brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight jwknight at
Mon Sep 9 17:46:42 EST 2002

"Dan Holzman" <holzman at> wrote in message
news:ale8rb$peo$1 at
> In article <ADpe9.59717$Ic7.4460122 at>,
> John Knight <jwknight at> wrote:
> >
> >Think again. All those
> >promises meant was that the same people who failed before would take
> >some extra courses and get bigger paychecks signed by someone else. Let
> >me tell you something: training can't turn foreigners into loyal,
> >dedicated White Americans.
> Of course, September 11th was not a failure of screeners -- box
> cutters were viewed as tools instead of weapons at the time, and not
> something that policy said couldn't be taken onto a plane.
> The failure was with those who set policy, but their jobs have never
> been in question for some reason.
> I am curious, though, if the author John quotes feels that Timothy
> McVeigh was a "loyal, dedicated White American."

If Timothy McVeigh DID blow up the federal building all by himself (an
impossible task) for the reasons the media claimed he blew it up (an
excellent reason), then he WAS the sheer definition a "loyal, dedicated
White American".  To this day, the criminals who killed Christians in a
church in Waco have yet to be punished, which is a festering wound that
could easily destroy the country.

To paraphrase the jewish commander who bragged about shooting a Palestinian
girl in the eye with a "rubber" bullet: "3,000 dead jew Yawkers aren't worth
a Waco Christian's fingernail".

> Luckily, the security measures that will succeed in preventing another
> September 11th are in place, and it has little to do with screening.
> The measures in place were illustrated when passengers restrained
> Richard Reid (another name that doesn't sound Middle Eastern), and
> when a pilot reports a problem and a pair of F-16s drop in out of
> nowhere to escort the plane to an airport.

All of which ignores that 70% of attempts by federal agents acting as
passengers to smuggle such weapons onto passenger jets, AFTER these
"security measures" were implemented, were successful.

You jews and "liberals" just can never understand the basic problems, can

> >Why are they allowed to man
> >our security checkpoints and have access to our military and commercial
> >secrets?
> The author is under the impression that the folks working airport
> screening have access to military and commercial secrets?   Please.

What a moron. Read it again.  "man our security checkpoints ***and*** have
access to our military and commercial secrets?"  We have allowed jews to get
security clearances, which MUST stop.  We cannot repeat the Jonathon Pollard
and Julius Rosenberg fiascos again.

The most dangerous foreign enemy power are the internal jews, not Muslims in
a cave in Afghanistan, or climbing aboard jetliners with boxcutters or even
machine guns.

> >sane immigration policy, similar to the one we had for all of American
> >history prior to 1965, when the Jews opened the floodgates of non-White
> >immigration. We need an immigration policy that would have stopped
> >Mohammed Atta at the border and said "America is a White country. You
> >cannot live here. You cannot attend our flight schools. Go back where
> >you came from." And we need an immigration policy that would have
> >stopped the ancestors of the William Kristols and Jacob Schiffs and
> >Michael Eisners and Ari Fleischers and told them "America is a White
> >country. You cannot live here. You cannot buy our broadcast networks or
> >film studios or newspapers. Go back where you came from."  Without the
> >racial agenda of the Jews bringing America into these wars, and without
> >colonies of the belligerents themselves within our borders, America
> >would be a much safer place.
> Unfortunately for the author, Jews were in America since the
> Revolutionary War.  The first American President to address a
> Synogogue was George Washington.

And all of them warned us NOT to admit jews, didn't they?

John Knight

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list