Posted by Texan on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:32 | #

The first video was very interesting. 

The other two:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XniolWxVdvM&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7-JmY8QWOc&feature=channel_page

Posted by Anarcho Anglo on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:55 | #

@ Guessedworker

You’re welcome. I’ll upload the other three parts and David Irving’s speech tomorrow..

Posted by Robert Reis on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 04:30 | #

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/do_you_know_any_heroes_around_here/

Posted by Bill on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 08:06 | #

Has Bowden done anything similar with today’s BBC?

Posted by Anarcho Anglo on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:55 | #

@ Bill,

A list of Bowden’s, and all the other previous New-Right lectures can be found on Troy’s forum.

http://traditionandrevolution.freeforums.org/list-of-new-right-meetings-and-speakers-t1440.html

AA

Posted by RADICAL RIGHT-WINGER (Yosemite) on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:39 | #

FRED asserited:

“They/we are centrists.”

No, we are men of the right. To be a right-winger is to seek the conservation of the national identity throughout the process of change by a steady concern for the whole of the nation’s life. Even modern “conservatives” think they are doing just that — preserving the national identity through ‘patriotism’ — but because most of them are blind to racial differences, they are not doing so in practice. But because race replacement actually undermines the national identity, and hastens the process of change, conservatism, even by the definition of pseudo-conservatives, is inherently nationalistic and racialist.

Aside from the odd misfit and social deviant, humans are inherently conservative. Why? Because humans have learned through millions of years of evolution and social experience that a stable environment is superior, for it ensures present and future security, trans-generational continuity, and it allows for freedom of action as well as an easy command of material resources and circumstances. It is the revolutionist, the leftist, and the lunatic that disturb peace of mind by bringing in unaccustomed life patterns. Right-wingers have always opposed needless or deleterious innovations, whether sociological or mechanical, and above all they seek the conservation of the national identity.

Posted by Q on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:57 | #

Of course Yosemite makes valid points, however, I think we should refer to white-preservationists a “centrists.” The Left always tries to paint pro-whites into a corner and label us fringe right wingers. We are not fringe at all! We are normal. What could be more normal than trying to stop the genocide of people of European decent? We are not right-wing at all, we are centrists. Besides, far right-wingers by definition are anarchists. I’m for a Government bound by a Constitution which is of the people, by the people, and for the people - white people ...

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:51 | #

My answer to Yosemite is what Q wrote.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:04 | #

The Centrists, or “Old” Centrists in hindsight, are the ordinary middle-of-the-road folk, more or less apolitical, of the period from the war’s end to roughly 1965, who let themselves get blindsided by this combination of Jews, capitalists (largely Jews too), communists/new-left (largely ......  all right I won’t say it), and so on, blindsided not through any real fault of their own but because they were too honest and well-meaning, had too much innate integrity, too much natural moral stature, to suspect what was afoot behind the scenes, the back-stabbing, the ill intent, the hate, the ill use, the theft, the filth, the unspeakable, the crime, the destruction, the genocide.

That was the Old Centrists.  The New Centrists are the same folk, still the same centrists, who’ve seen their mistake and are determined 1) to undo the damage, and 2) make it so it can never happen again from now till the end of time.  Burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me.

Posted by james on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:44 | #

Will Dugin be making a speech?

All talk no substance this is something will real teeth and potential development.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XI3eqEteT0&feature=channel_page

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:08 | #

James, if your high-school French is still serviceable, here are a few paragraphs from a recent Dugin interview (originally published in German):

http://euro-synergies.hautetfort.com/archive/2009/07/05/95fcde8880063036857b125cc7d59512.html .

He doesn’t say much in it, otherwise I would’ve translated it for posting here.  (If you don’t understand French, in other words, you’re not missing anything.)

Posted by YOSEMITE on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:15 | #

Q/FRED:

“The Left always tries to paint pro-whites into a corner and label us fringe right wingers. We are not fringe at all! “

Of course we are normal. That’s why we are right-wingers. Conservatism represents the healthy instincts of normal people. Leftism is a deviation from normality. Humans are inherently conservative creatures. They have learned through millions of years of evolution and social experience that a stable environment is superior. That’s what conservatism is all about. It is the leftist and innovator that destroy stability, traditional, social continuity, and undermine national identity. The Centrist merely serves to strike a balance between the healthy instincts of normal people (conservatism) and the subversion introduced by the leftist scum.

“We are not right-wing at all, we are centrists.”

Centrism is a deviation from normality; just less of a deviation than leftism. The equation “centrism = normality” is simply wrong. It is conservatism that is normal, sane, rational, and inherent in human nature. Only lunatics, deviants, misfits, oddballs, innovators, and revolutionists are opposed to conservatism in its traditional sense.

“Besides, far right-wingers by definition are anarchists.”

Conservatism is Statist. You are thinking of American right-liberalism, not the political thought of European-style conservativism, which has always had monarchistic, statist, and traditionalist tendencies. The conservative seeks to turn the clock back before the industrial revolution and the overthrow of our aristocratic order, not to support the anarchy of modern capitalism.

Posted by Q on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:18 | #

YOSEMITE,

Strictly speaking, all your points are sound and I am in full agreement. However, I’m simply coming from a public relations and marketing angle when I say: White Preservationists are centrists. That way WE claim the the political center as ours —that drives the leftwing loons and goons absolutely mad. They want to continue to slander, demonize, marginalize and label us with their terms. But by identifying ourselves as centrists, it somewhat neutralizes their power to smear us as “right-wing racists”, a term that most whites are afraid to be associated with. I think it’s a better strategy to market ourselves as centrists. It will help to remove the stigma the Jews and LIEberals tagged pro-White interest groups with.

Posted by james on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:21 | #

@Fred Scrooby

I used the translate function on the new Windows explorer browser.

What do you mean he doesn’t say much he said more in that interview that most speakers at these conferences.

He’s right states like France and Germany want a possible EU relationship that doesn’t follow US policy being a vassal state union of countries aligned with the US.  Except the new EU countries that are vassal states of the US and there representatives in the EU just like Britain.

Although I would fault him in one regard Turkey with German and US help is helping push a pan-Turkish nationalist empire in the Eurasian sphere.

Did you check the youtube video I posted?

Posted by james on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:27 | #

For those who think race is the answer this is a very good interview and breakdown of the social concept by E. Michael Jones at http://culturewars.com/Podcasts.html and author of The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History.

http://romancatholicreport.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/samfrancis.mp3

I’ve noticed something about WN’s essentially they want to be Jews.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:10 | #

James,

Please read the EGI pdf, linked top left under Existential issues.

Posted by Q on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:26 | #

BTW - Fred Scrooby is the man who came up with the centrist and normal angle. Its simplicity is absolutely brilliant.

Hat tip!

Posted by YOSEMITE on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:58 | #

FRED:

“I’m a centrist, Yosemite.  . . .  I’m an ordinary . . .  who knows normalness when he sees it and degenerateness when he sees that.”

You know normaless and degeneration when you see it—therefore you would <i>not</i< be a centrist, which is a deviation from normal thinking. It is an eclectic ideological position that is intermediate between the healthy instincts of the conservative, and the life-destroying doctrines of leftism.

“No ‘-ism’ characterizes me ...”

Except for Centrism?

Q:

I’m simply coming from a public relations and marketing angle when I say

I am aware of that. But it is not true. It is a lie. Our central tenets do conform to conservatism. Our enemies are not stupid. They are leftists; they know real conservatives when they see them. And that’s why they hate us but they are willing to engage with American right-liberals.

Posted by Englander on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:51 | #

Fred, unless I’m very mistaken you do like to describe your views as centrist because you consider them to be moderate. Normal. You probably consider the floor to have moved beneath us that we find ourselves on the extreme right without even moving our feet. Ignoring the issue of liberal converts to our cause, I think that describes us accurately. We have remained steadfast because the other side has really offered no reason to budge.
Yosemite here likes to frame this as right and wrong, good versus evil. If you’re on the right you’re OK and everyone else is a deviant. I’m not sure I agree with that completely.

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:50 | #

Off-topic, but I figured I’ll put it here since this is where a potentially relevant event occured yesterday.  This morning I went back to read an older post:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/a_call_for_a_radical_right_intellectual_schwerpunckt/

I noticed that people were replying to comments by Fred which no longer appeared, which is something he’s complained about in the past.  I wonder if perhaps something similar to yesterday happened, where someone signed a comment as Prozium, although he apparently was not the real Prozium.  I also remember someone posting porn with Fred’s handle a while back.  Perhaps this is what happened here-  some ‘Fred Scrooby’ comments were deleted and the other ones in the thread disappeared as well.  I’m guessing some malicious person knows the e-mail addresses associated with Fred’s and Prozium’s handles.

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:12 | #

Opposition to race-replacement isn’t necessarily tied to any other political position.  Defense of EGI is a form of conservatism in the sense of the most fundamental conservation.  Anyone normal opposes race-replacement, be they libertarian, communist, green, socialist, democrat, monarchist, whatever.  Just like any normal person would not want to swap their children for someone else’s.  Like Fred says, those who oppose race-replacement are normal, those who don’t are degenerate.

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:12 | #

Here is a good article from the Telegraph which shows the tribal nature of what’s going on in Xinjiang:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5805352/As-China-reels-from-184-deaths-in-Urumqi-riots-a-beaten-woman-fears-for-her-husband.html

Many people don’t understand what’s happening there.  It’s not that the Uighurs are rebelling against foreign rule (though that’s part of it).  They are rebelling against government enforced race-replacement.  Of course, the Chinese government, not being idiots and not having an ethnic vendetta against its own people, uses its majority to do the replacing.  They’re still in the Western expansion stage that NA was in a couple of centuries ago.  Even the Turkish PM does not seem to understand it.  He had this to say about the events:

I have used the word ‘atrocity’ before…… no other word can describe a situation which is nearly genocide in which hundreds have been killed and more than 1,000 others wounded.

But almost 3/4 of those who’ve died have been Han Chinese.  He’s completely missed the true attack on the Uighur’s genetic interests, which is China’s Han settlement policy.  Maybe he doesn’t recognize race-replacement as an issue.  Or maybe he dares not point it out, in case people start asking about what’s happening in Germany (and already nearing completion in Kreuzberg and Neukölln).

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:16 | #

Any sane (normal) person who looked at what’s happening in Xinjiang would conclude that race-replacement leads to political instability and violence.  Unfortunately, many Westerners use this to bolster their degenerate identity (based on liberal tolerance).  “It’s only because the Chinese are intolerant and anti-democratic that the Uighurs are upset.  Because we are morally superior, race-replacement will work out differently here”.  These people won’t be convinced until they are being dragged out of their cars at intersections.

Posted by Q on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:05 | #

Subject: Capitalism vs Socialism

Interesting way to explain the difference

Think about this…

“An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single
student, but had once failed an entire class.

The class (students) insisted that socialism worked since no one would be
poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said,
“OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.”

“All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so
no one will fail and no one will receive an A.”

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The
students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had
studied very little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little
studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since
they couldn’t make an A, they also studied less. The second Test average
was a D.

No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an
F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted
in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.

To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism
would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater
their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward
away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.”

Posted by White Normalist on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:36 | #

C’mon Scrooby dooby doo and just label yourself a ‘White Normalist’.  It is a good title!!!

Posted by james on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:52 | #

@Dasein

No Uighurs are part of a trans Turkish nationalist who are financed and run by the CIA. There organisation are financed by NED and pre-planned attacks on Han population there.

There part of a US geo-political strategy for US domination of Central Asia and its oil and gas reserves.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14327

Thats what happens when you base your viewpoint on squarely on race you don’t see the bigger picture.

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:45 | #

james, there’s nothing surprising about foreign powers taking advantage of the racial tension.  These were race riots, regardless of who fomented them.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:05 | #

James,

Perhaps you should tell us your ethnicity.  Are there any clues in that to your expressed desire to fine race irrelevant?

Posted by Svigor on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 03:16 | #

I think many here are conflating “normal” and “healthy.”  That’s fine for shorthand, but don’t actually confuse the two because they’re quite distinct.

Suicidal tendencies are now normal.  They cannot be healthy.

Ethnic nationalism is healthy.  Currently it is not normal.

Posted by Svigor on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 03:22 | #

Thats what happens when you base your viewpoint on squarely on race you don’t see the bigger picture.

Kind of a tendentious way of putting it, don’t you think?

No room for something in the middle?

Don’t confuse specialization in a taboo niche for obsession.

Posted by on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 04:24 | #

</i>Stop those italics!</i>

Posted by Lurker on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 04:29 | #

Success! That was me above btw.

Thats what happens when you base your viewpoint on squarely on race you don’t see the bigger picture.

I think most of us are used to arguing with people who say that race is never an issue. In fact they are usually so vehement about that position that we know they are straying into “doth protest too much territory”.

Of course its not the whole story, but its often a significant missing part - if not the most significant in many issues.

Posted by Dasein on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:11 | #

Fred, that must be annoying,  I hope you get an answer.

Here’s just one more example I found this morning too:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/its_testosterone_what_else/

Seems like almost every old post I’ve been going through recently has this problem.

Posted by Q on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:03 | #

Seems like almost every old post I’ve been going through recently has this problem.

Odd, strange, disconcerting. It kinda makes you think someone is building a legal case against against Fred; or is sanitizing the record so no one can build a case??? Who else here is being being scrutinized?

GW, can you clear this up?

Posted by Dasein on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:08 | #

Well, some good news.  This post, as far as I can tell, had an attrition rate of zero:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/europe_is_dead_long_live_eurasia/

I’m not sure if there’s a pattern to what’s going on.  In any case, I wish you luck in getting to the bottom of it.

Posted by james on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:27 | #

@Guessedworker

I’m 100% Scottish and our politicians and media are as wormy as every other EU state and the US.

If race is the primery issue then explain the Balkans conflicts they were all white.

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:09 | #

I’m 100% Scottish

I debated “james” at Takimag.  He is aracialist because he thinks that is the Christian way to be.  He is veritably obsessed with Russia because he is an Orthodox Christian.  When pressed about why he cares more about Russians than Scots, or the English, he will tell you the English deserve what they get for helping America subdue Orthodox Serbia, and that race is not an issue in Scotland because there are so few muds there.  Another victim of the faith gene, yawn.

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:27 | #

Four questions for you “james”:

1.)  You were aware that Dugin is a fucking atheist, weren’t you?

2.)  Would you object to every Russian woman breeding with niggers, so long as said niggers were Christian, and as a result the Russian people were mongrelized out of existence? 

3.)  Do you still believe, as you stated in the past, that much of Scotland resembles a Third World country, and hence nothing much would be lost if they were mongrelized out of existence by niggers as well? 

4.)  Why don’t you pull your head out of your ass?

Posted by danielj on Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:40 | #

Thats what happens when you base your viewpoint on squarely on race you don’t see the bigger picture.

What happens when you base your viewpoint solely and entirely on the ramblings of some Canadian moron with an unspellable last name?

By the way, a lot of “sources” - if one were to flip to the back of the book and check - in Michel Chossudovsky’s “works” are no source at all. Often times, they are the National Enquirer and other such nonsense publications.

Linking to Global Research makes you look like an idiot.

Posted by james on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:42 | #

@Captainchaos

Most wars are based on ethnicity and religion not on race. With the except of the colonial wars in Africa but that was motivated need for resources and land and money. An Oligarchical system which is the basis of this globalisation and one world government.

I’m not an Orthodox Christian they don’t have it here in Scotland but if they did I would join.

I studied the race issue as a social construct thinking that was the answer but I saw its short comings. Like the fact that there are hundred of pro white activist groups but they can not unify apart from David Duke in the US to get a sizable support to elect people on pro-white issues.

Why is the NWO trying to eliminate Orthodox Christianity because that is the last bulwark against the NWO.

1) He is a geo-political strategist race or religion should not deter strategic alliances say with China when you have a unified force against your own national interest like control over the Eurasian sphere.
Brezinski the anti-Christ played of China against Russia during the Cold War and is trying to create divisions in the Eurasian sphere so the US can control Eurasia and its vast oil and gas reserves then it would be end game as they would have conquered the world. 

2) My point about race is not in support of race mixing or immigration but as a unifying force based solely on being white you need something more concrete than that. Croats and Serbs were white yet they killed each other in fact Croats teamed up with the Muslims to fight the Serbs.

As I mentioned before the government and society we have now which is white enacts policies we support (except me) like immigration, wars, media, news, MTV, modern art, financial institutions, etc.

How were Jews able to get control of every single white country were they are elevated above others and spared criticism for there group actions? 

Do you mind gay marriages or if western countries as long as they are white?

3) I said race is not an issue but if you bring any group of people who are not native to the host country that would cause tensions and decimate the country.
I said parts not much of Scotland resembles a third world country.
The concept of multi-culturalism is a western creation that they promote through control of the mass media and NGO’s and foreign policy to enact it on other countries. 

4) White activists essentially want to be Jewish don’t they?

@danielj

The articles he posts are fully reference and the one I linked to is by geo-political analysts, researcher and writer F. William Engdahl.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:14 | #

Scotland has a Coptic Orthodox Church in Kirkcaldy, Fife and a Romanian Orthodox Church in Glasgow. Of course, the usual old ludicrous, grovelling, Jew-inspired Jesusjabber, (albeit augmented by amusing Oriental versions of the wondrous tales of Yahweh & Son Inc) will insult your intellgence in both locations, james.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:23 | #

Sorry for the ’ intelligence’ typo.

An outreaching Orthodox Church in Texas, St George’s, is doing impressive work helping Mexican immigrants settle in the US and making them feel at home - so much so that the Mexican authorities have asked those marvellous Christians to set up an Orthodox Mission across the border.

http://www.stgeorgepantry.org/

‘Christianity - You Know It Makes Sense’.

Posted by Gina on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:43 | #

We do need a new political vocabulary to carry our view of the world.  These old terms like right-wing, centrist belong to the opposition and carrt their meanings.  The change is coming and will probably come out into the open unexpectedly.

When will the David Irving links be uploaded?  Its supposed to be brilliant. 

http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-it-cant-happen-here-1595

Posted by james on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:26 | #

@Al Ross

Legal immigrants who were given citizenship in the US.

Good better than Muslim countries and western ones like Britain setting up Muslim organisations in Mexico.

Would you prefer white Muslims than Orthodox Mexican Christians coming into the US.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:58 | #

Does james really think that the Orthodox Church in Texas differentiates between US passport carrying Mestizos and their illegally resident brethern when dispensing its aid?

The Mexicans’ indigenous forebears only converted to Christianity because of the superiority of stout Cortez’s firearms and Toledo steel which they believed to be manifestations of the power of a deity superior to their own. Perhaps, in true Christian fashion, some of the Spanish friars who accompanied the army, deluded themselves into thinking that the New World savages believed the biblical fairy - tales peddled so assiduously but these gullible clerics were probably in the minority. There is no doubt that Islam’s warlike ethos was far more suited to the Aztec psyche than the pointless and insipid message of that third of Yahweh called Jesus.

The US crime rate and American White civilisation (tautologically speaking) in general are adversely affected by the presence of any type of (Christian) Mexican. White Muslims are about as common as Zulu Mensa members so even giving them a mention in a theoretical question is indicative of a last unclutched straw.

Posted by Anarcho Anglo on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:57 | #

@ Gina

I’m uplaoding them now (i’ve done two) although there are some sound issues due to an extractor fans being switched on after Bowden’s speech.

http://www.youtube.com/user/NewRightLondon

AA

Posted by Armor on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:52 | #

Opposition to race-replacement isn’t necessarily tied to any other political position.  Defense of EGI is a form of conservatism in the sense of the most fundamental conservation.  Anyone normal opposes race-replacement, be they libertarian, communist, green, socialist, democrat, monarchist, whatever.  Just like any normal person would not want to swap their children for someone else’s.  Like Fred says, those who oppose race-replacement are normal, those who don’t are degenerate. (—Dasein)

The left/right divide definitely stopped making sense when the formerly left-wing political parties came out in favor of race-replacement, and when the formerly right-wing political parties followed suit. No one can describe himself as left-wing or right-wing if he supports race-replacement.
Defense of EGI is certainly a form of conservatism, but sacrificing EGI can hardly be a sign of “progressivism”. Still, it seems that political parties that call themselves “left-wing” are particularly unlikely to say anything against immigration. It makes it impossible for the anti-immigration movement to look for support among those who identify themselves as “left-wing”.

I think the EGI.pdf, classified under “Existential Issues” in the top left hand corner of this website, gives a good presentation of the fundamental issue :

“Mainstream” discussions about immigration, race, and the implications of a multiracial society usually consider only secondary questions such as economics, crime, culture, etc. They ignore the ultimate interest of a people: genetic continuity. No rational person would support policies that would, on the one hand, “enrich” their family while, on the other hand, simultaneously replace their family with strangers.

But what I don’t like is Salter’s phrase “genetic interests”, or “ethnic interests”. I wish there was some other name to refer to the idea that normal people don’t want their children to be replaced by third-world immigrants.

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:57 | #

But what I don’t like is Salter’s phrase “genetic interests”, or “ethnic interests”. I wish there was some other name to refer to the idea that normal people don’t want their children to be replaced by third-world immigrants.

That is just it, the children of people of European descent are not being literally replaced.  What is being replaced is the gene frequencies which preponderate in Europeans relative to the gene frequencies of alien peoples within specific, demarcated lands, or even globally if on wishes to extend the scope of concern that far.  The mixed-race child born to a White woman is no less “her child” in the sense that it grew, and was birthed from her womb, than were it unalloyedly White.  In other words, from the perspective of how “normal” peoples’ minds function, it is perfectly appropriate to describe what to them is an abstraction with a term which denotes an abstract concept.  And without the “domain-specific mental capacities” by which other races and peoples viscerally experience the very real organic life of their people that we perhaps lack, how then can we give our own to understand the imperative of acting in the interest of their EGI, or at least construct of functional equivalent?

Posted by danielj on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 03:49 | #

The articles he posts are fully reference and the one I linked to is by geo-political analysts, researcher and writer F. William Engdahl.

Do you really not get it?

Posted by Dasein on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:27 | #

James also cites rense.com.

Posted by james on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:52 | #

@danielj

Why wouldn’t I post articles hosted on Global Research from online publications, main stream media sources, historians and geo-political analysis.  Majority Rights quotes main stream newspapers like the Telegraph.

The Rense article was in the other article about Poland and was an email correspondence to Rense by a Polish man who was in the leadership of the Solidarity movement discussing to Jewish takeover of Poland after WW2.