This Land Belongs To Us: say rioters in Denmark

Posted by Bill on November 01, 2005, 12:26 PM | #

This whole thing makes me more furious by the day.  I was just reading about the race riots in Paris.  All I can say is that the stupid europeans created a monster they are now powerless to stop.  Turking or North African people are as prevelant in European cities as black people are in American ones.  And europe is beginning to feel the demographic effects.  From what I heard, Tony Blair is repatriating thousands of muslim immigrants, but I have a feeling its more talk than action.

Posted by Bill on November 01, 2005, 12:34 PM | #

On another note: on November second it will be one year since the Van Gogh murder.  Perhaps some sort of tribute should be made to a man who had the gumption to stand up to the eurabians?

Posted by Guessedworker on November 01, 2005, 12:39 PM | #

You’re right, Bill.  I’ll see what we can do about remembering TVG.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Posted by James Bowery on November 01, 2005, 02:32 PM | #

Why does no one have the honesty to call these riots what they are:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/11/1/124935/413 a Race Riot.

Posted by Matthew on November 01, 2005, 02:46 PM | #

Geoff,

this is fascinating how they call “this is our place” in Denmark riots.

You put a link in the other day about the guy who writes Civil War II stuff in USA and he said first symptom of coming breakup is people either barracading or calling areas, their land.

This is first symptom of coming real civil war and complete breakdown.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 01, 2005, 03:04 PM | #

“From what I heard, Tony Blair is repatriating thousands of muslim immigrants,”  (—Bill)

He’s got millions more to go, so it’s none too soon to start ... The goal is restoration of the status quo ante, remember—let no one forget that. 

That’s the status quo ante:  U.K. demographics restored to exactly what they were in the 1950s.  Sorry, but our side will not accept anything else.  The race-replacers started it behind our backs without consulting a single soul but just decided to ram it through, placing us before the fait accompli, thinking once a certain critical mass had been installed here we’d not dare to send them back and the game would be up, chalk one up for their side.  But that’s not how the game’s going to be played.  They’re going back.

Put that in your “parlour bigot” pipe and smoke it, race-replacers.

Posted by Zach on November 01, 2005, 03:08 PM | #

Yes one interesting point that book notes is the danger of living in a surrounded enclave, which is still where most non-Westerners in Europe and NA live. As long the race rioters are located in resource dependant cities or neighborhoods, they can always be surrounded and waited out, worst case. If the situation becomes inverted, with them controlling the countryside though, then that is going to spell much bigger trouble.

Posted by Zach on November 01, 2005, 03:24 PM | #

Re: Fred above. The funny thing is that in say, 1900, I doubt that anybody would have believed you if you had told them that in a little more than half a century, the age of colonialism would be over, with Europe giving their former colonies their independence, most of the whites packing up and leaving, etc. I don’t think there is anything particularly radical about questioning if history might not repeat itself again regarding this reverse-colonialism we see in the West. My guess is that a century from now everyone will wonder why anybody ever thought the status quo could be sustained.

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 01, 2005, 03:51 PM | #

Fred, I’ve been meaning to ask - have you gotten around to reading more about WWII like you said you would? I think our present malaise basically dates back to then. Also - google “Antony Sutton”. See what comes up.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 01, 2005, 08:46 PM | #

How fast things can change

> In 1900 I doubt that anybody would have believed in a little more than half a century, the age of colonialism would be over, with Europe giving their former colonies their independence, most of the whites packing up

Although this episode was a disaster for us and the world we can take heart - things can change quickly

We must hold to a vision of Europe which is purified of alien elements both physical and mental. I say there can be no comprimise on this - Europe must be NOW and FOREVER the homeland of only the European peoples. We defend our family, we defend our race, we defend our homelands.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 01, 2005, 09:43 PM | #

Geoff has a point, above. 

NO FORCED RACE-REPLACEMENT!  To whatever extent the other side has already succeeded in forcing it, IT MUST BE REVERSED.  MERELY STOPPING ITS FURTHER PROGRESSION ISN’T GOOD ENOUGH.  WE DEMAND FULL RESTORATION OF THE EUROPEAN RACIAL/ETHNOCULTURAL STATUS QUO ANTE, NOTHING LESS!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 02, 2005, 12:19 AM | #

Steve Edwards, yes, I’ve begun little by little to look into the reasons behind WW I and behind certain things that happened during and right after it that have been a mystery to me.  For example:  Why did the Wilson administration force the Kaiser to abdicate in favor of a republic?  This was royal-then-imperial Prussia going back seven hundred years and all of a sudden all that had to disappear down the memory hole as the place got changed into some corrupt, incompetent piece of inadequacy and decadence called the Weimar republic because President Wilson’s advisors said so???  What the hell was going on with that???  Why was the U.S. in it in the first place?  The U.S. had absolutely nothing to do with it.  Had it never stuck its nose in, Britain would’ve been obliged to settle on a peace agreement by 1917 and the thing would’ve been compromised to everyone’s satisfaction in the normal way just as the Franco-Prussian war had been.  Had the U.S. stayed out Germany would’ve remained the Second Reich under the Kaiser, Hitler wouldn’t have happened, and the Soviet Union would not have been permitted by post-war Germany to get off the ground—in other words, had the U.S. stayed out, the 20th century wouldn’t have happened, and instead la Belle Époque would’ve continued its merry way at the very least several decades into the new century, possibly longer.  Were reds controlling Wilson, as we now know them to have been controlling Roosevelt?  Even with Germany’s defeat, had the Kaiser not been pushed out by the Americans—had he been allowed to remain, as Hirohito was in 1945—Hitler and the Nazis never would’ve arisen, obviously.  The list of mysteries goes on and on and yes, I’m trying to educate myself better on that topic, as I am also on the topic of WW II, in regard to which there’s also a long list of mysteries.  Thanks for telling me about Antony Sutton.  His stuff looks interesting.  I’ve just put the first google page on him into “my favorites” so I’ll be able to thoroughly browse it and the following pages at my leisure.

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 02, 2005, 07:36 AM | #

Here are the three best Sutton books online:

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/index.html

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/best_enemy/index.html

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 02, 2005, 07:37 AM | #

Everything, EVERYTHING, we have been told is damned lie.

Posted by AD on November 02, 2005, 02:33 PM | #

The problem with Sutton is that he did not put these recent(ish) events into proper historical context. Therefore, he(intentionally?) entirely misses the point, especially in regards to the Bolshevik revolution, something that i spent 2 years of post-grad study scouring.

The reason that the reality of the Bolshevik revolution is rarely brought up while Nazism is ‘exposed’ 24/7 isn’t because of some banking ‘conspiracy’. In ‘exposing’ Henry Ford he is doing nothing radical. Of course he helped finance the National Socialists, not in the interests of banking and internationalism, but in absolute opposition to them. That is why his memory is constantly vilified.

The answer is far more obvious, there is no ‘conspiracy’ besides the ‘conspiracy’ not to make Hollywood movies about what happened. Read any history book published before 1945 for a slap of reality. The common thread between marxism,‘psychology’, capitalism, bolshevism, multiculturalism and every other disease that plagues western man isn’t ‘Skull & Bones’ or the ‘Illuminati’. It is absolutely obvious and unhidden for anyone who cares to look at legitimate sources. The whole ‘world domination’ thing is a strawman to make plain-as-day facts seem like a ‘conspiracy theory’ when it is nothing but simple ethnic interests.

If you want to see the reality of the bolshevik revolution in action, see any ‘multicultural’ western country today or read about Germanic farmers being duped into clan wars over usury 400 years ago. Same motive, same culprits, same dumb cattle over and over and over….

Posted by ben tillman on November 02, 2005, 02:41 PM | #

Were reds controlling Wilson, as we now know them to have been controlling Roosevelt?

Of course!  There was a socialist living in the White House running the country.  His name was “Colonel” Edward Mandell House.  He wrote a novel called Philip Dru Administrator:  A Story of Tomorrow 1920-1935, in which the title character became the sinister dictator of America.

Read it here:

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/8phlp10h.htm

Posted by AD on November 02, 2005, 02:52 PM | #

As for Denmark, the only problem with muslims, like every other alien group in the west, is that they’re here. Arguing or debating beyond that is redundant.

My worst nightmare is an ‘integrated’ society with well behaved non-westerners as neighbours. Let them run amok now and reveal themselves, lest i put at risk my descendents who may have to live with their ethnically confident descendents.

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 02, 2005, 05:45 PM | #

I understand your point, to a certain extent, AD, however you seem to be understating the extent to which the Anglo-American establishment built up groups such as the Round Table and the Council on Foreign Relations to submerge American (and our) sovereignty under a world government. I do not see that central process as being the end-point of ethnic interests.

That doesn’t mean that ethnic interests aren’t supporting, for their own reasons, many of the necessary ingredients (that you listed) of destroying our national sovereignty (and on this point I have no quarrel with your fundamental argument), but we still have to be aware of the world government angle, simply because it is well documented (by respectable historians including the late Carroll Quigley) that the Anglo-American elites, working through tax exempt foundations, have been engineering exactly that.

Interestingly, whenever I try to bring up the subject of the Bolshevik Revolution being heavily underwritten by financiers in America, Britain and Germany, people just don’t want to hear it. Deep down, people like to believe that the Bolshevik Revolution was an ideological struggle against “evil capitalism” when the Bolsheviks actually granted industrial concessions to western capitalists.

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 02, 2005, 05:47 PM | #

Having said that, AD, Sutton did disappoint in his book where he explicitly discounts the ethnic motives of the Bolsheviks…and then justifies them!

Posted by Svigor on November 02, 2005, 06:08 PM | #

Thanks for the links Steve.