More Blame-Shifting and Explaining Away The Impolite Reality Of Stone-Age African Failure

2 Aug MMXI - Clk 2 Enlrg

With the winds at their backs (cue the Norway massacre, the Debt ceiling [BRA] crisis, Gabrielle Giffords' reappearance in the news, etc.), the devious morality athletes at Amerika's Newspaper of Record are rolling out the heavy propaganda artillery.

Now that the terrain has been softened by their relentless nitpicking and their daily jabs at the reality of HBD, the Times is back at it with a new round of attempting to guilt-trip the Gullible West into pouring more food aid into the Horn of Africa so that Somalia can double its population - again - in a single generation.

A simple Google search of "Somalia population" might be in order, for those reading, at this juncture. (An even better search would involve the CIA World Factbook on Somalia - though statistical breakdown by ethnicity is verbotten on that gov-approved site).

What you will see, after such a search, is that despite the bleatings of the delusional do-gooders at The New York Times, the fact is that the Horn of Africa is doing very well population-wise, thank you very much. White Western food aid flown in regularly on Boeing C-130s has for over FIFTY YEARS  ensured the artificial sustenance and monstrous, unsustainable growth of that otherwise humble hunter-gatherer, pre-Christian, pre-Historic for that matter, permanently fecund and hungry people.

After the alleged crimes of European Colonialism in Africa, today, in 2011, White Western Food Aid is the single most evil thing that the developed world could possibly be doing in the "Developing" World.

African women of the brush are genetically programmed to reproduce with wanton abandon. The top breeders on earth are, respectively, women from Niger (6.52 chirren per uterus), and women from Somali (6.26 chirren per womb - source: zee United Nations).

It is historically, unthinkingly, what they are supposed to do, and noone can blame them for this problematic propensity to reproduce. Once inseminated, through might or lack of foresight, these women reproduce. They put little thought into the whole process. Unlike their Welfare Diva sisters in the UK and the USA - and the rest of the Developed World - they do not intentionally pop out chirren knowing that a large brood will ensure a large welfare check; rather they do it in the most instinctual, unthinking, "natural,"and bovine of ways.

Sure, the sight of creatures old and young (especially young, for reasons elucidated below) covered in flies and dying of starvation is enough to make one almost rethink the political realism angle behind even a blog such as this, but at the same time, the predictability of it all is like the magic potion that allows cooler, more rational heads to prevail.

The morality athletes at the New York Times have emotion, sensationalism, and old-fashion network-TV cluelessness in their corner, to be sure. To further pull at a gullible and misinformed peoples' heartstrings, they also have an endless supply of images of emaciated fly-covered African children, the sad detritus of overpopulated humanity that even a video like this cannot, sadly, serve to enlighten Westerners as to the animalistic nature of African reproductive tendencies.

I have said it on this blog before: when global population reaches stupid high numbers, especially in the dependent, non-productive Third World, the value of individual human life plummets. Imagine for an instant a planet inhabited not by seven billion, but by seventy billion, seven hundred billion, SEVEN HUNDRED AND ONE BILLION...

Get the picture?

Demographics is destiny, but the New York Times will never, EVER report this tragic fact, this horrid reality. Is is way too counter to what they stand for, which is a sick, untenable form of global justice, based on ludicrous notions of group parity in achievement no matter what, no matter the historical record, no matter the evidence for all to see.

It is willful blindness to reality on an epoch scale. But the diversity enforcers at the New York Times are sticking with their story, no matter what. No matter who has to suffer as a result of their putting ideology before reason.

As it is, if the United Nations refugee camp-dwelling, African women featured in today's Times article are squeezing out almost SEVEN children per bunny-womb, how do you think it is possible for an impoverished African woman of the dusty lowlands of Somalia, to have the same kind of white liberal guilt-fueled love for each of her little chirren, on a scale that we see in the West?

Answer: she doesn't. And never will.

These poor Africans produce these poor chirren, like the mooing cow that thinks it is taking a dump. It is sad, it is awful, and YES, I am TOUCHING IT WITH A TEN-FOOT POLE, but to what effect?

(Deep breath and pulse-check).   .../...

Check out the video below: it shows two vieilles salopes françaises, two middle-aged middle-class French bitches, who go on a mission to Africa to improve their own wretched lives and self esteem by supposedly saving the poor souls of the Dark Continent, clueless as always to the true nature of their mission.

Of course, what they are really doing is 100% selfish, and informed almost entirely by cluelessness,  stupidity, and self-importance. What's funny is that the Africans they are going to help hold no such illusions.

At one point in the vid - and this is RICH - the main fat white bitch from the south of France (Association "Comment Ca Va"), gets off by telling her adoring followers, about a cute story, when she was explaining to the poor fuzzy little chirren of Africa in the school room her association paid for, about how evil and horrible her kind were to the little negro chirren's ancestors. The fat DWL white French bitch recalls telling the poor little darkies, "Do you know what a 'Négrier' is?".

For our English-language readers, a "négrier" is slave trader.

But in French, a "négrier" has the same phonetic meaning as "nez" (nose) "grillé" (grilled).

A man with a sunburnt nose.

So the fat white DWL woman from the South of France, gets all besides herself telling the camera crew, how cute and adorable she thought it was, that these little African chirren, in the midst of a genuine DWL lesson to indoctrinate them about true White European Slave Traders, actually thought that a "négrier" (an evil white Euro slave trader) was nothing more than a man who forgot to wear a hat in the sun and became a "nez-grillé".

It is sad and pathetic to behold: this stupid, fat white French bitch, intent on instilling the hatred of her own kind in the impressionable minds of these little sub-Saharans, who is taken aback when all the horrors of the imagined colonial "négrier" crimes that she wants so badly to instill into their mind sis trivialized. It's worth checking out :

" Basse Cour ":

http://rutube.ru/tracks/4612674.html?v=e64ca6d1500f66b13c0ef4a3a056019a

But I get way ahead of myself, by posting this link to the "Basse-Cour" video (shot by a Frenchy filmmaker who started out as a DWL himself, but then started to get it, after spending a lot of time in Africa).

In the same way that the truly well-informed-about Africa in France make rare exceptions to the international lexicon of Africa-realism, we see that the New York Times - despite their vast resources - are as ever committed to perpetuating the White Western lies about Africa, as we see in today's featured COTT / NYT article :

"Somalis Waste Away as Insurgents Block Escape From Famine"

We now see that morality is not so simple as that, and today we have a very real platform where the question of the African demographic time bomb can be discussed dispassionately and without the strings of conventional wisdom attached.

For the record, those strings, as the NYT would like it to be surmised, are as follows:

- Somalian Stone-Age Status and Piratery, can be explained away by two things:

(A) Lack of a functioning civil government in Mogadishu since 1991;

(B) The legacy of racism as per White Western Colonialism.

.../...

The New York Times: Helping Africa Overpopulate Since 1946.