USToday published today a long note on The Talk with a pic of Trayvon as a cute kid (not this pic) instead the pic as he looked when bashed the head of that small Mestizo. Is the paper trying to intimidate white people? Is the paper trying to cause black riots? Or people want to hear this kind of phantasy? Do they sell more papers? There was a time when Communist papers published these kind of articles, showing how bad was America and capitalism. Today American journals are voicing the Communist propaganda of the Cold War.
15 comments:
At this rate, the photos next week will be photos of his mother's pregnant belly.
I downloaded this photo of sweet baby martyr Trayvon from an American paper. The USToday published the standard pic of Trayvon at age ten. Why are they lying? If this blood campaign continues, that poor mestizo with the Jewish name will surely be killed in jail.
Today American journals are voicing the Communist propaganda of the Cold War.
And that's by no means an accident!
Thanks Anonymous. I spent an hour with the lecture. Interestingly, his conclusion is the same as mine: religion is necessary for survival. However I doubt his examples of Mayan and Egyptian etc civilizations disappearing because they lost faith in God.
Another thing: he speaks about Soviet subversion causing the collapse of America in the time of Andropov. Yet it was the Soviet Union that was demoralized and collapsed, not America. Conclusion: the CIA is a more effective subvertor (?). They know and practice the technique of subversion. They have adopted Soviet methods and perfected them.
Obama emerged from the CIA backed "development" environment.
It is complicated.
If you have another hour, there's also a interview from 1984 with him where they go into the personal background, show pictures, talk about how he escaped dressed as an American hippie and so on.
>Was the CIA a more effective subvertor?
Everything behind the curtain was managed, so there was no carrier for classical subversion.
Rock & Roll had limited reach, maybe students, but nothing above, i'm sure the Politbiro didn't rock to Elvis.
As he said, subversion is a two street, the Soviets were a dead end in this regard.
You've mentioned "Zimmerman" as a Jewish name again. Is there any evidence that his (adopted) father is Jewish? Zimmerman ("carpenter") is also a family name among German and Swiss-descended Gentiles.
Jewish sounding but not Jewish. The Zimmerman in question is 100% Catholic.
The process by which Jews received German surnames is still somewhat mysterious to me, in that whenever I have looked at Polish records until maybe the 19th century, Jews were usually referred to by first name only - the Jew Isaac, the Jew Moses, etc. By this time they had been in Poland for hundreds of years. For internal Jewish purposes, surnames were also not used - the usual method was to refer to refer to the father - Joseph the son of Meyer, etc.
K
Rabbinical families had surnames from early dates, some going back to the medieval period. German Jews also adopted informal surnames earlier than Jews farther East, and were formally required to take surnames around the time of Napoleon's invasion. Ultimately, many more governments required Jews to adopt surnames to aid in record-keeping for collection of taxes. As to why German-sounding names? You, K, know as well as I that they spoke Yiddish. Why they didn't adopt Slavic tongues I'm not certain, but I vaguely recall a medieval rabbinical decree requiring that the Eastern Jews keep Yiddish.
In my naiivite, I had always thought that Jews with Germanic surnames came from Germany, and furthermore, that their names often reflected the primary trade of the senior male in the line at the time that surnames had to be adopted.
Napoleon forced a similar mandate on the Dutch, who often selected absurd surnames as a mild form of protest. This is why Dutch names seem so bizarre to South Africans (who can quasi-understand Dutch), noting that the Dutch who colonised the Cape did so before this event in Holland, and were therefore surnamed in a less bizarre manner.
Anon.
In another life, I had the pseudonym of "Soloman Eselkopf." True story!
-s.n.
This is worse than Pravda.
Ivan
The name thing still doesn't add up. Zimmerman is NOT the Yiddish word for carpenter. Carpenter in Yiddish is stolyar , from the Polish stolarz. The Yiddish word for merchant is handler, not kaufman(n). Etc. So the surnames appear to be of German, not Yiddish origin, but most Jews didn't adopt surnames until after they had been in Poland for hundreds of years.
K
Short balding Semitic untermensch attacking Teuto-Nordic Master Race leftist invader
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4216723,00.html
K,
You are describing Eastern Yiddish, not all Yiddish, but your point is still valid since most of our ancestors were Eastern Jews who spoke that variant. My only thoughts are that in some areas of Poland, i.e. those annexed to Prussia or Austria, the Jews attempted to Germanize. It is also possible that the authorities who imposed the surnames Germanized (or de-Yiddishized) them.
If they were going for German then they would have used the double n at the end - Zimmermann, Kaufmann, etc. but most Jewish names have only the single N.
K
Post a Comment