An ad for Jaguar

JEANETTE V. writes:

The man and woman in the back seat of a car is an ad for Jaguar. You can see more here.

The next one is an ad I received in my e-mail hawking Photoshop actions used to enhance photos. I will not be purchasing any of that business’s products.

Adriana writes:

The white woman and black man in the Jaguar ad are the two of the stars of the TV show “30 Rock.” 30 Rock features an ensemble cast, so one might try to argue that the advertisers specifically picked out a white woman and a black man from that cast, except anyone who watches the show will know that Jane Krakowski and Tracy Morgan play the two “always-at-odds” stars of the in-show television show (it’s a show about a TV show).

Laura writes:

Adriana’s point places the Jaguar ad in a different context.

  Read More »

I HAVE quite a few comments from readers on recent threads. Unfortunately, I have not been able to get to them yet. I hope to post them by this afternoon.

JANE S. writes:

Mississippi Masala (1992) is a movie that explores the issue of biracial marriage rather well (Spoiler alert). It’s about a man who is a third-generation Indian immigrant in Uganda. He spends his entire life in close relationships with blacks. As an attorney, he valiantly defends the rights of blacks. Then Idi Amin comes into power and expels the Indians. The man learns that his dearest childhood friend supports Amin’s decision to deport Indians, including him. He realizes that, at the end of the day, race trumps everything.

He and his family wind up in Mississippi running a motel. Their grown daughter falls in love with a young black man in the community. Her father objects to this strongly. Read More »

AUGUSTIAN PAULDURAI writes:

The Women and Child Development (WCD) ministry of India is planning to introduce a policy that would require husbands to pay a monthly salary to their homemaker wives!

The cabinet ministers have recently approved a marriage law amendment bill that will empower women to initiate no-fault divorce and get a share in the property (an incentive) acquired during the marriage. The holy Bible says [love of] money is the root of all evil. The feminist-controlled Indian government is trying to divide and destroy families by bringing money into family relationships. Read More »

DANIEL S. writes:

I had time to watch the video “trailer” of Innocence of Muslims (I am not sure if there is an actual full length version), and found it stupid, juvenile, and poorly produced. Supposedly $5 million was spent on it, though it doesn’t show. The content is deliberately inflammatory toward Muslims, depicting Muhammad as a homosexual, a violent buffoon, and womanizer. The alleged producer is an Egyptian Copt with a dubious background, supposedly he was convicted at some point of bank fraud. The actors in the movie were allegedly misled, being told that the movie was to be about a man in Egypt 2,000 years ago named “Master George,” with the actors’ dialogue later being dubbed over to make the film about Muhammad. One can make what they will of that information in judging the intention of those behind the film. (Another important question to ask is when does proper criticism and warning of the danger of Islam become overshadowed by ‘ressentiment’?)

Of course, the trailer would have never seen the light of day in the West, it would have been lost among the flood of other silly and banal videos that populate sites like Youtube. Read More »

PAUL writes about the recent discussions here on interracial marriage and relationships:

This is an extremely important topic for me and the West. I recall many years ago attending yet another wasteful business conference. I am white, and I date white women only. I met a very dark but wholly European-featured Hispanic young lady (whose elegance and heritage proved to me she was brought up in a middle-class or wealthy family and attended American Catholic schools, although she never said it, and I don’t pry). Read More »

IN A DISCUSSION last year, a reader named Charles wrote:

Here is an article from Asia News reporting on a Christian couple in Pakistan who were each given 25 year sentences for allegedly touching a Koran with unwashed hands. The article is dated March 3, 2010 – a little over one year ago.  This was before Pastor Jones was in the news.  The article is also discussed at Jihad Watch.

Islam is going to treat Christians and other non-Muslims very badly even if no one ever destroys a Koran.  Even touching this book with unwashed hands is an insult to them.

So, Muslims and Western liberals, please stop blaming Mr. Jones for inciting Musilm riots and for inciting Musim violence against others.  The violence was well underway before Mr. Jones appeared on the scene.  In fact, it has been underway for the past, oh, 1400 years.

SEE the heated discussion here last year about the actions of Terry Jones. As I said at that time, Jones was acting courageously when he announced he would burn the Koran as a form of protest and resistance to Islam. In another entry, I quoted Jeff Culbreath of What’s Wrong with the World. He wrote:

ALAN ROEBUCK, and two other readers, have interesting responses to the entry from Roger G., the Thinking Housewife flying saucer correspondent.

Mr Roebuck writes:

I wanted to give my two cents about the flying saucer thing.

The best take on the subject that I’ve ever heard comes from Hugh Ross, former professor of astrophysics and head of the Protestant “science apologetics” organization Reasons to Believe.

In summary, Ross’s take is this:

Although most reported “OFU” activity (around 95 percent) is either charlatanism or honest misunderstandings, there is a significant amount of unexplainable, real UFO activity. This activity often leaves behind physical evidence, but the craft themselves have never been handled. They are only seen in the sky. Read More »

HERE’S a story in the Los Angeles Times about Steve Klein, an insurance agent and activist who was involved in the making of Innocence of Muslims, the movie that sparked the violence in Libya and Egypt. He said the purpose of the film was to provoke local terrorists so as to identify them and that, contrary to news reports, the main backer of the film was an American Christian, not an Israeli Jew. From the piece:

He said he did not “give a darn” if it offended Muslims.

The intent of the film, he said, was to help identify people who sympathized with Osama bin Laden and terrorists.

“I am not responsible for the actions that they go out and do,” Klein said. “Why would I be bothered? I told the truth. I have told the truth. I will continue to tell the truth.” Read More »

ROGER G. writes:

Awhile back, our estimable blogmistress wrote about her sighting of a green fireball.  I am the official flying saucer (and rugby) expert for the THW and VFR websites, so it might be thought that I would have responded. But I am an old and seasoned flying saucer nut. Therefore I’m not to be provoked by a bolide, or any of the many other natural phenomena which lie behind almost all UFO incidents.

However, other readers have made comments implying that flying saucers don’t exist. (See here and here) That’s a point of view which does motivate me to respond.

I concede that intelligent and well informed people generally are of such opinion. On this matter, they are wrong. Anyone who looks at the evidence objectively must conclude that we are being visited from outside the earth – given what we know of Sol’s other planets, certainly from outside our solar system. Read More »

THE ROAD to serfdom is paved with cheap tomato sauce and mozzarella asphalt. Obama walked into a Florida pizzeria this week and bought 20 pizzas with cash. The owner pledged his vote. “I just gave him a great big bear hug,” Scott Van Duzer said, the BBC reported. Smart move on the part of the president. Obama knows the power of the Pizza Industrial Complex.

Read More »

A COMMENTER at VFR, Chris K. writes:

Eleven years ago it became pretty obvious that a significant portion of the Mohammedan world hates us and wants to kill, convert, or conquer the West. If I suddenly found myself in a war with hundreds of millions of people, I’d get serious pretty quick about fighting it. We refuse to admit that Islam itself is the problem. We refuse to take economic measures to cut off the oil financed funding of jihad. We refuse to be realistic about the social and religious vulnerabilities of our society. A sane society would have seen the thousands of Muslims dancing in the streets of the world that September day, and drawn some conclusions about that and done something about it. We would have developed our own resources, we would have embargoed the whole Muslim world. Any wars we would have fought would have been wars of destruction, and not rebuilding the homes of our enemies. We would have ceased to pretend that we can afford unlimited spending on the ineducable, the foolish, or the already wealthy. Instead we act like all of America is a Chicago public school classroom, where no learning can take place.

The proper response to 9-11 would have been to separate Muslims from the West. As Lawrence Auster has written, this would involve inducing Muslims humanely to leave the United States and, when necessary, expelling them altogether.

DAVID BROOKS, another human hot air balloon, writes glowingly today of Hanna Rosin’s new book on the “End of Men.” Brooks lends support to her theory that men are lagging behind their former employment and academic success rates because women are more “fluid” and “adapatable” in the modern economy. Men just don’t get it. He writes:

Rosin is not saying that women are winners in a global gender war or that they are doing super simply because men are doing worse. She’s just saying women are adapting to today’s economy more flexibly and resiliently than men. There’s a lot of evidence to support her case.

Brooks makes no mention of the 50-year feminist campaign to remake our schools and regulate the job market. Nothing about the millions of dollars in fines and damages companies have paid for failing to comply with sex discrimination laws. Nothing about the rewriting of history so that every male achievement is suspect or any musing over whether men could be, I don’t know, demoralized?

Not a peep from Brooks on these remarkable changes, or on the grotesque aggression and self-centeredness of the modern woman careerist. Nor does he truly lament the declining employment rate of men. Women are doing “super,” according to the “conservative” Brooks, as if women could ever be “super” while dumping men and children by the wayside.

Read More »

COMMENTS have been added to two of the recent threads on interracial couples, here and here. In the first, a reader says, in addition to arguing that there are no innate racial differences in behavior or psychology, that it is simply wrong to discourage interracial marriage for the sake of some utopian goal of preserving Western culture. To which I respond:

Again, you are distorting my main points about interracial marriage, points which have as much to do with the happiness and welfare of individuals of all races as with the worthy project of maintaining Western civilization. It’s not a question of maintaining some beautiful abstraction in the form of Western civilization, but of helping people of all races find their identity and foothold in a heartless and impersonal world. You would deny them those bonds — bonds which are real though not all-encompassing and can be seen by all of us — and send individuals forth into the modern Tower of Babel in which identity revolves exclusively around abstractions, competition and material gain.

In the second of those threads, a reader, Aaron S., who is white and married to an Asian woman, makes some excellent points. Read More »

 Behold the eye of the Lord is upon them that fear him,
Upon them that hope in his mercy;
To deliver their soul from death,
And to keep them alive in famine.
Our soul waiteth for the Lord:
He is our help and our shield,
For our heart rejoice in him,
Because we have trusted in his holy name.
Let thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us,
According as we hope in thee.  (Ps 33. 18,22)

ANN BARNHARDT, the remarkable and inspiring woman who is refusing to pay taxes to the federal government under Obama, is another anti-suffragette. She made these terrific comments on Sept. 1 about the women’s vote:

Do you know when things really started to go – literally – to hell in this country? When women were given the right to vote seperate and apart from their husbands. What a flipping disaster. This is when the war against marriage and the family began in earnest – and it has taken less than 100 years for both institutions to be almost completely destroyed. And it all started with the damn suffrage. Read More »