Military Staff Angry About Repeat Terrorist Attacks In Their ‘No Guns Zone’

Screen shot 2015-07-18 at 10.13.34 AM


When President Clinton took office, he outlawed US soldiers from carrying sidearms in military facilities. Since then, Bush Jr. continued this ban and so has Obama.  Taking advantage of this, more than one terrorist has openly attacked military personnel at various bases and other ‘no guns’ facilities, killing a number of soldiers in massacres.  Like letting aliens pour into this country (as is happening all over Europe, too!) legally and illegally, then telling us we must go to war with billions of people to stop ‘terrorism’, the door hangs off the hinges in our country letting in these terrorists and then telling us the FBI and CIA has to spy on American citizens because of all these foreign terrorists attacking us. This insanity continues under both GOP and DNC rule.


I want gun control in our cities due to black males hating black lives and running wild shooting at each other with terrible frequency.  But disarming our soldiers is crazy, crazy.  So why did Bush Jr. and the GOP Congress accept the Clinton ruling about guns held by soldiers?  It is obvious to me that the Republicans feared insurrection from within the military and so, went along with this scheme.  From 2013:  White House petition asks for military permission to carry concealed firearms on government installations which had zero effect.


When Did Military Bases Become ‘Gun-Free Zones’? – Breitbart


According to a Washington Times editorial written days after the Nov. 5, 2009 attack on soldiers at Fort Hood, one of Clinton’s “first acts upon taking office… was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases.”


Clinton’s actions birthed Army regulations “forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection.”…“Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood.”


Breitbart is very partisan and loved the Bushes.  So he didn’t ask the obvious question: why did Bush Jr. continue this? This Is Why Most Military Personnel Aren’t Armed on Military Bases — and It’s Not Clinton’s Fault because it was this document:

Screen shot 2015-07-18 at 11.25.12 AM

This policy change was proposed while Bush was still President, this was an election year and is February.  Due to the huge number of terrorist attacks on disarmed military especially the Fort Hood attack, soldiers have been petitioning for this directive to be retracted with zero effect.  From 2014:  Soldiers want OK to carry concealed weapons on base | Army Times |


“It’s the only place that a licensed soldier can’t carry,” said Staff Sgt. Jacob Wiley, who’s assigned to the 708th Contingency Contracting Team at Fort Campbell, Ky. “When you’re deployed,you have your weapon issued to you, and it’s mandatory that you carry it. Then you come back home and you come onto post, and … the only people who are going to have weapons are military police … and those who don’t care about the law.”…


After the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood, Wiley said he and his fellow soldiers had to sit through ineffective active-shooter training.


“It’s ridiculous. All they do is put a Band-Aid on it, check the block,” he said. “The briefing told us to shut the door, turn off the light and hide behind the desk. And do what? Pray that someone with a gun comes to save me?”…


Eric Chambers, a former Army medic and sergeant, agreed.


“At the very least, allow senior enlisted and company officers to carry handguns,” he said. “This way almost every area and soldier will have protection nearby. If we cannot trust our senior NCOs and officers to protect our troops, then who can we trust?”


The agenda right now is split: the US wants fewer guns while it wants more security.  The right wing wants more arms, the left wants even cops disarmed.  I, personally, am armed not only with guns but swords and other devices.  I live where it takes the sheriff an hour to reach me and I lived like that in Arizona in the past, too.  But when I was in NYC, I was all for disarming the thugs!  Big time.  The new Mayor disagreed and now thug gun shooting incidents are rapidly climbing again.


I never understood the need to disarm our soldiers.  My father during WWII carried and used a concealed sidearm more than once.  We had a gun collection in Tucson which I used more than once.  But in NYC I did a number of citizen’s arrests using no guns.  I didn’t want guns there, in a crowded city filled with who knows what.  I had a friend go to prison when he got overexcited when a robber attacked his neighbor and shot the robber in the back.  Guns can be used wrongly but disarming our troops so they can be massacred is just totally deranged.


If we can’t trust our troops we should disband them and end the Pentagon as a failure.  But then, I remember the Vietnam War.  Troops angry about that war DID shoot their officers and this was called ‘fragging’.  And I suspect the Pentagon tough guys who probably were desk jockeys during the Vietnam War (like many of our ‘leaders’ this last 50 years including actor Ronnie Reagan!) were worried about this and wanted to prevent soldiers from showing ire towards them and their policies.  So they were disarmed.


While the CIA and Pentagon sends weapons to Sunni radical organizations to overthrow Saddam, Syria, Libya, etc. arming the terrorists is old hat.  Also, I note the news that this latest terrorist is from Kuwait is being pretty much hidden or not mentioned as important.  Just like the 9/11 attackers and where they came from was not examined very much, either.  Also note the lack of Iranian terrorists attacking Americans.


sunset borger

side picture begging boneEmail:



209 Greenhollow Rd

Petersburgh, NY 12138

Make checks out to ‘Elaine Supkis’

Click on the Pegasus icon on the right sidebar to donate via Paypal.


sunset borger


Filed under Politics, war and peace

41 responses to “Military Staff Angry About Repeat Terrorist Attacks In Their ‘No Guns Zone’

  1. CK

    1) Gun control hitting what you aim at; not hitting anybody else.
    2) Civilians without access to guns = slaves.
    3) An advertised “gun free zone” is a free fire zone.
    4) With a bit of skill an advertised “gun free zone” can be a fine honeypot.
    5) An armed society is a civil and polite society. Especially when there are barbarians about who are also armed.

    The US will stop pestering Iran when the Iranian oil and gas industry is again controlled by Americans and Brits. Until then Iran is evil.

    As the American military becomes gayer and trannier and more effeminate, I am beginning to think that keeping them away from guns is a good thing.
    Wasn’t it supposedly a gay lovers quarrel that led to the USS Iowa sabotage back in ’89?
    Village people life In the Navy, if it’s underway it isn’t gay.
    Somewhere on this computer is a pic of Cher straddling a 16″
    gun barrel in an music/enlistment video for the USN


    ELAINE: My own child is a ‘trannie’ because she was born with both female and male characteristics. She is VERY capable of fighting, too. So am I, for that matter. There are women who know how to fight and are good at it. Just more men are able to do this thanks to evolution, of course.

  2. Lee

    Clinton did this. Blame him.

    Ever hear the term, ‘sitting duck’? It applies here.


    ELAINE: Except Bush Sr. initiated it, Bush Jr. continued it and a GOP Congress with him went along with it so…DON’T BE TRICKED.

  3. Petruchio

    I’m curious about the Washington Times’ reporting that, “one of Clinton’s “first acts upon taking office… was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases.” It’s curious because it seems that since it was one of Clinton’s first acts, it must have been a priority with him. The question is, Why? I’ve always believed that the DC Insiders have more knowledge than the common folk. Did Slick Willy expect some rebellion from his military? Military personnel carrying sidearms clearly concerned him or why issue an Order forbidding it? In any event, I doubt the timing of this Order issuance was coincidental.

  4. Jim R

    Time for another Dr. Strangelove clip —
    “You can’t fight in here, this is the War Room!”

  5. emsnews

    I marvel at how right wing males can’t see the obvious sometimes.

    The GOP did this TOO! They are fully responsible for it. 100%. So are the Democrats. Just like BOTH are for wild illegal alien immigration to cut wages.

    Both are Bilderberg gangsters, too. Note how both are attacking Trump fiercely.

  6. Petruchio

    “If we can’t trust our troops we should disband them…” Therein lies the fatal flaw of a government that rules by force of arms, its military. You have to be VERY careful who you let carry guns–or access to other weaponry. You never know when some rogue general will start to get ideas. Does this sound like what happens in a Banana Republic? Why Yes!! It does!!

  7. vengeur

    Elaine is right again. For all their flag-waving military worship, Bush GOP republicans quietly go along hand in hand with destructive policies of the Democrats. And vice versa. On the subject of crime, we have this from Detroit. You will notice the race of the victims is NOT revealed.

  8. vengeur

    OT: From the “you can’t make this stuff up Department: O’Malley has to apologize for saying “all lives matter”. LOL Too funny. Some folks apparently find “all lives matter” to be racist and offensive. LOL They even find a professor to explain why.

  9. Being There

    Sorry, but if you don’t see a set-up here what do you see?

    The model is the same. Clinton ends Glass-Steagall, the stockmarket tanks a few years later after crazy real estate speculation.

    The war on terror is used so we don’t see that we are being strangled economically by an oligarchy who wants to suck the economy dry while imposing austerity.
    So what do you look at? Clash of cultures instead of banking oligarchy.

    So we keep allowing people to go to hotbed regions of islamic terrorism for months without any surveillance, but the new private surveillence contractors get untold amounts of taxpayer $$$ even the congress isn’t told how much…right?

    The purpose of the military is to protect the nation state, but they’re used instead to insure unipolar power and empire, while having no protections in recruiting offices here—which could attract terrorists.

    SO Why didn’t they end this ban the last time a recruiting center was attacked?

    game set and match…….

  10. Lee

    Did Clinton sign it?

    Re,Clinton did this. Blame him.

    Ever hear the term, ‘sitting duck’? It applies here.


    ELAINE: Except Bush Sr. initiated it, Bush Jr. continued it and a GOP Congress with him went along with it so…DON’T BE TRICKED.

  11. Being There

    Clinton and W didn’t change it. Neither did Obama. Point is this feels like a set-up for something that would eventually happen. Just like our economy. It’s like setting the table for something down the pike.
    Then when the time is right, something happens. A big mortgage meltdown, a terrorist killing spree….to what effect?
    It all depends on the agenda.

  12. Jim R

    Being There, those last two posts of yours sum it up nicely.

    I don’t really have anything to add.

  13. CK

    @EMS If your child was born with both sexes’ apparatus then your child is a hermaphrodite not a transvestite or transsexual or a potential Jenner. Hermaphroditic births are rare. In the past when a child was born that way, the Ob-Gyn made a decision with or without the parent’s input.
    It is not surprising that a hermaphrodite would be able to some of everything almost as well as its more numerous singly sexed individuals.
    Somewhere along the way you made the decision to change her from a both to a her.

  14. CK

    Fighting is what one does when one is unarmed or does not know how to handle the weapons he has. Fighting is stylized has rules and laws and is more and more feminized.
    Know your enemy and know yourself and you will be victorious in all your battles so says Sun Tzu; until you meet someone with superior weaponry and superior strategy and superior strength and then you will lose.
    It is far better to have guns and not ever need to kill with them than to not have guns when you need them. No one has any need to know how well strapped you are or how many ways you have to defend yourself; until such time as they initiate violence against you. They should not leave the initiation field alive.
    My life matters.
    Your life matters.
    Each person’s life matters. Groups are disposable individuals are what matters.

  15. emsnews

    Groups are not disposable. Groups is what we call ‘society’ or one’s clan or one’s empire. Individuals struggle to survive when the groups fall apart.

  16. CK

    Without individuals there can be no groups. Individuals come first. Not a chicken or egg question at all. Voluntary groupings of individuals make for successful groups. All and every group is disposable, replaceable, ignorable. Because individuals will always find ways to voluntarily create society and civility. Something no group can impose.

  17. emsnews

    Dead wrong.

    First there were FAMILIES. We see this in gorilla and chimpanzee communities. Males tend to be ‘individuals’. Females, never. We are our children.

  18. CK

    1 male and 9 females in any species and the species will survive.
    9 males and 1 female in any species and the species dies.
    First their were individuals. Some had innies and some had outies that fit the innies. Thus was born recreation.
    9 months later and a lot of ice cream and there was wrinkly smelly loud wet offspring. Which the outies protected. And thus was started Re-creation.
    Individuals first
    slap and tickle next
    fat whiny and painful next
    family 4th at best.
    Males, at least northern European males from west of the Hajnal line are the creators, the civilizers, the family formers and protectors.

  19. emsnews

    African people have little problem creating families, clans and tribes. Ditto Asians.

  20. CK

    True indeed, and the Asians actually created societies and civilizations too.
    And they did it the same way, individuals first, slap and tickle second, fat whiny and in need of ice cream and pickles third and family 4th.
    The northern Asians and the northern Europeans created civility and society and civilizations; the warm-landers, not so much.


    ELAINE: That is absurd especially when talking about Asians who are very much big on family ties!

  21. Lou

    CK, I agree. Cold weather made for smarter people [if only by culling].

    WHAT HAVE BLACK MEN INVENTED? For that matter, what have women invented [not wanting to get EMS angry w that].

  22. Jim R

    The warm landers created storytelling and music and ritualized dance (and avoided all out wars) because that was what worked for them. The northerners created fire, steam heat, bureaucracy, and massive central planning because that was what worked for THEM.

    And Darwin does select by culling. The only thing that works, in the big picture.

  23. emsnews

    Um, fire was first ‘created’ in Africa. There is no way the apes could move northwards without this element. The ability to make stone tools was created by black African people, all humans were created in Africa and then moved outwards. Each and every wave of them for there were multiple waves starting with the earlier humanoids.

  24. CK

    As I said the Northern Asians and the Northern Europeans created society, civility and civilizations. There is no absurdity nor am I denigrating social ties among the Asians. Family, clan and kin are more important for the inbreds of the world.
    Me Against My Brother.
    My Brother and I against my Cousins.
    My cousins and my brother and I against the world.
    As it was in the Garden; is now, and ever shall be in the MENA.

    The Catholic church was the responsible body in refusing to recognize cousin marriage as legitimate. At one point, in England, if two people who wished to marry had even a 9th cousin relationship the church would not endorse the marriage nor perform any sort of ceremony. So instead of a familial arab/middle eastern/gujurati/Israeli cousin marriage clan form of society; the north Asians without the benefit and the north Europeans with the benefit of the church gave the world civilizations based on trust and reciprocity.
    A Bernie Madoff is hard to pull off among outward oriented Northern Europeans, easy to pull off among extended family clan and sept and tribesters.


    ELAINE: You should look up the genealogy of all the Medieval royals! A very tight, very interrelated group they all were!

  25. Jim R

    But maintaining fire in the north requires planning ahead. As you well know.

    Not so much in Africa, where everything humans need is right there. Just go out and clobber your dinner with a rock.

    And I’m not so stuck on the African origin story. Humans were mobile, and they were all over Asia. People have found human fossils in Africa because some of them were nicely buried in volcanic ash, and because the Leakeys happened to be in Africa when they started digging for them.

    But there are quite a lot of human lineages in Africa now. It is far from homogeneous, the different tribes are more diverse genetically than other races from other parts of the planet.

  26. CK

    About fire, fire was first created by lightning which hits everywhere.
    In how many places did some brave Neanderthal pick up a burning branch and study it and determine that it could be used to create a continuous and controlled source of light and heat? Africa, Estonia, Manchuria no one knows where the Very First Flaming Brand was picked up and used. My money is on someplace cold. Afterall who really needs permanent fire when the temp never falls below 70 and there is a 12 month growing season with no hard work required to keep and maintain ones daily energy needs?
    Mankind started in many places, Africa was one but not the only one.
    Mankind did not spread out from Africa, the Neanderthals were in northern Europe before the first African left the veldt.
    Likewise there is evidence of stone, and shell tools all over the world way before there is evidence of African migration.
    But it is nice to believe that the Africans were responsible for something good, it is nice to believe many untrue things until mother nature intrudes and smashes the belief idols into the intellectual rubble they are.
    I reality there is no equality of/between/among men. There is similarity in how all have been created up to now. There is one inalienable right, as long as you are functionally alive you can dream of an improved circumstance and pursue some form of happiness. Life is not inalienable, it can be taken at the whim of anyone with arms better than yours, liberty is not inalienable ask the prison population, ask the black slaves taken by their black brethren and sistern and sold to the semites, as the finns taken by the varangians and the rus and sold to the semites, ask the slavs and the Italians and the Spanish taken by the Barbary coasters and sold south to Timbuktu and points east and west along the salt road in the sahara. Your liberty and your life are at the mercy of the better armed and the more politically connected.
    Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner a corporal Klinger for the new century, but the same old shit as the Hasty Puddings of the prior centuries.

  27. emsnews

    All Neandertals originally came from Africa and evolved when moving northwards as did ALL following floods of humans coming out of Africa. We are all Africans.

    As for Caitlyn, my own child is the same. No one is ‘set in stone’ as whatever, we are CREATIVE humans and even our culture which we wear, is created out of thin air.

    The movement in and out of Eurasia and then into North and South America was due to the Ice Ages. During these periods, people with dark skin wouldn’t do well in the much colder northern regions. Remember, all humans evolved into humans during the entire 2.5 million year Ice Ages.

    Each evolution first would happen in central Africa and move outwards due to superior brains and tool use including how to use fire. Each time these pulses of humans moved northwards and mostly eastwards, they did so SLOWLY, very slowly and during these moves, evolution sorted out the darker skinned children and the lighter skinned ones thrived but only if they were in the cold Ice Age conditions.

    At no point did Ice Age conditions hit much of Africa. Preceding pulses of humanoids moving northwards were destroyed by hostile cold pulses in the Ice Ages and then during Interglacials, a new group would move northwards. After all, the Neanderthals moved in DURING THE PREVIOUS ICE AGE but after 30-50000 years was gone as a species.

    Northern people have Neandertal genes but it is a small part of our genetic makeup. I would guess that red hair and other elements like lighter skin was part of the genetic addition.

  28. CK

    The latest, and of course subject to change, physical data suggest that the Neanderthals were in ALL of Europe well before the first stirring of the first African diaspora.
    A gene splits into a new combination.
    The combination’s effect when expressed in offspring is that the offspring have a greater chance to survive in their current environment.
    If it is a dominant gene it spreads quickly within the environment. Depending on the length of a generation for the creatures involved, within a very few generations the gene is the standard in its category within the environment.
    For white humans in the USA today, a generation is approaching 30 years.
    For the middle American immigrants a generation is approaching 13 years.
    For a fruit fly a generation is 12 hours maybe, for a bacteria 20 minutes. MRSA explained.
    If it is a recessive gene then its effects take many more generations to be felt.
    Evolution in humans can be a slow process or it can happen within a few generations at most. Lactose tolerance took a very few generations to spread and it helped lead to Northern European dominance of the world for a short period of time.
    I submit that you are completely wrong about our successful culture and where it came from; not thin air; not fantasy, not the “Peoples of the Various Books” books.
    And you are incorrect about being set in stone for many of our human characteristics. Caitlyn “Klinger” Jenner is an xy he is not an xx, if he slices his penis off, turns it into an innie and invites the world to view his “bravery”, he is still an xy male … just a no longer properly equipped one.
    You may console your SJW self with the idea that you are actually some sort of African but Mother Nature is no more on your side than she is on Trans-racial Rachel Dolezal’s.
    There were no floods no rivers no streams at best a few dribbles out of Africa. There is an obvious reason for this fact. To the north it was much less easy to feed oneself and the people already there were not interested in adding vibrant diversity to their lands, to the east and west there is much wide and scary water which needs science, organization and long term thinking to cross and to the south there was free food, easy times and no work necessary to survive. Which way did the veldt Africans move? South. To the Cape, and look at JoBerg today, they cannot even keep the lights on and the water running to the top floors of the buildings the descendants of the Northern Europeans build and left to them.
    It was not necessary for the various and multiple Ice Ages to hit Africa; Africans lived there already and had 0 motivation to move to less sybaritic climes. I am sure that there were multitudinous eradications of various groups and septs and clans and individuals during the various movements to follow food. The smart ones survived most of the time.

  29. emsnews


    You can’t understand this. They did not evolve from apes in Europe. See this simple fact?

    Also the other side of the coin: by 8,000 years ago, they were all gone and only a few genes eked into the pool of humans that also came out of Africa.

  30. Jim R

    They found Neanderthal remains in Africa??

    Where in Africa did they come from?

    Just finding hominid remains in Africa does not mean that — at whatever stratum, two mya, five mya — that Africa was the only place such remains could be found.

    Remember, this is an ape that has long straight legs (for an ape), and can run. A hominid walking from Capetown to Kamchatka is not impossible, and that sort of movement could occur in a mere eyeblink compared to the millions-of-years time line of the scientists.

    They have found so many hominid fossils in Africa because they have been digging in Africa. A few such fossils have also been found in China, for example. Evidence of an actual African origin is thin and speculative, mostly based on the diversity of primates in Africa. Africa is a tropical place, and a pretty nice place for primates to live, but it is not at all the only such place on the planet.

    A whole species of extinct hominids has been found on an island in Indonesia, and they lived there until about 600,000 years ago (again, that is but an afternoon in a timeline of millions of years). How did they get to the island, those dumb, primitive hominids? Swim?

  31. Jim R

    Re-reading the article, I see that I mis-remembered, and they disappeared 12,00 years ago, even more recently. A volcano on the island.

    And it’s interesting to watch the bigotry of the paleontologists, claiming that the individuals were retarded, or suffered a mineral deficiency that left them stunted and deformed. Of course, it’s kinda hard to explain how the tribe of retards managed to live to adulthood, propagate, and make sharp stone arrowheads. Well, they must have been real dumb, look what small heads they had!

    There is probably some genetic/family relationship (my speculation, and not from the article) to the existing tribes of native peoples in Indonesia, as they are generally short in stature, unlike our tall Neanderthal European selves, who had to deal with large arctic animals like mammoths. No need to be real tall and strong if you know how to make a poison dart and fire it from the bushes…

  32. emsnews

    Sigh…Neandertals changed over time in Europe AFTER migrating there from Africa.

    There were MANY pulses of migration from Africa since homoerectus did this over 100,000 years ago. Each wave washed over the previous ones and pretty much ended up a monoculture.

    This is because Humans are quite MURDEROUS. The ones with better weapons kill off rivals. The fact that Africans during the last wave also mated with Neandertals is interesting information.

    But not one full blooded Neanderthal survived the last wave of Africans.

  33. emsnews

    And the main reason the right wing Christians cling to the magical creation of humans by this ‘god’ is due to racism. They hate the idea we all came out of Africa originally.

    My own parents hated this information and would rage about it with me and treat me as ‘stupid’ when I gave them information not to mention logic.

    All living things evolved from previous living things and we all began our descent from single celled creatures floating in fetid waters many millions and millions of years ago.

    All plants, animals, germs, creatures, living things are RELATED. We are all relatives. Big time. This is why we can eat plants and animals and germs easily infect us. We all share a lot of genetic coding.

  34. Lou

    We all share a lot of genetic coding. Yes, Humans and apes are very closely related. Is it that we and they are 99% genetically the same?

  35. Jim R

    I think the scientific narrative has been polluted with the “Adam and Eve” story. They want to stick a pin in a calendar and say that two million years ago (or whatever), these chimps gave birth to a human for the first time, and then it was a matter of slowly crawling out of Africa.

    I say that there have been countless waves of hominids, then humans, and that they didn’t necessarily all come -out- of Africa. Some of them went -in-, like the modern “lost tribe of Israel”. Started in the Middle East and ended up in Africa. There are many races of modern humans in Africa, along with many non-human primates.

    Evolution is not this linear progression, it is an endless braid of interconnected strands.

    And, by the way, having black skin is simply a matter of living near the equator for a couple dozen generations. LIkewise, white skin is a result of living away from the equator. It is a really minor characteristic.

  36. CK

    So many things must be taken on faith if one is a liberal. The out of Africa theology is but one of many. The single point of origin for the various human races is another. Other animals, plants, insects can appear at many different places at many different times but humans MUST only come up from some ape. Neanderthals were never sub-Saharan African.
    Bringing Gods into the argument is ridiculous none of us have mentioned Creationism or The Garden of Eden ( which is somewhere in the Tigris-Euphrates plains and a long way from Lucy in the Veldt with grubs.)
    I don’t know which of the many starting points of humans was the first. It might have been in South America or in Warm Greenland or Manchuria or Africa. Hell it might have been in the finger lakes region of NY. All places with old fossils and older strangenesses.
    There are many ape families to evolve from, spread over many continents.
    Racism is an empty social construct. Races exist. The Earth is not a closed system, never has been. Everyday star matter, and planet matter and supernova matter rain down. Most of it is inorganic matter but not all.
    There is no proof there are only theories and hypotheses. Folks latch onto a comfortable theory and it becomes a belief, and beliefs must be defended from all contradictory information. And unfortunately if the contradictory information is strong the defense becomes homicidal.

  37. Jim R

    There are several interesting items among -modern- humans that suggest these uncounted/unaccounted-for/unknown waves of human migration.

    There’s the Kennewick Man, the 9,000 year old skull they found in Washington State.
    He looks European, while all the first nations/native american groups we know about have Mongolian features. Did he go for a stroll across Bering Land, and just get lost?

    And the Ainu in Japan. …

    And then there was that grave site they found in China — can’t recall all the details, but it was somebody important, a princess or something. She had red hair, and looked European. The Chinese have tried to downplay it, because they think everyone in China always looked like them.

    Now, if you have humans doing that for 2,000,000 years, and it will be hard to figure out where the first ones arose.

    Maybe the first humans were the ones who discovered how to make iron, maybe 4000 years ago. All those other human-like creatures weren’t really human, because they didn’t know how to reduce iron ore. And then we can argue about whether Middle East steel, or English steel, or Baltic steel were the best… well, to tell the truth, the English were still slathering themselves with blue paint and warring with wooden clubs when the Middle East first started making steel.

  38. Christian W

    Re: Red hair

    Actually the scientific record is quite clear here.

    Some fascinating facts here about our origins (if you are European – there are links to the other haplogroups on wiki)

    Origins of red hair

    The dominant European Haplogroup (R1b) (which is also the dominant European Royal haplogroup) carries the red hair mutation.

    I have red hair, which is rare among Finnish people, it also means I must have a Germanic male ancestor down the Y tree. I guess it is because many of my ancestors came to Finland from Sweden with the First Crusade and later. They were Gautar (Goths) and Sviar (Swedes) ie Germanic tribes that settled in Sweden and later joined to become the Swedes. In my family people are anything from very blond to red heads to very dark haired. The two main Viking haplogroups are the I1 and the R1b.

    A couple of quotes from the links above: “Slavic, Baltic and Finnish people are predominantly descended from haplogroup R1a, N1c1 and I1. Their limited R1b ancestry means that the MC1R mutation is much rarer in these populations. This is why, despite their light skin and hair pigmentation and living at the same latitude as Northwest Europeans, almost none of them have red hair, apart from a few Poles or Czechs with partial German ancestry.”

    (You can see from the Finnish haplogroups that they are a mix of influences from the East/South East (R1a – Russia), North/North East (N1c1) and Scandinavia (I1).


    “Paleolithic mammoth hunters

    Haplogroup R* originated in North Asia just before the Last Glacial Maximum (26,500-19,000 years ago). This haplogroup has been identified in the remains of a 24,000 year-old boy from the Altai region, in south-central Siberia (Raghavan et al. 2013). This individual belonged to a tribe of mammoth hunters that may have roamed across Siberia and parts of Europe during the Paleolithic. Autosomally this Paleolithic population appears to have contributed mostly to the ancestry of modern Europeans and South Asians, the two regions where haplogroup R also happens to be the most common nowadays (R1b in Western Europe, R1a in Eastern Europe, Central and South Asia, and R2 in South Asia).”

  39. Christian W

    And then there was that grave site they found in China — can’t recall all the details, but it was somebody important, a princess or something. She had red hair, and looked European

    Hey look, a relative 🙂

  40. Jim R

    My point: people can move around. And they do. A lot.

  41. Petruchio

    “I marvel at how right wing males can’t see the obvious sometimes.” Elaine: I used to be a brainwashed, rightwing Republican tool and fool, so I can answer this comment. If you ONLY watch Fox Propaganda and if you ONLY read rightwing nutjobs like Cal Thomas and George Will, that goes a long way to understanding how rightwing males can’t see the obvious. Also: if you IMMEDIATELY and without hesitation or questioning disregard anyone and everyone you are told–usually by Fox–is egads!!! a liberal, then you never, ever encounter alternative viewpoints. Your pathetic, brainwashed mindset not only rejects every alternate viewpoint, it rejects the prospect of even listening to an alternate opinion on a subject.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s