Comments posted

Page 1 of 3516 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

Wells of Natn'l Geographic: "we're all African" wrote:

Dangerous scientism from Spencer Wells of The National Geographic “human genome project.”

Following a note of interest on a positive (or at least not negative) side, they have discovered that after coming out of Africa there was a long incubation period of peoples in central Asia - one branch of which went to Europe: the only branch that Wells did not follow in his video tour of the genetic trail. I imagine because Europeans as a difference are not important to his benefactors, who have him finish his tour of the genetic trail in Brazil. He adds this comment at the end:

“Racism is not only socially divisive, but also scientifically incorrect. We are all descendants of people who lived in Africa recently. We are all Africans under the skin. “


        —Spencer Wells, Population Geneticist

This comment appeared in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on 07/05/15, 02:08 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Well, Eric, sounds like a good idea….what do you have to say about the “The Telegraph’s Wonder Women” MS. Cohen?

.................................


Claire Cohen is Deputy Women’s Editor of The Telegraph

This comment appeared in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/05/15, 09:14 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Eric Bloodaxe wrote:

Claire Cohen needs the Luciana Berger treatment that Andrew Anglin unleashed.

This comment appeared in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/05/15, 08:29 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

I’m a bit worried that terms in themselves can be a form of red-herring-ing.

That’s extremely modernist of you, Neil. As if we are supposed to do without so much as shared language and shared understanding of its meaning.

I categorically deny that I am givining red herrings in these terms; it is the Jewish red capes that are the red herrings. The underlying concepts have strong truth value and survival value.

Underlying any reasoned argument is the question of ontology.

There’s an underlying ontologically necessary IS-ness to these 9 terms that I’ve set out and a corresponding falsity to the red capes.

There’s the whole idea of “otherness” which says to understand things you need a dialectic. “The question is its own answer” seems the Hegelian response.

There is an inherent otherness in the notion underlying “the left” which is a union of people (correspondingly, others who are not in the unions) and corresonding accountability which is not sufficiently captured by sheer description of what is. To take objectivity that far outstrips agentive responsibility to the social, its organization and its “oughtness” - an ought of accountability more invoked by an agreed upon union than by sheer description of what is..

Everything to do with racial matters can probably be considered as a type of “other”. If we understand people as other, then the question has already been answered. It’s that basic, but today that is disallowed.

Some thngs need to be simplified but that’s going too far. It is not too complicated to propose that a group of people, the natives of a nation, the nation, the left, the union, the class are one and same.

Reliance on a sheer objecivist pursuit of the foundation of otherness is unnecessarily susceptible in its modernist naivete, as we are connected to the other in terms of our ability to interbreed with them, and therefore we must to some extent “construct” our racial difference and to some extent actively and deliberately invoke accountability to it.

It’s because we are not allowed to do that we apparently get into long-winded discussions. #1 of ERFE has something on that; maybe it is a more populist idea. By discussing pop-culture without authorial intent, the mind is not closed-off, one can get to the root of what is there.

The only risk to long windedness is due to GW’s valid request that I give more evidence and document my hypotheses of these red capes.

The post modern “mind” is not closed off, Neil, disucssing pop-culture is perfectly valid.

“Authorial intent” is sometimes a red-herring when it’s the work you’re considering.

Its true that there may be some Jewish artists who do not intend to render a “dada” image of post modernity in order to obfuscate a proper understanding.

But then they simply would not be good examples of agentive intent.

It is probably much the case that Jews are simply allowing for this misunderstanding and not shouting, “no, no, you’ve got it wrong, you White people should understand Post Modernity in its correct function in order to protect yourself in healthy tradition and advance your interests with Modernity where possible.”

But if it has fallen down to me to make this case, with all the jews there are ensconced in academia, media and other influential positions, it is safe to say that as a group, that at very best, they do not care to stop Whites from this msundestanding and do not mind them chasing the dada red cape.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/05/15, 07:32 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

neil vodavzny wrote:

I’m a bit worried that terms in themselves can be a form of red-herring-ing. Underlying any reasoned argument is the question of ontology. There’s the whole idea of “otherness” which says to understand things you need a dialectic. “The question is its own answer” seems the Hegelian response.

Everything to do with racial matters can probably be considered as a type of “other”. If we understand people as other, then the question has already been answered. It’s that basic, but today that is disallowed.

It’s because we are not allowed to do that we apparently get into long-winded discussions. #1 of ERFE has something on that; maybe it is a more populist idea. By discussing pop-culture without authorial intent, the mind is not closed-off, one can get to the root of what is there.

“Authorial intent” is sometimes a red-herring when it’s the work you’re considering.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/05/15, 07:00 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

"dada" post modernity vs White Post Modernity wrote:

The red cape of Post Modernity as “dada” nonsense is to confuse Whites about the crucial utility of Post Modernity as a concept which would allow us to simply manage both the good and bad aspects of modernty and tradtion (incl. inherited forms) in our favor.

Noting that Whites do not often understand this concept so crucial to our survival as peoples and the fact that Whites will often react to the term “post modernity” with revulsion and cite examples associating it with “dada” nonsense leads me to an infernce of Jewish responsibility.

It is true that non-Jews whom we might call “wailing modernists”, inlcuding those wedded to a strictly scientific view on the world, can be susceptible to be skeptical of the importance of the post modern turn and thus prone to accept the dada misprepresentation.

However, Jewish responsibily for promoting or allowing for this obfuscation (whereas post modernity is not against science, reality, coherence and facts) is an inference and a hypothesis that I make at this point from their heavy inluence through academia, particularly regarding sociological concerns, media and the arts.

It does require more documenation, and if we are to be true to White Post Modernity, we might take opportunity to get away from the modernist, Cartesian model of information transmission, wherein I am supposed to glean this information from pure reason and inference then transmit the information to you as a complete package and have you open the package of this perfecly assembled and complete infromation…

....as opposed to the way knowledge acquisition really happens, which is more or less in joint construction..

I have sent you, the reader, a “specificatory structure”, partly finished information that is a working hypothesis, that there are significant Jewish sources promoting a misinterpretation of “post modernity” as “dada nonsense”....

As as specificatory structure, partly finished information requiring further specification, the reader might kindly participate by helping to “compete the theory”, helping to shape and craft the hypothesis with me by providing some instances, examples, peoples and dates.

I can do this by myself, taking info from books and on line, but we are capable of getting a quicker and fuller picture of the truth with some joint participation.

This is not a competition to see who can be Moses issuing the commandments received from god to the masses in 1 -3rd person lineal transmission.

This is you and I, first to second person negotiation of the truth.

It is not a competition wherein I try to show-off to you and you try to show off to me, it is a competion against bad theory, including theory that does not serve our White/European Native nationalist interests.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/05/15, 06:38 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

tanstaafl on MIR wrote:

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-130203/TS-988601.mp3

This comment appeared in entry 'MR Radio: Guessedworker speaks with Tanstaafl' on 07/05/15, 02:37 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Pay attention! wrote:

Pay attention!..

This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Radio: Dr Christian Lindtner speaks to DanielS and GW' on 07/04/15, 08:04 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Red cape over socialconstructionism & hermeneutics wrote:

3. Social Constructionism and Hermeneutics

The red capes over these good ides, is explained fairly well in this essay except that I had apparently mistaken Gdamer to be Jewish, instead of Jew thinker or a thinker convenient to Jews, because of the appreciation for him that Jewish academics displayed.

I have not fully explicated where these ideas began to be perverted by Jewish interests. But in the case of social constructionism I might begin by looking at the Berger and Luckman book. Examples of perversion of social constructionism by Jewish headed academia in ensuing decades is all people know. Once again it would be more dificult to find examles of social constructionism proper. Shotter would tend to be a more favorable example.


In the case of hermeneutics, I would begin, as I have, with Heidegger and predecessos, tracing a line through Christian hermeneuticists with a notable example in Vico - though he was not using that term, he was doing hermeneutics. Moving forward, I would look at Gadamer (“philosphical hermeneutics”) and for salient examples of the abuse of hermeneutics by Jewish academics in subsquent generations.

Again, examples do not only abound but have been insitutionalized - Most importantly the notioin of “marginals” not as those just within the group bounds, but those from without looking for inclusion.

This imposing of pseudo marginals (every freak, non-White and White traitor in the world) upon us is a flamboyant red cape (Chutzpah) that has been very successful in creating revulsion to hermenetuics and the concept of marginals.

I have already indicated that the Algerian Jew, Derrida, is a particurly influential source of this perversion, and other perversions of hermeneutics.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/04/15, 03:25 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Jack Sen on UKIP and The EU wrote:

At Red Ice, Jack Sen on UKIP and The EU

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/07/RIR-150701.php

This comment appeared in entry 'Is UKIP controlled opposition or genuine Nationalism?' on 07/04/15, 02:58 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Arch Hades wrote:

She’s a Jew and that’s not surprising, but what also not surprising is the actual mother of the biracial child featured in the Cheerios commercial is of British decent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4zSkcF4SVc

This comment appeared in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/03/15, 02:56 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Gottfried's foil wrote:

Doing the bidding of his master, er, mentor (Paul Gottfried), Richard Spencer goes Stark and frantically tries to divert attention from a White Left.

http://www.starktruthradio.com/?p=1384

He proposes the shlock “Generation Identitaire” model. Which, of course, rather than citing Jewish power and influence or even international capital, blames everything on “68rs”, i.e., diverts attention to a generational conflict with White men of a different time - corresponding with Marxist take-over of European academe.


Marcuse was an emblematic 68er.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/03/15, 02:37 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

On Arendt, Heidegger and his other students wrote:

Bernstein on his relationship with Arendt, Arendt’s reltionship with Heidegger, his admiration for Heidegger as a teacher, having produced a number of prolific scholars of his students.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbFOD0oLnps

This comment appeared in entry 'Hannah Arendt: Far From Innocent' on 07/03/15, 12:40 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Bernstein contra incommensurability/eco-difference wrote:

2. Equality/Inequality

While I have discussed this red cape quite a bit, having never been immersed in a community of what I will call the received (from Jews) “left” or a nation controlled by the received “left,” I can only say to begin, thet I have never heard much talk of people wanting “equality”, whether from our liberal enemies, from Marxists or from anyone; thus, it strikes me as strange that WN would be chasing after it.

Demand for equality was something that I heard a bit in relation to feminism in the sixties and seventies but only once (also in relation to feminism) in the 80’s that I can recall, and it was the late 80’s in fact.

But as I alluded above, it is a reasonable inference that Jewish interests would take this moniker of the French revolution and exaggerate it to their ends through Marxism, to include themselves and those previously not included in the original conception of national equality.

I can imagine it would not be too difficult to find Jewish academics holding up the term; nevertheless, I have begun my critique of equality/inequality on the basis of having experienced Jewish academics distracting from the better underlying concepts.

First, the better underpinning ideas that I am familiar with are from Bateson and Thomas Khun.

With an Aristotlean framework, Bateson criticized the application of the category of quanity and the purview of physics to biology and especially misapplication to humans.

He argued that as biological creatures that we are evolved for optimalities and the contingency of interaction, including our mammalian relations and human capacity for agency.

To capture our differences and not distort and wreck human relations we ought not think in terms of quantity (as equality/inequality does) but rather in terms of qualitative/or paradigmatic sameness and difference. “The difference that makes a difference” was a distinguishing phrase of his.

These are good ideas, terms which would allow for better within and between group relations than equality/inequality.

So why have they not become popular among Whites? The reason is because they have been abused and twisted with a Jewish red cape.

One can see the abuse and misapplications of these ideas ubiquitously in what is called political correctness. Where rather than truly respecting qualitative differces, diversity and multiculturalism, we are forced together in oblivious integration.

Now, Thomas Kuhn’s notion of “incommensurate paradigms” is another good concept which would help Whites to maintain our social systems properly.

It advises against quantitative comparisons, especially where paradigms are incommensurate.

In developing a proclivity to look for incomensurabilty and qualitative differences, we would tend to think in terms of symbiosis and differing functions, niches as opposed to false and competitive comparisons.

We would have more control over our group system and function better.

What clue do I have that Jewish interests might not want us cultivate this idea?

I organized a conference in 2008. A few prominent Jewish scholars spoke.

The topic of Professor of Philosophy, Richard J. Bernstein was this:

The title of my talk is “Incommersurabilty econsidered.”

Incommensurability began a major theme in twentieth century thought with the publication of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.  But the fascimation with incommensurability spread quickly to many fields including philosophy, anthropology, sociology and political science.  I will explore the varied meanings and uses of incommensurability and will seek to evaluate what is insightful and what is confusing about the use and abuse of this concept.

My personal experience of Bernstein was that he did not seem to like my using non Jewish scholars of ecology to defend Europeans. But to show beyond personal experience that Berstein is motivated by Jewish interests is very easy.

One can take a look on youtube and find Bernstein discussing how Jews “pioneered ecological thinking”..... this was after my conference, which I thematized by “pervasive ecology”, a way of thinking that I inferred from Bateson and a theme which was barely addressed by the Jewish shcolars at the conference despite the fact of its being an important argumentative basis for European survival. Nevertheless, in the clip linked below, one can hear Berstein detailing how the Jewish “Hans Jonas was the pioneer of ecological thinking and bio-ethics in the 1950’s, well before it was fashionable.” One can also in that same youtube see Bernstein discussing the discrimination quotas that had existed against Jews in the Ivy League….but not how they are now grossly and unjustlly over represented by dint of nepotism in the Ivy League.


Jewish Scholars at The New School
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8MXVKTs0W8

For another example of Bernstein’s motivation, take his book:

Freud and the Legacy of Moses

This important new title by Richard J. Bernstein presents a detailed examination of Freud’s last book, Moses and Monotheism. Bernstein argues convincingly that this frequently vilified and dismissed book is one of Freud’s most important works. It is in Moses and Monotheism that Freud answers the question that obsessed him: what is the essence of the Jewish people? Bernstein goes on to show how Freud developed a new interpretation of the concept of a religious tradition—an interpretation that is applicable to both Judaism and Christianity.

etc.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/03/15, 06:54 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Tracing the red caping of "The Left" wrote:

Daniel, this list of sins would benefit from some scholarship ... names, publications, dates, quotes, etc, to put beyond doubt that they can indeed be assigned to Jewish authors.  Where possible, said authors should be shown to exhibit Jewish ethnic concerns.

I will start by sketching where I would begin to look to document where underlying good ideas for White socialization and the red cape misrepresentation germinated and began to circulate..

First regarding “The Left”

1. “The Left and The Right”

We all know that the terms began with the French Court.

This germinated an understanding that the right represented those loyal to the elite, specifically, the king, while the left represented the populace - generally, the broader court, and in turn, the concerns of the nation’s people.

The French revolution would segue into the expanse of the currency and utility of the terms.

I would guess that Jews as outsiders to poliical power could gain power by organizing and dividing people on the left - particularly dividing them from their own elites. I would search for some examples.

They would likely take note that the revolution’s motto of “equality” did not include themselves and they would form coalitions of unions to transform “equality” to include

Women and slaves who, for example, were not held to be equal.  Men without property were not necessarily equal either - and Jews were frequently barred from propertty ownership.

Jews would begin to see the utility in holding up and expanding this term against the power, derive benefit by hiding behind the red cape of its good-guy sound and the elitist and unfair sound of any who oppose it.

Staying with the issue of Jews being excluded from property ownership and/or Europeans being able to exclude Jewish interests on the basis of national citizenship and property ownership, that would spawn the idea of Marxist transformation of the red cape of “The Left” as against private property and its being international as opposed to national.

The workers not being property owners were being exploited but by unionization they could challenge the power.

The most consistent, underlying aspect of anything referred to as the left, what it has behind its grievances is an organized group, is unionization, whether a literal union or simply a conceptual union.

However, through Marxism, unions were not made on a national, but an international basis and set abstractly to represent the union of the working poor against the rich.

Wheras a concern for White interests would have unions not based on economic class, but on nation - its native White people would be synonymous with the nation and the union.

All documentation on the Franfurt school shows them transforming the Marxist left once again, the basis of unionization then becoming those they could represent as victim groups against Whites- non-Whites, women (dividing our co-evolutionary females against us by pandering to them when puerile), gays, etc…while altercasting “Whites” as “The right” or “far right” elites with power, private property, nationalism, etc.

Marcuse’s “liberating tolerance” would tolerate only the left and not the right - making an exception to not tolerate a White union of White men nor the union with their co-evolutionaries, incl. women. While at the same time reifying what is in nature a condition, “tolerance”, meant to brace against transient toxic states, into a permanent condition of accepting toxicity until we are haplessly disolute

Unionization of people in cooperation against non-unioized people is of course going to be a winning strategy. They can bilk and exploit European peoples for whatever they are worth.

To search for examples of Jews altercasting our would-be unionized interests as “the right” or the “far right” through the sanction of media that they own, academic departments their texts dominate, is an absurdity. One would rather have to search hard for exceptions.

The question then emerges “Why?” would they insist on calling us the right and I have addressed this in several places, but basically because it keeps us non-unioniized thus disorganized.

And while they have us under attack by their unions they have WN chasing the red cape of “The left” as they have conceived it which is international lbereralism in its activist prescription to us.

As our elites cop to the altercast as rightists opposed to “communism” they remain theoretically opposed to unionization and thus disloyal and not accountable to their people.

Without accountability to and from them, and feeling the liberal attack the White rank and file defect and outbreed or do not breed at all.

The stress and toxicity of “Leftist” pressure (read, international liberalism) felt by those Whites who do care for themsleves can be tremenous and their revulsion to all that has been associated with it causes them to look for unassailable warrant beyond what can be trammeled by “the people”, farther and farther into abstract objectivity….and farther and farther from a White left, a unionization of their people.

It is incumbent upon us, as White Nationlists, to re-take the definition, of “The White Left” as a union snyonymous with nation and native people.

To reject upon occasion the negative associations Marxists have associated with the term.

 

That does not really answer GW’s suggestion, but it begins to clue in on where one/I might look for documentation, dates, quotes, etc. while already naming and circumscrbing a few.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/03/15, 03:07 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

U.K. in the dead of night wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMu7XUc9OcI

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/03/15, 02:41 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

Soulless Jewish fembot Claire Cohen on the Toragraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11712922/Womens-World-Cup-2015-Our-sympathy-for-Laura-Bassett-is-sexist.html

One of the Lionesses was in tears - had a thorn in her paw - when she deflected a slanted cross from an opponent into her own goal.

Usual British brly ltr8 hashtag emotional incontinence with “poor Laura” “absolutely gutted” “so, so proud” “U R A TRU champion” and other remote, faggoty boosterism.

It’s silly season and bread and circus sports time.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/02/15, 09:00 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

to clarify wrote:

This part needed to be written a bit better, and now is, a bit better:

Chasing this red cape is a diversion from the call for a reasigment of White men as having intrinsic value - Being - as opposed to being expendible in wars not of the bounded interests of our people; as opposed to chasing the red cape of universal traditional manhood in service of a universalizaing religoius ideal, international corporations, oligarchs and the YKW; and in charging this red cape, the intrinsic value of White people overall, as the unit to be defended, is argued against - WN are arguing against our own deepest interests again, against the warrant to exist. The very thing we need most is prohibited by a Jewish language game in which they form coalitions with black power, feminism AND misinformed traditional women, to deny our being, our reality, value and warrant to exist in midtdasein - the non-Caresian being there* amidst our people.

* or “being of”, as GW prefers.

 

This paragraph is also a more clear.

 

3. Social Constructionism and Hermeneutics: These concepts devised to counteract Cartesion runaway and facilitate systemic homeostatis instead have been misrepresented by Jewish interests with the red cape distortion that people and groups can just be whatever they imagine they might construct of themselves. The lie persists that these concepts are anti-empirical and anti-science. On the contrary, these ideas are meant to enhance and make more accurately descriptive the conduct of science and reality testing. With that, they serve to correct bad science (the kind that anti-racists would espouse as well), i.e., “scientism”, and myopic focus on narrow units of analysis only, such as the individual strictly, moment or episode, to the detriment of the broad view on systemic homeostasis.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/02/15, 08:20 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Beam's Bottom Line wrote:

If you have been reading previously than start reading at:

“We leave for the Russian border:”
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l-4Bh979WdU2G4aQPo9Y4XeyxLTIuo1l2wzpoPW5XlY/pub


His Russian/Ukrainian expedition complete, here is Beam’s bottom line:

Beam’s bottom line on Ukrainians and Russians:

I watched closely the teenagers in the grass dancing to the radio.  Pick these people up, transport them to the U.S., and they would be us.  It is but by the simple act of birth location that they are not Americans.  While their language was strange to my ear and far different from the familiarly paced words of my neighbors in Texas, their hopes, thoughts and wishes for a good future were no different than my own.  We are, after all, just people passing through this life.

 

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Louis Beams Light on Instigation of White Fratricide - From Russia/Ukraine' on 07/02/15, 08:02 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

Propaganda for our genocide:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/01/countries-migrants-integrating-oecd-employment-immigration

lol @ Israel:

http://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2015/06/population-zip/giv-21277aBYsDY6qGpiC/

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/02/15, 05:22 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mulatto clues wrote:

In trying to ascertain a mulatto who can ostensibly pass for “White” sometimes the telltale signs are more in the body: In the case of Rashida Jones, while she does have a slightly negroid mouth, her pelvic and thigh stucture are perhaps even more indicative of some African atavism. Also hinting African atavism is her sinewy muscularity and a lack of White suppleness in her body.

This comment appeared in entry 'Pay attention' on 07/02/15, 03:50 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Graham_Lister wrote:

Banking reforms that don’t include taking away their power to create money at will are just a distraction. Change the system see http://positivemoney.org/our-proposals/debt-based-money-vs-sovereign-money-infographic/

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/01/15, 10:08 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

Latest article from that ubiquitous female academic Lolita Waddock-Hunt:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-michael/i-sometimes-dont-want-to-be-white-either_b_7595852.html

“Being White—even with the feeling of culturelessness and responsibility for racism—is nothing compared to not being White. But being White—and facing the truth of what that means historically and systemically—can drive you to do the weird and unthinkable that we see in Dolezal today.

It seems like a good warning. Rachel Dolezal’s actions are a potential pitfall for any White people on the journey towards recognizing the truth of what it means to be White and accepting responsibility for it. But we cannot not be White. And we cannot undo what Whiteness has done. We can only start from where we are and who we are.”

More anti-white poison and affirmation of the Original Sin of Whiteness.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/01/15, 10:08 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

documenting the sins wrote:

Posted by Guessedworker on July 01, 2015, 05:10 AM | #

Daniel, this list of sins would benefit from some scholarship ... names, publications, dates, quotes, etc, to put beyond doubt that they can indeed be assigned to Jewish authors.  Where possible, said authors should be shown to exhibit Jewish ethnic concerns.


GW, it can be done. I can do it. It is more laborious and time consuming than theoretically difficult.

Though it is plain to me based on my experience of Jews and academia, some proof will be a liittle more difficult (especially where people are intent on disagreeing) as it is expressed in patterns and practices that result from covert and implicit agreement among the YKW.

I wanted to put the simple and clear list of ‘sins’ up-front first as I have been acccused of being long winded and evasively baroque in the language and extent of my exposés.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/01/15, 10:07 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

Germany is fellating the Jew as it dies a demographic death.

And while it is on its knees it can still point a stern finger and with a spunk-filled sputtering mouth and a straight face affirm ‘the Holocaust’ and enforce the terms of Money Power:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/01/greek-debt-merkel-dismisses-tsipras-compromise-plan-referendum-bailout

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/01/accountant-auschwitz-trial-oskar-groening-admits-guilt

Either we remove the grip that the Jews have on us or we will be done away with it.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/01/15, 09:29 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

Daniel, this list of sins would benefit from some scholarship ... names, publications, dates, quotes, etc, to put beyond doubt that they can indeed be assigned to Jewish authors.  Where possible, said authors should be shown to exhibit Jewish ethnic concerns.

This comment appeared in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our own interests' on 07/01/15, 05:10 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

White life is cheap.

We are being attacked as a race and we have to defend ourselves as a race.

And anti-white whites must be treated as enemies as well.

This comment appeared in entry 'The Naivete of The Native Species Long Evolved in Isolation' on 07/01/15, 05:07 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Their new normal: "It's not shocking" wrote:

http://www.friatider.se/muhameds-comment-while-raping-twelve-year-old-ida-black-dck-expensive-gets-away-22-days-community

Muhamed’s comment while raping twelve-year-old Ida: “Black d*ck is expensive” – gets away with 22 days of community service

Publicerad 27 juni 2015 kl 00.43

Last November a Somali immigrant brutally raped a 12-year-old girl in Sundsvall, Sweden. This Wednesday he was found guilty of child rape – but got away with a meagre 180 hours of community service. After Fria Tider reported on the case earlier this week it has stirred a public outcry, but the prosecutor said the verdict did not surprise her.

“There is nothing shocking or surprising,” she told Fria Tider after the ruling was issued.

On November 10 last year the 18-year-old Somali immigrant, Muhamed, lured 12-year-old Ida to his home in the city of Sundsvall, central Sweden. Muhamed had claimed to be in possession of intimate pictures of the young child and promised he would give them back – if she followed him to his apartment.

But Muhamed did not give Ida any pictures. After having lured her to his home, he simply raped her. The ruling from the district court states that he repeatedly punched her in the face and held his hand over her mouth during the rape. According to the court he also kept repeating the words “black d*ck is expensive” over and over while raping the girl.

This comment appeared in entry 'The Naivete of The Native Species Long Evolved in Isolation' on 07/01/15, 12:53 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

The choice of traditional roles and basic tasks wrote:

When talking to a lady friend sympathertic to the post modern quaternary system of negotiating gender relations, she raised the problem that women would tend to opt for the modernist option - i.e., being independent career women and so on.

We agreed that was likely to be their path and that it is a problem - an interesting one.

My lady friend also saw the logic in offering a choice between tradional ways (staying home, having chldren, being supportive) and the modern way of pursuing career, social and personal reward.

By having the option, they will see their agency in electing the traditional role at times or indefinitely and not be as inclined to rebell against it as they are not unduly forced into this role.

Anthropologist Mary Catherine Bateson told me something incisive with regard to modernity and women: “don’t make the mistake of thinking modernity is necessarily good for women. In times past tasks that were usually performed by women, such as food preparation, making and repairng clothes were important.” Modernity rendered the significance of these functions fairly trivial if not redundant.


This relates here to the project here of making and recognizing as important the ordinary levels fundamenal to actualization: socialization, being, routine.

 

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Females, Women, Actualization and Gender Differentiation' on 06/30/15, 03:27 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Blowback wrote:

http://news.sky.com/story/1508894/british-and-irish-tourists-die-in-beach-horror

A gunman disguised as a holidaymaker has killed at least 38 people, including eight Britons, in an attack on a popular tourist resort.

Terrified sunbathers ran for their lives as the attacker, dressed in shorts and hiding his Kalashnikov inside an umbrella, opened fire on the beach in Port el Kantaoui on the outskirts of Sousse, Tunisia.

 

 

This comment appeared in entry '"Rock solid, unwavering, enduring and forever!"' on 06/29/15, 08:17 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

As opposed to “game” requiring White males to be more foul, abusive and socially irresponsible, because puerile females like it as a signal of strength and independence from social constraint..


..It stands to reason that it makes more sense to require females to be more decent and cooperative as it is more easily achieved and will have a better effect on society…

The acts of imploring if not forcing females to be more decent, to mature into socially conscious and responsible women, is in fact an expression of male strength, initiative and leadership.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Should we deviate from authenticity in order to “game” women?' on 06/29/15, 03:07 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Lindtner report from Roskilde conference wrote:

http://jesusisbuddha.com/news.html


Last update 27-06-2015


[27-06-2015] Report by Christian Lindtner on the international conference: “Gospel Interpretation and the Q-Hypothesis”. Roskilde, 21-24th of June 2015.


 
[25-06-2015] POPE AND CATHOLICS SUDDENLY INVITE BUDDHISTS TO FRIENDLY DIALOGUE

The pope, as known, is a Buddhist Sâri-Putras disguised as the successor of Simôn Petros - the first mythical Mahâyâna bishop of Rome. The Christian SP is a “reincarnation” or “transformation” of the famous Buddhist SP. This will be obvious to anyone who compares the relevant Buddhist sûtras with the corresponding Christian eu-aggelion, or “gospel”. The Greek term is a synonym of the Sanskrit.

That SP would turn up again was predicted already in Buddhist canonical scriptures. All Buddhist scholars are aware of this fact.
Jesus , i.e. Buddha in disguise , calls SP Bar-Iônas (Matthew 16,17), and Bar-Iônas translates the Sanskrit Jina-putas, son of Jinas (= Buddha = Jesus). At the same time, PuTRaS contains an obvious pun on PeTRoS, i.e. Peter. A Jina-Putras is, in turn, a synonym of a Bodhi-sattva(s).
The main source for the true ID of SP is, of course,  the Lotus Sutra.
In the Lotus Sutra, chapter 7, the Buddha tells his disciples that they have all been his disciples in former states of existence, and that they will also be his disciples in future worlds, in other realms - although under different names. (See W.E.Soothill, The Lotus of the Wonderful Law, Oxford 1930 (and later reprints), p.  136.
The NT proves the truth of this prophecy.
The pope knows very well that he has, as it were, a real identity problem.  It is very easy for Buddhist scholars to expose him and his 264 predecessors as imposters - Buddhists under different names. The same goes for educated Catholic scholars (See Michael Fuss, Buddhavacanam & Dei Verbum, Leiden 1991).  They know that Rome has a problem, a real problem.
Why not try to solve problems in a friendly way?
He, therefore, has very good reasons for inviting Buddhists to a “friendly dialogue”, with emphasis on “peace” and “fraternity”.

But the path to friendship, peace and fraternity must be paved by honesty and courage and historical truth.
How will Buddhist scholars handle this challenge? Can there be friendship without honesty?

Lutherans also have a problem of their own   with regard to the Buddhists sources of the New Testament gospels. This became abundantly clear during the past few days at the Roskilde conference on “Gospel Interpretation and Q-Hypothesis”, organized by the Faculty of Theology,  Copenhagen University, and sponsored by the Velux Foundation.  As veteran Danish professor of NT, Mogens Müller, dictated: We do NOT want to hear about Buddhist sources!
Finally, be sure to listen to what the brilliant and broadminded American theologian Dr. Robert M. Price, has to say about the Lotus Sutra and the New Testament, on Bible Geek, June 10, 2015.
The Lotus and the Logos by Robert M. Price


[14-06-2015] Why is the Gospel fourfold?

Scholars of the New Testament will be taking up this old problem of the fourfold Gospel at the Roskilde Q-Conference 21-24th of June 2015. Professor Francis Watson has discussed the puzzle in his recent book: Gospel Writing. A Canonical Perspective. Here is a youtube-interview:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZJNjHNJIvg

A possible solution ignored by Watson is offered here by the great American theologian Dr. Robert M. Price. A Buddhist key to the puzzle of the fourfold Gospel canon.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-20430/TS-983542.mp3

Dr. Price has just published “The Human Bible” 2014. Can be ordered from Amazon. This very important work contains references to Buddhist sources normally ignored by other NT theologians.

On May 22. 2015 Dr. Price also discussed the problem of Buddhist sources to the New Testament.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss20430.xml

Here is an image of Dr. Price in one of his possible previous incarnations as Wodan.


This comment appeared in entry 'Majority Radio: Dr Christian Lindtner speaks to DanielS and GW' on 06/29/15, 02:30 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

What would we do without these higher mammals known as ‘Jews’ to tell us what’s what?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/02/only-the-radical-left-can-save-greece-and-europe-from-disaster

Their prescriptive commentary functions as a kind of dry comedy: as they continue to drain us.

Host desiccation.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'MajorityRadio: AltRight's Colin Liddell talks with GW and DanielS' on 06/29/15, 11:11 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Mick Lately wrote:

Putting two and two together: that the Maastricht treaty forbids EU member states from printing money to finance their national debt, including non-Eurozone countries such as Britain & and the deby at 60%-of-GDP limit set out in the Treaty.

One would have to say that a major reason for the Maastricht Treaty was to compel EU countries to control by the Money Power without completely sinking themselves and derailing the whole project.

This comment appeared in entry 'MajorityRadio: AltRight's Colin Liddell talks with GW and DanielS' on 06/29/15, 10:40 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Gladiator wrote:

From what I gather from the essay according to Constantine, you may be racially GERMAN but you cannot think like one in modern day FRG?
Is that true? Is the FRG a police state that suppresses thought? No matter whether is Left or Right. Than if it is so then the author is right the FRG is nothing more an abbreviation of the the Third Reich. The former defining who is more German, than the latter.

This comment appeared in entry 'WE AVOW OURSELVES TO THE DIVINE RACISM OF THE GERMANIC PEOPLES' on 06/29/15, 09:07 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Page 1 of 3516 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›