Sunday, 5 February 2012

Censor sleeps as Malmo burns

As well as my Swedish colleagues and writers to this blog I also use The Local, Sweden's English language slimesheet, for developments in that doomed paradise. Obviously when perusing The Local I have to keep my PC to English dictionary handy for deciphering the code. Although semi-literate (in English anyway) that slimsheet's comment censors are vigilant and efficient. Non-conforming views are deleted while repeat offenders get permanently blocked.

You can imagine my surprise then when the latest episode of Malmo's death spiral opened up to a whole range of real people comments. Amazing. Worth reading them. One in particular revealed some interesting insights and new information, at least for me.

NATO's supreme commander, Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN news stated in 1999 (during the bombing of Serbia):"Let's not forget what the origin of the problem is. There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states."

And Bill Clinton confirmed General Wesley Clark's statement when he recently revealed America's major aim in the war against Serbia:"I believe it is necessary for us in the future that we engage ourselves permanently in the Balkans in order to foster multi-ethnical democracies there." (Die Welt, April 17, 1999, p. 7)

The number one aim of World War II was formulated in Wendell L. Willkie's book "One World" (Simon and Schuster, New York 1943, page 85) as follows:"Abolition of racial exclusiveness of the German people!"Wendell Willkie was a Republican candidate for the US-presidency in 1940. He then travelled as Roosevelt's special envoy to Russia in order to get Stalin's agreement on the American aim to "abolish Germany's racial exclusiveness". He was successful, Stalin accepted in 1942 when Willkie visited him in Moscow.

The program for Germany after allied victory was also stipulated in the "PM's Daily" (New York, January 4, 1943) under the title "Shall We Kill The Germans" The plan "to kill the Germans" stated: "During allied occupation we must enforce immigration into Germany of non-Germans. Especially non-German men must be attracted to immigrate to the German states".

As evidenced in Sweden and Norway, multi-cultural states are generating nothing but division, hate, contempt and resentment for each other. The U.S. knew, specifically, that the immigration of large numbers of Muslims would cause the very nerve centers and soul of these countries to be attacked from within. Subdued through internecine warfare, they are very easy to manipulate since their populations are tied up with racial tensions and confusion. They don't realize and recognize alien influences from outside whilst ethnically homogenous nations see and feel the manipulations of the world rulers immediately from outside. That is the reason why psychopaths running the U.S. need a multi-cultural-racial world in order to rule the planet.

63 comments:

Jerry said...

Malmo is lost. Has been for some time.

magnificent Randolph said...

Magnificent Randolph said;
reading this post makes for sobering cogitation. If they can destroy these nordic countries, and above all else destroy my beloved Germany, they will have irreparably broken the very backbone of the white race in its finest form, and probably for at least a millenium if not forever.

pdf1 said...

Bears out my point. Germans have been and are the most unjustly demonized people in history. And we all know who's behind it, don't we children?

Anonymous said...

Another thirty of so years of this, it's over for the White race.

Anders Brevik documented in his essays thru out many nations that when Muslims reach a 65% population, they take over.

Although they are not near the 65% number yet, they are in many areas of London. They are out breeding the natives by leaps and bounds. It is just a matter of time before they reach the majority and begin the whole slaughter of Whites.

It's a take over, stupid, whoever doesn't see this is living in a dream.

You can thank the subversive jew for all this. They are a wreckless bunch who always falls on their own sword. This time around they will take down the rest of the western world with them.

Denise said...

It takes 3 days to be able to post comments, after you've registered, fyi...

Dr. Wassell said...

Great comment from that guy. I think tho' he should have been a bit more specific about 'the psychopaths running the U.S.'

Noam sayin?

Anonymous said...

Oh, by the way .. you're really going to like this ... I did.

India tells Britain: We don't want your aid

India’s Finance Minister has said that his country “does not require” British aid, describing it as “peanuts”.

*******************

Pranab Mukherjee and other Indian ministers tried to terminate Britain’s aid to their booming country last year - but relented after the British begged them to keep taking the money, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

The disclosure will fuel the rising controversy over Britain’s aid to India.

The country is the world’s top recipient of British bilateral aid, even though its economy has been growing at up to 10 per cent a year and is projected to become bigger than Britain’s within a decade.

Last week India rejected the British-built Typhoon jet as preferred candidate for a £6.3 billion warplane deal, despite the Development Secretary, Andrew Mitchell, saying that Britain’s aid to Delhi was partly “about seeking to sell Typhoon.”

Mr Mukherjee’s remarks, previously unreported outside India, were made during question time in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of parliament.
Related Articles
Trouble ahead with Indian jet deal 04 Feb 2012
Government to replaced Indian aid with small business loans 21 Oct 2011
Aid to India will be stopped, pledges minister 13 Jun 2011
Britain to continue aid to India 27 Feb 2011

“We do not require the aid,” he said, according to the official transcript of the session.

“It is a peanut in our total development exercises [expenditure].” He said the Indian government wanted to “voluntarily” give it up.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/9061844/India-tells-Britain-We-dont-want-your-aid.html

Bummer. You can't even give it away.

Your tax dollars at work ... well, almost.

Uncle Nasty.

PS: Anyone know if the typhoon is any good?
.

Anonymous said...

An American Carol or Big Fat Important Movie

The Airplane guys do Michael Moore.

Californian said...

Strong national states are anathema to a globalized order. The governments of national states would make the interests of their own people superior to the interests of globalized elites. So they gotta go.

We might also look at the US-EU support for the "Arab Spring" rebellions. Kick out the old dictators who might on occasion stand up for their own people in the face of the diktats from foreign capitals (or foreign capital?). So support revolutions which boot out the old dictators and put in mobs who can be easily manipulated while giving the appearance of democracy and all that jazz.

(Since the Islamic Brotherhood appears to be gaining power under the new setup, one wonders about the supposed Global War on Terrorism. Are we seeing a much bigger war take its place, a Global War on Nation-States?)

And you have to figure that under this system, white-run South Africa really had to go. Those pesky Boers had the audacity to not only defy the internationalists, but also show that a country under siege from sanctions and terrorism could prosper. Now that SA is sinking into ANC-run corruption and incompetence, its mines and finances are open for globalist exploitation.

That is the reason why psychopaths running the U.S. need a multi-cultural-racial world in order to rule the planet.

Nicely summed up.

Anonymous said...

An establishement Jew Max Dimont wrote in his book “The Indestructible Jews”,(of course a lie thinks that the truth is attempting to destroy it) that the destiny of Western civilisation was “ The diasporisation of man into one world, and a synthesis of the Western, Slavic and Sinic civilisations into one universal culture having the ethics of the Torah for its moral foundation and Jerusalem as its spiritual center.”


Usher in the raceless Noachides...

Relative 'excellence' in the 'Chosen' achieved via the manufacture of mediocrity in others.

Such is the testament to their 'magnificence' self ascribed.

Grab Barf Bag and fill it with existential manifestations of contempt that such an ideology deserves.

Anonymous said...

MY POOR OLD DAD FROM MALMO IS TURNING OVER IN HIS GRAVE, JOHN OLD RTD, CHICAGO COPPER.

Anonymous said...

What these dumb, avaricious, “here today, gone tomorrow” shabbos goyim politicians don’t seem to realise is that it won’t be the architects of these suicidal policies that will be held accountable – these masters of the black arts will have escaped to their little bolt-hole in the Middle East (booty and plunder in tow) long before the proverbial shit hits the fan. No! It will be the politicians themselves that will have to face the mob come Judgement Day. Lets just hope and pray that no mercy is shown to these treacherous bastards!

Frank Galton

AOM said...

Does anyone have statistics on demographics in Sweden? And/or Norway for that matter?

I'd like to know how serious the numbers are.

Anonymous said...

Savant:“You can imagine my surprise then when the latest episode of Malmo's death spiral opened up to a whole range of real people comments. Amazing.”

Savant,

I’ve noticed this as well with the Daily Telegraph comments section.

I don’t want to sound too paranoid, but do you think this could all just be a ploy, similar to Mao Zedong’s ‘100 Flowers Campaign’? Allow the indigene to vent their feelings for a brief period in order that the Establishment can identify any “troublemakers”. They can then round up all dissenters at a later date.

Or could it be that the Establishment want to gauge public opinion/the political climate for the meantime before they launch an all-out assault?

Frank Galton

AOM said...

@ Savant...

The comment posted below the slightly hysterical one posted by yourself makes a lot more sense, in my opinion.

'@AngelFire

I have to disagree.

Sweden has had a liberal immigration policy since WWII. The first phase of immigrants were from the poorer countries of Europe, Turkey and Southeast Asia. They were "economic" immigrants in search of a better life. These immigrants had every incentive to learn Swedish and integrate into Swedish society. The Swedish government gave them the opportunity to improve their economic standing, but nothing more. By the way, these Muslim and Christian immigrants were good citizens. They worked. They paid their taxes. They participated in society.

The newest wave of immigrants is entirely different. They are "political" immigrants who are portrayed as "victims" of violent dictators. The Swedish government, in an entirely bizarre twist, acts as if Sweden "owes" these immigrants housing, health care, food and education. The new immigrants are a new "entitled" class. No demands are made of them. There are no expectations of good citizenship. The core of western civilization, THE SOCIAL CONTRACT between government and citizen, has been thrown away by the Swedish government in a fit of extreme liberalism.

For me, the situation is quite simple. The Swedish government has created a problem of monstrous proportions, and only the government can fix it. The government needs to recognize that the new immigrants are guests in Sweden. The Swedish people owe them NOTHING but the opportunity to become good citizens. The Swedish government needs to make it clear that they can stay if they participate constructively in Swedish society. If not, send them home. '

You can, i believe successfully integrate small numbers of immigrants, given the right circumstance and conditions... it's just that things have changed, numbers are much higher and Government policy in most European countries is dangerously wrong headed. Ethnically pure states are a thing of the past, if indeed they ever existed (The Irish certainly not) however we need to ensure that the native people retain the vast majority and that numbers do not threaten social cohesion etc etc...

I

kraken said...

AOM: If you take the totals country-wide they are still not terribly alarming. About 10% in sweden and about 6% in Norway. But they are concentrated in certain areas, which look like Mogadishu or Karachi. Then there is the problem of birth rates. Nordik women have 2 kids at most. Somali's And other Muslim's and African's seem to have about between 8 and 10. Do the math. If these trends continue we'll be a minority in a couple of generations.

SAVANT said...

@Frank Galton. Yes, I've seen the change, most notably in the Telegraph but also in a lot of the American MSM. Many have even taken to printing the N word!

For what it's worth my view is that this is not centrally co-ordinated. Bad and all as they are our enemies don't have Mao's coercive resources - for now anyway. Also some outlets such as the NYT most definitely will not print anything outside what they see as the acceptable realm of discourse.

The media have taken a LOT of flack in their comments sections along the lines of 'why have you deleted my comments? Can't you tolerate opposing views?' The likeliest explanation then, IMHO, is that they're yielding to popular demand.

Having said that, let's not leave our guard down!

Andreas said...

Mag Randolph: You are correct. The Germans were always the biggest impediment. Neutralise them and you were half way to control.

They - the enemies of the white race - are more than half way there now, unfortunately.

Magnificent Randolph said...

Magnificent Randolph opines;
thank you Andreas. Here is a little aside, but relevant, I think. The USA was once a great republic, a Jeffersonian republic, full of promise for all mankind; the creation of the Enlightenment, forged in the minds of great men, actualised in a revolution that did NOT end in blood, crime, incendiarism, regicide....Here is a telling detail; even now something near one third of all Americans are of German or Germanic background and ancestry. You may ask, how come the American project did so well for so long? I would reply, how could it NOT do so, built as it has been one such a foundation of consolidated and comprehensive excellence.

Anonymous said...

SAVANT said...

The media have taken a LOT of flack in their comments sections along the lines of 'why have you deleted my comments? Can't you tolerate opposing views?' The likeliest explanation then, IMHO, is that they're yielding to popular demand.

Having said that, let's not leave our guard down!


I would say no, Savant. Never forget with whom we deal. Never.

Shakepeare had them in mind when through Lady MacBeth he said:

“We have scorched the snake, not killed it.”

and:-

“There the grown serpent lies. The worm that’s fled
Hath nature that in time will venom breed,”


Don't forget, the tribe hate Shakespeare with a passion. He saw them for what they are.

Never be optimistic about falling readership and viewership in the MSM. They don't need money. They can bleed money for years. All they have to do is have the power to take ours."

UN
.

Anonymous said...

Genocide of whites in South Africa is now at stage six (of eight)due to the increasing numbers of rapes and murders

Newsnet

Rusty Mason said...

"The Swedish people owe them NOTHING but the opportunity to become good citizens."

The Swedish people don't owe the invaders a damn thing.

Anonymous said...

Why do Jews hate The Bard? Shylock?

Jus' askin'

Bemused stare said...

Here you see the success of decades of effort.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MHtDF-z77wk

Enough to break ones heart. Over the next decade, we will rely on these kids to make decisions, often difficult ones.

The horror.

Tony VA said...

Bemused Stare. Yeah, I saw this earlier. Imagine trying to explian to these retards how white civilization is being systematically destroyed?

Anonymous said...

I think Frank Galton nails it.

Meanwhile, an interesting Scandinavian occurrence. Andreas Breivik is going to trial ... maybe.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/6374338/Mass-killer-demands-medal-at-court-hearing

Mass killer demands medal at court hearing

The right-wing extremist who has admitted killing 77 people in Norway's worst peacetime massacre has told a court that he deserves a medal of honour for the bloodshed and demanded to be set free.

Anders Behring Breivik smirked as he was led in to the Oslo district court, handcuffed and dressed in a dark suit, for his last scheduled detention hearing before the trial starts in April. He stretched out his arms in what his lawyer Geir Lippestad called "some kind of right-wing extremist greeting."

Reading from prepared remarks, the 32-year-old Norwegian told the court that the July 22 massacre - carried out with a bomb, a rifle and a handgun - was a strike against "traitors" who he said are embracing immigration to promote "an Islamic colonization of Norway."

Like in previous hearings, Breivik admitted to setting off the bomb outside the government headquarters in Oslo and opening fire at a Labor Party youth camp on Utoya island, outside the capital. But he again denied criminal responsibility for the deaths and rejected the authority of the court.


He's got my vote. Anyone want to place odds on:-

A. Shrinks overruled, declared insane, vanishes forever?

B. While awaiting trial, Shipped to a prison where enrichers abound to be shanked in the showers?

C. Sealed courtroom where snippets of utterly useless crap are doled out ... i.e. Breivik watches Sweden's Next Top Model?

D. Whole thing falls off the table into obscurity, with the occasional ten-yearly article "Whatever Happened to Breivik" retrospective popping up?

Any suggestions?

Oh sorry, I forgot E. Breivik allowed his full say. All Breivik's statements (uncensored) and testimony published daily.

Trial completely open and above-board in every way. Victim statements of Norwegians opposing immigration, read aloud. Bloggers, EDL, KKK, as well as press, allowed to comment --

Sorry. Sorry.

Dozed off for a second, there.

UN
.

Rob said...

Just one example of the benefits we've enjoyed since we've been rescued from the evils of living in homogeneous states.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097330/Pictured-Swollen-face-trainee-chef-left-dead-savagely-beaten-Asian-gang-hate-crime-attack.html

mischling said...

UN - in fact I thought that Breivik had been declared insane - the classical solution of all totalitarian regimes?

So he's on trial now, if he?

Anonymous said...

Mischling ... The article is quite revealing:-

Some 100 survivors and victims' relatives watched in disbelief as Breivik asked to be released and then told the judge he should receive a military honour for the attacks. Many survivors had expressed concern that Breivik will use court hearings to draw attention to his extremist views.

"It wasn't good that he got to say what he wanted to say," said Amel Baltic, a 16-year-old survivor of the Utoya massacre. "It made me irritated."

And

Judge Wenche Gjelsten ordered Breivik to remain in custody until the trial begins on April 16. Breivik faces terror charges that carry up to 21 years in prison, but if he's deemed to be gravely mentally ill he will be sent to psychiatric care.

A psychiatric evaluation found Breivik criminally insane, but a second evaluation was ordered amid criticism of that diagnosis. Breivik has refused to co-operate with psychiatrists in the second review.


UN
.

potgieter said...

Californian - trend is plain to see in SA. And that bastard Freddie O. playing both sides of the fence all along the way. Just waiting to see which side he should jump on. Hopefully roasting in hell now.

Anonymous said...

White nationalists confront muslim peadophile gang appearing in Liverpool Crown Court today.

Anonymous said...

Rob 20.58
Following the Asian attack on the white lad, the EDL, North West Infidels etc are having a demo in Hyde, Manchester

EDL Demo

Bemused stare said...

Uncle Nasty, they are in a pickle here. Lost in the nut hatch is not going to make him disappear. Knocking him off is out of the question I reckon, as having him as a martyr is a thought they don't want to contemplate unless they are already on a toilet while doing so. A contrived court case is the only option and a hairy one.

Anonymous said...

Re-reading the post on Breivik ... which is from New Zealand Stuff ... NZ's online news feed, I could not help but notice that the usual demonise-thy-nazi-enemy phrases were used.

The accused "smirking", etc., and the reference to a strange two-handed salute (kinda hard to give a one handed salute when you're cuffed, but this is a journalist and one must make allowances), but even so, I got the impression that the demonization was a bit half-hearted.

None of the old spite and lefty vitriol that we all know and love.
Could the left be losing its drive and its touch?

Doubt it. Liberalism, like rust, never sleeps.

UN
.

Krokodil said...

PS: Anyone know if the typhoon is any good?

Well, the WW2 version wasn't bad, but not too sure about the modern one. It has cost a lot of bucks, though, so hopefully it's not crap.

As for Breivik, screw him, I have no sympathy for him.

I never judge acts of terror by their cause, but by their actions.

Going down the route of saying "well this cause is noble, but that one isn't blah, blah" ... will always be a recipe for subjective disagreement, depending on which side of the fence you stand (the old expression of "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" remains entirely relevant).

Be it Muslim terrorism, Jewish terrorism, Sikh terrorism, Tamil terrorism, ANC terrorism, Palestinian terrorism, Irish terrorism (both sides), FARC etc. etc. (hardly an exhaustive list, I'm well aware), I condemn them all!

Why? Because their targets are to a greater or lesser degree almost always going to involve civilian casualties, regardless of age, gender, race, religion, political affiliation etc. etc.

Reluctantly, I can make a distinction between attacking civilian targets and military ones (by self-styled "freedom-fighters"), though even in the military case I will certainly not approve - but, as it is, Breivik hardly fits that particular description.

How much has he helped the cause of anti-multiculturalism? No idea, but probably not at all, and worse. Though how unsuccesful or otherwise he's been, has no bearing on my comment.

He's a scumbag - and should swing. Of course he won't, but he should anyway.

As for our political elites and leaders, well, maybe they should swing too, but I do think that's a different argument.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and this from the MAIL online ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082698/Boy-14-kills-intruder-Michael-Henderson-gang-FOUR-men-try-break-house.html

Nice big pictures of the perpetrators in the lead.

They make no bones about the predators being niggers ... and very little sympathy -- real or fake -- for the one who became a good nigger.

Especially from the comments.

A trend?

Le's see, shall we? I go with the "Hundred Flowers" theory expounded elsewhere in the blog by Frank Galton. Hey, the west has become Marxist in every other way ... why not go the whole hog? Gulags in Dartmoor. 4AM kick-downs of doors. The Lubyanka in Notting Hill.
Your papers, Comrade, please.

We're heading for it.

UN
.

Jeremy said...

UN - you inevitably provide me with my daily belly laugh. In this instance your comment about the two-handed salute and the limitations of 'journalists'.

Thanks!

gallowglass said...

There do seem to be a lot of these instances of whites defending their homws with lethal force. Let us pray it's a trend.

F McCool said...

I'm just after reading that link from Uncle Nasty about the 4 black thugs breaking into the kid's house.

Get this:

"In the call, the teen, says: 'I just shot the man. He came around the corner. I shot him. He broke the whole glass out (of the back door).'

He continues: 'I don't know how many it was (who broke in). Just one came around the corner. I got one more in the chamber. I'm going to shoot again,' the boy said.

'Do not, while I’m on the phone, do not fire that firearm, OK?' the dispatcher says

'What if another one comes in the house, ma'am?' he asked.

'Let me know, OK, if you see anybody. I will let you know(when a deputy gets to the house),' the dispatcher responded."

Holy shit - how daft is that? Three more thugs on the prowl and she tells him to wait till the deputy arrives.

FFS!

Anonymous said...

gallowglass said...

There do seem to be a lot of these instances of whites defending their homws with lethal force. Let us pray it's a trend.

Quite a few US States have passed -- over the last few years -- legislation de-criminalising the use of deadly force in the defense of one's person and property.

These are popularly known as "Castle Doctrine" and clauses that state this fact are called "Stand Your Ground", "Line In The Sand" or "No Duty To Retreat" clauses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine

Apart from America, I do not know if this is legal in any other countries ... a sad state if you ask me.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

Am I right, Krokodil, that, in your comment of 7 February 2012 02:46, you refer mainly to bombers, as distinct from shooters?

UN
.

Motoboy said...

@ F McCool. I thought that too at first but if you read some of the comments it seems that the deputies were liable to walk in the door at any time. Could havebeen a horrible mistake.

Anonymous said...

F McCool said:-

Holy shit - how daft is that? Three more thugs on the prowl and she tells him to wait till the deputy arrives.

FFS!


That's bureaucrat, desk-bound cop thinking for you ...

When seconds count, they're only minutes away.

I am prepared to put money on the despatcher being a donut-slurping Affirmative Action Hire who can barely push a pencil and possessed of an an arse that would stun a Clydesdale stallion.

Uncle Nasty
.

Anonymous said...

Motoboy makes a good point ... but I still feel the same about despatchers.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

Krodikil I would've agreed with you once. I do not agree with indiscriminate terror or the targeting of 'civilians'. Targeting armed forces may seem to be 'heroic' or 'brave' I don't think it is . This definition of 'bravery' is one that like so much else that has been manufactured, handed to us and serves 'their' interests and not our own. Rank and file Soldiers , Police officers etc have no real power and targeting them only kills innocent, hardworking and brave people.

In comparison targeting 'civilians', the powerful and influential in the 'civil' service , media etc will serve our purpose. That they don't carry guns doesn't detract from the fact that they're the ones fashioning and wielding the weapons that are destroying our race and our nations. They make themselves valid targets by their actions and their influence. It would be perverse to target decent men while leaving the degenerate marxist to prosper all because we want to appear 'brave' as defined in way which only serves to protect our real enemies.

RegThe Hedge said...

Krokidill if 1000 men stood up and followed Brevnik then our problems would disappear tomorrow.
If 1000 got together and began an IRA war then the authorities would be fucked.
1000 men who are fully prepared to die? You couldn't stop them.

You are obviously a pacifist. I am not.

Anonymous said...

Anonny of 15:00

Afraid I have to agree 100%. If you want to make a difference, you do not have to kill anyone pour encourager ... and all that.

You could blow up all the banks in the world and achieve nothing in fixing the economy.

However ....

Ten minutes alone in a room with, say, Mr. Goldman or Mr.Sachs ... or in the case of unfettered immigration -- Mr. Shatter ...

Just you, him and a baseball bat could change your world very much for the better.

Sad but true, some people could benefit from a dose of real terror.

Never be distracted by the minions on the periphery ... seek the core of the problem -- and deal with the core.

Which is what Breivik did.


Think about it. One reads of a muslim blowing up 200 peasants in a Hyderabad marketplace, and five minutes later it is forgotten.

Little people.

what Breivik did, was, to use a favourite phrase, sent "Shockwaves through the corridors of power".

You can bet your last buck that Imodium sales in the "corridors of power" went trough the fucking roof.

Covington goes into the morality of targets and targeting in great depth.

Covington's books, unlike most books never started as entertainment and then evolved into social statement and then cautionary tale.

They started as cautionary tales and have rapidly become instruction manuals.

I wonder when they will become history. Soon, now.

http://downwithjugears.blogspot.co.nz/2012/01/nva-target-selection.html

Uncle Nasty.

Read the books.
.

Anonymous said...

RegThe Hedge said...

Krokidill if 1000 men stood up and followed Brevnik then our problems would disappear tomorrow.
If 1000 got together and began an IRA war then the authorities would be fucked.
1000 men who are fully prepared to die? You couldn't stop them.


I have read on several occasions that the core of the IRA never numbered more that 200 individuals.

Just goes to show, don't it?

UN
.

Heraclitus said...

UN - they say violence solves nothing, but that is patently untrue. Ref. the IRA as you mentioned. Love 'em or hate 'em (the latter for me) they were blood y effective.

Were a similar small number of really dedicated men to rise to the defense of the west, the PTB would deal with them eventually.

But they would have to be totally dedicated as were the IRA. And also very clear on objectives and fully united in the will to achieving them.

That's where the current WN movements totally and utterly fail. Even on this blog and many others you can see the centrifugal forces at play.

Heraclitus said...

When I said the PTB would deal with them I meant that in the sense of trying to come to an accommodation with them.

Anonymous said...

Heraclitus said...

That's where the current WN movements totally and utterly fail. Even on this blog and many others you can see the centrifugal forces at play.

True. True. Bloody true. It's like trying to sweep bloody ants.

However, on this blog alone, I would say there are a half-dozen or more hard-core, granite-headed pragmatists.

Well, my opinion, anyway.

Not a bad start.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

There is not going to be another 30yrs.of this. They don't HAVE a new world order. Get out the Mantra where ever you can.

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

Anonymous said...

Heraclitus ...

PTB? Powers that be?

Just confirming. If so, most definitely. Politicians are not famed for their ... shall we say, inflexibility and fortitude?

We used to have jokes about account directors in the advertising game ... the guys and occasional women who liaised between agency and client.

Client:- "How're you going, Fred?"
AE: "Ahhh, great JB. If ... that's okay with you?"

Client:"What time is it, Fred?"
AE: "Ahhh ... what time would you like it to be, JB.?"

There was always the "Ahhh."

Politicians are no different. They have spines of purest macaroni

UN
.

rebel said...

"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."

It's the new mantra.

Say it loud

Say it often

Say it everywhere

Do that and in time it will get accepted or at a minimum put the bastards on the back foot.

Krokodil said...

@UN your comment 13:44.
No, I was making no difference in regard to terrorist shooters or bombers - and in Breivik's case, seeing as he was both a shooter and a bomber, clearly no difference at all.

@anon 15:00
I think I made it clear I don't approve by one iota terrorist attacks on military targets - merely that those who do so are clearly taking more of a risk. And it is for that reason primarily that they usually don't. Soft targets are always easier targets, and that will mostly mean not targeting the (armed) police or military.

A brief example would be where a Black terrorist group, in the early 90's, targeted a church in Cape Town, South Africa (an evangelical mixed-race church, quite non-political) and proceeded to kill a number of parishioners. However, a member of the congregation drew his gun and began firing back, at which point the cowardly scum legged it out of there. The terrorists had figured on no armed opposition when planning their attack.

Even the terrorist attacks that have been perpetrated against the police or military, have usually been done where it was safest to do so, and not direct confrontation.

The police and military (and politicians, judges etc.) are the direct enforcers of the will of the state and, therefore, are more pertinent targets than just people going around doing their stuff. But I mean that in the sense of the school bully trying to take on a somewhat bigger kid than those he usually picks on. He's still a bully, and a little sod, but at least he's taking more of a risk.

That's why I said it was with reluctance that I could make a distinction between attacking military or civilian targets. I'm totally against both.

@Reg the Heg
By any reasonable, modern-day definition of terrorism, Breivik would be considered a terrorist.
But, according to you, being anti-terrorist is to be a pacifist. By the same reasonable, modern-day definition of terrorism, that would make almost the whole of the Western military (including special forces) a bunch of pacifists. Don't be absurd.

For the record, back in the early 80's I did national service in the South African army, and spent many months in the war-zone of that time (northern South West Africa, as it was then called, and various parts of Angola). I wasn't a pacifist then, and am not now.

Re: the IRA, were they particularly effective, or did the British state simply lack the resolve and political will to deal with them in an aggressive enough manner? I'm no expert on the Troubles (if that's the right term), I merely ask the question.

Anonymous said...

Krokodil said (among other things):

That's why I said it was with reluctance that I could make a distinction between attacking military or civilian targets. I'm totally against both.

If I may attempt to clarify matters, here ... on my behalf, anyway, successful resistance to a growing tyranny (as was mentioned in the Bill of Rights) is most definitely not achieved by arbitrarily attacking civilians or the military -- providing that the military is a legitimate military and that the police are a legitimate police force and not -- as so many police forces are these days -- simply muscle or a hit squad for an illegitimate, or barely-legitimate goverment.

What the lefties love to call a regime

It is by targeting the authors of our woe -- them and their willing handmaidens alone.

Don't you just love the word "regime"?

Rayyyyy-Jheeeem.

Perhaps we should make common the use of phrases like the Obama "regime"?

The Cameron "regime"?

I get the feeling they won't like it.

UN
.

Heraclitus said...

@krok. How does one differentiate between a legitimate regime/government and one that is not? By one having a democratic mandate? I think not, not least because of the difficulty of defining democratic. Is the current US 'regime' truly democratic? Most of us here would argue in the negative I believe. Does that justify armed resistance? A very different story, truth to tell.

Californian said...

Perhaps it is time for Europeans to demand a right to bear arms?

None of the old spite and lefty vitriol that we all know and love.
Could the left be losing its drive and its touch?


Maybe. Maybe because Brevik put the fear of divine retribution into the multicultists. Maybe because the cumulative effects of internet websites like this one are mobilizing opposition--and the left can not deal with cracks in their agitprop monoloply. Maybe because groups such as the EDL are getting out in the streets and fighting back.

There's a growing insurgency going on here against the multicult.

Californian said...

I wanted to make one more comment about Breivik:

The left has glorified terrorists such as Nelson Mandela and Che Guevara. Not to mention supporting assorted insurgents who routinely used terrorism as a means of warfare, e.g., Bob Mugabe's merry men. Now the left is having to deal with terrorism directed against themselves. Were Breivik's actions different from the Church Street bombing? Or the growing farm attacks in South Africa?

What's interesting is that they seem to be trying to sweep this incident under the rug. I suspect the reason that they want Breivik committed for insanity is to quietly dispose of him, thus avoiding a show trial which could be turned against them.

Perhaps the multicultists are having to face a situation with which they lack the means to cope. Regardless, this affair will bear more study.

johan said...

Californian you're right. One man's freedom fighter is anothers terrorist. They also want to shut Breivik, badly want to shut him up because he's highly articulate and he can say what he wants in court. He's dangerous to them. Locking him up in a madhouse is the best way out for them.

Baloo said...

Wendell Effing Willkie, eh? Fascinating piece of history. Thanks. This is linked and commented HERE by EX-ARMY.

Anonymous said...

"Re: the IRA, were they particularly effective, or did the British state simply lack the resolve and political will to deal with them in an aggressive enough manner? I'm no expert on the Troubles (if that's the right term), I merely ask the question." @Krokidil, the British weren't reluctant to use violence and even were involved in the murder of innocent civilians. The SAS killed IRA activists at Loughall and Gibraltar. There was more than likely collusion between the British security forces and the UVF in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the murders of the Miami Showband. The Paratroopers deliberately targeted Catholics in revenge for IRA killings of their men. They were as aggressive as they could without alienating world opinion.

Anonymous said...

"Be it Muslim terrorism, Jewish terrorism, Sikh terrorism, Tamil terrorism, ANC terrorism, Palestinian terrorism, Irish terrorism (both sides), FARC etc. etc. (hardly an exhaustive list, I'm well aware), I condemn them all!" @Krokidil liberal democracies like the US and the UK did as bad in the bombings of Dresden, Hiroshama and Nagasaki. They gave the Germans and Japanese as good as they got from them and better.