Hufschmid's main page
Audio page

Eric Hufschmid, 13 February 2010

Life is wonderful for some of us.
But sad to others.
Some of us contribute to society by building bridges, growing food, or making furniture.
But some people rape, cheat, murder, steal, or kidnap.
The "innocent" people who can't cope with the problems of modern society are inadvertently allowing tremendous corruption, suffering, and wars.

We have to push aside the talking monkeys, put more advanced humans in control of the world, and then remove the people who are destructive.

Hufschmid-2010Feb13.mp3   19 mb,  118 mins

A transcript with links is at this page.
To download the audio file, click your right mouse button and select Save Target As

If animals were as intelligent as humans, would they behave like you or me?
If we could increase the intelligence of a gorilla to the point at which it was as intelligent as you, would it behave so much like you that it would be able to substitute for you at your job and family? Would intelligent animals blend into human society?

Or if your intelligence could be reduced to the level of a gorilla or a spider, would you behave like a gorilla or a spider?

The answer is no! A gorilla with the intelligence of a human would be an intelligent gorilla, not a human. And a human with the intelligence of a gorilla would be a stupid human, not a gorilla.

The behavior of an animal is determined mainly by its emotions, not its intelligence. The primary reason that rabbits, spiders, dogs, dolphins, birds, and gorillas have different behavior is because they have different emotions, not because they have different levels of intelligence.

If all humans had identical intelligence, would we behave the same?

Imagine that we could increase everybody's intelligence to whatever the maximum is for humans. We would all become geniuses with identical intellectual qualities, but would that make us behave the same? Would men and women behave the same? Consider how different people are today:
• Some people eat so much food that they become fat, and some are so worried about becoming fat that they become anorexic. Some people abuse alcohol or other drugs. Some people purchase more material items than they can afford, thereby putting themselves in debt.

• Most people become very upset or frightened by the evidence that Jews staged the 9/11 attack, the world wars, and other crimes, and that the Jews are lying about the Holocaust and a lot of other historical events. They ignore all of this information, and they try to stop other people from talking about it.

• Some people can't have calm, serious discussions about euthanasia, orphans, voting systems, school systems, raising children, or other issues that affect modern society. Instead, they fight over right or wrong, good and evil, smart and stupid.

• Some people have the ability to discuss crimes, such the 9/11 attack and the HoloHoax, and some can also discuss the issues that modern society faces, such as euthanasia and orphans, but they don't care enough about society to be interested in spending their time discussing these issues and experimenting with different policies. They would rather watch television, play video games, have parties, or play with their dogs.

• Some people rape, murder, steal, vandalize, cheat, and join crime networks.

Why do we behave so differently? Why do men behave differently than women? Why do children behave differently than adults? It's not because we have different intellectual abilities. There's a wide variety of intellectual abilities among alcoholics, for example, so their alcoholism isn't due to a particular level of intelligence.

The reason we behave differently is because we have different emotional qualities. All humans have exactly the same emotions, but there are subtle differences between us. For example, some people are more arrogant; some have stronger sexual cravings; some are more easily frightened; and some are more independent. Furthermore, no living creature is "perfect". We all have defects. Therefore, some people behave differently simply because they have different types of defects in their brain.

What do we do with the misfits?

As I described in Part 4 of my Social Technology articles, people today must be capable of working with one another for the benefit of society. The people who can't deal with the problems of modern society, or who simply don't care much about society, are inadvertently allowing the criminals and other destructive people to cause tremendous corruption, suffering, and wars. Unfortunately, there is no way yet of helping any of these troublesome people. The destructive people have to be sterilized and exiled, or killed. The people who obey the laws but who can't or won't deal with society's problems have to be told to keep their mouth shut, stop voting, and let the rest of us deal with the problems.

We can't coexist peacefully!

Either we suffer...

...or the criminals suffer.

Nobody wants to exile or kill people, but allowing destructive people to live among us is allowing them to kill, rape, and abuse us. We can't fix their problems with jail or fines. We have to decide who is going to suffer. If we exile or kill the destructive people, then they will do the suffering, but if we let them live among us, then we become their victims, and we do the suffering.
We can make the world safe and peaceful...

...or allow the abuse to continue.

There's no right or wrong with this issue. We simply make a decision on how we want to live. We don't have to tolerate abuse. None of us owes anything to any criminal. We are under no obligation to feel sorry for them, or give them second chances, or do them any favors.

Feeding the hungry is making the problem worse!

Humans and animals have powerful cravings to have lots of children and take care of all of them, regardless of how badly behaved they are. Unfortunately, this type of behavior is no longer acceptable. Nature is no longer killing children for us, so we must now decide who reproduces, and who doesn't. The people who can't deal with this issue are misfits in this modern world, and they must be told to keep their mouth shut.

The people who help the homeless and the hungry assume that they are wonderful people. For example, here is a report about an American family that sold their house, and gave half the money to The Hunger Project to help a village in Ghana. The family has written a book about their sacrifice. (Or were they hoping to profit from this? Was it just a publicity stunt?)

Giving food to hungry people actually makes the problem worse because it allows them to live long enough to reproduce, thereby increasing the number of hungry people! Furthermore, some of these poor people become criminals, and some become victims of crime networks who deliberately cripple them so that they make more money begging, and some are sold as sex or labor slaves.

The problem in India is shocking:

"...10 million street children..." beggary in india

"...gangs are deliberately crippling children for profit." gangs crippling children

"Most beggars originate from the more than 200 million Indians who continue to live under impoverished conditions..." South Asia ID03Df01

Imagine if there were homeless people living in the streets of your neighborhood, and in front of your home. What would you think if a family in America sold their house and gave half the money to feed the homeless people in your neighborhood? Would you be impressed by that family and want to purchase their book so that you could read about their noble sacrifice? And what would you think of a charity that was providing the homeless people in your neighborhood with food and medicine? Would you want to donate money to that charity?

If we behave like animals, we will suffer like animals

If we decide to feed the homeless and hungry people, then we should sterilize them, and if we don't want to sterilize them, then we should either let them die, or put them out of their misery in a quiet and painless manner. India, Africa, and other nations should get rid of all of the charities that are feeding or providing medicines to the homeless and hungry people. Who benefits by letting them suffer?
The Madras Famine in India killed millions of poor people, but we can stop hunger and starvation whenever we want to. All we have to do is stop acting like stupid animals and start restricting reproduction.

However, if the majority of humans are still too similar to animals to deal with reproductive issues, then we will continue to live - and suffer - just like animals.

I suspect that some of the loving, caring people who are trying to help the victims of the recent Haitian earthquake, and who want to feed the hungry people in India and Africa, are actually criminal Jews who want to increase the number of homeless and retarded people in order to destroy our nations, which in turn makes it easier for them to get control of us, as they describe in the Protocols of Zion.

We should put unwanted people out of their misery, not let them suffer!

Every year Americans abandon millions of unwanted dogs, cats, lizards, and horses. And every year Americans abandon unwanted children in orphanages, hospitals, military academies, and Catholic schools. The people who release their unwanted pets in the city, or who dump their unwanted children in orphanages or other institutions, rather than kill their unwanted pets and children, consider themselves to be compassionate and loving, but how many of those abandoned animals and children end up having a happy life? Who benefits by giving life to unwanted or defective people who never enjoy life?
(I mentioned the issue of unwanted pets and humans in my audio file for 11_Feb 2008 and in Denial of the Obvious, one of the articles in my Sheeple Psychology series.)
Some Philosophical Questions
If a child's life is dominated by hunger, loneliness, rejection, mental or physical pains, suicidal thoughts, beatings, rapes, and envy of children who are happy and healthy, did we do a wonderful deed by allowing him to live? Or did we torture an innocent child? Should we care whether an unwanted child is suffering? If so, and if there's nothing we can do to end his suffering, should we let it continue? Or put him out of his misery? If we kill a child who doesn't enjoy life, are we ending his life, or ending his suffering?

Some of us have pleasant childhoods that provide us with lots of wonderful memories to enjoy when we are older, but some people have miserable childhoods that they try to forget.

It's difficult for the unhappy people to die of old age because they feel cheated for never having the opportunity to enjoy life. When they look back at their life, they are reminded of the pain, the sadness, and the misery. They want to live a while longer and hope that soon they'll find happiness. They're not interested in singing along with Louis Armstrong in What a Wonderful World. They want to find friends and enjoy life before they die.

Take a serious look at the lives of the criminals who are causing trouble in the world today. How many of them are happy as adults? How many were happy as children? I don't think any of them are happy. It seems that they merely exist, or survive, from one day to the next, just like a primitive savage, or an animal. They don't enjoy other people, and they don't enjoy the universe, either. Instead, they waste their lives in crime networks, or on drugs or alcohol, or struggling to be rich and famous, or raping children, or fantasizing of revenge.

Their lives are full of miserable experiences that they want to forget. They are suffering, and they bring misery to other people. If society had killed these people while they were young, we would have spared them a lot of misery, and we would have spared the rest of us the years of abuse that they inflicted on us. Everybody gains by getting rid of miserable, destructive people.

How can we deny life to "Baby Hope"?
CNN has a report about a baby girl in China with a defect that surgeons can correct today, but the parents are in China, and they decided to let the baby slowly die on its own. An organization in China heard about this baby and is trying to save her, and this is bringing up the issue of who decides whether this baby lives.

CNN points out that another baby with the same defect was put up for adoption, and an American family gave it the necessary surgery, and the baby is doing fine.

However, a news article from China claims that the baby also had swelling of her kidneys and heart disease, and that the baby was given medical treatment in China, but after 13 days the parents decided the situation was hopeless and that the baby was being put through unnecessary pain. I suspect that CNN is minimizing the baby's problems in order to promote the philosophy that we should save all defective babies.

Our ancestors never had to be concerned about defective babies. They took care of every baby that was born. Nature made the decision of which of the babies lived and which died. Today we have to decide what to do with defective babies, and we have to decide whether parents should make the decision, or whether society decides for the parents. I think society should do the job that nature did for our ancestors. We should pass judgment on which defects are acceptable, but the babies with the unacceptable defects should be killed in a quiet and painless manner, not allowed to die slowly!

We have such strong inhibitions about killing people that we prefer to let babies and terminally ill people die a very slow and painful death, but who benefits from this idiotic policy? We should stop acting like stupid animals and put these people out of their misery.

Some people promote the philosophy that we should try to save every baby, no matter how difficult, painful, and expensive the medical procedures are. But there are billions of eggs and sperm that never have the chance to become people. By killing a defective baby, the parents can have another baby, and the next one may be in better health. Why should we waste time and resources on defective babies when millions of eggs and sperm are wasted every day? And why should parents suffer the burden of defective babies? And how many of the defective babies will have a happy life?

The human race survived millions of years of high infant mortality rates, and their babies suffered slow and miserable deaths. It will be easier for us to deal with this issue because we can put the babies to death in a quiet and painless manner. But are there enough people who can handle a child killing service? Or an assisted suicide service?

No pain, no gain
Our government, schools, industries, and cities will improve only if we discuss the problems we face and start experimenting with possible solutions. Nothing improves all by itself. We actually have to do something about the corruption, crime, starvation, and retards.

What would happen if every nation began sterilizing their unwanted and retarded people? What would happen if we started exiling the misfits and executing the dangerous criminals? The answer is that the transition period would be unpleasant, but eventually every nation would become a beautiful area of the world; every nation would become full of people that we enjoy and are proud of.

The transition period would be brutal, but the human race would become happier and healthier as a result. The world would become a garden of wonderful humans who work together and trust one another. And the future generations would look back at our era with horror at the thought of living among freaks, criminals, and retards. They would be thankful that they were born in the future and not during our time.

So, what will it be? Will we continue to suffer abuse from criminals and freaks? Or will we cleanse the world of destructive people and turn this planet into a paradise?

Why is the media continuing to attack Tiger Woods?
Corky Siemaszko of the New York Daily News describes this photograph on the cover of Vanity Fair as a "menacing shot".

Philip Kennicott of the Washington Post compares it with recent photos taken by the National Enquirer: "The Tiger Woods of Vanity Fair is showing the demons that the Tiger Woods of National Enquirer will have to exorcise. "

The National Enquirer writes "TIGER ON THE LOOSE! Bimbos, lock up your daughters -- Tiger Woods is OUT of sex rehab!"

Have you noticed that the media doesn't insult the women as golddiggers, sluts, or whores? Why don't the Jews condemn Barbara Walters for having an affair with the married Senator Edward Brooke? Why don't they write articles with remarks such as, "Barbara Walters on the loose! -- Black women, lock up your husbands!"

I think Barbara Walters is treated nicely because she is one of their Zionist whores. I doubt that she was in love with a married - and black! - Senator. (Have you overheard Jews insulting black people?)

Incidentally, Barbara Walters had trouble pronouncing the letter R, which is typical of children, and possibly Neanderthals, as I described 2_July 2008.

“I'm Baba Wawas, and I had an affauh with Senata Edwawd Bwooke, a ma-wied, nigga.”
Tiger Woods will return to golf, and his first competition seems to be the Tavistock Cup, (it is misspelled here) which is part of the Tavistock Group, and may have some connection to the Tavistock Institute, which had blood splattered all over it during the 7-7-7 bombing.

I put some information about Tavistock here. Incidentally, the Tavistock Cup starts March 22. As I wrote here , the Jewish network seems to be full of infantile jerks who have a fascination with "numerology". They make an issue of the number 322, such as here and here.

Will the Latinos be tricked into trusting the Jews? 

This article claims that Jews want to help the Latinos with immigration issues:
“The Jewish-Latino alliance on immigration issues builds on the heritage and experience of the Jewish community...”
In reality, the Jews don't like the Latinos any more than they like the rest of us Goyim. The Jews don't want to "work with" the Latinos. Rather, the Jews want to use them for diabolical reasons, such as to break down America. This is why the Jews are encouraging them to speak Spanish.

The Jews also infiltrate and create Latino organizations, including such "truth sites" as that expose the Jews as criminals. The Jews are also trying to fool the Mexicans into believing the Southwest is Aztlan, but they're not having much success with that concept because most Mexicans want a job and a family, not a war with America.

“Let's work together! We will help you get what you deserve.

We Jews have been abused for 6000 years. That's why we have a special bond with you fuc... uhhh,.. uh, Latinos! You can trust us!”

Will the "N people" become victims of this Jewish trick? 
A lot of Jews refer to the word "nigger" as "the N word". The Jews do this to make it appear as if they have a special compassion and bond with black people.

For example, here is a segment on youtube (it starts at about 6:40, but if you don't want to waste your time, here is the brief but significant excerpt in MP3 format) of Alex Jones and Kevin Booth interviewing Ricky Ross (who is black) on February 3, 2010, and they are all referring to the word "nigger" as the "N word".

The black people who get upset over the word "nigger" are fools who are falling for an idiotic Jewish trick. It is as ridiculous as Italians complaining about The D Word (dago), or white people complaining about The C Word (cracker), or Japanese complaining about The J Word (jap), or Germans complaining about The K Word (kraut), or the English complaining about The L Word (limey).

“We Jews have such a strong compassion for you nigga... uhh,... you N people that it brings pain to our souls to even hear the N word.

We can't say that word. It hurts us too much. We Jews know what discrimination is, so we feel your pain.”

 Warning: I'm tired of being called The A Word and The H Word!

Jews are routinely insulting me with The A Word (anti-Semite), and The H Word (Holocaust denier). I'm tired of this abuse! I want an apology! Stop referring to me with those derogatory terms!
Black comedians should make jokes about the word "nigger"
Instead of being suckers and allowing the Jews to instigate fights over "the N-word", black comedians should laugh at the word "nigger".
Unfortunately, some black people can't pronounce the word Negro, either! And some of them may not even be capable of pronouncing the word "nigger" with an R, which would explain why some of them are using the word "nigga" - and "gangsta" instead of gangster. (Or, perhaps the words "nigga" and "gangsta" were created by Jews, such as Barbara Walters, who have trouble pronouncing the letter R!)

Anyway, my point is that the black people should realize that the Jews are trying to instigate fights between the races, religions, wealthy and poor, conservatives and liberals, and men and women. Don't fall for their tricks!

Every race should improve itself, not feel sorry for their "Underdogs"
Many Americans boast about being the wretched refuse of Europe, but the nice qualities of America didn't come from the wretched refuse. It came from the immigrants who contributed to society and behaved in a responsible manner. America's philosophy of feeling sorry for the Underdog is destructive.

The respectable Caucasian Americans should stop feeling sorry for their disgusting relatives, or other Caucasian refuse. Likewise, the respectable black Americans should not defend the black people who are retarded, dishonest, psychotic, or violent. And the respectable Mexicans, Japanese, and Chinese should stop protecting their criminals, weirdos, and freaks. Every race and nation should think of themselves as a patch of flowers in the human garden.

Imagine how nice the world would be if every nation would cleanse itself of criminals and freaks. Imagine being able to walk down the streets of Bombay, India, without stepping over homeless people. Imagine visiting Africa and encountering only healthy, educated, respectable Africans. Imagine being able to visit a karaoke bar in the Philippines without worrying that violent fights will break out over Frank Sinatra's song "My Way". Imagine if Thailand didn't need a law to stop young boys from castrating themselves (I mentioned this 19_May 2008).

A nation should be ashamed of its corrupt government officials, teenage prostitutes, and criminal news reporters, not boasting that the nation is full of wretched refuse. We should remove the destructive people from society, not protect them.


Stop letting Jews select your leaders!

The Jews are currently deciding for the black people who will be the "leaders of the black community". The Jews promote Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, Oprah Winfrey, and other black people who promote pouting, hatred, hoarding of money, or some type of destructive or idiotic behavior.

The Jews ignore, suppress, or kill the black people who are impressive and who promote good attitudes. The end result is that all we see on television are disgusting black people. The African nations are also allowing the Jews to select their leaders, such as Idi Amin. When Amin later turned against Israel, the Jews ruined his image.

Unfortunately, most Africans and black Americans will continue to allow the Jews to select leaders for them. Why? For the same reason that all Caucasian nations are allowing the Jews to select leaders for us, such as Al Gore, Angela Merkel, Tony Blair, Nicolas Sarkozy, Stephen Harper, John Kerry, the Clintons, and Sarah Palin.

Furthermore, scientists of all races are allowing the Jews to determine which scientists get funding, publicity, and awards! The scientists don't even complain that Al Gore won a Nobel prize, an Oscar, a Primetime Emmy Award, a Grammy Award,....his list of awards is here.

Scientists aren't even complaining that Dr. David Ray Griffin, Ph.D., a Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2008 and 2009. The scientists (and their friends!) who nominated Griffin, Gore, and Obama should be investigated, but how many scientists are interested in providing themselves with better leadership?

The "scientists" that the Jews promote are "educated criminals" or "Scholarly Savages" who assist with Jewish crimes. For example, Dr. Griffin, Ph.D., will give more lectures during April and May 2010 to deceive more people about the Jewish involvement in 9/11 and other crimes.

We need better leaders for science so that we can fund sensible scientific programs, and we need better leaders for our school system so that we can create courses that prepare children for society and prevent criminals and incompetent people from referring to themselves as scientists, especially in the social sciences, but how many scientists care who their leaders are or whether the social sciences are dominated by criminals?



The sheeple - regardless of their race, education, or intelligence - will eat whatever the Jews feed them. When we explain to the sheeple that the Jews are taking advantage of them by staging the 9/11 attack, by lying about the Holocaust, by taking over the banking system, etc., they ignore or insult us! They don't care that they're abused.

 We need men who can stand up to feminists
Jews are instigating fights between men and women, but the men who currently dominate society are so disgusting that they can't tell the women to shut up. 

We need a group of men who are impressive enough that the women realize that men really are more intelligent and better suited to leadership positions.

“How can a woman enjoy life? We've been oppressed by men for 6,000 years. We need to be liberated; to be set free.”

 Did you notice that Eustace Mullins is dead?

I was expecting Mullins to die without anybody reporting it, but his death got a lot of publicity. For example, the conventional media claims to hate him:
"Nationally known white supremacist and anti-Semite Eustace Mullins of Staunton, described in 2000 by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a one-man organization of hate", The News Leader
The truth seekers on the Internet claim to love him:
• "He was absolutely BRILLIANT ... HIs knowledge and wisdom about the controllers was simply astonishing." - Jeff Rense

• “Legendary Populist Historian...” - Pat Shannan

• "Legendary author of hundreds of books and pamphlets demolishing the lies of warmaking mainstream media" - John Kaminski

Internet sites that refuse to give me publicity, and which will post only a few of Christopher Bollyn's articles, will post articles and videos from Mullins, mainly his information about the banking system:

Eustace Mullins; another blackmailed Homo? 

Many years ago Rick Cooper wrote this booklet that accused Eustace Mullins and other "patriots" of being homosexual, and now I am even more convinced that Mullins was indeed one of their blackmailed, homosexual puppets.

Mullins made a lot of critical remarks about Jews, but the Jews focus on his expose of the banking system. This is more evidence that the Jews were using Mullins to shift attention away from Israel and Zionism and onto the bankers.


Important message:

Help counteract the propaganda!
Free videos at my site: