|
|
|
What’s Your Opinion of Bill White?
I’ve run across many white nationalists who think Bill White is, at best, a lone wolf with severe psychological problems and, at worst, an agent provocateur for the Mossad. I’ve never run across a white nationalist with a verifiable identity that takes Bill White seriously. If you have knowledge of the real situation regarding Bill White and/or his claims that Ron Paul is a white nationalist, please post them in a comment to this blog post and provide also some pointers to the “real world”—for verification so we can authenticate your claim. The “real world” pointer could be as simple as your real identity so we can investigate whether you are yet another plant. Comments:2
Posted by danielj on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 18:07 | # If Ron Paul is actually associated with these types of WN’s I might have to withdraw my support and pledge no further pecuniary assistance. 3
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:22 | # But Daniel the whole point of the entry is to say of course Ron Paul isn’t associated with these types (no one in his right mind would be!) and therefore to ask those with information on why White may have done this to step forward. I just read the first page-and-a-half of comments at the linked site and it certainly looks as if they’ve got White’s number. He doesn’t appear to be fooling anyone over there — or very few, at most. He strikes the rest as working for the other side or some kind of complete nutjob. The guy someone quoted who calls him “Bill NonWhite” may have hit on the truth (“NonWhite” in the sense of “Non-European Caucasian,” or “NEC” as I’ve seen it abbreviated, meaning either he’s NEC himself or works for NECs). I don’t know anything about White (I’ve read his name half-a-dozen times mentioned in passing at the sites I visit). I didn’t come up through VNN or Stormfront so don’t know the personalities who seem so familiar to those who “came up” through those sites. Reading that VNN comment of his linked in the entry, I don’t see an alternative to applying Matra’s assessment of guys like him generally: he’s either a nutjob or on the payroll of our enemies and out to sabotage Ron Paul. 4
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:43 | # I actually think VNN’s monitor should delete that whole thread, as someone over there has called for. Whatever the true nature/identity/motivations of Bill NonWhite, there’s simply no way that post of his was the work of a sane or well-intentioned individual (well-intentioned toward our side, that is — I can think of a number of sides it was “well-intentioned” toward). As for Bill NonWhite, I trust from now on he’ll be shunned like a Garth Brooks fan and no one’ll go near him — well, OK, maybe not that extreme ... I trust he’ll be shunned like cancer, leprosy, bubonic plague, and AIDS and no one’ll go near him. 5
Posted by William Daniels on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:00 | # Based on information we have collected, we believe that Bill White bears the same relationship to any pro-Euro group as Frank Collin (aka Joseph Cohen) had to the “Nazi” group of a dozen people he founded and used to demand a right to march through Skokie in the mid-1970s. For a short refresher on Frank Collins (aka Joseph Cohen), see this product of Judicial, Inc.
6
Posted by melba peachtoast on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:35 | # Darlings, I thought as you did, until yesterday I had a little thought. Now I think that I have no idea what BW’s reasons were for his “attacK” on RP. This was my thought: Given that the attack has been pretty well debunked even in the MSM (see NYT retraction of initial coverage), RP’s cause was if anything helped by BW, in that it will be more difficult now to tar him as an upstart crow in WN feathers. If BW had intended to gain initial credence in the MSM for an easily-shown-to-be-nonsensical story, thereby immunizing RP against the charge that he is somehow associated with WN, how could the intention have been more successfully implemented? On the other hand, even here in the Outback one does hear things, and one of the things one has heard is that if Bill White is not delusional, then there is no such affliction. 7
Posted by danielj on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:58 | # But Daniel the whole point of the entry is to say of course Ron Paul isn’t associated with these types (no one in his right mind would be!) and therefore to ask those with information on why White may have done this to step forward. I know. My point is that it is so obviously untrue that Paul has no “Nazi” or WN sympathies. (He considers racial collectivism an “ugly” form of collectivism, although don’t hold your breath waiting for the criticism of judaism.) My opinion is that the media (old media/Mossad/C.I.A) will do anything to throw deranged and dysgenic looking/sounding characters claiming to speak for us into the limelight. This is why I question the behavior of Alex Linder. The people that came out at Knoxville were his (so to speak) and only damage our credibility. In fact, Alex himself acted out of line by getting arrested. VNN needs no publicity. Although, this isn’t about Alex so enough about that. Bill is a jew. You can see it on his face. Bill planted the story and his old and gray kin over at the N.Y. Crimes ran with it. In opposition to what Mrs. Peachtoast believes, the damage is done no-matter the retraction. Also, it makes it easier to smear him in the future. How, you ask? The most revolutionary of all methods is the dialectical one. The thesis is that Ron Paul is a normal man or mainstream candidate, and this is the viewpoint of the Lew Rockwell jews. The anti-thesis is that he is a Bill White style Nazi courtesy of the National Socialist jews and heirs of the Frank Colin legacy. Finally, the Old Media/Mossad/CIA will lead everyone to the synthesis that he is a revisionistic, Mencken/Pound type “Nazi sympathizer.” Although not an actual Nazi his policies, if elected, would be very congenial to actual Nazis. 8
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:01 | # William Daniels, thanks for the information on Joseph Cohen. It is important generally and particularly so in the “Bill White” situation. 9
Posted by Maguire on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:21 | # James, “information on Joseph Cohen. It is important generally and particularly so in the “Bill White” situation.” There’s a few more details to complete the trail. Cohen’s most famous follower was “Rabbi” Harold Covington. It’s natural that Old Harold has lately became a retired mentor of sorts for the Supreme Commander. I’ll leave it to others to decide whether this is because schizophrenics naturally gravitate to each other, or because their case officers decided to merge the operations. Maguire 10
Posted by J Richards on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 00:58 | # James, Bill White is a Jew/Zionist agent: http://judicial-inc.biz/Bill_White.htm The Zionists are using an old trick. A crypto-Zionist smears Ron Paul and other Zionists start promoting this smear to argue that Ron Paul is indeed a white supremacist. Eric Hufschmid has explained this clearly -
Bill White isn’t alone. There is a history of Zionists establishing “white supremacist” organizations. http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/History-of-White-Nationalism.html http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Ashkenazi-Nazis.html http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-hatehoaxes-american-nazis.html http://judicial-inc.biz/Klassen.htm Also see the link on “Frank Collins” in the comment by William Daniels. 11
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 01:19 | # None of the sources linked in the comments of this thread are reliable. Judicial-inc, Hufschmid, and apparently Jew Watch are filled with misinformation. Bill White is not a Jew (he is an attention whore). Ben Klassen is not a Jew. GLR is not a Jew. 12
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 01:19 | # It’s a darn good thing there aren’t any “virulent antisemitic” supporters here at MR that are working for the Ron Paul campaign. If there were, that would serve to be a real embarrassment, wouldn’t it? 13
Posted by Byron on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 01:58 | # There sure is a lot of smoke surrounding the contention that White is an agent provocateur. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php 14
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 01:59 | # No one is going to link to this site and even if they do we have no credibility or weight. 15
Posted by goldentriangle on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 02:27 | # Bill White is most likely a puppet. I seriously doubt if Bill White does anything by his own choosing. He might be some closet pedo being blackmailed. Don’t know much about Bill W. But I do know the FBI likes to plays agent provocateur, infiltrator and it likes to make national incidents. The FBI played a role in the Feb. 2007 neo-Nazi rally in Orlando, Florida. It paid some informant to help organize a Nazi rally in a predominately black neigborhood. 16
Posted by J Richards on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 02:55 | # The Reliability Issue Bleh said the links are not to reliable sites. I wouldn’t bet on the tabloid-style judicial-inc site, but jew watch and especially Hufschmid are certainly not less reliable than Zionist-controlled news sources. No reasonable person should blindly believe anything he reads. This is especially true of websites exposing Zionists crimes. Zionists have been historically operating under secrecy and they have always been deceptive. This makes it unlikely that any website exposing Zionist criminality is 100% right. Because of the internet the Zionists have been forced to set up websites that expose some of their crimes. They do this to establish rapport and credibility with their readers, and the larger purpose is to mislead them and preserve the Zionist crime network minus a few sacrifices here and there. This brings me to Byron’s links to rense.com and whatreallyhappened.com, both part of the Zionist crime network. Note Hufschmid’s statement, “It gives credibility to the phony investigators who exposed the victim.” Crypto-Jew Mike Rivero of whatreallyhappened.com is taking kudos from other Zionists for exposing something the Zionists set up in the first place. All I have to say is reader beware. Some information on Jeff Rense and Mike Rivero - 17
Posted by Chuck Shoeman on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:43 | # Have you ever heard of a “Line Item Veto?” There are 2 candidates that want that Power as the United States President, and It’s not Ron Paul. Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson have address that the US Congress give them the power of the “Line Item Veto”. If you’re worried about white nationalists taking over the good ole USA, than worry about them. This coupled with the Do Nothing Congress and the power of the Patriot Act, will create a King from a President. American soldiers are said to take an oath to “Protect against all threats both foreign and domestic.” Luckily for the Domestic threat, all of the Soldiers are on the other side of the world attacking the foreign illusion of a threat. Germany suffered this threat once and lost. I hope it’s not America’s turn. 18
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:44 | # “No one is going to link to this site and even if they do we have no credibility or weight.” No credibility or weight, you say? LOL. Freudian slip, aye, Daniel? I’m guessing if I did some investigation, I should be shocked SHOCKED to find at least one “virulent antisemite” (like Bill White without the silly costume) who works directly for the Ron Paul campaign that is a regular WRITER and poster here at MR? BTW, Im going to vote for Ron Paul. Too bad there are a few idiots from within that could possibly taint his reputation during his campaign. 19
Posted by J Richards on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:46 | # Rusty mason, Neither paranoid nor schizophrenic describes Hufschmid. Hufschmid’s argument should be clear – INVESTIGATE EVERYONE THINK CRITICALLY In other words, something should not be believed because the person mentioning it is deemed trustworthy but because it is supported by evidence, explains the bigger picture, is a better explanation compared to the opponent’s argument, etc. 20
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:22 | #
We are not going to taint him here. We are insignificant. Not to me of course. I thoroughly enjoy my time here and have learned much. Re Paul:I’ve given the man money and registered as a Rep. to enable myself to vote for the man as well.
21
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:24 | # Hufschmid is a mixed bag. So is judicial inc. So what? His central thesis of INVESTIGATE EVERYONE/TRUST NO ONE certainly makes him somewhat credible in my book. 22
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:43 | # “We are insignificant. Not to me of course. I thoroughly enjoy my time here and have learned much.” Good for you, Daniel. At least you back up your statement. I happen to agree with you…to a certain extent. Some people that post here think that they are going to be the leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution where whites will regain dominance over their own territories. Fantasies abound! 23
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:51 | # His central thesis of INVESTIGATE EVERYONE/TRUST NO ONE certainly makes him somewhat credible in my book. I don’t quite understand how extreme paranoia about “Zionists” (never Jews), White Nationalists, and NASA helps advance our interests. Just because you say “trust no one” doesn’t mean you get a pass for spreading blatant and ridiculous misinformation. 24
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:58 | # I’m not giving him a pass. I’m agreeing with him that I trust no one, including him. However, who the hell knows about Hufschmid except us and few Myspace friends of Daryl Bradford Smith? He is unable to damage our cause, especially since he goes to great pains to distance himself from White Nationalism. He has no proximity to anything what so ever that might possibly be called the WN “movement.” (Not that there is much of a movement to speak of) Also, I’m not sure about the moon landing thing either, but it certainly doesn’t make up an important part of my platform when proselytizing. 25
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:58 | # Some people that post here think that they are going to be the leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution where whites will regain dominance over their own territories. Name them. Fantasies abound! I’m sure Zionism seemed pretty fantastic in 1890. 26
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:03 | # I am not ecstatic about Hufschmid taking up the anti-Zionist cause either, but getting ourselves all worked up about credibility is as equally, hysterically funny as Hufschmids posturing. It paints the picture that we are somehow standing on the edge of legitimacy and would be accepted into the mainstream if not for the pesky Hufschmid types. Modern, effeminate, apartment-living Man draweth no distinction between us and those that don the tinfoil hat or those whose wardrobes contain a sizable amount of Nazi regalia. 27
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:05 | #
Frank Mc kind of fits that bill. A lot of people that surround us have ridiculously violent fantasies. It is the nature of the game we play. Turner Diaries types abound. Not necessarily at MR, but they run in our circles no? 28
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:06 | # He is unable to damage our cause, especially since he goes to great pains to distance himself from White Nationalism. But then you have people like J. Richards sending him traffic. At best, this wastes the time of white racialists. At worst, this helps convert white racialists into anti-racist paranoiacs in the DBS/Hufschmid mold. 29
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:08 | # I agree. Should we start a petition to convince GW that free speech is a bad policy? It isn’t our blog. You are more than welcome to help me at my website. I have plenty of ideas and plenty of work to do. I will send you the passwords to my account right now if you would like to engage in serious and productive work. 30
Posted by George Taylor on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:10 | # Bill White strikes me as a mentally unbalanced punk who will do most anything to garner attention. Look at his colorful history: anarcho-troublemaker in high school, neo-communist Pravda ‘reporter’, and now ‘Mr. Nazi’. What a bad joke he is on all of us. Too bad White has money provided by his slumlord operations, for he can use it to keep throwing himself at the forefront of the movement, all the while being labeled ‘dangerous’ by Morris Dees’ kike and queer infested SPLC. Further, if White isn’t a closet Jew working as an agent provocateur, I am the goddamn Pope. I will never trust or give any support to a deranged clown like Bill White - his ridiculous history and current antics give White Nationalism a bad name. 31
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:13 | # But then you have people like J. Richards sending him traffic. At best, this wastes the time of white racialists. At worst, this helps convert white racialists into anti-racist paranoiacs in the DBS/Hufschmid mold. That is the problem with addressing the 9-11 issue. Everyone that is “enlightened” is anti-racist. David Ray Griffin - Christian “Theologian” (my pimpled ass) There is hardly anybody scholarly on our side outside of KMac and he can not do the “footwork” and more radical activism due to his position. 32
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:17 | # It paints the picture that we are somehow standing on the edge of legitimacy and would be accepted into the mainstream if not for the pesky Hufschmid types. This is not what I’m saying at all. In general, I like facts and clear thinking. I don’t like it when people invent facts and make conclusions based on fallacious reasoning, and then try to spread their misinformation to others. It would be one thing if it could be demonstrated Hufschmid is advancing our interests in any way. But he’s not. He seems to be driven by self-promotion and/or mental illness, and he professes to subscribe to an ideology that is directly opposed to mine. 33
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:23 | # I would suggest it is only mental illness. He has the bad computer programmer’s mind as opposed to the Bowery type. I don’t like him either and understand that we here should not grant him legitimacy, but there is nothing we can do to remove the links. We can create an alternative that provides actual facts related to many of the issues brought up on his site and filtered through a WN framework. 34
Posted by zusammen on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:24 | #
Rusty, this is the only important statement to emerge from all the comments thus far. It is also the message the object of this very blog post has been sending to White Nationalists. 35
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:26 | # “Name them.”—bleh No! Do your own research! If you’re new to this site I can understand your challenge. But if you’ve been reading the posts here awhile, you would know whom I’m talking about. “I’m sure Zionism seemed pretty fantastic in 1890.” I wouldn’t know, I wasn’t around in 1890.What I do find so appalling, is the willingness of the white race, in the here and now, to be so…..so…..obedient with their participation in their own race replacement. 36
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:48 | # “No! Do your own research! If you’re new to this site I can understand your challenge. But if you’ve been reading the posts here awhile, you would know whom I’m talking about. “ I’ve followed this site since it launched. I tend to skip reading boring and/or delusional posters. Maybe some here believe they will be “leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution”. If so, you should be able to link to supporting posts. “What I do find so appalling, is the willingness of the white race, in the here and now, to be so…..so…..obedient with their participation in their own race replacement.” We shall see what happens. 37
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:02 | # Should we start a petition to convince GW that free speech is a bad policy? I’m more concerned that J. Richards is in a position to delete posts. But, as you say, it’s GW’s site. You are more than welcome to help me at my website. I have plenty of ideas and plenty of work to do. I will send you the passwords to my account right now if you would like to engage in serious and productive work. No thanks. I think there would be much we disagree on. But good luck with your site. 38
Posted by zusammen on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:03 | # Dr. William L. Pierce speaks from the grave regarding the Ron Paul Revolution.
39
Posted by J Richards on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:15 | # Rusty Mason,
How about you take his science challenge and address his points?
He has been saying that we should not consider Ron Paul as a panacea. He is not endorsing any other candidate. If Hufschmid had to select one candidate, I am positive it would be Ron Paul. He is skeptical about Ron Paul. This is reasonable. Some Zionist groups are indeed pushing him. Ron Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve. If he is serious about this rather having a plan to replace it with a different-named Jew-owned central bank equivalent then he is either looking at not getting elected or getting assassinated while in office, like JFK. But some Zionists groups are going along with his plan. Why? Skepticism is healthy.
Duke has a gambling addiction and has served time in Federal prison. It is certainly possible that he was blackmailed by Zionists and given less time in exchange for keeping his hands off the most important issues. You should know the importance of exposing the Holocaust hoax but Duke claims he doesn’t have the historical knowledge to take a stance on the Holocaust! Why doesn’t Duke expose the fake white supremacist groups? Why is Duke heavily covered in the mainstream media? Zionists don’t promote anyone unless they have something to gain from it. This is an important point. A website like majorityrights is bad news for the SPLC and ADL, yet they don’t mention us. No surprise here. See the top left corner of the website. You will note links to good information on ethnic genetic interests, miscegenation and a Race FAQ. Do you think the APLC and the ADL would want to give publicity to this information? Do you think they would want to give publicity to a site that links to Hufschmid and the money masters site under “eye openers”? What if I add two more links, one exposing 9/11 as a Zionist-masterminded false flag op and the other exposing the Holocaust hoax, both richly evidence-based? Do you think the SPLC and the ADL will be more or less likely then to expose majorityrights as an anti-Semitic hate site? And Duke has yet to take a clear stance on 9/11. He has at most suggested that Israel had prior knowledge of the attack and for a long time maintained that Israel was responsible for the attack by infuriating Muslims and making them attack us, whereas 9/11 was in reality a false flag operation fully masterminded by the Zionists. Again, skepticism is healthy.
This is not right. The point is, be a lazy ass and import slaves to do your work and eventually the slaves will outnumber the masters, and the civilization will go down (this is a tacit admission on his part that blacks are not capable of maintaining Western civilization). Whites in South Africa ran into the Xhosa, not the Bantu (very dark Negroes), and they let in a bunch of Bantu to take advantage of their labor, and look at the result. In a similar manner, there are many Americans who pay a contractor to do their landscaping, but this person hires illegals, and the Americans don’t care; they are happy to get the job done for less. To some extent we are responsible for the predicament we find ourselves into when we see our nation run over by Third World hordes.
Zionists are certainly a very powerful group. This is easily verifiable. Hufschmid doesn’t scare us about their spying. He has exposed Zionists agent Alex Jones as the person who is trying to scare people about government spying, hoping to prevent them from asking critical questions and investigating things. Hufschmid on the other hand has come up with inspirational messages, telling us that we will most likely die of some horrible disease, full of pain and suffering. So why should we be scared of exposing and fighting the Zionists?
We are partly responsible. It is not all the Jews’, blacks’, non-whites’ fault.
I suppose you will count me as one too. ————————————- Daniel J,
Hufschmid’s site attracts thousands of unique users a day. —————————————
Exposing the harm caused to whites by Zionists is not wasting the time of white racialists. Hufschmid no longer works with Daryl Bradford Smith or considers him trustworthy. Hufschmid’s dislike for “Ashkenazi Nazis” isn’t the same as being anti-racist. For all we know Hufschmid may believe that whites are smarter than blacks, but he is smart enough to know that the people who tried to integrate an uneducable and uncivilizable race with whites were not the blacks themselves. No prizes for guessing who they were and who between blacks and these people deserve more of our attention.
Exposing Zionists criminality doesn’t advance our interests? Zionists got America involved in both World Wars, have stolen our military technology, have spied on us, gotten hundreds of billions of American tax payer money, control most of the mainstream media, attacked the USS liberty, were behind the Lavon affair, masterminded 9/11, own the privately held Federal Reserve, got us to attack Iraq, are trying to get us to attack Iran, and so on. Making people aware of this crime network doesn’t advance our interests? Ridiculous. 40
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:17 | # “I’ve followed this site since it launched. I tend to skip reading boring and/or delusional posters. Maybe some here believe they will be “leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution”. If so, you should be able to link to supporting posts.” Bleh, read some of this stuff! * minus Frank McGucken or course. 41
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:32 | # Hufschmid no longer works with Daryl Bradford Smith or considers him trustworthy. Uh-oh. How can you be sure Hufschmid isn’t a Zionist disinformation out to discredit DBS? 43
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:54 | # Onlooker, stop your sly insinuations and oblique references and speak plainly. 44
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:00 | # Onlooker strikes me as <strike>very similar to</strike> “Northerner” and “A Casual Observer.” Exact same attitude problem and short fuse. 45
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:05 | # onlooker, At a glance, I fail to locate any prospective self-declared “leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution” in that thread. Bowery argues “white nationalists should try to negotiate with the Lakota” but does not seem to be setting himself up as a leader or actually planning to take action. He hasn’t, as far as I know, flown to SD to start talks. He seems to be engaging in more of a thought experiment than anything, though I’m sure, like most of us, he wouldn’t mind if his words have some influence. His scheme may be highly unlikely to succeed, but I wouldn’t call it grandiose. Secession may seem outlandish today, but it’s probably more outlandish to believe the United States federal government as presently constituted will hold sovereignty over its present territory in 200 or 500 years. 47
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:10 | # Onlooker/A Casual Observer/Northerner is some sort of malcontent asshole, and a resentment-filled one. 48
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:11 | # Shut the fuck up Jewby. I am “northerner”. I am not “a casual observer” much less “onlooker”. Without defending ACO (there’s another poster I don’t read), a lot of people seem to have “attitude problems” with you. Wonder why that is. 49
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:13 | # From now on, A Casual Asshole joins Silver on my ignore list. I skip over their comments unread. 50
Posted by J Richards on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:14 | #
Read Hufschmid’s explanation of why he no longer works with DBS – http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-Hufschmid-Bollyn.html http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-phone-call-8Sep2007.html Then head over to the iamthewitness (IAW) site and see how well DBS has countered this. There is more. When Hufschmid was working with DBS, the site layout and most original written content at IAW were Hufschmid’s work. I had no problem linking to IAW back then. But some strange things happened. A Swedish guy wanted to set up a wiki for IAW and wanted access to the IAW server. Hufschmid denied him access. So this Swedish guy set up a wiki at a different site using mediawiki software (the same as the Zionist site wikipedia) and offered a browser toolbar made by an Israeli company! When Hufschmid left, this Swedish guy became the webmaster, and the change in quality of IAW was obvious. Then there was the don’t taser me bro incident. The Jew Andrew Meyer staged it. This was so obvious, but the Swedish webmaster praised it as defiance of police authority! Meyer was widely covered in the media. He mentioned the Skull and Bones society when he questioned Kerry. Zionists spread nonsense about secret societies to deflect public attention from their crime network. So the reasonable thing would have been to suspect that Meyer staged the incident to spread Zionist propaganda, but why didn’t the Swedish webmaster think about this? I felt uncomfortable with the IAW site, but soon thereafter, Hufschmid left and explained why he did so. DBS turned out to be another deceptive individual. If you go over these details you should be able to see who is more trustworthy, DBS or Hufschmid. 51
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:29 | # That’s some airtight reasoning, JR. I’m glad to know which is the more trustworthy source of misinformation. 52
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:29 | # It is easy to discount “onlooker”: 1) He doesn’t distinguish between a “white supremacist” who claims Ron Paul is a white nationalist and a white nationalist who openly supports Ron Paul making no claim that Ron Paul is a white nationalist. 2) He doesn’t distinguish between demanding that “whites will regain dominance over their own territories” and demanding “any deal that lets whites control the entry of nonwhites to any territory anywhere in the world”. In short, he’s about as sloppy a thinker as one would expect of someone who is so politically correct that he has the zeitgeist on his side so he doesn’t need any rigor to support his idiocy. 53
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:29 | # Are you sure you have the IQ to post here, Northerner? The minimum allowed is set at 70, I think. Maybe you’d better check before you show up again. By the way, a Zoloft-Cymbalta-Phenobarbital-Wellbutrin cocktail might work wonders for that attitude problem of yours. You too, ACA. You guys oughta check it out. Hey just trying to be friendly. (And please do look into that IQ minimum.) 54
Posted by bleh on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:57 | # Am I to take it Jewby is the well-adjusted poster child (poster old jew?) for the use of psychotropic drugs? Jewby’s bitchlike behavior is on full display tonight. This post ends my interaction with Jewby in this thread. 55
Posted by Proofreader on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:08 | # JB; here’s my humblle opinion: each and every man in full neo-nazi drag is 99.99 % likely to work for the government. At least, this turns out to be the rule in Europe, where neo-nazi outfits are routinely funded and infiltrated by the government. 56
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:32 | # I’ve got it, he’s a Garth Brooks fan! (I’ve gotta learn to shut up about Garth till I’m certain none of his fans is around!) 57
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:36 | # On the other hand he could be an Irish Catholic (although their IQs would be a bit high for him ... one’s room temperature Fahrenheit, the other room temperature Celsius ... not quite a match ...) 58
Posted by john on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:12 | # Prof. Hartungs video : “The Thousand year future” is interesting. 59
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:27 | # John I just looked at that video and wasn’t impressed. 60
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:29 | # (I didn’t stay with it to the end — I bailed out at the part where he began talking about George Bush and stem-cell research, maybe two-thirds of the way through. If it got better after that let me know and I’ll go back and finish it.) 61
Posted by john on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:22 | # Fred, I can see why you stooped at the mention of bush, but it’s worth finishing the video. 62
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:24 | #
Can anything get it to end in all threads? 63
Posted by john on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:32 | # Newletter nuber 2 is the pertinent one. 64
Posted by john on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:37 | # Mistake, Outlaw newsletter 4 is the pertenent one. 65
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 16:14 | # JRichards: The information that Hufschmid brings up is interesting and worthy of discussion. The problem isn’t my trust or mistrust of Hufschmid but whether or not we can utilize his presentation of facts. I don’t really doubt his sincerity and I don’t seriously disagree with most of his stuff but he comes off as a bit off a kook. Presentation and image are everything in today’s world. But, to each his own I guess. Bill White however, is obviously a hindrance to our cause but the question remains somewhat unanswered. He had to have know he would be immediately discredited which makes the people who did the discrediting suspect no? 66
Posted by onlooker on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 17:20 | # Bleh said: “At a glance, I fail to locate any prospective self-declared “leaders in some grandiose new type of revolution” in that thread.” I provided that thread so you can get the general feel of the preposterous ideas that get serious consideration amongst a few prominent kooks at this site. A better example of grandiose ideas that pervade MR as a whole, can be found at Majority Radio. Click on, Lowell Speaks. Some of the guys that post here (like JB) have their philosophical feet solidly grounded in mid air. 67
Posted by danielj on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:02 | # John: The Bradley Smith stuff is about a Bill Wright not a Bill White. Is it the same person? 68
Posted by William Daniel on Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:11 | # This thread is very interesting as a source of red herrings…well-honed lines that serve to shut up European Americans when they discuss the situation. Frequently, the conversation-stopper ignores six things beginning with [1] the heavily Judaized nature of American culture up through WWI, maybe even WWII, a time when Jews were thought of as symbols of a kind of Old Testament biblical and holy priesthood, not as actual persons. When [2] actual Jewish immigrants started to massively immigrate in the 1880s, it took them a while to seek to deconstruct our society….the first attack by a Jewish group on a Christmas event was in New Jersey in 1909, not quite a century ago, and a blink of the eye in historical time. Then [3] our leadership was significantly murdered or tramatized by WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. Combining all this with the [4] messages sent out by media and entertainment as to the punishment afforded dissidents to Jewish rule, we find tremendous advances by [5] individual Jews (investment banking, college presidencies) and [6] young Jews as a group who take increasingly large shares of the “white quota” for public and private college admissions. (Yes, when you read about the percent of white admissions, realize that European American admissions to many colleges are declining as a share and by total number, and are not reflected by the public stats.) A carefully honed party line has been developed to blame the results of these things on European Americans, and a good example (which should raise the hairs on your neck) is by onlooker on Sunday, December 30, 2007 at 04:26 AM. This is the quintessential and triumphal “blame the victim” conversation stopper in this discourse: “What I do find so appalling, is the willingness of the white race, in the here and now, to be so…..so…..obedient with their participation in their own race replacement.” And this is only one of several polished conversation-stoppers that blame the victim we find in these discussions. We need to quarantine with some kind of warning label the comments by a person who makes an anti-European American statement like that to alert newbies that they are being subjected to a horrendous meme designed to promote race replacement. 69
Posted by onlooker on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:04 | # William Daniel, if you took my statement: [“What I do find so appalling, is the willingness of the white race, in the here and now, to be so…..so…..obedient with their participation in their own race replacement.” ] to be an anti-European American statement, you surly are looking through the proverbial looking glass, comrade. Your ignorance and distorted perception of reality is beyond words or hope. If you’re so ignorant you can’t comprehend, or recognise that white people are turning in on themselves in a destructive way, then your stagnant inadequate mind, and all that spews forth from it isn’t worth paying attention to. 70
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:22 | # Bill White is probably a fabulator. I’m puzzled why some Americans like to run around in mismatched German uniforms from the ‘30s. 71
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:57 | # Perhaps, Friedrich, they are confusing and conflating Hitlerian militarism with Spenglerian Prussian ethical (national) socialism. 72
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:29 | # I bet it’s just a far right version of “épater le bourgeois” or the undisciplined, chaotic, disorderly, sloppy American expressive individualism. In brief, they have nothing in common with the old German National Socialists who always put the community before the individual. 73
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:00 | # Yes, that may well be it. Only the neophiliac Americans could come up with Libertarian Nazi-ism. 74
Posted by zusammen on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:10 | # White and his web radio co-host, a post-grad student, have demonstrated deep, extensive understanding of National Socialism. Unlike the lazy, girlishly emotion-laden speculation in many of the comments, the web radio programs are verifiable. By the way, Ron Paul seems to only plan to allow Whites to compete slightly more equitably with the overwhelming quantity of non-whites and the overpowering hostile government occupying Aryan living space. Thanks, Paul! 75
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:44 | # zusammen, why is Bill White running around the U.S. disguised in mismatched German costumes from another era? What’s he trying to say? What’s libertarian National Socialism? How can one pretend to know something about National Socialism and include “Libertarian” in his party’s name? “Libertarian” and “National Socialist” are mutually exclusive, zusammen. 76
Posted by zusammen on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 19:22 | # I don’t see any value in wearing old nazi uniforms. Libertarian does not appear in the ANSWP acronym. At what point do we overcome the ad hominem portion of today’s decidedly Judeo-ish/Christian-ish discussion and tackle the substance of the man’s position? 77
Posted by Duncan Tyyne on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:30 | # I must respectfully disagree with the position taken by William Daniel above.
This quote by onlooker is neither triumphal, nor is it a conversation-stopper. The real conversation-stoppers are chestnuts about the Jews being secretly in control of absolutely everything. If this is true (and if it is, it would have been true at least since the time of the Roman Empire), how can we ever expect to get anything accomplished? How did the Jews get in control in the first place? Have they been putting some sort of mind control serum in our water? Are they employing sorcery to curse every last white individual, including those in WN movements (who are constantly accused of being Jewish tools)? If whites are so perfect, why couldn’t we prevent the Jews from taking control? It’s ironic that Mr. Daniel uses the phrase “blame the victim.” The whole concept of “victim-blaming” arose from intellectual arm of the 1960’s civil rights movement in the US, which in turn was heavily influenced by the Jewish-dominated Frankfurt School. An example of “victim-blaming,” for them, was the demand of conversative whites for blacks to actually work for their proverbial piece of the pie. These demands were supposedly without any moral justification, since blacks were a perfect, cherubic race who had lived in a peaceful utopia until the white devil came and forced them into slavery. Blacks didn’t have to work for a piece of the pie; it was their pie in the first place, stolen and carved up by the devil. Questions of why they did not fight to the death for their freedom (as just about any other race on the planet would have done) or even worse, why their tribes betrayed each other to the devil, did not fit the moral narrative constructed to exonerate blacks of any and all responsibility for anything. In reality, it is utterly fallacious for conflicts between human groupings to be turned into morality plays. Even the ones that were painted as such from the beginning (like the American civil rights movement) are actually about power. This has been realized by thinkers from Vilfredo Pareto all the way to the American Jewish agitator Saul Alinsky, and it can be realized by anyone with half a brain who studies the leaders involved in such conflicts. A white woman raped by a Negro during a home invasion is certainly a victim, but the white race as a whole is not a victim of anything. It is simply on the losing ends of different power struggles with several groups, of which Jews are one. The Jews are formidable indeed, but they are not invincible or all-powerful. They fight amongst each other, make inadvertent mistakes, and bite off more than they can chew. Their high IQs make it easy for them to weasel their way into dominant positions in society - but we still have more high-IQ people than they do. We can defeat them.
From the tone of this paragraph, you’d think onlooker was rejoicing in the fact that whites willingly cooperate in their own race-replacement. He actually said he was appalled by it. In fact, I think it’s oversimplification to say that whites are “willingly cooperating,” but that’s beside the point. The point, in my view, is that whites must accept responsibility (not “blame”) for their prediciment and make choices that will get us out of it. If the ball is placed in our court, then we’re the ones who get to play. This is not a “horrendous meme designed to promote race-replacement”; it’s a hopeful assurance that we can still take control of our own destiny. 78
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:37 | # zusammen, my mistake, I was thinking of something absurdly called the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party The far right pullulates with strange characters like Bill White. 79
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:58 | # The real conversation-stoppers are chestnuts about the Jews being secretly in control of absolutely everything. If this is true (and if it is, it would have been true at least since the time of the Roman Empire), how can we ever expect to get anything accomplished? How did the Jews get in control in the first place? Have they been putting some sort of mind control serum in our water? Are they employing sorcery to curse every last white individual, including those in WN movements (who are constantly accused of being Jewish tools)? If whites are so perfect, why couldn’t we prevent the Jews from taking control? The answers to all of your questions is summed up in the phrase Jewish Virulence. The last century has amplified that virulence to catastrophic proportions via 20th century mass media technology which, while not exactly reversing The Gutenberg Revolution, at least recentralized public opinion molding power in capital intensive systems that the theocrats of any age would have envied. The only “uncanny” thing to explain here is how Jews were able to mobilize a migration from Eastern Europe to Hollywood over the span of just a few years to take over Edison’s invention of the motion picture projector. Once that happened, everything else is explainable in relatively mundane terms. But perhaps this isn’t that mysterious when you consider the fact that Jews are a theocratic culture hence have an “uncanny” grasp of the power of media. PS: Your point about the Roman Empire is relatively lame. When the Goths sacked Rome, they did it with the assistance of Jewish merchants and, to be sure, the price they paid was Christianization, but this is small potatoes compared to the destruction visited on Euroman as a consequence of Jewish virulence during the 20th century. 80
Posted by onlooker on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:29 | # “The answers to all of your questions is summed up in the phrase Jewish Virulence.” Hogwash! http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/did_the_jews_do_it/ 81
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:41 | # My argument regarding capital intensive mass media technology of the 20th century does not rely on MacDonald’s thesis, “onlooker”, so the link you provide isn’t relevant to my thesis except to emphasize that the transformation of 20th century Euroman society is uniquely important in history. 82
Posted by skeptical on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:55 | # You’re all Joos by virtue of the fact that this whole thread is filled with Jooish thought (even the German nationalist F. Braun). Seriously though, the U.S. was in the near past a White country. It was our country! Think about what that means. For the Americans here at MR, we should properly assign blame to the Eastern European Jews for overhauling our immigration policies and changing the very definition of America (via a relentless barrage of propaganda) but we should remember that the ultimate responsiblity for losing what was ours must lie with ourselves (a near tautology). It goes without saying that a previous generation of White Americans fitfully layed down their swords in the names of “anti-racism” or “economic progress” and we are strugglying to relearn how to pick them back up again in a very different era. With respect to Bill White (or non-White as the case may be), the man may have some good ideas but he reeks of the past in costume and title. Why?! After all, the past is dead along with those who made it. Of course, we can still dream the dreams that many of them fought for but what worked for them undoubtedly won’t work for us in this new age. 83
Posted by onlooker on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:24 | # “For the Americans here at MR, we should properly assign blame to the Eastern European Jews for overhauling our immigration policies and changing the very definition of America (via a relentless barrage of propaganda) but we should remember that the ultimate responsiblity for losing what was ours must lie with ourselves (a near tautology).”
Re. Immigration Act of 1965: In the Democratic-controlled Congress, the House of Representatives voted 326 to 69 in favor of the act while the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18. President Lyndon Johnson signed the legislation into law. Johnson wasn’t a Jew. And how many Jews were in the Congress at that time? 84
Posted by VLC on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:56 | # that irrelevant discussion on an irrelevant clown belongs in the bowels of VNNForum. by the way the Grand Kommänder in a new thread on that forum says:
hahahaha! As if the Ron Paul campaign doesn’t have better things to do than to ask VNNF members to “smear” the neo-Fuhrer. I think he has been the subject of a “smear” campaign ever since he started posting on the forum.
and a gigantic ego. He can’t help but to to take the stage and do a show. 85
Posted by VLC on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:58 | # J.Richards: I would extend that prescription to anyone who uses the word ‘zionist’ instead of the word jew. I thought people here were beyond the patriotards’ euphemisms.
yeah except Hufschmid. I heard - from Michael Collins Piper - that Hufschmid is Ruppert Murdoch’s nephew. maybe he’s secretly working for head of News Corp! maybe HE’S A ZIONIST trying to pass as a non-zionist! he’s loony, that’s enough for me. Next. Can’t we try to do something more productive than talk about nutty people ? (and J.Richards sounds like he could be the brother of the neo-soviet poet who once posted stuff on this blog)
86
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:58 | # Guys like John Derbyshire revel in the fact that there appeared to be no popular opposition to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, but my thesis concerning the mass media combined with KMac’s thesis regarding the unique role of Jewish activists is the explanation for why there was no appearance of popular opposition: The elites were being lobbied intensively by leading Jewish organizations and the people’s voice, the press, was dominated by their coethnics. The people were, in essence, rendered voiceless by the Jewish takeover of centralized mass media in the 20th century. 88
Posted by onlooker on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:26 | # “The people were, in essence, rendered voiceless by the Jewish takeover of centralized mass media in the 20th century.” I respectfully and regretfully have to agree with you on that note. We’ve identified our enemies, but we are currently in a powerless position to effectively combat them. 89
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 03:13 | #
Completely right. That utterly insane bill was never significantly debated publicly: essentially no public airing was given to what it portended demographically, and what very little was permitted to leak out was dishonestly interpreted for the public who, trusting those running their government and media (in those days government and the media were respected, believe it or not), and never in their wildest dreams expecting a stab in the back — certainly not of this magnitude — saw no particular reason for heightened scrutiny at that precise moment: they had their own everyday lives to get on with and trusted their representatives to govern honestly. That bill was intentionally slipped through with as little debate as possible or even public awareness of what was afoot, the exact opposite of the way epoch-making societal alterations are supposed to be introduced (they’re supposed to be subjected to honestly-worded referendums or, at the very least, massive public debate). The stealth approach was deliberate and James Bowery’s comment sums up important aspects of how it was pulled off. 90
Posted by onlooker on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 04:39 | # “Completely right. That utterly insane bill was never significantly debated publicly” Neither is the NAU project. What d do you have to say about that, smart guy? 91
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:01 | # Without knowing any details at all; without having read MacDonald’s research( * ); without knowing anything about what diaspora Jews as a tribe most desire politically (to wit, destruction of nationalisms they see as rivals to theirs) or about the power they’ve amassed which enables them to get a lot of what they want (U.S. support for and yearly payments to Israel; destruction of Euro nationalism by forced race-replacement; some other stuff) we can be certain the Euro peoples of the 1965 U.S. (90% of the population then) didn’t want what the Celler-Kennedy “Good For The Jews” immigration holocaust bill promised to inflict, for the simple reason no group wants its own destruction. To imagine the U.S. white population wanting that bill while understanding its inevitable consequences is like imagining the Jews wanting the 1935 German Nuremberg Laws, or wanting to be rounded up and put in concentration camps. There are things that simply don’t happen in this universe. If someone came along and said the German Jews wanted the Nuremberg Laws and claimed to be able to demonstrate it you’d know even without seeing his demonstration it was false. German Jews didn’t want the Nuremberg Laws. Likewise with this: we don’t need to know KMac’s scholarship or any other details to know the U.S. population didn’t consent to that bill, and therefore in some way or other it was gotten through congress without their informed permission. All that remains is to find out exactly how that was pulled off, not whether it was. It was. All KMac’s research does is fill in lots of the details. ( * ) His research is definitive and unanswerable, by the way, which explains why the other side — why the Jews — instead of answering him, deal with him 90% by simply ignoring him, putting him out of their minds, pretending he doesn’t exist, and the remaining 10% by calumniating and very aggressively and dirtily going after him as a “hater” with intent to personally damage and thereby “neutralize” him. They’ll do that, but they won’t answer him because they can’t. Jews don’t believe in Anglo-Saxon freedom of speech, by the way. It may be it’s genetically alien to them — they’re unequipped genetically to perceive the Anglo-Saxon principle, to “feel” it, to value/respect/honor it; I think to a degree it likely is genetic, reflecting the part of them that’s uneuropean: being orientals, not westerners, they have the despotic oriental mind. They don’t really “know” what Anglo-Saxon free speech is. To them it’s just words, potentially a valuable tactic to make use of when they’re out of power, but it’s not a principle. The principle is “What’s good for the Jews.” When Jews don’t enjoy hegemony they invoke free speech endlessly but it’s not a principle for them (they pretend it is), only a tactic. The minute they achieve hegemony they quash it and the principle becomes not “freedom of speech” but “what’s good for the Jews.” Free speech, a “European thing,” is alien to the despotic Asiatic mind: Chinamen can’t understand it; Arabs can’t; Jews can’t, being Asiatic: they are lacking in the genetic wherewithal to appreciate/value/respect/honor the principle of free speech. Where Jews hold sway non-Jewish people will not enjoy free speech and what’s deemed “not good for the Jews” will not be allowed to be said, and we’re seeing that under the post-‘60s Jewish hegemony in the U.S and the U.S.-influenced/dominated Eurosphere. In sum: Jews do not believe in freedom of speech and don’t imagine you’re going to get it where Jews rule: you’re not. Jews don’t argue: where they can they crush; where they can’t they quietly ignore, biding their time till they can crush. 92
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:22 | # What James Bowery said in another thread about non-Euros who’ve come here under the fraudulently-passed 1965 immigration bill being, in principle, subject to expulsion without financial reimbursement has merit: the receiver of stolen goods (the “fence” in police parlance) has no right of ownership. 93
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:35 | # I’m not saying those who came “legally” under that bill ought to be expelled without financial reimbursement (as of course all illegals should, and immediately, together with those Euros who hire them). I don’t think they should. But that it is our right in principle to do so is valuable knowledge and can, when the time comes, be held in reserve as a reminder to any who, offered a generous “buy-out” package, decide to hold out for an even more generous one, pushing things into the realm of the financially unrealistic. At that point the principle of the thing (to wit, we don’t in principle owe them reimbursement and are in fact doing them a favor to offer any at all, let alone anything generous) can be mentioned to get them to ... “see the light,” shall we say? Yes ... to get them to see the light ... That’s how that can be used. 94
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:57 | # Not to mention the fact that if the Eurosphere nations put their minds to it and really tried to come up with the cash (a ton of which they could save simply by avoiding getting into Bush’s wars) they could all of them offer reimbursement packages to all non-Euros that were so generous the non-Euros would be lining up for miles to accept them and move back home to the Third World with a bundle of euros or dollars in their pockets sufficient in those places for them to live like kings for life. You implement a policy like that and you’ll have them out of the Eurosphere in three years and things can pick up demographically where they left off in the year 1950 or so. Today’s Quiz: what group living in Euro countries would be the most outspoken, the most effective, the most stubborn, the most shrill, the most aggressive, the most hysterical, the most certain to offer huge political bribes, and the most certain to make dire behind-the-scenes political threats, in opposing any repatriation program such as the above? 95
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:04 | # [The above being the “pull” half of the “push-pull” policy aimed at getting them to go home, the “push” half being the ending of all the social and financial advantages they get once here, advantages which actually have the effect of giving them precedence over the white natives. Combine “push” and “pull” and they’ll be out of here and back home living like kings (and far happier than they ever would’ve been had they stayed here) quicker than you can say “Anti-Defamation League.”] 96
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 16:10 | # Yes on the internet we’re saying things the Jews disapprove of but that’s because they haven’t been able to impose censorship yet, something they’re working very hard behind the scenes to accomplish. If they succeed, nothing critical of them will be permitted to be said over the internet. 97
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 16:12 | # (or anything critical not of them directly, but of harmful policies they favor, such as forced race-replacement of Euros: no criticism of any of it will be allowed) 98
Posted by skeptical on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:33 | # onlooker, I agree that seemingly “elite” White liberals also largely share in the blame for the travesty that has befallen Europids in America. As you said, Johnson was no Jew. 99
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:42 | # The relationship between “white liberals” and Jews is pretty much the relationship of heroin addicts with heroin pushers except these pushers pretty much run a theocracy in which mainlining heroin is a holy sacrament enforced on the population, and in which the concept of medical ethics is simply unthinkable. 100
Posted by Svigor on Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:47 | #
Yes. I’d like to write that on AIPAC stationary, light it on fire, and jam it up Auster’s ass. Okay two letters - one for Auster’s ass, and one for “The Realist’s” ass. Rhetorically speaking of course. The babe in the woods routine over media control is, like, so 80s. 101
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:37 | #
Here‘s an example: the Jews are approvingly discussing and applauding the criminalizing of what they call “Holocaust denial” as if that’s an appropriate thing for a government to criminalize, and they call for even more stringent criminalizing of it. Amazing though it be, they have no idea it’s absolutely impermissible for governments to criminalize opinion about historical events whether in regard to claims of gas chambers at Auschwitz or anything else. The Jews don’t realize what blatant, unacceptable, contemptible totalitarians they’re being and apparently don’t have to realize it, as they control the media, so who in the mainstream is going to condemn their intolerable behavior? No one. Not only that, but by criminalizing expression of doubt about the claimed exterminations they prove the claims to be false and they force awareness of that falseness on everyone. So what we have are the Jews themselves proving loudly before the whole world that the claims of exterminations are false. What they’re doing is so ridiculous you could laugh at it, were it not so fraught with dire consequences. The above is of course only one example. Another is Jewish groups working very hard to get the internet censored: every now and then you’ll see what amounts to a tip-of-the-iceberg news article about their quiet, strenuous activities. 102
Posted by rustymason on Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:48 | # J Richards and Bleh, Eric Hufschmid has a lot of good points, articles, and leads for further research,I’m not arguing that he is of no value at all, simply pointing out that he also has some serious flaws with his reasoning ability. You defend his telling us to verify, verify, verify. So what? What value is that obvous advice to anyone with a mental age over 12? Of course one should verify and cross-check as much information as one can. Hufschmid’s value because of this is nil. What a thinking person should be on the lookout for too is hypocritical or contradictory arguments. Zum beispiel, Hufschmid takes issue with sites like Rense.com for putting UFO nonsense also serious articles on zionism, and rightly so. For how can the average intellect take anything on Rense seriously if there is also UFO articles on there? A fair argument. But then Hufschmid turns around and does the same thing, by insisting that the moon-landing— and by implication our entire space program of several decades and millions of steady employees— is all fake. On the face of it his argument is crazy, and upon detailed inspection, his “proof” is ridiculously flimsy. It is also irrevelant! Who fricking cares? What the hell difference does it make now, thirty-odd years later? There is much more proof for the faking of a hundred other things, why pick on something so evidently hard to prove, and that most poeple don’t wnat to disprove anyway? The biggest problem with Eric Hufschmid is that he is in all probability a paranoid schizophrenic, trusting absolutely no one. It is fine to doubt what seems odd at first, but eventually, one must establish something that is true, a few people who are trustworthy most of the time, some things that verifiably true by a consensus of well-informed people. But Hufschmid cannot not do that. He essentially claims that everyone of any influence is in on a zionist conspiracy. He leaves absolutely no possibility that some people, such as Alex Jones and David Duke, are right most of the time, wrong some of the time, and biased in some things because of their unique experiences and makeup. Hufschmid cannot believe that *anyone* with any power is still a flawed human being prone to occassional errors. Anyone who leans too much on the understanding of an ultra-paranoid schizophrenic sch as Eric Hufschmid will see demons everywhere and will never be able to get a firm grip on little truths, much less larger ones. He will be filled with doubt and will be ineffective in the Kampf, forever second-guessing himself and others. 103
Posted by rustymason on Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:58 | # Sorry, a foreign keyboard, and kids and wife talking to me about a new puppy. “Hufschmid takes issue with sites like Rense.com for putting UFO nonsense also serious articles on zionism, and rightly so. “ Correction: “But Hufschmid cannot not do that. “ Happy New Year, we’re off to check out some new puppies. 104
Posted by captainchaos on Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:52 | # Mein fuhrer, Bill White! Heil! Heil! Heil! LOL! 105
Posted by Duncan Tyyne on Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:56 | #
I read all about this in the “Who Rules America?” report from the National Alliance several years ago, and for the most part I still agree with it. Jewish domination of major media outlets is not an “anti-Semitic carnard” as Abe Foxman would have it, but a fact, demonstrable through honest research. There’s nothing “shadowy” or “conspiratorial” about it, some comments on this blog aside. Fortunately, it seems less and less people are paying attention to the likes of Fox News and mainstream op-eds these days; unfortunately, they are not turning to sites like this one, but instead to even more degenerate and meaningless forms of entertainment (dance-off competitions, Britney Spears’ vagina, etc.). Porno merchants like Al Goldstein might find this thrilling, while neocons like Midge Decter might find it alarming (a dumbed-down, undisciplined populace cannot get behind wars for Israel). It seems they are trying, however unconsciously, to have it both ways: mountains of stupid ballyhoo to keep us distracted and docile, combined with a barrage of militaristic media to keep us fired up for more war. Tomislav Sunic recently had a very interesting conversation with David Duke in which they noted that in the Soviet Union, the Jews could not have the latter without awakening a White Beast that would ultimately turn on them.
I did not intend to make a point about the Roman Empire, one way or another. I was only using it as a chronological point of reference. I actually know very little about Jewish presence and power in ancient Rome - only that it was there. See below: “Softly! Softly! I want none but the judges to hear me. The Jews have already gotten me into a fine mess, as they have many other gentleman. I have no desire to furnish further grist for their mills.” (Cicero, Oration in Defense of Flaccus, quoted at http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/repute.htm) On the other hand, everyone with even a smattering of historical knowledge knows that the Jews were scattered throughout the ancient world long before A.D. 70. For example, the city of Rome was so lousy with Kikes in 179 B.C. that the urban praetor, Cn. Cornelius Scipio Hispalus, tried to expel them, although we may be sure that for every one he threw out of the front door, two crawled in over the back fence. After his year of office, their money and intrigues obtained effective revocation of his decree. As everyone who reads Cicero knows, the predatory aliens had obtained such economic power in the Republic that they could cause financial panics by cornering gold and supposedly exporting it to Jerusalem under the pretext that their religion required it. And when Caesar was assassinated in 44, the Jewish swarm howled and rioted, not because they had any liking for Caesar, but because they always profit from political upheavals, which give them opportunities to plunder all factions. (Revilo P. Oliver, “A Persistant Hoax,” http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Persistent_Hoax.html) “The destruction visited on Euroman… during the 20th century” was not only a consquence of Jewish virulence but also of the willingness Euroman himself to act as the weapon of destruction, in spite of all his better instincts (see the famous Christmas truce in Belgium during WWI). It would be the height of arrogance for me, sitting here tickling a keyboard, to say I would have had the courage to have acted differently in those times. But I still find it chilling that more white men actually didn’t. 106
Posted by Hal Turns on Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:55 | # http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/NEWS/801170326/-1/NEWS Hal Turner stalked in front of Kingston High School with his neo-Nazi supporters in 2005, tossing white-power taunts at counter-demonstrators. That was just part of his legacy. He railed against President Bush and Jews, too. He handed out the private addresses of New Jersey Supreme Court justices. But some government agencies are OK if you work for them — and Turner apparently did. He was an FBI informant, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that monitors hate groups and extremists. According to the center, hackers confronted Turner on his Web site Jan. 1 and told him they had broken into Turner’s computer server. What they found were e-mails between Turner and an FBI agent who was apparently Turner’s handler. The unidentified hackers posted a July 7 e-mail to the agent. In it, Turner gave the agent a message from someone threatening to kill Sen. Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, the center said in a story on its Web site, http://www.splcenter.org. “Once again,” Turner wrote to the agent, “my fierce rhetoric has served to flush out a possible crazy.” When the e-mails hit a neo-Nazi Web site, Turner shut down his own Web site. “I hereby separate from the “pro-White” movement. I will no longer involve myself in any aspect of it,” Turner said. Yesterday, Turner said the only thing he can say about the FBI allegation is “no comment.” The FBI hasn’t commented, either. The center’s Mark Potok didn’t object to the FBI’s use of informants in general. “There is no question these are groups in many, many cases that really do need infiltrating, but ... this goes way over the line. It is like a game of Russian roulette and we are the bait.” Kingston Mayor Jim Sottile was dumbfounded by the revelation of Turner’s FBI informant status. “You can’t make this stuff up,” the mayor said. Maybe Turner was acting all the time, Sottile said. “But it wasn’t an act when he had this whole community in an uproar and cost us $80,000.” 107
Posted by Proud to be White on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:48 | # White is a Jew. During his UAP days, he tried to recruit me as I was in my confused days of 19 not understanding why I didn’t like Jesus Christ or Humanism. I studied up on him and found him to be Jewish. He went to Jewish schools and had a homosexual Jewish lover named Luke Kuhn. He also studied…......yep, you guessed it, Psych. I think Ron Paul may have some Jewish background as well, besides his being a Doctor giving me more suspicion. I will say this, Bill White turned me onto Evola and such, so I can’t totally hate his Jewish ass, but the guy is still a fraud. White Nationalist movements over the years are full of Jews. From World Church of the Creator to the American Nazi Party. Time for him to change Overthrow.com back into a Marxist or Randian/Misessian site. Both those 2 head/same coin philosophies are what he represents. Leave us be. Post a comment:
Next entry: Happy 2008 to all our readers
|
|
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) Computer say no by Guessedworker on Thursday, 09 May 2024 15:17. (View) |
Posted by Matra on Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:58 | #
Bill White is, at best, a lone wolf with severe psychological problems
That would explain his clown costume in the picture.
Anyone who dresses like that has to be considered an enemy of whites as they must know any cause they attach themselves to will be discredited in the eyes of the public. I automatically assume anyone like him is, if not a head case, an agent for the other side.