Archive for April 17th, 2007
FIRST UP, YOU LEAVE OUT THE SENTENCE ABOUT “ASSIMILATION, I.E. INTERMARRIAGE.”
NO WORSE MISTAKE IS POSSIBLE.
There are already plenty of breeding nonwhites in our cutnries to destroy our race. The WORST thing that could happen is if immigratin were suddenly cut off and everybody decided the problem was solved.
Assimilation, INTERMARRIAGE, is the threat, not LIBERALS.
Can ANYBODY hear me out there?
OK, I think I can improve this further but please read and let me know what you think.
The British mantra:
“Our politicians and our media keep telling us there is RACISM. Their SOLUTION, to this RACISM, is for the third world to pour into EVERY white country, and ONLY into white countries.”
Britain and the Netherlands are crowded just like Japan and Taiwan, but our politicians and media don’t demand that Japan and Taiwan must end RACISM, by bringing in millions of Africans, Bangladeshis, etc., and assimilating with them.”
Our politicians and media demand the final solution to RACISM, is for mass non-white immigration into ALL white countries, and ONLY, into white countries.
What if I said there is RACISM, and this RACISM can only be solved with mass non-blacks immigration into ALL black countries, and ONLY, into black countries????
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about RACISM? I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK race.
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this, and what kind of LIBERAL black man would agree to this????
“But if you tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against the white race, our politicians and media agree that you are a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
They say they are anti-racist. What they REALLY are is anti-white.”
“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”
Comment by Lord Nelson
I agree with a commenter that the word LIBERAL is out of place here. I said “sane,” but the removal of either adjective would do just as well. But you’re the Brit, not me.
I LIKE “Britain and the Netherlands are crowded just like Japan and Taiwan, but our politicians and media don’t demand that Japan and Taiwan must end RACISM, by bringing in millions of Africans, Bangladeshis, etc., and assimilating with them.”
But does that let them talk about white countries with low birth rates in Eastern Europe? You have to TRY it to find out. On Stormfront, Prometheus kept hitting someone who used this dodge to say,
“So this makes genocide OK?”
“The argument is that anti’s seek non-whites to enter ALL and ONLY white nations.
You didn’t READ the mantra. If you did, you would have got the point of it.”
“Anti-racists come here, and they all argue ONE thing. That the white race must go. That the white race must go by means of their beloved multiracialism.”
“The anti-racists agree, that despite the facts, this must happen. White nations MUST go multiracial.”
“You see, it makes no difference whether the Netherlands is more crowded, THE most crowded, or the LEAST crowded. The argument for anti-white multiracialism will remain the same.”
“Case in point.”
“Anti-racists will argue that race doesn’t exist, so white people have no logical argument against multiracialism.”
“Anti-racists, upon being shown that race DOES exist (many still haven’t caught up, but for those that do), they argue that the white race should assimilate non-whites so as to stop inbreeding (a blatant mistruth) and improve the genetic pool.”
“Whether race exists or not, the argument is the same. It is for multiracialism in WHITE nations.”
“Whether white nations are declining or not, the argument is the same. Whether they are crowded or not, the argument is the same.”
“The crux of the matter is this. Why with all this variation in understanding of facts is the only thing that anti’s seem to be consistent on, is that ALL and ONLY white nations MUST become multiracial nations.”
“That is the point of the mantra.”
“Now I ask you this, why is it that anti-racists are consistent ONLY in demanding that WHITE nations and white nations only become multiracial?”
As you can see, a Prometheus doesn’t just concentrate on the anti’s argument. He uses it to slam his point home. So your effectiveness MAY depend on YOUR ability to do that.
Ronald Reagan’s movie, “Bedtime for Bonzo” was based on a real incident.
In the comedy, Reagan played a psychology professor who was trying to prove that environment or nurture was everything and that heredity, nature, genes, was nothing. He adopted a chimpanzee and tried to raise it as a child to prove this.
In the real incident, a professor decided to raise his newborn child along with a chimpanzee to prove the same thing. The experiment ended when his child failed to learn to talk. The child was becoming chimpanzee-like; the chimpanzee remained totally a chimp.
This evidence was NOT introduced in the case of Brown versus the Board of Education of Topeka which outlawed segregation in schools. But if you look at integrated schools today, its relevance is hard to miss.
There is all the difference in the world between people who diddle about Mantra wording and those who, like Lord Nelson, go in there and TRY new wording.
Remember the rule of Western Science:
“One experiment is worth a hundred Expert Opinions.”
My earlier caution still hold: Don’t get off on something else. You have to go back and SEE if you allowed the people you hit with your version of the Mantra used an “out” you gave them. I pointed out to one person who used “a version” of the Mantra that he had NOT made the POINT. He read it back over and agreed.
But you will not always have me to remind you to go back and see if you stuck their noses in THE POINT. When you do an experiment, do like Lord Nelson: Go back and criticize yourself very carefully about how it worked.
I think it was Lord Nelson. It also sounds like Pain, too.
Sarge hands out hell when somebody uses diddles abut the wording as an excuse to sit on their can. Get out there and DO it, TRY it. THEN check your results very carefully and critically.
That is how the white man transformed the world. We can do it again.
I got comments from the long, long article – pamphlet actually — below by StevenP.
I THINK I saw that, as of today, some of his corrections had been “sprung” from our complicated machinery here by which the new Akizmet system figures out what is spam. I understand that a REAL Peter is now a co-author with Steven P.
So if you read the long piece, you can find some supplementary work in the comments.
I hope StevenP, SysOp, and the rest of you can realize how grateful I am for all this.
Bill Clinton was once quoted by his friends the media as saying, “I need some ADULTS in my staff!” I know exactly why he ended up in that position. Micromanagers don’t GET adults.
In fact, Clinton’s reason that he could not get adults was the same reason it never occurred to him that he had to do anything but lie. Even a psychopath has one limitation on his lying: his MEMORY. But Clinton had a superhuman memory. He could remember exactly what he had said to each person and I am sure he ENJOYED that game because he was so good at it.
Because of his no less than superhuman memory, Clinton was the ultimate liar and the ultimate micromanager. I am exactly the reverse. Most bosses are somewhere in the middle.
Clinton had no compunction about lying, and he ENJOYED it because of his great memory. I find lying almost impossible. In my disability report this is referred to as “an excess of offensive concerns” — meaning I am, by psychiatrists’ standards, overly concerned about hurting other people’s feelings. And my disability report also goes into my almost nonexistence memory for immediate details or names.
Clinton learned to use his disabilities, and I learned to use mine. As I said, most bosses are in the middle. But if you are in places like Capitol Hill, and you are like me, the very best people fall all over each other wanting to work under you. This is good management theory, but I am astounded how well it WORKS.
But screw the modesty. I have to be a genius to be able to do this. From what I have said so far, it sounds like this “management style” consists of just handing things over to subordinates and going home. But I am essential. In fact, I am working now only because I am the ONLY one who can do what I do.
There are two images of the Boss. One is the spineless type and the other is the Fearless Leader. Ashbrook (NOT ASHCROFT) was my ideal boss. He was always available. He took full responsibility. He assigned me, and listened when I said it should be handled by someone else. But HE made the decision. More than half the time, he replied that I should handle it, and he was right. I was scared, but HE was the Boss.
I used John exactly as he used me: As a precious resource to get the job done. I could write a constituent reply on many subjects off the top of my head that took the case worker hours to work out. John ordered me to stop doing that. At about 2 AM one morning John came back from the District and came into the office. He took one look at me and said,
“Dammit, Bob, you’ll work better if you’re ALIVE! Get the hell out of here and take tomorrow off!” He made me promise not to work at home the next day. I didn’t have my first nervous breakdown until I worked for another boss.
I used John for decisions HE had to make. The bottom line was that I wasn’t working FOR him. We were working for the same CAUSE. He never even bothered to talk to me abut it when I screwed up. He knew I’d punished myself plenty.
I get SysOps. I get Steven P. I get Mark and Brain and Pain and the rest, and Clinton said out loud he couldn’t find ONE of you.
So when I make statements abut how tired I am, or how I can’t find things, I am NOT wallowing in your sympathy. Sympathy has NOTHING to do with it. I am telling you the shortcomings of the man you have to work WITH.
If you think I have any reason to feel sorry for myself, just look at the group BEHIND me!