← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Recluse
Thread ID: 11038 | Posts: 35 | Started: 2003-11-12
2003-11-12 04:00 | User Profile
Discussing immigration on Scarborough Country. Reruns at 3 am eastern.
2003-11-12 05:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Recluse]Discussing immigration on Scarborough Country. Reruns at 3 am eastern.[/QUOTE] Ohmigod. Wait till the VNNers hear about this. I'm sure Linder will think it was worse than hearing Foxman chat with Dees.
2003-11-12 17:46 | User Profile
I watched it. It was great, as Jared Taylor always is. He and Buchanan made a terrific team for the white man. :cheers: And that (the US being a white country) was pretty much the subject of the show.
MSNBC must have noticed how ratings for news programs rocket when immigration is the topic. Even Donahue tried it before his program tanked.
Scarborough is doing a series on immigration and it's impact on jobs, along with jobs being shipped out of the country, this week. If the rest of the programs are as good as last night's was, millions more sheeple will start roaring. (Sorry for the mixed metaphors.)
2003-11-12 18:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=LA Refugee]MSNBC must have noticed how ratings for news programs rocket when immigration is the topic. Even Donahue tried it before his program tanked.
Scarborough is doing a series on immigration and it's impact on jobs, along with jobs being shipped out of the country, this week. If the rest of the programs are as good as last night's was, millions more sheeple will start roaring. (Sorry for the mixed metaphors.)[/QUOTE]
I'm still very much of the mind that the issue of immigration is the horse we have to hitch our wagon to in order to see any significant real-world gains.
2003-11-12 19:09 | User Profile
Here's the transcript:
[url]http://www.msnbc.com/news/992620.asp?cp1=1[/url]
2003-11-12 19:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I'm still very much of the mind that the issue of immigration is the horse we have to hitch our wagon to in order to see any significant real-world gains.[/QUOTE]
No. I hate to sound like Franco,but the Jew will have to be named and confronted for "real-world gains" to take place. Or put another way - no real-world gains without the pain of being called 'anti-Semite' by every voice with a Big Media p.a. system. Until then, it's just band-aids on cancer - albeit in sporty designer colors.
Look around you, Tex...even [I]you [/I] know this is so.
2003-11-12 20:04 | User Profile
From transcript:
GUTIERREZ: Name one Mexican who has been a terrorist, Buchanan or Jared Taylor? BUCHANAN: How about that guy that murdered all those women along the railroad tracks? :lol:
BUCHANAN: Mr.Gutierrez, let me make one statement. His country is a failed country. He comes into this country, his folks do, and they want to make America a successful country like their country. If we don?t control our borders and you bring in all of these people from these failed countries and make America just like what they got, then what we got is lost.
:yes: Go Pat Go. He should have given Gutierrez an old Irish right cross to the chops.
2003-11-12 20:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]No. I hate to sound like Franco,but the Jew will have to be named and confronted for "real-world gains" to take place. Or put another way - no real-world gains without the pain of being called 'anti-Semite' by every voice with a Big Media p.a. system. Until then, it's just band-aids on cancer - albeit in sporty designer colors.
Look around you, Tex...even [I]you [/I] know this is so.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I came to this conclusion very reluctantly. In fact, I kicked and screamed about it for over 15 years. I really fed myself a ration of shite about it for the longest time. I was truly lost in doublethink.
But I was finally forced to admit that it really is at base a struggle between the Tribe and Europeans. MacDonald's "Culture of Critique" was the turing point for me. I remember reading it feverishly over a weekend, and on Sunday night I flung it across the room. It hurt, but I finally got over it.
Millions of us are going to have to take that bitter medicine.
It's important to keep in mind, however, that we shouldn't lead with the chin, so to speak. Don't endanger your livlihood with it, at least not yet. We're still in the early stages, IMHO. Every time somebody speaks about ITZ they get creamed. But it's not hopeless. Remember that the Soviet Unioni was brought down by a whispering campaign abetted by video and audio tapes. Same for the Shah of Iran. When it's time, we'll know.
In the meantime, I spread the word among my close family and colleagues as diligently as I can. I constantly test and probe opinions on this question, and my impression is that people are growing increasingly aware of Jewish power and it's death grip on our politics and culture.
This current war should help speed the plough, at least so I hope.
Walter
2003-11-12 20:19 | User Profile
Thanks Walter and Il Ragno. That's 2 points fer Uncle Franco!
Iz it Franco's imagination, or is yer Uncle Frankie usually correct about, oh, 99% of the time? Mebbe I should charge some pesos for my great advice.....and humbleness....
:holiday: :holiday:
2003-11-12 20:32 | User Profile
From the Hebrew Brother's refugee organization to Jabcob Javit's, all Jewish organizations have forcefully pushed for non white invasion. The passing of Hate laws was promoted by who? Imagine your being genocided, and the boot of tyranny is on your neck, if you resist, that is "Hate" today now.. The truth of why it is hate can't be stated enough Jews undermined our nation with the paid help of coward mammon worshiping Shabazz Goys........ /These Shabazz Goys prance like a lone Rooster with 20 hens, but I pray I live to see their trials for treason. It will be U.S. or them.....
2003-11-12 20:49 | User Profile
Wait -- make that 3 points for Uncle Franco!
:holiday:
2003-11-12 21:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Thanks Walter and Il Ragno. That's 2 points fer Uncle Franco!
Iz it Franco's imagination, or is yer Uncle Frankie usually correct about, oh, 99% of the time? Mebbe I should charge some pesos for my great advice.....and humbleness....
:holiday: :holiday:[/QUOTE]
Right, always name the [img]http://matrix-explained.com/php/images/smiles/icon_bazar.gif[/img]
2003-11-12 21:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]No. I hate to sound like Franco,but the Jew will have to be named and confronted for "real-world gains" to take place. Or put another way - no real-world gains without the pain of being called 'anti-Semite' by every voice with a Big Media p.a. system. Until then, it's just band-aids on cancer - albeit in sporty designer colors.
Look around you, Tex...even [I]you [/I] know this is so.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I couldn't disagree with you more. Here's why.
First, if 'naming the jew' is the horse you are going to ride, you not even going to get inside the rodeo.
Second, outside of the context of the various issues, 'naming the jew' has absolutely no traction here in the States (I don't know about Europe). Thus the end result is that you have accomplished nothing, except for maybe coming off sounding like a raving lunatic and quite possibly hurting more than helping.
Now a key point I want to make so there will be no misunderstanding is that I am not saying that within the argument and at certain stages it is entirely proper to 'name the jew.' So to be clear, my argument is by no means that the jew should never be named, rather that there is a time and a place for that and it is most definitely not when you are trying to get your foot in the door of a skeptical customer.
On the other hand, immigration is very simple and easily understood by the most clueless dolt. It doesn't take much intelligence to walk outside your door and witness the brown and black faces becoming more dense and closer. This fact makes the immigration issue that much easier to exploit and use for your larger design and purpose.
2003-11-12 21:39 | User Profile
I hear what Tex is saying. But, if we do not Name The Jew now, when, oh when, shall we name that Jew? Indeed, at the rate our West in sinking into the toilet, I gotta wonder when Tex thinks it will be the proper time to "go public, no holds barred." Like we can afford to wait 30 years! In 30 years, it will be WAY too late.
In fact, it may already be too late, given that Suzie Creamcheese and Sally ShoppingMall think that "Jewish" is simply a religion and that negroes are just like us except their skin is a little darker. And there are millions of them all over Yidmerika.
We are in DEEP crap, folks. If we don't name God's Special Lapdogs now, then when? After the Net is censored? After free-speech is curbed under the sneaky category of "racial intimidation" [which is not protected speech]? [1] How long are we gonna wait?
[1] by-the-by, that will very likely happen within 30 years. All Congress has to do is make "Naming The Jew" a crime by calling it "racial intimidation," and presto! federal charges will await you. How will we Name The Jew then?
2003-11-12 21:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]I hear what Tex is saying. But, if we do not Name The Jew now, when, oh when, shall we name that Jew? Indeed, at the rate our West in sinking into the toilet, I gotta wonder when Tex thinks it will be the proper time to "go public, no holds barred." Like we can afford to wait 30 years! In 30 years, it will be WAY too late.
Franco, I understand your point but Tex is right. We can't make the Jew the center of all our arguments, otherwise people will just think we're obsessively compulsive. Hitler or anyother nationalist leader for that matter did not make reference to the Jew in every public appearance and/or speech he gave. He often talked about the Jews directly, but he also indirectly went after them by going after the liberals and communists. I suggest we adopt a similar strategy of limiting direct attacks against Jews unless neccessary and simply go after the lackeys the rest of the time.
In fact, it may already be too late, given that Suzie Creamcheese and Sally ShoppingMall think that "Jewish" is simply a religion and that negroes are just like us except their skin is a little darker. And there are millions of them all over Yidmerika.
To this I can argue that I accept a strategy very similar to what NTS(an anti-communist Russian nationalist group) used against the Communists. That is of quality over quantity.
BTW, I liked to ask il Rango and Sert why is it if I say half the stuff Franco does about America and Americans, I get all sorts of condemnation and talk about how I'm a traitor and such? I'm not asking for you to go after Franco, but do please show some consistency when condmening people for "anti-american" remarks!
2003-11-12 22:05 | User Profile
Ben Franklin stated in the begining of our coutry that the Constitution was flawed but would serve U.S. nicely for a while and when the corruption of the U.S. came, so would despotism come them to hold it together.. Yes T.D. your right absoultly on naming the Jew to the Majority dolts.. Speaking of Dolts, in 1776 on minority wanted a split with England.... A minority, if the founders had tied their horse to caring what the dolts had to say, we'd be all be saying hail to the weirdo Queen... Each man is on his own almost, as Ernst Zundel shows, though a handful of whites have given him finiancial help from $5 to a couple of hundred. Total tyranny rulz the West now and the despotism facing U.S. has the MEDIA and spends time and money harrassing almost every web site that states the why's and whoz the blame details.. So I come full circle to state that [url]www.amren[/url] O.D. and other sites have been very helpful in waking U.S. up with out a Pickets Charge of naming the Chew's and their supremecism. So, yes T.D. naming the Jew, is perhaps a Pickets charge as they have over whelming apathy, and wealth going for their side.
2003-11-12 22:22 | User Profile
Oh I've bashed Franco plenty, but underneath his aggressively Hitler-happy tone, he's basically an America-for-Americans guy, which I agree with.
Tex, your points are 'true', but sooner or later we are gonna have to bumrush past the ticket booth at that rodeo....especially given that the girl behind the glass has been given explicit instructions not to allow certain people admittance under any circumstances.
Framing our arguments in terms that meet the approval of the khazars only means the battle is lost before it's even [I]joined[/I]. This is why they mystifyingly seem to be fighting and winning on a hundred different fronts at the same time with only 2% of the population, while we spin our wheels, at loggerheads with each other on tactics....the Invisible 98%.
Like the Jews up in Canada like to say, FOR OURSELVES - FOR OUR CHILDREN - FOR ISRAEL FOREVER. Why shouldn't we adopt the very same strategy? Because we're not [I]allowed [/I] to. Until that is confronted, we can't win a thing, we can only ball up our fists and howl at the moon.
2003-11-12 22:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Smedley Butler]So, yes T.D. naming the Jew, is perhaps a Pickets charge as they have over whelming apathy, and wealth going for their side.[/QUOTE]
I understand your point, Smedley, and thank you for the kind words. But I think it is simplistic and naive to believe that 'naming the Jew' will magically work like some mantra, similar to the movie 'Candyman' where repeating his name three times will conjure him up out of thin air. For those who advocate this approach I would ask this: there are numerous leaders doing this right now, how much success are they truly enjoying?
2003-11-12 22:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Framing our arguments in terms that meet the approval of the khazars only means the battle is lost before it's even [I]joined[/I]. [/QUOTE]
Just to clarify, IR, my concerns are not to meet the approval of the khazars, but rather to reach our people where they are at and perhaps enjoy some success and influence.
2003-11-12 23:27 | User Profile
Tex wrote:
"But I think it is simplistic and naive to believe that 'naming the Jew' will magically work like some mantra...........For those who advocate this approach I would ask this: there are numerous leaders doing this right now, how much success are they truly enjoying?" [Franco edited this for length only]
Tex, that is rather shocking. How many major American politicos "name the Jew?" About 2, maybe 3. Big whoop. We need dozens of politicians naming the Jew weekly. When that begins to happen, changes will occur. Until then, nope.
2003-11-12 23:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE]How do we "name and blame the Jew" successfully when we blame the Jew for something most Americans fully support?[/QUOTE]
Well, Dubya may be inadvertantly doing it [I]for [/I] us -but while he bumbles, the rest of us chip away at the massmind by hammering at it with things like this:
[QUOTE][url]http://www.vdare.com/roberts/spin_cycle.htm[/url]
Bush Fiddling In Iraq While U.S. Economy Burns By Paul Craig Roberts
Are we being spun on jobs by the White House and the rah-rah Bush media like we are being spun on Iraq? Make up your own mind after considering the following.
Only a few of the 116,000 private sector jobs created in October provide good incomes: 6,000 new positions in legal services and accounting—activities that reflect corporations gearing up to protect their top executives from Sarbanes-Oxley.
The remainder of the 116,000 new jobs consist of temps, retail trade, telephone marketing and fund raising, administrative and waste services, and private education and health services.
Physicians’ offices hired 9,000 people to cope with Medicare and insurance company paperwork. Nursing and residential care facilities hired 5,000, child care services hired 6,000, and hospitals hired 3,000.
Many of the new jobs do not pay enough to support a family. The temp and retail jobs are 40% of the total.
All of the new jobs are in services. None of the new service jobs are capable of producing export earnings to bring balance to our massive trade deficit.
Jobs capable of producing tradable goods and services continue to be lost at a rapid rate. In the last 3 months, the US lost 91,000 manufacturing jobs.
Computer jobs have disappeared. In Tampa, San Antonio, Seattle, and California, office buildings are closed that a few years ago contained tens of thousands of computer engineers. People who in 2000 were making between $60,000 and $100,000 annually cannot today find jobs.
On November 3, CBS News reported: “US October layoffs surge 125%.” Layoff announcements from US companies more than doubled in October to 171,874, the highest in a year according to the outplacement firm, Challenger Gray & Christmas. In October the auto industry sacked 28,000 workers and telecommunications companies cut 21,000 jobs.
While the ladders of upward mobility are collapsing, the US continues to import several million legal and illegal poor immigrants each year. Thirty-five million Mexicans are not needed to pick the California fruit and vegetable crops. There is no economic or social rationale for the US to permit massive inflows of poor people, whose needs are overwhelming US taxpayers, hospitals and government budgets.
Population experts predict that immigration will boost the US population by 100 million people by mid-century. Imagine what that portends for energy consumption and the environment.
The US is already a heavy energy importer with a serious trade deficit. The economic development projected for Asia means a huge increase in world energy consumption. Unlike the US, Asian economies have export surpluses with which to pay their energy bills.
It is possible that the loss of American jobs in tradable goods and services, combined with the importation of massive numbers of poor people, will leave the US without the means to purchase its energy needs in world markets. When the dollar’s value is undermined by budget and trade deficits, energy prices for Americans will explode.
A country that substitutes foreign labor for its own domestic labor via outsourcing, offshore production and Internet hiring, a country that transfers its wealth to foreigners to pay for imports, a country that fills up with welfare-dependent multitudes while it squanders $200 billion in Iraq, is a country headed for third world status.
Some industry experts argue that the US has lost so much of its core industrial capability that advanced manufacturing skills are disappearing in the US. The US lacks mass production ability in critical areas of high-tech manufacturing.
The US assembles parts made elsewhere. Knowledge- and capital-demanding activities, such as charge-coupled devices, industrial robotics, numerically controlled machine tools, laser diodes and carbon fibers, are passing out of US hands.
A service economy has less to export than a manufacturing economy. What will the US sell abroad to pay for its energy and manufacturing imports?
We are currently paying for our imports by giving up the ownership of our companies, real estate, and corporate and government bonds.
Once the US has spent its wealth, we will have no way to pay for the energy and manufactured goods on which we have become import-dependent.
While the once fabulous US economy erodes, the hapless Bush administration thinks its most important goal is to waste American lives and massive sums of money to force “democracy” on Middle Eastern peoples who do not want it.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.[/QUOTE]
Americans are inured daily to be ever watchful for 'anti-semitism' and to stand for 'freedom'.... but the bottom line is when the credit card bills mount beyond hope of repayment, the beer money dwindles to loose change, and the repo man comes a-calling twice a week, Americans will slowly but surely begin looking for scapegoats. (Actually, it's far from [I]only [/I] Americans who do this.) We are more than ever a country in love with illogic, and I say if we can convert a few to linear logic by [I]disguising [/I] it as illogic....go for it! A win is a win is a win. You might never make your case with facts (ie, Iraq's nonexistent WMDs are a clear & present danger;but Israel's very real nuclear stockpile is a benign non-issue), but you [I]might[/I] if you dress up facts as jingoistic voodoo totems with no basis in reality.
2003-11-13 00:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Oh I've bashed Franco plenty, but underneath his aggressively Hitler-happy tone, he's basically an America-for-Americans guy, which I agree with.[/QUOTE]
Ok, then why are you constantly hounding on me for advocating the same thing? I believe in an America for Americans, not Amerikwans which is the target of like 99.9% of my rants for which you and Sert seem to like to condemn me as a "traitor". Again you're not showing consistency here. But this for another thread!
Now back to the real topic at hand:
In response to AntiYuppie, in my opinion it seems the only real mainstream issue we can really hound the Jews on is the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. This is probally one of the few issues you can name the Jew openly without the ADL coming down on you too hard(at least when compared to other incidents).
Gulf War II is also a good example as AntiYuppie pointed out, since among other the Israeli foreign minister even spoke before Congress(or some committee of it) about how the US should take out Iraq and that those countries who opposed are "the ones not on the front lines of the war on terrorism".
So when it comes to at least foreign policy, I think its best to talk of "Israeli" influence over the US as opposed to simply talking about "Jewish" influence. That way we can name the Jew yet still stay somewhat off our enemies' radar screens.
Sometimes its not what you say that matters, but how you say it!
2003-11-13 07:44 | User Profile
I like to add to my previous post!
I think what we need to do especially when it comes to the Jews is apply lessons of military strategy. Clausewitz writes that in order for a successful military campaign, its neccessary to break and destroy the enemy's "center of gravity". That is, the very thing that keeps your enemy's forces together and coordinated. Clausewitz was refering to the enemy commander, head of state, elite military unit, etc. In our case, it's the Jewish establishment and whatnot.
However, Clausewitz also taught that the "center of gravity" was also the most heavily defended element in the enemy's forces, because without it the army no longer can function properly. In other words, making frontal assaults against a heavily entrenched and defended foe is going to be nothing but suicide. Unless the enemy is already weakened to a considerable state, frontal assaults on the "center of gravity" will fail.
Clausewitz(and other military strategists do as well) advises for rear and flank assault to weaken the enemy. There is often greater oppurtunity for suprise, the enemy's defense cannot be strong everywhere at once, and the enemy's morale is more likely to break when the danger of encirclement is evident. Only when the enemy is clearly in a severe weakened state do you start making direct frontal attacks towards the center of gravity!
Ok, now what does this have to do with politics? Well everything, for war is politics by other means(ie violent means). Even Mao Zedong said that politics is simply war without violence. One major reason why both Lenin and Hitler were successful was because both saw politics as a non-violent form of warfare and applied military strategy to their plans.
Now the center of gravity we face are the Jews. But like anyother center of gravity, the Jews are heavily defended and entrenched. To make continous frontal assaults against them get us nowhere. Therefore we need to instead conduct flank attacks and rear guard actions.
This means that we can become involved with more mainstream "conservative" movements: pro-life, anti-gun control, etc. and only gradually and slowly do we convert them to our way of thinking. It's like the frog in the pot of water: throw the frog into a pot of boiling water and it will jump out; but put it in a pot of water and gradually turn up the heat and it'll keep on swimming untill its too late.
For example: in the beginning we overtly have a neutral position on the Jews, even claim we're against anti-semitism. After a while we can go after individual Jews, say like in the case of local activism a local Jew supporting all sorts of anti-white agendas. But again at this stage we're still "neutral" on the tribe. After a while, we can go after a certain faction of Jews, while remaining "neutral" on most Jews altogether. Only after some gradual disposition can we begin to turn on the tribe altogether. But if we try to attack the tribe all at once, we're not going to very far. Unless something real drastic happens that weakens the tribe grib on power, direct frontal assaults will not work!
I like to hear what some others of you here have to say about this approach.
2003-11-13 08:24 | User Profile
Perun, your post on "Clausewitz" is a very good point, and is a reminder for those of U.S. that are digusted about the termite's, as to alway's keep our selves composed and speak as Gentleman out there. Some hard core leftist's I know that read all the coward self hating magazine's like Atlantic Monthly, Harpers, The Nation, Mother Jones, or The Economist publications like this rarely will print anything offensive to the hate supremecist tribe, but the "Palistinian thing" is the first thing I have withnessed that has given these leftist pause to think about Jews outside of their daily dose of N.P.R./P.B.S. . Though being the phony intellectual College grad's that they are, they will point out it, it's just Shoroni Baloney, and not any such thing as a Termite Hive etc.. Though giving out the [url]www.ussliberty.org[/url] website, has got me result's that have profoundly changed a few that I gave it too, in the last couple of years. Especially the retired Military when they see how TV/media/talk radio is full of feces after reading the the Liberty site. Yes, of course flanking move's!....I will suppose all of at O.D. are doing so, or least most of U.S. The leftist are twenty times worse than Rapture type's as they will try to call cop's or get you harrased for giving out newspaper's like the one from the Council of Conservative Citizen's, along with Jared Taylor's A.R. Which is not really anti Jew, just anti the anti white tyranny the Jews installed on U.S. with their Shabazz Goy's...I don't bother to give the newspaper's out now since the towers, since the brainwashed who listen to talk radio don't read any way. Bottom line is more people are pissed off every day, by the schools, tax, and the non white invasion.. Something is brewing, that is why the Bastard enemie's of U.S. did poll's a few years back found out we are pissed at the District of Criminals and then gave U.S. the "Patriot Act" along with more feral agent's that have been strickley trained to be sensitive to all, except any whites who name the reason our floor is falling out from under our feet..
2003-11-13 08:40 | User Profile
Smedley Butler, you brought up a good point about the Liberty incident, which gets back to what I said earlier. If we wish to go after the Jews directly, I'd say we target Israel's role in US foreign policy. First off, this is more mainstream, especially with the whole Palestinian issue creating a negative image. But again, don't immediately go full blown and say "well thats how all Jews are" or that the US refuses to do much because Jews control us. But rather something more along the lines of "the Israelis have influential allies within our government and what not, and here are some politicians known to turn the other way when Israel violates this and that international law".
I also remember one time watching a movie with some of my friends and I made a joke about how there were so many "bergs" and "steins" in the credits. I didn't convert them right away, but it did start them thinking even in a frivious way. But then again, me and my friends have always made fun of Jews and other minorities.
I'm not saying we change our message or views, I'm saying that sometimes we need to change how we get our message across. Need we forget, this is exactly how the cultural marxists pull their :dung: off.
2003-11-13 18:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=jamestown]Right, always name the [img]http://matrix-explained.com/php/images/smiles/icon_bazar.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
Awesome!!!!
2003-11-14 01:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]
One such opportunity was given to us by Gulf War II. If ever there was an issue that had an overt Jewish/Israeli angle, that would be one. [B]The problem there was that the majority of Americans enthusiastically supported the war and don't care that they were lied to and conned into it.[/B] [B] How do we "name and blame the Jew" successfully when we blame the Jew for something most Americans fully support?[/B] People need to be slowly educated about some rather subtle matters of foreign policy before the "Jewish angle" can become significant in their minds in a way favorable to our cause at all.[/QUOTE]
I am on [url]www.WHRWfm.org[/url] radio talk show Tuesdays 6-6:30pm "Talk America!", if anyone is interested. I've read some Fichte (address to the German nation, 1806/7); the passage from Jung that "names the Jew' as Old Adam in the process of transforming the Prima Matrixum into "gold"; documented the "4 statements" of l996 - 1998 - 2000 -- 2001 (9.20) by essentially the same group of neocons, whom David Reiff cited as botching the post-war situation in Iraq:Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith; once identified, no repeated labelling is required.
(Call in! 607-777 - 2137)..
"Oh sweet Jesus, there's no turnin' back".. (Nick Cave and the Bad Seed) (I'm betting Trisk will be lurking out there.)
2003-11-16 21:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]I'm still very much of the mind that the issue of immigration is the horse we have to hitch our wagon to in order to see any significant real-world gains.[/QUOTE] Agreed! Most people seem to have a great deal of difficulty truly understanding any concept based on an ideology, no matter how rational its basis. However, the practical aspect of Third World immigration into the U.S. is something that Joe and Sally can grasp from at least an empirical analysis.
2003-11-16 21:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]No. I hate to sound like Franco,but the Jew will have to be named and confronted for "real-world gains" to take place. Or put another way - no real-world gains without the pain of being called 'anti-Semite' by every voice with a Big Media p.a. system. Until then, it's just band-aids on cancer - albeit in sporty designer colors.
Look around you, Tex...even [I]you [/I] know this is so.[/QUOTE] Not so! I found my way into American Nationalism by first discovering American Patrol, rather than VNN or the National Alliance's site.
Naming the Jew is not the predicate to naming the Mexishit.
2003-11-16 21:36 | User Profile
Not so! I found my way into American Nationalism by first discovering American Patrol, rather than VNN or the National Alliance's site.
Buchanan, Jared Taylor, and David Duke are the ones who tossed out the rope for me to pull myself out of the mucky river of modern leftism with.
2003-11-17 01:40 | User Profile
Buchanan helped me as well, back in the days when I regularly perused WND. I didn't catch on to Duke or Taylor until discovering Hal Turner. :thumbsup:
2003-11-18 14:22 | User Profile
Here ase some quotes from Buchanan on this program:
"And what we argue is simply this, not to end immigration forever, but the same kind of time-out, moratorium, we had from 1924 to 1965, so we can assimilate and Americanize the people who have come here."
"No, I think legal immigration should be stopped; 250,000 a year, which would still be as generous-more generous than any country in the world, I would go for that."
"Well, let me go back to history. Clearly, the founding fathers and those who first came to this country were British. They were English. They were Scotch-Irish. They were Scotch and some were Irish. Thatââ¬â¢s who the country was set up for. But I will say this. Blacks arrived in this country in 1619, before the folks at Plymouth Rock in 1620. They are as American as apple pie. They were here as long as our folks were. I do believe this, Joe. If you have a country like California is today, where there is no predominant ethnic group, but it is all basically minorities, such as you had in the old Yugoslavia, Slovenians and Serbs and Croats, it risks coming apart. You need a common culture. When I went to high school just up the street, there were Poles, Mexicans, Slovaks, Irish, Italians, but we all studied Shakespeare. We all followed the same ball clubs. We all listened to the same radio programs. We all spoke the same language. We were assimilated. That is what needs to be done. We need to create a common culture to which all contribute. If you go for multiculturalism, you will wind up with multi-countries."
What Pat seems to be saying is that a multiracial society is fine as long as it's not multi-cultural. Sometimes he throws out the different race of immigrants or blacks as a problem, but he seems to suggest that it is a problem that can be fixed by culture. Of course it's hard to pin down just what he thinks, because he won't come out and say it. I have read and heard many interviews/debates where Pat says the same things that he does in this one. In conversations where others have pressed Buchanan on the race vs. culture issue, he indicated that he agrees with the idea that the problem is not race but culture without actually saying so himself. Buchanan is very slippery.
At least I got a good chuckle when some idiot who is "not racist" confused Pat Buchanan with Pat Robertson.
2003-11-18 19:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Of course it's hard to pin down just what he thinks, because he won't come out and say it. I have read and heard many interviews/debates where Pat says the same things that he does in this one. In conversations where others have pressed Buchanan on the race vs. culture issue, he indicated that he agrees with the idea that the problem is not race but culture without actually saying so himself. Buchanan is very slippery. [/QUOTE] Indeed. This is how I read him, though:
I am pro-White, but I cannot say so explicitly because I will be lambasted by the media Jews. I am tolerant of [I]a few[/I] non-Whites, as long as they're more intelligent than the norm and accept White culture as the dominant culture of the U.S. :)
2003-11-18 22:17 | User Profile
Well, I've been thinking about this. I wonder if it's not possible to bring a few folks over by addressing Jews as Jews [I]within the context of issues[/I], the two most obvious being the War on Iraq and immigration. The War on Iraq is an easier entree because it involves Jews acting not just as "liberals" but as ethnically self-identified Jews. Just whip out "A Clean Break," the paper referred to by Bill Keller of the NYT in that now semi-famous NYT opinion piece. What do you make of this? "Uh, uh," your opponent will stammer. Immigration is a little tougher, but you can still credibly tie the issue to their ethnicity, i.e., look, the reason Jews supported open immigration is because they think having too many White folks around is bad. That means you're getting crowded out so they can feel better. How do YOU feel about THAT?
So really, the Tex side and the IR side are onto something here, but I think we can tie the threads together for the strongest rope.
Cause itz coming.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
2003-11-19 16:06 | User Profile
Here's another thought: there is a risk to too much issue emphasis, as opposed to Jew emphasis. Focus on issues, and people will lose sight of Jews. The point is to demonstrate how Jews themselves are the constant social irritant, regardless of the issue.