B. U. G. S.

Seeker, overall well done. I would never respond to the Adam comment but insist that they respond to your point. Ask questions and don’t let up until they respond. You could have used more ridicule…”so you are telling us that the founding fathers who did not allow non-whites to become citizens felt that America should one day become brown??? What are they teaching you kids in grade school these days?”

@Richard, the pillar of white genocide is assimilation. If immigration suddenly stops, there are enough non-whites in white nations to ensure assimilation alone will blend us out of existence. Immigration is a pillar but assimilation might be considered the foundation. Homosexuality, abortion and feminism are not healthy in white societies IMO but are certainly not pillars of genocide.

Let’s not attach our message to homosexuality, abortion and feminism (well, I guess unless you’re posting someplace where views are universally opposed to those)…let’s follow the practical sense of politicians who avoid divisive issues. We don’t want to scatter the minds of our audience all over the place! We want their ears and minds focused on “Anti-White,” “White Genocide,” and “anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.”

(Richard, are you new? If so, welcome to Bugs!! :))

Generally you won’t have to mount much argument about genocide, as you’ll pick up from other bugsters, who may even give you some examples here shortly, how to turn queries back to the mantra.

And Peter’s correct remarks shouldn’t be misconstrued to mean that we emphasize assimilation but not immigration…the Mantra makes a big deal of both. They work together.

Separation is what creates diversity (separate sub-species) and maintains diversity, and ending separation is what ends diversity, by interbreeding separate subspecies out of existence.

The separation between human subspecies in this country has been ended not only by increasing the physical presence of non-whites here by “immigration,” and also by having constantly repeated the r-word until it’s become the automatic reflex of most whites at any attempts to maintain social separation.

So you’ll see lines in various posted versions of the Mantra reading something like, “But EVERY White country and ONLY White countries are being flooded with non Whites who will blend us out of existence.”

meawhiterabbit
If he is mixed race, it is in his ethnic interest, there be a mixed future, in all White countries. He is not loyal to White people, he is loyal to his own kind, which is mixed race people.

See what mixed race Obama does, regarding immigration in America. He sues any state that tries to stop illegal immigration. Again Obama is mixed race and it is in his ethnic interest, to make America non-White.

If the anti-White is White, he does not value his own Whiteness, which is fine by me. The problem arises, when he insists Whites that do value their Whiteness, also lose their identity and be forcibly integrated with non-Whites. Creating conditions that will destroy identifiable groups, against their will, is GeNOcide.

We have a right to a continued existence. The anti-White, no matter what his race, will not accept that. They are all guilty of GeNOcide.

Direct him to this video and ban him, if he become a nuisance.

White Genocide – explained
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3D-pRv_sc

@ Richard: I’m not following you. All the left organizations I ever heard of support abortion, feminism and gay rights…I don’t see what importance that has to our own task. We have a single message, White Genocide. By constant repetition, we attempt to load that term and the term “anti-White” with the same automatic depth of feeling that the r-word has been loaded with by the anti-Whites.

Abortion, feminism, homosexuality are themselves topics that are loaded. When we introduce loaded topics other than our own, that diverts energies from our message to the other topics.

As for pro-Whites with strong feelings about abortion, feminism, and homosexuality, we’d like to see their strong feelings focus more on White Genocide.

As Bob said in a coaching session not too long ago, we don’t talk about all the things other people talk about. Our message is the White Genocide program of the anti-Whites!

@ Richard: I just reread carefully your two recent posts on this thread, and your profile. This sentence seems the one that’s principally guiding you (?):

“Some people who may not have an issue with non-White immigration may wake up when they see how it is usually pushed by the very same people that push these other genocidal demands.”

Since you are possibly posting in a sub-culture where unanimous views on those three topics are part of the sub-cultural zeitgeist, possibly you are in a special situation that I can’t see clearly.

Still, I think my points would have relevance for your situation, and I’d also add a caveat that applies to just about all of us but especially to those of us who are new (as I am also): We have spent many years before coming here deepening our feelings about many other topics that are generally important to pro-whites. In contrast, the time we’ve spent since coming here deepening our feeling about White Genocide has not yet, for many of us, made that feeling seep into every cell of our bodies as deeply as our feelings about those other issues have. This makes it hard for us to USE those other issues to support our message, because our old feelings leap at the opportunity to once again beat the drum for the issues we spent so many years feeling so strongly about! And so the issues show up in our posts loaded with the charge they have for us, and detract from our message! The old issues use us, instead of our using them! Best to avoid them IMO…even if we transcend our own charge on those issues, our readers will not have, and will be distracted. IMO.

OldBlighty-Good advice. You are right.

Here is another exchange same idiot, same site.
AntiWhite in response to America being a White country;
The Seeker of Truth December 16, 2011 at 6:08PM

“The US was created solely by White people.

With your “illogic” Logic, this nation was created solely by White men, what are you going to do with all of the White Women, who weren’t even allowed to vote until the 19th Amendment was adopted August 26, 1920, are you going to exclude them from being American Ciitzens, as you propose to do with those you HATE The Seeker of Truth?
Me in response to stupidity;
The original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free white persons” of “good moral character”. It thus left out indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and later Asians. While women were included in the act, the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States….” Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father. This was the only statute that ever purported to grant the status of natural born citizen.[1][2]
This act was written by the very people that wrote the constitution and founded the country. One would think that they would have the greatest knowledge of what they meant when they said ‘ourselves and our Posterity.’ That is if one knew any REAL history. Yet you seek to twist words and jump hoops to justify your agenda of a world without White people. You are a genocidal maniac RELTIH, but you think that is okay because you are ‘anti-racist’ and your targets are White babies. Anti-racist IS a codeword for anti-White.

A stumbling block that used to give me trouble is a favorite of certain anti-Whites and is similar to their “race doesn’t exist” line, though a little more difficult to address concisely if you aren’t used to dealing with it in BUGS style.

You’ll be making a point about a specific example (“Mexicans routinely call for the death of the White majority” or “Israeli Jews practice segregation”), but instead of answering your question, they’ll say something like “Mexican/Jew isn’t a race” or “Jews are White.”

Now, you need to remember that if someone says something in response that you have to think about, if you can’t come up with a short answer in a very short time, just get back on point (the Mantra) and continue. You’ll kill yourself if you stop to explain why what they just said is wrong.

However, if you can make a short convincing statement that they ARE wrong AND move back to the mantra, you’ll handily win the point with the audience.

In the case of my example, the response is simple:

Anti-White says: “Mexicans/Jews aren’t a race.”

You say: “Cute, but if I say anything you don’t like about Mexicans/Jews/etc that you don’t like, you call me a “racist,” so clearly YOU think they’re a different race than I am.” (Then get back on whatever mantra point you were making.)

Anti-White says: “Jews are White” or “Jews aren’t a race.”

You say: “Except that YOU call me an anti-Semite (a RACIAL term) if I say anything about Jews that you don’t like.” (Then get back on whatever mantra point you were making.)

You can, of course, play around with these to more suit them to your own needs. I just wanted to get the germ of this idea posted.

@ Gar5: Your reply has truth in it. Here’s another idea, using the fact that the Mantra presents two components of White Genocide, the flooding of White countries with non-Whites, and the insistence that Whites “’assimilate,’ i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites”:
———-

Unlike now, there was no program of White Genocide being waged.

Anti-Whites didn’t control the media, the schools, the churches, and the government, and teach Whites that they must assimilate and intermarry with those non-White groups or they were naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews.

Anti-Whites didn’t yet have the power to enforce White Genocide with law.

Law didn’t require White children to mingle with non-white children and be taught to marry them.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.