http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.[13]

…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(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.— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II

Genocide is a point most anti-Whites refuse to accept. To accept this is a massive step.

Genocide is a crime which has an actus reas and mens rea.

The actual act (AR) and the mental state behind this (MR).

Genocide is the partial or complete destruction of a race. So you do not have to completely destroy a race to commit genocide. You are guilty if you take steps which caused the partial or complete destruction of the race and you did this with the intention of partially or completely destroying that race.

If you thought those pesky Whites need cutting down to size and you started a programme of demoralisation aimed at reducing White birth rates aimed at causing a decline in the White race. This is genocide.

It is the “destruction” that causes the problem in most people’s minds. Destruction they presume is bombs bullets and other deadly weapons. That it is mass murder. Of course if you were trying to get rid of the White race that will fail and fail massively. The split-second the White race got wind of this, they would  go into attack mode and destroy the aggressor like they have for ten’s of thousands of years. We are quite good at this – we are so good at this, it is one thing that is held against us!

No; destruction is a process where you have something and then at the end of it you don’t. So if in the year 2000 you have 1 billion White people and in 2100 your programme resulted in 200 million, where have 800 million White people gone? Your programme of reducing White births resulted in the White population crashing. That you never “killed” anyone is irrelevant. Your propaganda poisoned the minds of White people and stopped White births as sure as a chemical causing infertility stopped White births.

Once people latch onto this – that there are programmes in place which have encouraged a dramatic fail in White births, then they can start to see White genocide is real.

We don’t even have to go into mass immigration to start convicting of genocide. Then if you flood all White countries and only White countries with non-Whites we can see the intention is to do something only to White countries and White people. The anti-White could not care less what is happening in Nigeria – that country is not on their agenda. That something is happening in Tibet is not their concern b/c their intent is directed against White people, their crime is White genocide.

So if White countries are flooded and a propaganda programme exists to silence objection to this with words like racist and hate crime legislation – these people are also guilty of genocide. Their intention is to silence opposition to mass immigration. Some if their band of maniacs promote these non-Whites to assimilate with the host population, they are party to genocide. No White person ever came for the mating of a Black person and a White person. Obama is a Black person and never ever ever a White. These people are also guilty of genocide  b/c they are acting for the wholesale disappearance of White people.

They might say but this was not my intention, I did not mean genocide.

Genocide is the total or partial destruction of a race – destruction we have concluded means disappearance of a race by any means. It doesn’t have to be complete.

In English law, for a person to be guilty of murder they must have killed the person and had the intent to kill or commit grievous bodily harm. People were acquitted b/c they were able to convince juries they did not mean to kill or commit grievous bodily harm.

In the case R v Woollin [1999] AC 82 House of Lords, the appellant threw his 3 month old son to the ground in a fit of temper. The child sustained a fractured skull and died.

It was accepted that Woollin did not intend to seriously harm his son. There was little question of that but as a matter of public policy should such an act go “unpunished?” One could easily argue the father would be punishing himself to his death bed, but the State must also have its pound of flesh. It was held that if the act made the death or grievous bodily harm of the child a “virtual certainty” and the appellant knew this was the case, the jury should “infer” there was intent sufficient to satisfy the necessary mens rea of the offence. Woollin was held to have been guilty of murder.

Now this case applied to murder and as it was a House of Lords decision [Supreme Court] it held for all subsequent murder cases, but only murder cases. The “virtual certainty test” however has started to creep to other offences.

Genocide would easily fall within the realm of murder and so the virtual certainty test.

The defendants could say they never intended to genocide the White race but programmes operating in numerous White countries would clearly affect a significant proportion of White people – sufficient if successful to affect part of the White race. Genocide is partial or total. Partial is enough.

The Mantra is important. Lifting it into the consciousness of more and more people makes it harder and harder to claim you did not realise the outcome of your acts would be the virtual certain partial destruction of the White race. The Mantra helps ensure the guilty verdict of the anti-Whites in the crime of White genocide.

A further point would be the defence that the programme affected all races in the country. It was not specifically directed against White people.

Now they might be able to create sufficient doubt about this.

But they still do not escape. There is the “thin skull rule.”

You take your victim as you find them. If a blow to the head of a certain force would not fracture the skull of 99% of people but you hit the person with the thin skull and fracture it. You are guilty of fracturing their skull. No good bleating that you never expected that, you have hit 99 other people on the head and it never fractured their skulls.

Let’s say the defendant said my propaganda could be seen by all races in the USA. Let’s say the jury was gullible enough to accept the propaganda was not in reality being directed against White people.

In a battle in Braveheart, King Edward instructs his archers to fire into the enemy troops. The arrows would kill his own troops as well, he did not care. His intention was to kill the Scots. Anti-Whites are as cold and calculating as King Edward, or rather the Hollywood director of Braveheart.

Birth rates are much lower in Whites in the US. Whites have internalised the propaganda. They are more susceptible, they have thinner skulls so to speak.

The enemy can see this, this is why they do what they do. They still press on despite the virtual certainty of their acts and despite the White race’s thin skull.

There is no escaping guilt. Anti-White guilt.

We must replace this fabricated White guilt with the real guilt in this world, anti-White guilt. They are guilty of White genocide.