J. Philippe Rushton, R.I.P

Written by Paul Fromm

Monday, 08 October 2012 06:14

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format. If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails. You can read the original version online: http://ymlp296.net/ztoaVy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J. PHILIPPE RUSHTON, R.I.P I have known Phil Rushton for over a quarter of a century. Our Alternative Forum twice spnsored talks by this great pioneer in the study of racial differences, especially differences in behaviour. Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform brought out a short popularized booklet on his thoiughts -- What Rushton Really Said on Race, Evolution and AIDS (C-FAR BOOKS, .O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA. $4.00) Racial differences, Professor Rushton argued, were more than superficial, more than skin deep. They were, in fact, behvioural. At one end were Blacks with the behavioural or survival strategies of a fish -- many births, primiscuous life style, casual child rearing methods ("it takeds a village). At the other end, were Orientals and close to them Whites, with the survival strategy of the whale -- feweer children, involvewd and nurturing child rearing. The races also different significangtly in terms of propensity toward violence, forweardf planning and impulsive behaviour. In partnership with Professor Richard Lynn of the University iof Northern Ireland, he undertook a comprehensive review of I.Q studies and racial and weorld I.Q. distributions, Thde literature in over a hundred studies going back a century seemed to suggest that the average African IQ was 70! The I.Q. of Norther American Negroes is about 85; the I.Q. of North American Whites is roughkly 100. If accurate, this would suggest that the average African was borderline retarded. Professor Ruhston went himself to South Africa in the late 1990s to explore this data. It was accurate but he explained that 70 I.Q. is not so much borderline retarded but is more the emotional equivalent of a not very bright 12-year old, who would have basic food gathering and other survival skills but would have poor control of his emotional impulses and wojuld be poor at planning for the future. Needless to say, the policy implications of these findings were revolutionary. They hasd strong implications on immigrsation policy. Is it wise to import people from alien cultures with irespoinsible breeding and child rearing behaviours. [One thinks of the now intractable gangf problems in the heavily Caribbean ublic houjsing projects of Toronto.] Rushton pointed out to me that the I.Q. map of the Middle East -- a swath running across North Africa all the way to Northern India -- shows an average I.Q., with a few exceptions, less than 90. HGe felt thaqt President George Bush's ideal of exporting democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan and other such labnds was doomed to failure. [Partici[atory self-government requires a fairly high level of intelligence. It just isn't there. Democracy, he felt, would just not work there. Professor Rushton's views inflamed the egalitarians and the politically correct, At one point, then Liberal Premier of Ontario David Pedtgerson ordered an investigation as to wehter Professor Rushton's views violated Canada's notorioujs "hate law." PHIL RUSHTON HAS DIED Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, October 4, 2012 Before I ever met John Philippe Rushton I saw him on the Geraldo Rivera television program. It was in 1989, shortly after his ground-breaking work on race differences first began to get international attention. One of the guests was that weasel Barry Mehler of Ferris State University, who has tried to make a career of denouncing scientists if he doesn’t like their research. Prof. Mehler could hardly control himself. “I am trained in unmasking academic racism,” he shouted, “and you are a racist!” Phil smiled and replied quietly, “I am an academic.” Another guest was a black man named Charles King, whose understanding of science was even spottier than Prof. Mehler’s. “Are you saying I am your inferior?” he thundered. “No,” replied Phil, “I am saying we are different.” The program was a tour de force of reasonable explanations and unflappable manners on the one hand, and fulmination on the other. I met Phil not long after that impressive performance, and through many years of friendship until his death two days ago, the qualities I saw on that program always impressed me. Phil had an intense desire to know the truth, to understand our species in all its complexity. He was also polite to a fault, even in the face of the vilest provocation. But it is as a man of science that he will be remembered—a great thinker in the distinguished lineage of Francis Galton, Charles Spearman, and Arthur Jensen. In a sane world, Canada would recognize him as the national treasure he was. John Philippe Rushton was born in 1943 in Bournemouth, England, and received a Ph.D. in 1973 from the London School of Economics for work in the development of altruism in children. In 1974 he emigrated to Canada, and in 1977 he took a post at the University of Western Ontario, where he became a full professor in 1985. Phil’s first important scientific contributions grew out of his studies of altruism in children. During a sabbatical year he spent in Berkeley, California, in 1981, he could not help noticing that in a multi-racial society, people care most about their own group. Hispanics supported recognition of Spanish as an official language, Jews were interested in what was happening in Israel, and blacks associated with and supported each other. This led Phil to develop Genetic Similarity Theory, according to which people are most altruistic towards those to whom they are biologically close, and less altruistic and even hostile to those who are biologically distant. He studied how people sense genetic similarity, and the consequences this has for society. During this period he began to investigate race differences—in particular race differences in intelligence and brain size—but broadened his research to include all physiological and behavioral race differences. This led to his ground-breaking application of r-K theory to human races—and, of course, to his demonization. Phil’s crucial insight was to realize that different races show consistent patterns that reflect different reproductive strategies. At one extreme are East Asians, who are the most intelligent, have the largest brains, show the most sexual restraint, develop most slowly, live the longest, and are most law-abiding. This is consistent with having few children but taking very good care of them. At the other extreme are black Africans, whose behavior is consistent with less investment in larger numbers of children. On virtually every scale of r-K behavior (that is, on a scale of high-investment versus low-investment child-rearing), whites fall somewhere between Asians and blacks. Phil meticulously documented and argued this theory in his brilliant 1995 book, Race, Evolution, and Behavior ( http://www.amren.com/ar/1994/12/index.html#cover ). Phil had been publishing his ideas well before this, however, and in 1989, the Toronto Star started a campaign to have him fired from his job at the University of Western Ontario. The paper accused him of “racism,” and noted that “there are well established procedures for the dismissal of tenured staff.” The rest of the media joined in a chorus howling for Phil’s scalp. In February that year, Premier David Peterson of Ontario telephoned the president of the University of Western Ontario demanding that Phil be fired. Thugs disrupted Phil’s classes, and shouted abuse at him whenever he walked by. Once he found “Racists pig live here” [sic] scrawled on the door of his office. In March 1989, the Attorney General of Ontario began a police investigation to see whether Phil had broken laws banning the promotion of “hatred against any identifiable group.” A finding of guilt could have meant up to two years in prison, but eight months later, the Attorney General announced that Phil’s theories were “loony but not criminal.” The University of Western Ontario could find no legal way to fire Phil, so it barred him from the classroom and ordered him to record lectures on video tape for students to watch in private. Phil managed to persuade a faculty grievance committee that this was absurd. When he resumed classroom teaching—amid much media whooping and student protest—thugs repeatedly disrupted his courses and even assaulted him. Through it all, Phil never lost his temper, never threw a punch—and, most importantly, never backed down. Over the years, his enemies gradually retreated to a baffled state of relative silence, while Phil continued to publish top-flight research on race differences. As Phil moved into forbidden territory, his funding disappeared, and he asked the Pioneer Fund for help. Harry Weyher, who had been running the fund since 1958, gave Phil the support that made his best work possible. After a close and fruitful association with the fund, it was natural that Phil himself should become president of the fund on Weyher’s death in 2002. For 10 years, Phil continued Pioneer’s quiet but invaluable grants in support of race-related research. Phil also had a close association with American Renaissance. He spoke at no fewer than six AR conferences ( http://www.amren.com/archives/conferences/ ), and was invariably the main attraction. The first time he spoke, in 1996, a fascinated audience kept him on his feet for more than an hour past the scheduled end of his talk. Phil answered question after question with his trademark combination of patience, erudition, and charm. Afterwards, he told me his legs were aching, but that it was a pleasure to speak to such a well-informed group. Phil had agreed to speak at the conference we held in February this year, but he withdrew, saying he feared his health would not allow him to travel. I knew he had been in and out of the hospital with Addison’s disease, which attacks the immune system, but I hardly expected him to leave us so soon. Phil always had ideas for research; I grieve to think he will never be able to do that work. Whatever Phil’s enemies may say of him—and we know exactly what they will say—those of us who had the great privilege of his friendship know that he was first and always a seeker of the truth. It was the quality of the data he cared about, not whether they fit his or anyone else’s theories. And, of course, it was precisely because he pursued the truth that he was hated. Those who have never been slandered in the press, never been denounced by “scholars,” never assaulted by “anti-racists,” or never shunned by colleagues do not know the courage it takes to endure it year after year. Phil Rushton steered a straight course through the hurricane, and he did it with unparalleled dignity. He was as principled as a man as he was brilliant as a scientist, and our world is greatly diminished without him. J. Philippe Rushton, 1943 – 2012 _____________________________ Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp296.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqghjhgguewwmw Powered by YourMailingListProvider

 

27th Orwell Dinner Honours Heroic Couple Who Fought the Child Seizers at Child Protec

Written by Paul Fromm

Monday, 08 October 2012 06:10

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format. If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails. You can read the original version online: http://ymlp296.net/zci4mM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27th Orwell Dinner Honours Heroic Couple Who Fought the Child Seizers at Child Protective Agency VICTORIA. October 6, 2012. An overflow crowd delivered a thundering standing ovation to the parents of four children who were seized by British Columbia’s Orwellian named Ministry of Children and Family Development which falsely accused them of shaking their daughter after she suffered a head injury because of a fall. The George Orwell Free Speech Award is presented annually “to celebrate courage in defence of free speech and opposition to tyranny,” Douglas H, Christie, General Counsel to the Canadian Free Speech League, told the gathering. In presenting the award, Mr. Christie explained that four years ago the recipients Paul and Zabeth Bayne’s nightmare began, when “their one year old toddler fell and knocked his little sister over, After the little girl began vomiting, the parents rushed her to the hospital. Doctors discovered bleeding on the brain.” Suddenly, they were no longer treated as concerned distraught parents but accused criminals. The doctors called the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The little girl was seized and sent to a foster home.. When the traumatized parents, after numerous hearings, decided to go public and take their case to television, the Ministry of Children and Family Development, apparently in revenge seized their two boys. In the most shocking act of bureaucratic tyranny, several days after Zabeth gave birth to her fourth child, a boy named Josiah, he too was taken from them and whisked off to foster care. Aided by their lawyer Douglas Christie in their four year battle, the family impoverished themselves hiring medical experts who refuted the accusation that they had shaken their little girl. The family, including their four children, who were present at the awards dinner have finally been reunited. In presenting the award, Douglas Christie noted that “Paul and Zabeth continue to fight tyranny and put on seminars to help other people know the truth about shaken baby syndrome.” In accepting the award, Zabeth Bayne recounted the horrific visit to the hospital with their injured daughter. ”After the misdiagnosis of shaken baby syndrome, it would take years to see our family reunited.” She explained the nightmare experience. “We were frantic about our baby. We were interrogated separately. I spent three hours on the cold concrete floor of a prison cell awaiting questioning. The police then decided that our testimony was inconsistent. The doctors had written a report that our little girl had been shaken or squeezed and that one or both parents was guilty,” “We were not treated as innocent until proven guilty. Parents are told they must explain the child’s injuries consistent with the medical analysis,” she added. “However, the medical system frequently fails to do a full diagnosis. They did not do a differential diagnosis taking into account that there are other situations that mimic shaken child syndrome. Worse, the burden of proof for the child protective agencies is very low,” she added. Then, the darkness closed in. Their daughter was taken away. “We were not allowed to see our child. We didn’t know where she was or even how she was,” Mrs. Bayne said. The Baynes have founded the Evidence Based Medicine & Social Investigation Group (evidencebasedmedicineandsocialinvestigation.org ( http://evidencebasedmedicineandsocialinvestigation.org/ )). It connects wrongly accused parents with medical and legal experts. The group has held two conferences thus far. Zabeth Baynes insisted: “There are hundreds of people across North America serving prison sentences for false charges of child abuse. Lives and relationships have been destroyed.” And, she added, “the legal and medical systems are resistant to change.” In his introductory remarks, Douglas Christie discussed several current free speech cases. He noted that Terry Tremaine’s Sec. 319 (“hate law”) case had been judicially stayed because of undue delay. However, Mr. Tremaine, who was present meeting enthusiastic supporters, faces a contempt of court sentencing Tuesday, October 9 in Vancouver under a law that has now been repealed by the House of Commons. In another case, Mr. Christie has recently secured for pro-life activist Sissy von Dehn the right to appeal against her conviction for distributing, within the bubble zone, copies of British Columbia legislation establishing anti-protest, anti-free speech bubble zones around abortuaries. “The power of the state is an insidious thing,” said Mr. Christie. “It is intruding on the rights of individuals. Many people,” he added, “feel helpless. It is our duty to do something about it because it isn’t just my freedom, it isn’t just your freedom, it is our freedom that is at stake!” Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, discussed the horrific case of inveterate letter writer Brad Love. Mr. Love, by his own estimation, had written some 10,000 letters over a 20 year period to newspapers and public officials. . Political prisoner Brad Love wasconvicted in 2003 under Canada’s notorious “hate law” for writing non-violent letters to elected officials. Mr. Fromm explained that Mr. Love was released on August 29 on an astronomic $222,000 bail pending an appeal against both his conviction and further 18 month sentence for breach of probation. The appeal is set for April 29, 2013. “Mr. Love,” said Mr. Fromm, a frequent speaker at the Orwell Dinner, “was under a draconian bail condition imposed by one Judge Hogg that forbade him from writing to anyone, without their consent; in other words, a complete gag order. In 2009, he wrote letters to several Jewish groups in Toronto in support of Stop Israel Apartheid Week, having previously obtained their oral permission by phone. On July 13, Judge Kelly Wright sentenced him to 18 months in prison, having rejected his defence saying the groups had not give informed consent.” In sentencing the prolific letter writer , the judge entirely endorsed the Crown’s submissions as she had all through the protracted proceedings. The Crown, in her arguments, made it clear that the political gagging of Mr. Love was her goal: "Mr. Love, in the Crown's submission, in a unique offender." She indicated that her goal was "to prevent" Mr. Love's "views from hurting other people. We need to protect the public from hateful, scurrilous material." And, so, he must be silenced. Mr. Love’s letters, Mr. Fromm noted, “were sent to adults, most of them political players who could, had they found them offensive, done the adult thing and thrown them in the garbage, rather than run whining to the police and the censor courts.” Mr. Fromm explained that it is not just the sentences that make the hate laws so oppressive. It is the gag orders that form part of the bail conditions, as in the Terry Tremaine case, or the silencing “probation condition, as in the Brad Love case. Should his appeal not succeed, Mr. Love will have been gagged and/or imprisoned for 14 years under a law that appears to provide for only a two year maximum prison sentence for dissent. And, yes, “Mr. Fromm concluded, “all this occurs in pompous, self-righteous Canada, not in Red China or the Democratic People’s Republic of the Congo.” Also appearing as a featured speaker was past George Orwell Free Speech Award winner, former model and actress, and now videographer Lady Michele Renouf. In Victoria, she completed a seven-city Canadian speaking tour sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. “I am delighted to be in a room filled with supporters of heroes I honour,” she said, singling out host Douglas Christie, whom she hailed as the “Battling Barrister,” and Paul Fromm and political prisoner and free speech dissident Terry Tremaine. A frequent speaker across Europe, Lady Michele explained: “In Europe, we’re jailing lawyers for defending revisionist clients. In sentencing attorney Horst Mahler to 13 years in prison, a judge in Mannheim, accused him of defending his clients ‘too well.’” ”If Doug Christie were in Europe, he’d be in prison,” she warned. In Germany, she explained, “it is forbidden to introduce historical critical material in the defence of a revisionist client.” The spirited British videographer ,who is in Canada promoting her latest 2-hour production Dresden Holocaust, 1945 [available for $30 postpaid from C-FAR Books, P.O. 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA), proclaimed: “I am not prepared to be bullied or subjugated. I make films to expose ‘swindlespeak.’” For the future and betterment of our people, she explained, “we must lower the fear barrier. We should not be fearful to have and express an opinion.” _____________________________ Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp296.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqghjbgguewwmw Powered by YourMailingListProvider

 

27th Orwell Dinner Honours Heroic Couple Who Fought the Child Seizers at Child Protec

Written by Paul Fromm

Monday, 08 October 2012 06:04

*27th Orwell Dinner Honours Heroic Couple Who Fought the Child Seizers at Child Protective Agency*** *VICTORIA**. October 6, 2012*. An overflow crowd delivered a thundering standing ovation to the parents of four children who were seized by British Columbia’s Orwellian named Ministry of Children and Family Development which falsely accused them of shaking their daughter after she suffered a head injury because of a fall. The George Orwell Free Speech Award is presented annually “to celebrate courage in defence of free speech and opposition to tyranny,” Douglas H, Christie, General Counsel to the Canadian Free Speech League, told the gathering. In presenting the award, Mr. Christie explained that four years ago the recipients Paul and Zabeth Bayne’s nightmare began, when “their one year old toddler fell and knocked his little sister over, After the little girl began vomiting, the parents rushed her to the hospital. Doctors discovered bleeding on the brain.” Suddenly, they were no longer treated as concerned distraught parents but accused criminals. The doctors called the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The little girl was seized and sent to a foster home.. When the traumatized parents, after numerous hearings, decided to go public and take their case to television, the Ministry of Children and Family Development, apparently in revenge seized their two boys. In the most shocking act of bureaucratic tyranny, several days after Zabeth gave birth to her fourth child, a boy named Josiah, he too was taken from them and whisked off to foster care. Aided by their lawyer Douglas Christie in their four year battle, the family impoverished themselves hiring medical experts who refuted the accusation that they had shaken their little girl. The family, including their four children, who were present at the awards dinner have finally been reunited. In presenting the award, Douglas Christie noted that “Paul and Zabeth continue to fight tyranny and put on seminars to help other people know the truth about shaken baby syndrome.” In accepting the award, Zabeth Bayne recounted the horrific visit to the hospital with their injured daughter. ”After the misdiagnosis of shaken baby syndrome, it would take years to see our family reunited.” She explained the nightmare experience. “We were frantic about our baby. We were interrogated separately. I spent three hours on the cold concrete floor of a prison cell awaiting questioning. The police then decided that our testimony was inconsistent. The doctors had written a report that our little girl had been shaken or squeezed and that one or both parents was guilty,” “We were not treated as innocent until proven guilty. Parents are told they must explain the child’s injuries consistent with the medical analysis,” she added. “However, the medical system frequently fails to do a full diagnosis. They did not do a differential diagnosis taking into account that there are other situations that mimic shaken child syndrome. Worse, the burden of proof for the child protective agencies is very low,” she added. Then, the darkness closed in. Their daughter was taken away. “We were not allowed to see our child. We didn’t know where she was or even how she was,” Mrs. Bayne said. The Baynes have founded the Evidence Based Medicine & Social Investigation Group (evidencebasedmedicineandsocialinvestigation.org). It connects wrongly accused parents with medical and legal experts. The group has held two conferences thus far. Zabeth Baynes insisted: “There are hundreds of people across North Americaserving prison sentences for false charges of child abuse. Lives and relationships have been destroyed.” And, she added, “the legal and medical systems are resistant to change.” In his introductory remarks, Douglas Christie discussed several current free speech cases. He noted that Terry Tremaine’s Sec. 319 (“hate law”) case had been judicially stayed because of undue delay. However, Mr. Tremaine, who was present meeting enthusiastic supporters, faces a contempt of court sentencing Tuesday, October 9 in Vancouver under a law that has now been repealed by the House of Commons. In another case, Mr. Christie has recently secured for pro-life activist Sissy von Dehn the right to appeal against her conviction for distributing, within the bubble zone, copies of British Columbia legislation establishing anti-protest, anti-free speech bubble zones around abortuaries. “The power of the state is an insidious thing,” said Mr. Christie. “It is intruding on the rights of individuals. Many people,” he added, “feel helpless. It is our duty to do something about it because it isn’t just my freedom, it isn’t just your freedom, it is our freedom that is at stake!” Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, discussed the horrific case of inveterate letter writer Brad Love. Mr. Love, by his own estimation, had written some 10,000 letters over a 20 year period to newspapers and public officials. . Political prisoner Brad Love wasconvicted in 2003 under Canada’s notorious “hate law” for writing non-violent letters to elected officials. Mr. Fromm explained that Mr. Love was released on August 29 on an astronomic $222,000 bail pending an appeal against both his conviction and further 18 month sentence for breach of probation. The appeal is set for April 29, 2013. “Mr. Love,” said Mr. Fromm, a frequent speaker at the Orwell Dinner, “was under a draconian bail condition imposed by one Judge Hogg that forbade him from writing to *anyone*, without their consent; in other words, a complete gag order. In 2009, he wrote letters to several Jewish groups in Toronto in support of Stop Israel Apartheid Week, having previously obtained their oral permission by phone. On July 13, Judge Kelly Wright sentenced him to 18 months in prison, having rejected his defence saying the groups had not give informed consent.” In sentencing the prolific letter writer , the judge entirely endorsed the Crown’s submissions as she had all through the protracted proceedings. The Crown, in her arguments, made it clear that the political gagging of Mr. Love was her goal: "Mr. Love, in the Crown's submission, in a unique offender." She indicated that her goal was "to prevent" Mr. Love's "views from hurting other people. We need to protect the public from hateful, scurrilous material." And, so, he must be silenced. Mr. Love’s letters, Mr. Fromm noted, “were sent to adults, most of them political players who could, had they found them offensive, done the adult thing and thrown them in the garbage, rather than run whining to the police and the censor courts.” Mr. Fromm explained that it is not just the sentences that make the hate laws so oppressive. It is the gag orders that form part of the bail conditions, as in the Terry Tremaine case, or the silencing “probation condition, as in the Brad Love case. Should his appeal not succeed, Mr. Love will have been gagged and/or imprisoned for 14 years under a law that appears to provide for only a two year maximum prison sentence for dissent. And, yes, “Mr. Fromm concluded, “all this occurs in pompous, self-righteous Canada, not in Red China or the Democratic People’s Republic of the Congo.” Also appearing as a featured speaker was past George Orwell Free Speech Award winner, former model and actress, and now videographer Lady Michele Renouf. In Victoria, she completed a seven-city Canadian speaking tour sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. “I am delighted to be in a room filled with supporters of heroes I honour,” she said, singling out host Douglas Christie, whom she hailed as the “Battling Barrister,” and Paul Fromm and political prisoner and free speech dissident Terry Tremaine. A frequent speaker across Europe, Lady Michele explained: “In Europe, we’re jailing lawyers for defending revisionist clients. In sentencing attorney Horst Mahler to 13 years in prison, a judge in Mannheim, accused him of defending his clients ‘too well.’” ”If Doug Christie were in Europe, he’d be in prison,” she warned. In Germany, she explained, “it is forbidden to introduce historical critical material in the defence of a revisionist client.” The spirited British videographer ,who is in Canada promoting her latest 2-hour production *Dresden Holocaust, 1945 [*available for $30 postpaid from C-FAR Books, P.O. 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA), proclaimed: “I am not prepared to be bullied or subjugated. I make films to expose ‘swindlespeak.’” For the future and betterment of our people, she explained, “we must lower the fear barrier. We should not be fearful to have and express an opinion.”