A collection of material regarding race and racial differences, especially between Blacks and Whites, that I've posted in various places.

The Blacks to which I refer on this page, unless otherwise noted, are US-resident Negroes.

Races may be compared with metal canisters filled with gas. The net effect of their collective behavior is like the temperature of the canisters. You can measure the temperature of the canisters in order to see whether they are inside a safe-handling temperature range. If you forgo testing the temperature, or if you are informed about the temperature but choose to disregard any "too hot to handle" warnings, then you risk being burned. However, temperature does not predict the speed of any particular molecule in the canister. It only tells you what the RMS average speed is. Likewise, statistics on crime rates, HIV infection rates, IQ scores, and on similarly important subjects, which are broken down by race tells us that Blacks in general are rather nasty, savage, and primitive hominids, even though we realize that there are bound to be a few exceptions. The existence of those few exceptions does not justify or require our going over to the Black "canister" and associating ourselves in such a way that we will be burned.

If the resources needed for raising every person to their highest potential were available, I'd agree on the condition that any public assistance would be granted only if the recipient agreed to irreversible sterilization, since no finite pool of resources can forever satisfy a population of consumers whose numbers grow exponentially. However, resources are tight. And when resources are tight, you should use them to maximize the return per unit of expenditure. Since Whites are generally more intelligent than Blacks are, it makes little sense to divert career opportunities from more qualified Whites to less qualified Blacks. It makes little sense to spend money to educate less intelligent Blacks than to spend the same money on more intelligent Whites, who, compared to the Blacks, can learn more, learn faster, go farther, and return more benefit to society per dollar spent on their educations than the Blacks ever could.

—Jerry Abbott on VNN

Famous Black Quotes

"Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them." —Mary Frances Berry, Head of U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1991.

"Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values, and that i was defiling his women." —Eldridge Clever, Soul on Ice.

"You can't steal nothin' from a white man; he's already stole it. He owes you anything you want, even his life. All the stores will open up if you will say the magic words. The magic words are: 'Up against the wall motherfucker this is a stick up!'" —Amiri Baraka.

"The death of over 120 white people is a very beautiful thing." —Malcolm X.

"The white man is the devil." —Malcolm X.

"What we need is the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world." —Reverend James Cone.

"It is not necessary for a black man to hate a white man, or to have any particular feelings about him at all, in order to realize that he must kill him." —James Baldwin, 1972.

"I don't care about your idiot children." —Willie Brown, Black Mayor of San Francisco to a White parent at a public meeting. Published in The Social Contract, Summer 1998.

"I'm fucking for God! ... I'm not a negro tonight!" —Rev. Martin Luthur King, Willard Hotel, Washington DC, 6 January 1964.

"Muh dick made uh mistake." —Paul W. Turner, Black pedophile rapist and child-killer, to the Kansas City Police, May 2006.

Famous White Quotes.

When there is not enough religion in the pulpit to organize a crusade against sin, nor justice in the courtroom to promptly punish crime, nor manhood enough in the nation to put a sheltering arm about innocence and virtue—if it needs lynching to protect women's dearest possession from the ravening human beasts—then I say lynch, a thousand times a week if necessary. —Rebecca Felton, speech at the annual meeting of the Georgia Agricultural Society, 11 August 1897.

Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so large as to be almost inexpressible. It's Western exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of western power long after colonialism, imperialism and slavery have disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they don't grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't conscious of it. Superiority excites envy. Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call "minorities." —Joseph Sobran, 1997.

Black Facts on Parenting and Public Assistance.

On the average, throughout the United States, Blacks are 7.2 times more likely than Whites to be collecting welfare money and living at the expense of American taxpayers.

On the average, Black children spend 49.4% of their minority years in single-parent families. The average White child, on the other hand, spends only 12.8% in that situation. The reason there are so many Black single parent families is that Black males can't be bothered to take care of their children, and Black females are often so promiscuous that the males aren't sure which of the children are theirs anyway.

Consequently, the average Black child spends five times more of his childhood years receiving AFDC benefits and foodstamps than the average White child does.

Black mothers have math and verbal skill levels at the 19.7 percentile. By contrast, the average white mother had skill levels at the 52.5 percentile. Blacks have smaller brains and hence lower intelligence, compared with Whites.

Black women give birth to their first child at an average age of 19.9 years; White women do so at an average age of 23.4 years. Black mothers have an average of 3.05 children; White mothers have an average of 2.6 children. Despite their inferiority in many ways, Blacks are nevertheless outbreeding Whites, primarily because of the grotesque transfer of wealth from Whites to Blacks by means of social welfare programs.

Black Facts on IQ and Intelligence.

IQ distribution for US-resident Blacks: 85.0 ± 12.4
IQ distribution for American Whites: 103.0 ± 16.4

Averages are from Jensen and Rushton, "Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability" (PDF), published in Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2005, Vol 11, No. 2, pp. 235-294.

Standard deviations from Kennedy, Van De Riet, and White, 1963.

In a society composed of equal numbers of US-resident Blacks and American Whites, with the IQ distributions mentioned above, these would be the fractions of each race that would qualify for jobs requiring the indexed minimum IQ.

Min   Whites     Blacks   W/B
 IQ
100 0.57257228 0.11320135 5.1
101 0.54853117 0.09846934 5.6
102 0.52431068 0.08519251 6.2
103 0.50000000 0.07330463 6.8
104 0.47568932 0.06272938 7.6
105 0.45146883 0.05338277 8.5
106 0.42742772 0.04517557 9.5
107 0.40365319 0.03801557 10.6
108 0.38022952 0.03180963 12.0
109 0.35723714 0.02646547 13.5
110 0.33475184 0.02189324 15.3
111 0.31284403 0.01800678 17.4
112 0.29157805 0.01472465 19.8
113 0.27101169 0.01197082 22.6
114 0.25119573 0.00967523 26.0
115 0.23217361 0.00777403 29.9
116 0.21398129 0.00620967 34.5
117 0.19664711 0.00493079 39.9
118 0.18019186 0.00389209 46.3
119 0.16462894 0.00305392 53.9
120 0.14996457 0.00238194 63.0
121 0.13619812 0.00184670 73.8
122 0.12332257 0.00142313 86.7
123 0.11132493 0.00109011 102.1
124 0.10018682 0.00082998 120.7
125 0.08988502 0.00062809 143.1
126 0.08039209 0.00047243 170.2
127 0.07167698 0.00035318 202.9
128 0.06370563 0.00026243 242.8
129 0.05644162 0.00019380 291.2
130 0.04984674 0.00014224 350.4
131 0.04388157 0.00010376 422.9
132 0.03850599 0.00007523 511.9
133 0.03367971 0.00005420 621.4
134 0.02936267 0.00003881 756.5
135 0.02551547 0.00002762 923.7
136 0.02209969 0.00001954 1131.2
137 0.01907820 0.00001373 1389.4
138 0.01641540 0.00000959 1711.4
139 0.01407743 0.00000666 2114.3
140 0.01203226 0.00000459 2619.5

Related documents.
The Inequality Taboo, by Charles Murray
No Technical Solution: a Synopsis of the Race Problem in the United States, by Lewis Andrews
Winters Are Good For Your Genes, by J. Philippe Rushton
Wanted: More Race Realism, Less Moralistic Fallacy, by J. Philippe Rushton
The Mismeasures of Gould, by J. Philippe Rushton
The Effect of Urban Flight on IQ Distribution, by La Griffe du Lion
 


Black Facts on Crime.

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1995 Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details Sources: Crime in the United States, 1995, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.
/Age Group	Murders committed by		US population (thousands)		Population Ratio White / Black	Per Capita Rate of Murder Perpetration, Ratio of Black to White
	Whites	Blacks	Whites	Blacks
9 - 12	12	17	12074	2349	5.140	7.3
13 - 16	492	723	11677	2301	5.075	7.5
17 - 19	1117	1675	8697	1647	5.281	7.9
20 - 24	1398	2067	14528	2669	5.443	8.0
25 - 34	1733	1711	34027	5475	6.215	6.1
35 - 44	1108	771	35081	5088	6.895	4.8
45 - 54	479	302	25852	3122	8.281	5.2
55 - 64	192	115	18355	2124	8.642	5.2
65 - 74	104	48	16822	1629	10.327	4.8
total or average	6635	7429	177113	26404	6.708	7.5

Murder Victim - Offender Relationship by Race Source: Crime in the United States, 1995, Table 2.8
Year 1995	Race of offender
	White	Black	Other	Unknown
White victims	4124	699	60	71
Black victims	281	4422	15	46
Victims of other race	50	44	153	6
Victims of unknown race	21	10	-	30
In 1995, there were 10032 US murders having a single perpetrator and a single victim. Of these murders, Blacks committed 5175 (51.6%) and Whites committed 4476 (44.6%). The Black per capita murder rate was 7.6 times higher than the White per capita murder rate. There were at least 1149 interracial murders (11.5% of total murders), of which 743 were committed by Blacks (64.7% of interracial murders) and 331 were committed by Whites (28.8%). The Black per capita interracial murder rate was 14.8 times higher than that for Whites. There were 699 murders in which Blacks killed Whites (60.8% of interracial murders) and 281 murders in which Whites killed Blacks (24.5%). The average Black was 16.4 times more likely to kill a White than the reverse. The White/Black population ratio for 1995 was 6.59.

 

Race is not a social construct.

Leftists depend upon their slogans, for that is all they have for use in debate. All the evidence is against them, so we should never hope that the racial egalitarians will ever give up a slogan of which they have grown fond. One of them is "Race is a social construct."

The idea that race might be a social construct was a hypothesis invented by Richard Lewontin, a Harvard geneticist, in 1972. He claimed that the genetic differences between races were so slight that no one working only with genetic data would categorize people as Asians, Whites, Blacks, Mestizos, etc. Lewontin said that racial classification "is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance."

Leftists were quick to pick up on Lewontin's words and create a number of slogans from them, including "Race is a social construct" and "There's only One Race, the Human Race." The Lewontin hypothesis almost immediately became a required belief among the politically correct. And that was very unfortunate for them, because less than 30 years later it would become possible for geneticists and forensic scientists to conduct a statistical analysis of genetic markers in order to see whether their clusters correlated with the commonly identified racial groups.

They did. By 2005, it was well documented that Lewontin had been wrong. Practically every analysis of genetic markers demonstrated the biological reality of racial identities. In one of them, conducted by Tang, Quertermous, and Rodriguez, et. al., in 2005, all except five of 3636 test subjects (including Asians, Whites, Blacks and Mestizos) sorted statistically into the cluster of genetic markers that corresponded to their self-identified racial group. The success rate for predicting how someone would classify himself racially, using only his genes as information, was 99.9 percent, according to that study.

But leftists are even worse than sophomores when it comes to suffering correction. They have the pugnaciousness to call people who are much more informed than they are themselves, "ignorant." They've adopted the "social construct" slogan, and, come what may, they're not ever going to give it up. They will simply keep on using that slogan in lieu of reasoned debate again and again. Perhaps the reason is that they understand they have no real argument, that they have been proved wrong, and that once they begin giving up their slogans they won't be able to stop, and the truth will at last prevail, and they will lose all credibility with the public, and their unsavory, race-mixing political ambitions will be destroyed.


(Under Construction.)


The whole of the institution of the Jew-controlled media can be regarded as if it were a single perjured witness.

May I insult everyone's intelligence by unnecessarily pointing out that Obama isn't really this tall? The media have made the illusion of great physical stature for Obama on several occasions. They'll probably try to convince us that his IQ is above 160, too. Why they're doing it is rather obvious: they want to train White people to look up to the Black man. But whom do they think they're fooling? Blacks in general turn out, in the end, to be incompetent bunglers, however much they were talked up by their publicity managers and election campaigns. This particular Black is a foreign national pretending to have US citizenship so that he can seem to be a legal US president, instead of the Usurper he really is. And he's a malicious commie bungler on top of that. Because of the US Armed Forces' slackness in upholding our Constitution, the enemies of our country have infiltrated all the way into the office of President of the United States. One wonders if the flag officers on the Joint Chiefs of Staff are traitors, or merely amazingly stupid.

I have learned a few things about Obama's grandfather. Onyango Obama spent several years in prison because of his activities as a member of the Kikuyu Central Association (KCA), a terrorist group that attempted to drive the British settlers from Kenya by violence. Many members of the Association became leaders of the Mau Mau Movement, which committed murder and other violence throughout Kenya in the 1950s. Initiation in the KCA involved an oath to exterminate all white people in Kenya. The oath was solemnized with animal sacrifice and the drinking of blood in a ritual that also included cannibalism, bestiality with goats and other animals, and sexual orgies. From such roots does Obama spring.

Remind me to reject the Nobel Peace Prize if it should ever be offered to me. It was awarded to Obama on some flimsy pretext regarding a nuclear arms reduction initiative, as if there never was any such initiative before, as if this one were an original idea of his. The cash might be spendable, but as an honor the Nobel Peace Prize is worthless.

Jerry Abbott


Part 2. Conspiracy Theories in Nutshells.

Which do you think are false, and why?

1. Jews control the media and attempt to mold or guide popular thinking with slanted headlines, misleading titles, and skewed articles in newspapers and magazines, and with biased commentary via radio and television. Jews also control Hollywood and use movies to implant attitude- and behavior-modifying suggestions into the minds of movie patrons.

2. Jews (mostly) originated the Federal Reserve System, a private corporation that functions as a central bank for the United States, and, with it, are engaged in a long-running campaign to steal the value of Americans' productive labor in a manner that has been declared by the US government to be technically legal.

3. Israel and its partisans in the United States control US foreign policy and have significant and improper influence over US domestic policies. The behavior micromanagement legislation we call "civil rights laws" are a prime example.

4. Zionist Jews within the governments of the United States, the UK, Canada, Australia, and European countries, are the major reason for large-scale non-White immigration into White countries. Zionist Jews likewise destroyed Rhodesia and brought ruin to formerly White South Africa by this means.

5. The demolition of the World Trade Center towers on 11 September 2001 was largely an inside job, planned by Israelis and carried out in cooperation with the US government.

6. Anti-White racists—Jews, leftists, Blacks, etc.—are almost exclusively in charge of deciding officially what racism is, and what it is not, with the result that racism against Whites is permitted, whereas racism by Whites is not. This "political correctness" is so heavily biased against Whites that any call for White people to stand together, to protect themselves and each other, to support their race, is declared to be racist, even when there is no suggestion that other races are not entitled to do likewise.

7. Jews are heavily involved—much more so per capita than any other group—in illegal drug trafficking, illegal human organ trafficking, money laundering, sex slavery, and child pornography. Their talent for social chameleony makes it difficult for gentiles to identify which Jews are most involved in such trades. One of them could be your school teacher, an official Israeli diplomat, a judge, a doctor, a charity worker, or a member in good standing in your local tennis club. He would seem to be a very nice person, a pillar of the community, a right charming and sociable fellow, if you met him by day. It is easy to understand why someone might regard many Jews as "a drop of poison in a cube of sugar."

8. Rachel Corrie (at age 23) was murdered on 16 March 2003 on the orders of Ariel Sharon, who wanted to demonstrate to British and American liberals what will happen to them if they stand in the Jews' way in Palestine, and, possibly, to get for Israel its annual Purim (18 March 2003) sacrificial young White woman.

9. One of the principal reasons for the disappearance of White children, especially during late March or early April (shortly before the Jewish Passover festival) might be abduction and ritual murder by Jews.

Does anyone have suggestions for additional conspiracy theories that should be listed above?

Jerry Abbott

"The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you."
From the VNN postscript of Bassanio.

Part 3. Another deleted post from Yahoo Answers.

The Question: Is Hollywood trying to tell us something with the film, The Knowing? Or is it coincidence that Nibiru is a rogue planet next to the sun, supposedly heading this way?

My answer was:

Marlon Brando once said, "Hollywood is run by Jews!" It's true. It has been true for a long time. And ever since Jews took over Hollywood, they have made it their business to make movie-watchers confuse fantasy with reality. At first, the fantasies were outrageous, science fiction ideas that most people knew were just for fun. Then the Jews started making political, historical fantasies and getting people to really believe that they were true. And it worked. Mostly.

ADL chairman Abraham Foxman doesn't want you to say certain true things, such as "The Jews run Hollywood." If you tell such truths, Abe will call you an antisemite. And if Abe calls you an antisemite, at least a thousand other Jews will take up the chorus line and repeat it over and over and over... until you're fired from your job and denounced by the leaders in your community. Telling the truth about Jews could lead to your being attacked on the street and could make you homeless.

Abe Foxman probably doesn't want you to say anything at all about Jews, but, if you must mention Jews in Hollywood, you must say that "some" of the men in the film industry "happen to be Jewish." Yeah, as in ALL EIGHT of the major movie production companies in Hollywood are run by men who "happen to be Jewish" and NO major movie production companies in Hollywood are run by anyone who does NOT "happen to be Jewish." You are not supposed to comment on the probability that this happened by coincidence.

You are also not supposed to engage in a factual debate with anyone who points out what I just did. Instead, you are supposed to join with the Jews in their customary denunciations. Whether you know it or not, if you are a TV watcher then you have been strongly conditioned to turn off your rational faculty when this particular subject makes an appearance, and start slinging condemnation. You can't (accurately) tell an antisemite "How WRONG you are," but you will feel compelled to say "How RUDE you are!" Do you appreciate the significance of the difference in meaning?

The following quote is from the ADL's own website, with comments added by me [in brackets].

QUOTE.
New York, NY, April 8, 1996...The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called actor Marlon Brando's remarks about Jews in Hollywood "outrageous and offensive" [but true, nevertheless]. Reacting to Marlon Brando's comments on "Larry King Live," on Friday, April 5, that Jews run Hollywood [they do] and exploit stereotypes of minorities [they have], but never of Jews [correct], Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement: "It was shocking to hear Marlon Brando, the acclaimed actor and champion of civil rights, invoke the anti-Semitic canard that 'Hollywood is run by Jews, it is owned by Jews...' " [Context here might persuade someone that "canard" is Yiddish for "fact."]
END QUOTE.

Television is the same way, and always has been, both in the United States and in the UK.

How is it that I know these things? I don't own a TV or go to movies, so my experience comes from real life. If you do without your brainwashing media devices, then eventually you, too, will refamiliarize yourself with the real world.

Yahoo Answers staff deleted my answer within a few minutes. See more of my Yahoo Answers at The White Realist.

You know, if Abraham Foxman was a smarter Jew, he'd realize he can't damage control the exposure of the Jewish domination of the film industry. It's too out-in-the-open for even the ADL to lie away. Jews have written books bragging about how the Jews run Hollywood, and there's even a Jew who has criticized Foxman's hopeless deception crusade in the same way that I'm doing now. Hey, Abe—fuggetaboutit, all right? Time to go to Plan B. Minimize the significance of Jews owning Hollywood. Tell us all about how the Jews just want to make money and would never, ever think of using the film industry for spreading goyim-herding propaganda.

Jerry Abbott

Ceres is a spherical asteroid in the main asteroid belt.

JPL's elements for Ceres for 17 August 2009.
a = 2.7663639 AU
e = 0.0793433490
i = 10.5855446°
Ω = 80.3990462°
ω = 72.8252080°
T = JD 2454872.360507 = 20h 39m UT on 9 February 2009

It's mass and radius and rotation period are:

M = 9.43e20 kilograms
R = 487300 meters
Pr = 32667.012 seconds

Someday, there might be people living on Ceres, and when there are there will undoubtedly be some who demand that other people give them money, or else be robbed, beaten, imprisoned, exiled, or killed, and, at the same time, presenting good-sounding reasons for their extortions. Also, there will be patriots on Ceres who are too smart to be deceived by these sophistries, who will be seeking to whack the tax-collectors and the bureaucrats and officials who fatten themselves upon other people's labor.

On Ceres, assassination can become a sport, a supreme challenge of marksmanship. Players will need a .357 magnum pistol and some bullets.

Ceres' gravitational parameter, GM = 6.2938e10 m³ sec⁻²

Ceres' circular orbit speed, 1.5 meters out from the equator, is
Vo = sqrt [ GM / (R+1.5) ] = 359.383 m/s
Ceres' escape speed, from a point 1.5 meters out from the equator, is
Ve = sqrt [ 2GM / (R+1.5) ] = 508.244 m/s
Ceres' tangential rotational speed at 1.5 meters out from the equator is
Vr = 2πR / Pr = 93.728 m/s

The muzzle speed of a .357 magnum bullet is 430 m/s. Notice that if the patriot fires a bullet in the equatorial plane in the direction of his tangent velocity, the bullet will be going 523.728 m/s relative to the center of Ceres, which is faster than Ceres' escape speed. On the other hand, if he fires a bullet in the opposite direction, the bullet will be moving 336.272 m/s, which is less than Ceres' circular orbit speed.

So the patriot shoots the bullet in the direction parallel with the north rotational axis of Ceres. What happens?

Cerescentric state vector for bullet.
x = +487301.5 meters
y = 0
z = 0
Vx = 0
Vy = +93.728 m/s
Vz = +430 m/s

r = sqrt( x² + y² + z² ) = 487301.5 meters
V = sqrt[(Vx)² + (Vy)² + (Vz)²] = 440.096 m/s
a = 1 / { 2/r − V²/(GM) } = 973837.021 meters
P = 2π sqrt[ a³ / (GM) ] = 24068.622 seconds
hx = y Vz − z Vy = 0
hy = z Vx − x Vz = −209539645.0 m² sec⁻¹
hz = x Vy − y Vx = +45673674.5 m² sec⁻¹
h = sqrt[ (hx)² + (hy)² + (hz)² ] = 214459663.7 m² sec⁻¹
e = sqrt[ 1 − h² / (GMa) ] = 0.499607
i = ArcCos( hz / h ) = 77.7035°

The bullet goes into an elliptical orbit around Ceres, with a period of 6h 41m 8.622 s, an eccentricity of about 0.5, an inclination of about 77.7 degrees, and a pericerian altitude of 1.5 meters. Each time the bullet crosses Ceres equator at pericerian, its Cerian longitude is 265.243° antispinward (west), or 94.757° spinward (east), of where it crossed the previous time.

So the patriot's job is to find out where that nasty taxman will be at some future moment, then go to a position 94.757° west of there, carefully mount his pistol on some sort of immovable stand so that it is pointing north, wait until exactly 24068.622 seconds before the bureaucrat in question is due to arrive, then pull the trigger. The pistol will fire silently, since there's no air to transmit sound, and the bullet will fly away on its errand of justice.

Now, of course, this is a sport. The timing and aiming involved, not to mention the uncertainties in the manufacture of the bullets, will make most of these shots miss. The patriot is, after all, trying to shoot somebody who is on the other end of a 5717-kilometer trajectory. He might need several tries. But imagine the psychological effect on the taxman when he sees chips of rock suddenly fly from the side of his office building. The nice thing about it is that there is practically no risk of being caught by the local police, since they can't hear the gunshot, and if one location is being watched, then another will do if a suitable change of trajectory is made.

If by some incredible good fortune, the patriot actually kills the tax-collector, the people of Ceres would rejoice, except for the remaining unacceptably presumptuous and naughty bureaucrats, who would probably be wondering which of them was to be next.

Jerry Abbott

The circumference of an ellipse.
The circumference, C, is found the semimajor axis , a, and eccentricity, e, as follows:
Q = [1 − sqrt(1−e²)] / [1 + sqrt(1−e²)]
q₁ = Q² / 4
q₂ = Q⁴ / 64
q₃ = Q⁶ / 256
q₄ = 25 Q⁸ / 16384
q₅ = 49 Q¹⁰ / 65536
q₆ = 441 Q¹² / 1048576
q₇ = 1089 Q¹⁴ / 4194304
q₈ = 184041 Q¹⁶ / 1073741824
q₉ = 511225 Q¹⁸ / 4294967296
q₁₀  = 5909761 Q²⁰ / 68719476736
C = πa [1 + sqrt(1−e²)] { 1 + q₁ + q₂ + q₃ + q₄ + q₅ + q₆ + q₇ + q₈ + q₉ + q₁₀ }
There are more terms, of course. But this will usually be sufficient for a good approximation. Here are the exact values of the fractions, in decimal form.
k₁ = 0.25
k₂ = 0.015625
k₃ = 3.90625e-3
k₄ = 1.52587890625e-3
k₅ = 7.476806640625e-4
k₆ = 4.2057037353515625e-4
k₇ = 2.596378326416015625e-4
k₈ = 1.71401537954807281494140625e-4
k₉ = 1.1902884580194950103759765625e-4
k₁₀= 8.5998341091908514499664306640625e-5


Part 2. Predicting the trajectory of a bullet moving through air.

Some handy constants.

g = standard gravitational acceleration = 9.80655 m sec⁻²
φ = universal gas constant = 8.31447 J mol⁻¹ K⁻¹
Ts = sea level standard temperature = 288.15 K
L = temperature lapse rate = 0.0065 K m⁻¹
Ps = sea level standard pressure = 101325 N m⁻²
μ = molar mass of dry air = 0.0289644 kg mol⁻¹

The density of ambient air, ρ, assumed to be dry, as a function of altitude, h, in meters.

T = Ts − hL = ambient temperature
ψ = gμ/(φL)
P = Ps (1 − hL/Ts)^ψ = ambient pressure, if air is dry
ρ = Pμ / (φT)

Example: h = 768 meters.
T = 283.158 K
ψ = 5.2557277
P = 92432.9 N m⁻²
ρ = 1.13717652 kg m⁻³

Bullet parameters.

Cd = drag coefficient of bullet
A = cross section area
m = mass of projectile
V0 = muzzle speed

The drag acceleration, ad, as a function of bullet parameters, speed, and the density of the ambient air.

Cb = m / (Cd A) = ballistic coefficient
ad' = −ρ V² /(2 Cb) = magnitude of drag acceleration in dry air

The humidity of air has only a small effect on the air density. Even when you assume that the air is dry, when in fact it is 80% saturated, the relative error in the density is only about 0.0001. To correct the drag acceleration for humidity, do this:

k = percentage (0 to 100) of relative humidity.
Q = 1.08e-6
ad = ad' (1 − kQ) = magnitude of drag acceleration in air at k percent relative humidity

Example: 7.62x39 round (used by AK-47 rifles).
m = 0.008 kilograms
Cd = 0.5190793 = G1 standard model
A = 0.0000492652 m²
ρ = 1.13717652 kg m⁻³
V0 = 710 m/s
Cb = 312.835497 kg m⁻²
ad' = −916.217451 m sec⁻²
k = 60
ad = −916.158080 m sec⁻² = magnitude of drag acceleration at the end of the rifle barrel

The drag acceleration is directed opposite to the bullet's velocity in the air. Let θ be the elevation angle of the rifle when it is fired.

Algorithm.

Input h₀, k, m, Cd, A, V₀, θ₀. 

Constants
Re = 6371000
g = 9.80655
Ts = 288.15
Ps = 101325
μ = 0.0289644
L = 0.0065
φ = 8.31447
Q = 0.00000108
ψ = gμ/(φL)
Cb = m / (Cd A)

Function Drag (V, h)
     T = Ts − h L
     P = Ps (1 − h L / Ts)^ψ
     ρ = P μ / (φ T)
     Drag = −ρ V² (1 − kQ) / (2 Cb)
End

Begin
     n = −1
     t₀ = 0
     Δt = 0.001
     x₀ = 0
     y₀ = h₀
     Vx₀ = V₀ cos θ₀
     Vy₀ = V₀ sin θ₀
     Repeat...
          n = n + 1
          θn = Arctan( Vyn / Vxn )
          Vn = sqrt[ (Vxn)² + (Vyn)² ]
          ax = Drag (Vn, hn) cos θn
          ay = Drag (Vn, hn) sin θn − gn
          xn+1 = xn + Vxn Δt + ax (Δt)² / 2
          yn+1 = yn + Vyn Δt + ay (Δt)² / 2
          hn+1 = yn+1
          Vxn+1 = Vxn + ax Δt
          Vyn+1 = Vyn + ay Δt
     Until n≥1200 or (h₀−hn+1)>5
End.

Input:
h₀ = 768
k = 60
m = 0.008
Cd = 0.5190793
A = 0.0000492652
V₀ = 710
θ₀ = 0

Output:
tn     axn       vxn        xn        ayn       vyn       yn-y0
0.0  -916.158   710.000     0.000    -9.804     0.000     0.000
0.1  -718.516   628.767    66.774    -8.747    -0.925    -0.047
0.2  -578.579   564.221   126.307    -7.999    -1.761    -0.182
0.3  -475.886   511.698   180.017    -7.449    -2.532    -0.397
0.4  -398.301   468.122   228.944    -7.034    -3.255    -0.687
0.5  -338.259   431.387   273.869    -6.713    -3.942    -1.047
0.6  -290.843   399.997   315.399    -6.459    -4.601    -1.474
0.7  -252.746   372.866   354.010    -6.255    -5.236    -1.966
0.8  -221.677   349.180   390.086    -6.088    -5.853    -2.521
0.9  -196.007   328.322   423.940    -5.951    -6.455    -3.136
1.0  -174.555   309.815   455.829    -5.836    -7.044    -3.811
1.1  -156.444   293.280   485.969    -5.738    -7.623    -4.545
1.2  -141.016   278.420   514.541    -5.655    -8.192    -5.336

Jerry Abbott

Note: Fluid mechanics is not something that I'm good at. If anyone notices errors in this program, I'd appreciate a comment to let me know. One thing that might be wrong: I'm using the G1 model as the drag coefficient of a 7.62x39 bullet. Does anyone know what the value really is?

Heaven is for the unrepentant. Hell is for the unavenged.
Turning the other cheek does not shame the darkie; it only gives him another free hit on you.

[See Part 4, below, for the latest stuff about the Jewish money laundering and kidney selling scandals.]

I happen to disagree with the version of World War 2 history that the Jews usually tell, or have others who are under their influence to tell for them. And I resent the fact that there are countries in which the Jews have arranged for laws that make my opinions illegal to share with anybody else, which makes it unsafe for me to travel abroad lest I be punished with a prison sentence for what I believe the truth is.

I'm an American, and I had no plans to travel anyway, but it's still an outrage to me that this one ethnic group has so arranged the laws of many other countries that I could not safely travel internationally if, for whatever reason, I might want to do so.

And even though I don't actually travel, my words are routinely censored even though they are quite reasonable in thesis and moderate in tone. I don't swear. I don't insult anybody. My posts are censored because the Jews want them censored, and they have far too much influence, and exercise far too much selfish control over public discourse, for anyone else's good.

I recently registered on a web forum called "Politics Forum.org." You'd think with a name like that there would be a policy of allowing controversial ideas into discussion, no matter whom they offended, and debating them on their merits, on the basis of facts, with the realization that not everything said to be a "fact" is indeed a fact, with the knowledge that sometimes the Galileos are right and the Church is wrong, with the understanding that such a thing as a conspiracy is possible and that conspiracies do sometimes occur, especially when there is illicit money to be made.

Here is the content of my first (and so far only) post to "Politics Forum.org." I wasn't even finished with my touch-up editing before another poster had responded to assert that I was an asshole and that my post only served to show why threads like this one should not be allowed. My post was deleted within a few hours, and there followed a long series of posts, running on for several pages of the thread, in which Holocaust believers rehashed the propaganda lies and deceptions that revisionists have repeatedly disproved and which they still routinely debunk -- when they can, when they are not in prison for doing it.

W01f wrote: Wait a minute. Maybe Europe is different from Canada, but since when could you be punished by law for merely not liking certain races or ethnicities? Don't you have to actually commit a crime in order for it to be a crime? I don't see this guy hurting anyone, inciting violence or even admitting he doesn't like Jews. The only thing apparent is that he's a quack. There are many quacks in the scientific community who believe crazier things than that.

The Jews watch for people who say things that they don't like, and disagreement with the Holocaust myth is near the top of that list. They nearly own the German government, which is why the laws in Germany give more preferential treatment to Jewish interests than any other government except Israel.

England, however, is not a free speech country either, where the Jews are concerned. An Englishman is on the run from his own government now because he's wanted for the crime of telling the truth. His name is Luke O'Farrell, and his website is

http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/index.html

The Jews in England have pressured the British government to put Mr. O'Farrell into prison for writing what he has written on that website, and, so far as I can see, there are no false statements anywhere in any of his columns.

The persecution of dissenters to Jewish propaganda is international. It's going on in Germany, in England, in Canada, in Australia, and in the United States.

A Canadian named Ernst Zundel was arrested illegally by agents of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) at his wife's home in Tennessee. The INS had scheduled an immigration hearing, about which Zundel was never informed, and, when he failed to attend, they got warrants against him. Zundel was deported, again illegally, to Canada. Canada declared him "a danger to Canada's national security," but did not say why he is so dangerous in that way. (It seems ridiculous on the face of it, and it sounds as if the charge was merely a pretext to keep Zundel in prison.) Zundel was later deported to Germany to stand trial for denying the Holocaust.

http://www.zundelsite.org/zundel_persecuted/index.html
http://www.rense.com/general34/zun.htm

(Added comment not in original post: Which, of course, raises the interesting question of why Zundel was believed to be less of a danger to Canada's national security in Germany than he was in either Canada or the United States. I can think of only one way that might be true. If the Jews in Canada have positioned themselves to utterly ruin Canada economically, or in a way that enables them to provoke a war between Canada and some other country, such as the USA, and if the Jews of Canada have intimated that they would cause such mischief unless they got exactly what they wanted from the Canadian government, then the Jews of Canada would be a danger to Canada's national security that Canada simply can't handle, so, instead of forthrightly addressing the Jewish threat, the Canadian government must perforce appease the Jews, giving them what they want, in this case by jailing Ernst Zundel on the flimsiest of pretexts until a deportation to Germany for a "show trial" could be arranged. Zundel's persecution was, in a sense, "office politics" writ large.)

An American named Hans Schmidt was arrested in Germany for publishing a pamphlet in the United States that questioned the Jewish version of World War 2 history.

http://128.241.238.86/free-speech/fs961b.html

A British man named David Irving was arrested in Austria for sharing similar doubts in public.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Austria/arrest_2005/index.html

Now, it's Toben. The Jews put the names of the people whom they want punished on a hit list, which is circulated to the governments on which they have influence (by their control of the media and the banks). And whenever any of those people must travel, especially by air, they run a significant chance of being arrested at an airport either before takeoff or upon landing.

Despite myth to the contrary, it is not settled that six million Jews died during World War 2 -- anywhere or in any fashion. The number is more likely nearer 300,000.  Nothing like 4 million Jews died at Auschwitz, as they originally claimed, nor even 1.5 million Jews, as they now claim. The total number dead at Auschwitz during the entire war, Jew and gentile, inmate and guard, is about 70,000 - mostly from an epidemic of typhus that would not have happened if the Allies had not bombed German rail to the east, preventing the Germans from keeping the camps supplied with food, medicine, and rodent control chemicals (which is what Zyklon B really was).

The Nazis did not operate any gas chambers at Auschwitz, nor at Treblinka, nor in any other prison camp, during WW2. They did execute malefactors, and some of these were Jews, but most of the anecdotes you may have heard are false, and most of the pictures you may have seen are miscaptioned, staged, altered, or drawn by someone intent upon bolstering Holohoax propaganda.

A picture taken at Dresden, showing a bulldozer pushing a big pile of dead Germans was miscaptioned as a bulldozer pushing a big pile of dead Jews at Buchenwald. A photo made of "German" soldiers killing Poles in the Katyn Forest was later proved to show Soviet troops, dressed in German uniforms, doing that very thing. A pile of corpses of people dead of typhus was superimposed in the foreground of a line of naked prisoners waiting for their clothes to be returned from delousing (to kill typhus-spreading lice), and that photo was used to "prove" that Jews were being marched into gas chambers while their dead relatives' bodies were piled up just to one side.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the US president during much of the war. He said nothing about any Holocaust of the Jews. Do you suppose it slipped his mind?

The gas chambers are not the original means by which the Nazis were said to have carried out the mass executions of Jews. Other  methods for killing were circulated earlier as trial balloons. One of them? An electric floor, similar to an electric chair, except it was a whole large floor, made wet for enhanced conductivity. When revisionists proved that story untenable, the Jews substituted other killing methods, finally settling on the gas chamber story.

The truth, of course, would not have changed.

Nearly everything the revisionists have said about the Holocaust myth is true. Nearly every arrest made for Holocaust denial is a purely political arrest, and its victim is a purely political prisoner. The Soviet Union, itself the creation of Jewish bankers in New York and Jewish communists in Russia, did not actually die: it merely exported itself from Russia to the rest of the world.

Once upon a time, if you told the truth about the Jews in Russia, you were thrown into prison or worse. Now everywhere besides Russia, that's what's happening. The United States, because of its tradition of explicit legal protection for free speech, is perhaps the least affected of the affected countries, but that is not to say it is unaffected.

Think about it: Why should the Jews have legal protections from having their version of history doubted, when nobody else has such protections? Why should the Jews get such paramount consideration for their feelings, as opposed to the feelings of others? Is there really any reason?

Think about this, too: is all that is "antisemitic" necessarily untrue? If there is such a thing as a true antisemitic statement, then why would it be any more unspeakable than a true anti-White statement? Is there really any reason?

Jerry Abbott

P.S. Not only was this post censored shortly after it appeared, I was banned from the forum by the administrators. "You have been banned from this forum. Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information." This was after policies had been defined such that Holocaust related debate would be acceptable there. Perhaps what they had intended all along was stage sort of a faux-debate, with false-flag "doubters" being "convinced" by stalwart Holocaust supporters, and the arrival of a genuine skeptic was interfering with their plans.


Part 2. "They banned me and deleted all of my substantial posts, including my two newest posts in two different threads. It's funny how they decided some time ago to make 'holocaust denial' and arguing about the holohoax acceptable there, but then suddenly begin to delete all substantial posts that challenge the official fairy story." (An email from a friend in Finland.)

Bait and switch is a game played by unscrupulous merchants, in which they convince a buyer to pay for one thing, but then they give him something of inferior worth, plus some sort of excuse, such as "Oh the one you were looking at in our store is for display purposes only, we ship the actual item you purchased from our warehouse. It should be essentially the same as what you saw in the store." Only, of course, it isn't.

The game of bait and switch was possibly invented by Jews (or anyway I would not be surprised), at first for cheating in the marketplace. But they learned how to adapt it to political situations. What happened to you was bait-and-switch on rules and policies. You were told that something would be allowed, but the purpose for saying that was merely to identify people whose opinions were contrary to political correctness.

The Jews are perhaps the most frequent perpetrators of political bait-and-switch, but the most famous instance of that game wasn't committed by Jews, but rather by the communist government of China. It was called "The Campaign of 100 Flowers," in which the Beijing government pretended that it had suddenly become tolerant of democratic ideas. The Chinese democrats trusted the government and gave their opinions, and the government, for a while, smiled and wrote down the dissidents' names and addresses. Soon tolerance time was over, and the arrests were made, followed by the executions.

The Jews and the liberals who follow them, do that very same thing. And that's what happened to you.

Jerry Abbott


Part 3. Luke O'Farrell, after quoting a paragraph from an article in The London Times for 7 Sep 2006, said: "Oh dear, so it wasn’t the MCB [Muslim Council of Britain] who wanted to turn us into a police-state after all: it was the philosemitic politicians who conducted the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism. Whoever would have guessed it? Anyone who knows about Jews and free speech, that’s who. If Jews have power and influence, they start working to take away free speech. It’s no use arguing that some Jews support free speech and some white goyim oppose it: the average effect of the two groups is perfectly clear. It was whites who created free speech in the West and it is Jews who are taking it away. Was there any popular support for Britain’s race laws, introduced in the 1960s and steadily harshened ever since? No, there wasn’t, but what does the will of the people matter in a democracy? The Board of Jewish Deputies wanted the race laws and got them. The Jewish Anti-Defamation League would like identical laws in the United States; so far, thanks to the evil white males who created the First Amendment, it hasn’t gotten them."

Very true. And very well spoken. But the Jews not only suppress truthful speech by White people, especially on the subjects of race in general and Jews in particular, they also use their control of the media to spread false opinions though various kinds of deceit, which is often mostly the misuse of emphasis and omission.

Allow me to illustrate. In which group do you find the largest percentage of pedophiles? The Jews who own and operate the mass media would dearly like you to believe that it's White nationalists (most), followed by Catholic priests, followed by Black preachers, followed by Jewish rabbis (least). In fact, the exact reverse order is likely to be true.

The Jews have found a couple of White nationalist perverts after and because they were first discovered, and promptly reported, ostracized and condemned by other White nationalists. Now, against this White nationalist record, tally up these guys, many of whom carried on their disgusting perversions for years or even decades before someone blew the whistle.

Note: I do not originate, nor do I presume to confirm, any of the accusations against the below-named persons. The list to follow is simply a recitation of names of persons who have been accused by others of committing sexual crimes, mostly involving children. Anyone wishing to know the accusations in each case is invited to do his own research and form his own opinion.

Rabbi Avraham Asher
Rabbi Shlomo Aviner
Rabbi Lewis Brenner
Rabbi Ephraim Bryks
Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach
Rabbi Elior Chen
Rabbi Perry Ian Cohen
Rabbi Yitzchak Cohen
Rabbi Asher Dahan
Rabbi Arnold Fink
Rabbi Jacob Frank
Yehudah Friedlander (rabbinical assistant)
Rabbi Mordechai Gafni
Rabbi Ephraim Goldberg
Rabbi Isaac Goldenberg
Rabbi Sidney Goldenberg
Rabbi Mark A. Golub
Cantor Joel Gordon
Rabbi Israel Grunwald
Rabbi Solomon Hafner
Rabbi and Child Psychiatrist Alan J. Horowitz
Cantor Mark Horowitz
Elbert John Jarvis II (Beth El Hebrew Congregation voted this alleged pedophile "Man of the Year" in 2005.)
Rabbi Steven J. Kaplan
Rabbi David Kaye
Rabbi Israel Kestenbaum
Rabbi Robert Kirschner
Rabbi Yehuda Kolko
Rabbi/Yeshiva Teacher Ze’ev Kopolevitch
Rabbi Baruch Lanner
Rabbi Avraham M. Leizerowitz
Rabbi Jerrold Martin Levy
Rabbi Pinchas Lew
Rabbi David E. Lipman
Rabbi/Psychologist Mordecai Magencey
Rabbi Richard Marcovitz
Rabbi Samuel Mendelowitz
Rabbi Yaakov Menken
Rabbi Yona Metzger
Rabbi Juda Mintz
Rabbi and Psychologist Avrohom Mondrowitz
Cantor Howard Nevison
Rabbi Yehuda Aryeh Oratz (Name not unique, the alleged pedophile was born 11 April 1967)
Rabbi Michael Ozair
Rabbi Haim Pardes
Cantor Stanley Rosenfeld
Rabbi Edward Schlaeger
Rabbi David Schwartz
Cantor Michael Segelstein
Rabbi Charles Shalman
Cantor Robert Shapiro
Rabbi Ben Zion Sobel
Rabbi Ze’ev Sultanovitch
Rabbi Melvin Teitelbaum
Rabbi Aron Boruch Tendler (Name not unique, the suspected pedophile was born 15 January 1955)
Rabbi Mordecai Tendler
Rabbi Isadore Trachtman
Rabbi Hirsch Travis
Rabbi Eliyahu Tzabari
Rabbi Tzvi Wainhaus
Rabbi Matis Weinberg
Rabbi Yaakov Weiner
Rabbi Nachman Weisfeld
Rabbi Mordechai Willig
Cantor Phillip Wittlin
Rabbi Hershel J. Worch
Rabbi Mordechai Yomtov
Rabbi Sheldon Zimmerman
Rabbi Max Zucker

This is not, of course, an exhaustive list of alleged Jewish pedophiles. Nor is it even a complete tally of rabbis who are pedophiles. It is, rather, merely some of the names of alleged Jewish rabbi pedophiles that I could find in a hurry. No doubt further research would uncover more.

It is possible that some of the named Jews are innocent of the crimes for which they are accused. The reader is urged to review all of the available information and make his own judgment. The listing of the names is meant to be a starting point for such research. The list is not an attempt to convince anyone of any particular opinion in any case.

A percentage of the common secular Jews are also pedophiles, about whom you hear nothing because the Jews control the media. For example, the following Jews were given a position of trust, which they allegedly betrayed by some form of child sexual exploitation:

Arie Scher, career diplomat, formerly Israeli Assistant Consul to Brasil, Rio de Janeiro, 2000. Engaged in child rape, child prostitution, and child pornography. The customers for the prostitution business were mostly wealthy Jewish tourists from Israel.

Georges Schteinberg, college professor, formerly teacher of Hebrew language at Liessin College in Rio de Janeiro, 2000. Engaged in child rape, child prostitution, and child pornography as Arie Scher's accomplice.

Leonardo Chaim, counsellor at a youth boy's camp near Sao Paulo, Brasil. Engaged in child rape and child pornography (2000). Produced a pedophile instruction manual entitled "How to Rape a Boy" (translated from Portuguese).

Seth Bekenstein, member of the tennis club of Walnut Creek, California. Known to the FBI as the former US West Coast distributor of child pornography, some of it also snuff porn, made by a Jewish crime syndicate in Russia, with gentile children kidnapped throughout East Europe and FSU Republics.

Richard Steve Goldberg, Jewish aerospace engineer. Raped children in his spare time. Was one of the FBI's "Most Wanted" until his arrest in Canada in 2007.

David Sonenschein. Noted Jewish author and pedophile. Here's a "fair use" sample of his work.

"It is best when beginning sex with a kid to do it as part of a game. Sometimes the kid will make the first move, sometimes the adult. Sometimes the adult can create a situation where a kid can ask for sex or start sex if they want. Curiosity is a big factor, exploring somebody and having them explore you is another good way to start. This can be a kind of show and tell. Just about anything that adults can do together an adult and a kid can do together. It's best to go slowly the first time - and its more exciting that way too - but of course you have to be sensitive to size differences.

"Kids enjoy non-penetrating sex the best. Most very young or small kids can not and should not be penetrated by an adult. Having sex is having fun! If anyone is not able to relax, it won't be as enjoyable. Sex is play, not work. If you have sex with some that like it, they can tell those of their friends who may also be interested. Sometimes starting out sex is better if other kids are doing it too. Group sex is a good way to experiment and experience all kinds of sex with all different sorts of partners. What better way to learn!"

I recently found another long list of Jewish perverts, but I'm tired of typing their names. Click the link. They include a Jewish Youth Group Leader who raped four boys, a Jewish soccer coach who molested two, a Jewish school teacher who sent child porn through the Internet, a Jewish pediatrician who raped his little patients, a Jewish doctor who raped his daughter, a Jewish "Big Brother" who raped at least 35 of his "little brothers," a Jewish judge who looked at kiddie porn and molested children, and so forth, and so on.

As another writer has said, "this is just the tip of the iceberg." Maybe it's the tip of the goldberg, too. And the goldenberg. And the schteinberg. And the weinberg. Plus a few baums, steins, and witzes.

Furthermore: if you didn't know which pedophile offenders belonged to which racial group, if you didn't see any of their names, but were only given complete and accurate summaries of what each of them did, and then asked which of the offenders were the worst, you wouldn't pick out the White gentiles among them. Indeed, not. You'd pick mainly the Jews as being the worst of this bad bunch. Set their crime histories side-by-side, and blank out only the names and racial affiliations if you're afraid of being "prejudiced," and you will judge that the Jewish child predators will almost always have been crueler, dirtier, sicker, and more rapacious than the White ones have been.

So remember this the next time you hear a Jew carrying on about Catholic or White nationalist malefactors. The White moral record isn't spotless, but it's better than that of most other races. And the Jewish moral record isn't merely checkered, it's among the worst of all races. You can't know all the facts when your sources of information are controlled by Jews, and the Jewish control of the media lets them play these games of emphasis and omission in order to mislead you. When you discover the facts, you'll understand why the Jews must engage in censorship, deceit, and self-serving "information management."

Jerry Abbott


"Henceforth no Jew, no matter under what name, will be allowed to remain here without my written permission. I know of no other troublesome pest within the state than this race, which impoverished the people by their fraud, usury and money-lending and commits all deeds which an honorable man despises. Subsequently they have to be removed and excluded from here as much as possible."
MARIA THERESA, Queen of Hungary and Bohemia (1777).

Benjamin Franklin allegedly warned members of the American Constitutional Convention of 1787 about the Jews and about the danger of allowing Jews to immigrate to the United States. The warning reads that Jews are adroit tricksters in matters of financial policy, which they use to cheat gentiles out of the reward of their hands' and minds' labors. The warning compares Jews to vampires who must live among non-Jews in order to have a source of sustenance. Certain Jewish groups, known for their brazen lies on similar matters, have asserted that the "Franklin Prophecy" is a fraud and a hoax. One of these Jewish groups, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), is also on record as saying that Jews don't control Hollywood, and that anyone who claims otherwise is issuing "an antisemitic canard." If the ADL has the chutzpah, the extreme dishonesty, to deny the Jewish control of Hollywood, you have to wonder what other lies they tell. On the other hand, even a liar might occasionally tell the truth, so I reserve judgment on the authenticity of the "Franklin Prophecy." However, whether it is authentic or not, the content of the "Franklin Prophecy" is certainly true.

The Nazis have been telling the truth about the Jews for 90 years to a world that the Jews have deceived with lies.


Part 4. Besides sex-slavery and pedophilia...

Jews aren't the only ones running international sex-slavery businesses. They are just represented among its major profiteers in (very) disproportionately high numbers. If a young boy or girl is kidnapped in East Europe, there's a good chance that Jews were behind the kidnapping and that the child is now sucking Jewish penises in Israel or in some other place where Jews run prostitution or pornography businesses. But there's another kind of business that is run in parallel with sex-slavery, and that's the international black market trafficking in stolen human organs. Such as kidneys, for example. Again, Jews aren't the only ones involved, but again they are represented in such businesses in disproportionately high numbers.

In July 2009, the FBI arrested...

Peter Cammarano III, Democrat, mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey. Dennis Elwell, Democrat, mayor of Secaucus, New Jersey. Anthony Suarez, Democrat, mayor of Ridgefield, New Jersey. Daniel Van Pelt, Republican, New Jersey state legislator. L. Harvey Smith, Democrat, New Jersey state legislator.

Along with them were arrested these Orthodox Jews:

Eliahu Ben Haim, 58, Long Branch NJ, rabbi, laundered money gained from crime. Mordchai Fish, 56, Brooklyn NY, rabbi, laundered money gained from crime. Saul Kassin, 87, Brooklyn NY, rabbi, laundered money gained from crime. Edmund Nahum, 56, Deal NJ, rabbi, laundered money gained from crime. Lavel Schwartz, 57, Brooklyn NY, rabbi, laundered money gained from crime. Levi-Ishak Rosenbaum, 58, Brooklyn NY, rabbi, illegally tried to sell a human kidney. Schmulik Cohen, 35, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed inside his residence. Yeshayahu Ehrental, 65, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed in his Brooklyn office. Yolie Gertner, 30, Brooklyn NY, cash courier for Fish. David S. Goldhirsh, 30, Brooklyn NY, cash courier for Fish. Abe Pollack, 40, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed in his Brooklyn office. Binyomin Spira, 28, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed inside a bakery. Naftoly Weber, 40, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed in his Brooklyn office. Arye Weiss, 34, Brooklyn NY, ran an illegal bank for laundering money, concealed inside his residence. Shimon Haber, ?, ?, unknown charges. Moshe Altman, ?, ?, unknown charges. Itzak Friedlander, ?, ?, unknown charges. Charles Amon, ?, ?, bribed housing inspectors to look the other way. Levi Deutsch, 37, Brooklyn NY, indicted on unknown charges, currently living in Israel.

NEWARK, N.J. – An investigation into the sale of black-market kidneys and fake Gucci handbags evolved into a sweeping probe of political corruption in New Jersey, ensnaring more than 40 people Thursday, including three mayors, two state lawmakers and several rabbis.

Even for a state with a rich history of graft, the scale of wrongdoing alleged was breathtaking. An FBI official called corruption "a cancer that is destroying the core values of this state."

Federal prosecutors said the investigation initially focused on a money laundering network that operated between Brooklyn, N.Y.; Deal, N.J.; and Israel. The network is alleged to have laundered tens of millions of dollars through Jewish charities controlled by rabbis in New York and New Jersey.

Does anyone here still think that Jewish conspiracies don't happen? Is anyone here naïve enough to think that this is the biggest Jewish conspiracy to ever happen? Has anyone reading this any doubt that the unusual thing about this story isn't that Jews were doing this sort of thing, but rather that Jews were caught doing it, and reported on?

I mean, this is weird. For reasons I can't even guess at, the Jewish media themselves are (finally, at last) ventilating a major scandal in which a reasonably large number of politically medium-sized Jews have been caught running an international fraud on a significant financial scale for a long period of time. At present, I have no idea why the media bosses are doing this. Oh, I'm sure that there is a reason, but I don't know what it is. Jews do this kind of thing often and much, sometimes on a scale larger than this, and the Jewish media routinely hush it up, so why is this particular scandal getting so much public attention?

Okay. I've thought about it, and here's a theory. Most of the Jews in control of the mass media are secular Ashkenazim. The Jews who got busted for money laundering in New York and New Jersey are Orthodox Sephardim. So the media coverage of the naughty rabbis might be a part of a intra-Judaic ethnic turf war. Maybe. Concerning the FBI arrests themselves, the Orthodox Jews are predictably claiming that they were motivated by antisemitism. More about this as events warrant.

The charges made by the FBI were money laundering and illegal money transmitting (bribes). The story was reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer and the New York Daily News, 23 July 2009. It was briefly mentioned that some of the money being laundered was from "the trafficking of kidneys from Israeli donors." Cough. What do you want to bet that not all of those kidneys (and, no doubt, other organs as well) were voluntarily donated? What do you want to bet that the "donors" were Israeli only in the sense that they happened to be in Israel when the organs were removed from their bodies?

Israel Kills Palestinian Boys, Steals Organs for Transplants, Rense.com.
Israelis Deep into Organ Trafficking: An Open Letter to Israel Asper, Voices of Palestine.

Nancy Scheper-Hughes is an anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley, who decided to investigate the Jewish traffickers in human organs, particularly Rabbi Levi-Ishak Rosenbaum..

[Her] sources include a man who started working with Rosenbaum imagining he was helping people in desperate need. The man then began to see the donors, or to be more accurate, sellers, who were flown in from impoverished countries such as Moldova [in Eastern Europe, located between Romania and Ukraine].

"He said it was awful. These people would be brought in and they didn't even know what they were supposed to be doing and they would want to go home and they would cry," Scheper-Hughes said.

The man called Rosenbaum "a thug" who would pull out a pistol he was apparently licensed to carry and tell the sellers, "You're here. A deal is a deal. Now, you'll give us a kidney or you'll never go home.' "

"The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing." (Jack the Ripper, London, 1910.)

Prostitutes do a better business when they are young than when they are old. Older prostitutes (over 30) who are slaves might be considered a business liability by the brothel's operators, because of their lower margin of profitability. One of the things they might do to an older prostitute is kill her and remove her (or his) organs for sale on the black market.

Think about this, the next time you think about Jews.

Here's a paragraph from a New York Daily News article about the Orthodox Jewish community in Deal, New Jersey:

The Syrian Jewish community is renowned for its charity and insularity - taking care of its own from cradle to grave but excommunicating anyone who dares to marry outside the faith.

Look at the phrase "taking care of its own from cradle to grave." To non-Jews, this might be a reference to a readiness of church-based charities to help people who are temporarily in difficult circumstances, or perhaps a reference to an insurance policy on which they pay premiums. But in regard to Jews, it means much more than that. The Jews of Deal, New Jersey, live in mansions. They have money for everything: not merely for the necessities that we gentiles are hard-put to provide for our families, but also for luxuries and travel. And whereas we can scarcely afford to raise one or two children, these Jews have no financial problems with having six to ten children per family.

And none of them work. They don't have jobs. White nationalists, of course, knew that Jews commonly support themselves through skulduggery, but it has long been a mystery to the majority of White people who refuse to believe that Jews are often very successful criminals. Now, at last, their means of support has become visible. Jews, engaging in crime, some of it involving the sale of illegal drugs, some of it involving killing people, some of it involving forcing women into prostitution, some of it involving international trafficking in child pornography, some of it involving luring people from poor countries to Israel and then stealing their kidneys at gunpoint, take their ill-gotten money to secret banks which are disguised as charities, where it has the taint of crime laundered away from it. And that is how the Jews get their money, the money they use to live in mansions and have large families without having to work, as we gentiles must.

What the FBI's investigation uncovered is Jews, lots of Jews, behaving in exactly the way that Jews are stereotyped to behave, proving that the Jewish denials of that stereotype are lies. Which in turn proves yet another stereotype about Jews, which is, as Adolf Hitler put it, "Jews must tell lies for the same reason that people in northern countries must wear warm clothes."

For more information, especially the historical background for Jewish predation on gentiles, read BLOOD RITUAL, by Philip de Vier, published by National Vanguard Books in 2001.

And this isn't the first time dirty Jewish rabbis have been caught laundering money for criminals!

According to the New York Times for 17 June 1997...

A dozen men, including two identified as Orthodox Jewish rabbis, were charged by federal authorities Monday with conspiring to launder and hide $1.75 million in drug profits for Colombian narcotics dealers by routing the cash through the bank accounts of a synagogue and a yeshiva in Brooklyn. The bizarre case, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn said, brought together a collection of strange bedfellows - five New York representatives of Colombian drug traffickers, three go-betweens who purportedly transported cash in suitcase quantities, and four men with ties to a close-knit Jewish community. At one point, the officials charged, the rabbis ran tens of millions of dollars in drug profits through the bank accounts of a relatively modest Borough Park synagogue and provided nearly $3.5 million from American and Swiss accounts for the purchase of an aircraft for the Colombian drug lords. Money launderers are the indispensable partners of major drug traffickers, and the cynical act of using religious institutions to conceal drug proceeds is particularly reprehensible," said Zachary Carter, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, in announcing the charges. Seven defendants, including Rabbi Mahir Reiss, 47, of 3543 Bedford Ave., and Rabbi Bernard Grunfeld, 64, of 1417 46th St., both in Brooklyn, were arrested Monday and were arraigned late in the day before U.S. Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann, charged with conspiracy to launder money. Two suspects, Grunfeld and Israel Knobloch, 24, of 5200 15th Ave., Brooklyn, also were charged with conspiring to avoid federal cash-transaction reporting requirements. Six defendants were held without bail, and one, Abraham Reiss, 48, of 320 Riverside Drive in Manhattan, a brother of Mahir Reiss, was released on $750,000 bail. Three other men named in the federal complaint were listed as fugitives, and two more were being held in custody elsewhere in New York in other cases, according to Lee Dunst, the assistant federal attorney prosecuting the case.

Of course, many people will assume that all the bad Jews have been found now. There aren't any more bad Jews on the loose. All the Jews who have not been caught are good Jews. All of the crimes committed by Jews have been discovered and are now well-known to the public and to the authorities. These are all isolated and anomalous events. There aren't any more Jewish crimes to be found anywhere.

And if you believe any of that, then you are hopelessly stupid.

The Dirty Laundry of Jews in Australia (Sydney Morning Herald, 14 October 2000)
Jail Not Kosher for Jewish Money Launderers in Australia (Sydney Morning Herald, 14 October 2000)
Israel Is a Paradise for Money Launderers (Yediot Ahronot, 27 April 1997)

Jerry Abbott


Here's an antisemitic joke created by altering a Jewish sales ad for a yarmulke: "The Star of David or Magen David as it is known in Hebrew literally means the Shield of David. According to the Kabbalah, the two triangles facing opposite directions represent the dichotomies inherent in man: good vs. evil, or spiritual vs. physical. The triangle that is pointing downward symbolizes evil, which Jews gather from the pits of hell in order to activate a flow of wickedness that comes back up into the world, which is symbolized by the triangle that is pointing upward."

A joke about a Jew and an Amish man. Once upon a time, a hungry Amish man came to the doorstep of a Jew and knocked upon the door. The door opened and the Jewish man said, "Vell? Vat do you vant?" The Amish man said he was very hungry and asked if he might have some food. The Jew said, "Sure, sure," grabbed a bag of Doritos, tossed it at the Amish man, and slammed the door shut. As it happened, several weeks later the Jew was walking along the roadside after being jokingly kidnapped and stranded far from home by a gang of naughty Black homosexuals. He stopped at the door of a house, being very hungry, and knocked for attention. The door opened, and it was the Amish man. Not recognizing him at first, the Jew begged for food. The Amish man said, "Certainly, one moment..." The door closed. An instant later six Amish men appeared in the back yard with lumber and nails, and in two or three minutes had built a trestle table of the kind you find in all the better public parks. Then the Amish man's wife and daughters came out bearing plates, eating utensils, and two huge covered platters. A delicious aroma began to fill the area. The Jew thought he was in Heaven. "Sit and eat," suggested the Amish man. The Jew sat down in front of a plate, reaching for the cover of the largest platter. Removing it, he saw staring at him a perfectly done roast suckling pig... complete with an apple in its mouth. The Jew groaned because his religion forbade him to eat pork. Then he removed the cover of the other platter... and found a bag of Doritos.

I think that the Peak Oil theory is essentially correct. Kievsky made an important observation. It doesn't matter, insofar as the economic or ecological arguments are concerned, whether oil is a biological residue or whether it is abiotic in origin. The significant fact for these purposes is that it does not replenish at anything close to the speed at which we use it. Therefore, we are not in a steady state situation, but rather we are in a drawdown situation, and sooner or later the deposits will be diminished to the point beyond which they will have no more practical utility.

That point, as Dennis Lawrence noted, occurs when the energy needed to extract a barrel of oil, refine it, and transport its products to the end user, exceeds the energy contained in a barrel of oil. After that moment, oil is no longer a net energy resource, but is an energy sink. In order there to be any advantage in trying to use it, the EROEI (Energy Returned On Energy Invested) for oil must be greater than one.

I believe that oil is a biological residue of very prehistoric plants, that its chemical potential energy is derived from sunshine via photosynthesis. I also suspect that any methane dissolved in the Earth's mantle would react with oxygen or oxygen bearing minerals to form CO2, water, and other more oxidized compounds. When a volcano outgases, you don't observe copious quantities of methane; rather, you can observe that a large fraction of it is carbon dioxide, as might be expected from chemistry. But whether my opinion on this matter is correct or not, it is certainly correct that there exists for our practical purposes a fixed supply of oil, and when we have used it all, we will be short on energy, as well as on such important derivatives of oil as artificial fertilizer, pesticides, plastics, and so on, and suffering from the loss of a readily transportable (because fluid) high-energy density resource.

"When will the oil run out?" is A question. But it is not THE question. The answer to it, by the way, is "never," because there will still be some oil left in the ground when it is no longer energetically profitable to attempt to extract it.

"When will the EROEI of oil become less than one?" is a better question because it addresses the primacy of energy physics over market economics as the real basis of life on Earth. The answer to it is "probably in less than 30 years." But this is not THE question, either.

THE question is "When will be start having big troubles on account of an insufficiency of energy resources?" And the answer is "As soon as any of the major currently producing oil fields, which are being kept at present at a sustained peak of extraction rate by seawater pumping, become so depleted that they are no longer worthwhile on account of a local EROEI < 1. That could happen (to, say, Ghawar) most any time.

There are two reasons, and they work together like synergistic devils. First, there's plain old supply-and-demand. Fossil fuel supply rates will go into decline. There's some dispute over when that will happen, and I happen to think that, globally, it already has begun to happen, that the rise in fuel and commodity prices means exactly what it seems to mean (i.e., 911 was a conspiracy, the holocaust is a hoax, but peak oil is neither), and that the end of civilization really is heading our way. Rising prices are a continuous spectrum kind of thing, but they trigger toggle events, such as a major trucking company or supermarket chain going out of business, in the same way that a rise in photon energy triggers the photoelectric effect.

As China's industry grows and its technology modernizes, it will bid for more and more of the world's remaining fossil fuel energy. What it gets, America and Europe do not get. That's why Bush sent US soldiers to Iraq, and it is why those troops are going to stay in Iraq. A similar thing can be said of India and for some other parts of the Third World. More people in the future than in the past will want energy, and there will be less of it in total global supply, and much less of it per bidder.

But besides supply and demand, we in the West have an aggravating condition: fractional reserve banking, monetized debt... in short, Jewish fake currencies posing as real money. The Jews began this game way back in 1850 when the Rothschilds agitated up moral outrage over slavery (they'd have tried to sew division between American Protestants and Catholics if slavery had not been more convenient). They continued the agitation until North and South went to war with each other, borrowing Jewish phony money to gear up their armies. The biggest purpose of the Civil War was to disunite and endebt the United States.

After the war was over and Lincoln was shot for issuing greenbacks and trying to send the Blacks back to Africa, the Jewish bankers hijacked the Senate and the House of Representatives, whose corrupted members cheated up the 14th Amendment—which to this day has no actual legal existence, however much the government tells us to the contrary at gunpoint. The 14th Amendment had two major purposes: (1) paving the way for race-mixing and (2) forbidding Congress to repudiate the public debt of the United States. Of course, since the 14th Amendment has no legality, Congress may indeed repudiate the public debt, and it may indeed make the United States a White country again, by law. It does not because of political pressures which the Jews continue to exert through the banks and through the media.

The next step was the Federal Reserve System, which is a privately owned (by Jews) central bank which has stolen from Congress the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. Louis T. McFadden tried to warn America of what the Jews were up to, and the Jews killed him for it. Kennedy tried to reverse that fiat accompli, and the Jews killed him, too. Ignorants like to point out that the President of the United States nominates the chief governor of the Federal Reserve, and the Senate must decide whether to confirm him or not. But it is a mistake to think that the Jews care one whit whether this Jew or that Jew will serve as the visible liaison to the US government for the next several years, and a liaison is all he is.

Anyway, the Federal Reserve exists to create money "from nothing" by loaning it into existence. The bankers do no work to justify its creation. They do no work to recompense the country for the income they derive from the interest payments. They don't even pay income tax on that income, and they are the only for-profit corporation in the United States with that particular exemption. They even have advantages over counterfeiters (of the illegal sort) in that they can make the American taxpayer buy them the materials to print their money with, the paper to print it on, and the labor involved in the process.

The key fact is that all money in circulation in the United States (or very nearly so) is the aggregate principal of a great many loans. There is no other money set aside, interest free, to pay the interest with. And that means that the country as a whole can never escape endebtedness, so long as it continues to play the game by the Jews' rules. That's why the 14th Amendment's prohibition on repudiating the US public debt was so important to them. In fact, that debt must, by mathematical laws, continue to grow and grow unstoppably, eventually to the point where the whole productive power of the American people can no longer suffice to pay even the maintenance costs, the interest owed on the principal.

Although a few people will escape their own endebtedness through hard work, clever trades, or by means that are or ought to be illegal, they can do so only by capturing a portion of someone else's loan money, thereby leaving that fellow worse off than he was before.

The game is rigged so that the Jews can, at the time of their choosing, snatch away from us every worthwhile thing we have made and appropriate it for their own use, without doing any compensatory labor for our benefit in exchange.

Not content with even this, however, the Jews on the Federal Reserve banks augment their basic strategy with a contrived cycle of booms and busts. During the boom times, the Jews lower the interest rates to encourage Americans to borrow their fake money and use it to hire workers to build valuable things, or to buy them once built. Such as houses, for example. But at the moment the Jews believe that Americans are as deeply into debt as they are going to ever get, they contract the money supply and leave tens of millions of debtors without the means to repay their obligations. This is how the Jews "squeeze the sponge." They emerge at this time to haul the debtor Americans into court, whereupon they strip us of all that we had made with our minds, with our hands, at our risk, and dump us into homelessness, into the prisons, or into our graves.

Demand for energy resources rises exponentially because debt-interest increases the owed amounts at an exponential rate. As long as the supplies of energy kept pace with this demand, most of the people subject to Jewish economics could keep their place through constantly accelerating the rate at which they used energy. That's why prices have already begun climbing, even though the rate of oil extraction has been maintained at a plateau, for the moment, by seawater pressure. A plateau isn't good enough to keep the Jewish vampire away. He will emerge from his crypt and destroy us with our own courthouses unless we either regain an exponentially increasing energy supply, force the US government to quit pretending that the 14th Amendment is real law, or else kill all the Jews involved in the monetized debt scams that threaten us.

When the rate at which energy becomes available begins to decline the Jew cannot fail to emerge to drink our blood. He might even find ways to go after those of us who believe ourselves safe because we are not in debt. For example, the Jews might start manipulating the property tax laws. Every Jewish home? A temple. It has a religious tax-exemption. Every gentile home? A den of vice! It must be taxed double or triple, or a dozen times what it was before, until the goy homeowner can pay no more, at which time the sheriff will appear to dispossess him, and his house will be bought at auction by those Jewish banks who will already have in their hands the homes of the gentile debtors.

Jerry Abbott


Part 2. The Federal Prosecution of Shaun Walker stinks of political ulterior motives.

I just want to put in a "me too" to the information from Alaska Pride, The Truth, and the National Alliance. There is so much falsehood and malice in the federal prosecution of Shaun Walker that most of the people who set out to learn the truth about it can't believe that the government could be guilty of so much outrageous mischief. In their disbelief, they become overloaded with consternation and just don't want to hear any more.

So let me say up front that Shaun Walker and I are not friends. I've a personal grudge with him because I believe him guilty of helping to steal the National Alliance from its rightful Board of Directors to the detriment of the organization and its membership. However, honor compels me to say that Walker is not guilty of the crimes with which the federal government charged him.

The prosecuting US attorney built a case that was false through and through, and a complicit federal judge put a gag order on Walker so that Walker could not legally and publicly defend himself from the false and malicious charges or from the government's defamation of his character.

I know Shaun Walker personally, and, whereas I'm no friend of his, I can testify that he isn't given to drunkenness or to stupidly initiating violence. Walker would fight if provoked, and he'd fight to win, but he is an image-conscious person who would want people to say that he deserved to win, that the other guy was the villain. The government lied about Shaun Walker's character to make their false "hate crime" charges against him seem plausible.

The incident for which Shaun Walker was arrested was a 31 Dec 2002 fight that began in O'Shucks, a bar in Salt Lake City, Utah, when a bar patron threw an alcoholic beverage into the face of a white man named Keith Cotter. A mestizo bartender, Jimmy Ballesteros, decided that Cotter should leave the establishment, and while escorting Cotter to the door, Ballesteros gave Cotter a shove. That's what set off the fight between Cotter and Ballesteros. They are the ones who fought. Shaun Walker was not involved. Shaun Walker had entered the bar on that night hoping to meet with friends prior to walking downtown to see the New Year's Day fireworks celebration. Walker left the bar before the fight occurred.

Almost four years later, a US Attorney would charge Shaun Walker with committing a "hate crime" which not only was not a hate crime (local police recognized it as a "simple assault"), it was a crime that he had not even witnessed. The conflict involved other persons, and the violence was instigated by a thrown beer and a shove.

Jimmy Ballesteros refused medical treatment and reportedly went skiing the next day. Three weeks later, the police interviewed Ballesteros at O'Shucks, and Ballesteros told them that he didn't need any further assistance and that he probably would not be able to recognize anyone else (other than Cotter) who might have been involved in the fight. Two-and-a-half years later, on 6 June 2005, Ballesteros changed his story, telling police that he could identify "suspects" if he saw pictures of them.

About that same time, in May 2005,  federal prosecutors confronted Keith Cotter, who was suspected in a number of other assaults. The federals put pressure on Cotter and made a deal with him. Evidently, Cotter agreed to parrot what the federal prosecutor wanted him to say, and in exchange Cotter would not be prosecuted for some of the alleged offenses.

Shaun Walker had become Chairman of the National Alliance on 25 April 2005. So you see how it went. The US Attorney didn't begin "developing" his case against Walker in 2003. Oh, no. He began developing it after Walker became the leader of the National Alliance, and the development involved at least two instances of suborned perjury, false testimony probably solicited by the federal prosecutor.

And that's how Shaun Walker ended up being convicted for an act of violence at which he was not present. That is how a "hate crime" was fabricated, almost four years after the fact, from a simple assault for which no state charges were ever filed. The cause of the fight between Cotter and Ballesteros was the shove Ballesteros gave Cotter, a shove which compounded Ballesteros unreasonable and unfair decision to eject the victim of a prior assault (a thrown beer) instead of the assault's perpetrator (the thrower). But, even if Cotter had behaved unreasonably on that occasion—in my opinion, his decision to fight back was reasonable—the point is: Shaun Walker was NOT INVOLVED.

Until his release in November 2009, Shaun Walker was a political prisoner. His prosecution was motivated by Jewish organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, which have entirely too much influence with federal police, federal judges, and federal prosecutors. Shaun Walker went to prison because he became the leader of a White nationalist organization. The charges were invented to serve as a pretext.

The inescapable conclusion is that we have a government that is unable or unwilling to carry out any of its legal functions properly. It can't be trusted to make good laws. It can't be trusted to enforce the laws correctly. It can't be trusted to try cases impartially.  It can't be trusted to tell the truth or to abstain from lies. It can't be trusted to seek punishment for the guilty and let the innocent alone. The US government is a danger to Americans. Shaun Walker isn't the only victim. There's also Chester Doles and Matt Hale and Randy Weaver and Yorie Kahl, all of them victims of federal lies and corruption.

The Murder of Kenneth Trentadue
The Murder of Gordon Kahl
The Murder of Viki Weaver

Jerry Abbott


Leftists heat the pot and then blame the water for boiling.

Part 1.

QUESTION: Why is Nasa Racist against black Spacemen? How come all the spacemen that Nasa send to space are always white? I have NEVER seen them train and send a black spaceman there. And IT IS A FACT that all the spacement who went to the moon were white males. - Is this fair? ermm NO. - So why dont president obama declare a new mission to the moon before the decade is out and make sure that at least two of the crew are black spacemen? Everyone should be given a chance.

Arthur Jensen is a professor of psychology at the University of California at Berkeley. Philippe Rushton is a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario. Both of them have been prominent in the investigation of intelligence as being correlated with race, or of average group IQ being racially variable.

"How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?" by Arthur Jensen, Harvard Educational Review, Winter 1969.

"Race, Evolution, and Behavior," by J. Philippe Rushton, Transaction Publishers, 1995.

Here's a condensed brief on why Blacks are not represented in science in general, or in spaceflight in particular, with anything resembling their demographic percentage.

Blacks resident in the United States have an average IQ of 85, a figure that has been stable for about the past hundred years. The reason US resident Blacks have higher IQs than their African cousins (mean IQ 70) is that the former have absorbed White genes to the extent that today they are about 25% White, a fact which shows not only in a somewhat lighter skin color, but also in a significantly higher intelligence.

The lower IQ scores for Blacks don't occur because Blacks were "marginalized" or "disadvantaged." The shortfall in Black IQ is the direct result of Blacks having brains that are 100 grams lighter and have about 14% less cerebral sulsification. The causes of the brain differences were persistent environmental differences (chiefly climate) in paleolithic times; they are not the result of environmental differences in modern times.

The reason that Blacks have smaller and less complex brains is that they evolved in a tropical environment. Whites own evolution took them through generations of cold winters, during which people with small brains, caught without shelter while traveling, had their heads frozen solid, causing death. Natural selection favored the survival of people with larger brains, and, once the extra neural mass was available, nature was quick to find ways to put it to use. And that is why Whites are, in general, as a rule, smarter than Blacks today.

However improved versus the pureblood Africans they might be, the US resident Blacks are nowhere near the IQ of White Americans (mean IQ 103). The abundance Blacks in intellectual occupations is the result of legal arm-twisting; it is not a consequence of any Black intellectual merit.

Let me show you some homework.

White (American) racial average in IQ: 103.
White (American) racial standard deviation in IQ: 15 points.
Black (US resident) racial average in IQ: 85.
Black (US resident) racial standard deviation in IQ: 12 points.
Gaussian distribution in IQ assumed for both races.
Simpson's rule used to integrate distributions.
> Step size: 0.01 points of IQ.
> Variable precision: 16 digits.
Fraction of Whites with IQs above 130: 0.03593
Fraction of Blacks with IQs above 130: 0.00008842
US population ratio, Whites to Blacks, in 1995: 6.71.

For a job requiring a minimum IQ of 130, there should be one Black hired for each 2727 Whites hired, on the average. Any trend involving the systematic hiring of Blacks in a proportion greater than one per 2727 Whites indicates some sort of bias, unrelated to merit, in favor of Blacks. A "reachdown," in other words. Like those female firefighter applicants who were denied employment because they couldn't pass the "climb and carry" tests, but sued the city to be hired anyway, and God help the heavy person who must depend on any of them someday to carry him out of a burning building.

Likewise, one day the employer whose success in business depends on his Black reachdown hires actually knowing how to do the job they are being paid to do, to do it well and creatively enough to beat the competition, will fail when the legal assumptions about racial equality don't agree with the facts of life.

Space science involves many intellectually very demanding tasks. We can't have just anyone being an astronaut. It would at least waste the taxpayers' money, and might endanger the lives of other persons, if NASA made allowances for racial quotas and, thus, did reachdowns. Of course, those risks won't stop NASA from doing that very thing in the prevailing atmosphere of political correctness, but it is, nonetheless, a dangerous thing to do.

Suppose that some future manned deep space NASA mission runs into the sort of trouble that Apollo 13 had. The computer is down. The radio won't work. The window for a necessary course correction is coming up, and the crew hasn't received the delta-vee vector from Mission Control. Somebody like Buzz Aldrin (or me), in that situation, can just about figure out what the delta-vee has to be with a ballpoint pen on the back of an envelope. With a pocket calculator, it would be a breeze. Could the typical reachdown Black astronaut do as well? Not likely. Here's my article where I solve this very kind of problem.
http://jenab6.angelfire.com/eto.rtf
(You'll have to copy the URL and paste it into your browser's address window. This link doesn't work if you just click on it.)

The higher the minimum IQ is for satisfactory job performance, the smaller the Black-to-White hiring ratio would be, if the government stopped meddling in the market with "civil rights" laws.

If the minimum IQ for a particular job is 140, then the average hiring ratio (without government interference) would be one Black for each 19997 Whites hired. If the minimum IQ is 150, the hiring ratio would be one Black for each 190,981 Whites hired. If the minimum IQ is 160, the hiring ratio would be one Black for each 2,365,466 Whites hired.

The Asians tested are mostly those who immigrated to Western countries, which might constitute a high-pass filter on the general Asian population, whereas the Whites with whom they were compared were not so filtered. We really don't know what effect it would have on the "average Asian IQ," if most of the people in the interior of China, along with those in Nepal and Tibet, were also tested. For the studies from which we draw our comparisons, the Asians were not so completely sampled as were the Whites.

The average IQ for US-resident Asians is 105.
The average IQ for White Americans is 103.
The average IQ for the US population, including all races, is 100.
The average IQ for US-resident Blacks is 85.
The average IQ of Black Africans is 70.

It's clear where the BIG gaps are, and where they are not.

I don't know why some people speak of diversity (i.e., racial mixing) as if it were some sort of improvement. It usually isn't. Most of the time, the drawbacks outweigh the gains. And there might not be any actual gains, from a mission operational standpoint. You might think that ability and good intentions were all that mattered for building a professional team. But that's not quite true.

When races are mixed, a raft of adverse circumstances leaps into being and must be weighed against any gains in team competence. The most obvious adverse circumstance is the visceral offense that race-mixing nearly always gives to the hominid tribal sense, which usually manifests as a vague feeling of impending threat, much as though someone critical were always looking over your shoulder, breathing down your neck. People compensate for having that feeling by behaving in an excessively ingratiating manner, being over-polite, mouthing all the correct platitudes without devoting any rational thought to whether they are actually true.

Acting that way is no trouble at all... for the first hour or so. But if you find that you must do it every hour of every working day, you will get tired of the act. It will wear you out. You will have to divert increasing amounts of attention, mental energy, to maintaining the "tolerance facade" over your real personality. Your own performance will decline as the result. As people become tired of playing their unnatural roles, they'll begin to slip. To keep order, those in authority will start to crack down on those who slip.

And where there are such things as "protected minorities" who must be "shielded from oppression," those who are not in such favored groups will be presumed guilty when any disorderly behavior occurs. You can see where this will lead, I'm sure.

And when reachdowns are being done to satisfy laws, or to secure political objectives, with regard to mixing races, we ought not assume that everyone hired is able or has good intentions.

Jerry Abbott

"Mixing shit and ice cream ruins the ice cream and does not improve the shit. America's cities are made unlivable because of Black violence and impoverished because Whites fled from the Black perpetrators of murder, assault, robbery, rape, and property destruction. American's educational system, which was the wonder of the world a hundred years ago, was eviscerated and devalued every single year because of fanatical racial egalitarian attempts to mainstream Negroes. Civility in the United States descended into the anomie, stupidity, and rudeness of a third-world nation. From the pinnacle of polite society, or close to it, America fell down to the level of a Suweto ghetto with toys, deodorant and glamorized pornography. That's what multiculturalism did to the United States. For the past 50 years, the Americans have tried, with a government gun to their heads and with liberal hymns in their ears, to mix shit and milk. They did not get a milkshake. They got poison."


Part 2a. Calculating the orbital elements from a state vector and an instant of time.

QUESTION: What happens to everything else not traveling a the right velocity to fall into orbit?

Every possible combination of position and velocity corresponds to some sort of orbit. The orbit might terminate in a collision with another object, in an atmospheric entry, or with a change of velocity that puts it into a different orbit, but while a celestial body is moving under the influence of gravity, it's in an orbit. The position and velocity of an object, for the same moment in time, is called a "state vector."

[ x, y, z, Vx, Vy, Vz ] @ time = t

Let's assume that [x,y,z] is the heliocentric position vector whose components are given in meters, while [Vx,Vy,Vz] is the sun-relative velocity whose components are expressed in meters per second, and t is the moment of interest in Julian Date (days).

The solar gravitational parameter.
GM = 1.32712440018e20 m³ sec⁻²

The heliocentric distance, r (in meters), of the object at time = t.
r = sqrt( x² + y² + z² )

The sun-relative speed, V (in m/sec), of the object at time = t.
V = sqrt[ (Vx)² + (Vy)² + (Vz)² ]

The semimajor axis, a, of the orbit, meters.
a = 1 / { 2/r − V² / (GM) }

The angular momentum, h, per unit mass (m²/sec), in the orbit.
hx = y Vz − z Vy
hy = z Vx − x Vz
hz = x Vy − y Vx
h = sqrt[ (hx)² + (hy)² + (hz)² ]

The eccentricity, e, of the orbit.
e = sqrt[ 1 − h² / (GMa) ]

The inclination, i, of the orbit.
i = ArcCos( hz / h )

The longitude of the ascending node, Ω, of the orbit.
Ω = Arctan ( hx , −hy )

Definition of the two-argument Arctan function (result in radians).
atn(z) = single argument Arctan function of the argument z.
Function Arctan( y , x )
. if x = 0 and y > 0 then angle = +π/2
. if x = 0 and y = 0 then angle = 0
. if x = 0 and y < 0 then angle = −π/2
. if x < 0 then angle = atn(y/x) + π
. if x > 0 and y > 0 then angle = atn(y/x)
. if x > 0 and y < 0 then angle = atn(y/x) + 2π
Arctan = angle

Note: the math to this point works for either elliptical or hyperbolic orbits. However, some of the stuff to follow works only for elliptical orbits. I can supply the math for hyperbolic orbits on request. You'll know that the orbit is a hyperbola if (1) the semimajor axis is negative and (2) the eccentricity is greater than one.

The true anomaly, θ, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
cos θ = h²/(rGM) − 1
sin θ = h (x Vx + y Vy + z Vz) / (rGM)
θ = Arctan ( sin θ , cos θ )

Argument of the perihelion, ω, of the orbit.
cos ω'' = (x cos Ω + y sin Ω) / r
If sin i = 0 then sin ω'' = (y cos Ω − x sin Ω) / r
If sin i<>0 then sin ω'' = z / (r sin i)
ω'' = Arctan( sin ω'' , cos ω'' )
ω' = ω'' − θ
If ω' > 0 then ω = ω'
If ω' < 0 then ω = ω' + 2π

The eccentric anomaly, u, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
sin u = (r/a) sin θ / sqrt(1−e²)
cos u = (r/a) cos θ + e
u = Arctan( sin u , cos u )

The mean anomaly, m, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
m = u − e sin u
Note: u must be entered in radians, and m will return in radians.

The period of the orbit, P, days.
P = (π / 43200) sqrt[ a³ / (GM) ]

The mean motion, μ, in the orbit, radians per day.
μ = 2π / P

The time of perihelion passage, T, of the object in the orbit, Julian Date.
T = t − m/μ

The Keplerian orbital elements.
[ a, e, i, Ω, ω, T ]

Jerry Abbott


Part 2b. Calculating the state vector from the orbital elements and an instant of time.

Now, let's go the other way. We'll again use meters for distances (a, r), days for intervals of time (P), Julian date format for moments of time ( t, T) and radians for angles.

The Keplerian orbital elements.
[ a, e, i, Ω, ω, T ] @ time = t

The solar gravitational parameter, GM.
GM = 1.32712440018e20 m³ sec⁻²

The period of the orbit, P, days.
P = (π / 43200) sqrt[ a³ / (GM) ]

The mean anomaly, m, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
m₀ = (t − T) / P
m = 2π [m₀ − integer(m₀)]

The eccentric anomaly, u, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
u = m
Repeat...
. U₀ = u
. F₀ = U₀ − e sin U₀ − m
. F₁ = 1 − e cos U₀
. F₂ = e sin U₀
. F₃ = e cos U₀
. D₁ = −F₀ / F₁
. D₂ = −F₀ / [ F₁ + D₁ F₂ / 2 ]
. D₃ = −F₀ / [ F₁ + D₁ F₂ / 2 + (D₂)² F₃ / 6 ]
. u = U₀ + D₃
UNTIL |u−U₀| < 1e−14

The canonical position vector of the object in its orbit at time t.
x''' = a (cos u − e)
y''' = a sin u sqrt (1−e²)
z''' = 0

The true anomaly, θ, of the object in the orbit at time = t.
θ = Arctan( y''' , x''' )
Note: refer to the definition of the Arctan( y , x ) function in section 2a.

Rotate the triple-prime position vector about the z''' axis by the argument of the perihelion, ω.
x'' = x''' cos ω − y''' sin ω
y'' = x''' sin ω + y''' cos ω
z'' = z''' = 0

Rotate the double-prime position vector about the x'' axis by the inclination, i.
x' = x''
y' = y'' cos i
z' = y'' sin i

The heliocentric position of the object in the orbit at time t.
Rotate the single-prime position vector about the z' axis by the longitude of the ascending node, Ω.
x = x' cos Ω − y' sin Ω
y = x' sin Ω + y' cos Ω
z = z'

k = sqrt { GM / [ a (1 − e²) ] }
k is a speed in meters per second.

The canonical velocity vector of the object in its orbit at time t.
Vx''' = −k sin θ
Vy''' = k (e + cos θ)
Vz''' = 0

Rotate the triple-prime velocity vector about the z''' axis by the argument of the perihelion, ω.
Vx'' = Vx''' cos ω − Vy''' sin ω
Vy'' = Vx''' sin ω + Vy''' cos ω
Vz'' = Vz''' = 0

Rotate the double-prime velocity vector about the x'' axis by the inclination, i.
Vx' = Vx''
Vy' = Vy'' cos i
Vz' = Vy'' sin i

The sun-relative velocity in ecliptic coordinates, at time t.
Rotate the single-prime velocity vector about the z' axis by the longitude of the ascending node, Ω.
Vx = Vx' cos Ω − Vy' sin Ω
Vy = Vx' sin Ω + Vy' cos Ω
Vz = Vz'

The state vector of the object in the orbit at time t.
[ x, y, z, Vx, Vy, Vz ]

Jerry Abbott


Part 3.

QUESTION: Why exactly are there 6 billion people on this planet?

Voluntary methods of population control fail because whatever genes promote compliance behavior get deleted by natural selection from the gene pool. The "responsible" people, who limit their breeding, get outbred and replaced by the "reckless" people, who kept on breeding as fast as they could.

Forcible measures to limit births at the national level also have a potential problem. At least, they do if technology can't make up, in terms of national defense, what a reduction in the number of soldiers takes away. A country that assiduously ensures that its population is kept down might become vulnerable to conquest by a more numerous neighbor country, after which its population might go from limited (by birth control) to zero (by military genocide). And once again the "reckless" rapid breeders win the game.

Nature provided a way for humans to keep their numbers down: low-technology warfare. We're actually supposed to fight each other, to partition ourselves off in clannish tribal groups and make plans to exterminate our rival clannish tribal groups. In that way, the victors will limit the human load on the biosphere by killing the losers, and at the same time the struggles will generally go in favor of the stronger and smarter peoples. Over the generations, the human species would improve, as well as staying within sustainable numbers.

But along came the "universal brotherhood" religions, and the liberal sentimentalists, and the fossil fuel industries, and spoiled nature's whole game. For that, we shall pay a price when we start running low on fossil fuels and discover that we are far into resource overshoot. The human die-off that will follow will dwarf anything that man has ever done to himself with war.

Jerry Abbott


Part 4.

QUESTION. How to find the path of an object around a planet? Is there an equation?

Orbital motion near a planet is Keplerian only to a first approximation. Planets are often imperfectly symmetric in their mass distribution. There are equations that model the gravitational potential field of a planet by spherical harmonic expansions. They are fairly complicated.

Φ(r,β) = (GM/r) { 1 − Σ(n=2,∞)[ Jn (R₀/r)ⁿ Pn sin β ] }

Φ = potential energy per unit mass
GM = Earth's gravitational parameter
r = geocentric distance
Jn = Bessel function, or zonal harmonic, of order n
J₂ = 0.0010839, J₃ = -2.4e-6, J₄ = -1.3e-6, J₅ = -2.0e-7
Pn = Legendre polynomial, degree n
β = latitude
R₀ = Earth's average radius

The J₂ zonal harmonic is by far the largest, and corresponds to Earth's equatorial bulge, caused by the planet's rotation. For short term position predictions, the higher order harmonics (which correspond to various kinds of lumpiness) are often ignored.

However, if you're only going to use an orbit for one pass, as is usually the case for transfer orbits, then you can stick with the Keplerian approximation. I'll be good enough to get you to within shouting distance of where you want to be.

Jerry Abbott

Here's my answer.

Karl Marx was right about the injustices of capitalism, but he was wrong about the remedy. Capitalism's biggest fault is that individual merit only determines success at the beginning. As time goes by, wealth gathers into the hands of a minority, where it becomes a decisive advantage in the pursuit of more wealth. The measure of man moves from his genes to his bank accounts, from his blood to his wallet, from what he is to what he owns. The possession of wealth becomes the supreme survival trait, easily overmatching strength, dexterity, agility, stamina, and, in the end, even intelligence.

The reason it works is the availability of exosomatic energy resources, chiefly fossil fuels. As long as money can buy gasoline, rich men can pretend that fossil power, put to use in engines, is power inherent in them as men. No one without money-privileged access to nature's accumulated stores of exosomatic energy can compete with those who do.

That's what Ayn Rand left out of Atlas Shrugged. It's a fantasy, of course, but it is a fantasy very seductive to rich people, who believe it because it flatters them. Ayn Rand spoke much of "men of ability," leaving it very strongly implied that what enabled them was their personal qualities, such as intelligence or decisiveness. She spoke often of coal-burning engines and other industrial uses of fossil fuels. But she used every trick she could think of to prevent her readers from connecting the ability with the fuels and observing that her "men of ability" really weren't so much superior to everyone else as their wealth might lead one to suppose. In real life, wealth brings such men privileged access to exosomatic energy resources, which then become their enabler.

The simple fact is, the employer merely stands between the customer and the labor. He listens, and then he points. He produces nothing himself and could be outdone by any of his workers were he to try it.

When fossil fuels are depleted, as eventually they must be, the illusion will be dispelled: the lumberjack will again know himself stronger than the owner of the bulldozer, the engineer will again know that he is smarter than the corporate manager who once bossed him, and the banker will understand, at long last, that he is worthless. When fossil fuels are depleted, nature will present mankind with the bill for his accumulation of genetic defects, which temporarily had been put on the credit card of technology, and many hereditary lines will suddenly discover that they are not really fit to live in this world.

But Marxist socialism isn't a good remedy to capitalism. It leads merely to the exchange of one kind of exploiter (the capitalists) by another (the communist party). The workers don't actually get to behave as if the country were theirs; no, they must toe the communists' political lines and jump through the communists' legal hoops, more or less as they once did for their employers, or for corporate lawyers.

Marxism has "tragedy in the commons" type failures. Capitalism has one of these, too, but capitalism's commons is the entire world and everything in it, including the "non-player" people (the working folks), and the tragedy doesn't happen until the world is all used up. Socialism has tragedies in the commons on a much smaller scale, being the result of presuming all workers equals, even though they are not, and pretending that each worker ought to be paid the same for being "on the job" for an hour.

Every worker knows that it is useless for him to display exceptional talent or diligence, since he won't be paid for it, and what eventually happens is workers just show up and read books or drink vodka, unless the secret police appear to see whether everyone is working. Then one guy gets dragged off and executed, and everyone else works hard until they aren't scared any more, then they go back to reading books and drinking vodka.

Capitalism is like a cancer. It grows like mad, kills a world, and dies along with it. Marxism is like having chronically low energy while most of your body parts have been assigned to the wrong places.

However, it is a mistake to consider Marxism as the only kind of socialism. Marxism is socialism based on the idea that people are, first and foremost, members of economic classes. That's the wrong idea that causes much of the trouble with it. Nature's laws never produced any special reason for people to identify with their economic class.

But there is a kind of socialism that is based on the idea that people are, first and foremost, members of biological communities: families on the small scale, races on the large scale, with tribes being somewhere in the middle. Nature's laws did create a special reason for people to identify with their biological communities, though it requires explanation.

Millions of years ago, evolution was making animals more competitive by making them bigger, stronger, and more ferocious. The fossil record shows that dinosaurs kept gaining size and power. After a while, though, the point of diminishing returns was found, as the mass-to-muscle-power ratio set a limit on how large an animal could be without being unduly burdened by his own weight. At that point, additional increases in size were evolutionarily counter-survival, and further adaptive advantage had to be found by other means.

With the evolution of mammals, nature had settled on intelligence as the new means for evolutionary progress. But now there was a new trade-off: between the amount of time the mother remained pregnant, thereby being burdened and endangered, and the amount of time required for the formation of the baby's brain. Nature's compromise was somewhat longer pregnancies, but the baby was born without the ability immediately to care for itself. If the mammal babies were forsaken by their mother, as reptile babies usually are, they'd be easy prey for any carnivore or omnivore.

Nature's remedy was to evolve a new emotion for mammals, and that emotion was love, perhaps first expressed as the maternal instinct to take care of babies. That allowed mammal brains to grow larger with time. It also overcame the "tragedy in the commons" problem for biological collectives—up to a point, anyway.

A socialism based on the idea that people are primarily members of biological collectives might actually work, whereas Marxism, which is based on the wrong sort of collective, never has worked so far.

Jerry Abbott


Part 2. Our nickname for Barack Obama should be Pongo.

As former US President George W. Bush sometimes resembled an angry chimpanzee, even more does our current Usurper, False-President Barack Obama, resemble an orangutan. The Jewish media had an easy time of doctoring up carefully selected photos of Bush to emphasize his resemblance to a Pan. But despite all their efforts to conceal the resemblance of Obama to a Pongo, it is nonetheless obvious.

Lawbreakers deserve, at the very least, to be mocked, and someone who usurps the office of President in clear contravention of the supreme law of the land is one of the most egregious of lawbreakers. So, to give him his due, let us refer to Barack Obama, henceforth, as Pongo. Pongo from the Congo? No, this Pongo is from Kenya.

Notice to smartypants liberals: I already know that orangutans are apes native to Indonesia. That's the country in which Barack Obama currently has citizenship.



Part 3a. Some thoughts and statistics pertaining to feminism and child support.

I'm an antifeminist, and there are several small antifeminist movements afoot. But these are not nearly as effective as they should be. They are not unified, and they are mostly either local or mail-box organizations. They don't have the budget to compete with the Jews, er, ah, I mean the feminists.

Oh what the heck, I'll tell you. Feminism is only a part of a yet higher level of organization. Don't you suppose that there is a reason that it sprung up like a Jill-in-the-box in the middle of the 20th century? Feminism is one of several major strategies that the Jews have raised against Western Civilization. Another is economic globalism. A third is international racial mixing. A fourth is communism. A fifth is the systematic corruption of academia, especially as pertains to history and the life and social sciences. A sixth is the Jewish control of the mass media in America, in the UK, and in many European countries.

The 1960s hippie counterculture scene was also mostly a Jewish invention, albeit a more temporary one. It was led by Jews such as Abbie Hoffman and Ira Einhorn.

It's all part of the same, Jewish package of hate against the White West. Each of their strategies is intended to weaken us in some way, or divide our race against itself to the same end. Each of them has had heavy Jewish financial backing, and most of the leaders of the crusades, in every case, are Jews or Jewesses. Even communism, which began when Leon Trotsky carried $20 million in gold backed certificates from Jacob Schiff of New York's Kuhn-Loeb bank to finance the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.

In other words, not only are men's advocates several magnitudes of organizational scale too small to challenge the feminists effectively, if they were to slay the feminist dragon and do nothing more, then they would find all their work undone when the Dragon Breeders simply popped another dragon upon them at some later date.

Feminism has raised the divorce rate, made hostages of millions of children and slaves of millions of fathers. That's the truth. The only thing feminism has done to children is harm them while providing women with inducements to moral corruption, not to mention the harm to men foolish enough to believe that a woman meant it when she promised "...for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, for as long as you both shall live." Let's look at some of the details.

Children raised by their mothers only (i.e., in a fatherless home) account for:

* 71% of pregnant teenagers
(Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services, press release, Friday, March 26, 1999.)

* 63% of youth suicides.
(Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census.)

* 90% of all homeless and runaway children.

* 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes.
(Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988.)

* 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders.
(Source: Centers for Disease Control.)

* 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger.
(Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)

* 71% of all high school dropouts.
(Source: National Principals' Association Report on the State of High Schools.)

* 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers.
(Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)

* 85% of all youths sitting in prisons.
(Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992.)

Want that fixed? Then support changes to the laws that award custody to fathers, instead of to mothers. We know from statistics such as these that awarding custody to mothers causes an increased risk of harm to children. By making fathers the prime choice for custodial parent, the risk to children will lessen. And it will probably have a side benefit of reducing the divorce rate. The evidence is in, and this is what it means. Anyone who does not support that change in the child custody laws does not care about children, is venal to the point where he would sacrifice a million children's lives and hopes so that he might keep in good report with the Jewish media.

Child support is an extortion racket that feminists invented and slid into American laws, where they plague us all. It isn't about helping children. It's about transferring wealth from men who worked to earn it to women who did not. Child support awards contain a large proportion of hidden alimony, or money that the women receiving it use for their own pleasure. It is not fair to men that they must thus sustain a woman who no longer provides them with those things which wives do for their husbands.

Divorced mothers are about five times more likely to receive sole custody of children, as compared with divorced fathers.

80% of divorced mothers with sole custody of children receive child support payments from their former husbands, but only 30% of divorced fathers with sole custody of children receive child support payments from their former wives.

47% of divorced mothers who are ordered to pay child support to custodial fathers are complete deadbeats, but only 27% of divorced fathers who are ordered to pay child support to custodial mothers do not pay.

(Source: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.)

Now, suppose we pretend that we could remove the gender bias from the law. If fathers and mothers were equally likely to receive sole custody of children, if non-custodial parents all had the same odds of paying or receiving a child support award, regardless of their gender, then what would the ratio of deadbeat moms to deadbeat dads be? The per capita rate of deadbeats among noncustodial moms with a child support obligation, divided by the per capita rate of deadbeats among noncustodial dads with a child support obligation, is 1.74. Male parents have some combination of honesty, dutifulness and concern for their children that exceeds that of female parents by that ratio.

It is clear that children would be better off if they were raised by their fathers, rather than by their mothers, other things being equal. It is also clear that, on a per capita basis, women are more likely than men to try to sneak away and not pay. If the gender bias in determining custody, and the further gender bias in deciding whether a child support award will be made, were removed from the law, it would be obvious that the typical deadbeat parent is a woman, not a man.

Whether you judge by the per capita rate ratio of female to male deadbeats (1.74), or by the abuse/neglect statistics presented earlier, it seems likely that fathers are more responsible parents than mothers in about seven cases out of ten, on the average.

So why are things as they are? Jews. They corrupted White women with promises of power, and achieved their real aim, which was weakening the White race by setting its men and its women against each other. It's actually a rather simple variation of their Marxist game, in which the Jews use the working class against the intellectual class, promising power to a part, but really achieving only a weakening of the whole.

The evidence that women have been morally corrupted is not especially hard to find.

In 1963, before women had started roaring too loud to be ignoring, there were 160,000 reports of suspected child abuse. As feminists began having their way with the divorce laws, women going through divorces found it expedient, and essentially risk-free, to falsely allege that their husbands were child abusers. In 1985, there were 1.7 million claims of child abuse. In 1995, the number had reached three million allegations, and more than two-thirds of them were definitely proved to be false. To my knowledge, not a single one of those lying women went to prison for perjury, even though in each case a man would surely have been wrongfully incarcerated if her lies had been believed.

(Source: National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN), Child Maltreatment 1995: Reports From the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System.)

Jerry Abbott


Part 3b. Venting some similar thoughts on Yahoo Answers, in response to the question:

Why do feminists blame men for womens decisions period? If not enough women aspire to gain positions of power its mens fault. If not enough women aspire to become pro athletes its mens fault. If women enter the adult entertainment industry its mens fault. Whats up with that?

It's worse than you suppose. Even if lots of women enter the adult entertainment industry, men aren't supposed to have any fun while being entertained by them. No, the feminists want all the fun to belong to lesbians. Men are merely supposed to appreciate the aesthetic grace and power of the women performers, and to speak very respectfully of them, in such a way that implies they are worshiping them as though they were angels, not lusting after them because they are members of the opposite sex.

As to the other professions in which women don't appear in their demographic proportions, usually it's because women don't apply or train for them in demographic proportions. Feminists assert, quite without proof, that women do apply and train for such professions, but that men "band together" to deny them entry or advancement. That's not the case. Men generally are not cohesive enough to behave with the kind of sexist collectivism that you observe among feminists. But you can't reason with feminists to the point where they understand that they are projecting themselves into their mental image of men.

Shelob, feminists are certainly competitive. They just don't want qualifications to matter. Remember the female firefighter trainees who failed the "climb and carry" tests, were denied employment for that reason, and then sued the city to be hired anyway? There's a prime example for you.

Another example can be found in child support laws. It's the woman who chooses to have the baby... but they want men to pay the bills. Logically, in all fairness, the man's liability should be limited to half the cost of an abortion, to be paid only if the woman has an abortion. Well, okay: maybe whether she has an abortion or not. But half of what an abortion costs is the just extent of the amount due. Instead, men get stuck with the equivalent of forced labor, i.e. slave labor, in the amount of 10,000 to 20,000 hours, from which all the reward goes to the woman who mothered his child.

Feminists like to find fault with men who don't pay child support, but they don't acknowledge the sexism which they had such a large part of putting in the child support laws. Mothers are at least five times more likely than fathers to receive custody. Custodial mothers are 2.7 times more likely than custodial fathers to be awarded child support from their former spouse. If both of these sexist practices were ended, such that fathers and mothers were equally likely to receive sole custody and such that custodial parents were equally likely to receive a child support award, regardless of the custodial parent's gender, then you would see that the typical deadbeat parent is a woman, not a man. On a per capita basis, noncustodial mothers owing child support are deadbeats 1.74 times more often than are noncustodial fathers owing child support.

Not only that, it's a fact that about 3/4 of the major problems that afflict children—teen pregnancy, dropping out of school, going to jail, using drugs, etc.—involve children being raised by their mothers alone, i.e., in fatherless homes.

Whether you judge by the responsibility in paying child support, or by the distribution of the results of bad parenting, it is clear that fathers are better parents than mothers in about seven cases out of ten, on the average. By instilling into child custody laws a heavy preference for maternal custody, feminism has harmed children. It seems obvious in retrospect that feminism never set out to protect children, that their aim all along was to create an extortion racket in which men could be enslaved by their former wives following a divorce, which gave females legal and social leverage by which to pressure and control males. Which has resulted in the moral corruption of women.

Jerry Abbott

*since JD 2454852

To the governments of every country in the world. As long as Barack Obama is acting as President of the United States, and has not proved his Constitutional eligibility to do so, he should be presumed a Usurper of the powers of the United States to whose acts the United States cannot be legally bound. It is in your interests, as it is in ours, for you to forsake all ties with the United States until such time as it once again has a head-of-state of proven legality. Please, do not conduct any business with the United States until then, nor enter into any treaty, nor collaborate in any venture which Barack Obama or his agent may propose. Shun the United States as a rogue nation until we have a lawful chief executive once more.

To the US Armed Forces. Please support and defend our Constitution and entertain no pretenses that you are doing so when you are not.

As long as the one who hold the office of President is constitutionally ineligible, you are in a dangerous dilemma. The moment you get an order that originated with the Usurper, or resulted from one of his policies, you will have to choose whether to be called a "traitor" in the press and on legal papers or else be a traitor for real. If you obey the order, then you really are a traitor, even if nothing bad happens to you. If you disobey the order, rightly pointing out that you are forbidden to obey illegal orders, then you will be called a traitor and probably punished as if you were one, even though the exact opposite will be true.

To date, very few of your comrades in the ranks and in the officer corps have demonstrated a willingness to do their duty to preserve the Constitution in the face of an outlaw president. It's as if Jesse James were running a bank, and all the bank guards were pretending not to notice the stealing he was doing, just as long as their own paychecks and retirement benefits were left alone.

Did you not think that the time might come when you would have to fight for your country? Didn't you consider that the danger to your country might come from an unusual direction? What kind of soldier are you?

To the top military leaders: How does it feel, Generals, Admirals, Chiefs of Staff, to be caught so unprepared for the communist assault when it finally happened? There you have been, these past 60 years, bristling with your modern weapons, ready to fight anyone who might be tempted to start a war with the United States, loud in your declarations of "preparedness," and then watching without any meaningful challenge as your enemy walks boldly and openly into the office of your Commander-in-Chief. Do you have enough sense to know when you have been mocked?

I mean, thanks for nothing, fellows. Do you know what you are? Let me just tell you. You probably watched the movie Braveheart. It was a good movie, with Mel Gibson playing William Wallace. Do you remember how, in the crucial battle for Scottish Independence, the Scottish nobles, who figured they could get a better deal from the enemy king than they'd have in an independent Scotland, betrayed their country by failing to charge into battle at the pivotal moment? That's you.

This farce of an illegal alien's presidency has convinced me that the Constitution of the United States has, in fact, no defenders and is dead. This travesty should have been dealt with, either by the courts before Obama's inauguration or by the military before the sun set on that day. Since the Constitution is the device by which the United States came into existence, and by which it lived, it follows that there is no more United States of America. There's just a criminal gang in possession of the trappings of power. The noble experiment with the American Republic has run its full course and has fallen in the end to internal corruption. May our next effort to create a "Jeffersonian" Republic, if there can ever be another, have longer life and better fortune.

Edit: It seems I was wrong. The Constitution of the United States has one defender: Lt. Scott Easterling, who is defying the orders of Barack Obama until such time as Obama proves that he is eligible to serve as his Commander-in-Chief. One man in uniform actually meant it when he swore his oath. One, single US Army officer didn't just say the words to get a paying job and a chance at federal retirement benefits.

Easterling had been too old to join the US Army until the Army raised its maximum enlistment age to 40. Up to that time, he had been working for a defense contractor to do what he could to support American troops. When it became possible for him to enlist, Easterling did so, leaving his former job. He applied for and was accepted to Officer Candidate School, passed, and became a 2nd Lieutenant in August 2007.

Now. Watch the traitors tear him apart. Because that's what will happen. Even the cowards who share Easterling's belief that Obama must prove that his presidency is legal by the Constitution will stand by and watch as the one American with courage gets torn apart by the powerful criminal gang in Washington.

Or will they? A second American soldier in Iraq (name withheld) and (retired) Maj. Gen. Carroll D. Childers have joined Easterling in a lawsuit that seeks to require Obama to prove that he is qualified to hold office as the President of the United States. So there is some small movement in progress, though at present it appears somewhat hesitant and diffident.

US Representative Bill Posey proposed a bill that would require future US presidential candidates to prove their constitutional eligibility to hold office—something that is theoretically a part of constitutional law anyway (it comes from the idea of reserved and enumerated powers). Posey suggested that there be a federal law to make the theory more explicit, so that in the future political candidates and their parties can't miss it. Certain Media Jews took Posey to task for his proposal, with one of them saying, "What you should do is stop embarrassing yourself and take the Reynolds Wrap off your head." Such typical Jew sass.

Here's what Representative Posey said in response:

"Why'd I do this? Well, for a number of reasons and the more and more I get called names by leftwing activists, partisan hacks and political operatives for doing it, the more and more I think I did the right thing. I've been called some pretty nasty things. That's fine. But none of these tolerant people actually want to discuss the issue at hand … whether or not a presidential candidate should have to file these documents with the government. I could easily fill up a page listing all the activities an American needs to show their ID for … everything from playing youth soccer to getting a drivers license, buying cigarettes and alcohol, to opening bank accounts and even playing little league. So I was pretty surprised to find out that to run for president, despite the constitutional requirement and the media scrubbing that goes on, it's not required for a candidate to file these documents when they submit their statement of candidacy with the FEC."

It sounds like Bill Posey understands a valid principle of modern politics, to wit: The more often and the more vociferously you are the target of leftist smear attacks, the more likely it is that you are right, or in the right, and not merely "on the right."

A retired U.S. Navy officer, Walter Francis Fitzpatrick III, has filed a criminal complaint against Barack Obama, calling him an "impostor" who illegally holds the office of President of the United States. The charge is filed with the U.S. Attorney's office for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Fitzpatrick accused Obama of "treason," though this might not be strictly correct, since before one may be a traitor, one must first have a basis for a fealty that can be betrayed. Since Obama is not a US citizen, he has no such fealty, hence he isn't a traitor. He is, however, a Usurper—and that's plenty bad enough.

On the other hand, someone with an obligation of fealty, especially if combined with a position of public trust—such as, for example, being a federal judge or the governor of Hawaii—who knowingly aided or abetted Obama's illegal pursuit of power contrary to the clear provisions of the US Constitution, is indeed guilty of treason, and that is a capital crime.

A grand jury, led by Georgia resident Carl Swensson, has criminally indicted Barack Obama on charges pertaining to his ineligibility to hold office.

Lyle Rapacki is a security analyst who advises police about circumstances that could lead to civil disorder. He has written, and publicly released, a "white paper" that the issue of Barack Obama's ineligibility to hold the office of US President could trigger domestic unrest. But descriptions of his wording leave something to be desired, honestywise.

For example, Rapacki said, "This could create a constitutional crisis." Wrong. The time to say that was before Obama was inaugurated. Now that he occupies the President's office as a Usurper, the constitutional crisis is already here. The only thing that hasn't started yet is its remedy.

Rapacki suggested that there would be confusion over which of Obama's orders, laws, and actions "should be valid." The correct answer is that NONE of Obama's orders, laws, and actions is valid.

Rapacki said, "The economic crisis could with this type of constitutional crisis could prove to be a 'flashpoint' that would test conventional law enforcement and elements of homeland security."

Did you notice the implicit assumption that law enforcement and homeland security would be on the Usurper's side? Perhaps they would be. But that's the exact opposite of what their job is. The mission of law enforcement is to uphold the law, not prop up a Presidential Usurper, thereby aiding and abetting the biggest malefactor in the country. If the police and security apparatchiks were to do their jobs correctly, there wouldn't need to be a civil war. All that would happen is that Mr. Obama and his accomplices would be arrested and given a fair trial, following the due process of law.

Rapacki asks a loaded question. "What does [Obama's ineligibility to be President] do to the decisions that already have been made, already done for the economic issues that can't be taken back?"

What does he mean "can't be taken back"? Anyone who takes the money of the American people from the hand of a Usurper, to do the Usurper's will, is a traitor. The penalty for treason is death. It has always been death, throughout history and in every country that has ever existed. If a traitor is permitted to give back his ill-gotten money and escape with no other penalty, then he is getting off lightly.

Jerry Abbott


"Most codes extend their definition of treason to acts not really against one’s country. They do not distinguish between acts against the government and acts against the oppressions of the government; the latter are virtues; yet they have furnished more victims to the executioner than the former; because real treasons are rare; oppressions frequent. The unsuccessful strugglers against tyranny, have been the chief martyrs of treason laws in all countries." (Thomas Jefferson)


Part 2. How much of Obama's opposition is genuine?

I've noticed a very over-proportionate fraction of Jews among Obama's outspoken critics who are lawyers agitating for him to be investigated for eligibility. Experience has taught me that the Jews are very clever people who have ways of keeping races much larger than theirs divided and confused, and one of those ways is the adroit use of shills. A shill is a pretender to being someone he isn't, or to pretend to a purpose which he intends to sabotage. A seller in an eBay auction might, for example, use a phony account to bid on his own item to attract attention as well as get a higher final price from someone else.

Just so, Jews sometimes use shills to control a debate. They'll send some of their own number to represent their own opposition. The Jewish owners of the mass media are wise to the scam, of course, but they abet the shills by pretending to take them as serious opponents to the main Jewish opinion on an issue. The public never finds out, or at least never can prove, that the whole ballyhoo on TV and in the press is controlled by a single plan, that people with the same agenda are running both sides of the debate, that the fuss is phony, that the appearance of considering all sides of an issue is an illusion, that the result of the debate is predetermined, that the side which is to win will win and the side which is to lose will rant and bellyache... but lose—by design.

The remarkable lack of success by any of the mostly Jewish ostensible opponents of Barack Obama (Alan Keyes is Black) makes me wonder whether they aren't all a bunch of very high-level shills. Perhaps not, but where there are Jews, there's nearly always a certain amount of deception. Sometimes there's a great deal of deception. It would be consistent with what I've learned to expect from Jews if most, if not all, of the Jews (and perhaps some of their imitators) who are loudly clamoring to see Obama's papers and filing lawsuits supposedly aimed at getting Obama to release his birth certificate are doing so in bad faith. That is, many of them might not really be out there to win, but merely to be seen seeming to struggle.

The alleged AP article that appeared in April 2009, concerning Obama's allegedly receiving financial aid as a foreign student while enrolled at Occidental College in California, might be a hoax. However, I doubt that this particular hoax was invented by anyone seriously challenging Obama's eligibility to act as US president. Rather, this hoax (if such it is) was probably invented by persons on Obama's side. It's one of the simplest of propaganda tricks, and it has a categorical name: Setting Up A Strawman.

When Obama's educational records are finally made public, I do indeed expect to see evidence that Obama attended school as a foreign student. The real evidence will say the same thing the strawman does, except that it won't be such an obvious hoax that it could not have been manufactured by anybody who had hoped to do a seriously good job of hoaxing. Likewise, when Obama's longform birth certificate is finally brought up to the light from the Hawaii state archives, I do indeed expect to see that the document is a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate.

Jerry Abbott


Part 3. The Way Back: Undoing the Damage after Obama Is Deposed.

Barack Obama, the orangutan that currently occupies the White House, is a Usurper of the powers of the United States in violation of the eligibility requirements for US President specified in the Constitution of the United States. Everything he does with his office is illegal, his least official act is a felony. He never should have been permitted to take office. The sooner he is ousted, the less the total damage will be.

The rule of law in the United States begins with the Constitution of the United States. As long as the laws are well-constituted and enforced without political favor or sacrificed to a social agenda, they establish a kind of justice in a country and safeguard it from chaos. When there is a controversy over who is entitled to wield power, the laws must be followed strictly to the letter. A man who is legally ineligible to an office, even if the ineligibility seems a picky one, must never be allowed to hold it. In a sense, Obama's inauguration destroyed the United States, inasmuch as it put an end to the Constitution as the definitive authority on who may act as the country's head of state. The only chance to restore the United States is for Obama either to resign or to be removed.

After Obama is removed, the job of tracking down all of the illegal expenditures of America's money and requiring all recipients of illicit cash to repay it to the US Treasury will begin. That goes for individuals, corporations, and foreign countries. All of the laws and treaties signed by Obama will have to be identified and anulled as void ab initio. All of Obama's policy changes must be discovered and reversed to what they were before he changed them.

Also, the people responsible for putting a Usurper into the office of US President will have to be tracked down, arrested, held for trial, and, if convicted, punished appropriately. Every person who aided or abetted Obama, by concealing the truth about him, or by carrying his lies for him, or by giving him money used in his criminal pursuit of power, must face trial for sedition and/or for treason.

Every military officer who obeyed Obama's orders must be dishonorably discharged from the service without pay or benefits, and, where appropriate, also tried for sedition or for treason. Every judge who evaded his duty to make judicial inquiry into the legitimacy of Obama's candidacy or his presidency must be stripped of his office, arrested, and tried for treason. Every police officer who enforced a law that would not have existed had Obama never taken the President's office must be investigated for civil rights violations and for complicity in treason.

A Civil War is not too high a price to pay for removing Obama the Usurper. The consequence of not removing him is to destroy the authority of the Constitution and to lose the country therefore.

Jerry Abbott


Part 4. Barack Hussein Obama II is probably not a citizen of the United States.

Prologue. When leftists want to deceive the people, but fear that the truth will come out despite their attempts to block discovery by the general public, they use the phrase 'conspiracy theory' to describe all truthful summaries of the facts. The average person is meant to believe that 'conspiracy theory' is a synonym for 'lie,' but really it's only an equivocation. Leftists relentlessly use this term to deceive, avoiding the shorter and simpler term of 'lie,' so that if the truth becomes widely known they can claim never to have engaged in deception. They never called it a lie, they will tell us, but only described it as a 'conspiracy theory' and hope that no one remembers the smirks, sneers, jeers, and sarcasm that accompanied their uses of that phrase.

Americans are in a media-suppressed constitutional emergency. The US President-Elect, Barack Hussein Obama II, seems to have been born on 4 August 1961 in the Coast Provincial Hospital of Mombasa, Kenya, upon which birth he was given the name "Barry Obama." His father's relatives have claimed to have been present for his birth in Kenya, and I believe them. When they spoke, they might not have been aware that Obama could be disqualified from becoming President of the United States because of his birth outside the territory of the United States.

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." (US Constitution, Article II, Section 1.)

Our Constitution requires that the US president be a natural-born US citizen, and Obama's foreign birth legally disqualifies him to hold the office for which he has won a popular election.

Wikipedia, which is supposedly the encyclopedia constructed by its users, but which in reality is thoroughly under the control of liberals and Zionists, has been censoring all references to Obama's questionable citizenship status and banning members who attempt to include mentions of those issues in the Wikipedia article on Barack Obama, which as it stands is a political whitewash filled with lies.

Source: "Wikipedia scrubs Obama eligibility: Mention of citizenship issues deleted in minutes, 'offending' users banned," by Aaron Klein in World Net Daily.

In fact, Wikipedia has recently "locked" the article to all except approved members. The lies are in. The truth is out. And the liberals in control of Wikipedia intend to keep it that way.

There was an exception that applied in 1961 to some foreign births of babies to American parents, but it does not apply to Obama's birth. The law stated that if at least one of the parents had been a US citizen AND resident for at least 10 years, at least five of which years with the parent above the age of 14, then the parent was empowered to bequeath US citizenship to her baby. But Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, was only 18 years old when Obama was born, so she was not able to transmit US citizenship to Obama.

Ann Dunham, a White woman, had traveled to Kenya to visit with the family of the Black male who was her husband at that time. She had wanted to return to the United States to have her baby, so that it would receive US citizenship. But she waited too long, and the airline refused, because of her advanced pregnancy, to board her for a flight to Hawaii, fearing that she might go into labor during the trip. Obama was subsequently born in Kenya, and his paternal grandmother has stated that she was present at his birth.

A week or so later, Ann Dunham and her baby returned to Hawaii. It is possible that a fake Hawaiian birth event was staged, as some immigrant Mexican women have done for their Mexico-born babies.

Alternatively, it is possible that Hawaii issued a "certification of live birth" for Obama in 1961. That may be the document that Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino allegedly found. Obama supporters are trying to make it seem as if this COLB is the mysterious long-form birth certificate that Obama can't be bothered to retrieve and publish. But the two documents are not the same. The certification of live birth is a shorter form does not prove birth in the United States. It only indicates that the state issuing it has NOTICED that a US citizen has had a baby. The line on the COLB that indicates the "location of birth" merely reflects what someone told the state official who made the record. Nobody really checks.

Barack Obama's sister has identified two different Honolulu hospitals, Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital, as being the location of Obama's birth. So the US-resident part of Obama's family has not been consistent about which hospital Obama was supposedly born in, while the African side of his family seems very sure that Obama was born in their presence in Kenya.

Hospitals in Hawaii to Obama: You Were Not Born Here!, at EarthFrisk Blog.

A pro-Israel website, Israpundit, says that Peter Ogego, Kenyan Ambassador to the United States, admitted in a radio interview that Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

Kenyan Ambassador confirms Obama was born in Kenya, at Israpundit.

Fellhauer: “One more quick question, President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”

Ogego: “It’s already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive.”

Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”

Ogego: “It would depend on the government. It’s already well known.”

The Kenyan government has not denied the existence of Obama's Kenya birth records. Rather, it has SEALED those records. More recently, the government of Kenya has issued a gag-order to restrain Obama's African relatives from speaking again to reporters (this was reported in the Nairobi Star for 11 Dec 2008).

Kenyan Government Imposes Gag Order on Obama Family, at World Net Daily. "No media contact: 'We are doing this because we want to ensure better flow of information', says government."

The Kenyan government yesterday heightened its war on the media, arresting 11 journalists even as Prime Minister Raila Odinga promised to intervene in the matter. The journalists, who included Kenya Times reporter George Kebasso, were arrested when police fired teargas canisters to disperse a demonstration staged to oppose the punitive Communications (Amendment) Bill 2008 presently awaiting presidential assent.

Reliable police sources said that the order to arrest the scribes came directly from Police Commissioner Major Gen. (rtd) Mohamed Hussein Ali through the Nairobi Provincial Police Officer (PPO) Njue Njagi. And hours after the arrest, Cabinet Ministers James Orengo (Lands) and Mutula Kilonzo criticised the harassment on journalists and urged police to allow them to press for their rights.

Just what, exactly, Kenya's government hopes to accomplish with this gag-order, other than embarrassing itself, isn't clear. The Obama family has ALREADY given copious, documented, eyewitness testimony that Barack Hussein Obama (junior) was born to Ann Dunham, in their presence, in Kenya in 1961. Nothing more, really, is required or needed of them. So it's not easy to see why Kenya's officials are locking the barn door after the cows have escaped already. Maybe they can pretend that what Grandmother Obama said earlier simply "doesn't count." On the contrary, it does. It always will count as testimony given freely with no motive other than expressing family pride. The Obama family's original testimony is what they said before the forces of corruption began their perverse and evil work. That's why it "counts."

A notice in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser for 13 Aug 1961 reads "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug. 4." It is not known who provided the information for the notice, but a private investigator hired by World Net Daily, Jorge Baro, has released an affidavit that questions whether Barack Obama's family ever lived at the address listed in the published notice of his birth in 1961. An elderly neighbor of Obama's alleged former residence, Beatrice Arakaki, has stated that she has lived in her home since before 1961 and remembers no mixed racial family ever living next door. Further, none of the investigators could locate any current or past resident of Kalanianaole Highway who could recall Obama or his family living at the address listed in the announcement. Read more about it here.

Here's what a priest named Father Joe wrote about Obama's birth.

Apparently this is what happened:

Obama’s family did not take to Ann Dunham Obama (his mother) very well, because she was white, according to Sarah Obama. Shortly after she arrived in Kenya, she decided to return to Hawaii because she did not like how Muslim men treated their wives in Kenya. However, because she was near delivery term the airline would not let her fly until after the birth of her baby. Obama’s grandmother said the baby—Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.—was born in Kenya and that shortly after he was born, his mother rushed him back to Hawaii.

Immediately after she got home, his birth was REGISTERED on or about August 8, 1961, in the Hawaiian public records office. Evidently some have tried to cover up these facts with listing the hospital of his birth. However, two hospitals in Hawaii have been given, the Kapiolani Medical Center and the Queen’s Medical Center. Now it appears that neither was correct and that he was born in Kenya, coming to an American hospital later only for a checkup. At least one case of a researcher trying to get records about Obama’s birth in Kenya was arrested at the airport and deported. This whole business is shaping up like a bad movie. But alas, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction!

Father Joe Jenkins is the pastor of the Church of the Holy Spirit and a Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC.

During Barry Obama's school days, his mother divorced his Kenyan father and married an Indonesian male named Lolo Soetoro, who probably adopted Barry, since the boy's name was changed to Barry Soetoro. The Indonesian school's records list Lolo Soetoro as Barry Soetoro's father, and Indonesia permits only its own citizens to attend its schools, so Barry Soetoro (a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama II) seems to have acquired Indonesian citizenship through his adoption by Lolo Soetoro.

Indonesia does not permit dual citizenships. If Obama became a citizen of Indonesia as a child, then Indonesia's laws would declare that he lost whatever prior country citizenships he might have had at that time. However, US laws evidently would ignore Obama's assumption of Indonesian citizenship, unless his mother had expatriated both herself and him in favor of Indonesian citizenship (U.S. Nationality Act of 1940). I don't know anyone who can answer that question one way or the other.

It has been claimed that Obama (then "Barry Soetoro") traveled to Pakistan in 1981, when he was 20 years old. Pakistan was under martial law that year and was subject to a US State Department travel ban. Barry Soetoro probably would not have been admitted to Pakistan if he were traveling with a US passport, and the only other passport he might have had would have been one from Indonesia. If Obama had used a Pakistani passport as an adult, it might be arguable that he forsook US citizenship by that act or by whatever oath he had to take in order to get Indonesia to give him a passport.

Since then, Barry Soetoro changed his name to Barack Dunham, then to Barack Obama, and he now styles himself as Barrack Hussein Obama, after his Kenyan father.

Obama has been challenged to provide a certified copy of his vault, or long-form birth certificate, which would be signed (if it exists) by his mother and by the attending physician, would identify the hospital in which Obama was born, and would provide facts that could be checked.

Instead of doing that, Obama merely released a copy of his short-form Hawaiian "certification of live birth," which proves nothing because Hawaii was giving these COLB's even to foreign-born babies in 1961. Even if this document were genuine, it would not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii, but only that the State of Hawaii knew that he had been born... somewhere or other. Furthermore, estimates of what Obama has spent to hire legal firms to defend himself from being ordered to present his documentary bona fides to the public have exceeded $500,000. Why would Obama spend so much on legal help, when a simple and inexpensive act would have made those legal costs unnecessary?

And this particular COLB might not be genuine. Notice that the child's name is given as "Barack Hussein Obama II"? Obama was named Barry when he was born. His name was changed to Barack later. Notice the way his father's race is identified as "African"? In 1961, states were officially using the word Negro to refer to Blacks.

The document provided by Obama (or by his campaign managers) to "prove" his US citizenship doesn't do any such thing. He undoubtedly meant to fool us into believing the contrary. But that document would not prove his natural-born US citizenship even if it were genuine, as it is the wrong document for that purpose. Experts in detecting fraud in computer graphics say that they've detected signs of digital tampering. They are documented by these articles:

Rathergate II: Certification of Live Birth a clear forgery, by Janet Porter of WorldNetDaily.
The Greater Evil, by Ron Polarik, Ph.D., at Townhall (many large images).

On the other hand, other sources say that Obama's COLB is a genuine COLB, and that the defects noticed in the Hawaii Health Department seal and in the green patterned security paper are scanning artifacts. But they agree with WND that it doesn't establish that Obama is a natural born US citizen, as the Constitution requires US Presidents to be. The very fact that Obama holds out as proof a document that does not do any proving weighs against his credibility.

Several affidavits from Kenya's citizens assert that Obama was born in Kenya. Hawaii's "Statute 338" permits foreign-born children of Hawaii residents to get Hawaiian COLBs of the same kind that Obama has shown us via Factcheck, Snopes, and "Fight the Smears." In other words, a COLB isn't good enough. It never was good enough to establish the eligibility of a candidate for President of the United States. It certainly and doubly wasn't good enough the moment Obama's grandmother and Kenyan Ambassador Peter Ogego gave us testimony that Obama was born in Kenya. None of the hospitals in or near Honolulu have any record of Obama or his mother. The birth certificate allegedly found in the Hawaii state archives by Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle could be originally from Kenya—Governor Lingle has never said anything to rule this out, and accordingly there is a reasonable suspicion that Governor Lingle was being deliberately ambiguous.

Shocker: Why Obama will NOT be President in January, at EarthFrisk Blog.

There's a very good chance that Obama has deceived Americans so that they would accept him as the next US President. He has been repeatedly challenged to divulge his long-form birth certificate, the genuine signed document that that really would prove whether or not he had US citizenship at birth, but he has refused to do so on each occasion. Instead, he has spent thousands of dollars (estimates say about $500,000) to fight lawsuits against him to make his birth records known.

It is rather obvious that every US citizen has direct and tangible interests in making sure that their next head-of-state is legally qualified to hold that job: taxes, wars, the impact of law-enforcement upon public morals, just to name three. It is a fact that a federal judge in Pennsylvania at first agreed with Berg in Berg vs. Obama, and, on 29 September 2008, ordered Barack Obama to turn over a copy of his "vault" birth certificate within 72 hours. Citing the earlier case FEC vs. Akins, the court found that "the injury pertaining to voting, the most basic of political rights, is sufficiently concrete" and ruled that Berg did have standing to sue Obama, and that his standing had six separate grounds, being pursuant to all of the following:

[1] 5 USC 702
[2] FEC vs Akins
[3] 524 US 11 (1998)
[4] 5 USC 148(b)
[5] 28 USC 1343, Civil Rights and Elective Franchise
[6] Federal Question Jurisdiction

Judge Surrick wrote: "Plaintiff [Berg] is within the zone of interest protected by the statute or constitutional provision."

The judge then ordered Obama to turn over these items to Berg within three days:

[a] A certified copy of Obama's "vault" version ("original" long version) Birth Certificate.
[b] A certified copy of Obama's Certification of Citizenship.
[c] A certified copy of Obama's Oath of Allegiance.

And then something happened. Less than a month later (24 October 2008), without any introduction of evidence, testimony, or affidavits from the Obama/DNC side, the court reversed itself. We don't know what caused the reversal, or what the judge's reasoning was. All we know is that the court, after giving a carefully-reasoned opinion against Obama and in favor of Berg, and after ordering Obama to turn over his "vault" birth certificate (which, presumably, Obama defied), the judge changed his mind and ruled that Berg did not have standing to sue Obama.

Apparently, the judge decided that he was mistaken on each of those six grounds which he previously believed gave Berg standing, since any one of them would have been sufficient all by itself.

Those were the circumstances under which Berg vs. Obama was dismissed by the federal judge in Pennsylvania.


Now that Obama's citizenship has been seriously questioned, the burden of proof rests squarely on his shoulders. The "burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States * * * is upon those making the claim." Bute v. Illinois, 333 U.S. 640, 653 (1948). And if each of the General Government's powers must be proven (not simply presumed) to exist, then every requirement that the Constitution sets for any individual's exercise of those powers must also be proven (not simply presumed) to be fully satisfied before that individual may exercise any of those powers. The Constitution's command that "[n]o Person except a natural born Citizen * * * shall be eligible to the Office of President" is an absolute prohibition against the exercise of each and every Presidential power by certain unqualified individuals. Actually (not simply presumptively or speculatively) being "a natural born Citizen" is the condition precedent sine qua non for avoiding this prohibition. Therefore, anyone who claims eligibility for "the Office of President" must, when credibly challenged, establish his qualifications in this regard with sufficient evidence.

In disposing of the lawsuit Berg v. Obama, which squarely presents the question of Obama's true citizenship, the presiding judge complained that Berg "would have us derail the democratic process by invalidating a candidate for whom millions of people voted and who underwent excessive vetting during what was one of the most hotly contested presidential primary in living memory." This is exceptionally thin hogwash. A proper judicial inquiry into Obama's eligibility for "the Office of President" will not deny his supporters a "right" to vote for him-rather, it will determine whether they have any such "right" at all. For, just as Obama's "right" to stand for election to "the Office of President" is contingent upon his being "a natural born Citizen," so too are the "rights" of his partisans to vote for him contingent upon whether he is even eligible for that "Office." If Obama is ineligible, then no one can claim any "right" to vote for him. Indeed, in that case every American who does vote has a constitutional duty to vote against him.

Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.


Judge R. Barclay Surrick knows he was correct the first time, when he told Obama to prove his citizenship. His reversal suggests that he was corrupted by some means, though we don't know what the means was. Bribery? Blackmail? A threat of some kind? Perhaps time will reveal the details. But two things are certain: Judge Surrick knows that his first decision, to require proof of natural born US citizenship from Obama, was the correct decision, and he also knows that his reversed, amended decision was spurious, dishonest, and in conflict with established laws, precedents, morals, and common sense. It might even be treason.

Obama's paternal family have raised reasonable doubts about the location of Obama's birthplace by stating that they were present at his birth in Kenya. It is now reasonable to demand of Obama that he prove that his relatives in Kenya are mistaken and that he is right, instead, when he claims he was born in Hawaii. The simplest and best way for him to do that is to publish his original long-form Hawaiian birth certificate, if it exists. No rhetoric or substitute in lieu of that document will suffice.

So there is reason to believe that our country is in danger of being ruled by a usurper, one of the most dangerous kinds of criminal there can be, beginning at 12h EST on 20 January 2009. Why is it important? Well, for one thing, the sitting of a usurper as US President can start another American civil war, if US military commanders become divided regarding whether to support an unconstitutional President, or whether to support the Constitution by removing the usurper.

On 17 December 2008, the US Supreme Court did two things: (1) It denied a petition for injunction by Philip Berg which would have prevented Obama from taking office as President, and (2) it scheduled the legal case Berg vs. Obama for conference on 9 January 2009. Immediately, almost every organ of the Jewish-controlled mass media began telling the same lie, namely, that the Supreme Court had contemptuously dismissed the Berg vs. Obama case. To get the truth of things, someone would have to read right-wing blogs on the Internet (which isn't unusual in such matters as this). Why the Jews are doing this kind of thing, I can only guess, and my best guess is that they are trying to increase the SHOCK value of their hiss & screech news coverage that they have planned if things don't go their way in the Supreme Court. That is, the Jewish media bosses are trying to fix things, PR-wise, so that the Justices will look like villains if they find Obama constitutionally ineligible to take office.

The oath of office for every military officer is to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Obeying a LEGITIMATE President is SECONDARY to obeying the Constitution. It is true that some of our commanding generals are nothing but political bureaucrats who would only burp and shrug and act as if a presidential usurper were of no matter. But other US military leaders would react as their oaths and US law require them to do. A usurper's every act as US President is a violation of law. A usurper acting as President is ipso facto an enemy of the Constitution, and all who obey his orders are traitors to their country.

So unless Obama proves that he is, in fact, a natural born US citizen who has never renounced his US citizenship, there could be a civil war in the United States at some point in the future. The facts are circulating on the internet despite the strenuous efforts of the Obama campaign people to discredit them. The mainstream news media were silent on Obama's doubtful US citizenship for months, which ensured that most Americans would remain ignorant on the matter until it was too late, or nearly too late, to protest.

Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue is Legitimate, at American Thinker.
Obama Citizenship Accusations Come to a Head, by Kurt Williamsen.

Also, the Internet's largest search engine, GOOGLE, apparently has done something to reduce the amount of "Berg vs Obama" citizenship challenge information as possible. At some point, the responses from relevant web searches fell off sharply, while responses from other search engines did not.

On 5 Dec 2008, the US Supreme Court refused to give certiorari to one case challenging Obama's eligibility to be US President, namely Donofrio vs. Wells. Another such case, Berg vs. Obama, has yet to be discussed by the high court. You'd think that the Justices would assign Berg a very high priority, due to the fact that the Electoral College will vote on 15 Dec 2008 (it is 12 Dec as I write this updated paragraph). But there are suspicions aired that the SCOTUS may be acting on a political agenda, that it is their intention to delay their consideration of Berg and thereby avoid delaying the EC vote.

If the Electors vote BEFORE any discovery that Obama is constitutionally ineligible to be President, then by law the Electors will be required to cast their votes for him, since he won the popular election. However, if the Electors vote AFTER it is confirmed that Obama is ineligible to be President, then the Electors will be required to vote for the runner up in the popular election: John McCain. If the SCOTUS Justices were acting upon a liberal political bias, then delay is exactly what you'd expect them to do. Let the Electors vote first for the Obama-Biden ticket. Let Obama become US President. Then, if it seems the politically smart thing to do, "discover" that Obama isn't qualified and have his presidency anulled, leaving another liberal, Biden, as acting US President. Whether Obama is later determined to have, or not to have, US citizenship, there will be a liberal President who will nominate liberal Justices to the Supreme Court when the present Justices retire.

Of course, this is only a theory. But it is a plausible theory, a theory which makes sense, a theory about a quiet conspiracy of political preference on the part of persons who should be, and would like to SEEM TO BE, above such politics.

Furthermore, it is known that Obama met secretly with eight of the nine Justices (Samuel Alito was absent) in January 2009 shortly before his inauguration, at a time when cases were pending against him in the Supreme Court. That's a fundamental legal ethics violation. What happened in that closed meeting between Defendant Obama and those Justices? Did he give them a large bribe? Did he threaten their grandchildren? Did they, for political partisan reasons, give Obama coaching on how to "get by" the SCOTUS without unduly embarrassing them on account of malfeasance? The American people have a right to be certain that their highest court remains above corruption, and now the American people have been denied this assurance.

So for the Supreme Court to delay, knowing that time is running out, may be functionally indistinguishable from their deciding... wrongfully and underhandedly. You know the old saying: justice delayed is justice denied.

Our First Illegal Alien President: Supreme Court Fails to Act, by Jeff Davis at White Civil Rights.

All the courts are failing to act, and some of them are using some of the most transparent, even supercilious excuses. Here's an example. Federal Judge James Robertson recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by retired (but subject to recall) Air Force Colonel Gregory Hollister that would have sought to require Obama to prove his qualifications to be President of the United States. And just why did the judge throw out the case? BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC to a point where many people had heard about it. Of course, lawsuits such as Berg vs. Obama predate the widespread knowledge of Obama's questionable citizenship, and the courts were doing their dismissing, delaying, denying thing back then, too, on one pretext or another. Now "twittering" has been added to the list of convenient pretexts for judges who don't want to do their constitutional duties. Why is it that "twittering" doesn't prevent most other lawsuits or trials from going forward, not even if the twittering involves a massive effort on the part of the television media and the nation's largest newspapers?

In the last few months, dozens of U.S. courts have dismissed legal challenges to Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to occupy the Oval Office, and even the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hold a hearing on the evidence – but what have the courts actually cited as reasons for dismissing the concerns of millions of Americans? Mootness, lack of jurisdiction, lack of responsibility, lack of standing, a series of "no comments" and even the fact the issue has been "twittered." The one subject that has been avoided to date has been whether or not the president is, in fact, eligible. —World Net Daily.

Who can doubt that there IS a conspiracy—a very widespread, very high-level one—to deny a due process examination to the reasonable doubts that many people have regarding the constitutional eligibility of Obama to serve as US President? Nobody honest, that's for sure. The nearest that any court has come to honesty in regard to cases such as Berg vs. Obama was Judge Surrick's original finding that Berg had standing to sue Obama, to require that Obama turn over his documents, and that Berg's standing had six independent legal grounds. Unfortunately, Surrick's honesty didn't endure even a month before something, presumably that conspiracy, got to him and made him change his mind. All six times.

It's my belief that the mainstream news media are minimizing their coverage of this constitutional crisis in order to preserve the option of creating "shock coverage" at a later time, should Obama be disqualified from holding office. Blacks and leftists might be inflamed by such media tactics into a murderous rioting rage. The threat of this media "shock treatment" is a kind of political leverage, or blackmail, which might be meant to pressure the US Supreme Court, the Electoral College, and perhaps also the US House of Representatives, into installing Obama despite his failure to meet the constitutional qualifications for that office.

Around the Clock Bars Week of Inaugural Concerns Officials, in the DC Examiner. It sounds as if the urban Blacks are setting the stage for an ugly riot in the event there are legal problems resulting from Obama's citizenship status, and using "celebration" as a cover for their preparations. The law authorizes DC bars and restaurants to serve alcohol until 5 am. Proponents on the DC Council referred to it as "emergency legislation." (It is known that two of the 13-member DC council who opposed the bill are White men: Phil Mendelson and Jim Graham.)

So if Obama isn't qualified, but gets the job anyway, we may have a civil war and martial law. If Obama does not get the job, we may have a civil war, or perhaps rioting in a good many US cities, which could serve as a pretext to impose martial law. And the reason for the latter danger is devious information management by the bosses of the mainstream news media.

In the United States, no candidate for high public office is allowed to come to the attention of the voting public unless he has some dark secret, known to the bankers and their media mogul cohorts, which they can use to control him. Unimpeachable candidates simply are not allowed. They don't get campaign funds. If one of them is rich enough to buy his own campaign, the mainstream media will sneer and spit his chances away.

I think that Obama's supporters and financial contributors knew from the beginning that Obama wasn't constitutionally eligible to hold the office of US President, and that they planned to keep his secret as a form of blackmail, as a trump card over him, to be played in the event that Obama displeases them with his financial policies, or with his foreign policy, or with his executive orders, or with his powers to veto legislation, or by any failure on his part to choose people acceptable to them as his top advisers. In any such case, they'd have a "researcher" suddenly "discover" that Obama isn't really qualified to be president. They would pretend to be very surprised.

I believed for a time that the premature disclosure of Obama's doubtful citizenship would sour that deal, but apparently the secret that is not-so-secret remains good enough. The bankers and the media bosses (briefly, shall we say Jews?) can still use it. If Obama gets his own ideas, these Jews will have someone "discover" that the "rumors" about him were true after all! Wow, who'd have believed that a "crazy" like Philip Berg and a bunch of bloggers could actually have stumbled upon the truth! The powermongers would pretend to be very surprised.

Perhaps the reason Obama is being so energetic in his propaganda efforts is that he has a very long way to fall if it should come out that he wasn't a US citizen when he enjoyed the rights and privileges that, by the Constitution, belong ONLY to US citizens. Among these are representing the people of Illinois, who are entitled to be represented by one of their fellow citizens. If Obama isn't a citizen of the United States, then he is also not a citizen of Illinois, and he has employed himself for several years in cheating all the people residing in that state of their constitutional rights. For that, he could end up in a federal prison for the rest of his days, I should think.

So Obama is going to try as hard as he can to become US President without proving to anybody that he is a US citizen. Once he is installed in office, he'll try to use the official powers of the presidency to protect himself, even if it means turning the United States into a military dictatorship.

Please spread the word about this issue, as the mainstream news media are trying to suppress it, and pass it on to the rest of the world if you can.

A timeline for lawsuits against Obama that would require him to prove he is a US citizen is given at America's Right.

To the governments of every country in the world. As long as Barack Obama is acting as President of the United States, and has not proved his Constitutional eligibility to do so, he should be presumed a Usurper of the powers of the United States to whose acts the United States cannot be legally bound. It is in your interests, as it is in ours, for you to forsake all ties with the United States until such time as it once again has a head-of-state of proven legality. Please, do not conduct any business with the United States until then, nor enter into any treaty, nor collaborate in any venture which Barack Obama or his agent may propose. Shun the United States as a rogue nation until we have a lawful chief executive once more.

To the US Armed Forces. Please support and defend our Constitution.

Letter To Members of the U.S. Military and Legal Professionals: Dr. Orly Taitz Esq seeking Article 138 By Military Personnel

Note: I have no way of telling which of these high-profile challenges to Obama's presidency are genuine and which are false-flag efforts to uncover and eliminate military officers who remain loyal to the Constitution, rather than to the Usurper. Make your bets as you will. Just, if you please, don't go on pretending that there is no problem.

Jerry Abbott


More to read:

Devvy Kidd:
Impeach Obama?
Chief Justice John Roberts Meets Obama in Private
No, We Don't Have a New President
Obama Supporters: Deceived or Just Plain Liars?
Obama Eligibility Issue Must Be Resolved Soon
Obama Citizenship Crisis and Industrial Strength Stupidity
.

Heliocentric position of Voyager 1 at 12h UT on 13 March 2009 (JD 2454904).

r = 109.17 AU
hlong = 254.146 degrees
hlat = +34.858 degrees

Heavens Above: Probes on Solar Escape Trajectories.

Here's how to do the calculation.

Voyager 1, orbital elements.
a = -3.22185 AU
e = 3.72466
i = 35.777 degrees
Ω = 179.001 degrees
ω = 338.272 degrees
T = JD 2444227.38

Hyperbolic mean anomaly.
M = 0.01720209895 (t - T) sqrt[1/(-a)^3]

Hyperbolic eccentric anomaly.
u = 0
Repeat...
. u0 = u
. f0 = e sinh u0 - u0 - M
. f1 = e cosh u0 - 1
. f2 = e sinh u0
. f3 = e cosh u0
. d1 = -f0 / f1
. d2 = -f0 / [ f1 + (d1)(f2)/2 ]
. d3 = -f0 / [ f1 + (d1)(f2)/2 + d2^2 (f3)/6 ]
. u = u0 + d3
Until |u - u0| < 1E-14

True anomaly.
Q = arccos { (e - cosh u) / (e cosh u - 1) }

Heliocentric distance.
r = a (1 - e cosh u)

Canonical position vector.
x''' = r cos Q
y''' = r sin Q

Rotate by argument of the perihelion.
x'' = x''' cos ω - y''' sin ω
y'' = x''' sin ω + y''' cos ω

Rotate by inclination.
x' = x''
y' = y'' cos i
z' = y'' sin i

Rotate by longitude of ascending node to get...
The heliocentric position in ecliptic coordinates.
x = x' cos Ω - y' sin Ω
y = x' sin Ω + y' cos Ω
z = z'

Heliocentric longitude.
hlong = (180/π) { arctan( y / x ) + δ } degrees
if x>0 and y>0 then δ=0
if x>0 and y<0 then δ=2π
if x<0 then δ=π

Heliocentric latitude.
hlat = (180/π) { arcsin( z / r ) } degrees

TI-89 Titanium calculator program: probe(jd).
It finds the position of a probe on a solar escape trajectory (a hyperbola relative to the sun).

:probe(k,jd)
:Pgrm
:setMode("Display Digits","FIX 6")
:setMode("Angle","RADIAN")
:ClrIO
:.01720209895→k0
:(probes[1])[k]→a
:(probes[2])[k]→e
:(probes[3])[k]*π/180→i
:(probes[4])[k]*π/180→L
:(probes[5])[k]*π/180→w
:(probes[6])[k]→T
:(probes[7])[k]→nam
:k0*(jd-t)/(-a)^(3/2)→m
:0→u
:While abs(u-u0)>1.e-14
:u→u0
:e*sinh(u0)-u0-m→f0
:e*cosh(u0)-1→f1
:e*sinh(u0)→f2
:e*cosh(u0)→f3
:-f0/f1→d1
:-f0/(f1+d1*f2)→d2
:-f0/(f1+d1*f2/2+d2^2*f3/6)→d3
:u0+d3→u
:EndWhile
:cos⁻¹((e-cosh(u))/(e*cosh(u)-1))→q
:a*(1-e*cosh(u))→r
:r*cos(q)→xp
:r*sin(q)→yp
:xp*cos(w)-yp*sin(w)→x
:xp*sin(w)+yp*cos(w)→y
:x→xp
:y*cos(i)→yp
:y*sin(i)→zp
:xp*cos(L)-yp*sin(L)→x
:xp*sin(L)+yp*cos(L)→y
:zp→z
:(180/π)*tan⁻¹(y/x)→lh
:If x<0 Then
:lh+180→lh
:EndIf
:If x>0 and y<0 Then
:lh+360→lh
:EndIf
:(180/π)*sin⁻¹(z/r)→bh
:Output 1,1,nam
:Output 11,20,x
:Output 21.20,y
:Output 31,20,z
:Output 41,1,r
:Output 51,1,lh
:Output 61,1,bh
:EndPrgm

TI-89 Titanium data file "probes" - used in program probe(jd)

r1c1=-5.663407
r1c2=1.39939
r1c3=2.346188
r1c4=229.543416
r1c5=287.930748
r1c6=2453772.55
r1c7=newhoriz
r2c1=-3.22185
r2c2=3.72466
r2c3=35.777
r2c4=179.001
r2c5=338.272
r2c6=2444227.38
r2c7=voyager1
r3c1=-4.02568
r3c2=6.27722
r3c3=78.7783
r3c4=101.6368
r3c5=130.06246
r3c6=2445454.94
r3c7=voyager2

Execution from the TI-89T HOME screen:

probe(2,2454904)

Output on the IO screen:

voyager1
   -24.473811
   -86.175767
   62.397398
109.172641
254.145519
34.858239

The first three numbers are the rectangular position in heliocentric ecliptic coordinates, x,y,z. The last three numbers are the position in heliocentric spherical coordinates, r,hlong,hlat.

Preface: This is a short story that I wrote on 22 September 1985 using the author name David Sims. Copies were mailed to several Members of Congress and US Senators. A few of them wrote back comments. I must confess that this story was a bit naive. I didn't know when I wrote it that the biggest leak that the US economy has is built into the money system itself, with the bankers who run the Federal Reserve System having a vested interest in wrecking the state in order to own the nation. If I had known about that, I'd have made the gash in the ship's hull reach a foot below the waterline even when the ship was empty.


The Good Ship Economy
by David Sims (a.k.a. Jerry Abbott)

     There was once a great ship that set to sail in a deep ocean.  It had many passengers aboard, and a swimming pool on the top deck for their enjoyment, but it was dry.  The captain had promised that he would have it filled later.

     The world situation was unstable.  So tense were international relationships that even passenger ship such as this one had defensive weaponry: great water cannons which could loft a stream of water at an enemy ship, getting its crew uncomfortably wet.  However, the cannons' water batteries were empty.

     The ship had, unfortunately, a long vertical gash in its hull.  The captain wasn't worried about it, since the lower extent of the gash was fully a millimeter above the waterline.  Even if water started coming in, he could always order his passengers to bail.

     The ship Economy steamed out of the harbor.  It had not gone far when the lookout upon the bridge cried "Enemy ship!"  The captain sped to the bridge and snatched the lookout's telescope.  Sure enough, there was an enemy ship on the horizon.  Alarmed, the captain ordered the water cannons made ready, just in case of trouble.

     Pumps began to work, and the water batteries were filled up to the half mark.  The extra weight made the Economy ride a bit deeper in the water, and the sea begin to seep through the part of the gash which was not below the waterline.  If nothing was done about the seepage, the influx of water would begin to fill the bottom deck, making the Economy still heavier.  That would result in the ship settling into the ocean even deeper, and the water would pour through the gash faster.

     The captain had no choice but to put the passengers to work bailing.  He gave each of them a bucket and sent them below to scoop up the water, bring up their full buckets, and dump the water off the side.  The captain really wasn't worried that his ship might sink.  After all, the leak was a small one, and his passengers seemed able to take care of it easily.

     The enemy vessel paced the Economy, coming no closer, but not going away either.  The captain guessed that the enemy knew that he had filled his water-batteries (at least up to a point), and that the enemy was reluctant to do battle on even terms.  He also guessed that the other ship was constantly watching his, hoping to see him empty his batteries by porting over the side. The captain of the Economy resolved to keep his ship battle-ready as a deterrant.

     Night came, and the Economy sailed on.  At midmorning of the next day, some of the third-class passengers complained that the swimming pool was still dry, and they wanted to swim.  This was their right, the captain realized, and he must do whatever he could to keep his third-class passengers happy, since they were the majority.  He ordered the swimming pool filled to the half mark, and set the remainder of the passengers--those in the first and second classes--to working harder and bailing faster.

     In the afternoon a representative of the first-class passengers entered the bridge to speak with the captain.  He complained that certain clauses in the first-class passenger contract made him exempt from bailing duty.  The captain was dubious about this, but he was unfamiliar with the precise text of that contract.  He asked the passenger for a copy of his contract "so that he could study it."

     That night, a third-class errand-runner brought a copy of the contract. The captain offered the boy a penny for his service, but the boy refused it (explaining that accepting employment aboard ship would adjust his status to second-class).  The captain dismissed him and locked himself in his cabin.  He seated himself at his desk and opened the sealed document.  Folded inside the contract lay a five hundred dollar bill.  The captain decided that the exact wording of the contract did, after all, exempt the first-class passengers from bailing.

     The red dawn came again, and the captain emerged from his cabin, much refreshed for the good night's sleep.  He strode up to the top deck where all the grumbling, weary second-class passengers were stumbling up from the hatches bearing buckets full of water.  He smiled and waved to them, promising that things would get better soon.

     Upon entering the bridge, the lookout reported to him that the enemy ship had sneaked closer during the night, but was again pacing the Economy.  It was still far beyond water cannon range.

     The captain commanded the water batteries to be filled up to capacity. The Economy took on more weight.  The tired second-class passengers could now barely keep up with the incoming water.

     The third-class passengers complained that the water in their swimming pool wasn't deep enough, and they demanded that the captain do something about it.  The captain ordered the pool filled up to the brim.  Now the second-class passengers were definitely losing ground to the tide.  The lower hold was slowly being filled with water.

     One second-class passenger, a scientist named Gerard, trudged to the bridge with an idea for the captain.

     "Why aren't you bailing?" demanded the captain when he saw him.

     "S-sir!" stuttered Gerard.  "Our shipping lane will take us past Frontier Island, will it not?"

     "Yes, yes!" snapped the captain, waving his hand angrily.  "What of it? We can't dock there for repairs--we don't have a treaty with Frontier Island that permits it."

     "But we could send a few men there in a lifeboat to buy what we need to fix the ship, couldn't we?"

     "Out of the question!" snarled the captain, thinking of the thousands of dollars the materials would cost.  "In the first place, the only ones qualified to go would be myself and the crew, and we are needed here."

     "But couldn't you send a passenger?" Gerard begged.

     "NO!" shouted the captain.  "A third-class passenger doesn't have the education or the wits to operate as our agent," he ticked off with his fingers. "Such extra duty is not written into the first-class contract.  And you second-class passengers are needed here to bail!  Now get back to work!"

     Gerard, the scientist, shuffled away.

     The Economy sank the day after it had passed Frontier Island by.  The enemy ship had surged forth and hosed it immediately after the Economy had ported water from its batteries in a last-ditch effort to stay afloat.  As the good ship Economy sank beneath the waves, the enemy was treated to the spectacle of all the passengers, crowded upon the top deck, scrambling in a huge pile--each one trying to reach the peak so that his face would be the last to go under.