B. U. G. S.

I can’t find a thread on tailgating, so I’ll post this here.

A couple of days ago I posted this to a fine bugser video (with very few comments to it btw) based on a good clip of David Duke:

Dr. Duke is very much “on message.” I would only add an explanation that the low world-wide white birthrate of 1.2 children per couple is in large part a result of demoralization and insecurity. When we whites once again feel in possession of our own societies and our own lives, our birth rate will go up.

Being taught since the first grade that one’s own race is bad has an inevitable effect on a person’s natural desire to have children, whether that connection is consciously felt or not.

A few days later I realized that (once again!) I’d tailgated, and I went back and replied to that:

“I would only add an EXPLANATION…”

No, no NO!

THIS is what I would add:

If African countries suddenly had low birth rates, would you insist on flooding those African countries with non-Africans and forcing Africans to integrate with the non-Africans so as to “assimilate,” i.e. intermarry and be blended out of existence?

And if any African objected to that genocide of his people, would you tell him that the genocide of his people was justified because of their low birth rate?

So much better. I like to think it’s what Gavin would have told me to do if he’d seen my first comment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzRLviUkxts

@HD

 I can’t find a thread on tailgating…

http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/topic/tailgating-problematic-anti-white-arguments/page/2/

I was just thinking for a couple minutes about all those people who try to say that America, Australia and Canada are not white countries. Pretty much all their arguements come down to “nation of immigagrants.” Let me know if I’m slipping here but I just came up with this little thing:

Sir John A Macdonald wanted to preserve the “aryan character” of Canada. The FIRST law past by Australia was the white australia policy. The american constitution says “…For ourselves and our posterity…” How can they argue these are not white countries when the very people who MADE these countries defined them as such? Those same people admit Europe is for whites and still demand massive non-white immigration and “assimilation.” It sounds like they are trying to get rid of white people. It’s genocide. “Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-white.

What do you guys think? I know Bobs advice is to say that the anti-whites have already defined them as white countries by their deliberate targeting of them and that’s worked for me too. I’ve just been finding these random facts and found they fit together nicely.

Gator that is a great analogy using casinos.  I will use it.  Thanks.

I have a question: Is it a good idea to “lockdown” (I don’t know how else to say it) on some threads rather than just move on? I mean,  is it good to keep hammering at the same thread (for days, weeks or as long as it takes) until no Anti-White dares to post another objection to your talking points?

I’ve decided to try it, but I’m guessing a lot of people must have already tried this strategy. If so, is it worthwhile doing on some threads?

Can those who are using the terms “Eurocide” in place of Genocide, and “AW” in place of anti-white please explain how such usage does NOT damage our consistent mantra message?

Jlocke

You can`t steal the word genocide, it is the black letters of the international genocide law.

So anti-whites don`t contest Eurocide and that means it`s good?

Come on John, you know about “The Silence” and the enemy going easy on stuff that`s good for them.

I have only used it a few times, to be fair. I still use genocide.

Dungeoneer asked, “Short memory John, why continue to test something which you don`t deny is damaging for our consistent mantra message and concentrate instead on the real thing i.e white genocide?”

I didn’t think it hurt our consistent message personally, but since you think think it does, I won’t use it.