The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Department of Not Quite as Reassuring as Intended
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the front page of NYTimes.com:

Screenshot 2015-09-29 06.28.25

So, assimilation doesn’t work, but we shouldn’t worry about it because it will be our children’s problem, not ours? After all, some of the government officials who decided to let in, say, the the Tsarnaevs and Todashev probably died of natural causes in the interim, so the joke’s on us, right?

And, sure, Sirhan Sirhan pretty much destroyed the democratic process in 1968 by shooting the guy who had just won the most important Democratic primary, but nobody had heard of Palestinian terrorists back then, so he doesn’t count.

 
Hide 85 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Getting them here is all that matters – whatever explanation being used at the moment is immaterial. They will say *anything*.

    The powers that be are determined to let a thousand cool clocks bloom!

  2. Case in point: The pilots of the 9/11 Boeing Cruise missiles …..all born here, oh wait a minute, my bad. Well then the Boston Marathon Mad Bomber Brothers, born here, oh wait….hmmm. The Fort Hood shooter , no, but I see her point.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Buffalo Joe

    Sirhan Sirhan.

    But having a Palestinian shoot the guy who just won the California Democratic primary for President, blowing up the 1968 democratic process, is a small price to pay for the feeling of smug satisfaction you get for saying because Data.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Kevin O'Keeffe, @Pat Casey

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @Buffalo Joe

    Of the two Fort Hood shootings, one was born in the US and one in Puerto Rico, which is almost native-born.

    You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working...

    Replies: @rod1963, @Jefferson

  3. @Buffalo Joe
    Case in point: The pilots of the 9/11 Boeing Cruise missiles .....all born here, oh wait a minute, my bad. Well then the Boston Marathon Mad Bomber Brothers, born here, oh wait....hmmm. The Fort Hood shooter , no, but I see her point.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Chrisnonymous

    Sirhan Sirhan.

    But having a Palestinian shoot the guy who just won the California Democratic primary for President, blowing up the 1968 democratic process, is a small price to pay for the feeling of smug satisfaction you get for saying because Data.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Steve Sailer

    just to be clear, Sirhan Sirhan was born in Jerusalem, according to WikiP. Didn't realize he was still alive and well in San Diego.

    Replies: @antipater_1

    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
    @Steve Sailer

    Interesting facts about Sirhan Sirhan:

    He was born into a Christian family, and was by all accounts, a lifelong Christian (having dabbled in membership in the Baptist and 7th Day Adventist sects, subsequent to his family's move to the USA). He also belonged to the Rosicrucian Society.

    This was frankly not at all what I expected to learn, when I began perusing his Wikipedia entry.

    The Rosicrucian Society's Egyptian Museum, in San Jose, is a must-see, if you happen to be visiting the Silicon Valley area, by the way.

    Replies: @fnn

    , @Pat Casey
    @Steve Sailer

    Have to say, I find it incredible that no one seems to know the facts about RFK's assassination, which are both simpler and more mysterious than that of his brother.

    First of all, no motive has ever been revealed because Sirhan does not know why he shot RFK, or if he did---he has never been able to remember what happened the night of June 5, 1968.

    The fatal shot was to the back of RFK's head behind his right ear, and was fired from at most a few inches away. No one says Sirhan got within three feet of RFK, and of course he was at all times in front of Kennedy.

    At least 13 shots were fired, though Sirhan's gun held only 8 bullets! This is not in dispute, and the LAPD has admitted that photographic evidence of the crime scene was destroyed.

    At least five witnesses said they saw a woman fleeing the scene shouting "We shot him! We shot him!" according to initial police reports, one of which took the testimony of a mystery couple only identified as "the Bernsteins" who said they stopped the woman outside the hotel and asked who she shot and were told "Kennedy." This couple has never been able to be located.

    Head of the LAPD's investigation was a "retired" cop named Manny Pena, except he wasn't retired, because he was working for the CIA. To be precise, he worked with the Agency for International Development, otherwise know as the "Dirty Tricks Department," which apparently specialized in assassination techniques.

    The LAPD saw fit to label the notebooks scrawled with the words "RFK must die!" and other automatic writing of that sort---those notebooks were labeled and reported in the press as Sirhan's "diaries."

    And then there's the case of William Joseph Bryan ("I'm not going to comment on that case because I didn't hypnotize him!"---though no one had said he did) and the fact that Sirhan's notebooks included scrawlings of the name DiSalvo, and the testimony of the call girls who serviced Bryan in the lead-up to his mysterious death in a Las Vegas hotel room.

    The guy was hypnotized.

    see Robert Kaiser's RFK Must Die!
    and William Turner's The Assassination of Robert Kennedy

    Replies: @D. K., @whorefinder

  4. East Indians and Arabs are defrauding our medical system on a massive scale. Take Lebanese born Dr Farid Fata, who in just 10 years billed Medicare alone $150 million for cancer treatments he prescribed to 533 essentially healthy patients. His family fled back to Lebanon before he was sentenced. Odd how little was made of this story.

    I could relate anecdotes but I’d rather just see the data. I have never encountered an Indian doctor that wasn’t a lying POS.

  5. From Wikipedia:

    Najibullah Zazi (born August 10, 1985) is an Afghan-American who was arrested in September 2009 as part of the 2009 U.S. Al Qaeda group accused of planning suicide bombings on the New York City Subway system ….

    Zazi underwent weapons and explosives training at an al-Qaeda training camp in Pakistan in 2008. On September 9, 2009, he drove from his home in Aurora, Colorado, to New York City, intending to detonate explosives on the New York City subway during rush hour as one of three coordinated suicide “martyrdom” bombings. ….

    On February 22, 2010, he pleaded guilty to conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction, conspiring to commit murder in a foreign country, and providing material support to a terrorist organization. He said he was recruited by al-Qaeda in Pakistan for a suicide “martyrdom” attack against the U.S., and that his bombing target was the New York City subway system. …

    Two of his high school classmates who had traveled with him to Pakistan, his father, his uncle, and an imam from Queens have also been indicted on related charges. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder referred to the planned attack as “one of the most serious terrorist threats to our nation since September 11, 2001.”

    Zazi was born in a village in Paktia Province, Afghanistan. He has two sisters and two brothers. At the age of 7 in 1992, he and his family moved to the city of Peshawar in Pakistan where they settled as Afghan refugees.

    In 1999, he and the family left Pakistan and immigrated to New York City in the United States. They moved into a two-bedroom apartment in the Flushing, Queens section of the city. Mohammed Wali Zazi, Najibullah’s father and now a naturalized U.S. citizen, found work as a New York City taxi driver.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najibullah_Zazi#cite_note-NYTimes2009-09-15-1

  6. 60 comments so far and they are not buying what she is selling.

  7. @Steve Sailer
    @Buffalo Joe

    Sirhan Sirhan.

    But having a Palestinian shoot the guy who just won the California Democratic primary for President, blowing up the 1968 democratic process, is a small price to pay for the feeling of smug satisfaction you get for saying because Data.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Kevin O'Keeffe, @Pat Casey

    just to be clear, Sirhan Sirhan was born in Jerusalem, according to WikiP. Didn’t realize he was still alive and well in San Diego.

    • Replies: @antipater_1
    @stillCARealist

    Sirhan was a Christian Palestinian Arab. The original anti-Israel Palestinian movement was founded by Christians and not Muslims.

    Replies: @fnn

  8. Knowing of your interest (obsession?) with Paul Walker:

    Paul Walker’s daughter Meadow sues Porsche over fatal crash

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11897944/Paul-Walkers-daughter-Meadow-sues-Porsche-over-fatal-crash.html

  9. Yes…

    Let’s consider what we would think of this line of reasoning if applied to a decades old public policy success story:

    The data is clear: Most air pollution is not caused by buses and commercial trucks, but by cars, pickups and SUVs.

  10. @stillCARealist
    @Steve Sailer

    just to be clear, Sirhan Sirhan was born in Jerusalem, according to WikiP. Didn't realize he was still alive and well in San Diego.

    Replies: @antipater_1

    Sirhan was a Christian Palestinian Arab. The original anti-Israel Palestinian movement was founded by Christians and not Muslims.

    • Replies: @fnn
    @antipater_1

    All the original Palestinian liberation groups (Fatah, PFLP, DPFLP, etc.) were secular nationalist or Marxist. The PLO to this day doesn't include any Muslim or Islamist or whatever you want to call them outfits.

  11. • Replies: @Bad memories
    @Shaq

    So, basically what they are saying is: "Wherever you have concentrations of NAMs you will have crime!"

    Do they need software for that?

  12. off topic:
    right now the authorities say that more than 10.000 immigrants come to Germany daily. This means that after having had around 80.000.000 people for the last 4 decades the german population might easily rise to 90.000.000 in the next one or two years. with probably one of the unbalanced gender demographics in the world

  13. I gotta admit her argument is not totally clear to me– is she saying to bring in more refugees in order to offset the ranks of homegrown terrorists? Like, so the two can do battle with each other, Sharks/Jets-style? Doesn’t sound very thought-through.

    • Agree: Kylie
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Uncle Tom Shales

    KENT
    Our top story, the population of parasitic tree lizards has exploded, and local citizens couldn't be happier! It seems the rapacious reptiles have developed a taste for the common pigeon, also known as the 'feathered rat', or the 'gutter bird'. For the first time, citizens need not fear harassment by flocks of chattering disease-bags.

    Later, Bart receives an award from Mayor Quimby outside the town hall. Several lizards slink past.

    QUIMBY
    For decimating our pigeon population, and making Springfield a less oppressive place to while away our worthless lives, I present you with this scented candle.

    Skinner talks to Lisa.

    SKINNER
    Well, I was wrong. The lizards are a godsend.

    LISA
    But isn't that a bit short-sighted? What happens when we're overrun by lizards?

    SKINNER
    No problem. We simply unleash wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the lizards.

    LISA
    But aren't the snakes even worse?

    SKINNER
    Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat.

    LISA
    But then we're stuck with gorillas!

    SKINNER
    No, that's the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.

    , @AnAnon
    @Uncle Tom Shales

    she is just desparately searching for some squiggle that will get westerners to agree to allow their nations to be overrun. that is her argument.

    , @WowJustWow
    @Uncle Tom Shales

    It's more like the "more sex is safer sex" paradox: instead of eradicating the root cause of disease, you just need to convince more of those selfish STD-free individuals to start getting more slutty so any individual act of casual sex is less likely to pass on a disease.

    Likewise, if too many of our Muslims commit terrorist acts, it just means we need to import all the sane Muslims of the world to reduce the chance that any given Muslim you meet on the train to work is there to blow it up. It won't reduce the total number of terrorist attacks, but if you're lucky you'll get to a point where you can say Muslims on average are no more terroristic than any other group in America so you can write more smug editorials in the Times.

  14. Anne Speckhard, an adjunct associate professor of psychiatry at the Georgetown University School of Medicine, is the author of “Talking to Terrorists” and “Bride of ISIS”

    Sounds like a character from a Don DeLillo or Christopher Buckley novel, doesn’t it?

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Uncle Tom Shales

    She's on twitter. Might be productive to start a dialogue with her.

    https://twitter.com/AnneSpeckhard/status/648873760947326976

  15. @Uncle Tom Shales
    I gotta admit her argument is not totally clear to me-- is she saying to bring in more refugees in order to offset the ranks of homegrown terrorists? Like, so the two can do battle with each other, Sharks/Jets-style? Doesn't sound very thought-through.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @AnAnon, @WowJustWow

    KENT
    Our top story, the population of parasitic tree lizards has exploded, and local citizens couldn’t be happier! It seems the rapacious reptiles have developed a taste for the common pigeon, also known as the ‘feathered rat’, or the ‘gutter bird’. For the first time, citizens need not fear harassment by flocks of chattering disease-bags.

    Later, Bart receives an award from Mayor Quimby outside the town hall. Several lizards slink past.

    QUIMBY
    For decimating our pigeon population, and making Springfield a less oppressive place to while away our worthless lives, I present you with this scented candle.

    Skinner talks to Lisa.

    SKINNER
    Well, I was wrong. The lizards are a godsend.

    LISA
    But isn’t that a bit short-sighted? What happens when we’re overrun by lizards?

    SKINNER
    No problem. We simply unleash wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They’ll wipe out the lizards.

    LISA
    But aren’t the snakes even worse?

    SKINNER
    Yes, but we’re prepared for that. We’ve lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat.

    LISA
    But then we’re stuck with gorillas!

    SKINNER
    No, that’s the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.

  16. Do check out her website which is pretty great/funny… Apparently her primary background is that of a professional witness to the plaintiffs bar, testifying about PTSD (particularly teen-abortion-related?). I’m not saying the NY Times should eschew op-eds written by folks from varying walks of life but if her phoned-in “scientific conclusion” on refugees was less congenial to Ye Olde Narrative then I think the sort of frustrated worker bee sub-editor alluded to earlier here would most probably blanch at vetting & printing the learned opinions of this same author:
    http://www.annespeckhard.com/energy-healing—narrative-medicine.html

  17. @Steve Sailer
    @Buffalo Joe

    Sirhan Sirhan.

    But having a Palestinian shoot the guy who just won the California Democratic primary for President, blowing up the 1968 democratic process, is a small price to pay for the feeling of smug satisfaction you get for saying because Data.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Kevin O'Keeffe, @Pat Casey

    Interesting facts about Sirhan Sirhan:

    He was born into a Christian family, and was by all accounts, a lifelong Christian (having dabbled in membership in the Baptist and 7th Day Adventist sects, subsequent to his family’s move to the USA). He also belonged to the Rosicrucian Society.

    This was frankly not at all what I expected to learn, when I began perusing his Wikipedia entry.

    The Rosicrucian Society’s Egyptian Museum, in San Jose, is a must-see, if you happen to be visiting the Silicon Valley area, by the way.

    • Replies: @fnn
    @Kevin O'Keeffe


    He also belonged to the Rosicrucian Society
     
    Was it Annie Hall in which Woody Allen disses the Rosicrucian Society because he just couldn't take seriously a religion that advertises in Popular Mechanics?
  18. Pat Casey says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @Buffalo Joe

    Sirhan Sirhan.

    But having a Palestinian shoot the guy who just won the California Democratic primary for President, blowing up the 1968 democratic process, is a small price to pay for the feeling of smug satisfaction you get for saying because Data.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Kevin O'Keeffe, @Pat Casey

    Have to say, I find it incredible that no one seems to know the facts about RFK’s assassination, which are both simpler and more mysterious than that of his brother.

    First of all, no motive has ever been revealed because Sirhan does not know why he shot RFK, or if he did—he has never been able to remember what happened the night of June 5, 1968.

    The fatal shot was to the back of RFK’s head behind his right ear, and was fired from at most a few inches away. No one says Sirhan got within three feet of RFK, and of course he was at all times in front of Kennedy.

    At least 13 shots were fired, though Sirhan’s gun held only 8 bullets! This is not in dispute, and the LAPD has admitted that photographic evidence of the crime scene was destroyed.

    At least five witnesses said they saw a woman fleeing the scene shouting “We shot him! We shot him!” according to initial police reports, one of which took the testimony of a mystery couple only identified as “the Bernsteins” who said they stopped the woman outside the hotel and asked who she shot and were told “Kennedy.” This couple has never been able to be located.

    Head of the LAPD’s investigation was a “retired” cop named Manny Pena, except he wasn’t retired, because he was working for the CIA. To be precise, he worked with the Agency for International Development, otherwise know as the “Dirty Tricks Department,” which apparently specialized in assassination techniques.

    The LAPD saw fit to label the notebooks scrawled with the words “RFK must die!” and other automatic writing of that sort—those notebooks were labeled and reported in the press as Sirhan’s “diaries.”

    And then there’s the case of William Joseph Bryan (“I’m not going to comment on that case because I didn’t hypnotize him!”—though no one had said he did) and the fact that Sirhan’s notebooks included scrawlings of the name DiSalvo, and the testimony of the call girls who serviced Bryan in the lead-up to his mysterious death in a Las Vegas hotel room.

    The guy was hypnotized.

    see Robert Kaiser’s RFK Must Die!
    and William Turner’s The Assassination of Robert Kennedy

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Pat Casey

    "BINGO!"

    In addition to which, Vice President Humphrey was going to win the nomination, in lieu of LBJ, anyway. Even RFK's campaign manager later admitted as much. RFK's belated attempt at the Democratic nomination was wholly dependent upon his convincing a lot of Humphrey delegates to switch to Kennedy, at the convention. His win in California, while impressive, was not enough to upset the cart, and make loyal Democrats switch from their sitting Vice President to a belated peace candidate (who had not even had the courage of his born-again convictions, until Senator Gene McCarthy had made clear that LBJ was not invulnerable, even within the Democratic Party itself). The assassination was surely a(nother) tragedy; it remains, however, an infamous murder mystery-- not the major turning point in American presidential history that it is made out to be.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Sirhan Sirhan admitted several times that he shot RFK because of RFK's support for Israel (esp. in Six-Day War). Sirhan identified as Arab and saw the middle east as Arab v. Jew, not Muslim v. Jew, which he stated on the stand, causing one of his Jewish defense attorneys to become upset and attempt to resign. That and Kennedy's fame (both as a Kennedy and as a candidate) set Sirhan over the edge.

    And you admit they found diaries in Sirhan's own writing claiming that RFK had to die. That's pretty strong preemeditated motive evidence.

    SIrhan Sirhan only started to recant his confessions and/or "forget" his actions when his post-trial strategy became aligned with the conspiracy theorists who championed him. As an easily manipulated, low-IQ person, he has probably been convinced by his conspiracy theory handlers that he didn't do it or that he was hypnotized----not by his CIA handlers.

    What might be a stronger case for you conspiracy theorists is not that Sirhan or Oswald "didn't do it", but that they did do it and they did it because they were low-IQ, easily manipulated sorts that only required a little push to assassinate. With Oswald and Sirhan you have the motive, means, and opportunity, but you also have their vague associations with various shady government agencies. (Oswald's contact with the cuban embassy in mexico and time in the USSR have long been sticking points in my discounting any conspiracy theories).

    Replies: @D. K., @5371

  19. Steve, the standard leftist response to your concerns about the second generation is that we just need to do a better job assimilating them. (That’s a variant on “all we need to do is fix the schools”).

    Makes perfect sense if you believe the “blank slate” theory. And of course there’s the added advantage of justifying more jobs for social workers.

    • Replies: @Gunnar von Cowtown
    @International Jew

    But...but...but... leftists have told me for years, nay decades, that assimilation is racist. It's almost like they don't follow an ideology based on sound logic?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Travis

    , @NOTA
    @International Jew

    The tricky part is, that answer is kinda almost right. If we are going to let lots of foreigners in, whether from Mexico or Syria or Nigeria or China, we had better go to some effort to assimilate them to US norms. We don't want a big lump of permanently unassimilated foreigners, because that's a breeding ground for all kinds of problems.

    If only there were some *other* way to avoid having a big lump of unassimilated foreigners move to the US....

  20. @Uncle Tom Shales
    I gotta admit her argument is not totally clear to me-- is she saying to bring in more refugees in order to offset the ranks of homegrown terrorists? Like, so the two can do battle with each other, Sharks/Jets-style? Doesn't sound very thought-through.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @AnAnon, @WowJustWow

    she is just desparately searching for some squiggle that will get westerners to agree to allow their nations to be overrun. that is her argument.

  21. @Shaq
    OT: "Predicting Crime with Math" http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2015/09/predicting-crime-with-math.html

    Replies: @Bad memories

    So, basically what they are saying is: “Wherever you have concentrations of NAMs you will have crime!”

    Do they need software for that?

  22. @antipater_1
    @stillCARealist

    Sirhan was a Christian Palestinian Arab. The original anti-Israel Palestinian movement was founded by Christians and not Muslims.

    Replies: @fnn

    All the original Palestinian liberation groups (Fatah, PFLP, DPFLP, etc.) were secular nationalist or Marxist. The PLO to this day doesn’t include any Muslim or Islamist or whatever you want to call them outfits.

  23. @Kevin O'Keeffe
    @Steve Sailer

    Interesting facts about Sirhan Sirhan:

    He was born into a Christian family, and was by all accounts, a lifelong Christian (having dabbled in membership in the Baptist and 7th Day Adventist sects, subsequent to his family's move to the USA). He also belonged to the Rosicrucian Society.

    This was frankly not at all what I expected to learn, when I began perusing his Wikipedia entry.

    The Rosicrucian Society's Egyptian Museum, in San Jose, is a must-see, if you happen to be visiting the Silicon Valley area, by the way.

    Replies: @fnn

    He also belonged to the Rosicrucian Society

    Was it Annie Hall in which Woody Allen disses the Rosicrucian Society because he just couldn’t take seriously a religion that advertises in Popular Mechanics?

  24. @International Jew
    Steve, the standard leftist response to your concerns about the second generation is that we just need to do a better job assimilating them. (That's a variant on "all we need to do is fix the schools").

    Makes perfect sense if you believe the "blank slate" theory. And of course there's the added advantage of justifying more jobs for social workers.

    Replies: @Gunnar von Cowtown, @NOTA

    But…but…but… leftists have told me for years, nay decades, that assimilation is racist. It’s almost like they don’t follow an ideology based on sound logic?

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Gunnar von Cowtown


    assimilation is racist
     
    There's an interesting contradiction here. On the one hand, diversity is our strength. On the other hand, the standard response to "Somalis aren't a good fit for a modern country" is that the next generation will assimilate.

    Christopher Caldwell (_Reflections on the Revolution in Europe_) says that back in the 50s and 60s, when the first Arab immigrants were welcomed to Europe, everyone assumed they'd immediately grasp the superiority of Western culture and thus want to assimilate ASAP.

    Replies: @Lagertha

    , @Travis
    @Gunnar von Cowtown

    I suppose it is logical , since their agenda is to destroy western culture...so they lie about assimilation stating that it will occur if we help them but then prohibiting us from deriding the immigrants backwards culture because "diversity" is good so we must allow them to keep their foreign ideology (which happens to include a hatred of America)

    just as the Koran teaches Muslims it is acceptable to lie to and cheat infidels , Leftists , like muslims, are never truthful and believe themselves to be morally superior to all others.

  25. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    It’s been said that young women and even girls in the Muslim world are forced into marriage with older men.

    It seems the likes of Merkel and Hollande are pushing their people into a forced marriage with the Arab-Afro-World at the behest of their Ziontological masters.

    This is more forced marriage than rape(of Europe). But then, forced marriage is a kind of rape, I guess. Eurape, or Planet of the Rapes.

    http://islamqa.info/en/47439

    http://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/12042/is-forced-marriage-to-a-religious-man-allowed

  26. The article makes a good point. We need to let in refugees as soon as possible or else they will remember our shabby treatment of them and turn to terrorism.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Tiny Duck

    You misunderstand.
    We need to let in Immigrants to ensure the steady supply of home grown terrorists for the next generation.

  27. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    Merkel thinks she is the Wali Mujbir who can force all of Europe to marry the Afro-Arab World.

    http://living4islam.blogspot.com/2009/03/to-force-or-not-to-force-that-is.html

    “This is a common mistake that many Muslims make: The belief that the father and the paternal grand father are wali mujbir, and that wali mujbir means they can force their virgin daughters to enter into any marriage of their choosing. A mistake that happens because they tend to translate technical, VERY technical, terms literally. And that too VERY literally.”

  28. Of course we had 2 Muslim refugees, the Tsarnaev brothers, commit the biggest domestic terrorist attack since 9/11.

    But that was all the way back in 2013. Why dredge that up in formulating refuge policy in 2015?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Jimi

    "Of course we had 2 Muslim refugees, the Tsarnaev brothers, commit the biggest domestic terrorist attack since 9/11.

    But that was all the way back in 2013. Why dredge that up in formulating refuge policy in 2015?"

    Yeah 2013 was a trillion years ago. Who the hell is still even alive today and old enough to remember when the Boston bombing took place? Meanwhile the Left Wing Megaphone wants to obsess over more recent current events like the death of Emmit Till for example which only happened in 1955. Everybody in America is old enough to remember the death of poor innocent Black body Emmit Till in 1955. But the Boston bombing happened such a long time ago that it might as well have taken place during the era of Genghis Khan.

  29. OT, Steve, but you ought to jump in in the comments on Fred Wilson’s blog post today (Trickle Up Economics). Excerpt:

    I would like to propose another approach that I call “trickle up economics” in which we lower the tax and other burdens on the lower and middle class, we invest in educating their children (and them), we make sure they have the skills to get good jobs in the economy of the future, and we make sure they have access to things like good transportation, safe neighborhoods, healthy food, quality health care services, etc that are required for them to be fully functioning citizens in our society.

  30. And, sure, Sirhan Sirhan pretty much destroyed the democratic process in 1968 by shooting the guy who had just won the most important Democratic primary, but nobody had heard of Palestinian terrorists back then, so he doesn’t count.

    A very good point, often overlooked.

    God I’m tired of Middle Eastern people (of ALL kinds…) f*cking up my country. It’s been going on literally for as long as I can remember. I was awakened by my family’s shocked exclamations the night Robert Kennedy was killed in LA. I remember going downstairs to watch the whole mess on TV with the grownups.

    I thought he was going to be the next president. (That was before I learned what douchebags the Kennedy’s were.)

    I’m literally tired of the Middle East, and I just can’t care anymore about ISIS this and Israel that and who blew up what when. Just turn the whole sandpile into a glass parking lot and walk away — please.

    I know. Ain’t gonna happen. We have to be tied up with the whole world, as we have been for far too long. Nobody remembers or cares about President George Washington’s warning to avoid foreign entanglements:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington%27s_Farewell_Address#Foreign_relations_and_free_trade

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It's harder when you're a world power, though it made a lot of sense for the nascent USA to do so.

    I still do think we get involved in other people's business way too often.

  31. @Jimi
    Of course we had 2 Muslim refugees, the Tsarnaev brothers, commit the biggest domestic terrorist attack since 9/11.

    But that was all the way back in 2013. Why dredge that up in formulating refuge policy in 2015?

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “Of course we had 2 Muslim refugees, the Tsarnaev brothers, commit the biggest domestic terrorist attack since 9/11.

    But that was all the way back in 2013. Why dredge that up in formulating refuge policy in 2015?”

    Yeah 2013 was a trillion years ago. Who the hell is still even alive today and old enough to remember when the Boston bombing took place? Meanwhile the Left Wing Megaphone wants to obsess over more recent current events like the death of Emmit Till for example which only happened in 1955. Everybody in America is old enough to remember the death of poor innocent Black body Emmit Till in 1955. But the Boston bombing happened such a long time ago that it might as well have taken place during the era of Genghis Khan.

  32. The Blind Sheik and the 1993 bombers, also unexpectedly not born here.

    This Brooklyn plot failed in 1993 only because one of the plotters got cold feet and practically tackled a rookie street cop-

    http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/01/nyregion/police-break-up-suspected-bomb-plot-in-brooklyn.html?pagewanted=all

    Naturalized citizen Faisal Shazaid only foiled because a Times Square t-shirt vendor who happened to be a Vietnam vet saw his BBQ tank/fireworks bomb and intervened.

    If 9/11 didn’t get the establishment’s attention, at a loss what will. But our betters are very good at holding maudlin remembrances with somber music.

    As for my friend murdered on 9/11, his family can get hassled in airports, like all of us.

  33. We have to be careful these days. Refugees (a.k.a. immigrants) have rights. We would never want to be “racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic or ablest” regarding them … and it is irrelevant if we fear for our social, cultural, religious, and political values in the deluge. Anyway (below), the University of East Anglia is trying to tackle these cross-cultural issues. It banned a Mexican restaurant from handing out sombreros at a university function as “racist”. I guess that good grades at East Anglia are also not PC. They might be interpreted as “ablest”; that is, “microaggressions” emanating from “White male privilege”. From RT:

    “Chris Jarvis, the (student) union’s campaigns and democracy officer, defended the decision.

    ‘At the student union we want all members to feel safe and accepted, so at all events we try to ensure that there is no behavior, language or imagery, which could be considered racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic or ablest.’

    ‘At the fair, all our stallholders were sent a copy of our advertising policy prior to the event and were also given a physical copy of the policy on the day, so we’re confident that all stallholders should have been aware of our restrictions on advertising in relation to equal opportunities and cultural appropriation,’ he said.

    ‘The company in question was Pedro’s restaurant, and the stallholders stopped once asked and were amicable in ceasing. That said, we know that when it comes to cultural appropriation the issues can sometimes be difficult to understand and many don’t realize that they may be about to cause offence or break a policy.’ ”

  34. How come terrorist attacks do not occur on Japanese soil? Oh yeah they do not open their borders to masses of hostile Muslims. Japan already has a problem with earthquakes, they do not need to add Vibrantly DIEverse Muslim immigrants and their unassimilable off springs to their list of problems as well.

  35. “The data is clear”… I love it. Sounds so authoritative. No other points of view are needed. Here are the facts…. Then you say whatever you want. I’m going to start using that. I’ll win ever discussion before they even start!

  36. @International Jew
    Steve, the standard leftist response to your concerns about the second generation is that we just need to do a better job assimilating them. (That's a variant on "all we need to do is fix the schools").

    Makes perfect sense if you believe the "blank slate" theory. And of course there's the added advantage of justifying more jobs for social workers.

    Replies: @Gunnar von Cowtown, @NOTA

    The tricky part is, that answer is kinda almost right. If we are going to let lots of foreigners in, whether from Mexico or Syria or Nigeria or China, we had better go to some effort to assimilate them to US norms. We don’t want a big lump of permanently unassimilated foreigners, because that’s a breeding ground for all kinds of problems.

    If only there were some *other* way to avoid having a big lump of unassimilated foreigners move to the US….

  37. We can always tell when commenters are whupping up on best propagandists in and out of the New York Times: Comments are closed early, today at 180 total. But I do love the force-feed of today’s blather, that assumption that we’ll resettle them, of course, only question is how quickly. Faster please, as one old neocon hack would say. I suppose they hope we’ll just ride along on the “of course” boat, without noting there is not a reason in the world we SHOULD resettle every immigrant unfortunate enough to live in a country either too incompetent to run itself, or situated too close to a blessed Western favorite like Israel. It’s not an inevitability that we become strangers in our estranged land. It IS inevitable that we will be unless we awaken from our stupefaction. Their boat is leaking. Let’s swamp it.

  38. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012103508.html By Eliot Abrams, (a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs in the Reagan administration and a deputy national security adviser to President George W. Bush. )

    A larger Haitian diaspora would be a far better base for the country’s economic future than aid pledges that may or may not be met. If several hundred thousand more Haitians were able to migrate, those Dominican, Honduran or Salvadoran numbers suggest that remittances to Haiti would give its economy a huge and continuing jolt.

    This would require Canada, France and the United States — the First World countries with the largest Haitian diaspora communities — to adopt a different and more liberal immigration policy toward Haiti. Canada has already stepped up, expediting immigration applications from Haitians with family members living there. Canada’s immigration minister noted that “we anticipate there will be a number of new applications, which we will treat on a priority basis.”

    But France and the United States have so far agreed only to no longer send Haitians back to Haiti. […]

    Well, not every way we can — for one of the best ways to help Haiti is to allow some Haitians to move abroad. It is ridiculous to argue that leaving Haiti in the coming year or two “will only bring more hardship to the Haitian people and nation.” Migration would mean that Haiti needs to provide fewer hospital beds, schools, meals and jobs — and migrants’ remittances will be key to Haiti’s economic recovery for decades to come.

    President Obama said that the disaster in Haiti “is one of those moments that calls out for American leadership.” He should be asking Congress not only to provide aid funds but also to allow a significant increase in the number of Haitians legally admitted to the United States — to several times the roughly 25,000 per year in the past decade. Canada and France should do the same. There are no panaceas for Haiti’s recovery, but any sensible approach must include migration from the island. If the United States is committed to giving Haiti hope for the future, enlarging the Haitian diaspora is a surefire way to succeed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Mozote_massacre

    Early the next morning, the soldiers reassembled the entire village in the square. They separated the men from the women and children and locked them in separate groups in the church, the convent, and various houses.[7]
    During the morning, they proceeded to interrogate, torture, and execute the men in several locations.[8] Around noon, they began taking the women and older girls in groups, separating them from their children and machine gunning them after raping them.[9] Girls as young as 10 were raped, with soldiers reportedly heard bragging how they especially liked the twelve-year-old girls.[10] Finally, they killed the children at first by slitting their throats, then by hanging them from trees, with one child as young as two years old.[11] After killing the entire population, the soldiers set fire to the buildings. The soldiers remained in El Mozote that night but the next day went to the village of Los Toriles, some 2 km away and carried out a further massacre. Men, women and children were taken from their homes, lined up, robbed and shot and their homes then set ablaze.[12] […] On February 8, Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, told the committee that “it appears to be an incident that is at least being significantly misused, at the very best, by the guerrillas”.[17]

    Abrams declared, “The Administration’s record on El Salvador is one of fabulous achievement.”

  39. @Gunnar von Cowtown
    @International Jew

    But...but...but... leftists have told me for years, nay decades, that assimilation is racist. It's almost like they don't follow an ideology based on sound logic?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Travis

    assimilation is racist

    There’s an interesting contradiction here. On the one hand, diversity is our strength. On the other hand, the standard response to “Somalis aren’t a good fit for a modern country” is that the next generation will assimilate.

    Christopher Caldwell (_Reflections on the Revolution in Europe_) says that back in the 50s and 60s, when the first Arab immigrants were welcomed to Europe, everyone assumed they’d immediately grasp the superiority of Western culture and thus want to assimilate ASAP.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    @International Jew

    The Somalis in Finland have completely ignored/refused assimilation attempts. They live in a parallel universe, collecting social welfare benefits (they have huge families) and forbidding their teenagers to socialize with Finns. They congregate with each other and do not socialize with adult ethnic Finns. It is a disaster. Muslim men are raping Finnish girls; that is a fact. If they do say, a clitorectomy on a daughter who winds up ill or dying of septic shock, at least Finland had the balls in the past to deport the entire family.

    Everyone hates the Somalis, and people resent this new refugee invasion. And, no, many MENA cultures do not embrace the technology and advances of western cultures. They see that people in western countries have a better life, and that's about it. I honestly think that there is no way certain cultures will assimilate when they come from a tribal, clannish, low-trust, high-corruption, religiously fanatic, culture. Finns are really creeped-out by hallal (animal abuse big time) and all that bs. God doesn't care what you eat or wear. I really dare the NYT to go and write about the abysmal facts about the non-integration in Finland of Somalis. Yeeah, never gonna happen!

    Replies: @Jacobsson

  40. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    Shoo!!! He be a victim!!

    http://thehilltop.cldc.howard.edu/?p=4652

    “When Vester Lee Flanagan fatally shot a television reporter and cameraman during their live filming in Roanoke, Va. Aug. 26, the African-American community shook its head at the sight of a Black man committing such a heinous crime. There is no denying that what he did was wrong and unjustified, yet, it is important to note that Mr. Flanagan, like thousands of other Black Americans, was battling a mental illness that had not been properly attended to, according to his colleagues. Flanagan’s actions reveal that, just like any other ailment,mental healthis multifaceted and if left untreated, can be lethal.”

  41. They fight over there, or we fight them here

    Wait, no.

    Either we fight them here or we fight them over there.

    No, that’s not right.

    They fight over there, then they fight here.

    Err, maybe.

    We fight over there, then they fight here.

  42. @Tiny Duck
    The article makes a good point. We need to let in refugees as soon as possible or else they will remember our shabby treatment of them and turn to terrorism.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    You misunderstand.
    We need to let in Immigrants to ensure the steady supply of home grown terrorists for the next generation.

  43. There are feasible ways to process refugees quickly without taking security shortcuts. In 1999, 20,000 ethnic Albanians, mostly Muslims, were not left to languish in refugee camps but instead evacuated from Kosovo to the United States, given asylum here and efficiently processed at Fort Dix, N.J.

    So how has letting in a bunch of Albanians worked out?

    I guess this success story was too good to check for Speckhard to check….

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Fort_Dix_attack_plot

    The plan, mostly by Jersey Albanians, was to go to the base with AK-47s and murder as many of our soldiers as possible. The plot was foiled when one of them took a videotape with terrorist boot camp footage, no doubt involving monkey bars, to a Circuit City for duplication and a concerned clerk called the FBI.

    Their family, like any patriotic Americans who learn their relatives were plotting mass murder, claims it is all a government conspiracy to frame them.

    Most of the terrorists on American soil do not come from the ranks of refugees but are individuals who are born here and who become vulnerable to recruitment because of mental illness, social marginalization, issues of discrimination and other factors that have nothing to do with admitting refugees into our country.

    Discrimination causes terrorism! White racism to blame again! No doubt this member of the Fort Dix terror cell was the subject of vicious anti-brown people discrimination:

    • Replies: @Front toward Enemy
    @Lot

    Stop, just stop. Everyone knows Global Warming er Climate Change or weather causes terrorism. Stop diluting the fantasy.

  44. On Fox News’s The Five they reported that Marco Rubio only has a net worth of $100 thousand dollars. Marco Rubio is poorer than Bernie Sanders. By American politics standards, he is part of the underclass.

    $100,000 dollars is lunch money to Donald Trump. Never vote for a politician who does not have a personal net worth of at least $1 million dollars. Politicians who are not smart enough to be financially successful in their own personal lives are not going to be smart enough to know how to be successful in running the biggest economy in the world.

  45. Here is an interesting ad for Steve Sailor to analyse (he was in advertising I think) , the Mexican women look so white, I wonder what the SJWs would think of it.It also features a border wall between Texas and Mexico.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=37&v=45boXIgXFUQ

  46. To put into perspective how poor Marco Rubio is by Washington politician standards, what Bryan Cranston earned for just 1 episode of Breaking Bad is more than Marco Rubio’s entire net worth.

  47. @Uncle Tom Shales
    I gotta admit her argument is not totally clear to me-- is she saying to bring in more refugees in order to offset the ranks of homegrown terrorists? Like, so the two can do battle with each other, Sharks/Jets-style? Doesn't sound very thought-through.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @AnAnon, @WowJustWow

    It’s more like the “more sex is safer sex” paradox: instead of eradicating the root cause of disease, you just need to convince more of those selfish STD-free individuals to start getting more slutty so any individual act of casual sex is less likely to pass on a disease.

    Likewise, if too many of our Muslims commit terrorist acts, it just means we need to import all the sane Muslims of the world to reduce the chance that any given Muslim you meet on the train to work is there to blow it up. It won’t reduce the total number of terrorist attacks, but if you’re lucky you’ll get to a point where you can say Muslims on average are no more terroristic than any other group in America so you can write more smug editorials in the Times.

  48. @Pat Casey
    @Steve Sailer

    Have to say, I find it incredible that no one seems to know the facts about RFK's assassination, which are both simpler and more mysterious than that of his brother.

    First of all, no motive has ever been revealed because Sirhan does not know why he shot RFK, or if he did---he has never been able to remember what happened the night of June 5, 1968.

    The fatal shot was to the back of RFK's head behind his right ear, and was fired from at most a few inches away. No one says Sirhan got within three feet of RFK, and of course he was at all times in front of Kennedy.

    At least 13 shots were fired, though Sirhan's gun held only 8 bullets! This is not in dispute, and the LAPD has admitted that photographic evidence of the crime scene was destroyed.

    At least five witnesses said they saw a woman fleeing the scene shouting "We shot him! We shot him!" according to initial police reports, one of which took the testimony of a mystery couple only identified as "the Bernsteins" who said they stopped the woman outside the hotel and asked who she shot and were told "Kennedy." This couple has never been able to be located.

    Head of the LAPD's investigation was a "retired" cop named Manny Pena, except he wasn't retired, because he was working for the CIA. To be precise, he worked with the Agency for International Development, otherwise know as the "Dirty Tricks Department," which apparently specialized in assassination techniques.

    The LAPD saw fit to label the notebooks scrawled with the words "RFK must die!" and other automatic writing of that sort---those notebooks were labeled and reported in the press as Sirhan's "diaries."

    And then there's the case of William Joseph Bryan ("I'm not going to comment on that case because I didn't hypnotize him!"---though no one had said he did) and the fact that Sirhan's notebooks included scrawlings of the name DiSalvo, and the testimony of the call girls who serviced Bryan in the lead-up to his mysterious death in a Las Vegas hotel room.

    The guy was hypnotized.

    see Robert Kaiser's RFK Must Die!
    and William Turner's The Assassination of Robert Kennedy

    Replies: @D. K., @whorefinder

    “BINGO!”

    In addition to which, Vice President Humphrey was going to win the nomination, in lieu of LBJ, anyway. Even RFK’s campaign manager later admitted as much. RFK’s belated attempt at the Democratic nomination was wholly dependent upon his convincing a lot of Humphrey delegates to switch to Kennedy, at the convention. His win in California, while impressive, was not enough to upset the cart, and make loyal Democrats switch from their sitting Vice President to a belated peace candidate (who had not even had the courage of his born-again convictions, until Senator Gene McCarthy had made clear that LBJ was not invulnerable, even within the Democratic Party itself). The assassination was surely a(nother) tragedy; it remains, however, an infamous murder mystery– not the major turning point in American presidential history that it is made out to be.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @D. K.

    The RFK conspiracy goes all the way to the top: George Plimpton and several NFL players!


    O'Sullivan stood by his allegations stating that the Bulova watch company was a "well-known CIA cover"
     
    And it is a perfect cover, as our circa-1968 enemies: Cuba, Mao's China, and the Soviet Union, were well known for their heavy consumption of mid-range Swiss wristwatches.

    Seriously though:

    The history of "The First Moscow Watch Factory":

    Founded in 1930 under orders from Stalin, the First State Watch Factory was the first Serious Soviet watch and mechanical movement manufacturer. Via its USA-based trading company Amtorg, the Soviet government bought the defunct Ansonia Clock Company of Brooklyn, New York in 1929, and the Dueber-Hampden Watch Company of Canton, Ohio. It moved twenty-eight freight cars full of machinery and parts from the USA to Moscow in order to establish the factory. Twenty-one former Dueber-Hampden watchmakers, engravers and various other technicians helped to train the Russian workers in the art of watchmaking as part of the Soviet's First Five-Year Plan. Interestingly, the movements of very-early products were still stamped "Dueber-Hampden, Canton, Ohio, USA" (examples of these watches are very collectible today). In 1935 the factory was named after the murdered Soviet official Sergei Kirov. As the Germans closed in on Moscow in 1941, the factory was hurriedly evacuated to Zlatoust. By 1943 the Germans were in retreat, and the factory moved back to Moscow, adopting the "First Moscow Watch Factory" name (Russian: Первый Московский Часовой Завод - 1МЧЗ).
     

    Replies: @D. K.

  49. http://www.dailylobo.com/article/2015/09/28-loborespect-center-opens

    victimology knows no bounds.

    sex + victimhood = sensationalism

  50. A blend of born-there and born-here jihadis – we are told that Bosnians are the “good”-because-they’re-“European”-Moslems: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/woman-pleads-guilty-in-terror-funding-case-with-st-louis/article_d5484d66-8544-545d-bfbc-bc681d6e4bac.html

    One. More. Time: Import The Third World and You ARE The Third World.

  51. Has anyone seen this? The writer must have changed that paragraph in the article since Steve’s post. It now reads:

    “Counterterrorism data is clear: Most of the terrorists on American soil do not come from the ranks of refugees but are individuals who are born here and who become vulnerable to recruitment because of mental illness, social marginalization, issues of discrimination and other factors that have nothing to do with admitting refugees into our country.”

  52. @Buzz Mohawk

    And, sure, Sirhan Sirhan pretty much destroyed the democratic process in 1968 by shooting the guy who had just won the most important Democratic primary, but nobody had heard of Palestinian terrorists back then, so he doesn’t count.
     
    A very good point, often overlooked.

    God I'm tired of Middle Eastern people (of ALL kinds...) f*cking up my country. It's been going on literally for as long as I can remember. I was awakened by my family's shocked exclamations the night Robert Kennedy was killed in LA. I remember going downstairs to watch the whole mess on TV with the grownups.

    I thought he was going to be the next president. (That was before I learned what douchebags the Kennedy's were.)

    I'm literally tired of the Middle East, and I just can't care anymore about ISIS this and Israel that and who blew up what when. Just turn the whole sandpile into a glass parking lot and walk away -- please.

    I know. Ain't gonna happen. We have to be tied up with the whole world, as we have been for far too long. Nobody remembers or cares about President George Washington's warning to avoid foreign entanglements:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington%27s_Farewell_Address#Foreign_relations_and_free_trade

    Replies: @SFG

    It’s harder when you’re a world power, though it made a lot of sense for the nascent USA to do so.

    I still do think we get involved in other people’s business way too often.

  53. @International Jew
    @Gunnar von Cowtown


    assimilation is racist
     
    There's an interesting contradiction here. On the one hand, diversity is our strength. On the other hand, the standard response to "Somalis aren't a good fit for a modern country" is that the next generation will assimilate.

    Christopher Caldwell (_Reflections on the Revolution in Europe_) says that back in the 50s and 60s, when the first Arab immigrants were welcomed to Europe, everyone assumed they'd immediately grasp the superiority of Western culture and thus want to assimilate ASAP.

    Replies: @Lagertha

    The Somalis in Finland have completely ignored/refused assimilation attempts. They live in a parallel universe, collecting social welfare benefits (they have huge families) and forbidding their teenagers to socialize with Finns. They congregate with each other and do not socialize with adult ethnic Finns. It is a disaster. Muslim men are raping Finnish girls; that is a fact. If they do say, a clitorectomy on a daughter who winds up ill or dying of septic shock, at least Finland had the balls in the past to deport the entire family.

    Everyone hates the Somalis, and people resent this new refugee invasion. And, no, many MENA cultures do not embrace the technology and advances of western cultures. They see that people in western countries have a better life, and that’s about it. I honestly think that there is no way certain cultures will assimilate when they come from a tribal, clannish, low-trust, high-corruption, religiously fanatic, culture. Finns are really creeped-out by hallal (animal abuse big time) and all that bs. God doesn’t care what you eat or wear. I really dare the NYT to go and write about the abysmal facts about the non-integration in Finland of Somalis. Yeeah, never gonna happen!

    • Replies: @Jacobsson
    @Lagertha

    Why would you even want that? The NYT would just tell us that it's the fault of the Finns

  54. @D. K.
    @Pat Casey

    "BINGO!"

    In addition to which, Vice President Humphrey was going to win the nomination, in lieu of LBJ, anyway. Even RFK's campaign manager later admitted as much. RFK's belated attempt at the Democratic nomination was wholly dependent upon his convincing a lot of Humphrey delegates to switch to Kennedy, at the convention. His win in California, while impressive, was not enough to upset the cart, and make loyal Democrats switch from their sitting Vice President to a belated peace candidate (who had not even had the courage of his born-again convictions, until Senator Gene McCarthy had made clear that LBJ was not invulnerable, even within the Democratic Party itself). The assassination was surely a(nother) tragedy; it remains, however, an infamous murder mystery-- not the major turning point in American presidential history that it is made out to be.

    Replies: @Lot

    The RFK conspiracy goes all the way to the top: George Plimpton and several NFL players!

    O’Sullivan stood by his allegations stating that the Bulova watch company was a “well-known CIA cover”

    And it is a perfect cover, as our circa-1968 enemies: Cuba, Mao’s China, and the Soviet Union, were well known for their heavy consumption of mid-range Swiss wristwatches.

    Seriously though:

    The history of “The First Moscow Watch Factory”:

    Founded in 1930 under orders from Stalin, the First State Watch Factory was the first Serious Soviet watch and mechanical movement manufacturer. Via its USA-based trading company Amtorg, the Soviet government bought the defunct Ansonia Clock Company of Brooklyn, New York in 1929, and the Dueber-Hampden Watch Company of Canton, Ohio. It moved twenty-eight freight cars full of machinery and parts from the USA to Moscow in order to establish the factory. Twenty-one former Dueber-Hampden watchmakers, engravers and various other technicians helped to train the Russian workers in the art of watchmaking as part of the Soviet’s First Five-Year Plan. Interestingly, the movements of very-early products were still stamped “Dueber-Hampden, Canton, Ohio, USA” (examples of these watches are very collectible today). In 1935 the factory was named after the murdered Soviet official Sergei Kirov. As the Germans closed in on Moscow in 1941, the factory was hurriedly evacuated to Zlatoust. By 1943 the Germans were in retreat, and the factory moved back to Moscow, adopting the “First Moscow Watch Factory” name (Russian: Первый Московский Часовой Завод – 1МЧЗ).

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Lot

    No conspiracy is required: the most plausible theory is that RFK was accidentally shot down by a neophyte security guard, while the latter returned fire at Sirhan. (The security guard admits to his having drawn his weapon, after Sirhan opened fire, but denies having fired any shots in return.)

    As for RFK's celebrity "body guards," they are part of the proof that Sirhan did not kill RFK: their story was that they tackled Sirhan, pinning him atop a pantry table, after he had gotten off only two shots. Sirhan's remaining six shots were fired wildly from that pinned position. Since RFK was hit three times, all at close range, Sirhan could not have inflicted RFK's wounds. (All three shots that wounded RFK also were delivered from his right rear--where the security guard had been standing, guiding RFK by his right arm, with the guard's left hand-- and at an upward angle.)

  55. Victor Orban’s astonishing speech from last week

    http://www.kormany.hu/en/the-prime-minister/the-prime-minister-s-speeches/viktor-orban-s-speech-at-the-14th-kotcse-civil-picnic

    I think that the phenomenon I’ve just described is no more or less than identity crisis. This seems to be bad news, but it is the first good identity crisis I’ve ever seen. Earlier we have talked about identity crises among ourselves: the Christian identity crisis, or the national identity crisis. But now, Ladies and Gentlemen, we are witnessing the liberal identity crisis. Viewed from the right perspective, the whole issue of asylum and mass migration, the whole problem of economic migration is nothing more than the identity crisis of liberalism. I’ll try to broadly summarize what it consists of. People in general – not only Europeans, but definitely Europeans – want to see themselves as good; but people can define “good” in a wide variety of ways. Liberals also want to see themselves as good. They also have an idea of ​​what it means to be a good person. And liberals can only live with themselves if they see themselves as good people. However, the liberal notion of what is “good”, as I described earlier, only exists at the level of phenomena: freedom of movement, universal human rights, and so on. Now this is producing disastrous consequences. But the particular quality of liberals is that while they want to be good people, they do not want to see their levels of welfare spending and standards of living falling; and so a crisis develops. This is the truly great challenge facing liberalism today: how to see themselves as good people according to their own principles, and at the same time how to protect the standard of living which they have achieved so far.

    I am convinced that it is no longer possible in Europe to both see ourselves as good in the liberal sense and to live in prosperity…

    Well, the fact is that liberals should ask themselves who they really are. Because if you cannot be good in the liberal sense while maintaining current existential needs, you need to solve this dilemma somehow. Poor liberals do not get any help from their politicians in this regard. This is what is missing in European politics. There is no vision, and indeed even expressing these questions in these terms is not allowed in European politics, and is almost life-threatening. This is a totally Hungarian luxury… Such a meeting could not be convened in Germany, where it would not be possible to say such things; nor could it in France – and it is even risky in Poland.

    Overall, therefore, the question is one of who in the end will tell the liberals who they really are. I am not sure if we were completely right, but I don’t think we were far wrong when we thought that modern liberalism is a form of hypocrisy. At all levels…

    Hungary – and now I do not want to speak for other countries, but I would like to think that most of Europe thinks as we do – must protect its ethnic and cultural composition. This needs to be explained, because in the eyes of liberals today this is the main sin.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    @frizzled

    Forward him the work of Kevin MacDonald (California state U- Long Beach) life's work.

  56. The FT’s Martin Wolf essentially makes the case for citizenism over migration in his latest column:

  57. @Lagertha
    @International Jew

    The Somalis in Finland have completely ignored/refused assimilation attempts. They live in a parallel universe, collecting social welfare benefits (they have huge families) and forbidding their teenagers to socialize with Finns. They congregate with each other and do not socialize with adult ethnic Finns. It is a disaster. Muslim men are raping Finnish girls; that is a fact. If they do say, a clitorectomy on a daughter who winds up ill or dying of septic shock, at least Finland had the balls in the past to deport the entire family.

    Everyone hates the Somalis, and people resent this new refugee invasion. And, no, many MENA cultures do not embrace the technology and advances of western cultures. They see that people in western countries have a better life, and that's about it. I honestly think that there is no way certain cultures will assimilate when they come from a tribal, clannish, low-trust, high-corruption, religiously fanatic, culture. Finns are really creeped-out by hallal (animal abuse big time) and all that bs. God doesn't care what you eat or wear. I really dare the NYT to go and write about the abysmal facts about the non-integration in Finland of Somalis. Yeeah, never gonna happen!

    Replies: @Jacobsson

    Why would you even want that? The NYT would just tell us that it’s the fault of the Finns

  58. @Buffalo Joe
    Case in point: The pilots of the 9/11 Boeing Cruise missiles .....all born here, oh wait a minute, my bad. Well then the Boston Marathon Mad Bomber Brothers, born here, oh wait....hmmm. The Fort Hood shooter , no, but I see her point.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Chrisnonymous

    Of the two Fort Hood shootings, one was born in the US and one in Puerto Rico, which is almost native-born.

    You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working…

    • Replies: @rod1963
    @Chrisnonymous

    The more they follow Islam the greater the chances of them becoming a jihadi or supporting them. The Koran demands that they follow the path of Jihad and waging war against unbelievers. Same with other Muslim books like the "Alchemy of Happiness" or "Reliance of the Traveler".

    They are agree waging war against the unbeliever is part of being a strict Muslim.

    Here's a link to poll conducted on American Muslims.

    https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/

    Here a excerpt:
    "ccording to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

    More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

    These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey. It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

    Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

    These people aren't immigrants they are colonists/invading army.

    Europe will soon find that out as well.

    , @Jefferson
    @Chrisnonymous

    "You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working…"

    In other words American born terrorists with Middle Eastern last names outnumber American born terrorists with WASP last names. The vast majority of American born terrorists are not English Mayflower descendants.

  59. Yeah, I get what you are saying. I am a dork and not worthy to be a bona fide spokesperson ( I am an American Finn!) yet, I think: truth is empirical. Truth = truth. My grandfathers fought hard to keep Finland free, so, I guess I am an ultra patriotic Finn who feels a need to set things straight from afar, even if I am just sayin’ stuff on this blog.

    I have a double-edged sword in that I know how the MSM works in the USA, know the machinations of the media, and know their weaknesses…or more importantly, how individuals can be compromised by their weaknesses, their vanity (you’re so vain…).

    Being part of the elite American university alumni has its benefits. I think I am a new and different kind of SJW! SJW swordmaiden to fight the bullshit of the SJW leftards, and all the misguided stuff they say and write, who are just, well, privileged white kids still angry at their parents for punishing them for something they did in High School or Boarding School back-in-the-day. Or, typically, their parents didn’t pay enough attention to them, didn’t connect with them, or they were just really, shitty parents. I think I found one friend at my elite college back in the late 70’s who really loved her parents as much as I did…and she was Brazilian!

  60. @frizzled
    Victor Orban's astonishing speech from last week

    http://www.kormany.hu/en/the-prime-minister/the-prime-minister-s-speeches/viktor-orban-s-speech-at-the-14th-kotcse-civil-picnic


    I think that the phenomenon I’ve just described is no more or less than identity crisis. This seems to be bad news, but it is the first good identity crisis I’ve ever seen. Earlier we have talked about identity crises among ourselves: the Christian identity crisis, or the national identity crisis. But now, Ladies and Gentlemen, we are witnessing the liberal identity crisis. Viewed from the right perspective, the whole issue of asylum and mass migration, the whole problem of economic migration is nothing more than the identity crisis of liberalism. I'll try to broadly summarize what it consists of. People in general – not only Europeans, but definitely Europeans – want to see themselves as good; but people can define “good” in a wide variety of ways. Liberals also want to see themselves as good. They also have an idea of ​​what it means to be a good person. And liberals can only live with themselves if they see themselves as good people. However, the liberal notion of what is “good”, as I described earlier, only exists at the level of phenomena: freedom of movement, universal human rights, and so on. Now this is producing disastrous consequences. But the particular quality of liberals is that while they want to be good people, they do not want to see their levels of welfare spending and standards of living falling; and so a crisis develops. This is the truly great challenge facing liberalism today: how to see themselves as good people according to their own principles, and at the same time how to protect the standard of living which they have achieved so far.

    I am convinced that it is no longer possible in Europe to both see ourselves as good in the liberal sense and to live in prosperity...

    Well, the fact is that liberals should ask themselves who they really are. Because if you cannot be good in the liberal sense while maintaining current existential needs, you need to solve this dilemma somehow. Poor liberals do not get any help from their politicians in this regard. This is what is missing in European politics. There is no vision, and indeed even expressing these questions in these terms is not allowed in European politics, and is almost life-threatening. This is a totally Hungarian luxury... Such a meeting could not be convened in Germany, where it would not be possible to say such things; nor could it in France – and it is even risky in Poland.

    Overall, therefore, the question is one of who in the end will tell the liberals who they really are. I am not sure if we were completely right, but I don’t think we were far wrong when we thought that modern liberalism is a form of hypocrisy. At all levels...

    Hungary – and now I do not want to speak for other countries, but I would like to think that most of Europe thinks as we do – must protect its ethnic and cultural composition. This needs to be explained, because in the eyes of liberals today this is the main sin.
     

    Replies: @Lagertha

    Forward him the work of Kevin MacDonald (California state U- Long Beach) life’s work.

  61. @Lot

    There are feasible ways to process refugees quickly without taking security shortcuts. In 1999, 20,000 ethnic Albanians, mostly Muslims, were not left to languish in refugee camps but instead evacuated from Kosovo to the United States, given asylum here and efficiently processed at Fort Dix, N.J.
     
    So how has letting in a bunch of Albanians worked out?

    I guess this success story was too good to check for Speckhard to check....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Fort_Dix_attack_plot

    The plan, mostly by Jersey Albanians, was to go to the base with AK-47s and murder as many of our soldiers as possible. The plot was foiled when one of them took a videotape with terrorist boot camp footage, no doubt involving monkey bars, to a Circuit City for duplication and a concerned clerk called the FBI.

    Their family, like any patriotic Americans who learn their relatives were plotting mass murder, claims it is all a government conspiracy to frame them.


    Most of the terrorists on American soil do not come from the ranks of refugees but are individuals who are born here and who become vulnerable to recruitment because of mental illness, social marginalization, issues of discrimination and other factors that have nothing to do with admitting refugees into our country.
     
    Discrimination causes terrorism! White racism to blame again! No doubt this member of the Fort Dix terror cell was the subject of vicious anti-brown people discrimination:

    http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/burlingtoncountytimes.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/4/c9/4c921851-b7e8-5dcb-a53d-ab091f14832b/55d7a1288d777.image.jpg

    Replies: @Front toward Enemy

    Stop, just stop. Everyone knows Global Warming er Climate Change or weather causes terrorism. Stop diluting the fantasy.

  62. @Lot
    @D. K.

    The RFK conspiracy goes all the way to the top: George Plimpton and several NFL players!


    O'Sullivan stood by his allegations stating that the Bulova watch company was a "well-known CIA cover"
     
    And it is a perfect cover, as our circa-1968 enemies: Cuba, Mao's China, and the Soviet Union, were well known for their heavy consumption of mid-range Swiss wristwatches.

    Seriously though:

    The history of "The First Moscow Watch Factory":

    Founded in 1930 under orders from Stalin, the First State Watch Factory was the first Serious Soviet watch and mechanical movement manufacturer. Via its USA-based trading company Amtorg, the Soviet government bought the defunct Ansonia Clock Company of Brooklyn, New York in 1929, and the Dueber-Hampden Watch Company of Canton, Ohio. It moved twenty-eight freight cars full of machinery and parts from the USA to Moscow in order to establish the factory. Twenty-one former Dueber-Hampden watchmakers, engravers and various other technicians helped to train the Russian workers in the art of watchmaking as part of the Soviet's First Five-Year Plan. Interestingly, the movements of very-early products were still stamped "Dueber-Hampden, Canton, Ohio, USA" (examples of these watches are very collectible today). In 1935 the factory was named after the murdered Soviet official Sergei Kirov. As the Germans closed in on Moscow in 1941, the factory was hurriedly evacuated to Zlatoust. By 1943 the Germans were in retreat, and the factory moved back to Moscow, adopting the "First Moscow Watch Factory" name (Russian: Первый Московский Часовой Завод - 1МЧЗ).
     

    Replies: @D. K.

    No conspiracy is required: the most plausible theory is that RFK was accidentally shot down by a neophyte security guard, while the latter returned fire at Sirhan. (The security guard admits to his having drawn his weapon, after Sirhan opened fire, but denies having fired any shots in return.)

    As for RFK’s celebrity “body guards,” they are part of the proof that Sirhan did not kill RFK: their story was that they tackled Sirhan, pinning him atop a pantry table, after he had gotten off only two shots. Sirhan’s remaining six shots were fired wildly from that pinned position. Since RFK was hit three times, all at close range, Sirhan could not have inflicted RFK’s wounds. (All three shots that wounded RFK also were delivered from his right rear–where the security guard had been standing, guiding RFK by his right arm, with the guard’s left hand– and at an upward angle.)

  63. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Victor Orban does have a direct way with words:

    “This is the truly great challenge facing liberalism today: how to see themselves as good people according to their own principles, and at the same time how to protect the standard of living which they have achieved so far.

    I am convinced that it is no longer possible in Europe to both see ourselves as good in the liberal sense and to live in prosperity…

    …the question is one of who in the end will tell the liberals who they really are. I am not sure if we were completely right, but I don’t think we were far wrong when we thought that modern liberalism is a form of hypocrisy. At all levels…”

    Of course you can have a pony! Remember to live in the world as it should be, not as it actually is!

  64. @Gunnar von Cowtown
    @International Jew

    But...but...but... leftists have told me for years, nay decades, that assimilation is racist. It's almost like they don't follow an ideology based on sound logic?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Travis

    I suppose it is logical , since their agenda is to destroy western culture…so they lie about assimilation stating that it will occur if we help them but then prohibiting us from deriding the immigrants backwards culture because “diversity” is good so we must allow them to keep their foreign ideology (which happens to include a hatred of America)

    just as the Koran teaches Muslims it is acceptable to lie to and cheat infidels , Leftists , like muslims, are never truthful and believe themselves to be morally superior to all others.

  65. Love this comment from a “Nan Socolow, West Palm Beach, FL”:

    “The millions of fleeing refugees from the Middle East are our problem as well as all European countries’ problem. The world cannot turn aside and do as the western nations did in Das Dritte Reich, from 1933-1945 when millions of Jews and other “untermenschen” of the German’s quest for a “Judenrein” world disappeared into the ovens of Germany’s myriad concentration camps. The US in the 1930s gave Germany’s millions of desperate refugees the cold shoulder.”

    Wonder if Nan knows how many of the refugees Israel is taking in. Wonder if Nan cares.

  66. @Chrisnonymous
    @Buffalo Joe

    Of the two Fort Hood shootings, one was born in the US and one in Puerto Rico, which is almost native-born.

    You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working...

    Replies: @rod1963, @Jefferson

    The more they follow Islam the greater the chances of them becoming a jihadi or supporting them. The Koran demands that they follow the path of Jihad and waging war against unbelievers. Same with other Muslim books like the “Alchemy of Happiness” or “Reliance of the Traveler”.

    They are agree waging war against the unbeliever is part of being a strict Muslim.

    Here’s a link to poll conducted on American Muslims.

    https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/

    Here a excerpt:
    “ccording to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

    More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

    These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey. It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

    Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

    These people aren’t immigrants they are colonists/invading army.

    Europe will soon find that out as well.

  67. @Chrisnonymous
    @Buffalo Joe

    Of the two Fort Hood shootings, one was born in the US and one in Puerto Rico, which is almost native-born.

    You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working...

    Replies: @rod1963, @Jefferson

    “You can go through the list of terrorist incidents in Wikipedia. Most seem to be native-born. However, of those, many or most are from the immediate next generation, which means assimilation is not working…”

    In other words American born terrorists with Middle Eastern last names outnumber American born terrorists with WASP last names. The vast majority of American born terrorists are not English Mayflower descendants.

  68. So, assimilation doesn’t work, but we shouldn’t worry about it because it will be our children’s problem, not ours?

    Why not? That strategy made Social Security the third rail of US politics.

  69. @Pat Casey
    @Steve Sailer

    Have to say, I find it incredible that no one seems to know the facts about RFK's assassination, which are both simpler and more mysterious than that of his brother.

    First of all, no motive has ever been revealed because Sirhan does not know why he shot RFK, or if he did---he has never been able to remember what happened the night of June 5, 1968.

    The fatal shot was to the back of RFK's head behind his right ear, and was fired from at most a few inches away. No one says Sirhan got within three feet of RFK, and of course he was at all times in front of Kennedy.

    At least 13 shots were fired, though Sirhan's gun held only 8 bullets! This is not in dispute, and the LAPD has admitted that photographic evidence of the crime scene was destroyed.

    At least five witnesses said they saw a woman fleeing the scene shouting "We shot him! We shot him!" according to initial police reports, one of which took the testimony of a mystery couple only identified as "the Bernsteins" who said they stopped the woman outside the hotel and asked who she shot and were told "Kennedy." This couple has never been able to be located.

    Head of the LAPD's investigation was a "retired" cop named Manny Pena, except he wasn't retired, because he was working for the CIA. To be precise, he worked with the Agency for International Development, otherwise know as the "Dirty Tricks Department," which apparently specialized in assassination techniques.

    The LAPD saw fit to label the notebooks scrawled with the words "RFK must die!" and other automatic writing of that sort---those notebooks were labeled and reported in the press as Sirhan's "diaries."

    And then there's the case of William Joseph Bryan ("I'm not going to comment on that case because I didn't hypnotize him!"---though no one had said he did) and the fact that Sirhan's notebooks included scrawlings of the name DiSalvo, and the testimony of the call girls who serviced Bryan in the lead-up to his mysterious death in a Las Vegas hotel room.

    The guy was hypnotized.

    see Robert Kaiser's RFK Must Die!
    and William Turner's The Assassination of Robert Kennedy

    Replies: @D. K., @whorefinder

    Sirhan Sirhan admitted several times that he shot RFK because of RFK’s support for Israel (esp. in Six-Day War). Sirhan identified as Arab and saw the middle east as Arab v. Jew, not Muslim v. Jew, which he stated on the stand, causing one of his Jewish defense attorneys to become upset and attempt to resign. That and Kennedy’s fame (both as a Kennedy and as a candidate) set Sirhan over the edge.

    And you admit they found diaries in Sirhan’s own writing claiming that RFK had to die. That’s pretty strong preemeditated motive evidence.

    SIrhan Sirhan only started to recant his confessions and/or “forget” his actions when his post-trial strategy became aligned with the conspiracy theorists who championed him. As an easily manipulated, low-IQ person, he has probably been convinced by his conspiracy theory handlers that he didn’t do it or that he was hypnotized—-not by his CIA handlers.

    What might be a stronger case for you conspiracy theorists is not that Sirhan or Oswald “didn’t do it”, but that they did do it and they did it because they were low-IQ, easily manipulated sorts that only required a little push to assassinate. With Oswald and Sirhan you have the motive, means, and opportunity, but you also have their vague associations with various shady government agencies. (Oswald’s contact with the cuban embassy in mexico and time in the USSR have long been sticking points in my discounting any conspiracy theories).

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @whorefinder

    Sirhan Sirhan also had an explanation for why he once attempted to climb the wall, in the room where he was meeting with his defense team. He failed to note, however, that he actually had done so because the volunteer psychiatrist, Dr. Diamond, had given him that instruction during hypnosis, a short time before, to be triggered by the doctor's subsequent use of a particular word; the word then produced the suggested behavior. Once retrieved and set back down at the table, Dr. Diamond asked Sirhan why he had done such a bizarre thing. Sirhan, unaware that he had been hypnotically programmed to do so by his inquisitor, immediately provided a rationalization for his behavior. That is what normal people do, in the face of abnormal situations; that is how the human mind works. As for Sirhan's supposedly being a "low-IQ person":

    http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Sirhan%20Sirhan%20NAA%20Guinn/Item%2004.pdf

    Lee Oswald was reportedly tested in school, at age ten, as having an IQ of 103. A few years later, after he had moved from New Orleans to New York City, and become a bit of a problem student, he was given the Wechsler IQ test for children. He scored a 118. It is evident from his atrocious spelling, even as an adult, that Oswald was severely dyslexic, and that that was the intellectual problem that hampered his academic efforts. A "low-IQ person" does not get himself assigned to Atsugi, as a radar operator, tracking top-secret U-2 flights for the United States Marine Corps! He does not subsequently get invited onto a radio show in New Orleans, as a 23-year-old, to discuss Marxism, the Cold War, and international affairs.

    Both Lee Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan scored far above average on formally administered IQ tests. Even their reputed lower performances, on earlier occasions-- 103 for Oswald and 98 for Sirhan-- would make them both very average people, intellectually, rather than the "low-IQ person[s]" that you would wish. In either case, the ballistics of their respective assassinations prove that neither one was guilty of precisely what he has been accused of (and, in Sirhan's case, convicted of), even if neither is wholly the innocent tool that some would make him out to be. Get back to us, though, when you have figured out how either man accomplished precisely what he is alleged to have done, based upon both the ballistics and the eye-witness testimony of the respective timing of the shots, in either case.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    , @5371
    @whorefinder

    Surely Oswald's sticky end should be an even bigger sticking point.

  70. @Uncle Tom Shales

    Anne Speckhard, an adjunct associate professor of psychiatry at the Georgetown University School of Medicine, is the author of “Talking to Terrorists” and “Bride of ISIS”
     
    Sounds like a character from a Don DeLillo or Christopher Buckley novel, doesn't it?

    Replies: @gruff

    She’s on twitter. Might be productive to start a dialogue with her.

  71. @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Sirhan Sirhan admitted several times that he shot RFK because of RFK's support for Israel (esp. in Six-Day War). Sirhan identified as Arab and saw the middle east as Arab v. Jew, not Muslim v. Jew, which he stated on the stand, causing one of his Jewish defense attorneys to become upset and attempt to resign. That and Kennedy's fame (both as a Kennedy and as a candidate) set Sirhan over the edge.

    And you admit they found diaries in Sirhan's own writing claiming that RFK had to die. That's pretty strong preemeditated motive evidence.

    SIrhan Sirhan only started to recant his confessions and/or "forget" his actions when his post-trial strategy became aligned with the conspiracy theorists who championed him. As an easily manipulated, low-IQ person, he has probably been convinced by his conspiracy theory handlers that he didn't do it or that he was hypnotized----not by his CIA handlers.

    What might be a stronger case for you conspiracy theorists is not that Sirhan or Oswald "didn't do it", but that they did do it and they did it because they were low-IQ, easily manipulated sorts that only required a little push to assassinate. With Oswald and Sirhan you have the motive, means, and opportunity, but you also have their vague associations with various shady government agencies. (Oswald's contact with the cuban embassy in mexico and time in the USSR have long been sticking points in my discounting any conspiracy theories).

    Replies: @D. K., @5371

    Sirhan Sirhan also had an explanation for why he once attempted to climb the wall, in the room where he was meeting with his defense team. He failed to note, however, that he actually had done so because the volunteer psychiatrist, Dr. Diamond, had given him that instruction during hypnosis, a short time before, to be triggered by the doctor’s subsequent use of a particular word; the word then produced the suggested behavior. Once retrieved and set back down at the table, Dr. Diamond asked Sirhan why he had done such a bizarre thing. Sirhan, unaware that he had been hypnotically programmed to do so by his inquisitor, immediately provided a rationalization for his behavior. That is what normal people do, in the face of abnormal situations; that is how the human mind works. As for Sirhan’s supposedly being a “low-IQ person”:

    http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Sirhan%20Sirhan%20NAA%20Guinn/Item%2004.pdf

    Lee Oswald was reportedly tested in school, at age ten, as having an IQ of 103. A few years later, after he had moved from New Orleans to New York City, and become a bit of a problem student, he was given the Wechsler IQ test for children. He scored a 118. It is evident from his atrocious spelling, even as an adult, that Oswald was severely dyslexic, and that that was the intellectual problem that hampered his academic efforts. A “low-IQ person” does not get himself assigned to Atsugi, as a radar operator, tracking top-secret U-2 flights for the United States Marine Corps! He does not subsequently get invited onto a radio show in New Orleans, as a 23-year-old, to discuss Marxism, the Cold War, and international affairs.

    Both Lee Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan scored far above average on formally administered IQ tests. Even their reputed lower performances, on earlier occasions– 103 for Oswald and 98 for Sirhan– would make them both very average people, intellectually, rather than the “low-IQ person[s]” that you would wish. In either case, the ballistics of their respective assassinations prove that neither one was guilty of precisely what he has been accused of (and, in Sirhan’s case, convicted of), even if neither is wholly the innocent tool that some would make him out to be. Get back to us, though, when you have figured out how either man accomplished precisely what he is alleged to have done, based upon both the ballistics and the eye-witness testimony of the respective timing of the shots, in either case.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @D. K.

    Sirhan had motive, means, and opportunity.

    1. That "affidavit" isn't from Dr. Diamond, it is from Eduard Simson. In other words, anything said is hearsay and his 3rd-party viewing. If Dr. Diamond has written this, it would be a ton stronger. Also, a quick search for "Dr. Eduard Simson" on Google/Bing doesn't pull up any hits on the first pages except to O'Sullivan's discredited documentary. Any other info on this "Dr. Eduard Simson"? Did he ever speak out to the media? Write a book? I'm genuinely curious---and suspicious. That a clearly-very accomplished Phd who ends being a prison shrink and never got famous for his ideas? Did he publish at all?

    2. Low -IQ may or may not be out, but clear mental problems abound in both Sirhan and Oswald, (I will also point out that high-IQ people can be manipulatable as well---in fact, the higher IQ manipulatable people are often more easily manipulated because they think their intelligence protects them (interrogations, for example, of high-IQ but nervous/high strung people tend to get information much more quickly thank lower-IQ but calmer people)).

    That said, Sirhan was clearly had some mental/emotional issues. How do we know this? He was a "church hopper"---he frequently changed his religious affiliation. Church hoppers are unmoored from their identity, whether it be from inborn psychological problems or childhood trauma (such as, ahem, moving to a completely different country and having your father abandon you, as Sirhan did). Church hoppers seek to use religion as a magic, mystical pill to solve their problems. CHurch hoppers have a secular counterpart----shrink hoppers, those folks who regularly and frequently change their shrink and try any radical/quack mental therapy hoping to magically cure their unhappiness (you see these guys more in New York City and other SWPL enclaves). Church hoppers and shrink hoppers don't see religion/psychology as a process, but as a quick fix---that somehow, they just need 6 months of intensive "something" and they will not feel so lost or abandoned.

    Church/Shrink hoppers aren't usually bad people, just sad and weird---it's clear they're mostly lonely and just weird/odd, but generally trying to fit in, and, feeling they can't, reach out to the unknown for help, but get frustrated that it requires work. The documentary series 7 up, which chronicles the lives of a group of children all grown up now every 7 years, has a church hopping dude in it---he's a very smart dude (high IQ test as a child) but it's clear some emotional trauma keeps him from having a job, and every 7 years he's onto a new religious or psychological path.

    Sirhan, being unmoored, finally sought to center his identity on his race versus his religion. That, Kennedy's natural fame, and his "inevitability" momentum was sufficient motive.

    3. The Sirhan-wasn't-alone/didn't do it issue also brings up the huge problem of witnesses. Oswald acting alone is actually easier to get away with--- because he shot from far away, so no one saw him fire the gun, and, if ballistics hadn't put to rest most of the questions, at least leaves open the possibility of a second shooter while keeping them anonymous. But RFK gets plugged in front of a crowd of people, many of whom are deeply loyal to RFK, one of whom is a hulking pro football player unafraid of physically fighting people rushing his man RFK, and some how none of them notice anyone but Sirhan Sirhan? The ever-observant George Plimpton misses it all? A reporter right there misses it? And let's not forget that the CIA had no idea if anyone was sneaking a camera with them to snap a photo of the man of the hour, RFK. The CIA likes assassinations, but this had far too many moving, missing parts, too many things to go wrong, too many chances of it being noticed. And that brings us to-----

    4. Easiest opportunity. The Kennedys have always been horny dicks. The easiest way to get to a horny dick is through his penis. Send up an alluring girl to poison/shoot him, and then shoot the girl as she tries to "escape." Or murder him while his mistress is coming over, make it look like she did it, kill her trying to "escape". Put the blame on some low-level radical group or make the girl a lone-wolf assassin. Much tidier, and expose the Kennedys as cheaters to boot, making them look bad. Murders on national TV, in front of large crowds? Yeah, highly dangerous at getting caught. Makes them a martyr.

    John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln at a theater because it was the closest he could get to him. A crowded hotel back room is not the closest the CIA can get. And the CIA likes plausible backdoors to get out of jams. If the so-called "Bulova CIA men" were shooting too, how could the CIA disown them, non-Arab Americans with no connection to Sirhan, if somebody noticed them?

    5. Don't forget about the KGB. No, not as suspects in the killings---as suspects in spreading the conspiracies. The KGB used disinformation plans to keep the JFK conspiracies alive in the public because it caused Americans to distrust their own government. Don't think RFK's murder didn't set off a similar plan that hasn't filtered down to today.

    All in all, Sirhan's motive, means, and opportunity are pretty solid. Like I said, the best doubters should instead push the idea that he was the only assassin, BUT that he was programmed to do so. Unfortunately for that theory, there is very little evidence in the public eye about successful brainwashing of long-term assassins who then completely forget all their brainwashing, and Sirhan and his team have yet to provide it. Mentioning MKULTRA doesn't cut it, we need some proof that this can be done in general before we start applying it to Oswald.

    Replies: @D. K., @Pat Casey

  72. @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Sirhan Sirhan admitted several times that he shot RFK because of RFK's support for Israel (esp. in Six-Day War). Sirhan identified as Arab and saw the middle east as Arab v. Jew, not Muslim v. Jew, which he stated on the stand, causing one of his Jewish defense attorneys to become upset and attempt to resign. That and Kennedy's fame (both as a Kennedy and as a candidate) set Sirhan over the edge.

    And you admit they found diaries in Sirhan's own writing claiming that RFK had to die. That's pretty strong preemeditated motive evidence.

    SIrhan Sirhan only started to recant his confessions and/or "forget" his actions when his post-trial strategy became aligned with the conspiracy theorists who championed him. As an easily manipulated, low-IQ person, he has probably been convinced by his conspiracy theory handlers that he didn't do it or that he was hypnotized----not by his CIA handlers.

    What might be a stronger case for you conspiracy theorists is not that Sirhan or Oswald "didn't do it", but that they did do it and they did it because they were low-IQ, easily manipulated sorts that only required a little push to assassinate. With Oswald and Sirhan you have the motive, means, and opportunity, but you also have their vague associations with various shady government agencies. (Oswald's contact with the cuban embassy in mexico and time in the USSR have long been sticking points in my discounting any conspiracy theories).

    Replies: @D. K., @5371

    Surely Oswald’s sticky end should be an even bigger sticking point.

  73. @D. K.
    @whorefinder

    Sirhan Sirhan also had an explanation for why he once attempted to climb the wall, in the room where he was meeting with his defense team. He failed to note, however, that he actually had done so because the volunteer psychiatrist, Dr. Diamond, had given him that instruction during hypnosis, a short time before, to be triggered by the doctor's subsequent use of a particular word; the word then produced the suggested behavior. Once retrieved and set back down at the table, Dr. Diamond asked Sirhan why he had done such a bizarre thing. Sirhan, unaware that he had been hypnotically programmed to do so by his inquisitor, immediately provided a rationalization for his behavior. That is what normal people do, in the face of abnormal situations; that is how the human mind works. As for Sirhan's supposedly being a "low-IQ person":

    http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Sirhan%20Sirhan%20NAA%20Guinn/Item%2004.pdf

    Lee Oswald was reportedly tested in school, at age ten, as having an IQ of 103. A few years later, after he had moved from New Orleans to New York City, and become a bit of a problem student, he was given the Wechsler IQ test for children. He scored a 118. It is evident from his atrocious spelling, even as an adult, that Oswald was severely dyslexic, and that that was the intellectual problem that hampered his academic efforts. A "low-IQ person" does not get himself assigned to Atsugi, as a radar operator, tracking top-secret U-2 flights for the United States Marine Corps! He does not subsequently get invited onto a radio show in New Orleans, as a 23-year-old, to discuss Marxism, the Cold War, and international affairs.

    Both Lee Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan scored far above average on formally administered IQ tests. Even their reputed lower performances, on earlier occasions-- 103 for Oswald and 98 for Sirhan-- would make them both very average people, intellectually, rather than the "low-IQ person[s]" that you would wish. In either case, the ballistics of their respective assassinations prove that neither one was guilty of precisely what he has been accused of (and, in Sirhan's case, convicted of), even if neither is wholly the innocent tool that some would make him out to be. Get back to us, though, when you have figured out how either man accomplished precisely what he is alleged to have done, based upon both the ballistics and the eye-witness testimony of the respective timing of the shots, in either case.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    Sirhan had motive, means, and opportunity.

    1. That “affidavit” isn’t from Dr. Diamond, it is from Eduard Simson. In other words, anything said is hearsay and his 3rd-party viewing. If Dr. Diamond has written this, it would be a ton stronger. Also, a quick search for “Dr. Eduard Simson” on Google/Bing doesn’t pull up any hits on the first pages except to O’Sullivan’s discredited documentary. Any other info on this “Dr. Eduard Simson”? Did he ever speak out to the media? Write a book? I’m genuinely curious—and suspicious. That a clearly-very accomplished Phd who ends being a prison shrink and never got famous for his ideas? Did he publish at all?

    2. Low -IQ may or may not be out, but clear mental problems abound in both Sirhan and Oswald, (I will also point out that high-IQ people can be manipulatable as well—in fact, the higher IQ manipulatable people are often more easily manipulated because they think their intelligence protects them (interrogations, for example, of high-IQ but nervous/high strung people tend to get information much more quickly thank lower-IQ but calmer people)).

    That said, Sirhan was clearly had some mental/emotional issues. How do we know this? He was a “church hopper”—he frequently changed his religious affiliation. Church hoppers are unmoored from their identity, whether it be from inborn psychological problems or childhood trauma (such as, ahem, moving to a completely different country and having your father abandon you, as Sirhan did). Church hoppers seek to use religion as a magic, mystical pill to solve their problems. CHurch hoppers have a secular counterpart—-shrink hoppers, those folks who regularly and frequently change their shrink and try any radical/quack mental therapy hoping to magically cure their unhappiness (you see these guys more in New York City and other SWPL enclaves). Church hoppers and shrink hoppers don’t see religion/psychology as a process, but as a quick fix—that somehow, they just need 6 months of intensive “something” and they will not feel so lost or abandoned.

    Church/Shrink hoppers aren’t usually bad people, just sad and weird—it’s clear they’re mostly lonely and just weird/odd, but generally trying to fit in, and, feeling they can’t, reach out to the unknown for help, but get frustrated that it requires work. The documentary series 7 up, which chronicles the lives of a group of children all grown up now every 7 years, has a church hopping dude in it—he’s a very smart dude (high IQ test as a child) but it’s clear some emotional trauma keeps him from having a job, and every 7 years he’s onto a new religious or psychological path.

    Sirhan, being unmoored, finally sought to center his identity on his race versus his religion. That, Kennedy’s natural fame, and his “inevitability” momentum was sufficient motive.

    3. The Sirhan-wasn’t-alone/didn’t do it issue also brings up the huge problem of witnesses. Oswald acting alone is actually easier to get away with— because he shot from far away, so no one saw him fire the gun, and, if ballistics hadn’t put to rest most of the questions, at least leaves open the possibility of a second shooter while keeping them anonymous. But RFK gets plugged in front of a crowd of people, many of whom are deeply loyal to RFK, one of whom is a hulking pro football player unafraid of physically fighting people rushing his man RFK, and some how none of them notice anyone but Sirhan Sirhan? The ever-observant George Plimpton misses it all? A reporter right there misses it? And let’s not forget that the CIA had no idea if anyone was sneaking a camera with them to snap a photo of the man of the hour, RFK. The CIA likes assassinations, but this had far too many moving, missing parts, too many things to go wrong, too many chances of it being noticed. And that brings us to—–

    4. Easiest opportunity. The Kennedys have always been horny dicks. The easiest way to get to a horny dick is through his penis. Send up an alluring girl to poison/shoot him, and then shoot the girl as she tries to “escape.” Or murder him while his mistress is coming over, make it look like she did it, kill her trying to “escape”. Put the blame on some low-level radical group or make the girl a lone-wolf assassin. Much tidier, and expose the Kennedys as cheaters to boot, making them look bad. Murders on national TV, in front of large crowds? Yeah, highly dangerous at getting caught. Makes them a martyr.

    John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln at a theater because it was the closest he could get to him. A crowded hotel back room is not the closest the CIA can get. And the CIA likes plausible backdoors to get out of jams. If the so-called “Bulova CIA men” were shooting too, how could the CIA disown them, non-Arab Americans with no connection to Sirhan, if somebody noticed them?

    5. Don’t forget about the KGB. No, not as suspects in the killings—as suspects in spreading the conspiracies. The KGB used disinformation plans to keep the JFK conspiracies alive in the public because it caused Americans to distrust their own government. Don’t think RFK’s murder didn’t set off a similar plan that hasn’t filtered down to today.

    All in all, Sirhan’s motive, means, and opportunity are pretty solid. Like I said, the best doubters should instead push the idea that he was the only assassin, BUT that he was programmed to do so. Unfortunately for that theory, there is very little evidence in the public eye about successful brainwashing of long-term assassins who then completely forget all their brainwashing, and Sirhan and his team have yet to provide it. Mentioning MKULTRA doesn’t cut it, we need some proof that this can be done in general before we start applying it to Oswald.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @whorefinder

    I invited you to explain how the two orthodox theories of the respective cases can explain the ballistics, vis-a-vis the eyewitness testimony:

    How did Lee Oswald fire three shots, with the first one missing the president's car completely (wounding James Teague, standing near the triple underpass, far down the street, when the bullet shattered the curb, near him, and he was hit with a dislodged fragment), the second one allegedly inflicting a large number of wounds in both President Kennedy and Governor Connally, sitting in front of him, yet turning up in a hallway corridor at Parkland Memorial Hospital, looking as if it merely had been fired into cotton wadding, and the third being the infamous head shot, captured in graphic color by Mr. Zapruder, with two of those shots, according to most witnesses, being fired in such rapid succession that Oswald could not possibly have fired both, with his defective bolt-action surplus rifle, let alone re-aimed along its defective sight, yet managing to hit the president in the head, with both the farthest and quickest shot?

    How did Sirhan Sirhan wound Senator Kennedy three times, all at close range, with the fatal head shot being from within just a few inches, and all at an upward angle, from RFK's right-rear, when Sirhan was a few to several feet in front of his target, and was tackled back onto a pantry table, after only his second shot, and fired his final six shots from there, pinned down, on his back, by the aforementioned celebrities?

    Psychobabble about the alleged assassins is utterly beside the point, in answering those forensic questions about the two infamous Kennedy assassinations of the 1960s.

    Replies: @IA

    , @Pat Casey
    @whorefinder

    One of these days, I shall have to become my own blogger---like you, except not---because by different routes interestingly unusual and too-delicate to specify, I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that's more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane. I'm convinced that a lot of marginal men get remembered by history because they had something in common that way with me; something does stick out about lucid thinkers who seemed to leave themselves the excuse of being trivial or round the twist. Which is to say, the blog I don't have would be good, next to so many blogs repugnant to any sense that words are put down for public consumption as though being chiseled in stone: the only writing worth publishing is the kind that cares if people could possibly care to read it when the writer is gone. To wit, the proverbial first draft of history is not a fatuous trope to invoke for being self-important but for being invoked by people who are profoundly self-deceiving and unforgivably myopic.

    Of course, the first thing is to know the facts that are there to be known, though that largely presupposes knowing how to read, which makes me think you really are not prepared to be a self-publishing writer, because your interpretation of what I wrote is illiterate, and you don't know very many facts. There is a difference between knowing why you did something and having a memory of doing it, and I wasn't implying Sirhan wasn't there where it happened when it happened carrying a gun. "Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy "premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought," Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident." Given the particularities of the circumstance, blurting that out is a very luminous detail, but to realize that, you have to be aware of the weighty concept of luminous details, you have to know what the fuck they are.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall's effects on German soldiers in WWI--- insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale). And you don't seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can't dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don't know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records. The fact that it was done at all, carried out over a period of decades, does not suggest that the only seriously competent branch of our government was putzing around.

    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous. If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot "conspiracy theory."

    I wonder if Ted Kennedy's infamous blunder of a response when Roger Mudd asked him why he wanted to be President (which was overblown and not so atypical as far as American politicians go) was because his immediate gut response was: Because they killed my brothers. Its easy to see how that thought in that moment would throw somebody off that way. And if so, I wonder if Ted Kennedy ever explained it to anyone that way, someone he trusted, who told someone else they trusted, and so on, til the tale became a theory that exists like a conspiracy.

    Replies: @whorefinder

  74. @whorefinder
    @D. K.

    Sirhan had motive, means, and opportunity.

    1. That "affidavit" isn't from Dr. Diamond, it is from Eduard Simson. In other words, anything said is hearsay and his 3rd-party viewing. If Dr. Diamond has written this, it would be a ton stronger. Also, a quick search for "Dr. Eduard Simson" on Google/Bing doesn't pull up any hits on the first pages except to O'Sullivan's discredited documentary. Any other info on this "Dr. Eduard Simson"? Did he ever speak out to the media? Write a book? I'm genuinely curious---and suspicious. That a clearly-very accomplished Phd who ends being a prison shrink and never got famous for his ideas? Did he publish at all?

    2. Low -IQ may or may not be out, but clear mental problems abound in both Sirhan and Oswald, (I will also point out that high-IQ people can be manipulatable as well---in fact, the higher IQ manipulatable people are often more easily manipulated because they think their intelligence protects them (interrogations, for example, of high-IQ but nervous/high strung people tend to get information much more quickly thank lower-IQ but calmer people)).

    That said, Sirhan was clearly had some mental/emotional issues. How do we know this? He was a "church hopper"---he frequently changed his religious affiliation. Church hoppers are unmoored from their identity, whether it be from inborn psychological problems or childhood trauma (such as, ahem, moving to a completely different country and having your father abandon you, as Sirhan did). Church hoppers seek to use religion as a magic, mystical pill to solve their problems. CHurch hoppers have a secular counterpart----shrink hoppers, those folks who regularly and frequently change their shrink and try any radical/quack mental therapy hoping to magically cure their unhappiness (you see these guys more in New York City and other SWPL enclaves). Church hoppers and shrink hoppers don't see religion/psychology as a process, but as a quick fix---that somehow, they just need 6 months of intensive "something" and they will not feel so lost or abandoned.

    Church/Shrink hoppers aren't usually bad people, just sad and weird---it's clear they're mostly lonely and just weird/odd, but generally trying to fit in, and, feeling they can't, reach out to the unknown for help, but get frustrated that it requires work. The documentary series 7 up, which chronicles the lives of a group of children all grown up now every 7 years, has a church hopping dude in it---he's a very smart dude (high IQ test as a child) but it's clear some emotional trauma keeps him from having a job, and every 7 years he's onto a new religious or psychological path.

    Sirhan, being unmoored, finally sought to center his identity on his race versus his religion. That, Kennedy's natural fame, and his "inevitability" momentum was sufficient motive.

    3. The Sirhan-wasn't-alone/didn't do it issue also brings up the huge problem of witnesses. Oswald acting alone is actually easier to get away with--- because he shot from far away, so no one saw him fire the gun, and, if ballistics hadn't put to rest most of the questions, at least leaves open the possibility of a second shooter while keeping them anonymous. But RFK gets plugged in front of a crowd of people, many of whom are deeply loyal to RFK, one of whom is a hulking pro football player unafraid of physically fighting people rushing his man RFK, and some how none of them notice anyone but Sirhan Sirhan? The ever-observant George Plimpton misses it all? A reporter right there misses it? And let's not forget that the CIA had no idea if anyone was sneaking a camera with them to snap a photo of the man of the hour, RFK. The CIA likes assassinations, but this had far too many moving, missing parts, too many things to go wrong, too many chances of it being noticed. And that brings us to-----

    4. Easiest opportunity. The Kennedys have always been horny dicks. The easiest way to get to a horny dick is through his penis. Send up an alluring girl to poison/shoot him, and then shoot the girl as she tries to "escape." Or murder him while his mistress is coming over, make it look like she did it, kill her trying to "escape". Put the blame on some low-level radical group or make the girl a lone-wolf assassin. Much tidier, and expose the Kennedys as cheaters to boot, making them look bad. Murders on national TV, in front of large crowds? Yeah, highly dangerous at getting caught. Makes them a martyr.

    John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln at a theater because it was the closest he could get to him. A crowded hotel back room is not the closest the CIA can get. And the CIA likes plausible backdoors to get out of jams. If the so-called "Bulova CIA men" were shooting too, how could the CIA disown them, non-Arab Americans with no connection to Sirhan, if somebody noticed them?

    5. Don't forget about the KGB. No, not as suspects in the killings---as suspects in spreading the conspiracies. The KGB used disinformation plans to keep the JFK conspiracies alive in the public because it caused Americans to distrust their own government. Don't think RFK's murder didn't set off a similar plan that hasn't filtered down to today.

    All in all, Sirhan's motive, means, and opportunity are pretty solid. Like I said, the best doubters should instead push the idea that he was the only assassin, BUT that he was programmed to do so. Unfortunately for that theory, there is very little evidence in the public eye about successful brainwashing of long-term assassins who then completely forget all their brainwashing, and Sirhan and his team have yet to provide it. Mentioning MKULTRA doesn't cut it, we need some proof that this can be done in general before we start applying it to Oswald.

    Replies: @D. K., @Pat Casey

    I invited you to explain how the two orthodox theories of the respective cases can explain the ballistics, vis-a-vis the eyewitness testimony:

    How did Lee Oswald fire three shots, with the first one missing the president’s car completely (wounding James Teague, standing near the triple underpass, far down the street, when the bullet shattered the curb, near him, and he was hit with a dislodged fragment), the second one allegedly inflicting a large number of wounds in both President Kennedy and Governor Connally, sitting in front of him, yet turning up in a hallway corridor at Parkland Memorial Hospital, looking as if it merely had been fired into cotton wadding, and the third being the infamous head shot, captured in graphic color by Mr. Zapruder, with two of those shots, according to most witnesses, being fired in such rapid succession that Oswald could not possibly have fired both, with his defective bolt-action surplus rifle, let alone re-aimed along its defective sight, yet managing to hit the president in the head, with both the farthest and quickest shot?

    How did Sirhan Sirhan wound Senator Kennedy three times, all at close range, with the fatal head shot being from within just a few inches, and all at an upward angle, from RFK’s right-rear, when Sirhan was a few to several feet in front of his target, and was tackled back onto a pantry table, after only his second shot, and fired his final six shots from there, pinned down, on his back, by the aforementioned celebrities?

    Psychobabble about the alleged assassins is utterly beside the point, in answering those forensic questions about the two infamous Kennedy assassinations of the 1960s.

    • Replies: @IA
    @D. K.

    Kennedy was shot, accidently, by his own secret service trailing in the following car, so says a documentary on Netflix.

    Replies: @D. K.

  75. Pat Casey says:
    @whorefinder
    @D. K.

    Sirhan had motive, means, and opportunity.

    1. That "affidavit" isn't from Dr. Diamond, it is from Eduard Simson. In other words, anything said is hearsay and his 3rd-party viewing. If Dr. Diamond has written this, it would be a ton stronger. Also, a quick search for "Dr. Eduard Simson" on Google/Bing doesn't pull up any hits on the first pages except to O'Sullivan's discredited documentary. Any other info on this "Dr. Eduard Simson"? Did he ever speak out to the media? Write a book? I'm genuinely curious---and suspicious. That a clearly-very accomplished Phd who ends being a prison shrink and never got famous for his ideas? Did he publish at all?

    2. Low -IQ may or may not be out, but clear mental problems abound in both Sirhan and Oswald, (I will also point out that high-IQ people can be manipulatable as well---in fact, the higher IQ manipulatable people are often more easily manipulated because they think their intelligence protects them (interrogations, for example, of high-IQ but nervous/high strung people tend to get information much more quickly thank lower-IQ but calmer people)).

    That said, Sirhan was clearly had some mental/emotional issues. How do we know this? He was a "church hopper"---he frequently changed his religious affiliation. Church hoppers are unmoored from their identity, whether it be from inborn psychological problems or childhood trauma (such as, ahem, moving to a completely different country and having your father abandon you, as Sirhan did). Church hoppers seek to use religion as a magic, mystical pill to solve their problems. CHurch hoppers have a secular counterpart----shrink hoppers, those folks who regularly and frequently change their shrink and try any radical/quack mental therapy hoping to magically cure their unhappiness (you see these guys more in New York City and other SWPL enclaves). Church hoppers and shrink hoppers don't see religion/psychology as a process, but as a quick fix---that somehow, they just need 6 months of intensive "something" and they will not feel so lost or abandoned.

    Church/Shrink hoppers aren't usually bad people, just sad and weird---it's clear they're mostly lonely and just weird/odd, but generally trying to fit in, and, feeling they can't, reach out to the unknown for help, but get frustrated that it requires work. The documentary series 7 up, which chronicles the lives of a group of children all grown up now every 7 years, has a church hopping dude in it---he's a very smart dude (high IQ test as a child) but it's clear some emotional trauma keeps him from having a job, and every 7 years he's onto a new religious or psychological path.

    Sirhan, being unmoored, finally sought to center his identity on his race versus his religion. That, Kennedy's natural fame, and his "inevitability" momentum was sufficient motive.

    3. The Sirhan-wasn't-alone/didn't do it issue also brings up the huge problem of witnesses. Oswald acting alone is actually easier to get away with--- because he shot from far away, so no one saw him fire the gun, and, if ballistics hadn't put to rest most of the questions, at least leaves open the possibility of a second shooter while keeping them anonymous. But RFK gets plugged in front of a crowd of people, many of whom are deeply loyal to RFK, one of whom is a hulking pro football player unafraid of physically fighting people rushing his man RFK, and some how none of them notice anyone but Sirhan Sirhan? The ever-observant George Plimpton misses it all? A reporter right there misses it? And let's not forget that the CIA had no idea if anyone was sneaking a camera with them to snap a photo of the man of the hour, RFK. The CIA likes assassinations, but this had far too many moving, missing parts, too many things to go wrong, too many chances of it being noticed. And that brings us to-----

    4. Easiest opportunity. The Kennedys have always been horny dicks. The easiest way to get to a horny dick is through his penis. Send up an alluring girl to poison/shoot him, and then shoot the girl as she tries to "escape." Or murder him while his mistress is coming over, make it look like she did it, kill her trying to "escape". Put the blame on some low-level radical group or make the girl a lone-wolf assassin. Much tidier, and expose the Kennedys as cheaters to boot, making them look bad. Murders on national TV, in front of large crowds? Yeah, highly dangerous at getting caught. Makes them a martyr.

    John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln at a theater because it was the closest he could get to him. A crowded hotel back room is not the closest the CIA can get. And the CIA likes plausible backdoors to get out of jams. If the so-called "Bulova CIA men" were shooting too, how could the CIA disown them, non-Arab Americans with no connection to Sirhan, if somebody noticed them?

    5. Don't forget about the KGB. No, not as suspects in the killings---as suspects in spreading the conspiracies. The KGB used disinformation plans to keep the JFK conspiracies alive in the public because it caused Americans to distrust their own government. Don't think RFK's murder didn't set off a similar plan that hasn't filtered down to today.

    All in all, Sirhan's motive, means, and opportunity are pretty solid. Like I said, the best doubters should instead push the idea that he was the only assassin, BUT that he was programmed to do so. Unfortunately for that theory, there is very little evidence in the public eye about successful brainwashing of long-term assassins who then completely forget all their brainwashing, and Sirhan and his team have yet to provide it. Mentioning MKULTRA doesn't cut it, we need some proof that this can be done in general before we start applying it to Oswald.

    Replies: @D. K., @Pat Casey

    One of these days, I shall have to become my own blogger—like you, except not—because by different routes interestingly unusual and too-delicate to specify, I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that’s more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane. I’m convinced that a lot of marginal men get remembered by history because they had something in common that way with me; something does stick out about lucid thinkers who seemed to leave themselves the excuse of being trivial or round the twist. Which is to say, the blog I don’t have would be good, next to so many blogs repugnant to any sense that words are put down for public consumption as though being chiseled in stone: the only writing worth publishing is the kind that cares if people could possibly care to read it when the writer is gone. To wit, the proverbial first draft of history is not a fatuous trope to invoke for being self-important but for being invoked by people who are profoundly self-deceiving and unforgivably myopic.

    Of course, the first thing is to know the facts that are there to be known, though that largely presupposes knowing how to read, which makes me think you really are not prepared to be a self-publishing writer, because your interpretation of what I wrote is illiterate, and you don’t know very many facts. There is a difference between knowing why you did something and having a memory of doing it, and I wasn’t implying Sirhan wasn’t there where it happened when it happened carrying a gun. “Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy “premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought,” Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident.” Given the particularities of the circumstance, blurting that out is a very luminous detail, but to realize that, you have to be aware of the weighty concept of luminous details, you have to know what the fuck they are.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall’s effects on German soldiers in WWI— insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale). And you don’t seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can’t dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don’t know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records. The fact that it was done at all, carried out over a period of decades, does not suggest that the only seriously competent branch of our government was putzing around.

    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous. If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot “conspiracy theory.”

    I wonder if Ted Kennedy’s infamous blunder of a response when Roger Mudd asked him why he wanted to be President (which was overblown and not so atypical as far as American politicians go) was because his immediate gut response was: Because they killed my brothers. Its easy to see how that thought in that moment would throw somebody off that way. And if so, I wonder if Ted Kennedy ever explained it to anyone that way, someone he trusted, who told someone else they trusted, and so on, til the tale became a theory that exists like a conspiracy.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Oh man, you're losing credibility by the second here.


    I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that’s more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane.
     
    lol, you're losing completely here. Now it's not "just look at the facts in front of you!" but instead "I know some secret information that proves I'm right and brilliant, but I won't share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?" You sound like a woman.

    Your secret knowledge is bogus, little liar.

    “Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy “premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought,” Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident.”
     

    And? A crazy, narcissistic, paranoid delusional with a recorded low IQ is repeatedly informed by conspiracy theorists fighting to release him that he was the victim of brainwashing and that he didn't really kill Kennedy. Crazy people deny committing crimes even when they recorded on high definition video tape committing them. Why? Simple: the instinct of self preservation is incredibly strong in the human mind---so strong as to deny reality itself.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall’s effects on German soldiers in WWI— insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale).
     
    There's a major difference between getting soldiers amped up for a major battle and allegedly brainwashing a man into becoming an assassin. Trying to equate the two is only making you look stupider. Since you've declined to provide a modicum of proof as to how someone can be hypnotized into becoming a first-rate assassin, have motives for his assassination, and yet have no evidence of brainwashing or memory or evidence of his brainwashing, and only his denials to support him-------the obvious conclusion is that you have none, and you, like most conspiracy theorists, are a liar.

    And you don’t seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can’t dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don’t know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records
     
    .

    Again, you appeal to "secret knowledge" that you cannot prove, but claim exists, somehow. You again merely name-check MKULTRA and don't cite any facts of the program to show how or when Sirhan was brainwashed/hypnotized so thoroughly that all this was possible. An appeal to secret knowledge doesn't work here, boy; you need facts. Merely claiming Sirhan was hypnotized to do it all is a far, far stretch when your argument merely boils down to repeating the same conclusion without argument to back it up.


    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous
     
    .

    WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!


    If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot “conspiracy theory.”
     
    This is, sadly, your strongest argument: that the events, taken as a whole, smell really funny. I agree. But that's all you have: suggestion. You haven't put forth any of the following:

    1) proof that hypnosis/brainwashing can make a person into an assassin that has no memory of his training and for which there is no evidence.
    2) proof that Sirhan's post-trial denials are less self-serving and crazy than the clear political motives he gave at the time
    3) alternatively, proof that there was another gunman shooting in that backroom that no one noticed/everyone involved was required to cover it up.
    4) proof of the motive, means, and opportunity of another to commit the crime.

    Instead you do the following to make yourself wholly incredible:

    1) claim you have "secret knowledge" that what you are saying is right, but refuse to explain that secret knowledge
    2) claim that getting soldiers hyped for a battle is the same as hypnotizing unwitting people into being assassins
    3) claim that any hypnosis/brainwashing program (including MKULTRA) had the ability to create an assassin, without offering specific evidence of such a strong claim.

    The cinch is that conspiracy theorists never put forth clear alternative theories on the JFK and RFK assassinations. They merely claim that people should "open their eyes" and "do their own research." Such a silly argument fails as a criminal defense strategy daily, since it's patently obvious that if the criminal defense attorney believed it was another suspect, he would clearly state that subject's motive, means, and opportunity. Since he doesn't, the jury ignores it.

    When you start naming names, proving clear unmuddied motives, and show opportunity to the accepted theory of the RFK assassination, we'll start listening. Until then, you're just a low-IQ, ranting little narcissist demanding that everyone just "trust you" that Sirhan Sirhan wasn't a lone assassin driven by political motivations and his own crazy.

    Now off with ye, liar!

    Replies: @Pat Casey, @D. K.

  76. @D. K.
    @whorefinder

    I invited you to explain how the two orthodox theories of the respective cases can explain the ballistics, vis-a-vis the eyewitness testimony:

    How did Lee Oswald fire three shots, with the first one missing the president's car completely (wounding James Teague, standing near the triple underpass, far down the street, when the bullet shattered the curb, near him, and he was hit with a dislodged fragment), the second one allegedly inflicting a large number of wounds in both President Kennedy and Governor Connally, sitting in front of him, yet turning up in a hallway corridor at Parkland Memorial Hospital, looking as if it merely had been fired into cotton wadding, and the third being the infamous head shot, captured in graphic color by Mr. Zapruder, with two of those shots, according to most witnesses, being fired in such rapid succession that Oswald could not possibly have fired both, with his defective bolt-action surplus rifle, let alone re-aimed along its defective sight, yet managing to hit the president in the head, with both the farthest and quickest shot?

    How did Sirhan Sirhan wound Senator Kennedy three times, all at close range, with the fatal head shot being from within just a few inches, and all at an upward angle, from RFK's right-rear, when Sirhan was a few to several feet in front of his target, and was tackled back onto a pantry table, after only his second shot, and fired his final six shots from there, pinned down, on his back, by the aforementioned celebrities?

    Psychobabble about the alleged assassins is utterly beside the point, in answering those forensic questions about the two infamous Kennedy assassinations of the 1960s.

    Replies: @IA

    Kennedy was shot, accidently, by his own secret service trailing in the following car, so says a documentary on Netflix.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @IA

    Did the negligent agent then plant Lee Oswald's rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and do so so well that it took a small army of investigators-- local, state and federal-- quite awhile to find it hidden, there, among the cartons of school books?

    Replies: @Mike Sylwester

  77. @IA
    @D. K.

    Kennedy was shot, accidently, by his own secret service trailing in the following car, so says a documentary on Netflix.

    Replies: @D. K.

    Did the negligent agent then plant Lee Oswald’s rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and do so so well that it took a small army of investigators– local, state and federal– quite awhile to find it hidden, there, among the cartons of school books?

    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester
    @D. K.


    Did the negligent agent then plant Lee Oswald’s rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository
     
    Oswald shot the bullet that hit Kennedy in the upper back, but then the Secret Service agent accidentally shot the bullet that hit Kennedy's head.

    When the Secret Service agent in the following car stood up, his weapon fired accidentally.

    Oswald shot bullets that were extremely hard, which is why the so-called Magic Bullet passed through Kennedy and Connelly and remained "pristine".

    In contrast, the Secret Service shot a bullet that was extremely frangible, which is why it disintegrated in Kennedy's head. Also, that bullet's trajectory lines up better with the following car than with the sixth-floor window.

    Read Bonar Menninger's superb book Mortal Error.

    http://www.amazon.com/Mortal-Error-ballistics-astonishing-discovery/dp/0312080743

  78. @D. K.
    @IA

    Did the negligent agent then plant Lee Oswald's rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and do so so well that it took a small army of investigators-- local, state and federal-- quite awhile to find it hidden, there, among the cartons of school books?

    Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    Did the negligent agent then plant Lee Oswald’s rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository

    Oswald shot the bullet that hit Kennedy in the upper back, but then the Secret Service agent accidentally shot the bullet that hit Kennedy’s head.

    When the Secret Service agent in the following car stood up, his weapon fired accidentally.

    Oswald shot bullets that were extremely hard, which is why the so-called Magic Bullet passed through Kennedy and Connelly and remained “pristine”.

    In contrast, the Secret Service shot a bullet that was extremely frangible, which is why it disintegrated in Kennedy’s head. Also, that bullet’s trajectory lines up better with the following car than with the sixth-floor window.

    Read Bonar Menninger’s superb book Mortal Error.

  79. @Pat Casey
    @whorefinder

    One of these days, I shall have to become my own blogger---like you, except not---because by different routes interestingly unusual and too-delicate to specify, I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that's more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane. I'm convinced that a lot of marginal men get remembered by history because they had something in common that way with me; something does stick out about lucid thinkers who seemed to leave themselves the excuse of being trivial or round the twist. Which is to say, the blog I don't have would be good, next to so many blogs repugnant to any sense that words are put down for public consumption as though being chiseled in stone: the only writing worth publishing is the kind that cares if people could possibly care to read it when the writer is gone. To wit, the proverbial first draft of history is not a fatuous trope to invoke for being self-important but for being invoked by people who are profoundly self-deceiving and unforgivably myopic.

    Of course, the first thing is to know the facts that are there to be known, though that largely presupposes knowing how to read, which makes me think you really are not prepared to be a self-publishing writer, because your interpretation of what I wrote is illiterate, and you don't know very many facts. There is a difference between knowing why you did something and having a memory of doing it, and I wasn't implying Sirhan wasn't there where it happened when it happened carrying a gun. "Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy "premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought," Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident." Given the particularities of the circumstance, blurting that out is a very luminous detail, but to realize that, you have to be aware of the weighty concept of luminous details, you have to know what the fuck they are.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall's effects on German soldiers in WWI--- insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale). And you don't seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can't dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don't know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records. The fact that it was done at all, carried out over a period of decades, does not suggest that the only seriously competent branch of our government was putzing around.

    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous. If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot "conspiracy theory."

    I wonder if Ted Kennedy's infamous blunder of a response when Roger Mudd asked him why he wanted to be President (which was overblown and not so atypical as far as American politicians go) was because his immediate gut response was: Because they killed my brothers. Its easy to see how that thought in that moment would throw somebody off that way. And if so, I wonder if Ted Kennedy ever explained it to anyone that way, someone he trusted, who told someone else they trusted, and so on, til the tale became a theory that exists like a conspiracy.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    Oh man, you’re losing credibility by the second here.

    I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that’s more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane.

    lol, you’re losing completely here. Now it’s not “just look at the facts in front of you!” but instead “I know some secret information that proves I’m right and brilliant, but I won’t share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?” You sound like a woman.

    Your secret knowledge is bogus, little liar.

    “Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy “premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought,” Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident.”

    And? A crazy, narcissistic, paranoid delusional with a recorded low IQ is repeatedly informed by conspiracy theorists fighting to release him that he was the victim of brainwashing and that he didn’t really kill Kennedy. Crazy people deny committing crimes even when they recorded on high definition video tape committing them. Why? Simple: the instinct of self preservation is incredibly strong in the human mind—so strong as to deny reality itself.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall’s effects on German soldiers in WWI— insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale).

    There’s a major difference between getting soldiers amped up for a major battle and allegedly brainwashing a man into becoming an assassin. Trying to equate the two is only making you look stupider. Since you’ve declined to provide a modicum of proof as to how someone can be hypnotized into becoming a first-rate assassin, have motives for his assassination, and yet have no evidence of brainwashing or memory or evidence of his brainwashing, and only his denials to support him——-the obvious conclusion is that you have none, and you, like most conspiracy theorists, are a liar.

    And you don’t seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can’t dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don’t know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records

    .

    Again, you appeal to “secret knowledge” that you cannot prove, but claim exists, somehow. You again merely name-check MKULTRA and don’t cite any facts of the program to show how or when Sirhan was brainwashed/hypnotized so thoroughly that all this was possible. An appeal to secret knowledge doesn’t work here, boy; you need facts. Merely claiming Sirhan was hypnotized to do it all is a far, far stretch when your argument merely boils down to repeating the same conclusion without argument to back it up.

    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous

    .

    WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!

    If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot “conspiracy theory.”

    This is, sadly, your strongest argument: that the events, taken as a whole, smell really funny. I agree. But that’s all you have: suggestion. You haven’t put forth any of the following:

    1) proof that hypnosis/brainwashing can make a person into an assassin that has no memory of his training and for which there is no evidence.
    2) proof that Sirhan’s post-trial denials are less self-serving and crazy than the clear political motives he gave at the time
    3) alternatively, proof that there was another gunman shooting in that backroom that no one noticed/everyone involved was required to cover it up.
    4) proof of the motive, means, and opportunity of another to commit the crime.

    Instead you do the following to make yourself wholly incredible:

    1) claim you have “secret knowledge” that what you are saying is right, but refuse to explain that secret knowledge
    2) claim that getting soldiers hyped for a battle is the same as hypnotizing unwitting people into being assassins
    3) claim that any hypnosis/brainwashing program (including MKULTRA) had the ability to create an assassin, without offering specific evidence of such a strong claim.

    The cinch is that conspiracy theorists never put forth clear alternative theories on the JFK and RFK assassinations. They merely claim that people should “open their eyes” and “do their own research.” Such a silly argument fails as a criminal defense strategy daily, since it’s patently obvious that if the criminal defense attorney believed it was another suspect, he would clearly state that subject’s motive, means, and opportunity. Since he doesn’t, the jury ignores it.

    When you start naming names, proving clear unmuddied motives, and show opportunity to the accepted theory of the RFK assassination, we’ll start listening. Until then, you’re just a low-IQ, ranting little narcissist demanding that everyone just “trust you” that Sirhan Sirhan wasn’t a lone assassin driven by political motivations and his own crazy.

    Now off with ye, liar!

    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    @whorefinder

    lol, you’re losing completely here. Now it’s not “just look at the facts in front of you!” but instead “I know some secret information that proves I’m right and brilliant, but I won’t share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?” You sound like a woman.

    Losing? I wasn't competing. You deserve to be condescended to at every turn, you little whorefinder you. A closer reading than your default reading skills can scan will read a careful reasoning, safe and sound. I didn't say anything about secret information or being brilliant. This is a public square and that's my real name and I'm no blackguard. And the routes I've known are as I said. But what exactly do you think I was getting at buddy? I think this thread is making you a little unhinged, which means your losing, and I am smiling, because my credibility is most of all amusing to me.

    As for sounding like a woman, well you would know right, you know all about what women sound like in conversation right? The ones, that is, who don't know about your secret, your secret life as a whorefinder I mean. Or maybe you're missing what's more like a pink shirt type of thing. As for me being a liar, only by fair-rules omission, though we should all lament the decay of lying in every sense is what I say. But don't you think the point is rather that you don't know what I'm talking about, don't know what the facts I didn't acquire by accident even concern? You don't know, thats it, thats the point, cause you don't. So how can you know I'm lying? "Your secret knowledge is bogus little liar!" How old are you whorefinder? You sound like the premature reader who gets beat by the esoteric novel, that he consoles himself by calling bogus, but was really written against his type by design, the impetuous lessers.

    Of course I'm playing with you whorefinder. But I did not invent the game, and you do not deserve an introduction. But I do, which is why I got the one that I did. That speaks to the natural order of things between you and me, people like you don't deserve to be people like me, and that's the purpose betas like you serve: to make the presence of alphas apparent by all your efforts. And I get great satisfaction from the diversion of these comments when I show you the disrespect that you deserve, because you are a disgrace to your race, the least of your generation: you are an underhanded feminist for men with malice. Disgusting.

    As for the argument at hand, here you go: You Win, because you obviously know what I don't, and the ones with ears to hear heard it.

    , @D. K.
    @whorefinder

    Sirhan Sirhan was "a first-rate assassin?" As Pat Casey and I both have pointed out, above, the evidence proves that none of his eight shots, that night, hit his alleged target, Senator Kennedy! As for theories, conspiratorial or otherwise, about any particular crime, infamous or otherwise, none is necessary to disprove a previously posited theory. I do not have to know who killed either of the Kennedy brothers, let alone why, to disprove the officially sanctioned theories of a pair of lone-nut misfits performing respectively miraculous feats of marksmanship.

  80. Pat Casey says:
    @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Oh man, you're losing credibility by the second here.


    I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that’s more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane.
     
    lol, you're losing completely here. Now it's not "just look at the facts in front of you!" but instead "I know some secret information that proves I'm right and brilliant, but I won't share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?" You sound like a woman.

    Your secret knowledge is bogus, little liar.

    “Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy “premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought,” Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident.”
     

    And? A crazy, narcissistic, paranoid delusional with a recorded low IQ is repeatedly informed by conspiracy theorists fighting to release him that he was the victim of brainwashing and that he didn't really kill Kennedy. Crazy people deny committing crimes even when they recorded on high definition video tape committing them. Why? Simple: the instinct of self preservation is incredibly strong in the human mind---so strong as to deny reality itself.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall’s effects on German soldiers in WWI— insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale).
     
    There's a major difference between getting soldiers amped up for a major battle and allegedly brainwashing a man into becoming an assassin. Trying to equate the two is only making you look stupider. Since you've declined to provide a modicum of proof as to how someone can be hypnotized into becoming a first-rate assassin, have motives for his assassination, and yet have no evidence of brainwashing or memory or evidence of his brainwashing, and only his denials to support him-------the obvious conclusion is that you have none, and you, like most conspiracy theorists, are a liar.

    And you don’t seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can’t dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don’t know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records
     
    .

    Again, you appeal to "secret knowledge" that you cannot prove, but claim exists, somehow. You again merely name-check MKULTRA and don't cite any facts of the program to show how or when Sirhan was brainwashed/hypnotized so thoroughly that all this was possible. An appeal to secret knowledge doesn't work here, boy; you need facts. Merely claiming Sirhan was hypnotized to do it all is a far, far stretch when your argument merely boils down to repeating the same conclusion without argument to back it up.


    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous
     
    .

    WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!


    If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot “conspiracy theory.”
     
    This is, sadly, your strongest argument: that the events, taken as a whole, smell really funny. I agree. But that's all you have: suggestion. You haven't put forth any of the following:

    1) proof that hypnosis/brainwashing can make a person into an assassin that has no memory of his training and for which there is no evidence.
    2) proof that Sirhan's post-trial denials are less self-serving and crazy than the clear political motives he gave at the time
    3) alternatively, proof that there was another gunman shooting in that backroom that no one noticed/everyone involved was required to cover it up.
    4) proof of the motive, means, and opportunity of another to commit the crime.

    Instead you do the following to make yourself wholly incredible:

    1) claim you have "secret knowledge" that what you are saying is right, but refuse to explain that secret knowledge
    2) claim that getting soldiers hyped for a battle is the same as hypnotizing unwitting people into being assassins
    3) claim that any hypnosis/brainwashing program (including MKULTRA) had the ability to create an assassin, without offering specific evidence of such a strong claim.

    The cinch is that conspiracy theorists never put forth clear alternative theories on the JFK and RFK assassinations. They merely claim that people should "open their eyes" and "do their own research." Such a silly argument fails as a criminal defense strategy daily, since it's patently obvious that if the criminal defense attorney believed it was another suspect, he would clearly state that subject's motive, means, and opportunity. Since he doesn't, the jury ignores it.

    When you start naming names, proving clear unmuddied motives, and show opportunity to the accepted theory of the RFK assassination, we'll start listening. Until then, you're just a low-IQ, ranting little narcissist demanding that everyone just "trust you" that Sirhan Sirhan wasn't a lone assassin driven by political motivations and his own crazy.

    Now off with ye, liar!

    Replies: @Pat Casey, @D. K.

    lol, you’re losing completely here. Now it’s not “just look at the facts in front of you!” but instead “I know some secret information that proves I’m right and brilliant, but I won’t share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?” You sound like a woman.

    Losing? I wasn’t competing. You deserve to be condescended to at every turn, you little whorefinder you. A closer reading than your default reading skills can scan will read a careful reasoning, safe and sound. I didn’t say anything about secret information or being brilliant. This is a public square and that’s my real name and I’m no blackguard. And the routes I’ve known are as I said. But what exactly do you think I was getting at buddy? I think this thread is making you a little unhinged, which means your losing, and I am smiling, because my credibility is most of all amusing to me.

    As for sounding like a woman, well you would know right, you know all about what women sound like in conversation right? The ones, that is, who don’t know about your secret, your secret life as a whorefinder I mean. Or maybe you’re missing what’s more like a pink shirt type of thing. As for me being a liar, only by fair-rules omission, though we should all lament the decay of lying in every sense is what I say. But don’t you think the point is rather that you don’t know what I’m talking about, don’t know what the facts I didn’t acquire by accident even concern? You don’t know, thats it, thats the point, cause you don’t. So how can you know I’m lying? “Your secret knowledge is bogus little liar!” How old are you whorefinder? You sound like the premature reader who gets beat by the esoteric novel, that he consoles himself by calling bogus, but was really written against his type by design, the impetuous lessers.

    Of course I’m playing with you whorefinder. But I did not invent the game, and you do not deserve an introduction. But I do, which is why I got the one that I did. That speaks to the natural order of things between you and me, people like you don’t deserve to be people like me, and that’s the purpose betas like you serve: to make the presence of alphas apparent by all your efforts. And I get great satisfaction from the diversion of these comments when I show you the disrespect that you deserve, because you are a disgrace to your race, the least of your generation: you are an underhanded feminist for men with malice. Disgusting.

    As for the argument at hand, here you go: You Win, because you obviously know what I don’t, and the ones with ears to hear heard it.

  81. @whorefinder
    @Pat Casey

    Oh man, you're losing credibility by the second here.


    I have acquired a few facts about this country that are privy to very few people, so that when the rest of you consider the general issues involved, the thing is stated with the unconvincing subtleties that betray the pose of mere opinion. I imagine mine would be a better-than-average blog just because knowing these discrete facts has given me a perspective on America that’s more sound than that of those who are right rather by accident, or are right by dent of being eccentric, or insane.
     
    lol, you're losing completely here. Now it's not "just look at the facts in front of you!" but instead "I know some secret information that proves I'm right and brilliant, but I won't share it with you plebians, just trust me, mmmm kay?" You sound like a woman.

    Your secret knowledge is bogus, little liar.

    “Since blurting out at trial that he killed Kennedy “premeditatedly with 20 years of malice aforethought,” Sirhan has repeatedly claimed that he remembers nothing about the incident.”
     

    And? A crazy, narcissistic, paranoid delusional with a recorded low IQ is repeatedly informed by conspiracy theorists fighting to release him that he was the victim of brainwashing and that he didn't really kill Kennedy. Crazy people deny committing crimes even when they recorded on high definition video tape committing them. Why? Simple: the instinct of self preservation is incredibly strong in the human mind---so strong as to deny reality itself.

    Knowing how to turn people into assassins has literally been around as long as the word itself, and is still practiced in pretty much the same form whenever Africa needs child soldiers. Modern know-how was adumbrated by what was learned from adderall’s effects on German soldiers in WWI— insomnia by amphetamines makes men think of nothing but killing their enemies, who are constantly named by potent doses of pointed propaganda (the stuff of military morale).
     
    There's a major difference between getting soldiers amped up for a major battle and allegedly brainwashing a man into becoming an assassin. Trying to equate the two is only making you look stupider. Since you've declined to provide a modicum of proof as to how someone can be hypnotized into becoming a first-rate assassin, have motives for his assassination, and yet have no evidence of brainwashing or memory or evidence of his brainwashing, and only his denials to support him-------the obvious conclusion is that you have none, and you, like most conspiracy theorists, are a liar.

    And you don’t seem to be aware that hypnosis is not a myth. One thing you have to keep in mind is that all the science behind this stuff is classified, or only in the minds of the men in the know, and you can’t dismiss mentioning MK ULTRA as insufficient given what we know, because we don’t know the half of what was done, whats his name destroyed the records
     
    .

    Again, you appeal to "secret knowledge" that you cannot prove, but claim exists, somehow. You again merely name-check MKULTRA and don't cite any facts of the program to show how or when Sirhan was brainwashed/hypnotized so thoroughly that all this was possible. An appeal to secret knowledge doesn't work here, boy; you need facts. Merely claiming Sirhan was hypnotized to do it all is a far, far stretch when your argument merely boils down to repeating the same conclusion without argument to back it up.


    At the end of the day, I think people like you are simply naive, and think the others are naive for being credulous
     
    .

    WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!


    If what happened to JFK and RFK had happened to equivalent statesmen in Russia under analogous circumstances in the same context, you would be an idiot to dismiss dirty tricks by the KGB as crackpot “conspiracy theory.”
     
    This is, sadly, your strongest argument: that the events, taken as a whole, smell really funny. I agree. But that's all you have: suggestion. You haven't put forth any of the following:

    1) proof that hypnosis/brainwashing can make a person into an assassin that has no memory of his training and for which there is no evidence.
    2) proof that Sirhan's post-trial denials are less self-serving and crazy than the clear political motives he gave at the time
    3) alternatively, proof that there was another gunman shooting in that backroom that no one noticed/everyone involved was required to cover it up.
    4) proof of the motive, means, and opportunity of another to commit the crime.

    Instead you do the following to make yourself wholly incredible:

    1) claim you have "secret knowledge" that what you are saying is right, but refuse to explain that secret knowledge
    2) claim that getting soldiers hyped for a battle is the same as hypnotizing unwitting people into being assassins
    3) claim that any hypnosis/brainwashing program (including MKULTRA) had the ability to create an assassin, without offering specific evidence of such a strong claim.

    The cinch is that conspiracy theorists never put forth clear alternative theories on the JFK and RFK assassinations. They merely claim that people should "open their eyes" and "do their own research." Such a silly argument fails as a criminal defense strategy daily, since it's patently obvious that if the criminal defense attorney believed it was another suspect, he would clearly state that subject's motive, means, and opportunity. Since he doesn't, the jury ignores it.

    When you start naming names, proving clear unmuddied motives, and show opportunity to the accepted theory of the RFK assassination, we'll start listening. Until then, you're just a low-IQ, ranting little narcissist demanding that everyone just "trust you" that Sirhan Sirhan wasn't a lone assassin driven by political motivations and his own crazy.

    Now off with ye, liar!

    Replies: @Pat Casey, @D. K.

    Sirhan Sirhan was “a first-rate assassin?” As Pat Casey and I both have pointed out, above, the evidence proves that none of his eight shots, that night, hit his alleged target, Senator Kennedy! As for theories, conspiratorial or otherwise, about any particular crime, infamous or otherwise, none is necessary to disprove a previously posited theory. I do not have to know who killed either of the Kennedy brothers, let alone why, to disprove the officially sanctioned theories of a pair of lone-nut misfits performing respectively miraculous feats of marksmanship.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS