Harry Binswanger on Open Immigration

[Selene]

This imaging of the immigration disaster in Europe is heart wrenching...

Remember the Vietnamese photo of the naked child running at the photographer and in agony from Napalm?

Well, can anyone look at this photo and not feel a deep sadness about the potential that was ended on this beach?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/if-these-extraordinarily-powerful-images-of-a-dead-syrian-child-washed-up-on-a-beach-dont-change-europes-attitude-to-refugees-what-will-10482757.html

[william.scherk]

Well, can anyone look at this photo and not feel a deep sadness about the potential that was ended on this beach?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/if-these-extraordinarily-powerful-images-of-a-dead-syrian-child-washed-up-on-a-beach-dont-change-europes-attitude-to-refugees-what-will-10482757.html

 

Nope. Not me. But I have seen so many horrors, this one is just of a type that sears into many folks' minds. 

 

-- we crossed paths with this link to the UK Independent. See the Altruism thread that I resurrected. 

 

This tweet  makes a lot of sense ... this is what the Assad regime has done to 'rebellious' cities (but not to ISIS) ...

 

 

Why does Europe have a refugee & moral crisis? One reason the state of Syria & cities like Homs. pic.twitter.com/c0yXDOaW56

— Gerry Hassan (@GerryHassan)

September 1, 2015

[Peter]

We all feel a deep sadness, William.

Egyptian Billionaire Offers to Buy Mediterranean Island for Syrian Refugees by Leah Barkoukis | Sep 04, 2015: The billionaire tweeted that he could host the migrants and provide jobs for them building their new country. It might be a crazy idea he admitted, but said it could work until they can return to their countries. In an interview with AFP, Sawiris said the plan is certainly feasible. You have dozens of islands which are deserted and could accommodate hundreds of thousands of refugees [as] temporary shelters to house the people, then you start employing the people to build housing, schools, universities, hospitals, he said. And if things improve, whoever wants to go back [to their country] goes back.

end quote

I suppose a migrant camp - island is one idea but what if they cant take care of themselves? Would charity that extends beyond the current crisis with ISIS be manageable for the UN? We could supply them with fishing poles and seed corn that clearly states on the bags, For planting only, do not eat. Or we could exterminate ISIL.

Words of sanity in a troubled world, Peter

[Neil Parille]

Peter,

The Derb gives a little perspective on the picture of the drowned child:

http://www.vdare.com/articles/oprahfication-ethnomasochism-and-the-preventable-death-of-aylan-kurdi

-NP

[Peter]

As the refugees pour into Europe I want to ask them why aren’t you eliminating the people who are killing you? Why aren’t you fighting them? Of course I see a lot of the refugees are women and children but there are plenty of men too who should be liberating their homeland. The price of entrance to Europe should be that able bodied men join a liberation army to take back Syria.

France has said it will take in 24,000 refugees over a two year period. They don’t really want any more Islamic residents on top of the Algerians who live there already. Many of the France’s Algerian expats are not assimilating, are thugs, live in slums, have low employment, and all of that is probably on a par with what they would have back in Algeria.

I sort of agree with the caption below the photo of the dead little boy. The father did put his family into harm’s way by putting them into a small rubber boat, but death may have been a more sure thing back in his home town. What a horrible dilemma for Syrians. Support Assad, ISIL, or a third or fourth faction, or nobody, and still get caught in the crossfire. I wonder if Russian will succeed in restoring stability and a horrible dictator to absolute power? Their tolerance for their religion has brought them to this point. People doing horrible things, praying five times a day, and all for a thing that does not exist.

[Wolf DeVoon]

People doing horrible things, praying five times a day, and all for a thing that does not exist.

Rand used to say "It's earlier than we think."

No obligation for able-bodied intelligent men to fight and die for a so-called homeland or fatherland or whatever.

[Peter]

Wolf wrote: No obligation for able-bodied intelligent men to fight and die for a so-called homeland or fatherland or whatever.
end quote

Of course, but there is no obligation for Europe to take refugees in, except in a “stay for now then go home when the smoke clears” sort of way. And the price of admission should be you will fight to go back where you came from. The country of Hungary didn’t want any of them and I don’t blame them one bit.

Are we obligated to take in Mexico’s masses of indigents? No, and we send back busloads of them. With a new President the disincentive to come here ILLEGALLY will be stronger. Well, maybe not with Jeb Bush, Old Hickory Clinton, Bernie Sanders, or Joe Biden.

I have brought this up twice before, but maybe I will get a different response this time. Imagine all property in the geographical place called America is privately owned (the Randian Ideal) and a person from Mexico crosses the open border (another Randian / Objectivist Ideal.) If the immigrant is not invited by a property owner then he is free to cross the border . . . except he is simultaneously trespassing on private property as he crosses.

If all roads are privately owned, even if it is a jointly owned road, and the owners do not allow an invited guest from Canada to use their road to get to the property they are invited onto, then they are trespassing. What if you built a road to the next property but that property owner won’t let you onto their land then you would be trespassing, so it is a road to nowhere though you would want to travel your own property.

Add in the concept of toll roads an immigrant or refugee can’t afford to use and they are stuck, until private security (no coerced taxes for government) evicts them. Or the property owner might agree to pay for services rendered and the Sheriff shows up but if he doesn’t have the next property owners permission to use the land to transport the emigrant who is trespassing back to Mexico then he legally cannot. The Sheriff would need a helicopter capable of flying above a property owner’s airspace . . . oh well. Perhaps, Olanders can rethink this supposed ideal.
Peter

[anthony]

All roads privately owned has seemed to me a silly reductionism.

[Selene]

Wolf wrote: No obligation for able-bodied intelligent men to fight and die for a so-called homeland or fatherland or whatever.

end quote

I have brought this up twice before, but maybe I will get a different response this time. Imagine all property in the geographical place called America is privately owned (the Randian Ideal) and a person from Mexico crosses the open border (another Randian / Objectivist Ideal.) If the immigrant is not invited by a property owner then he is free to cross the border . . . except he is simultaneously trespassing on private property as he crosses.

If all roads are privately owned, even if it is a jointly owned road, and the owners do not allow an invited guest from Canada to use their road to get to the property they are invited onto, then they are trespassing. What if you built a road to the next property but that property owner won’t let you onto their land then you would be trespassing, so it is a road to nowhere though you would want to travel your own property.

The ludicrous "what if arguments" are easily defeated by the "what if refutations."

What if we all developed transporter machines then we wouldn't need to use roads.

Secondly, if this projected wet dream of all roads being privately owned came into existence, then do you not reason that there would be rational solutions that would make the transactions flow.

As they say in Dune, "The Spice must flow."

A...

[Peter]

The Spice must flow. Well thunk, but that is a layer of rationality to a less than rational Utopian impossibility, which was my point. Someday. Someday pigs will fly. The most ironic juxtaposition is that Rand’s ideal society is so much like Anarchy that the minarchists point to it as proof that no government is possible and best – yet, Rand was scathing about rational anarchism becoming a reality.
Peter

[Brant Gaede]

All roads privately owned has seemed to me a silly reductionism.

It's what many libertarians like to do. You can't argue effectively that way to the virtues of a free society as if the idea of private roadways could be a carrot on a stick leading on--whoever the fools.

--Brant

"rational anarchism" may be rational if it stays in your head--which doesn't mean you can't take a hypothetical meat ax to government as opposed to killing the beast, for some governance is the classical "necessary evil"

[william.scherk]

Peter,

The Derb gives a little perspective on the picture of the drowned child:

http://www.vdare.com/articles/oprahfication-ethnomasochism-and-the-preventable-death-of-aylan-kurdi

"The Derb" is poorly informed -- which vitiates his conclusions. Check this paragraph from his column at the racialist site Vdare:

Thus the crowds you’ve been seeing in news pictures the past few days, in Greece, Macedonia, and Hungary, almost all come via Turkey. And Turkey is a peaceful, stable, modern country, and has been accommodating to the refugees, settling two million of them in camps.

Derbyshire does add a small smudge of nuance to that crashingly wrong depiction of Turkey:

It’s true that he’s a Kurd, and that Turkey’s government does not celebrate Kurdishness in the full multicultural spirit, having their own long-running Kurdish problem; but if that was intolerable to Mr. Kurdi, he could have gone as a refugee to Iraqi Kurdistan, a de facto independent country that is hosting ten thousand Syrian Kurdish refugees.

Whew! What a perfect ignorance of the geography of war and the actual means of egress to Kurdistan. But then he moves deeper into the dark waters of bigotry and ignorance:

You can imagine cases of genuine refugees. The swarms heading for Europe likely include some genuine refugees among the economic migrants, criminals and terrorists. But as Ann Coulter writes in her splendid book ¡Adíos America!:

The biggest scams in immigration law are the humanitarian cases. One hundred percent of refugee and asylum claims are either obvious frauds or frauds that haven’t been proved yet. The only result of our asylum policies is that we get good liars.

Ugly, untrue, stupid, hateful. That's the kindest thing I can say about Coulter's vicious comment that Derbyshire contends is truth. What the fuck are we doing on an Objectivish forum when we cite approvingly tendentious racialists at a white supremacy site?

As the refugees pour into Europe I want to ask them why aren’t you eliminating the people who are killing you? Why aren’t you fighting them?

Well, if you are keeping on topic -- Syria's refugees -- and in particular keeping to the topic of the one refugee family in the news ... you may need to educate yourself on the case of Mohammed Kurdi, the father. You will discover upon some research that Kurdi was once a guest of the Mukhabarat -- and that he and his family were rendered essentially stateless because of Syria's reluctance to offer Syrian citizenship to the Kurds of Hasaka. The compound problem of citizenship is only deepened by the special 'guest' status obtainable in Turkey -- which does not have a refugee system in place for any but Europeans!

More cogently, Peter, you may need to educate yourself about the Catch-22 that faced the Kurdi family in Turkey. HInt: what is a Turkish exit visa, and how can a Kurdish-Syrian obtain one (without the all-important Syrian passport withheld by the Baathist dictatorship's sectarian policies)?

Of course I see a lot of the refugees are women and children but there are plenty of men too who should be liberating their homeland. The price of entrance to Europe should be that able bodied men join a liberation army to take back Syria.

It's interesting that your ignorance leads you to use a moralist cudgel, to tell a refugee what he should and shouldn't do. Without knowledge of the Syrian conflict and its ramifications, your suggestion will seem at best only naive.

I sort of agree with the caption below the photo of the dead little boy. The father did put his family into harm’s way by putting them into a small rubber boat, but death may have been a more sure thing back in his home town. What a horrible dilemma for Syrians. Support Assad, ISIL, or a third or fourth faction, or nobody, and still get caught in the crossfire.

There you go. A dilemma. That is a good clue that the issues are more complex than a simple morality play.

I wonder if Russian will succeed in restoring stability and a horrible dictator to absolute power? Their tolerance for their religion has brought them to this point. People doing horrible things, praying five times a day, and all for a thing that does not exist.

The Russians are allied with the mafia family that runs Syria. The family that runs rump Syria as its personal fief, whose slogan is "Assad or we burn the country." The family that has attempted to strangle any opposition at birth.

Wolf wrote: No obligation for able-bodied intelligent men to fight and die for a so-called homeland or fatherland or whatever.

end quote

Of course, but there is no obligation for Europe to take refugees in, except in a “stay for now then go home when the smoke clears” sort of way. And the price of admission should be you will fight to go back where you came from. The country of Hungary didn’t want any of them and I don’t blame them one bit.

Again ignorance of the real world constraints and agreements and European law as it pertains to refugees and asylum. Again a near-psychopathic inability to attend to human nature.

It must be fun to sit in a chair and rule over reality.

Edited September 7, 2015 by william.scherk

[Brant Gaede]

If you aren't an expert know you aren't an expert and don't pretend to be one; it's unseemly. Being a Special Forces Aidman gave me a very modest view of my medical skills. Like I told one doctor, "I know just enough to be dangerous." No medic in the world was more highly trained, then and I suspect still now, in medical skills, than those who got my training which included field surgery not involving a body cavity--even some dentistry. It was very broad and very shallow training, except for flat out emergencies and the surgery. I never did any amputations, but if I had, followup surgery would not have been necessary. The caveat would have been patient time under the knife. I'm sure a board-qualified surgeon would have been at least--at least--thrice as fast, but not Civil War fast when they gave you a bottle of whiskey and then hit you with an un-sterilized saw. In the 19th C. how fast the surgeon worked was the primary attribute of his competence after sheer patient survival, even after the general use of general anesthesia. One of the best that way scorned the germ theory of disease and demonstrated his scorn by doing surgery with deliberately dirty hands. President McKinley's doctors had as much to do with killing him as the bullet they kept searching for. In his time the ratio of the doctor helping you/hurting you was about 1:1. There is still a ratio today, of course; there always will be. It's now much more favorable to the doctors. Today the greatest benefit from my medical training and experience is evaluating what a doctor would do to me in a way I could not as a layman. The doctor as an authoritarian figure doesn't exist to me, as my Father's doctors soon found out. That didn't mean I didn't go along with their decisions, I usually did, but I didn't once or twice they did not know about.* It meant that they couldn't cram something down my throat.

--Brant

*the use of mega-vitamins before surgery delivered in a milkshake

[william.scherk]

If you aren't an expert know you aren't an expert and don't pretend to be one; it's unseemly.

I don't think of myself as being an expert in any field. I am of middling intellect and probably a captive of cognitive biases, which captivity can tend to limit me in research and understanding -- unless I try very hard to interrogate what I think I know.

In a small few areas of knowledge I might have on average a wider, deeper comprehension -- but in each area it depends on the pool one is being averaged in. Perhaps I know a bit more about the conflict in Syria than that 'average' OLer, but I hope I don't use that slight advantage in knowledge to parade myself as Expert William (my lack of Arabic alone puts me in the bottom percentiles; I must accept that I am but an amateur indeed). I hope I am up for challenging discussion and for further learning and analysis -- it is in my own interest to intelligently accept correction.

What raises my ire sometimes is the sad inevitable effect of ignorance: bigotry.

If one arrives at conclusions without establishing an argument, the conclusions may well be invalid. It seems to me of supreme importance that one examines critically all stages of reasoning -- so that one does not end up with an false conclusion (as with the wisdom of books like How We Know What Isn't So). This is sort of akin to so-called scientific reasoning: rigorous, protracted testing of each step and recursion of reasoning.

What amazes me here about Peter's comparison of Scientology to Freemasonry is that he is seemingly so confident of his conclusions, so blithe. How did he get there (to his conclusions)? It seems he has assembled a few scraps of information but not put those scraps to any rational test -- resulting in an incoherent mass of prejudice and dogmatism -- riddled with incorrect notions and unsupported beliefs.

Finally, of course, there is Peter's ironic elsewhere call for 'evidence,' 'proof.' It seems that the old adage what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander is not applicable: the baseline intellectual standards Peter demands of other folks' opinions are absent in relation to his own.

That ignore function is so very tempting.

Edited September 7, 2015 by william.scherk

[Selene]

If you aren't an expert know you aren't an expert and don't pretend to be one; it's unseemly. Being a Special Forces Aidman gave me a very modest view of my medical skills. Like I told one doctor, "I know just enough to be dangerous." No medic in the world was more highly trained, then and I suspect still now, in medical skills, than those who got my training which included field surgery not involving a body cavity--even some dentistry. It was very broad and very shallow training, except for flat out emergencies and the surgery. I never did any amputations, but if I had, followup surgery would not have been necessary. The caveat would have been patient time under the knife. I'm sure a board-qualified surgeon would have been at least--at least--thrice as fast, but not Civil War fast when they gave you a bottle of whiskey and then hit you with an un-sterilized saw. In the 19th C. how fast the surgeon worked was the primary attribute of his competence after sheer patient survival, even after the general use of general anesthesia. One of the best that way scorned the germ theory of disease and demonstrated his scorn by doing surgery with deliberately dirty hands. President McKinley's doctors had as much to do with killing him as the bullet they kept searching for. In his time the ratio of the doctor helping you/hurting you was about 1:1. There is still a ratio today, of course; there always will be. It's now much more favorable to the doctors. Today the greatest benefit from my medical training and experience is evaluating what a doctor would do to me in a way I could not as a layman. The doctor as an authoritarian figure doesn't exist to me, as my Father's doctors soon found out. That didn't mean I didn't go along with their decisions, I usually did, but I didn't once or twice they did not know about.* It meant that they couldn't cram something down my throat.

--Brant

*the use of mega-vitamins before surgery delivered in a milkshake

I heard an interview with an author about this and Tom Edison on the John Batchelor Show about a year ago:

The needle used to sew up McKinley's wound, 1901

The needle used to sew up McKinley's wound, 1901

Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural Site Foundation

Could X-rays Have Saved President William McKinley?

At the 1901 Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York, an assassin shot President William McKinley twice at close range with a .32 caliber revolver. One bullet grazed McKinley's sternum (breastbone) and another penetrated his stomach.

A hastily assembled medical team, headed by a gynecological surgeon, operated immediately at the small Exposition hospital, but the second bullet could not be found. After cleaning the stomach cavity, the surgeon closed the incision with black silk thread and a straight sewing needle. A worried McKinley aide sent word to inventor Thomas Edison to rush an X-ray machine to Buffalo to find the stray bullet. It arrived but wasn't used.

The medical team reported that the president was improving. McKinley's family, Congress, and the public believed he was going to recover. Instead, he died the morning of September 14. At the autopsy, physicians found that the unrecovered bullet did not cause the death of the President through loss of blood and resultant shock. Instead, gangrene had developed along the path of the bullet, and McKinley died of septic shock due to bacterial infection.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/galleries/cases/mckinley.html

[Brant Gaede]

Gangrene meant the bullet killed tissue which killed its blood supply for oxygen kills the causative organism which thrives on the dead flesh. That's why I was taught how to surgically debride wounds. These organisms are anaerobic and include the one that causes botulism. The bacteria was probably introduced by the doctors then spread through the dead tissue getting worse and worse. It's not the bacteria that does the damage, but the toxin they produce.

A standard .30 full metal jacket military round--call it the NATO round--is made to go through the target and if it goes through it retains a lot of energy and maybe hits even another victim. In the 1960s the US military switched over to the .223 higher velocity round. Less weight + more speed = much more energy discharged into whom was hit. Much more wound to debride for more dead tissue. However, not much of an issue if the wound was in a body cavity for it was likely a kill shot. A South Vietnamese soldier showed me his old bullet wound in the upper right arm. It was small enter and exit scars with no other evidence of damage. That was a .30 cal. flesh wound. If it had been a close in .223 it would have taken off his arm or all the associated flesh on one side. I was so glad no one else than I and my team-mates--friend or foe--had our M-16s. I didn't quite trust our CIDG troops whom we "advised."

The pre-eminent surgeon in the Buffalo area was doing terribly serious surgery when someone rushed in and said his services were needed immediately. The surgeon said he would not stop--not even if it was for the President. He was then told it was the President and he did not stop and did not operate on him. That's the story. I read it on the Internet so it has to be true (and probably is).

--Brant

[Selene]

The pre-eminent surgeon in the Buffalo area was doing terribly serious surgery when someone rushed in and said his services were needed immediately. The surgeon said he would not stop--not even if it was for the President. He was then told it was the President and he did not stop and did not operate on him. That's the story. I read it on the Internet so it has to be true (and probably is).

--Brant

Good point.

I have been amazed at how effective the use of maggots, genetically modified as I understand it, in terms of wound management.

g modality?

Because of antibiotic overuse, and unnecessary prescriptions (used for viral infections, for example), widespread resistance was the result. This then resulted in doctors and scientists looking at different options for wound healing and cleaning.

In 2004, maggots were approved by the FDA as a valid "medical device." If the idea of maggots chewing on your dead skin makes you queasy, it may ease the feeling slightly to know that the larvae are raised from sterilized fly eggs. Plus, they are placed in a tea-bag like package before being placed on the wound.

Maggots take a two-pronged approach

A study from 2012, presented in the Archives of Dermatology, "showed that maggots placed on surgical incisions helped to clear more dead tissue from the sites than surgical debridement." Surgical debridement is the current standard in which a scalpel or scissors are used.

Maggot therapy is said to eliminate the "often lengthy and painful" procedure for that of surgical debridement.

In a different study from late in 2012, published in Wound Regeneration and Repair, indicated "that secretions from the maggots modulate the complement response, a part of the immune system that reacts to invading pathogens and is crucial to clearing infections."

"Maggot secretions turned down complement activity in blood samples from healthy adults by inhibiting the production of several important complement proteins, and, the researchers found, reducing this overactive immune response speeds up healing."

It is estimated that more than half, and perhaps up to 80% of wounds can be healed using maggot therapy.

Perhaps this approach to wound healing falls in the same category of leach therapy, and maybe for good reason. Mother Nature provides.

Sources for this article include:

scientificamerican.com

A...

[Peter]

A great preservative against angry and mutinous thoughts, and all impatience and quarreling, is to have some great business and interest in your mind, which, like a sponge shall suck up your attention and keep you from brooding over what displeases you. Joseph Rickaby

William wrote:
It must be fun to sit in a chair and rule over reality.
end quote

The king is ignorant? Boring ad hominem. Have you no sense of Poesy? Chancellor! Get Sir William some video games to occupy his mind. I suggest, Super Mario Brothers, Tetris, and Grand Theft Auto. I wonder what Sir Donald of Trump would have to say about intruders to the kingdom?

[Peter]

Published today. The Past and Future of the Refugee Crisis by Thomas Sowell: . . . Europeans have already seen this scenario play out in their midst, creating strife and even terrorism. Most of the Muslims may be peaceful people who are willing to live and let live. But it takes only a fraction who are not to create havoc. No nation has an unlimited capacity to absorb immigrants of any sort, and especially immigrants whose cultures are not simply different, but antagonistic, to the values of the society in which they settle. The inescapable reality is that it is an irreversible decision to admit a foreign population of any sort -- but especially a foreign population that has a track record of remaining foreign. end quote

In contrast, Mexicans seem North American. Oh. They are southern North Americans? And Canadians are northern North Americans? And Eskimos are North Pole ice dwellers, hence the Santa Clause and his (Innuit) elves legend.

I am waiting for the Germans to denounce their Progressive leaders. Merkel may become less popular when the refugees become an eye sore.

[william.scherk]

¿ɯopƃuᴉʞ ǝɥʇ oʇ sɹǝpnɹʇuᴉ ʇnoqɐ ʎɐs oʇ ǝʌɐɥ plnoʍ dɯnɹ┴ ɟo plɐuop ɹᴉS ʇɐɥʍ ɹǝpuoʍ I ˙oʇn∀ ʇɟǝɥ┴ puɐɹפ puɐ 'sᴉɹʇǝ┴ 'sɹǝɥʇoɹq oᴉɹɐW ɹǝdnS 'ʇsǝƃƃns I ˙puᴉɯ sᴉɥ ʎdnɔɔo oʇ sǝɯɐƃ oǝpᴉʌ ǝɯos ɯɐᴉllᴉM ɹᴉS ʇǝפ ¡ɹollǝɔuɐɥƆ ¿ʎsǝoԀ ɟo ǝsuǝs ou noʎ ǝʌɐH ˙ɯǝuᴉɯoɥ pɐ ƃuᴉɹoq ¿ʇuɐɹouƃᴉ sᴉ ƃuᴉʞ ǝɥ┴

How is that comparative analysis of Scientology/Freemasonry coming along, Peter?

[Brant Gaede]

My sister was so bored in grade school she sat at the back of the class and taught herself to read backwards and upside down.

So you see, it's a fine tradition you are upholding.

--Brant

how did ya do that, btw?

[Brant Gaede]

Do this:

¿ɯopƃuᴉʞ ǝɥʇ oʇ sɹǝpnɹʇuᴉ ʇnoqɐ ʎɐs oʇ ǝʌɐɥ plnoʍ dɯnɹ┴ ɟo plɐuop ɹᴉS ʇɐɥʍ ɹǝpuoʍ I ˙oʇn∀ ʇɟǝɥ┴ puɐɹפ puɐ 'sᴉɹʇǝ┴ 'sɹǝɥʇoɹq oᴉɹɐW ɹǝdnS 'ʇsǝƃƃns I ˙puᴉɯ sᴉɥ ʎdnɔɔo oʇ sǝɯɐƃ oǝpᴉʌ ǝɯos ɯɐᴉllᴉM ɹᴉS ʇǝפ ¡ɹollǝɔuɐɥƆ ¿ʎsǝoԀ ɟo ǝsuǝs ou noʎ ǝʌɐH ˙ɯǝuᴉɯoɥ pɐ ƃuᴉɹoq ¿ʇuɐɹouƃᴉ sᴉ ƃuᴉʞ ǝɥ┴

How is that comparative analysis of Scientology/Freemasonry coming along, Peter?

see previous

[Jules Troy]

O¿0

[Peter]

How is my comparative analysis of Scientology/Freemasonry coming along? Mathematically proven to 3.14. How many digits did you want. And once again I say for shame! No Jewish Masons? Bigots. Well I guess there was Jackie Mason.

[Selene]

No Jewish Masons? Bigots. Well I guess there was Jackie Mason.

This is not true.

A...

Bringing Bigots To Light In America Since 1658