Search? Click Here
Did you know you can visit to the swarm with www.bugsswarm.com?
Post on the internet Working Thread

Carloman

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 41 through 52 (of 52 total)
1 2 3
  • Author
    Posts
  • 05/11/2014 at 11:28 am in reply to: Denying the consequences of speaking out, and demanding a list of names #93594
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies. One more question: What people were specifically threatened for participating in the White Man’s March? I think mentioning people who were threatened or harmed for participating in the White Man’s March would be better than mentioning someone who was arrested for some rant on a train.

    05/11/2014 at 12:32 am in reply to: Denying the consequences of speaking out, and demanding a list of names #93585
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies. You’ve all given me some ideas.

    Jason wrote, “Horus made a great point recently – it is impossible to have “discussions” or arguments when we are in the middle of psychological warfare.” I agree, but how do we make that point to the audience. The anti-White says, “Let’s have that discussion right here on youtube.” If I reply, “Not now; we’re in the middle of psychological warfare,” the audience won’t understand what I’m talking about. Would a good answer be, “The time will be ready when there is a general willingness to discuss White genocide”?

    Speaking of Horus, he does speak about genocide tribunals and putting a velvet rope around people’s necks. I’ve listened to the first eleven of his podcasts. He seems to meander around a lot. Is it worth listening to the rest of them?

    Also, you’ve all answered my second question, but what about the anti-White who says there are no consequences to speaking out about White genocide. Are there any examples I could point out?

    04/12/2014 at 9:50 pm in reply to: Writing a Book Review for amazon.com #93171
    Carloman
    Participant

    The review posted yesterday. Here is the link:

    http://www.amazon.com/review/R23B5N62IB3FAX

    I’ll also post the link on the working thread later tonight.

    04/11/2014 at 1:09 pm in reply to: Writing a Book Review for amazon.com #93141
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thank you for all your suggestions. I have posted the review this morning, giving it one star, since nearly everyone else gave it four or five stars. Amazon said they are processing my review, and that they will e-mail me when that is done. As of now, I have not received any e-mail from them, and the review has not posted.

    04/10/2014 at 2:46 pm in reply to: Writing a Book Review for amazon.com #93125
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thank you for your feedback.

    Here is my revised review:

    This is a very worthwhile book about Frank Borman, a national hero, the first to command a manned mission to lunar orbit. The author, Frank Borman himself, provides a lot of details about his military career, his NASA days, and his time at Eastern Airlines. But it also contains within it the seeds of what is wrong with American society, and why we are in decline.

    Sprinkled throughout the book are several anti-White statements, some subtle, some not so subtle. The two most glaring ones are one where he complains about a policy at West Point, already repealed by the time he was a student there, forbidding Black cadets from dancing with White women, and another where he calls White people “rednecks” for maintaining a segregated school system that benefited White students. These may seem mild compared to the blatant anti-White statements and policies we hear today. Borman himself may think he was just being fair. After all, in other passages he wrote approvingly about flying the Confederate flag, and about how he disapproved of more favorable treatment for non-Whites. Nonetheless, attitudes such as these, which started to become common among members of his generation, set the stage for the more blatant anti-White policies that were to come, such as massive non-White immigration in ALL White countries and ONLY White countries.

    When we have Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, and White countries for everybody, over time we have fewer and fewer White people. It’s White geNOcide.

    Frank Borman was indeed a great American hero, but he never understood the truth of the statement that anti-Racist is a codeword for anti-White.

    Does anyone have any more suggestions before I post this? Has anyone here posted a review at amazon.com (or bn.com) containing Mantra ideas? If so, could you provide a link. Thank you.

    03/04/2014 at 9:53 pm in reply to: New Talking Point #92363
    Carloman
    Participant

    You can make them a little shorter:

    White flight is a codeword for White ethnic cleansing.

    White privilege is a codword for White self-determination.

    (or White sovereignty, but I like the first better, because the second could be twisted to mean White supremacy.)

    02/26/2014 at 9:19 pm in reply to: Dealing with Requests/Demands for Specific Information #92257
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies. Now that I think about it, I’ve been doing it all wrong. I’ve been telling people that African and Asian countries don’t ALLOW massive immigration of other races. But it doesn’t matter whether it’s allowed or not. The fact is, other races are not flooding into African and Asian countries. It doesn’t matter what the reason is; it’s White genocide just the same.

    02/26/2014 at 12:49 pm in reply to: Dealing with Requests/Demands for Specific Information #92246
    Carloman
    Participant

    Thank you for all the replies. You all gave me answers to the first question, but what about the second question: Have you ever tried to apply for citizenship to an African country and been denied?

    In that case, he’s not really denying that White genocide is happening, but rather implying that we could easily do the same thing to other races (if we weren’t so racist ourselves). How can we take that and bring it back to the topic of White genocide?

    The only thing that I could think of, looking at your responses above, is something like, “Don’t be silly, anti-White, We don’t want other races in my OUR countries, and we don’t belong in THEIR countries, either.” Would that be a good response, or can you think of something better?

    01/23/2014 at 11:48 pm in reply to: I'm not "anti-racist" #60309
    Carloman
    Participant

    Well, if he just said, “I’m not anti-racist,” and nothing more, I’d reply, “Good, I’m glad to hear that,” and leave it at that. But he still says that you’re making stuff up and that he’s not anti-White. Perhaps we could have a reliable study on hand to quote, just in case someone ask about that. But I think it’s better to say something like, “When non-Whites pour into White countries and mix with us, in time it will mean the end of our race. The exact year that it happens is not important. If you’re okay with that, then you’re certainly anti-White, regardless of whether you call yourself anti-racist or not.”

    All in all, I think it’s good when someone denies that he’s anti-racist, because it means that we’ve put him on the defensive. If he also denies that he’s anti-White, that’s even better.

    01/07/2014 at 9:31 pm in reply to: White Privilege is just a codeword #59808
    Carloman
    Participant

    Actually, the first one is good, but shorten it to “White privilege is a codeword for White self-determination.”

    01/02/2014 at 10:17 pm in reply to: Interracial Mini-Mantras #59701
    Carloman
    Participant

    Cleric Preston, I read over your interracial mini-mantras yesterday, and I thought them over for one day before commenting, to make sure that I said exactly what I wanted to say.

    There’s one that I think you got wrong, so let me explain my reasoning. The purpose of the mantra is to convince the audience, not insult the race-mixer. In the one where you use the term “fetish,” I have the following three issues:

    1. I think that the use of that term may make some members of the audience tune out and not read any further. Not everyone gets raging mad when they see a mixed-race couple. I believe that there are many people who would not see anything wrong with an interracial couple who may still be concerned about White genocide.

    2. It undercuts one of our other arguments. If we claim that when two races share the same living space then it is NATURAL that they should mix, how can we claim that people who race-mix are pursuing an UNNATURAL fetish? Those are two contrary positions. To use Beefcake’s example, if we put a lion and a tiger in the same cage and they mate, that is not a fetish; that is natural. There are many high-IQ White men with Asian wives, and they will point that out to us.

    3. I’m not even sure that it’s true that interracial couples are pursuing a fetish. I’m no psychologist, but I can think of a number of reasons for it: fetish, sharing living space, alienation, brainwashing, lack of upbringing, simply being fed up with wimpy White males/feminist White females, or any combination of the above. So if a man says, “I don’t have a fetish, I just share my cubicle at work with a cute Asian woman, and we hit it off,” or “I’m sick of feminist White women,” are we going to argue with him? It’s just a distraction from the issue of White genocide.

    On the other hand, the one about Yoko Ono and John Lennon you got just perfect. I like it for a number of reasons:

    1. It doesn’t insult anyone, so you won’t loose the audience.

    2. John Lennon and Yoko Ono are popular cultural icons who are respected across social classes and generations, so it doesn’t make us look like a bunch of rednecks.

    3. I can actually imagine it starting discussions among people, since, for example, if White countries and Japan follow the path of genocide, there will be no more John Lennons and no more Yoko Onos.

    My only reservation is that, although I am old enough to remember John Lennon, perhaps some younger people may not know who he is. I don’t follow popular culture, but it would have to be someone who is widely respected, not some degenerate wigger.

    The one about Snow White and Pocahontas is okay, but it suggests that White people are better, which is a little bit off message. The one about the Australian Aborininal leader is also good.

    The important thing in all of these is not whether we like them, but how the audience will react.

    12/30/2013 at 8:50 pm in reply to: Interracial Mini-Mantras #55964
    Carloman
    Participant

    If I understand the purpose of the Mantra correctly, the Mantra is to point out to people the ongoing program of genocide against the White race. Reading the UN definition of genocide, I don’t think that individual cases of race-mixing constitute genocide, but only inflicting conditions that lead to race-mixing. I suppose one might say that individual cases of race-mixing “contribute” to genocide, but, according to the definition that we are using, I’m not even sure that that is the case. So, as important as it is to discourage individual cases of race-mixing, I don’t see how it has anything to do with the Mantra.

    So suppose that you post the Mantra on an article or video, and someone replies, “I’m White, my boyfriend is Black, and we love each other! Are you trying to make our relationship illegal? How dare you!” The only way that I can see that you can reply within the terms of the Mantra is to relate it to a White homeland. For example, “Asians have their own exlcusive homelands, Africans have their own exclusive homelands, . . .” If the couple lives in, say, Brazil, then their relationship may be deviant, but I don’t see how it relates to White genocide. So I don’t think that you should address the individual relationship, but rather the need for all races to have their own exclusive homelands.

    If someone you know personally tells you about an interracial realtionship, then it would be perfectly appropriate to discuss crime stats, genetic heritage, etc., privately with that person, or in front of other people who may be interested. But in front of a public audience these topics cause people to tune out, so only genocide and the need for a homeland should be discussed.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 12 posts - 41 through 52 (of 52 total)
1 2 3