Yes, when people think of genocide they see heaps of corpses.

Let me explain something about political warfare. Alan B had the insight that Papilon has changed the nature of debate by posting the Mantra on BNP.

Here is where Alan’s insight is so critical. He did NOT say that the entire British population had begun torchlight parades in favor of THE TRUTH. He noted a minor but critial sea change.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what power politics is all about.

If genocide has a stereotype, ad we have a definition which even the critics have to admit is valid, we can either try to justify ourselves — which is ALWAYS fatal — or we can just go on and use the real definition over and over and over and over until THAT is the accepted definition because it is TRUE.

We are inthe process of appropriating THEIR word. If Jews had kept the word genocide as a defensive measure they could still have it. But they chose to use it to describe any method by whiich whites tried to preserve their own kind. In the UN Resolutions they expanded the definition to include anything that whites could conceivably use to save white gentiles.

So the policy they are now pursuing is, by their own definition, genocide.

So now we are supposed to redefine the word to suit THEM?

No way, Jose!

They stumbled into an exact definition of the genocide THEY are practicing. They expanded it so they could vent their hatred of white gentiles.

Hate is self-destructive.

Even Stevenp quotes chapter and verse to say that I am right, what I describe inthe Mantra IS genocide. But we are supposed to let them get away with doing away with OUR race on a technicality.

No way, Jose.

As Noah Webster said, language is USAGE. We are going to USE that definition. In the meantime, it will go throuhg the standard stages of being called absurd, being attacked,and being accepted.

I’ve been here before.

A LOT.

They are trying to do away with my race. That is genocide. Stop quibbling.

NOT SPAM

NOT SPAM

Yeah, that is the first or second thing that you notice when reading the mantra for the first time. I think I read somewhere on this blog that what the mantra speaks about fits the UN definition of genocide.

I’m following the thread papillion posted. Very hard on the BNP up to my reading at page 8. I see we got some of our people in there. The mantra has really changed the tone of the discussion. Now they are trying to deny that we are victims, rather than asserting that we are victimizers.

Comment by Al Parker

ME:

As I said, this is the kind of thinking we need in 2006.

“The mantra has really changed the tone of the discussion. Now they are trying to deny that we are victims, rather than asserting that we are victimizers. ”

I have THOUGHT that way for years, and it is a relief for me to see someone else thinking in terms of moving the battlefront.

And this IS the battlefront. This is the ONLY battlefront. All those soldiers in battle were the RESULT of words printed and spoken before the shooting started. The soldiers make better stories, but they don’t make history.

This will not be the first time that someone made history by being on top of technology. The printing press MADE the Protestant Reformation. The Hussites had won victory after victory on the battlefield a century before, but they were crushed inthe end and the movement died right there.

One Jew got it right. A lady who had been watching Parliament complained to him that all they did there was give their opinions. He replied, “Madam, opinion rules the world.”

Papillon reaches more people in a single insertion of the blog than the biggest crowd Lenin ever spoke to.

Something that used to require endless printings and repetitions from the literate to the illiterate was a breakthrough in communications when printing was developed. But compared to ” the buzz on the net” that is stone-age stuff, like speeches and parties.

One papillon is worth a dozen generals, and I am grateful to Alan B for having the smarts to see it and for pointing it out