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

Some Comments on Commenters

Posted by Bob on March 15th, 2010 under Bob, Coaching Session, Comment Responses

When someone uses some version of “You are hiding racism” or “You are being a racist,” you should have come up with the answer:

“You are faced with a truth you cannot deal with, white genocide. Your answer is to say that those who disagree with you are Evil, in this case, Evil Racists. That tactic was used against people bringing up a legitimate point by the intellectually exhausted before Socrates was born.”

“It is cowardly and mindless.”

I won’t be here forever, gang, and I need for YOU to learn to put this standard stuff in historical context for YOURSELVES.

Simmons, it seems to me that once you have figured out why information is produced you will naturally know for whom it is produced. Did I miss your point?

The Occidental Digest article was good, but it seems to me that, by using the word “victimization” instead of genocide, the writer sounded like the same old thing. It is like the old crime statistics. Sounding like the same old thing, even when you bring out the decimation of whites, allows the other side to debate THEIR “victimization.”

We need a straight line, not a circle of accusations.

Words are critical. Any time you use terms your readers are familiar and comfortable with, you make the other side comfortable as well. Once you argue a long, long time, you will find there is no such thing as a “good twist on the Mantra.”

It is good to let us know when something hits on the subject of genocide, but don’t fall for it.

Don’t break ranks. Stay on message.

  1. #1 by BGLass on 03/15/2010 - 7:41 am

    The use of “victimization” also is a reaction within the debate that has been framed by opposition. It is not a word that would exist within a real white point of view, maybe. This was what I was saying about “white guilt” (their word) versus “white terrorization” which is what many whites feel. They are NOT guilty. They are afraid and trying to appease people, to get them to stop attacking them. Little kids in school SAY they are feeling afraid, not guilty. (Guilt is what the opposition imagines you must feel, if in fact, you did all the evil the tv movies show you did, and so if you didn’t feel guilt, you would not be “human,” and therefore would be truly a white devil, spawn of satan, etc.) Whites ARE victims. But they are not victims in the sense of those who feel they, ‘killed all the indians, enslaved all blacks, reneged on all treaties, gassed all you-know-whats, dragged all homosexuals, used HAARP to cause earthquakes in Haiti’ and so on. Often, whites actually feel helpless (at more evidence the attacks will never end), hemmed in, entrapped, etc. It’s hard—but people need to stop often, and ask: Is this word we always hear —like guilt— really what I’m feeling? Really what others are saying about what they feel? Too few people do this.

  2. #2 by Dave on 03/15/2010 - 10:42 am

    The hardest things in life are always danced around.

    Nobody is interested in argument and refutation. In fact, argument and refutation are widely resented as belonging to the conceits of intellectuals. The broad world doesn’t give a damn and will never give a damn about real argument and refutation.

    Instead the world responds to the personal bearing of the respondent. Impressive personal deportment will trump argument every time, without exception.

    The Mantra is an entire semantic domain in and of itself. Accordingly, you have to be aware of semantic domains and not engage in the mixing of semantic domains when you confront people.

    The purpose of the Mantra is to suborn heresy. Accordingly, the semantic domain of the Mantra is pure distilled militancy. Therefore, your personal deportment should be unwaveringly militant. (This is where Nick Griffen makes his mistakes. He continually falls into the trap of trying to prove he is a reasonable person.)

    To hell with proving you are a reasonable person.

    Instead, when someone hurls the accusation “racist” at you, respond by saying, “Go to hell!” “You are an enemy of my people and my family and an advocate of their annihilation and you have no idea of the depth of my commitment to bringing you and your kind to justice.”

    There is no way to parry the fact that you are in an impasse with your opponent. In an impasse, THE SUPERIOR FORCE prevails: Asia for the Asians, Africa for the Africans, White Countries for Everybody!

    Don’t deviate. Stay within the domain of militancy, absolutely committed militancy.

    Every time you attempt to grasp a symbol or an emblem, you depreciate real militancy.

    Never in all of history has a real soldier ever been in need of a uniform. Flags rally weaklings, not real men.

    Stay away from uniforms and stay away from flags and emblems at all costs. We have no need to hide behind anything.

    Realize that your personal deportment is everything. Absolutely everything.

  3. #3 by BGLass on 03/15/2010 - 12:09 pm

    True. At my first office, I came aboard with a lip-service communist who said something very smart and lefty at the first meeting, trying to make an impression. The big boss said, “That has been disproven,” meaning communism. No if, ands, buts. No argument. Delivered very matter-of-factly. There was to be no discussion. And that ended all communism in the department. If you don’t have power, blistering fierce morality works.

  4. #4 by Wandrin on 03/15/2010 - 8:05 pm

    Never defend. Always attack.

  5. #5 by Alan B on 03/15/2010 - 9:29 pm

    Reciently, a leader of the Tea Party movement was interviewed on MSNBC by some talking hairdo I can not remember. The interviewer was white, liberal and his task was to paint the Tea Party followers as racist retards and the guest as someone willing to have then as members. So what happened?
    The talking hairdo accused this Tea Party leader of being tollerart of racist,mention a few stupid signs a few memmbers carried and demanded that this leader account for this outrage and what he planed to do about it. The Tea Party guest did not grovel and beg forgiveness as expected. The guest pointed out that a reporter for MSNBC made a anti semitic comment in the past and was later promoted by MSNBC and asked whether MSNBC was in favor of anti semitism. That unexpected remark sent the talking hairdo into a tizzy and this jerk made a complete ass of himself and shouted get him off the air. Turn the tables of the white haters and they crumble and that is what the mantra can do in a few seconds.

You must be logged in to post a comment.