Saturday, 2 August 2008

The Second Coming ...... in Berlin

And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.

The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.

When he was twelve years old, they found him in the temple in the City of Chicago, arguing the finer points of community organisation with the Prophet Jeremiah and the Elders. And the Elders were astonished at what they heard and said among themselves: “Verily, who is this Child that he opens our hearts and minds to the audacity of hope?.........”

For anyone who missed last week's hilarious Times take on Obama's European tour, I strongly recommend that you continue reading here.

For all Britain's faults, I can not imagine any circumstances where a Main stream US newspaper would write a similar article about the affirmatively assisted candidate from Illinois.

However, the Times is one honourable, and slightly unexpected exception, any one who has watched TV news anchors and journalists, many with otherwise fearsome reputations, swooning like teen aged schoolgirls at the very mention of his name knows that the anointed one's rose petal strewn path to the Whitehouse is assured, and that he will get they without anyone in the press ever asking a serious question about him.

Stand by for a very disillusioned electorate in 2009.


alanorei said...

Actually, a mixed-race character like BO is an accurate type of the final antichrist, according to Revelation 13.

MarkRougemont said...

LOL, the "antichrist"????? I think they don't want to ask Obama serious questions anymore because they are afraid he will give good answers. It is much more desirable to play on a person's fear with this kind of low level attack smear than to actually discuss the facts. Seriously, what is wrong with having an American President that is respected and admired worldwide?
Is it the fact that Obama is "mixed-race" that is the source of the fear here? Is it the fact that Obama didn't have London on his 'tour list' that has people jealous on that little isle of yours? And Sarah, "affirmatively assisted", LOL, is that the serious question you want to discuss with him, or are you playing to some 'fear' as well?

alanorei said...

The antichrist will be respected and admired worldwide. That's the whole point. As indicated, read Revelation 13.

Moreover, the Devil's 'Christ' is not to be feared. He is to be resisted, James 4:7. And he will be, Revelation 12:11.

BO's non-arrival here (so far) is a plus. We have more than enough foreign undesirables within these shores as it is.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...


I think you may have failed to appreciate the irony in Alinorei's post.

In relation to your other comments fact Obama did visit this little Island last week, he just didn't hold a triumphal rally in front of worshiping crowds, so the US media didn't bother to report it.

As to whether he is affirmatively assisted, I think that goes without saying, I can not imagine any circumstances where a white politician would be in the position Obama is in today with such modest prior achievements, or indeed to have been given such an embarrassingly easy ride.

Obama is where he is because of his ethnicity, and if he becomes president it will be for the same reason.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Hi Alanorei

acvtually Obama was here briefly, it was his last stop after Paris, and he had meetings with both Brown and Cameron.

However, I think everyone had realised that teh Berlin gig was a bit over the top, so it was all rather low key.

MarkRougemont said...

You are correct, from what I found he also met with Blair for an hour or so. It was all very low key compared to the Berlin speech. As far as the antichristal irony from alenori, it appears to me he is serious, however, I do see the irony in the article you quoted, nobody will take it seriously.
Honestly, the fact that he is mixed-race and a serious contender if not front-runner for our next PROTUS, has to be considered a great accomplishment. Under the circumstances, calling that accomplishment "affirmatively assisted" makes it appear as if it were handed to him on a silver platter. That is far from the reality of the situation, in my opinion.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

It would be an accomplishment if he had done much to accomplish it apart from speaking quite well whilst being black.

I can not think of anything he has said or done which would not have been considered average had a white man said or done it.

The only "change" BO offers is his complexion.

alanorei said...

Thanks for the correction, Sarah. BO is at least BG - been and gone.

Interesting he should have been so well received in Berlin, though, for obvious reasons.

And significant. Germany is the 'engine' of continental Europe and 2nd or 3rd among the world's leading ecomomies (behind the US and possibly Japan).

This suggests to me that BO is a 'dress rehearsal' for the mixed race antichrist when he appears. If he is widely accepted in Germany - as well as in the US, he clearly has a strong power base in both the new world and the old, i.e. the West.

The antichrist's part Oriental ethnicity will then give him the support of the East, including Islam. Everyone will be able to say, he's part of us.

I agree with your additional comment on BO. He has the party machinery behind him, which is not mixed race. said...

The Affirmative Action Hoax
By Ian Jobling • 8/8/08
Buy The Affirmative Action Hoax
from Amazon.
Steven Farron’s The Affirmative Action Hoax is, to my knowledge, the most thorough and uncompromising exposé of affirmative action in higher education. As many other writers have done, he provides copious evidence that universities discriminate against whites on a massive scale. However, unlike most critics of racial preferences, Farron examines his subject from a race realist perspective that acknowledges the reality of biological differences in intelligence among the races. This perspective enables him to see clearly how flimsy all the arguments commonly made in favor of affirmative action are. Farron also recognizes that the dogma of racial equality that underlies affirmative action inevitably leads to the corruption of academic standards.

Farron proves through countless examples that affirmative action university admittees have been far below the white standard for decades:

In 1989, black applicants who were admitted to selective colleges scored 350 points lower on the SATs than white admittees did.1
In 1996, the University of California at Berkeley Law School accepted every black applicant with an undergraduate GPA of 3.25 and a Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score in the 70th percentile but rejected all white and Asian applicants with the same scores.2
In 2001, the average SAT score of Hispanics who were admitted to UCLA was lower than the average score of whites who were rejected.3
Similarly, for decades the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores of minorities who are admitted to American medical schools have been lower than those of whites who were rejected.4
Blacks and Hispanics receive 80 percent of merit scholarships—that is, scholarships supposedly awarded on the basis of talent rather than need—at the University of Michigan, despite the fact that they have much lower test scores and grades than whites and Asians.5
Farron directs devastating criticism against the claim that affirmative action is necessary to compensate for the disadvantages suffered by American minorities, such as poverty and past discrimination. First of all, the beneficiaries of racial preferences are not poor or disadvantaged in any other respect. All studies of the subject have shown that the large majority of affirmative action admittees to universities come from middle and upper-class households.6

Furthermore, minority students do not underperform in school and on tests because of poverty, but because blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites. In fact, the average IQ of whites in the bottom half of the American income range is about eight points higher than the IQ of blacks in the top half.7 Poor whites score better on standardized tests than wealthy blacks. In 2002, the average math SAT score of whites whose parents earned less than $10,000 was 497, but the average score of blacks whose parents earned $100,000 or more was 490. LSAT scores show the same pattern.8

Some defenders of affirmative action argue that blacks underperform in high school due to low self-esteem. However, the clear conclusion of studies on this subject is that black teenagers have significantly higher self-esteem than whites. The Washington, DC school population is more heavily black than that of any state, and it also scores worse on standardized tests. Yet the students there are more likely to answer yes to the statement “I am good at mathematics” than students in any state.9

Universities are under pressure not only to admit, but also to graduate, large numbers of minorities. Indeed, in some cases, universities that do not graduate specified quotas of minorities are denied federal funding or accreditation.10 The compulsion to graduate unqualified applicants inevitably lowers academic standards.

Dr. Bernard Davis, a faculty member at Harvard Medical School, exposed this travesty in 1975. Affirmative action resulted in the admission of black medical students who were far below the usual standard for Harvard, which is, of course, one of the most selective schools in America. The average MCAT score of black admittees was in the mid-400s, which was lower than the average score of white applicants who were rejected by all medical schools in the country.

Naturally, these students fared poorly, but the school hid the disparities by lowering its standards. Harvard replaced the usual letter grades with a pass/fail system to obscure differences in student performance. Also, the medical school began offering repeat examinations for students who failed courses and lowered exam standards. Even worse, Harvard devalued its medical degree. Whereas previously Harvard had required that degree recipients do much better than the minimum national standard on standardized tests for medical students, the school began granting its degrees to all students who performed at the minimum level or above.

However, even this was not enough to guarantee passage of black students. In 1975, the dean of the medical school granted a degree to a black student who had failed to meet the minimum national requirement on standardized tests after having taken them five times. The indignant Davis made the whole mess public. In recompense for his bravery, students picketed his office, and he was denied promotion.11

The lowering of standards is responsible for the colossal grade inflation that has taken place at American universities in the past 40 years. In 2003 about half of students at the nation’s top colleges received A’s. As Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield explains:

in the late 60’s and early 70’s, white professors, imbibing the spirit of affirmative action, stopped giving low or average grades to black students and, to justify or conceal it, stopped giving those grades to white students as well.
The affirmative action travesty persists because of the willingness of university administrators and the media to deceive the public. One tactic is to simply to deny that racial preferences exist. Up until 1996, the University of Michigan administration would tell anyone who asked that they simply did not take race into account in admissions. Then a professor forced the university to disclose its admissions records through a Freedom of Information Act request, and it turned out that standards for black admittees were far below those for whites and Asians.12

A more common lie is that race gives applicants only a slight edge. The dean of Berkeley’s law school told a reporter in 1995 that race only comes into play when admissions committees must choose between two applicants with the same qualifications. When the law school was forced to disclose its admissions records, the enormous disparities quoted at the beginning of the article were revealed.13 Farron shows through many examples that the news media can be counted on to parrot the lies of university administrators, repeating discredited denials of racial preferences without looking into the facts.14

The Affirmative Action Hoax takes on many other myths concocted by the academic elites and their media minions to defend racial preferences. If you’re mad at what Farron labels “the vicious anti-white discrimination that has pervaded American society since the 1960s,”15 then this book is for you.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks Teacher Paris

I wonder if many of the public realise quite how terrifying this is. People are being given qualifications which exceed their abilities and many do on to be given jobs or be appointed to positions which impact on all our lives.

Siddo said...

"If he is widely accepted in Germany - as well as in the US, he clearly has a strong power base in both the new world and the old, i.e. the West."

Were JFK's "Ich Bin Ein Berliner" and Ronald Reagan's "Mr. Gorbachev... Tear down this wall!" Also paving the way to the Antichrist?

alanorei said...

This sure is a blast from the past.

I think all US presidents since the Civil War have been manipulated in some way by Rome. Fifty Years in the Church of Rome by ex-priest Charles Chiniquy, friend and confidante of Abraham Lincoln, reveals the extent to which Rome and the SJ held key positions in major US cities even before the Civil War.

The point of my comment was, however, the similarities between BHO and the final (papal) antichrist, especially w.r.t. mixed race, stemming essentially from Africa.

Kennedy and Reagan were less significant, therefore.

alanorei said...

This sure is a blast from the past.

I think all US presidents since the Civil War have been manipulated in some way by Rome. Fifty Years in the Church of Rome by ex-priest Charles Chiniquy, friend and confidante of Abraham Lincoln, reveals the extent to which Rome and the SJ held key positions in major US cities even before the Civil War.

The point of my comment was, however, the similarities between BHO and the final (papal) antichrist, especially w.r.t. mixed race, stemming essentially from Africa.

Kennedy and Reagan were less significant, therefore.