B. U. G. S.

If you name yourself after a rabbit, it might give the game away. They already know we use rabbit names.

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/just-look-at-who-the-conservatives-want-for-president-in-2012/question-2069095/?postId=64997629&page=4#comments

Oh god, the people on sodahead were so dumb. I have never heard “we all bleed red” used in an actual debate until they came along, and said it dozens of times. I almost gnawed off my own hand.

Since they all seem to have the attention span of a gnat, I think if we’re to make any progress there we just need pick out one of the least stupid, and debate him while ignoring everyone else completely.

(I suppose if no one there is capable of going three posts without spamming unfunny demotivators, we could create a “sock puppet” to show them how an intelligent person would ACTUALLY debate the issue. Even controlled by one of us it would be the smartest anti-white there.)

@Kingsnake
“we just need pick out one of the least stupid, and debate him while ignoring everyone else completely.”

We fight them all.

All anti-whites are stupid and juvenile, the “educated”, just hide it better than others. The more stupidly they behave the better. Remember we are doing this to wake the white people that are watching, we are not trying to convert anti-whites. Anti-whites are guilty of genocide and deserve only our mockery and contempt.

“I have never heard “we all bleed red”

Whenever they use an anti-white slogan, cut and paste it into one of these. It makes them look stupid if you do it as much as they do.

“Because of history ” does not justify white genocide.

“For the economy” does not justify white genocide.

“Low birth rates”, does not justify white genocide.

“We all bleed red!” does not justify white genocide.

“We are all human!” does not justify white genocide.

“Race is just a social construct!” does not justify white genocide.

“We are all from Africa!” does not justify white genocide.

And so on and so forth

*************************

Meanwhile, no one is flooding Africa with Non Africans and telling them… “we all bleed red” …we are going to create a blended humanity in ONLY Africa.

No one is flooding Japan with non-Japanese and telling them… “we all bleed red” …we are going to create a blended humanity in ONLY Japan.

Only White countries are doing this, only Anti-Whites like you are pushing it. Its GeNOcide.

Kingsnake, most of sodahead isn’t thinking, they are just repeating trillions of dollars and decades of anti-white propaganda. Follow OldBlighty’s advise and try not to take them too seriously because they are demented.

Here is a video making fun of the “We All Bleed Red” quote. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e4tbclQfJ4

thanks to meawhiterabbits for the DNA link above. I cut and pasted the following:

@HarvestBuffoon falls victim again to faulty reasoning.
Genome research reveals that “percent difference,” is not a relevant comparison. Small differences can matter tremendously. Mice and humans have many DNA sequences in common, and many mouse genes are very similar to human genes.
When they say there is only a small difference genetically between the races, there is only a small difference genetically between man and chimpanzees …so very small percentages translate into HUGE differences.

“@HarvestBuffoon falls victim again to faulty reasoning.
Genome research reveals that “percent difference,” is not a relevant comparison. Small differences can matter tremendously. Mice and humans have many DNA sequences in common, and many mouse genes are very similar to human genes.
When they say there is only a small difference genetically between the races, there is only a small difference genetically between man and chimpanzees …so very small percentages translate into HUGE differences.”
—————————————-
Wolfram, that is a fine response if you want to argue about genetics, but it has nothing to do with the mantra. If you don’t get the mantra in a response, it is not worth much. If you added something like “Why do some scientists insist there is only one race and use it as an excuse to flood every white nation and ONLY white nations with non-whites and force them to ‘assimilate’ out of existence? Why do these scientists have such genocidal intentions?

Two excellent comments from Peter. The mantra is not about accusing anti whites for being wrong on facts. It’s about accusing them of having an inconsistent moral.

You don’t need to prove that race is a genetic reality, because they don’t care about genetics. What they care about is seeing themselves as supreme moral beings. So that is where we want to hit them.

If they say that there is no such things as a white race, one response could be: “Sure there is. Whites are the people you can accuse of being a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.” If that is not a reality, nothing is.

Roderick, the answer is in the mantra. “The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.” You can use this or a variation in any economic discussion.

I like to pull up GDP per nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita and point out a non-white nation with a higher per capita than a white nation and ask them why anti-whites don’t insist on forced assimilation and immigration in the non-white nation. Always use the mantra.

One problem I’ve been running into is that anti-Whites (NativeSupport is a good example) pretend they don’t know that Governments routinely use geographic terms as a shorthand for race. For example, while Asian is also a geographic term, a White man born in Tokyo wouldn’t be “Asian” according the the Census Bureau.

It’s not really a problem per se, except that I don’t want to have to stop to address the point. Anyone have a quick way to deal with that, and get right back on the main message?

Another related problem is that they seem to be more cautious in what they say and have a new sort of veiled attack.

In the old days, they would just come out and say race isn’t real. Now they look at your phrasing and claim what you’re talking about isn’t a race. Then when you try to pin them with the question “are you saying there’s no such thing as race?” they respond with “I didn’t say that” and will go no farther.

Of course, my solution is to be aggressive and say something like “the fact that you won’t say there’s no such thing as race shows you recognize that race is real.” Then I can get right back on message.