|
|
|
A resignation John Ray has left the MR panel of writers. In so doing he has characterised his postings here over the past several months as a counterbalance to an intrusive anti-semitism. I don’t think that characterisation will surprise anyone. John is as strongly supportive of the positive Jewish contribution to Western society as most nationalists are critical of the negative, but neither can value the other’s analysis. There is, as we all know, a wider tragedy in this disconnection in so much as Jewish cultural and ethnic activism works freely upon the body politic, while its critics go not just unheard but slurred, silenced and imprisoned. If the free speech environment at this one small blog could not break down the barrier - and I recall all too few fruitful exchanges of opinion (not just with John) - then the outlook for our people is pretty bleak. Anyway, John has gone and it is incumbent upon me to thank him for his past interest and efforts, and wish him well with his extraordinarily diverse array of blogging activities. We look to the future now. Comments:2
Posted by Steve Edwards on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:36 | # I think this is the only possible remedy for MR; thus there is now a basis for moving forward. It’s just a shame that so much damage had to be done simply to get this far. 3
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:58 | # Obviously, I carry responsibility for that, Steve. It was my choice to allow the matter the work itself out to its logical conclusion, my reason being that this of all blogs has to try to address that goddamned disconnection. Stepping in earlier would have pleased many, it’s true, but represented a failure. We have failed, of course. I guess I am just a born last-ditcher. 4
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:08 | # I see John’s departure as a blogger the same way I saw JW Holliday’s: as a loss to the blog. Such departures narrow the scope, which is to be regretted. I’d say I look forward to John’s continued participation in the comment threads were it not for the fact he’s not loquacious, commenting only seldom in the threads and even then saying very little, usually almost nothing—so if he’s not a blogger we won’t be seeing him here again, would be my expectation. Therefore I’ll thank him for his invaluable participation and faithful support and bid him good-bye and godspeed. 5
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:16 | # Fred, scope is less important than quality. JJR posted much drivel. A worthy adversary—not in the sophistic sense but in the honest debate sense—who posts only once a week is vastly more valuable than JJR’s relentless crapflood. 6
Posted by Steve Edwards on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:20 | # JJR failed to meet the basic standard of arguing in good faith, so there really wasn’t any point in him sticking around. That his arguments were shite anyway goes without saying, of course. 7
Posted by Steve Edwards on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:38 | # BTW - which/how many people have resigned from MR so far? 8
Posted by Lurker Mark II on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:04 | # I’m so relieved that henceforth I’ll call myself Lurker Mark II, in deference to the chap who claimed squatter’s rights on the nick. Wonder how many nanoseconds before JJR pops up and links to MR, writing on the lines of ‘this proves no dialogue is possible between scholarly, moderate, affluent, good-looking libertarian individualists and the fanatical knuckle-dragging WN haters who want to drag us all back to the blah blah blah- and now I’m never going to tell you where to get those luscious oysters!’ 9
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:35 | #
Too late, Mark-II—he’s already told us. As a great seafood lover I’ll defo stop in that place and have some, if I ever get as far as Downunder! (Thnx for changing your name, btw—it’ll help keep things sorted in the threads, as to who’s saying what.) 10
Posted by Daedalus on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:40 | # I don’t recall the issue ever being “anti-Semitism.” As those familar with my posts on other forums and blogs well know, I have been extremely critical of the Nazification of American racialism. But that is because I consider myself a racialist. It got to the point where JJR was dedicating entire topics to chortling over miscegenation within his own family. If that is within the scope of the blog, what isn’t? 11
Posted by onetwothree on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:11 | # The disagreements seemed academic. Don’t confuse one man’s marriage to an Asian, or his family’s acceptance of that with more historical questions. Miscegenation is an unavoidable symptom of the disease. I would posit that it’s a rare white nationalist who wouldn’t marry an Asian girl if she had the right appearance, personality, etc. In general, I would recommend not alienating people who disagree with a macro question for micro reasons. 12
Posted by Donald Miller on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:19 | # Yesterday, on 9/9/06, I posted on “why we do it…and is it enough” about the need to start colonies in our big cities. Today I see in the San Jose Mercury News an article about “Jewish campus enters final approval stage” which features eight acres, senior housing, a preschool, a gym, a cafe, shops, a town square, and a community center that’s as big as a big box retail store. Then there’s four more acres for 159 townhouses and apartments “seamlessly” connected to the campus. The article makes the point that this is a small town of 12 acres in itself. To top it off, there is to be a 96-foot-tall tower of glass, “gently lighted.” When white people start building colonies like this for white people, undeterred like Jews are by shouts of diversity and inclusion, we will have entered an important phase of white regeneration. And this is how it will be done…on the ground right where we stand, not somewhere else. To see the 9/10/06, page 6B, article, go to: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/15485950.htm Or to: Here are the first four paragraphs of the article: ***** Posted on Sun, Sep. 10, 2006 The Palo Alto City Council on Monday has a single item on its hearing agenda—one of the city’s largest developments since the postwar decades, when hundreds of three-bedroom, two-bathroom houses replaced the dairy farms in the town’s southern half. The Taube-Koret Campus for Jewish Life project, at San Antonio Avenue and Charleston Road on the site of the former Sun Microsystems headquarters, could pass for a small town in itself. The buildings on its eight acres would include housing for seniors, a preschool, a fitness center, a cafe, shops, a town square and a community center that’s the same size as the Costco store down the street. On four more acres would sit 159 townhomes and apartments designed to be a seamlessly connected part of the campus. That project belongs to a non-profit housing group. 13
Posted by EC on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:30 | # Certainly, racial preservation invokes the most viceral of emotions especially with people who are aware of the current plight we find ourselves in and this includes nearly everyone reading and commenting here. Having someone ridicule, antagonize, repeat already debunked and refuted topics ad nauseaum, view with disdain, promote miscegenation with “good immigrants”, distill a complex topic in a simplistic ‘left/right” dichotomy, and argue in bad faith weakens this site immensely. It is not his “liberalism” that was the problem, but all the points mentioned above. Steve Edwards is of liberal ideology who is chummy with Abiola for Christ’s sake, so is Svigor if I remember his words correctly. I am moderate and even leftist in many social aspects of life, yet we three are one when it comes to race and white racial preservation. I would gladly have people like Steve or Svi on my side than a staunch “conservative” like Ray. So this goes well beyond his puerile squid ink. I have no problem with differing opinions and as a matter of fact, I welcome them. The issue becomes what is a differing opinion versus a detrimental meme. Ray’s beliefs are detrimental memes that do not belong on sites like this. Opinions of Edwards, Svigor, Richardson, and yes, even Hutchinson may not always jive with the more hardened, but they are at least logical and in good faith. I’d like to see some of the old bloggers come back and rekindle the blogging interest here. People like Steve, Mark, Geoff, and JW. Even Braun would be good, despite the Nazi fixation. I know Steve and Mark are official bloggers, though their interest has evidently waned. My apologies if I’ve stated anything above that is untrue. 14
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:05 | # Donald Miller, that was an extremely interesting comment about the Jewish campus. That eye-opening project points up the most jaw-dropping hypocrisy on the part of the Jewish Community in this country. It’s unbelievable how that community says one thing and does another—how they want race and ethnocultural mixing for European Americans and none for themselves. What dishonest, hypocritical, shocking, sickening and, frankly, unacceptable behavior!
Regulars at this site don’t need to be reminded of the need for thorough revision of the whole concept of “anti-Semitism,” as the “anti-Semite” charge gets leveled so often nowadays in obviously irresponsible, insincere, undeserved, politically-motivated ways as actually to have lost all meaning (more and more we’re hearing dreck such as “the film ‘The Passion of the Christ’ is anti-Semitic”; “the film ‘The Lord of the Rings’ is anti-Semitic” [yes, I actually read that charge somewhere!]; “it’s anti-Semitic to oppose open borders” [which you read about some public Jew or some rabbi declaring almost every week somewhere in Europe—it’s got to be at least every month, if you look for it—whenever any perplexed or angry European stands up to publicly question open borders]; etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam). There are other reasons a revision is called for, such as the one I think Bo Sears has brought up, about there being no obvious reason dislike of Jews (where it does actually exist, and no matter whether “rational” or “irrational”) has graver moral culpability or social urgency attached than other ethnic dislikes or prejudices whether “rational” or “irrational” (such as, to cite one example of hundreds, Jewish dislike of white people [Europeans] which is widespread, certainly among factions within the Jewish community such as those fanatically devoted to helping push open borders on us — neocons; those Jewish individuals and organizations manning, backing, and funding the ADL, ACLU, SPLC; and so on: if European “anti-Semitism” led to the Holocaust, hadn’t Jewish anti-Christianism already a decade earlier led to the Holodomor?). The charge of “anti-Semite” is way, way, way overused; way too often falsely, insincerely, or politically leveled. In this vein, a video excerpt linked over at The Civic Platform blog is of interest. In it a man named Ostrovsky (whom I’ve never heard of) tells of an instance he himself was involved in, where the false, purely politically-motivated leveling of the “anti-Semite” charge was “ordered” against U.S. congressman Pete McCloskey by an agency of the Israeli government, the order (or, apparently, more like a “request” or a “suggestion” than an “order”) being duly carried out by the ADL here in the States! I don’t know who this Ostrovsky is — he’s apparently worked for Israeli intelligence and written a couple of books, and if he’s one of these anti-Israel Jewish Israelis (who generally give me the creeps) I want to say I don’t support him in any way in which he may betray, or act against the survival of, his own country. I also want to say Pete McCloskey is a rabid left-wing Democrat whom I’ve long loathed on general grounds, who richly deserves far more condemnatory epithets leveled at him than this one. But the really-and-truly slimy Jewish tactic, which Ostrovsky reveals, of the purely political leveling of the charge of “anti-Semite,” the request coming down from the Israeli government and getting obediently carried out by the ADL here, is highly revealing apart from being thoroughly damning and just incredibly nauseating. Here‘s more Ostrovsky from the same Civic Platform entry, by the way, talking about something else. (If either link fails, here‘s the source log entry.) 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:14 | # Excuse me, McCloskey’s a Republican. He’s so left-wing I think of him as a Democrat. 16
Posted by the once and future x on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:35 | # “I’d like to see some of the old bloggers come back and rekindle the blogging interest here. People like Steve, Mark, Geoff, and JW.” What am I, chopped liver? 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:57 | # If you are Soren, I assume you’ve heard about that major new oil strike in the Gulf of Mexico, with the potential supposedly to increase U.S. production by 50% ( ... if true, it ought to push back the date of peak oil by a few weeks, no? ...). 18
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 20:44 | # “What am I, chopped liver?” Well, the only man I ever knew use that term was a Latvian named Blumenaus who enjoyed the gee-gees and clubs where exiguously-dressed young ladies accepted a Martini at £20 a throw. That was back in the mid-seventies - which gives time enough, I guess, for the liver meme to travel to Denmark and thence across the pond. So, Soren? Are you still to be numbered among the beasts or will you risk a little Nietzschean Return? 19
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:22 | # I do want to use this opportunity to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by EC and seconded by Svi. James, especially, and Svi and Alex have done a tremendous job upping their posting frequency over the last few weeks, and that is much appreciated by me at least. But the MR project demands a full compliment of hands. The door was never closed on those who absented themselves. Now, I guess, we’ll discover the damage done by my loyalty to JJR (which I would have extended to any of you in the same circumstances - and, indeed, did so to Geoff). The keys to the blog remain at your disposal. I would also repeat an invitation I made, I think, after Geoff’s departure to the effect that there are many commenters here - and onetwothree, EC and Fred are all among them - who would make invigorating bloggers. Soren, Matra and Alex came by that route. I am open to the possibility. As I said, this is the moment to look to the future. 20
Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:58 | # Those who believe they will miss the Chiron-like wisdom of JJR will, no doubt, look forward with enthusiasm to his rebirth as a blog commentator. Cant wait. 21
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:15 | # Was he always this bad; bragging about miscegenation and what not? 22
Posted by Steve Edwards on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 06:11 | # JJR’s problem was that he was basically a juvenile. His demeanour was utterly childish and intentionally destructive. His standard of discourse was atrocious. Yet some people who should have known better insisted that there was nothing wrong with cheering on (let alone hosting) a malevolent interloper who held his colleagues in contempt. Much damage has been done thus far, and it is not clear how redeemable the situation is henceforth, however, I think we can view the end of JJR as a kind of liberation for the blog. The atmosphere will definitely be less poisonous - that much is guaranteed. 23
Posted by Amalek on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:21 | # Ray was just a raging egotist who’d do or say anything to keep attention focused on himself. A group blog cannot stand being hijacked. The nature of one contributor’s opinions matters not one whit compared with the childish, or actorish, insistence on ‘Look at me! Look at me!’. Glad GW finally saw the light. I don’t want tbat fellow who kept posting holiday snaps of Hitler and Mussolini to become too prominent either. 24
Posted by Voice on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:33 | # MR will be much less anti-semitic now that he is gone. It will allow more rational discussion of JQ instead of the constant rebuttal of the rubbish he posted. 25
Posted by Steve Edwards on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:44 | # I’m not anti-semitic in the slightest, and I doubt most of the so-called “anti-semites” around here have been judged fairly. I support the Jewish right to self-determination, and I also support the European right to self-determination. Just as any European who calls for the destruction of Israel can properly be called an anti-semite, any Jew who agitates for the destruction of Europe is properly labelled anti-white. It’s very straightforward logic. If rights are to have any meaning they should be applied consistently. To deny them to white Europeans is to be a low-life bigot. 26
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:48 | # Well,it looks like the Brownshirts,led by O tto H immler have achieved their goal.Seems like you waited for him to leave,before you started the circle-jerk;but then ,that’s to be expected of those whose prime focus is the"JQ” Sieg Heil ! 27
Posted by On Holliday on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:03 | # Nick, you unmitigated, useless MORON: How many times did I have to say that I wanted JJR to post *more* here, *not* resign, and that I was *not* being sarcastic about it? Let me put it into language you can understand: Me Tarzan, me tough ex-marine, me bullet-proof. Ugh. Ugh. Me want JJR to stay on the blog, ugh, me want JJR to post more, ugh. Semper Fi, get all ‘dem muds, ugh, Semper Fi, bullet-proof, ugh, ugh, me want JJR to post more. Got it? “Seems like you waited for him to leave,before you started the circle-jerk;but then ,that’s to be expected of those whose prime focus is the"JQ” Sieg Heil !” Idiot, if you are saying that we “forced him out”, then obviously he was being criticized when he was *still here.* I also realize that criticism of your IDF buddies - you know, the same who allowed to 200+ Marines in Lebanon to get blown up (Semper Fi!) - is equivalent to “Sieg Heil”, but others have a more, you know, nuanced view. Nick: exhibit A in the wisdom of having civilian control of the military. Ugh. 28
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:36 | # Damn,Himmler[OOPS-Holliday],you’re really on a roll today! and as usual,any perspective other than yours is unacceptable.I would like to point out that this country{USA] was forged in blood and courage-not by pin-head theorists who merely pontificated from mommy’s bedside.I happen to be very proud of my Corps,my Country,and my Race.It appears I’m your next “target of opportunity”,so go for it-your foaming-at -the mouth is amusing,as is my grandson’s temper tantrums.Semper Fi ! 29
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:59 | # The United States was forged by the Marines? I wonder what the Army would have to say about that. :p 30
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:02 | # Himmler[or Holliday]“civilian control of the military”=Mac Namara[Johnson years]=the only time our country left the field of battle never having lost an engagement.Pin-heads in action-you really need to brush up on history.Check up on Westmoreland{General},who was more concerned about his political after-life than the conduct of the war-lots of good info out there,if you choose to be really perspective. And we “Tarzans” are the ones that face the enemy every day-lost jobs,increased “entitlements”,closing ERs,insurance rate increases,lower wages for White Americans,gang rapes and murders by illegals,etc.This is why I put the holy grail of the “JQ” in perspective. 31
Posted by On Holliday on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:05 | # “I happen to be very proud of my Corps,my Country,and my Race” In that order, I presume. “I would like to point out that this country{USA] was forged in blood and courage…” We sure could have used some of that “blood and courage” right here in the USA, in the 1960s… “and as usual,any perspective other than yours is unacceptable” You seem unable to answer the simple point that I wanted - and openly stated - for JJR to post *more* here. Therefore, your implication that somehow “Otto Himmler” was responsible for JJR leaving is incorrect. What I sincerely wish is for JJR to return and fill the blog with his valuable contributions - contributions which are indeed valuable, albeit not in the manner he thinks. 32
Posted by On Holliday on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:09 | # “Pin-heads in action-you really need to brush up on history.” I see. So the military was in charge, politically speaking, say in WWII, or any other of those “good wars”, that “our boys won, gaddamiit!” “And we “Tarzans” are the ones that face the enemy every day-lost jobs,increased “entitlements”,closing ERs,insurance rate increases,lower wages for White Americans,gang rapes and murders by illegals,etc.” That is faced by all white Americans, Tarzans or otherwise. Which generation bequethed that disaster to America? “This is why I put the holy grail of the “JQ” in perspective. “ As if the JQ has nothing at all to do with the aforementioned problems. 33
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:22 | #
34
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:38 | # Daedalus-I never said Marines-read it again-however,I DID say “pin-heads”,so what’s your point?LOL BTW,The Continental Marines was authorized by the then setting Congress on Nov 10,1775;one day before the Navy;the Continental Army was not authorized until several months later.Nonetheless,our Founders[even the pinheads of the time],put their lives,wealth,and reputations on the line-AND USED THEIR REAL NAMES,in establishing this REPUBLIC.American history is quite interesting-especially pre-Civil War-some might try reading it. 35
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:04 | # The Marines never played much of a role in the American Revolution. The same is true of the Civil War. They played no role whatsoever in the Texas War of Independence. The only branch of the military that played a major role in actually “forging” the nation would be the Army in the Mexican War and fighting the Indians along the frontier. Actually, if you examine American history closer, you will notice that the “pinheads” have been responsible for the greatest territorial acquisitions: the trans-Appalachian wilderness acquired through diplomacy in the Treaty of Paris, the Louisiana Purchase, Florida, Texas, Oregon, and Alaska (Seward’s Icebox). The Marines have been used mostly to push around poor countries in Latin America. Surely you know of Smedley Butler:
36
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:21 | # “Which generation bequethed that disaster to America? “ 37
Posted by On Holliday on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:38 | # ““Which generation bequethed that disaster to America? “ No, yours. You said you were in your late 60s, right? Let us say, 67. That puts you born in 1939. In 1960, you were 21, in 1970, 31, in 1980, 41 (if I’m off by a year or two, it doesn’t matter with respect to the point). Therefore, when *you* were a young man and then a mature adult male in his prime - *then* it was that America was lost. Therefore, it was YOUR generation that bequethed the disaster to us. It was YOUR generation who gave a “pass” to the real enemies of America - domestic ones all - while pissing away American lives in the godforsaken jungles of Southeast Asia, for no damn reason worth the life on one white man. Then, your generation has the nerve to engage in online bravado, criticise those of us who have to be the “men among the ruins”, and call us “Himmler” because we question JJR’s illogical comments about certain groups. In point of fact, I am relatively *uninterested* in the JQ, and only mention that in response to JJR’s provocations, or in response to (from JJR or others) *wrong* comments about Jewish genetics. “before academia became escounced in their “ivory towers"of Liberalism and correctness,and kissed ass on any off-the wall excuse for more tax-payer funding for their “cause du jour”. Dr. John Jay Ray? “Himmler…” Yes, moron? “I’m actually beginning to think you’re a red herring,but JJR says you’re legit.But then,we can’t trust JJR,can we??What a Schlmiel.” ugh. “Take two Prozac,and call me in the morning.Semper Fi!” Me say you take two Prozac, me want you call me in morning. Semper Fi - always faithful, *except* to those Marines who died in the Lebanom Marine barracks truck bombing. Let’s just blame that on the “ragheads” on, move along. Did you ever wonder why Caspar Weinberger was infuriated at the Israelis over that? Was Weinberger - himself Jewish - a “Himmler” because of this? Don’t strain what passes for your “brain” too hard. 38
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:41 | # Dadelus-I would like to have the source for your Smedly Butler non-quotation-I’m not neccesarily contridicting it,but having read most of his memoirs,find it totally out of character.The prose is unseemly,and the verbiage un characteristic.BTW-Just what is YOUR experience with the military-protesting doesn’t count!LOL&Semper; Fi! 39
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:41 | #
The “Greatest Generation,” in the North. The boomers catch a lot of flak because of their involvement in the antiwar movement of the late sixties/early seventies, but the U.S. committed itself to civil rights reform decades before. Truman was the first president to embrace civil rights. Brown, which set the tone for the next ten years, came down under Eisenhower. Kennedy and LBJ carried on the policies of their predecessors. Roughly 75% of White Americans were already willing to say they believed in racial equality by 1954; when the first boomers were about 12 years old. The Twenty-Sixth Amendment, which lowered the legal voting age to 18, wasn’t passed until 1971. 40
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:51 | #
Wrong again. Academia was swooning for liberalism in the fifties, especially racial liberalism. James T. Patterson’s Great Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974 (from the Oxford History of the United States series) reflects the spirit of the age which was all about social engineering. The “Greatest Generation” declared war on war, poverty, drugs, and racism - and lost an all four counts. 41
Posted by On Holliday on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:02 | # Smedley Butler: http://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Anti-War-Americas-Decorated/dp/0922915865 If the Tarzans want to be angry at someone, they should look at Feith and Wolfowitz (never mind the de facto draft dodging chicken hawk gentiles like Bush and Cheney), who sit in their comfortable offices sending young white men overseas to die - for *nothing* of utility for whites. But, no. Feith and Wolfowitz are the “good guys”, “rightists” and “conservatives” all. Those who value the lives of the white American soldier, and who believe that such men should be sent into combat only to defend race, culture and nation state (not the constitutional state) - we must call such people “Himmler” and “pinhead.” Don’t you know that whitey must sit up and beg when “Wolfie” snaps his fingers? Let’s not be Otto Himmler, now. 42
Posted by Daedalus on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:07 | #
It’s the single most famous thing he ever said. Punch it into Google and look at the results that turn up. As for the U.S. military, I would rather crawl on my hands and knees over broken glass than serve in the institution that brought nigger equality to the South. 43
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:11 | # Himmler-you give credibility to the “loose cannon"hypothesis-Howard Dean needs an aide-you would be a shoe-in.As I’ve said before-No little puke will prevent me from commenting on this site,until GW asks me to leave;you least of all-you may have been instrumental in JJRs’leaving,but I’m a lot harder nut to crack.The pen may be mightyer than the sword,but only in a six foot square room ,where a Claymore is useless against a pen which can intrude thru an eye-socket,an ear-drum,a nostril,throat,base of the skull,under the sternum,or femoral artery.Cheers!! 44
Posted by Calvin on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:30 | # The liberal establishment has advanced by co-opting any movement or belief system to further its destruction of traditional European values and beliefs. The result has been a constant withering attack coming from all directions, under which the Western world has crumbled. Global liberalism is now the established paradigm. Any attack, from any direction, against the liberal establishment is to be welcome. If some people are attacking half-heartedly and are focusing their attacks against an aspect of the global tyranny which is not thought to be a priority target by others, or refuses to attack a pillar of the establishment which is deemed to be a vital prop by others, so what? Isn’t it better to have JJR inside the tent pissing out, rather than outside the tent pissing in? 45
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:40 | # “Himmler-you give credibility to the “loose cannon"hypothesis-Howard Dean needs an aide-you would be a shoe-in.” Translation: I am a semi-senile elderly moron, who cannot look in the mirror without realizing that I have, in the most cowardly fashion, betrayed my oath to protect America from domestic enemies, so it makes me feel better to incoherently grunt nonsense on blogs. Gaddamit, I’m doin’ somethin’! “As I’ve said before-No little puke will prevent me from commenting on this site,until GW asks me to leave;you least of all-” Can you even *attempt* to answer any of my arguments? No. You cannot. A superannuated lump of flesh who’s verbal flatuelence here is an embarassment - which is why I say you should comment MORE. “you may have been instrumental in JJRs’leaving” You really are a disciple of JJR, aren’t you? You keep on ignoring my continued point that I wanted JJR to post MORE on this execrable blog, I stated that openly, and did NOT wish him to leave. I realize, Nick, that you are a semi-illiterate, moronic old fool, but, at least, try to follow an argument to the point that your microcephalic mind is able. “but I’m a lot harder nut to crack.” I have already stated that I think GW should make you a regular blogger here. I realize that since that was stated in normal English, and not in Neanderthalic grunts, you may not understand. “The pen may be mightyer than the sword,but only in a six foot square room ,where a Claymore is useless against a pen which can intrude thru an eye-socket,an ear-drum,a nostril,throat,base of the skull,under the sternum,or femoral artery.” Oh, wow, Rambo! Very scary! Nick, what were you doing when the Negroes were rioting in the 60s - hiding under the bed, wetting your pants? 46
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:43 | # “Isn’t it better to have JJR inside the tent pissing out, rather than outside the tent pissing in?” No, the best thing is to have JJR inside the tent, pissing IN. Which is why I state my desire for JJR’s return to this blog. 47
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:47 | # “but having read most of his memoirs” But not the book, “War is a Racket.” Interesting. What’s wrong - your IDF masters didn’t want you to get the wrong ideas about gunning down rock-throwing Palestinian children? Or is that a case of self-censorship? 48
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:14 | # JW, There must be many who scratch their heads in total puzzlement at your present antics. You are under no obligation to sink this “execrable” blog (which, as far as I am aware, has done you no injustice). A while back on Zach’s blog our friend Arcane went off on one of his “MRers are all basically Nazis” jaunts. I invited him to write a post here bringing forth the evidence for this charge. He declined. Will you, if I ask you to post one last time explaining our deficiences - in more rational terms than you have here - for all to judge? 49
Posted by Calvin on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 13:19 | # “No, the best thing is to have JJR inside the tent, pissing IN” Why? 50
Posted by Steve Edwards on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 13:25 | # You aren’t paying JW the dignity of taking him seriously - his goal is to destroy his blog. He has said this publicly and privately. Why do you not take him at face value? And Guessedworker - JW’s animosity to this blog would never have reached its present extreme state had the necessary action of expediting the inevitable been taken much earlier. 51
Posted by Steve Edwards on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 13:27 | # Sorry - “his goal is to destroy THIS blog”. 52
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:02 | # Steve, why do you say that? I always take JW extremely seriously, and have corresponded with him in good humour and good faith without any real real break since his first approach to us. I have great respect for him, of which he is fully aware. His present destructiveness towards MR is a source of some pain to me. But I don’‘t go running around wondering whether I am responsible for that. On the contrary, there is MORE than the JJR issue - or Nick Tamiroff’s marineology - at work with JW, and it is not unreasonable to ask what it is. 53
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:07 | # GW, I have sent you an email, which you can read and respond to - privately of course - at your leisure. I’ve said what I had to say and will, for the time being, discontinue the current line of anti-MR comments. It is obvious that the bulk of the bloggers and commentators here support your approach - particularly with JJR gone - and so, in the spirit of OMOV, I defer to their wisdom. 54
Posted by Steve Edwards on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:30 | # OK, fair enough - I just noticed that JW’s behaviour has changed quite markedly in the last few weeks. 55
Posted by Kulturkampf on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:50 | # “A superannuated lump of flesh - {who’s} - verbal flatuelence here is an embarassment - which is why I say you should comment MORE.” JW, given how aggressively you’ve been dumping on Nick Tamiroff for being an illiterate grunt, it would be more than fair for him to tell you at this point that you make him sic. This is a great blog - if you don’t like it, do a JJR. (PS. Nick may rub some people up the wrong way but I’ve come to think of him as a foul-mouthed, racist version of Steve Irwin - and hence quite likeable.) 56
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:24 | # “This is a great blog - if you don’t like it, do a JJR.” Er… I already did so- long before him. JJR resigned as a blogger, he made no committment, as far as I know, never to comment here again. My situation is the same. As you have have noticed, I’ve been removed from the “writers” section for quite some time now, based on my own request. With respect to Nick, I do not wish to get into a childish “blame game”, but the “problem” started when he began attacking me for my criticism of JJR. That’s interesting because the criticisms of others, Steve for example, never set off Nick’s ire. I would rather not waste my time with these flamewars, but there is a principle involved. Two actually. First - and here I’m putting on the “hat” of someone “pro-MR” - these sorts of ill-considered, vulgar, and Rambo-like comments contribute to the situation where the likes of KMacD avoid participating in the blog. And of course there are other problems…. Second, the problem is not with any one person of that generation. I see these types in my own family, and argue vehemently against them. What I mean are the types who - and excuse my “crude” language here - rant and rave about “the niggers and the spics” while supporting the likes of Bush or (the war hero!) McCain. People who would not contribute a penny to AR (but would read my issues for free), who think voting “conservative” every two years solves all problems, and yet cannot figure out why things have gotten worse with Bush and our 12-year-old “Republican Revolution”, people who - while raving at and cursing at coloreds - never stop and think *why* and *how* these coloreds, maligned as being “stupid” and “useless”, have gotten to the point of de facto ascendancy over white Americans. Racial slurs, bravado talk, superficial analysis, rah rah Bush..all that is getting is no where. I would rather see a member of the older generation contribute to the racial movement in some way, with money or time (that retirees have) and eschew the slurs and big talk vs. the alternative: racialist “trash talk” and ‘conservatism” while doing nothing. Now, I’m not even talking about anyone here - I’m talking about people I know, personally. These people, multiplied in their millions, is why there is a “disconnect” between the racial feelings that millions of white Americans still have and the lack of racialist power. They’ll whine about the “negras and ‘dem speeks” but the idea of voting for Buchanan, never mind Duke, is one they do not want to contemplate. William Pierce was a “evil Nazi” and thus, not worth any regard at all. One gets tired. If all these people from the GI generation and the immediate pre-war generation and the early boomers would just take some of the energy they use in the slurs and the “damn negras” and the bravado, and invest some of that into more quiet, and yet more effective, real activism, then we’ll get somewhere - maybe. No one is asking the elderly to do anything other than monetary investment, behind the scenes organizing, political involvement, etc. No “Rambo” schemes necessary. So, if people here agree with KK and say I’ve been to “aggressive” then, fine. But if the realization that their generation wrecked America can make any of these folks actually put their money where their mouths are, then so much the better. 57
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:26 | # “As you have have noticed” “..may have noticed” my own enthusiasm for proofreading has waned considerably since the OMOV consensus here is for the more “earthy” fare at the blog. My apologies. 58
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:38 | # “it would be more than fair for him to tell you at this point that you make him sic. “ He’s been doing that all along. He started the “debate” simply because I had the temerity to use quantitative measurements to prove JJR wrong. Note the “reverse snobbery” element here that the Tarzans use to their advantage. No one thinks twice if someone who attempts to make quantitative arguments vs. JJR is deemed a “pinhead, supercillious, effete, useless intellectual”, etc. On the other hand, if the “supercillious intellectual” responds to this third party attack (after all, my initial criticism was of JJR and *not* of Nick), then it is the counter-attack, and not the initial attack, which is viewed askance by others here. I’m sorry. If someone uses ad hominem for no reason, particularly in response to comments not even addressed to them to begin with, I do not understand why they should not expect a response. 59
Posted by Kulturkampf on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:18 | # Thoughtful commentary on the failings of the racially conscious but politically naive, JW. I also agree with your sound advice for the BNP in another thread (and had been thinking along the same lines myself). There’s every reason for making these constructive contributions, as opposed to wishing on the destruction of the whole blog. Speaking of activism, btw, does anyone know what the National Policy Institute has been up to? Aside from publishing the new volume ‘Race and the American Prospect’, and posting news stories, there don’t appear to be any new developments. 60
Posted by On Holliday on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:32 | # OK. It seems the consensus here is that I was “too harsh.” I can say therefore I regret the intensity of the counter-attack. However, I cannot understand where “Otto Himmler” is blamed for JJR’s depature, while others here have been, recently, much more vehement than I on that topic. And, no, “Ray of Sunshine” was not “Otto Himmler.” 61
Posted by EC on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 23:50 | # However, I cannot understand where “Otto Himmler” is blamed for JJR’s depature, while others here have been, recently, much more vehement than I on that topic. Let me take a stab at this. While there has not been a shortage of criticism regarding JJR from many commenters, yours of late has been quite voluminous. Not that I minded, personally, though others apparently have. You were the clearest and easiest target by that standard and, in my opinion, this was compounded by the mere fact of who you are. In other words, in the context of a public school, it’s one thing for a student calling a teacher an asshole and a totally separate issue when one of the vice principals does it. In public and repetitively, no less. That is how I perceive it. I ask again, how about trying to make the blog better? Clearly, by being present and commenting, you’ve done a tremendous good, despite wanting to bring it down.
Post a comment:
Next entry: America and demos, Conservatism and ethnos
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:14 | #
I could put up with a Jewish author who accepted the right of self-determination, on their own territory, for people who didn’t want Jews in their society and indeed who might want “whites only” or “Germans only” or whatever “only”.
Guys like JJR, however, sit on their real estate assets while young men can’t afford housing to start families, and then mockingly tells people that the reason whites aren’t winning the demographic war is they aren’t having enough babies.
He’s better off somewhere else given the sort of firestorm that’s building around real estate.