by Robert Frenz

David L. Smith allegedly is responsible for the America On Line 'Melissa' virus. My personal opinion is, that if found guilty, fun-loving Dave should be castrated and henceforth shipped to Basutoland where the friendly blacks could invite him for dinner after par-roasting him at a 'necklacing' party. I have absolutely no use for this type of individual which is far too common among America's young. They are of no use to anyone and are cancers on civilization. Good intentions, or "fun", elicit no sympathy from me when they lead to destructive acts. We are far too lenient on the criminal element in this country.

The TV manure-slingers probably will bubble about how Dave was some sort of genius and perhaps he'll be pardoned once he "finds Jeesus" and/or agrees to help government sleuths do in other 'hackers' and Internet mischief makers. Perhaps there is some 'good' in this sort of being but I prefer not to waste my time discovering those nebulous points. Simply kill them all and let God sort them out.

Often, we are apt to lose sight of the main trail when we wander down the lane of so-called intelligence. Many clever, and brilliant people are criminals and their behavior is that which should be considered solely.

Human intelligence can never be accurately defined, nor measured, by other humans. One would have to be a god in order to understand God for Arthur Schoepenhauer (German philosopher) once pointed out that no man can ever see above himself.

Our intelligence tests serve only as useful predictors of what a person's performance might be. That's all -- and only a jackass would wave his scores about as some sort of flag as to his worth. The bottom line is that character is the real measure of any man. A trustworthy friend, with an I.Q. of 90, is far more valuable as a human being than any 120 I.Q. treacherous liar.

In the 1920s, when America was still sane, a 'trial of the century' took place. (It seems we have about as many of those as we do new Hitlers.)

The University of Chicago, noted for its discriminatory testing of all prospective students, harbored among its myriad of brilliant students, one Nathan Freudenthal Leopold and a Richard A. Loeb -- both jews and both faggots and both reported to have I.Q.s in the 180s.

As was the policy of the University then, and also which was true in the 1950s when I attended, high school graduation was not an entrance requirement. One was accepted on merit alone and so these two mentioned students managed to graduate at ages 18 and 17, respectively. This remains an extraordinary achievement since education had not yet deteriorated to a batch of Nintendo games and social palaver, as we find today.

Although brilliant, in the usual meaning of the word, Leopold and Loeb had very serious character flaws which led to their arrests over several petty theft and arson charges. Both, coming from very wealthy families, managed to avoid serious jail time by the spending of copious amounts of money in the right places.

Richard and Nathan, perpetually intoxicated by their own intelligence, decided to plan the 'perfect' crime -- an intellectual 'thrill' -- completely ignoring the fact that their previous arrests were made by the simple policemen they held in contempt. This new piece of mischief centered around murder. The intended victim was none other than a fellow jew, faggot and cousin, Robert Franks.

Loeb was the more ruthless of the two and in the back seat of a rented automobile, the Franks boy, aged 14, had his skull penetrated by a chisel, driven by the hand of Loeb, while his mouth was stuffed with a gag. He died in moments. Near-sighted Leopold lost his glasses when the Frank's body was tossed into a culvert. They also sent ransom notes to the Franks family demanding money. In short order, their intellectual inferiors had them in custody. So much for brilliantly planned crimes.

The courts, at that time, were not places where one could plead poverty, broken home life, slavery, or shed 'survivor' tears, as a means of defence. The spirit of the law was in effect and the judicial system was not corrupted by the word-twisting, letter of the law, circuses it is now. Leopold and Loeb were facing positive execution -- a time-proven method of rehabilitation.

As was mentioned, Leopold and Loeb came from extremely wealthy families and so it was no surprise that Clarence Seward Darrow (the most famous lawyer of that period) was retained as the lawyer for the defence. With an extremely well-stated argument against the death penalty, the two young men were found guilty and sentenced to life-imprisonment (murder) plus 99 years (kidnapping), in the Illinois Penitentiary at Joliet.

In a shower room at the prison, Loeb made the mistake of making sadist homosexual advances toward another not so inclined. The resulting skirmish left Loeb lying in a pool of his own blood, dying from a violent razor attack. He was 31.

Leopold was paroled in 1958 and spent the remaining 10 years of his life working in Puerto Rico as a hospital technician.

Character is everything and it remains obvious that Leopold and Loeb could have contributed much to the society in which they lived had they not been steered by the severe handicap of being without moral substance. I think about this each time I hear of some blight-wing criminal claiming he is fighting for my race -- the White race. I need them not.

3 April 1999