brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight johnknight at usa.com
Sat Aug 17 01:37:15 EST 2002


"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:u5mplukpl6f4b2em3omrisp4q2jv8vdm7u at 4ax.com...
> ohsojourner at aol.com (OhSojourner) wrote:
> >Again, I requested that you not change the subject line.  I am posting
> >from Google, and Google only sorts according to subject line.  Plus,
> >it's easier to keep track of all the different subthreads.
>
> Whatever posting method he uses, he seems to use a precanned header,
> which is why the subject line never changes, the groups list never
> changes, etc., even when he responds to others.  In addition, he
> probably only reads post under that one subject line, as we've changed
> subject lines before and discussed him for weeks with nary a comment
> from him.  My guess is that he does not read Usenet directly, but
> reads it in email and has no clear idea of what a newsgroup is.
>

This is about typical for your powers of observation.  As usual, you're
wrong on each and every count.

>
> >> The problem with letting government have even the slightest iota of
control
> >> over our free enterprise system is that it puts the quixotic woman
voter in
> >> charge of making decisions that she has utterly no ability to
comprehend,
> >> just as you and parsetree have aptly demonstrated.
> >
> >You seemingly have no ability to comprehend an entire paragraph, John
> >(nor apparently a request not to change the subject line).  We already
> >know about your proposal to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment.  However,
> >I'd like to know what you have in mind in regards to the certain
> >ethnic groups you continually malign.  Do you have a WORKABLE solution
> >in regards to this?
>
> His repetitive solution is to ship them to Madagascar, shooting any
> that object.  He apparently thinks this is "workable" and "moral".
> "The meek shall inherit the Earth" is not part of his Bible %^).  For
> him, the white Christian Israelites (read Germans and/or Celtics
> depending on his mood) shall inherit the world, and they have the
> right to live without any "muds" around.
>

Again, in just three sentences, you managed to include three errors.

What is it about "wiberals" that they don't seem to be able to comprehend
the written word?

> >John, do you have any comprehension of the phrase, "USUALLY OFFENSIVE"
> >...?  If you are deliberately using a word taken as OFFENSIVE, it
> >usually implies that you have no good will towards whomever you are
> >directing your words.
>
> He has no good will towards those that he insults.

You wouldn't recognize "good will" if it slugged you in the side of the
head, "wiberal".

>
> >> Don't take this wrong.  Our opinion of feminazis is extremely low, and
we
> >> can't be 100% certain that "hate" isn't an apt description.
> >
> >Who is "our" and "we"?  (Maybe best not to know...)
>
> Probably the people of his mailing list or militia group, that he is
> really talking to when he posts to Usenet.  After all, he certainly
> isn't going to win any converts with his postings.

At this point, we have 3.2 million Signatories to the Fathers' Manifesto and
a poll which shows that 87% want to ship the jews to Madagascar.  We'll keep
you posted on the nigger and "wiberal" poll, but there's already no doubt
that you're even less popular than jews.

>
> >> One of the reasons you're so despicable is your complete inability to
grasp
> >> most words that are posted to this forum, like "affirmative action" and
> >> "average" and "probability" and "nigger", so it's your own words (words
that
> >> you've created) that indict you.
> >
> >Lying about me does nothing to bolster your argument or credibility,
> >John.  Please produce specific URLS for the posts showing my
> >"inability" to understand "affirmative action", "probabilities" and
> >"averages".
> >
> >FWIW, do you consider yourself loveable, John?
>
> I don't think he knows what the word "love" means.  My best guess from
> earlier postings is that he was married, had kids, his wife left him
> (probably adulterously, and probably after he abused her, but perhaps
> after he got into these cultish hate groups), and his obvious
> eccentricity meant that she got sole custody and perhaps even and
> order prohibiting visitation.  This of course has driven him off the
> deep end.

No doubt making six errors in only 3 sentences is the very "best guess" you
could ever make.  It's actually a compliment when a "wiberal" is so
desperate to defend his moral position that he has to make up LIES about
people just so he'll have something to insult.



>
> >> And what exactly would anyone do with that extra time?  Trying to
explain
> >> something like the "economy" or "GDP" to the 3 1/2 billion brain cell
> >> limited klan is usually like talking to a pet rock, which never
requires
> >> much extra time.
> >
> >You still aren't answering my question, John -- just buying more time.
> > What workable solutions do you have in mind?  Shipping all black
> >people to Madagascar?  Please explain how this can possibly be
> >"workable".
>
> The same way the Final Solution was "workable".  The guy would be
> dangerous if he wasn't such a nincompoop.  Unlike Hitler, he has the
> charisma of a flea, and the caginess of a rock.
>
> lojbab

Hitler was also a jew whose policies were directly responsible for killing
48 million CHRISTIANS, something you "wiberals" obviously couldn't care less
about.  You're so brainwashed about "6 million jews died in the holocaust"
that what Hitler and the Nazis ACTUALLY did must seem like a comic book to
you? http://christianparty.net/nazi.htm

The Germans DID determine that they were going to kick the jews out of the
country, and they had some VERY good reasons for doing that.  Hitler
sidelined that plan, temporarily, but the Germans still managed to reduce
the number of jews in Germany from 600,000 to less than 20,000 in only half
a century, which is a primary reason German family incomes are now almost
twice as high as ours.

This is living proof that it can be done, and that there are significant
benefits.

Interestingly enough, the population of jews in the US during WWII increased
by 600,000.  Quite a coincidence, eh?  By 1988 it had doubled, to 8 million
jews (according to jEWISH sources), and the effect on this country has been
disastrous.

But then the same jEWISH sources estimate that the worldwide population of
jews plunged by 5 million between 1988 and 2000, which kinda gives you an
idea of how reliable jewish population figures are.  They wouldn't be trying
to cook the numbers, would they?
http://christianparty.net/holocaust.htm

John Knight








More information about the Neur-sci mailing list