OJ Sentenced to 16 years!

Next step for the anti-White OJ team, there were NO blacks on the jury, and whites are all racists so, OJ was not given a fair trial, lets wait a few days and see if this becomes the new defense.
Everyone knows OJ killed those people back in the 90’s, even the black community knows it!  But many blacks see OJ as their anti-White Hero, who got over on the “man,” and killed some of the enemy, I watch some of the interviews from the first trial, and many of the blacks called Nicole Brown Simpson a prostitute and a slut, and they said she got what she deserved, typical.  Only thing they forgot was that she was white, and white are evil and must die.

In this case justice is served.

The Taboo Hypothesis

The Taboo Hypothesis

by Baron Bodissey

I minored in Anthropology in college, and during my senior year I wrote a term paper for Physical Anthropology about Professor Arthur Jensen and his work on race and intelligence. After examining his studies and those of other scientists, I concluded that there seemed to be an irreducible genetic component to IQ. However, there was not enough evidence to draw firm conclusions, and given the incendiary nature of the topic, I suggested that it would be unwise to force the issue.

My proto-PC attitude was typical of a high-minded long-haired college student in the early 1970s. Little did I know that further work on this subject — indeed, even the mere discussion of it — was about to be shut down. By the middle of the decade, the current reign of politically correct science had begun, and it was no longer possible to consider any linkage between genes and intelligence.

It just wasn’t done. It was the hypothesis that dared not speak its name.

In the intervening thirty-five years, the scientific evidence on the issue has continued to accumulate. Prof. Jensen’s widely reviled scholarship has never been refuted by the data, but his conclusions have been politically squashed. On race and intelligence — just as on global warming — “the science is settled”. The academic establishment has determined the truth by fiat, and any further discussion of the subject can only be evidence of “racism”.
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
James Watson, the renowned biologist and co-discoverer of the double helix in DNA, ventured an opinion last year on the subject. His statements put him on the wrong side of “science”, and the disapproval of the establishment came down on him like a ton of bricks.

Back in October, Honest Thinking posted a pair of articles about the whole affair. The first one focused on an article by Jason Malloy published in Medical Hypotheses, “Those who punish, those who lie, those who silence, those who condemn, those who intimidate… they have corrupted science”.

HT posted some excerpts from Malloy’s article:

Summary: Recent comments by the eminent biologist James Watson concerning intelligence test data from sub-Saharan Africa resulted in professional sanctions as well as numerous public condemnations from the media and the scientific community. They justified these sanctions to the public through an abuse of trust, by suggesting that intelligence testing is a meaningless and discredited science, that there is no data to support Dr. Watson’s comments, that genetic causes of group differences in intelligence are falsified logically and empirically, and that such differences are already accounted for by known environment factors. None of these arguments are correct, much less beyond legitimate scientific debate. Dr. Watson was correct on all accounts: (1) Intelligence tests do reveal large differences between European and sub-Saharan African nations, (2) the evidence does link these differences to universally valued outcomes, both within and between nations, and (3) there is data to suggest these differences are influenced by genetic factors. The media and the larger scientific community punished Dr. Watson for violating a social and political taboo, but fashioned their case to the public in terms of scientific ethics. This necessitated lying to the public about numerous scientific issues to make Watson appear negligent in his statements; a gross abuse of valuable and fragile public trust in scientific authority. Lies and a threatening, coercive atmosphere to free inquiry and exchange are damaging to science as an institution and to scientists as individuals, while voicing unfashionable hypotheses is not damaging to science. The ability to openly voice and argue ideas in good faith that are strange and frightening to some is, in fact, integral to science. Those that have participated in undermining this openness and fairness have therefore damaged science, even while claiming to protect it with the same behavior.

(c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The article goes on to quote Dr. Watson:
– – – – – – – –

“A priori, there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so”.

This seems reasonable enough. No one who favors the objective evaluation of evidence could disagree with him, right?


Here are some of the responses. In Nature:

“Crass comments by Nobel laureates undermine our very ability to debate such issues, and thus damage science itself”.

In the Chicago Tribune:

“The damage to Watson’s legacy from his statements may be difficult to mend,” said Jerry Coyne, a professor of evolutionary genetics at the University of Chicago. “He’s done tremendous damage to science, to himself and to social equality,” Coyne said. “It makes us all look bad”.

The author goes on to note the similarity between Dr. Watson’s case and what happened to former Harvard president Larry Summers, who dared to suggest that there might be inherent biological differences between men and women. The scandal!

What effect will this continuing intellectual mob violence have on future and current scientists and researchers who want to freely study human genetics, cross-cultural psychology, sociology, or any discipline that may reveal similar facts that have the potential to cause their professional or personal destruction by an intellectual community that resembles the medieval church?

Those who punish, those who lie, those who silence, those who condemn, those who intimidate… they have corrupted science.

They have injured the intellectual openness, freedom, and fairness of our society and our institutions, with untold costs to our collective human well-being.

Not James D. Watson.

Honest Thinking had this to add:

I find it particularly disappointing that Francis Collins, Watson’s successor in the Human Genome Project (HGP), released the following statement:

“I am deeply saddened by the events of the last week, and understand and agree with Dr. Watson’s undoubtedly painful decision to retire in the aftermath of a racist statement he made that was both profoundly offensive and utterly unsupported by scientific evidence“.

It is of course always disappointing when some scientific authority resorts to downright lies instead of facing up to some disturbing truth. But Collins is not just a high profile scientist, he also happens to be high profile Christian. This means he is bound by the biblical command not to lie, as well as the prescription to love the truth. Unfortunately, Collins has demonstrated that he prefers smooth lies over unpleasant truths. This is all the more ironic, since in his book he criticizes creationists for their unwillingness to face the truth about evolution.

However, even creationists understand (unless they are prepared to invoke miraculous intervention on the part of God to prevent natural developments from taking place) that one cannot have genetic separation of populations without also having genetic differences accumulating. This is just simple and obvious micro-evolution, which is accepted as a fact of life by virtually everyone (in particular by creationists, as it happens). Thus, it turns out that Collins is eager to convince people of the truth, beauty, and explanatory power of evolutionary theory, but he is unwilling to accept one of the most obvious consequences of that very theory.

Not only has Collins betrayed his HGP predecessor and scientific colleague, James Watson; not only has Collins betrayed the scientific community by failing to stand in firm defense of the truth; not only has Collins betrayed the general public by deceiving them and lulling them into a false sense of security (at a time when the West is about to commit demographic and civilizational suicide); on top of all of this, he has betrayed his own faith by joining ranks with the forces of darkness and ignorance. And instead of being a staunch friend in a time of need, he turned his back on Watson and washed his hands to cleanse himself of ‘racism’. If Collins takes his faith seriously (as I suspect he does) he needs to change his ways.

Many scientists owe Watson a public apology for their cowardly behavior during and after last year’s scandal. To my knowledge, not a single one of them has yet had the courage to come forward and admit that they attacked and criticized Watson on insufficient grounds. The longer they wait before doing so, the more embarrassing it will get. Sooner or later some of these people are going to start muttering about “more profound differences than previously thought” or something along those lines. Ok, that’s better than nothing. But I wonder who will be the first to simply cut the crap, skip all lame excuses, and unreservedly apologize to Watson (preferably while he is still alive). This is the kind of situation that separates the men from the boys.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Prof. Jensen is still studying this subject and writing about it. Thirty-five years of vilification have not stopped him.

In the second article, Honest Thinking reviews an article by Rushton and Jensen published in Medical Hypotheses, “Race realism and the moralistic fallacy”.

Here are some excerpts from Rushton and Jensen’s article:

Summary: Recent editorials in this journal have defended the right of eminent biologist James Watson to raise the unpopular hypothesis that people of sub-Saharan African descent score lower, on average, than people of European or East Asian descent on tests of general intelligence. As those editorials imply, the scientific evidence is substantial in showing a genetic contribution to these differences. The unjustified ill treatment meted out to Watson therefore requires setting the record straight about the current state of the evidence on intelligence, race, and genetics. In this paper, we summarize our own previous reviews based on 10 categories of evidence: The worldwide distribution of test scores; the g factor of mental ability; heritability differences; brain size differences; trans-racial adoption studies; racial admixture studies; regression-to-the-mean effects; related life history traits; human origins research; and the poverty of predictions from culture-only explanations. The preponderance of evidence demonstrates that in intelligence, brain size, and other life-history variables, East Asians average a higher IQ and larger brain than Europeans who average a higher IQ and larger brain than Africans. Further, these group differences are 50—80% heritable. These are facts, not opinions and science must be governed by data. There is no place for the “moralistic fallacy” that reality must conform to our social, political, or ethical desires.

(c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.


When one of the greatest biologists of the 20th century, Nobel-Prize winner James Watson, noted that people of African descent average lower on intelligence tests than do Europeans and East Asians, he was excoriated by the mass media and elements of the scientific elite and forced to retire from his position as Chair of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [9,34]. Watson’s treatment was especially egregious given that, in point of scientific fact, more than a century-and-a-half of evidence corroborates his statement. Moreover, supportive new data and analyses appear regularly in mainstream, peer-reviewed journals in the relevant scientific disciplines. Evidence to the contrary is exceedingly weak. Most of the opposition to the genetic hypothesis consists of mere moralizing and worse, the creation of a threatening and coercive atmosphere incompatible with academic freedom, free enquiry, and the civil liberties of a truly democratic society. An enormous gulf separates the politically correct gatekeepers and enforcers from true experts in the behavioral sciences.

Nor is Watson’s case unique. He is but the latest in a long line of academics that have been pilloried and defamed (detailed accounts given in Hunt [20]). The others include Nobel-Prize winner William Shockley, Hans Eysenck, Linda Gottfredson, Richard Lynn, Richard Herrnstein, Charles Murray, Christopher Brand, Glayde Whitney, Helmuth Nyborg, and Tatu Vanhanen. The present writers too have endured their share of attacks. The taboo on race will surely become a major topic of investigation by sociologists of knowledge. There is no parallel to it in the history of science. It is uniquely imposed, mainly through self-censorship, by members of the Western intelligentsia in their own academy — which prides itself on a tradition of academic freedom, open inquiry, and the unfettered discovery, systematization, and pursuit of knowledge and its dissemination to the general public.

Despite the chilling effect described, we (and the others) have persevered in part because of the great importance of the topic, the fascinating data it provides, and the theoretical issues it raises…

Because many consider the race-IQ hypothesis incendiary, it is essential to thoroughly examine all the relevant data. We did this in our 60-page review, “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability,” which was published as the lead article in the June 2005 issue of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association [51]. In the current article we summarize and update those findings (more complete statistical details and references can be found there). Again, the preponderance of evidence argues that it is more probable than not that the genetic contribution to racial group differences in intelligence, brain size and other life-history variables is between 50% and 80%. A good introduction to the issues involved is Bartholomew.

Notice the cautious and non-inflammatory nature of the authors’ conclusions: It is more probable than not that the genetic contribution to racial group differences in intelligence… is between 50% and 80%.

Yet this is simply not allowed. We must not consider the possibility. To do so is racist. The science is settled. These guys are making scientists look bad. Etc.

Once again: it’s the hypothesis that dare not speak its name.

Important Note:

Commenters are warned not to generate a race-based free-for-all on this post.

This post is about the anathematizing of scientists who dare to question the politically acceptable orthodoxy on the topic of race.

This post is about the enforced group consensus that reigns in the scientific establishment.

This post is about the way academic and fiscal pressure is used to marginalize anyone who goes outside that consensus.

This post is not about the characteristics of one race or another.

This post is not an invitation to list the positive or negative characteristics of any particular race.

This post concerns process. It does not concern content.

Racial diatribes are off-topic. There are plenty of other forums available where you can hold forth on such subjects to your hearts’ content.

If the thread gets out of hand, it will be closed to further comments.

Russia Insists on Reciprocity

Russia Insists on Reciprocity

by Baron Bodissey


Many people who share the Islamophobic persuasion have suggested the idea: for every mosque built in the West, one church should be built in Mecca, or Medina, or Cairo, or Islamabad, or Tehran.

Fair is fair.

This has remained a mere fantasy for those of us who live in dhimmified countries — which includes most of Europe, the United States, Canada, and Australia. None of our leaders would have the temerity to ask for such a thing.

But Russia — that’s another matter. According to The Washington Times:

A Russian Church for a Saudi Mosque?

This delightful story just came in thanks to getreligion.org: The Saudis have recently asked permission to build a mosque in Moscow, a city where there are only four mosques and 2 million Muslims. The Russians, however, are saying they want, in return, an Orthodox church in Saudi Arabia.

As we all know, the Saudis have a habit of constructing mosques in dozens of world capitals while forbidding houses of worship for any religion whatsoever outside its Wahabist brand of Islam. They’ve gotten some bad PR locally for some of the hate language in textbooks at the Saudi Academy in northern Virginia. Not only are hapless Christians terrorized and jailed for daring to hold private prayer services in Saudi Arabia, but God help them should they try to convert someone to their religion. And that’s for a fellow People of the Book: One can only guess at what the treatment of Buddhists and Hindus must be like.

Wouldn’t it be so ironic if the Russians were the first Christian body to win acceptance of the right to build a church in, say, Riyadh? (Some of the Russians are calling for a church in Mecca, but the chances of any other religion getting a foothold within walking distance of the world center of Islam is less than zero.) Of course we all know the Saudis aren’t about ready to let Bibles or other religious literature, let alone a church, anywhere near their homeland, but all the same, it’s amusing to see the Russians give the Saudis a taste of their own medicine.

Indeed it is.

The source for the WashTimes article was Window on Eurasia. Here’s more detail:
– – – – – – – –

Vienna, November 26 — The king of Saudi Arabia has announced that he is ready to support the construction of a mosque and Islamic cultural center in Moscow, a city with only four mosques for its more than two million Muslims. In response and probably to block this, Orthodox Christians in Russia have called for opening a church in Saudi Arabia.

These two proposals have sparked an often intriguing discussion by Russia’s Muslims and Christians over the role religion plays in defining the two societies and about the role of law in regulating that, a discussion that could either enrich or complicate the Kremlin’s relations with Muslims inside Russia and Muslim states abroad it is currently trying to court.

Last Thursday, Rushan Abbyasov, the head of the international department of the Union of Muftis of Russia (SMR) announced that the Saudi king had agreed to finance the construction of a mosque and a cultural center in Moscow “if the Russian authorities will offer a site” appropriate for them (www.interfax-religion.ru/islam/?act=news&div=27412).


Given that Moscow has only four mosques — the same number it had at the end of Soviet times — but a Muslim population that may number as many as 2.5 million, Muslims in the Russian Federation were delighted by the offer and the attention from abroad it suggests. But many non-Muslim Russians were horrified that another mosque might be opened in their capital.

After the Saudi offer was reported, three Russian Orthodox groups — the Moscow section of the Union of Orthodox Citizens, the Radonezh Society, and the Byzantine Club — released an open letter to Saudi King Abdullah suggesting that there should be another mosque in Moscow only after a Russian Orthodox church was opened in Mecca.

Their appeal noted that “Saudi Arabia is building mosques in dozens of Christian countries” and then asked whether it would not be only just if permission were given to Christians to build a church within its borders for Christians living there, something Riyadh has been reluctant to permit (www.interfax-religion.ru/islam/?act=documents&div=835).

And in support of their argument, the three groups cite the comment of Jean-Louis Cardinal Toran, the head of the Papal Council on Inter-religious Dialogue that “if Muslims consider it correct to have a large and beautiful mosque in Rome, then it is equally correct for Christians to have a church in Riyadh.”

The Orthodox groups also argued that it would be “very important” to lift the restrictions now in force against Christians visiting the Holy cities of Mecca and Medina,” to all visitors to Saudi Arabia to wear crosses, and to create special courses about Christianity in general and Russian Orthodoxy in particular.

Moreover, they suggested that if the Saudis want to begin broadcasting their television programs to the Russian Federation and its Muslims, then “it would be just” to offer “Your subjects the opportunity to watch Russian Orthodox channels and thus to learn that “Christians don’t believe in three gods, don’t distort the Bible and don’t pray to idols.”

Individual Russian commentators were more outspoken about the Saudi proposal. Arkady Maler, who writes frequently on cultural issues, said that the king’s offer should be rejected not only because Christians can’t build churches in the kingdom but also because Saudi Arabia is the homeland of Wahhabism, which some Russian jurisdictions have declared illegal.

Consequently, he said, no more mosques should be built, especially by the Saudis, in the Russian capital until there are churches in Saudi Arabia, because there is no reason to build another mosque in Moscow which at most would serve only “a few thousand people,” far fewer than the number of Christians in Saudi Arabia (www.rus-obr.ru/opinions/1267).

Dmitry Volodikhin, a Russian nationalist fantasy writer, added an additional reason for opposing the construction of a Muslim center in Moscow: The Russian capital, he said, needs to restore more Russian churches for Orthodox Christians before it thinks about building new mosques for Muslims (www.interfax-religion.ru/islam/?act=news&div=27460).


What makes this interesting is that Ashirov, whose comments have often put him at odds with both other Muslim leaders in Russia and with the Kremlin, here adopts a position that the Russian government likely would be very comfortable with, while the Russian Orthodox nationalists are staking out one that could cause trouble for Moscow at home and abroad.

So the Russian nationalists, who take their Orthodoxy seriously, are more interested than their own government in pushing the Saudis into a corner.

This is a story that’s worth following. The Saudis will never give in, of course, but it’s the thought that counts.

Don’t you wish that the political leaders of the West — not to mention the Church of Rome and the major Protestant denominations — could show half the spine that these guys have?

For those who are interested, these are the original Russian-language references used in the above article:

Danish Warship Sinks Pirate Vessel

Danish Warship Sinks Pirate Vessel

by Baron Bodissey

A news article from yesterday’s Jyllands-Posten, as translated by Henrik Ræder Clausen:

Danish Warship Sinks Pirate Vessel

The Danish navy vessel Absalon seized at least four RPGs from pirates — and then sank their ship.

The pirates were adrift in the Gulf of Aden without engine power, drinking water, or food. After eight days they asked for help from the Danish marine vessel Absalon, which is on patrol duty in the area.

On Thursday evening Absalon chose to board the ship, relates TV2 correspondent on Absalon, Rasmus Tantholdt.

– – – – – – – –

Aboard the ship the Danish soldiers found four RPG’s and seven Somalis, who were all taken aboard Absalon.

Due to weather conditions in the area it was not possible for Absalon to have the pirate vessel on tow, and thereafter, according to navy operational headquarters, it was destroyed. It is now the intention that the alleged pirates are to be taken to Yemen and handed over to the local authorities.

Previously Danish soldiers have set suspected pirates free after six days, because there is no agreement stating that the Danish navy has a right to detain suspected pirates in the Gulf of Aden.

Here’s a video from Danish TV of the sinking (hat tip TB).

Lost City of ‘Cloud People’ Found in Peru

Lost City of ‘Cloud People’ Found in Peru

More news stories on American History

Jeremy McDermott, London Telegraph, December 3, 2008

The settlement covers some 12 acres and is perched on a mountainside in the remote Jamalca district of Utcubamba province in the northern jungles of Peru’s Amazon.

The buildings found on the Pachallama peak are in remarkably good condition, estimated to be over 1,000 years old and comprised of the traditional round stone houses built by the Chachapoya, the ‘Cloud Forest People’.

The area is completely overgrown with the jungle now covering much of the settlement but explorers found the walls of the buildings and rock paintings on a cliff face.

The remote nature of the site appears to have protected the site from looters as archaeologists found ceramics and undisturbed burial sites.

Archaeologist Benedicto Pérez Goicochea said: “The citadel is perched on the edge of an abyss.

“We suspect that the ancient inhabitants used this as a lookout point from where they could spot potential enemies.”

The ruins were initially discovered by local people hacking through the jungle. They were drawn to the place due to the sound of a waterfall.

The local people “armed with machetes opened a path that arrived at the place where they saw a beautiful panorama, full of flowers and fauna, as well as a waterfall, some 500 metres high,” said the mayor of Jamalca, Ricardo Cabrera Bravo.

Initial studies have found similarities between the new discovery and the Cloud Peoples’ super fortress of Kulep, also in Utcubamba province, which is older and more extensive that the Inca Citadel of Machu Picchu, but has not been fully explored or restored.

Little is known about the Chachapoya, except that they had been beaten into submission by the mighty Incas in 1475.

When in 1535 the Spanish Conquistadores arrived in Peru, they found willing allies in the Cloud People for their fight against the Incas.

Spanish texts from the era describe the Cloud People as ferocious fighters who mummified their dead.

They were eventually wiped out by small pox and other diseases brought by the Europeans.

The women of the Chachapoya were much prized by the Incas as they were tall and fair skinned. The Chronicler Pedro Cieza de León offers wrote of the Chachapoyas.

“They are the whitest and most handsome of all the people that I have seen in Indies, and their wives were so beautiful that because of their gentleness, many of them deserved to be the Incas’ wives and to also be taken to the Sun Temple.”

Original article

(Posted on December 4, 2008)


“They were eventually wiped out by small pox and other diseases brought by the Europeans.”

Another lie by anti white racist liberals. Small pox did not exist in Europe until about 1510. Small pox, like syphllis was brought back to Europe by the early explorers. Here is the proof:

(1) Medical forensic; small pox affects the bones. Persons who die of small pox have noticable lesions in their bones. Europeans practiced burial, not cremation. Europeans had small graveyards. So every 100 years or so cemetery keepers dug up all the old bones and piled them in basement caverns. Forensic sciencts and physicians have observed millions of bones belonging to thousands of Europeans. Not one smallpox lesion has been discovered that could be dated before 1500.

(2)Medical epidemology. Small pox first appeared in Europe around 1510. Physicians and public health authorities knew it was not measles or chicken pox or any other disease presenting with a rash. It was blatantly, obviously a new disease. It was a virulent disease, often killing its patients in a few days. No one seemed to have immunity. Almost everyone exposed succumbed to it. This is characteristic of a disease newly introduced into a population.

(3) No bones of native Americans have been discovered showing small pox lesions. But very few skeletons and bones of native Americans have been found, especially compared to the hundreds of millions of European bones preserved in the ossuaries.
Smallpox lesions have been discovered in an American animal cerca 1300 AD. Scientists have discovered the bones of a bear living in central Mexico around 1300 AD. The bones of the bear bear easily identifable small pox lesions. S

Smallpox therefore existed in Mexico cerca 1300AD wheras no evidence of smallpox has been found in Europe before 1500.

Another day, another liberal anti White racist mantra endlessly repeated by the liberal media.

Posted by at 6:04 PM on December 4

Have you heard the Legend of Viracocha? Ancient Peruvians believed that in the beginning, Lord Viracocha, prince and creator of all things, emerged from the void and created the earth and the heavens. This legend is similar to the legends of Kukulcan (Mayas) and Quetzalcoatl (Aztecs). This god was described as being a bearded man with white skin and beautiful emerald eyes.
That is the reason why Aztecs and Incas were confused when the Spanish conquistadors arrived to America. They first thought Viracocha/Quetzalcoatl was coming back.


Posted by at 12:46 AM on December 5

What can be said about the hunting down of white cultures the world over for cneturies. Whites are the global minority and yet have developed the most advanced prosperous countries/cultures. No matter where whites build towns/cultures/ prosperity for themselves they are chased down by racial thieves to destroy what we build and like locust tear it all apart and move on to the next white site for consumption!
Chasing/hunting white people has become the brown sport! V

Posted by at 1:32 AM on December 5

There are some fantastic accounts given by the Spanish historians . Unfortunately , it is all being covered up by political correctness . Any theories on where they came from ? Perhaps those provinces in India containing the fairer complected people ? Maybe even Europe ? Interesting subject .

Posted by at 3:11 AM on December 5

“(3) No bones of native Americans have been discovered showing small pox lesions. But very few skeletons and bones of native Americans have been found, especially compared to the hundreds of millions of European bones preserved in the ossuaries.
Smallpox lesions have been discovered in an American animal cerca 1300 AD. Scientists have discovered the bones of a bear living in central Mexico around 1300 AD. The bones of the bear bear easily identifable small pox lesions. S

Smallpox therefore existed in Mexico cerca 1300AD wheras no evidence of smallpox has been found in Europe before 1500.

Another day, another liberal anti White racist mantra endlessly repeated by the liberal media.”

Posted by at 6:04 PM on December 4

I would like to take your word for it; but for better confirming this in a scientific manner, could you please provide sources for your post?

Posted by EA Steve at 4:56 AM on December 5

Recent scientific paper about smallpox phylogeny and hypotheses about its possible spread:

Apparently, the virus came to Europe and Africa from the East Asia. The Americas got it twice – once a local, less deadly variant “alastrim” in South America evolved, the second entry was that of the European more deadly variant. Interestingly, the Indian population in Ecuador didn’t diminish under Spanish rule, probably due to sort of “vaccination” by the resident alastrim virus.

Posted by EW at 6:39 AM on December 5

I had no idea about smallpox. Thanks.

Posted by Rechill at 7:34 AM on December 5

Mexican Cartels Send Messages of Death

Mexican Cartels Send Messages of Death

More news stories on Mexico and Latin America

William Booth, Washington Post, December 4, 2008

The death squads of the drug cartels are killing in spectacularly gruesome ways, using the violence as a language to deliver a message to society.

Increasingly, bodies show unmistakable signs of torture. Videos of executions are posted on the Internet, as taunts, as warnings. Corpses are dumped on playgrounds, with neatly printed notes beside them. And very often, the heads have been removed.

When someone rolled five heads onto the dance floor in a cantina in Michoacan state two years ago, even the most hardened Mexicans were shocked. Now ritual mutilations are routine. In the border city of Tijuana, 37 people were slain over the weekend, including four children. Nine of the adults were decapitated, including three police officers whose badges were stuffed in their mouths.


As competing drug cartels and their fragmented cells fight the police, the Mexican army and one another for control of billion-dollar smuggling corridors into the U.S. drug market, the violence unleashed by President Felipe Calderón’s war against the traffickers grows more sensational.

An estimated 4,500 people have been killed in drug-related violence since 2007, when Calderón flooded the border and other drug hot zones with 20,000 Mexican troops and thousands of federal agents. November was the bloodiest month so far, with at least 700 killings, according to tallies kept by Mexican newspapers. Some victims had no connection to the drug trade, police say.

Twisted version of ‘shock and awe’

Experts say the cartels and their enforcers are attempting their own twisted version of “shock and awe,” broadcasting via traditional media, rumor mill and the Internet a willingness to fight to the end. Authorities also say the cartels are killing so graphically in order to sap public confidence in the government, perhaps hoping Calderón will allow the cartels to return to business as usual, when the smuggling organizations operated with the tacit support of corrupt officials.


Violence grows more grotesque

As the war drags on, the violence grows bolder and more grotesque. Last week in Juarez, the corpses of seven men, each shot multiple times, strangled and tortured, were lined up against a garden hedge at a primary school. The killers left poster-size signs. Soon after the bodies were discovered, the local police frequency was commandeered and songs in praise of cartels were broadcast on police radios.

In Tijuana last month, a man was executed inside a church. Bystanders, including children, have been killed in daylight gun battles. Five journalists have been assassinated this year, while the hotel where federal police stay in Ciudad Juarez has been assaulted by passing gunmen.

Law enforcement officials in Mexico and the United States say the spasm of violence is born of overlapping struggles. The cartels, and the cells within them, are fighting each other, dealing with traitors inside the organization and competitors outside, which in many cases may include crooked cops who work for the cartels. The traffickers are also fighting the police and military.


Messages left on dead bodies

The cartel killers communicate to one another and to society not only by murder but also message. In October, eight bodies were dumped facedown in an empty lot near a day-care center in Tijuana. Their hands were tied and a message read: “Here are your people.”

State prosecutors in the western state of Michoacan, where the small drug cartel La Familia is based, discovered a head in an ice chest in the port city of Lazaro Cardenas. Tape covered the eyes and an attached message read: “From the Gulf Cartel.” Two weeks ago, someone left funeral wreaths along the streets in the northern city of Hermosillo. State police say six of the wreaths included hand-lettered posters signed by the Gulf drug cartel. One of the signs read: “This is a message for the entire state police force, if you mess with us we are going to kill you and your entire family.”


Original article

(Posted on December 4, 2008)


Rahm Emanuel, the new white house chief of staff, has called for the elimination of any border patrol and a deconstruction of any fence put up to on our southern border. We can expect the drug cartels to accept his invitation and set up home in a neighborhood near you.

Posted by Tim at 5:21 PM on December 4

Don’t worry. Karl Rove assures me that these Mexicans are naturally conservative and some day will make good Republicans…

Posted by Paul at 5:31 PM on December 4

“Mexican Cartels Send Messages of Death”

Yep, intelligent people will draw the appropriate conclusions concerning Mexico, the rest will vacation there.

Posted by Bobby at 5:55 PM on December 4

Zimbabwe needs some diversity! This would be a wonderful opportunity to have about 500 Mexican criminals dumped into Mugabe’s lap. Then we’d find out which group could out “Third World” each other.

Posted by at 7:07 PM on December 4

Lou Dobbs had a report on this very subject tonight, with guests who have investigated the situation, writing an article on it which appears in Newsweek Magazine.

Both reporters sounded super negative about the situation, even projecting a feeling of hopelessness about the chances for reversing the crime and chaos.

Both also pointed out what we already know, which is that almost all the police and military are on cartel payroll.

Drug crime is the only crime that brings in so much wealth it’s necessary for the drug kingpins to start banks in order to have someplace to put their money, after various methods of money laundering.

With criminal organizations that have enough cash flow to pay standing armies and who have so many in the government and police on their payroll right now, it’s just a matter of time before Calderon’s government is going to be taken over by some sort of coup, rigged to look like one that involves politics rather than drug influence.

Dobbs asked why the US side was spared these thousands of killings and violence, and it was alleged that it was not in the interests of the cartels to pursue that kind of violence in the US right now, but neither reporter made any remarks about drug money influencing politicians and businesses on the US side, which has been reported numerous times by others in the recent past.

From all the information contributed to the situation so far, it appears as if the crime and violence will only increase.

If the neo-cons like unilateral attacks against nations that are endangering our national security or intend to do just that so much, and the importation of drugs is causing us definite national security problems, I’m wondering why the US has never taken over Mexico and installed a true democracy there instead of doing the same thing to countries who couldn’t harm us if they wanted to nor did they represent a threat to our national security as Mexico has for the last several years.

Posted by Ranger at 8:25 PM on December 4

To Ranger:

I think I might answer your question. If the United States invaded and bombed Mexico, trying to install a “democratic” regime there, do you realize how many Mexicans would migrate north? Perhaps some 20-30 million. I know, it’s paradoxical, but the United States is the only country to have engaged n war, where the people of the opposing country flock to, after the shooting is over. Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia and Haiti are examples of this.

The USA tried to capture Pancho Villa, after he led border raids in 1916, without success. This left Mexicans resenting the USA- but they still kept migrating here.
Besides, the USA doesn’t want to cut off a cheap labor supply. There are lawns to be cut, dishes to be washed, beds to be made, especially among among Hollywood liberals. Do you think they’d hire Puerto Ricans to do the jobs done by Mexicans?

On a sidebar, do American tourists still go to Tijuana for those legendary donkey shows?

Posted by Soprano Fan at 11:22 PM on December 4

When can we expect some of the bailout money to be funneled to mexico to be given to corrupt govt officials spending it on whores and villa’s ? Seems like the first cash infusion that we sent them wasnt enough to pay anyone off. With the money that was already sent a secure border fence could have been constructed all along the border. Im not saying that we would use american workers that so desperatly need jobs across america but it would be a nice jesture to use a few of them and fill the other postions with illegals that now find themselves in financial stress because of our economy.

Posted by at 1:18 AM on December 5

Let’s see…when Bush took office some of his comments about Mexicans were:
“They are only coming for jobs.” (And education, medication and all the perks they can get).
“If they can cross the Davis Mountains, we want ‘em.” (WE? Do you have a mouse in your pocket, Mr. President)”
“Family Values don’t stop at the Rio Grande (The US does)!

I’m sure others can think of many more idiotic statements by the pro-illegal president.

Posted by June at 9:04 AM on December 5