In the first article in question, advertised right there in the index strip on the bottom of the front page that is the most valuable publishing real estate on planet earth, the disgusting weasels at the New York Times entreat readers to turn to page A11-17 to read about a feature entitled: "Bones Testify To Cannibalism." When we saw that I knew immediately that something was up, because why would the vermin at the NYT ever put an article on cannibalism on their front page?
Answer: to confuse their readers by plunging them into contrived historical dystopia and further debase the image of America's Anglo Saxon founding stock.
As this Vice Guide to Liberia video clearly demonstrates, cannibalism is still very much alive in certain parts of the world, but why again would the Grey Lady report today on an alleged American variation thereof? And on their front page no less?
Before even this answer was readily apparent (hangover), with my usual wariness I delved into the Times' article on the so-called "cannibalism" at Jamestown (the first permanent English settlement in America), and as sure as Obama's middle name starts with the letter "H," the Times did not fail to disappoint.
From the article "Bones Testify" :
Archaeologists excavating a trash pit at the Jamestown colony site in Virginia have found the first physical evidence of cannibalism among the desperate population, corroborating written accounts left behind by witnesses. Cut marks on the skull and skeleton of a 14-year-old girl show that her flesh and brain were removed, presumably to be eaten by the starving colonists during the harsh winter of 1609."The first physical evidence of cannibalism," they say, as if a pre-Stone Age practice that is in fact to this day a common and uniquely african trait, was as ordinary back then as tall ships and funny hats.
In the Times' defense, the article does provide some dispassionate historical trivia :
James Horn, a historian with the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, said at a news conference on Wednesday that the young woman probably had arrived on one of the six surviving ships from a supply fleet that sailed from Plymouth, England, in early June of 1609. A week short of its destination, the fleet was scattered by a hurricane. The flagship, named the Sea Venture, which carried the expedition’s leaders, was driven onto reefs at Bermuda, an event that became the inspiration for Shakespeare’s play “The Tempest,” Dr. Horn said.How-evah, the last few paragraphs of the Times' article are ripe with sickeningly dishonest attempts at historical revisionism:
In mid-August, six of the ships eventually reached Jamestown. But their arrival, with little food and many extra mouths, did not bring relief or comfort. The settlers’ insistent demands for food antagonized the Powhatan Indians, who at first had welcomed and provisioned them. In October or early November, with about 300 colonists crowded into the narrow confines of the James fort, the Powhatans launched a full-scale attack and siege, cutting off any hope of outside relief.With wily and clever economy of words, the Times manages here to cast the local savages - who had in fact not the wheel, barely mastered fire or any other post-caveman endeavor, and could more accurately be described as existing not in the Stone Age but in the "stick age" - as perfect gentle specimens of the Noble Savage Myth. Sort of like the characters you'd imagine would appear in a New York Times Cliff Notes for "Django Unchained," were it to be drafted for a future alien invader population from outer space.
Mark Twain himself would surely have appended the NYT article with a few Reminders To The Reader on the savagery of the Red Man. The New York Times, of course, in their pursuit of Universal Equalism even through the ages, has no time for Twain and his thoughts on the "Noble Red Man." Which btw start like this :
"He loves the dark-eyed daughter of the forest, the dusky maiden of faultless form and rich attire, the pride of the tribe, the all-beautiful. He talks to her in a low voice, at twilight of his deeds on the war-path and in the chase, and of the grand achievements of his ancestors; and she listens with downcast eyes, "while a richer hue mantles her dusky cheek."
Such is the Noble Red Man in print. But out on the plains and in the mountains, not being on dress parade, not being gotten up to see company, he is under no obligation to be other than his natural self, and therefore:(ps: for further kicks and giggles, check out this funny college dissertation on Twain's essay cited above: "COLFA Research Paper Competition: Huck Finn's Indian Complexion - Student Status: M.A. Graduate Student - Department: English - Supervisor: Dr. Jeanne Reesman").
He is little, and scrawny, and black, and dirty; and, judged by even the most charitable of our canons of human excellence, is thoroughly pitiful and contemptible. There is nothing in his eye or his nose that is attractive, and if there is anything in his hair that--however, that is a feature which will not bear too close examination . . . He wears no bracelets on his arms or ankles; his hunting suit is gallantly fringed, but not intentionally; when he does not wear his disgusting rabbit-skin robe, his hunting suit consists wholly of the half of a horse blanket brought over in the Pinta or the Mayflower, and frayed out and fringed by inveterate use. He is not rich enough to possess a belt; he never owned a moccasin or wore a shoe in his life; and truly he is nothing but a poor, filthy, naked scurvy vagabond, whom to exterminate were a charity to the Creator's worthier insects and reptiles which he oppresses. Still, when contact with the white man has given to the Noble Son of the Forest certain cloudy impressions of civilization, and aspirations after a nobler life, he presently appears in public with one boot on and one shoe--shirtless, and wearing ripped and patched and buttonless pants which he holds up with his left hand--his execrable rabbit-skin robe flowing from his shoulder--an old hoop-skirt on, outside of it--a necklace of battered sardine-boxes and oyster-cans reposing on his bare breast--a venerable flint-lock musket in his right hand--a weather-beaten stove-pipe hat on, canted "gallusly" to starboard, and the lid off and hanging by a thread or two; and when he thus appears, and waits patiently around a saloon till he gets a chance to strike a "swell" attitude before a looking-glass, he is a good, fair, desirable subject for extermination if ever there was one.
The second NYT Disinformation Stuka bomber unleashed today on the Memory of the West is a giddy Times hatefest directed at old white dudes in England who may or may not have fondled some random floozy forty years ago in a BBC dressing room, and who today find themselves under arrest and assaulted by a sick society that is officially forbidden not only to identify its true adversaries, but also to prevent said foes from invading and reverse-colonizing Britannia (read: the inventors of and the foot soldiers for La Guerre du Grand Remplacement), entitled "British Stars of Yesteryear Find Themselves In Sights of Sexual Offence Inquiry".
Talk about mis-channelled anger !
From that ludicrous page A09 NYT article :
**double sigh**The operation involves at least 69 police officers and staff members and has already cost more than $2.7 million, according to figures obtained by The Independent newspaper through a Freedom of Information Act request.The result has been a flurry of arrests, about a dozen involving very public people. But even as women’s rights advocates and others applaud a new era of openness, in which once-cowed victims feel able to speak out, lawyers for the high-profile suspects say that in the current climate, the accusers appear to be going out of their way to opportunistically target celebrities. And, they say, many of the accusations — of gropings, lewd behavior and drunken passes, as well as sex that seemed consensual at the time — have more to do with the anything-goes culture of the era than with any criminal behavior.
Tne New York Times: Criminally Complicit In Re-Directing The Sheeple's Wrath Away From The True Enemy, Since 1981.