Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:56 | #

In a racially Balkanized “American” there will be zero tolerance for Jewish shenannigans. Whether Jews want to accept this or not, they are very likely to be blamed for the destruction of America. Anti-semitism will be rampant. It will be quite normal. Somebody will be blamed for the destruction of America. Where will such as Alan Dershewitz, Bill Kristol, Michael Bloomberg and others do then? Who would put up with them? Jews should be very very very worried. Of course, White Americans should blame themselves for letting this happen. But they will go after the Jews instead,not without some justification I might add.  Why is it that Jews are incapable of uderstanding this?

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:53 | #

“Self-Deception as an Aspect of Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy”, Chapter 8 of “Separation and Its Discontents” by Kevin MacDonald:

“It was Jewish historiography with its strong polemical and apologetic bias, that undertook to trace the record of Jew-hatred in Christian history, while it was left to the anti-Semites to trace an intellectually not too dissimilar record from ancient Jewish authorities. When this Jewish tradition of an often vio-lent antagonism to Christians and Gentiles came to light “the general Jewish public was not only outraged but genuinely astonished,” so well had its spokesmen succeeded in convincing themselves and everybody else of the non-fact that Jewish separateness was due exclusively to Gentile hostility and lack of enlightenment. Judaism, it was now maintained chiefly by Jewish his-torians, had always been superior to other religions in that it believed in hu-man equality and tolerance. That this self-deceiving theory, accompanied by the belief that the Jewish people had always been the passive, suffering ob-ject of Christian persecutions, actually amounted to a prolongation and mod-ernization of the old myth of chosenness . . . is perhaps one of those ironies which seem to be in store for those who, for whatever reasons, try to embel-lish and manipulate political facts and historical records. “ (Hannah Arendt 1968, viii–ix; inner quote from Katz [1961b, 196])

Evolutionists have shown considerable interest in deception and self-deception as mechanisms for furthering evolutionary goals (Alexander 1987; Beahrs 1996; Trivers 1985, 1991). Evolutionists propose that self-deception is favored when-ever it prevents the detection of one’s deceptions of others. Deception and self-deception are thus interdependent phenomena. Self-deceiving individuals are able to present an appearance of trustworthiness and sincerity and to believe their own rationalizations: “The agent is now perceived by both self and others as ‘genuine,’ a truly ‘good person’ as opposed to ‘manipulator’ ” (Beahrs 1996, 6). Beahrs (1996) proposes that the targets of deception also often engage in self-deception or something close to it. These individuals accurately perceive the deceiver’s machinations but act as if they are deceived.

Posted by Thanks, Jews! on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:11 | #

Long Island, New York mystery meat, albums one and two:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/photos/ny-nassaudwimugs10-pg,0,879972.photogallery
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ny-mugshots,0,6421324.photogallery

Posted by Dave Johns on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 20:04 | #

RE: Long Island, New York mystery meat, albums one and two

Good Lord!!! Surly the poor souls in those mug shots had there facial features photographically distorted?

Posted by Sally on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:15 | #

A good way to think about Jews is to realize how much they want to be white and how much they don’t want to be white, all at the same time. I have been struck when we make a venture into the real world that the first thing Jews ask is something like this, “Who is white?” or “Just who is a European American?” or even more brazenly, “Are you saying Jews are not white?”

And that’s just about all they may care about, to get the question on the table with a sulky demeanor and a sullen look. We’ve answered on occasion that, “Yes, Jews can be white. Pay your $25 dues, please.” Another time we read off the long list of slurs that the San Jose daily used to use (they stopped after our mid-June ad appeared and was mailed to the top 18 executives of the parent company in Colorado), and said, “If you’ve been called white trash, white boy, redneck, hillbilly, typical white person, Wonder Bread, WASP, etc., then you’re white.” End of conversation, but what a strange thing to focus on. And what would be the basis for this need to be accepted and then to reject it simultaneously?

For text of ad:

That’s why we’ve taken to using the term “the diverse white American peoples” so that when Jews and others want to be white, we can just tell them they are part of the diversity of the white American peoples and get them off our back. When they call us WASPs, we just call them WEJs (wedges, white European Jews).

Placing them in positions of leadership is a wholly different thing, however.

Whatever else you may want to say about Jews, it is instructive that their particular brand of facing-the-world has allowed this one segment of “whites” that has the highest per capita income and the highest per household wealth to “identify” with the poorest non-whites and to do battle against the remaining diverse white American peoples, their histories, cultures, names, values, and institutions. And it appears that it will always and forever stay that way. (The next group with slightly lesser per capita income and slightly lesser household wealth is Japanese-Americans.)

Perhaps the best we can do is to cleanse our language and values of their language (no more usage of “gentiles” or “tchotchkes” or “kosher,” etc.) and acceptance of values (MTV, political slander—oops, punditry, glossy & depraved Manhattan magazines, Wall Street manipulation, etc.). Cleansing our language and values appears to have to be done at this time by one person at a time.

The good news is that we appear to be living at the precise time in history when we start waking up to the fact that conservatism of any stripe does not equal Republicanism, and that white liberation does not stem from conservatism (instead it overthrows conservatism), and that we are seeing this very month the beginning of defensive white identify politics which had been beaten down heretofore in the USA by conservatism or Republicanism. Scholars will find this historical moment of great interest.

Posted by Sally on Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:17 | #

Oops.

For text of ad:  http://www.resistingdefamation.org/sub/metro.asp

Posted by 2R on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:40 | #

“and that we are seeing this very month the beginning of defensive white identify politics which had been beaten down heretofore in the USA by conservatism or Republicanism. Scholars will find this historical moment of great interest.” (Sally)

I appreciated your post but could you expand on this statement?  Are you saying that Sarah Palin is a sign of “defensive White identity politics?”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 02:09 | #

Sally seems to have a pretty good grasp of what’s going on — not perfect (whose grasp is perfect?) — but damn good.  Unusual for a woman.  (Assuming she is one.)

Posted by JTaverner on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:45 | #

Here’s a suggestion for those who want to help awaken other Whites.

1. Use google news to find popular stories about immigration, globalism, the war on terror, etc.
2. Ensure the article has a commenting section.
3. Post a comment from the “Jewish perspective”.

By “Jewish perspective”, I mean what is said by Jew’s actions rather than words.

For instance, if an article comes up about racism in America, reply as follows:

“Never again will we let racism become a threat to us. The concept of “White race” (which I don’t accept) has been proven by the Holocaust to be a danger to Jews everywhere. The world must be made safe for Israel. “Whites” declared themselves threats to us in WWII. You are now seeing God’s justice. There will never again be another Holocaust.”

As another example, if the article is about the joys of diversity, reply as follows:

“America _must_ embrace diversity. As a Jew acutely aware of our past persecutions, I’m know I’m safer with many different peoples enriching America. We are a nation of immigrants. Whites are predominantly old and past their productive years, we need a more vigorous population for the war on terror which threatens us and Israel. It’s time to get over the racism hurdle. We need to make the world safe for all peoples in both the world _and_ the US.”

If the post sounds sincere, it will make it through moderation (moderators are typically sensitive to posts critical of Jews but lenient of posts by Jews). Don’t be facetious; express the parasitic Jewish position as honestly and straightforward as you can. By posting in such a manner, you are in effect doing Jews a favor; honestly expressing their intentions. They have, by whatever process, become inhibited in expressing honest intent to their host populace. In any case, they attempt to do the same for us, as the majority of the “Seig Heil!” posts you’ll find on heavily viewed news stories are likely posted by Jews to paint a negative picture of Whites from the perspective of what Jews think we’re thinking.

One other thing to be aware of, carefully choose your poster’s name. Don’t use anything sarcastic or with the word “Jew” in it. Use an typical Jewish first name “Bernie”, “Aaron”, “Schlomo”, etc., or, use a combination of a typical Jewish last name preceded by a letter for the first name, “BWeiss”, “ALevin”, “SGreenburg”.

It’s our job to make sure the world hears the Jewish side of things…

Posted by Sally on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:07 | #

Fred, thanks for the compliment. However, the diverse white American women have always thought larger than their menfolk. You may not know it but the idea for the Bill of Rights was by a woman (the US Constitution was originally mostly just a framework for governmental organization), the idea of Manifest Destiny was by a woman, and the idea to go to the moon was whispered in the ear of President Kennedy by a woman.

But back to Manifest Destiny. Now that one-third of all working-age Mexicans have moved to the USA, it is time for the diverse white American peoples to complete the feminine notion of Manifest Destiny by invading the northern tier of Mexican states, settling them, hanging the drug dealers and narco-governmental personnel, and turning them into garden spots. There’s a lot of fine farm land, open spaces, and good hunting on the plateau land even if the low lying land is too hot. We can decide if we want a new country or just get them annexed to the decadent and masculine USA.

Here are the Mexican states we intend to take over for the diverse white American peoples in northern Mexico: Tamaulipas, Nuevo Leon, Coahuila, Chihuahua, Sonora, Baja (north & south). Forget the “Northwest Trek,” go south. And remember you heard it here first. We could transform those states into wonderful living spaces, and they are certainly emptying fast.

Fred, why don’t you men think big thoughts?

Posted by silver on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:50 | #

In any case, they attempt to do the same for us, as the majority of the “Seig Heil!” posts you’ll find on heavily viewed news stories are likely posted by Jews to paint a negative picture of Whites from the perspective of what Jews think we’re thinking.

In any non-racialist forum debates that hit on race or immigration you can count on the replies containing innuendo about “pointy hats” to be Jews.  Long before I accepted the racialist view completely I used to make use of its sturdiest, least challengeable (so I thought) points.  Invariably, people would respond with insinuations about “nazis” or “kkk.”  It would be extremely frustrating to have to battle so hard for mere common sense, and that even though I was wholeheartedly granting them their premises about the evils of “racism.”  I knew some were Jews but I never thought anything of it.  Later, I thought to go back and examine their responses on all topics for certain patterns.  There it was: Jews, almost to a man.  They try to nip everything in the bud.  Anytime you can’t get a word in sideways about IQ or immigration, count on it being a Jew.  One fellow who resorted to some of the most creative IQ-denial I’ve yet seen belonged to something call the “JDO” and a couple of years later posted about moving to Israel.  Another completely lost it over a poster mentioning Jewish Democratic block-voting (how could he generalize so/it was impossible to measure/it was slander against jews).  Another time, mass hysteria ensued over a discussion of German post-war losses and my, at the time completely innocent, remark that Hitler had obviously gotten the German economy rolling again.  I’m quite sure some of them are affiliated with and receive their instructions from Jewish activist organizations; others are probably simply highly attuned to subjects which might impact them, much as I used to be.

Fred, why don’t you men think big thoughts?

Fred and Cap certainly do.  Ho boy, grabbing the Mexican northwest.  Easy online racialism just hit a new high.

not perfect (whose grasp is perfect?)

Only yours, Scroob.  Blame the Jew in front of the same dozen people six times before breakfast every day and twice that on Sunday.  Oh, excuse me, and Rienzi: he’s got it all worked out, too—right down to the allele, to boot.

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:04 | #

“Fred and Cap certainly do.  Ho boy, grabbing the Mexican northwest.  Easy online racialism just hit a new high.” - silver

I’m about ready to personally lead the invasion, silver.  You need to book a flight over here so you can join in the fun.

Posted by silver on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:25 | #

But many people, in their evil desires, would like to use that as a reason why the less intelligent are worth less.

I’ll tell you what, Cap, you get me a Med territory in the US (anywhere is fine, though I’m partial to the NE, if you’re wondering) and I’ll book a flight tomorrow.  Hell, I’ll tan it up and even move in with the Puerto Ricans if I have to (as long as we keep out the Dominicans).  I’m easy.  I’m not even doing this for myself personally.  I just want separation.  Separation is best for everyone.  Have some respect for people trying to do you a favor.  (Don’t worry, I’ll still help even if you don’t; it’s a carryover from the Christian ethic I was raised in.)

Posted by Troll Ferreter on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:53 | #

Hell, I’ll tan it up and even move in with the Puerto Ricans if I have to (as long as we keep out the Dominicans).  I’m easy.

LOL Sure you are Paco.  Just wondering though if you ran this by all your other “Serb”, I meant “Serb-Greek” bros about your easy tude towards tan Puerto Ricans?  I bet they’d have a problem with it, just guessing.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:36 | #

Silver,

Do you remember reading this?

Say no, but you won’t use MR for your personnel vendetta again, and I won’t ban you.  Say yes, sorry, won’t make that mistake again, and I won’t ban you.  Say something else or don’t say anything at all and I will ban you.

Up to you.

Posted by silver on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 00:05 | #

Yes, I recall writing that and yes I recall your warning not to do so again.  In my defense, I wasn’t executing a personal vendetta with any comment in this thread. 

I’m surprised you come down so hard on me, GW.  You’ll notice in a thread recently commented on by a “Mike Walker,” Scrooby saw fit to call me a “gnat” for no more than pointing out his notion of “normalness” would not itself be sufficient to prevent the unthinkable.  Where is your censure?  I get called a “troll” by people clearly incapable or unwilling to treat seriously anything I say; isn’t that the height of childishness? 

Go ahead, GW.  Release your frustration and ban me.  The urge to deal with ambiguity by horribly misinterpreting it is a worrying tendency among you people that you may one day rue. 

Here, allow me to earn my banning, in order to assuage your conscience: I live in Thailand, Rienzi.  Clearly I have little problem living among people vastly different from me.  Puerto Ricans are much less different to me.  I appreciate aspects of their culture (much of it loosely “western”), their music in particular and can get by in their language.  I imagine I’d have little difficulty living among them.  Being a preservationist doesn’t preclude appreciating others.  What others (be they Serb, Greek, English or an uppity Bostonian wop) make of that is of little importance to me; what they cannot do, no matter how much they insist they can, is deny my commitment to separationism by misinterpreting a stated willingness to live among those not exactly my own kind as “yet another” indication of my “mendacity” rather than the selfless gesture it in fact is.

Enjoy talking among yourselves, closed-minded zealots.  Surely WN just took a massive step closer to fruition by banning another of its “enemies.”

Posted by Thai Gook on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:02 | #

We no like Silver.  He too brown, look like Paki.  He talk too much too.  He say he Serb, but he Paki.  Thai Gook no lie.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:20 | #

Silver,

I have accomodated you through all your metamorphoses here, not least because, in a certain non-trivial sense, accomodation of opposing forces is what we aim to do.  I want to see altruism reciprocated.  I want to see differences at least confronted intelligently, if they can’t actually be resolved.  I want to see the promotion of our common interests.

I’m not sure that you even noticed the efforts made on your behalf, or questioned why, after your disastrous early performance, you were still here at all.  Failure to comprehend this and respond accordingly bespeaks of either intentional disrespect or profound self-absorbtion.  I don’t know which it is.  But to claim, as I think you are, that a “commitment to separationism” is driving your behaviour seems utterly bizarre to me.

Now you point out Fred’s attack dog tendency as an example of my inconsistency.  Fred knows that he can go too far on occasions, and is big enough to apologise if necessary.  But we all know him, and we indulge his more canine moments because that’s just Fred.  You, on the other hand, have made yourself impossible to know.  The two cases do not compare.

I’ve been at this game too long to not know that IP-banning is a pretty vain exercise.  Take your leave voluntarily.  If by some unlikelihood it suddenly dawns on you what this site is about, no one will take offense if you reappear.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:45 | #

I probably shouldn’t chime in here but what the hell. 

I’ll simply register my view that, taking the totality of Silver’s output at this site all together, including those comments he signed as “Peter North” (in fairness, I’ll recall that he denies he was “Peter North”), there is, finally, no net evidence that he’s 1) sincere, 2) completely honest, or 3) on our side.

Note:  “completely honest” doesn’t mean someone has to divulge everything, just that he not mislead where he does “divulge.”  He can keep everything a secret if he wants, but if he declares something it’s supposed to be reliably true. 

There’s a lot of stuff where Silver’s not being frank.  For me, the main one is his continually stating and/or implying that Serbs are racially something other than Russian-like.  They’re not.  They don’t resemble Turks, Egyptians, or Iraqis for example, which he keeps implying they do.  They resemble slavic Euros.  I’ve never been to Australia but I flatly do not believe the children of Serb immigrants to Australia are vismins (visible minorities):  the Serbs aren’t racially different enough.  They’d be invisible.  That Serbia is close to Turkey and was part of the Ottoman Empire hasn’t changed Serbians racially into Turks.  Why it hasn’t can only have to do with their restraint as regards marrying only among their own kind, never among the Turks.  Because if they hadn’t shown such restraint they’d have become Turk-like.  But they’re not.  They’re Euro.  However they pulled it off, they pulled it off.  Or maybe there just weren’t lots of Turks around in Serbia?  Maybe the Turks didn’t send lots of Turks in, the way China is sending lots of Han into Tibet and Bush lots of Mexicans into America, with the express purpose of changing the race?  In those days controlling a subject nation didn’t necessarily always mean flooding it with your own race.  Maybe the Turks left them alone race-wise, I don’t know.  In any case, however they’ve avoided it, they’ve obviously avoided becoming Turks or Middle-Easterners racially because they don’t look like those races.  They’re slavic.  They’re white.  (OK, not white according to Prozium, but he doesn’t consider German Austrians white either.)  They’re as white as, let’s say, Slovaks, Chechs, or Poles.  They’re as white as Russian Muscovites.  That they’re located to the south of other Slavs in the Balkan peninsula doesn’t change that.  They’re slavic.  I do not believe their second-generation children in Oz, which Silver claims to be, wouldn’t fit right in.  He’s not telling the truth.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:50 | #

Czechs

Posted by Catfish LeRoy on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 02:07 | #

“We could transform those states into wonderful living spaces, and they are certainly emptying fast. Fred, why don’t you men think big thoughts?”

It’s a nice fantasy, Sally, but I think you know it’s utterly futile. Once White settlement had created the safety, wealth, and prosperity that Whites are famous (or infamous) for creating wherever they go, then everything would come full-circle again, with the Hispanics who had vacated N. Mexico coming back to “reclaim what is rightfully theirs.”

You have to understand the pattern, Sally: Whites create unparalleled societies characterized by fairness, opportunity, and rule-of-law. Wherever they go, less fortunately-endowed groups (parasites and rent-seekers) will follow, seeking to exploit White functionality. That’s why the world must first be made safe for explicitly ethnic-based states and societies. Otherwise, it’s eternal White Flight on a global scale. Whites cannot go on creating wealth and prosperity with hard work and honesty, only to watch impotently as their value-added societies dissolve under opportunistic non-White migration.

It’s all reminiscent of the Greek myths about Hades: Whites are condemned repeatedly to toil and cook-up a sumptuous feast, only to watch THEIR banquet numerically overwhelmed and devoured by parasitic brown and Ashkenazic Tards. The interlopers and despoilers stream in en masse after the work and preparation have been done by White hands. Then…it’s feeding time!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 02:15 | #

(JWH comments, by the way.)

Posted by 2R on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 02:32 | #

“However, the diverse white American women have always thought larger than their menfolk. You may not know it but the idea for the Bill of Rights was by a woman (the US Constitution was originally mostly just a framework for governmental organization), the idea of Manifest Destiny was by a woman, and the idea to go to the moon was whispered in the ear of President Kennedy by a woman. ” (sally)

Hey Sally, I’m interested in learning more about these historical occurrences.  Could you give me a link or some other kind of reference of where I can further read about them?

“it is time for the diverse white American peoples to complete the feminine notion of Manifest Destiny by invading the northern tier of Mexican states, settling them, hanging the drug dealers and narco-governmental personnel, and turning them into garden spots.” (Sally)

Sally, I’m not too sure this strategy is what we have mind?  Mexico belongs to Mexicans, and its their land to do what they wish with it.  War is a serious matter, and it would be very hypocritical to want Mexicans to leave, while at the same time, taking their land by force.  We have plenty of land, the problem is that we don’t control it.  The age European conquest is over.  What we’re trying to reverse is the further conquest of our land.  Let Mexico be for Mexicans, Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, Israel for Jews, White countries for Whites, and the world will be a better place. 

But hey Sally, could you please answer my earlier question about Sarah Palin? 

Thank You Sally

Posted by Robert Reis on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:30 | #

Very good and easy to read summary.
http://tyrannyalert.com/9-11 fairy tale.pdf
“911-the fairy tale from hell”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:45 | #

From the Even Mexican-American Patriots Want Mexican Immigration Into the U.S. Shut Down department:

There are four upstanding, patriotic young men in this video (cited by Marcus Epstein) who, when they saw signs all around them at the Republican Convention saying “Viva McCain” in Spanish, decided to quickly make a three-part sign saying, “BUILD THE FENCE.”  The second of the four young guys is Mexican or half-Mexican from the looks of him, the three others white.  It’s well-known that huge numbers of Hispanics and Negroes in this country want Mexican immigration stopped but the Jews who pay the piper of both parties won’t listen of course, since they have their Jewish race-replacement agenda.  Watch the video,

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/09/14/suppression-of-immigration-at-republican-convention-worse-than-i-thought/

and see how Insane McBraindead’s agents ordered the sign these upstanding patriots held up to be taken down.

Posted by Robert Reis on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 07:10 | #

Popular Mechanics Flying Circus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfASIxN8U44

and
heavy weight REMIX
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=72wfcpR_cnI

Posted by silver on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:29 | #

What the hell.  Not much good me shutting up only to be superceded by the unbearable lightness of Monitor’s imbecility.

I have accomodated you through all your metamorphoses here, not least because, in a certain non-trivial sense, accomodation of opposing forces is what we aim to do.

It wasn’t so much a matter of metamorpheses as it was the evolution of one man’s thought unfolding in front of your eyes.  You were more interested in pigeonholing me (or filing me in the too-hard basket) than understanding me, relying, I imagine, on his highness Rienzi’s evaluations (ignoring his absolute>/i> self-absorbtion while speculating about mine, which I find amusing). 

Oh come off it, GW.  Look at the quality of human one encounters here.  I can scarcely imagine there even existing an appropriate “accordingly” with this mob—you, sadly, included.  If you disagree, tell me now how I might have escaped the vortex created by my initial assault.  This isn’t just about me, mind you: how might <i>any man ever come good in your eyes when you do your best to reduce the likelihood to zero? 

But to claim, as I think you are, that a “commitment to separationism” is driving your behaviour seems utterly bizarre to me.

I’ve settled on what I believe to be the most pragmatic principle.  It’s a principle whose end result is the same as which you seek, so you might want to pay attention no matter how “bizarre” or incompatible with your means you find it. 

There’s a lot of stuff where Silver’s not being frank.  For me, the main one is his continually stating and/or implying that Serbs are racially something other than Russian-like.  They’re not.  They don’t resemble Turks, Egyptians, or Iraqis for example, which he keeps implying they do.

Fred, there isn’t a chance in hell you know my people better than me so I’d appreciate not being lectured about them.  In fact, since you assume such a thing as an “Italian race” exists, I wonder whether you’re much qualified to lecture anyone about “race” at all, except to reiterate a few of the bedrock assumptions of racialism. 

I do not believe their second-generation children in Oz, which Silver claims to be, wouldn’t fit right in.  He’s not telling the truth.

You not only dismiss my infinitely more informed opinion on the matter, you don’t even believe Anglo Australians’ opinions—a sure sign you don’t know what you’re talking about.

But far worse than that, you mistakenly assume I want to “fit right in.”  I can’t speak for every single other Serb (or Greek, a people with whom I’m equally familiar), but there can be no doubt I speak for a sizable number when I say “fitting in” with Anglos is one of the things farthest from their minds.  In my case, as much as I appreciate the better features of their culture (the numbers of such steadily dwindling, sadly), that’s a far cry from wanting to surround myself with anglos.  Serbs, Greeks (and others) don’t self-segregate from rejection by anglos; they do it because they prefer themselves. There’s but one pragmatic case to be made for arguing for racial inclusion and that’s economic, not cultural or racial, and it relies, imo, on copious mendacity and special pleading.  The case for separation, on the other hand, arises from enlightened self-interest: I don’t want to dilute or lose my “own” (I’m not fully Serb, remember) people to negroes or asians (aside from the cousin married to a negro, I have another married to a malay, sadly, with children). 

Now, I’ve said here and elsewhere that my concern, my personal concern, isn’t overwhelmingly racial.  I’m not speaking for any other Serb, Greek, or anyone else, here.  This is just me, personally.  I am quite capable of living with racial aliens of the same culture (and overriding committment to it), and even being happy doing so.  But I also believe that being around racial familiars is simply better. I say this to highlight that I’d be happy with virtually any sort of separation.  It’s not about some grand nationalist philosophy for me, just pragmatism.  Other folks, of course, see it differently.  For example (and example only, GW—keep your hair on), Rienzi is someone who cannot tolerate the idea of living around anyone who fails to meet his autosomal standards; others, like McCulluch, around those who fail to meet certain phenotypic requirements.  These others frame the issue as one of life or death gravity.  I don’t quite see it that way, but that doesn’t really matter, since the end is largely the same.  To summarize: I have my opinions on what constitutes a reasonable basis for it, but I don’t really care which way I am or anyone is grouped.

Either there’s something in all this which makes me a persona non grata or so enigmatic as to be barely tolerable or there isn’t; I’d really appreciate being told which it is, GW—and no more speculating about my motives or anything else, just deal with what your presented with.

Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:43 | #

[Serbs, Greeks (and others) don’t self-segregate from rejection by anglos; they do it because they prefer themselves.

Anglos can’t stand other Anglos. It is very strange.
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/20/71-being-the-only-white-person-around/?cp=56

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:52 | #

Silver’s comments are interesting for me due to my longtime expatriation in the Far East. I have friendly acquaintances but no friends among the major Asian races of the city in which I work but am fortunate enough to have cultivated deep and lasting friendships with other expat Whites of various nationalities.

I have observed newly arrived young White expats’ embarrassing attempts to ingratiate themselves with locals, their main selling point being that they are fervently anti-racist. My Asian acquaintances know my WN views but one or two Whites have stormed, in high dudgeon, out of the club bar “in disgust” at my racism (racialism being an unknown term). Ironically,the locals with whom I sometimes drink, and who have, in the main, experienced tertiary education in the West to a higher level than the new expats, understand, after a short explication, instinctively about group EGI and not one Asian has taken offence at my views.

Religion, however, is a different matter and my trenchant views on the egregious nonsense remain unvoiced and as a guest in a foreign country full of believers I think this is appropriate.

Posted by Robert Reis on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 02:41 | #

captain jack aubrey said…

Americans today are told that their children have no more right to this country than the child of someone from Guadalajara or Guangdong. Why die for such a place? No one washes a rental car, no one bleeds for a rental country….

It was always a dumb idea to try to suggest that you could strengthen a First World economy with a Third World population - a bit like that John Belushi video where he’s an Olympic champion who breakfasts on chocolate donuts and Marlboros.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 03:13 | #

“Americans today are told that their children have no more right to this country than the child of someone from Guadalajara or Guangdong. Why die for such a place?”  (—Robert Reis)

Good point.  Let the Jews and other élites man their armies for the defense of Israel and Halliburton with Chinamen and Mexican Indios from Oaxaca.  No more American Euro blood spilled for Jews and race-traitor élites.  Let’s see how an army, navy, and air force manned by Puerto Ricans, Hindus, Arabs, Nigerians, Somalis, Hmong, and Mexicans defends Israel when there’s a real crunch.  Then let’s see the look on Foxman’s and Max Boot’s faces.

Posted by snax on Sun, 28 Sep 2008 03:25 | #

Fred -

Let the Jews and other élites man their armies for the defense of Israel and Halliburton with Chinamen and Mexican Indios from Oaxaca.  No more American Euro blood spilled for Jews and race-traitor élites.  Let’s see how an army, navy, and air force manned by Puerto Ricans, Hindus, Arabs, Nigerians, Somalis, Hmong, and Mexicans defends Israel when there’s a real crunch.  Then let’s see the look on Foxman’s and Max Boot’s faces.

That ARMY isn’t designed to protect Israel, it’s designed to attack you.

The clue is in the hue: that’s not an ARMY to protect Israel, that’s an ARMY to attack you.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:19 | #

In this thread The Realist sees himself as debunking Prof. MacDonald (scroll down; the comments don’t have their own links):

“if MacDonald’s interpretation of Jewish leukophobia were correct, you would expect that the Jewish left would be strong supporters of Jewish ethnocentrism, which they are not.”  (—The Realist)

The overwhelming majority are. 

Also, what is The Realist calling “the Jewish left”?  All Jews are left.  “Jewish left” is redundant.  Might as well say black-haired Chinaman, long-necked giraffe or water-dwelling trout.  All Jewish “conservatives,” all Jewish “centrists,” all Jewish “liberals,” and all Jewish “leftists” want Euro race genocide via the demography/immigration weapon, while all of the above with the sole exception of maybe twenty percent of Jewish “leftists” want Israel’s well-being and Jewish preservataion. 

Incidentally, as far as I’m concerned the Jewish neocons, who are without exception both fervent Zionists and advocates of the total destruction of all Euro nation-states and the forced race-replacement of all Euro races, are part of the Jewish left. 

“Zinn is a case in point.  As you can see in pieces of his like this and this [see links in the original text], Zinn is highly critical of Jewish ethnocentrism.”

He’s not “highly critical.”  He chides Israel comparatively gently in contrasted with the vicious ways he goes after Euro-race societies and cultures.  Even where Jewish chiding of Israel is less gentle, the tiny fraction of Jewish élites who take that kind of position on Israel certainly don’t invalidate MacDonald’s conclusions which are fully vindicated by the other 95% of Jewish behavior including the major portion of the “Jewish left.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:25 | #

“Mark Jaws” in that Inverted World thread has a fairly good letter right underneath Jobling’s.  As he points out, one thing Jobling doesn’t understand is the degree to which the majority of Jews dislike and feel enmity toward Euros.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:50 | #

Jobling, after letting Mark Jaws’ letter onto the thread (he tightly controls what gets on his threads in advance) has gone back and deleted it!  (It came right after Jobling’s last night; it’s not there now!)  Judged acceptable by him at first, it apparently didn’t pass muster on second consideration. 

Jobling of course is a good ally, one of the best, on the race-replacement issue no matter what he thinks of the degree of Jewish ethnic (not just Jewish “leftist” which almost everyone admits, but Jewish ethnocentric) culpability, actual ethnicity-motivated Jewish ethnoracial attacks against Euros (exactly the way Greek Cypriots might attack Turkish Cypriots or vice-versa, on a purely ethnocentric basis), as a huge, simple, and in fact obvious (obvious when you take your blinders off) explanation of all this:  whatever he thinks of Jewish culpability of lack thereof he’s of course an excellent and strong ally on race-replacement.  But you do have to rub your eyes a little at his lack of appreciation for certain truths about Jewish political motivations and yes, even those of “leftist” Jews (I put leftism there in quote marks because there’s a deep sense in which Jewish “leftism” is merely Jewish ethnonationalism and that can be seen as long ago as the 1860s in the Russian Empire).  Even the very mild letter of “Mark Jaws” which I mentioned, “Jaws” being a regular commenter in Jobling’s threads and apparently a trusted one since his letter passed muster the first time around, ended up getting zapped.  On the Jewish question, Jobling is clearly running a very tight ship, one of the tightest.  He and nitwit Charles Johnson of Little Green Charles Johnson Turds (no I’m not calling Jobling a nitwit here, only Johnson) could almost join forces in that regard.

Posted by Robert Reis on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:13 | #

7/7: The Ripple Effect
57 min - video.google.com
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=7/7:+The+Ripple+Effect&emb=0&aq;=-1&oq;=#

  http://tinyurl.com/4cfxrv
 

‘The Ripple Effect’ is an extremely well-done video on the 7/7 bombings. It is clear that the British government has reliable assassins and a compliant electronic media.