JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: muman613 on May 06, 2010, 03:40:56 PM
-
This story is truly obscene... The Mexicans are upset about the Arizona illegal immigrant law so a Mexican director makes a film where a Mexican goes around killing Americans to avenge this great 'wrong'...
This is sickness and it should not be shown in the states. Some crazed mexican will see this and be inspired to kill, like the crazed dirty arabs...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/06/violent-movie-declares-war-arizona-immigration-law/
Violent Movie Declares War on Arizona for Immigration Law
A violent new film from cult director Robert Rodriguez is declaring war on Arizona with a "special Cinco de Mayo message" in the wake of the state's controversial illegal immigration law.
A violent new film from cult director Robert Rodriguez is declaring war on Arizona with a "special Cinco De Mayo message" in the wake of the state's controversial illegal immigration law.
That message is: "They just f---ed with the wrong Mexican."
"Machete," which features a knife-wielding Mexican assassin out for revenge against double-crossing gringos, won't be in theaters until September, but it is already sparking a political melee over Wednesday's stab at the Grand Canyon State.
In the trailer for the film, the title character is hired to assassinate an anti-immigration U.S. senator played by Robert De Niro. Protesters are seen waving nationalist signs as the senator speaks to a charged-up rally: "We are at war," he booms. "Every time an illegal dances across our border, it is an act of aggression against this sovereign state — an overt act of terrorism."
But before the trailer even begins, the battle-scarred title character stares out from the screen as he tells viewers that what's about to unfold — an immigration-laced slasher grindhouse flick — is about the current border battle in Arizona.
Click here to see the video.
The trailer was released Wednesday, just 24 hours after an envelope filled with a still-undetermined white powder was sent to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, temporarily closing the State Capitol in Phoenix. The powder spilled out when a staffer opened it Tuesday morning, sending Hazmat teams scrambling through the governor's offices. No one was sickened, but state police and the FBI are investigating the incident.
It was just the latest development in a debate that is growing more rancorous by the minute.
Some outspoken critics of illegal immigration took umbrage at the movie trailer and its swipe at Arizona, which is the entry point for one-third of all illegal immigrants in the U.S.
"It's pretty ugly out there," said former Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, a staunch advocate of tougher immigration laws. "Half the time that's the way all of us are depicted: corrupt, no good, racist."
Tancredo, who served in the House from 1999-2009, said he received "tons of death threats" while in office and frequently wore a bulletproof vest during public speeches. Though the language of the film is nothing new to him, he said he still finds it offensive.
"The racists who made that trailer, they are as racist as anything I have ever seen" from either side of the immigration debate, Tancredo said.
But, he added, "these guys are 'politically correct' racists, so you cannot heap indignities upon them."
In "Machete," the protagonist, played by Danny Trejo, is a former Mexican Federale now looking for work as a day laborer in Texas. He charges $70 a day for yard work, but an oily businessman makes him an offer he can't refuse: $150,000 to take out a senator bent on deporting illegal immigrants.
"As you know, illegal Americans are being forced out of our country at an alarming rate," says the contractor. "For the good of both our people, the senator must die."
The film, which is set to be released Sept. 3, is produced by 20th Century Fox, a production company owned by Fox News' parent company, News Corp.
20th Century Fox said that Rodriguez speaks for himself on political issues. The studio was comfortable with the release of the movie trailer on Cinco De Mayo, but says it has no political stake in the immigration debate.
Representatives for Rodriguez did not return requests for comment. But the head of the production studio handling the international release of the film said "Machete" is a classic grindhouse picture typical of the man who made "Desperado" and "Sin City."
"'Machete' is a Robert Rodriguez movie through and through, wild and wonderful, exactly the kind of exciting and irreverent genre movie that his fans dream about," Ashok Amritraj, CEO of Hyde Park Entertainment, said in an interview with Variety Magazine.
De Niro, playing the senator, fits many familiar tropes about the Southwest: he's a gun-toting, Stetson hat-wearing, flag pin-blazing cowboy from Texas.
He and Trejo are joined by a number of stars: Cheech Marin plays a shotgun-shooting warrior priest, Lindsay Lohan plays the senator's Patty Hearst-like daughter and Don Johnson, as a sheriff, growls that "there's nothing I'd like more than to see more than that Mexican dance the bolero at the end of a rope."
Jessica Alba, a border patrol agent, rallies a group of laborers while crying, "We didn't cross the border — the border crossed us!"
Tancredo, who argued that the film should not be distributed at all, said he wasn't worried the movie would incite any violence, but that its political message was clear.
"I think it is a true reflection of exactly who these people are and what they think about America," he said.
-
They already kill Americans, but this is still exceptionally sick.
-
I'm not seeing how this film is bad politically speaking, if anything it will act as a catalyst.
-
I actually think this film reflects the fact they act like monkeys when it comes to debating rather than have an argument.
-
They're so full of it. And that law is not controversial.
-
I support the law but but freedom permits the making of this video regardless whether someone likes it or not!
-
I support the law but but freedom permits the making of this video regardless whether someone likes it or not!
Do you really support that kind of speech? Inciting people to violence is not usually included under free speech.
-
The word freedom contains the word free in it
i dont support those crazy ass beaners but they should have the right to express themselves regardless what i think about the trash they are saying!
Freedom doesnt have compromises no matter what!
-
The word freedom contains the word free in it
i dont support those crazy donkey beaners but they should have the right to express themselves regardless what i think about the trash they are saying!
Freedom doesnt have compromises no matter what!
There are some ways in which free speech can be restricted which don't violate the constitution. Restricting incitement to violence is one of these.
-
Restricting is only a way of trying to cover something up!
Restriction is such a dirty move and in most cases makes many situations or issues worse!
-
Restricting is only a way of trying to cover something up!
Restriction is such a dirty move and in most cases makes many situations or issues worse!
You are naive... The reason to restrict certain speech is to prevent mayhem and death. The primary example of the test of free speech is the question "Do you have the right to scream FIRE! in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire?". The obvious answer is NO WAY JOSE!
The stampede which would be created by doing so would certainly result in death and injury... This is where your freedom of speech ends and my freedom of life, liberty, and hapiness begins..
You also have a strange understanding of 'freedom'... Just because you are 'free' to kill yourself, or free to stick your hand in fire do you think you should do it? Jewish wisdom teaches that true freedom only happens when you create boundaries of acceptable behavior. This is what the Torah is to the religious Jewish people.
-
I don't agree with you! There needs to be a way society is run but telling someone they cant do something and restricting them from doing it is useless and is a complete failure! Look drugs in the united states, they are illegal and we have much larger problems than countries with much more lenient laws! Prohibiting something will only lead to complete failure!
-
I don't agree with you! There needs to be a way society is run but telling someone they cant do something and restricting them from doing it is useless and is a complete failure! Look drugs in the united states, they are illegal and we have much larger problems than countries with much more lenient laws! Prohibiting something will only lead to complete failure!
I don't think you read my example. People need to be responsible for their speech. Freedom of speech is worthless unless one knows that they have to fight for that freedom. Freedom of speech doesn't mean being able to say anything any more than freedom of action doesn't mean we go around doing everything. Freedom and Responsibility go hand in hand. If you are not responsible in your speech you will do much damage to society and to individuals.
I don't think everything should be legal. You seem to differ with me. Drugs are a big problem in this world and by making it legal doesn't make the problems go away. I used to smoke pot many years ago but today I don't think it should be legal. Just because you think it is OK today doesn't mean it will be 10-15 years from now. When a person is young they make many mistakes and hopefully learn from them.
I think whoever made this movie is just showing how evil and twisted mexicans can be. I hope that it backfires on those involved and causes more harm to the illegal mexicans who are sucking from our already weak government system.
-
These people wont be taken seriously!''
Regulation not prohibition will do much more good!
''Freedom of speech doesn't mean being able to say anything any more than freedom of action doesn't mean we go around doing everything.''
But the thing is muman that people in general will say what they feel regardless what others think about it! This is how our society as a whole is!
There are tons of things about this society that i dont like and or agree with but i cant stand trying to stop something that is going to happen no matter what i do so the best way to combat this is to find the best most efficient way to deal with it!
In the matter of these mexicans! This law must be passed and the mexicans living illegally in this country should be shut down for good! A growing minority in america is a growning problem in america! No matter what you say or not matter how messed up this sounds And many levels america was much better with less of the trash! Im not saying all are trash so i dont want anyone getting butthurt about this!
-
*cough*troll*cough*
-
Restricting is only a way of trying to cover something up!
Restriction is such a dirty move and in most cases makes many situations or issues worse!
are you some kind of super anarchist? beacuse that the impression i get from you posts.
-
The word freedom contains the word free in it
i dont support those crazy donkey beaners but they should have the right to express themselves regardless what i think about the trash they are saying!
Freedom doesnt have compromises no matter what!
There are some ways in which free speech can be restricted which don't violate the constitution. Restricting incitement to violence is one of these.
You're being naive if you think regulation on speech would damage anyone but the White population. Look at Europe...
-
The word freedom contains the word free in it
i dont support those crazy donkey beaners but they should have the right to express themselves regardless what i think about the trash they are saying!
Freedom doesnt have compromises no matter what!
There are some ways in which free speech can be restricted which don't violate the constitution. Restricting incitement to violence is one of these.
You're being naive if you think regulation on speech would damage anyone but the White population. Look at Europe...
I don't agree with hate crimes legislation or banning discussion of certain sensitive topics. I do agree with not allowing directly inciting violence.
-
These 'people' are ILLEGAL OCCUPYING CRIMINAL INVADERS.
They are Americas palestine.
This is judgement for forcing Israel to live with THEIR invaders.
Paybacks a b*tch.
-
well,maybe it is time to incite violence on our part too.
-
These 'people' are ILLEGAL OCCUPYING CRIMINAL INVADERS.
They are Americas palestine.
This is judgement for forcing Israel to live with THEIR invaders.
Paybacks a b*tch.
Exactly. They are to us like the Arabs are to Israel.
-
Only a WN fujjpacker would write "White" with a capitalized W. Skkie, it's time to go back to your HIV clinic.
-
well,maybe it is time to incite violence on our part too.
Not on this message board for sure. This is a 100% law abiding forum.
-
I am sorry to derail this thread, but this needs to be dealt with.
Only a WN fujjpacker would write "White" with a capitalized W. Skkie, it's time to go back to your HIV clinic.
If you read my initial post here, it should be clear to you that I do indeed support White Nationalism, so I am not seeing how you feel you're catching me on something.
I don't know why you're so belligerent, I have been more then respectful to you but I feel its unfortunate you're so intent on creating enemies. If you don't like me thats perfectly fine but I don't see how random insults contribute to fruitful discussion.
-
I do indeed support White Nationalism
Admins, are you paying attention here?
-
I do indeed support White Nationalism
Admins, are you paying attention here?
i hope you understand that every person in this forum is white nationalist by definition.and to rubystar,when i said that we need to incite violence on our part i meant the whole white race not this forum.
-
White Race? What's that?
-
White Race? What's that?
the white race or in it's formal name the cucasian race is the people that originated from europe,the middle east and central asia.i personally do not include muslims in beacuse i don't want them in the pan white state that are sure to come if we want to survive.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
ouch,i see another one that become prey of the liberal propaganda.i agree that some asian could be defined as whites by culture but they are not whites in the biological sense.the negroes is a different stroy beacuse they shown us that they will never integrated with white society (or any other non black society).
-
White Race? What's that?
I am not sure anymore...But at one time they were the people that could ride the front of the bus.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
-
Re: "White Race? What's that?"
The Talladega 500! :::D
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
Their definition of man was a White male. The thought that this would ever be an issue never occurred to them, it was considered obvious. The fact that they owned slaves invalidates the belief that they viewed all human males to be equal.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
Their definition of man was a White male. The thought that this would ever be an issue never occurred to them, it was considered obvious. The fact that they owned slaves invalidates the belief that they viewed all human males to be equal.
I agree with Ron Ben Michael that race cannot be defined. And I do not believe that the founders intended to create a racist nation. I realize slavery was in practice at that time but there was discussion that it was immoral {which it most certainly was}. From a Jewish standpoint the episode of American slavery was a complete and utter shame, detracting from any moral superiority we could claim. It is not the practice of a moral society to capture and enslave foreign populations.
In Judaism there is a concept of slavery, which is very much different than that of American slavery. Slavery in the Torah is actually a thing to help society, to help the debtor and t he low-level criminal get a second chance at life. I am of course referring to the laws of the Jewish servant {which is discussed at the beginning of Parasha Mishpatim}... Torah permitted slavery of the non-Jews...
I do not believe that America should be a racist nation. I am proud that this country allowed my ancestors to emigrate here over 100 years ago. Immigrants from all over the world encountered racism against them, the italians, the polish, the russians and they were able to survive and prosper. Racism has no place in this modern world.
-
White Nationalists are all over my blog, they dont believe that races should mix. Jews stay with Jews, Whites with whites, christians/christians, etc. Many of their movements do NOT hate Jews that hate race mixing.
---
White "Supremists" think that all white people are the superior race and hate Jews. Usually are neo-nazi.
-
<<AsheDina is just pro-G-d, Pro-Right wing. I dont care if they are black white, whatever.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
Their definition of man was a White male. The thought that this would ever be an issue never occurred to them, it was considered obvious. The fact that they owned slaves invalidates the belief that they viewed all human males to be equal.
I agree with Ron Ben Michael that race cannot be defined. And I do not believe that the founders intended to create a racist nation. I realize slavery was in practice at that time but there was discussion that it was immoral {which it most certainly was}. From a Jewish standpoint the episode of American slavery was a complete and utter shame, detracting from any moral superiority we could claim. It is not the practice of a moral society to capture and enslave foreign populations.
In Judaism there is a concept of slavery, which is very much different than that of American slavery. Slavery in the Torah is actually a thing to help society, to help the debtor and t he low-level criminal get a second chance at life. I am of course referring to the laws of the Jewish servant {which is discussed at the beginning of Parasha Mishpatim}... Torah permitted slavery of the non-Jews...
I do not believe that America should be a racist nation. I am proud that this country allowed my ancestors to emigrate here over 100 years ago. Immigrants from all over the world encountered racism against them, the italians, the polish, the russians and they were able to survive and prosper. Racism has no place in this modern world.
You're in denial if you think the founders ever intended their nation to be for anyone but whites.
Anyway, if you believe racism has no place in the "modern world" then you believe the White Race has no place either. This is where I unfortunately have to disagree with you.
I do expect you to fully accept every African who wants entrance into Israel though, to do otherwise would be racist.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
Their definition of man was a White male. The thought that this would ever be an issue never occurred to them, it was considered obvious. The fact that they owned slaves invalidates the belief that they viewed all human males to be equal.
I agree with Ron Ben Michael that race cannot be defined. And I do not believe that the founders intended to create a racist nation. I realize slavery was in practice at that time but there was discussion that it was immoral {which it most certainly was}. From a Jewish standpoint the episode of American slavery was a complete and utter shame, detracting from any moral superiority we could claim. It is not the practice of a moral society to capture and enslave foreign populations.
In Judaism there is a concept of slavery, which is very much different than that of American slavery. Slavery in the Torah is actually a thing to help society, to help the debtor and t he low-level criminal get a second chance at life. I am of course referring to the laws of the Jewish servant {which is discussed at the beginning of Parasha Mishpatim}... Torah permitted slavery of the non-Jews...
I do not believe that America should be a racist nation. I am proud that this country allowed my ancestors to emigrate here over 100 years ago. Immigrants from all over the world encountered racism against them, the italians, the polish, the russians and they were able to survive and prosper. Racism has no place in this modern world.
You're in denial if you think the founders ever intended their nation to be for anyone but whites.
Anyway, if you believe racism has no place in the "modern world" then you believe the White Race has no place either. This is where I unfortunately have to disagree with you.
I do expect you to fully accept every African who wants entrance into Israel though, to do otherwise would be racist.
Regarding Israel, as a religious Jew I expect ALL Jews to be able to enter Israel no matter what their ancestry {as long as it was via a Orthodox Conversion of course}. I do know some Black Jews and they are very kind people. I also know some Persian Jews and they are some very nice people too. I do not decide whether I will befriend a person based on their race. Judaism doesn't teach such a thing, although the levels go based on how close to our community they are... We have our immediate minyan, our community, our city, our state, our country, and our fellow Jews from all the four corners of the world, and finally to the non-Jew....
I did not say that the so-called White race has no place in this country... DO not ascribe such an idea to me. Obviously this country has a noble heritage based on some of the greatest thinkers in Europe. I learned American history and remember a great deal of this history I learned. The foundations of Democracy are that each citizen has a responsibility to the state, that the state provide for the security of the nation, and that the people honor the national entity. But what is special about America is that each State also has its independence from the Federal government and each state can, within certain limitations, have laws which represent the citizens of those states.
But this is all off-topic...
I do believe that America should care about American citizens first. I am a lifelong tax-paying American who has invested much into the welfare of the American economy. I have worked in my field since I was 17 years old, now over 24 years, and I have contributed to the economy in many wonderful ways. I believe that my tax dollars should be spent to protect the nation from foreign attackers {both terrorists and criminals}, I would like to support those in need {true need} of medicine and food through my tax dollars, and I would like to have this money used to invest in future technologies {alternative fuel sources}...
I do not believe that non-Americans can expect to be supported by my tax dollars. In this case as I described above {the responsibilities of a Jew}, I consider my taxes as helping my community, my city, my state, and my country... But I do not consider that money to help those in other nations. I give charity for the purpose of helping those in need outside of America. I think that those who are moved to give to charitable causes should do so in order to fufill the responsibilities we have to the world {and Jews have responsibilities to help enlighten the world}.
-
White is determined by dna! Genetics explains everything
-
White is determined by dna! Genetics explains everything
What is white dna? Please link to it..
-
Here is what I found when I googled this question:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728.html
Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 16, 2005
Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.
The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."
The work raises a raft of new questions -- not least of which is why white skin caught on so thoroughly in northern climes once it arose. Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.
The work also reveals for the first time that Asians owe their relatively light skin to different mutations. That means that light skin arose independently at least twice in human evolution, in each case affecting populations with the facial and other traits that today are commonly regarded as the hallmarks of Caucasian and Asian races.
Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group.
Even study leader Keith Cheng said he was at first uncomfortable talking about the new work, fearing that the finding of such a clear genetic difference between people of African and European ancestries might reawaken discredited assertions of other purported inborn differences between races -- the most long-standing and inflammatory of those being intelligence.
"I think human beings are extremely insecure and look to visual cues of sameness to feel better, and people will do bad things to people who look different," Cheng said.
The discovery, described in today's issue of the journal Science, was an unexpected outgrowth of studies Cheng and his colleagues were conducting on inch-long zebra fish, which are popular research tools for geneticists and developmental biologists. Having identified a gene that, when mutated, interferes with its ability to make its characteristic black stripes, the team scanned human DNA databases to see if a similar gene resides in people.
To their surprise, they found virtually identical pigment-building genes in humans, chickens, dogs, cows and many others species, an indication of its biological value.
They got a bigger surprise when they looked in a new database comparing the genomes of four of the world's major racial groups. That showed that whites with northern and western European ancestry have a mutated version of the gene.
Skin color is a reflection of the amount and distribution of the pigment melanin, which in humans protects against damaging ultraviolet rays but in other species is also used for camouflage or other purposes. The mutation that deprives zebra fish of their stripes blocks the creation of a protein whose job is to move charged atoms across cell membranes, an obscure process that is crucial to the accumulation of melanin inside cells.
Humans of European descent, Cheng's team found, bear a slightly different mutation that hobbles the same protein with similar effect. The defect does not affect melanin deposition in other parts of the body, including the hair and eyes, whose tints are under the control of other genes.
A few genes have previously been associated with human pigment disorders -- most notably those that, when mutated, lead to albinism, an extreme form of pigment loss. But the newly found glitch is the first found to play a role in the formation of "normal" white skin. The Penn State team calculates that the gene, known as slc24a5, is responsible for about one-third of the pigment loss that made black skin white. A few other as-yet-unidentified mutated genes apparently account for the rest.
Although precise dating is impossible, several scientists speculated on the basis of its spread and variation that the mutation arose between 20,000 and 50,000 years ago. That would be consistent with research showing that a wave of ancestral humans migrated northward and eastward out of Africa about 50,000 years ago.
Unlike most mutations, this one quickly overwhelmed its ancestral version, at least in Europe, suggesting it had a real benefit. Many scientists suspect that benefit has to do with vitamin D, made in the body with the help of sunlight and critical to proper bone development.
Sun intensity is great enough in equatorial regions that the vitamin can still be made in dark-skinned people despite the ultraviolet shielding effects of melanin. In the north, where sunlight is less intense and cold weather demands that more clothing be worn, melanin's ultraviolet shielding became a liability, the thinking goes.
Today that solar requirement is largely irrelevant because many foods are supplemented with vitamin D.
Some scientists said they suspect that white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance may also be the product of "sexual selection," a phenomenon of evolutionary biology in which almost any new and showy trait in a healthy individual can become highly prized by those seeking mates, perhaps because it provides evidence of genetic innovativeness.
Cheng and co-worker Victor A. Canfield said their discovery could have practical spinoffs. A gene so crucial to the buildup of melanin in the skin might be a good target for new drugs against melanoma, for example, a cancer of melanin cells in which slc24a5 works overtime.
But they and others agreed that, for better or worse, the finding's most immediate impact may be an escalating debate about the meaning of race.
Recent revelations that all people are more than 99.9 percent genetically identical has proved that race has almost no biological validity. Yet geneticists' claims that race is a phony construct have not rung true to many nonscientists -- and understandably so, said Vivian Ota Wang of the National Human Genome Research Institute in Bethesda.
"You may tell people that race isn't real and doesn't matter, but they can't catch a cab," Ota Wang said. "So unless we take that into account it makes us sound crazy."
As it says Race is not biologically provable... But they did find a gene which accounts for white skin...
-
The argument presented in that article has a number of flaws, within that .1% significant differences can manifest themselves. Furthermore there is no evidence to believe the summation of ones genetic code is in some way more significant then presence of specific genes.
Ultimately race is defined by (you're not going to like this) the evolutionary changes that took place over 10,000s of years as a result of environmental pressure. The value of the differences is up to personal interpretation but how someone could deny the obvious differences that exist in human races is beyond me.
With that in mind genetic samples could be taken from a number of Englishman(real ones, not a recent immigrants) and used as a basis for racial classification.
To make it simple, think of 3 colors of paint being placed on the points of a triangle, then imagine the colors slowly seeping into each other. While intermediate colors exist the primary colors do also and so to attempt to invalidate the existence of the primary colors by using the intermediate colors that resulted from contamination is being intellectually dishonest. Even if those primary colors were completely destroyed you could still break down any of the intermediate colors and figureout how much of each primary color went into them.
That article had an agenda, it was far from unbiased.
-
Yes! Genetics is the answer to your questions! Middle eastern people are white, maybe except for the ones with high concentrations of black dna from the slaves or earlier times!
-
Skkie: "...With that in mind genetic samples could be taken from a number of Englishman (real ones, not a recent immigrants) and used as a basis for racial classification."
What about all the ones with the 'bad blood' that aren't related in any way to the Duke of Normandy? By definition, wouldn't their percentile of genetic material prove the science?...by that, meaning that they never belonged in England to begin with?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As for this: Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 16, 2005
All lies and fabrications of the Illuminati!
Everyone who's spent any time studying the subject would know that "white skin" was developed in a laboratory by "Dr. O-bongi" some forty million years ago, when he poured Clorox all over some schwartze that was locked in a cage.
Of course, pushing the envelope also has its price, as the venerable Dr. O-bongi forfeited his life...He had proved only that he could invent "white skin", but was incapable of improving either the texture or taste of the meat.
Even so, the beloved Dr. O-bongi, Mother Abrka's greatest son, will always be remembered for his eloquence with words when he said:
"Me try mak'um Big Yum-Yum!"
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
The Founding Father of the US didn't intend it to be "White". They were "race"-neutral and not "race"-obsessed like WNs (White Nazis) and Black Nazis. According to this logic, in the next decades when Europe and America will be fully conquered by the Muslims and will lose its "White" population throught the time after the Conquest, every White will lost his or hers right on the land of Europe and America.
Pure Social Darwinism.
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
ouch,i see another one that become prey of the liberal propaganda.i agree that some asian could be defined as whites by culture but they are not whites in the biological sense.the negroes is a different stroy beacuse they shown us that they will never integrated with white society (or any other non black society).
"White" society doesn't exist. There are Catholic society, Irish society, Italian society, Russian Orthodox society, etc. But let's say it does. Are Blacks who honor Whites and "White ideas" (for example, Alan Keyes) able to intergrate into "White" society? Are Whites who despise themeselves with monstrous passion and adopt ideas that are hostile to White people (self-hating Whites) able to intergrate into "White" society?
I prefer to see all White-skinned evil people perished then see 1 good Black-skinned fellow's hair being cut.
-
Evolution is a scam and a psuedo-scientific idea made up by a bored Socialist journalist.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
the answer to your question according to the supreme court was that the founders didn't saw the blacks as anything near human.and nom asian (besides native americans) lived there in the time of decleration.
-
Human "races" is a Darwinist myth and what made Europe and America "White"? The question here is culture and not race.
Europe was White due to the biology of the population which inhabited it, America was White due the biology of the founders who intended it to be a White nation(although thats obviously a lost cause).
How can you know that the founders intended it to be a 'white' nation? Where in any of the founding documents is this stated? Why does it say "All men are created equal" and not "some men are created more equal than others"?
Their definition of man was a White male. The thought that this would ever be an issue never occurred to them, it was considered obvious. The fact that they owned slaves invalidates the belief that they viewed all human males to be equal.
I agree with Ron Ben Michael that race cannot be defined. And I do not believe that the founders intended to create a racist nation. I realize slavery was in practice at that time but there was discussion that it was immoral {which it most certainly was}. From a Jewish standpoint the episode of American slavery was a complete and utter shame, detracting from any moral superiority we could claim. It is not the practice of a moral society to capture and enslave foreign populations.
In Judaism there is a concept of slavery, which is very much different than that of American slavery. Slavery in the Torah is actually a thing to help society, to help the debtor and t he low-level criminal get a second chance at life. I am of course referring to the laws of the Jewish servant {which is discussed at the beginning of Parasha Mishpatim}... Torah permitted slavery of the non-Jews...
I do not believe that America should be a racist nation. I am proud that this country allowed my ancestors to emigrate here over 100 years ago. Immigrants from all over the world encountered racism against them, the italians, the polish, the russians and they were able to survive and prosper. Racism has no place in this modern world.
You're in denial if you think the founders ever intended their nation to be for anyone but whites.
Anyway, if you believe racism has no place in the "modern world" then you believe the White Race has no place either. This is where I unfortunately have to disagree with you.
I do expect you to fully accept every African who wants entrance into Israel though, to do otherwise would be racist.
what? do you want the demise of israel? beacuse this what will happen if more blacks would emigrate.we already have around 700,000 illegal aliens plus 1.5 legal ''native'' aliens and 20,000 non ''native'' legal aliens.i realy hope you didn't propose what i understood you proposed.
-
White is determined by dna! Genetics explains everything
What is white dna? Please link to it..
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/white/default.aspx
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728.html
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/19/1/310.abstract
hope it will explain some facts to you.
-
Re: "White Race? What's that?"
The Talladega 500! :::D
:::D
-
Skkie: "...With that in mind genetic samples could be taken from a number of Englishman (real ones, not a recent immigrants) and used as a basis for racial classification."
What about all the ones with the 'bad blood' that aren't related in any way to the Duke of Normandy? By definition, wouldn't their percentile of genetic material prove the science?...by that, meaning that they never belonged in England to begin with?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As for this: Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 16, 2005
All lies and fabrications of the Illuminati!
Everyone who's spent any time studying the subject would know that "white skin" was developed in a laboratory by "Dr. O-bongi" some forty million years ago, when he poured Clorox all over some schwartze that was locked in a cage.
Of course, pushing the envelope also has its price, as the venerable Dr. O-bongi forfeited his life...He had proved only that he could invent "white skin", but was incapable of improving either the texture or taste of the meat.
Even so, the beloved Dr. O-bongi, Mother Abrka's greatest son, will always be remembered for his eloquence with words when he said:
"Me try mak'um Big Yum-Yum!"
:::D :::D :::D You're killing me here! Your posts are too funny, and still always right on the money. ;D
-
The borders need to be sealed. The administration uses the racist theme to stop legal actions from being taken against illegals committing crimes and further causing chaos in the border states. Destroying America from within!!!!