B. U. G. S.

Nothing is changing faster than history.

This is causing a real strain because history is not only what Horus calls a closed system, it is locked and barred.

And everything that has been built on this locked system is teetering.

What we have is called Mankind History where Everything was invented in Egypt and Mesopotamia. The everything became the Greeks, then the Romans took over. All this time what historians actually called “half-naked savages” inhabited Northern Europe.

Just as a matter of logic, no half naked person could survive in Northern Europe. But logic is precisely what is excluded from a closed system.

So Mankind History says that all mankind inherited what was done exclusively by the Egyptians — Mesopotamia is mentioned but not much — and all Mankind got everything from the same place.

As I have stated repeatedly, just STATING what Marxism or Mankind History says makes it a laughing stock. But taking it seriously is the way its opponents, like respectable conservatives, make their living.

A lot of noise came up on the publication of The Da Vinci Code. But what was really fascinating was what was NOT said. Nobody had any proof of what everybody had taken for granted: that Jesus was not married, and that he never had sex.

The entire Christian theology after Saint Paul put human sterility as the basis of the Church. One of the fundamental bases of Christian theology was that all sex is sinful. Even Protestants assumed that Christ was not only unmarried, but, as the Perfect Man, he never had sex or, even THOUGHT about sex.

But it comes out at last that when that premise was actually STATED, it turned out to be nonsense. St. Paul was a sophisticated intellectual, so he put his degenerate Zoroastrianism into the creed.

But when that premise was STATED, it quite simply disappeared.

So would Marxism, if we stopped trying to impress people with our complications and simply STATED what it actually says.

Mantra Thinking states what anyone can see.

All closed systems produce more and more absurd errors. Each published theory of history, leftist or respectable rightist, argues over the same set of assumptions without which no one is allowed in the argument. Then someone builds on that theory Then someone stacks his theory on top of that theory, and society accepts only theories based on the closed system, in this case Mankind History,

It is a tower that all comes from Egypt as its base. State the basic assumptions and you destroy All of the complicated philosophical systems that are teetering on top of those first erroneous assumptions.

If you just STATE what all those professional philosophers and commentators make their living on, as the Da Vinci Code in one case actually did, every single philosophy and political theory now current is threatened.

seapea points out:

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=a/res/260(III)

The above link use to have the full text of the General Assembly resolution 260 (III) of 9 December 1948 (where we get the geNOcide definition) but now

it spits out a “NO AUTHORIZATION” error page. It’s been a few months since I’ve pulled that page up but I find it curious that we can’t view it any

longer and still there other pages on the UN’s site that link back to that document which is now being blocked.

Is it getting dumped into the memory hole too?

UL says:

I actually thought this was going to happen a while ago. I noticed we brought up international law alot and figured they would try to change/get rid of

the law so we would have no grounds.

Shear stupidity. The law is out there for anyone to look up. We already have everything we need from the law too. We have the law itself and the man who

wrote it.

Any attempt to change/forget the law could be interpreted UNDER THE LAW as them trying to commit genocide.

Even if they were able to succeed in changing the law, the original law is still all over the internet and them changing “genocide’s” meaning is a

violation of genocide’s meaning. Only someone who wanted to commit genocide a certain way would want to alter it.

This is just more proof that we truely are dealing with a bunch of genocidal freaks.

I actually thought this was going to happen a while ago. I noticed we brought up international law alot and figured they would try to change/get rid of

the law so we would have no grounds.

Shear stupidity. The law is out there for anyone to look up. We already have everything we need from the law too. We have the law itself and the man who

wrote it.

Any attempt to change/forget the law could be interpreted UNDER THE LAW as them trying to commit genocide.

Even if they were able to succeed in changing the law, the original law is still all over the internet and them changing “genocide’s” meaning is a

violation of genocide’s meaning. Only someone who wanted to commit genocide a certian way would want to alter it.

This is just more proof that we truely are dealing with a bunch of genocidal freaks

Old Blighty adds:

I have used that quote for around 2 years and revisited that page often. I also told many anti-whites to search for that quote under Genocide.

The first time I noticed something was up, they added an awkward explanation at the top saying, Don’t be confused, genocide really is just about killing

lots of people…

Then I returned this week and the non-violent definition was removed and now it is only found among violent definitions to muddy the waters.

***

When they react to something you are doing, they are telling you, that you are hurting them.

What do you do when they react to something? You push harder at that precise point.

@Epiphany

“Wow, sounds exactly like what is happening to Whites today!”

Yes it is creepy isn’t it? It is a carbon copy of the so called multiculturalism policy, they demand for all white countries and only white countries.

It was meant to be a warning against genocide and they have been using it as a how to manual.

But our Professionals keep explaining to us that anti-whites are not concerned about the Mantra and can knock it over with a sentence.

But then again they have no more taken a look at reality than any of them has ever actually LOOKED at a Mantra debate.

I can’t find which commenter wrote this, I have an awful time when I try to look something back up:

From Article 2- definitions of genocide

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

“Genocide involves the attempt to achieve the disappearance of a group by whatever means. It does not have to be violent, it could be a combination of policies that would lead to a certain group dying out.”

Malcolm Fraser (Prime Minister of Australia 1975-1983)

I’ve been reading in Der Spiegel about Tibet… a good example, people will claim there is some violence there, but it’s basically an influx of non-Tibetans. The Dalai Lama considers it to be genocide and monks are immolating themselves to draw attention. China did try to call the Dalai Lama a “naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews” but it was pretty much laughed off by the mainstream media (probably because he’s not White).

Old Blighty, not Bob, points out:

The anti-whites are reacting to us again.

They have removed this quote from the Wikipedia entry on Genocide.

“Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.”
-Raphael Lemkin

Previously, it was the very first quote, of the very first link, if you Google Genocide. Now they are trying to make it go down the memory hole.

I found it in a far less prominent position here:

http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/whatisit.html

Jason says:

“Whenever anyone tells us the Mantra can’t work for this-or-that reason, ask them what kind of roadtesting they’ve done to establish that. It will always be a big fat zero.”

“’We’ Whites talk about all Whites, as if there was no such thing as race-traitors. As if we didn’t have millions of traitors among us. It is not ‘Whites’ in general who decided to flood their countries with Third Worlders, desegregate their schools, and force assimilation. It was Anti-Whites that did that, including big numbers of White race traitors.”

“None of those Anti-White measures would pass a popular vote among Whites, even to this day. These Anti-Whites have assumed a position of power among Whites, but they have no loyalty to Whites.”

“They are not mere puppets being led astray by ‘the Jew’ or helpless victims of Illuminati mind control. No, they are fully responsible for their actions.”

“If normal Whites have a flaw, maybe it’s being too good-natured; not seeing the prevalence of traitors in their midst. This is why we must push the concepts of ‘Anti-Whites’, ‘race-traitors’, and ‘White Genocide’, into the mainstream, so that future generations have some protection. And we must add to that the Sociopath (or the borderline case disguised as a Hipster or Yuppie) who may not necessarily promote genocidal policies, but has a nonchalant attitude toward the genocide of his people.”