Saturday, November 27, 2010

A Review Of Band Of Brothers

I have watched this miniseries and considered writing my own review. I have put it off for several months and then came across this, I may still do one in the future but for now this is a worthwhile read and a very accurate review of the show.

Full Story With Links

Band of Brothers, the 2001 TV miniseries, was produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks.

Episode 9 was directed by David Frankel and written by John Orloff.

Based on the 1992 book by Stephen E. Ambrose, Band of Brothers. E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler’s Eagle Nest, Simon and Schuster (reviewed edition by Pocket Books, 2001).

In ten episodes, Band of Brothers depicts how E (“Easy”) Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, trained in America and England and then fought from D-Day through to the end of the European phase of WWII. It is a technically strong and gripping production. The battle scenes are among the most realistic I have seen, though one must allow for the demands of the cinematic medium — emphasis of a few individuals and spatial compression of combat groups. I am reminded of the grim and gritty street battle sequences in Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan. This review looks at the ninth episode, which does not depict military conflict but is itself something of a black operation in the culture wars.

As our own Edmund Connelly has repeatedly demonstrated, Jewish interests have frequently been pushed by American television and Hollywood films in various ways, often as a backdrop to stories unrelated to ethnicity, like the omnipresent upper class Anglo twit and the Black genius technical expert. The 9th episode of Band of Brothers, titled “Why We Fight”, represents an unprecedented level of ambition — to claim America’s WWII sacrifices as motivated by the desire to save Jews from Nazi persecution, to make America’s sacrifice in WWII all about the Jews, not about Americans doing their duty in a tragic internecine conflict.

The episode opens with a scene of devastation in the German town of Thalem, on April 11, 1945. There is rubble in the streets and townspeople are cleaning up. A group of relaxed G.I.s looks on from a balcony. An impromptu chamber orchestra of old men is playing a Beethoven dirge.

Then a flash-back: “One month earlier, Sturzelberg, Germany”. The war is as good as over. The Wehrmacht has given up the fight. Roosevelt’s death is announced. There are scenes of looting by officers and men; of a soldier having sex with an enthusiastic blond German girl; of drinking. The bridge over the Rhine at Remagen is announced captured.

The company is still under orders, though the men are beginning to think about life back in the States. The company moves out in convoy. A Jewish G.I. — the only Jewish soldier in the series and in the book — talks about his plans for after the war. “I’m going to find a nice Jewish girl.”

Masses of German POWs march by in orderly ranks. An officer says admiringly that even in defeat the Germans look like soldiers. But the Jewish G.I. sees nothing but objects of hate and contempt, standing up in the vehicle and screaming: “You stupid fascist pigs. . . . You ignorant, servile scum!” This displays a sophisticated vocabulary for someone who we are told in the final episode went back to driving taxis after the War. The scene does not occur in Ambrose’s book.

The company drives past a scene of summary executions of three uniformed Germans, who are kicked out of a building, made to kneel, then unceremoniously shot in the head, blood spraying. Their killers then begin to go through pockets. The killers are also uniformed but are not Americans or British. Perhaps Czech troops. The troops of Easy Company are shocked by the murders. They look down grimly, except for the Jewish G.I., who smiles.

A patrol in a forest near Landsberg in Bavaria discovers a concentration camp full of starving prisoners. (A 21-minute clip, including the concentration camp material, is available here.) The 101st did in fact liberate a camp in the area. The Jewish G.I. is the company’s translator. He translates the words of an inmate being interviewed by the commander. This is a work camp for Jews, pause, and Gypsies. The scene in Ambrose’s book does not mention Jews or Gypsies. It is described as a work camp (pp. 262–263).

German civilians in the local town deny any knowledge of the camp but they are not believed by the G.I.s. Food is requisitioned from the local town, from a bakery. We see a fat baker complaining as his entire stock is removed without explanation or payment. In Ambrose’s book there is no such character. Instead an officer finds a store of cheese and has it distributed to the camp inmates without incident (p. 262).

Whether or not there was a baker, the way he is presented is an exemplary propaganda construct of the cheapest Hollywood films. His jiggling neck and self righteous possessiveness stands for all German civilians in the town who, we are led to assume, must have known of the camp. It is implied that they remained knowingly well fed while the Jews starved. An officer threatens the baker with his pistol and accuses him of knowing about the camp. The baker’s unpleasant appearance is another example of Spielberg using hackneyed propaganda technique. It is not enough that a person do wrong. He must also wear a black hat and waxed mustachio.

The G.I.s begin to feed the camp inmates but a doctor warns of the danger of overeating following starvation. The inmates must remain in the camp under medical supervision. The Jewish G.I. is ordered to make the announcement, which he does reluctantly because he knows how much the inmates desire to be free at last. After making the announcement and pleading with the inmates he collapses in tears.

The next day all able-bodied German civilians are ordered to clean up the camp. The scenes of the cleanup are disturbing, as townspeople wade among the corpses.

The wife of a German general, seen earlier in her home facing down an American looter, is now seen pulling at bodies, humbled and distraught.

Flash forward to the episode’s start date, 11 April. Hitler’s death is reported. The company receives new orders: to occupy Berchtesgaden, Hitler’s mountain retreat.

The closing message of the episode reads: “These camps were part of the Nazi attempt to effect the ‘Final Solution’ to the ‘Jewish Question’”.

In fact these were work camps for building jet fighters. As the book states: “It was a work camp, not an extermination camp.” The film makes no mention of the POWs from Russia, Italy and other countries, German communists and homosexuals who also suffered at the hands of the Nazis. Spielberg’s film and many others like it steal the memory of the camps and the sufferings of many nations and relabel them “Jewish property”. This is an obvious lapse of scholarly standards in deference to Jewish sentiment.

The next caption reads: “Between 1942 and 1945 five million ethnic minorities and six million Jews were murdered — many of them in the camps.”

This again distinguishes Jewish suffering inside and outside the camp system. It implies that Jews were not an ethnic minority, which is incorrect. And it omits the ethnic majorities in Slavic lands who suffered inside and outside the camps. The high death toll among Polish and Russian civilians during the War is deemed unworthy of mention in Spielberg’s film. If the forced labour of Jews was an act of genocide, why not pay respects to the Russian, Ukrainian, and Polish nations?

The episode claims the forced work camps for Jewish victimhood. Its lies and distortions must have been deliberate because the script was read by experts. This is a work of black propaganda that exploits fine acting and technical wizardry.

Who did Spielberg choose to direct and write the episode? With David Frankel as director and John Orloff as writer it has the appearance of complete ethnic vertical integration. Was nothing left to chance? The other executive producer was Tom Hanks, not a Jew. But he would have been no counterweight to Spielberg’s ethnic dedication. Hanks is a typical tame Hollywood WASP who has done nothing for his people, produced no equivalent of Schindler’s List.

The series received the recognition it deserved. Orloff’s depiction of the concentration camp was honoured by the American Jewish community, not at all surprising considering that it was written for them. Here he is receiving the award for Best TV film from Sam Rubin at the 2nd Annual Jewish Image Awards in Film and Television at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles, Ca. Tuesday, Sept. 24, 2002.

More on the book version

The episode’s depiction of the concentration camp differs radically from that in the book. Instead of a concentration camp full of Jews, the book describes a “Displaced Persons’ camp” at Dormagen, containing forced labourers brought from occupied Europe (p. 255). The 101st did liberate the concentration camp Kaufering IV near Landsberg on the Lech in April 1945 but this section of Ambrose’s book is not titled “Why We Fight”. The book and most of the miniseries depicted the experiences of Easy Company. Not the liberation scene. This is based on a film made by the U.S. Army at the time, and supplied to Spielberg and Hanks by the European Holocaust Memorial organization in Landsberg (see links section of the Wikipedia article).

There is documentary evidence of the mixed status and ethnic composition of workers in the Landsberg camps. In October 1944 a local administrator estimated that there were 21 camps with 5,251 inmates working for various manufacturing companies. This included eight separate Jewish camps, with one more under construction. The administrator noted that there were also prisoners of war from Poland, Russia, and France. These figures do not tally with another estimate of just one facility near Landsberg for the period 15 July to 15 August 1944, when the workforce consisted of 9,000 prisoners brought from a concentration camp — many Jewish — plus 3,000 foreign workers and 3,900 German workers. Either way there were a great many non-Jews involved.

The phrase “why we fight” does not occur in the book. Ambrose quotes Maj. Winters as saying: “Now I know why I am here” (p. 263), which was an understandable emotional reaction to the misery of the camp, not a considered philosophical statement, and not one linked exclusively to the plight of Jews. It expressed a humanitarian sentiment. It is not a warrant to rehearse the Holocaust ritual yet again and push aside the men’s true responses and priorities.

The soldiers felt that they were fighting for America, not to end suffering most Americans did not know about until after the war’s end.

Less than one page of text about the camp becomes half an episode in Spielberg’s rendering. In the book there is no mention of the Jewish Holocaust. Yet the series is presented as based on Ambrose’s book. The G.I.s did not see Jews; they saw suffering humanity. Spielberg’s biggest crime is to have rewritten the scene to represent the G.I.s as feeling and thinking like him, focused on his ethnic kin. In effect he claims the Finest Generation for the Jews.

There are also errors of omission. For example the series ignores the praiseful reaction of the G.I.s to Germans, once they began to occupy German territory. There is a story! It could have been told by someone who was sympathetic to the innocent German civilians or merely objective and looking for an interesting tale to tell. The series could have depicted American G.I.s discovering how similar the Germans were to themselves. There are dramatic possibilities in this realization. Intimate moments of self doubt, of stunned realization. Close-up encounters with vulnerable human beings; flawed but very much like Americans. One can imagine a story in which some soldiers realize they have been fighting a sort of civil war. This is not a fanciful construction — it is right there in Ambrose’s book.

The book deals with American-German relations in some details. For example the soldiers began to realize how similar the Germans were to their own loved ones — they began to realize their own ethnic kinship. On one occasion a G.I. was clearing an apartment block so that it could be requisitioned by the company. This was wartime and the G.I.s’ hearts were hardened. The procedure was to go from door to door telling the occupants they had five minutes to vacate their apartments, taking no bedclothes so that the G.I.s would be comfortable.

They came pouring out, crying, lamenting, frightened. “I knocked on this one door,” Carson recalled, “and an elderly lady answered. I looked at her and she stared at me. God, it was a picture of my own grandmother. Our eyes met and I said, ‘Bleib hier,’ or stay here.”(p. 260, emphasis added.)

This is genetic similarity at work — one genotype recognizing a similar other. The old lady did not speak. All the G.I. perceived was her face. There is more along these lines that one would never guess from Spielberg’s series, except for the Jewish G.I.’s compassion for his people in the camps

Ambrose summarizes the American soldier’s judgment of various nationalities during WWII, mostly negative.

He felt the Arabs were despicable, liars, thieves, dirty, awful, without a redeeming feature. The Italians were liars, thieves, dirty, wonderful, with many redeeming features, but never to be trusted.

The French provincials and Parisians had assorted negative traits, while the British were “brave, resourceful, quaint, reserved, dull”. The Dutch were “simply wonderful” though few American soldiers were in Holland.

Wonder of wonders, the average G.I. found that the people he liked best, identified most closely with, enjoyed being with, were the Germans. Clean, hard-working, disciplined, educated, middle-class in their tastes and lifestyles (many G.I.s noted that so far as they could tell the only people in the world who regarded a flush toilet and soft white toilet paper as a necessity were the Germans and the Americans), the Germans seemed to many American soldiers as “just like us” (pp. 248–9).

Americans admired the German civilians who, of their own volition, began picking up rubble the morning after a battle. In that regard they compared the Germans favourably to other Europeans they had encountered. How easy it would have been, how inexpensive, to have the G.I.s utter a few words of praise as they watched German civilians clearing the street at the start of Episode 9.

Ambrose suggests that some of the good impression made by the Germans was due to the comfort provided by their middle class homes. But even Webster, a convinced German hater, could not help but soften. He wrote to his parent in April 1945 that the “Germans I have seen so far have impressed me as clean, efficient, law-abiding people”. They were churchgoers. (Couldn’t Hanks persuade Spielberg to allow just one scene of Germans in church?) “In Germany everybody goes out and works”, unlike other nationalities. “They are cleaner, more progressive, and more ambitious than either the English or the French” (p. 250).

The shock of ethnic recognition experienced by G.I.s as they entered Germany has been discussed elsewhere. Ambrose quotes one author, Glenn Gray, thus: “The enemy could not have changed so quickly from a beast to a likable human being. Thus, the conclusion is nearly forced upon the G.I.s that they have been previously blinded by fear and hatred and the propaganda of their own government” (p. 250).

The only pronounced reference to ethnicity concerns the only Jewish member of Easy Company, Joseph Liebgott. He is seen early in the series objecting to an anti-Semitic outburst by a fellow private. He has no visible Jewish characteristics, unsurprising because he is played by Ross McCall, a Catholic Scotsman. Apparently Spielberg knows when genetic similarity is useful. Because the character played by McCall is so different to the real Liebgott as described in the book, I have referred to the former as “the Jewish G.I.” This is the (miniseries) character who screamed collective insults at German prisoners of war and smiled at the murder of others.

The Jewish G.I. character is given some balanced resolution in the tenth and final installment directed by Mikael Salomon. In July 1945 the division is occupying a part of Bavaria, which includes Hitler’s mountain retreat, the Eagle’s Nest. For much of that episode he is in a vengeful state of mind, occupying a black and white world where all Germans are on the dark side. He even kills a man on the hearsay that he had been a concentration camp commander and personally questioning him (well, he demands his death; another G.I. pulls the trigger). This is true to the book. We detect some softening when the Jewish G.I. translates a speech by a German officer. The officer is about to disband his company, and a watching American officer asks the Jewish G.I. to interpret. At first the translation is delivered mockingly, but the speech ends up winning the respect even of someone twisted by hate. The German officer begins by saying that it has been a long hard war. That he is proud of his men. That a spirit of comradeship has arisen from sharing the same dangers. They had become brothers. Some of the German troops weep. Later we see a friendly conversation between a German and an American soldier manning a checkpoint together, in which the German shows a human face (he recommended the Italian front over the Russian). The closing scene of the episode is in documentary format. A veteran of the 101st Airborne recites the great St. Crispin’s Day speech by Henry V in Shakespeare’s play, echoing the German officer’s words.

Other scenes relating to ethnicity include one in which half a dozen German prisoners of war are murdered in cold blood in the D-Day episode. The murderer is a handsome Anglo with Nietzschean views and homicidal demeanour, who hands around cigarettes to the unarmed Germans and gives them lights before shooting them down without provocation. The killer is not coarse or low class and he speaks standard American English without a trace of provincial or big-city accent. In the last few episodes the character is rehabilitated to become a hero. He is never punished or admonished. What is the point of this invented scene, which does not occur in the book? The closest event in the book is when a few German prisoners are shot while attempting to jump their guards (p. 77). The very different film version associates Anglo ethnicity with mindless, psychopathic aggression.

Despite a scene in which a German POW shows a human face (before being murdered as above), the Germans are once again nameless aggressors. Not much change from the usual Hollywood formula. Among the G.I.s the weak characters are all Anglos. The Italian soldiers have ethnic residues but are mainly regular guys.


The Finest Generation were fallible human beings who were nevertheless as noble a band of brothers as there could be. They fought for their nation’s interests. Most were patriots at a time when America was seen by most citizens as a White republic. The ninth episode of Band of Brothers is an act of identity theft, an attempt to rewrite history to misrepresent the American soldiers of WWII as having different identities and different motivations than they in fact had. The ninth episode and to some extent the whole miniseries is part of an effort to airbrush from the American people’s memory the authentic historical American nation and replace it with a lie that serves leftist ideology and Jewish interests.

How can this sort of outrage occur? Once a group is beyond criticism, let alone censure, its ambition can expand to fill the status vacuum thus created. That privilege is created by the ban on anti-Semitism so broadly defined that it includes reasoned criticism of Jewish political culture. Any attempt to criticize Spielberg or other Jews for ethnic bias would attract the anti-Semitism accusation, unleashing real penalties formal or informal. No other group is so privileged.

The replacement of White Christian historical memories with minority perspectives and sometimes by self-hate fantasies is limited by the inertial quality of those memories. The interviewees at the start of the 9th episode had mixed feelings towards Germans. Only one said that Germans were thought of as evil. One said that he could have been friends with them under different circumstances. All the veterans were relaxed. None got excited or showed hostility. None mentioned the concentration camp liberated by the 101st. None mentioned Nazis. This is congruent with the book’s cursory treatment of the work camp. While the cruel conditions in the camp were deplored, the G.I.s had seen other horrors.

Living memories also limit the chutzpah of the casting director. It is true that a Scot was cast as the Jewish G.I. However the predominance among the actors cast for the film of Northwestern European racial types and Anglo regional accents is accurate, as is the segregation of Negroes to transport duties. It will take one or two generations longer before these aspects can be falsified with impunity. It is reasonable to conclude that this is the direction film is moving when a Jewish producer can tell his White Gentile audience that their fathers fought and died not in defence of their nation but for his own ethnic interests, knowing that he is safe from effective reproach.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Black Actor Kills Mother With A Sword

No surprise here.

An actor who appeared in hit show Ugly Betty has been arrested after allegedly killing his mother with a samurai sword inside her New York home.

Michael L Brea was taken into custody by a SWAT team after police spent 45 minutes trying to get into the apartment when neighbours reported hearing screaming from the home.

Brea had to eventually be tasered by police at the Brooklyn apartment where authorities said they were met with a 'very bloody' scene.

Police said they found Yannick Brea kneeling with fatal lacerations to her head in a blood-spattered bathroom.

Her son was in a nearby bedroom holding the three-foot sword and babbling about religion and repentance, police said.

A neighbour claimed the 31-year-old had taken his mother hostage and could be heard shouting passages from the Bible.

He claimed the actor had been shouting 'repent. repent,' before stabbing his 51-year-old mother with the sword.

There have been claims that woman was found decapitated.

Police had been called to a domestic disturbance at Brea's home prior to the killing.

They had left, but in the early hours of this morning neighbours again called police after hearing screams of help.

Bernard Bren who lives nearby claimed he woke up when he heard screaming.

'It sounded like a lady's voice and after a while I just didn't hear the woman's voice again,' he said.

'I heard this wild screaming', said Gregory Clare who lived below the apartment where Yannick was brutally killed.

'Michael was yelling, 'Repent, repent, sinner, sinner', over and over again', Clare said. 'He was screaming, 'You never accepted Jesus'. It was real loud'.

He added: 'I saw Michael last Saturday. He was asking about my daughter. He was always real kind.

Another neighbour said: 'Her screams woke me up. Screams I'll never forget. I heard [Michael] rambling. He was incoherent'.

Brea, who appeared in one episode of Ugly Betty, was apparently taken out of the Prospect Heights apartment on a stretcher and is currently at Kings County Hospital.

He will undergo a psychiatric assessment before police decide whether to charge him.

Neighbours said they could see splattered blood on the apartment windows.

The accused killer's cousin John Brea was stunned when he heard news of Yannick's death.

'She was a very loving person. She helped to raise all of us', he said, adding that his aunt was a hard-working woman.

When notified of the killing, Brea's ex-girlfriend said: 'Michael had the whole world in his hands. This is a shock'.

Brea is a Haitian-American actor who was also a dancer in film Step Up 3D. He was described by neighbours as 'quiet' and into martial arts.

Brea, who was described by neighbors as 'quiet,' was into martial arts and was a low-level Mason.

He apparently took the murder weapon from a Masonic lodge after a meeting on Monday night and then later used it on his mother, said the suspect's uncle Martial Brea.

His nephew was not cleared to take one of the ceremonial swords which typically has stainless steel blades with a short, black grip.

'Something happened that made him do it,' said Martial. 'The devil entered him.'

The murder suspect has a twin brother Marcel who is a physical trainer who apparently went to the hospital this morning with a friend.

Brea bought a Subway restaurant shop three years ago and he is said to have given away 300 sandwiches for free on Thanksgiving in 2008.

'I remember growing up and my mother was always feeding people who were less fortunate," Brea once told Haitian movie site 'My parents raised me to always share and to give charity in the name of God.'

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

The Color Of Crime

The next time you get in an argument with some dumbass who is in denial about racial crime stats link them to this article.


Explaining that blacks and Hispanics are more prone to violent crime than whites is like explaining that the sun comes up in the East. Everyone knows it. The crime statistics prove it, as do the nightly news programs and daily newspapers—whatever the producers of Law and Order want you to believe.

Now a black editorial writer at the Washington Post, Jonathan Capehart, has stumbled upon this truth. Capehart reports that he ran into New York City’s police chief at breakfast one morning and asked about the city’s rising crime rate. The conversation led Capehart to examine the New York City Police Department’s crime data. The color of murder and gun violence in New York

Lo and behold, Capehart learned something he apparently hadn’t known before: Blacks and Hispanics commit essentially all the violent crime in New York. They are also the most likely crime victims.

Capehart quoted the report for 2010 directly:

"Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter victims are most frequently Black (67.0%) or Hispanic (28.1%). White victims account for (3.2%) of all Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter victims while Asian /Pacific Islanders account for (1.8%) of all Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter victims. The race/ethnicity of known Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter suspects mirrors the victim population with Black (65.3%) and Hispanic (30.6%) suspects accounting for the majority of suspects. White suspects account for (1.8%) of all Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter suspects while Asian/Pacific Islanders accounted for (2.4%) of the known Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter suspects.

“The Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter arrest population is similarly distributed. Black arrestees (53.8%) and Hispanic arrestees (36.4%) account for the majority of Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter arrestees while White arrestees (7.1%) and Asian/Pacific Islander (2.2%) arrestees account for the remaining portions of the Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter arrest population."[PDF]

Seeing the news so starkly distressed Capehart. He writes:

"In short, 95.1 percent of all murder victims and 95.9 percent of all shooting victims in New York City are black or Hispanic. And 90.2 percent of those arrested for murder and 96.7 percent of those arrested for shooting someone are black and Hispanic. I don’t even know where to begin to describe the horror I still feel looking at those numbers. But the word ‘hunted’ comes to mind."

Capehart feels the same horror Jesse Jackson feels. "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life," Jackson once admitted, "than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery — then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."

Jackson is relieved when he sees whites footstepping behind him, as are all liberals, black or white, because even a staunch ideologue knows the truth: Blacks and Hispanics commit almost all of the violent crime in this country.

Capehart has finally seen the true color of crime. But six months ago, The New York Times’ Al Baker [Email him]unbosomed himself of a jeremiad that suggested the NYPD was "profiling" because a study of "stop-and-frisk" data showed that most of those stopped and frisked were, well, black and Hispanic. [New York Minorities More Likely to Be Frisked, May 12, 2010]

Reported Baker: "[b]lacks and Latinos were nine times as likely as whites to be stopped by the police in New York City in 2009, but, once stopped, were no more likely to be arrested."

Blacks are 23 percent of the Big Apple’s population, but constituted 55 percent of the stops. Hispanics are 32 percent of the population, but were 28 percent of stops. Whites, at 35 percent of the population, accounted for 10 percent of stops.

These data, compiled by the leftist Center for Constitutional Rights, allegedly prove the police are profiling,—although blacks were not arrested more than whites after a stop. And more importantly, although the readily available crime data — that used by Capehart — demonstrates that profiling isn’t the problem.

After the Times took its shot at the thin blue line, the City Journal’s sensible Heather Mac Donald discharged a blunderbuss loaded with data to blow a hole in the profiling charge. She published a piece in her magazine and (to the Times’ credit) she was allowed to publish a similar piece on the op-ed page of the Times. [Fighting Crime Where the Criminals Are, June 25, 2010]

Wrote Mac Donald, "[y]ou cannot properly analyze police behavior without analyzing crime". Mac Donald eviscerated the Times by quoting from the 2009 edition [PDF]of the same report that Capehart used.

"Blacks committed 66 percent of all violent crimes in the first half of 2009 (though they were only 55 percent of all stops and only 23 percent of the city’s population). [Emphasis added]Blacks committed 80 percent of all shootings in the first half of 2009. Together, blacks and Hispanics committed 98 percent of all shootings. Blacks committed nearly 70 percent of all robberies. Whites, by contrast, committed 5 percent of all violent crimes in the first half of 2009, though they are 35 percent of the city’s population (and were 10 percent of all stops). They committed 1.8 percent of all shootings and less than 5 percent of all robberies. The face of violent crime in New York, in other words, like in every other large American city, is almost exclusively black and brown. "[Distorting the Truth About Crime and Race, May 14, 2010 ]

Mac Donald observed that the police department’s Compstat process crunches crime data that tell police where the crime is—and something else important: blacks and Hispanics are stopped and frisked less frequently that the propensity for violent crime would seem to demand.

Yet the New York Times, Mac Donald correctly concludes, "assumes that policing should mirror census data"—that is, if blacks constitute 23 percent of New York City’s population, then blacks should account for 23 percent of all those stopped by police.

But the police can’t operate that way. They have to patrol crime-besieged neighborhoods and arrest the people who commit the crimes. And most of those people are blacks and Hispanics.

Thus, cops spend most of their time making busts in minority neighborhoods like the South Bronx and Harlem, not on the Upper East Side.

Unlike the professional race hustlers, Jonathan Capehart seems to understand the obvious:

"People have railed against black-on-black crime for decades. And yet it persists. Yes, there are a host of factors that push someone to a life of crime, but not all of them have to do with the limitations or failures of society. Some folks are just plain evil, and no amount of social intervention will stop them from preying on people, especially people who look like them.

“People have also railed — and rightly so — against the disproportionate application of the law against people of color. Bob Herbert has used barrels of New York Times ink against the NYPD's stop-and-frisk policy. But when faced with such stark murder and shooting statistics, what’s a police commissioner supposed to do to ensure the safety of the public?

“All of society has an obligation to ensure that its citizens can live their lives in peace and security. The police are doing their job."

So Capehart gets it. That’s very good.

But Capehart, perhaps innocently, missed the black-on-white aspect of these crime reports—rape being just one example.

Consider these data, right below those Capehart cited:

"Rape victims are most frequently Black (46.0%) or Hispanic (34.2%). White victims account for (15.1%) of all Rape victims while Asian/Pacific Islanders account for (4.7%) of all Rape Victims.

“Rape suspects are most frequently Black (54.9%) or Hispanic (31.3%). White suspects account for (7.4%) of all Rape suspects while Asian/Pacific Islanders accounted for (6.3%) of the known Rape suspects.

“Rape arrestees are most frequently Black (48.9%) and Hispanic (38.2%). White arrestees (6.8%) and Asian/Pacific Islander arrestees (5.8%) account for the remaining portions of the Rape arrestee population."

So blacks and Hispanics account for about 87 percent of those arrested for rape; whites about 7 percent. These data mean that almost all inter-racial rape is black-on-white or Hispanic-on-white.

Had Capehart looked even further, he would have found data from the Justice Department, duly reported by Lawrence Auster at that showed

"[i]n the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man. What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man." [The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States May 03, 2007]

In other words, white women are as entitled to feel "hunted" as Capehart.

Upshot is, if you’re a law-abiding black man or white woman in New York City, life can be dangerous.

Blacks and Hispanics are waging a fratricidal war of murder, rape and robbery in New York City—and rampaging against whites at will.

Capehart, to his great credit, is aghast.

Not so the New York Times’ Baker. Nothing to see here, folks, he assures bystanders. Move along. Move along.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

TSA Slogans

Land Of The Free: RT Reporters Arrested In Georgia

Young Boy Strip Searched By TSA

This is a police state, how long will you sit down and let it continue to degenerate?

Here is the description from the video.

Lets get the facts straight first. Before the video started the boy went through a metal detector and didn't set it off but was selected for a pat down. The boy was shy so the TSA couldn't complete the full pat on the young boy. The father tried several times to just hold the boys arms out for the TSA agent but i guess it didn't end up being enough for the guy. I was about 30 ft away so i couldn't hear their conversation if there was any. The enraged father pulled his son shirt off and gave it to the TSA agent to search, thats when this video begins.


Always carry a camera with you and film these type of actions, we MUST spread the word.

AIPAC Imploding?


Top AIPAC officials visited prostitutes, regularly watched porn at work: claim

Is US's most influential advocate for Israel about to implode?

A former foreign policy chief for the largest Israeli lobby in the US is threatening to provide evidence members of the organization regularly trafficked in classified US government information.

The claim comes in the midst of an increasingly ugly lawsuit in which parties have alleged or admitted to mass viewing of pornography among senior staffers at AIPAC as well as extra-marital affairs.

Steve Rosen, who was in charge of foreign policy issues at AIPAC until 2005, is suing his former employer for $20 million, alleging that AIPAC defamed him when they fired him. Rosen and colleague Keith Weissman were charged in 2004 with espionage for allegedly pressuring a Washington Post reporter into running classified US government information they had obtained about Iran. The charges were dropped last year, evidently due to lack of evidence.

But AIPAC fired Rosen years before the charges were dropped, on the grounds that Rosen's "conduct did not comport with what AIPAC would expect of its employees."

But Rosen disputes this, and his lawsuit aims to prove that what he allegedly did was standard practice at AIPAC. The Washington Post's Jeff Stein reports:

Rosen says his actions were common practice at the organization. He said his next move is to show that AIPAC, Washington’s major pro-Israeli lobbying group by far, regularly traffics in sensitive U.S. government information, especially material related to the Middle East.

“I will introduce documentary evidence that AIPAC approved of the receipt of classified information,” he said by e-mail. “Most instances of actual receipt are hard to document, because orally received information rarely comes with classified stamps on it nor records alerts that the information is classified.”

But Rosen said he would produce “statements of AIPAC employees to the FBI, internal documents, deposition statements, public statements and other evidence showing that [the] receipt of classified information by employees other than [himself] ... was condoned … for months prior to being condemned in March 2005 after threats from the prosecutors.”

"Unfortunately for AIPAC, Rosen has 180 documents which could prove that Howard Kohr, AIPAC's executive director, and probably the AIPAC board as well, knew exactly what Rosen was doing," reports M.J. Rosenberg at Al-Jazeera.

He suggests that Rosen's threat to reveal AIPAC trafficking of data is meant to intimidate the lobby group into settling out of court. Making the lawsuit go away "will not be easy - even if Steve Rosen ultimately accepts a payoff from the organization and refrains from telling what he knows," Rosenberg writes.

Other elements of the lawsuit could prove embarrassing, if not politically toxic. Lawyers for AIPAC got Rosen to admit he viewed pornography on work computers, but Rosen has countered that the head of AIPAC and his closest colleagues openly watched porn at work. The Jewish Daily Forward reports:

“I witnessed [AIPAC executive director] Howard Kohr viewing pornographic material, [Kohr’s secretary] Annette Franzen viewing pornographic material, probably a dozen other members of the staff,” Rosen said in his deposition. He added that, according to a Nielsen survey, more than a quarter of Americans regularly view pornographic websites at their workplace.

Later in his deposition, the former lobbyist also said he had heard from directors at AIPAC about their visits to prostitutes and he claimed Kohr had routinely used “locker room language” at the AIPAC offices.

Rosenberg posits that the lawsuit "could well destroy the lobby without ever making its way on to the front page. AIPAC is under siege, and is spending millions to stay alive."

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Gordon Duff On The Holocaust

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Last week, 17 men were arrested in New York for defrauding Germany out of $42 million in payments to phony holocaust survivors. Tens of thousands of American Jews had filed for pensions from Germany claiming to be concentration camp survivors. All swore they had been in the camps, told stories about gas chambers, human skin lampshades and such but not a single one had been in a camp at all. The state of Israel claims to have, alive today, nearly one million holocaust survivors.

As many as 90% of these may well be, not only frauds but many could easily be former concentration camp guards themselves, far more likely than surviving death camps. What better place to hide than Israel?

With numbers of camp survivors going up each year, we tend to forget we are talking about death camps. There were few survivors and most of them died immediately after the war. Those alive were found dying and couldn’t be saved, and most of them weren’t Jews but rather Russians, Gypsies, Communists, trade unionists and anti-Fascists.

Look at the numbers. There were only 5.3 million Jews listed as living in Europe, outside the USSR, in 1940. In a rough average, 12 death camps, filled to the brim with gas chambers and crematoriums ran 24 hours a day for 1000 days. Some are said, in testimony of literally thousands, to have killed from 17,000 to 20,000 per day. Lets use the figure, 10,000 per day times 12 camps times 1000 days.

Where do a million survivors come from? I can see a thousand, ten thousand but not 30,000 and certainly not the 15 million necessary to justify the current number of claimed survivors according to typical actuarial tables for healthy adults of the period, those who were not starved and tortured for years. Look at Vietnam veterans. Only 700,000 of 2.9 million survive 35 years after the war. Something is wrong here.


There are laws in the United States that punish people who wear military medals they didn’t earn or claim other such honors. When veterans discover someone claiming falsely to have served in war, that individual is arrested but also publicly humiliated. They are hunted down like dogs.

There are concentration camp survivors living in America, people who suffered incomprehensibly at the hands of the Nazis. However, there are also, in America we now know, tens of thousands or more who claim falsely to be of the heroic numbers from that period and numbers inside Israel that are unimaginable. Why are these people not punished?

As a Vietnam veteran, I share a common problem with others. For 4 decades, I met veteran after veteran, many were children when the war ended, but each claims some honor tied to military service based on a movie or television show. I have met, over the years, hundreds of such individuals, many at meetings of veterans organizations. I don’t find it horrible or destructive but it is disturbing and I won’t even remotely begin comparing service in Vietnam with the experience of a death camp.


Last week, authorities announced that those who had wrongly filed for benefits had been fooled somehow. I can see fooling someone as to whether they had seen a televisions show or not but there is only one American I can think of who imagined he had been in a death camp who hadn’t and that was President Ronald Reagan and he only claimed to have visited. Reagan’s error was based on dementia, not profit or gain. Now it seems, not only do we have tens of thousands of people who have a single false memory, they seem to remember years of horror, incredible detail and all of it is utterly false. There is no comparison, not with Reagan, not with Vietnam veterans, not with anyone.

Reagan’s error, despite the respect he is held in and his obvious illness, was been used to defame him countless times. His error was not only honest but done in the context of human feeling. How many of the others are lying, not only for financial gain but for something less wholesome?

Why then, in the name of all that is holy, did the authorities and news media immediately write this off as tens of thousands of cases of minor lapses in judgement rather than one of the most horrible moral crimes of all time?

There is no greater disrespect for a holocaust victim than this.


Two thousand people in Europe are in prison today for questioning some part, no matter how minor, of the holocaust. The official story of the holocaust is a compendium of testimony of several hundred thousand people as there was little physical evidence left at the end of the war. Some facilities were reconstructed based on testimony, for historical perspective but in general, it is believed that the Germans destroyed all evidence of death camps and mass graves when they learned they were losing the war.

Thousands of those who find this explanation unsatisfactory and had chosen to disagree, some noted historians, some scientists and some simple troublemakers and activists, have been imprisoned. At the trials, holocaust victims claimed that such questioning harmed them irreparably. However, not one holocaust victim has ever spoken up about the endless numbers of phony holocaust victims who besmirch them every day and have for nearly 65 years. Why is that?

One thing the revisionists claim is that almost every story from the holocaust, including notable books and even world famous holocaust survivors are, in actuality, the worst phonies of all. The analogy of the “phony veteran” is applicable here. After each war, endless numbers of those, who for reasons legitimate or not, felt their contribution to the war effort was less than honorable or noteworthy, claim accomplishments they are undeserving of. It is also known that combat veterans are seldom seen on bar stools at service organizations talking about heroic exploits.

In fact, as Americans are learning more and more each day, combat veterans have great difficulty surviving coming home and are often homeless, incarcerated and commit suicide in huge numbers. It would be easy to extrapolate the same for holocaust survivors. There is no greater potential cause of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the history of mankind than the concentration camps of World War 2. Not only would survivors kill themselves out of guilt, most would suffer greatly shortened lifespans. This has been amazingly well documented.

This being the case, only a few hundred holocaust survivors could be alive today, not the one million living in Israel.


Anyone imprisoned wrongly, anyone whose family was killed or whose assets were seized illegally, should be compensated. Anyone wrongly claiming to be part of a group they are not, one this unique in the history of mankind, deserves punishment. Why is this not done? Why is there no normal social pressure to “out” these people and defend the honor of holocaust survivors?

Has anyone ever asked a real holocaust survivor what it is like to see phonies continually on television talking about the holocaust? Do they forgive? We will never know, as it seems nobody cares about real holocaust survivors. The holocaust is brought up when Israel bombs a school or asks for foreign aid but as for the people themselves, these misuses of the suffering of some cheapen human misery and the human condition.


If one child was taken away, died in a gas chamber, typhus, shot, it doesn’t matter, one life, this is a holocaust. If it was done because of race, the crime is doubly evil in nature. The lesson of “never again” was meant to be a lesson for all mankind to treat every single life with the same honor and respect, not to use the suffering of some as an excuse for financial crime, self delusion or outrageous acts of aggression.

Instead, the holocaust has become theatre, a stage for two sides to debate, to play, to “lawyer” the world to death. Some feel they should fight the holocaust because it has become a tool of evil. Some defend it because it is a tool of evil also but they believe the world is evil and only evil men are meant to survive.

Picture the death of a single child. Then go to the trial of a “holocaust denier.” Who is evil? Who is good? Do any of them ever think of the single child or only how it died, who signed what or how many Palestinian children could be murdered just like that child, in that child’s name perhaps?


Why ask the question if 6 million Jews died? It is equally possible that 6 million Germans died in the Ukraine and Europe, not soldiers, not in air raids, but in a holocaust type extinction. This is not talked of but it happened. All of us, Jews, Germans, the west, all of us, were silent when Josef Stalin killed twice that number or more. It started before the war and continued after. The human suffering caused by Stalin was immeasurable but is never spoken of, barely touched on except by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and now his books are banned. They fail to conform to popular mythology.

There was nothing pure about the real war as there is nothing pure about wars today. The myths we may or may not make up to protect some are never really to protect anyone. The weak and vulnerable are never protected, only the powerful. This is how the powerful become such and remain that way. We are such liars.

Nobody ever cared about the holocaust survivors only what using their suffering would bring in honor and riches. Is this the truth? Is this the partial truth? Has anyone asked the hard questions, the real questions? Isn’t it time that all the survivors got together? Some voice is needed, a voice that can say “never again’ with authority.

But..”never again”…what?

Release of the ‘Dancing Israelis’, Coincidence or Blackmail?

By Doug Steil | Aletho News | November 16, 2010

By now, after nine years, anyone who has seriously looked into the circumstances surrounding 9/11 has read about the so-called “five dancing Israelis“, who, according to reports, had set up across the Hudson River “to document the event” (in their own words) in Manhattan, even before the crash of the first airplane coming from the north into the World Trade Center tower.

These “dancing Israelis”, as we can all surmise, were Mossad operatives, who were involved in operational aspects of the Zionist attack on lower Manhattan that fateful day, September 11, 2001. Two additional “suspects”, who were surely also part of the same Israeli operational team, were arrested on the approach to the George Washington Bridge, and, as was reported live that evening on the televised News (before this aspect to the story was buried), their van was laden with tons of explosives. (Though media reports may not have explicitly identified the people in the vans with explosives as Israeli, there should be little doubt that they were all part of the same team.)

There are two important aspects in conjunction with the 9/11 event in New York that have been virtually ignored even in the alternative media, which deserve closer scrutiny. One point involves the possible large-scale catastrophe that may have been induced by these operatives with explosives if they had not been apprehended as their van was about to drive onto the George Washington Bridge. The second aspect concerns the suspicious circumstances surrounding the crash of Flight 587, on November 12, 2001, more than nine years ago, in conjunction with the inexplicable release, just a few days later, of the “dancing Israelis” and other agents who had been involved in the 9/11 operation, including those who may have been on their way to blow up the George Washington Bridge.

By stalling the van at the middle of the bridge and getting away in time, a directed high-power explosion at that spot along the side might certainly have done some serious damage to a section of this bridge, given the dual cables per side , each slightly less than 36 inches in diameter. Most likely a truck explosion in itself would not have ripped both cables. But then, perhaps such a truck explosion was merely meant to serve as a low-tech trigger – to provide an explanation to the public, for why both cables on one side could have ripped – which itself would have been achieved by detonating a prepared coat of micro-thermite around the cables, just as the WTC towers were detonated by micro-thermite placed at crucial points along the structure weeks in advance, though the Government unconvincingly blamed structural failure caused by impacting airplanes and resulting fires. In light of what is known about the explosive thermite at the three WTC towers that were imploded into their footprint, it is not implausible, that the George Washington Bridge was also targeted for destruction that day, but this aspect of the operation was completely botched due to the van being intercepted. Just a few months earlier, in May, modifications to the George Washingtom Bridge were completed. Who would have ever noticed if coatings of micro-thermite were being applied during this renovation project ? Below are some quotes from NYRoads:

The project involved the rehabilitation of girders, columns, bridge decks, drainage and electrical systems, and roadway surfaces. New roadway expansion joints, guardrails, crash barriers, signs and lighting were also installed. The $38 million project was completed in May 2001.

Some pertinent questions arise in this context. Might some “follow-up work” of minor scope have been performed after the reported May completion date, shortly before 9/11, under the guise that something had not initially been done properly and thus needed to be corrected? What companies were involved in that multi-million dollar contract, and which companies were involved in the subsequent project, which would have removed any traces of micro-thermite coating that, according to this presumptive scenario, was applied more than nine years ago?

In 2002, the Port Authority began work to repaint the 604-foot-tall towers and the underside of the upper deck. Workers are removing older coats of lead-based paint, and are applying a three-coat paint system that includes a zinc primer, epoxy intermediate coat and a urethane topcoat. The $85 million project was completed in 2006.

Some investigative scrutiny of this previously neglected topic could certainly help in putting more pieces of the puzzle together, regarding what appears to have been planned as a spectacular and explosive encore on that ‘Demolition Day’, featuring live helicopter video of a major suspension bridge falling into the Hudson River, with only its two towers remaining. If one assumes that these putative Israeli suspects, disguised in Arab clothing, were prevented by their arrest at the on-ramp to the bridge from perpetrating a major crime – this would subsequently have impacted millions of people who commute between New Jersey and Manhattan – one can understand that it would take substantial pressure to get them released from custody. And we know from numerous reports, that they were all released just before Thanksgiving.

But why were these Isareli operatives ever released given their involvement? According to a report written by Christopher Ketcham, the Ha’aretz newspaper claimed that high-level Zionists in America were actively involved in obtaining their release:

Following what ABC News reported were “high-level negotiations between Israeli and U.S. government officials”, a settlement was reached in the case of the five Urban Moving Systems suspects. Intense political pressure apparently had been brought to bear. The reputable Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that by the last week of October 2001, some six weeks after the men had been detained, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and two unidentified “prominent New York congressmen” were lobbying heavily for their release. According to a source at ABC News close to the 20/20 report, high-profile criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz also stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men to smooth out differences with the U.S. government.

These high-level efforts may not have been sufficient, given that these captured agents were certainly involved in more than event documentation or simply driving moving vans. Perhaps a bit more high-level pressure was required to get these people ‘moving’ again. In this context, an interesting aspect that has not been widely reported is the fact that, just a week before their eventual release, American Airlines Flight 587 crashed after takeoff from Kennedy Airport in Queens. Though it was not widely reported – on the contrary, it appears that once again there was a big cover-up in this matter – the likely cause, according to a credible expert, was sabotage:

Expert Marshall Smith opined, “A single point failure, the in-flight actuation of the left engine thrust reverser, can account for all three observed phenomena of the clean breaking off of the tail and the failure of both pylons holding the engines.”

The mechanical engineer, aviation ground school instructor and former NASA adviser painted this scenario: During the night, a terrorist saboteur disguised as a ground crew mechanic reached up in the back of the left jet engine of the American Airlines Airbus and cut the hydraulic line going to the thrust reverser actuator and the control safety sensor lines.

Knowing the conventional path that the airliner would fly upon takeoff from Kennedy Airport on its course to Santo Domingo in the Caribbean Sea, the saboteurs could be almost certain that the plane would eventually crash into the water, thus making recovery of evidence and probable cause analysis more difficult, along with the minimized possibility of any inconvenient revelations possibly leaking out to the public. As it turned out, the jet crashed onto the narrow land strip, in a neighborhood in Rockaway Park, (“the Irish Riviera“).

Let us look at the timeline of the week long period between the crash of AA587 and the release of the Israeli agents a few days later. Flight 587 crashed on Veteran’s Day, Monday November 12, 2001. According to reports, the Mossad agents were released after “71 days” in custody. Anyone can easily verify the accuracy of the timeline implied by the headline, which indicates the week long period between the crash and the release of the agents: Assuming that September 11 already counts as a day, that yields 20 days in September, 31 days in October and 20 days in November (the last day presumably not a full day), thus Tuesday, November 20. The decision to release them must have come on the day before, Monday, November 19, in order to make arrangements to fly them back to Israel. On that day the New York Times published a prepared story, pushing the highly questionable notion of composite tail fin stress as the presumptive cause of the accident. This unsupported claim appears to be another case of contrived media misdirection (an endeavor the NYT is proficient in), to distract the public from the issue of sabotage.

It is reasonable to assume, however, that if by then the Government had already concocted and propagated a technically unlikely explanation — one that blamed the manufacturer Airbus for an alleged design flaw in conjunction with pilot over-reaction to vortexes from an airplane ahead — the technically far more plausible cause of the crash, which was consistent with observations from witnesses and physical evidence at the crash site, would have already been apparent to investigators and experts, such as the man whose assessment of sabotage is cited in the story cited above. Those who had the opportunity to examine the left engine could easily have corroborated the sabotage. (This raises the question, if one of the numerous investigators became upset that the matter was being covered up and talked about it with others.)

Based on the timeline, these Israeli operatives would have arrived back in Israel not before November 21. They appeared on the talk show sometime before the end of the month, after a few days of intensive de-briefing.

Thanksgiving Day was on November 22, so that any possible news of their release from custody and arrival back in Israel would have easily been drowned out as Americans were focusing on that major holiday.

Dandelion Root Kills Cancer Cells?

WINDSOR, Ont. — Extract from dandelion roots dug out of lawns by a University of Windsor scientist and his students make cancer cells "commit suicide."

Oncologist Dr. Caroline Hamm got the idea to look into dandelions after two leukemia patients refused their next course of chemotherapy, yet returned to the cancer centre not on stretchers, but with improved test results after a steady diet of dandelion tea.

Hamm contacted University of Windsor biochemist Siyaram Pandey. Two cases "were nothing, it could be coincidental," Pandey said, recalling his early skepticism. But he did some preliminary research and set his students loose.

They meticulously dug up dandelion roots — thanks to Ontario's pesticide ban, they didn't have to worry about toxins — and applied the root extract they formulated to leukemia cells.

"There it did great, it did work," said Pandey, who added the leukemia cells effectively commit suicide within 24 hours of getting the dandelion treatment.

"It killed the cells very selectively. It only killed the cancer cells. The regular cells were not killed."

The results were recently published in the Journal of Ethnopharmacy.

"Here you have a non-toxic alternative to chemotherapy," said John Dufresne, a retired University of Windsor biochemist who administers the program. Pandey's research could lead to a product that could treat cancers resistant to chemotherapy drugs, he said. "It's almost in a sense a naturopathic approach to cancer treatment and to me that's very exciting."

Pandey and his team — Hamm and students Pamela Ovadje, Sudipa Chatterjee, Carly Griffin and Cynthia Tragrants — are getting $60,000 over two years from the Windsor and Essex County Cancer Centre Foundation's Seeds4Hope program to conduct further research.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Parents in Christian-Newsom murders want more prosecution for Boyd

KNOXVILLE (WATE) - The parents of murder victims Channon Christian and Chris Newsom will always hold on to the memories of their children, but they're also seeking more justice in court.

The couple was carjacked at gunpoint, robbed, tortured, raped and killed in January 2007.

Christian, a 5'7" student at the University of Tennessee, was bound, put in garbage bags and stuffed in a trash can where she suffocated.

Newsom was bound, taken to a set of railroad tracks, shot three times and then set on fire.

Both wound up nearly unrecognizable on autopsy tables.

The randomness of the torture slayings evoked fear and disbelief from authorities and the community.

A massive investigation eventually brought four defendants to trial. Vanessa Coleman was sentenced to 53 years on lesser charges in the case.

Coleman's boyfriend, Letalvis Cobbins, and his friend, George Thomas, will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

And Cobbins' half-brother, LeMaricus Davidson, received the death penalty.

Still the parents of the victims say they have unfinished business.

"They kept saying Davidson was the ringleader. Well he may have been the ringleader, but he wasn't the most evil of them all. He may have been the ringleader, but he did everything Eric Boyd said," Deena and Gary Christian said.

Boyd is serving an 18 year prison sentence in this case. He was convicted in federal court as an accessory after the fact for helping Davidson hide from authorities.

However, Boyd was never charged with rape or murder. "I will always feel like Boyd is getting away with murder," said Chris' mother, Mary Newsom.

Cobbins told investigators it was Boyd and Davidson who launched the crime spree that started with the couple's carjacking.

"They jump out of the car and run to a white SUV and, um, there was two people, a man and a woman at the SUV. They jump in, pointing guns at them and, and um, they carjacked them I guess," Cobbins said during one interview by authorities.

"He is one of them that got in the (Toyota) 4Runner and put a gun on Channon. For that, he needs to face the death penalty," Gary Christian said.

"Eric Boyd was the one that first took him (Chris) away and tied him up and raped him," Mary Newsom said.

Most, if not all, of the defendants insinuated that Boyd was the one to first take Chris Newsom away after the carjacking. They said he returned a short time later without Newsom to Davidson's rental home on Chipman Street, where Christian was held captive.

"I figured when he came back without him you know that he went ahead and did something with the old boy," George Thomas told investigators in an interview.

"You don't know if Chris felt the bullet, but he damn well felt what they did to him," Gary Christian said. "I think Thomas shot him in the back and Eric Boyd shot him in the head."

"He never told me he did any of that. He never told me he was involved in any of that," said Boyd's attorney, Phil Lomonaco, during a recent interview.

Lomonaco was appointed to represent Boyd during the federal trial. He says he took a lot of heat for taking Boyd's case, but he had an obligation to uphold the Constitution.

Lomonaco also says if there's tangible evidence against Boyd, the state should make a move. "If they have the evidence that there is probable cause, then they should do it."

But even with all the accounts implicating Boyd, the Knox County District Attorney General's Office by law can't use the incriminating statements made to investigators by the other convicted killers, even if they did prosecute Boyd.

"I don't feel like Chris got full justice," said his father, Hugh Newsom.

The Newsoms know key evidence has to turn up to get any break in this case. "The longer it goes, the dimmer the memory gets, and you have witnesses, key witnesses, that disappear on you," Hugh Newsom added.

The Knoxville Police Department and the DA's office wouldn't comment for this report, except to say the case is still open and under investigation.

However, "There is no doubt that Eric Boyd is going to be prosecuted in state court," Gary Christian said. "Eric Boyd is not going to come on the streets in this country again."

The Christians say the other convicted killers may not have been motivated by race, but they believe Boyd was. "Eric Boyd did what he did because he hated white people," Gary said.

When asked if he feels this was a hate crime on the part of Eric Boyd, Hugh Newsom said, "Yes, absolutely."

The parents have been to more than 200 court proceedings to seek justice for the children they only see now in photos and dreams.

"Between, I think all four of us, we will never stop until everybody that was involved is put behind bars," Deena Christian said.

Boyd is being held at a medium security prison in West Virginia with 12 years of his 18 year sentence still to serve. He's due to be released in 2022.

Boyd's federal conviction in this case is under appeal.

Guy Shoots And Reloads 1911 With No Arms

Just some inspiration for the weekend :)

The Truth About The California Missle

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

The submarine launch of an ICBM off the California coast on November 8 is a milestone in American history. The immediate denials that it was an American test were a public relations disaster. America’s government does little but lie to its people, 9/11, Osama bin Laden, we could go on forever. In fact, nothing coming out of Washington or the press is remotely credible and it has finally been proven. This is a private confirmation we received:

REDACTED: Finally there is something that has occurred, in which I am actually an expert and qualified to give a real answer about. I am a retired U.S. Navy FireControl Technician, who is platform certified in missile systems XXXXXXXXX, I have also worked with the Navy’s Harpoon, Tomahawk and ASROC missile systems.Anyway, what I saw in the recent video concerning the object 30 miles off the coast of CA is blatantly a foreign made, Large Cruise or ICBM missile, being launched by a sub-surface aquatic platform.

First I know its a large missile because it did not exhibit the typical “corkscrewing” trajectory of a beam riding missile as it trys to acquire the targeting beam. This tells me its a Big Boy with a complete guidance system installed in it, what is nicknamed a “fire and forget” missile, as once its launched its internal guidance system takes over and there is no real need for external guidance.

I’m fairly confident its not one of ours, as the vapor trail appears “dirty” it looks brownish. I have personally been involved in (5) SM2 missile launches, and (2) ASROC missile launches, and have been on safety observation for at least 15 more launches of Harpoons, Tomahawks and other missiles. We put a lot of sweat and money into our “birds” and part of that is the fuel cells, they burn very clean, a whitish-blue infact, not a dirty blackish brown. That missile had rather crude fuel cells, which tells me its not one of ours.

A submarine comes approaches America’s heavily guarded coast, through a network of defenses costing billions, and launches an ICBM capable of carrying up to 10 hydrogen bombs, launches the missile 2 minutes from Los Angeles, and we are utterly unaware? This is the same military we trust our children’s lives to?

This is the same military that spent a 9 years hunting for Osama bin Laden, knowing he was dead, hundreds of millions of dollars, endless lives lost, all over a lie. Keeping bin Laden’s death secret is a deception not unlike the phony Yemen bomb scare and the “crotch bomber” last Christmas, “third rate boogeyman” ploys to justify wasted money and airport passenger abuse.

This is the same military that killed 5000 Americans in Iraq over more lies, always known to be lies. Behind the flag waving and patriotic blithering is a pack of greedy incompetents, many religious extremists, most up to their necks in right wing politics and too many willing to send us to war for their own personal reasons. A patriot wouldn’t last 5 minutes in Americas military.

They would tear the place down around them, screaming “thieves, liars and cowards” as they did it. This, however, this last insult, is just too much. The America people expected a decent lie. It is now nearly 10 days later and the military believes they can simply put their pointy little heads in the sand and the rest of us can go to hell? Not hardly!

Laid bare is the level of post Cold War leadership in the Pentagon, accustomed to wasting money, fabricating war news and trying to lie their way to empty victory in wars without plan or purpose, long proven unwinable.


Wayne Madsen, says the missile was fired from a Chinese submarine. Madsen has a fairly good track record on such things. There are 5 nations, all permanent members of the UN Security Council, that have such capabilities. (India soon) Madsen’s claim that China launched the missile just prior to announcing the lowering of America’s credit rating from A+ to AA, just above “junk bonds” is part of the story and certainly explains the timing. America’s ability to play world bully with someone else’s money is at an end.

However, it is more than economics, the move by the Federal Reserve to buy up its own debt, a shady currency manipulation aimed at China, or the push to continue the Bush era “free ride” tax breaks, all make America an unreliable investment. There are 5000 criminals in Wall Street that, if they lived in China, would have gotten a bullet in the brain. In stead, America gave them 2 trillion dollars in borrowed from China and jailed poor old Bernie Madoff. There are other reasons for China to mistrust America, a nation they clearly see as under the control of gangsters and extremists.

Thus the warning.


There is only one reason that the United States didn’t announce the usual “weather balloon” or “box cutters” cover stories. It means that the nation responsible, assuming it is China, warned us that they would go public and that the American military had to live with the humiliation as a punishment.

There is no other explanation. There also is no other “suspect” than China, who has the interests in the Pacific region, the technical capability and the complex “love-hate” relationship with the United States. China finances Americas debt, they are our largest trading partner, certainly our primary business partner in the world today in every way and are still continually presented to the American people as an enemy. Our homes are filled with Chinese products, without China, our local Walmarts would stand empty.

Assuming China, and without a denial from the Pentagon, we must assume China, what could the United States have done to push them this far? Is China telling the United States that we are ‘mad dogs’ ready to be “put down?”


America’s ignorance of history will continue to assure that America remains a victim of history’s lessons. China forgets nothing.

The Opium Wars of the 19th century were an announcement to the world that China was open for business, not trade, certainly not development but for crime and exploitation at the hands of the colonial powers of Europe, Russia and Japan. Over the next half decade, culminating in the Boxer Rebellion, China was carved up, piece at a time, humiliated and crushed. Nobody stood up for China, nobody but the United States. American missionaries were in every region of China, running schools, orphanages and earning the trust and affection of the Chinese people. It is one of those bright spots in American history.

McKinley’s Secretary of State, John Hay sided with China against the ravages of the colonial powers with his Open Door circulars. America’s policy toward China was one of open and free trade, something impossible under the system of “treaty ports” and “extrality” being used to subjugate China into a checkerboard of “interest zones.”

China learned to hate the west but not America. American’s were raised on the books of Pearl Buck who presented the countless generations of suffering and perseverance of the Chinese people in an idyllic manner. These were the books I read as a child, before that, read by my mother, who grew up with them in a coal mining camp in Kentucky. Millions of Americans knew more of China than they did their own country, felt a bond, a kinship and a partnership of spirit.

With the Japanese invasion and its endless atrocities America was divided on China. Franklin Roosevelt and the majority of the American people sided with China. Wall Street and the oil companies sided with Japan and kept sending oil, scrap metal and other vital resources which allowed Japan to build a military machine to control, not only China but huge portions of the Pacific as well. This would lead to period of unpleasantness between Japan and the United States culminating with the incineration of most of Japan’s cities.

Every child in China is taught about the AVG, the American Volunteer Group, the “Flying Tigers.” American pilots, under the leadership of General Claire Lee Chennault, provided the only resistance to Japanese bombing attacks on Chinese cities. To the Chinese, Americans are heroes who stood by China during its darkest hour. Ask any American who travels to China.

Describing the tumultuous period of Chinese history during the 20s and 30s is a task best left elsewhere. Suffice it to say, the struggle between the Nationalists under Chiang kai-shek and the communist forces under Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai are filled with twists and turns. During the 1920s, they were forced to worked together for awhile but Chiang turned on the communists who escaped his trap in what is now called “the Long March.” Later, when America entered the war, the Nationalists and communists joined forces under the supervision of American General Joseph Stillwell.

It is noted that the communists under Mao made far better allies than Chiang’s nationalists. A recommended read on this is Edgar Snow’s Red Star Over China.

With the advent of the Cold War and American misconceptions about the nature of Soviet and Chinese communism, America chose the disastrous policy of supporting the hopeless Nationalist cause and, eventually, direct military confrontation with a fully communist China during the Korean war. China could just as easily have been an American ally against the Soviets, even with its communist government, if it weren’t for the McCarthy witch hunt and the leadership failures of the Truman administration, some being deeply paralleled by President Obama today.

China had never been America’s enemy. It took “ping pong diplomacy” and Richard Nixon to restore balance and sanity to American policy after decades of childish blithering about the menace of “Red China,” an imaginary threat, being continually harped on by neo-cons even today, whenever the public tires of the fictions about Islamic extremism.

Today, China’s friendship for America is all that is keeping the United States afloat.


China, once a country where, in famine years, baby girls were abandoned in fields to die, is now the richest country in the world. Where millions had starved each year, Chinese tourists can now be seen anywhere in the world. Their progress is a marvel and one of the greatest success stories in the history of mankind. China’s government is a hybrid of privatization and communism, ruled by a “technocracy” that manages the economy and maintains an unaligned position in world affairs.

China’s policies are based on both security of its borders and people and the assurance of access to natural resources, oil and minerals in particular, without which China’s “bubble” might well burst.

America, on the other hand, seems to be moving backward, hopelessly in debt, continually embroiled in military adventures and clearly a failed democracy at home, moving inexorably toward totalitarianism and extremism. Sound far fetched? This is how the world sees America, not just the Islamic world but Canada, Britain, Western Europe and Russia. The question now, does China see America as a threat, a “rabid dog?” Are America’s adventures in the Middle East and South Asia, which have killed hundreds of thousands, maybe more, a threat to China?


China and the world have seen Iraq and Afghanistan destroyed. They are watching Pakistan be destroyed by an American policy that can have no purpose other than to see Pakistan dismembered and crushed. America’s covert war against Pakistan, a nation that has been an American ally since its inception, is a senseless policy. Now, with the “sea change” toward increased Israeli influence in America’s government, the onset of the new extremist “Tea Party” wing of “Israeli firsters,” an attack on Iran, one of China’s closest allies and largest suppliers of crude oil, is expected at any time.

China has no doubts that America, as it is currently “misgoverned,” stands ready to do anything as a pretense for war even though its last two military adventures are both “unresolved,” a generous term for “failed.”

It is also clear to China and others that America’s ruling cabal, calling it a government is a certain misnomer, no longer functions in the national interest. If the Chinese missile launch, providing it was the Chinese, was a warning of something, it was a warning based on this knowledge.

“If America can’t be trusted to take care of its own people and exercise its position as world superpower with sensibility and restraint, “there’s a new sheriff in town.”

Crash JP Morgan - Buy Silver

If you would like to know where to buy physical precious metals email me or leave a comment.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

How Veterans Day Became A Farce

My children brought home the Scholastic News from school on Friday. For those who don’t know, it’s “America’s Leading News Source for Kids.” Its weekly editions are typically led by a theme, and students are encouraged to complete the exercises within. This one caught my eye: “Hi I’m Joe, I am a veteran. That means I was in a war. Meet my dog Benjamin. I’ll show you how he helps me everyday.”

On the front is a heartbreaking photo of a Marine with a “robot leg” in a wheelchair, his arm slung over a beautiful golden retriever. Inside, after more photos of the veteran and Benjamin, and the veteran and his young family, my child is asked, “how can we thank (soldiers)? … we can send them a care package!”

How about demanding they all come home now, legs intact? I think about this ruefully for a moment and realize that I had spent much of Veterans Day looking at photos of amputees.


Anarchism, Reason, and History


January 24, 2002

Can any state have a “right to exist”? The question has been raised anew by Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe, in his book Democracy: The God That Failed. He answers it with a resounding No.

Hoppe is only the latest thinker in the tradition of philosophical anarchism. His mentor, the late Murray Rothbard, was another. Both owe their ideas to a great but little-known nineteenth-century American, Lysander Spooner.

Spooner’s position was simple. There is a moral law, which in essence we all learn in early childhood, even before we know our math tables. Basically it is this: Don’t harm other people. The principle is simple, even if its applications may occasionally be difficult.

From this, Spooner reasoned, it follows that no state should exist. Nobody can claim the power to change the moral law or a monopoly of the authority to enforce it. But the state claims the right to do both. It tries to change the moral law by legislation, which is falsely thought to add to the moral duties of its subjects; and it insists that only it may define, outlaw, and punish wrongs.

The results of the state’s claims include war, tyranny, slavery, and taxation. Human society would be better off without the state.

The best argument for anarchism is the twentieth century. One scholar, R.J. Rummel, calculates that states in that century murdered about 177 million of their own subjects — and that figure doesn’t even count international wars. It’s inconceivable that private criminals could kill that many. It would be interesting to know how much wealth states have confiscated and wasted.

But could society exist without the state? Is it a necessary evil of human existence? Can it even be a positive good?

Aristotle said that man is a political animal, but his conception of the community, or polis, was very different from the modern state. He thought the community should be small enough that its members could all know each other. Sound like any state you know?

St. Augustine saw the state, along with slavery, as a consequence of Original Sin. It could never be a good thing, but it was inescapable for fallen men. But we may ask whether this is really so; in Augustine’s day slavery seemed a necessary evil of social life, and a world without slavery was hard to imagine. Nobody could remember, and few could conceive, an economy without slaves.

Is it possible that we have likewise assumed that the state is inevitable only because we are used to it, and can hardly imagine a world without it? Just as the menial tasks once performed by slaves are now distributed differently among free men, perhaps, as anarchists argue, the functions of the state could be distributed among voluntary agencies.

The Renaissance philosopher Thomas Hobbes thought that anarchy — the “state of nature” — would be “a war of all against all,” making human life “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” His solution was the state, which would quell quarrels among men. He didn’t foresee that the state itself might aggravate conflict and make social order far more miserable than anarchy could ever be.

Hobbes’s near-contemporary John Locke offered a more attractive alternative: the limited state, which would have the power to secure men’s natural rights but would lack the power to violate them. But such a state has never existed for long. Once a monopoly of power exists at all, it tends to degenerate into tyranny; anarchists argue that this decline is inevitable, because tyranny is inherent in the very nature of the state.

Oddly enough, the great conservative Edmund Burke began his career with an anarchist tract, arguing that the state was naturally and historically destructive of human society, life, and liberty. Later he explained that he’d intended his argument ironically, but many have doubted this. His argument for anarchy was too powerful, passionate, and cogent to be a joke. Later, as a professional politician, Burke seems to have come to terms with the state, believing that no matter how bloody its origins, it could be tamed and civilized, as in Europe, by “the spirit of a gentleman, and the spirit of religion.” But even as he wrote, the old order he loved was already breaking down.

Whatever the truth is, the anarchists have much reason on their side. And much history.

Ron Paul Responds to TSA: Introduces 'American Traveler Dignity Act'

Israel is the Root Cause of Terrorism

Some of the most refreshing words I've heard come out of a politicians mouth.


British Politician: ‘Israel is the Root Cause of Terrorism'

Liberal Democratic peer asks why world allows Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to continue – "Is it Holocaust guilt?"


November 15, 2010 "JPost" -- LONDON – In the second attack on Israel by Liberal Democrat politicians in the same week that the party’s leader said the party got it wrong on Israel, Jenny Tonge claimed on Friday that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is the root cause of terrorism worldwide.

Possibly “Holocaust guilt” allows this treatment to go unchecked, Tonge said, adding that it might also be the “power of the pro-Israel lobby” in the UK and US.

The Liberal Democrat peer was speaking in the House of Lords at the Strategic Defense and Security Review, which sets out how the British government will deliver the priorities identified in its national security strategy.

On the issue of world conflict prevention, Tonge then said: “It is a disgrace to us all that problems such as Kashmir and Palestine are still alienating Muslims all over the world.

“The treatment of Palestinians by Israel is held up as an example of how the West treats Muslims,” she said, “and is at the root cause of terrorism worldwide.”

“Even [the Quartet’s Middle East envoy] Tony Blair has now admitted this publicly,” she claimed.

“Why do we let it continue? Is it Holocaust guilt? We should be guilty – of course we should. Is it the power of the pro-Israel lobby here and in the USA?” The peer went on say that “cynics might think” Britain is at the ready to help Israel attack Iran.

“Or is it the need, maybe, to have an aircraft carrier called Israel in the Middle East, from which to launch attacks on countries such as Iran? The cynic might think that that is why HMS Ark Royal and the Harriers [fighter jets] can be dispensed with [as part of UK defense cuts] – [since] we already have a static “Ark Royal” in a strategic position, armed to the teeth and ready to fight, provided that we do not offend Israel,” she said.

Tonge, a lifelong anti-Israel activist, continued: “I feel sorry for the people of Israel sometimes. Their government’s policies have made that country the cause of a lot of the world’s problems, yet now they are seen in the middle as the remedy and the base for the West to fight back.”

The party has distanced itself from Tonge’s comments, which “do not reflect the views of the Liberal Democrats,” a spokesman told The Jerusalem Post on Saturday. “Indeed, last week [party leader] Nick Clegg stressed that Israel’s right to thrive in peace and security is non-negotiable for Liberal Democrats.”

Last week, Liberal Democrat peer Lord Phillips told a meeting of the radical fringe group Palestine Solidarity Campaign in parliament that “Europe cannot think straight about Israel because of the Holocaust, and America is in the grip of the well-organized Jewish lobby.”

These two incidents came in the same week that Liberal Democrat leader and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg told a meeting of Liberal Democrat supporters of Israel that his party had got it wrong on Israel.

“I’m not certain that we have always made ourselves clearly heard on this, so let me say it again now: Israel’s right to thrive in peace and security is nonnegotiable for Liberal Democrats.

“No other country so continually has its right to exist called into question as does Israel, and that is intolerable. There can be no solution to the problems of the Middle East that does not include a full and proper recognition of Israel by all parties to the conflict,” he said.

“Campaigning for justice for the Palestinian people has been heard loud and clear from the Liberal Democrats, [and] it should always have been accompanied, equally loudly and equally clearly, by an awareness of the security challenges faced by Israel, and of the right of Israel to defend itself against the threats that it continually faces,” Clegg added.

In February, Clegg sacked Tonge as health spokeswoman in the Lords after she suggested that Israel set up an inquiry to refute allegations that its medical teams in Haiti “harvested” organs of earthquake victims.

It is not the first time the Liberal Democrat politician has been sacked by the party for her comments on Israel.

In 2006, then party leader Menzies Campbell dissociated the party from Tonge and condemned her for “clear anti-Semitic connotations” after she said that “the pro-Israeli lobby has got its grips on the Western world, its financial grips. I think they have probably got a certain grip on our party.”

In 2004, Tonge was sacked as a spokeswoman on children’s issues after suggesting she could consider becoming a suicide bomber.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Quote Of The Week

"There is no one more pro Israel and more pro Jew than I am"---Glenn Beck

Black Cop Rapes 12 Year Old

A Fulton County police officer has been arrested and charged with aggravated child molestation and rape, police said.

Officer Michael Bernard Wilson, 30, was arrested Tuesday by DeKalb County police, Capt. Darryl Halbert with Fulton police told the AJC. The five-year veteran of the department has been suspended without pay, Halbert said.

The mother of a 12-year-old girl reported the crimes to DeKalb police, who secured arrest warrants against Wilson, Officer Jason Gagnon said.

Wilson, of Ellenwood, was arrested during a traffic stop, Gagnon said. He has been charged with two counts of child molestation, rape and false imprisonment, Gagnon said.

The crimes date back to May, according to DeKalb County jail booking records.

Wilson was booked into the DeKalb jail, where he is being held without bond.

Soros Courts the Neocons


As reported in the Salon, George Soros has paid $150,000 to Randy Scheunemann, a neocon foreign policy figure. Scheunemann was McCain’s foreign policy adviser during the 2008 campaign and is now a top aide of Sarah Palin.

Scheunemann is completely in line on Israel, as is Palin. The Jewish Journal noted that during the campaign,  Scheunemann had led the attack on

Obama’s willingness to sit with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Scheunemann also led efforts to pitch the Iraq war to the American public prior to the invasion. . . . Scheunemann is also close to the pro-Israel community. Working with [Trent] Lott, he authored the 1995 legislation that would move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem; a year later, Scheunemann’s advice led Bob Dole — the Republican presidential candidate that year — to pledge to do so. This year, McCain has picked up that pledge.

I came across Scheunemann in writing an article on the neocons and Russia, where it emerged that he was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the government of Georgia to use his influence against Russia, a policy that coincided with Soros’ attitudes. Scheunemann was also President of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, sponsored by Bill Kristols’ Project for a New American Century.

So Soros is much more than the patron saint of the left.  Like AIPAC, it pays to play both sides of the aisle in American politics.

 Soros knows full well that Scheunemann has been a reliable partner in promoting Soros’ vision that the former USSR should buy into the suicide cult that has become the Western democracies—a cult that is strongly supported by the organized Jewish community and the Jewish-funded left. (Soros, of course, is a major funder of the  left throughout the White world, including, e.g., The neocons have a long history of promoting pretty much the entire social agenda of the left, including especially large-scale non-White immigration.

Given the results of the last election, it wouldn’t be at all surprising to see other attempts by Soros and other sources of Jewish money to strengthen neocon forces within the Republican Party in an effort to manage the rising tide of White populist anger.

Finally, the episode illustrates one of the great strengths of Jewish intellectual and political movements: They provide excellent career opportunities, both economically and professionally. Scheunemann is well connected to the neocon foreign policy establishment—doubtless very lucrative, and his firm has Soros’ Open Society Institute as a client. He’s living well, and his non-Jewish background is definitely an asset because it helps deflect public awareness that neoconservatism is a Jewish movement.