Archive for April, 2008
This is another of BWs gems in very important basics if you want to understand the trajectory of political semantics for a long time to come.
Millennial promises are a required form of political semantics for nonwhites. It sustains them and it is all they require. If you don’t believe that, look at Cuba for crying out loud.
And we have a future that continues to be mired in racial conflict. That is certain.
And because the semantic domain of political rhetoric must be millennial in character, as it must evoke anthem style emotions, the defining characteristic of white political rhetoric is becoming its very absence.
This is what nobody sees: WE HAVE EVOLVED. Accordingly, whites will not have any political semantics of their own whatsoever.
This is already endlessly puzzling and confounding nonwhites. They are unable to come to terms with it.
In fact, it is a defining characteristic of the current political cycle. And the least interested segment of the population is the white segment, which is logical once you understand why.
Simmons just said it in his comment on “Finishing the sentences of liberals”. Once you quit finishing those sentences, you have won the game. It’s called “being effective”.
That is our future.
And make no mistake it will be a future of heavy conflict. There will be no “perfection” there at all
You might enjoy a good laugh from this website Bob, it’s sketches of utopian futures from the past. Every single one of them is wrong by leaps and bounds.
It goes well with your points on futurologists too.
Whites have the only society that does not aim for Perfection. That is so basic it’s hard to explain.
Oriental philosophy always aims for a final perfect society. They went straight from that to Marxism, which is the same thing. A planned economy is part of a planned society which in turn assumes that all the Intellectuals have to do is to tell us what Perfection is and plan for it.
Like children, Wordists spend all their time bitching about inequalities of income and so forth which make us less than perfect. They tell us THEY have the Solutions to “problems.” But our society is unique precisely because we do not just solve problems our Prophets of Wisdom see. The greatest things we have today came as total surprises. The fact that we were too hot in the summer was not seen as a PROBLEM. No Intellectual saw air conditioning as a solution to a problem.
All the societies that considered hunger a PROBLEM failed to foresee the solution to it in unimaginable advances in food productivity. They saw it in terms of a static, planned population and a static utopian society. Like children, they saw only what was in front of them.
Only whites show any sign of being at home in reality. We expect endless change, and we try to make things BETTER. BETTER, unlike Utopia, has no limits. But it also means no one can PLAN for Perfection. So I go for the best genes in order for white future generations to make things BETTER.
My concept of the future is what WORKS, not some IDEAL. I cannot see any end to what my approach will do. Right now Wordists are destroying everything that is good for their particular Utopias. To me those Utopias are stagnant ant colonies like the much-worshipped Ancient Egypt or the equally defunct USSR.
All I offer is white people with better genes. The glory of it is the opposite of Utopian. I have no idea what the society whites with better genes will produce will look like. If I did, I would be a Wordist offering Utopia.
In other words, I would be childish and should not be trying to Porch Talk.
I do not know what the society whites with better genes would build would will be like. I do know I would like to live in it: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is still the best maxim I can imagine.
Shari says we all want teh future to be both our genotypes AND our descendants. That is true, but we can’t always have what we want. But Shari is taking the steps that ensures she CAN have both. She has children and is fighting for our race.
Shari, the ultimate expression of having our own descendatns is the Chinese concept of ancestor worship. We do not want to degenerate into that. Ten generations from today, your genes will be about one in one thousand of those of your direct descendants. We are here influecning what the other 999 parts will be like.
I seem to detect an idea here that you and I are going to have posterity consisting entirely of US. Only an amoeba can do that. The genotype we fight for has more to do to with racial decisionsgenes than any Family Values. Those who obsess on Family Values are right now marynig their daughters to nice colored boys.
A good many semi-respectables have done yeoman work, even the AR types with their IQ fixations. But the real work is done by those who face the cultists and peel the cult back to its core. People like Putnam and those like him did great and interesting work, but they made the mistake of trying to finish the sentences of liberals. Hence they got lost in the cult, it would have been like standing outside of Jonestown with a sign that said “We too believe in peace” or some such nonsense.
Excellent BASIC thinking. “Finishing liberals’ sentences for them” is the best descriptionof respectable conservative I have ever read!
Al Parker says that I outline a future “and another possible future in India of people who, besides their shared Varna, will not even be our descendants.”
A very useful basis for discussion.
I was wondering when someone was going to bring this specific example up: We need a Just-So Future in which OUR descendants are the white people. My aim is the most basic one in nature: the survival of my phenotype.
If this “Posterity” bit worked I wouldn’t be necessary.
An Indian child with its non-Aryan genes erased will be as kin to me as a Russian. Russians are not my descendants. Culturally India is rapidly westernizing, but Japan is doing it faster. We have been trained to believe that culture is all that matters. A society with our books but not our GENES will be just fine.
I say the opposite. Everybody can be culturally western, Orientals can catch up. But only whites can advance the West itself.
Al Parker, would you really put a pure Aryan child of Indians who wanted pure Aryan children in the same immigration category with brown Indians? I would rather have them than any rot-minded anti-white Whitakers from England.
You should look for what I am giving examples OF.
The problem is that, instead of taking every example I give as the Inevitable Bleak Things to Come, which is what our entire excuse for education has taught us, you should look for what I am giving examples OF.
The hole card for anti-whites Inevitability has always been Asia. They insist that the world is mostly Boasian “minorities” and therefore wildly pro-integration. So I gave the example of the weakness of that idea in Asia. Now I am told everybody is going to be an Indian.
It is terribly important for you to separate what I am giving EXAMPLES OF from the usual hard and fast Politically Correct Inevitabilities. We are ready to ride waves in a new age while they are desperately trying to jam everything into a hopelessly outdated framework.
When attacking the white race, the mantra of our enemies is, “This too shall pass.” But it never occurs to them that THEY, too will pass. And their cult will pass a lot faster than a race will disappear.
But I will not give you a Just-So FUTURE to replace THEIR Just-So Future.
POINT TWO refers to the fact that I am attacking the very Inevitables that our depressive defeatists find so overwhelming.
Their real weakness of our cult is that it has a rigid framework. EVERYTHING hits it as an unwelcome surprise. From the Internet to genetic engineering to settling the moon and space colonization to advances in ways to find out the actual truth in any area, everything militates against their rigid framework.
But only so long as WE are NOT in a rigid framework.
Bob’s blog doesn’t seem very inspiring to make people dedicate their lives to this cause.
Bob lays out a possible future of gated, prison-like communities for whites (when we once had nation-states) — and another possible future in India of people who, besides their shared varna, will not even be our descendants.
It not only fails to inspire someone who hasn’t yet become 100% dedicated, it makes one want to forget everything he’s learned here and find a nice hobby to take up. What’s the point of working for something now if change will happen naturally 50 or 100 years from now?
But I understand this is a straight-talking, no-nonsense blog so you get an answer when you ask for one and I’m grateful for that.
– Al Parker
As you say, I am not a Marxist or an integrationist. I don’t make up reality to look like our inevitable victory or to make you feel good.
As you indicate in your last grudging line, I do not tool my examples to make us seem like some Inevitable Flow of History. The essential media line today, as in all ages, is that what IS now leads to an INEVITABLE future.
THEIR future. I am saying all is in flux.
I’m a depressive myself, and if you choose to dwell on the example I gave to reach your depressive goal you will get there with or without me. Certainly that is what the current media want you to do with ALL present reality. I gave you an example I can see from my apartment window. A REAL one. A Marxist would have mad it more upbeat, but that is the kind of thinking BUGS does not engage in.
That is the sort of thinking you see on BBC documentaries. You get all but the last five minutes of interesting stuff. Then comes the last five minutes devoted tot he Politically Correct Summation. This tells how all that has been said fits into current Politically Correctness.
A dinosaurs documentary wind-up: See! look how long they lasted, but if we don’t ratify Kyoto, we can disappear, too;
2) technological history, whoever they were talking about, including Aussie Abos, are incredibly advance despite our looking upon them as “primitive, showing that a truly assimilated society can use their genius as much as it can whites.
Everywhere here can give other examples.
Your comment is very useful. For example, I have to explain something in more detail: My optimism comes from my own experience. It was awful back then because nobody would believe that the white race was going anywhere. Now the Mantra is its own explanation. The Mantra would have made people laugh back in 1960 with the Baby Boom and national origin immigration quotas. That is the milieu in which the present immigration policy was made law in 1965.
You cannot change a world people see as frozen in s\aspic. I LIVED in a world like that.
I sound immodest, but the fact is that now I have the reality coming at us and only I know what it is like. All those people in Minnesota and Iceland to whom non-whites were whites with painted faces now have their faces jammed into their Colored Brothers’ armpits. The security system you wail about is a symptom of this, not a guide to an Inevitable Future. A Norman Rockwell cover showing a brave little “Negro” girl being protected by troops is no longer all someone in Sweden likes to think of on race.
The second I give one example, you see a future of inevitable gated communities and such “Alas and Alack” crap. I see it as simply proving that there is no inevitable future. Thought Crime Laws always make it clear that the ruling group is lost. They cannot allow discussion beaus we real discussion today will NEVER lead in the direction of our Politically Correct Future as laid down in 1960.
Despite desperate efforts, the Boasian world, the world of no genetics, is DEAD. In order to preserve a rule based on Mankind Middle Eastern History, into which our present rule is hardwired, you have to suffocate all objection. That means it’s doomed.
In 1960 all over the world a PREFERENCE for the survival of white people was called Nazism everywhere but in the some parts of the South. Even a SOUTH AFRICAN wrote that, with our ten percent black population, integration was a solution for US, but not for them.
Back then the argument was that you had to have a Nazi regime to do anything about genetics. Genetics will soon be a matter of preference, and it has happened far enough after Hitler that all those shrieks are now seen as part of a profit-making industry.
Now genetics will be a matter of PREFERENCE, and the whole world, not just the South, has had a good deep lungful of what mixed children look like and how their intelligence is not equal and is not the same. We have made huge progress in that direction from a time when Carleton Putnam argued in Race and Reason that IQ was different and was suppressed by all universities to today when everybody knows it is true. Now they have to keep anybody from SAYING it, which is the last ditch.
We are in a position to influence PREFERENCE, while the media and the fundamentalists are in a coalition to stop genetic research in its tracks.
Breaking down the “all races are the same” anti-Nazi Absolute was a hell of a job, but it has been done. That was the first push to get the car rolling. If you think we are marginalized now, you should have been with us back then.
But all I see is that we are going to have to be part of the formation of the future, instead of sitting around taking bets on some Inevitable. That leads to optimism or pessimism, but so do drugs.
As you have said before, and I won’t mince words, all history is self serving bullshit. What we envision as history today is nothing more than a collection of accumulated facts from contemporary sources coupled with some sort of self-serving metaphysical poppycock that the current crop of house intellectuals wish to con the gullible with.
I read tons of so called “histories”. Or maybe I should say “have read tons’ of histories”. In any event, what I have found is that in all cases the so-called “major events” have always been totally unexpected by their temporal contemporaries.
The “Historian” is like a Paleontologist,or a Jamaican Rastafarian. Or a Catholic Bishop.
To make an unexpected event the result of some cause that will give them power.
I have a question.There are about 30 million black savages in the U.S.A. at this time. More and more enter our country every day. Our military actively recruits third worlders to serve as soldiers with the promise of citizenship for potential fighters and their kin.
What are you going to do?
Allow them to establish a giant Haiti with indefensible borders AKA ethnic separatism?
Good question, short and to the point.
My answer, of course, is what I think may be useful rather than a Prophecy From On High. I can’t give you an exact answer because I do not know the future.
But THERE is the point I want to make. I am sitting here in front of a computer the way I sat in front of a telegraph key on a ham radio fifty years ago. Practically nothing means the same thing it did then. Then, genetics was hard and dried. Nobody could do anything about it in the short term. Population was booming. I feared a hundreds-year-long gradual integration and “assimilation.” Outside the South, no one cared about something that would take centuries.
Young people assume that that was more comfortable for me, with segregation and the South fighting on the race issue. It wasn’t, because I was worried about the survival of my race and Southerners really just wanted things put off a generation or so.
In short, I was even more alone than I am now. Separation was a solution to THEIR problem, but not to mine. Every copy of Jet Magazine had a mixed couple on the cover. Blacks wanted their white women NOW. But outside of Jet, no one talked about that goal openly.
EVERYTHING has changed. I can use the Mantra now to express dangers that were barely theoretical back then.
The point of this is that we must stop looking to the old world. Any specific solution I come up with right now will make no sense fifty years from now. Questions of genetics today have no relation to what they were then. Our genes will be what we WANT them to be. It is critical to keep reminding people that, all the bullshit aside, blond is beautiful, not black.
To keep up with whitey, many blacks try to say they want the preservation of their race, too, but it isn’t true. There is nothing about black that anyone wants to preserve. You can SAY that now and there are a hundred thousand places to say it. The giant networks and magazines that dominated all information then are gone with the wind today.
What people revered back then as “sophisticated” is laughed at routinely now. Everybody knows that the media will say.
Even the example given shows a certain nostalgic flavor. In our prisons, blacks are more and more outnumbered and terrified by Hispanics.
I am sitting here on the tenth floor looking straight at some black houses. They are about two hundred yards away. We have closed circuit TV, locked stairways, and modern devices that make that two hundred yards more impenetrable than two miles would have been some years back.
As technology changes, the world changes.
NOTHING is the same. On the apparently self-sufficient farms of the Midwest, farmers have to buy new seed every few years, sort of like the annual flu vaccine we take, because the parasites change and adapt and would destroy their crops.
I am not interested as much in the safety problem but only in the genetic long-term. But BOTH have changed completely. It is old but true. The important thing is to ask the right QUESTION. Black savages and black genes are now two different questions.
News is made by those who say, “X said this today.”
History is made by those who keep repeating,. “This basic assumption is wrong. This basic assumption is evil.”
I rather enjoy an encounter with an anti-white who is impressed by his own intellectual acumen.
“You’re an intelligent person and you fall for that crap? You’re not serious, are you? You’re just pulling my leg. A 12-year old of average intelligence can see through that.”
This is what is needed to deal with the Big Lie: a SHORT, CUTTING truth that destroys the absolute self-confidence which is the only support for a Big Lie.
PLEASE keep up the good work!
I get bored when someone starts bitching about the word “black.” That was one point on which me and the black militants were on the same page.
Tolerate this old guy while he gives a quick soliloquy on language:
The Episcopal, Catholic, and Orthodox Churches each claim to be episcopal, meaning rued by bishops; all three claim to represent orthodoxy; and all three claim to be catholic, meaning universal.
Religious discussion would be a real pain in the donkey if I had to say, “Episcopal, but I don’t mean that Catholics and Orthodox are not episcopal too,” or “Catholic, but I don’t mean to imply that Orthodox and Episcopalians are not universalist , too.” It would bore you to death!
Likewise, I get bored when “black” gets all this nit-picking criticism. No, it does not refer to people who are pure black. It refers to people who have black blood and, when push comes to shove, these people identify with blacks. That reflects the actual situation in our actual world, which is what language is USED to do.
Black is easily pronounceable. It is now accepted by all but diddlers. It does not make a Spanish-speaking black baseball player into an American the way African-American does. In short the word “black” performs the function for which language EXISTS.
Leave it to the anti-whites to play with words and try to get off the subject with definitions. Black is a perfectly good word, and I use it consistently.
I discussed Sanator Sam, Dave describes Dwayne. Dave’s piece is more entertaining and is original:
What children see, that most adults forget, is the ridiculousness of adult narcissism.
I remember my 8-year-old school mate Dwayne, who was uncommonly ugly and had a tendency to slobber (even though we all liked him): He like to say this about his ugliness, “When you are born ugly, you are going to be ugly the rest of your life so you might as well get used to it.”
Adults have a REAL HARD TIME with that one. Accordingly, we know where liberalism comes from.
The last time we had a real leftie in the Governor’s chair in the State of Washington was Mike Lowry, a former US Congressman, who represented the district that included the University of Washington in Seattle.
Like Dwayne, Mike Lowry is uncommonly ugly. It is a marvel how somebody so ugly could actually get elected to Congress, but when you are running from a university district, go figure.
As Governor, his department heads were so ugly, all died-in-the-wool lefties, that I could only look at them by peeking through my fingers.
No wonder these lefties are so deeply into the “we are all equal” mantra. You have to hang your hat on something.
Later, the Governor disappointed his constituents by paying out $90K (out of his own pocket) to settle a sexual harassment claim (copping feels) by one of his female aids. That ended his political career, but it was all so very logical.
Dwayne never had any such problems. He was into self-acceptance and realism at a very early age. Today, he is a died-in-the-wool right-winger, with a stash of gold, a pickup truck, a mean dog, a Browning 1911, and an ugly wife and an ugly kid.
Like I said, we always liked Dwayne.
I’m trying my damnedest, but cannot find where you said that when someone told you they “weren’t a “racist”(?), your response would be telling them you wouldn’t brag to be a “traitor/coward”.
(Your email:b...@whitakeronline.org bounced back as well).
Odd request, perhaps, but sorry for the bother, and I thank you for your time!
“Anti-Racist” IS anti-White!!!
I mention you on my page today…
I have said that at least twenty times in the OV section.
The point here is not that you are criticizing me unjustly. I would rather that this ground be covered a hundred times than that my thin skin be pierced. This is a critical point, and my skin is not noticably thin.
In fact, you reminded me of something. A couple of years ago anti-whites in SF OV would constantly say that they couldn’t be anti-white because they were white.
I haven’t seen that “I can’t be anti-white because I’m white”line in YEARS, and if you hadn’t said this I wouldn’t have noticed. This is a direct result of repeating he Mantra at least two hundred times. Prometheus slams away at it as constantly as I do.
WE didn’t even notice this until you highlighted it. Your comment causes me to congratulatee Prometheus and me on what we have done.
News is made by those who say, “X said this today.”
History is made by those who keep repeating,. “This basic assumption is wrong. This basic assumption is evil.”
A lot of people have objected to my pretending to be a hick. By age sixteen I had reached a level of sophistication where I DESPISED self-styled “intellectuals” with the same vehemence that they despised “hicks.”
In the case of nut cases like me and Senator Samuel Ervin of North Carolina, claiming to be “hicks” is pure egomania.
I am a “hick” in the sense that I can tell when something is simply SILLY. “Intellectuals” talk pure crap. Respectable conservatives answer this pure crap as if it were Serious Thought. By the time one gets through debating this crap as if it were real logic one has entered into their delusions. Entering into the delusions of a crazy person is one of the things one is taught to avoid in dealing with the mentally ill.
Senator Sam .acted like he was representing the hicks. “Intellectuals” thought he was laughing at the “hicks,” the way the Kennedys were laughing at the Boston Southies who supported them slavishly.
It never occurred to the “intellectuals” that Senator Sam was laughing at THEM.
One brag I have made here is that I was an Honorary Boston Southie, that West Virginia coal miners said that “Whitaker speaks for us.”
Hence my Proud Hickdom. That is what I read into Jesus’s words about the Scribes and the Pharisees. He said that Evil with a PhD is Doctor Evil.
Senator Sam was not Jesus. I am not Jesus. For us, this attitude is unapologetic egomania.
In Washington, it was easy. I put on my deepest Southern accent, like Senator Sam Ervin with his “I’m just a country lawyer from North Carolina.” People who knew that Senator Sam was a MAGNA Cum Laude graduate of the Harvard Law School found his claiming to be a hick DISGUSTING.
Senator Sam never deviated from that hick image because it WORKED. He (and I) found that Yankees in Washington, DC are absolutely INCURABLE. They are suffering from a form of hypnosis. No matter how many times they told themselves, “Senator Ervin is a brilliant man, he is a DANGEROUS man.” they still fell under the spell of their entire life training about Southern accents.
No one without a Southern “accent” (WE don’t HAVE an accent, YOU do) can get away with asking basic questions, over and over. But we Southerners are considered to be children. We can ask and ask and ask, demanding an answer the way a child does.
That made it hilarious for me to watch Senator Sam in action. You really have to be able to talk your ass off to make a career criminal seem like a victim of circumstances. Only Senator Sam could get away with repeating, “But isn’t this guy just an evil person?”
To a Kennedy, the idea that someone is just “a bad person” is unthinking, judgmental, uncompassionate, anti-intellectual and so forth.
But even a Kennedy has to deal with the children. You have to answer the children who simply won’t shut up.
I don’t know how may of you have had the ego-deflating experience of trying to answer the insistent questions of a small child. You have a choice. You can 1) decide that the kid really is too young to understand the High Sophistication of what you are saying or 2) You can rethink what you are saying to the extent that some of it just doesn’t make sense.
What protects Political Correctness is that no one has the guts to be seen as a child. Senator Sam enjoyed the game. I think I am so much smarter than self-styled “intellectuals’ that I would be embarrassed at being accused of competing with them.
I got four replies to the article below. All four should be put up here in front.
Please read them.
I can relate to this in this way. When I married, a hundred years ago, I can honestly say I NEVER married for money. He was cute, nearly six feet, blue eyes, deep voice, but what got me is that I knew he intended to do his DAMNEDEST. Neither of us had any money, but I wanted a REAL home and a REAL family.
So I understand that it’s what a person REALLY wants that matters.
Unfortunately those who seek power now, seem to want nothing at all , but phony accolades. Perhaps to cover an awful emptyness.
You are confusing POWER and POSITION.
Dave’s comment on power referred to Nixon, and he has the same confusion. Someone once made an observation that really impressed me, “Nixon ran for office to BE something. Regan ran to DO something.”
Nixon wanted to BE a congressman, he wanted to BE president. But if Nixon had never been born, I doubt history would have been changed noticably. There were a hundred interchangable young men in 1946 who could have done the same things. POWER is t ability to CHANGE things.
Nixon had no POWER.
For me the outstanding thing about this election is that no POWER is involved. Neither Obama or Hillary represents any POWER. McCain would do what another traitor would do.
Power, position, money, these are as distinct as good looks, health, wealth and a happy marriage. Each is a FACTOR but there is as much trade off among them as there is direct relationshiup.
I hope to hell I get some thoughts on THAT.
Someone on Stormfront repeated the old line, “Why would somebody spent millions to get a 400,000 a year job?”
So I intrtroduced them to reality again:
I worked on Capitol Hill for a number of years and I never knew a congressman, outside of those who went straight to prison, who did not at least double his income when he left congress. One of my old buddies was congressman with a safe seat but he had to quit because he couldn’t afford it.
When Richard Nixon lost the presidential election of 1960 he took a job with a legal firm in California that paid 930,000 1960 dollars a year, versus the presidential pay of 150,000, but he deeply regretted losing.
I sat with a guy who was making over 500,000 1981 dollars in a bar in DC and he was literally CRYING because he couldn’t get a presidential appointment to a job paying under 100,000.
Some people want money. Others, especially people WITH money, want POWER. I was a recognized and PAID expert on power. If you could just buy power, I would be a LOT richer than I am.
The jobs I held in DC would have paid five to ten times as much in the private sector, but that is strictly theoretical. Anybody who can dedicate the one life he gets on this planet to selling farbric softener DESERVES ten times the money. I could never have done it.
You go to New York or California for money. In DC, the name of the game is power.
And no, you can’t just buy power. Power is a different game altogether.
It’s sort of like what Marilyn Monroe said in “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” to the father of a rich guy she wanted to marry: “A woman shouldn’t marry a man just because he’s rich any more than a man should marry a woman for her looks. But, my goodness, it HELPS!”
Almost everybody who gets elected or appointed could get a lot more money doing something else. But if you spend your life in the power game, you find that they are very different. Bill Gates did not marry the most beautiful girl in the world or the richest.
Different goals mean entirely different methods.
I have to do a hell of a balancing act here. But like everything I try to do, once you really understand it there is nothing complicated about it. My aim is to get you to use my way of thinking in addition to your own independent thinking. As Shari points out, the reason this seems odd today is because all of us have been “educated” in a way that makes this seem mysterious.
Real intellectuals, back when the seminar was actually a seminar and a Moot was actually a Moot would wonder what my problem is.
AFKAN has ridden this tide very nicely. He has come in under various names with his own message to use BUGS simply as another place to put it. AFKAN was used to people simply refusing to let him have his say, so he persisted. In the cases where a group will simply not listen to us, we are more than accustomed to going on and giving it up.
But AFKAN kept after us because he could tell BUGS was not just tuning him out. AFKAN has my admiration because we are not SEEKING just anybody. Someone who knows how to keep at it IN THE RIGHT WAY is what we are looking for. There are far too many who try and then give up because “Bob is being mean to me,” though of course they don’t put it that way.
I am particularly proud that my talent search found Shari. Shari often seems to be doing the opposite of AFKAN. She explains what I am saying, so it seems as if she is just repeating what we are saying.
Don’t be fooled. My big talent is that things jump out at me that others don’t even notice. The only reason Shari SOMETIMES seems to be repeating what we say here is that what she says fits so seamlessly into the theme. She continues the line of argument, applies it to different cases, and I learn a hell of a lot from a short statement by her.
Shari goes on with the line and I find that, when she does that, there is more to say.
My brag is that damned few people would appreciate both Shari AND AFKAN. I had to stop AFKAN, in his previous incarnations from walking over us and Shari from apologizing for being brilliant.
I was very, very “mean” to BOTH of them.
Those who can’t stand the heat should go to a cooler place than the BUGS kitchen.
We are a seminar. More important, we are a TEAM. That is one reason I am very careful about people who come here for their own message. Every one of us is EXPECTED to have his own message.
This is not a church, this is a seminar. The only party line is how to save our RACE. If that is not your aim, then you simply belong in one the hundreds of thousands of other sites in the Internet.
Unlike the usual church today, there the Party Line ENDETH. There is not a church on earth that ENDETH this way. You BEGIN with a faith in Jesus, for example, but that has to lead on to obedience to the Pope or an opposition to evolution or a dedication to the State of Israel or to Social Progress or Family Values.
BUGS is vitally important to me because I think I have major contributions to make to saving our race and straight thinking. My LIFE has been devoted to that. Please note that this is PERSONAL to me.
So when you drift off into statements you would have made had I never been born, it hurts me PERSONALLY. That’s what Stormfront is for.
I feel vindicated when you can tell from a comment that it fits HERE.
I know I have said this sort of things many times and I will say them again, because it happens to be my life’s work.
So much of what is called education, and those who present themselves as educated, is really disgusting mumbo-jumbo.
I hadn’t realized just how bad it is, since I’m not part of that.
I received this forward. “For those wanting to make a contribution in J’s memory, a student scholarship or award fund is being established in the College of Arts and Sciences, focused on J’s major department of Cognitive Science.
Although the exact nature of the fund is still being determined, it is designed to support scholarship inline with one of J’s central intellectual interests and passions: developing the intersection of sociologcal perspectives and
principals with inquiry in cognitive science, or possibly in cognitive musicology. This poor kid was only 25. It just makes me sick.
AFKAN did it right. Genral Commnets is where you should put something new for the main page.
A theme often returned to here is the moral cowardice of brave men, esp., those of the Greatest Mssturbation. Well, it is alive and well today. The following is from the blog at antiwar.
I Lied and I’m a Coward
I’m not a big fan of the New York Times, but today’s front-page investigative report on the Pentagon’s managing of the news is absolutely first-rate. One of the Pentagon officials, Torie Clarke, the Pentagon’s main propagandist, said her goal had been to achieve “information dominance.” In other words, she wanted the Pentagon’s message to get out and crowd out the independent information from others. To do this, the Pentagon recruited retired military officers and fed them select information that was often at odds with reality. Wow! I’m already sounding like a spin doctor. What I mean in the earlier sentence is that the Pentagon lied.
The payoff for many of these retired officers was that various “defense” contractors for whom they worked got a better shot at military contracts. [Why “defense” in quotation marks? Because most of what the Department of Defense does has nothing to do with defense: it’s offense, much of which makes us less safe.]
Interestingly, some of the retired military knew they were being lied to and passed the information on as truth nevertheless. In other words, they lied. One, General Paul E. Vallely, a FOX News analyst from 2001 to 2007, stated,
““I saw immediately in 2003 that things were going south [in Iraq.]” But on his return, Vallely told FOX’s Alan Colmes, “You can’t believe the progress,” and predicted that the number of insurgents would be “down to a few numbers” within months. Of course, it wasn’t. And it turned out that Vallely didn’t “believe the progress.”
How did they rationalize their lying? Take Timur J. Eads. Please. Eads is “a retired Army lieutenant colonel and Fox analyst who is vice president of government relations for Blackbird Technologies, a fast-growing military contractor.” Eads said he had withheld the truth on television for fear that a four-star general would call and say, “Kill that contract.” I’ve heard of people running from battle because they might be literally killed. And I’m sympathetic. But lying because the consequence of telling the truth is that your employer might lose business and you might get fired? Wowee. Pretty scary.
The whole article is well worth your time.
It confirms Bob’s thesis. These liars probably are bedecked with deserved medals for valor, but they have not the guts to stand up to authority or money. Some things never change.
I meant “black hat” Jews in my post, sorry for my editing mistake. Most people are of the mindset that they want to be positive and do something that matters, which in itself is good and all, I on the other hand will readily admit that I am the devil. I live for that moment when I see the other person go into physical convultions over stress that I induce (but only if they deserve it such as genociders).
Back to the Mantra, on that I was slow to realize that what I was reading was in general my way of subterfuge. Yes I’m working on the respectables, demanding that they please define what “racism” is even if they have to admit that they have spent decades being useless at best.
MGM’s slogan means “art for art’s sake.”
First lesson, if you want to find out what someone REALLY stands for, find the opposite of the line they repeat most. If any employee of MGM had come in with a proposal that a movie be produced entirely “for arts sake,” the question would not be, “Will he be fired?” The only debate would be over whether they would open the door before they kicked him out of it.
I just saw that slogan again at the beginning of a Thin Man movie from the 1930s. The Thin Man, Nick Charles, is ALWAYS drunk. He always has a drink in his hand. A decade or so previously the big movies were attacks on saloons, showing men becoming drunks and ruining their wives and kiddies.
If you don’t like the Tide of Public Opinion, just wait a while. Another one will come along.
I always took the tack of asking them, “explain in exact detail what you mean.” That is because every devotee or cult member is more or less an idiot, and this includes the PhDs, and most mass cults cannot go into “exact detail”, even the wacky black that Jews are reduced to speaking in tongues only amongst themselves never mind the high priests of PC and their jive.
Bob I think you are using the standard talk back to each other method of debate in which you want to exert dominance over the individual. Myself I want the fool opposing me to hate himself when all is said and done, and that is accomplished by severe mental anxiety caused by having them trying to explain their belief that they cannot explain.
I’m an interrogator. One of my opening questions is, “What is racism?”
Pain would understand: This made my morning!
I am obsessive. Your comments are the first thing I look for. This is from somebody who is obviously not just theorizing, he is out there fighting the fight. That last line is priceless to ME!
There was a reason I did what Simmons disapproves of in this case.
In this case, I even left out one thing I always INSIST on, “anti-WHITE,” in order to make ONE point at ONE time. Then Simmons comes in and makes damned sure I remember what the general strategy is.
Actually, I do not use the “What exactly are YOU talking about?” strategy as much as Simmons does. He is out there slamming away at that one. His actions cannot be overpraised.
There are so damned many holes in this Big Lie that you have to LEARN, as a LAB COURSE, which one is best for YOU. That means you have to get out there and DO it. The anti-white thread is a great place for that, but I have a feeling Simmons is hitting them everywhere he MAKES a shot at it.
I made **A** point. Z notes that I made that point very well.
Simmons reminds us of THE point.
Couldn’t be better.
Thanks! My coffee tastes GOOD this morning.
Here I vary from my ALMOST INVARIABLE PRACTICE of ALWAYS refering to OVs as “anti-white.” I am doing it because I am trying to make ANOTHER point and i don’t want to give htem a chance to wiggle.
— We Know Your Stuff, You don’t Know Ours
Let us say that we are in sixteenth century Spain and a Catholic is arguing with Protestants who are remaining anonymous. First of all, WHY swould the Protestants would insist on anonymity?
Let me tell you what the Catholic would NOT say:
A reasonably intelligent Catholic Believer in sixteenth century Spain would NOT explain,
“There is an Inquisition. The Wise Men who run this Inquisition say that the only True Faith is the Holy Catholic Faith.”
Why would he NOT say that? Because it would make them look like fools The Protestants are anonymous precisely BECAUSE they are fully aware that there is an Inquisition.
Something else the Catholic would not do would be to recite the basic teachings of the Catholic Church and expect us, 1) not to know this stuff; and
2) to bow down when we hear that the Ruling Authorities disagree with us.
Any literate person in the sixteenth century had been RAISED in the Catholic Church except Jews. You would assume that even a literate Jew living in a sixteenth century Catholic country ALSO knew the basic doctrines of a Church that controlled all educational institutions outside of the ghettoes.
We get on Opposing Views for a good intellectual battle. We are ready to debate the established religion of OUR time, Political Correctness. It is therefore a hell of a letdown when you quote Political Correct Doctrine at us.
It is hard to believe that any adult outside a retarded home would honestly think that we hadn’t HEARD all this crap. It is hard to believe that anyone outside a home for the retarded would be repeating it to us in the obvious conviction we hadn’t HEARD it already.
Mommy Professor tells you that we take this position because we have not HEARD the shallow clichés of our established religion of Political Correctness. It would take a particularly mindless Catholic in 1550 Spain to think that any literate person RAISED in sixteenth century Spain would not know that all the PAID Authorities agreed that Catholic Doctrine was absolutely true.
If someone back then started out assuming that heretics had never HEARD of the Catholic Church, you would decide he needed a home for the retarded.
Same here. We are heretics. We KNOW what the established religion is. Nothing confirms our opinion of True Believers like your assumption that we don’t.
Those of us who go to the Opposing Views section are interested in a good, solid intellectual FIGHT. Instead we run into people who seem to have escaped from the Home during visiting hours.
We, too, were RAISED in your established religion.
How can ANYBODY think we haven’t heard the Standard Line?
Mommy Professor and the semiliterate black kid says we are “Jus’ IGNUNT.” You have to be a real imbecile to fall for THAT line. We have heard every word of your their doctrine at least as many times as you have.
More. We all know that every established religion concentrates on stamping out all heresy. Since we won’t accept the standard line, we are hit with it over and over and over.
For every time a True Believer like you has been exposed to these standard lines, we have been exposed many times, repeatedly.
Like every True Believer, you cannot believe that anyone who has HEARD the True Faith doesn’t AGREE with it.
So when we come to Opposing Views, we find that the True Believers genuinely don’t believe we have HEARD all the standard stuff. Mommy Professor tells you, “They is jus’ IGNUNT!” You genuinely BELIEVE that the only reason we don’t agree with Mommy Professor is because we have never HEARD Mommy Professor’s Confession of Faith.
Just how smart does that make YOU look?