A few days ago, I wrote a blog entry about this subject, but never got around to posting it. I’ve made a conscious effort this year to avoid feuding with other bloggers who claim to be on the pro-White side of the political spectrum. However, this discussion has grown increasingly acrimonious, and it has entered territory that is of some interest of me.
A brief summary: Lawrence Auster of View from the Right has been quarreling with Richard Hoste of HBD Books and Alternative Right. The feud between these two started months ago over Auster’s objections to Darwinism, HBD, and Roissy. In recent weeks, it has accelerated as Pope Larry has been on the war path against Alt Right over various heresies: “anti-Semitism,” Darwinism, paganism, anti-Zionism, game theory.
Ferdinand Bardamu is supporting Auster. Dennis Mangan backs Hoste and Spencer. In particular, I enjoyed Mangan’s summary:
“Auster’s constant writing about Israel and anti-Semitism, as well as his habit of making one’s views about Israel a litmus test for those whom he considers worthy of being designated a conservative, and additionally his practice of reading out of the conservative camp anyone who fails his litmus test, give one the impression that he cares more about Israel than he does for his native land.”
Talk about hitting the nail on the head.
Recently, Larry has been going overboard with his defense of the Chosen People, even more so than usual. For Auster, Israel is now a “litmus test” of who pro-Whites can work with; those who don’t agree with this party line should be excommunicated to the fringe. He has been attempting to smear Richard Hoste by linking him to Fred Phelps and Timothy McVeigh. The attacks have been extended to all paleocons including Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow, and Thomas Fleming. Larry is even saying that White Nationalists want to “complete Hitler’s work” by destroying Israel and exterminating all Jews.
A few comments:
1.) I agree with Richard Hoste’s analysis of terrorism. It is an insignificant issue compared to interracial violent crime. In 2005 and 2006, over 60,000 White women were raped by negroes. How many were murdered, robbed, or simply assaulted? It must number in the hundreds of thousands every year; the millions every decade. The real terrorists are lurking in the shadows in our own cities.
Drunk driving, traffic accidents, alcoholism, and smoking kill far more White people than Islamic terrorists. Obesity and lack of exercise are bigger problems than IEDs. The terrorism problem is also tractable. A few simple changes to our foreign policy would eliminate the grievances that inspired 9/11 and fuel the growth of al-Qaeda. Traditionally, the United States has always had good relations with the Islamic world.
2.) Through the organized American Jewish community, Israel attempts to manipulate American foreign policy. That’s the only grievance I have against Israelis. If they would quit doing this, I wouldn’t have anything to resent about them. I don’t care about the “human rights” of the Palestinians or what goes on in Gaza and Jerusalem. Far from wishing destruction upon Israel, I want the Zionists in our own country to relocate there.
3.) My version of “anti-Semitism” consists in the belief that White Americans would be better off excluding a Jewish community from a White ethnostate than including one. The costs of Jewish influence in our society dramatically outweigh the benefits. Are they a plus or a minus? What kind of risk are we taking on? That’s the way I look at the issue.
I’m willing to grant the Jews a second chance: if they would only quit doing the things that we find so offensive about them, acknowledge and apologize for their past actions, and give us real assurances (not mere promises) that their behavior has permanently changed, well, I would no longer have a problem with them.
An argument can be made that Jews have made positive contributions to the advancement of science and technology. Israel, for example, is often cited as a high tech nation with lots of patents per capita. I don’t disagree, but the benefits of Jewish genius in this area can easily be reaped from abroad. Jews don’t have to be physically present in North America to invent a useful gadget that becomes popular here. Neither do the Japanese who prefer to stick to their own islands.
4.) I recognize that all Jews do not share the destructive mindset of many of their co-ethnics. I’ve always judged people as individuals and as members of groups. Instead of arguing with White Nationalists, these Jews can more profitably spend their time talking sense into their co-ethnics. This would go a long way toward defusing the situation and removing the causes of grievance that inspire anti-Semitism.
5.) Unfortunately, I don’t foresee this enlightened scenario ever happening. I doubt our Jewish elites will surrender their wealth, power, and privileges voluntarily. The clannishness that we see among Jewish racialists like Lawrence Auster – who put Jewish interests above White interests – does not inspire confidence.
Most of these people won’t even consent to the exclusion of the “bad Jews.” We are told that every Jew must be judged as an individual, but when take their advice and recommend the expulsion of Mark Potok and Tim Wise, after judging them as individuals, the same people cry foul. This shows they are only playing a language game in bad faith.
6.) Auster has been repeating all sorts of spurious gossip: Hoste and Spencer were roommates at Yale, Hoste and Peter Brimelow are CMS members, VDARE is losing funding on account of anti-Semitism, etc. This doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in his analysis and reporting.
7.) Admittedly, there are some “anti-Semites” who are so out there that even we laugh about them. When I log on here and see discussions going on about whether or not Christopher Columbus was a Jew, I can’t help but laugh. The difference is my reaction is humorous and productive. I think to myself: these are still my people, they acknowledge a Jewish problem, and persuasion works better than demonizing them.
In the past, I used to read VFR much more than I do now. Auster’s obsession with Darwinism and anti-Semitism killed my interest. His ambition to police the racialist blogosphere is reminiscent of the neocons. It gives credibility to those who claim Jews will use their position as opinion makers to impose a narrow interpretation of their ethnic interests on White Gentiles. I don’t foresee this becoming a problem though given the level of awareness of the Jewish Question in the pro-White community.
Larry Auster doesn’t seem to be able to get along with anyone: Peter Brimelow, Jared Taylor, Taki, Thomas Fleming, Richard Spencer, Pat Buchanan, Roissy, Steve Sailer, Richard Hoste, Tanstaafl, Dennis Mangan, Chechar, Conservative Swede, Robert Spencer, Hesperado, Ian Jobling, Paul Craig Roberts, Gates of Vienna, David Horowitz … I can’t think of anyone that Auster hasn’t feuded with over the last year or so. This says a lot about his personality.
I think we can write off a career in politics.
Update: Richard Spencer responds to Larry.
@Landser
Macdonald largely focuses on Jewish culture, and not stupid conspiracies. Maybe you should actually read his books. There is very little in either “They Shall Dwell Alone”,”Seperation and its Discontents”, and “The Critique of Culture” about Mossad and the Rothschilds. There is a lot of interesting things like Jewish economic activity in Spain after the reconquesta in “Separation and its Discontents”, than about general conspiracies about the Jews. Maybe if you read his book “The Critique of Culture”, you would care more about how Stephen Jay Gould altered the political dialectic on the intellectual validity on racial differences in intelligence based on genetics, than about Shin Bet murdering political opponents that generally hate you and the Jews. Now in his recent book “Cultural Insurrections” does talk about Israel, AIPAC, and the NeoCons, but even then he is not too concerned with Mossad or the Rothschilds.
“conspiracy theorist” is simply a meaningless slur word, and the non-Gentiles and their allies you use it are exactly the same as their Bolshevik predecessors called dissidents “insane.”
If “Mossad Did 911” was such a crazy “conspiracy theory” one wonders why it’s not simply ignored. Instead, the mere suggestion is viciously attacked and ridiculed.
Contrary to nuts screaming “Alex Jones” “Mossad Did 911” is a forbidden topic among the Alex Jones media. Yes, Alex Jones will talk about all sorts of conspiracy theories – except anything to do with Mossad.
Just like the nuts screaming “Alex Jones” here. Peas in a pod.
@Hunter A rape is sexual assault, but not all sexual assaults are rape. A sexual assault could include attempted rape as well as other unwanted contact of a sexual nature ie groping, forced kissing, etc. It depends.
I think the black on white rape stat is around 30,000, according to the Color of Crime–so your stat, 60,000, if it includes both rape and sexual assault, is a plausible number.
Re: Auster
A jewish Israel firster–stopped reading him AGES ago. I’m also skeptical of anyone who presumes to issue anathemas—who elected him pope and said he could determine what/who are permitted in the discussion?
@CaptainChaos
I have no problem with Hoste, I personally think Bardamu is being unreasonable about Hoste. I simply agreed with him on one of his comments about the Jewish people in comparison with Muslims. Maybe should stop assuming that everybody who is not in hundred percent in agreement with you, is some how a philosemtic loser who thinks bagels are the greatest food on earth. I am not guywhite, who pretends that Jewish people are basically deep down white nationalists who can not be white nationalists because of Hitler. I do not fit into ideological camps.
Let us no longer labor in the vineyard of trivia. The organized Jewish community for better than a century has worked with near superhuman effort for the diminution of the most valuable people that has ever lived, the White race, into nothingness. We are not insane, and/or morally degenerate, as our enemies ceaselessly attempt to smear us as, for opposing them by any means necessary. Indeed, how could a man possibly be anything but a moral degenerate or insane if he did not offer a blank determination to never submit to the genocide of his beloved people?
While I believe Jewish people to be white
Another good reason I’m an ethnopatriot (or ethnic nationalist, if you must), not a racial nationalist; you can argue that Jews are racially white, you can’t argue they’re ethnically white. There’s no denying they’re a separate, hostile ethnic group.
Hunter said: “In 2005 and 2006, over 60,000 White women were raped by negroes.”
Where are you getting these figures from, Hunter? If you’re basing those numbers on the National Crime Victimization Survey, then what you have said here is incorrect. The NCVS shows ca. 30,000 rapes AND sexual assaults of White women by Black men per annum, not just rapes.
We need to have these figures right in our discussions so we don’t look like idiots.
You should also say “reported” cases, as rape and sexual assaults often go unreported to maintain privacy and not go through further abuse from interrogation.
The definition of rape has changed over time, it used to be very specific, but now has broadening to include non-vaginal penetration and be gender neutral.
In the 1970s and 1980s, extensive rape reform legislation was enacted throughout the country. And the legal definition of rape dramatically changed. Michigan’s 1975 Criminal Sexual Conduct Statute, became the national model for an expanded definition of rape. Today, Illinois’ Criminal Sexual Assault Statute is considered the national model (Epstein & Langenbahn, 1994, p. 8). Both statutes broadly define rape to include:
*Gender neutrality, broadening earlier definitions of rape to include men.
*Acts of sexual penetration other than vaginal penetration by a penis.
*Distinguishing sexual abuse by the degree of force or threat of force used. That issimilar to the “aggravated vs. simple” distinction applied to physical assaults.
*Threats, as well as overt force, are recognized as means of overpowering victims.
*Taking advantage of an incapacitated victim. This includes mental illness, victims under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Some states require that perpetrators give victims intoxicants to obtain sexual access.)
Jews are a Middle Eastern derived people who have lived in diaspora amongst Europeans for millennia. Gypsies are a subcontinental Indian derived people who have lived amongst Europeans for millennia. If the latter is not White, then why is it that the former should be considered White, thought both be Caucasoid? Jews are not White.
Another good reason I’m an ethnopatriot (or ethnic nationalist, if you must), not a racial nationalist; you can argue that Jews are racially white, you can’t argue they’re ethnically white. There’s no denying they’re a separate, hostile ethnic group.
This is where subrace comes into play and why Nordish preservation is needed.
I would argue the opposite, they are racially, genetically non-White, if Whiteness is measured by the founding stock of the USA. They are genetically predominantly non-European. They may be “white” as in having depigmented skin, but then many NE Asians might be “white” compared to coal-black Congoids. Someone can be culturally or ethnically white, or act white and speak the language, without being White. Likewise there are various White subraces within each ethnic group.
*broadened
Organized Jewry as a whole has worked against White interests, however it is still prejudicial to assume that every single Jew has this mentality. This argument does not hold. The proper method of exclusion is based on racial/subracial disparity. In that way they can all be excluded on a sound basis.
“I think the black on white rape stat is around 30,000, according to the Color of Crime–so your stat, 60,000, if it includes both rape and sexual assault, is a plausible number.” This was for two years, 2005 and 2006, combined I presume. Not per year.
Auster completely won the debate.
If “Mossad Did 911” was such a crazy “conspiracy theory” one wonders why it’s not simply ignored. Instead, the mere suggestion is viciously attacked and ridiculed.
Contrary to nuts screaming “Alex Jones” “Mossad Did 911” is a forbidden topic among the Alex Jones media. Yes, Alex Jones will talk about all sorts of conspiracy theories – except anything to do with Mossad.
Just like the nuts screaming “Alex Jones” here. Peas in a pod.
We would ignore it if the conspiracy freaks didn’t keep pushing their absurdity in our faces and acting as though exposing their pet conspiracy theory is the path to victory.
Jewish influence is a significant cause of the decline of the white race, but conspiracies about who did 9/11 or who shot JFK are irrelevant.
Let us suppose Mossad did 9/11. So what? No matter who was responsible for 9/11, it did not induce the ongoing destruction of whites. And let us suppose you convince a majority of the population that Mossad did 9/11. What good does that do? Is it going to cause a groundswell of support for racial preservation?
My goal is the racial preservation of whites, especially Northern Europeans. Exposing this or that irrelevant conspiracy theory is not going to lead to racial preservation. The only way to achieve racial preservation is to deal with and address racial issues.
Lady Lurker said: “I think the black on white rape stat is around 30,000, according to the Color of Crime–so your stat, 60,000, if it includes both rape and sexual assault, is a plausible number.”
Actually, the “Color of Crime” says (page 12):
“There were an average of 15,400 black-on-white rapes every year during this period [that’s between 2001 and 2003]…. By contrast, there were only 900 “white”-on-black rapes every year….”
The authors have White in quotes because, of course, a lot of Hispanics get classified as White. :-/
Shockingly, on page 17 the report says:
“The NCVS tells us that interracial multiple-offender offenses are even more lopsidedly black than interracial crime as a whole. In fact, whereas blacks committed 10,000 gang-rapes against whites between 2001 and 2003 [so that’s ca. 3,333 per year], the NCVS samples did not pick up a single “white”-on-black gang rape.”
~~~~~
Mark said: “You should also say ‘reported’ cases, as rape and sexual assaults often go unreported to maintain privacy and not go through further abuse from interrogation.”
Indeed, “reported” cases would be correct if we were looking at police stats, but these stats used by the “Color of Crime” authors are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) which is a survey administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (whatever that is) done every year since 1972. Ca. 77,000 households are surveyed at random and the householders are asked to give details of any crimes they were victims of that year.
So, it’s not the most direct set of crime stats really. Although, as Mark pointed out, a lot of rapes are probably not reported to the police either.
Don’t know what the NCVS’s definition of “sexual assault” is. I’ll try to find out.
Oddly enough, if I recall correctly, the reason I first found out that the “30,000 White women are raped by Black men per year” is wrong had something to do with an Auster article where he incorrectly used that number. The 30,000 figure been bandied about for so long now online most people think it is correct, when in actuality it is rapes + sexual assault.
(Comment minus the links so it doesn’t have to wait for moderation.)
Lady Lurker said: “I think the black on white rape stat is around 30,000, according to the Color of Crime–so your stat, 60,000, if it includes both rape and sexual assault, is a plausible number.”
Actually, the “Color of Crime” says (page 12):
“There were an average of 15,400 black-on-white rapes every year during this period [that’s between 2001 and 2003]…. By contrast, there were only 900 “white”-on-black rapes every year….”
The authors have White in quotes because, of course, a lot of Hispanics get classified as White. :-/
Shockingly, on page 17 the report says:
“The NCVS tells us that interracial multiple-offender offenses are even more lopsidedly black than interracial crime as a whole. In fact, whereas blacks committed 10,000 gang-rapes against whites between 2001 and 2003 [so that’s ca. 3,333 per year], the NCVS samples did not pick up a single “white”-on-black gang rape.”
~~~~~
Mark said: “You should also say ‘reported’ cases, as rape and sexual assaults often go unreported to maintain privacy and not go through further abuse from interrogation.”
Indeed, “reported” cases would be correct if we were looking at police stats, but these stats used by the “Color of Crime” authors are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) which is a survey administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (whatever that is) done every year since 1972. Ca. 77,000 households are surveyed at random and the householders are asked to give details of any crimes they were victims of that year.
So, it’s not the most direct set of crime stats really. Although, as Mark pointed out, a lot of rapes are probably not reported to the police either.
Don’t know what the NCVS’s definition of “sexual assault” is. I’ll try to find out.
Oddly enough, if I recall correctly, the reason I first found out that the “30,000 White women are raped by Black men per year” is wrong had something to do with an Auster article where he incorrectly used that number. The 30,000 figure been bandied about for so long now online most people think it is correct, when in actuality it is rapes + sexual assault.
From the “Color of Crime”:
“There were an average of 15,400 black-on-white rapes every year during this period [that’s between 2001 and 2003]….”
“In fact, whereas blacks committed 10,000 gang-rapes against whites between 2001 and 2003 [so that’s ca. 3,333 per year]….”
So, nearly 1 in 5 black-on-white rapes between 2001 and 2003 was a gang-rape!
When White people aren’t making comments like this anymore:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/greeks-call-referendum-imf-bailout-call-austerity-barbaric-attack-and-premeditated-crime-aga
as justification for going to war for Israel, 911 won’t be relevant. Until then, it is, relevant, for White survival.
Posting is not “throwing it in your face” and your silly cries of “freaks” just shows your complete ignorance on a central incident of the 21st Century. The next time there is a false flag attack, I’m sure you’ll be watching the TV when they say Iran did it and start attacking anyone who says otherwise.
Your type is a liability for White people.
Amusingly (to me anyway), the reason I was aware that this “30,000 rapes per year” number is not right is because someone corrected Richard Hoste on that number AFTER he had quoted Auster on it. And BOTH of them got it wrong!
Hoste wrote in an article over on AltRight entitled “Why an Alternative Right is Necessary“:
“And since white society bears a collective guilt for pathologies that affect the entire black community, 40,000 white women raped a year by black men does little to change the racial scorecard.”
Hoste quoted an old article by Auster (“The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States“) for that figure, but he inflated Auster’s number. Auster had written:
“In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.”
Someone named Emily called Hoste on his figure and pointed out:
“Actual numbers from the document on which the article is based: in 2005 37,461 cases of sexual assault involved white women victims with black male perpetrators. According to the same document, rape accounted for about 37% of all sexual assaults, so that means approximately 13,860 such rapes.”
That’s closer to the average figure that the “Color of Crime” authors offered up, so I think Emily had her calculations pretty right.
However, now that I look at the infamous Table 42 in the NCVS’s Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005 Statistical Tables, I see that none of those figures is quite right.
Because, Table 42 doesn’t refer ONLY women as victims of sexual assault — it’s men AND women. (Sheesh. Can’t stats as presented by the gov’t EVER be straightforward??)
So, for 2005, it’s 37,461 cases of sexual assault involved White victims with black male perpetrators, NOT White female victims.
I’d say go with the “Color of Crime” figures. They must’ve spent time figuring this out. And they concluded:
“There were an average of 15,400 black-on-white rapes every year during this period [that’s between 2001 and 2003]….”
Note that they didn’t say “rapes of women”.
~~~~~
BTW, here’s the definitions:
Rape – Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.
Sexual assault – A wide range of victimizations, separate from rape or attempted rape. These crimes include attacks or attempted attacks generally involving unwanted sexual contact between victim and offender. Sexual assaults may or may not involve force and include such things as grabbing or fondling. Sexual assault also includes verbal threats.
(Comment minus the links so it doesn’t have to wait for moderation:)
Amusingly (to me anyway), the reason I was aware that this “30,000 rapes per year” number is not right is because someone corrected Richard Hoste on that number AFTER he had quoted Auster on it. And BOTH of them got it wrong!
Hoste wrote in an article over on AltRight entitled “Why an Alternative Right is Necessary“:
“And since white society bears a collective guilt for pathologies that affect the entire black community, 40,000 white women raped a year by black men does little to change the racial scorecard.”
Hoste quoted an old article by Auster (”The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States“) for that figure, but he inflated Auster’s number. Auster had written:
“In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.”
Someone named Emily called Hoste on his figure and pointed out:
“Actual numbers from the document on which the article is based: in 2005 37,461 cases of sexual assault involved white women victims with black male perpetrators. According to the same document, rape accounted for about 37% of all sexual assaults, so that means approximately 13,860 such rapes.”
That’s closer to the average figure that the “Color of Crime” authors offered up, so I think Emily had her calculations pretty right.
However, now that I look at the infamous Table 42 in the NCVS’s Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005 Statistical Tables, I see that none of those figures is quite right.
Because, Table 42 doesn’t refer ONLY women as victims of sexual assault — it’s men AND women. (Sheesh. Can’t stats as presented by the gov’t EVER be straightforward??)
So, for 2005, it’s 37,461 cases of sexual assault involved White victims with black male perpetrators, NOT White female victims.
I’d say go with the “Color of Crime” figures. They must’ve spent time figuring this out. And they concluded:
“There were an average of 15,400 black-on-white rapes every year during this period [that’s between 2001 and 2003]….”
Note that they didn’t say “rapes of women”.
~~~~~
BTW, here’s the definitions:
Rape – Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.
Sexual assault – A wide range of victimizations, separate from rape or attempted rape. These crimes include attacks or attempted attacks generally involving unwanted sexual contact between victim and offender. Sexual assaults may or may not involve force and include such things as grabbing or fondling. Sexual assault also includes verbal threats.
9/11 did not put us on the path to our impending demise. Deplorable though the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are, if the United States had not gone to war whites would still be on the road to extinction.
Please tell me what good obsessing over who did 9/11 does. Let’s assume you convince the majority of the country that Mossad did 9/11. What good does that do us? Is that going to lead to a groundswell of support for racial separation?
What is your ultimate objective? Is it racial preservation or is it “exposing Mossad conspiracies”?
It would break the back of the Israel lobby, which would have a significant negative impact on Jewish power, politically and culturally. The benefits of that should be obvious, on issues like immigration alone. Without Jewish power, multiculturalism and massive non-white immigration goes away. Without Jewish power, media, and money, the minority of dedicated multi-cult liberals lose their status too.
@Yosemite: Auster completely lost the debate.
‘
Let us suppose Mossad did 9/11. So what? No matter who was responsible for 9/11, it did not induce the ongoing destruction of whites. And let us suppose you convince a majority of the population that Mossad did 9/11. What good does that do? Is it going to cause a groundswell of support for racial preservation?
‘
Note that there are white people outside the USA, and if those white people were to recognize Mossad as a threat, it would change the international situation.
That aside, 9/11 did induce restrictions on civil liberties and a concentration of USA government power, which did, in my opinion, serve to destroy white lives. Thus you and I seem to disagree on the facts of the case.
It would break the back of the Israel lobby, which would have a significant negative impact on Jewish power, politically and culturally. The benefits of that should be obvious, on issues like immigration alone. Without Jewish power, multiculturalism and massive non-white immigration goes away. Without Jewish power, media, and money, the minority of dedicated multi-cult liberals lose their status too.
1. The proposition that Mossad did 9/11 is extremely dubious at best. You will consequently have a hard time convincing people of it.
2. Even if incredibly you are somehow able to convince people Mossad did 9/11, is that really the most productive use of time and resources?
3. How would proving Mossad did 9/11 break the power, media, and money of American Jews and curtail their influence? Why do you think Americans would go after and break up the power of American Jews because of the actions of Mossad?
4. Jewish influence is not the sole source of pressure for mass immigration.
5. Simply removing Jewish influence is not sufficient to achieve a racial solution, even to just halt immigration. Other forces and plain inertia support the status quo. If you want a racial solution, you must directly work for one.
6. Multiculturalism is good in the short run as a stopgap to prevent intermixture. The more Balkanization and separation, the better.
7. Stopping immigration is not sufficient to achieve racial preservation. The deed is done. The only thing those who seek racial destruction have to do at this point is sit back and wait for assimilation and amalgamation to do the job. The only way to achieve racial preservation is through separation.
That aside, 9/11 did induce restrictions on civil liberties and a concentration of USA government power, which did, in my opinion, serve to destroy white lives. Thus you and I seem to disagree on the facts of the case.
The wars and reaction to 9/11 have been deplorable and had many harmful effects, but they did not put whites on the path to their coming demise.
MGLS, you make plenty of good arguments there, and OD has already indulged me on this topic. I’d love to argue with you, but this isn’t the place. You are taking the issue seriously and I thank you for that.
Let’s agree to disagree. I’m very familiar with the topic and I think the most likely explanation is that Mossad did 911. Others have a different view. I think it’s a highly relevant important issue, others do not. I think there is room for various opinions here.
The day OD puts up a thread devoted to 911 I will engage anyone who wishes with substantive debate and plenty of credible facts and arguments.
I’m White and I think Mossad did 911 and Israel is our enemy. I support military action against Israel to disarm them of their nuclear threat, and I’d like to see the Israeli perps brought to justice.
It’s not the only issue, but it is a serious issue.
Jews are responsible for much the anti-free speech legislation in white countries and literally thousands of people have been fined and imprisoned for saying things Jews don’t like in Germany, other European countries and Canada. Search about the “Heretical Two” for one of the latest Jewish anti-white attacks that resulted in two pro-white activists being sentenced to years prison in the UK for criticizing Jews.
During the late 19th and early 20th Century, Jews in Eastern Europe were heavily involved in assassinations and other acts of terrorism against governments that weren’t under their control. The only reason they don’t do that now is that they have enough power to punish their enemies in other ways. If whites started taking back control of America, I wouldn’t be surprised if Jewish supremacists started engaging in terrorism again.
http://books.google.com/books?id=U_SU7fxj9BMC&dq=Zeev+Ivianski+Fathers+and+Sons&source=gbs_navlinks_s
“The Chinese are not a significant political or cultural force in the west. It’s that simple.”
They already influence our Labor and Tariff policies! H1-B Visas, repeals of the few remaining tariffs we have left, and (for at least East Indians and many Southeast Asians) apparently a racial alliance with the Brown Hispanics in the American Southwest.
Within one or two generations, China may even threaten to colonize what could have been White-dominated territories (or ethnostates) in Canada and the U.S.
A little off topic, I think the Hispanics will be allowed to take the Southwest, and what Hispanics do not take from the rest of the Continental U.S. and Canada may go to China.
Agree with SITS about tariff policy – this is really simple, the US should cut domestic taxes to zero and institute high tariffs. Make an exception for German cars and select Japanese technology.
What would we miss? What would we lack? Not a damn thing.
CaptainChaos: “Let those who attempt to cow us with cries of “Anti-Semitism!” all go hang.”
I hope you are aware, our enemies (i.e. many “anti-fascists,” etc.) are longing for the day, when they can execute us for our personal beliefs and support for White Preservation.
This may be possible, with an economic collapse, and a quick Red October-like Revolution followed by a mass gun confiscation.
@ “You’re inside a mighty fortress… Outside you’re surrounded by one hundred thousand screaming maniacs who want to kill you. But you have food enough to last for years, and the fortress is so well-built that you can easily repel an army of a million screaming maniacs” —Svigor
The best way to visualize it is the hordes of [Muslim] orcs outside LOTR’s Helm’s Deep.
@ “You’ve gotta be really lacking in judgment… or a faux-WN to think Muslims are a bigger problem than non-Gentiles. —Svigor
Again, the best way to visualize the internal enemy is to remember the grip that Gríma (Wormtongue) had on the king Théoden of Rohan before Gandalf the White broke the spell.
Is the clever and highly influential non-Gentile Wormtongue, who told the dark wizard where was located the weak spot in Helm’s Deep, a bigger problem than the primitive orcs?
I think so. Those who lobbied to open the US immigration gates are indeed more noxious than the Muslims who crashed the planes.
There’s no question about it: population replacement of Elfs by orcs is infinitely worse than 9/11. This is precisely my reading of Auster’s First Law (no link to my blog so it “doesn’t have to wait for moderation”): a law that crucifies his discoverer’s rhetoric on anti-Semitism.
Speaking of 9/11, anybody catch this recent article by some Jew named “Jeffrey Scott Shapiro”: Shame On Jesse Ventura!
It’s a hit piece attacking Ventura for his recent book on conspiracies and for questioning 9/11 in public.
Shapiro attacks Ventura and tries to “debunk” Ventura, the “Truthers,” and anyone who questions 9/11 by appealing to his personal experience. He says that he was a journalist on the scene on 9/11 at WTC Building 7 and saw it collapse right before his eyes. He says that no explosives were involved because he was there, he saw it collapse, and it collapsed silently:
Governor Ventura and many 9/11 “Truthers” allege that government explosives caused the afternoon collapse of Building 7. This is false. I know this because I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes.
But what’s interesting is this part:
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.
A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.
So Silverstein was on the phone discussing whether or not to do a controlled demolition before Building 7 went down. And Shapiro tries to downplay this and brush it off as something completely normal, something everybody was “aware of.” Building 7 then goes down, straight down into its own footprint, like it would during a controlled demolition. But Shapiro assures us that there weren’t any explosives or demolition, controlled or otherwise, involved, since he was there and, um, he didn’t hear anything.
Anybody else’s bullshit detector going off at this point?
This is the first time I’ve ever seen in a mainstream outlet connecting Silverstein to a controlled demolition, even if it ultimately tries to clear him from actually carrying it out (he was just talking about it on the phone with insurance). The Truthers always bring up Silverstein and controlled demolition of course. So this is the first admission that there is more to this Silverstein/controlled demolition thing.
The sad thing about this article is that, while for most of us here, some media Jew telling us “don’t worry about it, I was there guys” rightfully makes us more skeptical and suspicious, I’m sure there are FOX News addicted patriotards out there who probably don’t even know that “Shapiro” is a Jewish name and will just blindly believe this article and Shapiro’s insistence to trust him since he was there and didn’t hear nuthin’.
Incidentally, Shapiro is also making the rounds in the media recently to rehabilitate Bush Jr.’s reputation: The Bush Restoration Project: Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is on a mission to rehabilitate the former president’s reputation.
I suspect these two articles aren’t simply coincidence and are part of a wider low-level neocon propaganda media offensive.
Speaking of 9/11, anybody catch this recent article by some Jew named “Jeffrey Scott Shapiro”: Shame On Jesse Ventura!
It’s a hit piece attacking Ventura for his recent book on conspiracies and for questioning 9/11 in public.
Shapiro attacks Ventura and tries to “debunk” Ventura, the “Truthers,” and anyone who questions 9/11 by appealing to his personal experience. He says that he was a journalist on the scene on 9/11 at WTC Building 7 and saw it collapse right before his eyes. He says that no explosives were involved because he was there, he saw it collapse, and it collapsed silently:
Governor Ventura and many 9/11 “Truthers” allege that government explosives caused the afternoon collapse of Building 7. This is false. I know this because I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes.
But what’s interesting is this part:
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.
A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.
So Silverstein was on the phone discussing whether or not to do a controlled demolition before Building 7 went down. And Shapiro tries to downplay this and brush it off as something completely normal, something everybody was “aware of.” Building 7 then goes down, straight down into its own footprint, like it would during a controlled demolition. But Shapiro assures us that there weren’t any explosives or demolition, controlled or otherwise, involved, since he was there and, um, he didn’t hear anything.
Anybody else’s bullshit detector going off at this point?
This is the first time I’ve ever seen in a mainstream outlet connecting Silverstein to a controlled demolition, even if it ultimately tries to clear him from actually carrying it out (he was just talking about it on the phone with insurance). The Truthers always bring up Silverstein and controlled demolition of course. So this is the first admission that there is more to this Silverstein/controlled demolition thing.
The sad thing about this article is that, while for most of us here, some media Jew telling us “don’t worry about it, I was there guys” rightfully makes us more skeptical and suspicious, I’m sure there are FOX News addicted patriotards out there who probably don’t even know that “Shapiro” is a Jewish name and will just blindly believe this article and Shapiro’s insistence to trust him since he was there and didn’t hear nuthin’.
Incidentally, Shapiro is also making the rounds in the media recently to rehabilitate Bush Jr.’s reputation. There’s an article at Slate describing this called “The Bush Restoration Project: Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is on a mission to rehabilitate the former president’s reputation.”
I suspect these two articles aren’t simply coincidence and are part of a wider low-level neocon propaganda media offensive.
Semite: what debate? Auster has never debated anything in his life. Debate is like Kryptonite to non-Gentiles.
Organized Jewry as a whole has worked against White interests, however it is still prejudicial to assume that every single Jew has this mentality.
Oh, well, gosh, I’d never want to be prejudicial. How we can assume every non-Gentile fits your genetic characterization is anyone’s guess.
Similar argument:
“While we are indeed at war with Germany, we can’t intern German citizens on our soil or even assume everyone in a German uniform is our enemy. That would be prejudicial.”
Debate is like Kryptonite to non-Gentiles.
“non-Gentiles” – LMFAO 😀
Excellent, Svig!
Jews will never, ever issue an apology for the destructiveness they’ve wrought throughout white, Western nations and I’m shocked that anyone calling themselves a WN thinks that is a possibility, however remote. Especially since Jews have made a profession out of eliciting apologies and extorting money from gentiles and gentile nations for exaggerated and imaginary crimes against them. It seems some people believe that Jews are as sentimental and sensitive as white people which clearly isn’t the case.
While I can’t remember his exact words it was Ariel “the butcher of Beirut” Sharon who gloated that the Jewish people owe the world nothing and are a law unto themselves. His sentiment is shared by most Jews evinced throughout their 2000 year history and evidenced by their chauvinistic behavior and attitudes in America.
Especially since Jews have made a profession out of eliciting apologies and extorting money from gentiles and gentile nations for exaggerated and imaginary crimes against them.
Even if Jews ever, miraculously, did apologize about anything — they would still ask for money anyway — for all the ‘pain and anguish’ the apology caused them.
I don’t care if a non-Gentile “has the mentality” or not. For Chrissakes, these people deceive themselves about their true motivations. Their whole psychology is a mass of self-deception and rationalization and sublimation. Throw out the whole lot I say, and we’re sure to remove the ones “with that mentality.” What’s so valuable about those poor, misunderstood false positives that we should care about their removal?
And again, it isn’t about ancestry. It’s about tribal allegiance. Non-Gentiles have been leaving their tribe for eons now. That’s why there’s only 15 million or so of them (ostensibly) worldwide after 3,000 years. They know perfectly well how to distinguish themselves from the tribe – stop claiming tribal membership (stop putting on the uniform). When they can’t do this, we know where their loyalties lie. I mean, c’mon, their tribal loyalty is so strong they want to call themselves “Jewish White Nationalists,” but you can’t see the writing on the wall?
I can trust an ethnopatriot with non-Gentile ancestry. But I require apostasy, or its equivalent.
“non-Gentiles” – LMFAO 😀
Excellent, Svig!
Thanks, but that’s not mine. I don’t actually know who started it. I think I picked it up from someone at OO blog. It certainly fits with “Resisting Defamation” rules of engagement. I like it because it’s reciprocal (non-Gentiles refer to themselves by name, and us by the catch-all title of “gentile,” which means “heathen,” so we return the favor by referring to them as something they aren’t), and at the same time anyone can instantly grasp its meaning.
I’m still laughing about Auster posting the wild speculation from an anonymous correspondent that stated that Hoste and Spencer met at Yale where Hoste turned Spencer from a run-of-the-mill conservative into an anti-semite. According to Auster’s source, they’re now in the Charles Martel Society together, where they gather with other exterminationists to cheer on Chief Exterminationist Kevin MacDonald. Of course neither Spencer nor Hoste attended Yale, nor have they ever been members of the CMS.
Wherever Auster drew this story from, I must say that I find the absurd paranoia and derangement of non-gentile politics far more amusing than anything these non-gentiles produce in Hollywood.
“Chief Exterminationist Kevin MacDonald”
I can’t stop laughing at that phrase! Please, repost your message here.
http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/left-right/portrait-of-a-psychopath/
Svigor,
I often wonder why on earth Jewish white nationalists always have to indicate their Jewishness. I don’t even think most of them understand how embedded this Jew thing really is. I guess you have to be on the outside looking in.
Svigor,
I often wonder why on earth Jewish white nationalists always have to indicate their Jewishness. I don’t even think most of them understand how embedded this Jew thing really is. I guess you have to be on the outside looking in.
Yes. I don’t know what they’re thinking with that. It’s like a slap in the face to ethnopatriots. They want to serve two masters (ostensibly – I think they’re still serving just one master).
At best, they just want to have their cake and eat it too. Basically, they want to be members of two tribes, and we’re supposed to just accept it. But you can bet your ass they don’t go around their other tribe, announcing their “Jewish White Nationalist” status to their fellow non-gentiles.
Chutzpah. I don’t think it’s much for us to demand they pick a side, any side. In fact, I think that’s a pretty generous offer. On the other hand, I prefer them to non-gentile agents provocateur who hide their tribal affiliation while working toward non-gentile interests, but that isn’t saying much.
“So Silverstein was on the phone discussing whether or not to do a controlled demolition before Building 7 went down. And Shapiro tries to downplay this and brush it off as something completely normal, something everybody was “aware of.” Building 7 then goes down, straight down into its own footprint, like it would during a controlled demolition. But Shapiro assures us that there weren’t any explosives or demolition, controlled or otherwise, involved, since he was there and, um, he didn’t hear anything.”
Do you actually think they had time to wire a massive skyscraper for controlled demolition in a few hours in the midst of that chaos? If they did do a controlled demolition because it was damaged beyond repair, why lie about it? Or are you trying to say that it was done ahead of time? If so, why have a discussion about it if it were already planned to happen? You don’t even have clear theory about what happened, just a series of vague coincidences and discrepancies from early accounts that you have deluded yourself into believing is evidence of some fantastic conspiracy.
First of all, let’s clear something up. Whether it was Jews or Arabs behind it, either way it was a “fantastic conspiracy.” Whoever was ultimately behind it did engage in a conspiracy. That’s just a definition. So don’t use the term to try to bludgeon and marginalize a particular point of view.
I never suggested that I had “a clear theory” explaining every single damn thing about 9/11 because I don’t have one. And I don’t have to have one. I have questions. I’m just a White man who wants to know the truth. Who or what the fuck are you?
Larry Silverstein is on record saying that he and others (whoever they are) thought that the smartest thing to do was to “pull it” and “made that decision to pull”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
And now according to this recent article by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Silverstein was on the phone before Building 7 collapsed, discussing whether or not to do a controlled demolition of the building. And Building 7 collapsed as if it had been pulled in a controlled demolition. Shapiro says that there were no explosives involved because he was there and witnessed the building collapse silently.
All of these facts raise some questions for me. Maybe they don’t for you. But don’t tell me what to think and believe and question.
I am old enough to remember the Old Spotlight magazine/newspaper. It was once the main hub of American White nationalist/populist activism.
It as also extremely infected with cranks, kooks, idiots, conspiracy mongering nut cases, where one had to wade through endless reams of paranoid nonsense to find any healthy, sane White racial loyalty.
I think the Occidental Dissent is a great blog/web site. But, I must warn everyone here if these conspiracy mongering cranks are tolerated or worse welcomed they will flood in and drive away most positive, healthy Whites.
There is simply no reason to publish 911 conspiracy mongering nonsense.
9/11/10 works great for our side. It’s the perfect propaganda story.
Ugly, dark, hairy, racially and culturally alien Arab and Paki Muslims do a cowardly hi-jack, mass murder against a (White) US Office building.
300 White FDNY give their lives going up the burning buildings as everyone else flees in panic.
These 300 martyred White New York City Fire Department should be immortalized in songs, poems, comic books, movies as modern day 300 Spartans.
Nothing shows the clear racial divisions of “us” vs “them” better than 9-11-01. Regular White Americans in all states from New York to California remember 9-11 as a holy day, immigration control propaganda in California featuring Osama Bin Ladin’s ugly, hairy, racially alien picture on a California Drivers License was the most effective piece of political propaganda since the Willie Horton TV ads.
There is no reason to let idiot conspiracy mongering kranks mess up 9-11 as the perfect White Nationalist propaganda event.
For those folks who want to focus on REAL jewish problems, they can present the REAL Jewish support for open borders immigration, 1965 immigration act that floods our nation with the worst Third World non Whites and it is hard to find worse non whites than Mohammed Ata and Al Qaeda terrorists.
I live and work in the real world. I can say with 100% assurance that 99% of healthy, sane Whites in American simply WILL NOT allow anyone to take the side of NW Muslim terrorists who murder whites.
Hollywood, the MSM spend millions to depict White Nationalists as deranged, dangerous lunatics, insane, crazy haters – Right Wing Extremists who want to kill little children. Don’t start living your life according to a bad Hollywood script.
I ask that the directors of this fine web sight/blog make a concerted effort to keep out kranks, kooks, conspiracy mongering nut cases – otherwise the Occidental Dissent will end up like the Spotlight Magazine.
And one last comment.
Be on guard against the CT who spread paranoia about some other space death star, ray gun that causes earth quakes and zaps individual White patriots.
Jack Ryan,
Nobody here is talking about using “911 conspiracy mongering nonsense” to attract “positive, healthy Whites.” That’s a red herring.
You’re right that 9/11 was a “perfect propaganda story.” Only problem is that it was a memetic force that was controlled, manipulated, and used by our enemies, neocons, for ends quite contrary to and different from our own. In some ways it is largely spent as a memetic force. People associate it with the 2 quagmire wars it inspired, foreign adventurism, and the general sense of fatigue that has set in the country.
If you think that you can take this meme, whose terms of discourse and power have been completely controlled and manipulated by our enemies, and use it to de-program and then re-program “positive, healthy Whites,” against the reaction of our enemies who are much more sophisticated in media manipulation, have many more resources at their disposal, and will no doubt not stand idly by, then be my guest. But it’d be like trying to use Christmas today to resurrect the worship of Sol Invictus.
To 147Bernard
If you want to reach regular Whites, use 9-11-01 – the NW aliens, let in to the country on unsupervised student visas – overstayed their visas, thus were illegal aliens, use this as your basic argument to control immigration.
Present all NWs as potential 9-11 terrorists.
Virtually all sane Whites from Left to Right fear, hate NW Muslim extremists.
White nationalists, populists in all European countries from the Swiss people’s party, to Geert Wilders to the Northern League, Putin’s Russia and now the BNP make the ugly hateful, racially alien Muslims THE OTHER and 9-11-01 is presented as what happens when THE OTHER is allowed to come in to OUR COUNTRIES.
Making NW Muslim immigrants, terrorists the propaganda enemy WORKS – when Whites make the NW Muslims the propaganda enemy THEY WIN.
The Swiss People’s party is now the #1 party in Switzerland.
Anybody see their great propaganda posters showing Muslim turrets looking like missiles and women covered in Muslim burkas look like dangerous criminals hiding their faces so they aren’t identified for their crimes.
Again, good solid propaganda that WORKS.
And understand, the real anti White Jewish program is this:
1) Invade the world for Israel
2) Invite the world to all remaining White countries – open borders immigration to Europe, UK, including welcoming tens of millions of NW Muslims.
3) in hoc to the world to pay for #1, and #2.
So understand when you present WN as stopping the Muslim invasions, Muslim colonization, Muslim terror attacks against Whites like 9-11-01 you are not selling out to
THE JEWS
Instead you are opposing the worst part of the anti White Jewish program – flooding White nations with NWs, including NW Muslims.
Why make things hard on yourself our our movement? Go with what works.
9-11-01 is our holy day, it clearly presents the truth that WE must come together as a people to defend OUR PEOPLE from THEM – the OTHER, dangerous, ugly, hateful NWs who are not LIKE US – they are barbarians, murderers, terrorists.
It’s easy to do folks. Like a free throw in basketball.
Do the free throw, tell idiot, conspiracy mongering kooks who want to confuse everything to go take a hike or get a real job, get a life.
Jack Ryan may as well be Ariel Sharon, he is using the same rhetoric.
“9-11-01 is our holy day”
No, it *was* your holy day, but your team is rapidly losing your grip.
And rhetoric like “space death star, ray gun that causes earth quakes” and “shadow-council of magic Jews” is supposed to somehow place the 30% out of the pale? Come on.
Former CIA Richard Baer is closer to our side than Ryan’s side:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z5BnihtWfs
The people who know the least about the subject are the same ones who crow the most about those who do. Frankly, if you haven’t even read the 911 Commission report and the related literature, you’re not qualified.
And the Ragheads Did 911 crowd nearly always turn out to not have even read the basics. They don’t even *know* the official conspiracy theory but rabidly attack those who do.
9/11 needs absolutely no debate, especially on this website. It happened; let’s focus on ways to save Whites from extinction, instead of obsessing to “prove” a conspiracy theory.
I noticed people are already laughing at us commenters on Occidental Dissent. Not because we deserve to be laughed at (we don’t), but because they do not understand our message. Even a well-intentioned 9/11 Truther campaign will dramatically drop the reputation of this site.