
The prostitute met the client in Room 871 at about 10 p.m., according to the complaint. When discussing how the payments would be arranged, Client 9 told Lewis: "Yup, same as in the past, no question about it - suggesting Client 9 had done this before.
According to court papers, an Emperors Club agent was told by the prostitute that her evening with Client 9 went well. The agent said she had been told that "the client would ask you to do things that ... you might not think were safe ... very basic things, according to the papers, but Kristen responded by saying: I have a way of dealing with that ... I'd be, like, listen dude, you really want the sex?"
The next day, Spitzer testified before a congressional subcommittee about
regulations on the bond industry.
The ring arranged sex between wealthy men and more than 50 prostitutes in New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Miami, London and Paris, prosecutors said. Four people accused of helping to operate the ring were arrested last week.
The club's Web site displays photos of scantily clad women with their faces hidden. It also shows hourly rates, with prices set according to each woman's ratings, which range from one to seven diamonds. The highest-ranked prostitutes cost $5,500 an hour, prosecutors said.
"I have acted in a way that violates my obligations to my family and violates my, or any, sense of right and wrong," Spitzer said at the news conference. "I apologize first and most importantly to my family. I apologize to the public, whom I promised better."
The case began as a financial investigation by Internal Revenue Service
agents, and at some point was referred to the public corruption unit of the U.S. Attorney's office, authorities said. It was not clear from the
authorities whether Spitzer was a target of the investigation from the start, or whether agents came his across his name by accident.
Prosecutors compiled statements from a confidential source and an undercover officer and examined more than 5,000 telephone calls and text messages and more than 6,000 e-mails, as well as bank, travel and hotel records.
The four people arrested were charged with violating the Mann Act, a 1910
federal law against crossing state lines for purposes of prostitution.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, noted that
prostitution customers are often not charged, and said charges against Spitzer might be unlikely.
"Especially if he resigns, he may just be left alone. It may be that the public is satisfied by his resignation as governor," Tobias said.
Spitzer clashed with Wall Street executives throughout his two terms as
attorney general. Among other things, he uncovered crooked practices and
self-dealing in the stock brokerage and insurance industries and in corporate board rooms, and went after former New York Stock Exchange chairman Richard Grasso over his $187.5 million compensation package, calling it unreasonable.
He soon became known as the Sheriff of Wall Street. Time magazine named him Crusader of the Year, and the tabloids proclaimed him Eliot Ness.
His campaign slogan during his run for governor was Day One Everything
Changes. But his term as governor has been fraught with problems, including an unpopular plan to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and a plot by his aides to smear his main Republican nemesis.
Spitzer had been expected to testify in front of a state commission he had created to answer for his role in the scandal, in which his aides were accused of using the state police to compile travel records to embarrass Senate GOP leader Joseph Bruno.
His cases as attorney general included a few criminal prosecutions of
prostitution rings and tourism involving prostitutes. In 2004, he took part in an investigation of an escort service in New York City that resulted in the arrest of 18 people on charges of promoting prostitution and related charges.
Monday, March 10, 2008
DIVERSITY KILLS!
Eve Carson at some kind of Pro-Castro rally waving a communist flag, showing her “Diversity” spirit: “It’s that magic word that seems to be included in every discussion about trends in higher education - diversity.”–From a UNC article on the candidates for student body president
Diversity
1. Make more of a concerted effort to express the ways in which we, the student body, are committed to diversity.
1. One of the biggest goals of the Diversity Plan is to continue to attract members of underrepresented populations to UNC’s student population, faculty and staff. To reach out to underrepresented populations and invite them to join our community, we, the students, must show that we too welcome and appreciate the added experiences of those with different backgrounds. Eve will work with administrators and student leaders to come up with ways that the student body can express our own commitment to diversity as well.
2. Extend “Diversity Week” by having numerous activities like “Mix it Up” days in which students and faculty members are encouraged to sit with members of a different ethnicity.
1. “Diversity week” during fall semester was a huge success. But appreciating diversity shouldn’t be a one-week-per-year activity. Student leaders have expressed their desire to see activities like these happen more frequently, perhaps once a month, like a “step out of your comfort zone” day on campus. It may sound silly, but they could be like the “Mix It Up” activities you might have participated in when you were younger—when the members of your middle or high school were encouraged to sit with members of a ddifferent race at lunchtime. Students were interested in whether or not the student body president would support this initiative. Of course! Eve would not only participate in this activity, but would invite members of the Administration and Faculty to publicly lead by example as well.
3. Educate about implications of the new Diversity Plan
1. Along with the new Diversity Plan and the changes in General College curriculum have come a host of implications for the course bulletin. Eve will work with the Academic and Advising committees of Student Government and University Administration to make sure that students are aware of the new course requirements, and how the former ‘cultural diversity’ perspective has been redefined as “U.S. Diversity” and should affect students’ choices of classes. She will also educate students about the fact that students may petition for appropriate courses not listed as fulfilling the diversity perspective to get counted as such.
4. Set aside money for student organizations who organize a multi-group projects with groups of different goals or members.
1. At the “Melting Pot” forum hosted by the Committee for Diversity Affairs, students expressed their desire to see more events co-sponsored between highly-different student organizations—for example, a dance performance co-hosted by BSM and SANGAM or a discussion led by the Self Knowledge Symposium and Advertising Club. Right now, there is money in the Office of Diversity and Multi-Cultural Affairs for student groups to put on events. But Eve will designate a pot of money to go expressly towards student groups who plan big events with other, dramatically different student groups. This will explicitly reward student groups who coordinate events to bring distinct parts of the student population together.
5. Support the expansion of Carolina United
1. Last summer, the first Carolina United program was initiated—and was a huge success. It has now been integrated into UNC affairs and has annual funding. But more students would be fortunate to have the experience of attending Carolina United, and Eve will support efforts to expand CU so that it can be brought to more members of the student body.
6. Personally visit, meet with minority organizations to invite members to be part of Student Government
Diversity
1. Make more of a concerted effort to express the ways in which we, the student body, are committed to diversity.
1. One of the biggest goals of the Diversity Plan is to continue to attract members of underrepresented populations to UNC’s student population, faculty and staff. To reach out to underrepresented populations and invite them to join our community, we, the students, must show that we too welcome and appreciate the added experiences of those with different backgrounds. Eve will work with administrators and student leaders to come up with ways that the student body can express our own commitment to diversity as well.
2. Extend “Diversity Week” by having numerous activities like “Mix it Up” days in which students and faculty members are encouraged to sit with members of a different ethnicity.
1. “Diversity week” during fall semester was a huge success. But appreciating diversity shouldn’t be a one-week-per-year activity. Student leaders have expressed their desire to see activities like these happen more frequently, perhaps once a month, like a “step out of your comfort zone” day on campus. It may sound silly, but they could be like the “Mix It Up” activities you might have participated in when you were younger—when the members of your middle or high school were encouraged to sit with members of a ddifferent race at lunchtime. Students were interested in whether or not the student body president would support this initiative. Of course! Eve would not only participate in this activity, but would invite members of the Administration and Faculty to publicly lead by example as well.
3. Educate about implications of the new Diversity Plan
1. Along with the new Diversity Plan and the changes in General College curriculum have come a host of implications for the course bulletin. Eve will work with the Academic and Advising committees of Student Government and University Administration to make sure that students are aware of the new course requirements, and how the former ‘cultural diversity’ perspective has been redefined as “U.S. Diversity” and should affect students’ choices of classes. She will also educate students about the fact that students may petition for appropriate courses not listed as fulfilling the diversity perspective to get counted as such.
4. Set aside money for student organizations who organize a multi-group projects with groups of different goals or members.
1. At the “Melting Pot” forum hosted by the Committee for Diversity Affairs, students expressed their desire to see more events co-sponsored between highly-different student organizations—for example, a dance performance co-hosted by BSM and SANGAM or a discussion led by the Self Knowledge Symposium and Advertising Club. Right now, there is money in the Office of Diversity and Multi-Cultural Affairs for student groups to put on events. But Eve will designate a pot of money to go expressly towards student groups who plan big events with other, dramatically different student groups. This will explicitly reward student groups who coordinate events to bring distinct parts of the student population together.
5. Support the expansion of Carolina United
1. Last summer, the first Carolina United program was initiated—and was a huge success. It has now been integrated into UNC affairs and has annual funding. But more students would be fortunate to have the experience of attending Carolina United, and Eve will support efforts to expand CU so that it can be brought to more members of the student body.
6. Personally visit, meet with minority organizations to invite members to be part of Student Government
The Myth Of Gun Control In Germany
A common belief among defenders of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is that the National Socialist government of Germany under Adolf Hitler did not permit the private ownership of firearms. Totalitarian governments, they have been taught in their high school civics classes, do not trust their citizens and do not dare permit them to keep firearms. Thus, one often hears the statement, "You know, the first thing the Nazis did when they came to power was outlaw firearms," or, "The first thing Hitler did in Germany was round up all the guns."
One can understand why many American gun owners want to believe this. They see in the current effort of their own government to take away their right to keep and bear arms a limitation of an essential element of their freedom and a move toward tyranny, and they want to characterize the gun-grabbers in the most negative way they can. Adolf Hitler has been vilified continuously for the past 60 years or so by the mass media in America, and certainly no politician or officeholder wants to be compared with him. If the gun-confiscation effort can be portrayed convincingly as something of which Hitler would have approved, it will have been effectively tarred.
This identification of the inclination to deny citizens the right to keep and bear arms with National Socialism and Adolf Hitler has been strengthened recently by clever magazine advertisements which show Hitler with his arm outstretched in a Roman salute under a heading: "All in favor of gun control raise your right hand." A Jewish group, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), quite noisy for its size, has been especially zealous in promoting the idea that the current gun-control effort in America has its roots in Germany during the Hitler period. This group has gone so far as to claim in several articles published in popular magazines read by firearms enthusiasts that the current restrictive legislation being proposed by the U.S. government is modeled on a gun-control statute enacted by Germany's National Socialist government: the German Weapons Law (Waffengesetz) of March 18, 1938.
Again, one can understand the motivation of the JPFO. Many non-Jewish firearms owners are well aware that the movement to restrict their rights is led and promoted primarily by Jews, and anti-Jewish feeling has been growing among them. They know that the controlled news media, which are almost unanimously in favor of abridging or abolishing the Second Amendment, are very much under the influence of Jews, and they know that the most vocal anti-gun legislators in the Congress also are Jews. It is natural for a group such as the JPFO to mount a damage- control effort and attempt to prevent anti-Jewish feeling from becoming even stronger among gun owners. Their strategy is to deflect the blame from their kinsmen in the media and the government and direct it onto their most hated enemies, the National Socialists -- or at least to create enough smoke to obscure the facts and keep the gun-owning public confused.
Unfortunately for those who would like to link Hitler and the National Socialists with gun control, the entire premise for such an effort is false. German firearms legislation under Hitler, far from banning private ownership, actually facilitated the keeping and bearing of arms by German citizens by eliminating or ameliorating restrictive laws which had been enacted by the government preceding his: a left-center government which had contained a number of Jews.
It is not just that the National Socialist firearms legislation was the opposite of what it has been claimed to have been by persons who want to tar modern gun-grabbers with the "Nazi" brush: the whole spirit of Hitler's government was starkly different from its portrayal by America's mass media. The facts, in brief, are these:
* The National Socialist government of Germany, unlike the government in Washington today, did not fear its citizens. Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany has ever had. Unlike American presidents, he did not have to wear body armor and have shields of bulletproof glass in front of him whenever he spoke in public. At public celebrations he rode standing in an open car as it moved slowly through cheering crowds. Communists made several attempts to assassinate him, and his government stamped down hard on communism, virtually wiping it out in Germany. Between upright, law-abiding German citizens and Adolf Hitler, however, there was a real love affair, with mutual trust and respect.
* The spirit of National Socialism was one of manliness, and individual self-defense and self- reliance were central to the National Socialist view of the way a citizen should behave. The notion of banning firearms ownership was utterly alien to National Socialism. In the German universities, where National Socialism gained its earliest footholds and which later became its strongest bastions, dueling was an accepted practice. Although the liberal-Jewish governments in Germany after the First World War attempted to ban dueling, it persisted illegally until it was again legalized by the National Socialists. Fencing, target shooting, and other martial arts were immensely popular in Germany, and the National Socialists encouraged young Germans to become proficient in these activities, believing that they were important for the development of a man's character.
* Gun registration and licensing (for long guns as well as for handguns) were legislated by an anti-National Socialist government in Germany in 1928, five years before the National Socialists gained power. Hitler became Chancellor on January 30, 1933. Five years later his government got around to rewriting the gun law enacted a decade earlier by his predecessors, substantially amel ior a ting it in the process (for example, long guns were exempted from the requirement for a purchase permit; the legal age for gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18 years; the period of validity of a permit to carry weapons was extended from one to three years; and provisions restricting the amount of ammunition or the number of firearms an individual could own were dropped). Hitler's government may be criticized for leaving certain restrictions and licensing requirements in the law, but the National Socialists had no intention of preventing law-abiding Germans from keeping or bearing arms. Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler's government enhanced the rights of Germans to keep and bear arms; no new restrictions were added, and many pre-existing restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.
* At the end of the Second World War, American GIs in the occupying force were astounded to discover how many German civilians owned private firearms. Tens of thousands of pistols looted from German homes by GIs were brought back to the United States after the war. In 1945 General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American occupation zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their shotguns and rifles as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet occupation zone German civilians were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.
* Jews, it should be noted, were not Germans, even if they had been born in Germany. The National Socialists defined citizenship in ethnic terms, and under Hitler Jews were not accorded full rights of citizenship. National Socialist legislation progressively excluded Jews from key professions: teaching, the media, the practice of law, etc. The aim was not only to free German life from an oppressive and degenerative Jewish influence, but to persuade Jews to emigrate. The German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, specifically excluded Jews from manufacturing or dealing in firearms or munitions, but it did not exclude them from owning or bearing personal firearms. The exclusion of Jews from the firearms business rankled them as much as any other exclusion, and in their typically ethnocentric fashion they have misrepresented the law involved as an anti-gun law in an effort to cast their enemies in a bad light.
It should be noted in passing that the restrictions placed on Jews by the National Socialists had the intended effect: between 1933 and 1939 two-thirds of the Jews residing in Germany emigrated, reducing the Jewish population of the country from 600,000 when Hitler became Chancellor in 1933 to 200,000 at the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. Jews in the United States, looking at this period from their own narrowly focused viewpoint, have described these peacetime years of the National Socialist government as a time of darkness, terror, and regression, whereas for the German people it was a time of hope, joy, and spiritual and material renewal.
Much the same type of distortion is seen in the portrayal of the United States in the early 1950s: the so-called "McCarthy Era." Senator Joseph McCarthy (Republican, Wisconsin) used his position as chairman of the Senate's Government Operations Committee to expose the widespread communist infiltration of the U.S. government and other U.S. institutions which had taken place during the Second World War. A substantial majority of the communists who were dragged reluctantly out into the light of day by his efforts were Jews. As a result, the controlled media always have portrayed the period as one of terror and repression, when everyone was frightened of Senator McCarthy's "witch-hunt." Of course, it was nothing of the sort to non-Jewish Americans, who were not intimidated in the least. History viewed through a Jewish lens -- i.e., through media controlled by Jews -- always is distorted in a way corresponding to Jewish interests and concerns.
Both the German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, enacted by the National Socialists, and the Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, which was enacted by an anti-National Socialist government, are given below in full, first in facsimile and then in English translation. A little background information first, however, may help the reader to understand their significance.
After Germany's defeat in the First World War (a defeat in which Germany's Jews played no small part, demoralizing the home front with demonstrations and other subversive activity much as they did in America during the Vietnam war), the Kaiser abdicated, and liberals and leftists seized control of the government in 1918. Hitler, recovering in a military hospital from a British poison-gas attack which had blinded him temporarily, made the decision to go into politics and fight against the traitors he felt were responsible for Germany's distress.
The tendency of Germany's new rulers after the First World War was much the same as it is for the liberals in America today: they promoted cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and egalitarianism. By 1923 economic conditions in Germany had become catastrophic, and there was much public unrest. The communists had made major inroads into the labor movement and were a growing threat to the country.
Hitler had indeed gone into politics, and his National Socialists battled the communists in the streets of Germany's cities and gradually came to be seen by many patriotic Germans in the working class and the middle class as the only force which could save Germany from a communist takeover and total ruin. Hitler's National Socialists continued to win recruits and gain strength during the 1920s. The communists, with aid from the Soviet Union, also continued to grow. The political situation became increasingly unstable as the government lost popular support.
The government's response was to substantially tighten up restrictions on the rights of German citizens to keep and bear arms. The Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, was the most substantial effort in this regard. This law was enacted by a left-center government hostile to the National Socialists (the government was headed by Chancellor Wilhelm Marx and consisted of a coalition of Socialists, including many Jews, and Catholic Centrists).
Five years later, in 1933, the National Socialists were in power, Hitler headed the government, and the communist threat was crushed decisively. The National Socialists began undoing the social and economic damage done by their predecessors. Germany was restored to full employment, degeneracy and corruption were rooted out, Jews and their collaborators were removed from one facet of national life after another, and the German people entered a new era of national freedom, health, and prosperity.
Finally, in 1938, the National Socialist government got around to enacting a new firearms law to replace the one enacted by their opponents ten years earlier. The highlights of the 1938 law, especially as it applied to ordinary citizens rather than manufacturers or dealers, follow:
* Handguns may be purchased only on submission of a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), which must be used within one year from the date of issue. Muzzle- loading handguns are exempted from the permit requirement. [The 1928 law had required a permit for the purchase of long guns as well, but the National Socialists dropped this requirement.]
* Holders of a permit to carry weapons (Waffenschein) or of a hunting license do not need a Weapons Acquisition Permit in order to acquire a handgun.
* A hunting license authorizes its bearer to carry hunting weapons and handguns.
* Firearms and ammunition, as well as swords and knives, may not be sold to minors under the age of 18 years. [The age limit had been 20 years in the 1928 law.]
* Whoever carries a firearm outside of his dwelling, his place of employment, his place of business, or his fenced property must have on his person a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein). A permit is not required, however, for carrying a firearm for use at a police-approved shooting range.
* A permit to acquire a handgun or to carry firearms may only be issued to persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a permit. In particular, a permit may not be issued to:
1. persons under the age of 18 years;
2. legally incompetent or mentally retarded persons;
3. Gypsies or vagabonds;
4. persons under mandatory police supervision [i.e., on parole] or otherwise temporarily without civil rights;
5. persons convicted of treason or high treason or known to be engaged in activities hostile to the state;
6. persons who for assault, trespass, a breach of the peace, resistance to authority, a criminal offense or misdemeanor, or a hunting or fishing violation were legally sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than two weeks, if three years have not passed since the term of imprisonment.
* The manufacture, sale, carrying, possession, and import of the following are prohibited:
1. "trick" firearms, designed so as to conceal their function (e.g., cane guns and belt-buckle pistols);
2. any firearm equipped with a silencer and any rifle equipped with a spotlight;
3. cartridges with .22 caliber, hollow-point bullets.
That is the essence. Numerous other provisions of the law relate to firearms manufacturers, importers, and dealers; to acquisition and carrying of firearms by police, military, and other official personnel; to the maximum fees which can be charged for permits (3 Reichsmark); to tourists bringing firearms into Germany; and to the fines and other penalties to be levied for violations.
The requirements of "trustworthiness" and of proof of need when obtaining a permit are troubling, but it should be noted that they were simply carried over from the 1928 law: they were not formulated by the National Socialists. Under the National Socialists these requirements were interpreted liberally: a person who did not fall into one of the prohibited categories listed above was considered trustworthy, and a statement such as, "I often carry sums of money," was accepted as proof of need.
The prohibitions of spotlight-equipped rifles and hollow-point .22 caliber ammunition were based on considerations that the former were unsporting when used for hunting, and the latter were inhumane.
Now read the German firearms laws for yourself, either in the original German exactly as they were published by the German government in the Reichsgesetzblatt or in the complete English translations which are provided here. If you want to skip over most of the legal gobbledygook and go directly to the most pertinent part of the National Socialist Firearms Law -- the part pertaining to the purchase, ownership, and carrying of firearms by private citizens -- turn to page 35 (Part IV of the Law). Note, as already mentioned above, that two separate and distinct types of permits are referred to: a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), required only for purchasing a handgun; and a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein), required for carrying any firearm in public. Interestingly enough, as also mentioned above, a hunting license could take the place of both these permits.
When you have read the two laws reproduced here, you will understand that it was Hitler's enemies, not Hitler, who should be compared with the gun-control advocates in America today. Then as now it was the Jews, not the National Socialists, who wanted the people's right of self- defense restricted. You will understand that those who continue to make the claim that Hitler was a gun-grabber are either ignorant or dishonest. And you will understand that it was not until 1945, when the communist and democratic victors of the Second World War had installed occupation governments to rule over the conquered Germans that German citizens were finally and completely denied the right to armed self-defense.
One can understand why many American gun owners want to believe this. They see in the current effort of their own government to take away their right to keep and bear arms a limitation of an essential element of their freedom and a move toward tyranny, and they want to characterize the gun-grabbers in the most negative way they can. Adolf Hitler has been vilified continuously for the past 60 years or so by the mass media in America, and certainly no politician or officeholder wants to be compared with him. If the gun-confiscation effort can be portrayed convincingly as something of which Hitler would have approved, it will have been effectively tarred.
This identification of the inclination to deny citizens the right to keep and bear arms with National Socialism and Adolf Hitler has been strengthened recently by clever magazine advertisements which show Hitler with his arm outstretched in a Roman salute under a heading: "All in favor of gun control raise your right hand." A Jewish group, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), quite noisy for its size, has been especially zealous in promoting the idea that the current gun-control effort in America has its roots in Germany during the Hitler period. This group has gone so far as to claim in several articles published in popular magazines read by firearms enthusiasts that the current restrictive legislation being proposed by the U.S. government is modeled on a gun-control statute enacted by Germany's National Socialist government: the German Weapons Law (Waffengesetz) of March 18, 1938.
Again, one can understand the motivation of the JPFO. Many non-Jewish firearms owners are well aware that the movement to restrict their rights is led and promoted primarily by Jews, and anti-Jewish feeling has been growing among them. They know that the controlled news media, which are almost unanimously in favor of abridging or abolishing the Second Amendment, are very much under the influence of Jews, and they know that the most vocal anti-gun legislators in the Congress also are Jews. It is natural for a group such as the JPFO to mount a damage- control effort and attempt to prevent anti-Jewish feeling from becoming even stronger among gun owners. Their strategy is to deflect the blame from their kinsmen in the media and the government and direct it onto their most hated enemies, the National Socialists -- or at least to create enough smoke to obscure the facts and keep the gun-owning public confused.
Unfortunately for those who would like to link Hitler and the National Socialists with gun control, the entire premise for such an effort is false. German firearms legislation under Hitler, far from banning private ownership, actually facilitated the keeping and bearing of arms by German citizens by eliminating or ameliorating restrictive laws which had been enacted by the government preceding his: a left-center government which had contained a number of Jews.
It is not just that the National Socialist firearms legislation was the opposite of what it has been claimed to have been by persons who want to tar modern gun-grabbers with the "Nazi" brush: the whole spirit of Hitler's government was starkly different from its portrayal by America's mass media. The facts, in brief, are these:
* The National Socialist government of Germany, unlike the government in Washington today, did not fear its citizens. Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany has ever had. Unlike American presidents, he did not have to wear body armor and have shields of bulletproof glass in front of him whenever he spoke in public. At public celebrations he rode standing in an open car as it moved slowly through cheering crowds. Communists made several attempts to assassinate him, and his government stamped down hard on communism, virtually wiping it out in Germany. Between upright, law-abiding German citizens and Adolf Hitler, however, there was a real love affair, with mutual trust and respect.
* The spirit of National Socialism was one of manliness, and individual self-defense and self- reliance were central to the National Socialist view of the way a citizen should behave. The notion of banning firearms ownership was utterly alien to National Socialism. In the German universities, where National Socialism gained its earliest footholds and which later became its strongest bastions, dueling was an accepted practice. Although the liberal-Jewish governments in Germany after the First World War attempted to ban dueling, it persisted illegally until it was again legalized by the National Socialists. Fencing, target shooting, and other martial arts were immensely popular in Germany, and the National Socialists encouraged young Germans to become proficient in these activities, believing that they were important for the development of a man's character.
* Gun registration and licensing (for long guns as well as for handguns) were legislated by an anti-National Socialist government in Germany in 1928, five years before the National Socialists gained power. Hitler became Chancellor on January 30, 1933. Five years later his government got around to rewriting the gun law enacted a decade earlier by his predecessors, substantially amel ior a ting it in the process (for example, long guns were exempted from the requirement for a purchase permit; the legal age for gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18 years; the period of validity of a permit to carry weapons was extended from one to three years; and provisions restricting the amount of ammunition or the number of firearms an individual could own were dropped). Hitler's government may be criticized for leaving certain restrictions and licensing requirements in the law, but the National Socialists had no intention of preventing law-abiding Germans from keeping or bearing arms. Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler's government enhanced the rights of Germans to keep and bear arms; no new restrictions were added, and many pre-existing restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.
* At the end of the Second World War, American GIs in the occupying force were astounded to discover how many German civilians owned private firearms. Tens of thousands of pistols looted from German homes by GIs were brought back to the United States after the war. In 1945 General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American occupation zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their shotguns and rifles as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet occupation zone German civilians were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.
* Jews, it should be noted, were not Germans, even if they had been born in Germany. The National Socialists defined citizenship in ethnic terms, and under Hitler Jews were not accorded full rights of citizenship. National Socialist legislation progressively excluded Jews from key professions: teaching, the media, the practice of law, etc. The aim was not only to free German life from an oppressive and degenerative Jewish influence, but to persuade Jews to emigrate. The German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, specifically excluded Jews from manufacturing or dealing in firearms or munitions, but it did not exclude them from owning or bearing personal firearms. The exclusion of Jews from the firearms business rankled them as much as any other exclusion, and in their typically ethnocentric fashion they have misrepresented the law involved as an anti-gun law in an effort to cast their enemies in a bad light.
It should be noted in passing that the restrictions placed on Jews by the National Socialists had the intended effect: between 1933 and 1939 two-thirds of the Jews residing in Germany emigrated, reducing the Jewish population of the country from 600,000 when Hitler became Chancellor in 1933 to 200,000 at the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. Jews in the United States, looking at this period from their own narrowly focused viewpoint, have described these peacetime years of the National Socialist government as a time of darkness, terror, and regression, whereas for the German people it was a time of hope, joy, and spiritual and material renewal.
Much the same type of distortion is seen in the portrayal of the United States in the early 1950s: the so-called "McCarthy Era." Senator Joseph McCarthy (Republican, Wisconsin) used his position as chairman of the Senate's Government Operations Committee to expose the widespread communist infiltration of the U.S. government and other U.S. institutions which had taken place during the Second World War. A substantial majority of the communists who were dragged reluctantly out into the light of day by his efforts were Jews. As a result, the controlled media always have portrayed the period as one of terror and repression, when everyone was frightened of Senator McCarthy's "witch-hunt." Of course, it was nothing of the sort to non-Jewish Americans, who were not intimidated in the least. History viewed through a Jewish lens -- i.e., through media controlled by Jews -- always is distorted in a way corresponding to Jewish interests and concerns.
Both the German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, enacted by the National Socialists, and the Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, which was enacted by an anti-National Socialist government, are given below in full, first in facsimile and then in English translation. A little background information first, however, may help the reader to understand their significance.
After Germany's defeat in the First World War (a defeat in which Germany's Jews played no small part, demoralizing the home front with demonstrations and other subversive activity much as they did in America during the Vietnam war), the Kaiser abdicated, and liberals and leftists seized control of the government in 1918. Hitler, recovering in a military hospital from a British poison-gas attack which had blinded him temporarily, made the decision to go into politics and fight against the traitors he felt were responsible for Germany's distress.
The tendency of Germany's new rulers after the First World War was much the same as it is for the liberals in America today: they promoted cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and egalitarianism. By 1923 economic conditions in Germany had become catastrophic, and there was much public unrest. The communists had made major inroads into the labor movement and were a growing threat to the country.
Hitler had indeed gone into politics, and his National Socialists battled the communists in the streets of Germany's cities and gradually came to be seen by many patriotic Germans in the working class and the middle class as the only force which could save Germany from a communist takeover and total ruin. Hitler's National Socialists continued to win recruits and gain strength during the 1920s. The communists, with aid from the Soviet Union, also continued to grow. The political situation became increasingly unstable as the government lost popular support.
The government's response was to substantially tighten up restrictions on the rights of German citizens to keep and bear arms. The Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, was the most substantial effort in this regard. This law was enacted by a left-center government hostile to the National Socialists (the government was headed by Chancellor Wilhelm Marx and consisted of a coalition of Socialists, including many Jews, and Catholic Centrists).
Five years later, in 1933, the National Socialists were in power, Hitler headed the government, and the communist threat was crushed decisively. The National Socialists began undoing the social and economic damage done by their predecessors. Germany was restored to full employment, degeneracy and corruption were rooted out, Jews and their collaborators were removed from one facet of national life after another, and the German people entered a new era of national freedom, health, and prosperity.
Finally, in 1938, the National Socialist government got around to enacting a new firearms law to replace the one enacted by their opponents ten years earlier. The highlights of the 1938 law, especially as it applied to ordinary citizens rather than manufacturers or dealers, follow:
* Handguns may be purchased only on submission of a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), which must be used within one year from the date of issue. Muzzle- loading handguns are exempted from the permit requirement. [The 1928 law had required a permit for the purchase of long guns as well, but the National Socialists dropped this requirement.]
* Holders of a permit to carry weapons (Waffenschein) or of a hunting license do not need a Weapons Acquisition Permit in order to acquire a handgun.
* A hunting license authorizes its bearer to carry hunting weapons and handguns.
* Firearms and ammunition, as well as swords and knives, may not be sold to minors under the age of 18 years. [The age limit had been 20 years in the 1928 law.]
* Whoever carries a firearm outside of his dwelling, his place of employment, his place of business, or his fenced property must have on his person a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein). A permit is not required, however, for carrying a firearm for use at a police-approved shooting range.
* A permit to acquire a handgun or to carry firearms may only be issued to persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a permit. In particular, a permit may not be issued to:
1. persons under the age of 18 years;
2. legally incompetent or mentally retarded persons;
3. Gypsies or vagabonds;
4. persons under mandatory police supervision [i.e., on parole] or otherwise temporarily without civil rights;
5. persons convicted of treason or high treason or known to be engaged in activities hostile to the state;
6. persons who for assault, trespass, a breach of the peace, resistance to authority, a criminal offense or misdemeanor, or a hunting or fishing violation were legally sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than two weeks, if three years have not passed since the term of imprisonment.
* The manufacture, sale, carrying, possession, and import of the following are prohibited:
1. "trick" firearms, designed so as to conceal their function (e.g., cane guns and belt-buckle pistols);
2. any firearm equipped with a silencer and any rifle equipped with a spotlight;
3. cartridges with .22 caliber, hollow-point bullets.
That is the essence. Numerous other provisions of the law relate to firearms manufacturers, importers, and dealers; to acquisition and carrying of firearms by police, military, and other official personnel; to the maximum fees which can be charged for permits (3 Reichsmark); to tourists bringing firearms into Germany; and to the fines and other penalties to be levied for violations.
The requirements of "trustworthiness" and of proof of need when obtaining a permit are troubling, but it should be noted that they were simply carried over from the 1928 law: they were not formulated by the National Socialists. Under the National Socialists these requirements were interpreted liberally: a person who did not fall into one of the prohibited categories listed above was considered trustworthy, and a statement such as, "I often carry sums of money," was accepted as proof of need.
The prohibitions of spotlight-equipped rifles and hollow-point .22 caliber ammunition were based on considerations that the former were unsporting when used for hunting, and the latter were inhumane.
Now read the German firearms laws for yourself, either in the original German exactly as they were published by the German government in the Reichsgesetzblatt or in the complete English translations which are provided here. If you want to skip over most of the legal gobbledygook and go directly to the most pertinent part of the National Socialist Firearms Law -- the part pertaining to the purchase, ownership, and carrying of firearms by private citizens -- turn to page 35 (Part IV of the Law). Note, as already mentioned above, that two separate and distinct types of permits are referred to: a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), required only for purchasing a handgun; and a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein), required for carrying any firearm in public. Interestingly enough, as also mentioned above, a hunting license could take the place of both these permits.
When you have read the two laws reproduced here, you will understand that it was Hitler's enemies, not Hitler, who should be compared with the gun-control advocates in America today. Then as now it was the Jews, not the National Socialists, who wanted the people's right of self- defense restricted. You will understand that those who continue to make the claim that Hitler was a gun-grabber are either ignorant or dishonest. And you will understand that it was not until 1945, when the communist and democratic victors of the Second World War had installed occupation governments to rule over the conquered Germans that German citizens were finally and completely denied the right to armed self-defense.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Random Crimes? Newsnet14.com Flyer: Print This out and Spread the Word!
This flyer, produced by Newsnet14, is not copyrighted. Visit WWW.NEWSNET14.COM to get a copy.
The racial murder and rape of White women in America
How the so-called “Civil Rights” Movement in America has led to loss of the most important civil right of all: life.
The almost simultaneous murders of White co-eds at two different, prominent universities, Auburn and University of North Carolina, should bring attention to an epidemic of brutal African-American crimes against White women in the United States.
The murder of Eve Carson, Student Body President of UNC has shocked her campus and its surrounding community to its core. Ms. Carson was found murdered in the middle of an intersection just outside downtown Chapel Hill on Wednesday, March 5th. Her body … which had two gunshot wounds, including one to the head, laid just a mile away from her SUV, which was left abandoned. Bank ATM video revealed that the murderer-carjacker, an African American, apparently attempted to get cash from Carson’s stolen ATM card shortly after the crime.
In a similar recent incident, police arrested another African American attacker, Courtney L. Lockhart, 23, for the grisly murder and attempted rape of Auburn University freshman co-ed, Lauren Burk, on March 4. Courtney was arrested on March 7 after having brutally pistol-whipped the face of another White victim, 72-year-old Marjorie Llewellyn of Newnan, Alabama and briefly kidnapping her at gunpoint during an armed robbery and attempted carjacking earlier in the day.
The recent murders of two White coeds at major universities by Black predators underscore a racial reality that the mass media in America hides from the public: the tens of millions of White victims of Black criminality in America. Over the past four decades since the “civil rights” movement, crime figures show that millions of crimes have been committed by Blacks and other non-White predators against White people. The crimes include robbery, assault, rape and murder.
The racial component of crime in America has been largely ignored. It took a major newspaper outside of America to address the shocking epidemic Black crime in America.
Black crime rates against White people are many times greater than White crimes against Blacks. You wouldn’t know it by reading or listening to America’s mass media. Saturation national and international news coverage is given to the very few White cross-race crimes against Blacks such as the James Byrd dragging case in Texas, as well as the media-hyped Tawana Brawley case in New Jersey and the alleged rape of a Black stripper by White lacrosse team members at Duke University. Both of those latter cases, after months of front-page, sensationalized coverage decrying “White racism,” turned out to be complete hoaxes.
There is an incredible disproportionate rate of Black crimes against Whites in contrast to White crimes against Blacks. Per capita Black cross racial crimes of 50 or even 100 percent greater than Whites would be bad enough, but the Black crime rates against Whites are actually many times greater than White on Black crimes. Blacks are an estimated 57 (that is 5,700 percent!) times more likely to commit violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times (13,600 percent!) more likely to commit robbery. (see the color of crime report published by the New Century Foundation – an analysis of crime figures taken from official Justice Department crime reports) http://www.nc-f.org/
Perhaps the most shocking of all the crime data dealing with cross-race crime is the incredible rate of crime by Black males against White women. According to U.S. Justice Department figures over 34,460 White women are sexually assaulted or raped by Black men each year, and most authorities believe that the actual rape figures are at least twice the reported number. In perhaps the most shocking crime figure of all is the number of White rapes against Black women. Statistically, it is 0! Because they have fewer than 10 cases nationally.
According to murder figures released by the Justice Department in 2002, , Black predators are at least 22 times (2,200 percent) more likely to murder White women than the reverse. In regard to gang attacks including the horrible specter of gang rape, the figures are literally off the charts, with at least a 200 times (that’s 20,000 percent!) greater chance of Blacks committing gang assaults and that includes both White men and women victims!
The staggering personal tragedies connected with these huge crime numbers should be a national scandal. Yet, the facts go largely unreported. How many times have the public seen media portrayals of historical or contemporary racial discrimination against Black people. But, the question is, “In the terms of the most important of human rights, how does the discrimination of racially segregated water fountains or neighborhoods or schools compare with the racially born crimes of black slaughter and physical attacks levied against thousands of White people each year?
America has been treated to thousands of media articles for instance about the frontier-style vigilante justice of lynchings, events which have occurred at least since the time of the American Revolution when they began on the Virginia frontier. Lynching got its name from Colonel Charles Lynch of Bedford County. He defended his community against outlaws and against Tories who were treacherously aiding the British. The Lynch organizations not only captured suspicious characters but gave them trials. With the frontier moving west and often with not a single law enforcement officer for hundreds of miles, vigilante committees often hunted down criminals and meted out punishment which was called “lynching.”
Lynching also became prominent again in the face of terrible outrages against innocent women and children during the Black Reconstruction period in the South and was mostly employed there against suspected Black rapists and murderers, but lynching was often practiced against Whites in the South, and quite often against criminal Whites in the North and West.
Of course, everyone today naturally condemns the practice of lynching, as well they should. Mob violence cannot be defended. But, if one wants to characterize lynching as a racial crime because lynchings were more commonly employed against Blacks in the South than against Whites, a few facts must be taken into account. If one considers disproportionate rates of Black lynching in the South, one must also consider the Black disproportionate crime rate.
1) Many scholars who have studied the history of lynching in the United States make it clear that lynching wasn’t simply a racial crime, but one primarily exacted on criminals whether they were Black or White. Consider the fact that even today, Blacks commit more murders than Whites in the United States, and Blacks are many times more likely to commit interracial race crimes such as rape and murder. As pointed out by federal crimes studies, a Black man is 57 times more likely to commit a violent crime against Whites than vice-versa, thousands of times more likely to rape a White women than Whites are likely to rape Black women, and 22 times more likely to murder a White woman than vice versa. There is no reason not to suspect that similar extremely high rates of Black criminality have existed historically. Most of the lynchings up until the War Between the States were against Whites and Significant numbers of Whites in the late 19th and early 20th Century were also lynched. So, considering the rates of crime, historical lynching has always been proportionate to Black crime rates and not one simply based on racist motives.
2) One must also understand that historical lynching was most often applied to those guilty of rape, robbery or murder. Of course, there were cases where innocent men were lynched, but in contrast, the thousands of White women and other White victims of Black crime today are guilty of no crime. Lynching cannot be excused in any way, but most of those men lynched were undoubtedly guilty of vicious and horrible crimes against the innocent, especially against women and children. Those were the kinds of heinous crimes that really drove the extra-legal executions.
The U.S. Senate recently issued an apology for not historically taking a stand against lynching, something that has been condemned because for part of its history Blacks disproportionately suffered from it.
If that is deemed appropriate, why does the U.S. Senate stand mute against the brutal rape of over 34,000 White women per year by Blacks. In just one year the number of White women raped by Black males is 6 times the total number of all lynchings during the entire history of the United States. (Estimated to be about 5,000 including both Whites and Blacks)
If racial disparity is an issue, then the Black rate of murder and rape against White men and women has a far greater racial disparity than that of White and Black lynchings. Remember, according to the U.S. Justice Department official figures, 34,000 White women were sexually assaulted compared to less than ten Black women assaulted by White men.
One should also consider that the victims of lynching were men; only a small number were women (estimates are between 75 and 100 women lynched in the history of the United States), and most of those were lynched for crimes committed along with their male criminal partners. Compare the small number of women who suffered lynching compared to the 34,000 women who suffer from Black rape every year. In addition, 700 innocent White women are murdered each and every year by Blacks. Where is outrage about this racial crime?
If one wants to talk about moral outrages, the historical lynching of men who were overwhelmingly criminal and guilty of horrendous crimes, is quite minor compared to the mass murder and rape of the innocent going on literally as you read these lines. While you are reading this article another White woman will suffer rape at the hands of a Black man. (One White woman every 9 minutes if you accept the conventional wisdom that less than half of rapes are reported).
Next time someone comes up and tells you about the horrors of Jim Crow and segregation, how it was so terribly awful that African Americans, as well as White Americans lived in their own neighborhoods, went to their own schools, and even drank from their own water fountains, think about that supposed horror compared to horrendous violations of the most important civil right of all, the right to live and not suffer grievous personal assault or even death.
The fact of the matter is that Blacks as well as the Whites of America were a lot safer in the days of “evil segregation” than we are now. When America was a nation living by the values of White heritage, culture, standards and civilization, most Black kids were born legitimate in two parent families, they were not being shot down by each other on the steps of their homes, millions were not enslaved by drugs, half of them were not in prison or in some part of the criminal justice system. In a real sense, for countless millions of African Americans, the most important civil and human rights of all have been lost by the so-called victories of the civil rights movement.
For Whites the change has been just as dramatic. Millions of our people are now victims of Black robbery, rape, and murder. Millions of White boys and girls whose parents can’t afford private or parochial education, suffer in mostly Black public schools filled with sexual and physical intimidation, filthy language and dismal standards, drugs and theviolence of the “gangsta rap” culture, a culture that violates the sanctity of womanhood and all of the most basic of human rights.
Millions more of our elderly are practically home prisoners in their own neighborhoods. Let the media and government tell them about the supposed civil rights and blessings of forced integration. Millions more of hardworking, better-qualified White, middle-class people suffer from the racial discrimination of so-called affirmative action. Constant government and media concern about “civil rights” is the greatest con job in history, because so-called civil rights has taken away practically every conceivable civil right of the American people, including the most important one of all, the right to live and the right not to be physically abused, or raped, or robbed or hurt.
Let the government and media drone on about Black “civil rights” to the grieving parents of Eve Carson and Lauren Burk, two bright and beautiful White women who were so full of love and life but who now have lost the most precious civil right of all, the right to life itself.
They were murdered not just by the predators on our streets, but by a media and government establishment who stripped away their right to live a safe and full life. They were murdered by media who have lied to the American people about the joys of multiracialism and multiculturalism. It is a media that constantly tell us the wonderful and loving future we have in America as it is subversively morphed into a mostly non-White nation. It is the same media who have instilled collective White guilt for real or imagined crimes of White history, but have hidden the terrible crimes going on against us, our heritage, freedom and survival, right before our eyes.
Lauren and Eva were murdered by the politicians who sold us out for the bloc votes and for the approval of media that celebrates the coming extinction of our people, faith, heritage and nation. They have also sold their souls and ours to the Jewish money men of American politics who make them pledge their subservience to Israel as a quote, “Jewish State for the Jewish people,” while they would not even dare to invoke the term “White people” except in denigration and apology.
Eva and Lauren no longer have breath in their bodies. To the last moments of their lives they probably never for an instant understood why they lost their lives. They probably never knew that our people were in a desperate struggle for their existence, and they probably never dreamed they could be a casualty in that war.
Eva and Lauren are gone now. They cannot speak to us except by what they left behind. But, they cannot be forgotten. We who are aware of the crisis facing our people will remember them. We will remember them as they were, beautiful expressions of humanity made unique and special by their own efforts and by the imprint of our people’s DNA spiral.
For, in the end, the most important civil right of all, is life.
The almost simultaneous murders of White co-eds at two different, prominent universities, Auburn and University of North Carolina, should bring attention to an epidemic of brutal African-American crimes against White women in the United States.
The murder of Eve Carson, Student Body President of UNC has shocked her campus and its surrounding community to its core. Ms. Carson was found murdered in the middle of an intersection just outside downtown Chapel Hill on Wednesday, March 5th. Her body … which had two gunshot wounds, including one to the head, laid just a mile away from her SUV, which was left abandoned. Bank ATM video revealed that the murderer-carjacker, an African American, apparently attempted to get cash from Carson’s stolen ATM card shortly after the crime.
In a similar recent incident, police arrested another African American attacker, Courtney L. Lockhart, 23, for the grisly murder and attempted rape of Auburn University freshman co-ed, Lauren Burk, on March 4. Courtney was arrested on March 7 after having brutally pistol-whipped the face of another White victim, 72-year-old Marjorie Llewellyn of Newnan, Alabama and briefly kidnapping her at gunpoint during an armed robbery and attempted carjacking earlier in the day.
The recent murders of two White coeds at major universities by Black predators underscore a racial reality that the mass media in America hides from the public: the tens of millions of White victims of Black criminality in America. Over the past four decades since the “civil rights” movement, crime figures show that millions of crimes have been committed by Blacks and other non-White predators against White people. The crimes include robbery, assault, rape and murder.
The racial component of crime in America has been largely ignored. It took a major newspaper outside of America to address the shocking epidemic Black crime in America.
Black crime rates against White people are many times greater than White crimes against Blacks. You wouldn’t know it by reading or listening to America’s mass media. Saturation national and international news coverage is given to the very few White cross-race crimes against Blacks such as the James Byrd dragging case in Texas, as well as the media-hyped Tawana Brawley case in New Jersey and the alleged rape of a Black stripper by White lacrosse team members at Duke University. Both of those latter cases, after months of front-page, sensationalized coverage decrying “White racism,” turned out to be complete hoaxes.
There is an incredible disproportionate rate of Black crimes against Whites in contrast to White crimes against Blacks. Per capita Black cross racial crimes of 50 or even 100 percent greater than Whites would be bad enough, but the Black crime rates against Whites are actually many times greater than White on Black crimes. Blacks are an estimated 57 (that is 5,700 percent!) times more likely to commit violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times (13,600 percent!) more likely to commit robbery. (see the color of crime report published by the New Century Foundation – an analysis of crime figures taken from official Justice Department crime reports) http://www.nc-f.org/
Perhaps the most shocking of all the crime data dealing with cross-race crime is the incredible rate of crime by Black males against White women. According to U.S. Justice Department figures over 34,460 White women are sexually assaulted or raped by Black men each year, and most authorities believe that the actual rape figures are at least twice the reported number. In perhaps the most shocking crime figure of all is the number of White rapes against Black women. Statistically, it is 0! Because they have fewer than 10 cases nationally.
According to murder figures released by the Justice Department in 2002, , Black predators are at least 22 times (2,200 percent) more likely to murder White women than the reverse. In regard to gang attacks including the horrible specter of gang rape, the figures are literally off the charts, with at least a 200 times (that’s 20,000 percent!) greater chance of Blacks committing gang assaults and that includes both White men and women victims!
The staggering personal tragedies connected with these huge crime numbers should be a national scandal. Yet, the facts go largely unreported. How many times have the public seen media portrayals of historical or contemporary racial discrimination against Black people. But, the question is, “In the terms of the most important of human rights, how does the discrimination of racially segregated water fountains or neighborhoods or schools compare with the racially born crimes of black slaughter and physical attacks levied against thousands of White people each year?
America has been treated to thousands of media articles for instance about the frontier-style vigilante justice of lynchings, events which have occurred at least since the time of the American Revolution when they began on the Virginia frontier. Lynching got its name from Colonel Charles Lynch of Bedford County. He defended his community against outlaws and against Tories who were treacherously aiding the British. The Lynch organizations not only captured suspicious characters but gave them trials. With the frontier moving west and often with not a single law enforcement officer for hundreds of miles, vigilante committees often hunted down criminals and meted out punishment which was called “lynching.”
Lynching also became prominent again in the face of terrible outrages against innocent women and children during the Black Reconstruction period in the South and was mostly employed there against suspected Black rapists and murderers, but lynching was often practiced against Whites in the South, and quite often against criminal Whites in the North and West.
Of course, everyone today naturally condemns the practice of lynching, as well they should. Mob violence cannot be defended. But, if one wants to characterize lynching as a racial crime because lynchings were more commonly employed against Blacks in the South than against Whites, a few facts must be taken into account. If one considers disproportionate rates of Black lynching in the South, one must also consider the Black disproportionate crime rate.
1) Many scholars who have studied the history of lynching in the United States make it clear that lynching wasn’t simply a racial crime, but one primarily exacted on criminals whether they were Black or White. Consider the fact that even today, Blacks commit more murders than Whites in the United States, and Blacks are many times more likely to commit interracial race crimes such as rape and murder. As pointed out by federal crimes studies, a Black man is 57 times more likely to commit a violent crime against Whites than vice-versa, thousands of times more likely to rape a White women than Whites are likely to rape Black women, and 22 times more likely to murder a White woman than vice versa. There is no reason not to suspect that similar extremely high rates of Black criminality have existed historically. Most of the lynchings up until the War Between the States were against Whites and Significant numbers of Whites in the late 19th and early 20th Century were also lynched. So, considering the rates of crime, historical lynching has always been proportionate to Black crime rates and not one simply based on racist motives.
2) One must also understand that historical lynching was most often applied to those guilty of rape, robbery or murder. Of course, there were cases where innocent men were lynched, but in contrast, the thousands of White women and other White victims of Black crime today are guilty of no crime. Lynching cannot be excused in any way, but most of those men lynched were undoubtedly guilty of vicious and horrible crimes against the innocent, especially against women and children. Those were the kinds of heinous crimes that really drove the extra-legal executions.
The U.S. Senate recently issued an apology for not historically taking a stand against lynching, something that has been condemned because for part of its history Blacks disproportionately suffered from it.
If that is deemed appropriate, why does the U.S. Senate stand mute against the brutal rape of over 34,000 White women per year by Blacks. In just one year the number of White women raped by Black males is 6 times the total number of all lynchings during the entire history of the United States. (Estimated to be about 5,000 including both Whites and Blacks)
If racial disparity is an issue, then the Black rate of murder and rape against White men and women has a far greater racial disparity than that of White and Black lynchings. Remember, according to the U.S. Justice Department official figures, 34,000 White women were sexually assaulted compared to less than ten Black women assaulted by White men.
One should also consider that the victims of lynching were men; only a small number were women (estimates are between 75 and 100 women lynched in the history of the United States), and most of those were lynched for crimes committed along with their male criminal partners. Compare the small number of women who suffered lynching compared to the 34,000 women who suffer from Black rape every year. In addition, 700 innocent White women are murdered each and every year by Blacks. Where is outrage about this racial crime?
If one wants to talk about moral outrages, the historical lynching of men who were overwhelmingly criminal and guilty of horrendous crimes, is quite minor compared to the mass murder and rape of the innocent going on literally as you read these lines. While you are reading this article another White woman will suffer rape at the hands of a Black man. (One White woman every 9 minutes if you accept the conventional wisdom that less than half of rapes are reported).
Next time someone comes up and tells you about the horrors of Jim Crow and segregation, how it was so terribly awful that African Americans, as well as White Americans lived in their own neighborhoods, went to their own schools, and even drank from their own water fountains, think about that supposed horror compared to horrendous violations of the most important civil right of all, the right to live and not suffer grievous personal assault or even death.
The fact of the matter is that Blacks as well as the Whites of America were a lot safer in the days of “evil segregation” than we are now. When America was a nation living by the values of White heritage, culture, standards and civilization, most Black kids were born legitimate in two parent families, they were not being shot down by each other on the steps of their homes, millions were not enslaved by drugs, half of them were not in prison or in some part of the criminal justice system. In a real sense, for countless millions of African Americans, the most important civil and human rights of all have been lost by the so-called victories of the civil rights movement.
For Whites the change has been just as dramatic. Millions of our people are now victims of Black robbery, rape, and murder. Millions of White boys and girls whose parents can’t afford private or parochial education, suffer in mostly Black public schools filled with sexual and physical intimidation, filthy language and dismal standards, drugs and theviolence of the “gangsta rap” culture, a culture that violates the sanctity of womanhood and all of the most basic of human rights.
Millions more of our elderly are practically home prisoners in their own neighborhoods. Let the media and government tell them about the supposed civil rights and blessings of forced integration. Millions more of hardworking, better-qualified White, middle-class people suffer from the racial discrimination of so-called affirmative action. Constant government and media concern about “civil rights” is the greatest con job in history, because so-called civil rights has taken away practically every conceivable civil right of the American people, including the most important one of all, the right to live and the right not to be physically abused, or raped, or robbed or hurt.
Let the government and media drone on about Black “civil rights” to the grieving parents of Eve Carson and Lauren Burk, two bright and beautiful White women who were so full of love and life but who now have lost the most precious civil right of all, the right to life itself.
They were murdered not just by the predators on our streets, but by a media and government establishment who stripped away their right to live a safe and full life. They were murdered by media who have lied to the American people about the joys of multiracialism and multiculturalism. It is a media that constantly tell us the wonderful and loving future we have in America as it is subversively morphed into a mostly non-White nation. It is the same media who have instilled collective White guilt for real or imagined crimes of White history, but have hidden the terrible crimes going on against us, our heritage, freedom and survival, right before our eyes.
Lauren and Eva were murdered by the politicians who sold us out for the bloc votes and for the approval of media that celebrates the coming extinction of our people, faith, heritage and nation. They have also sold their souls and ours to the Jewish money men of American politics who make them pledge their subservience to Israel as a quote, “Jewish State for the Jewish people,” while they would not even dare to invoke the term “White people” except in denigration and apology.
Eva and Lauren no longer have breath in their bodies. To the last moments of their lives they probably never for an instant understood why they lost their lives. They probably never knew that our people were in a desperate struggle for their existence, and they probably never dreamed they could be a casualty in that war.
Eva and Lauren are gone now. They cannot speak to us except by what they left behind. But, they cannot be forgotten. We who are aware of the crisis facing our people will remember them. We will remember them as they were, beautiful expressions of humanity made unique and special by their own efforts and by the imprint of our people’s DNA spiral.
For, in the end, the most important civil right of all, is life.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Pictures Of Suspect In Eve Carson Murder Released
I guess the ‘random crime’ is just another college student murdered by a black thug
CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — Detectives are searching for a man videotaped using the ATM card of the University of North Carolina student body president who was shot to death on a city street. Chapel Hill Police Chief Brian Curran released two surveillance photos Saturday of the suspect taken at an ATM machine in Chapel Hill, but declined to say when the photos were taken. Police also released a photo of a baseball cap the suspect appears to be wearing in both of the surveillance pictures. Curran said the photos are their biggest break so far in the case.
Eve Carson was found Wednesday morning on a street not far from campus. She had been shot several times, including once in the right temple, and her body was found lying in the street.
Her truck was discovered Thursday, hours after police identified Carson as the shooting victim.
Curran said police have circulated the picture with police departments in North Carolina, hoping their officers might be able to identify the suspect.
He said the ATM photos show a young man in a baseball cap and hooded sweat shirt driving a sport utility vehicle that may be Carson’s Toyota Highlander.
The police chief said Carson appears to be the victim of a random crime.
CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — Detectives are searching for a man videotaped using the ATM card of the University of North Carolina student body president who was shot to death on a city street. Chapel Hill Police Chief Brian Curran released two surveillance photos Saturday of the suspect taken at an ATM machine in Chapel Hill, but declined to say when the photos were taken. Police also released a photo of a baseball cap the suspect appears to be wearing in both of the surveillance pictures. Curran said the photos are their biggest break so far in the case.
Eve Carson was found Wednesday morning on a street not far from campus. She had been shot several times, including once in the right temple, and her body was found lying in the street.
Her truck was discovered Thursday, hours after police identified Carson as the shooting victim.
Curran said police have circulated the picture with police departments in North Carolina, hoping their officers might be able to identify the suspect.
He said the ATM photos show a young man in a baseball cap and hooded sweat shirt driving a sport utility vehicle that may be Carson’s Toyota Highlander.
The police chief said Carson appears to be the victim of a random crime.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
The AWB is Back!
Radio interview with Andre Visagie, general of the Afrikaner Resistance Movement / Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB)
Saturday, March 1, 2008
US lets sex offenders re-enter the southern border
PHOENIX -- Illegal immigrant sex offenders sneaking across the Mexican border into the desert Southwest revealed a problem with the way criminals are being deported, a CBS 5 investigation uncovered.
When an illegal immigrant commits a crime in Arizona he or she is sent to jail or prison and then deported back to Mexico. However, 5 Investigates uncovered that instead of dropping the offenders deep into Mexico; they are being dropped off right at the border.
5 Investigates videotaped an Immigration and Customs Enforcement van carrying two illegal immigrants, who just finished serving prison, to the border.
Upon arriving at the border, the offenders stepped out, were handed their belongings and set free.
Investigates interviewed the men on what they planned to do next; one man said he planned to turn around and attempt to go back to California where his family lives.
Federal officials, such as Katrina Kane from ICE, said they face difficulties as their ways of deportation are limited.
"It's not the only way that we're deporting them. It's one of the ways we are deporting, you know, individuals to Mexico," said Kane.
Others disagree and believe there are better ways to ensure people charged with sex crimes do not re-enter society.
Scott Berkowitz of RAINN, an organization that lobbies Congress of behalf of rape victims, said he believes prison may be the best way to deal with those charges with sex crimes.
"The best thing we can do is keep them in prison for a much longer time," Berkowitz said.
Border Patrol agents report seeing illegal immigrants every night attempting to cross the border, many of them sex offenders.
Last year, on a small sector of thoroughfare near Nogales, Border Patrol caught nearly 400 offenders trying to sneak across in this one area alone.
Border Patrol Agent Mike Scioli revealed to 5 Investigates just how frequent these convicts enter back into the country.
"Within just the last week, we caught three major sex offenders and it was anything from lewd acts with a minor to child molestation; I believe one was a rape victim or sexual assault," Scioli said.
Agents said they identified sex offenders from North Carolina, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Iowa and California that were deported to Mexico and then turned around and re-entered the U.S. at the Arizona border.
Police said the Chandler rapist was one of these offenders.
The Chandler rapist is an illegal immigrant who was deported twice from California to Mexico.
Sex offenders and other ex-cons caught re-entering the U.S. face new prison terms up to 20 years.
However, the convicts 5 Investigates interviewed said the consequences of getting caught will not stop them from attempting to re-enter the U.S.
When an illegal immigrant commits a crime in Arizona he or she is sent to jail or prison and then deported back to Mexico. However, 5 Investigates uncovered that instead of dropping the offenders deep into Mexico; they are being dropped off right at the border.
5 Investigates videotaped an Immigration and Customs Enforcement van carrying two illegal immigrants, who just finished serving prison, to the border.
Upon arriving at the border, the offenders stepped out, were handed their belongings and set free.
Investigates interviewed the men on what they planned to do next; one man said he planned to turn around and attempt to go back to California where his family lives.
Federal officials, such as Katrina Kane from ICE, said they face difficulties as their ways of deportation are limited.
"It's not the only way that we're deporting them. It's one of the ways we are deporting, you know, individuals to Mexico," said Kane.
Others disagree and believe there are better ways to ensure people charged with sex crimes do not re-enter society.
Scott Berkowitz of RAINN, an organization that lobbies Congress of behalf of rape victims, said he believes prison may be the best way to deal with those charges with sex crimes.
"The best thing we can do is keep them in prison for a much longer time," Berkowitz said.
Border Patrol agents report seeing illegal immigrants every night attempting to cross the border, many of them sex offenders.
Last year, on a small sector of thoroughfare near Nogales, Border Patrol caught nearly 400 offenders trying to sneak across in this one area alone.
Border Patrol Agent Mike Scioli revealed to 5 Investigates just how frequent these convicts enter back into the country.
"Within just the last week, we caught three major sex offenders and it was anything from lewd acts with a minor to child molestation; I believe one was a rape victim or sexual assault," Scioli said.
Agents said they identified sex offenders from North Carolina, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Iowa and California that were deported to Mexico and then turned around and re-entered the U.S. at the Arizona border.
Police said the Chandler rapist was one of these offenders.
The Chandler rapist is an illegal immigrant who was deported twice from California to Mexico.
Sex offenders and other ex-cons caught re-entering the U.S. face new prison terms up to 20 years.
However, the convicts 5 Investigates interviewed said the consequences of getting caught will not stop them from attempting to re-enter the U.S.
Holocaust "Surviver" Admits Story is a Fraud.
A woman's best-selling account of how she lost her parents to the Holocaust and survived by living with wolves in the forests of Europe has been exposed as a fabrication.
"Surviving with Wolves", first published 11 years ago, has been translated into 18 languages and was recently turned into a film.
But in a statement issued by her lawyers, Misha Defonseca, who was born Monique De Wael, confessed that while her parents, members of Belgium's resistance, were killed by the Nazis her family was not Jewish and most of the events of the book were made up.
"Ever since I can remember, I felt Jewish," she said. "There are times when I find it difficult to differentiate between reality and my inner world. The story in the book is mine. It is not the actual reality - it was my reality, my way of surviving."
"At first, I did not want to publish it, but then I was convinced. I ask for forgiveness for all those who feel betrayed but I ask them to put themselves in the place of a small girl of four years old who has lost everything and who has to survive."
In her book, Mrs Defonseca describes being taken in by the De Wael family as a young girl.
"She was given a new name, a new home, and forced into a new religion," claims publicity for her book.
Knowing only that her parents had "gone East", the young Misha sets out to find them equipped only with a tiny compass.
After crossing Belgium, Germany and Poland alone on foot, close to starvation in a vast forest, she was adopted by a family of wolves.
Mrs Defonseca's book became a runaway bestseller after its publication in Italy and France and has made her a millionaire.
But suspicions were aroused in Belgium's Jewish community and some of her old school friends from the Anderlecht district of Brussels recognised her.
They insisted that she was born and raised a Catholic by the De Wael family and lived with her grandfather after her parents were deported.
"She belonged to a very good family and lived in the most beautiful house on the street," one former friend told La Meuse newspaper.
"Monique was always 'special'. She wanted to be the 'star' where ever she went."
Despite growing evidence in recent weeks of inconsistencies in her story, including a birth certificate showing she was not Jewish, Mrs Donfonseca insisted she was telling the truth until she released her statement.
At the film's premiere in France last month she even turned up with a little compass, "my most precious talisman", which she said had helped her find her way on her journey east through the forests of occupied Europe.
Vera Belmont, the director of the French film "Survivre avec les Loups" has taken the revelations well.
Her spokeswoman said: "The movie is a fiction from the book. No matter if it's true or not - she believes it is, anyway - she just thinks it's a beautiful story."
Jane Daniel, the publisher Mrs Defonseca claims persuaded her to write the book, is less forgiving after being sued by the author in a breach of contract case for £11 million.
She now intends to challenge the judgment on the grounds that Mrs Defonseca's original contract had warranted the truth of the story.
"Surviving with Wolves", first published 11 years ago, has been translated into 18 languages and was recently turned into a film.
But in a statement issued by her lawyers, Misha Defonseca, who was born Monique De Wael, confessed that while her parents, members of Belgium's resistance, were killed by the Nazis her family was not Jewish and most of the events of the book were made up.
"Ever since I can remember, I felt Jewish," she said. "There are times when I find it difficult to differentiate between reality and my inner world. The story in the book is mine. It is not the actual reality - it was my reality, my way of surviving."
"At first, I did not want to publish it, but then I was convinced. I ask for forgiveness for all those who feel betrayed but I ask them to put themselves in the place of a small girl of four years old who has lost everything and who has to survive."
In her book, Mrs Defonseca describes being taken in by the De Wael family as a young girl.
"She was given a new name, a new home, and forced into a new religion," claims publicity for her book.
Knowing only that her parents had "gone East", the young Misha sets out to find them equipped only with a tiny compass.
After crossing Belgium, Germany and Poland alone on foot, close to starvation in a vast forest, she was adopted by a family of wolves.
Mrs Defonseca's book became a runaway bestseller after its publication in Italy and France and has made her a millionaire.
But suspicions were aroused in Belgium's Jewish community and some of her old school friends from the Anderlecht district of Brussels recognised her.
They insisted that she was born and raised a Catholic by the De Wael family and lived with her grandfather after her parents were deported.
"She belonged to a very good family and lived in the most beautiful house on the street," one former friend told La Meuse newspaper.
"Monique was always 'special'. She wanted to be the 'star' where ever she went."
Despite growing evidence in recent weeks of inconsistencies in her story, including a birth certificate showing she was not Jewish, Mrs Donfonseca insisted she was telling the truth until she released her statement.
At the film's premiere in France last month she even turned up with a little compass, "my most precious talisman", which she said had helped her find her way on her journey east through the forests of occupied Europe.
Vera Belmont, the director of the French film "Survivre avec les Loups" has taken the revelations well.
Her spokeswoman said: "The movie is a fiction from the book. No matter if it's true or not - she believes it is, anyway - she just thinks it's a beautiful story."
Jane Daniel, the publisher Mrs Defonseca claims persuaded her to write the book, is less forgiving after being sued by the author in a breach of contract case for £11 million.
She now intends to challenge the judgment on the grounds that Mrs Defonseca's original contract had warranted the truth of the story.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Black rapes white woman as payback for slavery.
RALEIGH - The 36-year-old woman cried on the witness stand in the Wake County Courthouse on Wednesday, recalling the night more than eight years ago when she said a man broke into her Raleigh apartment and raped her.
The woman testified during the first day of the criminal trial of James Bernard Henderson, a Georgia man who was named as a suspect last year in the September 1999 crime when a DNA match led police to him. She is not being named in line with a News & Observer policy not to identify those who report sexual assaults.
Henderson, 41, is facing felony charges of first-degree forcible rape, first-degree burglary, first-degree kidnapping and first-degree forcible sexual offense.
He faces more than 90 years in prison if he is convicted of all those charges, according to court records and Superior Court Judge Henry W. Hight Jr.
His attorney, Gary Presnell, indicated he would argue that the woman was not raped but had a consensual sexual relationship with Henderson.
The woman denied that, telling jurors she had never met Henderson before the attack. That night, she said, a man broke into her apartment, made her cover her face with a blanket and raped her.
She had fallen asleep on her couch after returning from a weekend trip to the mountains with her boyfriend, she said.
"I woke up to a vision of a man coming into my apartment with a gun," she said.
The woman also told jurors Henderson repeatedly said he was attacking her because her forefathers raped and enslaved his ancestors. The woman is white, and Henderson is black.
Henderson was not identified as a suspect until 2007, when the case was reopened and evidence was tested by agents with the State Bureau of Investigation as part of a renewed effort to analyze rape cases where evidence had been collected but not tested for DNA.
After the 1999 rape, the evidence was not initially tested because police had no named suspect and the SBI declined to test the evidence without that, Jeff Cruden, a Wake County assistant district attorney, said in his opening arguments.
Last year, evidence collected that night, including semen, was retested, and Raleigh police learned from SBI agents that the DNA matched that of Henderson, who was living in Georgia. He was arrested there in April and has been held in the Wake County jail since.
The trial is expected to continue today.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
The Jena Six........and Other Scams
Patrick Buchanan, American Cause, February 15, 2008
Some Americans do not understand why the sight of a noose causes such a visceral reaction,” declared President Bush to the White House gathering for Black History Month.
As The Washington Post rushed to remind us, President Bush was “responding to news coverage of such episodes as the ‘Jena Six.’”
But if history is about truth, not myth, that news coverage deserves another look, before the Jena Six enter the history books alongside Emmett Till and “the Scottsboro Boys.”
By now, most folks know the media story. White students at Jena High in Louisiana hung nooses on a tree to warn black students not to sit under it. After a fistfight over this racist outrage, black kids in the fight were indicted for attempted murder, while the white racists who hung the nooses walked away with a verbal spanking.
Last September, 20,000 traveled to Jena to march against this prosecutorial outrage. Fortunately, however, there are still a few real journalists around. Among them are Craig Franklin, assistant editor of the Jena Times, whose wife teaches at Jena High, and Charlotte Allen, who wrote an extended piece for The Weekly Standard. According to Allen and Franklin, here are the facts and chronology you have been denied by the Mainstream Media.
There never was a “whites-only” tree at Jena High. Both races sat under it, though whites congregated there. The nooses, or lariats, were the work of three young teens, who got the idea from watching “Lonesome Dove” on TV, where rustlers are hanged.
Franklin says they were a joke aimed at white friends on the rodeo team. As they were painted in Jena High’s gold and black, Allen reports that the kids said the nooses were directed at a rival school’s Western-themed football team.
When school officials confronted them, all were remorseful. All had black friends, and none knew the nooses were offensive to blacks.
Far from being let off, they spent “nine days at an alternative facility, followed by two weeks of in-school suspension, Saturday detentions, attendance at Discipline Court and evaluations by licensed mental-health professionals.”
They were not prosecuted for a hate crime because none of those who investigated the incident believed they committed a hate crime. Hung on Aug. 31, 2006, the nooses had been taken down instantly. Only a few students ever saw them. Case closed.
September, October and November passed at Jena High with no racial conflict emanating from the noose incident of August.
On Dec. 1, however, Robert Bailey Jr. tried to crash a party at the Fair Barn in Jena. One Justin Sloan, 22, not a student, put a fist in his face. So witnesses and Bailey reported to police. And Sloan was prosecuted for battery.
On Dec. 2, Bailey and two friends jumped a white male entering the “Gotta Go” grocery. When the latter ran to get a shotgun out of his car, they wrested it from him and took it. So two witnesses at the “Gotta Go” agreed.
Two days later came the “schoolyard fight.” Only this was no fight. Black students barricaded an exit to the gym and lay in wait for Justin Barker. As Barker went for another exit, he was struck in the head from behind by Mychal Bell. Multiple witnesses say Barker fell unconscious as a gang of eight or 10 blacks stomped and kicked him in the head. The assistant principal who reached Barker thought he was dead. Barker’s emergency room bill ran to more than $5,000.
When the six were arrested and charged with attempted second-degree murder, none of them and none of the witnesses mentioned the noose incident. It had had nothing to do with this vicious racist assault.
After the charges were reduced to battery, Bell, tried as an adult, was indeed convicted by an all-white jury—because no blacks answered the summons to the jury pool. Why was Bell prosecuted as an adult? Because he had four prior convictions for crimes of violence.
After his conviction was overturned, Bell was ordered retried as a juvenile. Rather than face the same 17 witnesses, he pled guilty in December to hitting Barker from behind, slamming his head into a concrete beam and kicking him in the head. Sentenced to 18 months in juvenile detention, he agreed to testify against his co-conspirators.
While some $500,000 has been raised for the Jena Six defense, its whereabouts is unknown. Bailey did pose on the Internet grinning, however, with $100 bills in his mouth. Bell’s mom is said to be driving a new Jaguar, and Bailey’s mom a new Beamer. Two other Jena Sixers, Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis, appeared in rapper attire on Black Entertainment Television as presenters of a Hip-Hop Award.
A week ago, 6-foot, 6-inch Purvis, who had transferred to Hebron High in Carrollton, Texas, was charged with assault, choking a student and ramming his head into a bench.
And that’s the Saga of The Jena Six. It belongs right up there with the Rev. Al’s other classics: Tawana Brawley and the Duke rape case.
Some Americans do not understand why the sight of a noose causes such a visceral reaction,” declared President Bush to the White House gathering for Black History Month.
As The Washington Post rushed to remind us, President Bush was “responding to news coverage of such episodes as the ‘Jena Six.’”
But if history is about truth, not myth, that news coverage deserves another look, before the Jena Six enter the history books alongside Emmett Till and “the Scottsboro Boys.”
By now, most folks know the media story. White students at Jena High in Louisiana hung nooses on a tree to warn black students not to sit under it. After a fistfight over this racist outrage, black kids in the fight were indicted for attempted murder, while the white racists who hung the nooses walked away with a verbal spanking.
Last September, 20,000 traveled to Jena to march against this prosecutorial outrage. Fortunately, however, there are still a few real journalists around. Among them are Craig Franklin, assistant editor of the Jena Times, whose wife teaches at Jena High, and Charlotte Allen, who wrote an extended piece for The Weekly Standard. According to Allen and Franklin, here are the facts and chronology you have been denied by the Mainstream Media.
There never was a “whites-only” tree at Jena High. Both races sat under it, though whites congregated there. The nooses, or lariats, were the work of three young teens, who got the idea from watching “Lonesome Dove” on TV, where rustlers are hanged.
Franklin says they were a joke aimed at white friends on the rodeo team. As they were painted in Jena High’s gold and black, Allen reports that the kids said the nooses were directed at a rival school’s Western-themed football team.
When school officials confronted them, all were remorseful. All had black friends, and none knew the nooses were offensive to blacks.
Far from being let off, they spent “nine days at an alternative facility, followed by two weeks of in-school suspension, Saturday detentions, attendance at Discipline Court and evaluations by licensed mental-health professionals.”
They were not prosecuted for a hate crime because none of those who investigated the incident believed they committed a hate crime. Hung on Aug. 31, 2006, the nooses had been taken down instantly. Only a few students ever saw them. Case closed.
September, October and November passed at Jena High with no racial conflict emanating from the noose incident of August.
On Dec. 1, however, Robert Bailey Jr. tried to crash a party at the Fair Barn in Jena. One Justin Sloan, 22, not a student, put a fist in his face. So witnesses and Bailey reported to police. And Sloan was prosecuted for battery.
On Dec. 2, Bailey and two friends jumped a white male entering the “Gotta Go” grocery. When the latter ran to get a shotgun out of his car, they wrested it from him and took it. So two witnesses at the “Gotta Go” agreed.
Two days later came the “schoolyard fight.” Only this was no fight. Black students barricaded an exit to the gym and lay in wait for Justin Barker. As Barker went for another exit, he was struck in the head from behind by Mychal Bell. Multiple witnesses say Barker fell unconscious as a gang of eight or 10 blacks stomped and kicked him in the head. The assistant principal who reached Barker thought he was dead. Barker’s emergency room bill ran to more than $5,000.
When the six were arrested and charged with attempted second-degree murder, none of them and none of the witnesses mentioned the noose incident. It had had nothing to do with this vicious racist assault.
After the charges were reduced to battery, Bell, tried as an adult, was indeed convicted by an all-white jury—because no blacks answered the summons to the jury pool. Why was Bell prosecuted as an adult? Because he had four prior convictions for crimes of violence.
After his conviction was overturned, Bell was ordered retried as a juvenile. Rather than face the same 17 witnesses, he pled guilty in December to hitting Barker from behind, slamming his head into a concrete beam and kicking him in the head. Sentenced to 18 months in juvenile detention, he agreed to testify against his co-conspirators.
While some $500,000 has been raised for the Jena Six defense, its whereabouts is unknown. Bailey did pose on the Internet grinning, however, with $100 bills in his mouth. Bell’s mom is said to be driving a new Jaguar, and Bailey’s mom a new Beamer. Two other Jena Sixers, Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis, appeared in rapper attire on Black Entertainment Television as presenters of a Hip-Hop Award.
A week ago, 6-foot, 6-inch Purvis, who had transferred to Hebron High in Carrollton, Texas, was charged with assault, choking a student and ramming his head into a bench.
And that’s the Saga of The Jena Six. It belongs right up there with the Rev. Al’s other classics: Tawana Brawley and the Duke rape case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
