I would say that the answer to “Why shouldn’t they marry if they want to” would be to stay on the attack:
“You are saying that this whole program of immigration and assimilation and chasing down every white on earth who wants to live in a white community is just for True Love?”
Any other approach is tailgating.
#1 by Jason on 02/12/2013 - 6:59 am
Awesome. It would make a great movie: a love so great it required the genocide of a race!
What is the best break-away line when we decide to stop tailgating? If they are just being childish and profane I think we have that covered. But what if they are raising technical and legitimate sounding issues, but are obviously just trying to nitpick? What is the best final departure?
They did this with the White Normal Girls video – they bombarded it with tons of quibbling remarks.
#2 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 11:13 am
We rightfully oppose genocidal anti-white policy on an individual, national, and global basis.
Don`t we Dick Whitman?
#3 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 11:30 am
“We rightfully oppose genocidal anti-white policy on an individual, national, and global basis”
Subtext: We need to be able to tell/advise whites “not to fall in love” with non-whites.
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2013/01/29/anti-whites-insist-that-integration-must-be-enforced-everywhere-because-whites-dont-want-it/comment-page-1/#comments
#11 by Dick_Whitman on 1/29/2013 – 10:30 pm
“I don’t think it’s a good idea to tell people not to love who they wish….”
#4 by Jason on 02/12/2013 - 11:40 am
On this true love thing, after making the point Bob gave us, isn’t it better to avoid talking policies on marriage in some future white homeland? We are not even free have such speech in most white countries and it could be a real time waster.
Trying to argue with some lying anti-white who claims his True Love is of another race will just waste hours.
I have found the advice to stop talking about future policies and programs, until we are free to do so, helpful (especially with regard to Mantra work)
#5 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 11:52 am
Newsflash Jason, we`re not talking about the “future” white homeland or arguing in a non-mantra attack fashion with anti-whites about their favourite white genocide policy.
We`re talking “You are forcing white genocide on us” this minute this day.
#6 by Sentinel on 02/12/2013 - 11:52 am
Anti-Whites have taken an oath to pursue White people to the ends of the Earth until we no longer exist. If that ain’t True Love…
I think I’m starting to love them right back. 🙂
#7 by Harumphty Dumpty on 02/12/2013 - 12:57 pm
“You are saying that this whole program of immigration and assimilation and chasing down every white on earth who wants to live in a white community is just for True Love?”
This beautiful reply is not just a wonderful tool to use on others, but it does good work on myself too. It’s a mantra I’m going to repeat to myself a lot.
I know Bob is a lot smarter than I am, but still I think that if I felt the reality of what we’re serving up as deeply, completely, holistically as he does, I might at least occasionally think of such “obvious” things to say myself.
Sorry about that new-agey word in there, but look at its definition:
holistic: characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole.
Bob, you make it seem so easy.
I want this little mantra to make its way deeply into me, and reshape the thinking parts of my brain so that my own brain can produce the same kind of stuff at least to the degree it’s capable of.
#8 by shari on 02/12/2013 - 12:04 pm
Right Jason. This “true love” stuff is fraudulent anyway. How much of this kind of “true love” was there, before any notion of morals was shot all to hell? Well, actually more of the REAL kind than now, I think. You SAY you for true love? What you are is anti-white.
#9 by Bob on 02/12/2013 - 12:44 pm
Don’t miss my point here, please.
NEVER tailgate on what they want to switch to. Remake your own point.
When you are abandoning them to mumbling to themselves, a Parthian shot is our strategy.
#10 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 12:48 pm
Yes, even mentioning individual is bad, thanks Coach.
#11 by mandela on 02/12/2013 - 1:25 pm
Thanks BOB, good reply, I will use that.
#12 by beefcake on 02/12/2013 - 2:20 pm
Sorry Bob, I certainly hope mine was not tailgating when I made these suggestions:
“Anti-Whites insist Whites cannot be allowed anywhere exclusive for our race, and they enforce conditions which lead to interracial marriages intended to destroy our race.
Nobody is insisting that Blacks need to be prevented from having anything exclusive in order to inflict conditions which lead to intermarriages intended to destroy Blacks as a race and then telling them “nobody is forcing you to intermarry”.
Saying that intermarriage isn’t being forced is trying to conceal the fact that the conditions which lead to it ARE being FORCED.
They seemed to fit with the Mantra.
I like Bob’s reply, and will use it.
#13 by Lord Nelson on 02/12/2013 - 2:28 pm
What we are talking about here is “The final solution to White problem”.
Step 1: Mass non-white immigration.
Step 2: Miscegenation.
Both steps 1 & 2 are of course fully backed up with heavy propaganda/brainwashing from the media and education systems.
IMO. This is the favorite and most desired fall back position of all Anti-Whites. Once there is a large enough non-white presence in their particular white country. They then get to sit back. Play dumb. Pretend they only care about Love and Freedom. And at the same time, lay a MASSIVE and DEADLY trap for us Pro-Whites to walk right into.
Do Not Walk In To That TRAP!. (You will only be made to look like a sad idiot and complete loser if you do)
As bad as miscegenation may be. It only becomes a Genocidal issue when the non-white presence is big enough to make it so.
This is why in Eastern European countries which are still 99% white, the Anti-Whites are still screaming about the “Lack of Diversity”. And NOT simply crying about the freedom of love. The race-mixing propaganda will only begin in those countries once the non-white presence is big enough.
To me this possible answer below is not perfect. But it does at least avoid the big trap:
———-
Anti-White: ‘Well I just think people should be free to fall in love and marry who they want’.
Pro-White: ‘You’re talking about the final solution to the White problem.’
———–
When you look at it. The repeating pattern of first open borders, then racial melting pot for ALL white countries is so bloody obvious. That at a very high level, the whole thing must have been planned by our own ruling elites in each of our respective White countries.
Damn. I hope others here hate these b@stards as much as I do.
#14 by Wm White on 02/12/2013 - 10:02 pm
Your insight into the “process” for miscegenation to grow from an annoyance to a big problem for our race’s very survival is quite astute. Also, insightful is your observation of the calculated non-response, anti-whites spew forth, with their ulterior and covert feign of: “its for love and freedom.”
thank-you
#15 by Jmcaul on 02/13/2013 - 2:05 am
LN, I hope I hate them as much as you do too. (I think I do.) They call us ‘haters.’ They haven’t even BEGUN to feel the hate.
#16 by dungeoneer on 02/13/2013 - 12:19 pm
LordNelson:”As bad as miscegenation may be. It only becomes a Genocidal issue when the non-white presence is big enough to make it so”
Maybe I`m not reading you right LN, but isn`t “assimilation” more important than numbers of non-whites ref: Southern US whites and others living around tons of non-whites easily with the right racial mindset?
LordNelson: “Damn. I hope others here hate these b@stards as much as I do”
I hate `em too roughly and It`s leading me to mistakes. We must follow Ole Bob`s example and cultivate the refined type.
#17 by shari on 02/12/2013 - 4:05 pm
I wish I was all right, all the time. Maybe I will be. Thanks Bob for what you have done, and do.
#18 by Dick_Whitman on 02/12/2013 - 5:36 pm
“You are saying that this whole program of immigration and assimilation and chasing down every white on earth who wants to live in a white community is just for True Love?” (Bob)
This is a good reply to the “why are you against love” argument because it:
1) Doesn’t tell people who they should or shouldn’t love*
2) Doesn’t attempt to debate the meaning of love.
3) Focuses on the anti-White system and not the individual making a perceived choice.
However, against the “nobody is forcing you to intermarry” argument it doesn’t really fit. The best thus far for this argument is Beefcake’s
1)“Anti-Whites insist Whites cannot be allowed anywhere exclusive for our race, and they enforce conditions which lead to interracial marriages intended to destroy our race.
2)Nobody is insisting that Blacks need to be prevented from having anything exclusive in order to inflict conditions which lead to intermarriages intended to destroy Blacks as a race and then telling them “nobody is forcing you to intermarry”.
3) Saying that intermarriage isn’t being forced is trying to conceal the fact that the conditions which lead to it ARE being FORCED.
I have an article coming soon that will cover this subject in more detail.
#19 by beefcake on 02/12/2013 - 6:55 pm
Dick, thanks, you answered MY question.
After reading Bob’s reply, I was at first thinking I may have said the wrong thing (but unsure why). I was confused.
Then your post here made me realize those responces were to two DIFFERENT BS arguments.
Bob’s is to the “True Love” BS, mine is to the “Not Being Forced” BS.
#20 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 6:42 pm
That`s a typical white genocide justification. To ensure group survival whites have to be able as a group to say no to intermarriage don`t we anti-whites?
#21 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 6:54 pm
Calling whites who engage in genocidal group destruction via intermarriage anti-white is a non-negotiable part of being a pro-white.
Say what you want about Stormfront, but anyone arguing like Dick has that whites should not be discouraged from engaging in genocidal group destruction via intermarriage would be banished to Opposing Views.
#22 by mandela on 02/12/2013 - 9:17 pm
dungeoneer, we are all on the same team. I have great respect for your views, but I find Dicks comments useful in understanding the mechanics of the problem. Free speech is good. To a certain extent I dont care about people who race mix, like tony soprano says, they are dead to me
#23 by dungeoneer on 02/12/2013 - 11:44 pm
Free speech is good Mandela,but time wasting should be stamped on mercilessly.
I`ve never seen you have problems dealing with anti-whites in the swarm. your post that Dick Whitman used as justification for his “we need a debate on intermarriage” was:
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2013/01/29/anti-whites-insist-that-integration-must-be-enforced-everywhere-because-whites-dont-want-it/comment-page-1/#comments
#10 by mandela on 1/29/2013 – 2:19 pm
As well as Danials excellent list, there is also the case of Sarkozy saying Whites have no future and must interracially marry.
When anti-Whites tell me who am I to stand in the way of love I say they are justifying GeNOcide and have the morals of a Pedophile (as they think love justifies anything). Seems to work so far.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You`re telling anti-whites they are justifying genocide. You make the point that anti-whites are as immoral as pedophiles who justify their crimes in a similar fashion.
Anti-whites try to bury our message with garbage outside BUGS, and their operatives inside BUGS want to waste our time on “debate”
#24 by daedalus on 02/12/2013 - 10:43 pm
To the ‘true love’ anti-white,
Consider yourself encouraged to relocate to Africa
and help your mulatto children find ‘true love’.
#25 by Jmcaul on 02/13/2013 - 1:33 am
God Jason, THAT is BRILLIANT!!! I am going to mull over some variations of that for my personal arsenal. I like Bobs exhortation to stay on the attack and your response is something I am very comfortable saying in that vein because that is EXACTLY what they are saying! (I’ve been told often that I have a gift for sarcasm, though I don’t think the people telling me this felt particularly ‘blessed’ by it..! This is a way I can put it to good use.)
#26 by Jmcaul on 02/13/2013 - 1:50 am
This is Priceless.
Me too Sentinel. Lets CHARGE, making sure to employ our most bloodcurdling yells!!! They should spend the rest of their miserable anti-White lives ALWAYS looking over their shoulder; ALWAYS sleeping with one eye open. They should go through every moment of every day thinking, no, KNOWING we might drop right out of the sky at any moment. When we post the mantra thats what we are doing. we are stepping out of the shadows and saying ‘boo!’
Man, I’ve got to go find somewhere to post the mantra now!! (Note to self, buy stock in an adult diapers. Anti-Whites are going to be buying a LOT of those in the future.) Back later.
#27 by Dick_Whitman on 02/13/2013 - 8:17 pm
At this point I think we can conclude that the best replies we have for the “nobody is forcing intermarriage” and the “why are you against love” arguments are the following.
“Saying that intermarriage isn’t being forced is trying to conceal the fact that the conditions which lead to it ARE being FORCED.” (This one is for the intermarriage argument).
“You are saying that this whole program of immigration and assimilation and chasing down every white on earth who wants to live in a white community is just for True Love?” (This one is for the “love” argument).
————
I suggest that everyone copy and paste these replies and remember them. I’ve speculated in the past that the enemy will try to frame the debate around sex (1). Judging by how the enemy reacted at this site while we discussed proper replies to the “intermarriage” and “love” arguments, I think we may have cut off one of their major avenues of attack?
(1) http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2013/02/06/once-again-we-are-samizdat/#comment-60735