The War On Whites:

[BULLDOG]

So you want us to become a NAZI SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS state.Why am I not surprised?

That's gotta be a record for you. Five exchanges with him before you started screeching about Nazis. I suppose in your mind such a debate tactic has weight, but serious people think it just means you are an airhead.

Haha, and then, as if to underline my point about you being an airhead, you inexplicably include a video about whether Trump and Melania are holding hands. LOL

So who is "SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS" associated with in your mind?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is such a tiresome whine.

Why do RW refuse to work to better themselves and instead blame others for being such total failures?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[MikeK]

Oddly, you didn't start talking about a defensive posture, or exactly what you are defending against. You have alluded to aggressive measures from the start. Do you have any specific fears, or just your ominous fear of "the other"? Are you expecting roving gangs of murderers, like in a horror movie? Forced enslavement of your family? What exactly are you expecting, and from who?

My signature line has a link to a very informative video. The answer to your question is there. Just click on it.

 

[BULLDOG]

Oddly, you didn't start talking about a defensive posture, or exactly what you are defending against. You have alluded to aggressive measures from the start. Do you have any specific fears, or just your ominous fear of "the other"? Are you expecting roving gangs of murderers, like in a horror movie? Forced enslavement of your family? What exactly are you expecting, and from who?

My signature line has a link to a very informative video. The answer to your question is there. Just click on it.

Got it. You have no idea, but you've seen enough misleading videos till you think they have to be right.

 

[MikeK]

Oddly, you didn't start talking about a defensive posture, or exactly what you are defending against. You have alluded to aggressive measures from the start. Do you have any specific fears, or just your ominous fear of "the other"? Are you expecting roving gangs of murderers, like in a horror movie? Forced enslavement of your family? What exactly are you expecting, and from who?

My signature line has a link to a very informative video. The answer to your question is there. Just click on it.

Got it. You have no idea, but you've seen enough misleading videos till you think they have to be right.

"Misleading?" What the hell is misleading about that video? If you need more convincing, just go to YouTube and request "Muslim violence in Europe and Sweden." None of it is misleading. It's all true. But you seem to be one of those people who don't even believe what you see in a mirror.

 

[JQPublic1]

Calling a natural demographic shift a war is childish bullshit.

Hey, toots, the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act was not a "natural demographic shift". It was (((intentional))).

When a spider spins a web it is intentional and natural. When two men fight over a woman, it is intentional and natural.

A bill passed in Congress crafted to accomplish precisely what its (((crafters))) and their (((willing allies))) in the press assured the public it would not do is not a "natural demographic shift". It may be natural in a war-of-all-against-all survival-of-the-fittest sense, i.e., if you allow the enemy to dwell among you, he will destroy you if given the opportunity, being an enemy, and all, I'll grant you that. Would that we responded naturally.

Your premise is flawed on several fronts. First of all... the "enemy", it seems , in your mind, is every Muslim. A casual review of the evidence and case histories certainly does not support that extreme view..at least not in this country. I must admit,though, the latest terrorist events that are occuring regularly in Europe do nothing to help the cause of Muslims wanting to immigrste here. To be honest, I am probably just as apprehensive about letting more Muslims immigrate here as you are. Although I hate to admit it, i am starting to lean more toward Trump on this one...and that change of heart was spurred by the terrorist attacks in Europe.
Does that mean I want to turn my back on the refugees running for their very lives to avoid death or loss of freedoms that would probably ensue if they ever were returned to their home countries?
The solitary thought weighs heavily upon my conscience. The plan I would have supported is simple: supply these refugees with the best of arms and mission and allow them to fight their own battles on their own soil right there at home.

 

[cnelsen]

While they'll play their role, certainly, it isn't Muslims who have the West on the verge of total annihilation. It took our enemy centuries, but they've just about pulled it off at long last. And I learned something today: they know it, too; and are making their preparations. How eagerly they wait!

As for refugees, you know better than that. War refugees are people fleeing for their lives. It is mostly women, children, and old men, for obvious reasons. And they stay as close to their homes as safely possible, so they can return at the first opportunity and pick up their lives. (It strikes me Israel is just next door to Syria, from whence the alleged refugees are fleeing. Has Israel received a single "refugee"? I don't think so even though, as some anti-Semitic, racist, fascist, Nazi, Hitlers claim, Israel had more than a small part to play in triggering the bloodshed in Syria in the first place). Nor has China, Japan, or, for the most part, Russia taken any.

The invasion of Europe under way is by mostly young males, and they are embarking from Africa, Turkey, and Central Asia--places that aren't as nice as Germany, probably, but not war zones. Europe does not have a "refugee" problem.

My great hope is that, before the slaughter of the Europeans begins in earnest, some few patriotic throwbacks to a once great civilization pull it together enough to hunt down the Eurocrats who have sold out their people and slaughter them in the streets.

The Chinese would.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

So you want us to become a NAZI SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS state.Why am I not surprised?

That's gotta be a record for you. Five exchanges with him before you started screeching about Nazis. I suppose in your mind such a debate tactic has weight, but serious people think it just means you are an airhead.

Haha, and then, as if to underline my point about you being an airhead, you inexplicably include a video about whether Trump and Melania are holding hands. LOL

So who is "SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS" associated with in your mind?

stalin's soviet union, for one

 

[JQPublic1]

While they'll play their role, certainly, it isn't Muslims who have the West on the verge of total annihilation. It took our enemy centuries, but they've just about pulled it off at long last. And I learned something today: they know it, too; and are making their preparations. How eagerly they wait!

As for refugees, you know better than that. War refugees are people fleeing for their lives. It is mostly women, children, and old men, for obvious reasons. And they stay as close to their homes as safely possible, so they can return at the first opportunity and pick up their lives. (It strikes me Israel is just next door to Syria, from whence the alleged refugees are fleeing. Has Israel received a single "refugee"? I don't think so even though, as some anti-Semitic, racist, fascist, Nazi, Hitlers claim, Israel had more than a small part to play in triggering the bloodshed in Syria in the first place). Nor has China, Japan, or, for the most part, Russia taken any.

The invasion of Europe under way is by mostly young males, and they are embarking from Africa, Turkey, and Central Asia--places that aren't as nice as Germany, probably, but not war zones. Europe does not have a "refugee" problem.

My great hope is that, before the slaughter of the Europeans begins in earnest, some few patriotic throwbacks to a once great civilization pull it together enough to hunt down the Eurocrats who have sold out their people and slaughter them in the streets.

The Chinese would.

You've set the focus here on whether Muslims coming into any certain country are refugees or something else.
Obviously, Trump thinks the women children and old men being allowed into our great nation are a threat. However, as you posted, we aren't getting too many young men of fihlghting age as refugees. But if the threat is limited to Muslim males of fighting age, the primary group now inundating Europe, I wonder how we got the best deal of that bargain?
Also...that word " refugee" is the only key that opens the door to the west.
At least that's the term used by Fact Tank to describe the hordes of young muslim males flooding Europe.
5 facts about the Muslim population in Europe
Recent killings in Paris as well as the arrival of hundreds of thousands of mostly Muslim refugees in Europe have drawn renewed attention to the continent’s Muslim population.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

Does that mean I want to turn my back on the refugees running for their very lives to avoid death or loss of freedoms that would probably ensue if they ever were returned to their home countries?

The solitary thought weighs heavily upon my conscience. The plan I would have supported is simple: supply these refugees with the best of arms and mission and allow them to fight their own battles on their own soil right there at home.

The flaw in your conscientiously humane suggestion is we've already tried that and it has backfired badly on us. It is the reason why we frequently see columns of ISIS fighting units sporting Abrams tanks, 105 Howitzers, U.S. military jeeps and trucks, and much more. We gave that stuff to fighters whom we believed were anti-Al Qaeda or anti-ISIS but who turned on us the moment we left them alone and went over to the other side. One of the biggest problems we have in the Middle East is hatred for the U.S. is so intense and so prevalent we don't know from one day to the next who can be trusted.

Historically speaking, treachery is in the very nature of these people, which is why the Islamic culture is replete with internal and tribal conflict. Those who are your friend today might very well be your enemy tomorrow.

 

[MikeK]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

 

[cnelsen]

You've set the focus here on whether Muslims coming into any certain country are refugees or something else.
Obviously, Trump thinks the women children and old men being allowed into our great nation are a threat. However, as you posted, we aren't getting too many young men of fihlghting age as refugees.

I never said that.

.
Also...that word " refugee" is the only key that opens the door to the west.

That doesn't make them actually refugees. They are invaders looking to increase their consumption levels at the expense of the people already living there.

 

[cnelsen]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

The liberal faction HAS prevailed and those things ARE happening here. I suppose liberalism plays a role in the destruction of the West through mass immigration, but it is only one cog on the gear. Corporate profits have also played a large role. The US Chamber of Commerce has for decades been one of the most ardent boosters of importing cheaper humans from abroad. Christianity, at least the branch of Christianity influenced by the sick, sacrificial misreading of the New Testament, has played a role. And some liberals have opposed mass immigration--unions and environmentalists, in times past, for example.

There is one force for opening our borders to mass immigration that towers over all the others combined. This group bears the blame more than any other not only by virtue of its far greater impact, but also, and especially because, it is the one group whose efforts were knowingly and intentionally taken for the purpose of accomplishing the very thing we are talking about: the eventual subjugation of Christiandom.

That group is the Jews.

 

[JQPublic1]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

You need to research the leaders behind the immigration policies that have now become, in some cases, causal factors in perpetuating the present social upheavals occuring in Europe. Liberal immigration and family reunification policies are frequently cited as the reasons behind this tide of immigrants flooding into Europe but there is never a face or name attached to those accusations. However, I acknowledge that illegal immigration and refugee impersonation has been uncovered as contributing factors also.

 

[JQPublic1]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

The liberal faction HAS prevailed and those things ARE happening here. I suppose liberalism plays a role in the destruction of the West through mass immigration, but it is only one cog on the gear. Corporate profits have also played a large role. The US Chamber of Commerce has for decades been one of the most ardent boosters of importing cheaper humans from abroad. Christianity, at least the branch of Christianity influenced by the sick, sacrificial misreading of the New Testament, has played a role. And some liberals have opposed mass immigration--unions and environmentalists, in times past, for example.

There is one force for opening our borders to mass immigration that towers over all the others combined. This group bears the blame more than any other not only by virtue of its far greater impact, but also, and especially because, it is the one group whose efforts were knowingly and intentionally taken for the purpose of accomplishing the very thing we are talking about: the eventual subjugation of Christiandom.

That group is the Jews.

I was with you until you put that last sentence in there. I would substitue the. wealthiest 10% in lieu of JEW. Also...it isn't the subjugation of Christiany at stake as much as maintaining the status quo by pitting one group against another.

 

[cnelsen]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

The liberal faction HAS prevailed and those things ARE happening here. I suppose liberalism plays a role in the destruction of the West through mass immigration, but it is only one cog on the gear. Corporate profits have also played a large role. The US Chamber of Commerce has for decades been one of the most ardent boosters of importing cheaper humans from abroad. Christianity, at least the branch of Christianity influenced by the sick, sacrificial misreading of the New Testament, has played a role. And some liberals have opposed mass immigration--unions and environmentalists, in times past, for example.

There is one force for opening our borders to mass immigration that towers over all the others combined. This group bears the blame more than any other not only by virtue of its far greater impact, but also, and especially because, it is the one group whose efforts were knowingly and intentionally taken for the purpose of accomplishing the very thing we are talking about: the eventual subjugation of Christiandom.

That group is the Jews.

I was with you until you put that last sentence in there. I would substitue the. wealthiest 10% in lieu of JEW. Also...it isn't the subjugation of Christiany at stake as much as maintaining the status quo by pitting one group against another.

 

[JQPublic1]

I wouldn't call that a war on whites. I'd say it is the inevitable natural order of things. And I suppose the poorly educated whites will be led to believe it is the fault of liberals.

If we define "Liberal" as the mentality which is responsible for what clearly is the impending demise of traditional Swedish society, and I'm talking about those deluded but well-educated simpletons who welcomed the drooling assassins of their peaceful culture into their midst and transformed Sweden into the rape capital of the world, then yes, what we are seeing in Sweden and in Europe is the fault of Liberals. And if we allow the Liberal faction in America to prevail with regard to permissive immigration policies then the same things will be happening here.

The liberal faction HAS prevailed and those things ARE happening here. I suppose liberalism plays a role in the destruction of the West through mass immigration, but it is only one cog on the gear. Corporate profits have also played a large role. The US Chamber of Commerce has for decades been one of the most ardent boosters of importing cheaper humans from abroad. Christianity, at least the branch of Christianity influenced by the sick, sacrificial misreading of the New Testament, has played a role. And some liberals have opposed mass immigration--unions and environmentalists, in times past, for example.

There is one force for opening our borders to mass immigration that towers over all the others combined. This group bears the blame more than any other not only by virtue of its far greater impact, but also, and especially because, it is the one group whose efforts were knowingly and intentionally taken for the purpose of accomplishing the very thing we are talking about: the eventual subjugation of Christiandom.

That group is the Jews.

I was with you until you put that last sentence in there. I would substitue the. wealthiest 10% in lieu of JEW. Also...it isn't the subjugation of Christiany at stake as much as maintaining the status quo by pitting one group against another.

I am not about to watch a 2 1/2 hr video. A simple encapsulation would suffice for a message board audience. But I did d a cursory review of the subject via google and i found right wing sources all seeming to draw from your author, Kevin McDonald. I have never heard of this character before. HIs virtual anonymity was/is suspicious. After examining a PDF version of his long narrative I understood the entire premise. The thrust of McDonald's thesis turned on the notion the Jews construct and implement a Jewish strategy to inject and maintain multiculturalism in American politics. Multiculturalism, he thought, could provide a social shield behind which JEWS could hide from persecution. McDonald then showed how it was done:

Beginning with Horace Kallen, Jewish intellectuals have been at the forefront in developing models of the United States as a culturally and ethnically pluralistic society. Reflecting the utility of cultural pluralism in serving internal Jewish group interests in maintaining cultural separatism, Kallen personally combined his ideology of cultural pluralism with a deep

immersion in Jewish history and literature, a commitment to Zionism, and political activity on behalf of Jews in Eastern Europe (Sachar 1992, p. 425ff; Frommer, 1978).

Kallen (1915; 1924) developed a "polycentric" ideal for American eth- nic relationships. Kallen defined ethnicity as deriving from one's biological endowment, implying that Jews should be able to remain a genetically and culturally cohesive group while nevertheless participating in American


Kallen's idea of cultural pluralism as a model for America was popu- larized among gentile intellectuals by John Dewey (Higham, 1984, p. 209), who in turn was promoted by Jewish intellectuals: "If lapsed Congrega- tionalists like Dewey did not need immigrants to inspire them to press against the boundaries of even the most liberal of Protestant sensibilities, Dewey's kind were resoundingly encouraged in that direction by the Jew- ish intellectuals they encountered in urban academic and literary commu- nities" (Hollinger, 1996, p. 24).

Frankly, I think this Jewish influence is overhyped. But even so,the author doesn't explain the myriad other factors that may have played upon the minds of white lawmakers in a highly race conscious society to pass the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952 There are just too many holes in his theory. In any case, an immigrant is not a refugee. either is the refugee an asylum seeker... there are big legal differences between those three categories of foreign nationals seeking US citizenship.

 

[MikeK]

You need to research the leaders behind the immigration policies that have now become, in some cases, causal factors in perpetuating the present social upheavals occuring in Europe.

[...]

I can't disagree with what you've said here but I frankly wouldn't know where to begin. I can't say I haven't made some effort in that regard but in every case when I manage to find something that seems even halfway plausible it invariably runs headlong into an equally convincing but irresistibly conflicting theory.

The two competing theses are, as you've referenced, are the monied (ten percent) interests and, of course, the Jews, either of which would take more time than I have left (I'm 81) to effectively research. So rather than engage in a Herculean research effort to arrive at a conclusion that less than 0.1% of the population would attempt to decipher I've been content to point a finger at a source I can positively identify, which is the category most commonly identified as "Liberals," one very outstanding example being those moronic Swedish women and half-women waving the "Welcome" signs as their cynical potential rapists marched into their open arms.

If you have managed to convincingly and affirmatively identify some root sources of the madness which has affected those Swedes and their European and American counterparts I would be very grateful for your time in passing the information on.

 

[cnelsen]

You need to research the leaders behind the immigration policies that have now become, in some cases, causal factors in perpetuating the present social upheavals occuring in Europe.

[...]

I can't disagree with what you've said here but I frankly wouldn't know where to begin. I can't say I haven't made some effort in that regard but in every case when I manage to find something that seems even halfway plausible it invariably runs headlong into an equally convincing but irresistibly conflicting theory.

The two competing theses are, as you've referenced, are the monied (ten percent) interests and, of course, the Jews, either of which would take more time than I have left (I'm 81) to effectively research. So rather than engage in a Herculean research effort to arrive at a conclusion that less than 0.1% of the population would attempt to decipher I've been content to point a finger at a source I can positively identify, which is the category most commonly identified as "Liberals," one very outstanding example being those moronic Swedish women and half-women waving the "Welcome" signs as their cynical potential rapists marched into their open arms.

If you have managed to convincingly and affirmatively identify some root sources of the madness which has affected those Swedes and their European and American counterparts I would be very grateful for your time in passing the information on.

I can't remember where the study came from, but someone undertook to determine "in-group/out-group" differences between the world's groups--that is to say, they measured the relative animosity toward outsiders of people the world over, something like comfort with an outsider living next door, that sort of thing.

Europeans were the most accepting of outsiders, Arabs, the least. Second most accepting were Africans. Second least accepting were Jews. That's all I remember, but the study tied the findings to cultural markers like nepotism and found, unsurprisingly, that there was a very high correlation inversely between acceptance of outsiders and nepotism.

Then, using comparisons to the animal kingdom, they showed that of two representative populations placed into direct competition, invariably the less accepting eliminated the more accepting.

Xenophobia turns out to be a valid survival mechanism, but Jews have long attacked Europeans for xenophobia because, of course, they were the interlopers. Poignantly, they are the xenophobes, and now they are eliminating us.

 

[JQPublic1]

You need to research the leaders behind the immigration policies that have now become, in some cases, causal factors in perpetuating the present social upheavals occuring in Europe.

[...]

I can't disagree with what you've said here but I frankly wouldn't know where to begin. I can't say I haven't made some effort in that regard but in every case when I manage to find something that seems even halfway plausible it invariably runs headlong into an equally convincing but irresistibly conflicting theory.

The two competing theses are, as you've referenced, are the monied (ten percent) interests and, of course, the Jews, either of which would take more time than I have left (I'm 81) to effectively research. So rather than engage in a Herculean research effort to arrive at a conclusion that less than 0.1% of the population would attempt to decipher I've been content to point a finger at a source I can positively identify, which is the category most commonly identified as "Liberals," one very outstanding example being those moronic Swedish women and half-women waving the "Welcome" signs as their cynical potential rapists marched into their open arms.

If you have managed to convincingly and affirmatively identify some root sources of the madness which has affected those Swedes and their European and American counterparts I would be very grateful for your time in passing the information on.

I can't remember where the study came from, but someone undertook to determine "in-group/out-group" differences between the world's groups--that is to say, they measured the relative animosity toward outsiders of people the world over, something like comfort with an outsider living next door, that sort of thing.

Europeans were the most accepting of outsiders, Arabs, the least. Second most accepting were Africans. Second least accepting were Jews. That's all I remember, but the study tied the findings to cultural markers like nepotism and found, unsurprisingly, that there was a very high correlation inversely between acceptance of outsiders and nepotism.

Then, using comparisons to the animal kingdom, they showed that of two representative populations placed into direct competition, invariably the less accepting eliminated the more accepting.

Xenophobia turns out to be a valid survival mechanism, but Jews have long attacked Europeans for xenophobia because, of course, they were the interlopers. Poignantly, they are the xenophobes, and now they are eliminating us.

You place a lot of faith in that study. But I wonder just how accurate it is? European and American history indicates the Jews have been targets of hate all over the world...wherever they settled after Diaspora. Some locals have cited the refusal of Jews to assimilate as one major cause of social dissonance. Others condemn them based on the biblical narratives implicating them as the murderers of Christ. More frequent though, anti-Semitism emanates from raw jealousy .
Jews seem to prosper wherever they go.
It doesn't help that , collectively, the Jews are renowned for their demonstrable high cognitive ability. That results in Jews being overrepresented in lucrative pursuits and in key government positions much to the chagrin of the natives, many of whom are barely making ends meet.

But Jewish prosperity may not have any bearing on the economic status of locals at any government level. Even so..they are easy scapegoats due to their self imposed estrangement and high visibility within
Homogeneous communities.
Recognizing that anti-Semitism thrives best in homogenous communities a non jewish scholar writer thinks he detected a clever defense . Kevin McDonald has been on a mission to blame the Jews for liberal immigration policies. His pitch is that by turning homogenous populations into pluralistic societies, through cunning and political chicanery, Jews are thus blamed for all the immigration problems now facing the developed world.
I don't buy it. I think McDonald is just another paid shill for the wealthiest .
His job? To divert attention away from the robber barron top 1% and focus on
blaming the Jews for socio economic woes instead of them.