an interesting topic and a very thought provoking analysis.

will comment later...

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.

Obama is considered "black" because the majority of people consider him black. As a mixed person myself, I will never be considered "white" (although I have very light skin). While I can go by "mixed", I remain a black person in the eyes of the majority. At least somehow "tainted" (usually with the idea of an inferior intellect or proclivity to crime). I know this from the experience of my numerous white friend's and white girlfriend's that I have had throughout my life. Specifically I know it from their parent's view and immediate judgement of me.

Your warning that we should not mix races comes at the heart of veiled racist supremacist thinking. As a non-racist I am neither concerned with whether people mix or not. Exactly which culture is so worth protecting? Certainly, when we speak of protecting race we speak of either protecting some kind of important racial charactistic or we speak of culture. Often it is the latter. So then, is it the old Japanese culture or the new Native American culture? Is it the present European culture or the latest American culture? Cultures aren't created by the commoner--only insofar as necessity limits or demands particulars--rather, they are largely engineered by leaders and rulers. Moreover, variety is not rooted in race but each individual mind; strong and daring minds that step forth to make their place.

Strength is not found in nations of pure blood as America has demonstrated in its ability to wage war with many races in its ranks. The fall of largely racially "pure" nations further shows this. Strength is found in a nation's people being awake. It won't matter whether everyone is mixed or if everyone is separate and "pure" but only if everyone is awake. The Jew would like you to think otherwise. A simple distraction.

For those concerned with racial purity I beg to know if they believe there is a shortage of women or something [of any race]. A man should be able to love who he wants and breed with whom he wants. Therefore separation is neither encouraged nor discouraged and we can stop being distracted by Jews making us believe that it is our separation or lack of that takes our power, when it is in fact humanity's lack of awareness.

Obama is considered "black" because the majority of people consider him black.

Perhaps the majority do consider him as black. I don't care too much about the colour of his skin, but I do care who his backers are and what their motives might be.

As a mixed person myself, I will never be considered "white" (although I have very light skin). While I can go by "mixed", I remain a black person in the eyes of the majority. At least somehow "tainted" (usually with the idea of an inferior intellect or proclivity to crime).

Unfortunately, it is all too easy for the ignorant to jump to such conclusions solely on the basis of skin colour. The reason why they do is because they are fed such stereotypes by the Talmudvision. The majority of popular rap and hip-hop artists only serve to perpetuate the stereotype, while those with something intelligent to say are inevitably sidelined (and there are many such acts, believe me).

I know this from the experience of my numerous white friend's and white girlfriend's that I have had throughout my life. Specifically I know it from their parent's view and immediate judgement of me.

It happens.  The parents of an Italian ex of mine figured that all the Irish were 'barbarians' and were none too happy about my involvement with her.

Your warning that we should not mix races comes at the heart of veiled racist supremacist thinking. As a non-racist I am neither concerned with whether people mix or not.

Is it a warning that we should not mix races, or that we should not become unduly occupied with the issue to the extent where we feel that to be attracted to some with similar racial characteristics as ourselves is somehow 'wrong'?

Exactly which culture is so worth protecting?

Lots. My country has a culture and identity all of its own, going back several millenia, and I don't want to see it disappearing into a mismash of homogenised pop-culture. Having said that, appreciation of culture has nothing to do with the colour of one's skin - it is more to do with what you grow up with. One of our more popular musicians, the late Phil Lynott, was a mixture of Brazilian (Black) and Irish. He had a good rapport with Irish culture, weaving Irish melodies into his music, as well as having regular jam sessions and the occasional recording with the traditional Irish band Clann Éadair.  That cultural appreciation wasn't exclusive - he was as much in touch with music from the Caribbean and South America as he was with the music in the country he grew up in.

Certainly, when we speak of protecting race we speak of either protecting some kind of important racial charactistic or we speak of culture. Often it is the latter. So then, is it the old Japanese culture or the new Native American culture? Is it the present European culture or the latest American culture?

Why not preserve them all to the greatest extent possible? Sure, they will inevitably mix and mutate into new cultures,  as has happened throughout history. That is normal. An enforced monoculture isn't.

Cultures aren't created by the commoner--only insofar as necessity limits or demands particulars--rather, they are largely engineered by leaders and rulers.

That may be true of the modern day 'culture'. However, The Blues were not engineered by leaders and rulers, the Native American traditions were not engineered by the elite. Often the most profound cultures grow from the struggle of so-called 'ordinary people'.

Moreover, variety is not rooted in race but each individual mind; strong and daring minds that step forth to make their place. Strength is not found in nations of pure blood as America has demonstrated in its ability to wage war with many races in its ranks. The fall of largely racially "pure" nations further shows this.

The whole concept of racial purity is a joke. However, the concept of a cultural identity is not.  There are many aspects of cultures that deserve to be consigned to the trashcan of history, but equally, there are many aspects of every culture that deserved to be preserved and cherished.

Strength is found in a nation's people being awake. It won't matter whether everyone is mixed or if everyone is separate and "pure" but only if everyone is awake.

That much I can not disagree with.

The Jew would like you to think otherwise. A simple distraction. For those concerned with racial purity I beg to know if they believe there is a shortage of women or something [of any race]. A man should be able to love who he wants and breed with whom he wants.

What about a woman? Should she not be afforded the same rights? ;)

Therefore separation is neither encouraged nor discouraged and we can stop being distracted by Jews making us believe that it is our separation or lack of that takes our power, when it is in fact humanity's lack of awareness.

True. But our cultures, each of them, give us a grounding, a foundation, a home for the imagination, a connection to the past and to the future. No culture is more valuable than another, but they are all vital.  I don't believe for a moment that mixed-race relationships necessarily destroy cultures - the vacuous nature of society and its short attention span will do that all by themselves. However, if we succumb to the persistent attempts to destroy the uniqueness of our cultures and adopt the shallow, ego-ridden plastic subsitute that is being peddled every day before our very eyes, we may as well hang up our hats right now.

interesting username and very thoughtful comment.

you make some very good points.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with mixing races. But, there is also nothing wrong with not mixing with another race, if that's what you choose to do.

Mating should be a matter of personal choice. I would never encourage or discourage someone from doing one or the other.

With respect to multiculturalism, I think the biggest problem in terms of mixing cultures is that the way it has happened, most of the best aspects of each unique culture has been destroyed or forgotten and replaced with the most banal culture known to man.

The so-called "pop-culture" that most of us were born into is nothing but the glorified worship of self and material objects.

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.

[O]ur cultures, each of them, gives us a grounding, a foundation, a home for the imagination, a connection to the past and to the future. No culture is more valuable than another, but they are all vital.  

I think the reason we each find ourselves turning to our own unique cultures for "grounding, a foundation, a home for the imagination, [and] a connection to the past and to the future" is because our respective cultures were developed over many centuries and in some cases millenia to foster human development, and long term happiness for the entire community.

In stark contrast, the phony pop-culture that we have and continue to be force-fed over the last half a century was engineered by greedy marketers who work 24/7 to enslave us with their lies.

Therein lies the difference and the reason why an increasing number of Americans, no matter where they came from, are increasingly turning to their roots in search of time-honored values that make life worth living and foster the kind of family and community ties conducive to human happiness and progress.

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.

As a mixed person myself, I will never be considered "white"

And that sucks.  You have a factual bases to claim white identity, but ignorant stupid people would deny it.  A portion of my post dealt with this.

Your warning that we should not mix races comes at the heart of veiled racist supremacist thinking.

It is not veiled racist supremacist thinking.  I stated that there is nothing wrong with mixed races in my post.  You are falling into the trap of trying to make preservation of all races into a "racist supremacist thinking".  And as to:

Exactly which culture is so worth protecting?

All of them.  Maybe re-reading my post will clarify how it is not about racism or supremacy.

Certainly, when we speak of protecting race we speak of either protecting some kind of important racial charactistic or we speak of culture.

I hold race as one thing, and culture as another, they are not the same although they can be associated with one another, they form what is called ethnicity.  Race is genetic, culture is not.  Ethnicity is based on compounding race, culture, language, religion, etc to form a distinct ethnicity.  This is another reason why I find the importance in properly defining words, as many people define words in a different way. 

My post primarily deals with racial identity.  The second to last paragraph is where I deal with preserving races and cultures (which can be ethnicities).  Maybe this is where there is some confusion when reading the post that I am making this only about preserving race...

The point in protecting all races and cultures is to make sure they continue to exist.  I do not want all the races and cultures to eventually dissapear, as I believe and said this as well, the Talmudic supremacist want such an eventuality to become reality. (except for them)

variety is not rooted in race but each individual mind

Indeed.  We are all differnt.  Every single person on the planet.  But cultures and races have their differences, and I am for preserving all of them, not allowing the eventual amalgamation of all races into one unified human race. (as opposed to a unifed human species, there is a difference)

It won't matter whether everyone is mixed or if everyone is separate and "pure" but only if everyone is awake. The Jew would like you to think otherwise. A simple distraction.

I believe you applying a Jewish philosphy of complete racial separation to the principle of racial preservation.  And yes it does matter if everyone one on the planet is mixed, just as much as it would matter if everyone is white, or if everyone is black, etc.  When you buy into the idea that it doesn't matter if everyone is mixed or is solely another specific race, it is buying into the Jewish created politically correct deception of "their is only one race, the human race".  You are failing to see my point here, and this is a problem many people have when they read something regarding preserving race (as they usually picture a person only caring about their own racial preservation and therefore liken it to racism and supremacism).  It is not about preserving one race over another, again I thought I made this clear in my post, it is about preserving all races, even the mixed ones.

I am sorry to see you somewhat offended by the material posted with you being a person of mixed race John.  I thought this might step on some toes, but I tried my best to make my point clear.  If you re-read the post I think you will better understand what I was trying to say after reading this comment.

Is it a warning that we should not mix races, or that we should not become unduly occupied with the issue to the extent where we feel that to be attracted to some with similar racial characteristics as ourselves is somehow 'wrong'?

Exactly, the latter.

But our cultures, each of them, gives us a grounding, a foundation, a home for the imagination, a connection to the past and to the future. No culture is more valuable than another, but they are all vital.

Indeed.  Whatver culture you hold to, most likely, it is routed in your racial origins, and you should have the right to practice it.  This does not make race and culture the same thing though.  As anyone can choose to practice any cultural methods they choose to and find meaning in it.  Christianity is a religion, but it is also routed in Western culture, at least it was, until you-know-who waged war against it.  This falls right into my whole point of preservation.  The agenda to not care about keeping races and cultures alive plays into their plans.

Mating should be a matter of personal choice. I would never encourage or discourage someone from doing one or the other.

Exactly.  My post was to give my view on "racial identity, preservation and the whole race-card".  All races should be preserved, all cultures should be preserved.  Allying with someone solely based on race is ludicrous (as many have done with Obama was my one example).  If you want to mate with another race that's your choice.  But when there is an agenda to promote intermixing and socially condition people to see anyone who prefers to stay within their own race as wrong, unethical, racist, evil, etc, that is playing into their PC controlled views.  This can be dmonstrated in saying "Your warning that we should not mix races comes at the heart of veiled racist supremacist thinking.", as many people go strait for that type of thinking when they read about racial and cultural preservation... it always turns into a "racist supremacist" perception when it is not about that at all.  I hope this can become clearer to people if they take the time to think about it.  Racial or cultural preservation is not racism nor is it supremacy over other races or cultures.  To think otherwise is to continue to be deceived by false labels and perceptions they want you to have.

Peace.

total crap, Obama hasnt "played the race card" and to imagine that he will get elected on the strength of the black vote is lame.

The Zionists have been trying to tank his campaign since 3 days before the TX primary, yet 75,000 very libretatian minded Oregonians turned out at the end of the primary season to hear him and express their support. It was the whitest damn crowd you ever saw, as you would know if you spent much time in OR.

Yea, Obama, who's pastor of 20 years is an outspoken anti-Zionist is a manchurian candidate of the NWO....

I am not that stupid or easily led, nor base my opinions on the opinions of others. I do research, as should everyone, instead of acting so damn dumb...

That may be true of the modern day 'culture'. However, The Blues were not engineered by leaders and rulers, the Native American traditions were not engineered by the elite. Often the most profound cultures grow from the struggle of so-called 'ordinary people'."

The very statement I made that you replied to is in agreement with your above words. My words revisited: Cultures aren't created by the commoner--only insofar as necessity limits or demands particulars--rather, they are largely (i.e., not always but vastly) engineered by leaders and rulers.

With some additional clarification my statement should suggest that indeed common folk create culture out of what they have in their possession and what is presently demanded (perhaps in terms of survival or even in terms of a community's need for entertainment).

The replies to my initial comment are greatly appreciated. A few points:

Every culture is not worth protecting. You have to look at what it produces; who created it, and for what purpose. What is presently considered American culture [for instance] is hardly worth keeping. It was primarily engineered to produce a docile consumer drone just sharp enough to wage war for the Crown and Israel. Furthermore, there are and have been cultures that are ultimately stupid and destructive to its fellows and to outsiders. A culture of cannibals or thieves could be two very simple examples. Interestingly enough, such vile minor cultures end up quickly taking command of larger ones to insure their survival.

Lastly, tactically speaking, using race mixing as a means to exact "genocide" on a people is utterly ridiculous. From a position of waging war--which is a mathematical thing--it makes little sense. It would take centuries to dissolve any large nation into a pish-posh of mixed people. This is largely due to the human instinct to be attracted toward things of similarity. Even if you flood America with Mexicans (which is going on now), they will largely breed with their own people. An even more absurd example would be to think of China. How many Arabs, Whites or Blacks would it take to dissolve China into a nation of mixed people who can no longer be said to be "Chinese"?

The "threat" of race mixing is a distraction little different than the "threat" of Africanized Bees or the "threat" of terrorism [in America]. It is a distraction, as only an incompetent buffoon would attempt to use it to overtake a society. One thing our Owners aren't is incompetent (but they do excel at getting people to worry over imaginary threats). Therefore, race mixing should be taken completely off the table as a threat, because it is mathematically stupid and tactically inferior to any number of methods of decimating the strength of a people.

The illusion that race-mxing on a massive scale is going to be a huge threat to our ability to retain cultural strengths is counter-intelligence. Certainly a crafty method of getting people to worry about whether or not they are separated enough. As a side note: Interestingly enough, the closer we come together--even so far as the closer we all get to the level of paupers--the easier it is to see our lords.

It would be easier for both whites and blacks to see who controls both races if they were closer together insofar as interaction and closeness of ecomonic status.

It may take many a white person to realize that it isn't blacks who ruined society and that blacks are not in any way inferior when the entire lot of white people is reduced to nation of beggers, criminals, paupers and food stamp users. Therefore, I prepare for another Great Depression and welcome it. You can be assured that the white race will not be reduced to the level of the black majority until the prison is complete. Then with National ID Cards in hand the blacks and whites will--although too late--finally come together and realize that all races are subject to being reduced to a garbage dump of bad education, drug use, criminal activity and the men turning their backs on the women and children.

The true threat is an attack on culture, but not cultures. A force that merely mutates or otherwise changes a culture should not be called the threat, as some cultures are counter-productive not only to the species but to the planet (and back around to a species threat). Any number of counter-cultures or sub-cultures could be stated here as minor examples of that which should be disposed of, but there is little reason to waste such an illustration when the real threat is the present so-called American culture, among others. A threat to American culture is not a problem, as that culture is a threat to itself!

Going back, the true threat is an attack on the foundational culture of America, which most Americans hardly now exemplify. I speak of Constitutionalism, Patriotism and Christian virtues (not Bible thumping fundie nonsense, but the higher virtues of man which Christianity can, in its best incarnations, personify). For the record, "Christian virtues" is merely used herein because America is largely a Christian nation. The higher virtues of Islam, Buddhism or any number of religions are in line with such virtues (i.e., do your best to be a good person). The average American is so far removed from these foundational characteristics that one should begin to refrain from speaking in terms of threats to our present culture. Unless such a person feels we urgently need to protect foppish cowards, women infected by the ideas of Jewish feminists, Homer Simpsons, dumbfounded stooges swilling beer at pubs that once served as meeting places for revolutionaries and now serve as an extension of the living room (with a television blaring distractions in every corner).

An influx of Mexicans is honestly and simply, more of the same. If black and white lower class neighborhoods were expanding at the same rate as low class Mexicans running over the border, which is the greater threat? I say that they are both garbage. They are human beings and can be forgiven or elevated if they choose; they are human--given to mostly being sheep--and thus a product of the incompetence and lack of virtue within their rulers, but in such a present condition as their leaders mold them, they are an equal threat to the kind of society I would want for my children and probably yours. So now imagine that the black and white ghettos are growing at the same rate as the flood of Mexicans, but envision that our new Spanish speaking neighbors are all upper middle class and no illegal aliens are anywhere below that class. What is the greater threat? It should be noted that I speak of class and not economic status. I would sooner encourage a daughter or sister to marry into any upper middle class family of any race or nation if they exemplify class and virtue, well before I would have her marry a low class "American" simpleton.

The points are simple: To fear race mixing is to fear a phantom. To fear the collapse of American culture is to hold fast to a tumour. Our threat is against our foundation, which is rapidly being eaten away by Jewish termites.

 

I agree with you on most of it.  I will try to clarify what I mean when I say cultures and races should all be preserved with respect to your comments.

What is presently considered American culture [for instance] is hardly worth keeping.

I agree.  Clearly the way it has been manipulated and subverted (all Western culture for that matter) is not something we should hold onto in its present form.  The basis of Western culture - as you mentioned - is based on Christianity.  Although I am not religious, I have stated in a few posts on TIU forums that I respect and value the Christian philosophy and hold many of the ethical codes myself.  The Christian basis of Western culture would be a good cultural system to revert back to, a more altruistic system, that I think could further be made better.

Clearly a culture or race that would be hell-bound on destroying others or that engages in decadent degenerate behavior is not one that is worth preserving.

I still see the right of all ethnicities to preserve their language, race, culture as they choose to have it as long as it is not harming any one else, even if I do not agree with certain aspects of it.  They have the right to choose.  The problem now is that people are not even aware of how destructive their behavior and attitudes are, so their choices are not even truly their own, even though they seem to make them.  The choices are influenced my the many socially conditioned ideas they have been manipulated into adhering to.  Bad is good, up is down, it's warped.  It is quite a task to wake them up to this fact.

Lastly, tactically speaking, using race mixing as a means to exact "genocide" on a people is utterly ridiculous. From a position of waging war--which is a mathematical thing--it makes little sense. It would take centuries to dissolve any large nation into a pish-posh of mixed people. This is largely due to the human instinct to be attracted toward things of similarity.
I will assume that "genocide" is directed at me saying "subtle ethnic cleansing".  For many the term genocide is an outright systematic program that can plainly been seen, whereas a subtle "genocide" would not be directly visible.  As you would agree (I hope), the plan for world domination is not a recent development.  It has been worked on for many centuries.  And indeed it has been subtle.  For if it were not subtle/covert - meaning it were not difficult to detect or perceive - I would think the clarity of the agenda would have faced much greater opposition and we would not be exactly where we are now.  So to dismiss the ingenuity to again progressively implement another grand scheme to further assist them in their plans is not beyond their scope.  I hope you can agree on that.  They have been implementing stages for centuries, to add another stage to effectively eliminate  the common ground for people to unite on it very much possible.  As for "the human instinct to be attracted toward things of similarity", this can be subverted as well through social indoctrination (education, "PC") as each generation goes by (which I made reference to in my last comment on WUFYS).  They have already dumbed us down with each passing generation (froggy boiling..).  I do not see why this is so "ridiculous" as you put it.  Please point out the flaw in my thinking and I will be glad to change my views on this.  Otherwise, we are just seeing things from a different perspective and we just can't agree on this issue, which is fine by me.  I just need to see where the flaw in the logic is before I abandon the conclusions I have come to.

Furthermore, when I said "subtle ethnic cleansing", it refers to ethnicity, that being race and culture combined, also including language and any other additional characteristics that can be added to form an ethnicity.  To destroy an ethnicity would only require the removal of one of the those components that create that unique ethnicity.  As you mention the flood of illegals, this would eventually overpopulate the existing white and black populations that have been living in the USA over decades.  Apart from the racial diminishing that would result from the greater sized population of these illegals - if they would not adopt English, as many of them refuse to do, that aspect of ethnicity which is one part of defining the American culture (language, which is a part of the black and white ethnicity that makes up America) would be gone as well from being a defining characteristic of the culture that once existed.  This is not only happening in the US, or Canada, but also in other Western Christian based (or at least originally-based) societies.

The "threat" of race mixing is a distraction little different than the "threat" of Africanized Bees or the "threat" of terrorism [in America]....  One thing our Owners aren't is incompetent (but they do excel at getting people to worry over imaginary threats)
I can see that you perceive the threat to mix all races into one big amalgamation as being imaginary, but I think you are missing some key points that I mentioned above.  It is not so imaginary or ridiculous to serve as a mere distraction.  These things are taking place.  I hope after my elaboration these things become more clear to you.

It is a distraction, as only an incompetent buffoon would attempt to use it to overtake a society.
I think I made some decent points above as to why these guys are not merely buffoons to attempt to use this mechanism.

Therefore, race mixing should be taken completely off the table as a threat, because it is mathematically stupid and tactically inferior to any number of methods of decimating the strength of a people.
That's where I see you as being wrong.  It is quite genius, for the simple reason that it is subtle and covert, and therefore not stupid at all.  As they have done over the years and generation already, they have decimated the "strength of a people", this is another mechanism to do so, again over time.  The only reason to consider dismissing the concept of ethnic dilution - by which race mixing on a grand scale is one component - and subversion would be if we knew they were going to succeed in their plans now.  But we cannot know they will succeed.  And even if they would succeed in the next few years, there is no reason to doubt - with their further grip on controlling aspects of society - that they would use such a mechanism to further control humans by means of eugenics.  To learn more about prominent figures espousing concepts of eugenics, please read LatinAmericanView's

blog

on people like Aldous Huxley, Bertrand Russell and Charles Galton Darwin.

Additionally, the covert subtle methods are the only sure ways to maintain the docility of the people being affected.  For if another more overt mechanism, for example you say "From a position of waging war--which is a mathematical thing--it makes little sense", to use a physical method of waging war would be to destroy the docility in those affected because they would have an obvious right-in-their-face target they could clearly see and respond too.  Clearly this method is smarter and makes more sense when think about maintaining the existing docility.

The illusion that race-mxing on a massive scale is going to be a huge threat to our ability to retain cultural strengths is counter-intelligence. Certainly a crafty method of getting people to worry about whether or not they are separated enough. As a side note: Interestingly enough, the closer we come together--even so far as the closer we all get to the level of paupers--the easier it is to see our lords.
I believe this is where some confusion is arising, the view that this "imaginary" mechanism is only useful as a means to create further separation.  It is not about separation, although some do indeed use this concept to further their racial segregation, or racist or supremacist ideals.  Race-mixing in itself is perfectly OK, but above you state "that race-mxing on a massive scale is going to be a huge threat to our ability to retain cultural strengths is counter-intelligence" as being a mere illusion, is wrong.  The social conditioning tools at their disposal over generations will easily further reduce any careful analysis and concern over the agenda to compound all of humanity into what they want, while they remain excluded.  And indeed, yes we do need to become closer as a human species and get along as brothers and sisters to more easily see these bastards who want to be all of our masters and rise up against them as a united force (which will be simple to do if we can get enough people aware of what is going on).

It would be easier for both whites and blacks to see who controls both races if they were closer together insofar as interaction and closeness of ecomonic status.
I completely agree.

I agree with everything else you say, apart from that last line which reiterates your points on how it is all imaginary... I am trying to see things from your perspective with the arguments you are making, but from the info I have gathered, I cannot abandon my perception of the world as I see it.  I am glad you elaborated on things.  And now I have elaborated.  As it is quite easy to perceive something someone says in a different manner than was intended, such are the limitations of speech and typing in a interval manner where every single detail cannot be expounded upon to specifically clarify every possible interpretation the receiver gets from the person who is giving the message.  There are always things you should have said, things you should have explained in more detail, etc.  But it is only when someone does not receive the message as you intended that it is needed to clarify the message.  I hope you can further grasp my understanding of how the the multicultural and intermixing push is indeed part of their plan and is happening.  I can also understand the possibility of you never accepting it as you are indeed a person of mixed race and may have some aversions to accepting it.

I want to make one final point:  My post initially dealt with how using race as an identity is turbulent ground to stand on (but if you want to use it, use it logically, for if there is no logic in it then how can I affirm your choice to use it), and how it fits directly into the change from using the color descriptive to the geographic epithet as being illogical and even more pointless for the majority of people it is used upon as they never lived on that land (Let's just call Jews in the USA Israeli-Americans or Palestinian-Americans if we throw logic out the window...).  Then I segwayed into the purpose of this as "PC" conditioning tool to further remove the idea that race even exists in the first place.  And this is where the whole "problem" arose...  As I had mentioned in the initial post as to how they are achieving this: "The frog in the water that slowly boils to death".  If someone has never heard this, it refers to slowly turning up the water so that the frog boils to death, rather than throw the frog into hot water and he jumps right back out.  This is how the mechanism is run, as has the overall conspiracy been done and implemented over the centuries.  I do not see why this concept was not grasped in the initial post to explain why this is not a "mathematically stupid and tactically inferior" concept to grasp.

Peace.

your comments are truly impressive!

in short, I agree with a little of what both of you have to say.

will share my two cents worth in detail eventually...

many thanks for sharing your thoughtful and incisive comments with WUFYS readers!

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.