Jews Dominate Top Law Schools [Archive] - Vanguard News Network Forum

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 07:41 PM

[From Chain's thread here: http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=22110&highlight=Volokh ]

As taken from Alex Linder's post citing the 10 Top Law Schools-
http://vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=201065&postcount=7 [this is the thread that was lost]
1. Yale
Dink Dean Koh-
http://www.law.yale.edu/outside/html/faculty/hkoh/profile.htm

Dean and Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law
Contact Info
Yale Law School
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520harold.koh@yale.edu
http://www.law.yale.edu/outside/images/faculty/hkoh/profile.JPG
2. Stanford
Jew Dean Kramer-
http://www.law.stanford.edu/faculty/kramer/
deans.office@law.stanford.edu
650/723-4455
http://www.law.stanford.edu/faculty/kramer/arch.jpg
3. Harvard
Jewess Elena Kagan-
MORE DETAILED REFERENCE-
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=21806&highlight=kagan
http://www.law.harvard.edu/dean/
http://www.law.harvard.edu/administration/directory.php
Phone 697-495-4601
http://www.law.harvard.edu/dean/images/kagansitting.jpg
4. Columbia
Jew Dean Schizer-
http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/Fall2004
http://www1.law.columbia.edu/images/Communications/schizer2_outside.jpg
David Schizer, featured in The National Law Journal
Columbia Law School Dean David Schizer, 36, was named to the National Law Journal's annual "40 under 40" list of upcoming lawyers.
Dean Schizer, who just completed his first year as dean, is the youngest dean ever to serve at the Law School.
http://www.law.columbia.edu/misc/contact
435 West 116th St.
New York, NY 10027-7297
(212) 854-2640
Admissions@law.columbia.edu
5. New York University-
Jew Dean Revesz- http://www.law.nyu.edu/prospective/welcome.html
http://www.law.nyu.edu/prospective/revesz.gif
SECOND PHOTO HERE-
http://www.law.nyu.edu/alumni/images/revesz.jpg
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BM2VBOCHGzcJ:www.hjm.org.il/info29/info29eng.asp++Revesz%2Brabbi&hl=en
The scholarship named after Dr. Mordechai Revesz – established by his late widow, Dr. Thea Revesz – was awarded this year to Mr. Tzvi Hartman for his doctoral dissertation on "Transylvanian Jewry between the two World Wars". 6. University Of Chicago
Jew Dean Saul (a lovely first name) Levmore- (How about some "Lev" LESS?)
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/images/faculty/levmore.jpg
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective/deanletter.html

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/contact.html
The University of Chicago Law School
1111 E. 60th St., Chicago, IL 60637
phone: 773-702-9494
admissions@law.uchicago.edu
llm-admissions@law.uchicago.edu
7. University California At Berkeley Law-
Nig Dean Edley-
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/news/2003/chris%20edley%20named%20dean.html
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/news/images/edley.jpg
8. University Of Michigan At Ann Arbor
Jew Dean Caminker-
http://cgi2.www.law.umich.edu/_FacultyBioPage/facultybiopagenew.asp?ID=40
http://www.law.umich.edu/images/FacBioImages/caminker.gif
"Caminker+Rabbi"-
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=caminker%2Brabbi
MORE CAMINKER PHOTOS HERE-
http://images.google.com/images?q=Evan%20H.%20Caminker%20&hl=en&lr=&safe=active&sa=N&tab=wi
9. University Of Pennsylvania
White Man Dean Fitts- (and "Bernard G. Segal" professor of law)
http://www.law.upenn.edu/about/welcome.html
http://www.law.upenn.edu/about/images/mfitts.jpg
10. White Man Dean Jeffries-
http://www.law.virginia.edu/lawweb/lawweb2.nsf/0aee13661173471f852566cc007da682/bf6bf123fa52915e852569ff00579ef6?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,dean
http://www.law.virginia.edu/home2002/images/uvalawyer/fall02/jeffriesbw.jpg
John C. Jeffries refers to Vanguard News Network-
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:6YVRLlnEIBcJ:www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/03/22/hate+john+c.+jeffries%2Bjewish&hl=en
John C. Jeffries Jr., dean of the law school at Virginia, which had a number of professors named, said in a statement: “Despicable hate-mongering is facilitated by the Internet. For reasons both technological and legal, such speech is impossible to control. It should nonetheless be condemned and, to the extent possible, ignored.”

...Hate Group Casts a Wider Net
A few weeks ago, participants on an anti-Semitic Web site became angry when a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles refused to participate in an exchange of e-mail messages.

The professor was Jewish, and the Web site responded by placing photographs of and biographic material about UCLA professors and anti-Semitic diatribes online. In recent days, the Web site — Vanguard News Network — has expanded its campaign, which it says is designed to draw attention to the high percentage of Jewish professors on law schools’ faculties.

The Web site is now publishing a variety of information — photographs, results of Google searches, phone numbers — of faculty members who are Jewish (or have Jewish-sounding names) at leading law schools all over the United States.

Among the institutions who have faculty members discussed by name on the Web site are Georgetown, Harvard, New York, Stanford and Yale Universities; and the Universities of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Most of the comments attack Jewish faculty members at law schools, with a theme being that they make up a larger share of law school faculties than do Jews in the U.S. population, and that this over-representation signifies Jewish control of American society.

But some of the professors attacked are not Jewish or law professors. A black female professor is described as “Mammy Stormtrooper for Jooz.”

And a few professors who are listed teach in other disciplines. Harry Jaffa, a professor emeritus of government at Claremont McKenna College, is described by one of the Web site’s authors (verbatim) as “a troll jew at CMC, next to my school, Pomona, in Claremont. He’s the major Lincoln liar — the leader of the school that refurbishes reality to fit current jewish political needs, ie claiming lincoln was a liberator rather than dictator.”

Jaffa, author of such books as Crisis of the House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, says that he is Jewish and he does believe Lincoln was a liberator. The site on which he is listed generally sickens him.

“These people are old-fashioned racists who are defenders of slavery,” Jaffa said, adding that it was “a badge of honor” to be hated by the people who produce Vanguard News Network.

Several professors contacted said that they were just learning that they were being discussed on the Web site, and some said that they were shook up by being there.

Carl C. Monk, executive director of the Association of American Law Schools, said he was “very concerned” about law school faculty members being singled out for being Jewish — or for any discriminatory reason.
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that the Web site’s tactics were particularly offensive because of the pattern of anti-Semites’ first trying to publicly identify Jews, and then waiting for others to attack them in various ways. “History has taught us that this is the way it starts, and then all it takes is one crazy person.”

The Vanguard News Network, he said, “is all about hate, to facilitate bigotry, prejudice, racism and anti-Semitism.”

Steve B

August 15th, 2008, 07:52 PM

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 08:03 PM

[From Craig Cobb, slightly edited]

Let's move on through the top 19 law schools...

For numbers 11 through 19 (9 spots) we have:
4 Jews,
1 black,
1 white feminist feminist,
and 3 White men.

11. Duke Law
Dean White woman Jewized feminist, Bartlett-
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=Katharine+T.+Bartlett%2Blesbian
http://www.law.duke.edu/admis/dean.html
REFERENCE Bartlett's "Feminist Legal Theory"-
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=Katharine+T.+Bartlett%2Blesbian
http://www.law.duke.edu/images/admis/deanNav.jpg

12. Northwestern Law
White man lawyer and PhD in sociology, Van Zandt-
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/vanzanda/vanzanda.html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/vanzanda/vanzanda.jpg

13. Cornell Law
White Dean Schwab-
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/misc/MESSAGE4.HTM
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/images/DeanStewartSchwab.jpg

14. Georgetown Law
Jew Dean Aleinikoff
http://www.law.georgetown.edu/dean/images/AleinikoffWeb.jpg

15. University Texas, Austin Law
White Dean Powers
http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/profile.php?id=wpowers
http://txtell.lib.utexas.edu/stories/media/p0004-2.jpg

16. UCLA Law
Jew Dean Schill
http://www.law.ucla.edu/home/index.asp?page=684
Here our old Lefkow speech expert, Jew Volokh, trumpets the Jew news-
http://volokh.com/posts/1087844302.shtml
http://www.law.ucla.edu/images/michael_h._schill.jpg

17. Vanderbilt
Jew Dean Rubin-
http://tennessean.com/education/archives/05/01/63918339.shtml?Element_ID=63918339
http://tennessean.com/education/archives/05/01/63918903.jpg
http://www.wm.edu/law/cnews/show_news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1107318860&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3&
Professor Edward L. Rubin of the University of Pennsylvania Law School will present the 2004-05 Cutler Lecture titled “Sex, Politics and the Constitution” at 3 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 17 in Room 127 at the William and Mary School of Law. The lecture is free and open to the public.

Rubin is Dean-Elect of Vanderbilt University Law School, a position he will assume on July 1, 2005.

18. University of Minnesota
Rangutan Dean Johnson
http://www.law.umn.edu/facultyprofiles/johnsona.htm
http://www.law.umn.edu/uploads/images/188/johnsona.jpg

19. George Washington University Law
Kike Dean Lawrence
http://www.law.gwu.edu/About/
http://www.bu.edu/law/faculty/photos/lawrence.jpg
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0674738454.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:p6bXU02OFgMJ:www.bu.edu/law/faculty/profiles/lawrence/+Frederick+M.+Lawrence%2Bhate&hl=en
Interests: civil procedure; civil rights crimes; criminal law
Frederick Lawrence is one of the nation’s leading civil rights experts. His recent book, Punishing Hate: Bias Crimes Under American Law, examines bias-motivated violence and how the United States deals with such crimes. “For me, it is a great privilege to be able to integrate ideas and issues that I care about deeply into my scholarly work,” he says.

Professor Lawrence began his legal career as clerk to Judge Amalya L. Kearse of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Later, he was named an Assistant United States Attorney for the southern district of New York, where he became Chief of the office’s civil rights unit. Since joining the School of Law faculty in 1988, he has taught courses on civil procedure, criminal law, civil rights enforcement and civil rights crimes. In 1996, he received the Metcalf Award for Excellence in Teaching, the highest of the University’s teaching honors. “I endeavor to teach students how to think about law in its fullest sense and imagine themselves as creative and responsible lawyers,” he says.

Professor Lawrence has been a senior visiting research fellow with the University College London Faculty of Law and has studied bias crimes law in the United Kingdom through a Ford Foundation grant. He has lectured nationally and internationally about bias crime law, testified before Congress in support of federal hate crimes legislation and concerning Justice Department misconduct in Boston and, in 2004, he was a member of the American delegation to the meeting of the Organization and Cooperation in Europe on Enactment and Enforcement of Legislation to Combat Hate-Motivated Crimes. Since 2003, Professor Lawrence has served as chair of the National Legal Affairs Committee of the Anti-Defamation League.
Professor Lawrence also has performed in Carnegie Hall, Lincoln Center and the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts with the New York Choral Society.

Numbers 20-26: four White women and three White men. (Partlett is either a very enabling shabbez goy or a Jew.)

20. University of Notre Dame
White woman Dean O'Hara
http://www.nd.edu/~ndlaw/faculty/facultypages/ohara.html
http://www.nd.edu/~ndlaw/faculty/facultypages/oharanew.jpg

21. Washington University (at St. Louis) Law
White Dean Keating
http://law.wustl.edu/Admissions/index.asp?id=60
http://law.wustl.edu/Images/Admissions/DKeating2.jpg

22. Boston University Law
Maureen A. O'Rourke (presumably White)
http://www.bu.edu/bulletins/law/item01.html
http://www.bu.edu/bridge/archive/2004/05-13/photos/orourke.jpg

23. Emory Law
White Dean Alexander (affordable housing expert)
http://www.law.emory.edu/faculty/facbio2.php?userid=lawfsa
http://www.law.emory.edu/images/facpics/Alexander.jpg

24. University Iowa Law
White woman Dean Jones
http://www.law.uiowa.edu/admissions/dicta.php
http://www.law.uiowa.edu/images/carolyn-jones.php.jpg

25. Washington & Lee University Law
Nominal White man Dean Partlett (MAY be a Jew- CERTAINLY at least a shabbez goy- based on his writings...see below)
http://law.wlu.edu/faculty/facultypictures/partlettd.jpg
http://law.wlu.edu/faculty/profiledetail.asp?id=2
From 1974 to 1975, Partlett served as a senior legal officer for the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department in Canberra, Australia, where he was responsible for policy advice on the Racial Discrimination Act and other related human rights legislation.
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:u2lmz0WePg0J:www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst/supreme-court/1992-analysis-section1.html+partlett%2Bjewish&hl=en
Professor David Partlett explores this delicate balance in "From Red Lion Square to Skokie to the Fatal Shore: Racial Defamation and Freedom of Speech" (1989), 22 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 431, at pp. 459 and 468-69:

26. University Illinois Law (at Urbana)
White woman Dean Hurd-
http://www.law.uiuc.edu/admissions/dean.asp
http://www.law.uiuc.edu/faculty/images/hhurd.jpg

[post from "Fritz Kuhn"]

Chain, you're ahead of the curve as usual. The Jew York Times reports on a Georgetown Law School study of elite law school professors and has found them to be overwhelmingly . . . Democrats! You didn't think they'de use the dreaded J Word, did you? Some truths are too dangerous to mention outside of VNN.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/weekinreview/28liptak.html?ex=1282881600&en=b0ab1a204600ef48&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

PROFESSORS at the best law schools are generally assumed to be overwhelmingly liberal, and now a new study lends proof. But whether the ideological imbalance matters - to the academic environment students encounter, to the kinds of lawyers the schools produce and to the stock of ideas the professors generate - depends on whom you ask.

The study, to be published this fall in The Georgetown Law Journal, analyzes 11 years of records reflecting federal campaign contributions by professors at the top 21 law schools as ranked by U.S. News & World Report. Almost a third of these law professors contribute to campaigns, but of them, the study finds, 81 percent who contributed $200 or more gave wholly or mostly to Democrats; 15 percent gave wholly or mostly to Republicans.

The percentages of professors contributing to Democrats were even more lopsided at some of the most prestigious schools: 91 percent at Harvard, 92 at Yale, 94 at Stanford. At the University of Virginia, on the other hand, contributions were about evenly divided between the parties. The sample sizes at some schools may be too small to allow for comparisons, though it bears noting that by this measure the University of Chicago is slightly more liberal than Berkeley.

. . . I don't think the liberal bias of law school faculties has much impact on the students," said Richard A. Posner, a federal appeals court judge who teaches at the University of Chicago. "Law students are careerists, and for them law school is career preparation, not Sunday chapel."

The profession itself, said Nathaniel Persily, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, may moderate the influence of the academy. "Insofar as an elite law school might push students to the left," Professor Persily said, "corporate law firms might bring them back to the center."

John O. McGinnis, a law professor at Northwestern who prepared the study along with two New York lawyers, Matthew A. Schwartz and Benjamin Tisdell, said it was meant for the most part to present data rather than draw conclusions.

But the study does note an arguable inconsistency in the way law schools approach student admissions and faculty hiring.

When the United States Supreme Court endorsed race-conscious admissions policies in 2003, it based its decision on the importance of ensuring the representation of diverse viewpoints in the classroom.

Law schools that take race into account in admissions decisions, the study says, "open themselves to charges of intellectual inconsistency" if they do not also address the ideological imbalances on their faculties.

The most serious problem pointed to by the study, Professor McGinnis said, is that the ideas generated by the law schools are both uniform and untested.

"It may be," he added, "that the rise of conservative think tanks counterbalances this effect to a degree. As one who believes in markets, I think that alternative institutions in the long run will arise to supply ideas." Even so, he said, "liberal ideas might well be strengthened and made more effective if liberals had to run a more conservative gantlet among their own colleagues when developing them."

M. Kraus

August 15th, 2008, 08:05 PM

http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.php?status=0

Conservative estimate: 30 jews.

Edit: Correction, "only" 29, out of 90 total. Estimate based on internet search
for [name] + jewish.

1. David Barron
2. Lucian A. Bebchuk (alumnus: University of Tel Aviv, University of Haifa)
3. Yochai Benkler (alumnus: Tel Aviv University)
4. Gabriella Blum (alumnus: Tel Aviv University)
5. I. Glenn Cohen
6. Alan M. Dershowitz
7. Noah Feldman
8. John C.P. Goldberg
9. Morton J. Horwitz
10. Elena Kagan (Dean)
11. Daniel J. Meltzer
12. Frank I. Michelman
13. Martha L. Minow
14. Todd D. Rakoff
15. Benjamin Roin
16. David Rosenberg
17. William Rubenstein
18. Benjamin Sachs
19. Steven M. Shavell
20. Jed Shugerman
21. Joseph William Singer
22. Robert H. Sitkoff
23. Kathryn Spier
24. Matthew Stephenson
25. Cass R. Sunstein
26. Laurence H. Tribe (Honorary LH.D., Hebrew University)
27. Lloyd L. Weinreb
28. Jonathan Zittrain
29. Michael Klarman

90 Total

29/90 = 32%

Marse Supial

August 15th, 2008, 08:20 PM

This may not be very constructive but when I try and point out the heavy infestation of jews in top law schools or any law schools for that matter to friends, acquaintances, family, etc. I almost always get a patented response: What does their religion have to do with it?

It's enough to make your average White Nationalist go postal.

THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT!!! THAT IS HOW YOUR AVERAGE WHITE PERSON CONCEPTUALIZES JEWS: WHITE PEOPLE WITH A FUNNY / QUIRKY RELIGION. It was only a few years ago that I saw them that way. I know how hard it is to wake from that slumber. And worse, to the nigger-wise southern religious zealots, jews are like a challenge from God -- souls just begging to be saved. That is the root of the love afair that southern Protestant churches have going on with the Jews.

I had never encountered a jew-wise person 'till I started reading Stormfront, then VNN. As radically racially conscious as my family was toward niggers, there was no one who understood the jew underpinnings of the nigger menace.

We've got to figure out some way to make the average white person cognizant of what jews really are and what motivates them.

The jews' best defensive weapon is their white appearance. There has to be a way to make the average Kwan see through it.

GREL

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 08:57 PM

Marse Supial

August 15th, 2008, 09:04 PM

Chris 14

August 15th, 2008, 09:40 PM

Make sure to double-check those links, Alex:

12. Northwestern Law
White man lawyer and PhD in sociology, Van Zandt-
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/vanzanda/vanzanda.html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/vanzanda/vanzanda.jpg

Dean Van Zandt profile:
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/profiles/DavidVanZandt/

13. Cornell Law
White Dean Schwab-
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/misc/MESSAGE4.HTM
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/images/DeanStewartSchwab.jpg

Dean Schwab:
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/faculty/bio.cfm?id=70

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 09:47 PM

[From The Aryan Alternative #3]

Campus Outrage
Jews Occupy Over 50% of Top-Ten Law School Teaching Slots

HOW COME 2% OF THE POPULATION IS 60% OF
THE FACULTY AT UCLA LAW SCHOOL?

Say hello to the hook-nosed face of “American” law

They’re barely two percent of the population, but research indicates that jews occupy slightly more than half of the teaching slots at America’s top ten law schools. (By ranking of U.S. News & World Report, these are: 1. Yale; 2. Stanford; 3. Harvard; 4. Columbia; 5. NYU; 6. Chicago; 7. Berkeley; 7. Michigan; 7. Pennsylvania; 7. Virginia.) The same people who give you the endless song and dance about overrepresentation of white males in every sector they haven’t yet commandeered for themselves have nepotistically positioned their racial crime syndicate to decide who becomes a power player in 21st-century AmeriKwa -- and they breathe not a word of this prodigious legal enormity to the mass public. The simple fact is, jews and people trained to think like them exercise an effective monopoly over the legal profession. In a country in which you can hardly pick your nose without counsel, that fact is grounds for some very serious thought about where we’re headed, and what’s going to be left of normal whites like you and me when we get there.

VNN researched the matter online (you can verify all the findings, the names and pictures, online at vnnforum.com (http://vnnforum.com) ). This was easy to do, since all these schools list their professors by name. It is clear from the very look and feel of these sites that the attitude of the folks training our top lawyers is the same as the jewish business owner who said, “I only hire jews, women, and gays.” Normal white males need not apply, and the ones who do attend these schools, are either self-hating liberals to start with, or bent that way after Prof. Selznik’s “words mean what they have to” course. Simply look at the graphics used by these top ten schools to see the future this type envisions: women and coloreds and jews, with nary a white male to be found. This is the utopia the jew prepares for our race. When they say “abolish,” they mean it. White genocide is very plainly the agenda of the jews who control our law schools.

Funny thing about jews. When they’re what they call underrepresented (the term
they use when they’re not overrepresented to the degree of their liking), it’s because evil white males discriminate against them. But when they’re overrepresented, it’s because they value education, and work harder than anyone else! You can’t win with these jews! If you describe their games, you’re an anti-semite. You begin to see how it was that Matt Hale was denied his earned law degree solely because of his politics. If we don’t live in under a Jewish Tyranny, then what would you call it? Says one analyst, who you can bet you’ll not be seeing on CourtTV anytime soon: What has happned is Weimar all over again. The jews flocked to America, and whined, worked and wheedled until they took over all positions of power. Now they discriminate against others, and nobody talks or writes about it. But we all pay the price, and the price, in time, is our genocide. Everything in society pushes the same way. We face a coordinated but concealed oppression. It is the purpose of this newspaper to remove the cover from AmeriKwan society, and reveal to you the shrieking stringpullers and their shenanigans. Have no doubt: the complete jewish takeover of law schools is one of the major unreported stories of the 21st century.

How does the process work? We asked one anonymous expert: Jews are uniquely favored in the admissions process for a number of reasons. Firstly they are obsessive - they will study for ten hours for an exam which may require only a single hour of work. They are also scheming and sly - they will identify classes where the professor gives out high grades and avoid hard sciences where the class average is a B, or even a C. They will go out of their way to pad their resumes, get recommendations from powerful friends and family and defer their (limited) social lives to ensure that they ace the entrance exams. It's not so simple as the Dean saying Feinberg in, Flynn out. Jews are socialized from a young age to focus on fields where they can keep their fingernails clean, earn a lot of money, impress the relatives and use the argumentative skills. Many Whites who could intellectually wipe the floor with these jews have decided that the Talmudic world of legal "scholarship" is a waste of life - these Whites are scientists, engineers, builders, inventors, designers and business owners.

Why do the “top ten” matter? They don’t, necessarily. If you want to hang your shingle in Tucson, a U. of Arizona degree will serve. But if you want a federal clerkship, a job at a major corporate law firm, a chance to practice appellate law, the opportunity to be published in a major law journal or a shot at a job teaching at a law school, you better be in the top 10 or 20. And if you want to sit on the Federal bench or even the Supreme Court, you better be from Harvard, Yale or Stanford.

The nazis in Germany, as “haters” in America today, were inspired by just the sort of jewish takeover of institutions described above. They didn’t like the jewing of their native culture, and they reacted to vomit the jews. A similar reaction builds today in America. (Again, for background on all this see vnnforum.com (http://vnnforum.com) .)

The subject of extreme, almost unbelievable, jewish overrepresentation in law schools is a subject that jews are extremely touchy about. We first got into it with a jew Volokh at UCLA. After receiving some snotty comments, we decided to take a look at just how many hooknosed profs there were at this public institution. Turns out that over fifty percent of this PUBLIC SCHOOL’s law slots are held by jews. An newspaper called Inside Higher Education wrote an article about our posting the photos and names of a few of the dozens of jews polluting UCLA’s law school. Said Volokh, with his race’s characteristic brazenness: “So, yeah, we’re Jews. Yeah, we’re overrepresented on university faculties, in law and medicine, in the Senate, on the Supreme Court.” But only because they’re so smart, you see. Certainly not because they’re ethnic nepotists who discriminate against others. It’s only the whites who built this country and its institutions without any jewish help guilty of that. We encourage you, the college student receiving this paper, to test what we say. Check out your own school’s jew level, whether undergrad, graduate, or law. Your real education has just begun.

[html version of PDF of TAA #3 (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:geaSPrsi3YEJ:www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/taa/vnntaa3.pdf+%22jews+occupy+over+50%25+of+Top-Ten+Law+School+Teaching+Slots%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)]

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 10:35 PM

[Inside Higher Education wrote an article mentioning our expose after jew Eugene Volokh started crying.]

Hate Group Casts a Wider Net

A few weeks ago, participants on an anti-Semitic Web site became angry when a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles refused to participate in an exchange of e-mail messages.

The professor was Jewish, and the Web site responded by placing photographs of and biographic material about UCLA professors and anti-Semitic diatribes online. In recent days, the Web site — Vanguard News Network — has expanded its campaign, which it says is designed to draw attention to the high percentage of Jewish professors on law schools’ faculties.

The Web site is now publishing a variety of information — photographs, results of Google searches, phone numbers — of faculty members who are Jewish (or have Jewish-sounding names) at leading law schools all over the United States.

Among the institutions who have faculty members discussed by name on the Web site are Georgetown, Harvard, New York, Stanford and Yale Universities; and the Universities of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Most of the comments attack Jewish faculty members at law schools, with a theme being that they make up a larger share of law school faculties than do Jews in the U.S. population, and that this over-representation signifies Jewish control of American society.

But some of the professors attacked are not Jewish or law professors. A black female professor is described as “Mammy Stormtrooper for Jooz.”

And a few professors who are listed teach in other disciplines. Harry Jaffa, a professor emeritus of government at Claremont McKenna College, is described by one of the Web site’s authors (verbatim) as “a troll jew at CMC, next to my school, Pomona, in Claremont. He’s the major Lincoln liar — the leader of the school that refurbishes reality to fit current jewish political needs, ie claiming lincoln was a liberator rather than dictator.”

Jaffa, author of such books as Crisis of the House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, says that he is Jewish and he does believe Lincoln was a liberator. The site on which he is listed generally sickens him.

“These people are old-fashioned racists who are defenders of slavery,” Jaffa said, adding that it was “a badge of honor” to be hated by the people who produce Vanguard News Network.

Several professors contacted said that they were just learning that they were being discussed on the Web site, and some said that they were shook up by being there.

John C. Jeffries Jr., dean of the law school at Virginia, which had a number of professors named, said in a statement: “Despicable hate-mongering is facilitated by the Internet. For reasons both technological and legal, such speech is impossible to control. It should nonetheless be condemned and, to the extent possible, ignored.”

Carl C. Monk, executive director of the Association of American Law Schools, said he was “very concerned” about law school faculty members being singled out for being Jewish — or for any discriminatory reason.
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that the Web site’s tactics were particularly offensive because of the pattern of anti-Semites’ first trying to publicly identify Jews, and then waiting for others to attack them in various ways. “History has taught us that this is the way it starts, and then all it takes is one crazy person.”

The Vanguard News Network, he said, “is all about hate, to facilitate bigotry, prejudice, racism and anti-Semitism.”

— Scott Jaschik

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=16735&highlight=%22Inside+Higher+Education%22

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 10:43 PM

I'm not sure I'm following you, Alex.

GREL

Lead them in a roundabout way. Don't start by asserting the fact that jews dominate law schools, if that gets their back up. Leave the jew out, to start, and get them to join you in discussing what domination means. In fact, don't even use that word. Get them to agree with you on something related to our decline. One of the symptoms. Then gradually lead them around to the cause. Prick their imagination. Get them to think about how they would go about destroying this country, if that were their goal. What kind of policies would they pursue? What kind of laws would they make? How would they cover things in the media. Next step, you say, well, we have those policies, don't we. Get their agreement, step by step. Say, do you think these policies are accidents? Or are the results predictable and intentional. If they say the imposers meant well, point out that whatever the policy is, it's been going on much longer than is necessary to detect the awful results. Meaning that in fact the results are what is sought. THEN it's time to get to the nature of the seekers.

Get them to agree on one thing, then lead them step by step to your conclusion, drawing it out of them socratically.

"Would you agree that lawyers have a lot of power in our society?"

Who wouldn't agree to that?

Then it's just a matter of working your way back. Their reaction will tell you how to do it, what speed, which words to use.

You don't persuade people right off. What you do is, if you do it right, is show them that they already know the truth, agree with you, they just hadn't made the necessary connections. The data were there. They know society sucks. They know lawyers made it that way. What they don't know is that most of those lawyers are jews; all of those lawyers are trained to think like jews; the jews are pushing an anti-white agenda. It's your simple job to teach them the proper connections and new associations.

Marse Supial

August 15th, 2008, 11:01 PM

You don't persuade people right off. What you do is, if you do it right, is show them that they already know the truth, agree with you, they just hadn't made the necessary connections. The data were there. They know society sucks. They know lawyers made it that way. What they don't know is that most of those lawyers are jews; all of those lawyers are trained to think like jews; the jews are pushing an anti-white agenda. It's your simple job to teach them the proper connections and new associations.

Thank you. That's a lot easier to digest. And that's exactly what happened to me from reading the posts here at VNN.

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 11:14 PM

What was it Jefferson said, something about a long train of abuses directed at the same end? That's the way to pursue the argument. The same agenda is pushed, right? Never varies. Give them examples and parallels, ask them if their experience is different from yours.

Things are bad?

Check.

Something made them that way?

Check.

Jews are that something.

If not check, then at least you've opened them to the idea, whether or not they can admit it at the moment. Most men, white men, are extremely egotistical, especially when it comes to their own opinion. They like to think they come up with their own opinions, bu this is usually not the case. Women know how to manipulate men by MAKING THEM THINK THEY CAME UP WITH IT. The same technique works to teach them about jews. Be humble and show them they ALREADY KNOW what you're saying. They agree with you. You're just reminding them. There's usually some fear, and felt need to keep up a facade. But if you get that reaction, you've accomplished your mission. They have intellectually accepted your point. They just have to let it germinate for a time. To digest it in private.

Ed in CT

August 15th, 2008, 11:18 PM

Here's a list of Yale Law School Professors - A to B

1) Howard E. Abrams

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/abrams_howard.JPG

2) Bruce Ackerman (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/BAckerman.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/ackerman_bruce.jpg

3) Dapo Akande (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/DAkande.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/akande_dapko.JPG

4) Ian Ayres (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/ianayres.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/ayres_ian.jpg

5) Jack M. Balkin (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/JBalkin.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/balkin_jack.jpg

6) Aharon Barak (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/ABarak.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/Barak.jpg

7) Lea Brilmayer (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/LBrilmayer.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/brilmayer_lea.jpg

8) Richard Brooks (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/RBrooks.htm)

http://www.law.yale.edu/images/Faculty/brooks_richard.jpg

I left out the visiting professors, both from Yale and those imported for a semester.

Looks like in our A to B catagory, we have jews with a smattering of magic negros.
No Whites to be seen.

If you'd like to view the entire Yale Law School Faculty, just give this (http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/faculty.htm) link a click

Alex Linder

August 15th, 2008, 11:19 PM

seeer

August 17th, 2008, 10:08 AM

The whole legal industry is a scam, it is the only industry a working adult cannot train for since there are no true part-time school, now that we have nurse practitioners. Why is it necessary for 8 years (including licensing exam prep) to write a will?

It is also the only industry to control a branch of government. Originally most lawyers were farmers that did law in the winter as a side business so many trades were represented.

Kikes control the legal industry, so they control a whole branch of government.

Bardamu

August 17th, 2008, 11:36 AM

What if your worst enemy were given Godlike power to rule your life? Would that suck or what?

How would you go about messing up society, if that were your goal? What would you do? What kind of laws would you pass?

Don't start with jews, end with jews.

Meet them where they are, bring them back to the truth.

The problem I come against trying to educate (edjewcate) Jew-ignorant White men (the vast majority) is that none of them read and therefore I cannot give them a starter book to study. I've been trying to come up with a name for this type of cultural illiteracy. All these men can read the newspaper but they can't read through a book.

jimbo!

August 17th, 2008, 01:53 PM

If they didn't hear it on Fox, or it goes against what Fox says, then it's going to scare them. You overcome this by dealing with them in private, patiently, and presumbaly they trust you and your character. These can overcome the built in, animal, Authority-is-right bias in the type of men we're trying to reach.

There's no one way to do it - it depends on the specific person you're trying to reach, and the circumstances of your conversation.

If I'm with a farmer, I would talk one way. Slowly, patiently. If I'm with a smartass like me, then I'll try a little mocking, to get his competitive spirit up. Oh, you didn't know that 6/10 law school deans were jews. Yeah, I'm sure that doesn't affect anything, with an appropriate chuckle. Smart people hate to be thought not hip to what's REALLY going on, and this angle can be played to.

Footnotes, documentation, proof - these are just playing parts. The game is in using them, yes, but more so ourselves, to get the message across in the way best fit to serve the specific person we're one on one with

Alex....fair fckn DINKUM, m8!.....are these sorts of white people even worth bothering about?

wouldn't it be better to focus on sections of our race having more potential?

like: white children under, say, 17yrs old and white people "on the verge" of becoming WNs (like: staunch Ron Paul supporters)

the above two groups PLUS some-one who has had/has @ least some connection(s) with some WP or WN group are the only white people that interest me.....when you expand that to include, say, some-one who has just stuck $50 in the mail for one of our "fund drives" or even sent such in the past to some-one like Klassen or Pierce, then, all those sub-groups constitute a pretty large 'target audience', wouldn't you say?

why waste our time on white adults who are 'tards, lemmings & couch spuds?

if they're not WNs by now.....wtf makes you think they'll EVER be?

i hate to say it, but that was the ghastly mistake that Matt Hale made...he seemed to think that, if you had a white skin, you were basically OK.....hence: his getting 'duped' by that Tony Evola (sic) character!

in this day & age, those white people who do not fall into one of the above three 'groups' are little better than ZOG-bots it seems to me.....how can they be trusted?

in a sense, they are MORE DANGEROUS to us than jews....they are 'sleeper agents'/'fifth columnists' just waiting to be 'activated' by a few ZOG-"word-triggers" like "hater", "nazi", "bigot", "white supremicist", "Holocaust denier" &c!

i know you have changed the format & approach of this Forum to try & appeal to "a wider audience".....but, honestly, do you think such people are even "worth the effort"?

i have no time or patience for them .... and would not trust them for ONE INSTANT un-less they engaged in some MAJOR ACTIVISM to "prove them-selves".....i'll leave it up to yr imaginations as to what such 'activism' would entail!

seems to me, it's "too late in the day" to accept 'last-minute conversions' from those who were just recently total ZOG-enablers!

yr a better man than me if you've got the patience, forbearance & fortitude to 'prosletyise' to such a crew! :(

(jimbo!)

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q197/__jimbo__/picture-7.gif

Revisionist

August 17th, 2008, 02:29 PM

The problem I come against trying to educate (edjewcate) Jew-ignorant White men (the vast majority) is that none of them read and therefore I cannot give them a starter book to study. I've been trying to come up with a name for this type of cultural illiteracy. All these men can read the newspaper but they can't read through a book.

I believe this problem can be reduced to banal things like quality of life. The average, middle class White since 1945 has been in a position to enjoy unprecedented purchasing power and has largely been able to avoid life-threatening toil in order to provide for himself. I think that in the absence of direct and immediately ascertainable threats to survival and/or quality of life, most Gentiles simply are not capable of apprehending hostility as exhibited by others.

Consider this: Edward I formally expelled the Jews from England in the 13th century...these measures were greeted with mass approval, not because the serfs were well-read, but because Jewish power hurt them in an everyday, physically ascertainable capacity. In other words, most men be them knaves, paladins, intellectuals or fools are only willing to assign enemy status to X if they can demonstrate ''X hurts me''. In 2008, if you wish to convince people that they are being hurt by Jews, you must appeal to values that are not material in quality...that is a rather daunting task I think.

Marse Supial

August 17th, 2008, 02:29 PM

The whole legal industry is a scam, it is the only industry a working adult cannot train for since there are no true part-time school, now that we have nurse practitioners. Why is it necessary for 8 years (including licensing exam prep) to write a will?

There are a number of law schools that offer adult study programs -- night classes, weekend classes, flex classes and such. They are usually in the larger cities, but it's not impossible.

If all you were going to do was draft simple wills, you could get by with a lot less than the full curriculum. But law school doesn't work like that. You get the full program -- Property law, Evidence law, Contract law, Constitutional law, Tort law, Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Criminal Law, Sales & Financing, Corporate Law.

Plus, all of this stuff ties in together. Wills can't be separatied from property law. Property law can't be completely separated from contract law which also ties into Constitutional law &c.

It is also the only industry to control a branch of government. Originally most lawyers were farmers that did law in the winter as a side business so many trades were represented.

Kikes control the legal industry, so they control a whole branch of government.

I wouldn't say that jews control the law. They are vastly over-represented and that needs to change. But by far and away, the majority of lawyers and judges are white men. Now you wouldn't get that impression from watching TV where the judge is ALWAYS a negress, but that's TV.

Revisionist

August 17th, 2008, 02:36 PM

I wouldn't say that jews control the law. They are vastly over-represented and that needs to change. But by far and away, the majority of lawyers and judges are white men. Now you wouldn't get that impression from watching TV where the judge is ALWAYS a negress, but that's TV.

Depends on what is meant by ''control the law''. Marbury v. Madison was the mandate for judicial sovereignty, and it was fully realized in the Civil War amendments, IMO. Since Roosevelt, the Fed. judiciary has essentially become a Rabbinical sovereign.

Jews don't ''control the law'' in a day to day sense in all places, but they certainly hold ultimate authority over its parameters and the substantive rights therein.

Marse Supial

August 17th, 2008, 02:39 PM

Slightly off topic:

The legal field is so flooded with aspiring new lawyers right now it's scary. These kids are coming out of law school and many of them have absolutely no hope of finding a job in the field that they have spent 3 years and up to 100K training for. Some law firms are laying off lawyers.

Yes, experienced lawyers still make a pretty good living, but I wouldn't commend the idea of law school to anyone right now unless it has absolutely been your life-long ambition.

GREL

M. Kraus

August 17th, 2008, 06:13 PM

http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/faculty.htm

Again, I've left out "borderline" names. There's probably a few
more jews on the faculty than what is listed here.

1. Howard E. Abrams
2. Jack M. Balkin
3. Aharon Barak (alumnus, Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
4. Robert A. Burt
5. Morris L. Cohen
6. Jules L. Coleman
7. Daniel J. Freed
8. Paul Gewirtz
9. Dan M. Kahan
10.Paul W. Kahn
11.Jay Katz
12.S. Blair Kauffman
13.Anthony T. Kronman
14.Yair Listokin
15.Daniel Markovits
16.W. Michael Reisman (alumnus, Hebrew University)
17.Judith Resnik
18.Susan Rose-Ackerman
19.Jed Rubenfeld
20.Peter H. Schuck
21.Alan Schwartz
22.Ian Shapiro
23.Scott Shapiro
24.Robert J. Shiller
25.Reva Siegel
26.Dan Simon (alumnus, Tel Aviv University)
27.Robert Solomon
28.Alex Stein (alumnus, Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
29.Lior Strahilevitz
30.Stephen Wizner (Sackler Professor of Law at Tel Aviv University)

98 total

30/98 = 31%

Hugh Lincoln

August 17th, 2008, 08:27 PM

There is a white gentile critic of the "overlawyering" of America named Walter Olson, who runs a blog called "overlawyered.com" I read this blog, and his other writings, and he's got an Aryan instinct for the big scam, but says nothing about Jews. In fact, after several years of blogging, he took on a Jewish sidekick named Ted Frank, whose posts are greasy and self-serving compared to the cool and witty writing of Olson. The gentile-Jew split manifests itself in their own postings: Olson will decry such things as Holocaust denial laws in Europe, while Frank enjoys bashing Ron Paul as a crank.

M. Kraus

August 18th, 2008, 12:52 PM

http://www.law.stanford.edu/directory/

1.Joseph Bankman
2.Paul Brest
3.Joshua Cohen
4.William Cohen
5.Michele Landis Dauber
6.Barbara H. Fried
7.Lawrence M. Friedman
8.Paul Goldstein
9.Joseph A. Grundfest
10.Thomas C. Heller
11.Pamela S. Karlan
12.Mark G. Kelman
13.Amalia D. Kessler
14.Michael Klausner
15.Larry Kramer (Dean)
16.Lawrence Lessig
17.Lawrence C. Marshall (alumnus,Beth Hatalmud College,Jerusalem)
18.David W. Mills (co-chairman of the Board of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund)
19.Alison D. Morantz
20.A. Mitchell Polinsky
21.Robert L. Rabin
22.David Rosenhan
23.Jane Schacter
24.Jeff Strnad
25.Allen Weiner
26.Robert Weisberg

66 Total

26/66 = 39%

M. Kraus

August 18th, 2008, 06:46 PM

http://www.law.columbia.edu/faculty/full_time_fac

1.Mark Barenberg
2.Barbara Aronstein Black
3.Lori Fisler Damrosch
4.Ariela Dubler
5.Jeffrey A. Fagan (Research/Courses Taught: Racial Profiling; Social Contagion of Violence)
6.Jane C. Ginsburg
7.Suzanne Goldberg
8.Victor P. Goldberg
9.Harvey J. Goldschmid
10.Zohar Goshen (alumnus, Hebrew University)
11.Jack Greenberg (Argued before U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education, 1954)
12.Philip Hamburger
13.Michael A. Heller
14.Avery W. Katz
15.Benjamin L. Liebman
16.Carol B. Liebman
17.James S. Liebman
18.Lance Liebman
19.Eben Moglen
20.Joseph Raz (alumnus, Hebrew University)
21.Daniel C. Richman
22.Peter Rosenblum
23.Charles F. Sabel
24.Carol Sanger
25.Barbara Schatz
26.David M. Schizer (Dean)
27.Michael I. Sovern (alumnus, Tel Aviv University)
28.Jane M. Spinak
29.Susan P. Sturm

87 total

29/87 = 33%

Mike Parker

August 19th, 2008, 06:59 AM

Anyone who wonders why this is important should sometime look up the backgrounds of presidential appointees and other political appointees in the executive branch. They are at the subcabinet level in the cabinet departments (such as assistant secretary and deputy assistant secretary), and in similar posts in regulatory agencies. These are the people who really make public policy, by channeling information up to the better-known higher-ups, by framing the major alternatives (and disregarding any others), and by directly making all sorts of lesser decisions that can add up to major impact. One example is the role of the Jew Douglas Feith in making the case (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070226/dreyfuss) for the Iraq war, but this goes on in all agencies. These people are especially powerful in the regulatory agencies, which are subject to very limited oversight by any other branch of government.

You’ll find that a huge share of these political appointees are lawyers, most from the brand name law schools featured in this thread (Feith went to #14 Georgetown, following #1 Harvard College). That is true even excluding specifically legal positions such as at the Department of Justice and the General Counsel of other agencies. That is, most of these lawyers are not practicing law, they are deciding the substance of public policy. It may seem strange, in that there are people who seem to have more relevant credentials to do that, such as degrees in public policy itself, and in all sorts of technical fields related to specific policies. Those people are of course in government, more commonly as civil servants. But more often than not they work for politically-appointed lawyers, and carry out those lawyers’ wishes.

I’m not sure why this is, and it isn’t as typical in Europe. It may just be that lawyers’ facility with words (quibbling) helps them to sell dubious policies to others like themselves (such as Congressmen, also mostly lawyers) and to the media. It may also be that the big D.C. law firms are convenient, lucrative places to be when out of office. Whatever the case, these lawyers are immensely powerful, and who’s indoctrinated them and to believe what should be of interest to the rest of us.

ernst blofeld

August 22nd, 2008, 03:19 PM

as Mario Puzzo wrote in The Godfather, "a lawyer with a briefcase can steal more than a hundred men with guns."

bedford

August 27th, 2008, 11:17 AM

I remember reading an article in The Economist magazine that came
out in the early 90's about the large number of lawyers in America and
the negative effect it had on GNP. The article stated that the "ideal"
number of lawyers for economic efficiency would be no more than
400,000. I believe at the time there were 1 million lawyers in America.
So basically all these lawyers slow down the economy by a signifigant
amount. America needs more scientists and engineers and fewer
lawyers in order to compete with the rest of the world.

seeer

September 1st, 2008, 12:02 PM

There are a number of law schools that offer adult study programs -- night classes, weekend classes, flex classes and such.

If all you were going to do was draft simple wills, you could get by with a lot less than the full curriculum.

Plus, all of this stuff ties in together. Wills can't be separatied from property law. Wow, they sure have you fooled. Those part-time law school have to be done in 4 years, its just an extra year so it is not really part-time.

Full curriculum? Someone with a bachelor in paralegal studies covered all those classes. Louisiana has Civil Law Notaries that are allowed to draft contracts, wills, trusts, do house closings, etc. and the world does not come to an end.

Including lost wages it cost $300,000 to become a lawyer, paid for my the government and/or the lawyer. It is a scam to keep the competition out.

Marse Supial

September 2nd, 2008, 08:20 AM

Wow, they sure have you fooled. Those part-time law school have to be done in 4 years, its just an extra year so it is not really part-time.

The law school that I went to allowed 6 years for part time students to graduate. I think that's pretty much the standard now.

Full curriculum? Someone with a bachelor in paralegal studies covered all those classes. Louisiana has Civil Law Notaries that are allowed to draft contracts, wills, trusts, do house closings, etc. and the world does not come to an end.

True. There's a lot of legal work that can be done very competently by non-lawyers, and is in fact. In our office, paralegals usually do stuff like wills and house closings and other paperwork heavy stuff. Then the lawyer has a meeting with the client to make sure the client's wishes are clear and looks over the paperwork and makes sure everything is good to go.

Including lost wages it cost $300,000 to become a lawyer, paid for my the government and/or the lawyer.

It ain't cheap, but 300K? Tuition at the Ole Miss Law School this fall is only 10k per year. http://www.law.olemiss.edu/admissions/faq.html Books run you another $1200 per year if you buy them all new. I suppose that if you were making close to 100K per year and quit your job to go to law school, then yeah, it might add up to that. But most folks go in right out of undergrad and go to law school and work part time while they're in school.

It is a scam to keep the competition out.

I guess any licensing requirement, study requirement, tuition requirement, character requirement &c. has the effect of keeping competition out. But I don't think that's the primary objective of it.

But I'm perfectly comfortable with having some minimum standards that people have to meet before practicing law. As much so as with practicing medicine. There are enough idiots practicing law even with the requirements. I don't want to think about what it would be like if all that was required to be licensed was to raise a hand.

But as the barriers to entry go, law school is the easy part. The bar exam is what's a bitch. Different states have different degrees of difficulty, and suprisingly, Mississippi's is considered to be the 5th hardest in the nation. Three 8 hour days of solid testing. A group of niggers had a lawsuit against the bar association a few years ago complaining that the bar exam was too hard and washed out too many negros who had successfully completed law school but couldn't pass the bar exam.

GREL

seeer

September 2nd, 2008, 08:50 PM

The law school that I went to allowed 6 years for part time students to graduate. I think that's pretty much the standard now. Everywhere I went says ABA rules says a max of 4 years. Ole Miss does not have part time

There's a lot of legal work that can be done very competently by non-lawyers, and is in fact. In our office, paralegals usually do stuff like wills As long as it in your office?

It ain't cheap, but 300K? Tuition at the Ole Miss Law School this fall is only 10k per year. Ole Miss is public, so the taxpayer pays, I also included years of lost wages.

licensing requirement, study requirement, tuition requirement, character requirement &c. has the effect of keeping competition out.

But I'm perfectly comfortable with having some minimum standards that people have to meet before practicing law. As much so as with practicing medicine. Requirements to practice law to ripoff the public are MAXimum requirements. 8 years including bar review?
1. If the paralegals can do it, why can't people go straight to paralegals like in Louisiana? (Civil Law Notaries)

2. Ole Miss is a public school, so the taxpayer is paying. My figures including lost wages are accurate.

3. Almost all countries only require a bachelor degree to be a lawyer. You did not explain why someone with a bachelor degree in paralegal studies, 10 years experience, pass the National Certified paralegal exam, the state exam, background check will be put in jail for writing a will for a person, without giving a cut to a lawyer that did nothing.

Medical Doctors? Nurse Practitioners prescribe medicine without MD supervision and in most states have their own practices, so do not compare the legal monopoly to medicine where there is consumer choice. Besides, an MD actually does good for the world.

4. Old Miss does not have part time, I went to the site.
In addition, every site I went to says ABA rules says P/T must be done in 4 years.
at every ABA-accredited law school, a part-time program must be completed in four years.

As you can see, you are wrong. The legal industry is eating this country out of house and home. Besides, the judge knows the law, why can't defendants ask the judge what the law is like in other countries?

Louisiana Civil Law Notary Association: http://www.pclna.org/

From Old Miss Law SchoolCan I attend part-time?
No, we do not offer a part-time program. Our program is a full-time, day-time program only. http://www.law.olemiss.edu/admissions/faq.html

Marse Supial

September 2nd, 2008, 09:17 PM

Don't be so angry seeer. We're on the same side, bro.

1. If the paralegals can do it, why can't people go straight to paralegals like in Louisiana? (Civil Law Notaries)

Because most of the country doesn't operate under a Civil Law system like Louisiana does. They have a code (i.e. step by step instructions) for everything. The other 49 states (to varying degrees) operate on the Common Law system. The former draws mostly from a 'code'. The latter draws mostly from caselaw, which makes things exponentially more complicated.

Some states (namely California) are changing to allow para professionals to handle routine drafting tasks. But I can tell you from personal experience, I get a lot of business straightening out things that clients tried to do things on the cheap with a 'will kit' or 'legal zoom' or some such. And invariably these clients spend 5 times as much getting a mess straightened out as they would have had it been done right the first go round. I've seen people literally and absolutely unnecessarily lose their homes because they tried to file bankruptcy by copying their friend's petition and filing it themselves. So I send legal zoom a 'Merry Christmas' card every year. "Keep up the good work, boys."

2. Ole Miss is a public school, so the taxpayer is paying. My figures including lost wages are accurate.

I went to a private school. Not ivy league, but what is referred to as second tier. The costs there are about twice that of private schools, but still nowhere near $300k. If you're already making that kind of money, law school isn't a good investment for you. I was just using Ole Miss as a cost example.

3. Almost all countries only require a bachelor degree to be a lawyer. You did not explain why someone with a bachelor degree in paralegal studies, 10 years experience, pass the National Certified paralegal exam, the state exam, background check will be put in jail for writing a will for a person, without giving a cut to a lawyer that did nothing.

Medical Doctors? Nurse Practitioners prescribe medicine without MD supervision and in most states have their own practices, so do not compare the legal monopoly to medicine where there is consumer choice. Besides, an MD actually does good for the world.

You're a lawyer hater. And nothing I could say is going to change that. Lawyer haters are like men haters. There's not much reasoning with them, but I still try. I agree that the system isn't perfect, but the way to change it is not to allow even less qualified people to practice.

You keep going back to wills. Most wills are easy. So easy in fact, that it's hard to justify charging more than $100 bucks or so for the very simple ones. But if you want to do some estate planning that may have some tax implications, you better know what you're doing. And that requires a semeter or two of studying the tax code and the applicable federal regulations.

Lots of professions have licensing requirements. Plumbing is a good example. Any idiot can put a new flapper in a toilet. Any idiot can put a new flapper in their best friend's or their next door neighbors toilet. But if you're going to hold yourself out as a professional plumber and charge people money for it, you've got to pass the test and get a license.

4. Old Miss does not have part time, I went to the site. In addition, every site I went to says ABA rules says P/T must be done in 4 years.

I'll take your word for it. But the school I went to allowed 6. But if you're losing 75K or 80K per year in lost wages, it'd behoove you to get it over with as quickly as possible.

As you can see, you are wrong. The legal industry is eating this country out of house and home.

I love you too.

Besides, the judge knows the law, why can't defendants ask the judge what the law is like in other countries?

Not always does the judge know the law. Sometimes the judge is an idiot or a negress. Sometimes the law is not clear. Sometimes litigation is about factual questions. As often as not, there's a question about what the law is. That is the function of an appellate court in a common law system: To make the law where there is no law of the case.

But that being said, a litigant CAN ask the judge to make a ruling on what the law is. It comes in the form of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, or motion for summary judgment, or a declaratory judgment action or a number of other ways.

seeer

September 3rd, 2008, 09:15 PM

Because most of the country doesn't operate under a Civil Law system like Louisiana does. The law has been becoming more like the rest of the country over the years. Besides, a common law state can permit licensing for people limited to trusts, house closing etc. like Louisiana, the world will not come to an end.

I get a lot of business straightening out things that clients tried to do things on the cheap with a 'will kit' or 'legal zoom' or some such. I am talking about licensed professionals, with a bachelor degree and passing a test.

The costs there are about twice that of private schools, but still nowhere near $300k. I included 8 years of lost wage (4+3+ 1 year for bar review. ) Think how much the person could of made working as a plumber for 8 years.

You're a lawyer hater. I merely believe the licensing of lawyers should change and paralegals should not the threatened with force and put in jail for for drafting a custom will.

But if you want to do some estate planning that may have some tax implications, {{{ requires a semeter or two of studying the tax code and the applicable federal regulations. If you want the best tax advice, use a CPA. A tax lawyer is practicing CPA work without a CPA license. Ever notice many tax attorneys are also CPAs?

if you're going to hold yourself out as a professional plumber and charge people money for it, you've got to pass the test and get a license. I said that lawyers should continue to be licensed, just that the requirements should be reasonable like in England.

Not always does the judge know the law. But that being said, a litigant CAN ask the judge to make a ruling on what the law is. I am talking about asking questions informally, like during a DWI trial, like they do in many other countries. If they can do this in other countries it means the world will not come to an end.
Civil Law Notaries: Needed in every state. (Common Law Notaries in the other 49?) The problem is the legal monopoly is actually devouring the economy and has become a drag on the system. They have a lock on the state legislatures that they use as a stranglehold on the country.
http://www.la-notary.com/prestige/civillawplate400.jpg

Mike Parker

September 4th, 2008, 07:12 AM

3. Almost all countries only require a bachelor degree to be a lawyer.

I don't understand that either. Why can't you just go to college here and major in law the way you major in engineering? If you're old enough to learn ODE, why not SEC?

Charles Martel

September 8th, 2008, 01:34 AM

This is only the tip of the iceberg. This f'ed up situation goes all the way up to the top. To the supreme court. Now you can get an inkling as to why Matt Hale was so pissed off.

-JC

September 11th, 2008, 10:18 AM

Whatever else you may think of him, Peter J. Peters made an outstanding, and not preachy at all, tape series called They and Us. It is likely the best tapes he ever made for our purposes.

One is especially good and contains a commencement speech by a law school dean on the above subject, which is remarkable.

If we had more archive space for attachments and for audio, I'd upload that one, if I could find it.

Antiochus Epiphanes

September 23rd, 2008, 10:13 AM

Did we cover Univ of Chicago, Epstein and the Jewish "Chicago School of Law and Economics?" The guys who helped lay the intellectual foundation for the snafus that have lead to the current trillion dollar bailout of Jewish operated wall st banks making its way through Congress sponsored by Jewish Ben Shalom Bernanke head of the Fed.

Here is an example of what Jewish partisans do in law school. Slander the Catholics, promote the Jews. Try to make sure that the Jewish profit / genocide operation called "freedom of choice" (to murder goyim babies in the womb) continues.

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:2Jr1kpwjts0J:uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2007/04/our_faithbased_.html+jewish+professors+university+of+chicago+law+school&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

note this blog post date eh? Irony, the Jews always caballistically watch the numbers.

here is what the jew says:

What, then, explains this decision? Here is a painfully awkward observation: All five justices in the majority in Gonzales are Catholic. The four justices who are either Protestant or Jewish all voted in accord with settled precedent. It is mortifying to have to point this out. But it is too obvious, and too telling, to ignore. Ultimately, the five justices in the majority all fell back on a common argument to justify their position. There is, they say, a compelling moral reason for the result in Gonzales. Because the intact D & E seems to resemble infanticide it is “immoral” and may be prohibited even without a clear statutory exception to protect the health of the woman.

Professor Stone, Stein, 99% likely Jewish

Gary Nemeth

October 20th, 2008, 02:53 PM

The jew prides himself as an expert in law as well as experts in greed

Mack Bartlow

November 13th, 2008, 01:34 PM

"The point of this thread is to prove that the top ten law schools, from which the lower ones take their lead, discriminate against heterosexual White men and in favor of jews and coloreds. It will be seen that jews as a percentage of the law school professoriate at these schools never falls under 25% and usually is around 50%."

Affirmative Action is code for discrimination against the White Male.

Kind Lampshade Maker

November 13th, 2008, 04:04 PM

Here's something a little off-topic. But, for archiving, I thought this might fuel the discussion:

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/news/releases/april.11.2007b.html

Oy! Sounds more than a little Jewey tom me:

...Georgetown University Law Center Dean T. Alexander Aleinikoff

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/images/photos/208.jpg

is pleased to announce the appointment of Georgetown Law Associate Dean Lawrence O. Gostin...
...Gostin is visiting professor of public health (faculty of medical sciences) and research fellow (Centre for Socio-Legal Studies) at Oxford University, as well as a fellow of the Royal Institute of Public Health. Additionally, he serves as the health law and ethics editor and contributing writer for the Journal of the American Medical Association...
...In 2006, the IOM awarded Gostin the Adam Yarmolinsky Medal...
...In the U.K., Gostin was the legal director of the National Association for Mental Health:eek:...

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/news/images/gostin2.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Yarmolinsky

...Professor Adam Yarmolinsky (November 17, 1922 - January 5, 2000), son of Babette Deutsch and Avrahm Yarmolinsky...

http://www.umbc.edu/AboutUMBC/Welcome/Yarmolinsky/imx/front1.jpg

This is how Oxford students entertain themselves with:

http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/vermischtes/2008/11/13/nackt-wrestling/skandal-in-oxford-nackt-ringen-im-nachtklub.html

http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/vermischtes/2008/11/13/nackt-wrestling/nacktringen-im-nachtklub-10812222-kopf-schmal.jpg

Adi18

November 29th, 2008, 08:13 PM

The Judaization of American Politics and Universities, the Jewish Controlled Opposition to Jewish Communism, and the Jewish Use of Black Traitors
Christopher Jon Bjerknes

http://www.jewishracism.com

http://www.jewishracism.blogspot.com

The Jewess Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum, a. k. a. Ayn Rand, is perhaps the World's most famous member of the Jewish controlled opposition to Jewish Communism know as "The Trust". She taught the gullible Goyim to become disunited, disloyal, and psychopathically selfish, in the name of "fighting Communism." Of course, the Jewish Communists have a much easier time wrecking a nation of self indulgent, uncooperative and disorganized Goyim, than one in which each citizen bands together with each other citizen for the common good.

But Rosenbaum was by no means the only Jew who came to America to corrupt our society and use it for Zionist/Communist causes. In fact, the influx of Eastern European Jews into America from the early 1880's onwards infused a general Judaization into American life. The Jews began to overwhelm the universities and implemented their tribal loyalties to one another in the awarding of scholarships and appointments in the universities. Harvard openly objected to the infection.

Today, the Christian universities Harvard University and University of Chicago are in fact Jewish universities which train Jews and Shabbas Goys to take over positions of power in America and to ensure that America will always and only take into account "what is good for the Jews". The Jews did not exhibit greater talent or creativity than non-Jews, rather, the Jews took over through corruption and tribalism, and to a large degree destroyed the university system and replaced scholarly thought and discourse with Jewish dogmatism, Jewish mysticism, Zionism, Communism, Freudianism, Einsteinianism, homosexuality, etc. The supposedly "Jewish" innovations in academia are frequently the product of degeneration, plagiarism from Gentiles, or both.

The crypto-Jewess Madeleine "Albright's" father Josef Korbel was another totalitarian Jew who came to America and promoted Jewish Communism and Jewish Zionism in the name of combating Communism. Korbel's students spread war on behalf of Israel in the name of spreading "Democracy", a tactic employed by the Zionist puppet Presidents Woodrow Wilson and FDR long ago.

The foreign Jew Josef Korbel taught his daughter, who became Secretary of State, to corrupt America to favor the interests of Israel, not America. He also taught her to be a genocidal and psychopathic mass murderer who endorsed the genocidal Jewish attack on the Iraqis, in particular the Jewish mass murder of Iraqi children. Josef Korbel also taught the Judaized black traitor Condoleezza Rice, who has likewise endorsed the mass murder of Iraqis for the benefit of the Jews.

NPR reports:

"Josef Korbel may be one of the most influential Americans you've never heard of. He died in 1977, but his legacy lives on in his two most famous students: his daughter, Madeleine Albright, and his star pupil at the University of Denver, Condoleezza Rice."--Guy Raz, "For Albright and Rice, Josef Korbel Is Tie that Binds", www.npr.org, (28 June 2006), http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5516648

Colin Powell is another Judaized totalitarian, who has put Israel's interests above those of America. Colin Powell--like the Zionist Jew, and former Democrat who endorsed Republican John McCain, Joe Lieberman--left the Republican Party to endorse Barack Obama. Like Obama, Powell was close to the Jewish community and even spoke some Yiddish.

Powell served Jewry well as the Shabbas Goy who twice led Americans into an unprovoked illegal aggressive attack on Iraq. He also served the Jews very well, when he endorsed the Jews' puppet Barack Obama.

Obama's grooming in the Jewish community and the Jewish figures who catapulted Obama into the White House are described in the following article:

Pauline Dubkin Yearwood, OBAMA AND THE JEWS: A look at why some Jews love him and some don't trust him; and at the key role Chicago Jews played in getting him to where he is, http://www.chicagojewishnews.com/story.htm?sid=212226&id=252218, (10/24/2008)

Another Jew who came to America to corrupt America and promote Communism and Zionism in the name of combating Communism, was Leo Strauss. Strauss' philosophy is seen by some as the guiding force behind the Jewish attack on Iraq.

NPR reports:

"[. . .]Leo Strauss, a political philosopher who happened to educate -- among others -- president of the World Bank and former Bush official Paul Wolfowitz, writer Robert Kagan, academic Allan Bloom and journalist William Kristol."--Guy Raz, "A Tale of Two Korbels", www.npr.org, (28 June 2006), http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5516648

and,

"By some accounts, the U.S. road to Iraq can be traced back to Leo Strauss, a refugee of Nazi Germany who taught political philosophy at the University of Chicago in the 1950s and '60s."--"Talk of the Nation", www.npr.org, (25 October 2004), http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4125689

It well be good to bear these facts in mind as the crypto-Jews in the Jewish controlled "alternative media" attempt to confuse you by claiming that the British and Brzezinski are to blame for the coming Jewish war on the human race. These crypto-Jews are cut from the same prayer shawl cloth as the crypto-Jews who attempt to scapegoat Catholics for Jewish crimes against the human race.

http://jewishracism.blogspot.com/2008/11/judaization-of-american-politics-and.html

Antiochus Epiphanes

December 8th, 2008, 10:05 AM

question is why isnt it completely freakin obvious that the Jews are all in it together when a socalled liberal like alan dershovitz becomes the attack dog of zion in academe?

Jim Anderson

December 8th, 2008, 04:09 PM

question is why isnt it completely freakin obvious that the Jews are all in it together when a socalled liberal like alan dershovitz becomes the attack dog of zion in academe?

Because the average White is too drunk to spell, much less study Law.

A White Media needs to glamorize the Law profession. Until know the Jew Hollywood has been showing smart Jewboy lawyers getting the White woman.

We need to change that to interest more Whites in Law.

Mike Parker

December 9th, 2008, 08:49 AM

Legal Tyranny

by Daniel W. Drezner
12.02.2008

Last month, Dani Rodrik looked at the initial slate of Obama administration appointees and observed that a surprisingly large fraction of them were lawyers. As a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, he found this somewhat perturbing:

If you are bright and are contemplating a potential career in American politics, you go to a top law school—not a public policy school. This does not seem to have changed much in recent decades despite everything [Harvard's Kennedy School of Government] has done to make itself visible and relevant.
When one looks at the people picked for foreign-policy positions in particular, Rodrik might be onto something. The top two nominees for the State Department—Hillary Clinton and James Steinberg—both earned degrees from Yale Law School. Tom Donilon, the rumored deputy NSC adviser, and Janet Napolitano, the nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security, earned their J.D.s from the University of Virginia.

As a professor at a rival public-policy school I share Rodrik's concern (though we can claim at least one cabinet appointment). Why do law school grads get the foreign-policy jobs coveted by public-policy school grads?

The first reason is historical legacy. When the United States became the global hegemon after World War II, public-policy schools were exceptionally rare. The original gangsters of the foreign-policy community—think Dean Acheson, John Foster Dulles, Clark Clifford, John J. McCloy—were lawyers. This matters because the best way to get a top foreign-policy job is to make your mark by serving as a loyal deputy to past top foreign-policy makers. Since people are more likely to hire their own, it is hardly surprising that lawyers would hire other lawyers.

The second reason has to do with signaling. Presidents want their foreign-policy appointees to be politically successful, which requires a complex, interlocking set of skills. Analytical rigor and policy expertise are obviously necessary but hardly sufficient (expertise can be earned via a public-policy degree, but there are also other avenues). Dedication, determination and political discipline count for a lot as well.

Earning a law degree and then working on foreign-policy issues sends two powerful signals to prospective presidents that earning a public-policy degree does not. Simply put, a law degree is much less fun to earn than a law degree. One-L courses require a tolerance of a high level of drudgery. A public-policy degree, on the other hand, is much more fun to earn than a law degree. Which means that it requires less discipline. By getting a law degree, aspirants to top policy-making jobs are signaling to observers that they can grind their way through a serious amount of drudgery.

By going into public policy, lawyers are also signaling the monetary sacrifices they are willing to make. Compared to the median wage, most public-policy jobs pay a decent salary. Compared to the median legal wage, most public-policy jobs pay peanuts. Most Fletcher graduates would be delighted at the prospect of a six-figure salary in the corridors of power. Most Harvard law school graduates would be appalled at any job with the phrase "low six figures" attached to it.

So there are logical reasons why lawyers might be getting the top foreign-policy posts. Are these substantively good reasons, however? As a professor with an interest in seeing his graduates thrive in the public sector, I think attending a public-policy school should send an even stronger signal. It should say that the person in question is well-trained and has the other traits necessary for a leadership position.

Perhaps the next step should be to make the first year of a public-policy degree more like the first year of law school. After all, why should one-Ls have all the fun?

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a senior editor at The National Interest.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=20322

Brian Foley

December 20th, 2008, 10:36 PM

The point of this thread is to prove that the top ten law schools, from which the lower ones take their lead, discriminate against heterosexual White men and in favor of jews and coloreds.
That is indicative of a corrupt and manipulative legal system , I hasten to add from what I have read about Americas legal system and their lawyers , all Americas Top Lawyers have been White's not Jews or Asians . Namely
F. Lee Bailey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._Lee_Bailey)
Melvin Belli (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Belli)
Vincent Bugliosi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Bugliosi) .
All of the above possesed fantastic legal minds .

The only prominent Jewish lawyer is that dunce Alan Dershowitz who was cahrged with plagiarism (http://www.counterpunch.org/menetrez02122008.html) which sums up Jewish lawyers for you . So wha ever list their is I wouldnt worry to much us Gentiles still rule .

MikeTodd

December 20th, 2008, 10:44 PM

So wha ever list their is I wouldnt worry to much us Gentiles still rule .Yes, but the jew reigns! T.J.B.

Brian Foley

December 20th, 2008, 11:24 PM

Yes, but the jew reigns! T.J.B.
They are self corrupting they always in the end fail .

Antiochus Epiphanes

December 22nd, 2008, 12:30 PM

Oh, we have some top gooks too. The one that wrote the Constituttion shredding patriot act for one. but lets not get distracted eh?

Viet Dinh,

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2004/01/sec-040129-voa02.htm

rod crowley

December 27th, 2008, 09:26 AM

id be willing to bet the top medical schools arent fairing much better.

rod crowley

December 27th, 2008, 09:29 AM

The jew prides himself as an expert in law as well as experts in greedYup,thus explaining our biased JEWDICIAL SYSTEM!

Vaughn

January 13th, 2009, 04:20 PM

I was a student not too long ago. "They" were everywhere.

HaleyBurgh

January 28th, 2009, 03:43 PM

You guys belong in law school! You all seem so smart and worldly. :)

Antiochus Epiphanes

January 29th, 2009, 01:55 PM

........ So wha ever list their is I wouldnt worry to much us Gentiles still rule .

Gentiles rule? Wake the fuck up man!

melvin belli was just an ambulance chaser with a big ego, a personal injury lawyers out to line their pockets off big plaintiff awards. f lee bailey was a decent crminal defense lawyer and represented a lot of high profiles but he didnt and doesnt rule jack shit. vincent bugliosi is a talking head on tv end of story.

No the matter of RULE and RULING is the province of CONSTITUTIONAL LAW which is ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court.

Which has had Jews on it for decades. Do these names mean anything to you?

Justice Years of Service
Louis Brandeis (1856-1941) 1916-1939
Benjamin Cardozo (1870-1938) 1932-1938
Felix Frankfurter (1882-1965) 1939-1962
Arthur J. Goldberg (1908-1990) 1962-1965
Abe Fortas (1910-1982) 1965-1969
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (b. 1933) 1993-
Stephen Breyer (b. 1938) 1994-

Not to mention Jews are thick as fleas in "Civil Rights." Which is very much about cosntitutional rights under the bill of rights and the fourteenth amendment. Cimrinal defense, discrimination suits, free speech aclu type, blah blah blah. I'll bet over half the lawyers doing real cases at ACLU behest are Jews.

As Linder said-- they are framing the terms of our debate. We need to break out of that.

Larry Heinberg

January 30th, 2009, 08:52 PM

The point of this thread is to prove that the top ten law schools, from which the lower ones take their lead, discriminate against heterosexual White men and in favor of jews and coloreds.
This isn't the way to approach a question. You should ask "what is the situation?" not "is this the situation?".

Otherwise you bias your information gathering.

Antiochus Epiphanes

February 4th, 2009, 10:23 AM

This isn't the way to approach a question. You should ask "what is the situation?" not "is this the situation?".

Otherwise you bias your information gathering.

You butted into this thread with some kind of criticism but failed to communicate a coherent thought. What the fuck are you trying to say?

Larry Heinberg

February 4th, 2009, 06:09 PM

You butted into this thread with some kind of criticism but failed to communicate a coherent thought. What the fuck are you trying to say?

Just pointing to an example of confirmation bias - the tendency to look for evidence which supports your view, rather than looking at the evidence, then forming a view.

Be nicer please.

Antiochus Epiphanes

February 6th, 2009, 09:26 AM

Be nicer please are you a fucking jew feinberg? because I am not here to be nice to fucking kikes. go to a law school if you want somebody to kiss your kosher tuchus. If you're not a Jew then say so. Are you a matzo eater?

Just pointing to an example of confirmation bias - the tendency to look for evidence which supports your view, rather than looking at the evidence, then forming a view.

there's no confirmation bias, just a good catalogue of EVIDENCE that JEWS are, to use a phrase you may know from title VII disparate impact cases, Jews are "OVERREPRESENTED" in law school faculty.

Wish we could get the admissions data!

notmenomore

February 6th, 2009, 11:34 AM

Wish we could get the admissions data!

Suffice it to say, they're vastly overrepresented there also.

On the upbeat side (if there is one) is recent news that there are NO JOBS for law school graduates this year. None of the firms are hiring.

I guess when the world is broke there's no shekels to be picked up by counsel. In that case counsel dosen't have the wherewithal to continue affording legal flunkies to do all the work while the senior partners fuck off. A sad state of affairs, itz.

Mike Parker

February 7th, 2009, 04:15 AM

Just pointing to an example of confirmation bias - the tendency to look for evidence which supports your view, rather than looking at the evidence, then forming a view.

Shouldn't the default hypothesis be based on the Jews' own mantra of diversity? If the Ivy League is so desperate to have black and Hispanic students and faculty in line with their proportions of the population, shouldn't Jews be similarly represented? That would be about 2.3%. This thread shows how far that is from the truth.

Here is how a Jew law professor (albeit from a lesser school) deliberately manipulated affirmative action policy to advantage Jews at the expense of whites:

Who's to Blame for the Affirmative Action Fiasco?
By Hugh Murray

Blumrosen was set upon "selectively enforcing" the civil rights act by using disparate impact theory and proportional representation only when it affected others. (More accurately, Blumrosen was "selectively malenforcing" the civil rights law, imposing quotas for
underrepresented blacks, using quotas to curb whites; for women, against men; but never for gentiles and against Jews.)

Of course, had the EEOC sought to restrict Jews as it has white men, the storm of protest would have cast "disparate impact" theory into the dustbin of history. Thus, the role of Blumrosen and his allies in the media, academia etc., was to create a false target - the "overrepresented," "privileged" and "oppressive" white male. According to the EEOC, the statistics proved just that. However, the statistics proved otherwise. The partial statistics used by Blumrosen were simply the effort to deflect criticism to another group instead of the one most overrepresented, privileged and oppressive - his own.

By not asking the religious question on the EEOC questionnaires, the EEOC created a scapegoat of the white male. Once smeared as "privileged" and "oppressive," the non-privileged, working-class and poor whites began to pay the price for the "moral" system of affirmative action by being legally discriminated against and denied equal opportunity.

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.politics/2005-08/msg01689.html

More evidence that the "liberal" Jew's concern for social justice is a cover for ethnic warfare.

Antiochus Epiphanes

February 10th, 2009, 03:10 PM

here is an amusing story I found on Jew lawyers

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2816356

Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Updated: March 30, 6:15 PM ET
CBA coach Richardson suspended for remarks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESPN.com news services

Former NBA All-Star Micheal Ray Richardson appeared to be getting his life back on track after his league suspension in 1986 for drug use. He was coaching in the Continental Basketball Association and had led his team, the Albany Patroons, to the playoffs. But as they say: What goes up, must come down.
The Patroons have suspended Richardson for the rest of the CBA championship series for comments made to the Albany Times Union on Tuesday.

Before Tuesdays game against the Yakima Sun Kings, Richardson made anti-Semitic comments to two reporters in his office when discussing the contract general manager Jim Coyne had offered him Monday to coach his team in the CBA and USBL.

"I've got big-time lawyers," Richardson said, according to the Times Union. "I've got big-time Jew lawyers."

When told by the reporters that the comment could be offensive to people because it plays to the stereotype that Jews are crafty and shrewd, he responded with, "Are you kidding me? They are. They've got the best security system in the world. Have you ever been to an airport in Tel Aviv? They're real crafty. Listen, they are hated all over the world, so they've got to be crafty."

And he continued, "They got a lot of power in this world, you know what I mean?" he said. "Which I think is great. I don't think there's nothing wrong with it. If you look in most professional sports, they're run by Jewish people. If you look at a lot of most successful corporations and stuff, more businesses, they're run by Jewish. It's not a knock, but they are some crafty people."
And the offensive remarks didn't stop there.

According to the Times Union, Richardson told a fan who heckled him early in Tuesday's game, "Shut the [expletive] up." And near game's end, he shouted at another heckler, "Shut the [expletive] up, you [derogatory term for gay men],"

Assistant Derrick Rowland will coach the Patroons for the reminder of the series. Richardson will not be allowed into the Washington Avenue Armory during practices or games.

"It's terrible and I don't think it's fair," Richardson told the Times Union regarding the suspension. "But I want to make an apology if I offended anyone because that's not me."

The Patroons released a statement apologizing for the coach's remarks.

"The Albany Patroons' organization sincerely apologizes to any individuals or ethnic groups that these alleged statements may have offended," the statement read.

The release also stated that the team and league "shall conduct a full and complete investigation as to the validity of these allegations. If these allegations are true, appropriate action will take place immediately."

Richardson, the fourth overall pick in the 1978 draft, is best known for an embattled NBA career that ended because of drugs. He joined the NBA out of Montana and played eight seasons with the New York Knicks, Golden State Warriors and New Jersey Nets. He was the subject of a 2000 film "What Happened to Micheal Ray?" documenting his troubled life.

In his second year, Richardson became only the second player in NBA to lead in both assists and steals. In 1986, the four-time NBA All-Star was banned for life after he violated the league's drug policy three times in what David Stern called "the hardest thing I've ever had to do as commissioner."

Richardson began his comeback in 1988, joining the ranks of ex-NBA players in European leagues where he played for 14 years. His right to play in the NBA was restored that year but he stayed in Italy, where he was a leading scorer and fan favorite.

Richardson failed two cocaine tests in 1991, though he disputed the results.
Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Alex Linder

June 8th, 2009, 07:58 PM

"The Talmudic Subversion of Common Law"
[Interesting comment at Occidental Dissent]

10whodareswings

“The Talmudic subversion of Common Law”

This is a subject rarely addressed by racialists across the spectrum from Linderites to Taylorites. Where can I find out more in layman’s language? I stumbled on this one day and it opened my eyes. Before i realized universities like harvard were getting endowed to create Talmudic law depts. I thought the dialoguing with the judiciary and gentile politicians (many of whom are lawyers) was being conducted by fringe Orthodox sects like the Lubavitschers. That’s not the case at all as seen here:

http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/Gruss/stone.html and here:

The new synthesis of Common law and Talmudic law is sometimes referred to as Communitarian law. Communitarianism is the watchword. Europeans are more familiar with it than Americans. The new French anti-Zionist pary started by Doudonne M’bala M’bala is the first anti-communitarian organization in the West. M’bala is a quadroon from Camaroon. Someone should get Kevin MacDonald, or E. Michael Jones to address this slow mutation of Common law from it’s emphasis on individual rights to it’s emphasis on what best serves the community (tribe). New “communities” are being defined daily by the NWO social engineers.

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/200...-day/#comments

Alex Linder

June 8th, 2009, 07:59 PM

11Fiotheth

Probably the best source for the creeping ‘insertion’ of Talmudic concepts into the Law would be Michael Hoffman II. Check out his website:

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/index.html

However the Jews sort of operate as a ‘Law unto themselves’ and use the Talmud to justify any number of heinous activities for Jews and Jews alone to participate in and it is this Jewish Supremacist behavior that I was really referring to, however you are entirely correct that this stuff is creeping into the actual Laws of the land!!!! Yuck.

Antiochus Epiphanes

June 10th, 2009, 01:25 PM

Jews go around now giving "CLE" or continuing legal education to lawyers which establishes some kind of bullshit credibility in Talmudism as a species of legitimate legal ratiocination. I would call it fraudulent legalism at best, but what do I know.

Read up on how they try and twist the post-law-school minds just like they pretzel up the law students.

http://iatlaw.org/Default.aspx?link=category&cat_id=1

The Institute of American and Talmudic Law IAT Law is a non-profit organization providing continuing legal education CLE to attorneys and other professionals.
IAT Law provides the most innovative and entertaining programs on a wide range of topics while comparing American and Talmudic Law.

This is about like the ADL or SPLC giving "intelligence briefings" to cops. Nothing but pure self promoting Jewish bullshit.

Jean West

May 25th, 2013, 09:08 AM

This is a 2002 article; by this time "institutes," not mere courses, for the study of Jewish law and values exist in many law schools.

http://judaiclaw.org/TheJerusalemPostArticle.html

Jewish law institute launched in DC
By Janine Zacharia
Nov. 9, 2002

Jewish legal experts have created a new institute that will educate jurists and others about 2,000 years of Jewish law and promote the application of the teachings to contemporary legal disputes and other modern-day issues.

The launch of the Washington-based National Institute for Judaic Law was marked Tuesday night with a kosher dinner at the Supreme Court attended by 200 people, including three Supreme Court Justices - Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia.

US President George W. Bush sent greetings and applauded the institute for promoting an "understanding of Judaism's rich tradition of legal thought."

"As we face new challenges and welcome new opportunities, our society must continue to promote good character and strong values. Through the study and teaching of Jewish law and philosophy you are contributing to a growing culture of service, citizenship, and responsibility in America," Bush wrote.

Scalia, in a letter to the institute's founder, Noson Gurary, wrote that "Jewish law is certainly one of the oldest and most highly developed systems" and explained why the comparative study of legal traditions was beneficial.

"The idea is to make Jewish law more accessible to everyone," said Washington lawyer Alyza Lewin. Both Lewin and her father Nathan Lewin are helping establish the institute.

Last year, Alyza Lewin filed a brief to the Supreme Court based on the Talmud's take on capital punishment when the court was readying to hear a case on the constitutionality of the electric chair.

"Legal scholars often like to know what other legal traditions have said about certain issues," said Alyza Lewin.

Filing that kind of opinion is only part of the institute's mandate.

It will also promote the teaching of Jewish law, develop curricula on Jewish law that can be integrated into traditional law school courses, and serve as a resource for anyone wanting to know what the vast Jewish legal tradition has to say on various issues.

The institute's first project, already underway, explores how Jewish law can be applied to modern-day issues surrounding corporate ethics, an idea spurred by the recent corporate scandals involving Enron and Worldcom.

Gurary, who teaches at the State University of New York at Buffalo, thought up the idea of the institute about nine months ago.

"By demonstrating the philosophy of Jewish law and its moral values, we can bring http://judaiclaw.org/TheJerusalemPostArticle.html

Jewish law institute launched in DC
By Janine Zacharia
Nov. 9, 2002

Jewish legal experts have created a new institute that will educate jurists and others about 2,000 years of Jewish law and promote the application of the teachings to contemporary legal disputes and other modern-day issues.

The launch of the Washington-based National Institute for Judaic Law was marked Tuesday night with a kosher dinner at the Supreme Court attended by 200 people, including three Supreme Court Justices - Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia.

US President George W. Bush sent greetings and applauded the institute for promoting an "understanding of Judaism's rich tradition of legal thought."

"As we face new challenges and welcome new opportunities, our society must continue to promote good character and strong values. Through the study and teaching of Jewish law and philosophy you are contributing to a growing culture of service, citizenship, and responsibility in America," Bush wrote.

Scalia, in a letter to the institute's founder, Noson Gurary, wrote that "Jewish law is certainly one of the oldest and most highly developed systems" and explained why the comparative study of legal traditions was beneficial.

"The idea is to make Jewish law more accessible to everyone," said Washington lawyer Alyza Lewin. Both Lewin and her father Nathan Lewin are helping establish the institute.

Last year, Alyza Lewin filed a brief to the Supreme Court based on the Talmud's take on capital punishment when the court was readying to hear a case on the constitutionality of the electric chair.

"Legal scholars often like to know what other legal traditions have said about certain issues," said Alyza Lewin.

Filing that kind of opinion is only part of the institute's mandate.

It will also promote the teaching of Jewish law, develop curricula on Jewish law that can be integrated into traditional law school courses, and serve as a resource for anyone wanting to know what the vast Jewish legal tradition has to say on various issues.

The institute's first project, already underway, explores how Jewish law can be applied to modern-day issues surrounding corporate ethics, an idea spurred by the recent corporate scandals involving Enron and Worldcom.

Gurary, who teaches at the State University of New York at Buffalo, thought up the idea of the institute about nine months ago.

"By demonstrating the philosophy of Jewish law and its moral values, we can bring a little beacon of light in this world," Gurary said.

"I think this is what we need now, in this day and age."
," Gurary said.

"I think this is what we need now, in this day and age."