—Elizabeth Warren - American Indians - DNA - God's Law & More

By on

The first news link says (as do other news articles) that they did not even compare Elizabeth Warren's blood to so-called "Native"Americans (NA) in the U.S.  That's as if someone claimed to be an apple and we said, "No, we compared your DNA to pear DNA and it did not match; so you are not really an apple".

I sent out a youtube last year that says NA blood rarely shows up in a  DNA tests because of lack of database and incorrect reporting (many people with part indian blood claiming to be white, which then falsely attributes indian DNA as white).

[* The guy who made the youtube looks white (and fools who make comments at that youtube show their ignorance), and sounds queer, but he has documented evidence--and explains it, concerning his American indian ancestors and his arab ancestors. See:

Why Native American DNA does not show up in a DNA test - YouTube

Video for youtube american indian DNA white
Dec 5, 2011 - Uploaded by Lornicopia
What happened to my Native American DNA Created with MAGIX ... they are testing all those white people who ... ]

Furthermore, like the Huns, the American Indians were a highly mixed racial group, which absorbed the blood of all peoples it conquered.  The various different Indian tribes, though they will share some common DNA, had widely different features due to the different peoples that they absorbed.  The peoples of central and South American are really not a fair representative of the Indians of North America (the U.S. and Canada); many North American tribes had a lot of white blood because the indians killed various white peoples when they encountered them (Phoenicians, Iberians, Celts, and later Vikings, and then of course the European settlers; and they kidnapped women and children and then bred with them.  Indians are not white, if they were, they would not have been called "red men" and they would not have called white people "pale face" or "white man".  That some Indian tribes were lighter than other is not disputed, but no Indian tribes were white and anyone who claims that only does so do justify their own tainted blood; and thereby, also help destroy the blood of Christendom because of their own selfishness and moral depravity.  Were any indian tribes actually white they would not have been called Indians!  The dusky skinned, dark featured peoples of the Americans were called Indians because the explorers, thinking that they found a route to the Orient thought that they were in INDIA... that is why the peoples were called INDIANS, but had they been caucasian, they would not have called them indians, and would not have thought they were in India, but would have realized that they must have taken a wrong turn and ended up somewhere else.  Also, no indians spoke any indo-European language (and while explorers would have spoken Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch, and English, they most-probably would have had some crew members who would have recognized a few words of some other Indo-European language, had any of the Indians spoken an Indo-European language.  Also, the Indians had no written or systematic language until white missionaries developed it for them, or in the case of the Cherokee, a half-breed developed the written language.  Unless the alleged "white indian" tribes descended from European INFANTS, who like Moses, washed up on shore and were too young to know their own language! it is ludicrous to suggest that the "white Indians" forgot their own language.  Furthermore, there are Hebrew / Iberian / Phoenician and Celtic (ogam) and Viking (runes) inscriptions in North America and they were not written by any indians.  Some indians clearly said they killed fair skinned and blue eyed peoples and took their land in North America—BEFORE they realized the CASH COW of "political correctness" and just how valuable and powerful it would be to lie and say their own people were the first "nations".

With all the indians in the US why did those "testing" Warren's DNA simply not offer $50 bucks to 100 indians in Oklahoma to collect and use their DNA with 100% anonymity and not storing their personal data, name, etc. ...?  That is really what needs to be done.  Without doing that, this test itself is bogus and not fair to Warren (or the rest of us).

I also found it disturbing that the "experts" claim that 1/6 to 1/1,024 is considered the amount of indian blood that the average white American has... and goes to show just what I have long said either way you look at it —

[1. the amount of people who have intermarried with indians is staggering.  Though TODAY this is quite possible, especially in the South and west, this was not true 100 years ago (despite the bogus claims of one congressman in the Wikipedia link below); and

2. the "experts" and others considered so, lie to make the majority think that the blood of all white people is already polluted, so why not marry outside your race....? it is hard enough to find a suitable mate, let alone worrying about the person's race, just let go and be absorbed into the flood... and that is one avenue of Satan's Plan to destroy God's people, to mongrelize them out of existence...  God is Holy.  He commanded His people always to put away mixed blood and send away forever.  God will not have an illegitimate family thrust upon Him; He promised to preserve HIS people; not just any people.]

... but around here the southeast it is far more than 1/6 to 1/1,024 (more like 1/8 to 1/2 in about 80%, maybe 10% being 3/4 or more, and 10% actually white, but most who are white are married to someone part indian (and now, also african, hispanic, muslim, etc.); and this is most probably the last generation) and I am sure far more that those living in OK, TX, AZ, NM, and the entire mid-west and southwest, etc. also contain far more than a mere 1/6 to 1/1,024.

I believe that some American indians (cherokee and others in their federation) are descended at least in part from the Canaanites, and God said if the Canaanites were not utterly exterminated, they would be a thorn in our sides and pricks in our eyes (undetachable) and vex us all our days.  As it was in Biblical Israel, so it is today in the U.S.

I believe that Warren is part NA, — not enough to claim to be "tribal"; though they certainly would want to claim her since she is a person of influence (if she was just a housewife, they would not care less about her); maybe she should work on her tan and dye her hair black.  Many ignorant people don't don't have a clue about recessive and dominant genes and think that just because a person looks white (to them, not even knowing what to look for, basing it solely on light skin and hair) that they are white.  Such persons should take photos of different races and "photoshop" them and give them blonde hair and nordic light skin and see if they still think that such persons are white; and then study the features and begin to see the corrupted racial elements in mixed race persons.  If you know dog breeds you can look at a mixed dog and know that it is part German shepherd and part beagle or whatever the cross may be —and how is that a "social construct"...?  I emailed a funny looking photo to a seed nursery, from which I order seeds, of a pepper that I grew that had naturally crossed, the person who answered my email said that it looked to be a cross between a Japanese lantern and a Devil's tongue—she correctly named the 2 correct pepper parents that I grow.  Again... if she knew that... HOW is race merely a "social construct"?).

Most people who have been raised in godless state churches and schools think that race is merely a "social construct" (a lie as big as evolution itself, just not as "complex") and that it is unimportant (and they poison the well by associating it with "Nazi-ism" or "white supremacy"—showing their utter ignorance, dishonesty, and shameless subterfuge), so they already dismiss the entire concept from their minds as bogus, and don't give it any real thought because they don't think it is worth any thought; the latest sitcom or ball game coming on, to them, is far-more important to civilization; and of course God is not in their minds at all; even if they believe a "God" exists, they don't believe that He owns all matter and energy and space in the universe and that it is His Right to decree and establish laws by which His universe will be ordered.  Such is the result of Arminianism and humanism in detaching God from the minds of even "Christians", and causing man to think that he is his own moral "free agent" and his own person who can determine "morality" for himself according to his own "experience" and what "works for" him and what he "likes".  Even the majority not wallowing in the typical delusion think that the current world-political-moral view on just about anything is "reality" (such as race and gender, and they ignore God's moral Law as "obsolete", "archaic", "out-dated"*) and they then project their own experience and bias backward 4,000 years onto God and assume that God is required to operate based upon the thinking and "moral values" of sinful, damaged, humans, and that therefore, God can only think like a sinful liberal of the 21st century and that is how, therefore, He must have ordered His universe.  I guess they have never read the Book of Job.

[* Every law that God gave, from the dietary laws to the Sabbath (neither of which have been abolished) is MORAL issue.  MORALITY never changes and God did not abolish Morality / His Law.  Morality is established by what God determined—solely because He so decreed (and He is Holy, Perfect, and Immutable and morality cannot change): "Thou shalt not!" —  "This shalt thou do!"  THAT is what establishes morality in every single area in which God gave laws.  Evil never becomes good.  Immorality never becomes moral.  Right and wrong (morality) are determined by what God decreed.  Some ignorant people who have argued with me think that immorality only refers to things of a sexual nature, simply because that is the most-common TYPE of immorality with which the word is used and thus, that is what their cramped, confused minds think immorality is: based upon the false notion in their minds due to their lack of true study and their inability to think logically and validly.  Similarly, the words promiscuous and licentious most commonly refer to sexual looseness, but that is not the actual meanings of those words either (promiscuous means "to mix" and licentious means "acting with freedom"); however, because those words are used most often in a sexual context, poorly educated people think that is what those words mean and can only mean.  Such persons have not even begun to think (or even know what true thought is), yet they will heatedly argue over that which they do not even have a clue.  Okay, answer me a few questions: Is it immoral to deceive people?  Is it immoral to steal?  It is immoral to kill?  Morality (and its violation known as "immorality") refers to ANYTHING dealing with the difference between right and wrong, lawful and unlawful AS DEFINED BY GOD.  The "mind-fart" of thinking that immorality only has to do with things of a sexual nature (and similar mental flatulence) is what self-deludes "Christians" into thinking that the rest of God's Law can be ignored.  Tragically, such people not only believe what they believe, but they shamelessly attempt to lasso others into their delusion and drag them into sin with them, by attempting to be Bible teachers!]

The fact that the ancestors that Warren claims were indian are allegedly recorded as "white" is meaningless; and the authors of the news articles even use the stupid phrase they they "identified" with being white.  Talking to such persons is like talking to someone strung out on drugs or lobotomized.  They are not all there.  No meaningful conversation or debate can take place because there is a loosening of associations of reality (otherwise known as PSYCHOSIS), that means that words in their mind do not retain the constant, concrete, true meaning of those words, but mean whatever in their delusion they imagine that those words mean; and it means that what they consider to be reality follows their delusion and not the real world.  Such persons need to move to their own nation and they can all live together in Stupidtopia or Delusionica.

Regardless, 100 years ago or so (as it should be) people were ashamed that they were mixed (if they are not ashamed and if all moral society does not shun them as God commanded, well, that will eventually result in what we have... a society, a world in which the alien and mixed blood [that initially—deceitfully—championed "tolerance" and "equality" and "love" and "non-discrimination"] will very quickly become the overwhelming majority [and then persecute those left who are pure, stripping them of "equal protection under the law", declaring it "open season" on them, and showing zero tolerance and 100% hatred against them after the alien and mixed populations have subverted and stolen a nation that was not theirs, which their ancestors had not founded or built]).

Such mixed people 100 years ago also realized that if it were known that they were mixed it would exempt them from white, Christian society—and so, they prefer to help destroy society so they could entertain the delusion that they are not mixed.  Compare this with a leper colony.  God commanded quarantine.  What if a leper "identifies" with being a non-leper?  What would that do to society if lepers were roaming in among the healthy population?  The same goes for any deadly communicable disease (AIDS, hepatitis c, tuberculosis, Ebola, STDs etc.).  Both mixed blooded persons pretending to be white and those who communicable diseases pretending to be healthy, are guilty of murder... and if it is God's people whom they are murdering, well, they might truly have Hell to pay! 

Yes, certainly, it is "unfair" (for lack of an actually valid word) to those people of mixed blood. 

[* "Unfortunate" might seem a better word (but it would not be used by the mainstream because it does not carry the blunt deluded notion of "oppression").  However, the origin and meaning of the word "fortune" is similar to that of "lucky" the two "magical" mysterious "powers" or "gods" that control fate in the minds of orientals.  Orientals also believe certain "numbers" are "lucky" for them, and they will often have a number in the name of their business, and even the word "lucky", a sort of "offering" to their unknown gods of fate.]

But it is irrelevant that ostracization is not "fair" to people of mixed blood (or to rapists or child molestors), even as it is "unfair" to the leper.  All that matters (if a person actually cares about obeying God) is what God commanded—and He indeed commanded it and morality does not change.

[It is truly amazing that evolutionists and communists alike hypocritically VIOLATE THE FOUNDATIONAL Principles of their own creeds.  Evolutionists violate the chief tenet of their faith, "Survival of the Fittest / Natural Selection".  They imperially decree, "Don't feed the animals, it will make them dependent on man"—and yet they are the foremost evangelists and champions of a plethora of welfare programs that do just that!  Communists have as one of their foundational imperatives: "The needs of the few must give way to the needs of the many"... —and yet they claim it is "unfair" for a few mixed-blooded persons (or perverts, or AIDS-infected persons) to be treated as outcasts as God commanded to preserve the population.  Then, in another hypocritical twist, once the mixed blooded, perverse, infected population becomes the MAJORITY—purity and health are OUTLAWED!]

It would be no surprise if Warren's ancestors lied or had their parents lie and put "white" on their birth certificates (and it is simply anti-intellectual of people to claim that because Warren's ancestors "claimed to be white" that someone lying and misrepresenting truth would simply be unheard of...!).  There is no amazing revelation here... it is common sense... I am sure you could find thousands of people modernly and 100 years ago who had their birth certificates indicate something other than the truth concerning their race... the very fact that on many forms "non-Hispanic white" is an official choice, goes to show the subterfuge that began about 30 years ago in slowly desensitizing Americans to think Hispanics are white.  The many offspring of whites marrying Hispanics created the "in between" population to facilitate this lie... and it is genocide.  But the "tolerant", "equality champions" and "liberals" don't care about that—only if whites were a species of mosquito or owl would they care about us. 

Eventually, once enough mixed blooded people began to gain in numbers, corrupt politicians could be swayed (or bought) and immorally and illegally "congressional vote" then declared someone to be white if he was only 7/8ths white... whereas God commanded purity--absolute, not relative.  Those who believe otherwise believe in a changing God and therefore, not in the God of the Bible.  You can't pick and choose what Attributes and Decrees of God that you will believe and retain in your "religion" or "theology" and which you will relegate to the scrap bin of time as being archaic and even "morally wrong" (using such godless, stupid, unspoken logic as "but those were immoral times so God had to be immoral too" but because mankind has "progressed" and is more moral now, so is God).

[Those who pooh-pooh the concept of racial purity... stop, take a breath, remember that you did not create the universe.  It is not yours and it does not operate upon the laws that you want it to operate upon.  God is Immutable and so is His Standard of Morality.  He forbade marrying outside the race and commanded all aliens and all mixed blood to be sent away, whenever it crept in.  God said a bastard (mongrel) shall never enter the congregation (any place in true Israelite society--any place in God's Family) not even unto the tenth generation (an idiom meaning "never"), no not ever.  The congregation refers to legitimate membership in God's Family, not merely a "church service".

Understand, homoperversion is following the same trail blazed by interracial marriage/ mixed society.  God forbade BOTH FOREVER.  Morality does not change.  If you think it does you deny the Word of God and don't even know God.  Those who don't keep God's Commandments don't even know God and the truth is not in them, so wrote John in his first epistle, one of the last books of the New Testament to be written.  If you were the founding patriarch of a people, or if you were God, you could make up whatever rules you wanted.  But you are neither.  It is funny, those who claim God does not have the right to make the rules for His universe, if they were God, they would make their rules and expect everyone to abide by them.  Such is the anti-intellectual hypocrisy of humanists and God-haters.  If you hate what God decreed you hate God.  Christ said that when He returns He will instruct the angels wto bring all those who would not that He rule over them and slay them.  Understand, Christ ruling over you in not simply a notion—it entails His LAW, which, if you reject, you reject Him.  Now, since God says those who are bastards can never enter His Congregation / Family and all those who were aliens or mixed were always eventually cast out... why would you want to take the risk of cutting off your branch of the family tree forever?  Again, it has nothing to do with what your liberal mind, infected with humanism "thinks about" what God declared.  Gravity exists whether you like it or not, whether you are falling off a building and hate the thought of gravity or not.  Do you think God (who is IMMUTABLE and HOLY and PERFECT—and any change from perfection would be to imperfection) will change—to please you—the Laws He decreed 6,000 years ago ...?  Do you think that if enough sinful humans get together that they can "out vote" God, or pressure God to change His Law?  If mixed race people or mentally deranged liberals think they can force God to change concerning race, then what about gender?  What about any sexual perversion or any violent crime?  Where does it end and who has the right to say where it ends?  Only God and He commanded obedience and purity is one of the things He commanded—and not just in His people, but in livestock and grapevines and barley fields—in everything.  It is a matter of holiness because hybridization destroys HIS creation and the hydbridization of His people destroys HIS IMAGE.  Now we see that homoperverts of every flavor are "identifying" as something other than reality—and that trail also was blazed by nonwhites "identifying as white".  This clearly is neo-Babylon (which represents the last kingdom of this age) and Babylon means, "confusion by mixing".  Christ said, "as in the days of Noah so shall it be when the Son of man returns".  They were "eating, drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage"—until the flood came and took them away and they knew it not.  There is nothing wrong with those activities (and marriage is interestingly mentioned twice) so the only logical inference is that they were "eating, drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage IN COMPLETE VIOLATION OF ALL THE LAWS AND BOUNDARIES THAT GOD ESTABLISHED".  God destroyed the world because of it... their "eating, drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage" was not some normal, wholesome, innocent behaviour.

The very same verses that anti-intellectual "Christians" use to claim that all races are "abolished in Christ" (which they twist and distort out of their true meaning), if interpreted consistently, then also claim that all gender is abolished in Christ (which would support homoperversion).  Tell me, since only Adamkind was created in God's Image, with the Very Breath of God giving him a LIVING SOUL (a spirit that survives the death of the body, familial identity, and God consciousness)... what happens when someone marries outside the Adamic family?  Well, neither of us can know for certain, but since God forbade marriage outside the race and commanded all mixed blood to be sent away and declared that a bastard shall never enter His Family—why would you want to find out what happens?  Tell me this, if they eventually find a way to clone human DNA with gorilla, orangutan, or chimpanzee DNA and breed a hybrid human ape (which some people have been trying to do for decades)... what do you think will be the identity of that creature?  Do you think God will accept it as a member of His Family?  What does it do to the living spirit?  Animals are not human.  God commanded that any of His people who lays down with a beast is to be put to death.*  It does not matter what you think.  All that matters is what God commanded.  If you reject what God commanded you reject God.  You may think that you don't reject God, but you can't pick and choose which of God's Attributes or Decrees you will believe in.  If you do, you are engaged in idolatry.  Again, "fairness" has nothing to do with anything.  The Godhead is not a democracy run by humans.  Humans minds are sinful and fallen and limited.  To think that you know better than God, that you are more moral than God, again, shows your spiritual depravity and the fact that you don't know God and are therefore unregenerate.  There will be a "rude awakening" on the Day of Judgment.  Christ said that MANY who thought they were good Christians, doing "wonderful things" in His Name, will hear, "I never knew you, depart from Me ye that work iniquity" {anomos, "lawlessness", that is, violation of what God commanded}.

[* See my booklet, The Creation of Man in Genesis 1 and 2 for more detail concerning this.]

This was the BIBLICAL ruling that was actually legislated in various states.

"The one-drop rule is a social and legal principle of racial classification that was historically prominent in the United States asserting that any person with even one ancestor of sub-Saharan African ancestry ("one drop" of black blood) is considered black (Negro in historical terms), its implications of racial purity ..." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule)

I don't know why the legislators specified "Sub-Saharan"... the difference seems to be that other parts of Africa (north and also east) are more dominated by Arabs—but that does not make them any more white... so the specification seems nonsensical.

According to Wikipedia

Sub-Saharan Africa - Wikipedia

"The UN Development Program lists 46 of Africa's 54 countries as “sub-Saharan,” excluding Algeria, Djibouti, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Sudan and Tunisia. This doesn't make geographical sense—four countries included are on the Sahara, while Eritrea is deemed “sub-Saharan” but its southern neighbor Djibouti isn't."

But specifying "Sub-Saharan" is anti-intellectual, because even though those nations have a lot more corrupt arab blood infused, they are still part black and therefore certainly have one drop themselves.

And though the law referred only to Sub-Saharan African, this is what God commanded in His Law and this is what is required in order to preserve the family of God's people, it applies to all alien blood: hispanic, Asian, Oriental, Jewish (which is not ancient Israel, but Edomite Canaanite who stole true Israel's name), American indian, Arab, Turk, etc.  Those who still don't see the difference don't understand the meaning of the Hebrew word Adam and who Adam was and what family actually means and that it is sacred.  To have family boundaries destroyed is a plan of communism; not only does it destroy the blood of a nation, by mixing them with aliens, not only does it violate God's Law of everything after its own kind, but it causes the people to blend into a meaningless mass that are easy to control.  The upper echelons, the self-appointed elite, of course, preserve the concept of their families (as polluted as they may be), but "their" masses are supposed to surrender all such things and blend into the faceless, identity-less State.  Communism teaches one race, one religion, one creed. 

As I noted in my If You Had Been Brainwashed How Would You Ever Know It?, concerning Sung Myung Moon—

"According to the authors of the 'Christian Right and the Moonies,' 'It’s A Bizarre World,' [http://www.angelfire.com/tn/bizarrotom/] 'Reverend' Moon was recruited by none other than the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA) to form the Unification Church to be used as a political tool of the right-wing military government.  Further, it was not meant to be a Korean organization alone, but it was planned from the beginning to be “exported” to the United States.  Reportedly, the KCIA sought the organization skills of Rev. Bill Bright (head of Campus Crusade for Christ, which was very influential in the 1970s), who chose Moon to head the U.S. church.  Dr. Cathy Burns in her book, Billy Graham and His Friends,* states that Moon was also funded by Rockefeller, while also receiving support from Senators Ted Kennedy, Jesse Helms, Mark O. Hatfield, and columnist William F. Buckley; with many Illuminati, Masonic, Bilderberger, Council on Foreign Relations, and Trilateralist connections.

[* 788pp., pb., 22.00 + P&H.]"

God commanded all alien women whom sinful Israelites had married, to be divorced and all children by them sent away.  God is Immutable.  Morality does not change.  This is why the elect will be a very small number--and unless God draws those days short none even of the elect will survive.  God does not conform to modern humanistic, Marxist, evolutionist notions.  We are to conform to what God commanded or be left on the outside of the Kingdom and in outer darkness.  No one has any choice in who they were born to; but that is an irrelevant smokescreen.  None of us descended from Adam had any choice being born to sinful Adam either (at least, no one asked me; did someone ask you?), yet we are all tainted with a sin nature and Hell-bent unless God ordained us unto life and we repent and confess Christ upon being regenerated by the Holy Spirit.  God determines.  Those who hate God and hate what He determined to do because that is what He determined.  If while in Hell it makes them feel better to entertain the delusion that they are in control of their own destiny--MORE POWER TO THEM!

Back when our nation was Christian, in keeping with the Law of God only Christian white males could hold public office (funny that those who claim the U.S. was not founded as a Christian nation can overlook their illogic, as well as the evidence) and mixed marriages were even outlawed--even as was homosexuality.

"Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States ...

"Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States for ... to Whites: 1929," by W.A. Plecker, Eugenical News (vol. 14:8). Transcript: 1442. ... Maine (an act of 1786 made marriage of a white person and negro or mulatto void) 7.

It is truly amazing that the majority of "Christians" who realize that society has only become more immoral and perverse and nonChristian, somehow think that race mixing is a "nonissue" and that God is color-blind, even though homoperversion is following the same trail blazed for it by race mixing.  Those who think that God changed or morality changed or Christ abolished the Law or "everything changed a the cross" only reveal that they don't know God, Christ, or the Word of God; they know modern humanistic perversions of "bible stories" and corruptions of doctrine... not the harmonious unchanging Word of God.

Those who point to Ruth, Rahab, Hagar, Moses' "Ethiopian" wife, etc.,* only show their ignorance.  God is not doubleminded or confused.  He does not make mistakes, lie, or contradict Himself.  He is Immutable.  Those who believe otherwise worship a false god and that is why their "theology" is contradictory, humanistic, and continually changing as society continues is downward moral plunge.  He who would be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.  The world now holds only a few things to be "immoral"—being anti-multiculturalism, anti-homo-perversion, and anti-feminism.  God declared a curse on those who call evil good and good evil.  It is no wonder that Christendom is cursed when the majority are not God's people and when even the majority of God's people side with the world and call evil what God declared good and call good what God declared evil.

[* —which I deal with exhaustively in my Commentaries, as well as my annotations in Races in Chaos and Kind Unto Kind. See my: S.T.E.C. on Ruth, S.T.E.C. on James 2 / Rahab, S.T.E.C. on Genesis / Judges, as well as my Apologetic Expositions on Isaiah 56.]


Prior to  California's Supreme Court ruling of Perez v. Sharp (1948) no United States' court ever ruled against the law criminalizing interracial marriage.  It's pretty amazing that our Founders did not know what was "Constitutional" and that "unconstitutional" laws were on the books for nearly 200 years before the modern antichrist interlopers invaded our nation to tell us what is "Constitutional".  In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ILLEGALLY ruled in Loving v. Virginia that anti-miscegenation laws were "unconstitutional".  Are they really that stupid or are they all paid conspirators, or were they all blackmailed...?  Do they think our Founders did not know what was CONSTITUTIONAL?  NONE of those "Justices" belonged on that high court.

It is also illogical and anti-intellectual and disingenuous in light of the modern insanity of mentally deranged people who are legislatively considered "to be" WHATEVER they "identify with", but now they are denying that "right" to Warren.

The bottom line is dishonesty: Mixed blooded people identify as being white when it is to their advantage, and when the political wind swings left so do they... such cannot be trusted by their actions as well as their identity.  South Africa had the only Biblical Model in Apartheid ("apartness").

The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, No. 55 of 1949, was an Apartheid law in South Africa that prohibited marriages between "Europeans" and "non-Europeans". It was one of the first legislative acts passed following the National Party's rise to power in 1948.

Furthermore, under Apartheid white, mixed, and alien communities were all sacrosanct and preserved them all from encroachments of the others.  First of all, when South Africa was first founded, there were no black or mixed or Indian communities... there were only white communities;* the blacks and other then migrated into white settlements for handouts, work, or to steal.

[* Though whites farmers and those who employed black laborers had little settlements on their property where the blacks lived separately; later, when they grew in greater numbers, they were given villages and they were required to return to their own villages before night, after a day's work.  Privileges are not rights.  Guests don't have rights.  If employees don't like the work rules and environment, find a job in your own nation!]

Under Apartheid after dark, each race was only allowed in their own neighborhood.  That's how it was in the U.S. before so-called "Civil Rights".  Crime rates were very low before then.  To come into white neighborhoods aliens needed "work" or "travel" papers to be in white areas—and they had NO "Right" to be there, it was a privilege, which could be revoked at any time.  The blacks knew they had no right to the neighborhoods, they were not their neighborhoods, and if they did not show respect, they would be barred from even working during the day.

But Apartheid protected the nonwhite neighborhoods too.  Whites (or more properly, Jews) could not "exploit" the black or indian or mixed neighborhoods by owning businesses there.  Only blacks could own businesses in black neighborhoods, only (Malay) Indians could own businesses in their neighborhoods, etc.  But since the breaking down of Apartheid (and even before) many white families had Malay blood (as well as Portuguese and even some black) but kept it hidden and lied about it; but it is clearly evident in their features; not all "white" south Africans are the same.  But when the blacks are raping and dismembering their victims, they won't care if their victims are 1/16 black or 1/8 malay.  Blacks kill and torture their own people.  It is like a feeding frenzy among sharks when there is blood in the water.  Emotions and hormones shut the brain's communication of rational thinking off (what little there is) and adrenaline and hormones take over.

The liberal Marxists evolutionist antichrists, of course, howl against anything like Apartheid; they don't hide the fact they believe though the whites developed the civilization that they think it is the right of the nonwhites to destroy it.  Also, the same subversive politicians and other elite have no qualms about practicing their own economic-Apartheid... and their gated communities, security police keep out all the aliens with which they flood the nation—to destroy the nation.  Once the nation is destroyed, they will simply implement Police State curfews (another form of Apartheid, to keep the lower class masses from collaborating against the elites) and those who violate them will be shot.  There will be no heart-tugging and tear-jerking violins playing after such massacres, violins will be outlawed, along with the "free press" and anyone found video recording the police state-tactics of the elite, will "be found on the street after curfew" and shot as a criminal.

The swine are crossing the threshold into the Master's House.

[See: Animal Farm (1946) George Orwell, a classic; 114p., pb. 10.00 + P&H; ; DVD cartoon, 24.00; DVD 2-in-1, Animal Farm movie & Moby Dick 13.00 + P&H; skillfully reveals the duplicity and corruption of socialism/communism through an allegory in which animals take over a farm, then the pigs begin to change the established rules to be in favor of the pigs at all the other animals’ expense. A must for children and adults.]


It seems Warren's current meltdown is simply larger than her previous ones...


She clearly is part indian.  Those who look at eye, skin, and hair COLOR show their ignorance, and by that criteria, could not distinguish a cow from a horse! 

Clearly, she does NOT have a lot of Indian DNA; but no one as far as I can remember ever claimed that she was full indian. 

Cherokee Nation Blasts Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test as ‘Mockery’ and ‘Inappropriate’

Elizabeth Warren,<br />
                  CherokeeGetty Images 15 Oct 20187323
also, this is scary... how is she not in a mental ward, let alone in congress...?
and this is more shameless desperation


This also is funny, but is completely ignorant of the real issue of Indian DNA


This "scientific" article seems to contain disinformation.  HOW can any of a person's ancestors contribute NO DNA to an individual's biological identity?  I think this is a case of the "experts'" own ignorance in thinking that their paradigm of reality is actually reality and that there can be no other actual reality.  They orbit the truth, never landing on it.  Like ants in an ant-farm, they think they understand the world and don't even realize their own limitations, all that they cannot possibly know, and the vast amount of information that know that they misunderstand.
DNA transfer can easily contaminate a sample, and of course, the issue of purposely planting alien DNA in any sample can't be dismissed.

but they don't understand what they think they understand.  If an indian tribe (which many did, as did the Huns, as did the Jews, etc.) captured white people and bred with them, and the scientists claim to have an indian DNA marker, but it is actually of the white DNA in the indians, then what they think is Indian DNA is actually white DNA.  Unless they have a verified 100% pure original sample, there is no way they can untie the DNA fishing snarl accurately.  You can only identify what you actually know and if you misunderstand the data, you misinterpret it.

The truth is: DNA is 100% entirely reliable.  However, the real issue is that scientists do not understand DNA.