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

If there was a small inhabited island and we flooded it with “new islanders” of a different ethnicity and told the “old islanders” they? had to accept these people as new members of their new island family would that be:

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent? births within the group;

?

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

Great job on the point-by-point responses. Too bad people like 6 degrees, Larry and dannyboy are incapable of appreciating how thoroughly they’ve been schooled, and just keep coming back with the same fact-free sloganeering. Speaking of which, I wasn’t aware until now that the white supremacists had moved to “genocide” from mere “persecution” as their complaint. More inflammatory, I guess, but also even harder to back up with evidence.

I see, so you ask questions and don’t want answers. And who are your “fellow white citizens”, exactly?

“Why are the so-called “anti-racists” imposing mass immigration and “assimilation” ONLY on white countries which everyone agrees will result in fewer and fewer whites in existence?”

Oh do I get to ask questions or just you? I want to know who are these anti-racists who are “imposing mass immigration” on “only white countries?” I’ve answered this idiotic claim in detail, but apparently too many facts make your brain hurt.

Also I’d like to see this evidence of “forced assimilation.” In Europe immigrants are forced to assimilate into their new societies, and that isn’t exactly an unfair demand either.

“Why are the so-called “anti-racists” claiming deliberate demographic alteration policies making whites minorities in their own countries are not acts of genocide as per the 1948 genocide convention:”

First of all part of the demographic changes are due to lower fertility among the “white” population, a natural result of industrialization. Even by 1900 white middle class women had reduced their fertility by 50%(See The Way we Never Were by Stephanie Coontz). Who MADE them do that? Evidence shows that immigrants also have lower fertility within a generation or so, and industrialization has already started to lower the fertility of many developing countries.

Not that you’ll bother looking any of that information up.

“Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”

You have provided zero evidence to show that “only white nations” are being targetted for mass immigration. You have also refused to speak on the subject of mass immigration from Eastern Europe.

I have answered your questions, you refuse to answer mine. Like I said, you are willfully ignorant and your simple-minded worldview and persecution complex can’t handle concepts such as sociology or economics.

Any time you want to answer MY questions, or find the answers to yours, just scroll up to my last post before this one.

Why are the so-called “anti-racists” imposing mass immigration and “assimilation” ONLY on white countries which everyone agrees will result in fewer and fewer whites in existence?

Why are the so-called “anti-racists” claiming deliberate demographic alteration policies making whites minorities in their own countries are not acts of genocide as per the 1948 genocide convention:

Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group

?

Why do so-called “anti-racists” refuse to accept that Genocide is genocide,whether accomplished by bullets,mustard gas,or mass immigration and social engineering,ONLY when whites are the victims?

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

You’re ignorant.

Oh yes, I know you’ve heard it before and it probably has lost all meaning, but no, you REALLY are ignorant, as in you have no idea how immigration works, and what is FAR worse, you don’t even bother to find out.

See, because of YOU, I had to use this thing called Google, and I typed in “Immigration to Korea”, “to Japan,” to “India”, to “Africa”. I even went to some official government sites as well. I learned some very interesting facts. For example:

Korea grants citizenship and residency to those who are married to Korean citizens. Also the number of years for citizenship via naturalization is LESS THAN THE US(in ROK it’s 5 years). By contrast Russia, which you probably incorrectly believe is a “white” country, it is not possible to obtain citizenship or even legal residency via marriage. Many foreign brides in Korea are from Russia.

Japan is also far more liberal than many people think. http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2221.html

India gets immigrants from countries like Bangladesh and Nepal.

African countries take on waves of immigrants all the time, usually due to wars of famines.

At this point you’re probably saying: But THOSE are just African countries taking African immigrants, “Asian to Asian”, etc. But this only proves how ignorant you are. The rest of the world doesn’t divide itself up into “African” and “Asian” the way you, as an American do. And as I have said for the HUNDREDTH TIME: Since 1989 there has been massive waves of EASTERN EUROPEAN immigration into Western Europe, often causing the same kind of anger and xenophobia seen earlier with non-European immigration.

Take Poland for example, which saw more than 2 million people leave right after it gained membership in the EU. Most went to Britain, where they were rejected by many nationalists and accused of “stealing jobs”(sound familiar?) Polish workers used to go to Germany until that country cut them off by limiting immigration from Poland. Poles also worked(and possibly still do) as migrant laborers in the Netherlands, among other European countries.

Now an ignorant person such as yourself would probably tell those European nationalists that this is alright, because Poles and other Eastern Europeans are “white”. This might fly for a while, but eventually you will find yourself beaten to a pulp for suggesting equivalency of European cultures to hardcore nationalists.

So PLEASE, PLEEEEASE, ACTUALLY READ UP ON IMMIGRATION LAWS BEFORE SAYING STUPID THINGS. The US has some of the strictest immigration laws in the world. While you can go to most countries, get a stamp, and have a 90-day tourist visa instantly, many foreigners, even from “first world” countries have to go through all kinds of hoops just for a TOURIST visa to the US. Immigration visas? Forget about it, it’s a pain in the ass. Here is the process laid out in a diagram: http://reason.com/assets/db/07.....2ef5ad.jpg

Many Americans and Europeans live abroad in countries like China, Thailand, Cambodia, and even African countries as “expats”, often working illegally on their tourist visas.

Bottom line, you simply don’t know how immigration works.

Now to handle some of your idiotic arguments directly.

“Surely Ruslan Amirkhanov cannot be unaware that one-way immigration causes the complete genetic extinction of a target population,and therefore the destruction of any racial group in that territory?”

No, I am not aware. Could you please provide a modern case study showing this?

Also note the nature of European “immigration” to the Americas- despite involving flat out genocide and military conquest, as well as destructive disease epidemics, Native Americans are still here, in large numbers. If THAT doesn’t wipe out a “race”, dishwashers from Mexico probably aren’t going to do it.

“This is an established theorem in population genetics that can be traced back to? the 1931 paper by S.Wright titled “Evolution in Mendelian populations”.”

Nothing says cutting edge knowledge like a paper from 1931!

“Imagine going into your local pet shop and introducing some foreign breed hamsters into all the hamster cages.You think you could claim you are not trying to eliminate the pet-shop hamster breed with your forced imports?”

REALLY BAD ANALOGY ALERT!!! REALLY BAD ANALOGY ALERT!!! ACTIVATE EMERGENCY LOGIC SYSTEM IMMEDIATELY!!

Here is the list of problems with your analogy:

1. Someone is PUTTING the foreign “breed” of hamster into a small enclosed space. Aside from the occasional refugee resettlement, nobody is “importing” immigrants as you claim. To make this accurate we’d have to say that a certain number of “foreign” hamsters are admitted from time to time via some kind of process. Many hamsters are rejected.

2. Since you consider “whites” to be a breed(which is ridiculous because animal breeds are created via selective breeding directed by humans), to be an accurate analogy we would have say that a large percentage of the hamsters are the same “breed”, representing the flood of immigrants from Eastern Europe. One reason why the EU and US are still hesitant to open up visa-free travel with Russia is because they expect a flood of immigrants.

3. Hamsters, like most animals, breed according to instinct. You are not compelled by any force to marry someone you believe is not “white.” The only thing keeping you from a white mate is you.

4. Hamsters do not have an economy, so they don’t have to deal with problems like an aging workforce or social safety nets which must be paid for.

“Similarly,the so-called “anti-racists” are advocating force-blending all white people with 100`s millions of non-white immigrants in all white countries,all white communities.”

Again, WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE!!? WHAT ARE THEIR NAMES? Who is saying “white countries must take on loads of immigrants from non-white countries”?

If you ever bothered to look at most arguments in favor of immigration, that is the serious arguments which actually influence politicians and therefore policy, you will see that they come from economists. Industrialized countries have high standards of living due not only to their industrialization but also their social safety nets, which is why poverty in the US, as bad as it is, doesn’t mean death as it might in many other countries. Due to the high standard of living, many people defer child-bearing, reduce child-bearing, and some don’t have children at all. A successful economy, much less a social safety net(like social security), requires young workers to replenish the old. This is usually the issue economists are dealing with.

This is important because those who advocate looser immigration policies DON’T CARE where the immigrants come from. It has nothing to do with the immigrant’s “race” or “culture” but rather can they participate and support the economy, paying taxes into the system? Some people believe that these advocates want to drive wages down, but what drives wages down is illegal immigrants(which is what you get with strict immigration policies) who are not able to organize or get paid the minimum wage. Introduce easier work visas + minimum wage and the right to organize and there goes your wage problem.

Now if you have a suggestion on how say, Sweden or Norway can solve their demographic problem without immigration, I’m all ears. And again, keep in mind that advocates of liberal immigration policies don’t specify where the immigrant should come from. Those who support the immigration policies of Sweden, for example, are fine with immigrants be they from Africa or Russia, the Ukraine, or Baltic states.

So no, it’s not genocide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention

That’s all I have to say. Immigration is not genocide.

As for your question to Ruslan, I’ll answer it. There are Arabs and whites living in African countries. There are Chinese descendants living in Jamaica. There are Indian descendants living in Trinidad & Tobago. There white folks, mostly Spanish descendants, living in Cuba. I don’t see black folks in those countries being phased out nor are non-blacks in those countries being phased out. Do you want more, stupid?

“There is no reason to claim that allowing immigration will destroy or wipe out a people, in part or in whole”

Surely Ruslan Amirkhanov cannot be unaware that one-way immigration causes the complete genetic extinction of a target population,and therefore the destruction of any racial group in that territory?

This is an established theorem in population genetics that can be traced back to? the 1931 paper by S.Wright titled “Evolution in Mendelian populations”.

Imagine going into your local pet shop and introducing some foreign breed hamsters into all the hamster cages.You think you could claim you are not trying to eliminate the pet-shop hamster breed with your forced imports?

Similarly,the so-called “anti-racists” are advocating force-blending all white people with 100`s millions of non-white immigrants in all white countries,all white communities.

It`s genocide.

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

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

Malcolm Fraser (Prime Minister of Australia 1975-1983)

Genocide is genocide,whether accomplished by bullets,mustard gas,or mass immigration and social engineering.

Let`s see if Russian Amirkhanov is consistent in his views by asking him the following question:

Would the intentional flooding of all black countries and ONLY black countries with 100`s of millions of non-blacks and demanding the blacks “assimilate” themselves out of existence in the name of “anti-racism” be acts of genocide yes/no?

Take a look at how many immigrants Obama deported and talk to me about how they are “importing” immigrants into “white countries” and how this is “genocide”.

There is no reason to claim that allowing immigration will destroy or wipe out a people, in part or in whole. As I said, I’m guessing you probably haven’t even looked at the process for immigration to most European nations. You also don’t seem to care about massive immigration coming from Europe, yet Western Europeans sure do.

““Immigration is a passive thing” is only said in White countries, so that the reality of genocide might be dismissed. You say it because you are anti-white and promote genocide.”

I’m sorry but you are a complete moron who can’t comprehend basic English, though it is your native English. All industrial countries of the world, including “non-white” ones, have immigration issues. Some have liberal policies, some have very strict ones. The US in fact has some of the strictest immigration laws for an industrialized nation. That’s why there’s so much illegal immigration.

Allowing immigration does not promote genocide.

“As for assimilation, anti-whites say all things white must become “diverse” or it is “racism”.”

Really? NAMES PLEASE!!! If you actually paid real attention to European immigration issues, you would find that immigrants are often expected to assimilate, and many have. Some have tried, only to be rejected by the host population in spite of this.

In any case cultural assimilation doesn’t mean they’re forcing people to marry or taking kids and giving them to others.

“They say there should be no white countries, no white communities, no white schools, no white political parties, no white social gatherings etc, etc.”

WHO is saying this? I want a name for “they”. Second, there has never been such a thing as a “white country” in the history of mankind, so that doesn’t surprise me. White schools? They don’t promote black or Asian schools either. White political parties? Looks to me like you have the Republicans and the Democrats, because a cursory look at white family earnings in the US, white property ownership, and white health statistics shows that white folks have it pretty good in the US at least. No white social gatherings? Yeah, probably not, but they sure have plenty of Irish, Scottish, Polish, German, etc. social gatherings!

“The anti-whites give us whites two choices: Accept white genocide or you are a “racist”.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”

Again, based on the definition you provided, there is no genocide being committed against “whites”, and most of the people you are talking about when you say “white” countries certainly don’t consider themselves “white”. You are trying to project American culture onto Europeans.

No Larry, it isn’t. First of all, nobody is deliberately inflicting mass immigration on “white” nations(or any other nations which have large scale immigration for that matter). Why don’t you actually take the time to figure out what is required to immigrate to the EU, for example. They don’t hop a plane to Africa, drive to some village, and start handing out plane tickets and work visas.

Nobody is forcing Europeans to assimilate into another culture either.

Also note the line “calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” “Calculation” means it is intentional, that is someone actually WANTS to wipe out some people, and implements measures to that end. Immigration is a passive thing(like I said they don’t go out and catch people or fly them in en masse), and it is based on the demands of the labor market and the need of these nations to replace older workers.

“I need to see that inside. Please provide the actual reference, because frankly, you folks like to smear, and I don’t trust you to be fair, and neither should anyone else.”

When pressed you went to: “1) It doesn’t work like that. If you bring a reference, BRING THE REFERENCE! Maybe you didn’t go to an institution of higher education, but that is how it works.

2) You either don’t understand who William Pierce is, or you are attempting to show how I am correct by noting how wrong it is to compare people to that genocidal maniac.”

You said “bring it” and it was brought. I also pointed out that nobody compared Buchanan to William Pierce. It was very clear- Buchanan cited an ADV broadcast. Few political pundits, including on the right, do that.

Josh, that’s an oxymoron and cannot exist as one complete entity.

Pat Buchanan is a racist hack with plenty of followers as exemplified here and also, the Washington Post, the Washington Times and such exalting praise on Buchanan?

Please, you are making me laugh at what is really a tragic presence of hate in our American culture and thought.

” You were the one who so refused to even admit that a citation was there”

No, no no. That wasn’t my issue. I wasn’t doubting there was a footnote. I was suspicious that you people were being sleazy, not of fabricating a footnote. My issue was the CONTEXT, which was never provided, but at least now I understand why you declared victory when you didn’t understand my question. That’s what I meant by “I need to see that inside.” That’s how Talmudic types like myself say they need to see the context.

So since you have it handy, can we see the context?

The big surprise to me is that MSNBC would be so fair and balanced in its reporting agenda that it would provide an alternative to the usual mudslinging of Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman (Olberman is now with Current TV).

Gee, now I may have to recant my earlier claims that MSNBC is just another unreliable, so-called-left-wing propaganda mill for an audience of lazy, uncreative, and uninspiring mean people.

On second thought, however, MSNBC hasn’t had me as a guest on its network since I publicly chastised and villified Keith Olberman back in early 2008 for being the “dirty” journalist that he is. Recant my criticisms? Probably not.

Jim Gilchrist, President, The Minuteman Project

LiberalEliteMySweet wrote,

“No. It is guilt by non-association. There is no association. There is a reference. There is no association. See below for more on that.”

Seems to me like the SPLC was saying just that. The man cited William Pierce. It is not the first time the two have coincided on some issues. In fact Buchanan was probably more of an inspiration to Pierce than vice versa.

“When an organization like the SPLC focuses so much on minimal connections or even no connections at all, this reveals a preference for dirty tricks. When someone uses dirty tricks and guilt by non-association instead of a rational policy discussion, it is important to ask why they feel that is necessary to win.”

Yeah but they didn’t say that Buchanan was associated with William Pierce, or that there was some kind of meaningful connection, beyond the fact that Pat cited an ADV broadcast.

“Ruslan Amirkhanov will counter as he did above that the SPLC wasn’t claiming there is a connection, but as we see from readers on this thread, that isn’t how they took it. Why don’t you admit that was your intention all along, Rusian? Why the facile denials? You brought the reference because you wanted to insinuate a connection, which your readers made, just like you wanted.”

My denials? You were the one who so refused to even admit that a citation was there(implying that you DO see this as a significant connection), to the point that I had to download the damned book just to show you which chapter and citation it was. So don’t try to turn this one around on me.

Bottom line: If you don’t think a citation is a meaningful connection, don’t deny its existence unless you can confidently say it’s not there(for example, if you had the book and checked).

Also I am well aware of how people make incorrect conclusions about things- I am skilled in the art of psychic cold-reading, which largely predicated on the fact that people will remember something totally different from what actually happened. So “I’m getting some significance from late August,” gets reported as “HE TOLD ME BY BIRTHDAY!” But the problem is this- why leave the detail out? If you complain about that, why not leave out every detail about his book? And then Pat ends up looking like an ordinary conservative pundit who’s no more racist than most of them(who I believe just do it for the money).

“Everybody says there is this RACE problem. ”

WHO?

“Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”

WHO IS SAYING THIS? Do you realize that there are white countries with “Third World conditions”? Do you realize that many first world “white countries”(they don’t see themselves as “white”) don’t appreciate Eastern Europeans immigrating in large numbers either?

“The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”

Actually Japan has a serious demographics problem and it also has had increasing immigration from nearby countries. The fact that South Korea has become so successful may probably reduce immigration from there, but the fact is Japan really has no choice but to rely on foreign immigrants in the future and they most likely will.

What you fail to realize is that wherever there are two countries next to one another and one of them has better conditions, more opportunities for jobs, etc., there will be immigration. Period. India deals with immigration, as does Malaysia, Thailand, Japan, China, Korea, South Africa, UAE, and so on.

“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”

WHO IS SAYING THIS? I WANT NAMES!!! “EVERYBODY” IS NOT A NAME!!

Whew…let me add something to that request. If you actually paid attention to those who advocate immigration to solve labor shortages(regardless of the merits of their arguments), nowhere do they suggest that the immigrants need to be “non-white”, come from the “third world”, much less that they need to inter-marry with the host population.

By all means, show some proof to the contrary.

“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”

Again, WHO is saying the opposite, who is saying this at all? You just assume that “everyone” is saying this but you won’t find a single person suggesting it.

“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”

Uh OH!!! He used the G-WORD!! Ok, let’s play the WHITE GENOCIDE GAME!! Here’s how it works, I list a series of things that typically occur in a genocide(by the UN definition). You check all those which are happening to “white people”. READY? GO!!!

-Are White people in your country being killed en masse by either the state or paramilitary squads?

-Are White people forced by the state to relocate to ghettos or similarly segregated areas?

-Are White people denied political rights on the basis of being white?

-Are White people being rounded up into concentration camps?

-Are White people being FORCED to marry non-white people?

-Are White people not allowed to speak their language in public?

So…how many checks did you make?

“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”

In your delusional mind? Yes, probably so. But consider this: You’ve come on here whining about how “everybody” is saying that all “white nations” must take on all Third World immigrants and intermarry with them, when in fact NOBODY is saying this. So either you have a very tenuous grip on objective reality, or maybe you ought to try reading something OTHER than Stormfront and David Duke.

Seriously, how WRONG about what is happening can a person possibly be? Your claims here are equivalent to me ranting about how “EVERYBODY SAYS THAT DRINKING ANTI-FREEZE IS HEALTHY, WELL IT’S NOT, DAMMIT!!!”

Do you get this concept?

Obviously it wasn’t always that way…but it has become that way to some degree, hasn’t it?

LiberalEliteMySweet wrote,

“Or watching FAUX NEWS.”

Really? Is that what you think? That everyone who doesn’t see things through the SPLC-frame watches Fox News?

That you would assert that is revealing about you. Not me.

“In this arena guilt by association is unavoidable”

No. It is guilt by non-association. There is no association. There is a reference. There is no association. See below for more on that.

Lou Stouch, I don’t agree with a lot that Buchanan writes, but I enjoy is challenge to my own views, and don’t understand why people need to look for excuses to shut him down.

To everyone here, I would note that there are people who can read something that has a reference we may not like and still process the essay and rebut it without focusing on 6 degrees of non-association. Or even one.

When an organization like the SPLC focuses so much on minimal connections or even no connections at all, this reveals a preference for dirty tricks. When someone uses dirty tricks and guilt by non-association instead of a rational policy discussion, it is important to ask why they feel that is necessary to win.

Ruslan Amirkhanov will counter as he did above that the SPLC wasn’t claiming there is a connection, but as we see from readers on this thread, that isn’t how they took it. Why don’t you admit that was your intention all along, Rusian? Why the facile denials? You brought the reference because you wanted to insinuate a connection, which your readers made, just like you wanted.

The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

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

“Buchanan is an honest writer who … minces nothing except an occasional opponent.”
—The Philadelphia Inquirer

“Nobody turns a sharp phrase, drops an historical reference, or makes a literary allusion as naturally as Pat Buchanan.”
—Human Events

“Buchanan is a muscular writer, fully in command of the English language he feels is under siege. He is adept at linking history, statistics, and the writings of philosophers and economists to proffer forceful arguments.”
—The Washington Post

“Mr. Buchanan … is positively fearless. He is also right.”
—Tony Blankley, The Washington Times

“His approach is that of a true conservative, offering a perspective rooted in American tradition initiated by Washington.”
—Kirkus Reviews

It appears that you are deliberately playing dumb when you are unable to break down a sentence, much less a paragraph.
“The book’s message so energized former Klan leader David Duke that Duke fantasized on his own radio show last year about winning the presidency with Buchanan as his running mate.”
Nowhere in that quote does Grand Wizard Ernie Dukes imply that he has a connection with Buchanan (other than in spirit.) Certainly Ms Nelson does not.
The point is that a genuine man of faith and integrity would disavow any support of hate and nativist groups, and follow through on it. In this arena guilt by association is unavoidable; that kind of filth sticks AND stinks.
If you believe the point of these articles is to smear then reading them is not educating you or enriching your life. Perhaps, your time would be better spent reading these obscene, ignorant, hate-filled books. Or watching FAUX NEWS. Or banging your head against the wall…some more.

Marcus is a warm, caring, thoughtful, self-critical, funny, and ethical human being. And as anyone who has ever met the man is aware, he is a modern BI-racial American.