I have one in my bathroom.  But if I'm on travel, I have to take what I
can get.

Consider the source...

The idiot troll is obviously an anti-semite, with his reference to
"destruction of the goyim", so he thinks that those newsgroups will
appreciate his idiotic ranting. I am putting him in my "blocked sender's
list".

Yes it is a troll... Please do not respond to anything posted by
pamdomania or paminifarm.

Your own prejudicial ravings count for little compared to Paminifarm taking
a stand on something she believes in. The PC rot is destroying the moral
fibre of society whilst those who take a stand are labelled by the likes of
you.

What Is Racism?
The 'racist' double standard: how Whites are made to feel guilty and
"hateful" for loving their own people and culture.

by Thomas Jackson

There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater horror
than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of offenses, it is
thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press and public have become
so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and arson, that any but the most
spectacular crimes are shrugged off as part of the inevitable texture of
American life. "Racism" is never shrugged off. For example, when a White
Georgetown Law School student reported earlier this year that black students
are not as qualified as White students, it set off a booming, national
controversy about "racism." If the student had merely murdered someone he
would have attracted far less attention and criticism.

Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full alert
for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach against it,
America is said to be racked with it, but just what is racism?

Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the word.
They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock is superior
to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are rooted in race.
When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal more than this.
Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a clue to understanding
what Americans do mean. A peculiarly American meaning derives from the
current dogma that all ethnic stocks are equal. Despite clear evidence to
the contrary, all races have been declared to be equally talented and hard-
working, and anyone who questions the dogma is thought to be not merely
wrong but evil.
The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If blacks,
for example, are equal to Whites in every way, what accounts for their
poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of racial
differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation for black
failure is White racism. And since blacks are markedly poor, crime-prone,
and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive racism. Nothing else
could be keeping them in such an abject state.

All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic. Any
explanation for black failure that does not depend on White wickedness
threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of racial differences.
Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their hearts no desire to oppress
blacks, yesterday's Whites must have oppressed them. If Whites do not
consciously oppress blacks, they must oppress them Unconsciously. If no
obviously racist individuals can be identified, then societal institutions
must be racist. Or, since blacks are failing so terribly in America, there
simply must be millions of White people we do not know about, who are
working day and night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality
leaves no room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some
fashion, an indictment of White people.

The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to believe
that the only explanation for non-White failure is White racism, every time
a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on welfare, or takes drugs, White
society stands accused of yet another act of racism. All failure or
misbehavior by non-Whites is standing proof that White society is riddled
with hatred and bigotry. For precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed
in life at exactly the same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition,
thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to
strange conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be
committed almost exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black congressman
from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black mayor of Detroit,
have argued that only White people can be racist. Likewise, in 1987, the
affirmative action officer of the State Insurance Fund of New York issued a
company pamphlet in which she explained that all Whites are racist and that
only Whites can be racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained
without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?

Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can,
perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been forced
into it as self-defense because of centuries of White oppression. What
appears to be non-White racism is so understandable and forgivable that it
hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism
depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when
done by Whites is thought to be normal when done by anyone else. The reverse
is also true.

Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost tedious
to list them: When a White man kills a black man and uses the word "nigger"
while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and the nation beats its
collective breast; when members of the black Yahweh cult carry out ritual
murders of random Whites, the media are silent (see AR of March, 1991).
College campuses forbid pejorative statements about non-Whites as "racist,"
but ignore scurrilous attacks on Whites.
At election time, if 60 percent of the White voters vote for a White
candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for the black opponent,
it is Whites who are accused of racial bias. There are 107 "historically
black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be preserved in the name
of diversity, but all historically White colleges must be forcibly
integrated in the name of... the same thing. To resist would be racist.
"Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything that
could be construed as an expression of White pride is a form of hatred. It
is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect school instruction
and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas for native Americans to
ask them to learn English is racist.
Blatant anti-White prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is now the
law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action, if practiced in
favor of Whites, would be attacked as despicable favoritism.

All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses are
thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club or
association expressly for Whites is by definition racist. The National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) campaigns openly
for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights" organization. The
National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) campaigns
merely for equal treatment of all races, but is said to be viciously racist.

At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action have set
up student unions for Whites, analogous to those for blacks, Hispanics, etc,
and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently, when the White
students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found themselves to be a
minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club like the ones that
non-Whites have. They were turned down in horror. Indeed, in America today,
any club not specifically formed to be a White enclave but whose members
simply happen all to be White is branded as racist.

Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality of
American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn on a few
people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of Whites (and
sometimes men), and never the other way around. No one proposes that Howard
University be made more diverse by admitting Whites, Hispanics, or Asians.
No one ever suggests that National Hispanic University in San Jose (CA)
would benefit from the diversity of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one
suggests that the Black Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the
NAACP or the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from
a lack of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to
celebrate homogeneity. And yet any all-White group - a company, a town, a
school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a crippling lack
of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as possible. Only when Whites
have been reduced to a minority has "diversity" been achieved.

Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we are so
often asked to do, is no different from deploring an excess of Whites. In
fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess of Whites. Our
current immigration policies are structured so that approximately 90 percent
of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are non-White. The several million
illegal immigrants that enter the country every year are virtually all
non-White. It would be racist not to be grateful for this laudable
contribution to "diversity." It is, of course, only White nations that are
called upon to practice this kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to
imagine a nation of any other race countenancing blatant dispossession of
this kind.

What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated citizens
across the
border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into thinking that Mexico was
being "culturally enriched?" What if the state of Chihuahua were losing its
majority population to poor Whites who demanded that schools be taught in
English, who insisted on celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the
right to vote even if they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative
action" in jobs and schooling?
Would Mexico - or any other non-White nation - tolerate this kind of
cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet White Americans are
supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians entering their
country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed to "celebrate" their
own loss of influence, their own dwindling numbers, their own dispossession,
for to do otherwise would be hopelessly racist.
There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non- Whites
advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of "hating"
another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and Hispanics can be
activists without fear of being branded as bigots and hate mongers. They can
agitate openly for racial preferences that can come only at the expense of
whites. They can demand preferential treatment of all kinds without anyone
ever suggesting that they are "anti-white."
Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to affirmative
action to be called haters. They need only subject racial policies that are
clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called racists. Should they actually
go so far as to say that they prefer the company of their own kind, that
they wish to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of their European heritage,
they are irredeemably wicked and hateful.

Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race
relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their own
kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct from those of
the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None of this is thought
to be racist. At the same time, whites must also champion the racial
interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their own future on the altar
of "diversity" and cooperate in their own dispossession. They are to
encourage, even to subsidize, the displacement of a European people and
culture by alien peoples and cultures. To put it in the simplest possible
terms, White people are cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit
racial and cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.

Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is perfectly
natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to love one's people
and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and El Salvadorans are
doubtless astonished to discover that simply by setting foot in the United
States they are entitled to affirmative action preferences over native-born
whites, but can they be blamed for accepting them? Is it surprising that
they should want their languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters
to take possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the
once-great people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and
is prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for
it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?

No, it is the White enterprise in the United States that is unnatural,
unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let themselves be
convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, much less to
work for their own interests. Never in the history of the world has a
dominant people thrown open the gates to strangers, and poured out its
wealth to aliens. Never before has a people been fooled into thinking that
there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away
to others its place in history. Of all the races in America, only whites
have been tricked into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is
racism. Only whites are ever told that a love for their own people is
somehow "hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their
own kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their families
more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they hate their
neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no ill will towards
non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to participate in the unfolding
of their racial and cultural destinies.

What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly unnatural.
They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races
and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like asking a man to
forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbors, since to do
otherwise would be "racist."

What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is
likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of racial
preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for their own
people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the idea of becoming a
minority people. It is any unwillingness to be pushed aside. It is, in
short, any of the normal aspirations of people-hood that have defined
nations since the beginning of history - but only so long as the aspirations
are those of whites.

"What Is Racism?" was originally published in American Renaissance, Vol 2,
No. 8., P.O. Box 527, Oakton, VA 22124  Sample issue $2.

-----------

My sinuses are a little blocked. When they get blocked pressure builds up
causing pain so that is why  I am taking some medication to clear them. I
find that my nose runs a bit at work. My doctor said this may possibly be
due to an alergy so I have an alergy medicine to try also.

-----------

ken arabs should be nuked back to sand.

aus juden raus

No electrical appliance that you use water with, in the bathroom sink, is
going to keep 100% dry, 100% of the time. They need to be tested under wet
conditions, not just somewhere where they are run dry.

Right. That's why you should report it somehow, as it's obvious from Dr. G's
response in this thread that just reporting it to his company won't help, as
he blames it on you. If you hear in the evening news that a child was
electrocuted by one, you would  feel sorry if you had not reported it.

I don't know anything about which boards, but good to report it somewhere,
as that might get them to improve it, rather than only mentioning it here.
(Good to report it here also though, as this NG seems to be the primary
promotion avenue of the product.)

You could also report it to Consumer Reports magazine, as they do product
testing, and also report on products that are unsafe, recalls, etc.