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

GAR5 Does Intellectual WORK for Us

Posted by Bob on November 3rd, 2011 under Coaching Session


GAR5 realized that the whole point of BUGS is now getting new Swarmers.

But unlike other sites we do not count our new BUGSERS by the hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands.

Our long-term goal is 300 or 500 actual Swarmers. We are talking in years.

But GAR5 is a real BUGSER. He didn’t just SUGGEST a new members section. He, or he and whoever he consulted, DID it.

That is why other sites deal in thousands and we deal in ones.

It requires a new mentality, a discipline, and hard mental WORK to become one of us. In fact, only a new BUGSER even understands what is involved.

GAR5 set it up, then he did some serious mental WORK. He set down principles that a new BUGSER needs to adhere to. It makes excellent reading for those of us who have been here.

Here is the first part GAR5’s summation. I will return to other parts:

General information.

1/ Stay on message; we are dealing with the genocide of White people and the perpetrators – anti-Whites. We are not dealing with Jewish global conspiracies, Banking families, etc. This is about establishing a foothold in the general population — we can expand on other ideas later.

2/ We are not arguing, we are making the point that ALL White countries and ONLY White countries are told by anti-Whites that they must accept millions of non-Whites and ‘assimilate’ with them, which is genocide. We want people to get annoyed of hearing our message!

3/ Use our terminology and phrases; “Anti-White”, “Pro-White”, “White genocide”, “Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White”, “Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, White countries for everybody”. “Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White” should be the last thing in your post, if possible.

4/ We are not fighting with the anti-Whites — we are talking to the general public, use the anti-Whites to prove that they want genocide of our people.

5/ Capitalize “White”, when you’re talking about our race – it is not a color of skin. ALWAYS use “Genocide”, NEVER use “Extinction”, “Population Displacement”, “Demographics shift”, etc. NEVER call them “antis”, they are “anti-White” – they are against White people’s existence.

6/ Avoid using “The White race”, “Caucasians”, “The Whites”, because it makes it look distant and turns it into a philosophical debate; use ‘Our people’, ‘My people’, ‘White people’, etc.

7/ Be aggressive and take the moral high-ground; we are fighting for the survival of our people, and anti-Whites are fighting for the genocide of our people.

8/ Think before you talk. Words are our weapons, make sure anti-Whites can’t shoot your own arrows back at you. Talking about committing violence is a no-go. Think about what your opposition is going to say next. Even talking about the soon-coming tribunals is not a good idea because it makes us look dangerous.

9/ Use and memorize The Mantra and our talking points in the talking points section below. The anti-Whites say the same things, and we have good ways to counter them.

10/ Ask lots of questions. “As an anti-White would it be okay if Asia brought in millions of non-Asians and assimilated with them until Asians became a minority? Why is it okay if it happens to White countries?” If you don’t get a reply keep asking them – it means your opponent is embarrassed and is trying to get off the subject.

11/ Use “As an anti-White” when you are asking questions about our people’s existence, e.g. “As an anti-White do you think more assimilation is required in ONLY White countries?”.

12/ Know your target audience and appeal to them. Young adults want to talk about education fees and housing prices, Teens want to talk about music, Old people want to talk about pensions, etc. Try to connect with the people using their language/colloquialisms e.g. “Dude” “Mate” “Bloke” “Howdy” “Yeah” “Lol” “Rofl”

13/ Using lots of bad language is going to make you – and us – look stupid.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
  1. #1 by OldBlighty on 11/03/2011 - 7:27 am

    Nice one Gar5. Its amazing to see it all in one place. You are an excellent student.

    My only suggestion for improvement is this sentence:
    “As an anti-White would it be okay if Asia brought in millions of non-Asians and assimilated with them until Asians became a minority?”

    Always ask them to name the non-White country, to treat the same as they do all White countries.

    Never name the country for them.

    For some reason, asking them to name a non-White country, messes with their anti-White programming. They can’t name the country, because they’d be acknowledging the existence of race and that a race can be eliminated, using massive immigration and forced integration.

    All credit goes to Lord Nelson for that.

    Again, well done Gar5.

    • #2 by Gar5 on 11/03/2011 - 9:18 am

      I have found that when you ask them to name a non-White country, they usually go one way: “Oh, well what actually is a White country?”

      The version I wrote leaves them with a “yes” or “no” answer, and we all know that Asia/Africa/other non-White places aren’t White.

      I use that version because I find it’s harder for them to attack it.

      • #3 by OldBlighty on 11/03/2011 - 9:39 am

        “Oh, well what actually is a White country?”

        Anti-White, why are you asking me what a “White” country is, when you define it every time you open your mouth?

        A “white” country is any country, you anti-Whites INSIST has an obligation, to import huge numbers of third world immigrants.

        White Countries
        http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2011/05/11/white-countries/

        Then you go back to asking them to name a non-White country.

        I have only ever got a country name once and they immediately backpedaled. The rest shut down and stonewalled.

        • #4 by Vandals Inc on 11/03/2011 - 10:59 am

          I am new here, but IMO:

          They DEMAND we DO IT. An insistence is much different than a demand. A demand implies a retribution or series of reprisals behind it. Much stronger verbiage.

          There is nothing polite about anti-Whites. They MAKE demands.

          • #5 by Lord Nelson on 11/03/2011 - 2:51 pm

            Vandals Inc

            Yes demand they do.

            Welcome to BUGS!

  2. #6 by SpinRabbit on 11/03/2011 - 8:22 am

    This is very concise and helpful. Thank you.

  3. #7 by Lord Nelson on 11/03/2011 - 8:28 am

    “All credit goes to Lord Nelson for that”

    I would love to take the credit for that one. But it was actually an unkown BUGSer who I first saw using that very technigue to destroy an Anti-White in a live exchange on youtube.

    And yes it is kryptonite for Anti-Whites! 😉

    It should go somthing like this:

    “As an anti-White can you name an Asian country that you believe must bring in millions of non-Asians and assimilate with them until Asians became exstinct?”

    LN

    • #8 by OldBlighty on 11/03/2011 - 9:41 am

      Thanks LN. That one is going into my cheat file. 🙂

  4. #9 by Creator on 11/03/2011 - 10:34 am

    This summation is GOLD 🙂

  5. #10 by c-bear on 11/03/2011 - 11:05 am

    The first time I read it on swarm I thought to myself, “Now, I should have thought of that.” Excellent job!
    Being a Bugster takes a certain amount of discipline, I have found. It takes a lot of self control not to go off on a tangent about “the crazy bagel eaters” or the “unruly inner-city youth” lol.
    There are plenty of other sites devoted to “News n’ Jews”. That is where those discussions belong. We’re fighting White Genocide here. That is our discipline.

  6. #11 by meawhiterabbit on 11/03/2011 - 11:35 am

    On a similar topic i just had an anti-white say “what the hell is a black country?”

    I replied with……

    “So now you are ALSO denying Black Africans the right to have the continent of Africa as their homeland?

    Thats very unusual because as i said you anti-Whites ONLY ever argue for this to be done to EVERY White country and ONLY White countries. You are usually demanding and justifying the GENOCIDE of my people

    Or are you just trying to be awkward by claiming you have no idea what a “Black” country is?

    Which one is it? Hateful of Blacks? Hateful of Whites? Or just plain obtuse?”

    I think it was okay but i’d like something shorter. Any ideas?

    • #12 by Gar5 on 11/03/2011 - 12:01 pm

      Well I had a go, but I don’t think it’s very good.

      “You are not asking that out of curiosity.

      You are asking that so you can lead people to the conclusion that there are no Black countries, and therefore it wouldn’t wrong to flood ALL and ONLY Black countries with hundreds of millions of non-Black people, then force-assimilate them into the Black population. Aka, genocide.

      This is what’s been done to White people.

      Only anti-Whites like you support this. It’s genocide.

      Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.”

    • #13 by Lord Nelson on 11/03/2011 - 1:01 pm

      The answer to this one is actually pretty obvious:

      Anti-White: ‘what the hell is a black country?’

      Pro-White: ‘A country where Anti-Whites DON’T demand mass immigration and assimilation’.

      • #14 by OldBlighty on 11/03/2011 - 1:44 pm

        That one is such fun. By that point, you can almost sense their confusion. They are trapped in a maze and there is no exit.

        • #15 by meawhiterabbit on 11/03/2011 - 1:56 pm

          Ha yep simple and straight to the point LN. This anti-white came back and made the mistake of telling me that we all came from Africa so i then obviously hit back with “oh really then we all have equal rights to Africa if thats where we all come from originally. I assume you have no objections to Africa being flooded with Asians ……” Haven’t had a reply to that yet

          • #16 by Lord Nelson on 11/03/2011 - 2:13 pm

            meawhiterabbit

            Nice one. Let us know if the Anti-White gets back to you.

  7. #17 by dungeoneer on 11/03/2011 - 12:53 pm

    Good work Gar5.

  8. #18 by Cleric Preston on 11/03/2011 - 6:24 pm

    Recently I’ve been using
    “Which non-White populations do you INSIST ‘mix’ and ‘blend’ out of existence in their own countries,or are you ONLY Anti-White ?”
    I’ve yet to get a straight answer on that…

    • #19 by Lord Nelson on 11/03/2011 - 7:32 pm

      Cleric Preston

      Bullseye! 😉

      That’s exactly what I was trying to remember. Are you the un-known BUGSer who used that on youtube?

      Great Stuff

  9. #20 by Cleric Preston on 11/03/2011 - 8:39 pm

    G’day LN,
    I believe I’m the one you spotted,but there’s so many of us posting everywhere it may have been someone else who liked it and saved the talking point on their ‘clipboard’.

    I’ve used it live,face to face and the reaction was stunned silence for about 10 seconds followed by ‘I’m sorry,I don’t understand the question’
    It is VERY powerful

    A ‘well done’ from other Bugsers is praise indeed !

  10. #21 by Harumphty Dumpty on 11/03/2011 - 11:23 pm

    @meawhiterabbit:

    #15: Beautiful!!

    #11: I’d give him just your first sentence alone (a great question) and see what trouble he might get himself into with it.

    I’ve listened to Adelheim and LN’s first two podcasts on Bugs Radio where they talk about questions a lot. Thanks for pointing me to that.

    One of them said that generally he likes to start with open questions (ones that are not yes/no questions) and end with closed ones, but that if the opportunity is right for a closed question earlier, “go for it!”

    Your question seems to me a knock-out punch that the guy left himself wide open for. When he gets up from the floor he should be staggering and you can enjoy finishing him off! 🙂

  11. #22 by Harumphty Dumpty on 11/03/2011 - 11:34 pm

    @meawhiterabbit:

    On second thought, maybe leave it the way it is if you have an audience that’s hopefully paying attention. But if you’re just hoping to snag passersby, I think just the question alone is best.

    • #23 by meawhiterabbit on 11/04/2011 - 4:20 am

      Cheers HD

      I have now got him saying he is not anti-white just anti-stupid (its a start haha) and claiming he doesn’t understand what i mean when i say that using his logic that if we all come from Africa then “Africans have no more claim to the continent than say Asians” However he did go onto say that he wouldn’t want Asians flooding Africa and taking their jobs and homes so my next question is “so why do you support this in ALL White countries and ONLY White countries”
      I have a feeingl he’s going to do a 180 and now claim he doesn’t. Mission complete

      #15 is definitely a trump card to pull out if they ever claim we all come from Africa………….in fact i am going to set them up to say that in the future then hook them in if they take the bait.

  12. #24 by James C on 11/04/2011 - 3:40 am

    “#5 – NEVER use Extinction”

    Is it acceptable to use the term “extinction” in the context of making the Genocide charge? Not as a flyby attack, but as part of a protracted argument.

    For example saying that these policies lead inevitably to White extinction, everyone knows this and yet they continue to be forced on us. It’s not accidental, unforeseen or unintentional. It’s deliberate.

    Deliberately driving a people to extinction is Genocide.

  13. #25 by Harumphty Dumpty on 11/04/2011 - 6:02 am

    @ #24 James C.

    I’m still new but I think so, as long as you’re building toward “White Genocide.” In fact, I think “extinction” and “elimination” are nice stepping stones to get up to “genocide” gently, just as you do very well IMO in your example. In fact, I’m going to copy it and use it!

    “Genocide” is a huge leap for readers IMO. I think anything that leads them there is a help.

    I’m less certain about my own way of leading readers there, which seems to still rely on the (non)power of reason:

    “Anti-Whites are flooding every White country with non-Whites. That will result in the genocide of Whites as surely as the Spanish pouring into Mexico extinguished that land’s native peoples and replaced them with the
    interbred mixed race of today’s Mexico.”

    I feel uneasy about this. Maybe I just need to try it out where I can get some argument.

  14. #26 by Bob on 11/04/2011 - 7:47 am

    Thanks, Old Blighty.

    It is so GOOD to have a BUGSTER who SPOTS Tailgating

  15. #27 by Frank on 11/07/2011 - 10:59 pm

    #24 and #25 bring up a topic I’d also like clarification on. While I almost always include the Genocide word, I’ve often wondered if the “shock” of that word leaves ’em in a place where they write off the Mantra. I don’t propose NOT using it, but have always wondered if there is a “ramp up” to it which will make it easier for anti-Whites to “get”. Of course I don’t give a damn about the hard core anti-White’s feelings, but want the peanut gallery to stay tuned in.

    What’s suggested above is sort of like the “slippery slope” argument. LEADING the peanut gallery to accept the final dictum that it’s White Genocide by ramping up from less “scary” words to the coup de grace of saying they seek White Genocide.

    The slippery slope is usually used by anti-Whites as a rationalization for their hatred of Whites. Could we flip the tables on them by outlining the slippery slope to White Genocide? I’d like to hear others’ opinions on this.

  16. #28 by Harumphty Dumpty on 11/07/2011 - 11:46 pm

    #27 by Frank:

    I think it’s great if one can lead the reader up to the word “genocide” by steps so that the word seems inarguably correct or at least initially plausible. But I think what we’re depending on is that no matter how shocked people are the first time they read or hear the word, they won’t be shocked by the 500th time they read or hear it, and by the 2000th time they will accept it as self-evident!

    In your last paragraph, I don’t agree at all that “outlining the slippery slope to White Genocide” would even be an accurate depiction of the truth, which is that the process of white genocide is well underway.

  17. #29 by Cleric Preston on 11/08/2011 - 2:47 am

    #27 FRANK-No No NO
    Don’t lead up to it.Don’t use a ‘slippery slope’ or ‘ramping up from less scary words’.
    The entire point IS TO SHOCK
    Nearly every White person has been lulled into a trance like state where we think having to share our countries with 3rd Worlders is normal.The ‘shock’ of such extreme accusations,like GENOCIDE is designed to get a response.Any response,even negative,shows people are being impacted and influenced.

    Don’t build it up,just accuse them Anti-Whites of GENOCIDE straight up.
    ‘Shock’ is our friend.

    It’s like this,if I was to ask what were you doing on 5/3/04,unless it was your birthday or something you probably don’t remember.

    Let’s go back further,prior to 2004,what if I asked you what were you doing on September 11,2001 ?
    I bet you could tell me,in detail,where you were when the planes hit the towers.It was a confronting and shocking image.It was the ‘shock’ factor that awoke people to the danger of ‘terror-ism’
    It was the ‘shock’ that made the peoples minds receptive to the new information.On 9/11 the new information was ‘radical Islam is the enemy’.
    In our case the information we want to impart is ‘anti-racism is a codeword for Anti-White’,and ‘It’s GENOCIDE’

    The ‘shock’ makes it memorable,and that’s what we want !

  18. #30 by Harumphty Dumpty on 11/08/2011 - 3:33 am

    Cleric, okay, I’m convinced (almost), and thanks!

    Has this and similar items we’ve had questions about been covered by Bob in his earlier “coaching sessions” or elsewhere, or do I just have to rely on my instincts as to which of the views I get on various points are correct?

    And did those of you who’ve been here for awhile and are confident about all this get your understandings from Bob somewhere, or did you also have to rely on your own instincts and thrash it out among yourselves?

You must be logged in to post a comment.