Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

F*ck Da HollowCo$t. It doan make mein mangina wettt or put $lop in mein trough.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    No one ever demonstrated that I'm anything other than a jewboy either.

    No one ever demonstrated that I'm anything other than a jewboy either.


    http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...07#post1422707
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6467#post6467


    Originally posted by Hadding the Meercat/Baby-KAS
    http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...47#post1422747

    The problem with Christopher Thorpe's view is that (1) he's only dealing with what Greggy says out one side of his mouth, while (2) overlooking the fact that, if Greggy really were serious about inculcating a tougher attitude, the objection to Holocaust Revisionism (on grounds of uncontrolled weepiness) that he spouts out the other side of his mouth would be rendered null and void.
    .


    The problem is no one has ever demonstrated Whites feel guilt for no reason. Johnson and Taylor and others pushing this line ignore the media factor. White guilt, as with other attitudes, is simply a function of jews controlling the media and telling them how to feel. It's no more complex than that. It's simply a response to authority, a conformist response. If the same authority were telling whites to be proud of conquering a continent, they wouldn't feel any guilt over slavery or treatment of injuns. If authority were telling whites that Anne Frank died in a hospital bed after writing her novel with a ballpoint pen that didn't exist yet, whites would laugh, not feel guilty. If they were likewise told that there was not an atom of evidence of gassings, and that 6 million was a bogus figure based on a certain historical fetish jews have, and that it should be mocked and spit on and stomped into the dirt, do you think whites would be feeling guilty? Of course not. Whites feel guilty because they believe the lies are truth. And how would they know any differently? Every authority repeats them. And even the would-be counter-authorities like Greg Johnson go along with these lies. It is to shake head over.

    Greg Johnson is simply cutting his views to increase his chances of getting 501c3 satus. It's safe to blame whites, and it's dangerous to blame jews. That's why he's slowly but surely back out of WN to the conservative position that we're doing it to ourselves.



    .

    Ick bin ein gut-sick guido-kikenweasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS.
    Cornholing Forum Caligula [/URL]



    Comment


    • #17
      I'm a guilty meercat.

      I'm a guilty meercat.


      http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...47#post1422747
      http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6468#post6468

      Originally posted by Rabbi LinderMiller View Post
      No one ever demonstrated that I'm anything other than a jewboy either.

      http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6467#post6467
      http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...07#post1422707


      The problem is no one has ever demonstrated Whites feel guilt for no reason.
      .

      True enough. When the injustice aligns with Jewish interests, it gets different treatment in the media, and those are the injustices Whites do not seem to feel guilty about.

      I can't tell you the number of times I've clashed with White anti-Whites who cited Indians, slavery, Jim Crow, colonialism or the holocaust as reasons White should feel guilty. I've never had anyone bring up the Iraqi or Afghan civilian dead. I've never had anyone cite as reasons for guilt the cruel mistreatment of White indentured servants, or child laborers, or any other subset of the White population that has unfairly suffered.

      If you go back a bit further, it also seems to be true that prior to the Jewish media takeover, Whites felt no unearned guilt at all about any event. Like every race/ethnic group, Whites have committed their fair share of actions that one could argue were injustices. But, prior to WW2, I know of no evidence Whites were collectively languishing with unearned guilt over Indians, slavery, and colonialism in the 1910s - 1920s.

      If you go back even further, I know of no major historical commentators who ever suggested Euro peoples like to claim unearned guilt. Who talked about this? Herodotus? Aristotle? Luther? Hume? Machiavelli? I don't know that any of them ever did. If Whites have a guilt flaw, unless they discussed it and I missed it (possible), it seems that some of the most powerful minds to ever walk the Earth didn't notice it.

      So what we're left with is this:
      - Before the Jewish media takeover, unearned guilt seems to be non-existent among Whites.

      - After the Jewish media takoever, unearned guilt has become pervasive among Whites. The exception is when events that you would expect to trigger guilt are aligned with Jewish interests.

      So yeah, on reflection, I think you're right; this inherent race-guilt argument quickly crumbles upon scrutiny. Not is only is there no evidence Whites feel guilty for no reason, there is evidence the guilt perfectly aligns with Jewish media presentation, and Jewish presentation is the only explanation that makes sense.


      Numero Uno of Meercats

      Comment


      • #18
        Linder's argument is specious. Plus, he's probably sucked even more cock than I have.

        Linder's argument is specious. . .
        . . . Plus, he's probably sucked even more cock than I have.



        http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893
        http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6469#post6469


        Originally posted by Lew-Meercat
        http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...65#post1422865

        - Before the Jewish media takeover, unearned guilt seems to be non-existent among Whites.

        - After the Jewish media takoever, unearned guilt has become pervasive among Whites. The exception is when events that you would expect to trigger guilt are aligned with Jewish interests.

        So yeah, on reflection, I think you're right; this inherent race-guilt argument quickly crumbles upon scrutiny. Not is only is there no evidence Whites feel guilty for no reason, there is evidence the guilt perfectly aligns with Jewish media presentation, and Jewish presentation is the only explanation that makes sense.
        .

        Alex's argument is specious. Of course Jews are manipulating white guilt to serve their interests. But that does not imply that white guilt is an entirely Jewish invention, that whites are merely passive and innocent victims of Jewish mental aggression. All the Jewish propaganda in the world couldn't sell white guilt if white people were not willing to buy it. And as far as I know, whites are the only race weak and foolish enough to buy it.

        Have you ever heard of Jesus? The core of Christianity is the doctrine of that Jesus, who was without sin, took the sins of man upon himself and suffered our punishment for us, to square things with God. The whole doctrine is premised on the most primitive and absurd notion of justice, namely that justice can be done by punishing an innocent party in the place of the guilty party (which in turn is premised on the idea that punishment is first and foremost just a matter of animal sadism: the wounded animal lashes out in anger, and whether he lashes out at the innocent or the guilty does not really matter, because it feels the same to him). It is moral savagery wrapped up in religious sanctimony.

        Modern white guilt is just a secularized version of Christian vicarious atonement: whites derive psychological gratification and social status from Jews, Christians, and liberals by assuming the unearned guilt of other whites and suffering for it (or, better yet, making other whites -- "those people," who are not so enlightened) suffer for it, by giving our countries away to non-whites and Jews.

        I recommend that everyone re-read my essay "Our Fault?" before you buy Alex's claim that I am selling the "white suicide meme." He's pushing a crude false dichotomy here. http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/04/our-fault/


        .
        .


        Linder's bleeding mangina. . .
        . . . Itz already squeezed out a score of meercats, starting with Hadding.


        http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906
        http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6469#post6469

        Originally posted by Hysterical Gut-sick Guido-kikenweasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS
        http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...07#post1422707

        And what response did you advocate? Giving in. You cede everything the revisionists argue, only to turn around and say none of it matters - we still must cede the jews all their H claims. And now you turn around again, and cite your mealy mouthed admissio that FACTUALLY THE REVISIONISTS ARE 100% RIGHT as though you agree with that position. Well, if you're not lying now, which I sure wouldn't bet on, it's just cost you money. Isn't that ironic, since your double-talk, your trimming, your hedging was supposed to produce more income, not less? You've done more damage to yourself than you realize, Johnson. You've shown you'll change your tune for money. You've shown incredible inability to read basic politics. And you've shown that when your errors are pointed, even by your fans, you will respond with female-hysterical ad hominems.

        The fact-finders, who often call themselves revisionists, have well established the central claims on which the jew-communist agitprop term/concept 'holocaust' is based are big lies. These FACTS must be used to beat the jews' heads in. No quarter. Anyone who doesn't understand that is a weak analyst, and not someone who deserves support, but who deserves criticism until he figures things out and gets back on the right track.

        http://www.counter-currents.com/2012...f-controversy/
        .


        Alex, it is ironic that you are accusing me of female hysterics, because your reasoning skills have gone completely out the window here. I expected more of you, although I don't know why I expected solid reasoning skills from a journalist.

        1. Revisionists themselves concede that many innocent Jews died in WW II, and that is "Holocaust enough" for Jewish purposes, even if one scrapes away all the lies told after the fact by people who sought to use these deaths for political and financial advantage. I don't concede that. The revisionists do. I'm just the bearer of the bad news that revisionism can't successfully get the Holocaust off our people's back.

        2. I think Holocaust revisionism is a legitimate field of inquiry. Revisionists should have the right to investigate and publish without penalty. That does not constitute a blanket endorsement of their claims. Nor does it imply I think that revisionism is sufficient to get the Holocaust off our back. In the end, I think that the facts are on the Jewish side, in the sense that even if all the after-the-fact lies deducted from the story, there's still "Holocaust enough" for Jewish purposes.

        3. That means that we have to look elsewhere than revisionism for an answer to the Holocaust question. I think that part of that answer is to put the Holocaust and the Second World War in a larger historical context, so as to show that Jewish suffering is not unique and that Jews on the whole are an aggressor people, not passive victims. But the deeper answer is moral. I would like whites to become serenely indifferent to guilt trips and moral blackmail, no matter what our people have done in the past. A race with the vitality and will to power to project future cannot be tied to past negatives.

        4. All of the above is true, and I am saying it because I believe that it is true, and because I think it is important for White Nationalists to get their heads screwed on straight if we are going to be effective. I think you would prefer to believe that I am lying, but I am not. Sorry to disappoint you.

        5. This controversy is very important. I used to have a rather laissez faire attitude toward the whole range of the WN scene. I had hoped that I could help foster a constructive way for WNs of different stripes to make the best of their different outlooks by networking among themselves and turning their energies toward fighting the enemy rather than one another. Well, that was not possible given the human material here. But now I think that nothing is more important than to separate what I am doing from Old Right thinking and the milieu that gives birth to people like Hadding Scott and Wade Michael Page. So as I see it, the propensity to factionalism and infighting is now working in my favor. Keep up the good work.



        Counter-Currents Publishing
        Books Against Time

        Comment


        • #19
          Weber Once Renounced Holocaust Revisionism

          Weber Once Renounced Holocaust Revisionism


          http://nwhomeland.blogspot.com/2012/...holocaust.html
          http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6473#post6473

          .
          http://forward.com/articles/14953/re...-shoah-fight-/


          Revisionist: "It’s Time To Quit Shoah Fight"
          by Nathaniel Popper
          Thu. Jan 15, 2009


          One of the primary leaders in the fight to question and delegitimize the Holocaust has proclaimed that fight to be a lost cause, sparking a furious debate among his cohorts.

          Mark Weber, a telegenic Californian, has served for 15 years as director of the Institute for Historical Review, which was founded in the late 1970s as a center for people dedicated to doubting and criticizing mainstream histories of the Holocaust.

          This month, however, Weber released an essay on the institute’s Web site, questioning whether this work has ever had any relevance. Weber argued that Holocaust revisionists are unlikely to have any success in convincing large numbers of people.

          “It’s been almost 30 years, and Holocaust revisionism has gotten almost no support in academic circles or society at large,” Weber told the Forward. “It’s gotten some support in Iran, or places like that, but as far as I know, there is no history department supporting writing by these folks.”

          The argument in Weber’s essay, “How Relevant Is Holocaust Revisionism?” might appear, at first glance, to be good news for the Jewish organizations that have fought against Holocaust revisionists. But in his essay, Weber calls for his movement to shift to a new mission, one more purely directed to fighting against “Jewish-Zionist power.”

          Michael Shermer, a columnist for Scientific American who wrote a book about Holocaust revisionists, said that “for Weber, the Holocaust is just a minor skirmish. The real war to be won is about the Zionists.”

          Though Weber, like most Holocaust revisionists, is not a fan of the Jewish community, his essay has not even gained him popularity among his fellow travelers. Bradley Smith, a former employee of Weber’s institute who is a prominent online publisher of Holocaust revisionist material, told the Forward that he is putting together a whole issue of his newsletter with arguments against Weber.

          “It’s hard for me to think of Mark Weber as betraying me, because we’re friends. And yet, there are those who feel he has betrayed the institute and that he has betrayed the revisionist movement such as it is,” Smith said in a phone interview from Mexico.

          Smith said that a number of prominent revisionists will be calling for Weber’s resignation from the institute.

          The world of Holocaust revisionists — inhabited by people who are, by nature, disputatious and unconcerned with social norms — is not one in which divisions and fights have been foreign. Weber took over the Institute for Historical Review after a prolonged and expensive legal fight with its founder, Willis Carto, who had built the institute into what both antagonists and protagonists acknowledge was the premier forum for Holocaust doubters and deniers.

          Since taking over, Weber has continued to publish writing on the Holocaust and on World War II. But he came to the institute after working with the white supremacist National Alliance party, and he has pushed to broaden the institute’s mandate. The Web site that Weber has built features such articles as “The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution” and “Israel at 60: A Grim Balance Sheet.”

          In his new essay, published January 9, Weber does try to position himself as a more moderate voice in the debate about the Holocaust. He acknowledges Jewish suffering, and notes that Joseph Goebbel’s diaries speak about a concerted campaign to eliminate the Jews — a heretical view for many Holocaust doubters.

          “Much of the predictable hostility toward my piece has come from people who are basically cultists — or fanatics on this issue,” Weber told the Forward. “They view it with an almost religious fervor.”

          Already, this has appeared to cause some questioning on revisionist Web sites. One commenter, writing under the handle Carto’s Cutlass Supreme, responded to Weber’s use of Goebbel’s diary by asking: “What would people say about that here? Do we know the diary couldn’t have been tampered with?”

          Weber’s discussion of Jewish suffering, though, is a lead-in to the historian’s broader point, which is that the Holocaust doubters have not been effective agents in the broader battle against Jewish power.

          Michael Santomauro, who runs an e-mail list dedicated to questioning Jews and the Holocaust, said that Weber’s shift is a strategic mistake.

          “I think it is an unfortunate path he is taking, because the Holocaust is an effective weapon,” he told the Forward. “When the Holocaust is used as a weapon, it explains a lot of the lopsided foreign policy.”

          But for Santomauro and many of his online friends, much of the problem with Weber is not his ideology, but his work output. Most prominent revisionists are prolific writers who will publish anywhere in order to have their views distributed. Under Weber, the institute has ceased publication of its journal and stopped hosting international conferences.

          “He hasn’t done any work,” Smith said.

          Aryeh Tuchman, director of the Anti-Defamation League’s Library and Research Center, said that Weber’s slowed production hurt the doubters and deniers of the Holocaust long before his new essay. “There is not a central Holocaust denial organization or body anymore,” Tuchman said. “There’s no one who can serve to motivate them anymore.”

          The Iranian government, under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, tried to take up this mantle when it hosted a conference with Holocaust doubters last year. But even Weber said that the conference didn’t do revisionists any favors.

          “If the point of the conference was to be scholarly, the thing was a failure,” Weber said.

          “The thing only strengthened and confirmed the views people already had about Iran, Ahmadinejad and Israel.”



          posted by The Old Man @ 3:23 PM SATURDAY, AUGUST 11, 2012
          Come Home to the Northwest

          http://northwestfront.org/

          Comment


          • #20
            Greggie's sodomistic bunghole will be chewed by rabid mattoid Piercetarded meercats for 'truth' as we see it.

            Greggie's sodomistic bunghole will be chewed by rabid mattoid Piercetarded meercats for 'truth' as we see it.


            http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...07#post1422907
            http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6478#post6478

            Originally posted by Greg Johnson
            http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893

            All the Jewish propaganda in the world couldn't sell white guilt if white people were not willing to buy it. And as far as I know, whites are the only race weak and foolish enough to buy it.

            Does this mean that you will stop saying that Anne Frank is Holocaust enough?

            I am sorry but anybody that has a hard time stomaching The Turner Diaries is not a very convincing role-model for toughmindedness. Doctor Pierce loved us little loveless mattoid meercats and bought us meercat-yummy treats from the 400,000 in Order ZOGbux. All you can do, Greggie, is to upset us meercat fuktards and pop the gut-sick kiken-weasel with jew ass-GAIDS' colostomy bags.

            We are also the only race that seems to care much about the suffering of animals. I don't think that White people in general are going to become coldhearted brutes able to laugh off accusations of gratuitous mass-murder anytime soon. Even the Turks don't do that. And us loveless mattoid meercats are not nearly as hard-hearted as them Turks or other Asiatics.

            The answer to Holocaust propaganda is to educate our people in the truth as little mattoid meercats see it..

            Truth is a great European value, by the way, maybe our highest value. Calculating to exploit the prevailing false belief is rather Jewish unless you are a mattoid meercat like myself unable to understand the truth even if it is like a flea and bites me in jewranus.


            Comment


            • #21
              Itz not a whigger problem that I have a kike's hatred of this Greggie faggot.

              Itz not a whigger problem that I have a kike's hatred of this Greggie faggot.


              http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893
              http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6481#post6481


              Originally posted by Greg Johnson
              http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893

              Alex's argument is specious. Of course Jews are manipulating white guilt to serve their interests. But that does not imply that white guilt is an entirely Jewish invention, that whites are merely passive and innocent victims of Jewish mental aggression. All the Jewish propaganda in the world couldn't sell white guilt if white people were not willing to buy it. And as far as I know, whites are the only race weak and foolish enough to buy it.
              .

              Really? Blacks blame whites for their problems. This is the result of jews destroying alternative ways of looking at things (self-help or back-to-Africa) and making sure the only message blacks hear is: whites are guilty. What we see in society today is the masses reflecting the messages they uniformly receive from authority. As a gut-sick guido-weasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS I refuse to mention that whiggers have anything to do with wanting to be butt-fucked by jews and muds.
              .

              Originally posted by Greg Johnson
              http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893

              Have you ever heard of Jesus? The core of Christianity is the doctrine of that Jesus, who was without sin, took the sins of man upon himself and suffered our punishment for us, to square things with God. The whole doctrine is premised on the most primitive and absurd notion of justice, namely that justice can be done by punishing an innocent party in the place of the guilty party (which in turn is premised on the idea that punishment is first and foremost just a matter of animal sadism: the wounded animal lashes out in anger, and whether he lashes out at the innocent or the guilty does not really matter, because it feels the same to him). It is moral savagery wrapped up in religious sanctimony.
              .

              The last thing people unnaturally prone to feeling guilt would want to do is foist it off on another. Whites actually like christ-inanity because they enjoy luxuriating in the self-pity it affords: they identify with jesus. As a jew, I HATE Christianity and 'jesus'. The world abuses them unfairly, and they are living martyrs. No one understands or appreciates them. Examination of conscience is not popular with christians or anyone else, especially jewboys pretending to be 'White Supremacists.'.

              Look at the real psychology of those who have been intellectually persuaded by the authority teaching that whites are uniquely responsible for racism and 'the' 'holocaust.' They don't show they feel any personal guilt. Those whites wearing yokes to apologize for slavery are a tiny fetishistic minority of a larger minority of illiberals, yet you and Liar Taylor pretend they are representative. Where is the proof of that? There is none!!! But I'm just a sick little jewboy with a bleeding kike asshole rebelling against being put inside a kike asshole and you and Jared Taylor have a lot more and richer followers than the meercat fuktards and other jewboys playing net-nutzi on this tard corral. The average person doesn't doubt the teachings of authority, knows that it's not safe to go against them publicly, and knows . . . the important part . . . those who do go against them are fair game to be beaten up on in the most abusive terms. What that has to do with you or the other more successful bowel-Movement moderates this beat-down by ZOG of whiggers that allow it will forever remain unspoken, although always kvetched over. Which these authority-conformists, a good share of them, really enjoy. White guilt is nowhere to be found. Rather, many have been taught by authority that to redeem their race they must act and believe differently, and help stamp out any atavistic tendency not in line with the new order. This they do with some relish, sort of an inverted bloodlust born of conformity. So, this is altogether a matter of it being a whigger problem, and has actually nothing to do with denying or agreeing with the Holohoax. And nothing having to do with any of this being your fault Greggie. Just as we see with the war against Iraq.

              .

              http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893

              Modern white guilt is just a secularized version of Christian vicarious atonement: whites derive psychological gratification and social status from Jews, Christians, and liberals by assuming the unearned guilt of other whites and suffering for it (or, better yet, making other whites -- "those people," who are not so enlightened) suffer for it, by giving our countries away to non-whites and Jews.
              That's accurate. But without jews being the authority, transmitting their message thru school, the political class and the mass media, this view would be a tiny-minority view. Jews took over the media because they had to. They took over the media for precisely this reason: they can use it to mold the mass mentality. They have succeeded. They reap their rewards. You're ignoring all that, but it is the main thing. Why all of this is your fault Greggie. Not that of whiggers. They are blameless for putting up with this shit. Not some non-existent white propensity to feel guilt. You need to feel guilt Greggie. Not whiggers. I actually hate whiggers, but they ain't around to listen to my inherent kike hatred. You, on the other hand, Greggie, cum over here to be abused by a pussazoid jewboy whose asshole is being eaten away.
              .

              Originally posted by Greg Johnson
              http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...93#post1422893

              I recommend that everyone re-read my essay "Our Fault?" before you buy Alex's claim that I am selling the "white suicide meme." He's pushing a crude false dichotomy here.

              http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/04/our-fault/
              I'll read and respond to that later, altho I probably already have read it and don't remember. I'd have to read it again and still wouldn't have anything coherent to say other than how much I hate and envy you Greggie. You are living in sodomistic splendor in Sans Fagscrisco while I'm 'living' here in Kirksville on less than $500 per month running a decaying on-line virtual tard corral surrounded by meercats and jewboys.

              There's nothing crude and dichotomous about the fact that the jews abuse our people with Holohoax lies daily, and your view is that we should just . . . let them. Which is a lie as there is nothing you can do about the Holohoax other than to simply understand and say that it is largely irrelevant seventy years later. You are wrong in not saying that it is largely a lie before you 'step over it' like jew d-gshit, but I'm trying to lay on you this jew guilt trip that I've been lying about doesn't exist. For any jew-lie to work there has to be a stupid and weak whigger wanting to believe that jew lie. So you are right about that. Admitting the truth though, that you are partially right means that I don't have any excuse to abuse you though, and I'm a physical coward who doesn't want to get itz kike ass stomped by some enraged whigger.



              .

              Ick bin ein gut-sick guido-kikenweasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS.
              Cornholing Forum Caligula [/URL]



              Comment


              • #22
                Pay Attention 2 Me, Greggie!!!

                Pay Attention 2 Me, Greggie!!!


                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...56#post1422956
                http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6487#post6487


                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                Alex, it is ironic that you are accusing me of female hysterics, because your reasoning skills have gone completely out the window here. I expected more of you, although I don't know why I expected solid reasoning skills from a journalist.

                Ok Doc Hollywood, that must be why you're afraid to post my comments at your site, but I leave you free to post whatever you like here, because I can visibly and publicly stomp your Swedenborgian ass into the ground.

                I taught you the right way. When you grew up, you departed from it. Return to it, o prodigal sodomite!

                You need to sit down and figure out what you are, Dr. Johnson. That must precede any venturing into waters as deep as racial nationalism and jew-criticism. You have to think the thing all the way through, otherwise the daily hurricanes will blow you off course. Stability and consistency are what are most needed by the virtual (for now) masses. When people I respect like you and MacDonald go wrong, it is doubly or quadruply incumbent on me to bash them back to the right line, and that is a duty I will not shirk.

                Listen to me, you idiot. Don't listen to a liar like Jared Taylor. He is not our race's friend, he is our race's enemy.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                1. Revisionists themselves concede that many innocent Jews died in WW II, and that is "Holocaust enough" for Jewish purposes, even if one scrapes away all the lies told after the fact by people who sought to use these deaths for political and financial advantage. I don't concede that. The revisionists do. I'm just the bearer of the bad news that revisionism can't successfully get the Holocaust off our people's back.

                Many innocent people of all parties and persuasions died in WWII. Where's the politics in letting jews pretend they suffered specially and make billions off it? See what I posted earlier today from CultureWars - they use their 'hoax to coax billions out of German banks to make good their swindlers' shitty loans. Where does it end? There is no natural end unless we put a stop to it.

                It's awfully funny that you're perfectly willing to concede our WORST ENEMY the BIG LIE that his kind suffered uniquely in WWII. You're willing to let him use that as the basis of an anti-white 'educational' effort in public schools across the west, and as the basis for extracting literally trillions of dollars from the white people who suffered MORE than these lying jews did in WWII. That is astonishing. Where is the sound politics in it? I need to argue this? I mean, this is sky-is-blue stuff. And throw on top that the enemy's claims, which he has invested a fortune in promoting, ARE DEMONSTRABLY UNTRUE. And you're backing off the found facts like they serve the enemy? I mean, really, what the fuck?

                We're not even disagreeing because your position doesn't even rise to the level of risible, let alone debatable. The only relevant question is your motivation. Which we now know, since you've stated you are, is chasing funds through 501c3, which involves softening your position. Which is not what you should be doing. You should be up-front about what you're doing, and not try to pretend that your organization's self-interest is identical solid White politics when in fact is the opposite. That's how jews act, come to think of it.

                Hey, Gregster: here's a good name for your 501c3. Go-With-The-Flow Foundation. Has a ring to it, don't you think?

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                2. I think Holocaust revisionism is a legitimate field of inquiry. Revisionists should have the right to investigate and publish without penalty. That does not constitute a blanket endorsement of their claims. Nor does it imply I think that revisionism is sufficient to get the Holocaust off our back. In the end, I think that the facts are on the Jewish side, in the sense that even if all the after-the-fact lies deducted from the story, there's still "Holocaust enough" for Jewish purposes.
                Well, mister preacher man, dontcha find it a little odd that jews themselves don't seem to agree with you? If there's "holocaust enough," why expand a couple hundred thousand deaths into six million, and make up gassings (and soap...and lampshades...and on and on) out of whole cloth? They sure don't seem to think there's 'holocaust enough.' No, in fact what they invented as 'holocaust' is just another big lie, and that's the way to treat it.

                Face it, Greg. You're just throwing your own kind under the bus because you calculate, and very likely incorrectly, it will serve your personal interests. Like not admitting to homosexual behavior.

                Who can trust you, Johnson? There's a squirreliness at your core.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                3. That means that we have to look elsewhere than revisionism for an answer to the Holocaust question.
                Listen, dummy. The fact-finders' job is just that: find facts. They have no necessary connection to WN. Nor has WN to the ffs - logically and intellectually. But practically and politically, we WN do have connection because our enemy will call us naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews the minute we dare criticize God's holy pets at all. So it's not a question we can, as a practical matter, refuse to deal with. What revisionists discover, assuming their findings are valid, represents a mass of facts that we can use or not use politically. How in the world is it not to be used that jews were NOT gassed and did NOT die to the number of six million, not anywhere close? How do you not use that, when little kids (that you and Kevin MacDonald will never have) are abused with these GREAT LIES daily? "Holocaust enough" - are you friggin' insane? You're supposed to be on our side, not theirs.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                I think that part of that answer is to put the Holocaust and the Second World War in a larger historical context, so as to show that Jewish suffering is not unique and that Jews on the whole are an aggressor people, not passive victims.
                That's right.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                But the deeper answer is moral. I would like whites to become serenely indifferent to guilt trips and moral blackmail, no matter what our people have done in the past. A race with the vitality and will to power to project future cannot be tied to past negatives.
                Son of a fucking bitch, you dumbass: you can't DO THAT WHEN YOUR ENEMY CONTROLS ALL THE HIGH GROUND. The shit comes down on our people 24/7/365 through, tv, teacher and preacher. The LAST thing you need to worry about is the nature of our people. That's utterly irrelevant. They're being inundated with lies by the enemy, who controls everything that matters. That's where you want to put your time and effort. All our people are doing is going along with authority. Like the majority always have done and will do and cannot do otherwise. Are brainwashing victims morally flawed? Of course not.

                Do you even understand your position, Doc H? It's that even if WN were in charge and putting out revisionist found facts over the airwaves, whites wouldn't be receptive to them because of their unique disposition to feel guilty. Do you honestly believe that? Do you honestly believes whites are doing anything other than conforming to what SEEMS to be true, to what EVERYBODY ELSE seems to be doing and saying, to what LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY is spouting from every loudspeaker?

                That's the fucking problem, not that whites are biologically genetically flawed for some reason. The jews are the authorities. They have a script for every race, class, sex and whatever. And these scrips are mostly followed, and race has nothing to do with that. It's because the script-writers ARE THE AUTHORITY. Most people, in all times and places, for biological reasons, FOLLOW AUTHORITY. IF you want a biological 'flaw,' that's it: conformism to authority. But we know that's socially necessary. What's politically necessary, and you should be working on rather than writing 5k-word Batman reviews, is chopping off the jewish head and replacing it with a genuine Aryan kopf. When the white head returns atop the white body, the body will comply with its wishes. White guilt? Nigga please.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                4. All of the above is true, and I am saying it because I believe that it is true, and because I think it is important for White Nationalists to get their heads screwed on straight if we are going to be effective. I think you would prefer to believe that I am lying, but I am not. Sorry to disappoint you.
                If so, then you're wrong. But we know that your intent is to form a 501c3, and we know that trimming what you say might help you gain that status. So your motives naturally will be questioned. I mean, why else write this essay at this time? I see no reason other than that status. You tried to have it both ways - to trim the facts while not alienating the many WN who support the fact-finders and gratefully use their discoveries. It appears to me you miscalculated in a number of ways. But I don't think you've learned a darn thing from the reaction to your essay.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                5. This controversy is very important. I used to have a rather laissez faire attitude toward the whole range of the WN scene. I had hoped that I could help foster a constructive way for WNs of different stripes to make the best of their different outlooks by networking among themselves and turning their energies toward fighting the enemy rather than one another.
                .

                Encouraging whites to blame themselves isn't fighting the enemy, it's helping the enemy. The old and real Greg Johnson would not need me to explain this to him.

                Don't listen to Jared Taylor, Dr. Johnson, he is a fraud. Listen to me.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                Well, that was not possible given the human material here. But now I think that nothing is more important than to separate what I am doing from Old Right thinking and the milieu that gives birth to people like Hadding Scott
                .

                Hadding at WORST is a bit of self-righteous twit who is delusional about the real-world reality of legality. At WORST. But he has done excellent work where it comes to close readings and solid interpretations of Nazi and other history. One might contrast his solid, factual, absolutely unrebutted documentary takedown of the character defective Harold Covington, a man you have promoted without the slightest concern for the libels he's leveled against me and Will Williams and a thousand others. So spare me your sanctimony about how bad Hadding is. We don't allow Covington-level character defectives at our forum; if you make the charges he does, you either back them with facts or get banned. It would be nice if Counter-Currents had a similar policy, but you prefer to keep it a fanboy club where no one outside the echo chamber is allowed to respond. I think that's pathetic and weak.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                .

                You are a butt-head. Who asked you to comment on Page's actions? The guy gave his life to take out six muds. All you need to do is shut up about it, if you're not going to thank him. Instead of focusing on the kikes who let these non-Whites in, you denounce the white who acted against their anti-white policy. The most basic loyalty seems foreign to you. None of us knew Page, but if he was one of us ideologically, then our political loyalty means we don't denounce him, we use the event to do what is "good for whites," and that means attacking the kikes trying to genocide us through open borders. Maybe if you weren't a christian preacher, you'd feel less compulsion to wring hands and more desire to wring necks, as you should. Look at Golden Dawn going after that fucking Paki rapist. That's what gets women horny and incites in onlooking men the will to fight. That's where political change comes from. Not your little queer mini-books on Batman. Now get out of here, boy.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...06#post1422906

                So as I see it, the propensity to factionalism and infighting is now working in my favor.
                Yeah . . . just another miscalculation. They're flying thick and fast lately.

                Originally posted by Greg Johnson
                .

                Now that you can bet on.




                .

                Ick bin ein gut-sick guido-kikenweasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS.
                Cornholing Forum Caligula [/URL]



                Comment


                • #23
                  I really don't want to allow a gut-sick guido kikenweasel with jew ass-GAIDS to empty itz colostomy bag here on Counter-Currents.

                  I really don't want to allow a gut-sick guido kikenweasel with jew ass-GAIDS to empty itz colostomy bag here on Counter-Currents.


                  http://www.counter-currents.com/2012...#comment-24695
                  http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6493#post6493


                  Originally posted by LinderMillerite Meercat
                  http://www.counter-currents.com/2012...#comment-24664

                  Why didn’t you publish Alex Linder’s response to this article? He has the decency to allow you to comment on his website, without restriction. You should return the favor. What are you scared of? The fact that you censor his comments makes you look weak, dishonest and shifty.
                  .


                  I would have if he had not used ethnic slurs, personal insults, and generally acted like an ass.

                  I don’t provide a forum for people to insult me or my friends or the intelligence of our readers.

                  Beyond that, he has his own site, so it is not possible to “censor” him at all.

                  It is important to create clear intellectual distinctions between what we stand for and what Linder stands for. He is clever writer, but a toxic personality who is indifferent to reason and truth and who promotes every Old Right idea I reject in their most intense form, as well as a pathological madhouse atmosphere.


                  Counter-Currents Publishing
                  Books Against Time

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Greggie mistook me for a strong heterosexual non-meercat

                    Greggie mistook me for a strong heterosexual non-meercat.


                    http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...56#post1422956
                    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6496#post6496


                    The concatenation "Hadding Scott and Wade Michael Page" makes about as much sense to me as "Greg Johnson and Pee Wee Herman." What kind of milieu gives birth to people like Greg Johnson and Pee Wee Herman? The same as squeezes out Kevin Alfred Strom and Hadding the Loveless Mattoid Meercat, thatz' what!!!

                    I actually have relatively little in common with Wade Michael Page. That guy had an alcohol problem that conspired with the current bad economy to ruin his life -- first his job, then his house -- and he decided to go out with a bang instead of a whimper. Plus he was a musician and got lots and lots of pussy -- and I'm not talking of the four-legged kind. I'm talking about the kind that I've never got since it had me!!!

                    As a national-socialist mattoid meercat, my view is that the government failed by (1) economic policies that are disloyal to the American people and (2) letting Page wallow in his ruin and become a source of trouble instead of helping him get straightened out. There ought to be a little cage for all the non-mattoid meercat poseurs playing at Internut WN/NS.

                    An alcoholic ready to fly off the handle is one thing that I am not. I'm nothing but a little meer-pussy who would never resort to violence. I need bigger, stronger piss-pul to censor the unruly messers-up-of-mattoid-meercats within the bowel Movement.

                    I've taken up residence in one of Alex Linder's virtual colostomy bags, Greggie. Nyaaah-nyuh-nyuh-nayaaah-nyuh!!!



                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Wherein Uncle Lender lectures Greggie on how to be a successful New Right faggot

                      Wherein Uncle Lender lectures Greggie on how to be a successful New Right faggot

                      http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...54#post1428354
                      http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6504#post6504



                      [notes / comments on Johnson's 24m radio delivery on Old Right vs New Right. Available as text here.

                      .
                      .


                      OR/NR have in common and against "phony" right: reject equality, accept inequality

                      rejects "chimera" of equality. "All of life is governed by hierarchies of real fact and value."

                      traditional society (TS), OR, NR. TS is destroyed. OR means fascism/NS. attempts to restore TS within "modernity." (science, tech, mass society)

                      NR/OR want hierarchy and organic. we want a society free of exploitation and injustice (that is utopian).

                      how does NR differ from OR? THEY are stigmatized since WWII. NR rejects: "fascist and NS party politics, totalitarianism, imperialism, terrorism, and genocide."

                      This is why Greg can only describe Golden Dawn as "interesting." If he starts saying successful, then he has to observe that, contrary to what he's imaginging the NR to be, GD does embrace party politics and daily operations that are very similar to what the OR carried on.

                      NR differs from ENR (European New Right) in three ways: race over ethnicity in North America; must take on the jew in NA, where jews dominate; much more frank and direct critical engagement with fascism and national socialism, not playing around fringes like ENR does (partly because of law).

                      - for universal nationalism as way to keep peace. all deserve sovereign homelands

                      - "we believe" this world can be achieved peacefully through partition and transfer, rather than violence. 'gradual and humane' programs.

                      - "We believe that these aims can come about by changing people's consciousness. That is, by persuading enough people in positions of influence that everyone has a stake in ethno-nationalism. The promotion of political change thru the transformation of consciousness and culture is what we call metapolitics."

                      In less grandiose terms, NR is not to provide leaders but to influence some vague elite, either the existing or one yet to arise. But not actually BE that elite itself. In other words, the NR is kibitzers - people who stand around the table and tell the men actually in the game how to play their cards. I mean, it sounds great when Johnson lays it out, but really, in more prosaic terms, he's just going to offer more free advice. The NR's not actually getting in the ring. Like, you know, Golden Dawn.

                      metapolitics must come before a change in the political order.

                      So says Johnson. Because it fits what he wants to do - multiply essays. But in fact, the change in order comes from being involved in all aspects of the process, not just writing and thinking. All these matters, as much of them as can be engaged, go on simultaneously. That is what we saw with the OR Nazis, and what we see with the Neo-Old Right Golden Dawners. Creating a new political order is not the hands-off affair Johnson imagines it to be. Does Golden Dawn need some 'metapolitical' change before it can begin working to transform Greece? Hell no! Whites in Western countries don't need their consciousness transformed, they need potatoes. Potatoes and protection. They need cooking oil and champions. People who will help them vanquish enemies and feed them potatoes and milk when they are hungry. The state's not there - but Golden Dawn is. The real-world physical help and political leadership provided by Golden Dawn will do more to transform Greek consciousness and culture than 1,000 clever essays by Brown Johnson. And at some level he knows this. He does not have the character to admit that his approach is not, in fact, a political strategy but a personal declaration about where he and his group are going to put their effort. They're going to write essays. Lengthy important reviews of important new Batman movies; crypt-keeping of the same-old goth writers and ancient German thinkers everyone's long familiar with. Rehash after furious rehash, but no engagement with actual politics. I'd rather have Golden Dawn's fetapolitics than Greg Johnson's metapolitics anyday. And so would average Greeks. And so would Whites in all nations.

                      metapolitics must come before a change in the political order.

                      Johnson asserts this without proving it. It is merely his opinion. Like there's something new in human relations waiting to be discovered and transmitted, and everybody will go, holy shit, I never thought of that before. But it's not like that at all. We just need ordinary politics, carried on by heroes, not new philosophies, new ideas, anything new. Just better champions, tighter organization, more loyalty, greater bravery. Honestly, Greg, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but 10,000 more 10,000-word exegeses of the gothic in Lovecraft aren't going to produce political change.

                      tailored to the full array of white interests/outlooks/constituencies.

                      Well, that's the theory, but in reality you have pitched and will continue to pitch to an extremely narrow, if high-level, sector. You have the words right, but you can't deliver on them. Do you imagine that because you serve up a 5,000-word exegesis on "The Dark Knight Rises" that you are reaching the masses who actually attend such a movie? You're not. All you're reaching are intellectuals of a certain bent. The original VNN actually achieved what you imagine you are trying to achieve. You can't repeat its success because it involves qualities neither you nor your writers possess (wit, humor, ability to satirize), and because, for reasons of sniffishness, you won't go low enough to fish where the whitefish are. Your offering is monolevel, precisely in the way George Lincoln Rockwell advised against, even if your words make obseiance to the full-spectrum offerings he advised.

                      community organizing is key part of metapolitics.

                      Ok. "community organizing"...but not party politics. As Golden Dawn shows, they can easily be the same thing. Hamas showed that too. As did the OR national socialists. What you appear to mean by community organizing are the private salons, like the one you're holding this weekend in California.

                      [from here on I'll just take it from the transcript]

                      Second, there is community organizing, meaning the cultivation of real-world communities that live according to our vision in the present and may serve as the seeds of a New Order to come.

                      except that's not possible because of the LAW. which can only be changed by the politics you specifically state you will not be involved in.

                      The primary metapolitical project of the North American New Right is to challenge and replace the hegemony of anti-white ideas throughout our culture and political system.

                      And this magician is going to do this by ESCHEWING POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT in favor of MULTIPLYING ESSAYS. The butt baby of Davids Copperfield and Blaine wouldn't even dream of trying to sell an illusion this fragrant. Get this again, to fully appreciate its absurdity: without owning any tv stations, or radio stations, or any elected officials, Greg Johnson and his crew of anonymites are going to "replace the hegemony of anti-white ideas throughout our culture and political system." And they're going to achieve this WITHOUT any political involvement, simply by INFLUENCING (his word, not mine) some vague elite. Not being the elite. They don't propose anything as icky as leading an actual struggle, but by influencing some unknown mass of people. Presumably there is a body of men out there just waiting for 5,000-word exegeses of Batman movies in order to break from their thrall and lead our race to victory. We're a long way, truly, from simple Greeks out working the fields, collecting watermelons and onions to feed their hungry neighbors. Nah, that's not the stuff that provides the cultural and political transformation that "must" precede change in the political order. Too mundane.

                      The entire cultural and political mainstream—including every shade of the “respectable” political spectrum—treats white racial consciousness and white self-assertion as evil.

                      As always, Johnson acts like other ideas have triumphed because they persuaded people, when the known truth is that the vast majority has no real beliefs other than to avoid pain, and will generally go along with whatever comes out of the loudspeaker. That's the truth. It's just too boring for the Johnsons of the world to accept. You can't win a cultural battle where you don't control the mass media AND you refrain from actual politics.

                      Our goal is to critique and destroy this consensus and make white racial consciousness and self-assertion hegemonic instead, so that no matter what political party wins office, white interests will be secured. And you're going to do this without being involved in politics, without controlling any mass media, purely by the brilliant persuasiveness of your ideas. D is for delusional. Our goal is a pluralistic white society in which there is disagreement and debate about a whole range of issues. But white survival will not be among them. Meanwhile Whites are shot on the street daily by feral niggers, to be redundant, the white presidential candidate takes it up the ass from jews while sucking off niggers, and not a single word contrary to the existing order of things can be printed in the mass media. You're going to change that by eschewing politics for essay-writing. One is reminded of those cult nuts' attempt to levitate the Pentagon by prayer.

                      There are systematic analogies between the Old Right and the Old Left, and between the New Right and the New Left.

                      The Old Right and Old Left had widely divergent aims, but shared common means: hierarchical, ideological political parties organized for both electioneering and armed struggle; one-party police states led by dictators; the elimination of opposition through censorship, imprisonment, terror, and outright murder, sometimes on a mind-boggling industrial scale.

                      Greggy, you don't seem to understand that you can't just pick and choose how you fight. If the other guy is willing to cheat, lie, steal and murder - and you're not - guess who's going to win? You're simply high-handedly declaring that you're too good for anything as icky as actual fighting - which is merely a sign of your personality problems, and your lack of self-awareness, but what's unforgivable is the alacrity with which you throw your betters under the bus. Does their behavior at some level shame you? The NS not only wrote better essays than you, they thought better thoughts, and they fought better fights. Golden Dawn shows the proper relation between old and new right, if you must insist on that distinction. You can verbally camouflage it all you like with pretty words, but your retreat into mere essaying is the farthest thing from an actual political strategy. It's just your way of rationalizing your own choices.

                      Yes, in the case of classical National Socialism, revisionists argue that many of these atrocities are exaggerated or made up out of whole cloth. But revisionism about the Second World War is really beside the point, because the terroristic, imperialistic, genocidal impulse exists in National Socialism today. For instance, latter-day National Socialist William Pierce routinely pooh-poohed the Holocaust. But he was willing to countenance real terrorism, imperialism, and genocide on a scale that would dwarf anything in the 20th century. That spirit is what we reject.

                      All this does is show that you are incapable of loyalty. You will throw anyone under the bus if you think it will make you look better. The Nazis deserve respect, even if you're not a Nazi. You don't give it to them. All you care about is that you think they make you look bad. Let me assure you, Gregster - you alone are fully competent to make yourself look bad. I guess you could say you have achieved a metapolitical success in how I view you.

                      You reject the "spirit." Pierce recognized jews were attempting to genocide us, and wanted to return the favor. Guns to a gunfight, is all that is. Your view is that fights can be conducted by whatever means the fighter finds comfortable; there are no objective criteria that need to be taken into consideration. So you don't need to worry that you control no tv or radio, you just ignore that, and big it up that your website and books are going to create a cultural revolution. This is not serious stuff - when put forward as a political strategy. The very concept of metapolitics is bogus, because it always comes down the technics of influence, and here the control of the loudspeakers (cable tv, etc., and the political system) are determinative. Sorry, Greggy. There's no escaping politics.


                      Yes, there were degrees of totalitarianism. The Communist abolition of private property entailed a far greater disruption of and intrusion into private life than Fascism or National Socialism, which merely sought to harmonize private property and private enterprise with the common good whenever they conflicted. Fortunately, hard totalitarianism—even the softest version of hard totalitarianism—is neither desirable nor necessary to secure the existence of our people, so we reject it. You can't know a priori what will in fact be necessary since you haven't even begun the fight and in fact expressly reject fighting.

                      It is instructive to look at how the New Left has handled the mind-boggling, heart-rending, stomach-churning atrocities of the Old Left. The best New Leftists do not deny them. They do not minimize them. They do not pin their hopes on “Gulag revisionism” or rehabilitating the reputation of Pol Pot. They simply disown the atrocities. They step over them and keep moving toward their goals. Which is not a decision they make, as you imply, but an opportunity that is only possible because they control the organs of public opinion. They can't be forced to defend their record when nobody else is allowed a chance at the mike. Of course they're not going to talk about their record of mass murder. But you're ignoring what lets them get away with it, in order to further the frankly ridiculous illusion that your side can make a similar evasion. First, as the revisionists you've thrown under the bus have shown, there's nothing to evade. Second, the enemy can use that same media monopoly to force your side to respond to its attacks or else simply accept the damage they do. Why do you keep acting like the playing field is level, and everything is a matter of the choices we make? You act, per the Jared Barnum Taylor who associated with this school of stupidity, like there is no enemy. And we don't need to take him into account. We just put on our best writin' suit and pen up Another Great Essay! And if we do enough...we win! You're a cheesedog, Johnson.


                      This is exactly what we propose to do. We are too busy resisting our own genocide to tie ourselves to defending the mistakes and excesses of the Old Right. Johnson is a natural-born conservative. Attacking is not in him. The best he can do is evade and avoid, and get back to arranging the pretty flowers.



                      Why not pick it up and smash them over the head with it until they're dead? Then you won't have to dance, Chinaman, dance like a good little albino monkey.

                      The New Left retained the values and ultimate goals of the Old Left. They also retained elements of their philosophical framework. They then set about spreading their ideas throughout the culture by means of propaganda and institutional subversion. And they won. Aside from Cuba and North Korea, orthodox Communism is dead. Capitalism seems everywhere triumphant. And yet in the realm of culture, leftist values are completely hegemonic. The left lost the Cold War, but they won the peace. New Left and Old Left is as bogus a distinction as Old Right / New Right. What we're discussing here as though it's an ideas-battle is actually a matter of institutionalization of power. If the left owns all the satellite uplinks, and the politicians and preachers and teachers, then of course it can get away with "soft" means. The hard work of killing people has already been done. But that doesn't mean it won't have immediate recourse to this option wherever it needs to. Or that it in any way rejects the use of any means to get the job done. Old? New? Bullshit: same. It's you, the fool with no power, who is overtly, publicly rejecting the struggle for power that is in fact the only way your side could free itself or regain control of the apparatuses the control of which is what actually provides this influence you desire to effect. See, Greggy, people don't think. Very few of them. You are hugely overrating how thoughtful people are, and hugely underrating how much their meaningless views are simply authority-tropisms. Whatever the tv says to stay away from is what the mass-paramecium fears to be involved with. It's not deeper than that. People are not intellectuals. They will be influenced by brave leadership, in struggles such as we have before us, and nothing else. Certainly not by disembodied idea-ists who seek not to lead but to influence. Your aim to influence, which is wifely effeminacy, will be taken as weakness by the masses, and rightly so. The masses, as OR Hitler knew, require a strong hand. They take only a masculine impress, and reject what is soft, weak, unsure. I hate to have to explain this to you, young master Gregerson, but...when you look at Hitler, bublele? You're, yr yr...looking up. Not down. Up. Yeah. Sorry ol' Uncle Al has to break that news to you.

                      (Since in the West, both the Old and the New Left functioned primarily as a vehicle for Jewish ethnic interests, it would be more precise to say that Jewish values are hegemonic throughout the culture, even on the mainstream right.)

                      The New Left and New Right have widely divergent aims, but very similar means, namely the pursuit of political change through transforming ideas and culture, aiming at the establishment of intellectual and cultural hegemony.

                      This is just fruity beyond the point of acceptability. Premise is there's a real intellectual debate goin' on, and wez gonna win it. Yeah, except there is no debate because they own all the tv, radio and newspapers. Not only are you not giving even a passing not to their impregnable technical superiority in dissemination positioning, and legal context, you continue to pretend that the left's power is ultimately based on ideas rather than physical suppression of resistance. This is manifestly not true, and if you disagree, take your message to the street and see. But of course you don't even dare to get into that game, and you advise others against it. You're going to win it all growing flowers in your own little hothouse. It is to laugh.

                      The New Right rejects the totalitarianism, terrorism, imperialism, and genocide of the Old Right.

                      As well say, the New Right rejects winning. There is no winning without violence. Willing and able recourse to violence is how the jews took power. Ideas are merely an expression of jewish power, not the source. If I may use the phrase the quitter-conceder Weber used. Jews dominate this country because they are willing to use violence against competitors. And now they have the cops in their hands to do their dirty work for them. How are you going to change that? You'll say something fruity about new and different and better ideas, but this is nothing. This is just an academic pretending that politics is a battle of ideas rather than a battle.

                      But we do not reject their political model: the ethnically and culturally homogeneous, hierarchically organized, organic society. You just reject the only means by which it can brought about. Cuz the world has changed so much back then. Instead of fighting, today men just listen and vote. We want a world in which every distinct people has such a homeland, including the Jews. Great. Jews are for racism for them, and mongrelism for us. And you're for racialism for everybody. You bring a knife to a gunfight and expect to win.

                      Nor do we reject the theoretical frameworks of Fascism and National Socialism, which today are more relevant and better-grounded in science and history than ever before.

                      Nor do we reject such figures as Hitler and Mussolini. Objectivity requires that we recognize their virtues as well as their flaws. We have much to learn from them. We will never repudiate awakened white people just to curry favor with the Bourgeoisie.

                      This is particularly ludicrous. He's just gotten done rejecting basically everything the OR did, and now he's hypocritically talking about how he embraces the very people, philosophies and behaviors he just rejected. Johnson has come to make a habit of talking out of both sides of his mouth. "It is not enough that you believe, you must fight," said one famous OR guy. "I believe, but I will not fight," saith Johnson. Who then rotated yet again and expressed his support for Hitler's words. You need to decide, Greg, whether you're a Big Johnson or a Little Johnson. Well, you have decided. You just can't face the truth about your decision. I urge you to face it, and to reconsider.

                      I have received some gentle ribbing about including Hitler and Mussolini among the birthdays we commemorate, as it smacks of the totalitarian cult of personality. But as an editor, I find that birthdays are ideal, regularly-occurring occasions to discuss important figures. They also produce spikes in search engine traffic, which we want to capture. Besides, we commemorate many birthdays, and it would be craven to discuss people like Ezra Pound or Knut Hamsun but ignore the people they were imprisoned for following. So we will keep commemorating their birthdays until, eventually, everybody does. Ok, that makes sense. It is good to have heroes. Respected figures. Even if you disagree with them on things. But you undermined The Tradition when you draw an indelible line between your new thing and theirs. The psychology of celebrating them while simultaneously distancing yourself from them conveys a mixed message that is confusing, and unnecessarily so in light of the found facts you reject.

                      One of the main motives of the New Left’s move from politics to culture was disappointment with the proletariat, which was so effectively mobilized by Fascism and National Socialism, not to mention the centrist regimes of the Cold War era.

                      The New Left believed they represented the interests of the workers, but their approach was entirely elitist. They focused their attention on influencing the college-educated middle and professional classes, because these people have disproportionate influence on the rest of society, particularly through education, the media, and popular culture. It's a little more than influence. The left bought up the organs of opinion, took over the colleges, teachers' colleges and law schools, and bribed both political parties. This left it, over a few decades, in position to dictate ideology to the right half the bell curve, the college grads. The left doesn't influence people, it threatens them. If you don't agree, you will be weeded out of their system. If you're in the system and found out, you will be harassed and fired. To speak of persuasion and influence is far too soft. Dominate + paranoia + occupied power position + owning all the loudspeakers = suppressing all resistance. You can call that winning the debate, but that's not accurate. Preventing any debate from happening is accurate. To truly understand what the left does is to observe that it goes far, far beyond dictating political positions. It goes to the point of preventing bad thoughts from ever forming by developing techniques intended to stunt the mind: bad ways to read. And if the mind makes it over this hurdle, then all it has to read are PC-scripted textbooks. All it hears on radio/tv are jew-written news and fiction scripts. The left hasn't won the debate, it has taken over and smashed all competing views, and done what it could to destroy the very idea of idea-competition. Johnson's tone does not accurately convey the physiological-political reality of the left, which is utterly jewish, which is to say driven by hatred and paranoia. Any two white men speaking unrecorded by ZOG = conspiracy.

                      Likewise, the New Right represents the interests of all whites, but when it comes to social change, we need to adopt a resolutely elitist strategy. We need to recognize that, culturally and politically speaking, some whites matter more than others. History is not made by the masses. It is made out of the masses. It is made by elites molding the masses. Thus we need to direct our message to the educated, urban middle and professional classes and above.

                      Simple question, Greg. Given that Hitler, per the essay you published by Andrew Hamilton specifically did NOT try to attract the bourgeois at the start of his campaign to liberate Germany, and given that Golden Dawn in 2012 Greece is finding great success in going out in the streets to help the poor, why should anyone believe your way will work? Especially given that you have no way at all to influence the bourgeoisie through the colleges and grad schools? Why are cowardly, selfish, materialist upper-middle-class bourgeois with a lot to lose going to flock to your standard? As opposed to poor or lower-class people with comparatively nothing to lose?

                      There is no shortage of Old Right-style groups with populist messages targeting working class and rural constituencies. But we need to go beyond them if we are going to win. In America? Really? Who are these groups?

                      Who I am speaking for here? When I say “we,” I am speaking for more than just myself, but not for all or even most of our writers or readers. There is no presumption that every author we publish approves of our agenda, in whole or in essence. (Indeed, many of them are dead.) Nor is there any presumption that any author agrees with any other author published here. Publication here does, however, imply that I, as the Editor-in-Chief, think that a given work advances our agenda directly or indirectly: directly, by articulating a viewpoint that I would endorse as true; indirectly, by helping us build an intellectually exciting movement. That means that this so-called New Right is an artificial construct, of essays written by bourgeois individualists, not any genuine political school or tendency. It could just as well be called Greg Johnson's Fan Club. Or Greg Johnson's Racialist Reader's Digest.

                      And the North American New Right is an intellectual movement, not a fixed doctrine. The goals are fixed. The basic intellectual strategy is fixed. But everything else is in movement: usually toward our goals, but sometimes just whirling around the dance floor for the sheer joy of it (which, in a subtler way, also moves toward our goals). Yeah, I'm not feeling the brio in the forced tendentiousness of those 5,000-world Batman overintellectualizations.

                      There is a wide array of different and often incompatible intellectual traditions within the New Right. We have followers of the Traditionalism of Julius Evola and René Guénon as well as other thinkers who emphasize a metaphysics of eternal form. We have followers of non-Traditionalist, flux and history-oriented philosophers like Nietzsche, Spengler, and Heidegger. We have believers in decline and believers in Promethean progressivism. We have Darwinian biologists and scientific materialists squared off against metaphysical dualists. We have atheists, and we have representatives of all schools of religion, Christian and pagan, Eastern and Western.

                      We need this kind of diversity, because our goal is to foster versions of white nationalism that appeal to all existing white constituencies. Yeah, all white constituencies except the 95% who aren't intellectuals. We can speak to multitudes because we contain multitudes. Eh, not really. A variety of proud opinions, maybe, but a very thin and specific type.

                      How does the North American New Right relate to Old Right-style groups in North America and around the globe? Easy answer: you won't fight. You won't politic. You'll just scribble and scribble and scribble some more. And how do we relate to various democratic nationalist parties in America and Europe?

                      Alex Kurtagic has recently argued that democratic party politics can perform the metapolitical functions of education and community organizing, thus there is no fundamental contradiction between metapolitics and party politics. True, altho truer would be to observe that metapolitics doesn't exist. It's not like there is any politics that isn't based in some idea, some conception of things, no matter how poorly worked out. The problem Whites face is not philosophical, it's that they don't have power and their enemies do. Pretty simple thing. Of course political campaigning involves education and community organizing, but these are merely the byproducts of pursuing office. And that goal means that all educational and organizing efforts must be dominated by the election cycle and the political issues of the day. Your blatheration looks obscene next to what Golden Dawn is doing every single day in the field:

                      - feeding people
                      - protecting people
                      - setting up blood banks
                      - beating up enemies
                      - setting up new offices
                      - replacing offices destroyed by fire
                      - fighting fires in rural areas
                      - checking out animal abuse carried on by illegals
                      - helping the government patrol the border
                      - printing and passing out newspapers
                      - posting letters from Greeks
                      - posting ideological texts as lessons
                      - smacking commie cunts in the face
                      - rebutting big lies from 'human rights' hypocrites
                      - holding torchlight memorials

                      There's a lot more to it, when you have a real and functional nationalist party, than just running for elections.


                      That is fine, if one’s real goal is to win office. But outside of proportional representation systems, seeking office is pretty much futile. So if one’s real goal is education and organizing, then political campaigning is merely a distraction. So why not focus all one’s energy into educational and organizing efforts, and determine the agenda ourselves, rather than let electoral politics determine it for us? You're not doing that. You're writing 5,000-word Batman essays that no normal person wants to read.

                      Why not take all the money spent on purely political activities—voter registration drives, campaign travel, campaign literature—and channel it into education and organizing? What organizing?

                      David Duke, for example, has been doing enormously important work with his writings, speeches, and videos. Most of that work would come to a stop if he were to make another futile and expensive run for office. Which made a bigger impression on the public: his educational materials or his campaigns? The answer is obvious.

                      Intellectually, we need to draw a sharp, clear line between New Right metapolitics and all forms of nationalist party politics. We share the same broad aims, but we differ as to the best means of achieving them. We need to acknowledge these differences frankly, then divide our camp and pursue our common aims by the various paths that seem best to us.

                      I do not wish to spend time criticizing and attacking other sincere white advocates, competing for turf and followers or squabbling over dimes. In the end, the only valid argument for or against an approach is to look at its results. I want to win support by doing good work, not denigrating the work of others. Yet you spend all your effort denigrating both the original right, which actually dared, unlike you, get involved in politics, and damn near won the whole thing...and then you also denigrate the fact finders who preserve their legacy by protecting what they actually did from jewish big liars. You want people to credit you with real Nazi virtues while not holding you responsible for imaginary Nazi flaws. What a big stinking, steaming hypocrite you are. Who could trust you?

                      Even though one can draw a sharp intellectual line between New Right metapolitics and nationalist party politics, no wall separates us in the real world. The North American New Right is not a political party or a party-like intellectual sect. We are an informal network that can overlap and penetrate all social institutions, including parties. I maintain contacts with people all over the globe who are involved in various political parties. They know where I stand. Where we disagree, we agree to disagree. Are you a movement, or not? You say you are, but your words then again show you're not. Inconsistency has become a serious problem with you, Johnson. Brown Johnson's Book & Essay Club is what you are. That's fine. Or it would be fine if you admitted it. But you prefer to play games, with yourself and others.

                      Speaking personally, however, I wish that a wall could be erected in some cases, for if there are only six degrees of social separation between me and Barack Obama, there are far fewer degrees of separation between me and the next Anders Behring Breivik. And, for me, that is just too close for comfort. I do not want anything to do with gun-toting armies of one. The only gun I want to own is made of porcelain. Yeaaaah. You are going to take over culture. You and your ideas...and your porcelain gun. Mmhmm. We'll see that you're stuck in a lavender-scented rubber room, sir.

                      You see, I really believe that what I am doing is right and important. Too right and too important to expose to the risk of grown men dressing up as Knights Templar or Stormtroopers and playing with real guns. I have nothing against guns or gun-owners as such. But the Old Right model attracts unstable, violence-prone people, which just makes our job harder. Again: no one can make you look bad but you. And you're more than qualified on that front, see this essay.

                      But since I can’t build a movement—even a metapolitical movement—by being a hermit, the best I can do is draw clear intellectual lines of demarcation: again, the North American New Right is founded on the rejection of Fascist and National Socialist party politics, totalitarianism, terrorism, imperialism, and genocide. Yeah, we get it: No fight. Just right.

                      (Breivik is a complex case, because he emerged from the Counter-Jihad movement, a Jewish-dominated false opposition to the Islamic colonization of Europe. But we still share his basic concerns and his goal of Europe for Europeans, even though we reject his actions and much of his analytical framework.)

                      Cynics have accused the New Left of being nothing but a dishonest marketing ploy. Of course, there is no point in trying to convince cynics, who know a priori that the truth is always more sordid than it seems. But the New Left actually delivered on its promises: Marxism without totalitarianism, without terror, without camps. No, that's not accurate. Accurate is that anyone who threatens the regime will be thrown in jail. What crime did Mahler and Stolz and Rudolf commit? There's nothing at all soft, different or new about leftist tactics, they just don't need to be as repressive as they once were because they've consolidated their control. It is merely your self-interested pretension that the left changed its nature rather than its tactics, and that it renounces violence in favor or persuasion. It does no such thing. It uses violence wherever it needs to. You just won't acknowledge it. Because it encourages your nostrum that real change can be accomplished by soft means alone. In your case, by writing essays.

                      Of course we all know that the present regime is a form of soft totalitarianism which is enacting the genocide of the white race in slow motion. But the point is that this regime was not imposed upon our people through a violent revolution. They accepted it because of the transformation of their consciousness. They can be saved the same way.

                      Garbage. Decades of agitprop, and our people still vote time after time to close the borders and against affirmative action. With their feet they vote to move to White areas, and toward the altar with someone of the same race. Their consciousness has hardly been transformed. They simply see no option than to go along with most things because there's no one leading the other way, and they only get one position no matter which authority they listen to. And men who might lead them are sitting on the sidelines kibitzing with essays while advising others to stay out of politics, even though they have a contemporary example right in front of their nose in Greece that getting involved is what actually works.



                      .

                      Ick bin ein gut-sick guido-kikenweasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS.
                      Cornholing Forum Caligula [/URL]



                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Dr Kevin McDonald said the Holohoax is real to Peterless Skank

                        Dr Kevin McDonald said the Holohoax is real to Peterless Skank over on Voice of ReTards


                        http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...89#post1441789
                        http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6839#post6839

                        BUMP!

                        About 25 minutes into this old VOR interview with Peter Schaenk, Kevin MacDonald says he's not a Holocaust denier and in fact believes the Holocaust did happen.

                        He then goes on to say why Holocaust deniers should abandon their efforts to debunk the hoax and embrace his own approach as their way-to-go.


                        I'm Little Butt I'm Loud!!!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          If a loveless mattoid meercat chews off itz nutsack in a silent room will it make a scream?

                          If a loveless mattoid meercat chews off itz nutsack in a silent room will it make a scream?


                          http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...39#post1442339
                          http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6841#post6841


                          What I am seeing is a major rift in what passes for White Nationalism between conservatives who want to accept the established false history and try to work with it, and radicals who reject that. I say that as a loveless mattoid meercat who when it chewed itz nuts off in a sound-proofed room nobody heard muh silent scream and nobody gave a shit. This observation is apropos of nothing as I whine my way to alienation.

                          On the conservative side there is Bob Whitaker with his BUGSter/White Rabbit crew, Jamie Kelso, and Greggy Johnson with Counter-Currents. All of whom, if they have ever heard of me, think that I am a fuktarded dweeb unworthy of further notice. You might notice that these conservatives refer to each other and endorse each other (e.g.here, here). It is something approaching a clique. A clique that I can't get in to. I'm stuck here on Rabbi Lender's/Linder's Greater Free Range Tard Corral wherein I'm nothing more than a Colostomy Bag Likker, Third Class.

                          These are mostly people that came to White Nationalism after Dr. Pierce was gone. Fearless Leader was such a pussy that he didn't even give me a single one of the Order ZOGbux, and what little was left Erich Gliebe got, the piggish hound. They seem a rather fainthearted crew and tend to accept the Jewish account of what happened in World War II, and don't have a spare forum that they lend out to little importunate loveless mattoid meercats of the night and in some cases, e.g. Greg Johnson, they are even pro-Israel (because he doesn't want the Jews to come here, he says). Me, I could live as a First-Class Colostomy Bag Likker for a wealthy kike as long as I got fed more often as I know which side of the bagel my lox is smarmed on.

                          Some of Whitaker's statements ("But if white gentiles disappear, Israel will be gone long") also look like a pitch for Zionist support. From the perspective of historical dialectic, these people have already conceded a large part of the struggle. They are not going to scurry out into the caves and ditches and fight a suck-cess-fool meercat struggle for paltry existence like I must.

                          On the radical side, I think we have the oldtimers like David "The Duck of Deaf" Duke (more or less, and usually always much much less after visiting the casino) and Tom Metzger, and all the historical revisionists. I like it how Ol' Finckelsheenieite Pickle-Cunt Carolyn Yeager/Yenta has given me a place in her virtual burrow-furrow to yip and to yap about the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion even though, unlike Henry Ford, I don't believe in them. If Jonathan Bowden (advocate of "fascism," critic of Nick Griffin's pandering to Jews) were still alive we could count him on the radical side. I'm channeling him through jewranus. Many people on Stormfront that came up while Dr. Pierce was alive are in the radical camp. They believe that Don Black needs to get all of theyz' geezergelt and whiggaz-mites in order to run $permFront into the ground and for what it is worth agree that the enemy's historical narrative and basic assumptions have to be attacked, just as long as they don't vulgarly use the 'n-word' and get the Jews all angry. Actually trying to accomplish something useful is not used as the foundation of our own arguments.

                          Kevin MacDonald is in between, since he is not willing to question the Holohoax or publish material that does, but is dedicated to the proposition that our fundamental conflict is with the Jews and that this conflict is rooted in genes. I'm sure hoping that if I don't piss off K-Mac then I can get virtually published on TOO some more mattoid meercat droppings.

                          The conservative path is the low road and a path of less resistance. They ought to be storming the barracades, just as long as I'm not trapped in the front lines. As a importunate penurious meercat without a pot to piss in, much less a window to throw it out of, sometimes I idly wonder to what extent this recent trend toward conservative lameness is encouraged by financial considerations. There are probably a lot of White conservatives that are concerned about demographic changes but are not yet Jew-wise, and some opportunists might find it more convenient simply to tell them what they already believe and take their donations rather than try to educate them further. Real good work if only you can get it. There could also be money from Jewish sources used for the deliberate purpose of strengthening the conservative and defensive tendencies at the expense of real thinking in White Nationalism. Why? Oh why? since I'm allegedly so very smart am I not rich and increased with goods?

                          I think we can infer from Bob Whitaker's description of his BUGSters as “the only real pro-whites” -- if he really means it -- that these lame conservatives intend to become THE face of White Nationalism. That would not be a good thing for us loveless mattoid meercats already living hoof & ass to mouth.


                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Hadding, you can be the 'brains' of the bowel Movement because nobody wants meercat nuts.

                            Hadding, you can be the 'brains' of the bowel Movement because nobody wants meercat nuts.


                            http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...65#post1442365
                            http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6854#post6854

                            Hadding: Truth is important, but its not essential that you get there on the first date.

                            I'll grant that Doc Johnson and Kevin MacDonald should have scored by now, but can't produce the money shot.

                            Bugsters, on the other hand, are intellectual juveniles. Aside from Ole Bob, whose on death's door, these guys are still children in our movement. They've learned know a couple quick and dirty moves which, in my opinion, are pretty damned effective on the average, unconscious, White anti-White.

                            The mistake they commit is to visit websites and attempt to engage more experienced people like yourself, and start spreading their simple-minded propaganda, and then, when you try to put them in their place, they get uppity.

                            It's annoying, but I say if they want to be the face of WN, let them. Think of them as the frontline. People like yourself can be the brains, especially since the PhDs are unwilling to get serious.

                            I suspect our future is going to be determined more by events than philosophy anyway. Philosophically, Bugsters may be helpful in getting the ball rolling. They don't even have a political philosophy to offer. They are only good at exposing the hypocrisy of the anti-White Zeitgeist.

                            I say let 'em go. They're not going to go too far in first gear, and that's all they have, but they may be useful in breaking the inertia.

                            For now, with respect to the Bugsters, I think its best to keep the Long Knives in their sheaths.

                            The PhDs, on the other hand, should know better, and deserve no mercy.

                            Punch your weight.


                            You Nazis may be insane . . . .
                            . . . . but us whiggers are typpycull!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              As a pig ZOGbot, I love 'New Right' faggots

                              As a pig ZOGbot, I love 'New Right' faggots


                              http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...73#post1442373
                              http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6857#post6857


                              Counter Currents is an excellent production, probably the best WN resource on the net, especially in the category of high culture. If one wants familiarity with the history of the right, especially its intellectual heyday during the 30's, Counter Currents is the place to go. Referring to Greg Johnson as a philo Semitic conservative is contradicted by the facts. Hadding, didn't you once remark that you never read CC? I can tell. Save it for the Jews and Liberals folks.

                              Frenz' Law of White Nationalism:

                              Whiggers are always replaced by mamzers playing whigger.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                That New Right faggot Greggie says that the bowel Movement doesn't need nutzi mattoid meercats.

                                That New Right faggot Greggie says that the bowel Movement doesn't need nutzi mattoid meercats.


                                http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...88#post1442388
                                http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6858#post6858

                                Originally posted by ZOGling mamzer ass-clown View Post
                                As a pig ZOGbot, I love 'New Right' faggots

                                http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p...73#post1442373
                                http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=6857#post6857

                                Counter Currents is an excellent production, probably the best WN resource on the net, especially in the category of high culture. If one wants familiarity with the history of the right, especially its intellectual heyday during the 30's, Counter Currents is the place to go. Referring to Greg Johnson as a philo Semitic conservative is contradicted by the facts. Hadding, didn't you once remark that you never read CC? I can tell. Save it for the Jews and Liberals folks.
                                I read very well Greggy's anti-revisionist essay. He blatantly talks out both sides of his mouth. Saying shit like that loveless mattoid meercats and Ol' Finckelsheenieite Pickle-Cunt Carolyn Yeager/Yenta's kvetching services are not needed. Like to made muh mangina bleed!!! If you take anything that he says as reliable you are a sucker. The bowel Novement NEEDS us. Itz just that you fuktards don't know it.

                                But, when he says that he supports the existence of the Zionist state, that is egregious and noteworthy. He is going out on a limb saying that and it does have the appearance of pandering to Jews. Zionist jews as opposed to gut-sick guido-kikenweasels with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS like Rabbi Lender/Linder.

                                I am told that most of the good material on Counter-Currents is old, recycled material, like essays by Dr. Pierce, Fearless Leader and Cosmotologist Collecter of Order ZOGbux and Founder of an Elohim Shitty for CreaTards, our Hero, whom Greggy now denigrates, the "New Right" faggot..


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X