Obama is talking down the economy in order to use fear to control everything. You liberals said Bush governed using fear. Bush used fear of something real, terrorism. Obama is using fear of something that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd did to us on purpose in order to get Obama elected.

Let’s face it. Obama is not doing anything to resolve the stereotype that the black man’s intellect is beneath that of the other races. He is actually making it appear to be true, which is sad.

God save us from the left-wing’s fiscal stupidity. Have hope, with this President, the Democrats will lose all respect and we will soon have a totally conservative voter pool, Congress, Senate, and a smart man/woman in the White House.

Bet all of you liberals are shocked we will have 50k troops in Iraq for a long time to come. And also, a new war in northern Pakistan with an additional 150k troop surge. How is Obama any better than Bush? He is worse by a country mile. More war on top of the biggest spending bill in United States history. Wow, what an embarrassment to his darker race eh? What an embarrassment to Americans.

The Chinese and Japanese are not syupid enough to let their populations become racially tainted. White mans biggest problem is that he lacks a racial consciousness.

Diversity will destroy the USA.

Different races can never live in harmony unless ruled by a dictator. Human nature causes races to stay pure. Mixing leads to disaster.

This man was created equal bullshit aint gonna work.

I wouldn’t boil stability of societies down to a single factor; multiple factors obviously are at work.

Stalin was a Georgian, but Georgians aren’t Russians – I don’t know why you think that the Soviet Union was homogeneous, it was a patchwork of different nations! Soviet passports even indicated the nationality of the holder.

Kurds aren’t Arabs. Sunnis and Shiites have differences of opinions. Look what happened to Czechoslovakia with the “Velvet Divorce”. Tito kept multi-ethnic Yugoslavia together with a combination of skill and secret police tactics.

What do you think is behind the Darfur going-ons? The 15-year civil war in Lebanon? The examples abound.

“Do you think Helmut Schimdt was naughty to say such a thing?”

In my opinion, I think Helmut Schimdt was a flippin` idiot. If Germany was in such a current state crisis caused by “multi-culturalism”, then surely we would be seeing the same results in Germany as in Iraq, perhaps even the Russian invasion of Georgia?
Did you forget the fact that Georgia was once a part of the USSR? Those societies are “homogeneous” FYI.

Sorry that your arguement doesn’t seem to be holding up. So the best thing you could do was paste quotes from the opinions of someone else….ha.

You should know this already–
Actions speak louder than words and the actions taken by Russia recently says enough. The same can be said of Sadam Hussien`s regime. So the least you could do is post quotes.

“that multiculturalism can only work under authoritarian regimes, and that bringing millions of Turkish guest workers to Germany was a mistake.”

“The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a democratic society,”

The article goes on to say:

“Mr Schmidt, 85, who was the Social Democratic chancellor from 1974 until 1982, said that the problems resulting from the influx of mostly Turkish Gastarbeiter, or guest workers, had been neglected in Germany and the rest of Europe. They could be overcome only by authoritarian governments, he added, naming Singapore as an example.”

Do you think Helmut Schmidt was naughty to say such a thing?

My comment about homogeneity correlating with stability of societies kicked up a bit of an expected reaction. I must have hit a bit of a nerve!

In an article by Walter Williams, he declared :
“Multi-ethnic societies are inherently unstable, and how we handle matters of interracial crime is just one of the ways that we’re contributing to that instability.”

So, would you consider Walter Williams a Negro White Supremacist for asserting such a thing?

Iraq is made up of mostly the Kurds, Sunnis and Shia`s and they’re all of the same race, so therefore its a “homogeneous society” and its definately not “stabled”nor is it functioning properly.

Which brings me to the point that these White Supremacists are flat out wrong. Their theory does not hold up. Its hogwash.

If we`re discussing the topic of “homogeneous societies” brought forth by White Supremacists. Then surely you would look into the various societies of ancient history which were “homogeneous” and many of them were battle worn with constant fighting among themselves.

“Stabled” and “functioned” better?

History doesn’t tell us that. And we cannot learn by looking into history, okay???

So yes, we need to look at history.

“Societies that are racially/ethnically homogeneous tend to be more stable and function better.”

An illogical fallacy of one who does not understand nor did he ever studied “Societies” which were “homogeneous”. But contrary to his beliefs, a good example of a “stabled” and “functioning” Society is here in the United States and yet its not homogeneous. And they failed to recongnized that. What a shame.

Oh, you mean like Somalia and North Korea?

Stay tuned.

You: There is a major difference between random crimes and hate crimes.
Me: What about a random “hate crime” ?

You: The vast majority of hate crimes are committed by Whites.
Me: I got this from the FBI website. I didn’t paste the link as the SPLC editor seems more likely to delete posts with links. Two things to note: (1) is that White people are “underrepresented” as offenders; White people commit hate crimes at a low rate than, e.g., Black. (2) Where are the “Hispanics” who commit hate crimes? We know that they’ve been killing Blacks in Los Angeles! I’ve heard that Hispanics have been added to the White category. So if you examine the statistics for real White, the number would even lower.

An analysis of available race data for the 7,330 known hate crime offenders revealed that:

* 58.6 percent were white.
* 20.6 percent were black.
* 5.7 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (multiple races, group).
* 1.1 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander.
* 1.0 percent of known offenders were American Indian/Alaskan Native.
* 12.9 percent were unknown.

You: And what is the definition of a hate crime??? Simple..A hate crime is based on entirely on hate.
Me: Oh, maybe rape should be declared a hate crime? What about such a crime motivated by a little bit of “hate” and the rest by want of money?

You: And the motivations are almost always abour race.
Me: Not according to the FBI:
* 52.1 percent of the victims were targeted because of the offender’s bias against a race.
* 18.1 percent were victimized because of a bias against a religious belief.
* 15.3 percent were targeted because of a bias against a particular sexual orientation.
* 13.5 percent were victimized because of a bias against an ethnicity/national origin.
* 1.0 percent were targeted because of a bias against a disability.

You: Random crimes are not. And this is what’s troubling for White Supremacists is perhaps they have a difficulty time distinguishing the two?
Me: Oh, so maybe the 37,000 rapes committed by Blacks against Whites per year and virtually none by Whites against Blacks is causing the alleged confusion?

Regards.

Please, if any of these things have happened to you before, maybe you can find solace with the Kurds, Chechens, Palestinians, and any number of ethnicities that have ACTUALLY faced real persecution in this world. Otherwise, stop whining.

Random crimes usually have a motive related to but limited to drugs, gang rivalery disputes, sexual deviants(rapists and Pedophilia) and in most cases–money. Money seems to be the sole purpose for Random Crimes, which are largely committed by minorities.

Me: This is why you need to read up on history before making comments like that. The statement that Latvians were the most overrepresented group is based on the ethnic make-up of the original Bolshevik Central Committee, before Latvia was even annexed in the first place. That had the highest number of Jews and was only 6%. After that the number fell dramatically.

As for FBI statistics, I suggest you check them directly, and not from some racialist site. Check out “The Color of Deception” some time.

You said: Ok, I want to make it clear when I am talking about WN orgs, … and it is not hard to imagine how some of the more extreme propaganda can lead to violence. In fact it does lead to violence every year.”
Me: Possible. Has there ever been any reputable studies done on this besides ADL/SPLC knee-jerk emotion? So if we accept that this could indeed be the case, I’m far more concerned that the message the liberal media, the SPLC and people like Tim Wise – they are always telling “poor oppressed minorities” that the only reason they aren’t achieving equality of outcome is due to “White privilege” and “White racism”. “White National” correctly pointed out the “crime, murders and gang rapes that non-whites commit” in Western countries. Maybe the “enlightened” egalitarians are egging them on?

You: “Now, just to address a few specific points. Firstly, there is simply no comparison between the conversations at the average “respectable” racialist meeting and Jesse Jackson’s aforementioned comment.”
Me: Oh, maybe I should have reminded you of Reverend Jackson’s “Hymietown” comment ?

You: “For one thing, it is pretty clear that Jackson was not using the term in malice, ”
Me: Wanting to cut someone’s balls off sounds somewhat malicious!

You: “… but Obama has at least once talked down to blacks, …”
Me: Obama once belonged to a racist, anti-White church for 20 years. I’m sure that they talk about how much they love White people there!

You: “Now as for the SPLC, I am aware of what you speak, but since they were kind enough to let my comments on here I am not going to break their balls.”
Me: I commend the SPLC for having an open forum here!

You: “I am familiar with Norman Finkelstein’s work, but I don’t see how this negates the fact that WN leaders are parasites and con-men.”
Me: I don’t deny that there are some bad apples, but that doesn’t legitimize the goal of wanting “… our own Nation where European-Americans can live in peace.” Nor should Israel be de-legitimized due to a few rotten apples.

You: “White privilege and discrimination are readily proven by statistical studies. I suggest you have a look at timwise.org and find out about such experiments and studies.”
Me: I’m familiar with Tim Wise but certainly not fluent in what preaches. Let me guess: Statistically Blacks and “Latinos” aren’t as affluent as Whites, therefore they must be suffering from White oppression and/or Whites are “privileged”; since we don’t have equality of outcome some scam must be going on. There are other minority groups that are just as affluent if not more so than (Gentile) Whites – those are Jews and Asians. So all the nonsense about “White Privilege” is simply nonsense. Maybe we should talk about Jewish Privilege or Asian Privilege for a change?

You: “Lastly, I don’t see why you feel the need to tie the “interests of European-Americans” in with Israel.”
Me: Simple: in there USA there is a high degree of support for Israel and explicit support of Israel as an ethnically-based state. Virtually all politicians express support – including Obama – for Israel. Thus I see nothing wrong with ethnically-based states, including one “where European-Americans can live in peace.” Ethnically/racially-based are more stable and peaceful that multi-ethnic states. In varying degrees, one needs force to keep multi-ethnic states functioning.

You: “First of all, I am an anti-Zionist, so you are not going to find any hypocrisy here. “
Me: Fair enough.

You: “’European Americans’ are not very European either.”
Me: OK, then call European Americans Whites. Do you refer to Blacks as African -Americans?

You: “There is more to a nation than genetic ancestry. Culture and practical aspects matter as well.”
Me: True, but what about culture and “practical aspects” matter ?

You: “Grind your teeth about it all you want, but you have, in a practical sense, far more in common with a black or Latino American than you do with the average European German, Russian, or Pole.”
Me: Like what?

You: “And in conclusion, I want to comment on the idea of a few “bad organizations” undermining the legitimacy of the WN movement. The fact is there are no good organizations, period. Racialism, as an ideology, is unscientific, impractical, and ultimately unrealistic. Wherever racialists gather, cultural “pride” will inevitably give way to race-bashing and paranoid fantasies.”
Me: So I also conclude that you think the same about Obama and Obama’s former church; about the Congressional Black Caucus; about AIPAC; about “La Raza”; about MechA; about the ADL, etc?

“Since the traits you described could generally be applicable, do you then denounce other “extremists” organizations like ALIPAC, “La Raza” etc?”

88`s: Yes I do as far as the 2 you’ve mentioned above. {“La Raza” is merely a paper organization which really doesn’t influence society as much as the WN movement. However, I do not denounce the National Council of La Raza which is a separate entitiy from “La Raza”. Soley because I saw nothing in the website of NCLR that pertains to the idealogy of hate as what many White Extremists falsely and blatantly accused them of.

“Or what you only denouce White organizations?”

88`s: And there is a valid reason for that. For one, the WN movement is more active and vocal compared to their relatively isolated and near unknown “La Raza” rivals. If SPLC has written a piece in here about the ineffective “La Raza”, then surely I just might write a comment about it. But they’re rarely written about because they’re not doing anything to draw attention to themselves(i. e. Committing hatecrimes, vandalizing sacred structures, spraying painting racial slurs on people`s property with their tademarked “La Raza” to identitfy them et al, etc..) Like the WN movement. Who commit crimes on a daily basis. The most recent and well known is the 3 “skinheads” in Denver such as the article states.
So there you have it.

Since the traits you describe could be generally applicable, do you then denounce other “extremist” organizations, like AIPAC, “La Raza”, etc. Or what you only denounce White organizations?

Regards.

As for Jewish overrepresentation, this is a nonsensical argument. If a small minority actually dominated a certain organization or body, that would be cause for alarm. But the fact that a population is represented in higher numbers than their percentage of the population is not noteworthy at all. For example, WNs like to harp about Jewish “overrepresentation” in the first Soviet central committee, thus implying that the Bolshevik revolution was Jewish dominated or that the Soviet Union represented Jewish power. What they leave out, usually because they are simply ignorant on the subject, is that while Jews were overrepresented in the Central Committee(6%), numerous other groups were also overrepresented, as well as Muscovite Russians. In fact in 1917, the Bolsheviks had the smallest number of Jews of all the other factions involved, with the largest number being in the Jewish Bund, which was the first group to condemn the Bolshevik seizure of power. The most overrepresented group was Latvians, yet we never hear that Communism was a Latvian conspiracy, or the term Latvian-Bolshevism. Gee, I wonder why.

The idea that “the Jews” do this or “The Jews” support their interests requires one to assume that Jews are a homogeneous collective. In fact, Jews not only constantly conflict with one another, but they also have very different opinions about their identity. Some people consider themselves Russians, Poles, Germans, etc. despite “Jewish” heritage.

Conspiratorial thinking on the part of WNs is what guarantees that violent incidents would happen. Because conspiracy theories are non-falsifiable, they are never proven, which creates frustration in believers. It is only natural that some people get so upset about this that they commit grave crimes, such as the Oklahoma City Bombing. You may not be such a violent person, but given the conspiracies you believe in, does it not piss you off that the smoking gun for your claims seems ever-elusive, that people never “wake up” year after year, no matter what happens? Imagine what those feelings do to a more unstable person with nothing else in their life to be proud of.

As for immigration, you don’t have to like it, but you ought to take the time to understand how this capitalist system works, and understand that it is not the immigrants’ choice. Most people if they had a choice, would want to grow up in their native land. That’s why you see refugees crying and not jumping for joy.

The fact is that powerful “Jews”, and powerful white men, work together because what they do makes them rich and keeps them in power. None of these people really give a damn about ethnicity. Immigration is good for them, so it continues. This is because human society has been based on class, not race. A “white” businessman has no common interest with a “white” worker, period.

Now, just to address a few specific points. Firstly, there is simply no comparison between the conversations at the average “respectable” racialist meeting and Jesse Jackson’s aforementioned comment. For one thing, it is pretty clear that Jackson was not using the term in malice, but was trying to illustrate the patronizing nature of something Obama allegedly said. I am not sure if this incident was connected, but Obama has at least once talked down to blacks, such as with his “Popeye’s chicken” comments. If anything, Jackson was expressing anger at Obama talking down to blacks. This can’t even be called an analogy.

Now as for the SPLC, I am aware of what you speak, but since they were kind enough to let my comments on here I am not going to break their balls. However I will point out that unlike Pierce, they did not call average people lazy, or attack people allegedly on welfare, while living off donations. I am familiar with Norman Finkelstein’s work, but I don’t see how this negates the fact that WN leaders are parasites and con-men. It should be telling that the movement that is supposed to fight for what is allegedly good about “white people” is continually led by perverts, womanizers, con-men, and combinations of those things.
I should also point out that the existence of Israel is not totally tied to the Holocaust, but that is another issue entirely.

White privilege and discrimination are readily proven by statistical studies. I suggest you have a look at timwise.org and find out about such experiments and studies.

Lastly, I don’t see why you feel the need to tie the “interests of European-Americans” in with Israel. First of all, I am an anti-Zionist, so you are not going to find any hypocrisy here. Still, if we look at what racialists of all stripes say they want, and compare it to Israel’s policies, Israel still looks a lot better. “European Americans” are not very European either. There is more to a nation than genetic ancestry. Culture and practical aspects matter as well. Grind your teeth about it all you want, but you have, in a practical sense, far more in common with a black or Latino American than you do with the average European German, Russian, or Pole.

And in conclusion, I want to comment on the idea of a few “bad organizations” undermining the legitimacy of the WN movement. The fact is there are no good organizations, period. Racialism, as an ideology, is unscientific, impractical, and ultimately unrealistic. Wherever racialists gather, cultural “pride” will inevitably give way to race-bashing and paranoid fantasies.

Which is why we must denouce these Neo-Nazis/White Extremists.

I kind of understand the point you are making. In quite an overt way a few “pro-White” organizations do far more damage to legitimate White interests than good. For example, I was watching a Klan rally on TV a few years ago. Talk about making themselves look like fools; it’s hard to image that any anti-White organization could more effective than them!

Regarding behind the scenes “how they talk when there are no cameras or public audiences”, I can’t really comment. But it’s probably ubiquitously applicable. For example, remember Jesse Jackson’s comment a month or two ago regarding Obama (“Barack…he’s talking down to black people…telling niggers how to behave.”)? Apparently he said other things too. And Obama himself? Bless him, but he’s let a few things slip out too.

Regarding leaders of organizations living off their donors, the SPLC gets accused of that too! Remember Norman Finkelstein’s “The Holocaust Industry”? Assuming what he said is true, that is far worse than what “Ol’ Grandfather Pierce” or other such ilk have done. So, what would you do, deny Israel’s right to exist because of a few scam artists?

I certainly agree with you regarding the absurdity of blaming Jews for everything. It’s similar to “White privilege” and the invisible, yet must be there “racism” BS that is suppressing poor minorities.

The goal of wanting “… our own Nation where european-americans can live in peace.” isn’t essentially different than the goals of Zionists. One can easily find numerous flaws with Israel – there are quite a few!. But overall, Israel’s existence is legitimate and a good thing. Don’ t dismiss a goal as illegitimate due to a few flawed organizations and individuals.

Regards.

“WS: ‘We want our own Nation where european-americans can live in peace.’”
Me: It sounds like what Jews want who live in Israel. What’s wrong with that? Are you anti-Israeli too?

Jeno-side said: “There is a ‘Nation”’ out there for you and your kind and its called ‘Germany’. Where it all started. The thing called ‘Nazism’.”
Me: Oh, really? So are you saying that Jews in Israel are “Nazis” too?

Jeno-side said: “Or to what some claimed that ‘Russia is the last White Nation’ and you can emigrate there …”
Me: But didn’t you forget that Hitler attacked Russia? If WS was a “Nazi” why would you recommend Russia?

Jeno-side said: ” … and preserve your “european-american” culture in Russian atmosphere …”
Me: Maybe WS is American and wants to preserve America as the Founding Fathers envisioned? Did you know that the Naturalization Act of 1790 specifies that one had to be White to become a citizen of the USA?

Jeno-side said: “… under an autocratic tyrannical gover[n]ment rule where ‘Freedom’ is nearly non-existent.”
Me: Multicultural countries are far less compatible with freedom and democracy that homogeneous ones.

Regards.