Forum

It seems you didn't even understand what you wrote yourself, as usual. If you judge people by their actions—what difference does it make if a person is Jewish or not? Make up your mind how you judge people: by appearance or by actions, otherwise you are contradicting yourself.

I don't even know how to write to you anymore!

There is no difference; am I to blame that they are all Jews across the board?
All the cannibals who are currently eating Russia—turned out to be Jews, or acting on the instructions of Jews.

All the leaders of the USSR were either Jews, or their wives were Jewish ladies—am I to blame for this? I am simply stating the fact that they are all Jews.

If 300 of the world's wealthiest clans—the Rothschilds, DuPonts, Gateses, Bushes, Morgans, etc.—are all Jews across the board, am I to blame for that? Does a criminal not have a nationality? Is it forbidden to speak the nationality of a criminal aloud?

Am I to blame that this so-called Committee of 300 (the wealthiest clans in the world) decided to leave 1 billion people on earth, which does not include Russians or Slavs—decided to destroy everyone else through wars, alcohol, drugs, debauchery, vaccination?

Who is bombing Syria now?
Who bombed Libya before that?
What is the nationality of America's Secretary of Defense?
Who owns the Federal Reserve System—which is not subordinate to either the US government or the president?

It just so happened that the answer to all these questions will be: Jews. Am I to blame for this?
If you are Russian, can you not be called Russian? And a Jew, a Jew?

I wrote before that I do not call all Jews across the board cannibals, but only those who successfully carry out the genocide of the Russian people, those who organized this alcoholic terror. Currently, Russia's population is shrinking by 1 to 3 million every year! At such a pace, such a nation will simply soon cease to exist.

____________________________________________________________
Weapon of Genocide.
Alcohol: Statistics and Demographics

Following the Indians of America,
The Russian Ivans strive.
For "voluntary" drunkenness—
Multi-million losses!

Russia was traditionally one of the most sober countries in the world.

In Europe, only Norway drank less than we did.

We ranked second to last in the world for per capita alcohol consumption for three centuries from the 17th to the beginning of the 20th century.

With the start of the 20th century, per capita alcohol consumption jumped sharply.

It was less than 3 liters, and by 1914 it reached a level unheard of for the so-called drunken Tsarist Russia: 4.7 liters.

In 1914, on the eve of World War I, "prohibition" was adopted in Russia.

As a result, alcohol production and consumption in Russia dropped almost to zero—less than 0.2 liters per person per year, which is less than one glass of alcohol per person per year.

Prohibition existed for 14 years and was abolished in 1925.

The decree on the resumption of the vodka trade on October 5, 1925, was signed by Rykov.

And until the Great Patriotic War, vodka was contemptuously called "rykovka" by the people.

Subsequently, drunkenness increased and reached 1.9 liters in 1940.

During the war, drunkenness dropped sharply and only returned to pre-war levels in 1952.

After the death of I.V. Stalin, our country plummeted into a terrible alcoholic abyss.

There are official data from the CSU RSFSR, Goskomstat RSFSR, and Goskomstat Russia, which remained secret—hidden from the population—from the mid-1960s until 1988.

These are the so-called data on "registered alcohol consumption."

in 1970 – 1999

1 – American Sovietologist Vladimir Treml for 1970–1980; 2 – average estimate of Goskomstat RF, V. Treml, and A. Nemtsov data for 1980–1994; 3 – A. Nemtsov for 1998–1999; 4 – Goskomstat RF: registered alcohol consumption; 5 – start of the anti-alcohol campaign, 6 – start of market reforms.

Since 1960, calculations of moonshining and total alcohol consumption were first carried out in the USSR, and later in Russia, by American Sovietologist Vladimir Treml, who showed that true per capita consumption in Russia in 1970 was very high at 12 liters, and ten years later it grew by another 2 liters.

Since 1980, calculations of moonshining and total alcohol consumption under conditions of secrecy began to be performed by Goskomstat RSFSR, and since 1981—by Doctor of Medical Sciences and psychiatrist Alexander Nemtsov.

The Goskomstat data were declassified in 1989. The independence of obtaining these three estimates and the proximity of their values is the only way to verify the correctness of determining the level of real alcohol consumption in Russia.

The similarity of the three estimates allows for the calculation of the average level of alcohol consumption in Russia from 1980 to 1994.

On the eve of the anti-alcohol campaign, it stood at 14.2 liters of per capita alcohol consumption, of which 3.8 liters or 26% was moonshine.

Is 14.2 liters of pure alcohol per person per year a lot or a little, primarily for men? 14.2 liters of alcohol correspond to 35.5 liters of vodka (14.2 x 2.5 = 35.5) or an average of 71 half-liter bottles per person in the country.

But in 1984, the ratio of men to women was 1:1.15.

It is especially important, as shown previously, that Russian men drink 4/5 of the total amount of alcohol.

From this it follows that one man consumed an average of 130 bottles of vodka (142 x 0.8 x 1.15) per year.

Let us assume that the main consumers of alcohol are men aged 15 to 65.

They constituted 67.6% of the male population.

This means that one adult man consumed 190 bottles of vodka per year.

At the same time, it should not be forgotten that there are still men in Russia who do not drink at all or drink little (slightly more than 20% drank once a month or less).

With this correction, it turns out that 80% of adult men drink an average of more than 200 half-liter bottles of vodka per year on average, i.e.

more than 1 bottle every two days.

At the same time, of course, it should not be forgotten that some of those 80% drank 1 bottle a week, while another drank 2 bottles a day.

But even then, it turns out that the vast majority of Russian men can be considered drunkards.

Alcohol consumption in Russia in the first half of the 1980s was 2-3 times higher than in other countries.

For example, in 1984, alcohol consumption in Sweden, Finland, and Great Britain was 5.2, 6.6, and 7.2 respectively, and in the USA—8.6 liters of per capita consumption.

It is clear that the alcoholization of the Russian population before the start of the anti-alcohol campaign was very high (14.2 liters).

But this should not have been a reason for a sharp, directive, forced reduction in alcohol consumption without an active explanatory campaign.

What was needed was not an extremist "shock therapy" campaign, but a reasonable state anti-alcohol policy, primarily in the field of sobriety propaganda and anti-advertising of alcohol in all media and other public institutions, with a gradual reduction in produced and consumed alcohol—with the prospect of bringing its production to zero.

This issue has not lost its relevance even in our time.

Our society needs such a reasonable state policy today as well.

Despite the provocation, during the first year and a half of the anti-alcohol campaign (1985 and 1986), registered sales decreased by 51%, and real consumption by 27% due to a sharp increase in moonshining, which continued to grow and thereby compensate for the deficit in state sales.

In 1991, alcohol consumption approached the original level, mainly due to the underground production of alcoholic beverages, which at that time constituted more than half of total consumption.

A new and especially rapid growth began along with market reforms (from January 2, 1992).

These reforms were accompanied not only by the liberalization of prices and the sale of alcoholic beverages: in the general flow of liberalization, E. Gaidar's government temporarily abolished the state monopoly on the production and trade of alcohol.

Non-excise, and therefore very cheap, counterfeits appeared on the alcohol market.

Some of them were made based on low-quality technical spirits, whose toxicity was much higher compared to moonshine.

The sharp growth in spirit consumption continued until 1994, then a decline began up until 1998 (13.5 liters) and a new growth in 1999—2001 (14.5 liters in 2000).

How did the population of Russia die during this same time? The total number of deaths increased fairly evenly from 1965 to 1984 (by 36.1 thousand per year, from 959 thousand in 1965 to 1.65 million in 1984).

Population growth was increasing during this time, however, lagging behind the growth of mortality.

In connection with this, over 20 years (from 1964 to 1984), life expectancy decreased—especially significantly for men—by 2.5 years.

This is linked to the increase in alcohol consumption.

This is evidenced by the growth of state alcohol sales from 1960 to 1980 more than twofold (from 4.6 to 10.5 liters) and real consumption (from 9.8 to 14.0 liters).

Other evidence can be the constant growth in the share of deaths from alcohol poisoning (from 1.1% to 2.2%).

However, based on data from 1965—1984, it was difficult to assess the contribution of alcohol to the reduction of life expectancy of the population during this period and, thus, to isolate the alcoholic factor among other unfavorable phenomena.

Almost experimental conditions that arose as a result of the anti-alcohol campaign helped to do this. 1 – start of the anti-alcohol campaign; 2 – start of market reforms;

a – regression line for 1965—1984; b – for 1986—1991.


A noticeable decrease in mortality began just 2-3 months after the start of the campaign, and an obvious one—after a year and a half: by 203.5 thousand or by 12.3% (1986) of the total number of deaths in 1984. During this time, per capita alcohol consumption decreased by 3.7 liters, while the dependence of mortality on consumption was strictly linear from 1984 to 1986.

From this it follows that at the beginning of the anti-alcohol campaign, with a consumption of 10—15 liters of per capita alcohol, a reduction in consumption by each liter of alcohol reduced the total number of deaths by 3.3%.

The share of deaths increases sharply if calculations are conducted for men aged 35—59, for whom this indicator decreased by 25.4% or 6.9% per liter of per capita alcohol.

To assess the change in mortality related to alcohol during the anti-alcohol campaign, it is important that the regression line calculated for 1965—1984 can serve as a forecast of what mortality would have been after 1984 if the anti-alcohol campaign had not started.

After the sharp decrease in mortality in 1985—1986 and up until 1991, mortality stabilized at a new level.

At the same time, practically the same rate of increase in the number of deaths was maintained (38.6 thousand per year).

Having this data, one can calculate the number of people who could have died but did not die during the anti-alcohol campaign.

This quantity is determined by the deviation from the prognostic regression line, which amounts to 1.22 million people or 204 thousand per year.

During the anti-alcohol campaign, the number of deaths decreased not only among men but also among women.

The linearity of the relationship between alcohol and mortality allows for a transition from the mortality indicator per liter of alcohol to mortality per 100,000 male and female population: 944.3 men and 231.5 women.

Using these numbers, one can calculate the total alcoholic losses of the country in 1984: 344.4 thousand men and 168.7 thousand women (total 513.1 thousand or 31%)—direct (deaths from alcohol poisoning, related to alcoholic psychoses or liver cirrhosis, acute alcoholic pancreatitis, and alcoholism) and indirect alcoholic losses (fatal road traffic accidents related to alcohol, other violent or unnatural deaths, deaths related to somatic diseases complicated by alcoholism or drunkenness, or complicated by alcoholism or drunkenness).

The diagnostic composition of alcoholic mortality is of interest.

Among men in 1985—1986, the level of almost all classes of death decreased significantly, which constitute the vast majority of all deaths (77.8% in 1986—1991).

During this same period, a significant decrease in female mortality occurred only in the group of cardiovascular and external (violent, unnatural) causes (73.0% of all deaths in 1986—1991).

The only exceptions were neoplasms, infectious, and parasitic diseases.

Thus, most classes of causes of male mortality synchronously "responded" with a decrease to the reduction in alcohol consumption during the anti-alcohol campaign, which allows these formally non-alcoholic diseases and deaths to be linked to alcohol consumption.

In essence—these are indirect alcoholic losses, although factually—this is the country's alcoholic damage hidden from state statistics.

Calculations of alcoholic mortality, similar to calculations of general mortality, were performed for mortality from external causes (accidents, poisonings, injuries, and violent causes).

This group of causes made the main contribution to male alcoholic mortality (44.9%), despite constituting only 18% of total mortality.

Such a ratio is due to the fact that more than half of these deaths are directly or indirectly linked to alcohol.

This is confirmed by an analysis of autopsy material both in Moscow and in 25 regions of Russia from 1981—1984: alcohol was detected in the blood of 53.1% and 58.4% of those who died in this group, respectively, whereas in state statistics among deaths from external causes, the share of deaths "in a state of alcoholic intoxication" only rarely exceeded 10%.

It is a legitimate question: where does the information about alcohol in the blood or drunken state disappear for 40% of those who died from violent or external causes?

Among women, the share of this type of mortality was three times lower than among men, and almost twice as rarely was this mortality linked to alcohol.

Among the large group of deaths from external causes, the connection with alcohol consumption is of particular interest for socially significant types of mortality such as suicides and murders.

Suicides in 1984 constituted 23.7% of the total number of deaths from external causes or 43,123 men and 10,983 women (total 54,106 people).

With the start of the anti-alcohol campaign, there was a sharp decrease in the number of suicides: from 37.9 in 1984 to 23.1 in 1986 per 100,000 population.

One can calculate the number of saved lives of potential suicide victims: 111,178 people or 33.3% of people (28.7% men and 4.6% women) who could have ended in suicide but preserved their lives during the anti-alcohol campaign.

Murders are always a two-sided process, where there is a killer (killers) and a victim (victims).

Similarly, the theme of "alcohol and murders" is two-sided, since both the killed and the killer (or both) can be drunk, but the result is the same.

In 1984, murders constituted 7.7% of the total number of deaths from external causes or 11,039 men and 5,042 women (total 16,081 people).

In Russia, those killed with alcohol in their blood from 1981—1984 constituted 65%.

This share decreased during the anti-alcohol campaign to 59% (1988), after which its growth began (in 1990 again more than 60%).

As a result of the anti-alcohol campaign, there was a significant decrease in the murder rate: from 12.1 in 1984 to 7.4 per 100,000 population in 1987 against the backdrop of decreased alcohol consumption.

This served as evidence of the connection between these two phenomena.

Alcoholic mortality related to diseases of the circulatory system decreased significantly during the anti-alcohol campaign and grew during the period of market reforms.

The main mechanism for linking cardiovascular pathology with alcohol use is that chronic alcoholic intoxication complicates the course of already existing diseases of this class and is an additional risk factor: chronic alcoholic intoxication reduces the life expectancy of men with a cardiovascular system disease by an average of 17 years.

That was a joke, but I didn't even hope that you would understand it))

All you have to do is get circumcised as Oelm (an expert in these matters) says and you'll be accepted into the Jews :)
Only, solely if you are not a pure-blooded Jew they will use you and dispose of you at any convenient opportunity.