|
|
|
GW in conversation with Lee John Barnes At the weekend Lee John Barnes and I finally recorded an hour’s worth of sometimes fairly frank discussion, and the result is on the Radio page. Lee, it must be said, has no official remit to speak for the party leadership. But he is as close and as loyal to it as anyone I am likely to interview for the foreseeable future, and puts up a spirited defence - alongside an interesting focus on non-political activism to address the fractured and atomised condition of the white working class under multiculturalism. Comments:2
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:22 | # Lee, How clear is your copy? I am thinking about using alternative recording software. The entire conversation was a little over 90 minutes, which is pretty well double what we aim for. I was reduced to paring away at every cough, blip and hiccup in the end to try to get it down to at least an hour, and failed! There was, though, quiet a bit of repetition in the original, especially on the subject of community activism, and there is nothing of substance that was lost in the reduction, which Lee will be able to confirm. Despite the length of the conversation, there was one subject I forgot to ask about, and that’s how Lee sees the party addressing a Conservative-led coalition government. Will tactics change as the political landscape changes, which it will? 3
Posted by Grassy McKnoll on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:34 | # The only problem I had was that GW’s audio feed was at a lower volume than the guest speaker’s. I’ve tried to find an online broadcast of the original radio show and can’t. It’s not on BBCi Player nor on Radio 4’s website. If you go to the BBC’s podcast of it, the episode has been taken down. 4
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:39 | # Hi David, My copy was recorded vi call graph and seems clearer when I speak, less tinny and loud, than your version. I am using a built in mic on a lap top, hence the raised and loud voice when I speak as otherwise you cannot hear me through it, and it is - to be frank - a crap mic on the laptop. I have the copy if you want it. Regards, Lee 5
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:45 | # Hi david, good work on the edit mate. Re the coalition government - we now have a Two Party State as opposed to a Three Party State. Democracy is still dead. The collapse is still coming. The riots a’ la greece will begin soon. regards, Lee 6
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:46 | # Grassy, There is no adjustment on the Skype recording software I’ve got. I can do a post-production edit using Audacity, and split the feed in two and equalise them. But that hits the sound quality even more. The basic problem is with the initial recording software, which I don’t think is good enough. I also need to find a way to talk less! 7
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 12:52 | # The problem is primarily the mic on my laptop, not your software mate. Lee 8
Posted by john on Tue, 11 May 2010 13:58 | # Examples of good interviewing can be found here: 10
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 11 May 2010 14:38 | # I am even more impressed by Lee’s loquacity given that he was consciously shouting at his laptop! John, I would categorise this recording as a conversation rather than an interview. Lee is too adept at sticking to his own brief to let an interviewer push him further than he wants to go. 11
Posted by BGD on Tue, 11 May 2010 15:38 | # Interesting to hear. I agree with LJB that we need to encourage Brits to view themselves as a specific community and engage in community activism and politics. I would be interested to understand how this can be done “under the radar” and still retain an ethnic element. And if it doesn’t retain that element then it’s usefulness to us is likely lost and our “hidden hand” would probably slip from the levers as soon as it starts to be successful and spread out. No doubt it would then start to fly a Tea-Party / EDL non-racial banner. Surely, to have various grouplets that don’t hide their (distant) paternal roots even if they aren’t on the surface at least an outfit whose sole purpose is indoctrination would seem to be wiser? Perhaps I misunderstand. On a second note LJB seems to be arguing “shut up or get out and do your own thing” if you disagree with Nick’s policies. This argument was thereafter a little blurred with the following comments so perhaps I need to relisten. I would say on the one hand that Nick himself joined the party and played one tune on his flute and thereafter changed that tune quickly to very different sheet music and thereafter a lot of people were culled or edged out. One can’t complain if people point out that you’ve got to a certain position before kicking down the ladder. Finally if you want to have a national party then you need to have a broad church. Every party has its wets and its hardcore and as it expands the wets will no doubt get a bit wetter (though it’s unlikely the hardcore would get harder) and that doesn’t have to impact the core policies as they are the tail of the curve. P.S. Shame he wasn’t asked to answer the question about how we retain our ethnic identity if the calculations he made regarding retaining our demographic position by removing illegals becomes redundant when those illegals are quite possibly made legal as seems likely. If that happens then there has to be another argument or the road to civic national beckons, Gianfranco Fini anyone.. 13
Posted by Bill on Tue, 11 May 2010 15:44 | # On topic off topic. Does anyone know how many people voted is this 2010 election? Because 90% of them voted for the MSM (Lib/Lab/Con) Does this mean that 90% of voters are cool with mass immigration taking over their land? To some degree but this is not the whole picture. We don’t know the% mix of white and non white votes. (political correctness?) The pollsters regularly tell us there is a constant high figure (80%?) of concerned people who rate mass immigration as their number one concern. Which in turn tells us that a large percentage of the 90% who voted for the MSM (Lib/Lab/Con) were definitely not cool with mass immigration. What it does tell us is, they, (voters) were investing their hopes in the MSM to address their fears, which in the event didn’t happen, in fact the MSM barely discussed the problem. How can the population of an intelligent Western civilisation be so confused? (cognitive dissonance LJB) In other words, how can our people on the one hand be extremely concerned about immigration (polls) and on the other hand vote for a political system that couldn’t care less what they think? Of course the MSM are heavily responsible for this confusion. The nation is bound and trussed in the straight jacket of political correctness, and as such cannot address the questions the voters are asking. As GW touched in the interview, how can the BNP progress in the climate of political correctness where matters cannot be openly discussed? Until political correctness is busted wide open, it is hard to see how any sensible dialogue and therefore progress - can take place with their constituents. B&D;has told us that the non white vote has reached a critical mass in many areas and can now eclipse the white vote. A white majority vote is no longer possible in such areas. This situation is only going to get worse. Please let’s have more of this GW, only good can become of it . Congratulations - and you LJB for making possible. Emergency talks. The only combination not being negotiated is Lib/Lab/Con coalition of emergency. (In the interest of national unity of course.) 14
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 15:54 | # I would be interested to understand how this can be done “under the radar” and still retain an ethnic element. And if it doesn’t retain that element then it’s usefulness to us is likely lost and our “hidden hand” would probably slip from the levers as soon as it starts to be successful and spread out. No doubt it would then start to fly a Tea-Party / EDL non-racial banner. = There has to be everything. There have to be autonomous nationalist communes, ethnic groups that work for our people, legal groups that represent our people, lobby groups that represent our people etc - but these have to be non-political eg not run by the BNP or for the BNP. People have to run these for themselves in a way that does not involve politics. A community centre in my village would bring kids together (who are nearly all white) into contact with each other again and create a community. = no you are right, they can do as they like as long as they operate below the political radar, for as soon as they start getting political they are destroyed. On a second note LJB seems to be arguing “shut up or get out and do your own thing” if you disagree with Nick’s policies. This argument was thereafter a little blurred with the following comments so perhaps I need to relisten. I would say on the one hand that Nick himself joined the party and played one tune on his flute and thereafter changed that tune quickly to very different sheet music and thereafter a lot of people were culled or edged out. One can’t complain if people point out that you’ve got to a certain position before kicking down the ladder. = No one agrees 100 % with all a parties politics or personalities. If you cant tolerate it anymore then leave and do something else, just dont attack the party and those at the sharp end - as they are getting enough stick from everone else without our own people having a pop at them as well. If you leave the BNP then dont spend all your time like the moron on NWN or any of the other sites. Shut up about the BNP, organise what you want to see and get on with it. Show us we are wrong, prove we are wrong - dont just whine and say we are wrong and do nothing to prove it. The proof you are right is when you show us you are right. Finally if you want to have a national party then you need to have a broad church. Every party has its wets and its hardcore and as it expands the wets will no doubt get a bit wetter (though it’s unlikely the hardcore would get harder) and that doesn’t have to impact the core policies as they are the tail of the curve. P.S. Shame he wasn’t asked to answer the question about how we retain our ethnic identity if the calculations he made regarding retaining our demographic position by removing illegals becomes redundant when those illegals are quite possibly made legal as seems likely. If that happens then there has to be another argument or the road to civic national beckons, Gianfranco Fini anyone.. = If they legalise those illegals then that is a declaration of war against democracy, our people and the law itself, as they are rewarding criminality by rewarding criminals. In that case we then must begin a campaign of civil struggle. I would expect us as a nationalist movement to copy Sinnfein - not the terrorism but the civil rights campaign, the peaceful resistance, the marches, the confrontations with authority and the police, the formation of groups that confront the state directly and the support of nationalists thrown into prison. If they legalise the illegals then they are in effect usurping democracy and the electoral system as they will also reward those illegals with the vote - therefore this means that they have betrayed democracy - and if they do that then we have no duty to abide by their laws anymore. When they undermine our democracy, we must defend it. If they legalise the two million illegals then that is a declaration of war against democracy - and will trigger a street revolution. 15
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 16:05 | # Hi Bill, we end political correctness by refusing to be politically correct. We cannot talk about specific races / religions anymore as that is illegal - so we redefine the debate in the terms of environmental overload, cultural destruction, the problems of multi-culturalism, colonisation and mass immigration etc - we create a new form of debate. Dont walk into the traps they have set under the race hate laws, just no longer debate on the grounds of race and religion - debate on culture, environment, colonisation etc. Frame what we stand in a new way that the law hasnt criminalised. In order to undermine the media conditioning and cause cognitive dissonance we must meet people on the doorsteps in our communities and let them see we have their best interests at heart as we are them. Once they know us, then when the media describe us devils then this causes a perceptual crisis and they no longer trust the media. This is why at every level we must begin community activism now. Both overt and covert, political, cultural, legal and also below the political radar. 16
Posted by BGD on Tue, 11 May 2010 16:16 | # Thanks for the clarification Lee. I would say though (without looking to argue for arguments sake) that white people don’t really see themselves as an ethnic community unless its made more explicit, perhaps it’s our individual natures or perhaps it’s the continual low-level psychological warfare. You can see yourself as from a class or a local geographic region but not ethnically English (or whatever) without it being spelled out. it would be great to have a better life experience for those village kids of yours as a good in itself but once they go through school and get to university and are fed into the machine the early experiences in the white village probably won’t evoke more than a wistful memory. I guess some sub cultures do have the implicit whiteness that Kevin McDonald talks about (alternative music cultures in the UK I guess is one example) but to make more explicit the implicit before they have hit the end of the indoctrination process that the education system really is would be the ideal. It’s better not to have to unlearn. 17
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 16:27 | # Thanks for the clarification Lee. I would say though (without looking to argue for arguments sake) that white people don’t really see themselves as an ethnic community unless its made more explicit, perhaps it’s our individual natures or perhaps it’s the continual low-level psychological warfare. == I think its a product of the media conditioning and apathy. But if you listen to people now everywhere you go they are beginning to think as an ethnic group by defining themselves in opposition to all the immigrants coming in the country. The process has begun, we must nurture it along. You can see yourself as from a class or a local geographic region but not ethnically English (or whatever) without it being spelled out. it would be great to have a better life experience for those village kids of yours as a good in itself but once they go through school and get to university and are fed into the machine the early experiences in the white village probably won’t evoke more than a wistful memory. = absolutely. Not only are they unable to play outside in the streets together due to traffic, peadophiles, criminals etc the culture of modern childhood is based on playing on a PSP alone in their bedroom which further alienates them from any sense of community - and this is destroying the fabric of all our communities. The scrapping of the boys clubs etc in our villages, cities and towns by councils and the erection of the community centres for ethnics only was a deliberate plan - it was to break our community apart in order to prevent us organising to defend our communities, just as the break up of the old white working class slums and estates was deliberate in order to destroy our communities and import in immigrants into the atomised remnants of our communities and country. A divided people can offer no resistance to the immigration invasion. I guess some sub cultures do have the implicit whiteness that Kevin McDonald talks about (alternative music cultures in the UK I guess is one example) but to make more explicit the implicit before they have hit the end of the indoctrination process that the education system really is would be the ideal. It’s better not to have to unlearn. = Absolutely, but until then we must begin the process ourselves both within the political sphere and outside it. A totality of struggle must begin at all levels of society in order to re-create our community networks. 18
Posted by Bill on Tue, 11 May 2010 16:55 | #
It’s there under the surface, how could it not be, other than for the oppressive lock down by our elites. White flight tells us different. Whites, whenever possible vote with their feet in their droves to live with people who look and behave like them. Even it means moving to the other side of the world. Community has been destroyed by modern liberalism in a high-tech consumer age. Could it have been accomplished one without the other? Explicit whiteness in any shape or form is a no, no. It is seen by modern liberalism as apartheid. Zero tolerance. 19
Posted by BGD on Tue, 11 May 2010 17:08 | # Hi Bill, agreed but that’s why I made the distinction of explicit vs implicit (white flight) in the context of mentioning KMac - Psychology and White Ethnocentrism 20
Posted by Bill on Tue, 11 May 2010 21:05 | # As I scribe Brown is gone, new Labour is gone, an evil era gone. History will judge them. Cameron is poised to forward the baton. The star of good fortune favours nationalism, the seductive finger of history beckons. For soon, not far from now, Cameron will become exposed for what he is, a Trans-nationalist, Cultural Marxist. Heir to Blair - no friend of Britain he. Conservatives gone, new Labour gone, stunned populace - shock and awe. Vacuum. The BNP must seize the moment and fulfil their destiny. Could it really be? 21
Posted by Dan Dare on Tue, 11 May 2010 23:48 | # This is apparently the email circular purportedly from Eddy Butler to which Nick Griffin has responded to so furiously:
22
Posted by PM on Wed, 12 May 2010 02:51 | # LBJ ” The scrapping of the boys clubs etc in our villages, cities and towns by councils and the erection of the community centres for ethnics only was a deliberate plan..” I felt that the government insistence that the boy scouts should take girls was done for the same reason. They are scared of white British males, and rightly so. They will do anything they can to stop us forming groups or forging bonds with each other. Going forward, in the event of the civil resistance hypothisised above, would ANY ethnically-based party for Britons be legal? Didn’t the ruling in the recent BNP court case mean that if an organisation’s constitution or beliefs would put off a non-Briton from joining on account of their race/ethnicity, this is classed as ‘indirect discrimination’ and is not allowed? Personally, I think we should call ourselves English Zionists. If anyone asks our policy on terrorism, we could say “we are prepared to do whatever Israel is prepared to do.” Ditto immigration and national identity, or anything else. How could other parties condemn us when they refuse to condemn Israel? 23
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Wed, 12 May 2010 08:54 | # Going forward, in the event of the civil resistance hypothisised above, would ANY ethnically-based party for Britons be legal? Didn’t the ruling in the recent BNP court case mean that if an organisation’s constitution or beliefs would put off a non-Briton from joining on account of their race/ethnicity, this is classed as ‘indirect discrimination’ and is not allowed? Personally, I think we should call ourselves English Zionists. If anyone asks our policy on terrorism, we could say “we are prepared to do whatever Israel is prepared to do.” Ditto immigration and national identity, or anything else. How could other parties condemn us when they refuse to condemn Israel?
Organise groups with no formal structure and a hidden leadership, that way the law can do nothing about them. I like the English Zionists idea - that would really upset them if we talked like that. British Zionism - has a ring to it doesnt it. 24
Posted by Spirit of 76 on Wed, 12 May 2010 16:43 | # Greetings from Philadelphia. I want to add a bit of perspective to the recent election, as seen by a racially aware American of Anglo-Saxon extraction. Bully for England! Please do not misconstrue tactical defeats with a losing strategy. Mr Barnes has the right idea in that the point is to have many fringe groups pushing hard on the radical edge of discourse, placing the underlying ideas in play. After all if you don’t talk about them you can’t think about them and if you don’t think about them the ideas are lost (See Orwell’s principles of Newspeak). I understand you no longer enjoy constitutionally protected freedom of speech, so one must be clever about this, but discussing the wrongness of the prohibition is as good as discussing the merits of the cause itself. This is the method used to great effect in the US. There is another component I rarely see discussed, and that is the psychology of change, which is something of a specialty of mine as I work as a management consultant and constantly use certain techniques. One of the most illuminating insights I know was made by Leon Festinger in a 1961 article in Scientific American magazine on his “Cognitive Dissonance” theory. Please don’t dismiss this based on the conventional (and misleading) interpretation of simple brain lock. It is much more than that. His article touched on the seduction elements of subversive thought, instilling a profound sense of guilt on the seduced that compels the victim, usually sucked into the mud by misleading cons that have his outward approval but hold an inward dirty meaning unrealized until it is too late. Once in this state of guilt, of acting against his own most cherished principles, the victim is psychologically compelled to, effectively, recruit to his guilty cause to alleviate the state of dissonance. It is my experience this is the single most effective condition leveraged by our enemies - especially with regard to anti-racism and philosemitism. It is frighteningly effective and removes the new mental state from rational evaluation as guilt and betrayal are primal emotions of survival, per professor MacDonald’s insights. To overcome this “brainwashing” requires intense counter efforts impossible in the normal course of political action. As a practical matter, it takes unrelenting and opposing pressure on the victim’s mind to give a face-saving “out” from the adopted (actually enforced) guilt of false-betrayal. People usually call this “awakening”. Anyway, Mr Barnes seems to understand this process and we as a movement need to master its technical implementation or we will never win. The whole point of Festinger’s insight is that this emotion is so strong and powerful it can override intellectually determined principles and even kinship ties. It does explain quite a lot - and it gives the perfect role for “fringe” groups, that have no specific tie to any “legitimate” organization, to fill with impunity and importance. 25
Posted by Durotrigan on Wed, 12 May 2010 21:32 | # It’s good to see that Lee is advocating the following with respect to framing the debate:
Very much in tune with my thoughts. There are many ways in which the BNP’s message and agenda can be forwarded using a discourse that is both legal and which the middle classes find palatable. The register in which the message is delivered needs to change, but this doesn’t imply that the party has to either abandon its core policies or objectives. 26
Posted by the Narrator... on Thu, 13 May 2010 11:34 | # GW, (and any other Englishman here) do you think England will be saved in the end? Or perhaps better put, save itself? I don’t mean to ask can it be saved, but will it? I know you can’t crystal ball the future, but I’m wondering about what your instinct as an Englishman tells you. I ask because I wonder if our (American, British and Europeans everywhere) gut instinct that the tide will turn at some point in our favor is what is keeping many people from actively engaging the problem now. As an American I expect things to become very unpleasant here in the short term (the next hundred years or so) but am ultimately optimistic in the long term (the centuries beyond). Of course the opposite of this are those expecting ‘The Great Calamity’ to fall at any moment and undo all that has been done over the past century or so and thus sit back and wait for the sky to fall so they can pick up the pieces afterward. But for the rest of us I wonder if our sense of the inevitable dawn after the long night is what is keeping so many from reacting in an appropriately distraught manner in the present. And this appears to be reflected in the actions of our adversaries who, despite the banners declaring their inevitable victory, continue to wail, weep and pull their hair out in terror at the slightest movement of White Western Men. After all, the “We” of a people is not merely the present but the past and future as well. Our sense of ourselves and our gut instincts about the future are not without merit or foundation. The problem though is that actual change (for the better or worse) is a slow, subtle, effect. The trick is to avoid being the proverbial frog in the slow boiling pot. So I wonder if a sense that everything will turn out alright is hampering efforts to get to work now in setting things right. Do the English expect inevitable victory? I don’t know if anyone would be interested but here is an online text of a book written a hundred years ago called England and The English From An American Point of View. I haven’t read through all of it yet but it seems it probably reveals more about America though than it does about England. At any rate, here is an exert:
27
Posted by Bill on Thu, 13 May 2010 18:52 | # Narrator above 10.34 AM. [quote]do you think England will be saved in the end? Good question. Pollsters regularly tell us that 80+% of the British people, when asked what concerns them most in to-day’s Britain, say one of their main concerns is immigration. And yet in the election just held, 90% of the 61% total eligible to vote (39% abstaining) have just voted for one of the three main-stream liberal left parties, ie. Conservatives (Tory,) Liberal Democrats or new Labour. The remaining 10% voting for minority or independent parties - of which the BNP was one. Cognitive dissonance writ large? - as I posted here somewhere recently. Only people here on the Internet on a site such as this would any Englishman understand the question you are asking. If you had a clipboard and was standing on the street of any English town asking the same question, you would receive only a blank stare in reply, as most wouldn’t have a clue as what you were talking about. And there’s the rub. 90% of the British people are oblivious to the ‘immigration’ problem in all of its complexity. Why immigration? Whose responsible? From where does the idea originate? In other words, WTF is it all about? As you know, this site has discussed endlessly the question of why the ordinary British citizen is so unaware of the consequences of mass immigration. Not only to their own personal future, but also the future of their children and grand-children. I’d say only 10% of the population of Britain are acutely aware of the immigration threat and this startling state of affairs does not bode well for the chances of resistance to emerge. If the bulk of the people don’t care then what chance is there? But this is not the case, for as I say, pollsters tell us that it is very much on people’s radar. So what’s going on? Media dis-information and psychological warfare, ring fenced by a politically correct barbed wired regime is what’s going on. No wonder people are confused and cannot focus their thoughts on this perceived problem. It’s got to get a lot worse, before mass resistance to immigration manifests itself. To sum up at this juncture - with another question. Here’s another aspect thrashed to death here. How is the majority of the British population to be educated and made aware of what is going on? For until they smell the coffee we’re on a hiding to nothing and running out of time. For a long time now, I have been of the opinion that it will be an unrelated external event which will trigger a decisive impact on the immigration juggernaut and galvanise whites into cohesion. Peak oil is another similar Mad Max scenario that most folk are either unaware of or are not overly concerned about. Most aware people are confident the problem of PO will be solved by a technical breakthrough or new sources of oil/energy will be found or some such. IOW’s, It will be alright on the day, something will turn up! I ask myself if I am also guilty of such complacency as I scorn the PO brigade’s assuredness in ‘no need to worry’, ‘something will turn up’ mindset. Do I think England can survive? Phew! What a question. Those posting on BNP related websites (members/activists) invariably invoke that it is the indomitable spirit of the English that will see us through, to them, this is nothing new - we’ve been here before, we’ll come through. Even the BNP hierarchy promote this no surrender Churchill Bulldog spirit. If the whole nation would rise up in this spirit of those BNP activists who are in the front line trenches of our cities, then I think England’s future is assured. But it’s a big if. Will England survive in any form that we would recognise? Ah, that’s another question for another day. Footnote As Rumsfeld once said, there are too many unknown unknowns to answer this question. We are all waiting to see how things will unravel, trouble is, we have no idea how far down the road we are from the end game. 28
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 13 May 2010 20:46 | # O/T Did anyone else notice that Clegg in his first speech used the term “common purpose”? 29
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 13 May 2010 21:09 | # The election was a disappointment but the the BNP was still the 4th largest party. If you lump them with UKIP and the English Democrats thats quite a large bloc. If one goes a step further and includes the various Ulster loyalist parties thats quite a lot of patriot voters of one kind or another. The lefties on Facebook are very excited that the BNP was defeated, they seem to believe the election was fought against the BNP. I try to point out that its all about control of the narrative. By ruling immigration and the EU beyond debate the main parties are a lot more comfortable. I say try because the race replacers like to pride themselves on winning on the arguments. This comittment to debate hypocrtically includes banning the likes of me from their groups on FB. Still, we all know that goes on. Its notable that the BNP did better in the EU elections. Because of PR they had a chance of seats. The main parties had to address the issues however dismissivley and negatively, largely attacking the BNP itself rather than its polices. But if those issues get on the table at all, its bad news for the mainstream. We all know how pathologically afraid the left are to debate these issues online, why should politicians be any different? To enter into any debate is to face defeat for them, hence no debate. Online I know when Im up against an intelligent leftist race replacer, they are the first to descend into personal abuse and invective, they know they cant even allow the issues into their own heads, cognitive dissonance, look into the abyss etc Only the dimmer bulbs will try and fight it out on science, crime rates, history and all the rest and all they do then is fall flat on their faces, trousers round the ankles. 30
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 13 May 2010 21:51 | # Narrator,
My instinct has always been that Inevitablism isn’t going to do it quickly enough for a peaceful political solution to be effected. The wake-up will come, but it will come with the pain of dispossession and in the full fury of the realisation that it was all done deliberately. We will save ourselves the hard way, I fear. But, yes, we will save ourselves. 31
Posted by PM on Thu, 13 May 2010 22:00 | # Judging fom the obsession with Nazis shared by TV, papers and the education system, it seems that the Second World War must be the first war in history where the propaganda continues to increase exponentially long after it has finished. Q. What gets bigger the further away from it you get? A. Nazi Germany 32
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 13 May 2010 22:12 | #
In the course of militarization under that scenario, atrocities against the Other by the English will no doubt be committed that will have “debased” their perpetrators. Questions: Will said perpetrators be punished by right-thinking and upstanding Englishmen as was done concerning the Krauts, who also, we are led to believe, “debased” themselves? Or are such atrocities not even within the realm of possibility for the English during the course of militarization due to their inherent moral superiority as against the Krauts, and if so, why should militarization of the English be of concern at all? 33
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 13 May 2010 22:35 | # CC, Are you saying that the Wehrmacht in 1939 was the moral equivalent to a suppositional English Army of 2039? Are you saying that Leibensraum was the moral equivalent to an English War of Reclamation? 34
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 13 May 2010 23:05 | # It appears to be an apples to apples comparison, not apples to oranges. It is the reclamation of the German homeland from the Other which is the foundation of the debasement of the German. 35
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 13 May 2010 23:16 | # Let me re-word the question. Would the deliverance of Germany from Turks within German borders be the moral equivalent of a war of expansionism on Turkey itself? 36
Posted by Frank on Thu, 13 May 2010 23:21 | # A state that is not self sufficient is a slave that must depend on others for sustenance. Lebensraum is perhaps arguable if necessary for building a secure, self-reliant state that can defend itself. One reason why secession would be so damaging to the UK is it seems to need all its parts for economy of scale and greater self sufficiency. That’s not to say I’m taking a side on Lebensraum… I’m merely saying it’s arguable. 37
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 13 May 2010 23:34 | # GW,
Initially (in 1939) Germany was merely trying to reclaim land and Germans that had been taken from its possession per Versailles. So to that extent, yes.
To invade Turkey preemptively in the instance that Turkey was planning to invade Germany and liquidate the upper echelon of IQ of Germany’s population along with dealing with Turks within Germany (whom could be expected to be open collaborators with their invading co-ethnics) with less than a soft touch would be morally equivalent in that both would pose an existential threat to Germans and therefore merit both exercises. 38
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 14 May 2010 00:18 | # Frank,
Back in the day the English took the route of Lebensraum for their own enrichment and as a release valve for their expanding population. I mean, we’re quite literally sitting on the result. Should we give it back and come home to Europe as is adjudged proper for Afrikaners? Not a chance in hell. Also, let it be said, that the English didn’t treat the indigenous peoples of their conquered territory in the fashion of mindless sadists as was the Bolshevik wont. But then again, neither did the Krauts, nor the Afrikaners. P.S. I do not say acting for love of God, or Fuhrer, or whatever, is an illegitimate motivation. Better that than for fear of Him, I suppose. Do right by the race, and after that, to each his own, I say. 39
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 14 May 2010 00:45 | # The basis of English moral supremacy, vis-a-vis the Germans is essentially “We were not ignoble to our Jews”. This is the essence of the German debasement debate. It has nothing to do with a war of expansionism upon Pakistan, although, ironically, this is exactly what is happening. 40
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 14 May 2010 01:02 | # Desmond, Ignoble also to homosexuals, gypsies, prisoners of war, slave populations, and political opponents - all people not less human or deserving of life than Jews, I think. Basically, when one ascribes a supremacy to one’s own group - and all peoples do this to some extent - one is ascribing a lower value to other groups. If the degree of ascription is extreme, the Other is completely dehumanised. It was such a dehumanisation, a complete and systematic dehumanisation, that marked the Third Reich as morally inferior. That is the essence of the moral supremacy of Britain (and America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and all the countries of occupied Europe). 41
Posted by Ivan on Fri, 14 May 2010 02:17 | # That’s what I hate most about the Brits and Americans of British descent (as opposed to Germans, for example) - they are back-stabbers, cowards, hypocrites and bastards always trying to rake in ember with other’s hands. Among all Americans, they are the most Jew-like creatures. If Guessedworker doesn’t delete this comment, like he did with my two comments on the sly (thread “The Thin White Line”), I’ll explain what I mean. 42
Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 14 May 2010 04:02 | # @Ivan Please do I would be interested in what you have to say? I have noticed this trait in regards to Russia and China here in Britain or any other country that opposes Rothschild dominion like Germany or even the US instigating the civil war between the North and South supporting the confederacy with the likes of Edward Lucas and Peter Hitchens and glorification of the British Empire like Neil Ferguson, George Soros and even David Irving. The globalist system we are living in today is a British derived one. It is stunning the connections elitists around the world have in connection to Britain. 43
Posted by Ivan on Fri, 14 May 2010 05:12 | # jamesUK, For now I’ll just say this. What made me mad was that GW deleted twice the following comment I made in the thread “The Thin White Line” (I presume it was him, it is entirely like him, if not, I will apologize): Guessedworker, Was that you who deleted my comment? If ‘yes’, why did you delete Robert Reis’ comment with it? You can’t claim that Robert Reis’ comment was rude or inappropriate, can you? Be reasonable, man. Here is my comment to Robert Reis’ comment again. I want Soren respond to it before you delete it again.
Even thought I did not have the context of this incident available while watching the video, I have realized immediately - it was a deliberate provocation. Robert Reis is a nice guy, I am not. So I won’t be so reserved. Soren has simply being a fucking asshole for not providing the context of this incident. This Hitler worshiper with a squeaky voice and “leaders” like him - Kai Murros, Norman Lowell, etc - who are calling for extermination or starvation of millions of Muslim people richly deserves his fucking throat to be cut in the middle of the night before he realizes what hit him with a note on his side “Millions survived, Soren Renner did not”. ///// P.S. For the record, I am an American of Circassian descent. The most disgusting trait I find in a man is dishonesty and insincerity. I was born in Russia, if a Russian hates you he does it openly, and I can live with that. With an American you never know what’s on his fucked up mind when he asks you with always a phony excitement: Hi, how are you doing today? It’s good to see you, man. 44
Posted by Dan Dare on Fri, 14 May 2010 05:51 | # GW - concerning your remarks to Desmond I think it is important to mention that, at the time in question, relatively few Britons would have had any great difficulty with whatever Herr Hitler felt was necessary to enact in dealing with the especial domestic economic and social problems that he inherited on accession to power. Nor would they have had any particular issue with righting the wrongs of Versailles, or with the concept that Germany held the historical prerogative of vying with France for hegemony over the continent itself. Where I believe most Britons parted company with Herr Hitler was when he started to bully his neighbours into submission rather than using the power of diplomacy and persuasion to achieve his goals. It’s quite baffling why our resident Third Reich Nostalgics and New World-based faux Krauts are seemingly unable to grasp this elementary concept. They seem to be completely oblivious to the disdain in which they are held by both contemporary Brits and Krauts as well as to the total irrelevance of any possible ‘solutions’ that they might put forward in resolution of the existential crisis which confronts us all today. 45
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 14 May 2010 06:17 | # And yet, Dan Dare, the decent, fair -minded, British people who objected to Herr Hitler’s treatment of Germany’s neighbours would have been, somewhat earlier, up in arms if any continental politician had supported self - determination for colonial Ireland. 46
Posted by Dan Dare on Fri, 14 May 2010 06:30 | # At the time the various Home Rule bills were progressing through Parliament Al, a majority of decent, fair-minded British people would, prior to the Representation of the People Act 1918, have had very little say in the matter. Had they had had, there is no reason to suppose they would have opposed a measure of self-determination for Ireland along the lines currently enjoyed by Wales and Scotland. 47
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 14 May 2010 09:30 | # Ivan, There are five people with admin rights at this blog, one of whom has absented himself. I received a mail at 12.52am GMT from one of the others informing me that he had locked the thread on “The Thin White Line” because of a “repetitive disruptor”. I assume that he meant you. Is that correct? Al, The British people were not governing Irish Ireland. Neither, plainly, was this government conducted in the name of the people of Britain. The British ruling-class was both government and beneficiary. Condemn them by all means, as we condemn, and will not forgive, the ruling class of today for far greater trespasses against us. 48
Posted by Tyler on Fri, 14 May 2010 10:08 | # A wonderful interview! Was fascinating to follow your words. Thanks for sharing with us! 49
Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 14 May 2010 14:20 | # @Ivan
Great another Caucasian tribe sponsored by Georgia puppet terrorist regime and there British and US backers promoting the “genocide” of another minority population to attack Russia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Circassian_Genocide_conference_in_Tbilisi 50
Posted by Dan Dare on Fri, 14 May 2010 16:57 | # Dasein, as I hope would be clear by now, my fervent wish is that Britons and Germans should collaborate in furthering their common interest as part of a united Europe and continually harping about how hard-done by one side or the other was generations ago is not going to facilitate that process. Certainly neither side is blameless when it comes to the responsibility for the two Great Fratricidal Wars but that is a historical debate that has precisely zero relevance in our present predicament. As for the pre-war achievements of the NS regime even Churchill, writing as late as 1938, expressed the hope that should Britain find itself in a similar predicament to the Weimar Republic, it would find as worthy a champion for its cause as Herr Hitler. And this while acknowledging that some of the methods used by the regime to further its political and social objectives were unnecessarily brutal and unacceptable in a modern western society. 51
Posted by Ivan on Fri, 14 May 2010 18:01 | #
Yes, that is correct. I was “disrupting” a lie, I was “disrupting” dishonest attempt to portray hapless people as irrational low-life creatures who attack innocent people with no reason whatsoever. Do you have a problem with that? Or can you refute my charges? Your response does not even attempt to address the issue I am raising. Do I have a valid point or not? From your response it does not follow that it wasn’t you who quitely deleted my comments, but if that wasn’t you, I apologize for rushing to a hasty conclusion. And why are you hiding the name of the person who locked the thread? Can’t he speak for himself? You are an intelligent man, and you know perfectly well that the thread was locked not because of a “repetitive disruptor” - were it so, that person would not delete the incriminatory and valid comment by Robert Reis as well. Isn’t that what we all hate jews for - lying, distortion, misrepresentation etc? And here comes Soren “kill millions” Renner and does the same thing. Or is it only jews to be blamed for behaving like bastards? The education I received as a physicist does not leave much place for a strong religious belief of any kind. But I will tell you this about Islam and the Muslim people in general. Islam is the only ideology today (and, yes, Islam is an ideology first and foremost) that is resisting successfully the Jewish assault on everything human and decent. That’s why the jews are hell bent on destroying it. Instead of bashing Muslims, it behoves you to learn from them how to keep your people from drugs and alcohol; how to keep family values; how to keep your women from becoming whores. But you are “morally superior” - you don’t need all that archaic stuff. I do not support the cesspool of multiculturalism any more than I support destroying and taking the land of small ethnic groups like my own people. I do not support unlimited immigration of people from the third world, Muslim or otherwise, to Europe or America. Its not good for Europe, its not good for America, its not good even for immigrants themselves. Its good only for the Jewish agenda of destroying both the white race and the Muslims culture. Some of you understand clearly, like Fred Scrooby for example, and point out correctly “Lars Vilks was attacked not by Moslems but by the alliance of genocidalists who have brought those Moslems and other people of incompatible race and ethnoculture into Sweden… The ones you see there, the Moslems and so on, are merely the tools of these others, merely the pawns”. But even the brightest among you do not understand that Moslems are not the only “pawns” in this game - geniuses like Soren Renner, Kai Murros, Norman Lowell calling for extermination and starvation of millions of Muslims, instead of fighting the real enemy, do serve the same Jewish agenda, whether they realize it or not. They are the ultimate idiots. 52
Posted by Ivan on Fri, 14 May 2010 20:47 | # jamesUK, Taking into account your enthusiasm about “strong” Dugin, I assume you are a Russian or have some Russian roots. However, since I do not believe this is the right forum to discuss Russo-Circassian relations (I doubt many here even know who Circassians are), my comment will be short.
It may surprise you, but I agree that the purpose of the conference in Tbilisi was exactly like you stated it - to use Circassians to destabilize Russia, just like Georgia was used by the same forces. Whenever a question of a genocide comes up - look for a fucking Jew behind it. The last thing I would want is to have the tie-chewing coward Saakashvili to recognize the destruction of my people. In fact, Georgia could be blamed indirectly for the events that ultimately led to Circassian exodus - Russia had an agreement with Christian Georgians to protect them from Turks and Persians, and Circassians had the misfortune to become an obstacle to that help. Not a single Circassian residing in Russia has supported the conference. Circassians are not saints, we have our share of idiots like any other ethnic group. 53
Posted by jamesUK on Sat, 15 May 2010 02:27 | # @Ivan Actually I am 100% Scottish not a drop of Russian ancestry in my family tree. But what is a rarity I am a foreigner that actually likes Russia its culture, history, religion and future potential and there fight against the anti-Christ/NWO and the forthcoming war (they have been running a covert war since 89) against Russia and its fragmentation and destabilisation of the Eurasia. From what I understand is that Russian expats are the most anti-Russian of them all who hate Russia. Can’t say I have ever heard of the Circassians. Are they are Turkic Muslim tribe/people? But will we be seeing Circassian “rebels” trained by Georgian/Israeli/US military instructors placing bombings in Sochi in the run up to the winter Olympics there in 2014 like they did with there Tibetan and Uigher Muslim terrorists in the run up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics? No surprise the conference was sponsored The Jamestown Foundation one of the leading Neocon affiliated groups aligned with NED who has held and sponsored anti-Russian conferences before and supports regimes like the one in Azerbaijan. 54
Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 May 2010 03:13 | # We cannot talk about specific races / religions anymore as that is illegal - so we redefine the debate in the terms of environmental overload, cultural destruction, the problems of multi-culturalism, colonisation and mass immigration etc - we create a new form of debate. Can you elaborate on this? If I found myself in a position where it was literally illegal to talk about specific races, I’d talk about them in terms of their otherness instead (“non-whites” this or “non-brits” that). Also, obviously, I’d attack the law directly and incessantly (“tantamount to laws preventing doctors from talking about a disease”). I’d also consider going further than politics. I’d also consider lawfare against the left; how can they possibly talk about white guilt and otherwise browbeat us into submission and obey such laws? Is British academia so different from American? Here laws against criticizing a race would have the universities burning all their books, if actually enforced. Going forward, in the event of the civil resistance hypothisised above, would ANY ethnically-based party for Britons be legal? Didn’t the ruling in the recent BNP court case mean that if an organisation’s constitution or beliefs would put off a non-Briton from joining on account of their race/ethnicity, this is classed as ‘indirect discrimination’ and is not allowed? Wow, on the one hand I’m jealous of Brits; you guys have an actual political party! On the other, I’m constantly flabbergasted at the shit your government can get away with. Erm, aren’t the major parties slavish dedication to the annihilation of Britons (AKA multiculturalism, etc.) off-putting to Britons? Or does the law only protect alien races? If so, WTF? Can’t that be attacked as racist? Correct me if I’m wrong but all of this sounds like Sinn Fein time indeed, and no, I don’t mean Sinn Fein sans the violence. Personally, I think we should call ourselves English Zionists. If anyone asks our policy on terrorism, we could say “we are prepared to do whatever Israel is prepared to do.” Ditto immigration and national identity, or anything else. How could other parties condemn us when they refuse to condemn Israel? Now THERE’S a man who thinks like me. I understand you no longer enjoy constitutionally protected freedom of speech, so one must be clever about this, but discussing the wrongness of the prohibition is as good as discussing the merits of the cause itself. This is the method used to great effect in the US. Plus there’s always euphemism; how are they going to make “fiction” illegal? We will save ourselves the hard way, I fear. But, yes, we will save ourselves. Which makes me afraid that our posterity will have to fight fratricidal wars to get it done. So maybe that’s the answer to the “inevitablism” question above; sure, it’s inevitable that our peoples will be free, but the longer we put it off the nastier it’s going to get. 55
Posted by Dan Dare on Sat, 15 May 2010 06:20 | #
Never seen Lawrence of Arabia? 56
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 15 May 2010 08:22 | #
But in what manner should we move forward? If in the end half-measures fail us, shall there be the will to do what needs be done? If “yes”, the methods of Nazism will be utilized; if “no”, the race will perish. And it is not as if the eternally morally upright English have not themselves done precisely what they accuse the Krauts of having “debased” themselves by. Burned, tortured, killed, starved and enslaved those filthy, but of course not dehumanized, Krauts by the millions. English “ontological nationalists” cannot even countenance the sight of one nigger on the streets of London, nor will even one mongrel not ripped screaming and crying from its mothers arms and shipped out be tolerated. What if the labor shortage post-revolution cannot be made up by the return of expats, does anyone imagine that having gone that far the additional step of keeping non-Whites on to fill it, though completely disenfranchised and with anti-miscegenation laws in place would not be pursued, and that that wouldn’t be “dehumanising” to those non-Whites? Get real. But still, one has to hand it to the English, no one engages in purely hypocritical moral posturing with the same verve as they - with the possible exception of our good friends the Jews, that is. 57
Posted by Ivan on Sat, 15 May 2010 08:57 | #
Circassians are a conglomerate of 12 tribes closely related by their language and culture. They are Muslims but not Turkic. And don’t confuse them with Arabs either. Circassians had a long history of uneasy relations with Russians ever since 1561 when Tsar Ivan IV Vasilyevich, known in English as Ivan the Terrible, married Maria (originally named Kucenej before her baptism) - the daughter of Circassian prince Temrjuk. If you are interested, here are some links that’ll give you an idea of who Circassians are: Short history of the Circassians Who knows what The Jamestown Foundation is planning for the winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014, but it is probably safe to say that they’ll try to play the Circassian card to the full. Russia and Islam are two formidable obstacles to the NWO, that’s why driving the edge between the Muslim Caucasus and Russia is so irresistibly alluring to the proponents of the NWO. 58
Posted by jamesUK on Sat, 15 May 2010 19:00 | # @Ivan This is the same card they played when they coup etat the Tsarist government in 1917 and the decades before hand there an international media campaign bemoaning the rights of historic oppressed people and states within the Russian Empire.
There was a Trotsky quote about using races and liberal ideas as a pretext to genocide Russians but I can not ascertain if it is authentic or not so I won’t post it. Seeing how the region was home to the Khazar Empire, was used by Ottoman Turks for over a 100 years prior the Russian incursion into the region on raids on Russian and Ukrainian villages selling them into slavery and women into sex slavery across the Ottoman Empire in the tens of thousand which continues to this day through Chechen/KLA networks and encroaching threat by foreign hostile forces so there is probably more to the story then evil Russians invade and misplace natives groups and everyone else is just a poor victim. There has to be more to it than what is represented in Wikipedia? So are you anti-Russian then? Russia is Islam isn’t. In fact Islam is the proxy army, a force used by western intelligence and the NWO to advance there geo-political agenda like US dominance over Caspian like how the started importing jihadist into the North Caucasus in 89 and setting up the Third World Relief Agency in Vienna in 87 to destabilise the Balkans. British/US Rothschild oil interests in the region supporting the Chechen separatist regime and there terrorist apparatus which I have commented before on there extensive links to foreign intelligence begin with training Chechen militants in Bosnia in 91 and supporting there genocide an ethnic cleansing of Russian and non-Chechen population with mass rape, murder and ethnic cleansing before the first war something the controlled mass media did not tell us about. http://conrad2001.narod.ru/english/genocide/genocide_1.htm
Not surprised that they would support ethnic nationalism in the Caucasus as a counter against Russian influence and domination of the Caspian oil industry with Georgia and Chechnya being US vassals in the region. Brzezinski in his Grand Chessboard book outlining US strategy for domination of Eurasia were he talks about promoting Islamic militancy and Islam as a counter to “to infidel hence Russian influence” in the region. Russia, China and Orthodox Christianity are the bulwark against the NWO that’s why they are trying to wipe out Orthodox Christianity. 59
Posted by Ivan on Sat, 15 May 2010 19:46 | # jamesUK, I am not anti-Russian. My ancestors have joined Russia in 1557 by free will. Russia’s and Circassian histories are inseparable. “Oprichniki” were comprised of Circassians to a large degree. Peter The Great had a Circassian adviser. I spent my student years, the best years of my life, in Moscow. I am aware of the great Russian spirit exemplified by Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, and Solzhenitsyn. Russia gave me the best education I am capable of. My wife is a Russian, my kids are half-Circassian, half-Russian. You knocking into the open door, man. Yes, it is true, Orthodox Christianity is the bulwark against the NWO, just like Islam is. Anything that glues people together and preserves the culture of any given group of people (be that a religion, an ideology, a strong sense of ethnic identity, anything) is anathema to the NWO. You seem an intelligent man. Do I have to spell all that for you? Can’t you extrapolate what I have said so far? 60
Posted by jamesUK on Sun, 16 May 2010 01:11 | # @Ivan Islam is NOT a bulwark against the NWO it is the exact opposite it is the main instrument of the NWO to advance its geopolitical agenda. http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1919/mar/x10.htm In fact the parallels with what is happening today in Russia and the Eurasian sphere and amazing and using the same tactic instead of socialism using Islamism. But everything else is exactly the same just replace the names and groups of people and it is just like 1917. And the social structure of Islamic societies/countries has an inherent flaw in there social structure hence why they never develop or formidable Muslim countries with there militant attitude and high birth rates. In the 70’s Muslim militant groups like the Muslim brotherhood which was created by British intelligence was used to weaken progressive nationalist Arab regimes in the Mid East that traded with the USSR (Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran?). In fact other than Palestine Jewish groups, the Neocons and the NWO support Muslims over there non-Muslim inhabitants/neighbours. The US even ran Islamic terrorist training camps in the US during the 90’s up to 9/11 with the aid of the US military and British SAS with Turkish military instructors training KLA and Chechen militants in Turkey between 97-2000. Some of the 9/11 hijackers were trained a Turkish instructor Louai al-Sakka confirms the existence of the terrorist pipeline through Turkey to Chechnya in a court case in Turkey in 2008 who was helping train and transfer militants from camps in Taliban Afghanistan as far back as the 90’s but were denied visas to enter Georgia so they could travel to Chechnya.
1998 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Intelligence Information Report (IIR)
61
Posted by Ivan on Sun, 16 May 2010 04:27 | # jamesUK, Thank you for your input. I think that preventing the use of Muslims as a tool against the West, and vice versa, by the globalists is (or, at least, should be) a subject of a paramount importance to Europeans and Muslims alike. This is a point that should unite White people and Muslims, not divide. They should be united in their mutual goal of defeating the NWO, but separated geographically. Then, and only then, gentiles can live like good neigbors without the jews pitting them against each other. I do not wish to anger GW, the owner of the house, more than I have to. This subject does not seem of genuine interest to anyone except you and myself, even though I do think that unbiased look at Islam (as a comprehensive way of life, rather than just a religion) merits a serious discussion. Not just for its own sake, but for the impact it has, and will have even more in the future, for the survival of the West. Talk to GW, and if he agrees with what I’ve stated above, please open a new thread specifically designated to this subject, and I will gladly participate in the discussions. 62
Posted by jamesUK on Sun, 16 May 2010 18:23 | # @Ivan Islam is the problem not the solution. Europeans or any other people for that matter are not stupid enough to fall for the trap of a Muslim alliance to advance the Muslims own agenda and when that is done Muslim positioning themselves in positions of predominance. Islamic societies can’t even get along with there own people never mind non-Muslim neighbours or inhabitants. From Orthodox and Catholic Christianity, Jews, Hindus and atheists (Chinese) across the world Asia, Eurasia, the Mid Eat and Africa the major ethnic conflicts are against Muslims which is usually fomented by Muslims in the first place and result in the mass ethnic cleansing of the non-Muslim inhabitants with Palestine being the exception. 2000,000 Serbs from Kosovo 200,000+ the entire Russian population from Chechnya and threatening a genocide against the entire Russian population in the Caucasus and Russia as a whole. 400,000+ from Indian controlled Kashmir Attacks against Christians in South Asia like the Philippines and Africa. Also mention there involvement in organised crime in sex trafficking and drug smuggling which Chechens and KLA dominate into Europe and Russia. 63
Posted by Ivan on Sun, 16 May 2010 19:58 | # jamesUK, I’ll try one more time. You are not listening. Please open a new thread with GW’s consent, and I’ll be more than happy to debate you and anybody else here. Even a man as stupid as Norman “Starve the Muslims” Lowell is capable of coming to his senses after a little whipping: http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=70244 Now he is singing another tune: 1 billion Muslims are now the World Enemy’s implacable foe, increasingly radicalised. But you seem even more hard-headed than Norman is. If you want to fight Muslims, you are on, brother. Don’t expect Muslims will beg you not to fight them for they are not fighting from a position of weakness. If you doubt that, just listen carefully to Ahmadinejad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLkiM4CHAJo Compare this consummate and genuine leader to whores like Obama, Blair, Gordon, Merkel - the list is endless. The only true white leader in a position of power and influence today is Vladimir Putin. There is none in the whole West. That is breathtaking. 64
Posted by jamesUK on Mon, 17 May 2010 01:10 | # @Ivan I just wanted to respond quickly to your last comment rather than having to register and open a thread on the forum. What would do think I should call the thread Islam: Friend or Foe? I am not wanting a fight with Muslims but Muslims seem to want a fight with everyone else and do not seem to mind working with the NWO Jewish interests when it suits there agenda. I actually forgot they had a forum on MR. Good video 65
Posted by Ivan on Mon, 17 May 2010 03:09 | # JamesUK, Thank you for not taking offence at my harsh words. I take it as a gesture of good will on your part and appreciate it very much. It’s also a witness to your spiritual strength and your genuine desire to seek a solution to our mutual problem. Good will and open mind - that’s what we all - Whites, Muslims, and all other gentiles - are sadly lacking today and desperately need more than anything else. I think “Islam: Friend or Foe?” is an excellent name for the new thread. “Islam: Friend or Foe? The power of stereotypes”, or something like that, will also do. 66
Posted by Wandrin on Tue, 18 May 2010 16:59 | #
Yes, but only if a large enough mass membership political organisation is around to provide a nucleus of some sort, and by large enough i mean 100,000+. The change could be that worsening conditions leads to a sudden increase in votes and a political victory or it could be when the mozzies feel they have enough numbers to start a civil war which with luck leads to a military victory but either way if there’s a large enough organised nucleus when that moment arrives then we have a chance. Otherwise no, the native English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish - even the stupid Sinn Fein ones - will be wiped out. I don’t think the tide turning in our favour will help at all *unless* we are prepared for it and organised and i don’t think we could ever get to be organised in large enough numbers unless the organisation is fully legal and revolves around peaceful political activity and protest. Hopefully that message would prevent people sitting and waiting. We need to be ready in advance for the turn of the tide or we’ll miss it. 67
Posted by jamesUK on Tue, 18 May 2010 18:59 | # @Ivan
I don’t think you would like my answer. 68
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 18 May 2010 20:09 | # That’s OK, jamesUK (no pun intended!) We are here to dispute things, aren’t we, and dispute always implies some kind of disagreement. As far as I’m concerned, you are OK as long as you are sincere (and I think you are). I don’t think GW will be happy with the subject though.
Do me a favor. Check my spelling, grammar, correct use of articles and punctuation marks for me, please. I’m still working on my English. Thank you in advance. I’m a rich man, if you are willing to do that kind of work (which you seem to enjoy) for me, I’ll hire you. 69
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 25 Sep 2015 00:48 | # I was listening through old interviews that were done in the past from before I joined, and I’m enthusiastic to see that Lee John Barnes was actually here! I think he’s pretty good, it is great to see his name. The problem I ran into is that the audio file had quite a number of problems in it, since the audio seemed to not be mixed correctly. Things which I’ve done to it to make it more listenable: 1. DC offset at 0db on both GW and LJB’s tracks have been done. That should at least now make the interview listenable and should be good enough for the radio archive. There are still some quality issues with it in general, mostly the faint metallic-sound-like artefacts around the upper end of the spectrum, but that’s a case of GIGO, I can do nothing to fix that particular issue. The link in the original radio post made by GW, has been changed accordingly: https://majorityrights.com/radio/radio_comments/gw_talking_with_lee_john_barnes Clicking ‘Download Audio’ in there will now give you the file ‘Lee_John_Barnes_interview_remixed.ogg’, which is the new version of the file which contains the fixes I’ve described above. Enjoy! Post a comment:
Next entry: Nazi Link
|
|
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 Lee John Barnes on Tue, 11 May 2010 11:30 | #
Hi Guessedworker,
It was good to talk to you.
I have the whole conversation on MP3 if anyone wants to hear the whole thing anytime.
Just let me know on my blog that you want a full copy and I will upload it as a torrent on a P2P site and you can download the whole thing.
Onwards and Upwards,
Regards,
Lee