VAULT DWELLERS SERVED

Monday, April 2, 2012

Neanderthal Women In The Modern Era

In response to popular demand from readers:

Classic Amud beauty. Periorbital round sockets of the eyes draw back sharply on both sides of the head. Red or auburn hair with peculiar curls naturally. Huge forehead to hold a huge brain. Upper shelf of the mouth is broad and the jaw is very muscular - these girls could bite your arm off (or worse) if they wanted to. Powerful back but ratio to hips is less pronounced than in Sapiens girls. Bone density is x2 average Sapiens female or better. Blue eyes would not be unusual but here they are light green, also common. Overall effect is of a lively, observant, extremely intelligent woman, shows vivid emotional range in her face and gestures.


For comparison, here is the most beautiful Sapiens girl I could find. This woman is considered gorgeous by Sapiens standards in all regards:

54 comments:

Anonymous said...

oh s--t cant stop laughin i'm dyin here

Anonymous said...

Tex, how do you reconcile Rachel McAdams being a Neanderthal AND a tree-hugging, global-warmthinkery, enviro-nazi?

Anonymous said...

Amazing article about women and civilization:

http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2012/03/21/the-fundamental-cause-of-feminism/

alanmcl said...

Looks like you've fallen for too many Holywood heroines Cleve. The film industry selects for this female look because big cartoon-style facial features show up great on the silver screen and easily convey various strong emotions to the audience across the visual medium.

Rowan said...

Have to agree with Anon @ 12:23 - Pure comic gold. Quite the survival strategy you've developed there Tex.

Anonymous said...

I wonder where you found my ex?
(no I don't!)

Lucid

Koanic said...

OK, I get it now. But could you post 4-5 pics, that would be much better, to show the range.

I'm kinda half digging this chick. I can see where it comes from.

I needs more neotony. And pronounced feminine characteristics. Not sure I'm on board with strong jaws. But the eye socket thing, definitely, and green/blue eyes.

More pix of chix would help seal your case, because this chick is decent but somewhat iffy.

Anonymous said...

Here's picture of another one of my friends for your edification:

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=sologw&s=5

If you look at her roots, you can see that her hair is actually reddish. My friend was 27 in this photo, though she looks like she is about to start high school. Her sarcastic wit blows most people right out of the water.

-Melonhead Anon 6:51

njartist said...

Wait! The fat war pig has blue eyes as well!

How do you know the top girl won't put on 30# in ten years time and look just like the lower one? This is the U.S. after all: I speak from experience; I live in NJ.

Andhaira said...

Hey Cleve, saw something you might enjoy reading (don't know the source for this, but I didn't bother jewgling):
_________________________
Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the older woman that she should bring her own shopping bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment.The woman apologized and explained, "We didn't have this green thing back in my earlier days."

The cashier responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to
save our environment for future generations."

She was right -- Our generation didn't have the green thing in its day.

Back then, we returned milk bottles, cold drink bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.

We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator and elevator in every shop and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

But she was right.

We didn't have the green thing in our day.

Back then, we washed the baby's nappies because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

But that young lady is right.

We didn't have the green thing back in our day.

Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the county of Yorkshire. In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us.

When we packaged a fragile item to send in the post, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn petrol just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But she's right.

We didn't have the green thing back then.

We drank water from a fountain or a tap when we were thirsty instead of demanding a plastic bottle flown in from another country. We accepted that a lot of food was seasonal and didn’t expect that to be bucked by flying it thousands of air miles round the world. We actually cooked food that didn’t come out of a packet, tin or plastic wrap and we could even wash our own vegetables and chop our own salad.

But we didn't have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the tram or a bus, and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their mothers into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smart-ass young person.

Remember: Don't make old people mad.

We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.

Anonymous said...

Tex, would you say that actress Linda Fiorentino has Neanderthal features? her muscular jaw is particularly impressive. She's the closest resemblance I can think of to the girl I described on the other thread at 11:52 PM (except that the girl I described is about 100 times more beautiful, if you can believe it):

http://www.celebritiesheight.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Linda-Fiorentino.jpg

http://www.nndb.com/people/710/000025635/linda4.jpeg


Profile. The similarity is even more apparent here and the upper part of the mouth is identical:

http://www.nitrovideo.com/moviedb/the_moderns/images/LindaFiorentino-Moderns-02.jpg

Anonymous said...

How bout that moustache? She so low that male and female are merging together back into primal protoplasm. The highest kind of people have traits of both sexes - without losing the definition and sexual character.

Anonymous said...

Tex,

I had another thought about the cheese-eater theory today.

Dietary calcium attenuates fat absorption (http://www.ajcn.org/content/85/3/678.full). So, Neanderthals would have had to eat a ton of calories worth of dairy per day in order to digest enough fat to not die of rabbit starvation. We know that they weren't getting energy from carbohydrates based on the carbon composition of their teeth enamel. Several thousand calories of dairy per day would give them plenty of left over protein with which to build muscles while only having an average body weight of 170-185 lbs for males (hardly an obese weight if you are a 5'5" bodybuilder/powerlifter).

-Melonhead Anon 6:51

Anonymous said...

Just because ladies brush their hair back from their heads doesn't mean they have giant brains, and also I would be pissed if someone posted a real life picture of me to this specific website. There's a reason most people comment anonymously.

Anonymous said...

Parker Posey looks definitely Neanderthal. Notice the huge forehead.

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwddx70BUA1r8ptu0o1_400.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/200/483235772_98e7b6de54.jpg

Anonymous said...

"Tex, how do you reconcile Rachel McAdams being a Neanderthal AND a tree-hugging, global-warmthinkery, enviro-nazi?"

That is a good question....

- Greenbean -

Anonymous said...

April 3, 2012 6:53 AM

LOL Yeah...

Take a look at what happened to Cathrine Disher, from that TV show Forever Knight. She was a real honey back in the 1990s and now she can't stop eating the pies.

Little hotty!
http://www.celebrityfaqs.com/actress/catherine_disher/

Fatty boombah!
http://www.hallmarkchannel.com/Microsites/Datafiles/3155/catherine-disher.jpg

http://www.tvequals.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/THE-GOOD-WITCHS-GIFT-4.jpg

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9Cohsjf5qxM/0.jpg

Texas Arcane said...

Parker Posey, Linda Fiorentino. Absolutely.

Texas Arcane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Texas Arcane said...

3:25 PM

Brain volume envy.

Has nothing to do with the way she combs her hair. Rachel McAdams has got a big brain and is much brighter than any Sapiens female you know.

DRD4-R7 makes people do crazy things, including environmentalism. Rachel is a product of the reality she has been exposed to, like all Hollywood people.

Anonymous said...

We've now come full circle on this blog. Tex has now diagnosed Rachel McAdams as crazy. Those in glass houses...!

Anonymous said...

But not you, right, Cleve? You're from the real reality.

Sam said...

Tex I have great respect for a lot of stuff you talk about but I think you're pulling our legs on this one. Neanderthals do not have high foreheads! Look at all this pics on the links. None have high flat foreheads. This is a trait of the evils sapiens. I hate to say it but you're enthralled with sapien Women. Of course they could all be lying about what skulls are Neanderthal and which are not. If so then what reference do we use?

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/171068/enlarge

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neanderthal_profile.png

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/170988/enlarge

http://fineartamerica.com/products/1-neanderthal-skull-granger-greeting-card.html

http://www.mpg.de/295278/Neanderthal?filter_order=LT&research_topic=BM

http://scienceprogress.org/2009/03/designing-baby-neanderthals/

http://mr-verb.blogspot.com/2007/10/neanderthal-language-gene.html

http://www.plantbio.uga.edu/~chris/neander.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis.jpg

and on and on...
http://www.google.com/search?q=Neanderthal&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=6P0&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=qe17T4mzOo-utweNyaDyDA&ved=0CEEQsAQ&biw=1680&bih=864&sei=se17T-DNNI6Ftge68oT0DA

Anonymous said...

I can see why the modern Sapiens male would rather opt for the more convenient, low maintenance, submissive Sapiens females that would give him space to pursue other sexual partners and time for whatever trivialities make up his daily routine (since it is part of his nature to do both), instead of the dynamic, demanding, almost unbearably inquisitive and impossible to lie to without getting caught Neanderthal females. Every day would be Judgement Day with these girls and Sapiens male hates that because he lives in a constant state of postponement, trickery, made-up shit and solipsism that Neanderthal girls do not buy and can see through easily. It's as if he subconsciously realizes he will not be up to the task and therefore prefers more safe options, and the more of them the better.

Anonymous said...

Original ancient Cinderella story is about a Neanderthal girl?

Read the description of her features (golden curly hair, green eyes), her affection for animals that were her only friends, and how she has hated and forced to perform tasks just like every Neanderthal individual under the supervision of sapiens:

http://www.perankhgroup.com/cinderella.htm

Texas Arcane said...

11:55 PM

Amud, not Mousterians. There is a 300,000 year difference.

Amuds not only had larger frontal lobes but higher foreheads.

Anonymous said...

For reference, the Amud neanderthal skull:

http://australianmuseum.net.au/image/Skull-of-Homo-neanderthalensis-Amud-1-side-view

Sam said...

OK. I still don't see. Maybe I'm a little slow but here's what I found. Looking back I found this in one of the comments. All pics are from this website posted by Djanar.

http://karmak.org/archive/2003/01/westasia.htm

First:
skull from Amud, Israel

http://karmak.org/archive/2003/01/westasia_files/amudrt.jpg

second:
early modern humans of the Levant, represented here by this skull from Qafzeh

http://karmak.org/archive/2003/01/westasia_files/skhul5.jpg

Sapiens has flat face. Neanderthal more slanted forehead. I'm not seeing that in the picture of rachel-mcadams
Look at these side views of Rachel.

http://hairstylesandcuts.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/rachel-mcadams-braids-hg-de.jpg

http://man.bf-1.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/rachel_mcadams_and_ryan_goslings_toronto_lovin_main_3909.jpg

Open up both skulls show earlier. Compare.

One more,

http://www-hollywoodlife-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/121509_rachel_mcadams_544_94453457.jpg

Look how the forehead is vertical from the brows up half way then slants back. Same profile in the Sapien skull. What am I missing. She looks sapien to me and a very nice specimen I might add.

Anonymous said...

I have gone to bed with the first, and woken up next to the second. It's happened more than a few times....damned shape-shifting Sapiens.......grrrr

Texas Arcane said...

You have to be willing to consider that the majority of edjumafacated peeple pontificating may be engaged in deliberate fraud or else just plain stupid. This is not the first time this has happened in science and in fact it is fairly common and has been for centuries.

The rule is that when skulls are hidden out of view, academics describe the Amud forehead as sloping back, conveniently confirming their claims whatever they are this week. They tend to change very frequently.

If these same skulls are turned over for peer review and widespread examination and analysis to confirm their conclusions independently, two very strange things will always happen.

Either academics will suddenly claim this skull is one of those "anomalies" providing evidence of interbreeding or else the skull will be reclassified as other than Neanderthal.

The fact is, claims that the Neanderthal skull sloped back never stand up to public scrutiny. Once another expert has a chance to look at their reconstruction it becomes obvious that 90% of their conclusions were based on conjecture. In many cases it is obvious somebody has offered Homo Erectus up as a Neanderthal because they don't have the wherewithal to tell the difference.

I have seen documentaries where the pieces of the skull were put into another man's hand and suddenly, a modern human skull appears with a bigger brain case, slightly different in the eye sockets and a broader jaw shelf.

A review of how easily the "overwhelming proof" is debunked here:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v17/n1/neanderthal-children

It is not that I agree with creationists but rather that they are so much more damned honest, curious and scientific compared to the orthodoxy. I could show you where they superbly debunk the orthodox claims and then turn around and make an outrageous claim of their own that is not supported by the evidence.

We owe a great deal to creationists for exposing how many people ride the evolutionary bandwagon for no other reason than a solid income and an excuse to avoid getting a real day job. The majority of scientists in the universities nowadays are neither scientific nor particularly disciplined thinkers nor really merit any such credibility in the field of anthropology.

I believe those skulls you linked to at the Australian Museum site are not the same Amud skulls I have seen in cabinets in Israel and in Germany. In fact, a few of them look like Homo Erectus who many people believe was actually a large bipedal gorilla.

Texas Arcane said...

I forgot to add, Le Moustier is the most amazing example of the fraud that is common in the field.

Notice how the plasticene model the museum keeps on public display as a "replica" bears absolutely no resemblance of any kind to the verified X-Ray of the skull they keep in a locked room in the basement - a skull that shows no slope of the forehead at all. You can hide behind your credentials as a scientist but a liar with bad character is still a liar no matter how many degrees he gets from university.

Anonymous said...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120225110942.htm

"The amount of genetic variation in geologically older Neanderthals as well as in Asian Neanderthals was just as great as in modern humans as a species, whereas the variation among later European Neanderthals was not even as high as that of modern humans in Iceland”, says Anders Götherström, associate professor at Uppsala University."

Anonymous said...

Good post. I've been curious about this ever since you first posted about the female Neanderthal.

I have the large forehead, deep set eyes, weird waves in my hair, incredibly strong bones and an intellect that bothers every man outside of my husband. In fact, I once had a pastor friend of mine tell me "Don't get me wrong, Charity... smart girls are great and all, but I'd never marry one."

Wow.

Sam said...

After reading the last link:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120225110942.htm

Sounds like disease killed them off. Some kind of catastrophic illness wiped out all but a few that had the right genetic combination to survive. The North American Indians suffered a similar fate. Some say as much as 90% died from the multiple diseases induced from Europeans that they had no defense against. Maybe the Neanderthals died by a fluke disease vector. Same could happen to us.
Another devastating die off has just now been recognized. (By me maybe not others). Francisco de Orellana was the first European to go down the Amazon river. He claimed vast populations in large cities on and near the river. After he left it was almost 200 years before any other major expeditions. There was nothing there but jungle. They assumed he lied about the large cities. Only lately as a by product of studying Terra Petra and satellite photos has it been seen that there were large settlements in the areas where Francisco de Orellana said there were.
Terra Petra is a rich dark soil in the Amazon. Now believed to have been made by the Amazon Indians by charing corn stalks and other carbonis waste. They've been mining the soil for years as garden soil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta

Anonymous said...

If disease killed them then why do we have the female mitochondria albeit in a strange order and the male bones in our campfires across Europe. Mentioned by tex and verified by me.

Anonymous said...

Debra Winger as Wonder Woman, perhaps the finest example of Neanderthal beauty and archetype of symmetry and proportion:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d6/Debra_Winger_as_Wonder_Girl.jpg

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/11/07/magazine/07winger_2/07Winger-t_CA0-articleInline.jpg


Older-age picture of her, it's all there:

Chestnut hair with coppery red tones, blue eyes, large forehead, broad upper lip.

http://www.famouspeopleinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Debra-Winger1.jpg

Anonymous said...

Perhaps neos were great. Too great. Their arrogance leading to their destruction by God?

Sam said...

Read the link I posted by Anonymous and you'll understand. The paper said the genetic variability of the Neanderthals collapsed at some point. I take that as meaning there were a few survivors with a specific set of genes that were not as susceptible to whatever virus killed the rest. May be wrong but makes sense. Occam's razor. Of course could be all but one group decided to kill themselves with hand axes or maybe they took up a fetish of porcupine bathing. :)

Texas Arcane said...

12:55 AM

This is what I feel.

As modern people continue to argue that they were not really as amazing as they appear, I have already concluded that the Neanderthals had so much they stopped thinking of their creator. They became indifferent.

God would rather have Jacob not because he was better than Esau but rather that Jacob perhaps was less than perfect and still needed God.

I believe the Neanderthals began to worship the Neanderthals and eschew God. This is evident in the story of Jacob and Esau.

He was mighty in his mind, mighty in his body and mighty in his scope. The Neanderthals at the end began to think of themselves as the Alpha and the Omega.

This is what I think.

It is not the first time that God has raised other peoples as enemies to those who have forgotten him.

This is a true path to Christian humility, trust me. When you start to realize that Jacob was not perfect and that there is no neo-darwinian march upward and onward you will be able to appreciate the generosity of God towards mankind.

Anonymous said...

@Sam

I think the opposite is true. The more diverse a population the less susceptible it is to be wiped out by a virus, and the more likely it is to develop immunities. Look at the disease that wiped out the biologically homogenous Aztecs carried by the Spaniards. Or even the Israelis who looked to develop biological weapons that would only harm people with arab genes.

http://www.excludedmiddle.com/ethnic_weapons.htm


For that reason alone I think the version presented by the article has no credibility.

Anonymous said...

April 6, 2012 7:34 AM

DUH... Diversity ends with intermarriage, you dummy.

I assume you are one of those "Diversity is Strength" anti-Whites...

Massive immigration and forced integration, is only demanded for all White countries and only White countries.

It never had anything to do with diversity, it was always about the genocide of all Whites, everywhere on the planet.


As for "Aztecs" and American Indians, it was geographic isolation that did them in. They were not exposed to modern diseases, due to ocean separation and had no protection when it arrived on their shores.

The same deaths due to new disease, always occurred in geographically isolated populations all over the world, no matter how "diverse" they were, due to European exploration and very possibly, the same occurred in non-White explorations and conquests.

I am surprised Tex didn't call you on your neo-Bolshevik, anti-White genocidal bullshit.

Could be he doesn't have the energy to respond, due to your crushing stupidity?

Or is your stupidity, just pretense? I know from real world experience, what cunning little bastards, anti-Whites are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU&feature=plcp&context=C4660e90VDvjVQa1PpcFMUXSBCP0CXLIqoER3Q8YQdefBDXJLXgv4%3D

Sam said...

We have evidence that the North American Indian population was from a small population.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1351474

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8020620

That would explain their susceptibility to be devastated by disease they had not been exposed to.

The inverse that more variation would reduce the susceptibility makes sense. Yet this is not proven. If disease is not the reason for the genetic bottleneck, what was? If it was a climatic catastrophe or some other disaster how did just one group survive? No the idea that it was disease is not perfect but it seems to fit the facts the best for me. With more data I could change my mind but as of now that's the conclusion I draw from the evidence I've seen.

Texas Arcane said...

7:34 AM

I don't have the strength to respond sometimes/most of the time. I admit it.

Anonymous said...

@Anti-white parrot 11:51 AM

I'm talking about genetic variation within the same race or even family and not about racial diversity you moron. Look at you for instance, an inbred, probably the result of an incestuous "relationship", who has inherited a brain that has the diameter of an asshole and therefore lacks the capacity to spout anything else besides "anti-racist is a code word for anti-white" or "variations" thereof.


@Sam 4:37 PM

Take a look a at this. Research on different types of diabetes is linked to certain gene pools:

"Type 2 diabetes occurs at a particularly high frequency in Latin American populations, and there's reason to think that the Native American contribution to the gene pool has some effect."

http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/24496/


Also, genetic variation among one race, no matter how subtle (the European population of North America for instance) should be taken into consideration when researching disease cases:

"If the subtle population substructure that exists within European American populations is not understood and accounted for, genetic association studies can produce incorrect findings if disease cases are compared to healthy controls that on average have different ancestry."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080118093725.htm

Anonymous said...

@Tex 10:04 PM

Meaning you agree or disagree with my statement that the the article is rubbish and that it wasn't disease the main reason the Neanderthals went extinct?

Texas Arcane said...

Absolute rubbish. The Neanderthals had immune systems like cast-iron boilers.

I have a theory I have never expounded upon yet (was saving it for a future blog) that the Neanderthal was a vector for flesh-eating Staphlococcus that were harmless to other Neanderthals but deadly on contact to other hominids. There is evidence for this. The notion a creature as weak and flimsy as Sapiens could threaten the immune systems of Neanderthals is ridiculous in addition to being totally unsupported. Neanderthal bones are not found in large numbers dead without any apparent violence. They are mostly found hidden in caves or else in Sapiens campfire ashes.

Texas Arcane said...

Ockham's Razor presents the obvious conclusion ... Europeans became a threat to other races because of the strong immune systems they got through Neanderthal genes. This is why they are a demolition crew race wherever they go, mowing down the feeble locals like tenpins. They have Neanderthal immunity and can simultaneously carry any numbers of diseases without being harmed by them.

Anonymous said...

Third world Asians are bringing filthy diseases to the West for which, our anti-biotics have little effect.

I know, because my nephew who is a swimmer had very bad diarrhea recently. He was bleeding every time he visited the bathroom, because the bacteria had stripped his intestinal lining.

They had to use a last line of defense anti-biotic to defeat it, one that is normally reserved for AIDS patients.

That is something new for public swimming pools in all White countries, thanks to "diversity".

The Aztecs have Montezuma's Revenge. Drink the water in Mexico, and you will learn first hand, what it is. It does not make Mexicans sick, and they are not super men.

Asia, Africa, Europe, etc are connected by land and had massive populations in comparison to the Americas.

Europeans lived in filthy, rat infested, high density cities and were almost wiped out by the Black Death. So of course their explorers would be resistant to all kinds of nasty diseases, while those in the Americas were not.

Occam's Razor says, the simplest explanation, is most likely the correct one.

Disease kills the weakest, the strongest survive and pass on their resistant genes. Its natural selection.

Anonymous said...

Your reply makes much sense. Thanks for clarifying that Tex, though the anti-white parrot will be disappointed you didn't give me the "answer" he was expecting.

Anonymous said...

Hope this post doesn't appear more than once Tex, it doesn't seem to be going through... Normally it says your comment has been accepted for moderation. Maybe they are watching you now, you have 1/2 a million hits?

@April 8, 2012 2:02 AM

"I'm talking about genetic variation within the same race or even family and not about racial diversity you moron. "

DUH... Like all anti-Whites, your "diversity" arguments always lead to the same real world outcome.

No Whites, anywhere!

Race is defined by the United Nations as identifiable national groups and identifiable groups are protected from genocide, no matter what means are used to achieve it.

"Any means" to achieve the elimination of an identifiable national group, includes "diversity" policies targeting that group for elimination.

"Look at you for instance, an inbred, probably the result of an incestuous "relationship", "

Fresh Meat! So now he admits to the blog he is anti-White! It didn't take long did it? Point out they justify genocide only for Whites, and the inner anti-White, comes out to play.

They call White people inbred, as one of many Justifications for their White Genocide program:

- demanding massive immigration and forced integration for all White countries and only White countries, until ONLY White people are blended out of existence -


"Anti-racists" don't go to Africa or Asia and tell Africans and Asians, they are inbred and need to fix it with "diversity", because they aren't trying to make Africa or Asia more "diverse", ie LESS Black or LESS Asian.

"Anti-racists" don't tell the Jews in Israel, 1/4 of you have genetic diseases, so Israel must be flooded with millions of Blacks and Asians and everyone be forced to "mix in" until Jews disappear.

They are only doing this in all White countries and only White countries.

Its genocide.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I see they have changed the way they report that your post has been recorded. It is on the top left of the page now.

Sorry for the repeated posts, Tex. Just delete the earlier ones.

Anonymous said...

April 8, 2012 11:21 AM

"Your reply makes much sense. Thanks for clarifying that Tex, though the anti-white parrot will be disappointed you didn't give me the "answer" he was expecting."


I don't agree with Tex on everything, mostly his methods for dealing with those that say they are anti-racist, but are anti-White.

However I do respect him, because he allows others to voice their opinions - unlike censorious leftards and obvious anti-Whites, like you.

You see, if there were no people like you, there wouldn't be a need for people like me.

You better get used to it. Our numbers are growing and will continue to do so, until your lot get the message and leave our countries for good.

Anti-Whites declared WAR on Whites in 1965 and now you cry when we use YOUR methods to fight back and win???

Cry me a river, anti-White.

Anonymous said...

@ Anti-white parrot 11:45 AM

You fucked up, and now you try to cover your tracks. Tell me how how talking about genetic variation within the same race is anti-white. I would tell you to go read the link about medical research and genetic variation in whites but your intelligence is to low to understand it. Which is why since you are too stupid to have any knowledge about any subject discussed here or anywhere else with anybody all you can do is ruin other people's conversations with the same bullshit. I can picture what happens in real life when you interrupt conversations yelling "anti-racist racist is a code word for anti-white" with people walking away in disgust or re-arranging your already hideous and deformed face.

I'll leave you now since you're so stupid that you cannot even post a comment on this blog without messing up.

Anonymous said...

@April 8, 2012 11:00 PM

Maggot, we're just laughing and make fun of you in case you missed that too, you're the one crying here and, no matter how many times ignored, repeatedly appealing to Tex to come to his defense. Needy and insecure much?

You haven't got the intelligence or knowledge to have a conversation with anyone on this blog or make a useful comment about anything, so you have no other option than to constantly patrol these boards foaming at the mouth and see if anyone mentions anything about race so that your disturbed mind can twist it an give you the only excuse to post all over again your repetitive bullshit. I know perfectly well that I'm neither a leftist or promoting racial mixing and I don't need to list my credentials or beliefs to a piece of shit like yourself. If I was in charge of a eugenics program I would start with you since even sub-Saharan niggers have much higher intelligence than a mentally retarded piece of trailer-trash shit like yourself, who is the product of incestuous rape by your chronically depressed father to your long-dead alcoholic mother. That helps explain why any reproductive relationship beyond the family circle is "anti-white" for you, not that you ever had a chance to find consensual sex outside of it of course. Do a favor to humanity and go dig a hole as deep as you can and bury yourself in there, but first kill every relative of yours up to the third degree just to make sure that another deformed monstrosity like yourself doesn't show up on this planet again.

www.000webhost.com