When someone uses some version of “You are hiding racism” or “You are being a racist,” you should have come up with the answer:

“You are faced with a truth you cannot deal with, white genocide. Your answer is to say that those who disagree with you are Evil, in this case, Evil Racists. That tactic was used against people bringing up a legitimate point by the intellectually exhausted before Socrates was born.”

“It is cowardly and mindless.”

I won’t be here forever, gang, and I need for YOU to learn to put this standard stuff in historical context for YOURSELVES.

Simmons, it seems to me that once you have figured out why information is produced you will naturally know for whom it is produced. Did I miss your point?

The Occidental Digest article was good, but it seems to me that, by using the word “victimization” instead of genocide, the writer sounded like the same old thing. It is like the old crime statistics. Sounding like the same old thing, even when you bring out the decimation of whites, allows the other side to debate THEIR “victimization.”

We need a straight line, not a circle of accusations.

Words are critical. Any time you use terms your readers are familiar and comfortable with, you make the other side comfortable as well. Once you argue a long, long time, you will find there is no such thing as a “good twist on the Mantra.”

It is good to let us know when something hits on the subject of genocide, but don’t fall for it.

Don’t break ranks. Stay on message.