← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Blond Knight

Truth = Hate Speech: Religious Hatred Bill in Britain

Thread ID: 18781 | Posts: 250 | Started: 2005-06-23

Blond Knight [OP]

2005-06-23 12:55 | User Profile

Reminder to our British friends: Even though the government took your guns away, you can still use rope to hang these traitorous b--tards.

[url]http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/archive/200506/FOR20050622b.html[/url]

Quoting Koran Could Be Illegal Under Proposed UK Bill, Lawmaker Says By Nicola Brent CNSNews.com Correspondent June 22, 2005 [B] (CNSNews.com) - A British lawmaker says reading excerpts from the Koran that advocate harsh treatment for Christians, Jews and unbelievers would violate a religious hatred bill currently before parliament.[/B]

"If this bill makes any sense at all, it must mean banning the reading, in public or private, of a great many passages of the Koran itself," Conservative MP Boris Johnson said.

And that, he added, was "absurd and paradoxical, given that the measure is intended to be a protection against Islamophobia."

[B]The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill edged closer to becoming law Tuesday, after a House of Commons debate and second reading vote[/B].

Lawmakers from both parties who oppose the bill backed a compromise amendment, which would have allowed prosecution only in cases where attacks on religious beliefs were seen to be masking a deeper motivation of inciting racial hatred. However, that amendment was tabled.

During the debate, Johnson read out various excerpts from the Koran regarding the treatment of non-Muslims, including sura 22:19, which read in translation: "As for the unbelievers, for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skins shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods."

Johnson said while the Koran was not "unique in its hostility to other creeds," he challenged a government minister to explain "why and how you think the repetition of those words in a public or a private place does not amount to an incitement to religious hatred of exactly the kind this bill is supposed to ban."

[B]The proposed legislation, which has been introduced in a bid to protect Muslims, would apply to "words, behavior, written material, recordings or programs that are threatening, abusive or insulting [and] likely to stir up racial or religious hatred."

Convictions under the law could lead to a seven-year jail sentence[/B].

Home Secretary Charles Clarke told lawmakers the bill was about "hatred and incitement to hatred," assuring them it would not be "stopping anybody telling jokes about religion, stopping anybody ridiculing religions or engaging in robust debate about religion."

It would protect "people, not faiths," he added and assured opponents that proposed amendments would be considered "constructively" in committee. Critics say the bill in its present form is dangerous and vague, would threaten freedom of speech, and breed more hostility in British society.

[B]This is the third time in as many years that Prime Minister Tony Blair's government is trying to push through the controversial measure[/B].

A first attempt was withdrawn in 2002 because of fierce opposition in the upper House of Lords; a second failed earlier this year when the government removed the religious hatred clause from a broader piece of legislation it wanted to see passed into law before parliament dissolved for the general election in April.

This week, the government argued that while it did not believe there would be many prosecutions under any new laws, parliament needed to make it clear that "hatred, racism and extremism" would not be tolerated.

But Johnson said Islamophobia in Britain was "in danger of being exaggerated" and accused the government of serving its own political ends.

"If a religion is worth believing it ought to be strong enough, frankly, to withstand the most scurrilous and monstrous attacks and, if a religion is worth believing in, those assaults should diminish the critics and not the religion itself," he said.

Artists and writers have responded with skepticism to repeated government assurances that they would not face prosecution because only complaints approved by the attorney-general would go to court.

[B]"Mr. Bean" actor Rowan Atkinson has voiced reservations that a politician "subject to the political agendas of the day" should hold such discretionary powers.

The government may see it as desirable at some point "to prosecute a few writers or journalists or playwrights in their desire to ingratiate themselves with a particular religious community," he said this week.[/B]

Christian groups and civil liberties campaigners have also expressed concerns about the bill.

The bill also aims to protect people defined by their lack of faith, such as atheists and humanists, as well as satanists, pagans and members of religious sects.

Gregz

2005-06-24 02:18 | User Profile

"you can still use rope to hang these traitorous b--tards."

Whilst the English ruling class are degenerate liberal criminals, cowards and homosexuals.

London was once a cosmopolitan city now a days it's Asiatic zoo. :osama: :ph34r: The same is true of any major city in Western Europe.

Know wants to live in a society that tolerates traitor's and promotes subversion. You only have to look at the ethic make up of English schools to know that the English are finished as a people.

The British media have effectively been censored and are no longer critical of the US's support for Israels expansion policy or the war in Iraq. Britain is a ZOG controlled multiracial cesspit's and as such possess a threat to Europe's territorial security.

Our movements error, is in failing to address the treason of secular whites and hold them adequately to account. For there crimes against humanity. The rise of secularism in the West is directly to blame for the abandonment of it's Christian values and the dilution of it's European cultural and ethnic identity.

almahdi

2005-07-11 02:36 | User Profile

Islam has taken the lead in opposing ZOG and all manifestations of Jewish power. In this, the courage of Islam is an inspiration and example to all [url="http://alhusseini.com/common.php"]http://alhusseini.com/common.php[/url] Almahdi

Angler

2005-07-11 03:03 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Gregz]Our movements error, is in failing to address the treason of secular whites and hold them adequately to account. For there crimes against humanity. The rise of secularism in the West is directly to blame for the abandonment of it's Christian values and the dilution of it's European cultural and ethnic identity.[/QUOTE]Secularism in and of itself has nothing to do with it. One can be secular and an ultra-left-wing multiculturalist; one can be secular and an ultra-right-wing Nazi; or one can be secular and anything in between. And multiculturalism and ethnic "tolerance" -- "we are all God's children, regardless of race" -- is a key teaching of many Western Churches today.

Let's also not forget that pro-Jewish and pro-Israel Christians are more responsible for Jewish power in America today than even Judaism itself. The Christian Zionist lobby is the backbone of Jewish political power.

If everyone thought of the Bible as Jewish mythology, then Jews would no longer be seen as the "Chosen People" but as the parasites they are. So again, the problem is hardly secularism. The problem is widespread belief in feces like this:

[url]http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1000/1000_01.asp[/url]

2600

2005-07-11 03:21 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler] If everyone thought of the Bible as Jewish mythology, then Jews would no longer be seen as the "Chosen People" but as the parasites they are. [/QUOTE]

I know plenty of people who regard the Bible as Jewish mythology and do not think that Jews are parasites.

Angler

2005-07-11 03:21 | User Profile

[QUOTE=almahdi]Islam has taken the lead in opposing ZOG and all manifestations of Jewish power. In this, the courage of Islam is an inspiration and example to all.[/QUOTE]I agree with this. I am not religious, let alone a Muslim, but I admit that the Muslims of today are showing far more courage than any other group in fighting Jewish power. In fact, Muslims are the only significant group doing so.

Assorted white nationalists and paleocons are making some faint noise, but they'll never take up arms against the Jews and their allies like the Muslims have. Most whites are too obsequious before state "authority" to do so much as set off an illegal firecracker, let alone take serious action against their enemies.

On the other hand, this doesn't mean whites and Arabs should live together. It's not good for different cultures to mix. It only leads to strife. Muslim Arabs should live in their own lands, and Whites should live in theirs. People are generally resentful when masses of immigrants from foreign cultures arrive in their lands and start demanding that the natives there accomodate them.

Angler

2005-07-11 03:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=2600]I know plenty of people who regard the Bible as Jewish mythology and do not think that Jews are parasites.[/QUOTE]Okay, I exaggerated. But the main point is that Jews are greatly empowered by a large number of Christians who are sympathetic to them for religious reasons. Even many (most?) non-Zionist Christians feel a kinship with the Jews simply because they think of the Jews as their "spiritual forefathers." And these factors, rather than secularism, are in large part why Jews have been able to attain such power over the heavily-Christian US.

Bardamu

2005-07-11 03:43 | User Profile

Mudslim go home.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 07:50 | User Profile

LOL! :lol:

'Islam' seems to have plenty enough trouble organizing a working sewer system for its adherents. If anything, all the cowardly suicide bombers and smelly terrorists have done is increase 'ZOG's power throughout the globe.

Do us all a favor and go back to tending your sheep, beating your women and molesting your boys.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 07:57 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]Okay, I exaggerated. But the main point is that Jews are greatly empowered by a large number of Christians who are sympathetic to them for religious reasons. Even many (most?) non-Zionist Christians feel a kinship with the Jews simply because they think of the Jews as their "spiritual forefathers." And these factors, rather than secularism, are in large part why Jews have been able to attain such power over the heavily-Christian US.[/QUOTE]

Bull. Try Hitler's camps, perception of Israel as the heroic underdog in 1948, and the West's sole middle eastern ally in the Cold War. You give a fairly recent trend of belief amongst folks in the Bible Belt way too much credit, Angler.

Esoterist

2005-07-11 09:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]LOL! :lol:

Do us all a favor and go back to tending your sheep, beating your women and molesting your boys.[/QUOTE]Childish, rather disappointing, and Jewish insults. Every culture, every race has its losers.

Orthodox Islam teaches the same basic values as orthodox Christianity. Has Protestant Christianity weathered the storm of Modernism and protected us from the ravages of the culture of death? Nietzsche was right to target modern Christianity for its slavishness and decadence. Christianity has collapsed, and its representatives have allowed the reduction of our culture to nothingness by idealizing the lowest members of our own Aryan-Christian community and submitting to Jewish cultural assault. Islam has retained the strength and the backbone to ruthlessly and uncompromisingly stamp out necrotic modern things like the Jewish culture industry and sexual degeneracy. Nobility and courage have died out completely in the West, infected with soft living and the psychology of the spoiled child, while in the Levant a technically outranked people is waging heroic war to the death against their megalomaniacal and ignoble overlords. Christianity, in fact, has collapsed into total effeminacy and impotency in the present day world, while Islam, rightly contemptuous of the merely external 'favors' of the meretricious modern age, remains a largely valid vehicle of noble superpersonal human energies.

Traditionalist Islamic forces are fighting the same battle as traditionalist Western conservatives. OUR ENEMIES ARE THE SAME: the Caesarism of the international Jewish financial network and their foisting of dysfunctional loan-capitalism on the peoples of the planet; the deracinating forces of Judeo- Babelist globalism; unrestrained technological hedonism; secular utopianism; and metaphysical nihilism.

I am constantly amazed at the provincialism of 'defenders of the West', so devoid of far-seeing intelligence and realism as to not collaborate with other nationalistic and traditionalist elements in the world desiring the same goals and values. An effort toward strategic outreach by "Almahdi" is returned with incomprehension and puerile malicious insults!

When the barbarian Turcoman hordes were coming down on the Middle East during the Sixth Crusade, the Muslims and Knights Templars, wisely forgetful of their ancient hatred and religious conflicts, united to oppose a common enemy. Derive the lesson!

Bardamu

2005-07-11 11:58 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Esoterist] When the barbarian Turcoman hordes were coming down on the Middle East during the Sixth Crusade, the Muslims and Knights Templars, wisely forgetful of their ancient hatred and religious conflicts, united to oppose a common enemy. Derive the lesson![/QUOTE]

Well, the horde today is Muslim.

xmetalhead

2005-07-11 12:40 | User Profile

The Muslims currently in the West are there because of the Jewish power over the Western countries, brainwashing and distracting the White masses to give up all nationalistic and racial feelings and embrace a decadent, individualistic, materialistic, sexually degenerate, credit card lifestyle.

This is NOT the fault of the Muslim. They don't belong in the West, but we should support their struggles for their self-determination within their own nations.

As I see it, Esoterist is correct. The Muslims are actively and heroically fighting the Jewish One World Order while the White man stews in his own caldron, ocassionally stirred by our Jewish overlords just for fun.

We should be so brave.

Bardamu

2005-07-11 13:00 | User Profile

The slims want it all. They want Palestine, USBritZog out of their homelands, AND unlimited emigration into Europe. On any of these points there is going to be a war with them, but if they have to give up one, it will be Palestine to the Jews, so if the slims make a pact with anyone, it isn't going to be us.

Franco

2005-07-11 14:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]LOL! :lol:

Do us all a favor and go back to tending your sheep, beating your women and molesting your boys.[/QUOTE]

Well, let's give credit where credit is due. Muslim leaders regularly criticize the Jews and Israel. Do major Christian leaders do the same?

I'm still waiting for a major Christian leader to criticize the Jews in a public speech or an interview.

Just think: Jews have led the leftist, feminist and multiculturalist movements in the West. Yet the Christian leaders say.....nothing.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 15:02 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Esoterist]Childish, rather disappointing, and Jewish insults. Every culture, every race has its losers.

Indeed, some even more than others.

Orthodox Islam teaches the same basic values as orthodox Christianity.

Bull. The belief in the Triune God of Christianity has had a marked and fundamental impact on Christian culture, society and conception of man and God. Islam and Judaism are on the opposite side of the coin and much more alike to each other than they are to Christianity.

Has Protestant Christianity weathered the storm of Modernism and protected us from the ravages of the culture of death?

No, but it's my history and my people. I just don't care about foreigners and their foreign cult religions like islam. Sue me.

Islam has retained the strength and the backbone to ruthlessly and uncompromisingly stamp out necrotic modern things like the Jewish culture industry and sexual degeneracy.

Bull. Petr's put some numbers up somewhere here concerning the real degenerecy in muslim societies somewhere. I'll have to see if I can find them when I have the time. But you're dreaming if you think these people are noble, moral and honorable. If you do believe that, then you should move to Riyadh asap. I'll help you pack if you want.

Christianity, in fact, has collapsed into total effeminacy and impotency in the present day world, while Islam, rightly contemptuous of the merely external 'favors' of the meretricious modern age, remains a largely valid vehicle of noble superpersonal human energies.

Yes, I stand in awe at their cultural achievement. :clown:

Traditionalist Islamic forces are fighting the same battle as traditionalist Western conservatives. OUR ENEMIES ARE THE SAME: the Caesarism of the international Jewish financial network and their foisting of dysfunctional loan-capitalism on the peoples of the planet; the deracinating forces of Judeo- Babelist globalism; unrestrained technological hedonism; secular utopianism; and metaphysical nihilism.

John Walker Lindh? Is that you?

Our enemy may be the same in some regards, but that doesn't make us friends. They're still far and away our number one enemy throughout our European ancestral lands.

I am constantly amazed at the provincialism of 'defenders of the West', so devoid of far-seeing intelligence and realism as to not collaborate with other nationalistic and traditionalist elements in the world desiring the same goals and values. An effort toward strategic outreach by "Almahdi" is returned with incomprehension and puerile malicious insults!

First of all, 'Almahdi' is likely Raina the troll, doofus. Second, why don't you go sell your collaboration offers to the working-class whites who've had their neighborhoods run over by rioting Pakis back in England? Let us know how you get along.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 15:14 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Well, let's give credit where credit is due. Muslim leaders regularly criticize the Jews and Israel. Do major Christian leaders do the same?

I'm still waiting for a major Christian leader to criticize the Jews in a public speech or an interview.

Just think: Jews have led the leftist, feminist and multiculturalist movements in the West. Yet the Christian leaders say.....nothing.

That's rather short-sighted don't you think? Kind of ignoring two thousand years of Western history? The very fact you can ask those question and make those comments is itself the fruit of Western Christendom. You couldn't do the same in islamic culture so show some respect. Christian men much better than you gave their lives to keep Europe free of the pestilence that is islam.

If you really that concerned about it you would join Esoterist in moving to Riyadh asap. At bottom it's just another tool for you to bash Christianity, Franco.

Same old song and dance. Take two thousand three hundred and six. :yawn:

weisbrot

2005-07-11 15:20 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Bull. Try Hitler's camps, perception of Israel as the heroic underdog in 1948, and the West's sole middle eastern ally in the Cold War. You give a fairly recent trend of belief amongst folks in the Bible Belt way too much credit, Angler.[/QUOTE]

Tex, you seem to have forgotten your roots. We're both former Southern Baptists so you know I'm not taking potshots from behind cover here. Evangelical Protestants certainly do enable the success of the tikkunists, and to a huge degree. This trend isn't recent- that is, it dates back to the mid to late 1800's- and it isn't contained just to the Bible Belt, although it surely is much more prevalent there than in, say, Long Island. Coughcough.

Who's reading all those copies of "Left Behind"? Who is making the excuses for the Bush administration based almost solely on his blitherings about Jesus-the-philosopher? The influences you mention are surely important, but currently the most heavily used crutch employed by the neoconservatives is their power among evangelicals holding apocalyptic beliefs

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 15:30 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]Who's reading all those copies of "Left Behind"? Who is making the excuses for the Bush administration based almost solely on his blitherings about Jesus-the-philosopher? The influences you mention are surely important, but currently the most heavily used crutch employed by the neoconservatives is their power among evangelicals holding apocalyptic beliefs[/QUOTE]

If that were indeed the case, I suspect there would be many, many more political bones being thrown to the social-con/evangelicals from D.C. There aren't, so that shows me their supposed influence is largely a product of the mainstream, secular, anti-Bush/GOP media and a convenient whipping boy for the secular leftists in general.

Petr

2005-07-11 15:40 | User Profile

[FONT=Georgia][COLOR=Red][B][I] - "Bull. The belief in the Triune God of Christianity has had a marked and fundamental impact on Christian culture, society and conception of man and God. "[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT]

Indeed. I wonder whether Esoterist has heard about the problem of "[B]One and the Many[/B]" that has haunted pagan thinkers ever since the days of Parmenides and Heraclitus?

[url]http://www.freebooks.com/docs/24ea_43e.htm[/url]

[url]http://www.natreformassn.org/statesman/96/lcc.html[/url]

[FONT=Georgia][COLOR=Red][B][I] - "Petr's put some numbers up somewhere here concerning the real degenerecy in muslim societies somewhere."[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT]

Yes. Islam, with its neurotic separation of sexes and hyper-machismo, has fostered a veritable climate of [B]prison homosexuality[/B]. Serb Srdja Trifkovic comments:

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=DarkGreen][I]"[B]A Moslem who is the active partner in sexual relations with other men is not considered a Ã¢â¬ÅhomosexualÃ¢â¬Â (the word has no pre-modern Arabic equivalent); quite the contrary, his sexual domination of another man may even confer a status of hyper-masculinity. He may use other men as substitutes for women, and at the same time have great contempt for them.[/B] [B]This depraved view of sex, common in mainstream Moslem societies, is commonly found in the West only in prisons.[/B]

...

A 17th century French visitor to the Middle East went so far as to claim that Moslems were bisexual by nature, and many male authors gave descriptions of Ã¢â¬ÅlicentiousnessÃ¢â¬Â (lesbianism) among women in harems and bath houses. [B]Homosexuality became known to the English as the Ã¢â¬ÅPersianÃ¢â¬Â or Ã¢â¬ÅTurkishÃ¢â¬Â vice[/B].

This peculiar aspect of the Middle East has never entirely disappeared. The sight of men, even soldiers in uniform, strolling along a street hand in hand, strikes first-time visitors as extraordinary even today. The Moslem world enjoyed a reputation as a haven for sex with boys and men well into the twentieth century. [B]The proclivities of many Western authors like Gustave Flaubert, Oscar Wilde, or Andre Gide, reflected the pederast and homosexual attractions of the Islamic world[/B];"[/I][/COLOR][/FONT]

[url]http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5704[/url]

The financial corruption is also rampant in all Muslim countries, and always has been. The concept of "civic spirit" is alien to them, enriching one's own tribe, sect or family first being the main idea.

In accordance with the Islamic hypocrisy, alcohol might be no-no but drugs like opium and hashish have always been associated with the Middle East in the same way as pederasty has - ever wonder what reprobates like William S. Burroughs were doing in Morocco?

[COLOR=Sienna][SIZE=5]Low times[/SIZE]

[B]The drug problem

Bamdad B.
August 24, 2004
iranian.com[/B]

It's the end of the summer, and once again, a slew of relatives have returned to the US from their summer trips to Iran. And without exception, what I have heard from every one of them have been horror stories about drugs in Iran. What I am hearing is literally unbelievable.

Did you know...

[B]1) Tehran's daily opium consumption is over 4 tons a day (according to official Iranian government reports). Yes, 4 tons (metric) a day of opium is sold on the streets of Tehran.

2) Iran's opium addicts number greater than 2 million (according to the CIA).

3) Khamenei (yes, the Ayatollah, the "supreme leader") is an opium addict. [/B] [/COLOR]

[url]http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2004/August/Drugs/[/url]

Petr

Franco

2005-07-11 15:44 | User Profile

[QUOTE] At bottom it's just another tool for you to bash Christianity, Franco. [/QUOTE]

Actually, I only criticize the "modern," wimpy version of Christianity. In fact, give one example where I ever criticized Father Coughlin, Gerald L. K. Smith or similar types. I never have.

And to think that I thought we were soul-bonding, Tex. :jester:

xmetalhead

2005-07-11 15:48 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]There aren't, so that shows me their supposed influence is largely a product of the mainstream, secular, anti-Bush/GOP media and a convenient whipping boy for the secular leftists in general.[/QUOTE]

The mainstream media is anti-Bush/GOP?? I mean, they've always been anti-Christian, but the mainstream media is part and parcel of the governments' propaganda apparatus and rarely criticize George W Bush in any harsh manner. Not that he doesn't deserve to be impeached and/or jailed as a traitor and war criminal, but that's another story.

Or do you think Bush is getting a bad or unfair rap in the press?

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 16:11 | User Profile

[QUOTE=xmetalhead]The mainstream media is anti-Bush/GOP?? I mean, they've always been anti-Christian, but the mainstream media is part and parcel of the governments' propaganda apparatus and rarely criticize George W Bush in any harsh manner. Not that he doesn't deserve to be impeached and/or jailed as a traitor and war criminal, but that's another story.

Or do you think Bush is getting a bad or unfair rap in the press?[/QUOTE]

I'm certainly no Bush fan, x. You know that. But I don't think it can be denied that the mainstream media is quite hostile to Bush and the GOP in general. They've never missed an opportunity to portray him as some kind of bumbling, wacked-out born-again evangelical who hears the voice of God talking in his head.

weisbrot

2005-07-11 16:53 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident] But I don't think it can be denied that the mainstream media is quite hostile to Bush and the GOP in general. They've never missed an opportunity to portray him as some kind of bumbling, wacked-out born-again evangelical who hears the voice of God talking in his head.[/QUOTE]

Seems like the media- entertainment, infotainment, all of it- lets Bush off the hook for the worst of his sins. Even Michael Moore doesn't take him to task for kowtowing to Israel; the words "Jewish" or "Israel" didn't even appear in Fahrenheit 9/11 as far as I can remember. As for portraying Bush as a bumbling, wacked out born again, it would seem that in this case they're on the money. Perhaps the nature of Bush's God complex is so apparent that they can use it as a hook to hang the cloak of disguise over the rest of his treasonous activities, as well as to make them palatable to the Judeo- worshipping Christians that are in the Bush base. Remember the false prophets, Tex.

[QUOTE]If that were indeed the case, I suspect there would be many, many more political bones being thrown to the social-con/evangelicals from D.C. There aren't...[/QUOTE]

This might indeed be true. But to my thinking it is due to the lack of protest put up by the spineless leadership of the mainstreams. So far, every Promise Keeper and deacon in the land has seemed to be satisfied by the infrequent bones that have been thrown. The Bush reaction to the tepid con criticism of Alberto Gonzales shows either how little he cares about social conservative "Christian" opinion, or how little he thinks they'll stray regardless, or both. I tend to think that BushRove know that evangelicals will stay with them regardless, since as noted in Freeperland there is "no where else to turn".

Perhaps a Gonzales selection will make a Hillary campaign unnecessary. Could be we'll need some sturdy lamp posts, if Shlafly et al can continue to turn up the heat. But somehow I doubt it- the Promise Keepers are too strong in their effeminate feel-good JudeoChristian fortress of tolerance...

mwdallas

2005-07-11 17:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE]If that were indeed the case, I suspect there would be many, many more political bones being thrown to the social-con/evangelicals from D.C. There aren't, so that shows me their supposed influence is largely a product of the mainstream, secular, anti-Bush/GOP media and a convenient whipping boy for the secular leftists in general.[/QUOTE]You're right, TD -- they really haven't exercised much influence on foreign policy. Their having been misled by false prophets affects foreign policy in a different way -- by the neutralization of a large mass of patriotically inclined (but misled) Americans who would otherwise oppose such policy.

Walter Yannis

2005-07-11 17:28 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]If that were indeed the case, I suspect there would be many, many more political bones being thrown to the social-con/evangelicals from D.C. There aren't, so that shows me their supposed influence is largely a product of the mainstream, secular, anti-Bush/GOP media and a convenient whipping boy for the secular leftists in general.[/QUOTE]

I think they throw them as many sops as they have to but no more.

The Freeper Judeo-Christian types seem incapable of even recognizing the contempt the neokhans feel for them, much less taking umbrage at it.

Thus there capacity for sneering abuse seems unlimited.

Walter Yannis

2005-07-11 17:31 | User Profile

Israeli interests were also downplayed in the BBC's otherwise fine "Power of Nightmares."

Nobody seems to have the balls to really talk about the elephant in our collective dining room.

Petr

2005-07-11 17:37 | User Profile

[COLOR=Purple][FONT=Arial][B][I] - "The Freeper Judeo-Christian types seem incapable of even recognizing the contempt the neokhans feel for them, much less taking umbrage at it."[/I][/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

Neocons are here showing a classic case of "huckster's contempt" for their dumb clients. A rather common psychological phenomenon.

Petr

weisbrot

2005-07-11 17:53 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]You're right, TD -- they really haven't exercised much influence on foreign policy. Their having been misled by false prophets affects foreign policy in a different way -- by the neutralization of a large mass of patriotically inclined (but misled) Americans who would otherwise oppose such policy.[/QUOTE]

[I]Colin Powell [/I] didn't exercise much influence over US foreign policy- he just stood behind the podium and repeated the yellow-cake lies that Perle, Wolfowitz, Libby and Feith fed into his ear. The evangelicals lack of direct influence over US foreign policy says little about their fundamental power, and if I'm not misreading you, MW, you seem to agree.

The original statement in question made by [I][B]Angler[/B] [/I] was: [QUOTE]But the main point is that Jews are greatly empowered by a large number of Christians who are sympathetic to them for religious reasons. Even many (most?) non-Zionist Christians feel a kinship with the Jews simply because they think of the Jews as their "spiritual forefathers." And these factors, rather than secularism, are in large part why Jews have been able to attain such power over the heavily-Christian US[/QUOTE]

and I sadly have to admit this to be true.

After all, as it has been said elsewhere, the jews only have a special history because of their infiltration, influence and antagonism of two thousand years within Western Christendom. No more, no less.

I think the Jewish use of influence among the large numbers of evangelicals who hold or are sympathetic with the beliefs of apocalypic eschatology is only the latest manifestation of that long march through Western Christendom.

Guard the wheat, but still beware the chaff.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 18:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]The original statement in question made by x was:

Quote: But the main point is that Jews are greatly empowered by a large number of Christians who are sympathetic to them for religious reasons. Even many (most?) non-Zionist Christians feel a kinship with the Jews simply because they think of the Jews as their "spiritual forefathers." And these factors, rather than secularism, are in large part why Jews have been able to attain such power over the heavily-Christian US

and I sadly have to admit this to be true.

OK, now I'm confused. I'm a little slow so you're gonna have to spell this out for me.

What 'power' are we talking about? Domestic agendas or foreign policy? The war in Iraq?

weisbrot

2005-07-11 19:46 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]OK, now I'm confused. I'm a little slow so you're gonna have to spell this out for me.

What 'power' are we talking about? Domestic agendas or foreign policy? The war in Iraq?[/QUOTE]

Exactly so.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 20:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]Exactly so.[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes. Exactly.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-11 20:55 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]the cowardly suicide bombers [/QUOTE]I do not think suicide bombers are cowardly at all.

And how is what they do significantly different than that of an infantry soldier subject to the survival odds of, say, the battle of Liepzig (Napoleonic wars) or Gettysburg - other than the relatively obvious fact that it requires far more self discipline for a suicide bomber to carry out his mission alone, than it does for an infantryman to march forward when commanded to do so by a sidearm wielding officer behind him.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 21:03 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I do not think suicide bombers are cowardly at all.

So you morally equate the indiscriminate killing of civilian men, women and children with soldiers marching into war against great odds?

Courage is going forth into battle knowing the enemy will fight back, not blowing oneself up in the middle of innocents. The latter is not reflective of courage. It's simply pre-meditated murder.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-11 21:11 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]So you morally equate the indiscriminate killing of civilian men, women and children with soldiers marching into war against great odds?[/QUOTE]It is not indiscriminate when they have no other means of fighting back. They conceive of the real enemy as the hostile population which sends the soldiers, and that this population has the democratic means of stopping the soldiers from being sent, but perhaps enjoys the televised images of their armed forces slaughtering defensless, primitive armies, and vastly more innocent civilians on Moslem soil.

Facts are facts.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 21:33 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]It is not indiscriminate when they have no other means of fighing back. They conceive of the real enemy as the hostile population which sends the soldiers, and that this population has the democratic means of stopping the soldiers from being sent, but perhaps enjoys the televised images of their armed forces slaughtering defensless, primitive armies, and vastly more innocent civilians on Moslem soil.

Facts are facts.[/QUOTE]

OK. I'll be sure to remind you of that if, God forbid, it's your wife and children killed in the next subway bomb. Hopefully it would be of some comfort.

I'm not interested in how they perceive things. I'm interested in objective right and wrong. I'm certain that Henry Lee Lucas thought he was doing the right thing and had no other means of expressing hisself. That doesn't make him courageous or morally in the right.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-11 21:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]OK. I'll be sure to remind you of that if, God forbid, it's your wife and children killed in the next subway bomb.[/QUOTE]You and I do not live in a state that they have any particular interest in targeting, PTL!

But your point is well taken. Once the killing starts, humankind is programed not to empathize with the reality which motivates the other side. I am as pre-programmed as anyone in that respect.

What the moslems cannot see is that the U.S. and Britain are not democracies in any real sense, but well oiled dictatorships that routinely thwart the popular will when that will cannot be molded by the media. In truth, ordinary civilians have no ability to stop anything and, in fact, have become so totally disenfranchised that they are having their countries stolen from them.

If anything can justify their actions, it would be our own false advertising about the nature of our political system.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-11 22:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]But your point is well taken. Once the killing starts, humankind is programed not to empathize with the reality which motivates the other side. I am as pre-programmed as anyone in that respect.[/QUOTE]

But Y, the point is not about being pre-programmed and empathizing with an enemy. Did we empathize with the American Injuns when a day or two after a skirmish with our Calvary they sneak attacked a nearby settler's home, burning, killing, raping and kidnapping the unfortunate American settlers who were only seeking a peaceful existence and properous farm? Of course not.

The point is there is objective right and wrong--morally justified self-defense/just war and barbaric murder. If we are pre-programmed at all, then it is with this basic, universal sense of right and wrong with regards to killing given to humanity by God and shared to a greater or lesser degree by almost all cultures. The natural Law or Lewis' Tao, if you will. That said, when someone is guilty of murder then we judge them so and execute them.

il ragno

2005-07-12 00:28 | User Profile

Did we empathize with the American Injuns when a day or two after a skirmish with our Calvary they sneak attacked a nearby settler's home, burning, killing, raping and kidnapping the unfortunate American settlers who were only seeking a peaceful existence and properous farm?

By your own logic, Tex, does that justify putting on a false face of friendship and saying, "Here. Wrap your children in these warm blankets" when they've been carefully riddled with smallpox?

That's the problem I have with "Christian Nationalism". It conveniently excuses our sins (because ours is the Only True Religion), then rifles desperately through Scripture for any kind of bottle-courage justification to smite the infidel to the last man for the 'crime' of returning fire . Plenty of Christians out there who can dig up a quote or two taking us off the hook morally for the practice of chattel-slavery, but of course these are the same Christians who bleat about 'chains' at the prospect of a despotic federal government robbing our 'freedoms'.

The fact is that we've undergone a 15-year news blackout on the unpleasant details of our various bully-boy campaigns in the Middle East. We'll hear Maddy Albright laugh off the half-million Iraqi children and elderly dead as a direct result of US policy as 'worth it' - mind you, she never DENIED it, but instread justified it - so there's no hiding, Freeperlike, behind fantasies of that body count being a Dan Rather DemonRat lie that never happened. Yet, because it's only referred to after the fact, in passing, between talking heads on political talk shows, it's as if didn't really happen.....because it has to be on videotape, or on page 1 of the paper, to be really serious - to be worthy of any serious attention. So the only decent thing for the Arab to do, I guess, is to just suck it up as the cost of doing business, and let bygones be bygones....because it couldn't have been all that bad - it wasn't on tv!

We have no idea but vague ballpark numbers on exactly how many Iraqis have been mass-murdered during these two exercises in regime-change and 'liberation' because the White House will make life very very unpleasant for the media outlet that tries to arrive at a real number....and the Jew-controlled Big Media venues will be right there to enforce that pariah status. Instead we only hear about our guys killed by 'insurgents', and of course Israeli mothers and their children blown up on a bus, or in a shopping center. For all the logical outrage we feel hearing Perle or Rumsfeld muttering 'collateral damage' we never go beyond that sort of intellectualized distaste...because? You tell me. Surely the effects of a 'smart bomb' or two, or a night of 'shock and awe' bombardment broadcast like a Disney special to the folks at home, are at least comparable to an explosive planted on a subway? Surely God Himself doesn't value 3000 dead at the hands of suicide pilots above 500,000 children dead at the hands of policy wonks with clean, clean hands and shiny, manicured fingernails?

Our outrage - like our consciences - are, more and more, the result of what we are told plus a sizable dollop of what we secretly don't wanna know. It's valid to say "I'll be sure to remind you of that if, God forbid, it's your wife and children killed in the next subway bomb", but it's just as valid to say "I'll be sure to remind you of that when a foreign army of occupation kicks in your doors searching for rebel activity, and holds a rifle to your kid's head to terrify you and your wife into instant cooperation because they don't have a friggin' clue what language it is you're speaking....and then bulldozes your house because, * it, better not to take a chance; these people are all born liars anyway" ....the problem is *nobody ever says it.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 00:55 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]By your own logic, Tex, does that justify putting on a false face of friendship and saying, "Here. Wrap your children in these warm blankets" when they've been carefully riddled with smallpox?

I'd have to find the post, but I think it was established here on this board that we had no knowledge of germs or the ability of blankets to carry smallpox back in those days.

That's the problem I have with "Christian Nationalism". It conveniently excuses our sins (because ours is the Only True Religion), then rifles desperately through Scripture for any kind of bottle-courage justification to smite the infidel to the last man for the 'crime' of returning fire.

That sounds great IR, but unfortunately it is not what I've argued here on this thread. Thinking terrorists are cowardly scum that should be eliminated does not equate to support of my own government's actions in Iraq or anywhere else in the Middle East. Likewise, just because muslims are opposed to Israel and jews doesn't mean I need or want to buddy-up with them, much less cheer on and laud suicide bombers who murder innocents as heroic. I think I've been pretty consistent arguing for the complete withdrawal of any and all American involvement in that armpit of the world outside of peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with those nations that so desire. I believe that's the objectively right and moral position.

Bardamu

2005-07-12 01:58 | User Profile

There is going to be a civil war in Europe between Muslim and Whites. I really don't understand how we can see them as allies? One of the reasons we dislike Jews is their part in letting the Muslims in, so how does that translate into Muslims being our friends? :wallbash:

il ragno

2005-07-12 01:58 | User Profile

I think it was established here on this board that we had no knowledge of germs or the ability of blankets to carry smallpox back in those days.

Just dumb luck, huh? That'll be news to John Chivington. Come to think of it, Sherman's March to the Sea was similarly 'Christian' in nature. Maybe he had no knowledge that sending drunken troops to loot, rape, plunder and burn every structure before them could possibly cause any sort of loss of life or devastation.

That sounds great IR, but unfortunately it is not what I've argued here on this thread. Thinking terrorists are cowardly scum that should be eliminated does not equate to support of my own government's actions in Iraq or anywhere else in the Middle East. I think outside of peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with those nations that so desire.

But you are doing that! Because you're equating a near-medieval sinkhole with a first-world technological power. Ie, I'm sorry our government has been killing your people for 15 years - but you people aren't even human, with your cowardly terrorist attacks on the 'innocent'! "Arguing for the complete withdrawal of any and all American involvement in that armpit of the world" is very nice, but:

A) it's meaningless to the countries being invaded since your good intentions have no effect whatsoever on official policy, as opposed to Bill Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz, whose influence has only grown stronger, not weaker;

B) and recent history shows that wars of empire are only abandoned when the price of empire becomes too high for the conqueror to bear

Since America no longer really gives a damn about its soldiers any longer (if you're one of the chattering classes, it's just somebody else's kid over there anyway), the price taken out in dead troops will [u]always[/u] be bearable. (Just send more troops. They're not gonna push US around, by God!) So therefore the price must now be extracted from the comfortable civilians far away, who blather about 'democracy' and 'fighting tyrants' and 'prevailing at any price' from their La-Z-Boys, who have the luxury of changing the channel when the news from Iraq comes on to irritate them with all that depressing talk about 'insurgents' and 'suicide bombers' and 'body counts'.

Terrorism is just the new coin of the realm: the method by which the people we once comfortably kicked the shit out of - with no risk to ourselves - now use our cravenness, our decadence and our much-vaunted technology against us to extract some payback.

But that's not how the game is supposed to be played! Tell that to the people of London and Dresden and Nagasaki and Sarajevo. That's how the game is now played, and will be for quite some time to come.

il ragno

2005-07-12 02:07 | User Profile

There is going to be a civil war in Europe between Muslim and Whites. I really don't understand how we can see them as allies?

Nobody's talking about allies. The immigration disaster has been just that. But the [I]same people[/I] who brought you the immigration disaster are bringing you World War 4: Zionist Jews, statist Republicans, lunatic Christians and our corporate oligarchs. Could this 'clash of civilizations' have even been conceivable 40 years ago? Is it worth the blood and tears it'll surely cost to win to ensure ther longevity of Standard Oil and Coca-Cola and the State of Israel? One rots your teeth and the other two poison the air you breathe, after all.

With friends like that.....

Ponce

2005-07-12 03:43 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]There is going to be a civil war in Europe between Muslim and Whites. I really don't understand how we can see them as allies? One of the reasons we dislike Jews is their part in letting the Muslims in, so how does that translate into Muslims being our friends? :wallbash:[/QUOTE]

Bardamu? Muslims vs Whites in Europe and Mex vs Whites in the US and as you know the Mex are helping the Muslims infiltrate into the US......so, it is Muslimf + Mex vs Whites.

Hummmmmm mi no peachi ingli mi epanis, heheheheheheh. :biggrin:

Yggdrasil

2005-07-12 06:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Thinking terrorists are cowardly scum * * *[/QUOTE] I never said that moslem suicide bombers were not murderers or that they should not be given the death penalty. I just don't agree that they are cowards, and in fact thinking of them as cowards and calling them cowards is a strategic mistake because it tends to underestimate their determination and persistence.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 07:04 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]Come to think of it, Sherman's March to the Sea was similarly 'Christian' in nature. Maybe he had no knowledge that sending drunken troops to loot, rape, plunder and burn every structure before them could possibly cause any sort of loss of life or devastation.

Who or what are you arguing with, IR? Sorry, but I'm not seeing your point here.

But you are doing that! Because you're equating a near-medieval sinkhole with a first-world technological power...Terrorism is just the new coin of the realm: the method by which the people we once comfortably kicked the shit out of - with no risk to ourselves - now use our cravenness, our decadence and our much-vaunted technology against us to extract some payback.

Would that you gave impoverished, inner-city negroes growing up in the projects to the sound of nightly gunfire so much slack when they make their way out into the suburbs to rob, rape and kill whitey, the great oppressor.

But that's not how the game is supposed to be played! Tell that to the people of London and Dresden and Nagasaki and Sarajevo. That's how the game is now played, and will be for quite some time to come.[/QUOTE]

Again, who is arguing otherwise? Just like the Red Man here in America, killing innocent, civilized men, women and children is standard operating procedure for savage muslim filth. Surely this is common knowledge. That's why since the first Gulf War, which I strongly opposed, I have argued for the foreign policy of George Washington and principled isolationism and armed neutrality. Interventionism inevitably leads to blowback at a dear cost to our own people, the greater part of whom never had a say in whether we intervened in the first place.

However, I will not laud suicide bombers and commend their murder of innocents as courageous and on an equal moral threshold of say, Travis, Bowie and Crockett at the Alamo. That's just absurd and offensive to any civilized person's sensibilities.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 07:14 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I just don't agree that they are cowards, and in fact thinking of them as cowards and calling them cowards is a strategic mistake because it tends to underestimate their determination and persistence.[/QUOTE]

Or it helps us grow to despise them and their actions, not empathize with them, be sympathetic and try to understand their personal plight and steel our determination to put them down once and for all. I mean come on, should we have made the Black Panthers out to be courageous? The Carr brothers?

I just don't see the utility in taking a Phil Donahue approach towards these people.

il ragno

2005-07-12 07:44 | User Profile

Would that you gave impoverished, inner-city negroes growing up in the projects to the sound of nightly gunfire so much slack when they make their way out into the suburbs to rob, rape and kill whitey, the great oppressor.

The blacks are our permanent curse for the disastrous hubris of, first, slavery for profit, and second, emancipation for political gain. But that isn't even analogous with this situation which involves a native population resisting an occupying power. And it isn't even as simple as that, because the invasion has collapsed whatever capability Iraq had of keeping neighboring extremists outside its borders. Another American innovation we're bringing to the Middle East.

You're reading

[QUOTE]Terrorism is just the new coin of the realm: the method by which the people we once comfortably kicked the shit out of - with no risk to ourselves - now use our cravenness, our decadence and our much-vaunted technology against us to extract some payback. [/QUOTE]

and seeing a value judgment; it isn't intended as one. It's a statement of fact. Just as the Muslims in America are far more productive and law-abiding a group than our own native-born blacks is a statement of fact.

And there's a difference between a jihad Islamic-causin'-panic and a Carr Brother. The Carr Brothers begged for leniency in court; the jihadi woulda blown himself up with his victims.

Do they belong here? Listen, if we were talking about 1950 immigration levels, a scattered few members of any/everybody certanly wouldn't do any harm. And if we hadn't opened the door in '65, prompted and noodged into it by the Jewish left, they wouldn't be here in the numbers they are nor would they be legally agitating us to enter en masse. But the Muslims are really Europe's problem...we have a far more pressing problem with the mestizos. Who nobody invited in.

I will not laud suicide bombers and commend their murder of innocents as courageous and on an equal moral threshold of say, Travis, Bowie and Crockett at the Alamo.

Nobody's saying you should.

But you should at least feel equally repulsed at bombing raids launched over sovereign nations. Where the terrorists make thumbs-up signs, the death they cause never touches them, and the world gets to see Katie Couric interview their mom on morning television.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 08:01 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]But you should at least feel equally repulsed at bombing raids launched over sovereign nations. Where the terrorists make thumbs-up signs, the death they cause never touches them, and the world gets to see Katie Couric interview their mom on morning television.[/QUOTE]

Well, there can be no doubt that I have been against both wars in Iraq and any and all American intervention in the Middle East from day one, for what it's worth and granted it aint worth much. But to label the great majority of Americans who are supporting our troops in the current campaign, even if somewhat misguided, as terrorists...well let's just say that's a dark abyss I'm nowhere near ready to fall into.

Good discussion. Thanks.

Okiereddust

2005-07-12 08:43 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident][quote=Franco]Just think: Jews have led the leftist, feminist and multiculturalist movements in the West. Yet the Christian leaders say.....nothing. If you really that concerned about it you would join Esoterist in moving to Riyadh asap. At bottom it's just another tool for you to bash Christianity, Franco.

Same old song and dance. Take two thousand three hundred and six. :yawn:[/QUOTE]Franco's critique of Christianity is really quintessentially Jewish. Whenever there is something wrong in the western world they don't like, blame the Christian leaders for it. Except it is utterly crude and wthout subtlety, unlike the jews.

If so much of the Christians today in a choice netween views that obviously trend toward a clash between jewish and WN viewpoints choose the jewish tending views, it is because of the basic repugnency of the WN's personalities and viewpoints. They clearly in a personal manner are IMO the most odious and implacable Christian-haters in the world. Jews and philosemitic gentile liberals at least cloak their hatred generally, and appear open to reason.

Much of pagan WN really from a Christian viewpoint epitimizes all that is sickening about judaism, without any of the sugar and spice. I think small as it is the neo-Nazi's and pagan WN's represent a significant factor in the general pro-Israel stance among the American evangelical world.

Okiereddust

2005-07-12 08:52 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]Seems like the media- entertainment, infotainment, all of it- lets Bush off the hook for the worst of his sins. Even Michael Moore doesn't take him to task for kowtowing to Israel; the words "Jewish" or "Israel" didn't even appear in Fahrenheit 9/11 as far as I can remember. As for portraying Bush as a bumbling, wacked out born again, it would seem that in this case they're on the money. Perhaps the nature of Bush's God complex is so apparent that they can use it as a hook to hang the cloak of disguise over the rest of his treasonous activities, as well as to make them palatable to the Judeo- worshipping Christians that are in the Bush base. Remember the false prophets, Tex. ...[/QUOTE]I think of course this aspect about Bush's critics represents a big reason for the public pro_Israel stances popular among the Christian Right leaders. While these people are generally savaged mercilessly by the liberals (including many things you'd think the WN would remember, but which they never give them any credit for) when they turn to Israel, they get a clear immunity whenever the subject of Israel comes up.

Bardamu

2005-07-12 12:57 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Franco's critique of Christianity is really quintessentially Jewish. Whenever there is something wrong in the western world they don't like, blame the Christian leaders for it. Except it is utterly crude and wthout subtlety, unlike the jews.

You, the complete pagan hater, are being hypocritical complaining about pagan Christian haters. You remind me of the Jew who thinks hate is one way street and only they are allowed to indulge it. Also contradictory is your tarring of the entire WN movement as repugnant to Christians, when many WN are Christians. The two designations are not incompatible. David Duke calls himself a Christian and he is easily the most admired WN leader out there, by everyone, Asatruer included.

weisbrot

2005-07-12 13:23 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Much of pagan WN really from a Christian viewpoint epitimizes all that is sickening about judaism, without any of the sugar and spice. I think small as it is the neo-Nazi's and pagan WN's represent a significant factor in the general pro-Israel stance among the American evangelical world.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely right. Which is why nearly all of the public neo-nazi leadership is either on the payroll or under the thumb of organizations- governmental and otherwise- who diametrically oppose traditional Western Christian culture.

You know- the Episcopalians.

If it can be called a movement at all, the neonazi/pagan wing of WN is so thoroughly compromised as to be counterproductive and is to be avoided with predjudice.

Bardamu

2005-07-12 13:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]Absolutely If it can be called a movement at all, the neonazi/pagan wing of WN is so thoroughly compromised as to be counterproductive and is to be avoided with predjudice.[/QUOTE]

At least now you are being accurate with your language. And no it is not a movement, it is just a tendency, kinda like Christian nationalism. But there is nothing inherently antagonistic between Christianity and Asatru, except for Christian teachings. It is all so inconsequential as to hardly matter. The revolt of white people has next to nothing to do with whether you guys like paganism, or whether they like you, it is just not a factor.

Franco

2005-07-12 14:30 | User Profile

Are you dismissing Dr. William Pierce's work - many years of it - with a wave of your hand? Dr. Pierce educated thousands of White people about nationalism. Have Christian preachers done more? If so, what are their names?

As for my comments about Christians being "Jewish" comments, well, that's almost funny. Especially since I refer to the modern, wimpy variety of Christianity [i.e. Judeo-Christianity]. As I noted earlier, I have no criticism of Father Coughlin and his type.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-12 15:13 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Thinking terrorists are cowardly scum that should be eliminated does not equate to support of my own government's actions in Iraq or anywhere else in the Middle East.[/QUOTE]It certainly does!!!

When moslems have no means of resisting our bombings and slaughters on their lands other than suicide attacks, eliminating terrorists does indeed equate to support for our governments actions. Eliminating the terrorists eliminates all opposition to that policy.

In fact, a conjoining of rabid hatred of "cowardly terrorists" with self righteous displays of moral indignation at our government's mideast slaughters is exactly what our government needs to continue those slaughters.

We have a moral duty to defend ourselves against attack by suicide bombers, but we also have a duty to do so in a way that does not lend support to our government's policy in the mid-east. The correct moral posture, it seems to me, is to declare that "we will defend ourselves against suicide attacks but we do not feel terrorized by them and will not allow our emotions to be swayed in such a way that lends comfort and support for our government's mid-east slaughters".

Even more offensive than our government's slaughters of moslems in the mid-east, is their long run objective for being there, which is to cripple the population with MTV so that the girls all end up as promiscuous whores and the males end up playing video games and masturbating all day, while the IP and their dark allies get to sift through the rubble and sample what delights and amuses them. The whore houses of Tel Aviv need more cheap labor.

Don't give it to them.

Okiereddust

2005-07-12 15:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Are you dismissing Dr. William Pierce's work - many years of it - with a wave of your hand? Dr. Pierce educated thousands of White people about nationalism. Have Christian preachers done more? If so, what are their names? Pierce puts out a few tracts on jews and the media which a few people read. Christians put out the entire substantive content of our culture today, which wouldn't exist at all with, that which the pagan WN now try to take credit and pawn off the blame.

Call it mirror-image parasitism.

As for my comments about Christians being "Jewish" comments, well, that's almost funny. Especially since I refer to the modern, wimpy variety of Christianity [i.e. Judeo-Christianity]. As I noted earlier, I have no criticism of Father Coughlin and his type.

----------[/QUOTE]You don't have anything good to say. You say they are not prominent and don't count.

Okiereddust

2005-07-12 15:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=weisbrot]Absolutely right. Which is why nearly all of the public neo-nazi leadership is either on the payroll or under the thumb of organizations- governmental and otherwise- who diametrically oppose traditional Western Christian culture.

You know- the Episcopalians.

If it can be called a movement at all, the neonazi/pagan wing of WN is so thoroughly compromised as to be counterproductive and is to be avoided with predjudice.[/QUOTE]Sort of the point I was trying o make [URL=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17820]here at SF[/URL]. It doesn't go over too well.

Franco

2005-07-12 15:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE]You don't have anything good to say. You say they are not prominent and don't count.[/QUOTE]

When did I ever say that?

In fact, I resent being called 'anti-Christian' when my comments have never referred to Father Coughlin, Gerald L. K. Smith and similar people whom I more-or-less respect.

Some people are reading things into my ideology which don't exist. I admit that I am not religious, but that doesn't mean that I dislike, or hate, Christians.

[In fact, I often think that Christians hate "pagans" more than pagans hate Christians. Remember the "purge of the pagans" here at Original Dissent?].

Quantrill

2005-07-12 16:19 | User Profile

[quote=Il Ragno]Terrorism is just the new coin of the realm: the method by which the people we once comfortably kicked the shit out of - with no risk to ourselves - now use our cravenness, our decadence and our much-vaunted technology against us to extract some payback. As Pat Buchanan stated, 'Terrorism is the war of the powerless. War is the terrorism of the powerful.' I certainly do not agree with the Islamicists' goals, but their methods of killing civilians are no more dishonorable than our methods of killing civilians. That said, I will always fight for the survival of my kin and race, no matter who is right and who is wrong.

Okiereddust

2005-07-12 16:50 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]At least now you are being accurate with your language. And no it is not a movement, it is just a tendency, kinda like Christian nationalism. But there is nothing inherently antagonistic between Christianity and Asatru, except for Christian teachings. It is all so inconsequential as to hardly matter. Yes it is all so inonantagonistic and inconsequential that a lot of WN's can't avoid whining about Christianity constantly.

Granted, you don't as far as I can understand belong in that category. But the fact of the matter is a good portion of the WN world obstentatiously sneers its superiority constantly at Christianity.

It does reveal a pathology of self-hatred of ones own race and culture really, which while arguably is itself incited by a lot of jewish origin attitudes, is really worse than judaism's hostlity toward Christianity, in the same way that Stalins crimes were worse than Hitler's. Its directed at ones own people, not outsiders.

I obviously disagree, but when a some Christians choose to favor Israel, its not without reason. Given the choice between erudite, sophisticated jews with great power and influence, and missing link hyena's who can't help but whine all the time that you owe them a deep debt, who would you choose?

Most Christians view WN, and not without some reason, as a demonic, fanatically anti-Christian system of barbarism which they have no choice but to oppose.

The revolt of white people has next to nothing to do with whether you guys like paganism, or whether they like you, it is just not a factor.[/QUOTE]A non-factor you guys again can't help talking incessently about when given the opportunity.

mwdallas

2005-07-12 17:09 | User Profile

[QUOTE]After all, as it has been said elsewhere, the jews only have a special history because of their infiltration, influence and antagonism of two thousand years within Western Christendom. No more, no less.

This has been going on since the 17th century, if not longer.

See Graetz, and Manasseh ben Israel's exploitation of Cromwell through messianism:

[url]http://www.saltshakers.com/lm/GraetzD.rtf[/url]

[QUOTE]Among the Puritans, therefore, were many earnest admirers of Ã¢â¬ÅGod's people," and Cromwell was one of them. It seemed a marvel that the people, or a remnant of the people, whom God had distinguished by great favor and stern discipline, should still exist. [B]A desire was excited in the hearts of the Puritans to see this living wonder, the Jewish people, with their own eyes, to bring Jews to England[/B], and, by making them part of the theocratic community about to be established, stamp it with the seal of completion. The sentiments of the Puritans towards the Jews were expressed in Oliver Cromwell's observation, " Great is my sympathy with this poor people, whom God chose, and to whom He gave His law; it rejects Jesus, because it does not recognize him as the Messiah." [B]Cromwell dreamt of a reconciliation of the Old and the New Testament,of an intimate connection between the Jewish people of God and the English Puritan theocracy. But other Puritans were so absorbed in the Old Testament that the New Testament was of no importance. Especially the visionaries in Cromwell's army and among the members of Parliament, who were hoping for the Fifth Monarchy, or the reign of the saints, assigned to the Jewish people a glorious position in the expected millennium. A Puritan preacher, Nathaniel Holmes (Holmesius), wished, according to the letter of many prophetic verses, to become the servant of Israel, and serve him on bended knees.[/B] The more the tension in England increased through the imprisonment of the king, the dissensions between the Presbyterian Long Parliament and the Puritan army, the civil war, the execution of King Charles, and the establishment of a republic in England, the more public life and religious thought assumed Jewish coloring. [B]The only thing wanting to make one think himself in Judea was for the orators in Parliament to speak Hebrew. [/B] One author proposed the seventh day as the day of rest, and in a work showed the holiness of this day, and the duty of the English people to honor it. This was in the beginning of 1649. Parliament, it is true; condemned this work to be burnt as heretical, scandalous, and profane, and sentenced the printer and author to punishment. But the Israelite spirit aniong the Puritans, especially among the Levelers, or ultra-republicans, was not suppressed by these means. Many wished the government to declare the Torah to be the code for England.[/QUOTE]

See also David S. Katz's works such as Philo-Semitism and the Readmission of the Jews to England, 1603-1655:

[url]http://www.tau.ac.il/humanities/history/files/Katz.html[/url]

Ponce

2005-07-12 17:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I never said that moslem suicide bombers were not murderers or that they should not be given the death penalty. I just don't agree that they are cowards, and in fact thinking of them as cowards and calling them cowards is a strategic mistake because it tends to underestimate their determination and persistence.[/QUOTE]

A terrorist or a hero depend at what end of the gun you are.

The IDF have standing order to kill Palestinian children, are those soldiers heros of terrorists?

American troops are killing Iraqis civilians holding no weapons at a range of 1,000 yards and more with their M-81A1 (.50 caliber) for sport, are they (the American soldiers) heros or terrorists?

This time around we have killed over 150,000 Iraqis civilians and you don't even read about it in the news, what would happen if those were American civilians?.....and you don't expect them to fight Americans?

By our actions we are the ones creating "terrorists" and each day that we are in Iraq we created 200 more "terrorists".

LIke I said before, I admire more the one that give his life for his belief than the one that presses a button in order to send a missile to kill someone.

I only hope that when the US is invaded we act that way and with the same fortitude.

Franco

2005-07-12 17:34 | User Profile

[QUOTE]It does reveal a pathology of self-hatred of ones own race and culture really, [/QUOTE]

Ohhh....so White Nationalists hate their White culture, huh?? What books have you been reading, Okie? Books written by Sol Goldsilversteinbergwitzfeld?

It's not my fault that modern Christian leaders sit around and say nothing while the Jews dominate our culture, e.g. movies, magazines, the media. Don't blame the "Nazi pagans" for that.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 17:39 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Ponce]The IDF have standing order to kill Palestinian children, are those soldiers heros of terrorists?

Source?

American troops are killing Iraqis civilians holding no weapons at a range of 1,000 yards and more with their M-81A1 (.50 caliber) for sport, are they (the American soldiers) heros or terrorists?

Source?

This time around we have killed over 150,000 Iraqis civilians...

Source?

Texas Dissident

2005-07-12 17:45 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]It's not my fault that modern Christian leaders sit around and say nothing while the Jews dominate our culture, e.g. movies, magazines, the media. Don't blame the "Nazi pagans" for that.[/QUOTE]

OK, I won't. I think "nazi pagans" have plenty of blame covering them already for being likely agent provacateurs out to discredit genuine American nationalism and hamstring our sincere efforts of credible growth and effective change.

But that's just me and may or may not reflect the opinions of the OD community at large.

Franco

2005-07-12 18:00 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]OK, I won't. I think "nazi pagans" have plenty of blame covering them already for being likely agent provacateurs out to discredit genuine American nationalism and hamstring our sincere efforts of credible growth and effective change.

But that's just me and may or may not reflect the opinions of the OD community at large.[/QUOTE]

No doubt, there are some agents in White Nationalism who want to hinder the movement. Best bet: watch who regularly criticizes other White Nationalists with little or no good reason for doing so. [Key words: little or no good reason].

Franco

2005-07-12 18:05 | User Profile

But that's just me and may or may not reflect the opinions of the OD community at large.[/QUOTE]

And by the way, just for the record, Nazism DID work. The only reason it failed was because FDR, Chamberlain, Churchill and their Jew-Jewy cabals sent soldiers overseas to nip Hitler in the bud for world Jewry. The average citizen in Nazi Germany circa 1938 was well-off, healthy and proud.

Petr

2005-07-12 18:34 | User Profile

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=Sienna][B][I] - "And by the way, just for the record, Nazism DID work." [/I] [/B] [/COLOR] [/FONT]

Not if you ask people like Poles, Serbs or Russians. Communism also "worked" for Jews...

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=Sienna][B][I] - "The average citizen in Nazi Germany circa 1938 was well-off, healthy and proud."[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT]

And THEN Nazis set out to take [I]lebensraum[/I] from Slavs, ending with Slavic armies overrunning Berlin.

Petr

il ragno

2005-07-12 20:52 | User Profile

As usual after Okie throws in his two cents, one's a Canadian penny and the other's a washer.

Yes it is all so inonantagonistic and inconsequential that a lot of WN's can't avoid whining about Christianity constantly.

A lot of Christians can't avoid whining about it either. (Papists vs Protestants, anyone?) And I love the general OD reaction when names like "John Hagee" come up - a harumphed snort of disdain, followed by assurances that [I]premillenial dispensationalists [/I] represent a tiny, insignificant and - uhh- justplain[U]wrong[/U] branch of the faith. I don't doubt that last one, but of course given the events of the past few years one must conclude they're neither 'tiny' nor 'insignificant' in any way (nor particularly benign).

And of course there are plenty of OD-style 'Christian Nationalists' who condemn jihadists and similar lunatics while secretly wishing for a Holy War of their own to fight. Remember Walter and his 'kill-the-infidel-babies' call to arms? Beating infants' heads against rocks? Yeah...those horrible, inhuman Nazis and pagans and Muslims; why they just ain't [I]civilized[/I].

No, it's not just the 'pagans' who whine about Christendom.

I obviously disagree, but when a some Christians choose to favor Israel, its not without reason. Given the choice between erudite, sophisticated jews with great power and influence, and missing link hyena's who can't help but whine all the time that you owe them a deep debt, [I]who would you choose?[/I]

Why, the guys who are on [B]tv[/B], of course!

Okie continues to seize upon the booga-booga man of "WN", a movement that really [I]isn't [/I] - it's more a confederation of dissimilar whites who share an overlapping agenda of wanting to either preserve, defend or give CPR to the idea of a white homeland and a white future for generations yet unborn. That's because, being from Oklahoma, it's [I]very very [/I] important that he have some[U]one[/U] or some[U]thing[/U] in this world he can feel superior to. So he characterizes a broad, as-yet-shapeless-but-still-evolving white gestalt with the magic knee-slapping words "Alex Linder", pops open another Co-Cola and settles back contentedly, having saved the White Race from disaster with his ruthless social commentary yet again.

There are, under the elastic rubric of "WN", Christian and non-Christian, sophisticated and unsophisticated, rational and irrational, cultured and boorish...all types, in short. But don't bother telling Okie cuz he ain't listening. Of course he understands the Christians who swear allegiance to Israel: Okie's really only comfortable with the status quo, despite his occasionally grunting an endorsement of Kevin MacDonald. Were he to throw a party, it would strictly be for the pleasure of drawing up a list of people he [I]won't [/I] be inviting.

Most Christians view WN, and not without some reason, as a demonic, fanatically anti-Christian system of barbarism which they have no choice but to oppose.

We're waist-deep in "a demonic, fanatically anti-Christian system of barbarism" [I]right now[/I], when a WN couldn't be elected dogcatcher in Granby, Missouri. When American tanks roll into a backwards and defenseless village blasting heavy metal to terrify the populace....or when our policymakers decide satellite-feeding in hardcore porn to pacified areas to weaken their moral resolve against resistance is a [I]jim-dandy [/I] idea.....seriously, that's about as demonic as it gets, doncha think? Please point out the pagan Linderite WNs responsible for these policies.

almahdi

2005-07-13 02:43 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]Mudslim go home.[/QUOTE]

Well...we'er here to stay. This is our home too. So get over it.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 02:58 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]......or when our policymakers decide satellite-feeding in [B]hardcore porn to pacified areas to weaken their moral resolve against resistance** is a [I]jim-dandy [/I] idea.....seriously, that's about as demonic as it gets, doncha think? Well you obviously are the expert on this subject, I'll grant you that :lol:

Please point out the pagan Linderite WNs responsible for these policies.[/QUOTE]Well I definitely can name one pagan. Never quite sure what he believes in other than himself, but he's definitely not from Oklahoma :tongue:

Bardamu

2005-07-13 03:08 | User Profile

[QUOTE=almahdi]Well...we'er here to stay. This is our home too. So get over it.[/QUOTE]

Let a couple of dirty bombs go off here, compliments of Mudslim, and see how long you people hang around. Islam is a fish way out of water in this country, bubba.

almahdi

2005-07-13 03:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]LOL! 'Islam' seems to have plenty enough trouble organizing a working sewer system for its adherents. If anything, all the cowardly suicide bombers and smelly terrorists have done is increase 'ZOG's power throughout the globe.

Well dear

I think you better go back to your history book... we arab have a working sewer system and a street light in the city of Bagdad 1200 years ago. Well people in Eurpe took a dump dump in the woods we have in the city of bagdad. A police force, a post office, court, and laws 4500 ago. when the people of Eurpe didnt even know how to speak...don't you know the the numbe you use are arabic. [QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Do us all a favor and go back to tending your sheep, beating your women and molesting your boys.

Im sure you dont mean those those few hundred Christen prests who molest thousands of young boys in the U.S. Cowboy ? We dont beat our weman, but I dont know were you got this from. Maybe you watch some Holywood movie. Do you realy belive in aladin and abo? And the magic carpet to? I highly advise you to stop watching to much TV and read some books.

Ponce

2005-07-13 03:25 | User Profile

Almahdi you will have to forgive most Americans because many of them never have read a book and they have been brainwahsed by the Jews that as you know have command over the US government.

If they were as stupid as this humble dumb Cuban refugee there would be no Jews telling the American people what to do.

Welcome to OD and Saalam Aleikum.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-13 03:43 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Quantrill]As Pat Buchanan stated, 'Terrorism is the war of the powerless. War is the terrorism of the powerful.' I certainly do not agree with the Islamicists' goals, but their methods of killing civilians are no more dishonorable than our methods of killing civilians. That said, I will always fight for the survival of my kin and race, no matter who is right and who is wrong.[/QUOTE]Amen, brother, and by the way, how is it that we drifted so far off the original topic?? :smartass:

Ponce

2005-07-13 03:44 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Source?

Source?

Source?[/QUOTE]

Tex? is all a matter of record if you would bother to read once in a while, by that I mean world news and not the news put out by the Jewish controlled American news.

If they are true or not is a matter of personal opinion however I usually have to see the same news on at least three foreing sources in order to make it true in my mind.

Have you read about the terrorists in London? even they cannot get their story straight, now they say that all four of them die in the explosions and they also say that two of them were killed by the police.....tell me this, if the bombs had timers then why did they stay around in order to blow themselves up? make no sense.

All the had to do was to push a 20 seconds delay fuse just about when the doors were closing and gotten the hell out of there.....they could also use sugar with the bombs, sugar when mixed in the same package as the explosives will become hard as soon as the package explodes and the sugar would work as pellets or broken glass, depending on size.

It is a coincidence that out of about 950 public buses the one with the "terrorist" bomb was the only one that was not working that day and that the very same they the government was conductina a practice terrorist attack and that also a couple of the underground stations were closed on that day.

As you know the explosives that were used were the same type as used in the state of Israel by the IDF and lets not forget the "terrorist" alert that was called in to the Israely embassy, something smells here and is not me.

Tex? I'll try to find the one about the IDF order to kill Pals kids because that one bugs the hell out me.

Angler

2005-07-13 03:46 | User Profile

Sorry for the delay in responding...

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident][quote=Angler]Okay, I exaggerated. But the main point is that Jews are greatly empowered by a large number of Christians who are sympathetic to them for religious reasons. Even many (most?) non-Zionist Christians feel a kinship with the Jews simply because they think of the Jews as their "spiritual forefathers." And these factors, rather than secularism, are in large part why Jews have been able to attain such power over the heavily-Christian US.

We all know that Christian Zionists exist and that they support the Jews for religious reasons. There is nothing to debate there because the CZs even state those reasons themselves. You can always go to any CZ site on the web if you need verification. Rarely if ever do those people mention the Holocaust, the Cold War, or anything of that sort as reasons for their diehard support of Israel. They only mention the Bible and all that "bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you" BS.

Furthermore, it's well known that Christian Zionists are a very powerful force in national politics and have the ear of Bush and many members of Congress. Even the mainstream media has reported on the CZ lobby ("60 Minutes," for example) and stated examples of situations where they clearly influenced US Middle East policy.

When it comes to more moderate Christians, the secular factors you mentioned probably play some role as well -- possibly a greater role. There are other factors as well, such as the media -- particularly Hollywood and its almost exclusively negative and positive portrayal of Arabs and Jews, respectively. But let's not deceive ourselves by denying the strong religious factor behind US support for Israel.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 04:03 | User Profile

[QUOTE=almahdi]Islam has taken the lead in opposing ZOG and all manifestations of Jewish power. In this, the courage of Islam is an inspiration and example to all [url="http://alhusseini.com/common.php"]http://alhusseini.com/common.php[/url] Almahdi[/QUOTE]Interesting website. But in western countries moslems usually vote in support of jewish organizations efforts to establish "hate speech" laws to suppress criticism of the holocaust, homosexuals, abortion, etc. The Sihk dominated government of British Columbia exemplified this.

Angler

2005-07-13 04:03 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I do not think suicide bombers are cowardly at all.[/QUOTE]You're right -- they're not. Going on a mission from which you know you won't return is the very antithesis of cowardice.

If every single member of my family -- all the people I love most in the world -- were killed by a suicide bomber, I would of course be as furious and enraged as a person can be. I'd certainly call the bomber stuff like "evil," "wretched," "filthy," etc. But I wouldn't call him "cowardly," as that would simply be inaccurate. Calling a person who willingly embraces death for a cause "cowardly" renders the word meaningless. To willingly die for a cause is possibly the bravest thing a person can possibly do.

On the other hand, what the London bombers did wasn't the brightest thing they could have done. Why blow yourself up to kill people at random, at least some of whom probably opposed the Iraq invasion? That's senseless. If they were going to give their lives anyway, I don't understand why they didn't go after some of the lying politicians responsible for the war.

Bardamu

2005-07-13 04:14 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Interesting website. But in western countries moslems usually vote in support of jewish organizations efforts to establish "hate speech" laws to suppress criticism of the holocaust, homosexuals, abortion, etc. The Sihk dominated government of British Columbia exemplified this.[/QUOTE]

Sikhs aren't Muslims.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 04:14 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]But let's not deceive ourselves by denying the strong religious factor behind US support for Israel.[/QUOTE]But like Tex said, this is of very recent vintage. Historically the christian conservatives actually often opposed the secular left's more dogmatic support of Israeli causes, such as over arms sales to Arab countries.

And never forget the dogmatic insistence of jewish organizations in supporting secularism and weakening Christian influence in America, (a cause pagan WN support fanatically,) that such is an essential and central part of furthering and protecting jewish interests.

In religious matters in America, pagan WN's voluntarily wear a symbolic yarmuke on their head.

Bardamu

2005-07-13 04:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]And never forget the dogmatic insistence of jewish organizations in supporting secularism and weakening Christian influence in America, (a cause pagan WN support fanatically,) ...

[/QUOTE]

Could you give us a few examples of this "fanatical" support?

Angler

2005-07-13 04:46 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]But like Tex said, this is of very recent vintage. Historically the christian conservatives actually often opposed the secular left's more dogmatic support of Israeli causes, such as over arms sales to Arab countries. I agree that it's recent, but that doesn't diminish its great importance. Christian Zionism is doing harm now, even if it didn't do much harm in the past.

And never forget the dogmatic insistence of jewish organizations in supporting secularism and weakening Christian influence in America, (a cause pagan WN support fanatically,) that such is an essential and central part of furthering and protecting jewish interests. I have always wondered why Jews seem so eager to offend the same people who are the backbone of their support in this country. Maybe they feel certain that the Christian Zionists will never, ever turn on them no matter how offensive Jews act toward Christianity. After all, God said, "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you," and nothing Jews do will EVER make Christian Zionists stop believing that God said that and meant it about modern-day Israel. Christian Zionists have convictions; they KNOW their beliefs are correct. Thus, they can't be reasoned with.

In religious matters in America, pagan WN's voluntarily wear a symbolic yarmuke on their head.[/QUOTE]I don't think it's accurate to imply that Jews and pagan WNs are birds of a feather just because neither group cares for Christianity. That's like saying Christians and Jews are birds of a feather because neither group cares for paganism.

On the other hand, many WNs do seem to think of Christianity as a monolithic enemy because so many Christians support Israel and the Jews. Those who feel that way are, of course, guilty of painting with too broad a brush. They aren't "honorary Jews," but they're really not helping the cause by alienating Christians who might agree with them on issues other than religion.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 04:48 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]Could you give us a few examples of this "fanatical" support?[/QUOTE]You obviously have forgotten NeoNietszche, Av and Franco, or leaders like Linder and Pierce. Even the pagan Triskelion said they and other WN's overdid it and were stupid.

Though I will grant that occasionally these WN stand with us wen the SDL goes on its most extreme anti-Christian crusades like at the academies, but sometimes I think its just the reasoning used and the party using it, when they seem to both agree that Christianity fundamentally is where the west went wrong. Albeit they have different views of what "going wrong", entails.

Franco

2005-07-13 05:07 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]You obviously have forgotten NeoNietszche, Av and Franco, or leaders like Linder and Pierce. Even the pagan Triskelion said they and other WN's overdid it and were stupid.

Actually, I think Christianity was doing okay until about 1900 or so. Then it got wimpy and egalitarian.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 05:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]I agree that it's recent, but that doesn't diminish its great importance. Christian Zionism is doing harm now, even if it didn't do much harm in the past. True enough. But part of evangelicalism in America has always been very faddish, and I the most faddish is very prone to secular influences especially. Decadent religion always turns into worship of the status quo, and the jews have certainly been the status quo a long time in this country.

[QUOTE]I have always wondered why Jews seem so eager to offend the same people who are the backbone of their support in this country. Maybe they feel certain that the Christian Zionists will never, ever turn on them no matter how offensive Jews act toward Christianity.[/QUOTE]Its just basic jewish nature to stab their friends in the back. After all they invented the word "chutzpah".

But more fundamentally, American jews see evangelical understanding and support for the jews as limited to one cause basically Israel. At home their still the enemy.

You think if WN's suddenly discoverd a religion that saw special virtue in the nation of Liberia blacks wouldn't feel ambivalent" Its rather comparable in some ways. [QUOTE]After all, God said, "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you," and nothing Jews do will EVER make Christian Zionists stop believing that God said that and meant it about modern-day Israel. Christian Zionists have convictions; they KNOW their beliefs are correct. Thus, they can't be reasoned with.[/QUOTE]True. But that cuts both ways. These beliefs have changed in the past and could change again. And jews rightly fear that if it does change, there's little they can do. At least not as much as they would like.

[QUOTE]I don't think it's accurate to imply that Jews and pagan WNs are birds of a feather just because neither group cares for Christianity. That's like saying Christians and Jews are birds of a feather because neither group cares for paganism.[/QUOTE]Jews are hardly adverse to paganism of sorts, as pagans are religious synchrotists. That's why jews prospered so much in the Roman empire. (Even though it wasn't enough for them)

On the other hand, many WNs do seem to think of Christianity as a monolithic enemy because so many Christians support Israel and the Jews. Those who feel that way are, of course, guilty of painting with too broad a brush. They aren't "honorary Jews," but they're really not helping the cause by alienating Christians who might agree with them on issues other than religion.[/QUOTE]That's why I wonder at times what their cause really is.

weisbrot

2005-07-13 06:02 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]I have always wondered why Jews seem so eager to offend the same people who are the backbone of their support in this country. Maybe they feel certain that the Christian Zionists will never, ever turn on them no matter how offensive Jews act toward Christianity. After all, God said, "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you," and nothing Jews do will EVER make Christian Zionists stop believing that God said that and meant it about modern-day Israel. Christian Zionists have convictions; they KNOW their beliefs are correct. Thus, they can't be reasoned with. [/QUOTE]

Some of the diffidence noted here might make more sense if the true nature of the prevailing 'Murcun evangelical eschatological beliefs were better understood. Many Secret Rapture adherents are interested only in facilitating the return of the Diaspora to "Israel", followed by the discovery of a red calf...and then...[I]and then.....![/I]

Plot Spoiler/Hint: It doesn't go well for the vast majority of Jews in Israel...

il ragno

2005-07-13 06:08 | User Profile

Why blow yourself up to kill people at random, at least some of whom probably opposed the Iraq invasion? That's senseless. If they were going to give their lives anyway, I don't understand why they didn't go after some of the lying politicians responsible for the war.

Most politicians these days are practically flanked by the Praetorian Guard. You can't get to, or near, them.

If you could, there are plenty of domestic types who'd start taking 'em out long before the Arabs would.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 08:20 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Actually, I think Christianity was doing okay until about 1900 or so. Then it got wimpy and egalitarian.

----------[/QUOTE]Actually it was pedestrian atheism that got wimpy and egalitarian. Before 1900 it at least had the guts to call itself such. About 1900 it started deciding it might be easier if it stayed in the Churches and called itself "liberalism", "the social gospel".

Judiazed Christianity, instead of converting and circumcising themselves, just staying in the Churches and calling itself dispensationalism.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 14:50 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Actually it was pedestrian atheism that got wimpy and egalitarian. Before 1900 it at least had the guts to call itself such. About 1900 it started deciding it might be easier if it stayed in the Churches and called itself "liberalism", "the social gospel".[/QUOTE]

Either way, what you're really talking about are the politics and/or cultural milieu of Christians, not Christianity itself. Even then, if the critics of 'Christianity' like Franco (and on a more extreme level, degenerate and deranged social miscreants like Alex Linder) had honesty as their goal instead of attacking the one True Faith, then they would readily see that it is the populations that are the most Christian that are also the most conservative, anti-liberal and resistant to the advancing new world order global socialism than any other throughout the West. Atheist organizations like the Communist Party, ACLU and PAW are arguably the most liberal in the world. Likewise for the pagans, with the New Agers and associated earth-worshipping environmental orgs. End of story.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 15:13 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]We all know that Christian Zionists exist and that they support the Jews for religious reasons.

Of course I agree, but that's not the question on the table. The question on the table is what contributed to jews becoming prominent here in America. I say it has been sympathy for the nation-state of Israel, their relationship with us throughout the Cold War amongst the regional Arab Soviet client-states, their collective wealth and influence in Hollywood and corporate Media.

Furthermore, it's well known that Christian Zionists are a very powerful force in national politics and have the ear of Bush and many members of Congress.

This is where we disagree. If CZ's, or the greater evangelical Christian 'Right' if you will, were really such a powerful force in nat'l politics, wouldn't you think of their having some tiny something to show for it? Let's see, abortion? Nope. Gay rights? Nope. Ten Commandments still in the Court House? Nope. Tougher divorce laws? Nope. Prayer in public schools? Nope.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 15:17 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Ponce]Tex? is all a matter of record if you would bother to read once in a while, by that I mean world news and not the news put out by the Jewish controlled American news.

So in other words and in the King's English, you don't have any sources and are just pulling this fictitious information out of your rear end.

Why does this not surprise me? :thumbd:

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 15:19 | User Profile

[QUOTE=almahdi]Well...we'er here to stay. This is our home too. So get over it.[/QUOTE]

No, it's not and it will never be.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 15:24 | User Profile

[QUOTE=almahdi]Well dear

Yeah, yeah. We've heard all that before from Farrakhan and the like, about "the Original Man" living in palaces in Africa while whites were living in caves like dogs in Europe, etc. etc. etc. That and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

Listen, ultimately I just don't care. You muslims can do whatever it is you want to do--in your land. The extent of my interest is making sure you don't live over here and my government is not mixed-up in anything over there. Outside of that, enjoy your wonderful muslim life with your wonderful muslim families, friends and neighbors. I wish you nothing but the best.

Franco

2005-07-13 15:40 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Even then, if the critics of 'Christianity' like Franco (and on a more extreme level, degenerate and deranged social miscreants like Alex Linder) had honesty as their goal instead of attacking the one True Faith, then they would readily see that it is the populations that are the most Christian that are also the most conservative, anti-liberal and resistant to the advancing new world order global socialism than any other throughout the West.[/QUOTE]

I admit that Christians resist liberal ideas more than others. The issue is far more complex than that, though. Examples:

Christians often offer only passive resistance to liberalism. In other words, they are in defensive mode rather than in offensive mode. They don't act, they instead react.
Even many hard-line Christians rarely mention race and Jews. In fact, I know some of those types. They can quote the Bible chapter and verse, but race? Ha! They never even mention race. And do they mention Jews? Nope. Someone might call them a "hater."

White people are the key to Western culture, and the Christians better grasp that fact before all the Western countries are flooded with negroes and brown-skinned people.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-13 15:53 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]1. Christians often offer only passive resistance to liberalism.

What liberalism are you talking about? Doctrinal liberalism? Social/political liberalism? If the latter, then I don't see how you can say that with a straight face considering the fact that it is the Southern and Mid-Western, Christian conservative voting bloc that has kept this nation out of the hands of brazen liberals like Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry.

They don't act, they instead react.

Who among us are not reacting to the social tides of the last 50 years? This is just goofy.

Even many hard-line Christians rarely mention race and Jews.

How many people period go about 'mentioning race and Jews'? You're in La-La land, Franco. Get off the internet and away from scum like Linder. He's warping your brain.

White people are the key to Western culture, and the Christians better grasp that fact before all the Western countries are flooded with negroes and brown-skinned people.[/QUOTE]

Restore our people and land to the Biblical principles and historic Christian faith it was founded on and the rest will sort itself out under the divine guiding hand of God. He wants what is best for His people.

Gregz

2005-07-13 16:40 | User Profile

Texas Dissident

I agree with your last post. Those who oppose Christianity and seek to undermine it's standing have no true understanding of it's ethos. Christianity was perhaps practised to it's fullest extent in the past in the smaller isolated nations of Europe. A good example of this being Ireland. This nation long oppressed by a immoral, powerful and corrupt England. Remained the most devotedly Catholic nation in Europe with a strong sense of community and ethic identity.

Our culture must adhere to a superior system of ethics if it is to maintain it's moral compass and it's social cohesion. The influence of Christianity on the rapid social and industrial development of Western Europe and by extension it's colonies should not be underestmated. Polytheistic religions such as Paganism, in practice do not offer us such a clear system of mortality. But rather dilute our nations moral character.

Greg

[img]http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3827/38249857islam1501lz.jpg[/img]

mwdallas

2005-07-13 17:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE]I agree that it's recent, but that doesn't diminish its great importance. Christian Zionism is doing harm now, even if it didn't do much harm in the past.[/QUOTE]How about that? The one thing Okie and Angler can agree on is, in fact, false.

"Christian" Zionism has been intermittently but violently destructive since its origins in the 17th century. Regicide (Charles I), ethnic cleansing (northern Ireland), readmission of the Jews to England and all that followed from that (which would include little things like World Wars I and II!), Wilson's messianic vision to make the world "safe for democracy", the War of Northern Aggression (in the U.S.) to the extent it can be attributed to Puritan do-gooders (like John Brown and the Secret Six), etc.

I put "Christian" in quotes because they are not Christians but heretics who have followed the teachings of false prophets like Isaac Luria, Manasseh ben Israel, J.N. Darby, and C.I. Scofield.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 19:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]How about that? The one thing Okie and Angler can agree on is, in fact, false.

"Christian" Zionism has been intermittently but violently destructive since its origins in the 17th century.[/QUOTE]Your assertion that you can trace Christian Zionism back to the evils of the early Puritans, and then the early Puritans back to Woodrow Wilson, are awfully speculative. I've heard some southernaphiles occasionally assert something like that, but they're getting far afield, and in up tripping over themselves and their own assumptions.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 19:27 | User Profile

I don't have to trace anything. Cromwell and his ilk were "Christian" Zionists. The point is that great evils, then as now, have been perpetrated under the aegis of the heresy we call "Christian" Zionism. Whether 21st-century "Christian" Zionism is a direct descendant of 17th- (as opposed to a discrete occurrence of the same phenomenon) is irrelevant.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 19:35 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]I don't have to trace anything. Cromwell and his ilk were "Christian" Zionists. The point is .....[/QUOTE]If that is the point you are trying to make then explain yourself, and define "Christian Zionist". Premillineal eschatology at all, let alone the dispensationalist move toward the reestablishment of the physical jews in a reborn physical state of Israel, arose out of the decline of calvinism, being opposite theologically in almost all areas.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 19:48 | User Profile

Okie:

Perhaps I have used the term "Christian" Zionism too loosely, and that has caused misunderstanding. Perhaps I should denominate the phenomenon "philosemitic millenarianism", encompassing both postmillenarianism and premillenarianism.

Perhaps you will find time to comment on this thread:

[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18172&highlight=cromwell[/url]

You might also benefit from Heinrich Graetz's account of Jewish messianism, philosemitism, and the readmission of Jews to England:

[url]http://www.saltshakers.com/lm/GraetzD.rtf[/url]

And there is much more to be read that is not available on the net.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 20:06 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]Okie:

Perhaps I have used the term "Christian" Zionism too loosely, and that has caused misunderstanding. You definitely have, and it definitely did.

Perhaps I should denominate the phenomenon "philosemitic millenarianism", encompassing both postmillenarianism and premillenarianism.

Perhaps you will find time to comment on this thread:

[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18172&highlight=cromwell[/url]

Interesting article by Edward Rothstein. As usual though, jews fail to understand Christianity or take it seriously and thus misrepresent it.

The construct you made, "philosemitic millenarianism", apparently based on a Rothstein like analysis, is very artificial.

You might also benefit from Heinrich Graetz's account of Jewish messianism, philosemitism, and the readmission of Jews to England:

[url]http://www.saltshakers.com/lm/GraetzD.rtf[/url]

I'll have to read that. I think Cromwell may be taking a bad rap. It wasn't just jews targeted by the Inquisition - it targeted even more and struck fear in Protestants. Sometimes shared suffering and enemies can create. not unnaturally, some mutual sympathy.

True the Puritans were big on rediscovery of the OT. But that doesn't make one jewish, except to an unlearned pagan mindset.

And there is much more to be read that is not available on the net.[/QUOTE]I'll take your word for it.

MadScienceType

2005-07-13 20:09 | User Profile

[quote=Texas Dissident]This is where we disagree. If CZ's, or the greater evangelical Christian 'Right' if you will, were really such a powerful force in nat'l politics, wouldn't you think of their having some tiny something to show for it? Let's see, abortion? Nope. Gay rights? Nope. Ten Commandments still in the Court House? Nope. Tougher divorce laws? Nope. Prayer in public schools? Nope.

Well, they're no doubt "powerful" in the sense that they deliver votes for the GOP. The fact that they do it in spite of the failure of the GOP to give them anything more than rhetoric on the issues you listed above simply shows that "powerful" and "intelligent" are not necessarily correlated conditions.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the hard core, true-believer (belief in the GOP, that is) GOP voters are like battered women, always taking back the beer-smelling beta-male in the yellowing sleeveless T-shirt because he swears that uppercut was the last one ever.

Some folks apparently think, and I've heard them say it, that God put Bush in the White House for a reason and Bush can therefore do no wrong, even if he doesn't deliver the goods listed above. How prevalent this attitude is I've no idea. Somone or something put Bush in there, certainly, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't God.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 20:14 | User Profile

John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry was funded by the "Secret Six", who are also alleged to have financed Scofield, though that has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction. The New Yorker reviewing a book on Brown:

[QUOTE]With a classic American PuritanÃ¢â¬â¢s addiction to Scripture, he was more a man of the Old Testament than the New, a prophet and avenger, a Joshua rather than a Jesus. He had a particularly bad case of the old New England identification of the Puritans with the Jews, as the armed and chosen people. (Brown was, in his broad-mindedness, philo-Semitic.) But he was also a resolute roundhead, an admirer of Oliver Cromwell, and one of ReynoldsÃ¢â¬â¢s accomplishments is to help us see how the figure of CromwellÃ¢â¬âthe common man who read his Bible, and who killed a kingÃ¢â¬âhaunted the period and BrownÃ¢â¬â¢s actions.[/QUOTE]

From another source:

[QUOTE]It is surely significant and foreboding that the Whiggish North hosted a Cromwell revival ten years before the war. Brown raptly read the key texts: Joel Tyler HeadleyÃ¢â¬â¢s Oliver Cromwell (1848), an iconic biography that washed the blood-stained garments of the Royalists and the Irish with sanctimony; Thomas CarlyleÃ¢â¬â¢s study in proto-fascism, On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History (1845) and his edition of CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s Letters and Speeches (1845). Today, the revival tents are hosting a seminar featuring authors Tim Lahaye and Jerry Jenkins, whose Left Behind novels celebrate the rapture of the saints and the extermination of the sinners at the Battle of Armageddon. [/QUOTE]

Quantrill

2005-07-13 20:41 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust] I'll have to read that. I think Cromwell may be taking a bad rap. It wasn't just jews targeted by the Inquisition - it targeted even more and struck fear in Protestants. Sometimes shared suffering and enemies can create. not unnaturally, some mutual sympathy.[/QUOTE] Since the Inquisition was only in effect in Catholic countries, I don't think Protestants were ever its main focus, unless you consider the Waldenses proto-Protestants.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 21:25 | User Profile

I came across this while checking up on the name Sotomayor:

[url]http://www.netcom.es/mleon/orbayu_3.htm[/url]

Even in Spain, there was some focus on Protestants (see first bolded passage), and there was some connection/overlap between Jews and Protestants (see second bolded passage):

[QUOTE][B]Este autor considera al protestantismo como el ÃÂºltimo de los grandes problemas que tuvo que afrontar la InquisiciÃÂ³n y el primero que resolviÃÂ³ de una manera mÃÂ¡s o menos correcta.[/B] [This author considers Protestantism to be the last of the great problems that the Inquisition had to confront and the first that the Inquisition resolved in a manner that was more or less correct. - MW] Lo dice, porque los judÃÂos y moriscos fueron obligados a ingresar en la iglesia y luego se actuÃÂ³ salvajemente contra ellos por ser solamente "sospechosos". En cambio los protestantes nacieron dentro de la iglesia catÃÂ³lica, consideraban que habÃÂa que efectuar en su seno una Reforma y rechazaban a sabiendas y premeditadamente la doctrina catÃÂ³lica.

Es mÃÂ¡s, en aquella primavera tumultuosa del movimiento de la Reforma, hicieron cuanto pudieron para propagar sus Reformas y poner en peligro de contagio a toda la naciÃÂ³n.

[B]Los marranos de Amberes constituyen, tal vez, el otro punto de propagaciÃÂ³n mÃÂ¡s fuerte de la Reforma difundiendo el espÃÂritu humanÃÂstico y las ideas Luteranas y Calvinistas. [/B] [The secret Jews of Amberes constituted perhaps the other point of strongest propagation of he Reformation, spreading the humanistic spirit and Lutheran and Calvinist ideas. - MW] Tampoco hemos de olvidarnos de las simpatÃÂas que el inquisidor Manrique dispensÃÂ³ a todo el "nuevo saber".

El 7 de abril de 1521, el cardenal Adriano, que gobernaba el paÃÂs en ausencia del emperador, publicÃÂ³ el primer edicto, para prohibir los libros de Lutero, en cualquier lengua, y ser entregados a las autoridades confiscÃÂ¡ndolos.

Por esta causa los gobernadores escriben al rey de esta manera: "No contento aquel seductor de haber pervertido y engaÃÂ±ado a Alemania, procura con sus malignas y diabÃÂ³licas astucias... contaminar estor reynos... de EspaÃÂ±a y para ello, con yncitaciÃÂ³n y ayuda de algunos destas partes que desean impedir o enervar el santo oficio de la YnquisiciÃÂ³n ha tenido forma de hacer traducir y poner en lengua castellana sus herejÃÂas y blasfemias y enviar las a sembrar y publicar en esta catÃÂ³lica naciÃÂ³n. Y porque de pequeÃÂ±a centella... suelen hacer grande incendio y si... Vuestra Majestad no remediase a tiempo, mayormente estando algunas ciudades destos reynos alteradas podrÃÂa causarse grande escÃÂ¡ndalo y mayor incendio y tal que despuÃÂ©s no se podÃÂa fÃÂ¡cilmente extinguir.".[/QUOTE] More: [QUOTE]El "marrano" de Amberes, MARCUS PEREZ -al que prÃÂ¡cticamente acabo de conocer - logra enviar por mar 30.000 ejemplares de la "InstituciÃÂ³n de la ReligiÃÂ³n Cristiana" de CALVINO. Las "Consideraciones" de ValdÃÂ©s se leÃÂan en los pÃÂºlpitos de las iglesias . ÃÂ¿CuÃÂ¡ndo en la historia de EspaÃÂ±a hubo un movimiento religioso tan fuerte?.[/QUOTE] My translation: A crypto-Jew ships 30,000 copies of Calvin's "Institution of the Christian Religion" by sea. Valdes's "Considerations" were being read from church pulpits. When in the history of Spain had a religious movement been so strong?

mwdallas

2005-07-13 21:37 | User Profile

[QUOTE]I think Cromwell may be taking a bad rap. It wasn't just jews targeted by the Inquisition - it targeted even more and struck fear in Protestants. Sometimes shared suffering and enemies can create. not unnaturally, some mutual sympathy.[/QUOTE]Only nominal Christians were within the jurisdiction of the Inquisition, which poses a problem for your hypothesis.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 21:40 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Quantrill]Since the Inquisition was only in effect in Catholic countries, I don't think Protestants were ever its main focus, unless you consider the Waldenses proto-Protestants.[/QUOTE]

Oh com'mon, who was it focused on then? The jews had always been around, why do you think the Inquisition magically appeared at the time of the Reformation?

If it didn't occur in Protestant countries, that was only for lack of political power to make it occur.

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 21:47 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]Only nominal Christians were within the jurisdiction of the Inquisition, which poses a problem for your hypothesis.[/QUOTE]How? It was the case of the Marranos in Spain needing refuge from the Inquisition that was the whole subject of the appeal of the jews to Cromwell for admission. One which the Puritans, with the memory of Bloody Mary's persecutions (whether it was technically part of the Inquisition or not) still very fresh, could not help but view sympathetically. As well as their struggle with the much less Protestant mainstream Anglican Church of the Cavaliars.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 22:08 | User Profile

[QUOTE]It was the case of the Marranos in Spain needing refuge from the Inquisition that was the whole subject of the appeal of the jews to Cromwell for admission. [/QUOTE] Okie: I have a lot more to read on the 17th century and its antecedents, but you would profit as well from digging a little deeper.

The Jews (some left Iberia without having converted) and crypto-Jews had found refuge in Holland. But what else happened around that time?

The Chelmnicki uprising in Poland! Circa 1648!

Heinrich Graetz (a Jew):

[QUOTE]By reason of their great number, their importance, and their compact union, the Jews in Poland formed a state within a state; The general synod, which assembled twice a year at Lublin and Jaroslaw, formed a legislative and judicial parliament from which there was no appeal.... Hence no Jew ventured to bring an accusation against one of his race before the au- thorities of the country, fearing to expose himself to disgrace and contempt from public opinion, which would have embittered his life, or even entailed death.... The study of the Talmud in Poland, established by Shachna, Solomon Lurya,and Moses Isserles, reached a pitch attained at no previous time, nor in any other country.... A love of twisting, distorting, ingenious quibbling, and a foregone antipathy to what did not lie within their field of vision, constituted the character of the Polish Jews.... Pride in their knowledge of the Talmud and a spirit of dogmatism attached even to the best rabbis, and undermined their moral sense. The Polish Jews of course were extraordinarily pious, but even their piety rested on sophistry and boastfulness. Each wished to surpass the other in knowledge of what the Code prescribed for one case or another. Thus religion sank, not merely, as among Jews of other countries, to a mechanical, unintelligent ceremonial, but to a subtle art of interpretation.... The corruption of the Polish Jews was avenged upon them in a terrible way, and the result was, that the rest of the Jews in Europe were for a time infected with it. With fatal blindness Polish Jews offered the nobility and the Jesuits a helping hand in oppressing the Zaporogian Cossacks in the Ukraine and Little Russia.... They advised the possessors of the Cossack colonies how most completely to humiliate, oppress, torment, and ill-use them; they usurped the office of judges over them, and vexed them in their ecclesiastical affairs. No wonder that the enslaved Cossacks hated the Jews, with whom their relations were closest, almost more than their noble and clerical foes.... The Jews were not without warning what would be their lot, if these embittered enemies once got the upper hand. In an insurrection of the Zaporogians under their Hetman in about 1638, despite its brief duration, they slew 200 Jews, and destroyed several synagogues. Nevertheless, Jews lent a hand, when in consequence of the insurrection the further enslavement of the sufferers was determined upon. In the year 1648, fixed by that lying book, the Zohar, they expected the coming of the Messiah and the time of redemption, when they would be in power, and, therefore, they were more reckless and careless than was their custom at other times. Bloody retribution was not long delayed, and struck the innocent with the guilty, perhaps the former more severely than the latter.... [/QUOTE]

Then follows a discussion of Chelmnicki and various massacres, battles, and wars, ending with:

[QUOTE]The number of Jewish families said to have perished in ten years of this war (600,000) is certainly exaggerated, but the slaughtered Jews of Poland may well be rated at a quarter of a million. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]The Cossack persecution of the Jews, in a sense, remodeled Judaism. It became Polonized, so to speak. The Polish-Rabbinical method of study had long dominated the Talmudical schools of Germany. Now, through the fugitives, most of whom were Talmudical scholars, it became authoritative. Whoever wished to acquire thorough Talmudic and Rabbinical knowledge was obliged to sit at the feet of Polish rabbis. Through their influence, scientific knowledge and the study of the Bible declined still more than previously. [/QUOTE]

mwdallas

2005-07-13 22:13 | User Profile

[QUOTE][B]At the very time when the Jews of Poland were trodden down, slaughtered, or driven through Europe like terrified wild beasts, a land of freedom was opened, from which the Jews had been banished for more than three centuries and a half. [/B] England, which the wise queen Elizabeth and the brave Cromwell had raised to be the first power in Europe, a position very different from that of crumbling Poland, again admitted Jews, not indeed through the great portal, yet through the back door. But this admission was so bruited abroad, that it was like a triumph for Judaism. The Jews of Amsterdam and Hamburg looked with longing to this island, to which they were so near, with whose merchants, shipowners, and scholars they were in connection, and which promised wide scope for the exercise of their varied abilities. But settlement there seemed beset with insuperable obstacles.... Who would undertake to banish this strong prejudice in order to render people and rulers favorable to the descendants of Israel? The man who undertook and executed this difficult task did not belong to the first rank of intellectual men, but possessed the right measure of insight and narrowness, strength of will and flexibility, knowledge and imagination, self-denial and vanity, required for so arduous an undertaking. Manasseh ben Israel, second or third rabbi at Amsterdam, who at home played only a. subordinate part.... [/QUOTE] Manasseh ben Israel then convinced philosemitic millenarian Cromwell to let the Jews into England.

mwdallas

2005-07-13 22:34 | User Profile

The Revolutionary Jew and His Impact on World History

by E. Michael Jones

[url]http://www.culturewars.com/2003/RevolutionaryJew.html[/url]

[QUOTE]1648 Annus Mirabilis

According to the Zohar, the year 1648 was to be the mystical year of resurrection, when the Jews could expect deliverance from their more than millennium long exile. Heinrich Graetz, a German Jew, a devotee of the Enlightenment and author of one of the most frequently cited histories of the Jewish people, calls the Zohar that "lying book" and by extension impugns the entire Kabbalistic tradition. Since the Enlightenment was in many ways a direct result of the disappointment which followed from the failure of the Messianic expectations which reached their fever pitch and denouement in the second half of the 17th century, his skepticism is understandable, as is his scorn for the Kaballah, the mish-mash what he considered Gnostic and Talmudic mumbo-jumbo that had led to the rise and fall of Messianic hope in the first place. Graetz espoused a worldview which was the complete antithesis of the Messianic fever of the mid-17th century. He was so convinced in his opposition to the Kaballah because he had the benefit of historical hindsight and could see where its vaporous illusions were leading the Jewish people. Expectation of redemption fostered by widespread dissemination of Kabbalistic doctrine made the Jews, in GraetzÃ¢â¬â¢s words, "more reckless and careless than was their custom at other times."

Between 1340 and 1772, when Poland was partitioned for the first time, the Jewish population of Poland increased 75-fold while, during the same period of time the Christian population only quintupled.... This phenomenal expansion of the Jewish population in Poland was matched by a correspondingly rapid increase in wealth, and that, in turn, corresponded to a dramatic expansion of the territorial limits of Poland. The Golden Age of Polish Jews, according to Pogonowski, lasted from 1500 to 1648.

Once the Jews who were expelled from Spain began to regroup in the newly-Protestant regions of the North, their settlements began to draw Marranos like a magnet, and the disaffected Catholics who had once been living double lives as clerics with concubines in places like Saxony and Thuringia now began to make common cause with the Jews who had led double lives as well by converting to Catholicism simply to preserve their wealth. Revolution, which is to say, a pan-ethnic coordinated attack on the cultural hegemony of the Catholic Church over Europe, emerged as a force in world history when these two groups merged in places like Antwerp in the middle of the 16th century. Revolution was, in other words, a Protestant-Jewish alliance from its inception. The Jews, as Newman shows so well, promoted every "reform" movement in Europe, from the Hussites to the Anabaptists, as a way of weakening the hegemony of the Catholic Church, reasoningÃ¢â¬âfalsely in the case of LutherÃ¢â¬âthat the enemy of their enemy was their friend. In places like Antwerp and Amsterdam, the Jews put their wealth as well as their considerable expertise in finance and publishing at the disposal of the libidinous German monks and their princely protectors as their way of waging cultural warfare against the Catholic Church and Spain, its defender. When Johan Bokelzoon established his sexual liberationist communist dictatorship in Muenster in 1533, the native population was quickly overrun by libidinous nuns recently "liberated" from their convents by the Lutherans. (Martin Luther, in fact, got his wife, Catherine von Bora, from a Lutheran raid which liberated a convent in Saxony. He offered the youngest and prettiest of the ex-nuns to the Bishop of Mainz if that worthy agreed to convert to the Lutheran party.) The nuns under BokelzoonÃ¢â¬â¢s tutelage quickly adopted his sexual liberationist practices and began having visions of the coming of the new Jerusalem which caused them to practice glossolalia while rolling naked on the ground, frothing at the mouth. Liberation from the stress of living a double life as a faux Catholic was intoxicating, and the intensity of the intoxication was some indication of the stress that caused it.

The revolutionary link between Jews and Reformers was theoretical as well as practical. The "Reformers" for their part could justify their criminal behavior only by cloaking it in the imagery of the Old Testament. Regicide was the most heinous of crimes and viewed with revulsion by all of Christian Europe, and yet Cromwell justified his role in the murder of Charles I by appealing to the story of Phineas. "Be not offended at the manner," Cromwell wrote to Lord Wharton in January 1650,

"perhaps no other way was left. What if God accepted the zeal, as He did that of Phineas, whose reason might have called for a jury? What if the Lord have witnessed this approbation and acceptance to this also, not only by signal outward acts, but to the heart also? What if I fear my friend should withdraw his shoulder from the LordÃ¢â¬â¢s work . . . through scandals, though false, mistaken reasonings."

The consummation of this revolutionary alliance against the Catholic Church and Catholic countries like Spain involved, in other words, not only rummaging through the Bible for images that would justify regicide, it also entailed bringing Jews, so recently expelled from the Iberian peninsula, out of their temporary home in the low countries into the land now governed by the Puritan saints. According to Graetz:

"A desire was excited in the hearts of the Puritans to see this living wonder, the Jewish people, with their own eyes, to bring Jews to England, and, by making them part of the theocratic community about to be established, stamp it with the seal of completion. The sentiments of the Puritans towards the Jews were expressed in Oliver CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s observation, "Great is my sympathy with this poor people, whom God chose and to whom He gave His law; it rejects Jesus because it does not recognize him as the Messiah." Cromwell dreamt of a reconciliation of the Old and New Testament, of an intimate connection between the Jewish people of God and the English Puritan theocracy. But other Puritans were so absorbed in the Old Testament, that the New Testament was of no importance. Especially the visionaries in CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s army and among the members of Parliament, who were hoping for the Fifth Monarchy, or the reign of the saints, assigned to the Jewish people a glorious position in the expected millennium. A Puritan preacher, Nathaniel Holmes .. . wished . . to become the servant of Israel and serve him on bended knees. The more the tension in Israel increased . . . the more public life and religious thought assumed Jewish coloring. The only thing wanting to make one thing [was the return of the Jews]."

CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s followers felt that by readmitting the Jews to England they could bring about the second coming of Christ, the millennium, and the fifth monarchy mentioned in the book of Daniel. In short, the middle of the 17th century was suffused with an apocalyptic vision of ChristÃ¢â¬â¢s kingdom being actually established in the here and now. Jewish refugees from Spain and English Ranters and Fifth Monarchy men were of one mind on this issue. The Kingdom of God was at hand. Something like this had been held by Christians for over a millennium and a half, probably because its advent had been pronounced by Christ himself. What had changed, though, was the kind of kingdom ChristÃ¢â¬â¢s followers were supposed to expect.

St. Augustine gave the definitive Catholic explication of The Book of Revelation in the City of God, where he explained that the millennium was supposed to be understood as a spiritual allegory concerning an essentially spiritual reality. The Millennium had begun with the death of Christ on the Cross, and the New Jerusalem was fully realized in the Catholic Church. AugustineÃ¢â¬â¢s explanation became Church doctrine when it was adopted as the definitive explanation of the millennium by the Council of Ephesus in 431. From that time on, belief in the millennium as a worldly kingdom was dismissed generally as a superstitious aberration and particularly as "the error of the Jews."

Since there had been no Jews in England since their expulsion in 1290, at least not officially, English philo-Semitism had a distinctly utopian cast to it. The English Judaizers tended to idealize Jews according to their own idiosyncratic reading of the Old Testament. They did not, as one has come to expect of the English, evaluate them according to empirical observation, at least not at the dawn of the Messianic era in 1648. If they had been less preoccupied with their own revolution at home, the English could have learned something about Christian-Jewish relations by observing the apocalypse that was brewing in Poland at the very moment the English were debating the fate of their king. An objective study of what had happened in Spain might have been helpful as well, but an objective English study of anything Spanish is the historical equivalent of an oxymoron.

By 1540 the Converso issue was over in Spain. Figures from the tribunal of Toledo in the years from 1531 to 1560 suggest that only three percent of the cases which came before the Inquisition there dealt with Judaizers. Spain had saved itself from the fate of Poland first by importing the Inquisition from southern France, and then by exporting its problem to the north of Europe. For some indication of what might have happened in Spain if the situation created by the Jews there had gone unchecked, we need only look at the situation in Poland. Jewish influence over Polish political life not only continued in the century after it had abated in Spain; it increased in intensity as well, fueling Polish imperialism in the East. The same violence that appeared periodically in Spain beginning in the late 14th century was repressed in Poland where laws in effect codified Jewish hegemony over large areas of Polish cultural life. Since disobedience to the predations of the Jewish tax-farmers was a capital crime, there is some indication that 1) animosity against the Jews was widespread and 2) that it was severely repressed. The combination of those two factors made an explosion of violence all but certain, and the explosion came when the Seym, dominated by the Polish magnates and their Jewish administrators, rebuffed Cossack aspirations for political reform. Cultural drift in Poland under the self-serving hand of the oligarchs had led to an explosion of the sort that the Inquisition had prevented in Spain, and as a result of that explosion, the Polish nobles republic went into a state of terminal decline, only to expire altogether 147 years later.

The defeat of their cause in the Seym turned the hopeful expectation of the Cossacks into equally vehement outrage....

As some indication of the hold which the Kaballah exercised over the mind of Polish Jews, the Chmielnicki pogroms, occurring in what was supposed to be the Messianic year of redemption, only strengthened the faith of those Jews who felt that messianic deliverance, ushered in perhaps by catastrophe, was closer than ever. The idea that the Messiah would hear and answer the prayers of his people in time of need became transmuted into a belief that dire need was a sign that the MessiahÃ¢â¬â¢s arrival was imminent. The alembic which enabled this religious alchemy was Kabbalah, the very thing which had instilled the messianic expectation in the first place.

Scholem disagrees with those who see the Chmielnicki uprisings as the cause of the Messianic fever which swept European Jewry during the middle of the 17th century. "If the massacres of 1648 were in any sense its principal cause," Scholem argues, "why did the messiah not arise within Polish Jewry?" The source of messianic fervor, according to Scholem, was "none other than Lurianic kabbalism, that is that form of Kabbalah which had developed at Safed, in Galilee, during the sixteenth century and which dominated Jewish religiosity in the seventeenth century." According to the Kaballah, catastrophe and utopianism go hand in hand. [B][Lurianic Kabbalism is also the source of the concept of tikkun olam -- see below -- MW][/B] The presence of a catastrophe like the Chmielnicki massacres and the ensuing predations of the Swedish army meant, therefore, that redemption was at hand.

[B]The political implications of the Lurianic Kaballah seem clear enough. The Messiah must now wait upon manÃ¢â¬â¢s efforts. He can only come once the process of tiqqun or purification and healing has been accomplished by man, i.e., by the Jews here on earth, who act as the vanguard of redemption much as the communist party at a later date would function as the vanguard of the proletariat. Without tiqqun, "it is impossible that the messianic king come."[/B] From here it is but a short leap of thought to the conclusion that Israel had become its own Messiah, or as Scholem says, [B]"By transferring to Israel, the historical nation, much of the redemptive task formerly considered as the messiahÃ¢â¬â¢s, many of his distinctive personal traits, as drawn in apocalyptic literature, were now obliterated."

Horowitz sees much the same political meaning emanating from the Lurianic revision of the meaning of exile. Once the meaning of exile had been transformed by its incorporation into the Gnostic creed of LuriaÃ¢â¬â¢s Kaballah, "redemption is no longer a divine release from the punishment of exile, but a humanly inspired transformation of creation itself."

..."in the Gnostic view, the evil that men do emanates not from their own flawed natures, but is the result of a flaw in the cosmos they inhabit, which they can repair." As a result of the Gnostic transformation of Jewish thought that Luria accomplished, "Man" becomes "his own redeemer" (Horowitz, p. 131). Exile of the sort suffered by Jews for over a millennium and most recently in exile from Spain is, according to Luria,

"no longer a punishment, but a mission; no longer a reflection of who we are, but a mark of our destiny to become agents of salvation.[/B]

The Lurianic Kaballah was a reaction to the Inquisition. By the time of the Chmielnicki massacres, the other great catastrophe for Jews at the dawn of the modern era, it had spread to all parts of the Diaspora. "[B]Wherever Lurianism came," Scholem writes, "it produced messianic tension." It produced expectation of redemption. But now, as Scholem points out, "redemption meant a revolution in history." Since Lurianism created the Messianic fervor of the mid-16th century, it is not an exaggeration to say that it created the revolutionary mindset which characterized the modern world as well. The modern world emerged when medieval Judaism, having fostered northern EuropeÃ¢â¬â¢s rebellion against Rome, cracked open and fell apart itself when Lurianism found its fulfillment in Sabbetai Zevi, the false Messiah.[/B] Jewish Gnostic messianism, with the help of English puritan revolutionaries, was released from the ghetto into the nascent modern world, the world which succeeded the medieval world and was its antithesis. [/QUOTE]

mwdallas

2005-07-13 22:39 | User Profile

The Westward movement of Polish Jews in 1648-49:

[QUOTE]The most immediate consequence of the Chmielnicki uprising was a massive exodus from the Jewish paradise in the east. Penniless Jewish refugees began streaming west. It was at this moment that the legend of the wandering Jew was born. A race whose scriptures begins with a description of paradise and whose formative moment was escape from bondage in Egypt could not get the idea of escape into another paradise out of its head, and so having heard stories of how the displaced Sephardim were now prospering, their impoverished Ashkenazic cousins began streaming toward places like Hamburg, but more importantly, toward Amsterdam, which by the mid-17th century had achieved the reputation of being the Dutch Jerusalem. Amsterdam, as a result, became a crucial staging area for the ongoing experimentation in revolution which was the modern world.

[B]On January 30, 1649, eight months after Bogdan Chmielnicki had defeated the Polish army, while the slaughter of Jews was in full swing, the Puritan Demi-Jews presided over the execution of the English king.[/B] His death warrant was signed by 59 "saints".[/QUOTE]

Okiereddust

2005-07-13 23:17 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]The Revolutionary Jew and His Impact on World History

by E. Michael Jones

Revolution, which is to say, a pan-ethnic coordinated attack on the cultural hegemony of the Catholic Church over Europe, emerged as a force in world history when these two groups merged in places like Antwerp in the middle of the 16th century. Revolution was, in other words, a Protestant-Jewish alliance from its inception. The Jews, as Newman shows so well, promoted every "reform" movement in Europe, from the Hussites to the Anabaptists, as a way of weakening the hegemony of the Catholic Church, reasoningÃ¢â¬âfalsely in the case of LutherÃ¢â¬âthat the enemy of their enemy was their friend. So what else is new.Politics often makes strange bedfellows, especially when struggling jointly, even for very different reasons ultimately,against a fierce and implacable enemy. And naturally the jews did their best to take advantage of this situation by trying to woo Protestants, even if some like Luther saw through them. It was only natural that some Protestants wouldn't be so perspicuous, especially when coming from a country far removed from the bitter ethnic struggles of eastern and southern europe, which had not seen the jews personaly for almost 4 centuries, re:

[QUOTE]Since there had been no Jews in England since their expulsion in 1290, at least not officially, English philo-Semitism had a distinctly utopian cast to it. The English Judaizers tended to idealize Jews according to their own idiosyncratic reading of the Old Testament. They did not, as one has come to expect of the English, evaluate them according to empirical observation, at least not at the dawn of the Messianic era in 1648. If they had been less preoccupied with their own revolution at home, the English could have learned something about Christian-Jewish relations by observing the apocalypse that was brewing in Poland at the very moment the English were debating the fate of their king.[/QUOTE]So the english puritans were naive about the jews. Not surprising. Actually it isn't surprising either today that the churches that embrace philosemitism like the SBC are disproportionately located in southern rural locales, also lacking much hands-on personal exerience with the jewish community.

Anyway thanks for digging this up MW, even if we may always have somewhat different views on Cromwell and Charles I.

mwdallas

2005-07-14 00:16 | User Profile

Okie, I have just started digging into this stuff. I have a lot more reading to do, but my recent correspondence with a number of English conservatives has prompted me to look into this stuff. They tend to blame things on "liberalism" following from "The Enlightenment". But what caused the Enlightenment? In this, Luria and the Kabbalah (16th Century), Kabbalistic influence in Holland where many of the expelled Iberian Jews were, the predictions of the coming of the Messiah, the fact that the Jews got not a Messiah but a Holocaust (the Chielmnicki massacres), the Western migration of large numbers of Polish Jews practicing a more-virulent brand of Talmudic Judaism, the naivete of the British who had expelled their Jews 300+ years earlier, and the translation of the Bible from Hebrew to the vernacular all played a role.

Reading (Jewish sources):

David S. Katz's books Gershom Scholem's books on Kabbalah Heinrich Graetz's History of the Jews Jonathan Israel's "Radical Enlightenment" Adam Sutcliffe's "Judaism and Enlightenment"

mwdallas

2005-07-14 00:28 | User Profile

Two books that appear to shed light on the origins of Enlightenment thought are Jonathan I. Israel's Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity 1650-1750 (Oxford University Press, 2001), and Adam Sutcliffe's Judaism and Enlightenment (Cambridge University Press, 2003). Both of these authors are of Jewish ancestry, and the latter studied under the former at University College London.

From a review of Sutcliffe's book by Steven Nadler of the U. of Wisconsin (you can find it on Google, but it is cached so I cannot easily provide a link):

Sutcliffe begins his investigation with the Hebraism to be found in scholarly and religious milieux, especially in the Netherlands of the early seventeenth-century. It was not an unadulterated "philosemitism" -- in fact, Sutcliffe explicitly declines to use the terms "philosemitism" and "antisemitism" to frame the terms of his discussion -- but rather a profound interest in the texts, languages, culture and history of the ancient Hebrews, sometimes from academic motives, often as preparation for anti-Jewish polemics. The reader is introduced here to tensions that reappear later in Sutcliffe's account, between, on the one hand, fascination for and use of res Judaica, and, on the other hand, antipathy toward and fear of Jews and Judaism. The same individuals who had a scholarly and sometimes even a religious respect for Jewish sources also believed in the obsolescence of Judaism itself.

For readers coming from philosophy and its history, the real interest of this book lies in Sutcliffe's analysis of the role played by the Jewish material in the rise of Enlightenment rationalism. As we know from Israel's study, the real culprit here is Spinoza, as well as the city of Amsterdam itself and the Portuguese-Jewish community that thrived in its cosmopolitan and relatively tolerant environment. [There was also an infusion of Polish Talmudic Jews. - MW] Sutcliffe argues that Jewish Amsterdam was practically a breeding ground of the radical Enlightenment.

From another review:

At the center of Mr. Sutcliffe's narrative is Baruch Spinoza (1632-77), the Dutch-Jewish rationalist who, because he was not a Christian to begin with, occupied a unique position in the religious-intellectual landscape of the early Enlightenment. Regarded as a heretic by Amsterdam's rabbis for his confounding formulation that God and nature should be understood as one, he was formally expelled from the Jewish community. Uncertain what to make of his theological views, Jewish and Christian religious authorities alike decided that he was either a pantheist or an atheist -- and, in either case, anathema. Widely banned, his writings went underground, where they were translated into several languages and disseminated across Europe. The dangerous doctrine that came to be known as "Spinozism" left a colossal footprint on the Enlightenment, and on modern sensibilities more broadly.

The significance of this way of thinking "as an early forerunner of quintessentially modern modes of religious doubt and rebellion has seldom been acknowledged" in the historiographical literature, Mr. Sutcliffe writes. Standard accounts of the Enlightenment have tended to locate the main action either in Paris (around the philosophes), or in Germany (around Kant and the Kantians), or in the English-Scottish matrix. This understanding received major corrective surgery in Jonathan I. Israel's Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650-1750 (Oxford University Press, 2001), which focused a zoom lens on 17th-century Sephardic Amsterdam and the transnational influence of Spinoza's circle. (Mr. Israel was Mr. Sutcliffe's professor at University College London and supervised his dissertation, on which Judaism and Enlightenment is based.)

[S]cholars are calling Mr. Sutcliffe's work groundbreaking. It is "not only new but startling" says Sander L. Gilman, director of the humanities laboratory and of Jewish studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the author, most recently, of Jewish Frontiers: Essays on Bodies, Histories, and Identities (Palgrave Macmillan). [B]Mr. Sutcliffe is not merely pointing out another way in which the architects of liberal modernity fell short. Rather, he is arguing that the Enlightenment is unintelligible outside the context of its preoccupation with Judaism. [/B]

[B]In short, the Enlightenment came to define itself, Mr. Sutcliffe argues, as the antithesis of all things Jewish.[/B] Review of Sutcliffe

So, we have a Jewish intellectual milieu (connected by the Jewish neural network to all other such milieux), out of which comes an intellectual movement of atomisation - the ultimate individualist strategy - the absolute worst strategy we could adopt if we were to face subsequent competition with the Jewish or any other competing group. Might this not be the ultimate in the "culture of critique"? The counterpoint to chapter 5 of Separation and Its Discontents?

Franco

2005-07-14 02:55 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]What liberalism are you talking about? Doctrinal liberalism? Social/political liberalism? If the latter, then I don't see how you can say that with a straight face considering the fact that it is the Southern and Mid-Western, Christian conservative voting bloc that has kept this nation out of the hands of brazen liberals like Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry.

Who among us are not reacting to the social tides of the last 50 years? This is just goofy.

How many people period go about 'mentioning race and Jews'? You're in La-La land, Franco. Get off the internet and away from scum like Linder. He's warping your brain.

Let me give you an example of "mentioning race and Jews":

I know a guy who is very conservative and very religious. This guy could quote nearly the whole Bible, chapter and verse. But the topic of race never comes up in any conversation he has with anyone. In fact, I brought up that topic a few times with him, and he won't say anything except to say that all humans are the same in the eyes of God, etc. The same goes for a preacher I knew. Same thing.

Even very religious people often ignore race. If you prefer to suggest that, if I notice that fact, it means that I live in "La-La land," then okay.

Okiereddust

2005-07-14 03:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Let me give you an example of "mentioning race and Jews":

Even very religious people often ignore race. If you prefer to suggest that, if I notice that fact, it means that I live in "La-La land," then okay. -----------[/QUOTE]But it never seems to bother you that people in general don't mention race, only Christians. And sometimes conservatives. You seem to feel these people owe you something, in fact a great deal.

I haven't hung around on any left-wing forums I'll admit, but personally I've found pagan WN's to be the most obnoxious and condensending anti-Christ bigots I've ever seen. If Christians owe these type of WN's anything it is a piece of rope.

You personally Franco, in light of your monotonous one-note whine, worse than a negro whining, if they owe you anything, it certainly isn't good. :bash: :bash:

il ragno

2005-07-14 03:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE]But it never seems to bother you that people in general don't mention race, only Christians. [/QUOTE]

Besides the fact that that is the OPPOSITE of what he just said, need I remind you of the Forced March from OD that you and Tex and Walter enacted around a year ago? Myself, Wintermute, Neo and Avalanche, Anti-Yuppie and even Franco hisownself found ourselves most stridently not wanted here. All of us mentioned race - constantly and to excess - none of us "Christians" (certainly not as defined by you guys). Sure, fences got mended somewhat, but that still doesn't lend any credence to the statement in the quote-box above.

The ongoing battle as described in MW Dallas' posts seems to me to underline that - insofar as the long struggle of Jew vs Gentile is concerned - the Jew sees the battle lines and the winning strategy both as racial/ethnic, not religious. Religious belief may or may not be important to Jews but it remains a secondary matter, one best divorced from temporal/secular life....or at least kept at a safe remove.

One thing's for sure: if Jews threw their own to the lions with the self-righteous frequency that varying sects of Christians do, there would be no "Jewish question", because there would be no Jews left to ask questions about. Jew killing Jew is an aberration...gentile killing gentile (holy book in hand, spittle flying from mouth) is merely business as usual.

Franco

2005-07-14 03:57 | User Profile

[QUOTE]But it never seems to bother you that people in general don't mention race, only Christians. And sometimes conservatives. You seem to feel these people owe you something, in fact a great deal.[/QUOTE]

Aren't politically right-wing people in the West [i.e. conservatives, who are often Christian] supposed to be the defenders of Western culture? If so, then isn't it their duty to mention race and Jews, since those topics are so very important to culture? In fact, those topics are more important than religion, since a person can change his religion but cannot change his race.

How can a person defend Western culture if he doesn't mention the very foundation of Western culture, i.e. the White race and all that it stands for?

Petr

2005-07-14 03:58 | User Profile

E. Michael Jones is a quite fanatical traditional Catholic who is by no means an unbiased source on the history of Protestantism.

Here you can see him spreading rather childish slander about Martin Luther:

[COLOR=DarkRed][B]"That's basically the main point of the book, and overall Degenerate Moderns is a bit incoherent as the author assumes too much of the reader by giving a stream of examples without explaining the context of his argument adequately. Degenerate Moderns asks the question: "Was Martin Luther really a great reformer? or was he just wanting to [insert your thoughts here] with the nuns?""[/B][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Navy][B]"I really enjoyed Jones' book, but the last chapter where he rehashes old Counter-Reformation-til-the-turn-of-the-20th-century indictments of Martin Luther as a sex crazed inventor was outdated and contrived. "[/B][/COLOR]

[url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0898704472/ref=pd_sxp_f/104-7017526-4459134?v=glance&s=books[/url]

Petr

Okiereddust

2005-07-14 04:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Aren't politically right-wing people in the West [i.e. conservatives, who are often Christian] supposed to be the defenders of Western culture? Well everybody is "supposed to be" aren't they? What makes you think Christians and conservatives should feel they are so special? Especially when you always say they aren't?> If so, then isn't it their duty to mention race and Jews, since those topics are so very important to culture? So in other words you view them as allies, who are not doing their share? Odd way to treat your friends.

Naw, I think you guys think that they are phonies. Asserting to do - preserving western culture - what only you can really do. In other words they're competitors.

The problem is the way one treats his competitors is often worse than they way he treats his enemies. Especially Nazi's. Which is the problem a lot of Christians and conservatives have. In view of the long Nazi record of hostility toward Christian values and western civilization, they view Nazi's as worse than any communists, and wouldn't be caught dead doing anything associated with them. Like talking about race etc.

You Linderite types seem to do everything in your power to justify them in this position.

In fact, those topics are more important than religion, since a person can change his religion but cannot change his race. Obviously religious people disagree. If they were to agree with you they would no longer be religious. What you are asking of them is to renounce their religion. Just like the communists. But at least the communists are smart enough to realize a person can't simultaneously be religious and non-religious.

How can a person defend Western culture if he doesn't mention the very foundation of Western culture, i.e. the White race and all that it stands for? -----------[/QUOTE]Maybe their understanding of western culture has nothing in common with yours.Maybe to them you're barbarians from the stone age. And isn't that what you'd like to be?

Franco

2005-07-14 04:41 | User Profile

[QUOTE] In view of the long Nazi record of hostility toward Christian values and western civilization, [/QUOTE] Actually, the Nazis tried to save Europe from Jewish Bolshevism, which was spreading all over Europe in many different forms. In other words, they tried to SAVE Western culture - the art, the architecture, the music, but most importantly the race [i.e. Whites].

The only Christians that the Nazis opposed were the ones who gave speeches about how the Nazis were oppressing the "innocent" Jews and Marxists. The rest of the Christians were left alone by the Nazis, as a rule at least.

Okie, you seem very hostile to Nazi culture. I think that if you studied their culture more, your attitude about that culture would change.

[edited]

Yggdrasil

2005-07-14 06:35 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Your assertion that you can trace Christian Zionism back to the evils of the early Puritans, and then the early Puritans back to Woodrow Wilson, are awfully speculative. I've heard some southernaphiles occasionally assert something like that, but they're getting far afield, and in up tripping over themselves and their own assumptions.[/QUOTE]My grandfather, with only an 8th grade education, felt compelled to learn to read and write Hebrew. His Hebrew writing is in our family bible from 1870 (generations take a long time in my family). I know for a fact that Jew worship - and I mean that literally - has been around a long time among East Anglians. Douglas Reed claims that Asquith - of Balfour Declaration fame - was infected by it and I have no trouble believing it because his contemporaries in my own family were infected with it.

I cannot vouch for the precise degree that Cromwell and his followers were infected by it, but I have no trouble believing that they were.

White Elite

2005-07-14 17:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Actually, the Nazis tried to save Europe from Jewish Bolshevism, [/QUOTE] Um, wasn't Bolshevism a form of Communism invented by a Jew (Karl Marx) and a German (Friedrich Engels)?

Also, weren't their ideas just extensions of the ideas of Hegel, who was also a German?

Those are the facts that always puzzle me when I hear people call Communism or Bolshevism "Jewish".

Ponce

2005-07-14 19:58 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]So in other words and in the King's English, you don't have any sources and are just pulling this fictitious information out of your rear end.

Why does this not surprise me? :thumbd:[/QUOTE]

Tex? I don't blame you for feeling that way but I would like to point out that that type of "news" has a tendency to be bi-gone almost right away also my mind holds more space that my favorites in my comp......right Tex, my head holds more than just hot air.

I am keeping a list of what you and AngelEyes would like me to find and post and as soon as do so (if ever) I will be more than glad to do so.

PS: just got back from the VA and the doctor got ahead of your comment, he stuck his finger in there and found it to be empty.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-14 20:36 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Those are the facts that always puzzle me when I hear people call Communism or Bolshevism "Jewish".[/QUOTE]White Gentiles are great at spinning universalist theories.

But the very particular and specific practice of Russian Boshevism has an unmistakeable ethnic character. Arkady Vaksberg names names in his book "Stalin Against the Jews." including a complete roster of the management of the organs of mass murder - Cheka, OGPU, and each of the camps in the gulag.

As to the facts of the ethnic composition of the Bolshevic murder machine, I am afraid that the debate is completely closed.

Okiereddust

2005-07-14 21:05 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Um, wasn't Bolshevism a form of Communism invented by a Jew (Karl Marx) and a German (Friedrich Engels)?
Your history is off there W.E. Maybe what you meant to say was "Bolshevism a form of Communism, and Comminism was invented by a Jew (Karl Marx) and a German (Friedrich Engels)?

[QUOTE]Also, weren't their ideas just extensions of the ideas of Hegel, who was also a German?[/QUOTE]Not quite. Your in waters way over your head here. As for that matter most people are when talking about Hegel.

Those are the facts that always puzzle me when I hear people call Communism or Bolshevism "Jewish".[/QUOTE]

We've had lots of good threads here in the past on this

[url=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4898]Jews and the Russian Revolution[/url] and [URL=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227]Tikun Olsam[/URL] are a couple of of the many good ones my [URL=http://www.google.com/search?q=communism+jew+site:www.originaldissent.com&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&start=20&sa=N]Google Search[/URL] pulled up.

White Elite

2005-07-14 22:17 | User Profile

Okie, you may very well be right, but this thread perfectly illustrates how so many white patriots get distracted debating issues that have little relevance to our present day problems here in America. We have too many present-day problems to fix to get hung up on what happened 60-70 years ago. It's time to leave the Nazis and the Commies behind.

Okiereddust

2005-07-14 22:55 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Okie, you may very well be right, but this thread perfectly illustrates how so many white patriots get distracted debating issues that have little relevance to our present day problems here in America. We have too many present-day problems to fix to get hung up on what happened 60-70 years ago. It's time to leave the Nazis and the Commies behind.[/QUOTE]Sounds to me like you're trying to change the subject after showing how you don't know much about it.

If you don't know much about something, its hard for you to authoritatively say its not relevant.

White Elite

2005-07-15 00:10 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Sounds to me like you're trying to change the subject after showing how you don't know much about it. I don't really care about it.

I just find it ridiculous when Nazis call Communism "Jewish" considering that one of it's crafters was an "Aryan" German.

If you don't know much about something, its hard for you to authoritatively say its not relevant.[/QUOTE]Well, I don't know much about the planet Jupiter, but I'm pretty sure it's not relevant to the problems we face in this country.

Okiereddust

2005-07-15 00:44 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]I don't really care about it. Well you certainly don't know much about it. Guess you'd prefer to lay that to apathy rather than stupidity, but your lack of interest or knowledge certainly doesn't keep you from talking about something.

Since you don't have a signature, maybe you could add one like " I am a smug, complacent ignoramous. Please ignore me."

I think its already an unwritten one anyway.:lol:

[QUOTE]Well, I don't know much about the planet Jupiter, but I'm pretty sure it's not relevant to the problems we face in this country.[/QUOTE]You don't know much about that planet either? You certainly talk like you're from there :lol:

Bardamu

2005-07-15 01:02 | User Profile

Okie, you have such a winning personality.

Okiereddust

2005-07-15 01:37 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]Okie, you have such a winning personality.[/QUOTE]Must be from hanging around all you "paranoid, psychotic white nationalists".

Bardamu

2005-07-15 01:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Must be from hanging around all you "paranoid, psychotic white nationalists".[/QUOTE]

funny how you quote yourself. ;)

il ragno

2005-07-15 02:51 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]funny how you quote yourself. ;)[/QUOTE]

If he didn't, nobody else would.

PS to White Elite: smack him right back. Without his power-smilies, Okie's as weak as a kitten.

And pay no attention if somebody named "Frederick William" suddenly shows up to take Okie's side and attack you. That'll just be Okie pretending to be his own amen corner as usual.

Okiereddust

2005-07-15 04:07 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]funny how you quote yourself. ;)[/QUOTE]

Sorry Bardy and Raggy. Guess I forget you guys spend so much time stalking me you don't always keep up with the newbies, and I paraphrased a bit. Here's the exact quote

[QUOTE]Let's face it, most "WN" propaganda doesn't have an audience, not because "the Jews" are censoring it, but because most of the ideas disseminated by so-called "white nationalists" have been psychotic, inhumane and anti-social, and most decent, normal white people don't want anything to do with it

[URL=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showpost.php?p=121178&postcount=23]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showpost.php?p=121178&postcount=23[/URL][/QUOTE]

Franco

2005-07-15 05:28 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]I don't really care about it.

I just find it ridiculous when Nazis call Communism "Jewish" considering that one of it's crafters was an "Aryan" German.

Well, I don't know much about the planet Jupiter, but I'm pretty sure it's not relevant to the problems we face in this country.[/QUOTE]

Communism was based on the Jewish[I] kahal[/I]. So in that sense, it was "Jewish," in addition to Marx being Jewish.

Angler

2005-07-15 06:10 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident][quote=Angler]Furthermore, it's well known that Christian Zionists are a very powerful force in national politics and have the ear of Bush and many members of Congress.

In short, the CZ's and religious right have political and judicial losses right down the line on every issue significant to them. You just can't convince me they are anywhere near being labeled a 'powerful force' in national politics. Again, I say they are merely a convenient and easy target for the anti-Bush/GOP/conservative Lefties and nowhere near the great influence that the secularists like to make them out to be. Your counterexamples are well-taken, but the discrepancy between the political failures of the Religious Right and the successes of the Israeli lobby (these aren't really the same, although they definitely overlap) can probably be explained by the fact that there's no effective "anti-Israel lobby" at work in this nation. Sure, we have certain liberal groups (e.g., SUSTAIN) and a handful of ultra-right-wingers, but all such groups are highly marginalized and have little influence (hopefully that will change). But there is a pro-abortion lobby, a pro-gay lobby, an anti-prayer lobby, etc., that hinder the efforts of the Christian lobbyists. So that could explain the lack of success regarding issues other than Israel.

White Elite

2005-07-15 18:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Well you certainly don't know much about it. Guess you'd prefer to lay that to apathy rather than stupidity, I didn't know Christianity suggested insulting those you disagree with.

but your lack of interest or knowledge certainly doesn't keep you from talking about something. Are you trying to tell me that Friedrich Engels wasn't an ethnic German?

Since you don't have a signature, maybe you could add one like " I am a smug, complacent ignoramous. Please ignore me." After getting slapped around by Il Ragno repeatedly, it appears that you are itching for a fight.

I think its already an unwritten one anyway.:lol:

You don't know much about that planet either? You certainly talk like you're from there :lol:[/QUOTE]Do you have a job, or perhaps a hobby you could engage in?

White Elite

2005-07-15 18:30 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]Okie, you have such a winning personality.[/QUOTE] How many new members has this "administrator" run off anyway?

White Elite

2005-07-15 18:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]If he didn't, nobody else would.

PS to White Elite: smack him right back. Without his power-smilies, Okie's as weak as a kitten.

And pay no attention if somebody named "Frederick William" suddenly shows up to take Okie's side and attack you. That'll just be Okie pretending to be his own amen corner as usual.[/QUOTE] Paleoconservatism will never get anyplace with people like that manning the battle stations.

White Elite

2005-07-15 18:35 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Communism was based on the Jewish kahal. So in that sense, it was "Jewish," in addition to Marx being Jewish.------------[/QUOTE] And Engels was just part of the cover story I assume?

Franco

2005-07-15 19:21 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]And Engels was just part of the cover story I assume?[/QUOTE]

Who cares about Engels? In any Jewish/gentile partnership [i.e. Engels/Marx], the pointman is usually the Jew, even if the gentile gets credit. The Jew has more drive and more cunning than any 4 gentiles, given the Jews' higher IQ and natural mental restlessness.

How many books have you read about Jews?

[edited]

White Elite

2005-07-15 19:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Who cares about Engels? I do.

In any Jewish/gentile partnership [i.e. Engels/Marx], the pointman is usually the Jew, even if the gentile gets credit. Do you have any proof of this?

The Jew has more drive and more cunning than any 4 gentiles, Which Jew?

given the Jews' higher IQ and natural mental restlessness. So, Jews are bad people because they have higher IQ's?

How many books have you read about Jews? How many books have you read about common sense?

Franco

2005-07-15 20:11 | User Profile

[QUOTE]How many books have you read about common sense?[/QUOTE]

The question that I asked you was: how many books have you read about Jews? Are you going to answer my question?

mwdallas

2005-07-15 21:02 | User Profile

[QUOTE]I just find it ridiculous when Nazis call Communism "Jewish" considering that one of it's crafters was an "Aryan" German.[/QUOTE]

Marx and Engels didn't invent "communism", and "communism" and "bolshevism" aren't the same thing. Marx and Engels wrote books and articles that more or less added up to an ideology known as MARXISM. Bolshevism was that universalist ideology put into practice in Russia by an essentially Jewish coup d'etat for the benefit of the Jewish community.

Some basics on "communism":

[url]http://www.bartleby.com/65/co/communism.html[/url]

Petr

2005-07-15 21:35 | User Profile

Franco, if you want to get a deeper idea of the Communist phenomenon, I would suggest that you should read this long online book:

[COLOR=DarkGreen][FONT=Arial][SIZE=6]"The Socialist Phenomenon"[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]by Igor Shafarevich [/SIZE] [/FONT] [/COLOR]

[url]http://robertlstephens.com/essays/essay_frame.php?essayroot=shafarevich/&essayfile=001SocialistPhenomenon.html#pagestart_vii[/url]

(contains a foreword by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn)

It will show you that totalitarian socialism was by no means invented by Marx, but is something that has existed, in different forms, ever since the dawn of men.

Petr

Ponce

2005-07-15 23:03 | User Profile

I believe that the dislike of Jews by the gentiles comes from the fact that we don't understand them.

I really would like to learn more of those people of God who are the Chosen Ones as told in the Bible.

Because I would like to learn more of them I would like to corespond with any of you here who is of the Jewish faith.

And if you lie to me I will give you a new azzhole, with all due respect... of course :gunsmilie

I do have a list of about 10,000 questions for you to answer me and the first one will be about the Jewish wanted criminal by the name of Salomon who in person killed over 150 persons with a bat, his favorite weapon, and why the state of Israel refused to send him to those countries who wants to put him on trial.

As you can see I can be very nice when I want to be.

Okiereddust

2005-07-16 00:34 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Paleoconservatism will never get anyplace with people like that manning the battle stations.[/QUOTE]"White Elite". You sure are making a hit over here with your brilliantly crafted insights

How is the paleoism ever going to survive when true brilliant minds like yourself, with your scintillating original insights (but what about Engels? :lol:) and our old friend Raggy from New York, don't receive the proper recognition from poor Okies like me you deserve.

I see Raggy has adopted you, and is delighted to invite you into the latest incarnation of his old "Axis of Ego". I'm sure Raggy would invite you to come over to the Phora with him and with his cronies. You doubtless would feel more comfortable there - maybe Fade could have actually found a way to incorporate you into his new vision for America, transcending all our old prejudices. But alas, the temporary thrill chattering chipmunks get from being in each others company seems to die away fairly easy, especially for people like Fade, who specifically mentioned how tiresome it was being in the company of people like Il Ragno when he started to shut down the forum, as he's now done.

Now he's back here and we've discovered your originality. Gosh, I don't know how we ever survived this long without you.

Bardamu

2005-07-16 03:39 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]How many new members has this "administrator" run off anyway?[/QUOTE]

I don't know what his problem with you is, but if I were you I wouldn't worry too much about it. As long as you're not a troll, or Raina, you can come here and argue all you want.

il ragno

2005-07-16 08:31 | User Profile

Not very long ago, Texas Dissident PM'd a number of the Exiles (myself included) asking us to return.

More than likely, this was because - thanks to Walter and Okie's ideological purge of the "heathens" - you could stand here all day and feel the whoosh of the tumbleweeds blowing past you. OD - once the crown jewel of rightist discussion boards - had become a near-ghost town; except for Faust manfully continuing to post news items, and Gabrielle's paid political advertisements for Bush/Cheney, there was next to no traffic any longer. Okie's "triumph" was, as they say, a Pyrrhic one.

And lookit him now - blustering and flustering, gently hinting that we'd all be far happier someplace else. Franco, go back to VNN! Raggy, off to the Phora with you - and take this new guy with you!

Okie wants his echo chamber back. Particularly since he can no longer second his own opinions as "Frederick William". And I suppose after he runs me off, and White Elite, and Franco, and Bardamu, well then he can get started on the second wave of apostates. Angler, for instance, or maybe Howard, or MST. Whoever might irritate him by noticing what a posturing fool he is. After all, "dialogue" always works a lot better when everybody's saying the exact same thing and sticking closely to the script - everybody knows that.

In that case, Okie, I urge you to confer with Tex, and commence yanking OD authorizations all over again. Tell him it just looks bad when 150 or so lurkers have to endure embarrassing spectacles like people actually disagreeing and debating with each other, or threads that don't get conclusively resolved with Bible quotes. Point out to him the advantages of presiding over a ghost town.... like ample parking.

I mean, God forbid he should get the wrong idea - like maybe some of those 150- 200 daily lurkers are waiting for Okie to go away before they feel comfortable posting here.

Nahhh. Couldn't be that.

Okiereddust

2005-07-16 09:47 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]Not very long ago, Texas Dissident PM'd a number of the Exiles (myself included) asking us to return.

[QUOTE]In that case, Okie, I urge you to confer with Tex, and commence yanking OD authorizations all over again. Tell him it just looks bad when 150 or so lurkers have to endure embarrassing spectacles like people actually disagreeing and debating with each other, or threads that don't get conclusively resolved with Bible quotes. Point out to him the advantages of presiding over a ghost town.... like ample parking. [/QUOTE]Ghost town eh? You New Yorkers always like to substitute your cacophony of malicious babble for meaningful human discourse, although I guess that's just the mentality of hymietown.

Of course you New Yorkers think every town in Oklahoma is a ghost town, and feel you have to fill it with endless bandwidth. Personally I prefer a ghost town to "Night of the Living Dead" :lol:

I mean, God forbid he should get the wrong idea - like maybe some of those 150- 200 daily lurkers are waiting for Okie to go away before they feel comfortable posting here.

Nahhh. Couldn't be that.[/QUOTE]

Hate to burst your bubble Raggy. [url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showpost.php?p=121459&postcount=6[/url]

(P.S. I know what's really bugging you Raggy. You just miss Raina don't you? Admit it :lol:)

il ragno

2005-07-16 10:45 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Ghost town eh? You New Yorkers always like to substitute your cacophony of malicious babble for meaningful human discourse, although I guess that's just the mentality of hymietown. Of course you New Yorkers think every town in Oklahoma is a ghost town, and feel you have to fill it with endless bandwidth.[/QUOTE]

Par for the course. You never respond to me without getting a dig in at "New Yorkers". This your 'clever' way of alerting all and sundry "HE'S A NOO YAWKUH PROTO-MARXIST CRYPTO-JEW - AND HE WANTS YOUR PRECIOUS WHITE CHILDREN TO MARRY NIGRAS!!"

But anybody who's read my posts for longer than a week knows I loathe New York, lived in - and loved - the Deep South, and miss it very much. (And I got news for you. If you think [I]I'm [/I] harsh towards Oklahoma, you ought to hear [U]authentic Southerners[/U] discussing it. When folks from [B]Arkansas [/B] look down their nose at you, you [I]might [/I] have an image problem that bashing "New York" won't fix all by itself.)

Besides, [B]I [/B] can't help being from the Empire State - any more than [I]you [/I] can help being a buffoon in overalls.

QUOTE[/QUOTE]

As I've also told [U]you[/U] many a time, how can I possibly 'miss' you if you [I]won't go away[/I]?

Quantrill

2005-07-16 11:48 | User Profile

[img]http://theforce.net/jedicouncil/castingcall/pics/imperial/tarkinon.jpg[/img]

Enough of this. Ragno, release him. This bickering is pointless.

Okiereddust

2005-07-16 12:00 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]If you think [I]I'm [/I] harsh towards Oklahoma, you ought to hear [U]authentic Southerners[/U] discussing it. When folks from [B]Arkansas [/B] look down their nose at you, you [I]might [/I] have an image problem that bashing "New York" won't fix all by itself.)

You haven't heard it? Arkansas is hi-class now. Not only do all their towns have Wal-Marts, they've got Wal-Mart Mecca City itself. Not to mention being Bill and Hillary's old stomping grounds (even though, like you, he deserted things here for life in the Big Apple fast lane).

[QUOTE]Besides, [B]I [/B] can't help being from the Empire State - any more than [I]you [/I] can help being a buffoon in overalls.[/QUOTE]Hey, I'll be the first to admit its not your fault you're a typical New Yorker. :lol:

As I've also told [U]you[/U] many a time, how can I possibly 'miss' you if you [I]won't go away[/I]?[/QUOTE]I know. But it just doesn't seem like the old Raina without the whips and chains. Nowadays I'll read something that sounds more like me than me, and someone will say "he wait, that's just closet Raina"

il ragno

2005-07-16 12:34 | User Profile

Pins and needles.... needles and pins.... A happy man.... is a man who grins -

(repeated ad nauseum, while stabbing a cantaloupe with a butcher knife)

White Elite

2005-07-16 14:58 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]The question that I asked you was: Actually Franco, we were talking about Friedrich Engels, who was not Jewish.

And since Judaism is a religion, and since Karl Marx did not believe in, or serve, God, he also was not a Jew.

how many books have you read about Jews? Are you going to answer my question?[/QUOTE]I've read the standard Nazi diatribe, like Rosenberg and Hitler, as well as the protocols and all the other garbage.

I've also read the Bible, which is about Jews.

Since you are so erudite on the topic of Jews, I assume you have read the Bible?

White Elite

2005-07-16 14:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]Marx and Engels didn't invent "communism", and "communism" and "bolshevism" aren't the same thing. Marx and Engels wrote books and articles that more or less added up to an ideology known as MARXISM.

I'm pretty sure one of those books was titled "The Communist Manifesto".

White Elite

2005-07-16 15:01 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust] Now he's back here and we've discovered your originality. Gosh, I don't know how we ever survived this long without you.[/QUOTE] Okie, do you believe in Jesus Christ?

White Elite

2005-07-16 15:03 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]I don't know what his problem with you is, but if I were you I wouldn't worry too much about it. As long as you're not a troll, or Raina, you can come here and argue all you want.[/QUOTE] Thank you.

mwdallas

2005-07-16 15:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE]I'm pretty sure one of those books was titled "The Communist Manifesto".[/QUOTE]

So what?

madrussian

2005-07-16 15:57 | User Profile

"White Elite" seems to be neither white nor elite. Marx wasn't a Jew because he wasn't religious? How more obvious can it get? :dung:

Franco

2005-07-16 16:05 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Actually Franco, we were talking about Friedrich Engels, who was not Jewish.

And since Judaism is a religion, and since Karl Marx did not believe in or serve God, he also was not a Jew.

I've read the standard Nazi diatribe, like Rosenberg and Hitler, as well as the protocols and all the other garbage.

I've also read the Bible, which is about Jews.

Since you are so erudite on the topic of Jews, I assume you have read the Bible?[/QUOTE]

Karl Marx was Jewish by race.

White Elite

2005-07-16 16:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Karl Marx was Jewish by race. ----------[/QUOTE] Judaism is a religion.

Franco

2005-07-16 16:51 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Judaism is a religion.[/QUOTE]

Yes, Judaism is a religion.

Ashkenazim Jews [i.e. most Jews] are a hybrid race.

Ponce

2005-07-16 17:10 | User Profile

IlRagno, you wrote:

"it just looks bad when 150 or so lurkers have to endure embarrassing spectacles like people actually disagreeing and debating with each other"

To me that's why we are here, no?

And like I wrote before " if you want everyone to think like you do then you may as well sit infront of a mirrow and talk to yourself".

Am I right or wrong?

White Elite

2005-07-16 17:39 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Yes, Judaism is a religion.

Ashkenazim Jews [i.e. most Jews] are a hybrid race.

--------------[/QUOTE] And most Christians are white.

Does that make Christians a race?

Franco

2005-07-16 19:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]And most Christians are white.

Does that make Christians a race?[/QUOTE]

Did you know that there are many other forums on the internet?

White Elite

2005-07-16 19:35 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Did you know that there are many other forums on the internet?

--------------[/QUOTE] Are Christians a race Franco?

Franco

2005-07-16 19:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]Are Christians a race Franco?[/QUOTE]

No.

And this post is my last response to any of your posts.

White Elite

2005-07-16 19:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]No.

Thank you.

And this post is my last response to any of your posts.

------------[/QUOTE] I'll be watching you.

Angler

2005-07-16 21:39 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]And most Christians are white.

Does that make Christians a race?[/QUOTE]If I can just butt in here...

Christianity is a religion that's popular among members of all races, not just whites. In fact, it's probably gaining more popularity among Negroes than whites nowadays.

Judaism is a religion, but you do not have to believe in Judaism to be a Jew. Most Jews themselves define a "Jew" simply as someone who was born to a Jewish mother. (This is official State of Israel policy as well.) You can be an atheist or a tree-worshipping pagan and still be a Jew.

How are Jews best defined, then? As a highly-inbred tribe or a "nation without borders."

Sertorius

2005-07-16 21:52 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]...

I'll be watching you.[/QUOTE] Watching for what?

Ponce

2005-07-16 22:07 | User Profile

White Elite if you are a Jew then I am here for you and yes being a Jew is being part of a race or more proper a nationality.

Being Jewish was like saying I am a Christian but in the case of the Jews that's no longer the option and being a Jew is being part of a race.

Take the Star of Davis, that's supposed to be a religious emblem but you can now see it painted on war tanks, jets, missiles, helicopters ,the Israel passenger planes and on and on and on.

To me that would be like the Christians placing the holy cross all over the place....what the Jews are doing is the same as what Herr Hiler did with the Swastika.

By the way, the Star of David as well as the Swastika dates hundred and hundreds of years before the Nazis or the Zionists.

Bring it on........

White Elite

2005-07-18 15:21 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler] Judaism is a religion, but you do not have to believe in Judaism to be a Jew. Most Jews themselves define a "Jew" simply as someone who was born to a Jewish mother. (This is official State of Israel policy as well.) That idea appears to be derived from a misinterpretation of the Torah.

How are Jews best defined, then? As a highly-inbred tribe or a "nation without borders."[/QUOTE]Judaism accepts converts.

How can someone convert to a different tribe or race?

White Elite

2005-07-18 15:31 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Sertorius]Watching for what?[/QUOTE] More of his cloaked Nazi nuttiness.

Quantrill

2005-07-18 15:33 | User Profile

Judaism is something of an anomoly, as it is a religion and an ethnicity simultaneously. [QUOTE=White Elite] How can someone convert to a different tribe or race?[/QUOTE] To truly convert to Judaism, one must totally subsume any previous group identification to one's new identification as a Jew. Pledging prime allegiance to something other than 'the Jews' is considered de facto proof of non-Jewishness. This is why many Jews feel more loyalty to Israel than to their host countries, and it is why devout Jewish families sometimes hold mock funerals for those Jews who convert to Christianity.

White Elite

2005-07-18 18:36 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Ponce]White Elite if you are a Jew I am a Christian.

then I am here for you and yes being a Jew is being part of a race or more proper a nationality. Being a Jew is, first and foremost, being part of a covenenant with God. The race or ethnicity of the underlying members of the Jewish religion is secondary. There are Jews with blond hair and blue eyes, and there are Jews with dark brown skin and dark brown eyes. The overriding factor is whether or not they love and serve God.

Being Jewish was like saying I am a Christian but in the case of the Jews that's no longer the option and being a Jew is being part of a race. Jews have internalized some of the racist ideas they were exposed to in Europe, but that doesn't mean those ideas are correct. They're not correct. Race has nothing to do with character and morality.

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who would rather have Al Roker for a next door neighbor rather than Jeffrey Dahmer, even though Roker is "black" and Dahmer is "white". Character always trumps race.

Take the Star of Davis, that's supposed to be a religious emblem but you can now see it painted on war tanks, jets, missiles, helicopters ,the Israel passenger planes and on and on and on.

To me that would be like the Christians placing the holy cross all over the place....what the Jews are doing is the same as what Herr Hiler did with the Swastika. Hitler was a satanic, god-hating aggressor who killed, and directly or indirectly caused the death of, tens of millions of innocent people and destroyed an entire continent.

In 1947-1948, the UN voted to divide Palestine between the Arabs and the Jews. The Jews accepted it. The Arabs rejected it. The surrounding Arab states readied for war against the Jews, and have been warring against the Jews ever since, in an attempt to "push them into the sea". The Jews in Israel have been fighting back as is their right to self-defense.

Comparing the Jews efforts at self-defense to Hitlers maniacal war-mongering and genocide spree is ridiculous.

By the way, the Star of David as well as the Swastika dates hundred and hundreds of years before the Nazis or the Zionists.[/QUOTE]The Star of David symbolizes the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

The upward pointing triangle symbolizes Heaven. ^

The downward pointing triangle symbolizes Earth. v

When you have overlap them, you have a visual representation of the Kingdom of Heaven Earth, as referred to in the prayer of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Our Father, who art in Heaven Holy is thy name Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done On Earth v As it is in Heaven ^ Give us this day Our daily bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those Who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from the Evil One.

Hitler was a servant of the Evil One, as were Nietzsche, Marx, Engels, Stalin, Lenin, Crowley, Hubbard, Manson, and all the other God haters.

True Judaism has nothing to do with race. True Jews are servants of God.

Quantrill

2005-07-18 19:14 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite] Jews have internalized some of the racist ideas they were exposed to in Europe, but that doesn't mean those ideas are correct. They're not correct. Race has nothing to do with character and morality. The Talmud is filled with the most racist language and thought imaginable, and it was already well-established by the time of Christ. To lay Jewish racism at the feet of 'ideas they were exposed to in Europe' is absolutely ridiculous.

[QUOTE=White Elite]True Judaism has nothing to do with race. True Jews are servants of God.[/QUOTE] Search this forum for one of the many discussions of the Jewish Talmud, and then reevalute this statement.

Franco

2005-07-18 19:22 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Quantrill]The Talmud is filled with the most racist language and thought imaginable, and it was already well-established by the time of Christ. To lay Jewish racism at the feet of 'ideas they were exposed to in Europe' is absolutely ridiculous.

Search this forum for one of the many discussions of the Jewish Talmud, and then reevalute this statement.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the Talmud could be called the world's first racist book, since Jews are a race first and a religion second [i.e. even Jews who are not religious, such as liberal Jews, are still Jews via their genes].

In fact, I am surprised that the Talmud is not banned in Europe as a "hate" book.

xmetalhead

2005-07-18 19:40 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]I am a Christian.

Being a Jew is, first and foremost, being part of a covenenant with God. The race or ethnicity of the underlying members of the Jewish religion is secondary. There are Jews with blond hair and blue eyes, and there are Jews with dark brown skin and dark brown eyes. The overriding factor is whether or not they love and serve God.[/QUOTE]

They don't serve God. They reject and despise Jesus Christ who is God and they reject the Holy Spirit who is God as well. If a Jew converts to Christianity, he/she's considered a pariah. Which god do they serve?

[QUOTE]Jews have internalized some of the racist ideas they were exposed to in Europe, but that doesn't mean those ideas are correct. They're not correct. Race has nothing to do with character and morality.[/QUOTE]

That's a stretch. Do you live in town or city that's close to large negro populations? Black neighborhoods suck and they're dirty, violent and run-down. White neighborhoods are clean, pleasant, and safe. That's all I need to know about "character".

[QUOTE]I'm sure I'm not the only one here who would rather have Al Roker for a next door neighbor rather than Jeffrey Dahmer, even though Roker is "black" and Dahmer is "white". Character always trumps race.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't want Al Roker as my neighbor anymore than I'd want Jeffrey Dahmler. Character doesn't trump race. You'll find that 99% of blacks, including Al Roker, think OJ was innocent of having anything to do with his wife's murder, whether they say it out loud or not. OTOH, 99.9% of Whites think Jeffrey Dahmler, according to evidence, was a mass-murdering psycho killer who deserved his punishment. THAT's the difference.

[QUOTE]Hitler was a satanic, god-hating aggressor who killed, and directly or indirectly caused the death of, tens of millions of innocent people and destroyed an entire continent.[/QUOTE]

Hitler's Nazi ideology and rhetoric was always centered on Germany for Germans only. It was other nations that didn't want to tolerate an alternative system that would threaten their own corrupt Central Banking systems (owned and operated by Jews) and war ensued and Germany did what they had to do, like Russia and England had to do what they had to do.

[QUOTE]In 1947-1948, the UN voted to divide Palestine between the Arabs and the Jews. The Jews accepted it. The Arabs rejected it. The surrounding Arab states readied for war against the Jews, and have been warring against the Jews ever since, in an attempt to "push them into the sea". The Jews in Israel have been fighting back as is their right to self-defense.[/QUOTE]

The Jews have no blood rights to the land of Palestine, except maybe the small minority of Sephardic Jews, who already lived in Palestine and coexisted with Christian and Muslim alike. The "blond hair, blue eyed" Jews in Israel are descendants of an ancient tribe that later converted to Judaism and have no rights to the land. They stole it by deception.

[QUOTE]Comparing the Jews efforts at self-defense to Hitlers maniacal war-mongering and genocide spree is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

You call yourself "White Elite", then you should know that the Israelis use similiar tactics that were allegedly used by Nazis. Torture, population displacement and relocation, collective punishment, etc, etc. It's not ridiculous to make comparisons.

[QUOTE]The Star of David symbolizes the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

The upward pointing triangle symbolizes Heaven. ^

The downward pointing triangle symbolizes Earth. v

When you have overlap them, you have a visual representation of the Kingdom of Heaven Earth, as referred to in the prayer of our Lord Jesus Christ:

God condemns graven images don't you know? And the Jewish "Star of David" has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus Christ, David's bloodline to Christ notwithstanding. It has everything to do with denying Christ as the Savior and His fullfilment of Moses' Law.

[QUOTE]Hitler was a servant of the Evil One, as were Nietzsche, Marx, Engels, Stalin, Lenin, Crowley, Hubbard, Manson, and all the other God haters.[/QUOTE]

You left out FDR and Churchill.
[QUOTE]True Judaism has nothing to do with race. True Jews are servants of God.[/QUOTE]

Maybe in the same way that true Muslims are servants of God?

Petr

2005-07-18 20:13 | User Profile

[FONT=Courier New][COLOR=Purple][I][B] - "Yes, the Talmud could be called the world's first racist book"[/B][/I][/COLOR][/FONT]

"The Law of Manu" of Hinduism quite easily matches Talmud in racism...

[COLOR=Blue][B]Manu Smrti VIII.272

" If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears." [/B] [/COLOR]

[url]http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/brahman/bra000/manuconst.html[/url]

Petr

2005-07-18 20:14 | User Profile

White Elite, can you prove that you are not Raina?

Petr

il ragno

2005-07-18 20:23 | User Profile

Well, anyone could be Raina. It's a constant x factor on any and every rightist forum. And I often wonder how it is that people so diametrically opposed to the positions that get taken here ever find this board, let alone begin posting. They're sure not following the link at Stormfront.

Waitaminnit: White Elite ain't Raina. He's [B]Erik D[/B], Prozac-gobbling racist-cum-diversity counselor. Ye Gods....this guy's like a ping-pong ball: he don't know if he's Morris Gulett or Morris [I]Dees[/I].

White Elite

2005-07-18 22:59 | User Profile

Search this forum for one of the many discussions of the Jewish Talmud, and then reevalute this statement.[/QUOTE]Have you yourself read the Talmud?

If not, how do you know the correct context of those quotes we have all seen?

I have not read the Talmud either, but I am planning to in the near future to find out the truth of the matter.

That being said, the Talmud is the oral commentary on the Torah, which is the law itself. To my knowledge, many rabbis were quoted in it discussing various issues, so I'm not surprised if various untruthful ideas are mentioned in it.

However, I do know that 99% of all the neo-Nazi nonsense I was exposed to turned out to be lies (such as those ridiculously fabricated anti-Jewish Franklin and Washington quotes), so I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the same is true for the "racist" Talmud quotes.

White Elite

2005-07-18 23:00 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]Yes, the Talmud could be called the world's first racist book, since Jews are a race first and a religion second [i.e. even Jews who are not religious, such as liberal Jews, are still Jews via their genes].

In fact, I am surprised that the Talmud is not banned in Europe as a "hate" book.

------------[/QUOTE] I knew you would break your word Franco. You were supposed to be ignoring me, remember?

White Elite

2005-07-18 23:11 | User Profile

[QUOTE=xmetalhead]They don't serve God. They reject and despise Jesus Christ who is God and they reject the Holy Spirit who is God as well. If a Jew converts to Christianity, he/she's considered a pariah. Which god do they serve? God the Father. The same Father that Jesus Christ prayed to.

That's a stretch. Do you live in town or city that's close to large negro populations? Black neighborhoods suck and they're dirty, violent and run-down. White neighborhoods are clean, pleasant, and safe. That's all I need to know about "character". Yes, I don't suppose that would have anything to do with the fact that black people were held down and oppressed for 400 years by racist white people?

Hitler's Nazi ideology and rhetoric was always centered on Germany for Germans only. It was other nations that didn't want to tolerate an alternative system that would threaten their own corrupt Central Banking systems (owned and operated by Jews) and war ensued and Germany did what they had to do, like Russia and England had to do what they had to do. Jews ran banking in Europe because they had no other options, as banking was forbidden to Europeans by the Church, and Jews were prevented from owning land and practicing trades. The Jews took the option that was available to them (which the Church approved, because the Jews were "sinners"), they prospered at it, and then they were hated for that too. It's ridiculous.

That's the story of the Jews for the last 2000 years... damned if they do, and damned if they don't.

The Jews have no blood rights to the land of Palestine, except maybe the small minority of Sephardic Jews, who already lived in Palestine and coexisted with Christian and Muslim alike. The "blond hair, blue eyed" Jews in Israel are descendants of an ancient tribe that later converted to Judaism and have no rights to the land. They stole it by deception. The Jews have religious rights to the land, because it was promised to their ancestors 2000 years ago, by the same God that the Muslims supposedly worship. This is all documentable, so even the Muslims, if they really believe in the God of Abraham (as they claim to), should give the Jews their land.

You call yourself "White Elite", then you should know that the Israelis use similiar tactics that were allegedly used by Nazis. Torture, population displacement and relocation, collective punishment, etc, etc. It's not ridiculous to make comparisons. I am well aware of those accusations, and I never said the present day state of Israel was saintly. Even the Torah True Jews would agree with you on that.

God condemns graven images don't you know? To my knowledge, symbols are not prohibited, but graven images of human or animal figures that could be worshipped as "gods".

And the Jewish "Star of David" has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus Christ, My only point was that even Jesus Christ was referencing the "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" concept.

David's bloodline to Christ notwithstanding. It has everything to do with denying Christ as the Savior and His fullfilment of Moses' Law. Perhaps, perhaps not. I never claimed otherwise.

You left out FDR and Churchill. Both sent by God to defeat the Satanic Nazis.

Maybe in the same way that true Muslims are servants of God?[/QUOTE]I never claimed such a thing.

White Elite

2005-07-18 23:12 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Petr][font=Courier New][color=purple] - "Yes, the Talmud could be called the world's first racist book"[/color][/font]

"The Law of Manu" of Hinduism quite easily matches Talmud in racism...

[color=blue]**Manu Smrti VIII.272 **

" If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears." [/color]

[url="http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/brahman/bra000/manuconst.html"]http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/brahman/bra000/manuconst.html[/url]

Petr[/QUOTE] Excellent point.

White Elite

2005-07-18 23:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]Well, anyone could be Raina. It's a constant x factor on any and every rightist forum. And I often wonder how it is that people so diametrically opposed to the positions that get taken here ever find this board, let alone begin posting. They're sure not following the link at Stormfront.

Waitaminnit: White Elite ain't Raina. He's Erik D, Prozac-gobbling racist-cum-diversity counselor. Ye Gods....this guy's like a ping-pong ball: he don't know if he's Morris Gulett or Morris Dees.[/QUOTE]Yes spiderman, it's me... Erik D... the terror of Nazi sympathizers everywhere.

I did go back and forth for the past two years, because serving God goes against my selfish and egotistical nature, but I have decided to fight on the side of good after all.

No drugs or chemicals necessary.

Good to see ya il ragno. :)

mwdallas

2005-07-18 23:19 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Jews ran banking in Europe because they had no other options....[/QUOTE]Aside from the most obvious option of all: stay the hell out of Europe!

White Elite

2005-07-19 00:12 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]Aside from the most obvious option of all: stay the hell out of Europe![/QUOTE] In many case they were actually invited there by the European kings, and had few other options after being idiotically driven out of their homeland by the European Roman legions.

Franco

2005-07-19 00:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite]I knew you would break your word Franco. You were supposed to be ignoring me, remember?[/QUOTE]

WAS I RESPONDING TO YOU???

White Elite

2005-07-19 00:28 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]WAS I RESPONDING TO YOU???

----------[/QUOTE]You just did. :)

Bardamu

2005-07-19 00:29 | User Profile

[QUOTE=White Elite] Yes, I don't suppose that would have anything to do with the fact that black people were held down and oppressed for 400 years by racist white people?

[/QUOTE]

Ive heard Raina say pretty much the same thing, word for word. :jester:

White Elite

2005-07-19 00:30 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]Ive heard Raina say pretty much the same thing, word for word. :jester:[/QUOTE] Is it true, or is it not true?

Bardamu

2005-07-19 00:35 | User Profile

You just admitted you're Raina.

White Elite

2005-07-19 00:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]You just admitted you're Raina.[/QUOTE] I'm not Raina, but I think she was right on that point.

il ragno

2005-07-19 00:48 | User Profile

No, he's Erik D, not Raina. And the board he's really looking for is MootStormfront, not Original Dissent.

Bardamu

2005-07-19 01:09 | User Profile

Ban her.

kane123123

2005-07-19 02:52 | User Profile

Here's my take. Jews are not a race, but a religious community with strong ethnic elements (Ashkenazi and Sephardic) that usually apply. Just like most Christians are Slavs/Celts/Germanics/other Europeans, most Jews are Ashkenazi or Sephardic.

Judaism is a religion which I disagree with because of some of its hateful elements but I will say that I value morality more than I do religion. However, most Jews have not been too moral. I guess I will say that not all Jews are Jewish Supremecists, but enough of them are to warrant a threat. The Jewish community has many threatening people. Not all are threats but enough of them are.

I think Hitler was not a model citizen to model our Governement after but he was forced to go a to a lot of extremes he went to because of some of the bad economic circumstances of the time, which certain Jewish Supremecists happened to contribute to.

Angeleyes

2005-07-19 03:20 | User Profile

Shooting gallery time. How's the clay pigeon feeling today?

[QUOTE=White Elite]God the Father. The same Father that Jesus Christ prayed to. Funny, he came to remind them of the law, and they chose to martyr him for his troubles. Do Jews say The Lord's Prayer? [QUOTE] Yes, I don't suppose that would have anything to do with the fact that black people were held down and oppressed for 400 years by racist white people? [/QUOTE]
Are you including Arabs and 1300 years of East and later West African black slavery, not to mention 800+ years of white slavery practices by Arab beys and sheiks? Try not using half the story, and you won't look like an idiot. [QUOTE] Jews ran banking in Europe because they had no other options, as banking was forbidden to Europeans by the Church, and Jews were prevented from owning land and practicing trades. The Jews took the option that was available to them (which the Church approved, because the Jews were "sinners"), they prospered at it, and then they were hated for that too. It's ridiculous. [/QUOTE]
They made themselves useful. Survival instinct. Bully for them.
[QUOTE] That's the story of the Jews for the last 2000 years... damned if they do, and damned if they don't. [/QUOTE]
Funny, and Jesus came to save them from damnation. Yet when he spoke up, to expose the truth versus hypocrisy, they played fingers in the ears, "LALALALAL I'm Not Listening!" Strange, eh? Looked a gift horse in the mouth, so to speak. [QUOTE] The Jews have religious rights to the land, because it was promised to their ancestors 2000 years ago, by the same God that the Muslims supposedly worship. This is all documentable, so even the Muslims, if they really believe in the God of Abraham (as they claim to), should give the Jews their land. [/QUOTE]
"Religious Rights?" How droll. The Romans made them leave, since they kicked the ass of the Jews of Judea and hard. By 70 AD, their "religious right" was over taken by a simple secular right: the Romans resorted to the old school, sanctioned by the OT method of their lines on the map: by force. [QUOTE]I am well aware of those accusations, and I never said the present day state of Israel was saintly. Even the Torah True Jews would agree with you on that.[/QUOTE]How nice. [QUOTE]To my knowledge, symbols are not prohibited, but graven images of human or animal figures that could be worshipped as "gods".[/QUOTE]Cross is a symbol. But, does one worship the cross, or God? [QUOTE] My only point was that even Jesus Christ was referencing the "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" concept. [/QUOTE]
Negative. His comments to Pilate was that his Kingdom, where he reigned, was not of The World. With original sin, the entire spiritual salvation was to build a path to reach Grace. The eternal nature is beyond the confines of The World.

il ragno

2005-07-19 04:38 | User Profile

Erik has tumbled down the rabbit hole of "anti-racism" so far, so fast and so fu**ing foolishly, you really have to wonder if a brotha didn't help him 'come out' in another way, too.

Okiereddust

2005-07-19 04:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]Erik has tumbled down the rabbit hole of "anti-racism" so far, so fast and so fu**ing foolishly, you really have to wonder if a brotha didn't help him 'come out' in another way, too.

He's mentioned being the only white guy in an all-black neighborhood, and he sure sounds like someone who was made to ride a chocolate pony at gunpoint...and who's spent every day since talking himself into believing that pony ride was his idea. Thee's a lot of Donny the Punk in Erik D.[/QUOTE]You know, I was just about to suggest the same thing. There certainly is a common pattern I've noticed, and it occurs especially with a certain level of WN, high up enough so he's become a public figure and his anonymity has been shed, but still so low that he isn't tied to that pony forever. In fact I suspect the same general thing happened to Fade.

I just have a question if its just a black thing though. Erik basically talked about jews, as did Fade. It sounds like at the very least more than a few corner crips and bloods - more likely the local NAACP chapter, just off the phone from talking to the SPLC.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-19 05:01 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]You know, I was just about to suggest the same thing.[/QUOTE]So, is it the custom around here to hook trolls on a 6 pound line and let them flop around in their excrement, splashing it all over the board, til they get tired?

Okiereddust

2005-07-19 05:11 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]So, is it the custom around here to hook trolls on a 6 pound line and let them flop around in their excrement, splashing it all over the board, til they get tired?[/QUOTE]Well you don't really know if its a troll until you get it in the boat.

I guess from our FR experience we still have a bit of a free speech soft spot. Over at FR of course you just ask one little innocent question, "you think our war in the mideast is really in America's interest" and the gestapo is all over you "JR ban this Buchananite crypto WN-antisemite."

We could have banned WE right away, but we'd never found out he was ErikD. Interesting at least.

madrussian

2005-07-19 06:04 | User Profile

"White Elite" was pretty obvious. A pretensious handle, anti-anti-semitism, quasi-"Christian" posturing.

il ragno

2005-07-19 06:29 | User Profile

You have to understand that - not six months ago - Erik D had come to the Phora from VNN Forum, parroting the "the Jews are a plague and must be wiped out" company line. But after a week or so of exposure to Fade's "It is a fact that the Jews do not control the media" spin, he began to adopt this [I]new [/I] flavor sitting next to him in the icebox. Suddenly he "realized" extremism was a dead-end...just like Fade!

Except Fade's landed Southern gentry, so while he gives Jews a pass, he has [I]very[/I] harsh opinions on blacks; sure enough, Erik soon adopted the identical [I]Jews ok, blacks bad [/I] worldview.

About a week later, Lindstedt made his debut, and we all know his style - [I]I will drink dual-seedline nut-brown ale from jewr hollowed out skull, spam whigger-mamzer[/I] is how he says "hello" when first meeting you. So Fade and a few others hie over to VNN Forum to bait and insult him, Erik D in tow. Amazingly, once he was again in an environment rife with unapologetic racist riffraff, Erik begins mimicking their lingo once [I]again[/I], and he's Jew-bashing anew.

By now I wasn't alone in suspecting his elevator didn't go up to the penthouse, if you get my drift...and sure enough, he soon fessed up to being pretty much ex-everything: ex-skinhead, ex-WCOTC, ex-mental patient, etc, etc. He ostentatiously made his farewell to the Net forever to embark on a self-described 'journey of discovery'. That lasted about two months; and he's been ping-ponging back and forth ever since.

But it's only been very recently, the last two times he's beamed down from the Mothership, that he's been pushing the [I]we-are-all-black, 400-years-of-oppression, I-live-in-the-hood-and-see-Whitey's-evil-everyday [/I] script, while wearing a t-shirt that says "My Boss Is A Scientist Named Yacub".

So, given his propensity to attach himself to [I]any[/I]one stronger-minded and more dogmatic than he, y'gotta wonder what this latest orientation-session consisted of.

And frankly, it has to be said: whether you call it racism, racialism, race-realism or just plain [I]I don't like them people[/I], committing to these beliefs means committing to a sort of dual existence: going along to get along in public; and hewing to your version of Forbidden Truth in private. It's a path that is fraught with schizophrenic peril for even the strongest-minded - those more susceptible to mental illness are skipping thru a minefield without even realizing it. I often wonder if racialism is even suitable for anyone under 35 or so, particularly in our own era where adults remain adolescents almost indefinitely; and if this is a contributing reason to why there is nothing even resembling unity, shared purpose or even a workable plan, short or long-term, on the White Right.

Walter Yannis

2005-07-19 08:31 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]So, is it the custom around here to hook trolls on a 6 pound line and let them flop around in their excrement, splashing it all over the board, til they get tired?[/QUOTE]

Ha! :thumbsup:

Okiereddust

2005-07-19 09:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]And frankly, it has to be said: whether you call it racism, racialism, race-realism or just plain [I]I don't like them people[/I], committing to these beliefs means committing to a sort of dual existence: going along to get along in public; and hewing to your version of Forbidden Truth in private. It's a path that is fraught with schizophrenic peril for even the strongest-minded - those more susceptible to mental illness are skipping thru a minefield without even realizing it. I often wonder if racialism is even suitable for anyone under 35 or so, particularly in our own era where adults remain adolescents almost indefinitely; and if this is a contributing reason to why there is nothing even resembling unity, shared purpose or even a workable plan, short or long-term, on the White Right.[/QUOTE]Precisely Tex at this board has always tried to develop and emphasize our relationship with moderate nationalist candidates like Buchanan, and generally try to maintain our links with conservatism as opposed to the uncompromising nationalism and racial oriented strains.

You can quibble with their approach, moderation, and inevitable compromises, but cutting people loose from a policy of the possibility of constructive engagement with at least broadly sympathetic sections of society, keeping them locked in a cyber-world full of anarchic and schismatic WN's, has a lot of negative effects on people, especially younger and more unstable types. Plus I've long suspected that a lot of WN types mean to cultivate this type of craziness for their own purposes, such as with the lone wolf's of the "leaderless resistance" movement.

I think they're trying to use people for themselves, and often in destructive ways. We don't often see the results of that, but occasionally we do. ErikD is just one I'm sure of the many casualties of the WN movement out there.

I for one know that at least here at OD we've at least tried to keep open some positive venues and positive paradigms to help people like this. Its imprtant to us, although I know to a lot of people it isn't.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-19 15:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]I guess from our FR experience we still have a bit of a free speech soft spot. Over at FR of course you just ask one little innocent question, "you think our war in the mideast is really in America's interest" and the gestapo is all over you "JR ban this Buchananite crypto WN-antisemite."[/QUOTE]White Elite was claiming that Jews are some sort of superior form of Christian - a people we should worship and adore. It is a Talmudic message so offensive that a posting - challenge - reaffirmation combo ought to do the trick.

He was arguing that we should all accept our position as a subordinate race.

OD is our real estate, and if we cannot hold our real estate on the net, how can we ever expect to retake our country?

jeffersonian

2005-07-19 15:35 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Traditionalist Islamic forces are fighting the same battle as traditionalist Western conservatives.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense.

Even if their values were the same, which they are not, where are these "Traditionalist Isslamic Forces"? Cowering is where, afraid of the Islamofascist faction.

Traditionalists in the islamic world are, from all evidence, willing to follow whichever terrorist idiot sets off the last bomb.

Petr

2005-07-19 15:46 | User Profile

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=Purple][B][I] - "OD is our real estate, and if we cannot hold our real estate on the net, how can we ever expect to retake our country?"[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT]

I agree with Yggdrasil. If I were in charge over here, trolls like Raina and confused quasi-trolls like Erik D would be given a short shrift indeed.

Petr

Sertorius

2005-07-19 15:51 | User Profile

People like "White Elite" eventually get tiresome and wear out their welcome.

Bardamu

2005-07-20 01:06 | User Profile

Not that it matters, but you all are so sure White Elite was EricD, it sure sounded like Raina to me. Raina trolls here regularly about every 4 or 5 days. Her rhetoric is recognizable and she repeats herself. She would love to be misidentified as EricD because presumably she then would be allowed to hang around. These raids actually benefit the website by giving posters a chance to shoot clay pigeons.

il ragno

2005-07-20 03:49 | User Profile

Bardamu, it would be much easier to convice you had the Phora's old archive not disappeared forever.

There are certain weenies whose weenieness lodges itself in the file cabinet of your memory. It took a few posts to trigger mine, but - once it did - the other pieces fell into place.

Raina's mo is more "Jews gave you Western civilization" and - of course - "women love to kill", "racists r stoopit", and "white slaves are all asking for it", with lots of sidebar scatology. Raina attacks/asserts Jewish superiority; Erik D either pleads for, or insists on, universal oneness and brotherhood, like a stray dog yipping after you.

Okiereddust

2005-07-20 03:55 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]Bardamu, it would be much easier to convice you had the Phora's old archive not disappeared forever. [/QUOTE]No one's trying to retreive the archives? I thought Fade said they were saved somewhere.

Okiereddust

2005-07-20 04:04 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]White Elite was claiming that Jews are some sort of superior form of Christian - a people we should worship and adore. It is a Talmudic message so offensive that a posting - challenge - reaffirmation combo ought to do the trick.

He was arguing that we should all accept our position as a subordinate race. Well OK. I didn't follow all his posts thsat closely, take your word for it.

OD is our real estate, and if we cannot hold our real estate on the net, how can we ever expect to retake our country?[/QUOTE] Well how do you expect us to retake our country, and how are we supposed to implement in real life a cyber-suspension? I don't automatically see how the rules for managing forums with a tight rein translate into political hegonomy, and even if we do obtain hegonomy, how do we deal with dissenting voices? I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here.

ErikD was an obvious idiot, but being an idiot does not per se violate our forum rules, so personally I always like to exercise some caution.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-21 07:45 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Okiereddust]I don't automatically see how the rules for managing forums with a tight rein translate into political hegonomy, and even if we do obtain hegonomy, how do we deal with dissenting voices? I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here.[/QUOTE]Excellent question, actually!

I guess what I am saying is that there are certain viewpoints which, if allowed to clutter up the board, will offend the typical Paleocon and drive them away. I have the sense that Paleocons (and WNs, for that matter) are so alienated from the mainstream PC nonsense that they want to gather on boards which are PC free, or where PC views are confined to a "dissenting views" section.

Kinda like moving to a small town to avoid rush hour traffic. You don't want rush hour traffic to follow you there.

If the purpose of the OD board were to seek abstract truth, then I suppose all viewpoints should be allowed. But I don't think that is the proper purpose of the OD board. I view it as sort of a gentlemens' club of the web, where active posters have the same basic instincts and common goals (even if they differ on how to achieve those goals), and where certain irritants are not allowed in the door.

I suppose it all comes down to a question of having the will to dominate and survive.

Do we have it?

Should we demonstrate that we have it here?

Stigmata

2005-07-21 07:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I guess what I am saying is that there are certain viewpoints which, if allowed to clutter up the board, will offend the typical Paleocon and drive them away. [/QUOTE]Is this an example of a "typical paleocon"? [QUOTE] Neoconservative Jews are defenders of Western Civilization and would be welcome in a European-American nation.

Howard Stern, the redneck Jew, is emblematic of an even more significant movement of Jews out of the psychological ghetto of fear, and into mainstream European-American popular culture. When Howard Stern berates blacks, he is not overcome by fear that turning his goyish audience against blacks might lead to discrimination against Jews as well. Forty years ago that would have been an automatic reaction among all Jews. Today, that fear seems as implausible to most Jews as would a fear that stirring up anti-black sentiment would lead inexorably to discrimination against the Irish.

Jews in the Howard Stern/Andrew Dice Clay mold do not consider themselves threatened by other whites. Psychologically they feel that they are whites, and I see no reason to try to change their minds.[/QUOTE][url="http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-19.htm"]http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-19.htm[/url]

Petr

2005-07-21 07:57 | User Profile

Keep on stalking, Stiggy.

Petr

Stigmata

2005-07-21 07:58 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Petr]Keep on stalking, Stiggy.

Petr[/QUOTE] Keep on worshipping that dead Jew on a stick, Peetie.

Texas Dissident

2005-07-21 08:09 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]I suppose it all comes down to a question of having the will to dominate and survive.

Do we have it?

Should we demonstrate that we have it here?[/QUOTE]

I suppose you don't see it Ygg, but trust me we do it daily. In fact, quite often it seems that's all I do.

I would bet that for every one solid contributing new member we get 30 trolls, disruptors and run-of-the-mill wackos.

But such is life running a semi-open registration, public discussion board...

il ragno

2005-07-21 08:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE]No one's trying to retreive the archives? I thought Fade said they were saved somewhere.[/QUOTE]

So I hear, too, but as yet - nada. (Fade himself neither runs the neoPhora nor posts there.)

[QUOTE]....the proper purpose of the OD board [is] as sort of a gentlemens' club of the web, where active posters have the same basic instincts and common goals (even if they differ on how to achieve those goals), and where certain irritants are not allowed in the door....[/QUOTE]

When 100 people are all of the same mind on the vast majority of topics [via loyalty-oaths and background checks] you end up with an awful lot of one-post threads.

I will say this much: 95% of all the trollwankery and disruption on this board (and its ideological kin) are the result of one or two very specific pests. At long last one of those troll's sources of power has been discovered. While we may not be able to ever prevent this person from trying, trying again - and I'm precluded at the moment from saying more - we may shortly be able to yank off this creature's cloak of invisibility/invincibility and at last identify, isolate and contain any further outbreaks. Stay tuned.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-21 17:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Stigmata]Is this an example of a "typical paleocon"? [url="http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-19.htm"]http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-19.htm[/url][/QUOTE]

You know, it is time for me to go back and clean up my own web page of those writings from 1994 and 1995, before the true colors of the neocons were known, and which conflict with my current views.

Back then the neo-cons made a pretty good show of wanting to preserve Western Civilization, and Paleos like myself were taken in.

I have had this tendency to think that a lot of people with paleo instincts are probably still fooled, and thus might identify with these early writings - otherwise the Republican Party could not function the way it does.

However, I get blowtorched for these things I wrote back in 1994-95 so much that, right or wrong about their recruitment potential, it just ain't worth the dues anymore.

And given the facts on the ground ten years later, a few of the passages do sound rather ridiculous.

Yggdrasil

2005-07-21 18:09 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]I would bet that for every one solid contributing new member we get 30 trolls, disruptors and run-of-the-mill wackos.[/QUOTE]Sounds about right!! :rolleyes:

I understand that moderating is an under-appreciated art form, which is why I started off this detour with a comical question about "custom".

Its just that in this case overt espressions of Jewish supremecism (or the sumpremecism of Judaism) really get my goat, whether posted by trolls or the sincerely confused.

The point being that there are a few very bright lines which should bring swift discipline - much swifter discipline that one would inflict on the typical, clever "poser troll" who pretends to be a WN and then gently and persistently tries to move WN (or Christian Nationalism) in the direction that serves neo-con interests.

The key to survival for a "poser troll" is to move from thread to thread and to avoid getting into lengthy exchanges. The longer and more detailed the debate gets on a single thread, the more likely he is to prove himself IP and be banned.

The process of exposing and banning "poser trolls" us usefull to the extent that it can finely calibrate our IP detection antennae. Thus, in those cases a 6 pound line and some flopping around are OK.

Hugh Lincoln

2005-07-21 19:40 | User Profile

Your "dual existence" observation intrigues me, sir. I see this very phenomenon at work in the lives of many of us. And I don't think this topic gets enough serious treatment. (Though Robert Griffin wrote something in a recent TOQ about this, and it was thoughtful and encouraging.)

For some of us, the two "tracks," as I call them, are completely separate. For others, there is some merging. Others have only one track --- the public "racists," out there for all to see.

But you're right that the "dual tracking" can wreak havoc on the mind.

madrussian

2005-07-22 03:00 | User Profile

Does anyone voice mildly controversial opinions at work? When does one start sounding like a "racist"?

It seems to me that the terror of this "duality" only exists when one is around people whose guts one hates. Is that the case for the majority of posters here?

Bardamu

2005-07-22 03:14 | User Profile

I voice controversial opinions at work from time to time, but as a routine matter I stay off my soap box, as does everyone else for the most part. Work, politics, two different things. I'm in the strong union, blue collar world. My boss is a redneck, most of my co-workers are gun nuts, and all the white guys loath political correctness. It is not an impossible political environment by any means. But I keep my trap shut mainly because I am intent on my work.

madrussian

2005-07-22 03:19 | User Profile

Right, politics and work are separate and they don't require to proclaim allegiance to divershitty and multi-kulti at workplace. So the question stands: where is this duality and its dangers?

Bardamu

2005-07-22 03:27 | User Profile

Well, I'm in the blue colllar world, i.e. I'm a prole, so ideological loyalty is not very important. I think it may be different with intellectuals, especially if you are not a technician.

madrussian

2005-07-22 03:36 | User Profile

I am not blue collar. If you are in a technical field or in science, politics hardly enters the equation. I don't know about lawyers, but there are natural barriers for mexishis/blacks to enter that profession too.

Howard Campbell, Jr.

2005-07-22 03:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]Your "dual existence" observation intrigues me, sir. I see this very phenomenon at work in the lives of many of us. And I don't think this topic gets enough serious treatment. (Though Robert Griffin wrote something in a recent TOQ about this, and it was thoughtful and encouraging.)

For some of us, the two "tracks," as I call them, are completely separate. For others, there is some merging. Others have only one track --- the public "racists," out there for all to see.

But you're right that the "dual tracking" can wreak havoc on the mind.[/QUOTE]

Orwell called it "Doublethink". Not a rare phenomenon in occupied nations...


As Orwell explains in the book, the Party could not protect its iron grip on power without degrading its people and exposing them to constant propaganda. Yet knowledge of this brutality and deception, even within the Party itself could lead to disgusted collapse of the state from within, as the Soviet Union later fell in the late 20th century. For this reason, OrwellÃ¢â¬â¢s idealized government used a complex system of "reality control". Though the novel is most famous for its pervasive surveillance of daily life, reality control meant that the population could be controlled and manipulated merely through the alteration of everyday language and thought. Newspeak was the method for controlling thought through language; Doublethink was the method of controlling thought directly...

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doublethink&redirect=no[/url]

Doublethink was a form of trained, willful blindness to contradictions in a system of beliefs. In the case of Winston Smith, Orwell's protagonist, it meant being able to work at the Ministry of Truth deleting uncomfortable facts from public records, and then believing in the new history which he himself had written.

---

### madrussian
*2005-07-22 03:44* | [User Profile](/od/user/15)

One can argue that learning doublethink is benefitial for the whites, as they may finally learn how to think and feel as a group and become more cunning and discriminate when choosing their circle of close friends. In fact, that may be a necessary condition to survive and win: either you become more complex and tribal, or you just drown in divershitty.

---

### Howard Campbell, Jr.
*2005-07-22 03:47* | [User Profile](/od/user/244)

[QUOTE=madrussian]One can argue that learning doublethink is benefitial for the whites, as they may finally learn how to think and feel as a group and become more cunning and discriminate when choosing their circle of close friends. In fact, that may be a necessary condition to survive and win: either you become more complex and tribal, or you just drown in divershitty.[/QUOTE]

Jews constantly practice Doublethink among Host peoples.  Perhaps this plays a role in that group's unusually high incidence of schizophrenia?

---

### madrussian
*2005-07-22 04:25* | [User Profile](/od/user/15)

They are inbred, I think that's their main source of diseases.

---

### Howard Campbell, Jr.
*2005-07-22 05:01* | [User Profile](/od/user/244)

You raised a good point earlier, MR.

The Japanese and Chinese in their homogeneous societies don't squander enormous psychic capital on false appearances and doublethink required in the "diverse" West.

"HATE" is only a natural consciousness of kind.

---

### Okiereddust
*2005-07-22 05:02* | [User Profile](/od/user/29)

[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]Orwell called it "Doublethink".  Not a rare phenomenon in occupied nations...

As Orwell explains in the book, the Party could not protect its iron grip on power without degrading its people and exposing them to constant propaganda. Yet knowledge of this brutality and deception, even within the Party itself could lead to disgusted collapse of the state from within, as the Soviet Union later fell in the late 20th century. For this reason, OrwellÃ¢â¬â¢s idealized government used a complex system of "reality control". Though the novel is most famous for its pervasive surveillance of daily life, reality control meant that the population could be controlled and manipulated merely through the alteration of everyday language and thought. Newspeak was the method for controlling thought through language; Doublethink was the method of controlling thought directly...

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doublethink&redirect=no[/url] Golly, doesn't that sound exactly like divershitty training? Or our present system today?

Doublethink was a form of trained, willful blindness to contradictions in a system of beliefs. In the case of Winston Smith, Orwell's protagonist, it meant being able to work at the Ministry of Truth deleting uncomfortable facts from public records, and then believing in the new history which he himself had written.[/QUOTE]What you call Orwellian "doublethink" of course I think we know more commonly here as just the "self-deception" part of the "deception" mode of behavior from evolutionary psychology/sociobiology from MacDonald.

It is of course a common knowledge among political propaganda scientists that self-deception and deception are linked, and reinforce each other generally. Perhaps one of the reasons for the aleged high-incoidence of schiziphrenia among jews, although I would suspect it just owes more to the high rate of psychoanalysts among them.

Blond Knight

2005-07-22 05:16 | User Profile

[QUOTE] One can argue that learning doublethink is benefitial for the whites, as they may finally learn how to think and feel as a group and become more cunning and discriminate when choosing their circle of close friends. In fact, that may be a necessary condition to survive and win: either you become more complex and tribal, or you just drown in divershitty.[/QUOTE]

MR - You bring up an important point here. This phenomenon is expounded upon in the book "The Death Of Reality" by Lawrence Dawson. He exposes the work of the Frankfort School bunch in their efforts to impose an Orwellian type of tyrany on the sheeple in the western world.

il ragno

2005-07-22 10:38 | User Profile

I see two differences just at a glance; there are probably more.

When Jews [I]double-track [/I] today, they don't hide the part that's inconvenient for them to say but what's inconvenient for [I]you [/I] to [I]know[/I]. They don't have to worry about being overheard saying [I]I am a Jew/ we are the achievers, the light unto the world/ for 5000 years the world persecutes us/ antipathy towards Israel is treason against America/ millions of goyishe lives < one Jewish fingernail[/I]. This is what they can and have said [U]openly[/U]. No white may say any of that. What [I]they[/I] double-track is what might finally compel [U]you[/U] to snap, paint JUDE on their store-windows and drag them onto cattle-cars again. Bear this in mind: [U]we[/U] double-track to survive and avoid pariah status and persecution; [U]they[/U] double-track to maintain control.
The most extreme example of Jewish [I]double-tracking [/I] came during the weakest and most vulnerable point of their presence in Europe: the marrano period, the Inquisition. Are whites strong enough, unified enough, and selfless enough to insincerely undergo religious conversion and "pray" to alien gods, while biding their time - [I]and finding ways to make even their humiliation gain them advantages [/I] - until the tempests finally pass and they can again solidify, re-emerging stronger than before? No. Stubborn pride and a different, emptier, sort of exceptionalism holds sway with us. We've shown, time and again, the same pathological inclination to drop everything and take up arms to engage in racial fratricide over the most piddling of cosmetic differences among ourselves. It's true our histories have wired us differently, but look at - not just the wiggers - but the loyalists to a nonexistant "Judeo-Christian tradition"; I dunno what [I]you [/I] see, but [I]I[/I] see unconscious marranos who take to alien gods hook, line and sinker without it ever occurring to them that [I]this is [B]supposed [/B] to be just an act[/I].

Bardamu

2005-07-22 13:12 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno]I dunno what [I]you [/I] see, but [I]I[/I] see unconscious marranos who take to alien gods hook, line and sinker without it ever occurring to them that [I]this is [B]supposed [/B] to be just an act[/I].[/QUOTE]

The effect of being deracinated, atomized individualists.

Bardamu

2005-07-22 13:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=madrussian]I am not blue collar. If you are in a technical field or in science, politics hardly enters the equation. I don't know about lawyers, but there are natural barriers for mexishis/blacks to enter that profession too.[/QUOTE]

The people who have real problems with double-think are those working in the media and the schools.

madrussian

2005-07-22 15:34 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno] They don't have to worry about being overheard saying [I]I am a Jew/ we are the achievers, the light unto the world/ for 5000 years the world persecutes us/ antipathy towards Israel is treason against America/ millions of goyishe lives < one Jewish fingernail[/I]. [/QUOTE] Their being able to keep saying that openly without immediate consequences is a recently new phenomenon.

Hugh Lincoln

2005-07-22 15:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Bardamu]I voice controversial opinions at work from time to time, but as a routine matter I stay off my soap box, as does everyone else for the most part. Work, politics, two different things. I'm in the strong union, blue collar world. My boss is a redneck, most of my co-workers are gun nuts, and all the white guys loath political correctness. It is not an impossible political environment by any means. But I keep my trap shut mainly because I am intent on my work.[/QUOTE]

That, and it's still a leap from redneck gun nut who loathes political correctness to race-and-Jew-aware white advocate. I must really stay guarded because I'm sometimes mistaken for a liberal. I'll say I admire Pat Buchanan.

Quantrill

2005-07-22 16:07 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]That, and it's still a leap from redneck gun nut who loathes political correctness to race-and-Jew-aware white advocate. I must really stay guarded because I'm sometimes mistaken for a liberal. I'll say I admire Pat Buchanan.[/QUOTE] I was having dinner at a conference a few months back, and the talk turned to politics. We commiserated about the idiocy of our current war, and expressed our dissatisfaction with the policies of the Bush Administration. Another person walked up to join our conversation, and asked what the views of the group were. A woman at our table loudly informed him that we were all liberal Democrats! I was just drunk enough to enjoy telling her that I was actually a 'right-wing extremist'.

Howard Campbell, Jr.

2005-07-22 17:06 | User Profile

[QUOTE=madrussian]Their being able to keep saying that openly without immediate consequences is a recently new phenomenon.[/QUOTE]

Yes. And all these Hatecrime statutes and Holocaust Museums/Docudramas/Indoctrinations are designed to allow that double-standard to become permanent.

They never, never know when to stop pushing.

madrussian

2005-07-23 16:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE=il ragno] Raina's mo is more "Jews gave you Western civilization" and - of course - "women love to kill", "racists r stoopit", and "white slaves are all asking for it", with lots of sidebar scatology. Raina attacks/asserts Jewish superiority; Erik D either pleads for, or insists on, universal oneness and brotherhood, like a stray dog yipping after you.[/QUOTE] IR, should you give us an update sometime on the whole Raina/Carrigan/Fake/Brad business?

Genevan

2005-08-12 09:38 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Franco]It's not my fault that modern Christian leaders sit around and say nothing while the Jews dominate our culture, e.g. movies, magazines, the media. Modern Christian leaders say and do a great deal. Dr. D. James Kennedy has well over ten million viewers/listeners. He says that Pharisees will burn in Hell, and names the Hollywood culture wreckers for what they are. He likes the idea of Theonomy, under which homosexuals would be given the ultimate punishment. He is anything but PC, he's 100% opposed to the Pharisees and their fellow travelers. Doesn't sound like "saying nothing" to me. What Nazi pagan in America has an audience one-hundredth, nay one-thousandth the size?

Don't blame the "Nazi pagans" for that.[/QUOTE] Pagans and atheists are much more likely than Christians to be liberal, miscegenationists, homosexual etc. Your hero Hitler hated his own people, wishing the spiritual plague of locusts known as Islam upon Germany. Like others have pointed out Nazi pagans are only a detriment to nationalism in America.