Monday, August 31, 2009


Much of what is considered to be "Black culture" is really just the residual effects of having to settle for the scraps during more difficult times.
Of having to make due with what others have thrown away.
While a desirable trait in a state of emergency or when resources are limited - it can also retard one's progress towards gaining that which they really desire.
If we are willing to settle for the chitterlings, hog mauls and head cheese - we shouldn't be upset that others are enjoying a juicy porterhouse or rib-eye.

Many of the wounds suffered by those complaining of social injustices are self-inflicted.
Most of the problems were caused by poor personal choices and/or by the negative (or shortsighted) influences of those who surround any given individual.
But putting the causes aside - "who" and "how" do we help fix the shortcomings of our learned culture?

Maybe we need to just let some of the victims die.
Maybe we need to do some sort of triage for the hood.
Since resources are finite, maybe we should let a few die to save the many.
Maybe we need to use the medical model;

Levels of triage;
-Likely to live -regardless of care given.
-Likely to die - regardless of care given.
-Those for whom appropriate and timely care will have a positive impact on their outcome.

Maybe it's a harsh way to think about it, but maybe some people just cannot be saved from themselves and any attempt in doing so will only lower the possibility of a better outcome for the others.
Maybe we should focus on those most likely to survive.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

The Most Hated Women In The World

After reading reports of Madonna being booed in Europe after her defence of Gypsies, and then looking into gingerism on the advice of Anon - I'm confused.
Who are the most mistreated women in the world today?
Is it the Mongols in Asia?

Or is it Black women the world over? (Well, maybe not in Africa.)

Maybe it's red-headed women.
It seems that even if racism disappeared tomorrow - we'd still find a reason to hate one another.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Get Your Ish Together

The above image was taken after Hurricane Ike outside of Galveston, Texas.
Q; Which house is still standing?
A; The one that was built to withstand the storm surge that usually accompanies a hurricane.
Since Katrina, we've had four or five named storms hit the Gulf Coast between Galveston and NOLA.
But NOLA gets all the attention.

As I watch the coverage and read all the news stories and blogs about how the government failed the citizens of NOLA - I still ask "What could the citizens have done differently?".
The citizens were given notice that there would be a mandatory evacuation (Which means, if you decide to stay - be prepared to fend for yourself.) as far as a week in advance of the storm.
The use of the Superdome was intended as a last resort - not as one's best option.
The refugees didn't bring enough food or water. (People have been told for years to prepare a hurricane survival kit.)
The issue is often reduced to one of racial oppression instead of government ineptitude.

I know... it's the popular meme to turn white people into villains concerning the response to Katrina - but if it's that bad, donate or volunteer here;
or here;
Brad Pitt is the man. Doin' Angelina and rebuilding NOLA.

People often cite the story of white people denying refuge to Blacks at gunpoint in small towns along the evacuation route.
But this isn't only about race.
After Rita, many in my all-Black neighborhood stood vigil over our property with guns in hand.
Anyone who wasn't known was denied access.
It wasn't because those driving around were also Black - but because we were protecting our resources.
It was because we didn't tolerate looting.
The same could be said of those whites in the small towns.
It was more of a class issue than one of race.

Since our recent spate of hurricane damage - I've done a lot more voluntary restoration work.
The thing I've noticed is the dearth of Black faces at the rebuilding events in Black communities.
The question I'm often asked by young cousins (usually forced by me to help in recovery efforts) is "Why?".
The statements made by their sorry-ass parents and grandparents is; "Why is y'all doin' work for free?".

I've done work in areas where those who lived in the areas would sit beneath the trees drinking and watching as the mostly white volunteers were sweating to rebuild their neighborhood..
I've provided free housing to people while their biggest concern wasn't getting a job and starting over, but that of trying to figure out how to benefit from the next government program.
I've paid for my groceries while listening to welfare recipients proclaiming that "We need to have us a hurricane every month." while they were unloading scrimps (or strimps) and porter house steaks from their shopping carts and then paying for their goods with newly refilled LoneStar (food stamp) cards.
While picking up cousins in Fort Worth after our evacuation for Ike, I met a group of people from NOLA who were still having their bills paid and complaining that the government wasn't doing enough THREE YEARS AFTER KATRINA.

After years of trying to help those in need, I'm over Katrina and it's "victims".
After dealing with people who expect the government to solve all their problems and raise their families, I'm tired of the screams of "Racism".
Four years after Katrina and people still think that the government owes them a new house?
Ne-ga-ro please...
Just get your own shit together.

Friday, August 28, 2009


A few months ago, I was having pains in my lower abdominal area. At first, I though I had done too many crunches or that I lifted something with the wrong posture. But this was like no pain I had ever felt before. After a couple of days, I asked my doctor neighbor what the pain could be. He felt around and surmised that I needed to get to the hospital as soon as possible and that he thought that I could need an appendectomy.

Whoa... hold them horses. I hate being cut on. I looked up information concerning the appendix on the Internet and discovered that most in the medical community had no idea what purpose the appendix held nor the causes of inflammation.

Immediately, I started a regimen of fruit juice, activated charcoal tablets and yogurt (with active yeast cultures) in an effort to stabilize my dietary system. I switched from the occasional (Well, since being in the South - more than occasional) high fat/high calorie diet (links, ribs, fried everything, smothered everything else) of my current locale back to the healthier diet of my Cali. days. A huge salad every morning for breakfast, a small portion of chicken or fish and fresh veggies for lunch, another huge salad for dinner, and fruit, nuts or yogurt for snacks.

After about two weeks, I was fine. But what if I had listened to the initial reaction from my neighbor (and subsequent advice from other nurse neighbors)? I would be without an appendix. Now there is a story saying that the appendix does have a use;

Maybe we each need to do our own research before taking the word of someone whose livelihood depends on us being ill.

Like Asking A Barber If You Need A Haircut

We must be more stupid than we look.
Because we often ask those with the most to gain from our choices what those choices should be.
We listen to military men explain the value of warfare.
We listen to politicians explain the validity of their side of the story.
We listen to Big Oil explaining the scarcity of petroleum.
We listen to Big Pharma/HMOs/Big Insurance explaining the need to keep the health care system in it's generally failing state.
We listen to news sources telling us how bad things are only to ensure their ratings.
We listen to Wall Street explain how an electronic economy is better than a credit based economy, which was better than a cash based economy, which was better than a precious metals based economy, which was better than a work based economy.
IMO - The only thing these experts are expert in is ensuring their future pay checks.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

We Tend Toward The Average

The only people who are really concerned with their looks are;
Ugly people,
People whose looks dictate their pay scale,
Or good looking people who've failed to develop a marketable skill.
For most others - looks are just a tool to quickly gauge one's threat level or one's (possible) reproductive level.

Good hair/bad hair, light skin/dark skin, tall/short, fat/thin, and so on...
The truth is, we tend toward the average.
Shakara Ledard is more often favoured over Alek Wek - not because she looks more white - but because she is seen as closer to the average between all races, nationalities or ethnicities.
(C'mon ladies, don't hate. Who would you prefer to look like? Honestly.)

I wonder if the same applies to Zhang Ziyi and Sonia Couling?
Sonia (Second photo) seems less Asian (more rounded eyes, tan, soft features) and more marketable in the West.
Is she more attractive?

Tilda Swinton has the green eyes, pale skin and thin lips generally associated with being "white" - yet Angelina Jolie's Asian eyes, full lips and tanned skin are viewed by many as the white ideal of beauty.

Salma Hayek is just baad.
Por que?
Is it because she is really close to the average of all groups?

Scientia Gnosis

Okay... one's Latin and the other Greek - but you get the point.
It seems that the biggest failures of mankind can be traced to our inability to properly understand the relationship between science and religion.

Usually, we have attempted to reconcile the differences by making up religious mythologies that line up with our current understanding of the sciences.
But this methodology seems backward.
Maybe we need to align our scientific understanding with that of religion.

At about 606 B.C.E.,
Daniel 1:4 states - "Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skillful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learnings and the tongue of the Chaldeans."

Apparently, there was no problem with the early Biblical figures having an understanding of the sciences.

But learned men like Aristotle (Between 384-322 B.C.E.) somehow pitted "knowledge" against religion by making ridiculous claims that lacked the rigour of scientific proof.
Since Aristotle was considered an academic all-star - his opinions were often viewed as facts.
But this made as much sense as Michael Jordan trying to play baseball.

Among Aristotle's more "brilliant" musings;
- He didn't believe that plants had male and female counterparts.
- He didn't believe in inertia.
- He believed that the Ptolemaic view of our Solar System was the correct view. (Later, supported by the Catholic Church even after Copernicus and Galileo could prove it wrong.)
- Thought that heavier objects fell faster than lighter objects.
- He disagreed with his contemporaries (Democritus and Hippocrates) in thinking that the seat of human thought, intelligence and emotion emanated from the heart.
"The brain is an organ of minor importance, perhaps necessary to cool the blood." - stated Aristotle.
(Although recent evidence seems to ad the bowels or digestive tract to the mix - and possibly adding greater insight to Isiah 16:11, Jeremiah 4:18, etc.)
- He dismissed Democritus' concept of our physical world being made up of tiny pieces of matter, which he called atoms.

But even during the time of Christ (and shortly after) - scientists were active in taking part in religious events.
The Magi (possibly descendants or associates of the favoured Jews of the Captivity in Babylon) were called to bear witness of the Messiah's birth.
Collossians 2:8 states - "Believe lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit"
Timothy 6:20 states - "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called."
Maybe Paul had read some of Aristotle's observations.

Now String Theory and Unification Theory are sounding more and more like the Big Bang was the same thing as God creating the Universe(s).
What did the Gnostics know?

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Angelina v. Halle

Halle and Angelina are pretty much interchangeable - both look good (If that's your type.).
But is Halle just a Black girl with white features,
or does Angelina's sexuality come from her ethnic features?

Beyonce, Coco and Kim Kardashian all have the thick juicy bodies generally preferred by ethnic men.
Are these women only considered attractive because of their (traditionally) non-white features?
It seems as though the new ideal is shifting towards a more curvaceous body type.

Take A Good Look At A Monkey...

"A Monkey has thin lips,
A Monkey has straight (In this case, blond.) hair..."
-Paul Mooney

Beauty Is (Still) Learned

Anon. said; "...Scandinavia (and not the East East European and Russians) is the standard of white -- in which Blonde hair and blue eyes is there in plenitude..."

Okay... Let's look at the 100 Best Looking Women - according to the site;

1 - Jessica Alba (French Canadian/Mexican)
2 - Adrianna Lima (Brazilian)
3 - Doutzen Kroes (Dutch) *Photo Below
4 - Scarlett Johansson (Dutch) *Above Photo
5 - Alessandra Ambrosio (Italian/Polish)
6 - Meagan Fox (Irish/French/Native American)
7 - Keira Knightly - (Scottish/Welsh/English)
8 - Eva Longoria (Mexican)
9 - Eva Mendez (Cuban)
10 - Charlize Theron - (German/French)

So Anon., if we use your definition of the standard of "White" beauty - it would seem that only two of the top-ten qualify.
But even these two share the phenotypic trait of larger than average lips.
And Ms Kroes lacks the requisite Blond hair.

The thing that all of the women have in common is a certain amount of juiciness - not a bland, shapeless sylph among them. Again... why are the traits generally associated with white beauty lacking in the most beautiful "white" women.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009


So, Glamour magazine decides to put a fat girl on it's cover (which they photo shop down to a more appealing size) and puts an out of shape plus size model deep within it's pages.
And women trumpet this as a good thing?

What if Metropolitan Home put junky old homes on it's cover and between it's pages?

What if Car And Driver only focused on Gremlins, Pintos and Pacers?

What if The Robb Report only covered the hood and trailer parks?

And who wants to see this guy on Muscle and Fitness?
The truth is; people don't want average - they want examples of the best.
All the women excited to see a real woman in a fashion magazine... eat a salad and get on a StairMaster.
Aren't fit women "real" too?

Every Time...

Evey time I say that I'm through, they pull me back in.
I though that I was finished in dealing with the hood.
I thought that I had done and seen enough.
But every time I decide to leave - I meet someone in need, or someone making an effort, or some kids who are being lead in the more difficult direction.

Don't get me wrong,
I HATE the hood.
(Really, it's the hood mentality that I hate.)
I hate that most of the children are only being prepared for a life of bitterness and disappointment.
I hate that undereducated and under prepared adults can make a better living from getting a 51/50 check, welfare, Medicaid and housing assistance than they could by getting a job.
I hate that the institutions which were supposed to be put in place to end the underachievement are really more concerned with keeping their public and private funding.
I just hate the whole cycle of the hood.

After living the life and getting out - I though that I was qualified to help others out of a similar situation.
It worked for a group of people with whom I had grown up.
But in the end, the group became as oppressive and corrupt as those we were trying to replace.

After seeing the ill effects of power (well... really, just influence) without the proper preparation - I thought that I just needed a change of venue.
But this too has it's drawbacks.
The cycles of poverty and oppression are not universal.
In discovering that I first needed to learn a whole new culture (Not just ghetto - but "Country Ghetto".), I decided to learn a whole new culture.

I spent a year in real poverty in a city to with I was not accustomed.
Every cent that I earned was spent on someone other than myself.
Any money earned through trust funds, profit sharing or from work done was given to a needy family or individual.
I walked everywhere I needed to be, lived with no lights, gas, water or phone.
I only ate what was given to me by grateful recipients or else relied on the fruits and nuts from the trees in my back yard.
I relied on rainwater to flush toilets and bathe.
(Only a few people offered any type of assistance (which I declined until my mission of poverty was complete), and they are are the few people who can call on me at anytime.)
When people said not to judge some one unless you've walked in their shoes - I took the saying to heart.
When the Bible says that when compelled to walk a mile that we should go two - I took it literally.
Only after relearning the truths of poverty was I ready to deal with the problems of this town.
After having a Solomon-like sabbatical (In Ecclesiastes.), I was prepared.

But this thinking was also flawed.
I knew that most of the problems were psychological.
I knew that most people were choosing poverty as their way of life and passing this mentality on to their children.
I knew that most people were harming themselves more than any racism, class-ism or outside force ever could.
But I could not translate these facts to an unreceptive generation.
The victim mentality had been inculcated to deeply and for too long.
Again, I decided to shake the dust from my feet and walk away.

But how do we know who we effect or how?
Maybe the little seeds of wisdom, mercy and understanding haven't quite germinated yet.
Maybe there is some type of gestation period.
Maybe some kid will actually remember to properly conjugate a verb at the appropriate time in the future.
Maybe some kid will remember to practice manners, or compassion or good judgement when others in their peer group just walk away..
Maybe that which we thought was the least important thing will become the most important thing at the most important time.

Yeah I'm done with dealing with the hood.
But every time I walk away - they pull me back in.


Ever since the original Thunderbirds - I've been a fan of stop-motion animation.
In the '90's, Tim Burton's movies added a level of darkness that somehow made the medium even more appealing.
In the past decade, the torch seems to have been passed to Neil Gaiman and his films Mirrormask and Coraline.
Now, there is a (Tim Burton produced) post-apocalyptic film "9" to look forward to.
(Hmmm... maybe I am a FanBoy.)

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Black +

It would seem that most distinctions between races are determined more by culture than by melanin.
When people say that they don't like Black people - what are they really saying?
When pressed for an answer as to "why" they don't like Black people, it's usually the cultural traits that are mentioned.

"Black people are poor", "Black people are uneducated", or "Black people are loud and rude"; are a few examples.
But these traits are acquired - none are inherent.
When Blacks say that "This is just our culture" - what they are really saying is that; "This is the culture that has been determined for us and we were foolish enough to accept it as our own.".
By assuming that these traits are endemic to Blacks, how does one explain the "anomalies" of poor, uneducated, rude and loud whites?

Back in the day - I went to visit one of my best friends at USC.
His suite-mates were mostly white dudes from well-to-do families.
Pat was from the Bay Area and was into heavy metal and concert t's.
Dave was from New Orleans but had a closet full of Valentino, Armani and Hugo Boss.
After I had spent a week hanging out and taking in the life at a different school, I was accepted as one of the boys.

But the thing is; I had to school Pat on his choice of music. KROQ was the station he should have been listening to and it's artists were the one's he should emulate fashion-wise.
He's changed his estillo ever since.

Although Dave had a closet full of nice designer duds - he failed to realize their social value.
While preparing for a night at a local club, I took notice of the labels on the clothes in his closet.
"Dude, this is Armani...!", I said.
"I mom buys it.", he said.
"If I had had all this, I'd wear them with the labels on the outside." I joked.
Being that he liked the reaction from the girls to my mix of vintage and designer clothes - he followed my advice.
To this day, the boy only wears gear from Neiman Marcus, Saks or Barney's.

But these guys were well-to-do white guys - how could they miss the musical and visual aspects of "their" culture?
The thing is; they hadn't learned.
Yes, even white guys from well off families must learn aspects of their culture.
They are not imbued with supernatural powers that link them in to a higher order.
They, like Blacks or anyone else, must learn the social norms for their place in a wider society.

The traits listed above to describe all Blacks are generally referred to as "Being ghetto" by many aspirational Blacks (Bourgie).
It would seem that this then becomes an issue of status rather than race.
If aspirational Blacks view such traits as undesirable - why is it odd that whites would do the same?

"But Black people are ugly", is a common response to one's phenotype.
As pointed out in earlier posts - it is only with the introduction of traits from other ethnic groups that the "White Ideal" is viable.
(In other words - the less "white" the better.)
It would seem that there are some butt ugly people from all races, nationalities and ethnic groups.

But the bigger issue for Blacks seems to be that of; "Black+", or "Black++".
Often, Blacks are segregated from their historical culture by their level of success.
The more successful - the more white.
The more white - the less credible.

How is this problem rectified?
Often, it by learning the culture of the lower classes.
How many middle to upper middle-class Blacks fall into the trap of 'keeping it real' and then having to deal with the problems of their affectation of ghetto going wrong?
In these cases. one must not only be Black - they must become Black plus.
They must know how to survive in a ghetto environment but be able to adapt to a non-ghetto environment.
They must be able to speak in Ebonics but they must know when to transition into SAE.
They must understand where to wear blue or red but understand that slabbin' ain't cool in the office.

But the problems arise when one is crossing the borders between two (or more) levels of their culture.
This is why well paid athletes get into trouble with the law at tiddy-bars.
(They fail to leave the hood in the hood.)
This is why Black professors get arrested for protecting their own property.
(They forget that they are still Black.)
This is why money alone fails to qualify someone as middle to upper middle class.
(The Real Hoodrats of the ATL?)
This is why Black children from well-to-do families often date inter racially.
(When one is an "Only One" - what choice is there?)

So, by the limited definition of what it means to be Black - Who (with any means) isn't "Black+"?

Spice Up Your Life

Citizen Ojo said; "...The Spice Girls weren't ugly..."
I didn't say that they were ugly - just that only Mel B. had body.
Posh and Sporty are too thin, Ginger looks like a mom and the other one has boobs but no curves.
I was just pointing out that the attributes usually associated with beauty are generally lacking in the "Pure White" women of Briton.
The more ethnic attributes are only incorporated into a wider society by women who set a new standard (Like the Beyoncefication of the booty) that becomes desired by more and more men.
Posh Spice is said to be either Indian, Greek or some other Mediterranean ethnicity.
Ginger is Swedish and Spanish.
Mel B. is... um...
It seems that the least attractive of the group are the most British (My "white" model in this example.).

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Cute, Beautiful or Hot ?

Halle Berry is often cited as the most beautiful woman in the world.
I might agree - but this observation changes with one's mood.
But what use is beauty?
Like a masterpiece painting - the only use for beauty is to view and own.
But most women would love to be viewed as "Beautiful" - without regard for the implications.

Stacey Dash, Melyssa Ford and any other woman on the cover of King Magazine would generally be described as "Hot".
Again, most women would love to be described as "Hot".
But what is the value of such a distinction?
Hot women are usually viewed as something to do (or use) until one grows tired of the sex.
When this happens, it's on to the next hot girl.

Cute women, like Sanaa Lathan, are generally viewed as the low woman on the totem pole of attractiveness.
But the instinctive value of being cute is one of being taken care of.
(Much in the same way that cute babies (or puppies, kittens, etc.) are generally cared for and nurtured by any more mature individual.)
Women like Sanaa benefit by being a nice combination of all of the traits listed above - thus ensuring their survival and propagation.
It's odd - the least desirable deception is the most profitable.
(And no, SeeNew - not a jungle of hair on any of them.)

Stalker Sites

I'm sure everyone has a few skeletons in his closet - and with the advent of social networking sites, those skeletons have obtained a means to come out and play.

The upside of these sites is that they are a quick and easy way to keep in touch with old friends from far away.
This helps in keeping one's phone bills at a minimum and reduces the amount of time required to communicate (usually) mundane details of one's life.

The downside is that exes have obtained a means to continually ask the ultimate question of "Why".

I'm an okay looking guy with a (possibly) better than average lifestyle.
But I seem to be awfully lucky with the ladies.
(I say "lucky" because I have no game but somehow I end up with some nice hotties.)
But what I noticed from my experiences with these sites is that they offer a venue for women to reconnect in different ways.
Being that I would often go from girl to girl without regard for race - my ex list looks like a Benetton ad.
I also noticed a trend (based on my own experiences only and not meant as a generalization of all women from each group) of Black women using the networks as a forum to get even while non-Black women use the sites as a venue to get more.

Could it be because the Black women are still upset about being dumped for a non-Black woman,
while the non-Black women view being dumped for a Black woman as the norm?


White Women - Sure, I've been with more than have most white guys - but if we use the British woman as our starting point... yuck!.
Since most white people are often Anglophiles, this is the best starting point.
Since, at some point in time, Italians, Russians, Jews and those of Mediterranean descent were viewed as "other" - we'll go with the Brits as being our "White" model.

Among the problems with British women;

Pale Skin - Most would burn before they would get a really nice tan.
The lack of Vitamin D would add to their problems with calcium loss in their bones.
Who wants a hunched over woman with a broken hip?

Bad Teeth - Maybe this too is caused by the lack of calcium in one's bones.
But the simple answer is; C.R.E.S.T..

Terrible Bodies - Sure, I like big tiddies too - but I'd like some body to go with them.
Except for Mel B - which Spice Girl had a nice body?

Pie Faces - Unlike the strong jawlines and height of their Scandinavian cousins, the smoldering eyes and full lips and flowing hair of their Mediterranean cousins, or the cute noses of their Icelandic cousins (The Brits have either long dog noses or crushed pig noses) - British women lack any desirable features.

It would seem that the Anglos had to add a bit of "other" to their gene pool to compete with others with more desirable features.
The most overrated?
White women.


The Matrix - Sure, it was a huge blockbuster - but as far as trying to incorporate a wide variety of ideas and concepts into a simple and entertaining storyline, The Matrix rarely fails in it's attempt at equating esoteric beliefs and histories to childhood nursery rhymes.
Sure, it sometimes gets lost along the way (As do I) - but it's references to so many cultures, it's ability to create a new way of filming, and it's adherence to traditional thought make the series more seminal than derivative.

Prince - No matter how much praise the man gets - it's still not quite enough.
(He'd make the list for his choice of women alone.)
He one of the few celebrities (Ali is another) who makes other celebrities act like common fans.
IMO - 1999 was better than Purple Rain.

Family - Sure, almost everyone has one - but few actually understand their own.
It takes a whole lot of "success" to compensate for the lack of respect of one's father and the lack of love of one's mother.
It takes a whole lot of really good friends to compensate for the lack of loyalty of one's siblings and kin.
Okay... there are a lot more things that are underrated, (True Romance (the movie), Being American, and Stacy Dash among them), but none can top The Family.


Caster Semenya's situation has been blamed on;
race, aesthetics and a possible case of chimerism.
But facial hair on women is nothing new - just Google "Women's Facial Hair" and page after page shows up.
In fact - more than 10 percent of the women in Australia are said to suffer from the problem.
And as the image in the above ad shows - it's not just a Black, unattractive or athlete's issue.
White women (too) have been battling the problem for years.


Mark 6:5-6 "He could not do any miracles there... . And he was amazed at their lack of faith."

So if the Son of God was limited in his effectiveness in dealing with the salvation or destruction of Man - How much weaker would any organization created by Man be?
The Klan failed to eliminate Blacks from America.
The Crusaders failed to convert the Gentiles.
And the Illuminati (or any other NWO minded entity) will fail in their desire to subjugate mankind.

It would seem that a certain level of faith is required to give any organization it's power.
If we choose to ignore the imagined power of those who would subjugate others - would their power be diminished?
Is their power really only influence?
In any zero-sum game - the best way to win is not to play at all.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009


I guess Hitler's superstitions lead him to believe that in conquering Finland - He would be "Finnished".

But at other times, the thought of Neuropa was just too appealing.
The Project for a New American Century sought to re-draw the Middle East in this way.

A purported Illuminati map shows a different world.

And the world under the Ten Kingdoms of the Anti-Christ seems the most plausible.
Supposed Illuminatical works (Written by Ku Klux Klan founder, Illuminati member and Freemason - Albert Pike.) even give directions on how to accomplish such a New World Order.
"...The first World War should enable the Illuminati to seize power from the tsars and transform this country with strength of communist atheism.
The differences between the British and German empires, and also the struggles between the Germanic and Slavic nations, instigated by the Illuminati, should be used to incite this war.
Once finished, communism should be nurtured and used to destroy other governments and make religions weak..."
"...The Second World War should be incited by political discrepancies between fascists and Zionists.
The fight should begin to destroy Nazism and give way to political Zionism to facilitate the establishment of the sovereign state of Israel in Palestine.
During the Second World War a Communist League strong enough to equal the whole of Christianity should be constructed. From then on it should be kept and supported until needed the day social cataclysm arrives..."
"...The Third World War should be incited taking advantage of the seed planted by the Illuminati agents to provoke differences between political Zionism and the leaders of the Muslim world. The war should be channelled in a way that Islam and Zionism destroy each other and that other nations will involve themselves too to the extent that they become physically, mentally, spiritually and economically exhausted..."

Sure... all this sounds conspiratorial - but most groups seeking to better Man in a way that differed from the establishment started out this way.
Didn't Christians once have to meet in secret?
But didn't Christ himself warn against secret groups and organizations?

A Woman ?

Renee' Richards - Born A Man
Polish athlete Ewa Klobukowski - Born with ambiguous genitalia.
In the 1938 Olympic games, Dora Ratien was deemed to be A Man.

Because of her all around athletic ability and her dominance in track & field, many thought Babe Didrikson was also a man.

Now it's Caster Semenya's turn.
Admittedly - I often questioned the gender of some Eastern Block athletes -
But since the International Olympic Committee has already ruled on the eligibility of athletes of questionable gender;
is it really a moot point?