Guest Fullauto Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 So here it is... the official thread for Wez to verbally lash me! Let me give him a little ammo... I am a 32 year old White Male, with 1 child... I make about $55k/year as a carpenter... I am a White Nationalist, and have a Black Hole Sun Stencilled on my Study floor! Take it away! ftp://fullauto.myftp.org/pub/mp3/loose/Dj%20Adolf%20Hitler%20-%20Sieg%20Heil.mp3 <--- Click Here Wez to prime your hatred for me! ! Quote
Phantom Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 I'm not Wez but can I verbally bash you for the hell of it? I'm kind of procrastinating today. It's either verbally hand your ass to you or vacuum. And I don't like vacuuming. Quote Blah.
Guest Fullauto Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 certainly! Beat me up all you would like... I suck! Wooh000000 Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 White Nationalist? Please explain.. Me hate you? Hahaha.. thought we were gonna discuss your hatred of mixed races? BTW.. The Hitler link didn't work.. Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 White nationalism is a political ideology which advocates a racial definition (or redefinition) of national identity for white people, in opposition to multiculturalism. The contemporary white nationalist movement in the United States is a reaction to the decline (based on US census projections) in white demographics, politics and culture.[1] According to Samuel Francis, a key white nationalist writer, it is "a movement that rejects equality as an ideal and insists on an enduring core of human nature transmitted by heredity."[2] Anti-racist organizations generally have argued that ideas such as white pride and white nationalism exist merely to provide a sanitized public face for white supremacy.[3] The goal of white nationalism is to appeal to a larger audience. Most are nonviolent groups working for separatism.[4] Supporters see themselves defending the legitimate civil rights of white people against society's alleged racial double standards.[5] Jared Taylor, another key writer in the movement, claims similar racial views were held by many mainstream American leaders before the 1950s.[6] Opponents accuse them of hatred, racial bigotry and destructive identity politics.[1][7] According to Samuel P. Huntington, the modern movement is increasingly cultured, intellectual and academically trained.[8] Rather than espouse violence, they use statistics and social science data to argue for a self-conscious white identity.[9] They say a natural hierarchy should triumph over the "false promise of egalitarianism"[10] and that the downfall of white dominance spells doom for representative government, the rule of law and freedom of speech.[11] A point of contention for white nationalists and opponents alike is the issue of "white" identity. While the common definition of a singular "white" or "European" race is largely an anthropological archaism[citation needed], many white nationalists continue to hold this belief, as the white nationalist movement depends on the existence of such a categorization. Supporters say they stand for racial self-preservation and claim culture itself is a product of race.[12] As a result, according to Huntington, they say the demographic shift in the US towards non-whites brings a new culture that is intellectually and morally inferior.[13] With it comes affirmative action, immigrant ghettos and declining educational standards.[14] By challenging established policy on immigration, civil rights and racial integration, they seek to build bridges with moderately conservative white citizens.[15] White separatism and supremacism are two smaller subgroups within white nationalism.[5] The former seek a separate white nation-state, while the latter add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology.[5] Some white nationalists deny they are in either category.[5] Both schools of thought generally avoid the term "supremacy", saying it has negative connotations.[16] Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 This says they're non-violent, yet you are banking on a civil race war..With guns, I assume.. or is it water balloons? Please explain.. Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 they say the demographic shift in the US towards non-whites brings a new culture that is intellectually and morally inferior.[ And they don't believe in equality, yet don't wanna use the word "supremecy" because it has a negative connotation? Please explain.. Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 Seems you're in the subgroups, as you add a flavor of social darwinism and Nazism.. Correct? White separatism and supremacism are two smaller subgroups within white nationalism.[5] The former seek a separate white nation-state, while the latter add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology.[5] Some white nationalists deny they are in either category.[5] Both schools of thought generally avoid the term "supremacy", saying it has negative connotations.[16] Please explain.. Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 And where does a collapsing economy and racial civil war come into play? This says that seperation is needed to preserve it and white culture.. According to Samuel P. Huntington, the modern movement is increasingly cultured, intellectual and academically trained.[8] Rather than espouse violence, they use statistics and social science data to argue for a self-conscious white identity.[9] They say a natural hierarchy should triumph over the "false promise of egalitarianism"[10] and that the downfall of white dominance spells doom for representative government, the rule of law and freedom of speech.[11] I think you and your leaders need to get your story straight.. You wanna doom the economy to save it? Please explain.. Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 Presumption Alert!!!! You assume I would hate you for what you believe? Why the hell would I? Because you hate people for what they believe? I think so.. correct me if I'm wrong.. Please explain.. Quote
timesjoke Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 Your a tax paying, hard working, intelligent person who understands reality and does not blame anyone but yourself for your failings. You never take advantage of anyone and you believe people should not be allowed to come here illegally. You don't hate the military and you love America as is is "supposed" to be. You think you should be allowed to keep more of the money you work very hard to earn and do not like the fact lazy people get some of that hard earned money. Consider yourself soundly insulted. Well, it would all be 100% insults if you were a Liberal............ I tried, but damn, I can't really find somehting I do not like about you yet, give me some more time............... Quote
wez Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 Your a tax paying, hard working, intelligent person who understands reality and does not blame anyone but yourself for your failings. You never take advantage of anyone and you believe people should not be allowed to come here illegally. You don't hate the military and you love America as is is "supposed" to be. You think you should be allowed to keep more of the money you work very hard to earn and do not like the fact lazy people get some of that hard earned money. Consider yourself soundly insulted. Well, it would all be 100% insults if you were a Liberal............ I tried, but damn, I can't really find somehting I do not like about you yet, give me some more time............... What about this? You are a tax paying, hard working intelligent person in debt who understands the reality in your mind as you see it, who blames racial intergration for your failings. You would take advantage of anyone if you thought you could get away with it, as well as kill me for food. You love might = right and want the American economy and the dollar to collapse to spark a racial civil war so you can avoid paying your perpetual debt and do not like to see fat, white, lazy men in limos stealing your hard earned money and putting you into debt, but instead blame single black women getting food stamps for your plight and can't wait for the mother of all civil wars. Consider yourself soundly insulted. I tried, but damn, I can't really find something I do not like about you yet, give me some more time............. Quote
Phantom Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 certainly! Beat me up all you would like... I suck! Ok. I don't like your opinions on the Jews. Quote Blah.
hugo Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 Whites and asians should ban together to insure that the 14th Amendment is properly adhered to. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Quote The power to do good is also the power to do harm. - Milton Friedman "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - James Madison
ImWithStupid Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 Whites and asians should ban together to insure that the 14th Amendment is properly adhered to. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. There were those who would argue that the 14th Amendment is invalid, as it was ratified by forcing southern states to ratify it under pressure from an occupying Federal Military. Cohen is equally shocked that I would dare to argue that the Fourteenth Amendment was not constitutionally ratified, even though the evidence is about as ironclad as you could ask for, since this is "an argument the Supreme Court has rejected." Well, that’s that, then! Who you gonna believe, the Supreme Court or your own eyes? Consider some of the irregularities. In Tennessee, opponents of the amendment simply refused to be present for the vote, with the intention of preventing a quorum and thereby making ratification impossible. To overcome this difficulty, amendment supporters had two Tennessee legislators forcibly seized and held in an anteroom as the vote proceeded. In vain did the speaker attempt to proclaim the two men absent (they refused to answer the roll); the vote in favor of the amendment went ahead anyway. In Oregon, the vote was taken on the amendment at a time when two of the Republicans’ seats in the legislature were being challenged on legal grounds. Those two Republicans provided the thin margin by which the amendment passed. But those two Republicans were eventually removed from the legislature in that same session when it was determined that they had been illegally elected, and their seats were given to Democrats. Not surprisingly, the legislature at this point voted to rescind its ratification of the amendment. But its rescission was not allowed to stand, and Oregon was counted as having ratified the amendment. Beyond these and other such examples, there was a logical problem at the heart of the ratification process. On the one hand, after ten of the eleven former Confederate states initially refused to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment (the exception being Tennessee), Congress declared them to be without legal governments and therefore not entitled to representation or even to self-government. On the other, Congress demanded that these very states, said to be without legal foundation and not entitled to the privileges of statehood (including the right to send representatives and senators to Washington), ratify an amendment to the Constitution in order to resume their proper place in the Union and replace the military rule of Reconstruction with the self-government to which the states were entitled under the Constitution. If a state truly lacks a legal government it would indeed be prohibited from enjoying representation in the U.S. Congress – but, logically, it would also be excluded from the process of amending the Constitution. Thus their votes should not have counted. But without them, the amendment would not have been ratified. In 1865 Congress had accepted the Southern states’ ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, abolishing slavery. But in 1867, even though nothing about those Southern state governments had changed in the interim, they were suddenly declared illegal when they initially dared to reject the Fourteenth Amendment. Simple consistency would require Congress to accept both decisions by the Southern states (that is, the decision to ratify the Thirteenth Amendment and the decision to reject the Fourteenth) or to reject both decisions. But consistency was not a conspicuous virtue of Reconstruction. Only later, under the heel of military occupation, did the Southern states vote to ratify. Noticed by the New York Times by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Personally, I feel it would have eventually been ratified anyway, if left open for states to ratify as they saw fit. Quote
wez Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 Get the hell out here and take your medicine like a real man.. Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 White Nationalist? Please explain.. Me hate you? Hahaha.. thought we were gonna discuss your hatred of mixed races? BTW.. The Hitler link didn't work.. I don't hate mix races... I'm not sure, but by now you should have realized that everything you assumed about me has been wrong... are you getting the picture... you seem to have a prejudice... Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 This says they're non-violent, yet you are banking on a civil race war..With guns, I assume.. or is it water balloons? Please explain.. I only wish for it to come because I think it is unavoidable... And if it's going to come, I want it to come sooner than later, as every day white culture (notice I didn't say white people) is weaker and weaker... He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign. -Sun Tzu, the Art of War Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 And they don't believe in equality, yet don't wanna use the word "supremecy" because it has a negative connotation? Please explain.. We are not Equal... Equality is a myth... Phillip J Rushton has all but thrown the sod over the grave... Race, Evolution, and Behavior: and Winston Churchil understood it... "...this worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century." 1920 Supremacist believe that Cuacasoids are superior, and therefore should rule over Negroid and Mongoloid peoples... I believe all three are different... each with their particular strengths and weaknesses... EG... Negroid strength is OBVIOUSLY physical development, whereas Mongoloid strength is more intillectual in nature... I do not believe that whites should rule becuase of anything, but I do beleive that anyone with half a brain can see that we should separate... This melting pot is a failed expiriment... Humans of ALL races would be better served if ALL races had a Homeland where thier particular culture/social systems can flourish and thier children can learn thier history without interference and the inevitable racism that would result in the melting pot... I'm sure even you can see how this would benefit Black people Too... Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 I don't have as much time as you... please ask one or two questions/insults at a time... I can't spend all day typing... Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 Seems you're in the subgroups, as you add a flavor of social darwinism and Nazism.. Correct? Please explain.. I am a firm believer in Socail Darwinism, and think that anything other than absolutely necessary welfare is counter to natural law, which tends to be self similar across scale and subject... EG: Social Security and Welfare, both Personal and Corporate, is allowing individuals/companies to survive and breed in our country that would otherwise have been thinned from the hern through natural means... It will be the death of our nation... Nation... not country... I define a Nation as people that share 1) Language 2) Culture 3) Borders it is an unfortunate consequence that Nations as I define them share similar division points based on race... It is basically that way because we refuse to make people assimilate... But there are exceptions... NO WHERE in there have I mentioned race as a dividing point for nations... according to my definition, we are not 1 nation under god, we are 3 nations under one roof... And if you are as big a fan of Abraham Lincoln as I am, you would remember his most famous and foreboding quote, "A Nation devided will not stand!" Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 And where does a collapsing economy and racial civil war come into play? This says that seperation is needed to preserve it and white culture.. I think you and your leaders need to get your story straight.. You wanna doom the economy to save it? Please explain.. The collapse of the US dollar, and the resulting Crash of economies around the world would force many issues to the surface sooner than later... "... and from the ashes we will rise like a phoenix!" the longer we wait, the more the Media/Progressives can brainwash people into this horse shyt they have been feeding us since the 50's... Equality is a myth, and thus everything based on it is fundamentally wrong... Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 Presumption Alert!!!! You assume I would hate you for what you believe? Why the hell would I? Because you hate people for what they believe? I think so.. correct me if I'm wrong.. Please explain.. I don't think you hate me... just a turn of phrase... Quote
ImWithStupid Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 I don't think you hate me... just a turn of phrase... I hate you, but it has nothing to do with what you believe. For me, it's the haircut. Quote
Guest Fullauto Posted September 17, 2008 Posted September 17, 2008 I hate you, but it has nothing to do with what you believe. For me, it's the haircut. But I worked so hard on it! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.