Thursday, September 20, 2012

1400 Years of [Moslem] Inbreeding - has a cumulative effect


1400 Years of [Moslem] Inbreeding - has a cumulative effect


Inbox
FW: Informative Sharing: "1400 Years of [Moslem] Inbreeding - has a cumulative effect"
Reader Daniel 
Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Comment: Some who read this, may mistakenly see it as 'another slander of Moslems and
Islam', etc.or as some form of 'racism'.

No! it is a detailed serious  study of some major self-destructive flaws in both, Moslem's 
in-breeding marital practices, of 1,400 years now, and ...also, in their regressive anti-human progress,
irrational and insane violence encouraging, Islamic religion.
It is overdue for us in thr west, towake up as to what are the stark and dark realities of
the Moslem world, and of their foul rteligion. 


Begin Forward:
Date: September 19, 2012 8:22:18 PM EDT
Subject: Fwd: 1400 Years of Inbreeding - has a cumulative effect

• Explains  Obama-

• wow, this explains a lot! 

• well I guess this is why it is very hard to reason with these people!

 • If statistics are true - these problems  can't be fixed or corrected in short run.  The implications of increased health care and welfare have never been analyzed in USA.  May sink nations with open door policies.
   A few years ago, I heard a speech by a military commander who was in Iran in the mid '70s before the Shah fell.  He said for every 10 miles you drove away from the capital city - you stepped back 100 years in civilization.
   Probably does little good to think that bona-fide arguments or critical thinking will work in influencing them.
Bottom line: Islam is not simply a benign and morally equivalent alternative to the Judeo-Christian tradition.


• Verified by yahoo answers!

Is it true that almost 50% of the Muslims worldwide are inbred? Why do they do it?
- Yahoo! Answers

1400 Years of Inbreeding. Very Enlightening!

A huge Muslim problem: Inbreeding

 Nicolai Sennels is a Danish psychologist who has done extensive research into a little-known problem in the Muslim world: the disastrous results of Muslim inbreeding brought about by the marriage of first-cousins.

This practice, which has been prohibited in the Judeo-Christian tradition since the days of Moses, was sanctioned by Muhammad and has been going on now for 50 generations (1,400 years) in the Muslim world.

This practice of inbreeding will never go away in the Muslim world, since Muhammad is the ultimate example and authority on all matters, including marriage.  The massive inbreeding in Muslim culture may well have done virtually irreversible damage to the Muslim gene pool, including extensive damage to its intelligence, sanity, and health.

According to Sennels, close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred. In Pakistan , the numbers approach 70%. Even in England, more than half of Pakistani immigrants are married to their first cousins, and in Denmark the number of inbred Pakistani immigrants is around 40%.

The numbers are equally devastating in other important Muslim countries: 67% in Saudi Arabia , 64% in Jordan , and Kuwait , 63% in> Sudan , 60% in Iraq, and 54% in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar .

According to the BBC, this Pakistani, Muslim-inspired inbreeding is thought to explain the probability that a British Pakistani family is more than 13 times as likely to have children with recessive genetic disorders. While Pakistanis are responsible for three percent of the births in the UK , they account for 33% of children with genetic birth defects.  The risk of what are called autosomal recessive disorders such as cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy is 18 times higher and the risk of death due to malformations is 10 times higher.  Other negative consequences of inbreeding include a 100 percent increase in the risk of stillbirths and a 50% increase in the possibility that a child will die during labor.

Lowered intellectual capacity is another devastating consequence of Muslim marriage patterns. According to Sennels, research shows that children of consanguineous marriages lose 10-16 points off their IQ and that social abilities develop much slower in inbred babies. The risk of having an IQ lower than 70, the official demarcation for being classified as "retarded," increases by an astonishing 400 percent among children of cousin marriages. (Similar effects were seen in the Pharaonic dynasties in ancient Egypt and in the British royal family, where inbreeding was the norm for a significant period of time.) In Denmark , non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the intelligence test required for entrance into the Danish army.

Sennels says that "the ability to enjoy and produce knowledge and abstract thinking is simply lower in the Islamic world." He points out that the Arab world translates just 330 books every year, about 20% of what Greece alone does.
In the last 1,200 years of Islam, just 100,000 books have been translated into Arabic, about what Spain does in a single year. Seven out of 10 Turks have never even read a book.

Sennels points out the difficulties this creates for Muslims seeking to succeed in the West. "A lower IQ, together with a religion that denounces critical thinking, surely makes it harder for many Muslims to have success in our high-tech knowledge societies."

Only nine Muslims have ever won the Nobel Prize, and five of those were for the "Peace Prize." According to Nature magazine, Muslim countries produce just 10 percent of the world average when it comes to scientific research (measured by articles per million inhabitants).

In Denmark , Sennels' native country, Muslim children are grossly over-represented ! among children with special needs. One-third of the budget for Danish schools is consumed by special education, and anywhere from 51% to 70% of retarded children with physical handicaps in Copenhagen have an immigrant background.

Learning ability is severely affected as well. Studies indicated that 64% of school children with Arabic parents are still illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system. The immigrant drop-out rate in Danish high schools is twice that of the native-born.

Mental illness is also a product. The closer the blood relative, the higher the risk of schizophrenic illness. The increased risk of insanity may explain why more than 40% of patients in Denmark 's biggest ward for clinically insane criminals have an immigrant background.

The U.S. is not immune. According to Sennels, "One study based on 300,000 Americans shows that the majority of Muslims in the USA have a lower income, are less educated, and have worse jobs than the population as a whole."
Sennels concludes:

There is no doubt that the wide spread tradition of first cousin marriages among Muslims has harmed the gene pool among Muslims. Because Muslims' religious beliefs prohibit marrying non-Muslims and thus prevents them from adding fresh genetic material to their population, the genetic damage done to their gene pool since their prophet allowed first cousin marriages 1,400 years ago are most likely massive. (This has produced) overwhelming direct and indirect human and societal consequences.

Bottom line: Islam is not simply a benign and morally equivalent alternative to the Judeo-Christian tradition. As Sennels points out, the first and biggest vic tim s of Islam are Muslims. Simple Judeo-Christian compassion for Muslims and a common-sense desire to protect Western civilization from the ravages of Islam dictate a vigorous opposition to the spread of this dark and dangerous cult. These stark realities must be taken into account when we establish public polices dealing ! with immigration from Muslim countries and the building of mosques in the U.S.

Let's hope the civilized West and the North Americans wake up before a blind naivete about the reality of Islam destroys what remains of our culture and our domestic tranquility.

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Iftar Dinner Obama Butchers Truth


O'BAMA'S distortions about WHITE HOUSE IFTAR DINNER
    Category: The current American presidency, and one of the many reasons, why we need to boot it (Obama & his leftist democrat party), out of office:  
    This video: Mr. Obama's historical revisionism of American history, in order to please the Moslem world-
    Stunner! Iftar...Dinner lies, -Obama Butchers Truth, -Bolsters Muslim Brotherhood: 

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

OCA: The Real History


(History):
OCA's official version of the life of: "Met. Ireney" (Bekish)-
and 
THE Authoritative Real History


Category: This was the North American Metropolia's Metropolitan, who then  ruled his schismatic church, when it in 1970, it  recognized the authority of the Moscow Patriarchia, and accepted their autocephaly ('independence'), thus greatly pleasing the Communist rulers of Russia, and thus, more-splitting/dividing  the Russian diaspora, and weakening it's previous solid anti-communist stance.

This ill-gotten 'autocephaly', a 'blessing' from the Communists,  is still not recognized as valid by most of worldly-Orthodoxy, especially not the EP Greeks.


About Ivan Bekish,( his born name)- Metropolitan Ireney/Irenei:

He succeeded Met. Leonty-(Turkevich), who had succeeded Met. Theopholis (Pashkovsky), who had succeeded, Met. Platon (Rozhesvensky)- the one who first went into unlawful/uncanonical schism from the Russian Church Abroad's Synod, which canonical-body had been granted by Patriarch Tikhon, the governance of all the Russian Orthodox parishes and dioceses, outside of Russia, including North America.

And from which, this Archb. Platon had been a full member, before his schism.  (Archb. Platon, utilizing his manufactured,  'False Ukaz of Pat. Tikhon' as his basis for his schism), Forged Ukaz dated Sept. 29, 1923, with the 'signature of Pat. Tikhon' (!) (page 42 on this below mentioned, historical text)-  and he started the separate/schismatic  life of "The North American Metropolia", which schismatic church entity in 1970, under the leadership of this  Met. Ireney-(Bekish) foolishly/greedily accepted  'autocephaly' from the KGB controlled, Stalin created in 1943, 'Moscow Patiarchia' (the bogus, ersatz 'Russian Church' organization.)

The final break, between this Metropolia and The Russian church Abroad, after a convoluted back and forth re-conciliation and then re-separating period, from 1923 to 1946), with the Russian Synod in Exile, was in 1946, after that infamous 'Cleveland Sobor'.  (At that stormy sobor, the majority of the Metropolia delegates voted to join the MP, but the Metropolia bishops, wisely.... ignored that vote and did not unite/submit to Moscow).


READ: "A History Of The Russian Church Abroad: 1917-1971"
Library of Congress Catalogue Number   72-79507
ISBN  0-913026-04-2

This, clean reprint, is currently available from the Seattle, Washington, St. Nectarios Press bookstore for about $17.00, plus shipping.

St. Nectarios Press and Bookstore
10300 Ashworth Avenue N.
Seattle, WA  98133-9410
telephone: (206) -522-4471  Fax. (206) 523-0550

This unique history, is about the sole historical accurate record of this troubled Russian diaspora church history, avaliable in the English language, or indeed in ANY language.  The many footnotes, provide documented proof of this information.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Serbian patriarch ecumenism "left side"


Serbian patriarch ecumenism "left side"

In Sarajevo: SCANDAL! APOSTASY!
Put this Polish language site, through a machine translation. to have it put into Russian, or English, or other languages.

The many many photos, are shocking in themselves!

We Orthodox, must love ALL fellow mankind, of course, regardless of their religion or race or nationality, etc.

But our Church does not permit us to pray with them all in this liturgical way, nor to agree with their heterodox ecclesiology, or outright pure pagan religions!,  nor to. bow down/corrupt/distort  our Orthodox faith, to please them, "to receive the praise of men!" 


original Polish
  http://prawoslawnypartyzant.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/taize-sarajewo-serbskiemu-patriarsze-ekumenizm-wyszedl-bokiem/#more-4890

machine English – many photos

anti-Putin march in Moscow


Category: Putin is more and more openly reviled in Russia!

15 September 2012
Thousands join anti-Putin march in Moscow

A River in Egypt

"not the video" ???-and about that famous river in Egypt, "De-nial", (The Nile) 

Comment: About the Obama administration's clumsy unpatriotic mishandling of this current insane-Islamic uproar, etc.

(And another reason that we in America have got to vote him & his democrat party, OUT of our government, on all levels!).

Later reports prove, that the man who made that short cartoonish video, mocking Muhammad (as he justly deserves!), is an Egyptian Coptic CHRISTIAN. And who knows better than the centuries-oppressed Coptic Christians, about the anti-human/insane/vicious/ murderous/intolerant religion of False-Prophet Muhammad?

For how many long long centuries now, since that madman, miserable self-deluded 'Messiah' Muhammad, have Moslems been oppressing, murdering, pillaging, enslaving Christians, and Jews, and Hindus, and Buddhists, and ...each other, burning our sacred Christian Holy Bible and butchering our clergy, etc.???..and desecrating our churches and our holy places.

IF...we Christians, gave back to Moslems, world-wide, what they DESERVE, would even one of them be
 left alive on this earth?

Islam is a dark false-religion concocted by the Devil, and is perhaps THE most anti-human/anti-human progress
 and destructive organization EVER foisted upon poor mankind.

We Christians (of all stripes), need to...increase our efforts at CONVERTING poor deluded Moslems, to...Christ.

There is no other hope for them...or us.

Otherwise, we in America, dare not fully trust even one of them, inside our country, not ONE!

To save ourselves and our children and our country, we need to view all Moslems, as terrorists.

Moslems in America, need to be mass-expulsed.



A River in Egypt White House: "This is not a case of protests directed at the United States." By JAMES TARANTO Those mobs storming U.S. embassies in Cairo and elsewhere? The official White House line is that they're just overexcited movie critics.

Here's spokesman Jay Carney at a noontime press briefing, quoted by Mediaite.com: "This is a fairly volatile situation, and it is in response not to U.S. policy, not to, obviously, the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video--a film--that we have judged to be reprehensive and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it. But this is not a case of protests directed at the United States, writ large, or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive and--to Muslims."

The New York Times has a piece this morning claiming that President Obama made a "blunt phone call" to his Egyptian counterpart, Mohamed Morsi and got results: "Egyptian leaders scrambled Thursday to try to repair the country's alliance with Washington, tacitly acknowledging that they erred in their response to the attack on the United States Embassy by seeking to first appease anti-American domestic opinion without offering a robust condemnation of the violence."

Wait a minute, "anti-American domestic opinion"? We thought they just didn't like the movie. The riots are in Egypt, but Jay Carney seems to be in denial.

Reuters reports that Morsi's account of the conversation with Obama is quite different from the White House's, as reported by the Times: "On Thursday, [Morsi] said he asked U.S. President Barack Obama to act against those seeking to harm relations. His cabinet said Washington was not to blame for the film but urged the United States to take legal action against those insulting religion."

Egypt is demanding that Obama violate the American Constitution by prosecuting speech that is protected under the First Amendment. That fact is left out of the Times puff piece, which mentions only that Morsi "brought up" the film and Obama "said he understood the ire felt by Muslims." If Obama had said "no" to Morsi's outrageous demand, surely that would have made it into a Times account designed to convey his firm leadership.

"Scholars say the furor [in Cairo] reflects different traditions when it comes to religious rights and freedoms," the Times piece asserts. "Where Americans prize individual choice, Egyptians put a greater emphasis on the rights of communities, families and religious groups."

That's a laughably anodyne way of describing the distinction between freedom and Islamic supremacism, but one begins to suspect that the administration shares the Times's mindset: We have our values, they have theirs, and surely everyone can find common ground in deploring this awful video. 




Jay Carney: a prudent response or a pusillanimous one?
But even accepting that formulation, Americans are entitled to ask why our government has failed to take a clear stand on behalf of our values and our basic law. Perhaps the thinking is that a meliorative tone will have a meliorative effect. That certainly seems to have been the impulse behind the U.S. Embassy's initial statement, now down the memory hole but quoted here Wednesday, sympathizing with the mob that later stormed the grounds. Although the administration has disavowed that particular statement, every public pronouncement from the White House and State Department, including Carney's today, has been in the same spirit.

To our ear, it sounds pusillanimous rather than prudent. The "Arab street" seems to be hearing it the same way. Reuters reports that in Cairo, "hundreds of protesters gathered in streets near the mission, pelting police with stones and petrol bombs as they were pushed back from the embassy perimeter. . . . Thousands of people joined peaceful protests after Friday prayers in Tahrir and outside mosques in Cairo and other cities, responding to a call by the Muslim Brotherhood, the group that propelled President Mohamed Mursi [same guy, different transliteration] to power." That was the day after Obama supposedly dressed Morsi down.

The Times website reports that "the violently anti-American rallies"--no, no, no, no, no, they're only about the movie!--"expanded on Friday to more than a dozen countries, with demonstrators storming the American Embassy in Tunisia in a deadly clash and protesters in Sudan's capital broadening the targets to include Germany and Britain." In Yemen, they broke into the U.S. Embassy yesterday; in Lebanon they torched a KFC. Apparently there are no Chick-fil-As in that part of the world.

The Weekly Standard picks up the news from a CNN reporter's Twitter feed that "a mob has gathered and burned the American flag" at the U.S. Embassy in London. They also burned an Israeli flag. All because they don't like a movie, to hear Jay Carney tell it. It's Islam's answer to Siskel and Ebert: instead of two thumbs down, two flags charred.

Our colleague Anne Jolis phoned Anjem Choudary, who organized the London protest, and he makes quite clear that Carney has it wrong: "In Islam, you could ban it," he tells her, referring to the film. "How come Americans can't? They still proclaim 'freedom of expression'--but if Americans can believe in freedom of expression, which involves harming other people, insulting their prophets, then what's wrong with Muslims having freedom of action, doing what they did in Libya and Egypt?"

The Obama administration's response to the crisis has been not only fatuous but confused. The other day, as ABC News reports, a Telemundo reporter asked the president if he considers Egypt an ally. His reply: "You know, I don't think that we would consider them an ally but we don't consider them an enemy." In fact, since 1989 Egypt (along with Australia, Israel, Japan and South Korea, and later other countries) has been formally classified as a "major non-NATO ally."

The Times describes this as the president's having "signaled his displeasure" with the Egyptian government's lack of support. It sounds to us more like the careless musing of someone who is not a seasoned foreign-policy hand.

Indeed, it reminds us of this statement:
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
That was Barack Obama in October 2002.
"President Obama's strategists are convinced that the overseas attacks on U.S. diplomats are a major break for his campaign--as long as they are not viewed as politicizing the crisis," reports Howard Kurtz of the Daily Beast. There's a bit of a liar's paradox problem with that statement: How can the Obama campaign acknowledge viewing the crisis as a "major break" (albeit those are Kurtz's words) without being "viewed as politicizing the crisis"?

Kurtz quotes two Obama backers, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and an unnamed "Obama campaign official," who he writes "are trying to paint their rival as a neophyte." Albright complains at length about Romney's criticism of the Cairo embassy's statement, an obsession of the press for a couple of days this week.

"Still," Kurtz observes understatedly, "there are substantial risks for Obama in the way the volatile situation is playing out." Not to mention substantial risks for the country, and for what remains of stability in the Middle East, of the administration's absence of firm leadership.

Friday, September 14, 2012

two stories from Russian Press

from "Russian Press-Behind the Headlines"- two main stories-

(Moscow, Sept. 11, 2012 RIA Novosti)


Kommersant:
1) "President Putin Looses Quarter of His Support"-

2)"Patriarch Kirill Questions New Civil Code"-

My comment: What Mr. Gundaev is worried about, is that, if this  new civil code passes, that his MP kleptocracy, will.... be restricted  in it's on-going efforts at getting MORE free property, with the excuse, that ...it is needed, 'for God' (!)...the Almighty God, Who both created all, and Who...OWNS...ALL!

The Stalin created in 1943, 'Moscow Patriarchia' (so-called), is at it's top administrative levels, a bunch of greedy avaricious atheist THIEVES, who together with/but in some degree of rivalry, with the official Putin governmental apparatus, are BOTH, daily, robbing Russia and it's citizens, BLIND.

Putin is doing this, in the name of 'Serving Russia', etc., while Kyrill Gundaev is doing the same, but in his and the MP's case,

In The Name OF and FOR...'GOD'!


But, are any thieves ever, really, friends with other thieves?

No!

So, yes in that negative reality, "the church and the government are entirely separate in Russia" (famous words of Hilarion-Kapral), there IS.... a degree of 'separation' between current government and MP- church in the Russian Federation!

Politically, no. As the MP is the world-wide, religious-front  mouthpiece for the Kremlin. 

In other words, the Putin governmental KGB gang, are one group of thieves/liars, while the MP group, is...another, 'separate' criminal organization, at least when it comes to struggling to grab as much earthly power and money and possessions.

Can the country and people of the Russian land, survive, BOTH of these crooked entities?