Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!


Posted by Bob on October 14th, 2012 under Coaching Session

Like other guerilla operations that have to develop their own program, we have evolved our own terminology. It is one hell of a lot easier to say “Tailgating” than it is to keep repeating the whole story, that we have found, in action, that if you keep trying to answer the crap that is thrown at you, you stop killing effectively.

There are other terms we have developed that only occur here.

One phenomenon that wastes a lot of time to explain is an error Lord Nelson made and INSTANTLY CORRECTED, which in itself is as much a lesson as anything else. But every time I talk about it I must go on to explain that the important thing was not Lord Nelson slipping into it, but his instant recognition and correction. Photobucket

The first couple of times I mentioned it I explained all this, but Lord Nelson came back with another apology, which can wear you down and, more important, gets off the subject.

LN finally got the point that he should not apologize, but the fact is it gets us off the subject to talk about that original correction. WE need a TERM for that.

What LN did was to attack immigration as genocide. He left out assimilation. This is a VERY easy error to commit, and pro-whites do it all the time. It makes one’s path far, far easier, because the same people who will scream anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews if you criticize interracial marriage will discuss immigration with you as if you were human.

Hannity heard that David Duke opposed interracial marriage and said “You really ARE a Nazi!” He himself opposes open borders. So it is easy to slip into this groove, because it is so much smoother, and you haven’t realized WHY it is so much easier.

So from now on let’s call this almost unnoticeable slide into respectability “Sliding.”

Some of you are finding, IN ACTION, what works. Before the last few years, I had no chance to cut the Mantra.

The reason for that was that every time I brought it up, the people who discussed it were just discussing it. They had never USED it. So none of that helped me at all.

On the other hand, I really learn from BUGS reports, because they are REPORTS, not theorizing about what “people” can understand. So you have isolated what WORKS by itself in the Mantra.

You have developed mini-Mantras, a term which, justly, would have had me blowing my top five years ago.

Now you have been IN there, you have USED the Mantra, you are not talking about what theoretically might lead to something, but, from hard experience, what WORKS.

IN every subject, the instructor beats the basics in, but he is trying to get his students to the point where they can begin, very carefully, to make their own rules, their own contributions.

Please go ahead and do it.

But DON’T Slip. One person was talking about his success, but I looked over what he said, and everything he said had to do with “culture.” He impressed people, but in the end he didn’t SAY anything. He forgot to look at the message he left, not at how impressed others were.

If you win easily, be sure to check back and see if you didn’t just Slip.

  1. #1 by Jason on 10/14/2012 - 6:40 am

    I’m glad this was mentioned because I’m sure I have focused more on immigration than assimilation myself. It’s not intentional but it is easy to slip into, party because the other side doesn’t give as much resistance.

    If we aren’t pissing them off, we aren’t doing something right. After all, these Anti-Whites are executing our genocide (right now), so if we appear reasonable to them, something is seriously wrong!

  2. #2 by Fred_Richthofen on 10/14/2012 - 10:09 am

    This is my check list so I don’t lock my keys inside my car or start “slipping”. After I have completed my argument…
    ✓Did I mention open borders, forced integration, and assimilation?
    ✓Did I mention anti-racist is a code word for anti-White?
    ✓Did I mention RACE and GENOCIDE in caps to make them uncomfortable and draw attention?
    Hopefully this keeps me from “slipping.” Thanks for posting this. maybe someone else has a better or more complete check list.

  3. #3 by j1mmyZeta on 10/14/2012 - 11:56 am

    Is this piece saying that we shouldn’t be calling immigration alone genocide?

    Mass immigration in itself will depress indigenous birthrates. It can be through overcrowding, or by making the indigenous people feel that the place is no longer a good place to have children – but it is especially the case when the newcomers have unrestricted access to the social and financial benefits that the indigenous people have built up and are paying into; as well as being forced via taxation to pay for programs that are specifically intended to help non-White groups – I don’t think these issues could be called “assimilation”, but all contribute to the genocide that we are facing.

    “Undermining the homogeneity of European countries” deliberately via mass immigration is genocide, weather or not they are also forcing “assimilation”.
    And when people in the media celebrate that White people will inevitably become a (despised) minority in White countries by immigration and birthrate disparity alone, haven’t they just shown that they support our genocide?

  4. #4 by Bob on 10/14/2012 - 12:13 pm

    Yes, jZ, assimilation is essential to this genocide. We already have plenty of nonwhites in most white countries to multiply and carry out genocide.
    Historically the most racist white areas have been those with the highest minority population.
    Undermining the homogeneity of white countries will not get them what they want. Assimilation is essential to genocide, by definition.

  5. #5 by Skippy 01 on 10/14/2012 - 2:50 pm

    The mantra is good if you can use it but not if you can’t. If you’ve already seen a couple of people post the mantra and get their threads and accounts flashed in minutes, you can’t use the mantra where you are. So unpack the components and use them where they fit. (Even the mere terminology, like “anti-White” has its own value. The next time someone sees that, for example in someone else’s posting of the mantra, they will be familiar with that term and with a simple argument as to why it is valid terminology.)

    I say something like this (quoted from a recent conversation, where to be “on-topic” meant discussing the value of increased immigration): “The “value” of chronic, massive non-White immigration into historically White countries and only White countries, plus forced integration and assimilation, and eventually, inevitably intermarriage, is that it is genocidal for the Whites. It blends one race out of existence, and only one race.”

    And I add this, exactly, because I haven’t found a better way to phrase it: “If you pour an endless river of tar into a glass of milk, eventually there will be no milk in the glass, only tar.”

    I need the setup “plus forced integration and assimilation, and eventually, inevitably intermarriage” because if you were allowed to freeze the milk solid and keep it solid, you could pour a river of tar over it and the milk would still be there underneath. But anyone can understand that if you insist that the milk must be fluid and mingled, you are really insisting on an end state where there is no more milk in the glass, only tar.

    The glass of milk is because anyone can relate the milk to White / familiar / harmless. The tar is because it is very non-White; because everyone is familiar with molten tar and how heavy it is, so anyone can understand that it will fill the glass from the bottom and there will be no more milk; because tar is not insulting (I would not use “mud” or anything like that); and because anyone can understand that a river of tar does not belong in a glass of milk.

    It might sound stupid that I have to have a word-picture to explain how “chronic, massive non-White immigration into historically White countries and only White countries, plus forced immigration and assimilation, and eventually, inevitably intermarriage” will force an end-state with no Whites, but experience has convinced me that the picture is helpful. I would use a visual, like a television commercial, if I could.

    So far the strongest counter-argument from an anti-White has been to complain that my analogy was “simplistic”. I suspect that means something like “effective”.

    Don’t use the glass of milk and the endless river of tar if you don’t find them helpful.

  6. #6 by Bob on 10/14/2012 - 5:31 pm

    Fred, EXCELLENT!

Comments are closed.