← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · edward gibbon
Thread ID: 4123 | Posts: 46 | Started: 2002-12-20
2002-12-20 20:35 | User Profile
Under movies frenzied debate continues about the underlying thesis of the New York City draft riots of 1863, the year Gettysbury was fought. The great lies about that war safeguard three classes of Americans who managed to lie and evade that most important of American wars. Nobody in academia or the arts wishes to confront the needed calumny to maintain needed moral superiority for those who continue to deny harsh facts. These three groups are Harvard and Yale type WASP's, Blacks and Jews.
From my book:> ** The WASP hierarchy escaped the travails of the Civil War. They cowered in the campuses of Harvard and Yale. James McPherson, while writing in 1996, asserted appropriations by city councils and draft insurance societies allowed men who did not want to go to war to pay commutation fees. Professor McPherson baldly claimed this allowed poor men to buy their way out of the draft almost as readily as rich men. These avowals are needed by McPherson and his ilk to maintain moral supremacy and legitimacy for their caste. Professor McPherson of Princeton professed that Glory was the most powerful movie ever made of the Civil War and provided a cold dose of realism over romantic views of the Confederacy.
Professor McPherson claimed that 26 percent of the white soldiers in the Union army were born overseas while the foreign born constituted 31 percent of the draft age population. One possible explanation to the underrepresentation of immigrants in military service given by McPherson was the exemption from conscription given to aliens who had not filed for citizenship. Then McPherson said that two of the principal ethnic groups - German and British Protestants - enlisted in proportion to their representation in the general population, but that German and Irish Catholics did not. McPherson asserted he had data for these pronouncements, but did not bother to cite it. (When a black professor was assigned by the magazine Black Scholar to critique The Bell Curve, which maintained subnormal performance by blacks on intelligence tests, Professor McPherson advised the black professor against reading the book. Reportedly Professor McPherson of Princeton told the black that reading the book was exactly what "those white boys" wanted him to do. If he did so, the black would have to contend with their ideas which would distract the black from contradicting a lot of nonsense. How McPherson could know the book was nonsense without reading it has defied logic. But the most pertinent point was the classic illustration of the closed mind of the establishment academician, McPherson, when confronted with challenges to his deeply held beliefs.)
One of the curious things about the McPhersons of this country has been what they omit and fail to cite either from plain ignorance or deliberate oversight. The puritan strain in America is represented in McPherson, who with a sinecure at Princeton and once a leadership position in the Presbyterian church, carefully made judgments which affirmed the social and cultural superiority of his class. That Roman Catholics were fair game has long been accepted, and that Jews were not has been a covenant of more recent age. However, the Encyclopedia Judaica, published in Jerusalem, gave a Jewish population of the United States in 1860 of about 150,000. [color=red]***A little further in their exposition on the glory of the accomplishments of Jews in the United States gave a total of 500 Jews who fell during the Civil War. These numbers were proudly recounted by The Jewish Veteran, the official newsletter of the Jewish War Veterans. A little computation arrived at the ratio of one Jew in every 300 dying during that war. This worked out to little more than three deaths per thousand Jews. This contribution to the Civil War death toll was of the order of one sixth or one seventh of the rest of the population after making allowances that restrictions were placed on service by blacks. One could feel supremely confident that Jews came nowhere close to matching the contribution of the immigrant Irish on a proportional basis.**[/color]*]
The question must be why this fact has not been widely known and discussed. The supposition that the esteemed Presbyterian elder James McPherson was unaware of it is simply ludicrous, but far more interesting has been why he would not comment on it. Until the 1930's in the United States the progressive element was almost exclusively in the hands of radical non-conformists and high-minded Christians who attested to the probity of all those who wished to be admitted to their circle. These people asserted their cultural and moral superiority by professing pacifism as the answer to everything and at all times.
In 1941 just prior to World War II Father Danial Ryan had written of the contribution of American Catholics to the American war dead in World War I. Father Ryan after giving accounting for individual cemeteries in Europe consolidated his figures as 81,067 American dead in Europe through combat or disease and of that figure some 22,552 were of Roman Catholic faith. Thusly, Roman Catholics in America had accounted for over 28 percent of the American war dead when they were less than 17 percent of the American population. This accounting was necessary to counter the blatant claims of the ignorant in the Ku Klux Klan and the much more subtle and much more sinister claims of the ancestors of Professor McPherson that Catholics were not real Americans. True to form Roman Catholics have forgotten this or have through exposure to modern American mores become ashamed of having scrutinized the dead in the first place. The Irish hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church have lacked cultural surety and moral courage when confronting those they regard as their superiors. Their bishops tug the forelock and content themselves with their sheep.**
[color=yellow]Yellow Polichinello [/color]may choose to debate this, but facts prove even his duplicity fails. It must be pointed out that Northern whites died on the battlefield almost eight times the rate that blacks did.
When the debate for reparations reaches national levels the non-performance of Blacks must be used to rebut their childish arguments. If sources of money are needed, why not turn over the endowments of Harvard and Yale to Blacks. Then the fortunes of Jews must be confiscated.
McPherson and his loathsome kind have always assumed virtue, but not courage, was on their side. If we had a national news outlet, we could defuse much of the nonsense the national media promote. I have written two letters to McPherson requesting the source of his data on evasion by Irish immigrants, but he has not responded.
2002-12-21 03:55 | User Profile
edward gibbon,
I have always thought the Irish of New York rioted because did want to fight to Free the Negro. They made a good try at pushing the trash at of the City.
As for Harvard and Yale, I would like to see all the non-Marxist books taken from their Libraries and given a good home; and then both of them burned to the ground.
This is somewhat off subject, but you are talking about lying about the Civil War. I was wondering if you could take a stab at PC "Southern Nationalist" and the "Mexican Confederates"(and now "Mexican Confederates") stuff.
On the so-called "Black Confederates" [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=1301&hl=civil+war]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...01&hl=civil+war[/url]
On the so-called "Mexican Confederates" [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=1302&hl=civil+war]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...02&hl=civil+war[/url]
I did enjoy your Lynching History post.
Lynching History [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=780&hl=]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...&f=11&t=780&hl=[/url]
Related threads:
Hate and Ignorance at Vanderbilt [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=5006]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...t=ST&f=6&t=5006[/url]
The Rainbow Confederacy? NOT! [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=427]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...ct=ST&f=6&t=427[/url]
Ganging Up On America By James Fulford [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=10&t=5005]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...=ST&f=10&t=5005[/url]
Scorsese's GANGS OF NEW YORK [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=10&t=4399]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...=ST&f=10&t=4399[/url]
2002-12-22 18:41 | User Profile
Dr. Faustus:
I will have to get after Christmans celebrations. I have very little info on some of your inquiries. I will try to put in table form the different levels of casualties for different tribes. To this day I believe this info to be supremely important.
2002-12-23 22:26 | User Profile
Originally posted by edward gibbon@Dec 20 2002, 20:35 ** [color=yellow]Yellow Polichinello [/color]may choose to debate this, but facts prove even his duplicity fails. It must be pointed out that Northern whites died on the battlefield almost eight times the rate that blacks did. **
You know, Dick, for someone who always disappears when I try to engage you in a debate, you're really not in a position to be calling anyone yellow.
The problem with your facts is that you always selectively tailor them to meet your needs. Look at this number of 500 Jews dead in the Civil War. It really doesn't tell us much of what's going on because you don't detail the make up the population. Your analysis has all the depth of a birdbath. How old and how educated were they? this is important. More importantly, what were the service rates? Of course, when it's convenient to your argument to start digging into detail, you do so--again, very selectively and tenditiously--as you did with World War One and World War Two. Before you go accusing me of not bringing any evidence of my own, remember, I'm not the one claiming to be a some great historian with the discovery of the century. You are, and it's your job to back up your facts and reasons.
As I've said before, your historical argument does have some validity in that it puts lie to some of the more obnoxious ethnocentric hornblowing a lot of Jews do admittedly engage in. For instance, in World War II, while their service rates were proportional, they were nowhere near being spectacular, and so Jews really have no reason to point accusing fingers, as many of them pompously do, at others for "ignoring" Hitler's evil.
What your numbers do NOT do though is show that Jews, qua Jews are not trustworthy, which is something you[?] and others attempt to do with them. Even if I grant you your arguments, you still have significant numbers of Jews serving in the Armed Forces. This means the idea that you can judge somebody's allegiance reliably, or even make dubious assumptions about it, based solely on his being a Jew is proved utterly false, even by your own numbers.
Best, P
2002-12-24 00:35 | User Profile
[color=yellow]Yellow Polichinello[/color]:
I print this for lurkers and those who have forgotten. My documenting the evasion by Jews in 5 - yes 5 - American wars. [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=324&hl=evasion]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...=324&hl=evasion[/url]
I would not accuse you of bringing any evidence of your own because you have none. Your bold lies and arrogant nonsense appeal only to the likes of George on a bad pill day.
Your cite the Civil War total of 500 Jews dying. I took that number from the Encyclopedia Judaica and the newspaper of the Jewish War Veterans, both reliable sources on matters concerning Jews. What the *Encyclopedia Judaica * called the most significant anti-Semitic act in American history was US Grant's order deporting Jews from the war zone. What Jews had done to deserve that was not a concern for them - only that the Chosen People were selected to go. That these thugs had been proffiting from the deaths of Americans did not concern them. Nor their part in the resupply of Grant's enemies. The disgraceful behavior and ethics of Jews were not to be punished.
I point out that of a total of 150,000 Jews in this country during the Civil War that they died a rate less than 1-2 of Blacks who were forbidden to fight. Goyim such as myself died at a rate 6 to 7 times the rate of Jews.
Standing accused of not bringing facts to the argument I must laugh. I only had 22 endnotes citing sources and justifying conclusions. As ever you lie and cavil about trivialities. Your laziness and bullheaded stupidity are readily exhibited for those who read these posts.
What I did was prove Jews will not fight in numbers anywhere close to being commensurate with their population. Some Jews did fight, but they were a distinct minority among their kinsmen. Yet Jews have never hesitated in having others do their fighting and most especially, dying in their stead.
2002-12-24 01:28 | User Profile
**[color=yellow]Yellow Polichinello[/color]:
I print this for lurkers and those who have forgotten. My documenting the evasion by Jews in 5 - yes 5 - American wars. [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=324&hl=evasion]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...=324&hl=evasion[/url]
I would not accuse you of bringing any evidence of your own because you have none. Your bold lies and arrogant nonsense appeal only to the likes of George on a bad pill day.**
Unlike you, for whom every day is a bad pill day.
I repeat, I'm not the one claiming to be the great historian. You are, and you should be able to more fully account for your numbers than just citing one or two bare facts and issuing a condemnation.
Here's how the argument works:
Your cite the Civil War total of 500 Jews dying. I took that number from the Encyclopedia Judaica and the newspaper of the Jewish War Veterans, both reliable sources on matters concerning Jews. **
Yes, I see the number there. But war and culture are more complex than this. Casualties don't work on a linear basis. to pass a judgement I need to know more about the population's demographics: age, education, etc. I also need to know the service rates.
Then Dick jumps off on a tangent:
What the *Encyclopedia Judaica * called the most significant anti-Semitic act in American history was US Grant's order deporting Jews from the war zone. What Jews had done to deserve that was not a concern for them - only that the Chosen People were selected to go. That these thugs had been proffiting from the deaths of Americans did not concern them. Nor their part in the resupply of Grant's enemies. The disgraceful behavior and ethics of Jews were not to be punished.
What, pray tell, does this have to do with argument about rates of service and casualites? It's an entirely separate issue.
I point out that of a total of 150,000 Jews in this country during the Civil War that they died a rate less than 1-2 of Blacks who were forbidden to fight. Goyim such as myself died at a rate 6 to 7 times the rate of Jews.
I refer back to the earlier argument. You can take a statistically small group like Jews at the time, and extrapolate all sorts of shocking figures to suit your needs. One needs to know more about them than you give to reach a sound judgement.
Standing accused of not bringing facts to the argument I must laugh. I only had 22 endnotes citing sources and justifying conclusions. As ever you lie and cavil about trivialities. Your laziness and bullheaded stupidity are readily exhibited for those who read these posts.
No, I accuse you of playing with facts and tailoring them to fit your apparently emotional needs. The fact that you have to resort to namecalling so quickly in the conversation shows you have anything but an unbiased approach to the issue, which is a sine qua non for any serious historian.
What I did was prove Jews will not fight in numbers anywhere close to being commensurate with their population. Some Jews did fight, but they were a distinct minority among their kinsmen. Yet Jews have never hesitated in having others do their fighting and most especially, dying in their stead.
Actually, you did nothing of the kind. During the Civil War, the Jewish population was rather small, too small to make any sound judgement. The World War I numbers you provided showed a proportional share to the population, so you had to go and shake them down yet again and try looking at a demographic segment, through the filter of census reports years away from the period in question, I might add. You also failed to take into account such factors as language (Most Jews in World War I were immigrants). In World War II, you again had to parse demographics to reach an agreeable ratio, and you failed, again, to take into account demographics.
In both World Wars the amount of Jewish casualties ran into the thousands, certainly putting lie to your claim that Jews who did the fighting were a "distinct minority," as in a small fraction. They were, in fact, a significant percentage of American Jews, according to your own numbers.
Vietnam is really the only war where you have a serious case, but that can be explained by class and politics more so than ethnicity. The Gulf War, of which I am veteran, was such a brief and isolated war that it can't really be taken seriously in your indictment.
Best, P
2002-12-24 02:01 | User Profile
Polichinello, Have you actually read Mr.Earley's book?
2002-12-24 21:05 | User Profile
Originally posted by Mr.Wilson@Dec 24 2002, 02:01 ** Polichinello, Have you actually read Mr.Earley's book? **
I'm not commenting on his book, only on what he's discussed here.
Best, P
2002-12-25 02:29 | User Profile
Originally posted by Polichinello@Dec 24 2002, 21:05 ** > Originally posted by Mr.Wilson@Dec 24 2002, 02:01 ** Polichinello, Have you actually read Mr.Earley's book? **
I'm not commenting on his book, only on what he's discussed here.
Best, P **
P., old son... read the book please? Read my lips: HAVE YOU DONE THE READING?
I for example ain't "yellow"... strap me to the BOMB... baby... 'Over there...'
"Promise?"
What do I mean? TWO things, as usual... it's both... We were and still are on a cusp... I have NO fear of death anymore, but I'm almost 50... I don't think, anyone there, if the UN is worth its weight "should" even in the final analysis allow ("as if" they have any say?) anyone's going to War... unless they're 40 or above... I, might add, to make it fair... 40 & female... but that's REALLY unrealistic... Women, aren't that stupid.
I'm serious, it's another age, now R. early... even though I agree with, and commiserate with, the injustices done to yourself and others in your time... it sucked... should we all hunt them all down... even if we could.
I understand, your mission is that it doesn't happen again... in THAT, I'm on YOUR side...
This would be a comedy... except I agree with r. Early... the spectre of this happening, UNjustly... is still with US...
So of course I'm on "P.'s" & r. Early's sides as well... these are not just debating points... DIE for them, is my motto... let's build a fire on Main Street... I AIN'T kidding... and shoot it full of holes... Die, in peace, why die meaninglessly Elsewhere? Bith-ches?
2002-12-25 20:14 | User Profile
[color=yellow][SIZE=3]Yellow Polichinello:[/color][/SIZE]
Manners dictate that you not address me in a familiar sense. I have not been your friend. I am not now your friend. I have no intention of being your friend.
Your Talmudic inspired ignorance and abominable ethics insult those who appreciate the West. I am under no obligation to furnish evidence other that what I have refered. Your obsession with trivialities reveals your cultural standards.
I merely documented Jews evasion of five American wars, German military service in World War I and British military service in World War II. This is seven wars where Jews ran.
Later I will pin you to the cross.
2002-12-25 21:21 | User Profile
"Later I will pin you to the cross." -edward gibbon
I don't know, but I find that a bit Roman? Their greatest contribution was human discipline, itself... But of course that's flawed and limited as well, like other parts, of the Whole, when emphasized alone. No? Just as when emphasizing, the clever 'cortex' alone, is inherently a Flaw.
Also for students of Actual human history, the fellow pinned to the cross... wasn't a 'Jesus' or a 'Buddha', Jesus was an Essene and somewhere else. The fellow, as it were--pinned, was a great warrior... in his father's tradition in opposing the Romans, violently... who had the bad luck Not to die in battle like his father had, but to be captured in battle, tried, and crucified, instead.
Also as it pertains to doing the reading... speaking to one in the familar, when perhaps it is inappropriately cavalier, or impolite, isn't Talmudic. At least not to my knowledge, although I have not read the Talmud in its entirety.
We're inevitably singing songs here gentlemen... because although one day, I at least suspect it will be simpler, today it is yet nigglingly complex...
I for one, am torn between sympathies for Mr. P. or Mr. G.
Easily solved...by simply remembering I prefer myself... no choice, right? In life anyway, if not the "song"?
2002-12-27 05:22 | User Profile
edward gibbon, An important point of your book and posts is to reorient the viewpoint of the reader.If you were ineffective in doing so,Polichinello and other supporters of the ancient regime wouldn't be so vehement in attempting to (unsuccessfully) refute you.You are in the good company of other revisionist and non-establishment authors and researchers.You leave your detractors confounded.
2002-12-27 21:38 | User Profile
Originally posted by edward gibbon@Dec 25 2002, 20:14 ** [color=yellow][SIZE=3]Yellow Polichinello:[/color][/SIZE]
Manners dictate that you not address me in a familiar sense. **
Let me get this straight. You start off all your posts with a big, yellow insult, and now you complain about etiquette and ethics?
You do take the cake, Dick. You surely do.
Best, P
2002-12-27 21:44 | User Profile
Originally posted by George@Dec 25 2002, 02:29 ** P., old son... read the book please? **
I got better things to do with my time than read a book full of Dick's rants, George. It is fun to rattle his cage here, though.
Best, P
2002-12-28 19:25 | User Profile
[SIZE=4][color=yellow]Yellow Polichinello[/color][/SIZE]
Your insolence continues. You are not bashful in exhibiting your profound lack of knowledge and inablity to correlate facts. I hope you continue to post your brainless rants. Lurkers and others will easily see your crass stupidity and willingness to lie and obfuscate for your tribe.
I have sent a private message to Abe Foxman highlighting what you consider your triumphs, and I regard as your great lies. Mr. Foxman for your grotesque efforts will presently get you a seat on the ADL dais for your obscenities on behalf of your tribe.
2002-12-28 20:11 | User Profile
The Jews were too busy making money off the Civil War to fight in it. Grant and Sherman wanted Jews restricted from travelling to the south because they were engaging in War Profiteering.
I read a book about Confederate Partisans once and it talked about Mosby and his men ambushing wagon trains of Jewish Profiteers hauling their loot back north.
The Jews would sell a loaf of bread to a starving southern family at an outrageous mark-up.
2002-12-28 21:21 | User Profile
Lurkers and others will easily see your crass stupidity and willingness to lie and obfuscate for your tribe.
Well, I've been lurking, and I personally think your shallow historiography eats sh*t.
I can, just off the top of my head, think of several places where Jews fought disproportionately. The Spanish Civil War for example, where Jews from all over the world came to fight for the Left.
2002-12-28 21:35 | User Profile
Oliver,
Edward is referring to [url=http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol2no2/re-wars.html]this article[/url] as well as his book. Please read it.
You are correct. Alot of Jews did fight on the side of the Reds during the Spanish Civil War. Edward is talking about Jews fighting for America.
2002-12-29 01:33 | User Profile
I find Polichinello can be, at times, willfully disingenuous in the pursuit of his arguments. Moreover, I wholly agree with Earley/Gibbon's basic premise re Jews and American wars. I generally enjoy watching arguments get ballistically personal and ugly. And nobody's ever accused me of being philosemitic.
But Polichinello is neither crass, stupid nor crassly stupid, and Edward, you're not helping your case by referring to him as YELLOW POLICHINELLO in giant yellow letters, and the invective you're using smacks distinctly of someone trying to turn a crowd into a mob.
You're in the right, and you have the numbers on your side to back you up. That right there obligates you to take the high road in this argument. Turning this personal simply distracts attention from the legitimacy of your position.
2002-12-29 18:36 | User Profile
il ragno> **You're in the right, and you have the numbers on your side to back you up. That right there obligates you to take the high road in this argument. Turning this personal simply distracts attention from the legitimacy of your position. **
For the rest of this post I will take your counsel.
Oliver Cromwell > Well, I've been lurking, and I personally think your shallow historiography eats sht.*
I can, just off the top of my head, think of several places where Jews fought disproportionately. The Spanish Civil War for example, where Jews from all over the world came to fight for the Left. **
Lord Cromwell reveals his colors. What specificially did he find that offends him? Could it be the facts because they are all true? What Lord Cromwell dislikes so intensely is that I have printed the truth about Jews and American wars. Cowardice and deceit by Jews in our wars is a historical fact.
The Spanish Civil War which Lord Cromwell would like to enoble had Jews fighting for a side that would have reenacted the great butchery in the Ukraine on a smaller scale. American Jews have lied, apoligized and defended that killing for more than 70 years. More Slavs died at the hands of Jews than Germans killed Jews. Cromwell takes a different side than I. Franco was correct in fighting off this malign doctrine.
2002-12-29 19:02 | User Profile
Polichinello bleats about his moral superiority in other posts. [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=5132&st=20&#entry24620]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...=20&#entry24620[/url]
> I am aware that you regard no member of this forum approaching you in righteousness and probity.**
Even if I did, save a for a few people here, it woudn't be much of an accomplishment.**
> Your declaration of moral superiority should impress those who read these messages with your inability to reason or confront harsh realities.**
Just taking them at their word. They've gone at length telling me how they don't mind lying from their own kind; and think it's somehow justifiable to suspend normal morality when dealing with others they consider to be lesser beings. Best, P **
Polichinello in his postings has assumed the technique of yielding on points he regards as not important, but impugning base morality to those who challenge his more deeply held beliefs. A logician or statistician could very easily look at the numbers, check the sources and issue his opinion on their validity. This western approach will not be attempted by him. He makes perfectly stupid and meaningless statements about sampling and completeness.
It must be noted that all sources were obtained from respected organs that were not in the least considered anti-Semitic. In fact most were compiled by Jews. Most have long been in the public domain.
Oliver Cromwell must be a provative troll.
2002-12-29 19:34 | User Profile
Oliver Cromwell must be a provative troll.
Better than an idiot middle-brow :lol:
2002-12-29 21:23 | User Profile
I compliment, all on their ERUDITION... (more in so many cases than my own-- so I'm not 'con-descending') this is ALL very healthy, so far as I can tell...BECAUSE these issues sadly, & happily are never solved 'intellectually' alone... only through the chaos (hopefully controlled) of finally our genuine EMOTIONS & SPIRIT... someone, quick, gimme a chair, I want to break over someone's head...
Of course I could be 'wrong'?... I know this player, unspectacular in so many ways...who gets all the Vomen he wants?who claims it's not possible for anyone to fail, if their rap is 'right'... you've got to appropriately marinate the fish he candidly disclaims...which they appreciate too, since all Vomen are players too, to quote him... -?-
I Ask... is he speaking himself to 'blessing', which is admirable, in itself... or only marinating the fish...?
I.e. Oh, my g-d don't fight now... look at that one over, there, what an ____ ?
I'm only doing stream of consciousness here, right now... is it possible the irascible members of the debate, aren't getting Laid enough?
NO. I discount that... it's still pretty Healthy in my humble opinion...
But I do like that new (is it rap?) song to a certain extent, by whom I have no idea...you know the one?...
(quote) "Oh, bith-ch, get out the way, get out the way bith-ch get Out the way...oh bith-ch, get out the way, get out the way bith-ch, get out the way..." .... seems like it goes on ad infinitum, though the beat is pleasant...
HEMINGWAY called screwing... "the good destruction"... I agree... better than Dresden... or Hiroshima... or twin Towers?
Oh bith-ch... don't get out the way... (see that's why I disagree with it, I'm like on the other side of that pop song...) Ohh, bith-ch don't get out the way, don't get out the way bith-ch, don't get out the way... OOOPs, I learned about myself with this post... [I better have a beer...] There's only if you break it down love & fear... I like dah bith-ches... Don't get out the way bith-ch, don't get out the way...
2002-12-29 22:16 | User Profile
Here is a link to a photograph of two high-ranking government officials who are in total agreement with Polichinello. [url=http://www.larouchepub.com/graphics/2002/2945wolf_bush.jpg]http://www.larouchepub.com/graphics/2002/2...45wolf_bush.jpg[/url]
2002-12-30 20:16 | User Profile
Polichinello has written the following:
**Then Dick jumps off on a tangent:
What the Encyclopedia Judaica called the most significant anti-Semitic act in American history was US Grant's order deporting Jews from the war zone. What Jews had done to deserve that was not a concern for them - only that the Chosen People were selected to go. That these thugs had been proffiting from the deaths of Americans did not concern them. Nor their part in the resupply of Grant's enemies. The disgraceful behavior and ethics of Jews were not to be punished.
What, pray tell, does this have to do with argument about rates of service and casualites? It's an entirely separate issue.
I point out that of a total of 150,000 Jews in this country during the Civil War that they died a rate less than 1-2 of Blacks who were forbidden to fight. Goyim such as myself died at a rate 6 to 7 times the rate of Jews .
I refer back to the earlier argument. You can take a statistically small group like Jews at the time, and extrapolate all sorts of shocking figures to suit your needs. One needs to know more about them than you give to reach a sound judgement.
Standing accused of not bringing facts to the argument I must laugh. I only had 22 endnotes citing sources and justifying conclusions. As ever you lie and cavil about trivialities. Your laziness and bullheaded stupidity are readily exhibited for those who read these posts.
No, I accuse you of playing with facts and tailoring them to fit your apparently emotional needs. The fact that you have to resort to namecalling so quickly in the conversation shows you have anything but an unbiased approach to the issue, which is a sine qua non for any serious historian.
**What I did was prove Jews will not fight in numbers anywhere close to being commensurate with their population. Some Jews did fight, but they were a distinct minority among their kinsmen. Yet Jews have never hesitated in having others do their fighting and most especially, dying in their stead. **
Actually, you did nothing of the kind. During the Civil War, the Jewish population was rather small, too small to make any sound judgement.**
Your questioning of my account of Jews being deported from the war zone indicates your willingness to rationalize criminal and duplicitous behavior when done by Jews. If caught by the Confederacy, I suspect they would not have been deported, but hanged.
A population of 150,000 is not statistically insignicant. Neither is 500 deaths. Yet my kind of people, the goyim, died at a rate some 6 to 7 times that of Jews.
The facts speak for themselves. Jews as a group have ducked American wars.
Lord Cromwell has written:> **QUOTE
**Oliver Cromwell must be a provative troll. **
Better than an idiot middle-brow **
I will now spell PROVOCATIVE. I notice you have not answered my charge that Jews fought for a regime planning to kill millions of people as was done in the Ukraine. I will let the content of my posts stand and let others compare what I have written to your willingness to forgive and forget the great criminalities by your side.
2002-12-30 21:44 | User Profile
Your questioning of my account of Jews being deported from the war zone indicates your willingness to rationalize criminal and duplicitous behavior when done by Jews. If caught by the Confederacy, I suspect they would not have been deported, but hanged.
Actually, I didn't question it. I said it was besides the point, and it is. However, I will note that the order was immediately condemned by Grant's contemporaries as odious, and it was soon rescinded. And contrary to your last point, one of the reasons for the order was that Jews were generally sympathetic to the Confederacy. Judah P. Benjamin is probably the most outstanding example of a Confederate Jew, but there were plenty of others, including the first two Jewish U.S. senators, who both came from southern states.
A population of 150,000 is not statistically insignicant. Neither is 500 deaths. Yet my kind of people, the goyim, died at a rate some 6 to 7 times that of Jews.
The population is insignificant. In 1860 the white US population stood at 26,690,781 [http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/censusbin/census/cen.pl]. One hundred and fifty-thousand is only one-half of one percent of that population.
Further, the make up that population was 2/3's recent immigrants: ââ¬ÅIn 1860, there were about 150,000 Jews in the United States, up from just 50,000 ten year earlier.ââ¬Â
[url=http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:vH1qZDXUSFEC:www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~lurie/byjason/jews-civil-war.rtf+Jews+in+the+Civil+War&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:vH1qZ...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8[/url]
Immigrants rarely serve in proportion to their population because of a number of factors, like language, so this newcomer component would naturally drag down overall rates.
Finally, your reliance on deaths is a poor indicator of loyalty. Battles and deaths are capricious events, usually out of the hands of the soldier who goes where he's when he's told. A far better measure is service rates because it indicates, without any need for arbitrary chance, a person's attitude and patriotism. Here is the number of Jews who served:
[url=http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/civilwar.htm]http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/civilwar.htm[/url] ââ¬Åââ¬Â¦it is estimated that there were about 10,000 Jewish-American servicemen on both sides of the Civil War. The current database contains over 7250 records.ââ¬Â
According to what I found on the web, some 3,000,000 men fought in the Civil War. Basically, that's a rate of about 11% (I'm not going to deduct black soliders from that 3,000,000 number as I can't find a sure number on that, some say it's 180,000. This assumption is to your benefit, though). Now, if we take the 7,250 number and use 150,000 as the Jewish Population, then you have a rate which is a little under 5% (4.83%). But, if you take into account the large proportion of immigrants in that mix, then the number goes down to 50,000, and the rate increase dramatically to 14.5%.
Now, I do not think 14.5% is a fair rate. It's an exaggeration, but on the other hand the 5% underevaluates loyalty because of the demographic factor. A fairer number, one that can be reached by someone more expert than I (and obviously you), is probably somewhere in between--right around where the rest of the country is at.
Best, P
2002-12-30 22:19 | User Profile
Originally posted by edward gibbon@Dec 28 2002, 19:25 ** I have sent a private message to Abe Foxman highlighting what you consider your triumphs, and I regard as your great lies. Mr. Foxman for your grotesque efforts will presently get you a seat on the ADL dais for your obscenities on behalf of your tribe. **
LOL. I don't think I'm exactly in Abie's good book, nor will I ever be.
Best, P
2002-12-30 23:38 | User Profile
I will now spell PROVOCATIVE. I notice you have not answered my charge that Jews fought for a regime planning to kill millions of people as was done in the Ukraine.
Why would I want do deny that charge? It's true, and I probably know much more about it that you. It was the same in a dozen or so countries.
It's just that our side loses points with the type of people who make decissions because we have so many half-wits like you who serve as nothing but ammunition for the other side, and your use of the word significate is a typical case in point.
If I plant a kind of potatoe that produces 104 pounds on my test plot, and another kind that produces 100 pounds on the same amount of land and under the same conditions, no agricultural publication in the world will publish my results if I use the word significant to describe the difference.
Significant, to anyone with a college degree anywhere in the civilized world has a specific defenition when used in statistics, and I would have to start you from sqare one and totally re-educate you to make you useful to the cause of those of us who want to re-claim the USA for historic Christianity.
2002-12-31 00:28 | User Profile
Oliver Cromwell wrote> ** decissions significate defenition sqare**
A spell-checker may be in order for this board.
Cromwell further wrote> Significant, to anyone with a college degree anywhere in the civilized world has a specific defenition when used in statistics, and I would have to start you from sqare one and totally re-educate you to make you useful to the cause of those of us who want to re-claim the USA for historic Christianity.
My knowledge of statistics is somewhat rusty, but I am sure what has been discussed is well within sampling standards. But I say again what I have posted are facts. You may lie and quibble about these just like your friend Polichinello. The differences are at a minimum in the order of 50% and other times on the order of 6 to 7 times.
To save the United States for "historic Christianity", as you put it, could require some of the descendants, if any, of the 8 million Ukrainians killed. My posts will stand. Future posts by you will show if you approach my understanding of American and 20th century history. Anybody desiring to save "historic Christianity" in the United States would know you defended the side in Spain that was killing Christians with the assistance of American Jews.
2002-12-31 00:43 | User Profile
A spell-checker may be in order for this board.
Yes, I typed fast, as did you with your own mispelling that I ignored, which is the polite thing to do.
My knowledge of statistics is somewhat rusty
No, it's non-existant.
2003-01-02 16:51 | User Profile
Oliver Cromwell
Having little to do over the Holiday, I decided to telephone my contact at Ms. Tangerina's Academy of Beauty, Culture and Metaphysics. As I noted before, the charming colored girls fondly remembered the white man who taught there and posted here as wombatnine. His stay there enhanced their self-esteem. His crass stupidity gave them confidence that though he may have had a credential certifying himself as smart, he was the goofiest man they ever met. Many remembered having to help tie his shoelaces.
What else they remembered was how he would dress in a round hat and pretend he was rescuing England from evil. He thought he was Oliver Cromwell. It did not take much of a leap of faith to identify you as one and the same as wombatnine. Under either name you are an ignoramous.
2003-01-02 21:05 | User Profile
DITTO ed gibbon... I suspected flying saucer O-liver... as perhaps a CROSS dresser... even though we Whites (or in my case, 'thereabouts'... and even in P's case probably) we do these things, culturally speaking... even you too ed... for love in a sense of Jesus, or Pericles, or Moses, or my rabbi, (or those dead on the battlefield, or if non-self destructive for our ownselfs too)... who IS cool, 'r' (leff) or -?- AHHHH... wombbat9... hey, as I said, I likes dee bith-ches... Flying SAucer-O... let's at least let'em speaks for demselves, No? Let'em speak for dame'selves... no?
No cross dressing not even CROSS dressing over to wombat9... ok, "O"-?--- (does that stand for "O"... like the big O, and multiples?) OooooHHhhhh. Wombat9 = O-liver...SAucer... AHHHHHH!!! :lol: Read my yawning chasm... I kid, I kid... :ph34r: :blink:
2003-01-02 21:50 | User Profile
gibbon, you dolt, you have the discernment and learning of a lemming.
Ask you friends if this guy who couldn't tie his shoes was a 6 foot redbeared 220 pound 4 time all-American wrestler who speaks 6 languages.
But to the point, I'm waiting for your statistical analysis of your use of the word significant.
George, you have made the most eloquent defence of gibbon that I've yet heard on this board.
2003-01-02 22:47 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oliver Cromwell@Jan 2 2003, 21:50 ** gibbon, you dolt, you have the discernment and learning of a lemming.
Ask you friends if this guy who couldn't tie his shoes was a 6 foot redbeared 220 pound 4 time all-American wrestler who speaks 6 languages.
But to the point, I'm waiting for your statistical analysis of your use of the word significant.
George, you have made the most eloquent defence of gibbon that I've yet heard on this board. **
I've got to say this, and I've considered it... You know me?, that means Context, within it, as best as I perceive it... (I'm fallible needless to say...I know not the beginning, or the end of things)...no one does, worth their weight, their freight... we go from there...
As the saying goes "'It Takes A Village' ... idiot"... I'm more of a village idiot than ed gibbon... but perhaps, at least I think, so are you "O"... than ed... Is this a compliment to us or to ed? Probably to ed... know why? Still, sadly, though not necessarily for long-?-ALL things yet do lead to Rome... Savez, Mohavez? I'm betting ed...when they don't yet lead there, is cool... he knows that too?
Must always be contextual... under G-d... it's just my "read"... Big "O"... Big "Ed"... :P
2003-01-03 00:11 | User Profile
Young Lord Oliver Cromwell> ** ... just off the top of my head, think of several places where Jews fought disproportionately. The Spanish Civil War for example, where Jews from all over the world came to fight for the Left. **
You have not answered my questioning of defense by Jews of a criminal regime.
**Ask you friends if this guy who couldn't tie his shoes was a 6 foot redbeared 220 pound 4 time all-American wrestler who speaks 6 languages.
But to the point, I'm waiting for your statistical analysis of your use of the word significant.**
You have much to prove before I certify you competent in the English language. Was the all-American designation limited to those who compete in Special Olympics?
Please continue to flaunt your gross stupidity and ignorance. The next time you practice a choke hold, please insert your hand in your shorts.
2003-01-03 00:42 | User Profile
**You have not answered my questioning of defense by Jews of a criminal regime. **
QUOTE
I did, but I was speaking above your head. Why don't you ask again, but be specific how you define criminal, or you'll just look stupid to high school graduates again.
You have much to prove before I certify you competent in the English language.
Your Junior College night class doesn't qualify you to certify anyone.
Was the all-American designation limited to those who compete in Special Olympics?
I'd like to show you, but throwing you on your head would just increase your I.Q. by a statistically insignificant amount, so it wouldn't help.
2003-01-03 01:25 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oliver Cromwell@Jan 3 2003, 00:42 ** > **You have not answered my questioning of defense by Jews of a criminal regime. **
QUOTE
I did, but I was speaking above your head. Why don't you ask again, but be specific how you define criminal, or you'll just look stupid to high school graduates again.
You have much to prove before I certify you competent in the English language.
Your Junior College night class doesn't qualify you to certify anyone.
Was the all-American designation limited to those who compete in Special Olympics?
I'd like to show you, but throwing you on your head would just increase your I.Q. by a statistically insignificant amount, so it wouldn't help. **
This is terrible... Loving it...
what-?-am I a broad? No couldn't be I don't want the winner or the loser... I guess I'm just a 'bastard': "Fight, Fight, Fight!"
Please continue... I'll be at John-Henry's, a little, quiet jazz place... comfortable--that, at least, or hopeful of, I'm not sure which, the brawl will or won't spill into there... just Remember gentlemen... for your own sakes, there are No rules... This unfortunately is why, sadly, we must be concerned too with Big "S" in Iraq... "S" ol'buddy, ain't you leavin'yet? :ph34r:
2003-01-04 18:55 | User Profile
Young Lord Oliver Cromwell
As one who can derive the Gaussian Normal distribution using calculus, I regard myself as someone who remains competent in basic mathematics. You, I strongly suspect, could not do so. Much of what you write, again I strongly suspect, is untrue.
For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. You indulge only in name calling and lying. Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts.
2003-01-04 20:20 | User Profile
Originally posted by edward gibbon@Jan 4 2003, 12:55 ** Young Lord Oliver Cromwell
As one who can derive the Gaussian Normal distribution using calculus, I regard myself as someone who remains competent in basic mathematics. You, I strongly suspect, could not do so. Much of what you write, again I strongly suspect, is untrue.
For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. You indulge only in name calling and lying. Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts. **
Point taken, with a question?
Are you writing coherent, logical posts, as you suggest. Or perhaps do you realize you're writing coherent, rational posts?
Georgie has pointed out, that 'logic' is the pill we all take, the linear way the conscious human mind already 'likes' to "think" so as to convince itself it either is aware, or even Able to be aware of sufficient much...to make the "logical" choice. 'Logic' in other words is just a Mr. FeelGood, the pill we pop to go to World War One, Two... (how high can we chimps count? ... 'logically speaking')
While on the other hand rational thought requires we take into consideration the extant and profound limitations on conscious thought itself, the inevitable blind Spots ALWAYS in space & time... and also incorporate a designedly controlled amount of the irrational into our cosiderations... or we Are NOT even being rational per se.
Therefore logic is always How we human beings with our capacity now to think, assuage ourselves....While the rational, is how we challenge ourselves, even at the risk of being a little bit Uncomfortable in that process...
At least it's how I've come to view the distinction?more or less...
2003-01-04 20:47 | User Profile
I find Edward to be a very fine writer and a person who not only does a first rate job of historical research, but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does. I suggest people read his book.
2003-01-04 21:11 | User Profile
Originally posted by Pim@Jan 4 2003, 20:20 ** > Originally posted by edward gibbon@Jan 4 2003, 12:55 ** Young Lord Oliver Cromwell
As one who can derive the Gaussian Normal distribution using calculus, I regard myself as someone who remains competent in basic mathematics. You, I strongly suspect, could not do so. Much of what you write, again I strongly suspect, is untrue.
For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. You indulge only in name calling and lying. Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts. **
Point taken, with a question?
Are you writing coherent, logical posts, as you suggest. Or perhaps do you realize you're writing coherent, rational posts?
Georgie has pointed out, that 'logic' is the pill we all take, the linear way the conscious human mind already 'likes' to "think" so as to convince itself it either is aware, or even Able to be aware of sufficient much...to make the "logical" choice. 'Logic' in other words is just a Mr. FeelGood, the pill we pop to go to World War One, Two... (how high can we chimps count? ... 'logically speaking')
While on the other hand rational thought requires we take into consideration the extant and profound limitations on conscious thought itself, the inevitable blind Spots ALWAYS in space & time... and also incorporate a designedly controlled amount of the irrational into our cosiderations... or we Are NOT even being rational per se.
Therefore logic is always How we human beings with our capacity now to think, assuage ourselves....While the rational, is how we challenge ourselves, even at the risk of being a little bit Uncomfortable in that process...
At least it's how I've come to view the distinction?more or less... **
I find Edward to be a very fine writer and a person who not only does a first rate job of historical research, but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does. I suggest people read his book.
"It is unfortunate to have views different from the rest of mankind. It secures abuse." American General D. H. Hill, C.S.A.
Sertorius US Army Colors
I suggest folks READ his book, too... however ALSO the operative word in Sertorius's endorsement above is: "but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does."
I think Pim's point is on the other hand... gibbon APPROPRIATELY does Not apply logic... however may not even Realize that Fact, himself...
IF indeed that's Pim's point... regardless whether it's Pim's point or not... I happen to AGREE with it...
That's, sort of the hidden REALITY or genius of the book...the, if you will, little pony, under the pile of horse manure... every people, and every generation...lives for, or in hope of... in this case at least a pretty good book...
...the biggest complaint, in reality, against the book so far, is that it did not come out of the ruling classes... However I'll say this, it possesses a Brahmin's or a Lord's or dare I say a rabbi's (or priest's) appropriate sensibility in its best sense... :)
2003-01-04 21:19 | User Profile
For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. You indulge only in name calling and lying. Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts.
Hello, worm.
I agree with the pervert George that you don't use logic.
Why don't you concentrate for a few hours, and ask a specific question, or posit a specific stance on something?
Just for fun.
Let's see what happens, if you're not too scared.
2003-01-04 21:47 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oliver Cromwell@Jan 4 2003, 21:19 ** > For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. You indulge only in name calling and lying. Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts.
Hello, worm.
I agree with the pervert George that you don't use logic.
Why don't you concentrate for a few hours, and ask a specific question, or posit a specific stance on something?
Just for fun.
Let's see what happens, if you're not too scared. **
I guess Oliver C. is a Zionist or secularist provacateur... a PAID agent, and "pervert" in his own reich... err, I mean 'rite'... in his defense e.gibbon, probably a young lad... can't yet tell the difference between the rational, & the logical (although I'm not sure you can either?to your credit?)... & I guess you're correct, what a job the young lad here, has... no doubt can't do calculus...either... :blink:
2003-01-04 21:50 | User Profile
Originally posted by George@Jan 4 2003, 21:11 ** > Originally posted by Pim@Jan 4 2003, 20:20 ** > Originally posted by edward gibbon@Jan 4 2003, 12:55 ** Young Lord Oliver Cromwell
As one who can derive the Gaussian Normal distribution using calculus, I regard myself as someone who remains competent ÃÂ in basic mathematics. ÃÂ You, I strongly suspect, could not do so. ÃÂ Much of what you write, again I strongly suspect, is untrue.
For a Zionist provacateur you are not very imaginative. ÃÂ You indulge only in name calling and lying. ÃÂ Those who read this forum will decide on who writes coherent logical posts. **
Point taken, with a question?
Are you writing coherent, logical posts, as you suggest. Or perhaps do you realize you're writing coherent, rational posts?
Georgie has pointed out, that 'logic' is the pill we all take, the linear way the conscious human mind already 'likes' to "think" so as to convince itself it either is aware, or even Able to be aware of sufficient much...to make the "logical" choice. 'Logic' in other words is just a Mr. FeelGood, the pill we pop to go to World War One, Two... (how high can we chimps count? ... 'logically speaking')
While on the other hand rational thought requires we take into consideration the extant and profound limitations on conscious thought itself, the inevitable blind Spots ALWAYS in space & time... and also incorporate a designedly controlled amount of the irrational into our cosiderations... or we Are NOT even being rational per se.
Therefore logic is always How we human beings with our capacity now to think, assuage ourselves....While the rational, is how we challenge ourselves, even at the risk of being a little bit Uncomfortable in that process...
At least it's how I've come to view the distinction?more or less... **
I find Edward to be a very fine writer and a person who not only does a first rate job of historical research, but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does. I suggest people read his book.
"It is unfortunate to have views different from the rest of mankind. It secures abuse." American General D. H. Hill, C.S.A.
Sertorius US Army Colors
I suggest folks READ his book, too... however ALSO the operative word in Sertorius's endorsement above is: "but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does."
I think Pim's point is on the other hand... gibbon APPROPRIATELY does Not apply logic... however may not even Realize that Fact, himself...
IF indeed that's Pim's point... regardless whether it's Pim's point or not... I happen to AGREE with it...
That's, sort of the hidden REALITY or genius of the book...the, if you will, little pony, under the pile of horse manure... every people, and every generation...lives for, or in hope of... in this case at least a pretty good book...
...the biggest complaint, in reality, against the book so far, is that it did not come out of the ruling classes... However I'll say this, it possesses a Brahmin's or a Lord's or dare I say a rabbi's (or priest's) appropriate sensibility in its best sense... :) **
Bump.
2003-01-05 18:15 | User Profile
Young Lord Oliver Cromwell
**Hello, worm.
I agree with the pervert George that you don't use logic.
Why don't you concentrate for a few hours, and ask a specific question, or posit a specific stance on something?
Just for fun.
Let's see what happens, if you're not too scared**
I posited the fact that Jews have ducked American wars - five to be exact. I wrote of foreign wars and callously noted that the Jews of Germany died for the Kaiser at almost 10 times the rate their American kin would die fighting the Germany of Hitler. Yet the goyim of both countries died at a rate 50% higher than their ostensible fellow citizens.
By the limited standards of American Jewry Hitler was the most evil man ever to live. Yet in the 20th century the China of Mao, the Soviet Union of Stalin and the Japan of Hirohito killed more people than Hitler's Germany. Ask yourself why Americans continue to believe that Germany represented the ultimate in evil.
2003-01-05 18:54 | User Profile
Originally posted by George@Jan 4 2003, 21:11 ** I find Edward to be a very fine writer and a person who not only does a first rate job of historical research, but also applies logic in coming to the conclusions that he does. I suggest people read his book.
**
That's the nut of it, George. You can be clear when you want to!
For anyone lost at this point, a useful guide is War, Money and American Memory: Myths of Virtue, Valor and Patriotism by Richard Earley.
It's one of the few books I've read twice for the simple reason that many of the "facts" of American history I thought I "knew" are either dead wrong or so uninformed as to be worthless. Earley will stimulate you to read some background material on all the stuff you think you "know" too.
American culture has a logjam of trite and dangerous ideas right now. Earley's book helps clear it away, in your head if nowhere else.