Comments posted

Page 1 of 3472 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

DanielS wrote:

Why does one have to pick one of these stereotypes Wobble?

There has been a disingenuous argument circulating that we are going to be called Nazis anyway, therefore may as well be one.

Think about that for three seconds and you realize that is absurd.

There are many who cannot choose to be

“NS”

Red Necks (esp. not southern, because they are not)

Religious fanatics (in any conventional sense or even in the Creativity version, just don’t relate to it).


To be a crusader treating our people as a religion is possible here without the stereotypes. And when an adequate religion develops then maybe we can assume it.. til then our crusade does not have an acceptable religious definition as consensus (though I personally would accept “Our race is Our religion.”).

To be a knight crusading on behalf of Our people though, one must buck the stereotype of being called racist and ignore David Duke’s utterly stupid advice that We should go around wagging our finger at people that they are racists.

Why should we buck the term? Because we need to advocate what is being undone with the term “racism” in reality, not in Duke’s assumed Jewish definition. Duke insists that the term means supremacism, harm and exploitation of others in all of its use. That is just the Jewish cover of how it has more broadly come into use. Its more every day use is the conceptual organization of peoples and discrimination accordingly.

We need to be pirates enough WHEN ACCOUNTS ARE ASKED to give a better response than the one that Duke claims he used to say, when asked if he was a racist: “it depends upon how you define ‘racism’; if you mean by that I love my people well then, I guess I am.”

But that is not what I would say. I would take occasion to say what it means, not supremacism and antagonism but classification as a necessary means of accountability and human ecology.

I know that Bronstein invented the word and I don’t care. I don’t hear this hiss that Don Black attributes to the word.

I am not recommending that the world be adopted as a moniker as an indefinite go-by for our people but as an occasion to undo and correct the single most important word weapon that Jews have deployed against us.

Calling Jews the real racists only empowers the term of anti classification and liberalism, the two things that most importantly need to be undone.

I, for one, would never be comfortable going around calling people racists and will not do it.

If Duke wants to go around calling people “the real racists”, I guess he will.  But I object most strongly to his using the royal “we” in his admonition in opposition, that “We” ought to oppose “racism-Uh.”

Doesn’t the “Uh” suffix just go to show that his audience is liberal females?

Note that Duke never denounces Hitler and yet he says we shouldn’t defy the word racism because there is too much spin and we will not attract people. Well, Hitler doesn’t only have spin and propaganda going against him but Duke still does not denounce “Hitler-Uh.”

And he is concerned with the normal mainstream? Or is he concerned with pandering to soccer moms of the broad White American demographic with a pension for mudsharking?

Accepting the Jewish proscription of what the term is doing and calling people the real racists only empowers the term in its anti-classification and liberalism, the two things that most importantly need to be undone in service of accountability and human ecology.

Nor am I alone in having the testosterone to challenge the word when the occasion is right.

Ok, I guess you could say, Wobble, that here we have Templars or pirates of our own sort.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/30/14, 10:35 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

wobble wrote:

White youth being culturally disintegrated at school and in the media and looking for positive White role models won’t find any because they have all been destroyed in advance as part of the ongoing stealth genocide.

The only models that they’ll find at all are the ones which are still allowed to exist for demonization purposes: NSDAP, to a lesser extent Dixie and to a lesser extent than that Crusaders / Templars for religious types.

So those are the models they’ll drift to because that’s all that’s left in their poisoned history books.

Arguing about it is pointless imo. NS, Redneck or Templar are the available iconic choices. Pick one and run with it.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/30/14, 07:10 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

wobble wrote:

@XPWA

I think there’s a difference - mainly of physical scale - between countries like the US, Canada and Australia on the one hand and Europe on the other which makes total media control more difficult and collective action easier so although I agree the PWE option may have always been the best option in some places - like the US - but I don’t think it’s necessarily true everywhere.

 

This comment appeared in entry 'Salter: Accept that the State is no longer ours and rebuild radically of our people' on 10/30/14, 06:37 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Meta-ontology wrote:

Greg Johnson - Heidegger is misunderstood as an ontologist when it is believed that he treated Being as something merely referred-to or merely referring to things rather than also a meaning disclosed:


http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/heideggers-question-beyond-being/

Heidegger’s Question Beyond Being
Greg Johnson

6,362 words

Author’s Note:

The following text was written 21 years ago when I was in graduate school. I think it is a useful synthesis of the material available at the time, but I make no claims to originality. I tried to remove the kind of preciousness and pedantry that one finds in graduate student papers, but given the subject matter, what remains is necessarily somewhat densely written.

Everybody knows that Martin Heidegger was deeply interested in “Being,” indeed obsessed with it. If Spinoza was the “God-intoxicated philosopher,” Heidegger was surely the Being-intoxicated philosopher.

But this is not really true. Heidegger was not the least bit curious about what the word “Being” (the German “Sein”) refers to. His concern, rather, was something “beyond” Being. Heidegger’s concern was the “meaning” (Sinn) of Being. And the meaning of Being is something different from what the word “Being” refers to.

For Heidegger, “Being” is how beings (persons, places, things) disclose themselves, i.e., make themselves present, to a knower. The meaning of Being, by contrast, is how Being discloses itself to a knower. Being is the disclosure of beings. The meaning of Being is the disclosure of Being.

Heidegger claims that there is an “ontological difference” between Being and beings, meaning that there is a difference between beings and their disclosure (Being). The difference between Being and the meaning of Being is a “meta-ontological difference” between Being and its disclosure to us.

Ontology is the study of Being. And if there is a difference between Being and the meaning of Being, then studying the meaning of Being is something different from ontology. Many people mistake Heidegger for an ontologist, because they do not differentiate between Being and the meaning of Being. Indeed, the meta-ontological difference is ignored by most Heidegger scholars, Thomas Sheehan, Graeme Nicholsen, Otto Poggeler, and Mark Okrent being notable exceptions.[1]

1. The “Question of Being”

On page 1 of Being and Time, one finds the words: “Introduction. Exposition of the Question of the Meaning of Being [Frage nach dem Sinn von Sein].” This is followed by chapter 1, “Necessity, Structure, and Priority of the Question of Being [Seinsfrage].” And section one of that chapter is called “The necessity of an explicit recapitulation of the question of Being [Frage nach dem Sein].” Heidegger is not talking about three different questions here. The question of the meaning of being is the same as the “Seinsfrage”; it is the same as “der Frage nach dem Sein.”

A natural interpretation is that the question of the meaning of Being is the question of what the word “Being” refers to, namely Being. On this reading, then Heidegger is simply an ontologist. The question of the meaning of Being is, then, simply a long-winded way of saying the question of Being (“der Seinsfrage” or “der Frage nach dem Sein”). All three questions are asking about the phenomenon to which the word “Being” refers.

But it is a mistake to interpret the word “meaning” (Sinn) as simply superfluous. Rather, it is essential to the understanding of Heidegger’s project. The full, precise, and technical formulation of Heidegger’s project is the question of the meaning of Being.

See Greg Johnson’s full article at Counter-Currents:

http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/heideggers-question-beyond-being/

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/30/14, 02:29 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Be-In wrote:

This interview of Heidegger, that Johnson put-up over at Counter-Currents, is worthwhile in underscoring Heidegger’s concern for Being as a human relation to the world that has been lost in modernity and requires a new way of thinking to attain once again:


Part One
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8HR4RXxZw8


Part Two

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoYq9EXdpcw


Discussion of what Heidegger means by authenticity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4aTe1Yfhf0:

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/29/14, 01:06 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Note that “Voznich” is another name for Leon Haller.

It is useful to trace through his posts what our enemies really want associated with us:

1. the futility of mainstream, controlled politics - such as the libertarian safety-valve for Jewish oligarchic interests (in this last comment, Oct 29)

2. trying to push the tactlessness of “White superiority” (comment October 21rst, this same thread) to turn off would-be friends and alarm antagonists.

3. The “utility and reasonableness of Hitler” (Leon, er Voznich pleads for understanding about that - comment on this same thread October 18th).

4. The White suicide meme (this same thread October 17)

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/29/14, 08:02 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

voznich wrote:

An article in the neoliberal Economist of last week, which I just read tonight in a local supermarket, says that most British reject UKIP in recent polling data, and that only a minority support what they call “immigrant bashing” (wasn’t aware that not wanting immigrant hordes to overrun a small island country was “bashing” them). I wonder if that is accurate or “spin”.

How will UKIP/Farage do next year? I assume Farage will run for PM (can he? or must a PM candidate be an MP?). Might there have to be another coalition government, or will UKIP split the Right and let Labour run away with it?

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/29/14, 03:13 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Celtic Tribalism wrote:

David Jones on the history of Celtic tribalism


http://www.blogtalkradio.com/american-nationalist-network/2014/10/28/the-atlantic-axis-w-david-jones

Spiral Dance:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=438sIIv0whI

This comment appeared in entry 'Pay attention' on 10/28/14, 10:31 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

The Anchor is nice, Al.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/28/14, 08:59 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

A county currency proposal

countycurrency.org/CountyCurrency.pptx

This comment appeared in entry 'MR Radio: Migchels, Bowery Address Malign Economics' on 10/28/14, 03:22 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Nothing but the best for you Brits and any other Europeans who aspire to maintain their native kinds….and anything that I can do do help.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/27/14, 10:03 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

Well DanielS, we Brits sometimes take heart from UKIP’s recent electoral exit poll. How splendid it would be to sit in a pub in Barcombe and learn that GW had announced an Exit Pole..

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/27/14, 06:36 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

mctc-me wrote:

that is a very useful.
mctc-me.com

This comment appeared in entry 'Elitism, secrecy, deception … the way to save white America?' on 10/27/14, 02:42 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

I don’t think so.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 06:16 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Carolyn Yeager wrote:

Posted by DanielS on October 26, 2014, 03:53 PM | #

Carolyn, I don’t lie

Uh oh, your nose just grew another half inch.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 05:53 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Posted by Carolyn Yeager on October 26, 2014, 10:20 AM | #

Daniel,

Why do you lie so much? It’s too bad you’re not Pinocchio so we could watch your nose grow longer and longer. Pinocchio was Italian like you, but maybe was part Polish too? Do you also dream of becoming a real person someday? Best of luck, grin

Carolyn, I don’t lie, that’s your thing, but thanks for the best wishes.

Posted by BlutundBoden on October 26, 2014, 01:26 PM | #

I do not know why you have chosen to use my username, which you misspelled, in this article in the context that you have. I have never commented anywhere on the link that you mention in conjunction with it. I have, in fact, never even seen it before.

Thanks for the shout-out.


Let me spell your “name” correctly then BlutundBoden.

There were one or two threads at Renegade at the time which amounted to a continuation of one argument - with me against Hitler loyal people there and you being among the Hitler loyal people. That link was added near the end of one of the threads. While you may not have clicked on it and looked at it before, that is besides the point - which is that you were taking an imperviously loyal position in unanimity with Hitler.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 03:53 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

BlutundBoden wrote:

“...in this article…”

^ Excuse me, I meant in your comment.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 01:28 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

BlutundBoden wrote:

I do not know why you have chosen to use my username, which you misspelled, in this article in the context that you have. I have never commented anywhere on the link that you mention in conjunction with it. I have, in fact, never even seen it before.

Thanks for the shout-out.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 01:26 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Carolyn Yeager wrote:

Daniel,

Why do you lie so much? It’s too bad you’re not Pinocchio so we could watch your nose grow longer and longer. Pinocchio was Italian like you, but maybe was part Polish too? Do you also dream of becoming a real person someday? Best of luck, grin

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/26/14, 10:20 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Al, it is not enough for you that Jews and non-Whites be recognized as Other. Jews in particular as antagonistic and occupying seven major power niches.

It is not enough for you that we are advocating Germans along with all Europeans as a whole and in their discreet, distinct kinds.

No, you have got to try to bring this asshole Hitler here, who can only generate conflict between Europeans.

Al, Hitler is a piece of shit, and so is anybody who likes him. Get it through your skull or go to:

Carolyn Yeager

Daily Stormer

Renegade

American Nationalist Network

VNN


etc.

OK? There are these places for stupid assholes.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 08:39 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

If you understand enough English to discern the meaning of my original post on the subject of contemporary Hitlerian relevance, Occam, then you might moderate your proprietorial sharpshooting .

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 07:48 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Occam wrote:

This ought to be parsimonious enough for anyone, Al:

http://carolynyeager.net/hitlers-table-talk-study-hour-episode-33

If you still admire Uncle Asshole after that and still expect people to rally behind Hitler after listening to that, then your best interests are served at Carolyn’s blog, or one of the other Hitler blogs.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 07:37 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

It is vital that we should always make assay of proctologically parsimonious explanations such as that offered by Frunobulac.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 07:25 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Frunobulac wrote:

Give it a rest, Al.

Hitler was an asshole.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 06:58 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

FB’s knowledge of National Socialism and, indeed, of Herr Hitler’s life and work is surely unmatched here at MR and if, as seems likely, the German leader’s war record is deemed unhelpful to the WN cause then I’d go with the FB view.

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/26/14, 05:20 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

GW, your ontology project sees consciousness and deliberation as a distinguishing human element and one which is necessary to guide proper action. I can agree of course, and it touches here on an important difference from Vico.

Vico saw us as beholden to cycles of time, a destiny to repeat them, even if coming out to higher levels after each fall and return.

Rather than a fall, what we are seeing in the hippies un-articulated pursuit of midtdasein was the understanding, wisdom, if you will, to consciously, deliberately turn and reconstruct basic, organic and relational aspects of the optimal life of a western man. As an expression of alternative range of functional autonomy (authenticity), it would be opposed to lineal maximization of the modernist project.

If they were articulate enough to see it as a matter of optimization in contrast to maximization, they would have been well on the way to a proper incorporation of Artistotlean optimality and care for relationships as distinguishing characteristics of authentic human being as biological, mammalian creatures.

They were not articulate, of course, and Jews, and liberals associated false attributions to their motives where the right could not conscript them.

The feminist presumption of the time was that females were denied the higher reaches on the hierarchy of needs and that was unjust. Perhaps, but this rested on the projected assumption that males also had fulfillment on the basic levels, perhaps even more than females, and that is why they were over represented in the higher reaches on the hierarchy of needs - that males were achieving as a result of Maslowian differentiation of fulfillment.

The Draft was an elephant in the room such that only emasculation could be cause for its being ignored. That is to say, that males clearly did not have their basic needs recognized and fulfilled as easily as females.

Not that they should, of course, but if there is to be a critique and conscious guidance of authenticity, it has to be based on an accurate assessment of the facts.

Particularly, if we are to understand what the hippies were about as opposed to what traditional men and women, and Jews want them to be about - i.e., a way to blame White men and distract from their legitimate need to have their intrinsic value normalized and institutionalized.

If things are to be fair and functional between the genders, if we are to allow sufficient expression of full humanity for our co-evolutionary females (which, unlike Muslims and other third worlders, we should), then we have to take into account their cushioning on the basic levels of needs - they can have an unfair advantage in being pandered to and supplied with information and help that puts them into positions of power which they may not truly merit.

Its not that they cannot merit these positions, but their basic fulfillments need to be taken into account and the tendency to pander needs to be corrected with more tests of their merit - particularly of their broad social, racial, national understanding.* The understanding of bounded social classification. Absent that and understanding that White male sublimation is a minor and worthwhile tradeoff for a vastly superior way of life, we are seeing an overly liberal female empowering miscegenation, for example, because she thinks things are easier than they are and that White males are more responsible for their failure as “individual wimps” than they really are.

The White male correction to authenticity and optimality is stigmatic as well, perhaps more-so as they seek not ambition, but the basic needs on the hierarchy - sufficient organic requirements, security and possibility for normal relationships without super human efforts.

The correction to this (what the hippies sorely lacked for their ineloquence and misguidance of Marcuse’s “fee love”) on the basic level of needs is for there to be voluntary enclaves where absolute monogamy is held sacrosanct - sacred. The choice needs to be available for both male and female to have authenticity.

What Friedan’s thesis was not taking into account was that Male achievement was not always a result of differentiation of Maslowian fulfillment (though it assuredly was at times), but an expression of Nietzschean/Freudian deprivation and privation on basic levels - e.g., after he survives sexual rejection and perhaps even the draft, risking his life as designated expendable, a male might just say to himself, you are going to deny me the higher reaches? And he might be reacting quite inauthentically at that and conduct himself as a sociopath in fact - especially when he witnesses the kind of grumbles that females have regarding their unfulfilled needs.

Both male and female need to understand if they are to have authenticity, that nationalism, social classification of those more closely related, is essential in the accountability and ecological management of their needs and aspirations.

This means for men, for hippies even, that this is not a pacifist movement. If they are to have dasein (being), they must, as Michael O’Meara notes, also have it in Midt (in the middle of a classification of their folk). Which means, of course, that they must defend the boundaries of that classification against interlopers and antagonistic people.

It is also true, that if the male is to achieve, he needs to have those basic needs fulfilled sufficiently.

It was there I appreciated Bateson’s critical attitude toward the overly hard rites of passage of some tribes, which produced “harsh, overcompensating males.”

Thus if he is to achieve higher levels on the hierarchy of needs in authenticity, he needs sufficient leeway and balancing off on his tightrope act, felicity in relation to females as well, of course; sufficient concordance and cooperation in making it happen right.

I have sketched four aspects which I believe are distinct values for European peoples. And as opposed to the linearity of Maslow’s hierarchy needs to be reconstructed in an ongoing hermeneutic process if authentic optimality is to be managed in individual development and gender relations.

For Europeans, I see Being, Socialization, Routine and Actualization as essential - in an ongoing, conscious and deliberate reconstructive process.

Faced with the draft into war of aggression, having scarcely anything to do with their interests as White men, the hippies were motivated to pursue Being (more exactly, midtdasein). That was entirely appropriate, but not sufficiently conscious, not placed into conscious and deliberate relational negotiation with the other three necessary values of need fulfillment. Nor was it problematized against the incommensurate agendas of females and other races.


P.S. My apologies for calling Tom “shit” but I see this, what the hippies were pursing as SO important, so misunderstood and inappropriately disparaged as to require an emphatic rebuke when I see it happening again.


* It should also be true that some positions of influence were reserved for men on the traditonal assumption that they had sacrificed and made it there on merit and sufficient judgment - which they may not in fact, have. Hence, another reason to take the rigidity of the hierarchy into optimal reconstruction.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/25/14, 04:34 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

Tom,

I certainly don’t regard the hippy movement as a Jewish media creation, though Jews in America certainly pushed to the fore to associate it with their own radical politics and manipulate it into a form more suitable to their ends.  If one strips out the politics, what we are left with is a broad Western social movement, perfectly disorganised but creative and ontologically interesting, which sought not merely to express opposition to the mechanics of order, power, war, economics, and everything that used up lives, but to transcend that and place the human principle at the heart of the Weltanschauung.  This is, actually, a very modern nationalist thought, regardless of its conception and realisation in ultra-liberal individual and collective forms.  Nationalists know what “the human principle” means, and know it more certainly than any universalist Christian or utopian Marxist.  That which is human is the touchstone of our political thought, beyond the merely ethnic.  For there are laws in Nature that we watch liberals daily transgress but which we must observe ourselves.  The essence of why they are wrong and we are right is right there, in that.

As for your father, I understand that he would have felt disdain for those ultra-liberal forms.  But he, like my own father and like all those fathers and grandfathers who went willingly into the 20th century darkness, did not fight only for future generations to be trammelled within their own social limits and conventions.

The hippies did not free themselves or us.  We still live in an age of darkness.  We are still waiting for the intellectual, aesthetic, social and political movement which will deliver that.  Like the hippy movement, it must be a movement interested in peace so long as a peaceful means of “doing what we must to remain who we are” preserves the ethnic life we love.  That life can only be spent when no other way is open to us - the human principle, you see.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/25/14, 03:22 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Jimmy Marr wrote:

Great job over there, Lurker. I really appreciate it, and I left a comment saying so. Thanks also for the suggestion that I comment. You may also find the video link I posted there of interest.

I’ll post again here for others. It’s a video of the homecoming ceremony at Marysville-Pilchuk High School were that injun boy ran amok earlier today.

Jaylen Fryberg, or whatever his name is was clearly being used for display in a diversity freak show. I’d be in a murderous rage as well if I had been used in such a shameless travesty.

http://www.podblanc.guru/seattle-shooting-homecoming-prince-shown-here-marysville-pilchuck-high-school-homecoming-court-2014_b1b0c4c4d.html

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/24/14, 07:14 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Ebowling wrote:

From the organization, “Doctors Without Borders”..

Ebowling doctor hits the lanes in New York

http://www.naturalnews.com/047374_Ebola_outbreak_New_York_City_Dr_Craig_Spencer.html

This comment appeared in entry 'Ebola remiss an alarm for border control as even most objective standards of human ecology ignored' on 10/24/14, 08:18 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

Soren, we all must adjust to changing demographics, even in the hallowed field of your beloved literature.

For example, a rewrite of Harper Lee’s classic, guilt - ridden tearjerker has been optioned by Random House, with an Hispanic lawyer doing duty as the Gregory Peck character:  -  so, do watch out for “Tequila Mockingbird.”

This comment appeared in entry 'Thank You, Ebola-chan!' on 10/24/14, 05:55 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Greg Johnson on Vico

http://cdn.counter-currents.com/radio/Johnson on Vico.mp3

This comment appeared in entry 'Comments On Vico by Enza Ferreri, Greg Johnson, et al.?' on 10/24/14, 05:47 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Al Ross wrote:

The New Zealand Prime Minister, John Keys is a Jew.

This comment appeared in entry 'A Labour of ... well, not hate exactly, but certainly scorn' on 10/24/14, 05:41 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Lurker wrote:

Jimmy!

I was hoping you might show up on this thread:

http://aattp.org/oregon-white-supremecist-who-handed-out-anti-diversity-flyers-faces-huge-backlash-from-community-video/

I think we’ve done pretty well there but if you made a special guest appearance, your adoring liberal fans at the AATTP would be most appreciative. :-D

This comment appeared in entry 'Robert Ransdell: With Jews We Lose' on 10/24/14, 12:15 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

I strongly suspect Graham is right to move what he calls “the F people” out of the conversation. But the following node allows for a summing-up and for them to be put-aside for a time.


You can include the F politics of Renegade, American Nationalist Network, needless to say Carolyn, as covered by this example, but the discussed example focused from Storm-Fronters to Daily Stormer (the two most popular WN-Fuher mongers now). That is, the Stormfronters (Don Black et al.) were saying that DS in particular, should not be criticized.


Some interesting indirect feedback has come of this and recent threads at MR.


Don Advo has said that WN’s should not criticize the F worshiping Daily Stormer “for using a more direct approach” ..in other words he believes that they are saying the same European-friendly thing as any good WN, only louder.


Don Black “totally agreed” with Don Advo that we shouldn’t criticize the DS. Fromm agreed too, citing the “New Orleans Protocol” - this thing David Duke made up which I guess is supposed to say that you should treat Hitler like your buddy.

Well, a used car salesman can fool some of the people some of the time but can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

And here’s an example of what the DS is putting out that’ll fool some of the people, a post http://www.dailystormer.com/polish-pimps-tattooed-their-own-names-in-huge-letters-on-their-hoes/- where Anglin uses “Ebonic language” to “speak for the Poles.” Appearing on its discussion thread was

ELSE LÖSER’s protracted smear of Poles and Poland. Naturally Carolyn Yeager picked-it-up and ran with it, “oh, I was looking for this.”..  “This” http://www.danzigfreestate.org/loeser.html is a hit piece which I first saw at Renegade and when people there like blutenboden, Markus et al., tried to uphold it as truth, I realized that I could not agree and get along with them.

Coming back to the aptly named MS Loser, Carolyn is now busily discussing her “truthfulness” http://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-2  with Markus, along with some supposedly Polish guy who dutifully swears to its truth, Hadding (naturally) and (don’t laugh) Thorn - ha ha ha! Carolyn trusts Thorn’s word!

As she does Else’s

Hers is one of a few protracted diatribes against Poland (Czech etc.) that Nazis circulate. When I locate the other, I’ll include it here, but the other one cites absurdly exaggerated statistics of alleged atrocities against German civilians and other excuses for war. Sad, alarming, but some believe this stuff, and worse, believe it is relevant and somehow characteristic now. As they do Ms. Loser’s diatribe.

Because its so long, I’ll keep my response terse; hopefully more won’t be necessary. Just a sample shows the speed of their “objectivity and concern for truth.”


It takes a perspective as Carolyn does, that “Polish people do this, they all do”

http://www.danzigfreestate.org/loeser.html

The first thing to note about Else Loser is that she grew up in that one most hot area of contention between Polish and German nationhood as I had mentioned: Bromberg (Bydgoszcz) and Thorn (Torun).

This was the spearhead of both Polish and German collective historical grievance against the other. The people in these areas were most threatened and subject to folk propaganda, inherited grudges, resentments embellished lest they be forgotten - the place where it was necessary to maintain the most anti-other narrative.

And she was born in and wrote of Poland in the post-war time when Poland was under communist control.

She begins her diatribe by fore-fronting her strongest argument - they got ‘em now! - Kopernikus was German.

One of the first discussions that I ever had with Carolyn was to tell her to take the crypt of this man to Germany and keep him.  He is not Polish, fine. I don’t care, don’t need him, wasn’t meditating on it in my life. Poles do not need him.

But in thinking about why some would have (wrongly) claimed his Polishness historically, note again where Kopernikus was born - that same area of hot contention. He was born in Thorn (the adjacent town to Bromberg/Bydgoszcz). Not only was he born in Thorn/Torun, but politically, Kopernikus took the side of Poland and Polish nationhood against the brutality of The Teutonic Knights (another regime admired by the F god. The Teutonic Knights in fact took Gdansk from the Poles after the Poles held it for a time; the Teutonic Knights conducting themselves treacherously, brutally, gruesomely in the take-over there as they had elsewhere). Kopernikus recognized this, took the side of the Poles and he was associated with the spear point of Torun. Thus, it may have seemed politically expedient to shore up Polish nationhood at that spear point against it; and with that, enfranchise a prominent figure taking their (Polish side).

Knowing Poles, Poland, I can confidently say that Loser’s is a colossal smear that only people who really want to believe it, like Carolyn and Markus, would fall-for. But what can you expect from people who admire a regime that burned Polish libraries?

They characterize Poland as this, that, and the other way unable and unworthy of nationhood - how convenient and how interesting that this was written in 1982, when Lech Walesa was being jailed for protesting in an effort to achieve Polish sovereignty from the Soviet Union.

But Ms. Loser says, see? Poland can’t run a nation. It was 1982, the Soviet Union is in control, Poland is leading the way among nations under its control to bring it down, but she and Carolyn say never mind.

And now, after 20 years of nationhood, Poland having the largest growth in GNP in the world from 1994 - 2004, her kind are still wanting to remove Polish nationhood.

Forget that in 1919 Poland fought for and regained its nation after a 123 year absence - at the culmination of which their nation thwarted a Soviet advance against the Germans. No Carolyn, they did not want to be conscripts in Hitler’s army either. But to fight the Soviets as a sovereign nation they did and would have again if not for Hitler’s stab in the back.

But like Ms. Loser, Carolyn is sure it has always been true that Poland doesn’t deserve a nation…as Hitler was sure after just 20 years in 1939..

As Friedrich the “Great” was sure just after a newly reborn Poland established the world’s second Constitutional Republic after the US. Never mind, F the G needed to remove Poland’s nationhood.

And so Poland had their language not their nation. Ms Loser and fellows will make a big deal then about Poland valuing its language and historical narratives as a means to keep its people and nation together despite its political absence; as a means to preserve collective memory and aim to restore their geographical nation.

..in fact, the Ms Losers will try to say that Poland was never a nation…the Polans were never there, the Pomeranians, the Silesians, the Mazurians the Vistulans…all a product of that “Polish imagination.”

It is a very nasty strategy that the Nazis deploy to try to erase the history of peoples. I can’t imagine doing that. But..

...that is the Nazi propaganda put forth by Ms. Loser, consumed wholesale by Carolyn, Markus and the other Nazi freaks.

New Orleans Protocol, Dave? We shouldn’t disparage the DS and others speaking the same way, only louder, Don Advo?

Don’t get me wrong Don Advo, you do many things very well, that is why I address you. Because I expect better.


If this segment of Hitler’s table talk does not disabuse the listener of Hitler admiration then they are indeed, hopeless.

http://carolynyeager.net/hitlers-table-talk-study-hour-episode-33

There is a difference here, though, as Hitler is so plain in his intentions of colonization up to the Urals and in his intentions for the Slavs that well, I laughed and I laughed hard at his absurdity.

This comment appeared in entry 'Apollo&Dionysus: Were Hippies Protesting the Moon Landing, Ayn?' on 10/23/14, 11:12 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

REIKS TERVINGIVISOGOTH wrote:

Indeed Traficante’s toupe was unbecoming, but no need to be shrill.

....here’s Jez Turner interviewed on Voice of Albion

http://www.renegadebroadcasting.com/voice-albion-jez-turner-10-22-14/

This comment appeared in entry 'Mexicans versus Blacks.' on 10/23/14, 01:22 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Page 1 of 3472 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›