← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Bardamu
Thread ID: 17974 | Posts: 37 | Started: 2005-04-26
2005-04-26 13:04 | User Profile
[url]http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/2005/Anderson042605AK-47.htm[/url]
2005-04-26 13:33 | User Profile
That's quite the sales pitch!
Full-automatic fire in an assault rifle was never as good as it sounded, anyway. Shooters tend to spray inaccurate fire and waste ammunition. Agreed.
Remember that colossal f*-up that killed Pat Tillman in Afghanistan? The Army Rangers emptied a .50 cal ammo belt firing at Tillman's squad because they heard a single explosion in the distance.
2005-04-26 14:25 | User Profile
This is the Army's position on semi- versus full-auto fire, which makes a lot of sense:
When a soldier uses rapid semiautomatic fire properly, he sacrifices some accuracy to deliver a greater volume of effective fire to hit more targets. It is surprising how devastatingly accurate rapid fire can be. At ranges beyond 25 meters, rapid semiautomatic fire is superior to automatic fire in all measures (shots per target, trigger pulls per hit, and even time to hit). The decrease in accuracy when firing faster is reduced with proper training and repeated practice. (Emphasis added.) Source: [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-22-9/c07.htm#sectionii[/url]
Apart from controllability issues (which anyone who's fired a full-auto shoulder arm knows about), there's also the fact that spraying-n-praying makes it more likely that you'll find yourself with an empty mag at just the wrong time.
As far as the AK is concerned overall, I think it's a better weapon in many ways than the AR-15. It's certainly more reliable -- especially the magazines! I do prefer the 5.56 NATO over the 7.62x39, though. They both have their plusses and minuses, but the main thing I like about the 5.56 is its better armor-penetrating ability. The 7.62x39 goes through stuff like wood and (I believe) glass better than the 5.56, but the latter goes through body armor and Kevlar helmets more easily.
On the other hand, you can get a good AK in 5.56 NATO from Robinson Armament or from [url]www.ak-103.com[/url]. The latter is relatively expensive, though.
2005-04-26 16:31 | User Profile
They should sell this stuff in hardware stores, as far as I am concerned. It's something no home should go without, like, umm, duct tape or a flashlight.
2005-04-27 03:56 | User Profile
To paraphrase to old saying about Sam Colt: God didn't make all men equal, General Kalashnikov did. I love my AK.
Think about it! The AK and the RPG-7 have pretty much made it impossible for a modern army to occupy a county without the consent of its citizens. They have made old-fashoned empires nearly obsolete, including the new American Neo-Con Empire, except dumbo in the White House hasn't figured it out yet.
2005-04-27 04:22 | User Profile
A hundred years ago the machine-gun was a weapon on the cutting edge of technology and only the world's superpowers had them. Now every jig in Somalia and Johnny jihad in Iraq and Afghanistan has one. Fifty years ago the atomic bomb was on the cutting edge of technology and only the world's superpowers had them, now turd world countries like Pakistan and India possess them. What will they do when every turd world banana republic possesses them, and every Johnny jihad has a pack-pack nuke?:thumbsup: [QUOTE=CornCod]To paraphrase to old saying about Sam Colt: God didn't make all men equal, General Kalashnikov did. I love my AK.
Think about it! The AK and the RPG-7 have pretty much made it impossible for a modern army to occupy a county without the consent of its citizens. They have made old-fashoned empires nearly obsolete, including the new American Neo-Con Empire, except dumbo in the White House hasn't figured it out yet.[/QUOTE]
2005-04-27 04:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=SteamshipTime]Remember that colossal f*-up that killed Pat Tillman in Afghanistan? The Army Rangers emptied a .50 cal ammo belt firing at Tillman's squad because they heard a single explosion in the distance.[/QUOTE]It's called a recon by fire mate, and as the saying goes 'stuff happens'.:saddam:
2005-04-27 04:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE] [William Anderson]... Never underestimate the power of raw terror in warfare, and if most Whites have forgotten what a terrible, world-conquering force we once were, rest assured the jews and muds have not. They know that if we wanted to wipe them out, we could. That's why we are hated so much. They fear us so much it has turned to hatred and, if holding a job ranks at five on Jamal's list of things-to-avoid, a White man with an AK-47 and a nigger-killin' gleam in his eye tops the chart. ...[/QUOTE]
:yes:
2005-04-27 17:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Phantasm][William Anderson]... Never underestimate the power of raw terror in warfare, and if most Whites have forgotten what a terrible, world-conquering force we once were, rest assured the jews and muds have not. They know that if we wanted to wipe them out, we could. That's why we are hated so much. They fear us so much it has turned to hatred and, if holding a job ranks at five on Jamal's list of things-to-avoid, a White man with an AK-47 and a nigger-killin' gleam in his eye tops the chart.:yes:[/QUOTE]It sounds like a description of a Phineas Priest -P-
2005-05-03 17:37 | User Profile
I read that piece when it came out on the VNN site, and though I think it makes a lot of sense, it seems to be essentially a comparison of the M-16 clones vs. the AK-47 clones, without considering any other alternatives.
One would be the SKS, which fires the same 7.62x39 round as the AK. Unlike the civilian semiauto-only AKs that are sold here in the US (how come some tenthead in a tinpot dictatorship can own a real AK-47, but here in "free, democratic" amerika, I can't?), it's a genuine made-in-the-commie-bloc cold-war collectible. Prices range from near the $500 mark for an original Russian model in pristine shape to down around $150 for a new, unissued Yugoslavian model, with all kinds of variants in between those extremes. As far as I know, it's the only semiauto on the C&R list.
The SKS is every bit as reliable as the AK, possibly more so. You can buy one of the rarer versions as a strictly-stock collectible shooter while waiting for SHTF, or you can buy one of the common Chinese models and trick it out with as many "tactical" Rambo add-ons as your imagination dictates.
Another possibility is the Ruger Mini-14. Many will sneer at this amerikan-made semi for its supposed gross inaccuracy, but with the single addition of a heavy John Masen muzzlebrake, I can consistently keep all my shots within an eight-inch circle at 100 to 200 yards. And that's shooting freestanding -- bench rests and sandbags are for pansies, podner.
True, it shoots the lighter .223 round, which, as the article correctly points out, does have its drawbacks. But when S hits the F and the only sources of fresh ammo are Imperial supply trucks, you won't be able to head on down to the nearest gun shop or Wally World for a box of Wolf 7.62x39. 223 (aka 5.56) and .308 are going to be the going currency.
Of course, for real stopping power, you can't beat the M14, or, more specifically its civilian, semiauto version which goes by various names, the most common of which is "M1A." A Person of Diversity who's been hit by a .308 is going to be well and truly hit, even if he's 500 yards away.
None of this is to be taken as putting the civilian AK-47s down, and I think it should be taken as a matter of course that every White man should own (and know how to use) at least one effective gun -- and have a significant store of ammo, suitable for every emergency. But there are more alternatives available (at least for now) than just the AK and the M16 clones, and more factors to be considered than the original article indicates.
Buy guns and ammo now, kids, while you still can. At worst, you'll have entered into a pleasant and rewarding new hobby. And when SHTF finally does rear its dark and ugly head, yours will be the only White family on the block that's still alive.
2005-05-04 03:42 | User Profile
One would be the SKS, which fires the same 7.62x39 round as the AK. Unlike the civilian semiauto-only AKs that are sold here in the US (how come some tenthead in a tinpot dictatorship can own a real AK-47, but here in "free, democratic" amerika, I can't?), it's a genuine made-in-the-commie-bloc cold-war collectible. The laws in the US are asinine and tyrannical (fortunately no one can make us obey them), but if it makes you feel any better, most of the AKs in Iraqi are clones, too. The Iraqis made their own AKs and called them something else -- I don't remember what. Actually, I believe most countries that use the AK as their standard rifle make their own rather than buying them from the Russians.
Just because a rifle's a clone doesn't necessarily mean it's not as good as one made by the original company (though that is sometimes the case). For example, the FAL clones made by DSArms are widely regarded to be better than the original Belgian FALs (largely because of more modern manufacturing methods).
Also, [url=http://www.robarm.com/]Robinson Arms[/url] imports AKs from Russia that are made in the same factory that used to make weapons for the Russian military. They build their AKs on RPK (Russian light machine gun) receivers. They're heavy rifles but are very accurate and more durable than even a standard AK. Of course they don't give you the full-auto feature, but that's really a minor issue in lightweight weapons, as discussed in the Army manual (posted above).
Another possibility is the Ruger Mini-14. Many will sneer at this amerikan-made semi for its supposed gross inaccuracy, but with the single addition of a heavy John Masen muzzlebrake, I can consistently keep all my shots within an eight-inch circle at 100 to 200 yards. And that's shooting freestanding -- bench rests and sandbags are for pansies, podner. I've heard a mixed bag of things about the Mini-14. Doesn't it overheat too easily? I've heard that if you start rapid firing that thing, the groups will really open up, even from a sandbag. I think that's been one of the chief complaints. I've never even shot a Mini-14, so I have no idea.
Of course, for real stopping power, you can't beat the M14, or, more specifically its civilian, semiauto version which goes by various names, the most common of which is "M1A." A Person of Diversity who's been hit by a .308 is going to be well and truly hit, even if he's 500 yards away. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure the M1A is not just an M14 minus the uncontrollable full-auto. The M1A has only a cast receiver, while the M14's receiver is forged. I've heard of M1A receivers distorting after many rounds of use -- I don't know how many, but certainly a forged receiver will last a hell of a lot longer than its owner. The M1A is still reputed to be a good rifle, but for a semi-auto .308, I'd get a DSArms FAL instead of an M1A. JMHO.
2005-05-04 16:47 | User Profile
They're making forged M1A receivers now [url]www.lrbarms.com[/url] but they cost a pretty penny. The ammo resupply issue is a biggie for me, which I think clinches it, unless you've had the foresight (and funds) to stockpile 100K rounds of 7.62x39 or something. Reloading is an option I guess, but with most of the stuff in the country being steel-cased, your only option is to buy American-made AK ammo or the components, which negates the advantage of "cheap" AK ammo.
2005-05-05 02:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]I've heard a mixed bag of things about the Mini-14. Doesn't it overheat too easily? I've heard that if you start rapid firing that thing, the groups will really open up, even from a sandbag.
It's not a military weapon, to be sure, and not designed for military combat-style rapid fire. The barrel needs to be a lot heavier. That said, I bought one three years ago, and haven't seen any of the wild grouping problems often bandied about in the rumor mill. Maybe I'm just lucky. Nevertheless, it's dead reliable and in a SHTF situation I can't imagine finding it inadequate.
Now the Mini-30 (7.62x39) is a completely different horse. Hard to find magazines for, too.
One thing I will say is that the Mini-14 is getting too expensive. With today's prices approaching that of a used M16, it's a lot less cost-competitive than it used to be.
I think that's been one of the chief complaints. I've never even shot a Mini-14, so I have no idea.
Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure the M1A is not just an M14 minus the uncontrollable full-auto. The M1A has only a cast receiver, while the M14's receiver is forged. I've heard of M1A receivers distorting after many rounds of use
There, I'd have to ask you to come up with some confirmed examples, citing manufacturer. There is no single manufacturer of M14 clones; some even come from China, and I wouldn't touch one of those. But the cast-versus-forged debate per se has settled down to a mere simmer even on the most contentious and USGI-purist M14 forums. No one has yet managed show any evidence that Springfield's M1A receivers even wear more rapidly than USGI forged, let alone come up with a confirmed example of distortions.
-- I don't know how many, but certainly a forged receiver will last a hell of a lot longer than its owner.
So will a quality cast one, have no fear.
The M1A is still reputed to be a good rifle, but for a semi-auto .308, I'd get a DSArms FAL instead of an M1A. JMHO.[/QUOTE]
Matter of personal taste, so I wouldn't argue there. But anyone who fears that an American-made Springfield M1A, for example, is going to wear out or distort needs to investigate more closely. These are guns used by some extremely serious competitive shooters, and they're not guys who'd pay big bucks for a toy gun that warped or wore out on them. I might also add that a significant number of M1A shooters are ex-Vietnam grunts (I'm not one) who carried real USGI M14s in combat, and would be the first to complain at the top of their lungs if their American-made clones were wearing out or distorting.
Those who have a serious interest in the matter might want to follow (or join) one of the M14/M1A forums. This one's been around for a long time:
[url]http://www.ambackforum.com/viewforum.php?f=108[/url]
There's even one of the inevitable cast-versus-forged debates going on at:
[url]http://www.ambackforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=18561&sid=44144e38dc6c851521583deb2ab9afad[/url]
2005-05-06 07:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=arkady]It's not a military weapon, to be sure, and not designed for military combat-style rapid fire. The barrel needs to be a lot heavier. That said, I bought one three years ago, and haven't seen any of the wild grouping problems often bandied about in the rumor mill. Maybe I'm just lucky. Nevertheless, it's dead reliable and in a SHTF situation I can't imagine finding it inadequate. Well, reliability is more important than anything else anyway, IMO.
There, I'd have to ask you to come up with some confirmed examples, citing manufacturer. There is no single manufacturer of M14 clones; some even come from China, and I wouldn't touch one of those. But the cast-versus-forged debate per se has settled down to a mere simmer even on the most contentious and USGI-purist M14 forums. No one has yet managed show any evidence that Springfield's M1A receivers even wear more rapidly than USGI forged, let alone come up with a confirmed example of distortions. It's really nothing I'm certain about; I'm just passing along stuff that I read somewhere. It might have been in Boston's Gun Bible by Boston T. Party, but I don't have that handy right now. I believe the manufacturer in question was Springfield Armory.
I've heard about bad Chinese M14 receivers, but I think those were said to be improperly heat-treated forgings.
Matter of personal taste, so I wouldn't argue there. But anyone who fears that an American-made Springfield M1A, for example, is going to wear out or distort needs to investigate more closely. These are guns used by some extremely serious competitive shooters, and they're not guys who'd pay big bucks for a toy gun that warped or wore out on them. I might also add that a significant number of M1A shooters are ex-Vietnam grunts (I'm not one) who carried real USGI M14s in combat, and would be the first to complain at the top of their lungs if their American-made clones were wearing out or distorting. Well, that's the bottom line: owners' experiences. If people are happy with their M1As and haven't found that lots of shooting distorts the receivers, then I believe them. It's entirely possible that what I read was incorrect.
So yeah, a cast receiver might very well be adequate. I'd still rather have a forged receiver, but if the cast ones are good enough, that's cool. When it comes to a gun's internal parts, however, I definitely think it's important to have forgings instead of castings.
Here's a little passage from [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forging]Wikipedia [/url] on the subject:
In industry a distinction is made between open- and closed-die forging. In open-die work the metal is free to move except where contacted by the hammer, anvil, or other (often hand-held) tooling. In closed-die work the material is placed in a die resembling a mold, which it is forced to fill by the application of pressure. A great many common objects (wrenches, crankshafts...) are produced by closed-die forging, which is well suited to mass production. Open-die forging lends itself to very short runs and is appropriate for art smithing and custom work.
Closed-die forging is more expensive for mass production than is casting, but produces a much stronger part, and is thus used for tools, critical machine parts, and the like. One particular variant, drop forging, is often used to mass produce flat wrenches and other household tools.
2005-05-08 03:10 | User Profile
As Angler said you can get new Russian made VEPR (AK-47) Rifles in .308win, 7.62x39, 5.45x39 and .223 from ROBINSON ARMAMENT. Their M96 is overpriced, and they have not come out with the belt feeder they claimed to have in the works. I would stay away from the 5.45x39 guns too. The VEPR Rifle in .308win, 7.62x39, or .223 looks like a good buy but only 10 shot mags in .308wn. The VEPR is based on the RPK machine gun and made of heavier steel.
[url]http://www.ak47.com/[/url]
See this site for plan to build from parts kits. Parts seem to be getting harder to find now sadly.
[url]http://www.biggerhammer.net/[/url]
I recall reading that both those FAL and M14 receiver both had problems. Most of these guns are on cast receiver and out old junk parts. Makes on want a VEPR .308 or even the AR-10. I have read the Ruger Mini-14 overheats badly if you shoot it much.
I have been thiking somewhat kinder thoughts about the AR-15 than had in the past. Parts are easy to get and it is easier to take apart and put together than any gun around. I has it's problems but the US Army was often able to get the job done and the Isrealis use it too. And you can get them in .308 now too.
I would say a 7.62x39mm AK is the first gun to buy.
2005-05-09 18:02 | User Profile
I would stay away from the 5.45x39 guns too.
Any reason for this, Faust? Most 5.45x39 guns on the market are built-up from Bulgarian or Romanian parts kits. The only difference in quality comes in the receiver they are assembled on. That can be quite large. Vulcan and Hesse receivers are best avoided, I agree. However, Arsenal USA has now a 5.45x39 semi-auto clone that looks pretty good.
If you were referring to an ammo availability question, I agree. The same thing I said about the 7.62x39 applies, but even moreso, as there are no sources for reloading components for this round that I know of and there are far fewer makers of it that are importing it now (Wolf being the major one). Still, ballistically it's an interesting round from all I've read or heard.
2005-05-12 00:50 | User Profile
MadScienceType,
Yes, I was referring to ammo availability when I said stay away from 5.45x39. I will also add .223 is a somewhat better round, but it is availability that would make me stay way from 5.45x39. You can get a Russian made VEPR is .223 with 30 shot mags if you want a small bore AK. In the case of 7.62x39 you can even get US made ammo, I know it is not as cheap as the Russian stuff. There is no US-made ammo in the case of 5.45x39 that I know of. That was why I said say with .308win, 7.62x39, or .223. I am a bit more fond of .30 rounds than .22's. I have read some nice things about the .308 VEPR.
I think one could reload that Russian ammo but it would be a lot of trouble and I am not sure the end result would be that good. I saw a booklet on it once. Remember you can also get cheap Russian ammo in .223 also not reloadable.
2005-05-12 02:28 | User Profile
Take a look at this.
Parts Kits: [url]http://www.floridagunworks.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Category_Code=PK+PARTSKITS[/url]
2005-06-03 02:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=SteamshipTime]That's quite the sales pitch!
Agreed.
Remember that colossal f-up that killed Pat Tillman in Afghanistan? The Army Rangers emptied* a .50 cal ammo belt firing at Tillman's squad because they heard a single explosion in the distance.[/QUOTE] That would be called "sh for fire discipline" in most circles. :angry:
2005-06-03 02:52 | User Profile
That quote you put up was about the most revolting pile of vomit I've ever read from one of you racist jerk-offs. If you wanted to wipe out Blacks, you couldn't. If I saw a peckerwood with an A-K 47 and that "gleam" they get in their eyes when they're all excited to kill, rest assured ain't nobody gonna get the chance to hurt me or mine.
2005-06-03 03:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ked McFarlane]That quote you put up was about the most revolting pile of vomit I've ever read from one of you racist jerk-offs. If you wanted to wipe out Blacks, you couldn't. If I saw a peckerwood with an A-K 47 and that "gleam" they get in their eyes when they're all excited to kill, rest assured ain't nobody gonna get the chance to hurt me or mine.[/QUOTE] I personally have no desire to shoot blacks or anyone else who doesn't attack first. However, you should be honest enough with yourself to realize that blacks exist in the US and have it pretty good here ONLY because whites allow this to be so. You live here at our mercy; piss off enough of us and even the most liberal of whites will turn on you. You are outnumbered, outgunned, and outbrained. Even if whites merely withheld welfare from you, many of your kind would starve.
If you really don't like this situation, you can always return to Africa and live in a majority-black nation there. We all know how great those places are to live in. Otherwise, you American blacks should be grateful for all the free food, money, and education you're getting from Whitey.
2005-06-03 03:34 | User Profile
Blacks are the ones on the killing rampage these days, Ted. But to address one of your boasts, you really don't think Whites could beat Blacks in a honestly declared civil war, as opposed to this sneaky dirty war we have instead? :tank: :afro:
2005-06-03 03:41 | User Profile
I live at JAH's mercy-if you don't know your Bible, that's God. No disrespect to anyone here, but I bow to no whiteboy bully. And I'm certainly not outbrained, as Angler put it.
2005-06-03 03:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]Blacks are the ones on the killing rampage these days, Ted. But to address one of your boasts, you really don't think Whites could beat Blacks in a honestly declared civil war, as opposed to this sneaky dirty war we have instead? :tank: :afro:[/QUOTE] Whites would annihilate blacks in a race war for a number of reasons. One is sheer numerical superiority. Another is the fact that far more whites are armed. Far more blacks live in cities that heavily restrict gun ownership (and most blacks foolishly support such laws) and either own no guns at all or only crappy weapons like Saturday Night Specials or Tec-9s. The ones who do own guns rarely practice shooting.
2005-06-03 03:57 | User Profile
Angler, are you hoping for a race war? You seem to put alot of thought into preparing for one.
2005-06-03 04:17 | User Profile
Watcha gonna do, chuck a spear, darkie?
2005-06-03 04:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ked McFarlane]Angler, are you hoping for a race war? You seem to put alot of thought into preparing for one.[/QUOTE]I'm not hoping for any war, but I do collect guns and go shooting a lot. I believe in self-defense. If this government ever becomes tyrannical (e.g., throwing people into prison for their political views, or going door-to-door confiscating guns), then I will use my weapons to kill its agents until I am killed myself.
My problem is not so much with blacks as with the ethnocentric Jews and their allies who control the US government through their lobbying groups (especially the AIPAC) and through planted spies. They have become so powerful that they were able to sucker the US into a war for Israel's benefit (this latest Iraq war), using the president of the US as their puppet. This is intolerable. Right now I believe in resisting by simply spreading the word, but there may come a time when people like me become physically threatened for speaking out. That will be the point at which I use my weapons.
2005-06-03 04:40 | User Profile
Is there any need for that immaturity, Russkie? Just shut your commie a up if you can't say anything that's not retarded. I sent you a PM when I encountered your post: AWIPE-Why don't you just go back to the caves of the Caucusus mountains, Cracer? Now some moderator'll probably fly up my a, because only whitey's allowed to dis people personally on this board. F** IT. You are exactly what I called you.
2005-06-03 06:36 | User Profile
I hate to see our nice gun forum trashed by an unrelated flame war... :taz:
2005-06-03 06:46 | User Profile
Faust, let me fill you in. Phantasm began the flame war, with his William Anderson quote, which was basically a steady flow of white racist detritis. Some of the whites and I then began debating things, and Madrussian came a-leapin' out of his cave armed with 8-year old level speech about Blacks, so I had to put that boy in his place, and then you arrived. Sorry your "nice gun forum" has been marred, I know the penchant some of you have for instruments of destruction:tank: .
2005-06-03 12:54 | User Profile
I am more than willing to sit down with the blacks and have a mature discussion with them about our respective futures.....our seperate futures as being in different political entities. I hope it dosen't have to come to violence, but if it is a choice between no seperate future for the two races or war, I would sadly choose war.
I would get no joy from harming black people, despite their low intelligence, propensity for violence and long-time hatred of our people.
2005-06-03 14:25 | User Profile
Notice how rare it is to encounter Black separatists. This is because they themselves know that without the White man their living standards would plummet back to third world levels, if not pre-agricultural levels. Yet they have no end of gripes aimed at this very same White man.
2005-06-03 15:17 | User Profile
Y'all keep a lid on it or take it outside. Most of the inflammatory stuff was from VNN, so maybe you should go over there and give 'em a piece of your mind McFarlane.
Regulars,
Please don't feed the idiots.
2005-06-04 15:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ked McFarlane]That quote you put up was about the most revolting pile of vomit I've ever read from one of you racist jerk-offs. If you wanted to wipe out Blacks, you couldn't. If I saw a peckerwood with an A-K 47 and that "gleam" they get in their eyes when they're all excited to kill, rest assured ain't nobody gonna get the chance to hurt me or mine.[/QUOTE] You Blacks seem to be very agitated these days Ked. What's the problem? Finally realize that you're just a disposable tool? Did you have an epiphany? Did you realize that you're expendable once the Jews are finished using you to disrupt "Whitey?" Oh... I know... you don't like us even thinking about eliminating Blacks from our communities, much less talking about it in an open forum. Let's set the record straight... shall we?
You Blacks have destroyed and impoverished every community you've moved into... around the world. You've murdered, raped, vandalized and stolen your way to the reputation and status that you now enjoy. You are the scourge of every nation in the world... and it is your own doing. There is only one tribe that is more despised than yours...
If you don't like what White people talk about in White forums... feel free to go elsewhere.
:gunsmilie
2005-06-05 00:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]Notice how rare it is to encounter Black separatists. This is because they themselves know that without the White man their living standards would plummet back to third world levels, if not pre-agricultural levels. Yet they have no end of gripes aimed at this very same White man.[/QUOTE]Very true! As you say, the explanation is most likely that they're aware of their dependency on whites for good living conditions. Even blacks in US ghettos have it better than most blacks living in black African nations.
2005-06-05 01:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler] Even blacks in US ghettos have it better than most blacks living in black African nations.[/QUOTE]
I've heard it said, don't know if it's true, that America Blacks as a group constitute something like the 12th richest nation on earth.
2005-06-05 01:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]Ted. But to address one of your boasts, you really don't think Whites could beat Blacks in a honestly declared civil war, as opposed to this sneaky dirty war we have instead? :tank: :afro:[/QUOTE] No such thing as a fair fight, and war is a contest that only cares who won.
Honestly declared civil war? I don't think the "civilized" method of warfare is with us any more, and if anything, civil wars are even more uncivil that "regular" wars.