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

Ammunition

Posted by Bob on October 27th, 2012 under Coaching Session


I can’t find which commenter wrote this, I have an awful time when I try to look something back up:

From Article 2- definitions of genocidePhotobucket

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

“Genocide involves the attempt to achieve the disappearance of a group by whatever means. It does not have to be violent, it could be a combination of policies that would lead to a certain group dying out.”

Malcolm Fraser (Prime Minister of Australia 1975-1983)

I’ve been reading in Der Spiegel about Tibet… a good example, people will claim there is some violence there, but it’s basically an influx of non-Tibetans. The Dalai Lama considers it to be genocide and monks are immolating themselves to draw attention. China did try to call the Dalai Lama a “naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews” but it was pretty much laughed off by the mainstream media (probably because he’s not White).

Share it now. Like it while you're at it.
  1. #1 by Daniel Genseric on 10/27/2012 - 8:47 am

    Simple Math says UN Resolution 260, article II, section C, pertains to whites:

    White man + non-white woman = 0 white children & “Not racist”
    White woman + non-white man = 0 white children & “Not racist”
    non-white man + non-white woman = 0 white children & “Not racist”
    White man + white man = 0 white children & “Not racist”
    White woman + white woman = 0 white children & “Not racist”
    White man + white woman = white children & “EXTREMELY racist”

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white

    • #2 by Daniel Genseric on 10/27/2012 - 9:43 am

      Simple Math says UN Resolution 260, article II, section C, pertains to whites:

      White man + non-white woman = 0 white children & “anti-racist”
      White woman + non-white man = 0 white children & “anti-racist”
      Non-white man + non-white woman = 0 white children & “anti-racist”
      White man + white man = 0 white children & “anti-racist”
      White woman + white woman = 0 white children & “anti-racist”
      White man + white woman = white children & “EXTREMELY racist”

      Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white

      • #3 by Scythian on 10/29/2012 - 4:19 pm

        If EVERYBODY but straight white men are “minorities”, then by that very definition, the anti-white’s definition, the only minority that exists is straight white men. LMFAO!
        And again, separating a group’s women from its men is inciting genocide. What kind of vile pieces of rat’s excrement such as Jessie Jackson’s “Rainbow Coalition” and the SPLC (just to name two) would try to convince white girls that their own fathers, brothers, uncles, are the embodiment of evil that they must join foreign races to fight against? WHAT KIND OF EVIL IS THAT?

        • #4 by Daniel Genseric on 10/30/2012 - 6:34 pm

          Very good questions, Scythian

  2. #5 by Jason on 10/27/2012 - 9:27 am

    Maybe we need a thread where we can list all references to genocide for future use, along with arguments supporting White Genocide.

    • #6 by markwn on 10/27/2012 - 11:10 am

      Any major part of our arsenal, such as a genocide definition repository, might be better off as a visible “link” for easy access & bookmarking.

      Based on my short time here, things in threads seem to be difficult to dig up.

      btw…Regarding a few previous posts about GAR5’s site, here is the address:

      http://mantra.awardspace.us/

      Couldn’t find it but fortunately had it bookmarked.

      It is a goldmine of rebuttals, concepts and info with about 30 different categories for BUGSERS (especially new ones like me)…fantastic work GAR5!

    • #7 by c-bear on 10/27/2012 - 1:27 pm

      http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/topic/mini-mantras-ii/ is a good place to start. Many of us have already done all the research and condensed it into usable statements. It DOES need to be updated, but, it’s a good place to start. http://whitegenocideproject.com/ is a website started by a Bugster. What most Americans think they know about genocide they got from a state sanctioned “History” book, so many times I’ll send people here: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html It is the original 1948 document of the Convention on Genocide.

  3. #8 by Jason on 10/27/2012 - 9:50 am

    Off topic: This might be a good comeback when someone says White men brought slavery to North America. I think it takes the sting out of the “White people ruined the chaste American lands” argument. It also shows that slaughter, slavery and war are the common ancestry of all people (not just Whites). This was inspired by seeing two debaters argue over whether blacks or whites were the first slaves in North America. The real answer is neither.

    The first slaves in North America were Native Americans. Many Native American tribes practiced some form of slavery long before Europeans arrived.

    Native American groups frequently enslaved war captives. How long this practice preceded the modern arrival of White men is unknown, but one can safely assume it had been around for thousands of years.

    As you went into central and south America, the slavery was far more large scale and brutal, again many centuries before White men arrived.

    • #9 by c-bear on 10/27/2012 - 7:39 pm

      I like to make fun of the anti-whites when I hear that line. My favorite comeback is :
      “Silly anti-white. White people didn’t create slavery, we ABOLISHED it! “Because of slavery” isn’t a valid justification for GENOCIDE.”

  4. #10 by Gar5 on 10/27/2012 - 11:16 am

    Jason, that’s a LONG way to say “All races owned slaves”

    Keep it simple. Keep it short. Keep it sweet.

    • #11 by Jason on 10/27/2012 - 6:36 pm

      lol, good point. It became wordier than I meant and then I couldn’t edit it. I still think if someone says Whites brought slaves to America, it could be effective to say, “no, Indians already had slavery here”.

      • #12 by Dick_Whitman on 10/27/2012 - 9:26 pm

        it could be effective to say, “no, Indians already had slavery here”.(Jason)

        you could also add (when addressing an anti-White):

        “the only thing white people did unique regarding slavery was to end it. But I’m sure you’re indifferent to that fact as most anti-Whites are. You claim you are “anti-racist,” but what you really are is anti-White. “Anti-racist” is a code word for anti-White.”

  5. #13 by Jason on 10/28/2012 - 4:57 am

    By the way, I notice Don and Derek Black are using Mantra points on their radio show (I’m sure many of you knew that). They made the point to a caller, that nothing like “Global Warming” or any other social issue matters if White people are not here.

    http://wpbriradio.com/cm/blogs/derek-black

  6. #14 by Conrad on 10/28/2012 - 1:08 pm

    The book – Jack’s War – uses the enemies tactics against them. People are more often moved by emotions than by reason. Reason is good at holding people in a position once they are there but emotions work first and most effectively. Most of you here can testify to this fact in your own lives. Jack’s War also contains the full Mantra and some mini Mantras. I have seen the effect that this book has on people, it works very well. There are many white people that are sick & tired of what they are seeing all they need is an emotional push to get them going in the right direction.

Comments are closed.