Sunday, 20 January 2013

Comment policy change

In response to a suggestion by Paris Claims (where does that handle come from?) and several more of you over time, I'm changing to unmoderated comments.  sometimes I find that this lowers the standard of the interactions and of course it also exposes the blog to spamming.  Anyway, let's give it a try and see how it works out.

157 comments:

nastiestuncle said...

1st

nastiestuncle said...

I wonder if this will work. I reckon it would be better as it was before. But let's see.

Keiser said...

haha Ibeez riting on ur blug an u cannt say nufing n0w sevant sinz ur nt modur8ing yo commenz yarhahaha LoLz
Keiser

Krazed Keltic Kabballist said...

You're gonna have the Hasbaroids hangin' out your arse at every opportunity.... In fact the NA resplendent in his freedom, is already here !

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Frankly, Savant, I was always under the impression that a moderated site, meant that the owner read all posts, tossed out off-topic posts and the unmitigated garbage, and then allowed all remaining relevant posts to be published.

Considering (what seems to me, anyway) that you have an amazingly laid back attitude to posters of all persuasions, I would have considered this site unmoderated from day one. Please note, in writing that, that I intend no insult.

That being the case, could you or anyone enlighten me if I have it wrong?

Thanks,
UN
.

nastiestuncle said...

I think he moderated it just to keep out the spam, like "my friend earns $435 per day for one hour's work at www.getscammed.com".

Savant is a breath of fresh air in the blogosphere in terms of allowing people to post who make the flock cry and pull out their hair.
Contrast this with another site which shares much of the same readership which doesn't allow the posting of any facts which refute the religious-type beliefs posted daily by The Enlightened Ones Who Know The Truth Because They Saw It In A Youtube Video.



AnalogMan said...

Well, you were correct, weren't you? The quality of comments has immediately plunged, starting with your very first unmoderated comment. That's retarded, even for the troll. Which, I have no doubt, was its intention.

nastiestuncle said...

@AnalogMan

Cruel irony is a fickle mistress.


Ian said...

The owner of "Paris Claims" has said on another site that it's an anagram of "Islam is crap."

Ian said...

Savant, did you really mean "Policy" change ?

Franz said...

Good stuff. Either way.

Reading your backfile Savant, and I gotta say it:

WILL FRANZ THE FIRST COME BACK?

I'll be glad to re-do my account so it reads Franz2 or something; it don't matter since I fairly sporadic anyway.

But I'm coming to like the guy.

Anonymous said...

That's right Ian. well remembered.
The potential drawback to unmoderated comments is what happened over at Old Holborn's site. One or two sexual deviants would usually lower the tone with lewd comments. Shame OH has gone very part time these days, I used to enjoy his blog.
Gates of Vienna has been given the chop by Google. I'm more than surprised that they've been singled out.
Paris Claims

Anonymous said...

It's obvious Paris why GoV got the chop. They let a narcissistic
disjointed scribbler called Tachuan
burble on about the Holohoax.
Naturally he was attacked for writing about a subject he had previously confessed ignorance about. So many sensible comments came in against the ''Biggest Lie'' of the 20th century
that the kike controllers felt they had to shut it lest the sheeple started to wake up.

Anonymous said...

Tachuan's articles were generally well received by G of V readers, it seemed. I thought they were too long. Seriously, if Jews control the world, including the blogosphere, you would think they'd target this site( and various others) before they shut down a site that is generally supportive of Israel.
Maybe someone who has a better memory than me might recall a quote from an American general along these lines
"Take plenty of photos ( of the camps) because sure enough some bastard will deny this ever happened"
Paris Claims

Anonymous said...

"Get it all on record now. Get the films. Get the witnesses, because somewhere down the track of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened. - General Dwight D. Eisenhower, on future Holocaust denial
Found it....
Paris Claims

Keiser said...

Ok, now that we are free of the tyranny of moderation let's have every black (or whatever the PC term is now) post a comment saying how they are discriminated against on Irish Savant and demand that all posts that are derisory of blacks be changed, starting with the Philip Emeagwali post (Sunday, 25 July 2010, "The MSM sinks ever lower") who did indeed network 67 x10^256 grains of sand in to a functioning supercomputer.

Then all the Muslims start commenting with each other until entire threads are conversations about Islamic interests only at which point all posts can be declared Sharia Law "no go" areas.

The few Jews (Zionists) can sit back and rub their hands together and threaten legal action against anyone who comments that this is bad, encourage the above behaviour and act as the new defacto moderators. Nastiest Uncle this can be your job.

Sorry I know the above post is derivative to say the least but I couldn't resist. Savant just a suggestion, why not have a semi-moderated blog (can there be such a thing on blogspot) where comments that are clearly "trolling" are removed. Can trolls be banned in cases of abject nonsense being written?

SAVANT said...

Thanks for all the (unmoderated!) comment guys.

Yes, you identify all the potential drawbacks and in fact initially I had to go to moderating comments because of things like that. However, as UN says, I now allow all RELEVANT comments. I also have a relatively sophisticated spam filter. Again, I have the view that we learn by way of contrary opinion.

So look, I'll give it a go and see how it works out.

Anonymous said...

Give it a try Savant. If it doesn't work out, revert to how it was. It's your blog, your rules.
I got permanently banned from Harry's Place, called a Nazi just for suggesting that the actions and words of some jews was a cause of anti semetism. For those that don't know Harry's Place is a "progressive" blog inhabited by quite a lot of jews, fagotts, and leftards, and one or two others. Their home page has some bullshit about free speech& liberty and yet they ban anyone who offers an opposing opinion. Wankers.
Paris Claims

SAVANT said...

Yeah, Paris, I just don't understand that. I see in blog after blog people being banned for unsanctified comment. Truly and honestly I cannot understand that. If you vigorously disagree then flame them out or whatever but banning? well isn't that what the blogosphere is supposed to be about....that is, getting around the MSM thought police?

Shaunantijihad said...

Censorship. What the victors impose upon the vanquished.

Some people will use ridicule, censorship and even impose Hate Laws to stop you learning about the greatest lie ever told - that Germans built gas chambers to massacre Jews. It is is a total lie. A lie used to tar anyone who opposes mass Muslim and African immigration as a Nazi who wants to kill six million Jews.

Those who promote this lie, as well as the lies about the US Liberty and 911, are Jews or Jewish globalist shills who seek the extermination of Europeans.

Auschwitz - Why The Gas Chambers Are A Myth (full): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zh-zx6hVWug&bpctr=1358775766

Hat tip again to John Hardon http://hardons-blog.blogspot.co.uk/

eah said...

Mother who dared to tell the truth about immigration on the BBC: Granddaughter of a Polish airman explains why she HAD to speak up and reveal how her High Street has become a 'foreign country'

'Politicians and academics live in another world'

No kidding?!

Check out the Cambridge hag.

nastiestuncle said...

Speaking about Paris Claims, he was banned from a national socialist site masquerading as a nationalist site this morning for saying that he believed that the Holocaust happened but that people should not be imprisoned for expressing their opinions on it.
The site in question has long been known to have a very slender grip on reality and almost a complete lack of intellectual honesty. The site in question is so full of Enlightened People Who Know The Truth Because They Saw A Video On Youtube that one of the regular commenters, now contributors, is a hilarious man who believes that nuclear science doesn't exist and that there are no nuclear reactors, bombs, etc. The moderator is a man who thinks that contrails are chemicals sent to control us and that all large companies have a yellow triangle in their logo which means that they belong to a secret society of Jews.

And they genuinely wonder why Joe Public won't join them. Their conclusion is that once Joe Public has been told The Truth (with the help of Youtube videos) about WW2 then the way will be opened to a Nazi government and everything will be fine.

This, my main kneegrows, is why we do not stand a chance at present.

Anonymous said...

I've been banned for being a nazi on one site and banned for not being one on another! At least Savant tolerates me (for now)
Paris Claims

Roem said...

Well, I'll give you one reason Savant. White Nationalists have been banned from every forum possible by our enemies. And not just MSM. All kinds of blogs as well. So why should we give them airtime?

Esther said...

I commend this new policy and also your approach of allowing all kinds of opinions. It's only an echo chamber if unpopular views are aditid out. I know you did not do that, by the way.

Anonymous said...

Sav-I've noticed over the last few months that the middle class Irish are now talking about immigration,asylum,etc.The tide is turning,in my opinion.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 14:49

"I've been banned for being a nazi on one site and banned for not being one on another! At least Savant tolerates me (for now)"

It's obvious that Nazism is the way forward because it worked so well last time.
If we try it again we'll find:
1. A massive tourist drop-off.
2. Almost no-one will trade with us.
3. Our citizens will not be welcome in foreign countries.

It's almost as if national socialists..... have no brains.

But then again, some non-factchecked, full-of-fabrications Youtube videos say they are correct, so maybe I am wrong.

Julian said...

Nastiest Uncle. I'm totally with you on this if nothing else. Hitler and the Nazis did some good things, like the German economy as a prime example. But even if you think everything they did was great (and if you do you really need help) publicly stating this will get you consigned to the loony frings if not to jail.

People: It just DOES NOT WORK!

Wolfhound said...

Your blog, your rules.

I would be for moderation with an iron index finger due to the amount of people out there who hate us for our opinions (keep in mind, most of us would only hate others for their actions, the other side will do it for disagreeing with their propaganda!)

The tsunami of horseshit coming from NU will continue regardless but I still enjoy reading and posting here no matter what direction you decide to take this.

Anonymous said...

savant, yrs back while visiting relatives by marrige in the mayo charlestown area and sligo had to listen to the usual anti american shit of how we are all racist and the blacks are being made scapgoats for our insecurity,how we are war like and should leave the viet cong alone .bla bla bla.now that they have the nigger man in their midst the tide has turned,wonder how thats working out???????

nastiestuncle said...

@Julian 17:53

"Nastiest Uncle. I'm totally with you on this if nothing else. Hitler and the Nazis did some good things, like the German economy as a prime example. But even if you think everything they did was great (and if you do you really need help) publicly stating this will get you consigned to the loony frings if not to jail.

People: It just DOES NOT WORK!"

Well actually, Hitler wasn't so good for the German economy. That all was well with their economy pre-WW2 was a smokescreen, just as Western economies were thought to have been healthy pre-2007.
Germany's pre-WW2 economy was unsustainable and the only way to keep it going was by waging war.

People give all sorts of bullshit reasons as to why war was inevitable, usually blaming it on the British for a post-WW1 military build up.
1. Germany didn't have to compete with Britain militarily because Germany didn't have much of an empire to speak of. The competition was going to be between Britain, the US and the Soviet Union.
2. Hitler had said back in 1932/33 that his intention all along was war. The entire build-up of the German economy prior to WW2 was focused on his being able to wage war at some date in the future.

The worst possible thing which happened to European ethnic nationalism was Hitler and those who follow[ed] him. He wanted to murder and enslave the British (more or less the same ethnicity as the Germans), murder and enslave the Slavic people and he has ensured that pure ethnic nationalism in Europe would never ever stand a chance of succeeding again.

That's why I say the best we can do now is to push for a deportation of some, or at best most, of the unwanted in our societies, but we are never going to have '100% ethnically pure white lands' ever again. We certainly aren't going to have anything approaching what we want whilst we blame everything on Jews and idolise Hitler because these things make us sound like retards.

Like I said, it's almost as if national socialists........ have no brains.

Dan said...

Godwin strikes!

You should be banning NU immediately.

Not because he's a troll but because he'll talk about Adolf immediately.

SAVANT said...

@Nastiest. You're just about 100% wrong what you say about the German economy and Hiter's plans to 'enslave' the British. Too long a story to go into now, maybe another time, but you're way off the mark here, just repeating the usual tropes we've been hearing since we were in diapers.

SAVANT said...

@American anon above....

Americans have a wrong impression of Irish "anti-Americanism". What many take to be general negativity applies overwhelmingly to American foreign policy of the GW Bush variety....which has pretty much been the norm for most of the last century. Also dressing this aggression up as 'defending freedom and democracy'. Count me in on those views. W/r/t individual Americans and the population at large I can assure you that Irish people are overwhelmingly positive. Count me in again.

Are we getting a handle on our own cultural enrichers? I think so. Slowly, but it's happening. Look at Anon 17.31 above.

nastiestuncle said...

The German Field Marshal Brauchitsch signed a directive providing that "the able-bodied male population between the ages of seventeen and forty-five [in Britain] will, unless the local situation calls for an exceptional ruling, be interned and dispatched to the Continent."

Dispatched to the Continent for what? Afternoon tea? A presentation of medals? An enormous game of football? Slavery? Death?

Hitler knew that should he conquer Britain, the natives would resist. The French may not fart above their arse, but the British would. A German victory would have meant the genocide of the British people. But then, Hitler was not a white nationalist. He was a German nationalist.

Unless someone has a Youtube video made by a 14 year old called 'TruthSpeaker911" which shows Hitler stroking the head of a child which means he must have been a nice chap*.

*This very tactic was used by someone over at another site to show that Hitler could not have killed any Jews, LOLOL.

Franz said...

Savant,

You have surprisingly decent opinions of Americans that I ditched years ago. And I AM one.

I remember when I got that way: Canada, 1972, when Montreal was spiffing up a sports arena. The loudest dolts, the biggest pricks, were Americans. Because of dead branch of the family tree I passed myself off as a Bulgarian exile.

Those of us who hate the yanks but live here just find an enclave of like-minded fellow-ethnics, our little block is Polish-Hungarian-German and whatnot, all euro to the core and probable survivors of the coming race war.

American anti-Americans say RAH!

F McCool said...

Franz, I think you're being very harsh. In my experience Americans are very polite and friendly people. Very pleasant. Know SFA about the world at large but we won't hold that against them!

Anonymous said...

relatives by marrige in the mayo charlestown area and sligo had to listen to the usual anti american shit of how we are all racist and

Sorry 'bout that my friend, you'll still hear that crap in most places especially in north mayo/sligo which is not exactly ground zero. I was talking to a woman who told me about a relative of hers coming home to visit Ireland from one of the southwest states bringing an American friend with her and how awfully racist the American woman was and how delighted the Irish woman was that the big O is back for an encore because it pissed off Yanks like that one so much. This Irish Obot of course lives in one of the dwindling number of Irish towns who's demographic makeup could still pass for that of 1995. Funny how those of our people who love all this progress the most seem to live far away from it.

Franz said...

F McCool --

Now that I'm off to work I admit it DID come out harsher than I'd wanted.

It's more like: It's "martins day" here, one of the days of the year when it's clear that the bastids have gotten their way.

The rest of us (or anyway many of us) are just stymied about what to do next. We sometimes feel so owned and locked up we just blow off some.

It's a mood, true. But it's a very real situation.

Dan said...

I agree that had the Germans invaded that millions of English would have been murdered. Probably at the hands of newly liberated Welsh, Scots and Irish and not a few Vichy French.

that's what happens when insular societies are invaded and subjugated. Continental populations normally get to roll with the punches and have complex abilities to go along with conquerors. Germany invading the UK would have been as bad as William in 1066.

Dan said...

The Normans probably killed about 1o-15% of the English. Maybe more.

Dan said...

Then they rolled in Leinster with de Clare.

Anonymous said...

"The Normans probably killed about 1o-15% of the English. Maybe more. " ..Where did you get that figure from?

After the invasion 7500 knight stayed.The population at the time was in the millions.

Hitler had no intention of invading us.

Personally I wish he had. We're being wiped out now. Slowly but surely.

rob

Anonymous said...

That's why I say the best we can do now is to push for a deportation of some, or at best most, of the unwanted in our societies, but we are never going to have '100% ethnically pure white lands' ever again.

Probably true. But we can at least remove the Jews.

Anonymous said...

@ Nastiest Jew

Don't forget Hitler planned to set up breeding farms:

"A different fate was in store for the women of Britain. They would stay at home. Selected girls were to be forced into breeding farms, as mates of blond Aryan SS men."
http://tinyurl.com/dyxf7fw

No actual documents were ever produced to prove this Nazi plan ever existed. Which is not only childishly absurd, it also contradicts Hitler's numerous peace offers to Britain.

But, you can torture and blackmail a German into admitting almost anything. And Jews in the British, US and Soviet armies did precisely that, many, many times.

If only Britain had stayed out of that German/Polish border dispute, and the inevitable Soviet/Nazi war; parts of Britain would not now look like Islamabad or Lagos.

But best of all, if Britain had sided with our European brothers against you warmongering Jews, is the thought that your parents would have never made it to Britain from whichever Polish shtetl it was from which they came. You would now be living on the other side of the Urals where the Nazis intended to dump the lot of you.

Anonymous said...

gotta admit tho, the nazi did have the most smashing uniforms around,we think we would have enlisted if we got to wear a black ss uniform,,,,

Roem said...

Well, 'had' Germany invaded Britain it would have been ugly. But Hitler never had designs on Egland at all. He wanted to recover 'German' lands and get lebensraum to the East.

But when war started he obviously had to make plans along the lines of a potential invasion.

Anonymous said...

By the time Germany gets around to starting WW3 America will be just another defunct sea of sullen brownskins. Send in a couple of imperial administrators as the British did in India, Danke schoen!

JP

Anonymous said...

For those who would compare America to Rome, I have a thought: while the decadent Romans paid for blond barbarians from the edges of Empire tp fight their wars, with America the "barbarians" are the heartland whites, fighting wars on behalf of the corrupt urban elites and faggy Bruenen. Rome = Washington and Germania = Alabama?

JP

Anonymous said...

Am I missing something here?
Did not Hitler invade Austria, Poland, Norway, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, including the Channel Islands, Romania, Greece, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, Russia(apoligies to any country I have missed out) And still have time for skirmishes in N Africa, whilst bombing London and other British cities flat.
Paris Claims

Anonymous said...

World Jewry declared war on Germany in 1933, Paris Claims. It was an economic war of sanctions against German exports. You need to understand what Hitler failed to get, that the Worldwide and mostly invisible spiders web of Jewish business and political interests is far stronger in every way than one can imagine. Once Hitler had secured his own central bank and because they knew that he had sussed the Jewish money system, they knew they had to do him in.THEY turned on Hitler and persuaded the important Western nations to do the same. In other words he started something he couldn't finish, he failed to understand that the nation of Judaism had no actual physical home, and yet it was and still is massively powerful.All the tiny places AH overran were just consolidation of Europe so that in the showdown with Bolshevic [read Jewish] Russia he had a stronger position.

Anonymous said...

And guess who else sussed the international Jewish money fiddle system. Ghadaffi knew all about it,
Saddam knew it, Assad in Syria knows how they operate, even Ahmadinejad
in Iran can see how these Jewish
banker criminsals operate. That's why the US globalist {jewish]
banksters want these guys out of the way. Then guess who will be controlling the central banks in these countries.

Kruger said...

JP. Hitler did indeed invade all of those countries. But he did so due to the exigencies of a World War. The Allies could just as accurately have been said to have 'invaded' Norway, for example. Otherwise Hitler had no interest in invading and occupying these countries.

Keiser said...

I find the comments on Hitler very interesting. I have read quite a bit on the wars, the Gulags and the Ukrainian farmers famine (Holodomor). They all have a common thread, no prizes for guessing but specifically I have always wondered why Hitler has become vilified almost to the point of being some kind of deity of evil. There is only one thing that can produce that level of extreme view... fear. From where? The media. Now who are the ones in fear, that is the question.

Think about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the average person in the West (with a passing knowledge of current affairs) knows nothing about him except that they hate him. Why? Same reason as they Hitler... media spread fear. Who's fear? I think we know the answer.

Have a watch of this interview if you fancy (45mins)
Smug Piers Morgan with Ahmadinejad. He appears to be a a reasonable Muslim, is there such a thing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53ldtzriCMs


This one however I very much recommend (6mins 42s). Ahmadinejad speaking with Jews, all of whom are acknowledging Zionism is a serious problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_XAeqtY7Sk

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 05:35

Another 'nationalist' living in la-la land.

German-Polish border dispute! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The assumption that a person who defends people from undue hatred must be one of them. What a simpleton.

What a good reason for Joe Public not to support nationalists.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 01:23

"Hitler had no intention of invading us."

Another simpleton.

Hitler tried to destroy our airforce so that he could launch a seaborne invasion.
He needed to destroy Britain because he could then remove his Western forces to the East.
He needed to destroy Britain because it could be used to launch an invasion into France.
He needed to destroy Britain if he was to have any chance of conquering the US.

Roem said...

Nastiest Uncle. Now you're the simpleton. Do you REALLY believe that Hitler planned to invade and subjugate the US? Germany is about the size of California with about twice it's population. So this country would subjugate the US, along with the USSR, Britain, France, Poland and Canada, to name but a few.

Back to taking your pills.

nastiestuncle said...

@Roem 12:39

"Nastiest Uncle. Now you're the simpleton."

Haha.

"Do you REALLY believe that Hitler planned to invade and subjugate the US?"

Well let's see. If he wanted his 1000 year Reich, he would have had to. And he did declare war on the USA which meant that unless the USA conquered Germany, he would have had to go over and conquer the USA.

"Germany is about the size of California with about twice it's population. So this country would subjugate the US, along with the USSR, Britain, France, Poland and Canada, to name but a few."

Well, Germany in 1939 was about the size of California, but Hitler wasn't fighting the USA in 1939.
If Hitler had conquered all of mainland Europe (which he almost did), and had conquered the UK and Russia (as he had planned), then the USA would not have been fighting a California-sized Germany; it would have been fighting a Europe and Northern+Middle Asia sized Greater Germany, an area about seven or eight times the size of the USA and with far more natural resources.

"Back to taking your pills."

I don't see what relevance vitamin D3 pills have to the argument.

But I would advise that you start eating more oily fish.

See you later.

PS. I just heard that "OnlyIKnowTheTruth911" has just posted another Youtube video. Better get over there for your daily dose of brainwashing.

Seneca said...

NU. I am by no means on the other side of your usual arguments but your position here makes me subscribe to the view that you may indeed be an Israeli-paid shill.

You are generally very well informed so to suggest as you do that Hitler declared war on the USA and ipso facto he had the subjugation of that country in mind leads me to no other conclusion.

It's a simple matter of fact that Germany had to declare war on America once Japan did. And then to stretch that to claim that H. therefore planned to invade and subjugate???

Naughty Nasty!

Anonymous said...

"He wanted to murder and enslave the British."

Not entirely true. He wanted to eat all the British children and turn Britain into a giant homosexual brothel for convalescing Waffen SS memnbers.

Get your factoids right.

nastiestuncle said...

@Seneca 13:33

"NU. I am by no means on the other side of your usual arguments but your position here makes me subscribe to the view that you may indeed be an Israeli-paid shill.

You are generally very well informed so to suggest as you do that Hitler declared war on the USA and ipso facto he had the subjugation of that country in mind leads me to no other conclusion.

It's a simple matter of fact that Germany had to declare war on America once Japan did. And then to stretch that to claim that H. therefore planned to invade and subjugate???

Naughty Nasty!"

Well let's see. Try a little empathy and put yourself in Hitler's shoes.

1. Hitler's ally was at war with the USA, which meant that there was a possibility, at some point in the future (had the war gone Japan's way), that Germany would have to invade the USA, from the East across the Atlantic, to assist in any Japanese invasion of the USA from the West across the Pacific.
2. Hitler had already studied the racial make-up of the USA to see if 'pure Aryans' could be extracted from it, as he had done with other nations he had set his sights on. His conclusion was that the US population was too 'mixed up' to be racially pure.
3. A declaration of war comes with the possibility, at some point in the future, of an invasion of an enemy homeland. Germany's alliance with Japan meant that an invasion of the USA by a Greater Germany was always a possibility (see point 1).
4. Whether Hitler intended to invade or wanted to is besides the point. The declaration of war is enough to make this a possibility in the future.
5. Had Hitler's campaign in Europe gone to plan, and the USA had not been attacked by Japan, total war with the USA would probably be inevitable anyway, because the USA, full of European descendants, would be unlikely to have allowed Europe to exist in slavery. Had a Greater Germany been able to defeat the USA expeditionary forces which would have come through Siberia and possibly North Africa and Western Europe, a weakened USA would have made both a tempting and necessary target for invasion.
6. Had Hitler succeeded, there would have been two great world powers: a Greater Germany (possibly with an undefeated Imperial Japan) with nearly all British, French, Dutch, Belgian, Russian colonies under German or Japanese control versus the USA. Neither could exist without the destruction of the other.
7. Germany was working on long range bombers and missiles which were intended to have been 'trans-Atlantic' in capability. Why trans-Atlantic if the USA was not in Germany's sights?
8. In summer 1928, Hitler had written of his assumption that there would be war between Germany and the USA at some point in the near future.


nastiestuncle said...

So it's my conclusion that an invasion of the USA was not something seriously contemplated by Hitler or his generals in the short term and perhaps not even in the medium term, but was something which, had the war gone Hitler's way would have had to have been contemplated in the event of the successful conquer of Europe and North+Middle Asia. We know that he had it in mind, we know that there would have been war with the USA even if Germany had not declared war on the USA in 1941, we know that the USA would have had to have been destroyed or weakened suitably for a Greater Germany to have continued existing after Europe was conquered and it's fair to say that it would have happened even if it was not Hitler's plans to ultimately invade the USA; an invasion of the USA would have been necessary even if not wanted.
It's my contention that had the USA lost the Pacific war against Japan, there would have been an invasion of the US homeland, after successful nuclear strikes on the Eastern and Western seaboards along with carrier borne bombing raids, as early as the late 40s but most likely by the mid 50s. It's likely that Mexico (who had supplied both Germany and Japan with oil in the 30s) would have been used as a bridgehead into North America in return for some of its territory lost to the US in the 1800s, that the Germans had attacked Alaska from Siberia, the Japanese along the Western contiguous US and the Germans again into the Southern and Eastern US from the Caribbean and Eastern Canada from Britain, Portugal and West Africa.

Anonymous said...

Why are we wasting so much time and energy on the past?Lets focus on the here and now.

Canuck said...

Why are we wasting so much time and energy on the past?Lets focus on the here and now.

Remember Orwell: 'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past'

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 14:59

"Why are we wasting so much time and energy on the past?Lets focus on the here and now."

Because on certain "nationalist" (HAHAHAHAHA) sites, they think that if we completely re-write history (basically make it up) and pretend that everything is the fault of people who have a tiny fraction of their DNA which can be traced back to the Levant 2000 years ago, then the public will magically 'wake up' and everything will be alright.*

Someone could make a film about this.

*Also, contrails are really chemicals released by Jews to brainwash us, HAHAHAHAHAH, nuclear weapons do not exist, HAHAHAHAHAHA, steel magically doesn't lose its strength in buildings attacked by Jews so that thermite has to be used to bring them down, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, and the Rothschilds own way more gold than exists in the Earth's crust, AHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You see, if only people knew these things then we would be able to stop immigration. Somehow.

Calculus said...

Nastiest said: "...Well actually, Hitler wasn't so good for the German economy. That all was well with their economy pre-WW2 was a smokescreen, just as Western economies were thought to have been healthy pre-2007.
Germany's pre-WW2 economy was unsustainable and the only way to keep it going was by waging war..."

Nastiest, you have something to back up this statement?

It's quite tbe opposite IMO. Given the previous state of the german economy, that is in short, misery, the national socialist economic policies did very good to improve the ecomomy.
That Hitler decided to turned into an unrestrained warmonger when things were feeling richer is another story. Lets talk only about the pre-nazi german economy: poverty, misery and the total despair of the german people, certain that they could not improve the future of their children.
Why were they so certain of that? because they perceived their lives as locked in every aspect. The only thing the regular german 'John Doe' could see, was a jewish bourgeoisie who seemed to enjoy life and perhaps also no hope of any help coming from the, powerless and/or insensitive, german aristocratie.
There was three exits possible, the Nazis, the Communists and for few single young men: expatriation in America or South Africa.
It was the Nationalist socialists who broke the status quo, but it is likely that, had the very strong german communist party won over the nazis, they would have broken the status quo as well, although with a very different outcome.
And who knows, in an alternative world, maybe this putative communist germany circa 1938 would have decided to go to war as well.

To break their chains, the german people had to break the status quo, either by a nationalist or a socialist revolution, but it was just that basically: a Revolution. A violent revolution? you bet. More violent than the French or American revolutions? not sure. The french didn't do much of peace and love in 1789 and there is an attempt, right now, for a law proposal to rename the french republican crimes of the time against the populations of Brittany as a 'Genocide'.

So, I beg to differ with Nastiest, had war been avoided, an usurer-free nationalist german economy was prefectly sustainable on the long term, as it would be for the world today. But you have to be realistic here, the usurers will always prefer a war.

Anonymous said...

@ Nastiest Jew, the lying Zionist

Adolf Hitler, July 19, 1940, Reichstag

"Mr. Churchill has repeated the declaration that he wants war. About six weeks ago now, he launched this war in an arena in which he apparently believes he is quite strong: namely, in the air war against the civilian population, albeit beneath the deceptive slogan of a so-called war against military objectives. Ever since Freiburg,these objectives have turned out to be open cities, markets, villages, residential housing, hospitals, schools, kindergartens, and whatever else happens to be hit.

Up to now I have given little by way of response. This is not intended to signal, however, that this is the only response possible or that it shall remain this way.

I am fully aware that with our response, which one day will come, will also come the nameless suffering and misfortune of many men. Naturally, this does not apply to Mr. Churchill himself since by then he will surely be secure in Canada, where the money and the children of the most distinguished of war profiteers have already been brought. But there will be great tragedy for millions of other men. And Mr. Churchill should make an exception and place trust in me when as a prophet I now proclaim: A great world empire will be destroyed. A world empire which I never had the ambition to destroy or as much as harm. Alas, I am fully aware that the continuation of this war will end only in the complete shattering of one of the two warring parties. Mr. Churchill may believe this to be Germany. I know it to be England. In this hour I feel compelled, standing before my conscience, to direct yet another appeal to reason in England. I believe I can do this as I am not asking for something as the vanquished, but rather, as the victor, I am speaking in the name of reason. I see no compelling reason which could force the continuation of this war."

http://der-fuehrer.org/reden/english/40-07-19.htm

Martel said...

Germany wud have invaded and subjugated America? Yeah, right.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 15:51

Hmmm. An irrelevant-to-the-thread quote from Hitler, honest and decent man that he was, in which he preferred the British to lie down and stop fighting rather than stop him from conquering Europe.

Thanks for your time, Anonymous.

nastiestuncle said...

@Martel 16:08

"Germany wud have invaded and subjugated America"

You forgot the rest of the sentence, which should have read ....... had they conquered Europe and Russia.

Thanks for your time though.

Anonymous said...

Nastie uncle, the thousand year Reich
is in full swing. It started in 1939
and so is nearly 75 years old. You don't think the Germans, a people
with character and stamina, would have abandoned it because of a minor
set-back like WW2, do you? That was only a warm-up. Your people didn't beat them, you just won a minor war
against them.

nastiestuncle said...

@Calculus said...

" Nastiest, you have something to back up this statement?"

The internet is free for you to peruse.

"It's quite tbe opposite IMO. Given the previous state of the german economy, that is in short, misery, the national socialist economic policies did very good to improve the ecomomy."

Look upon the German Economy like that Bruce Forsyth card game that used to be on TV. The Germany economy, post WW1, was like a "2". The chances are the next card which got picked would be higher than a "2", or to put it another way, the chances were that whoever took charge, the economy would improve. By how much would depend on who took charge.

"That Hitler decided to turned into an unrestrained warmonger when things were feeling richer is another story."

Hitler had already decided in the 1920s that if he came to power he was going to launch a war. War was ALWAYS his aim, and it would be useful not to forget that.

"Lets talk only about the pre-nazi german economy: poverty, misery and the total despair of the german people, certain that they could not improve the future of their children."

Launching a global war they could not win was hardly a good way to improve the future of their children. They were short termist and were dazzled by the cult of Hitler - they would exchange a better life now for destruction in the future.

"Why were they so certain of that? because they perceived their lives as locked in every aspect. The only thing the regular german 'John Doe' could see, was a jewish bourgeoisie who seemed to enjoy life and perhaps also no hope of any help coming from the, powerless and/or insensitive, german aristocratie."

Well you don't know what the German John Doe thought, but something which is true is that Jews educate themselves or become proficient in a trade, something which insulates people somewhat from adverse economic conditions. That the Jews (well, more of them than the non-Jews) were successful is no reason to envy them to the point of supporting a party which says they will expell/ murder them.

"There was three exits possible, the Nazis, the Communists and for few single young men: expatriation in America or South Africa."

There were more than three exits. It is possible to improve an economy without resorting to Nazism.

"It was the Nationalist socialists who broke the status quo, but it is likely that, had the very strong german communist party won over the nazis, they would have broken the status quo as well, although with a very different outcome."

The outcome would still have been an improvement in the economy, albeit at least a short term one. The Nazi improvement in the economy was also a short term one.

"And who knows, in an alternative world, maybe this putative communist germany circa 1938 would have decided to go to war as well."

Quite possibly, and Western Europe would have found itself fighting Eastern Europe, with the help of the USA and Japan.

"To break their chains, the german people had to break the status quo, either by a nationalist or a socialist revolution, but it was just that basically: a Revolution."

I agree.

nastiestuncle said...


"A violent revolution? you bet. More violent than the French or American revolutions? not sure. The french didn't do much of peace and love in 1789 and there is an attempt, right now, for a law proposal to rename the french republican crimes of the time against the populations of Brittany as a 'Genocide'."

I have no opinion on that. It's up to them.

"So, I beg to differ with Nastiest, had war been avoided, an usurer-free nationalist german economy was prefectly sustainable on the long term,"

Incorrect. Hitler's plan had ALWAYS been war, since before he was even in power. He himself instructed the German ministers, in the early and mid-Thirties, to put Germany's economy on a war footing. Without war and without the looting of conquered countries, Germany's economy would have overheated and would have suffered a correction, throwing it back to economic hardship. Two million workers were employed in the construction sector alone. That's two million unemployed people from just one sector if Germany had stopped building things (such as Autobahns) which they would have had to have done if they had not gone to war.

"as it would be for the world today. But you have to be realistic here, the usurers will always prefer a war."

The usurers prefer whatever is best for them at the time and it is not always war. But the userers (by which you mean, Jews), were not in charge of Germany; Hitler and the Nazis were, and it is they who took Germany to war.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 16:22

"Your people didn't beat them, you just won a minor war
against them."

If WW2 was a minor war, I'd hate to see what a major war would be.

Tell me, would it involve Super Class Star Destroyers, Deaths Stars, The Force, Klingon Warbirds and Chuck Norris?

Anonymous said...

OK: Looks like we are back to the choice given in 1939. People are too simple for any other choice:

1. Internationalism with the danger of ursury from diaporic groups

2. Nationalism with periodic wars of conquest between countries, and stringent prison labor systems for all who "undermine" their countries.

We have to see ourselves as having individual responsibilities and choices, and not be tied to some meat-head "co-ethnics" who just drag you down.

Yes, the USA will get browner and dumber. It's up to you to know how to deal with this future. You Third Reich Wankers (New Term TRW) are like hippies : You can't change the world, dreamers! Salvation is individual destiny!

Save your own family and immediate local community, stop worrying about your "race", who only betrays you every day of your life!!!!

Shoo off TRW's (Third Reich Wankers).
You are like flies on a carcass.

----concerned American

Anonymous said...

@ Paris Claims

"Am I missing something here?"

Yes

Austria - Anschluss was supported by over 99% of Austrians, and it was Goering who ordered German troops into Austria, and they were cheered all the way.

Poland - Poland refused to settle the Corridor issue with Germany, deluded by their success in defeating the the 1919 Jewish-Bolshevik invasion, coupled with Britain's worthless guarantee, Poland believed that they could defeat Germany in any potential war. Massacres of Prussians in Danzig, forced Hitler into intervening. Poland ended up being an occupied country, ruled by a foreign power until 1989.

— Norway, only after Britain attempted to invade Norway to cut off Swedish iron from Germany, did Hitler invade Norway.

— Belgium
France declared war on Germany, but had the Maginot Line. The Germans simply avoided it by going thru Belguim

— Luxembourg
Conquered it within a few hours, inevitable due to France's war declaration

France - They started it

Channel Islands - Britain declared war on Germany and refused numerous peace offers from Germany

Romania - Invaded by the Stalin in 1940

Greece - Easter Sunday 1939, Churchill called Chamberlain and urged him to convene an emergency session of Parliament, and to launch and invasion of Crete. Mussolini had invaded Greece, and were being heavily defeated, so Italy's ally Germany came to their rescue.

Yugoslavia - The peaceful Balkans. LOL. No, Germany did not "invade" Yugoslavia, but they helped their ally Croatia.

Czechoslovakia - Created in 1918, out of lands that had never before been unified, and consisted of huge amounts of Germany territory lost under Versailles. Ethnic Germans in Sudetenland were discriminated against by the Slav/Jew leadership, so Hitler intervened. The Czechs were one of the worse perpetrators of mass murder against German civilians after the war, during the ethnic cleansing of around 2 million Germans.

Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia - All these countries welcomed Germans as liberators, these countries were invaded by Stalin in 1940

Russia - In 1939 Stalin invaded Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, and Poland. Many, a growing number, of historians now admit Stalin was planning a large scale invasion of Europe (he did end up conquering and keeping all of Eastern Europe), and Germany's invasion was a pre-emptive strike. All the defendants at the big Nuremberg trial insisted this was the case. Check out the work of Israel historian Misha Shauli who revealed some startling documents in late 2011.

N Africa - Hitler went to Mussolini's rescue again. Btw it was us and the Soviets who invaded neutral Iran and stayed their.

Paris Claims wrote>>> "Whilst bombing London and other British cities flat"

Figures from Bomber Harris' Bomber Command, published 1947:

Acres destroyed by bombing during WW2:

London - 600
Coventry - 100
Plymouth - 400
Hamburg - 6200
Berlin - 6427
Dusseldorf - 2003
Colonge - 1944
Between one and two thousand acres were devastated in Dresden, Bremen, Duisburg, Essen, Frankfurt-am-Main, Hanover, Munich, Nuremberg, Mannheim-Ludwigshafen, and Stuttgart.

“The raids which were made on London were very small indeed compared with the raids which were made on the German towns.”

— R.A.F. Squadron Leader Ernest Kinghorn MP, Houses of Commons, March 22, 1948,

Anonymous said...

NastiestJew said...

"Hmmm. An irrelevant-to-the-thread quote from Hitler, honest and decent man that he was, in which he preferred the British to lie down and stop fighting rather than stop him from conquering Europe."

LOL, you write out your movie script BS that Hitler was planning to conquer the entire planet, but when someone posts an extract from ONE of his peace offers to Britain it's "irrelevant-to-the-thread"

You lying 'circle' (translated from the Yiddish)

Anonymous said...

I've got to agree with nastiestuncle.Leave Hitler and the jews to the double digit IQ people.C'mon guys,start thinking outside the box.Time is running out for our people.

kulak said...

Save your own family and immediate local community, stop worrying about your "race", who only betrays you every day of your life!!!!

"Concerned American", why do you want whites to ignore white genocide?

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 17:34

"LOL, you write out your movie script BS that Hitler was planning to conquer the entire planet, but when someone posts an extract from ONE of his peace offers to Britain it's "irrelevant-to-the-thread""

It only sounds like a peace offer to someone gullible enough to believe it. And that would be you.

Anonymous said...

@ concerned American

You run to the hills then, you christian-zionist fool

Anonymous said...

Nastiest Jew wrote:

"It only sounds like a peace offer to someone gullible enough to believe it. And that would be you."

The gullible are the ones who fall for your hasbaraism.

Your people are the reason Europe is in its present state.

"The man of the distant future will be a mongrel. The races and castes of today will fall victim to the conquest of space, time and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, outwardly similar to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals." (pp.22-23)

"Russian Bolshevism constitutes a decisive step towards this goal, where a small group of communist spiritual aristocrats govern the land [...] The general staff of both parties [Communist and Capitalist] is recruited from the spiritual leader race (F├╝hrerrasse) of Europe: the Jews." (p.33)

"No wonder then, that these people, who escaped the ghetto-prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. A gracious providence provided Europe, at the moment when the feudal aristocracy fell into disrepair, with a new race of nobility through spiritual grace, thanks to Jewish emancipation." (p.50)

Coudenhove-Kalergi, R. N. Praktischer Idealismus. Pan-Europa-Verlag. 1925.
http://archive.org/stream/PraktischerIdealismus1925/PraktischerIdealismus#page/n0/mode/2up

Anonymous said...

I seem to recall Paris Brest Claims as being a regular on the JDL site.

Bobby Bandanza said...

Irish Nationalist Brotherhood

http://www.inbeire.com

Anonymous said...

"You run to the hills then, you christian-zionist fool "
I think you have a point there. Christian Zionism is a cover for the arrival of the Talmudic Judaic Antichrist. I just happen to believe the world IS doomed, by the Talmudic Antichrist Judaic Messianists. "Jews" are not jews, they are talmudists.
They DO control the world, and WILL bring about a situation where the world is controlled by an international, usurious elite, which the Christians will WORSHIP as the chosen ones. Wait, they already have, so they were chosen - by their use of talmudic methods.
The irrefutable law of reality, is that YOU WILL BE EXPLOITED. Whether it is by nationalists intent on war, or by internationalists intent on usury, you fate will be tossed in the winds of human nature.
We must choose to fight for the good. I believe that America is past the point of no return NATIONALLY, the answer is a return to LOCAL CONTROL.

My point is, I would rather have the individual responsibility of dealing with an international usurious elite, than a corrupted nationalism that is SUICIDE CULT.
Hitler was in a SUICIDE CULT, the results of the situation indicate this. We have to judge White Nationalism by its results, and the results this:

It is the height of stupidity to go war against both the English and the Jews.

Yes, Hitler was right in standing up to communism and international usury, but his strategy was one of the messiah complex. He wanted Germany to die for the sins of the world. Seen "odinically", he wanted Germany to hang itself from the world tree like Odin.

I'll say it again: Hitler had good ideas, but he ended up fighting evil, using the best of German blood and brains in a sacrifice, WHICH DID NOT WORK, to rid the world of international finance and communism.

You can no more rid the world of international finance by a certain diasporic group, than you can rid the jungle of mosquitos! When you fight irrefutable laws of human society, rather than compromise, you will be defeated.
Fighting international finance and communism as Hitler did was good cause, but it was bound to fail just as flying upward against gravity is bound to fail.

I know I am short of facts here, but please see I am referring to the larger logic you would glean from the facts: Hitler knew he would lose, and sacrificed his messiah Germany on the alter for the sins of mankind. Of course Jewmerica and Jew Britain plus Jew-conrolled Russia were going to win. So, Hitler was NOT a good thing.

---Concerned American

Anonymous said...

Hitler RESULTED in White Genocide. Deny that, and you have a problem favoring INTENT over RESULT.

So let's please move on from failed messiahs and get to the present:

The Irish Savant is more important that Hitler for Ireland. If you want to fall back into the old games of Nazis versus Jews, fine, go sacrifice yourself on the alter of reality like Hitler did.

Otherwise, let's start focusing on the present.
As Uncle Nasty said: "This, my main kneegrows, is why we do not stand a chance at present.

And Canuck: " Orwell: 'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past'

Canuck- lets look at that logic Orwell showed up there, it does not support the bizarre assertion that continuing to argue about White Genocidist Hitler helps fight White Genocide.

That Orwell phrase can be rephrased thus:
Step 1: He who controls the present controls that past.
Step 2:"He who controls the past controls the future"


Get it? What George Orwell is saying, is that control of the present COMES FIRST. You control the present but acting in such a way that REALITY REWARDS YOU. Don't be a sacrificial lamb, you supposed anti-Christians.

On the other hand, I think it is great that we are all airing out our concerns on open comment day.

We do need to come to the crux of the issue, the previous failed fight against international usury, communism, and anti-nationalism. Do you all want to be on the cross again? Hitler just ACTED Christian.

On the other hand, Hitler's dismissal of the Jews from Germany resulted in the tremendous financial health of the national economy following the war. Germany was beset COMPLETELY by Jewish usury and approaching communism before WWII, well since 1848. So yes, there is a middle ground here:

It is not anti-semitic, nor philo-semetic: Just Jew-aware. Jews are how Jews are. Irishmen are how Irishmen are. Is this not part of our nationalism - human groups are diverse, so we need to separate from each other in homelands, and be reasonably wary of the interests of completely different ethnicities. That is all we ask for, lets not go overboard, WE ARE REASONABLE.

Remember that always, when some hasbarat gets you sidetracked into discussion about Jews, rather than in fighting for you own interests. Jews are like hailstorms, they will always be with us. You want to fight hail, or wear a jacket? Hail Hitler - yes lets go stand in the hail, maybe Odin will make it go away after we hang from the world tree.

----Concerned American

Anonymous said...

"The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship. In this New World Order the "children of Israel" will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands."


-Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx, La Revue de Paris, p.574, June 1, 1928

rob

Anonymous said...

And we must admit -- The Nordic ideologies have a bizarre fixation on Suicide Cults: False Christs, Odin, Hitler, Buddha dissolving through nirvance etc. What's that about? I choose none of the above, that is for self-deniers.

I choose life and health, and and Ireland for the Irish.
it's simple really, what we propose is reasonable, healthy, and just. Human groups are diverse, and shouldn't all live in a babel together. It has never worked.

--Concerned American (close of my contribution, please you others: continue your venting as well)

Anonymous said...

By the way, this is man Bob Whittaker is the American equivalent of Irish Savant. He is mainly concerned with political operations THAT WORK to fight White Genocide.

You would all do yourselves well to have a look and the American Savant, "Bob's Undergraduate Seminar Against White Genocide" (BUGS)

http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/
This one is particularly good: Our Internecine Fights are More From Boredom Than Anger

--Concerned American

Martel said...

Nastiest --> had they conquered Europe and Russia.

Exactly. You don't think that the little matter of conquering the bulk of the Eurasian land mass would have kept H. busy for a while? And how exactly would the 60 million Germans have kept these 500 million Europeans quiescent while they headed off to finish off America.

Your paymasters will be looking for a refund if you continue like this.

Anonymous said...

I think you CAN rid the World of the '' Trillionaire Club'' of less than 5 very powerful American AshkeNAZI Mafia families, and it would be VERY good for the World. You can either assasinate them or separate them from all their stolen money and gold.The Rothschilds are the mainstay of this tiny secretive group who
constantly seek to grab more political power over the Western World until they can control it
totally with the press of a button.
Cameron is the Rothschilds homeboy
in UK, Rajoy is their placeman in
Spain, and Obama is their star
student in the US. The list goes on. The fact that they all see themselves as Ashkenazi Jews IS
very relevant TO THEM, even if it seems unimportant to most of us.The
first step for all of us however
it all pans out is to strengthen tribal ties considerably. The Jews
are already at that point, they have been there forever, THAT is what makes them SEEM unbeatable.

Anonymous said...

Hitler tried to destroy our airforce so that he could launch a seaborne invasion.

True

He needed to destroy Britain because he could then remove his Western forces to the East.

True

He needed to destroy Britain because it could be used to launch an invasion into France.

True

He needed to destroy Britain if he was to have any chance of conquering the US.

Three out of four ain't bad. Last should read he needed to keep the US Army and airforce out of the British Isles so that they couldn't attack Germany via France, conquer Germany and destroy National Socialism as the people who ruled America had decreed. (Indeed but for Roosevelt & Co Britain wouldn't have declared war in 1939.) But maybe you would see Hitler showing the world what it could be like without those bastards as conquering the 'US.'

kulak said...

@Concerned American

By the way, this is man Bob Whittaker is the American equivalent of Irish Savant.

Savant seems like a good man, but he's no Bob. I'm not either. But I'd like to be.

Just Jew-aware. Jews are how Jews are. Irishmen are how Irishmen are. Is this not part of our nationalism - human groups are diverse, so we need to separate from each other in homelands, and be reasonably wary of the interests of completely different ethnicities.

Now those are words of wisdom.

Hitler had good ideas, but he ended up fighting evil, using the best of German blood and brains in a sacrifice, WHICH DID NOT WORK, to rid the world of international finance and communism.

Remember the Alamo.

But don't repeat it.

kulak said...

I think it's fair to guess Carbuncle doesn't like Pat Buchanan's book.

Wolfhound said...

Germany was planning to invade the US..LOL!

Look at how much manpower and resources the US needed to land on a small strip of French coast to defeat a very much weakened and unprepared German defense system.

At every turn it becomes clear that historians or self appointed historians lie about Germany and Hitler. They have inflicted 10 times more savagery on the German people than anything Hitler ever did, yet maggots like NU are still talking shit and painting the West as the good guys.

All the Allies were (and still are) were gullible and already virtually enslaved goyim to be used as a private army for big jew money. That's all.

I've brought it up before, but I would like anyone who hasn't read Hellstorm: The death of Nazi Germany to give it a read. http://www.amazon.com/Hellstorm-Death-Nazi-Germany-1944-1947/dp/097138522X

The fact that these historic testaments have NEVER even been explored in any film or documentary whilst we have holohoax horseshit shoved down our throats on a continual basis (I was watching a documentary about rhythm in music the other day and they even brought it up!) is PROOF that the media is run by jews and their appointed goy shills.

Anonymous said...

Anon 19:15:

N.Jew: "Hitler tried to destroy our airforce so that he could launch a seaborne invasion."

Anon 19:15: True

No it's not fucking true you muppet. Name one, just one German warship sunk by the U.S. Navy in WW2. You can't as they didn't sink any, as Germany only sent two to sea during the entire war. The Germans didn't even commandeer the French battleships.

N.Jew: He needed to destroy Britain because he could then remove his Western forces to the East.

Anon 19:15: True

No Kermit, it's not true. Hitler knew, EVERYONE knew—read some of Lloyd-George's writings—that a Nazi / Soviet clash was inevitable. Hitler never wanted war with Britain AT ALL, but Winston "I am a Zionist. Let me make that clear." Churchill and his cabal, had been banging the war-drums since 1936. On April 23 of that year, Churchill claimed in the Commons; that Hitler was building the Autobahns as part of a devious plan for a future war!

"I pursue only one object, namely, the destruction of the Bolshevik tyrannies" - Winnie 1919

"I have only one purpose, the destruction of Hitler," - Winnie, 1941

N.Jew : He needed to destroy Britain because it could be used to launch an invasion into France.

Anon 19:15: True

Jesus H. Christ. You're a real fucking plank.
Following Britain's, then her dominions; Canada, Australia, NZ, India etc. declarations of war on Germany, and then Churchill's repeated dismissals of Hitler peace offers, the Germans made no attempted invasion of the British Isles, they never even dreamt about it. Hitler built no landing barges, troop ships, transport ships for tanks and artillery, no warships to protect landing craft. Hitler did not prepare the necessary sea going transports to invade Britain, an island with 46,000,000 people on it. FACT.

Anon: 19:15, you scored 0/3

Dan said...

The harrowing of the north. I can link various accounts.

It wasn't so much the Normans who stayed on btw. More what else they let in.

Franz said...

All this Hitler talk is easier if you take two things in mind:

One thing -- Holocaust Reparations money has ALWAYS been pegged to 1933, when Hitler took power and European Jews declared war on him.

Second thing -- Twenty years LATER when the natives of the former Belgian Congo did the SAME THING Hitler did in 1933, European Jews bent over backwards to see that the former BG (and all the OTHER "emerging nations" of Africa) got as much money and good UN publicity as possible.

Those two things always get me. The absolute flattening of the Germans. The total (and useless) support of all things African. In both cases the same basic situation.

Self-rule is the key. Germans may not. Africans must... try. And fail. And send us the bill. In perpetuity.

Clearer?

Dan said...

Normans exterminating 10-15%...

Including all the dead at Hastings...harrying the North...rebellions in Exeter, Dorset ...elsewhere like East Anglia...let's say there are 1 million English. Add to that folk who starved when they lost their land (95% of the land changed hands in a 5 year period.) add in the exile groups who left for Constantinople and Ireland, Scotland and Germany. Easily 100,000 people.

Dan said...

Franz,

I recommend you read Occidental Dissent . Hunter Wallace did a stirring write up of the Congo.

Anonymous said...

@ Wolfhound

I admire your grit for being able to get through Hellstorm. I read a single chapter and it made me literally nauseous. I can read Jewish hoax tales all day, just for the laughs. Here's one of my favs*

In late December 2012, Goodrich was interviewed by Charles Giuliani (who is a buffoon about history, but at least he knows who the real villains are).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQvL6NR-j5o

Goodrich does claim Ilya Ehrenburg's 'break the racial pride in these German woman' article is authentic, which it's not. Ehrenburg was a vile, despicable, evil fucking cunt. But that one was a fake article circulate by Goebbels or one of his minions.

* The Daily Herald of December 16th gave an extract from a speech by the chief Rabbi 'as copied from the manuscript'. It was to the effect that on July 27th, 1942, 500 Jewish women of a town near Kieff were ordered with their babies to a stadium where ('an eye-witness declares') German soldiers dressed in football clothes snatched the infants from their mothers' arms and used them as footballs, bouncing and kicking them around the arena. Of this report, Mr. Hannen Swaffer said 'Never since the days of the martyrdom of Christians in the Colosseum by Nero has such a story been told'. A correspondent of the New Statesman, who signed a Jewish name, remarked, 'May I, with a full sense of responsibility and of the possible opprobrium involved, say that I do not believe this story, and regard it as a fabrication from beginning to end. If anyone on the strength of this ventures to accuse me of proFascism, or of any complacency in respect to the brutal manifestations of totalitarianism, I engage to flay his intellectual hide for him, however thick it may be'. (The New Statesman said, 'We agree with our correspondent in regarding this story as nonsense'.)

Douglas Reed's Lest We Regret (1943) page 225

Anonymous said...

Anon 18.28
Either your memory is failing you, or it's someone with a similar handle. I spen a lot of time online and visit many sites, even ones I disagree with mostly eg Hurry up Harry, but I've never enen been on JDL's site, let alone commented there. I might take a look though.
Paris Claims

Franz said...

Dan --

Thanks.

I'm surprised OD is still around.

J Bull said...

anon 15.51. Fascinating quote from Hitler. Never knew that he was so explicit in his offer to Britain. Naturally Churchill turned it down as he'd been bought over at that stage, his debts paid off by jewish bankers.

And remember that this offer was made at a time when Britain was on her knees. I think NU is batting on avery sticky wicket indeed.

Julian said...

Nastiest, you rock baby!

You're taking on the massed ranks of the Nazis and Compassionate Nazis and more than holding your own.

I eagerly await the next salvoes.

Anonymous said...

little known fact,one of the few personal photos hitler kept in his personal office was henry ford,also old henry would send adolph 500 bucks each birthday,ford was a known anti semite who put up with jewish interference with his operations both here in the staes and abroad,he even published a anti jewish paper we beleive the fort dearborn messenger or some such name...

Anonymous said...

One drawback of not moderating is that it makes it slightly easier to deduce commenter location.

Anonymous said...

The kikes punished Henry Ford by flooding his factory town with niggers!

Ha, last laugh belongs to the kikes!.

---concerned American

Tony in VA said...

It is the height of stupidity to go war against both the English and the Jews.

But, Concerned American, what if both the English and the Jews, well, just the jews, decide to fight against you?

I am by no means in the NS camp, Really I'm just trying to ascertain what's going on, and what is going on is very bad for me and whites generally.

I tend to have followed Savant's trajectory in seeing increasing evidence of jewish manipulation 'behind the curtain' as it were. But I'm open to pursuasion and I feel Nastiest Uncle is, as someone else said, making a brave fight. But I also find him less and less convincing, at least on this thread.

Henry IX said...

Anon: 19:15, you scored 0/3

Wolfhound, LOL!

Anon performed like David Lammy on Mastermind

Communist Queer said...

I was going to read through all the comments - but there's too many - so I can't be bothered.

Suffice to say, I'm pleased that your hideous Nazi site is now open to the same fairness and scrutiny as the MSM, which you continually vilify.

Viva Obama!
Viva socialism!
Viva multiculturalism!
Viva the New World Order!
Viva all kinds of stuff ...

nastiestuncle said...

@Martel 19:10

"Nastiest --> had they conquered Europe and Russia.

Exactly. You don't think that the little matter of conquering the bulk of the Eurasian land mass would have kept H. busy for a while? And how exactly would the 60 million Germans have kept these 500 million Europeans quiescent while they headed off to finish off America.

Your paymasters will be looking for a refund if you continue like this."

Off the top of my head:

1. The vast bulk of Russia is uninhabited or sparsely inhabited, requiring small, mobile units to conquer. Much of the territory would not need to be conquered at all until such a time as it was needed for mineral prospecting, since the small numbers of people living in those areas would have had no means to launch an insurgency even if they wanted to. Most of the Russian population was situated in the West of the country in European Russia.
2. Large populations can be kept in line by disempowering them, empowering collaborators, using starvation as a weapon, using fear (such as forced family break up or hostage taking/ murder).
3. A fair number of men in Soviet controlled areas, especially in countries conquered by the Soviets, saw the Nazis as the lesser of two evils and would have (and in fact did) join the German forces. Huge numbers of Soviet soldiers deserted or surrendered in the early Russian campaign and had Hitler not viewed them as 'Untermenschen' and treated them like animals, a large number of these men could have been pressed into serving the Germans either as workers or soldiers, on the promise that their families not be treated badly.
4. Once the spirit of the local populations in Europe had been crushed, hope could be provided in the form of work or military service so that each man could be given a way to provide for his family.
5. History has shown that small numbers of people can control large populations and even gain collaboration from them if the right methods are used. The British were particularly successful at this in Empire.

I'm not really sure who my paymasters are by the way. Maybe Savant is paying me for the sport of it.

nastiestuncle said...

@Communist Queer 23:15

"Suffice to say, I'm pleased that your hideous Nazi site is now open to the same fairness and scrutiny as the MSM, which you continually vilify."

But...... MSM comment threads are moderated, so your comment would appear to be made of bullshit.

Mary said...

we blame everything on Jews and idolise Hitler because these things make us sound like retards.

I was under the impression that Nastiest had already confirmed that he is Jewish.

So who is he referring to with this use of "we" and "us" in the comment I have quoted above?

Dan said...

Nastiest uncle.

If you are Jewish you are not white. It's an optional thing for you. Give it up dude.

nastiestuncle said...

@Mary 01:22

"I was under the impression that Nastiest had already confirmed that he is Jewish.

So who is he referring to with this use of "we" and "us" in the comment I have quoted above?"

I've never said I was Jewish (because I'm not Jewish), except in jest when I've said to someone "my brother in Judaism", but then I've also said "my brother in Rastafarianism, blackness, Islam and so on".

You'll have to ask them why they think I'm a Jew, but it'll be along the lines of "anyone who defends Jews must be a Jew". National socialists are known for their high IQs and advanced cognitive abilities not to mention their second-to-none intellectual honesty, so you'll get an accurate and honest answer for sure.

:)




nastiestuncle said...

@Dan 01:53

"Nastiest uncle.

If you are Jewish you are not white. It's an optional thing for you. Give it up dude."

I'm not Jewish. I'm probably more ethnically English than anyone you've ever met. We've traced our family tree back as far as it will go and we don't even have any Welsh, Irish or Scots in us.

However, lots of Jewish people appear to be white. And what if a white woman married a Jewish man and converted to Judaism?
What if someone has had nothing but European breeding in them for the last couple of hundred years but was Jewish - would that make them white?
Or put it this way - if someone has had nothing but European breeding in them for the last couple of hundred years but had a very distant black ancestor - would that make them white.

Be careful with your answer as you'll find that if the answer is no then very few white people are actually white. In which case the very few of us who, like me, are actually white, should be able to boss the rest of you around and perhaps even give you a dose of Zykon-B for your impure ethnic troubles :)

See you later.


Mary said...

I've never said I was Jewish (because I'm not Jewish), except in jest

And yet attacking 'National Socialists' and getting overly aroused in defending jews at every turn seems to be your game.
Kind of weird turn-ons for such a purebred English Whitey, as you claim to be, eh?

Anyhoo......carry on ;)

Mary said...

However, lots of Jewish people appear to be white. And what if a white woman married a Jewish man and converted to Judaism?
What if someone has had nothing but European breeding in them for the last couple of hundred years but was Jewish - would that make them white?
Or put it this way - if someone has had nothing but European breeding in them for the last couple of hundred years but had a very distant black ancestor - would that make them white.

Be careful with your answer


See, the weird thing is, I always thought of jews as White. It was only when Jews themselves made it clear it's they who are not us, that I began to understand:

Here's one example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s

That's Mike Wallace explaining to Morgan Freeman how he isn't White; he is Jewish!

And of course Jewess Susan Sontag sharing her thoughts as to how "The White race is the cancer of Human history" helped me understand further.

And helpful Jews like Barbra Spectre coming all the way over here to Europe to "teach us how to be Multicultural", and explaining how "Jews will be hated for our leading role" in that surely benevolent mission, also helped
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QoJGvEVogI

Lots more material about the net, but I am sure you are well aware of that, being such a helpful fellow yourself....

;)

Anonymous said...

another little known fact is that hitlers brother alois left his wife and kids and went to england in the 20s and married a irish woman named donnelly making him a bigamist, the off spring of this union was a Patrick Hitler who was offered a job in a bank in berlin by uncle Addie but couldnt keep his mouth shut that family had a guy named Solomon in its closet,uncle told Patrick i made a call to the American consulate and your ass is on the next ship to nyc,he stayed here in states until war broke out and enlisted in the US Navy and was sent to Great Lakes Illinois for training,when he got off the train Naval Intelligence grabbed him and put him in a room with pencils and tons of paper nand told him to write down every thing he knew about uncle Adolph and we will send your meals in,the boy Patrick wound up as a Navy corpman medic somewhere in the Pacific and name was changed to Hiller,this was common with all foreign born who went in the us military as if they were captured they were considered non combatants,what ever became of Patrick was never known but someone on a American tv show stated that they wound up in new jersey area as very suceesful garden contractors,so thats all we know,dont know if other sailors knew who he was either,,,,

nastiestuncle said...

@Mary 03:25

"See, the weird thing is, I always thought of jews as White. It was only when Jews themselves made it clear it's they who are not us, that I began to understand:"

What you then did was to cherry-pick some anti-white (or more accurately, anti-'white privilege') statements made by some people who are classed as Jewish on account that they might have had a distant ancestor who hailed from the Levant.

We can cherry-pick about anyone really then blame the whole lot:
All white people are rapists, because white people in the UK commit the most rapes.
All white people are paedos, because white people in the UK commit the most paedophilia.
All white people are drunk drivers, because white people in the UK commit the most drink drive crime.

See how ridiculous the above statements are?
Just as ridiculous as lumping all Jews in together because of what some of them say.

Here's how it really is: Jews are over-represented in the international left but this does not mean that Jews in general want to kill white people nor is there a widespread Jewish campaign to kill white people.

If we can understand that, then we can move onto the important work of getting rid of the immigrants. Until then, us anti-immigration bunch will be seen as the Jew-obsessed nutters which many of us are.

nastiestuncle said...

@Mary 03:08

"And yet attacking 'National Socialists' and getting overly aroused in defending jews at every turn seems to be your game."

You might interpret my motive as arousal, but that's just your imagination.

"Kind of weird turn-ons for such a purebred English Whitey, as you claim to be, eh?"

If they were turn-ons they would be weird.
But I admit that as far as being a purebred English Whitey goes, being interested in world affairs with a bias towards reality rather than believing the contents of Youtube videos posted by '911Truth4Real911' is rather different from the usual purebred English Whitey interests, which include who won X-Factor, what's happening in the Big Brother house, did my team win at the weekend, liking Facebook updates and voting for people who want to kill me.

Now you go and fantasize some more.

Anonymous said...

@ Dan

While the Norman/English death rate is secondary to this particular post,I believe your figures for the number of English slaughtered is a considerable underestimate.

Both Norman Davies and Tom Holland say several hundred thousand perished when William really got going.After Hastings he firmly established his rule.Then,using the pretext of a few minor uprisings,he went to work.

The results were not pretty.

mr.a

MaryGold said...

What you then did was to cherry-pick some anti-white (or more accurately, anti-'white privilege') statements made by some people who are classed as Jewish on account that they might have had a distant ancestor who hailed from the Levant.

Umm, wha?

"anti-white privilege you say? LOL! Please do explain how you arrived at this fascinating analysis. Last time I heard about the supposed existence of 'White Privilege" was when I was trapped in a tortuous volunteer training session at my local crisis center hosted by a Black lesbian feminist!

So: you don't accept that Jews who identify themselves as Jews are "really" Jews?
How mighty White of you to say!
But then again I guess you, being "more ethnically English than anyone I've ever met", would be an expert on who is a "genuine" Jew or not.
I mean, that makes total sense.

Just as ridiculous as lumping all Jews in together because of what some of them say.

I didn't "lump" Jews in together because of what some of them say . Jews are "lumped" in together by virtue of their anti-white actions and the discernible pattern of "whats-good-for-jews" marking their priorities over "what's good for everyone else, least of all Whites". Dr. Kevin MacDonald and William Pierce are both good sources on that, btw.

You know; it's funny. Just this very week I noted that Alex Linder of Vnn Forum had made clear that he makes note of any posters who consistently mock and attack the theory that Jews/Mossad/Israel were behind 911. He has become so convinced by the evidence that Israel was indeed guilty of the attacks that it's now become a litmus test of sorts.

And then today, here's you:

But I admit that as far as being a purebred English Whitey goes, being interested in world affairs with a bias towards reality rather than believing the contents of Youtube videos posted by '911Truth4Real911' is rather different from the usual purebred English Whitey interests, which include who won X-Factor, what's happening in the Big Brother house, did my team win at the weekend, liking Facebook updates and voting for people who want to kill me.

Ps: Congratulations on not being a slave to the 'Electric Jew' (the TV), but your insistence on mocking legitimate inquiry into the various vines of poisonous fruits related to the 'JQ', appears to be a bit of a red flag concerning both your motives, and your character.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but it just ain't lookin real good Nasty......not too good at all.

SAVANT said...

To me this Jewish/White dichotomy is a bit of a red herring (so to speak!).

Clearly most Jews are 'white' by any meaningful definition of the term. If you've got fair hair and blue eyes you're white. Period.

I actually think it's a matter of affiliation. As we've seen (my own eyes opened only recently) many Jews, especially of the Hochjuden kind, are carrying out a war of destruction of the White ethny, debasing it with race mixing and marginalising it through AA and such.

That's why I sue a capital 'W' to refer to White in an ethnic sense as distinct from a visual one. So if a Jew sees himself as a White ethnic and of the Jewish religion/heritage then that's fine by me. And I know quite a few like that, by the way.

I know this will grate with many of the readers here but.......

Anonymous said...

Were you in the early house this morning Savant? Agreed, not ALL Jews
are bad, and not all piranhas will bite your leg if you walk in the river, but they are still piranhas.

SAVANT said...

@anon 10.07. I don't agree, simply because I know plenty who are not like that. I should point out that long before my own awakening two Jewish friends were bemoaning the black and Muslim immigration problem.

Anonymous said...

Nastiest Jew lies exposed:

>>>> "I'm not Jewish. I'm probably more ethnically English than anyone you've ever met. We've traced our family tree back as far as it will go and we don't even have any Welsh, Irish or Scots in us."

You have 8 great-great-grandmothers and 8 great-great-grandfathers, and that's only going back 4 generations, roughly a century. If we go back 5 generations, you'll have 16 of each.

"We've traced our family tree back as far as it will go"

You lying Jew.

Anonymous said...

Sav, the point with the Jews is simple, when it comes down to the wire, one Jew will always support another Jew, even if not knowing him, even if he has just killed a Goy.Their tribal glue is like a
super-strong super-glue.You say you know a couple, so what, I 'know' hundreds over here as I live near Goldberg Green [ Golders Green]. You don't really KNOW anyone unless you can get VERY close to them, about as close as most of us were to our mothers.

Anonymous said...

You also love your dog, but would you leave it in the house with just your three year-old daughter for
company?

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 10:55

"Nastiest Jew lies exposed:

>>>> "I'm not Jewish. I'm probably more ethnically English than anyone you've ever met. We've traced our family tree back as far as it will go and we don't even have any Welsh, Irish or Scots in us."

You have 8 great-great-grandmothers and 8 great-great-grandfathers, and that's only going back 4 generations, roughly a century. If we go back 5 generations, you'll have 16 of each.

"We've traced our family tree back as far as it will go"

You lying Jew."

Oh lord. Another highly intelligent person replies.

We did trace it back as far as it goes, and as far back as it goes happens to be the mid 1700s. Some families come from stock which was literate (yours wasn't) and kept records. Beyond the mid 1700s it gets patchy but the earliest ancestor traceable was from the 11th Century and he was of Danish descent.

Your family kept records too so I hear - of their bowels movements, for amusement in those long evenings by candle light- by making notches on a long stick. The longer the notch the bigger the poo. How your great, great Auntie Ethel did laugh at your great, great Uncle George's three inch long notches.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 08:17

"While the Norman/English death rate is secondary to this particular post,I believe your figures for the number of English slaughtered is a considerable underestimate.

Both Norman Davies and Tom Holland say several hundred thousand perished when William really got going.After Hastings he firmly established his rule.Then,using the pretext of a few minor uprisings,he went to work.

The results were not pretty."

I can vouch for this, possibly. My earliest recorded ancestor was one of William's knights (a Norman of Danish stock) who fought at Hastings and if the stories passed down through the family line are to be believed, he put down an invasion of Welshmen into Western England (not sure where exactly) shorty after the 1066 victory and "the fields ran red with Welsh blood" and no quarter was given to those surrendering or fleeing. My ancestor was given a castle, which he extended and further fortified, and then incurred the ire of his fellow Normal rulers by marrying a Saxon woman "of standing", but he stayed with her.
I've never really looked at that period of history but I'll get to it eventually when I'm fed up of talking about Hitler with these idiots.

Anonymous said...

This knight under William wasn't called Moeshe was he by chance?

BJKahn said...

Sav, the point with the Jews is simple, when it comes down to the wire, one Jew will always support another Jew, even if not knowing him, even if he has just killed a Goy.

Anonymous, that statement is simple untrue. There are many Jews who act like that but the majority would not.

It's really a pity to see such nonsense on this site (sigh).

Anonymous said...

The majority? Would that majority include you BJ Kahn? I know the
mentality very well, most of them
think Goys were put on the planet to be used by Jews.

nastiestuncle said...

@Anonymous 14:06

"This knight under William wasn't called Moeshe was he by chance?"

Yeah that's right, it was.
You fuckin prick.

HAHAHA.

Mary said...

Meanwhile, our (Jewish) Minister of Justice, Alan Shatter, is out stirring the shit with warnings on "rising Anti-semitism", lol......

http://www.theparliament.com/latest-news/article/newsarticle/irish-government-minister-attacks-reprehensible-rhetoric-of-some-eu-politicians/#.UQAKQSeUNP5

Irish justice minister Alan Shatter has warned the EU "not to ignore" a rise in anti-Semitism.

Addressing a ceremony to mark the international holocaust remembrance day, Shatter spoke of a "corrosive rise" in racist and anti-Semitic rhetoric by a "malign minority" of politicians in some member states".

Shatter said, "It is a moral imperative that we unequivocally repudiate the reprehensible rhetoric of those who seek to contaminate our political discourse and attempt to inflame dangerous prejudice."

Shatter, whose portfolio also covers equality and defence, was a keynote speaker at the event in parliament on Tuesday.

He added, "We must do more to end intolerance, racism and anti-Semitism."

Shatter, who was speaking for the Irish EU presidency at the event, also attended by parliament's president Martin Schulz, said the message should have special significance on the day the world remembered those murdered in Nazi death camps.

He said, "However, it is not enough to remember. We must also remember to act."

His demand coincides with the launch of a report which says that hate crime is a "daily reality" throughout the EU.

The report by the EU agency for fundamental rights (FRA), said that violence and offences motivated by racism, xenophobia, religious intolerance are all examples of hate crime, which it says is on the increase.

It states, "To combat hate crime, the EU and its member states need to make these crimes more visible and hold perpetrators to account.

"Greater political will is needed on the part of decision makers to counter pervasive prejudice against certain groups and compensate for the damage.


"Compensate" eh?
Better bend over and grab yer ankles kids, looks like Shatter the Jew is coming for "Justice" ;)

kulak said...

If you've got fair hair and blue eyes you're white. Period.

*sigh* Savant, have you already forgotten the lesson that race isn't genes? Races HAVE genes. Race is SURVIVAL.

Having fair hair and blue eyes just means you have SOME white genes. It doesn't make you a white man.

African albinos do not look white and are not white. If you spliced blue eyes in, they still would not look white and would not be white.

Neither, in my opinion, do many Ashkenazi Jews look white. How about that "Jewfro"? Many can be picked out by skull and facial features, and today those features raise alarm bells for me.

Obvious aliens are different. The Jews with the funny hats are not traitors. Jews with funny hats are far LESS of a threat to whites and are a lot harder to hate. Maybe easier to dislike in some ways, but harder to hate.

It's the Jews who LOOK like me that are traitors -- we see them as traitors because WE accepted THEM. We let them inside the perimeter.

They did not reciprocate.

Donovan has a nice definition of a man, and from it immediately falls a definition of a white man.

It is a man of white stock who defends the white perimeter.

Neither by genes nor by behavior are Jews white.

Some just look it, to our great misfortune.

Mary said...

*sigh* Savant, have you already forgotten the lesson

I noticed this kind of 'walk back' re: our jewish pals, but given the climate we are in, I tend to be understanding of such apparent pragmatism. With Ireland now holding the Presidency, maybe those who 'jew-name' will be brought under "special" scrutiny.......and there are very real consequences for such actions on the horizon, according to our beloved Shatter ;)

nastiestuncle said...

@kulak 16:21

"*sigh* Savant, have you already forgotten the lesson"

*Sigh* Savant, have you already forgotten the thorough brainwashing that kulak and Nasty Uncle have put so much effort into putting you through with all their oh-so-convincing Youtube videos and articles full of errors and downright lies? Did you not notice how smug they had become at having a blog nigga all of their own, their own little blogger who lapped up their sour cream?

How you have let them down! How their e-penises have shrunk!

"Having fair hair and blue eyes just means you have SOME white genes. It doesn't make you a white man."

Correct. But you miss the point. He's talking about Jews whose genetic make-up makes them white. Some Jews are more white than most white people. FACT.

"African albinos do not look white and are not white. If you spliced blue eyes in, they still would not look white and would not be white."

He isn't talking about albinos; he is talking about Jews who look exactly like non-Jewish whites.

"Neither, in my opinion, do many Ashkenazi Jews look white."

Some do, some look more 'Bulgarian'=looking.

"How about that "Jewfro"?"

How about that Jewfro which many non-Jewish whites have?

"Many can be picked out by skull and facial features,"

And what about the non-Jewish whites who look Jewish? Especially old men with big noses.

"and today those features raise alarm bells for me."

This is because you are obsessed with Jews. It is your religion.

"Obvious aliens are different. The Jews with the funny hats are not traitors. Jews with funny hats are far LESS of a threat to whites and are a lot harder to hate. Maybe easier to dislike in some ways, but harder to hate."

And yet these Jews with the funny hats tend to be Zionist Jews, the ones who are apparently doing all the harm to whites. How is that, if they are actually the 'good Jews' and the anti-Zionist Jews are actually the bad ones?

"It's the Jews who LOOK like me that are traitors"

How can someone be a traitor for simply having the same, or very, very similar, genetic make-up to you?

"we see them as traitors because WE accepted THEM. We let them inside the perimeter.

They did not reciprocate."

Really? You never knew Jewish people who you could go for a drink with and who would talk about tits and sport and the state of the world just like ordinary white people do? You never worked with them or for them? You never benefited from their scientific discoveries, the opportunities for which were afforded them by existing in white countries?

"Donovan has a nice definition of a man, and from it immediately falls a definition of a white man.

It is a man of white stock who defends the white perimeter."

That's great. So you mean that white people who do not defend white people cannot be white even though they are? A white person cannot be left wing?

"Neither by genes nor by behavior are Jews white."

Except for the ones who are white and who act white.

Dan said...

Funny you should mention Jewish enabling of Normans.

The First "English" incursion into Ireland was funded by Josche of Gloucester. He bankrolled De Clare AKA Strongbow. The King fined the Jewish fellow for funding Strongbow's illegal invasion.

Dan said...

Given your basic opposition to what this site stands for....

Could you please provide your heraldric patents? Say up until at least the Late Stuart period? Then you can let the trail go cold.

I think you are full of shit Nastiest.

SAVANT said...

kulak, I take om board the bit about the ones looking like us being traitors etc. But it's just daft saying someone like Harrison Ford, Goldie Hawn or Gwinneth Paltrow isn't white. They sure as hell are not Japs, for example.

Fact is many 'Jewish' people probably have a Jewish great grand-mother with all the other antecedents being white/Christian.

That's why I capitalise White when I mean someone who is ethnically White as well as being, obviously, racially so. I think we make ourselves sound ridiculous by claiming that people like those mentioned are not white. Never a good idea to make ourselves look ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Nazi uncle, NO jews are White, only in skin-colour. The difference is in the programming of the mind. The Jew
brain is opportunistic, cruel and
racist, the same mindset as the sand-nigga.

Dan said...

Jewishness works this way:

They are white when they enter university for statistical purposes.

They white when they commit crimes.

They ate white when it comes to averaging out income stats.

They are a racial and ethnic minority when it comes to the following:

When they are victims of crime.

When they are refugees.

When they admit co-ethnics to university

When they admit co-ethnics to professions. See Hollywood for this cultural lock.


They are also remarkable scolds. See Zinn, Dershowitz, Horowitz... When they feel the need to berate "fellow" whites. Like I said they turn the white on and off as they seek tactical advantage and advancement for the group.

Theoccidentalobserver very carefully lays out the case.

Wolfhound said...

Jews have never given anything to the lands they now inhabit, whether they have an ugly hooknose or not is irrelevant.

Unless you consider intellectually dishonest ideologies like Cultural Marxism, Egalitarianism, universal suffrage, militant homosexuality, desegregation, destruction of borders and the nation state, globalism, unfettered predatory capitalism, humanism and so on and so forth.

They may even have the best of intentions, although I can guarantee you some of them DO NOT.

The bottom line is their great influence has been like a cancerous tumor on White lands, most of which have been White lands ever since the Cro-Magnon first ran in to the Neanderthal.

Since every Jew will agree with you that they ARE a different people than us, then why do they insist on being in our house and changing our rules and customs?!

Just go home and leave us be! We'll promise not to hold any grudges and allow you to carry on your lives in your own homeland which ever way you please.

Dan said...

Doesn't the Indiania Jones trilogy look very different to you when you realize that Jones is plays red by a Jewish actor? And that his son in the forth instament is too?

In turn you see the goy portrayed as fop, unscrupulous, evil, incompetent, two faced, racist.

I remember that the freighter Captain they portrayed in Raiders was a nice black fellow. The British colonel in Temple was sympathetic. That's about it. Denholm Elliot's character was a pathetic mess.

The aindians didn't do so well but they are in the higher castes Aryans.

Dan said...

They are clearly a distinct ethnic group but fairly well blended in racially. Even though they maintain nepotistic and exclusionary hiring practices.

Dan Dare said...

This site used to have interesting threads but now they all turn into the same theme. Looks like your open policy has been hijacked. I don't bother reading the foul-mouthed jew's posts but then most of the rest are in response so now I don't come here anything like as often as before.

It's a pity you allowed the shills to earn their money.

Setanta said...

Dan 19.29. Masterful summary.

What pisses me off big time is when I see jews attacking 'white privelege' and claiming that, in doing so they're being selfless and altrusitic. 'Look, we're white too and we admit this'.

Of course as your piece showed, when it comes to getting their paws on the goodies for themselves or massaging the statistics to make us look bad they're not backward about coming forward.

Dan said...

I missed one. They are Jews when the win Nobel Prizes.

This is a particularly irritating one. As if it would be possible to do any research outside the European and American University system, largely funded by peons peasants and serfs who keep these institutions running.

Where is the University of Jerusalem circa 30AD?

The Lyceum and the Academy started it all in the West.


Anonymous said...

Nastiest Uncle isn't having a good influence on this board. His hijacking and constant evasiveness, nonsensical arguments add nothing. They take up space , give him a chance to call everyone 'my nigger' or 'gay but lovers' etc and adds nothing to the discourse.

It seems that unless it runs to his rules , conforms to his opinions he has a tantrum and shit's all over the blog while pretending points backed by fact or logic were never made.

Roem said...

ANon 18.58 and others. I agree but I have a simple response. = no response. I don't read him and don't respond. If we all do that he'll soon get tired of fucking us up and commit aliya.

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Anonymous said...

Nastiest Uncle isn't having a good influence on this board. His hijacking and constant evasiveness, nonsensical arguments add nothing. They take up space , give him a chance to call everyone 'my nigger' or 'gay but lovers' etc and adds nothing to the discourse.

It seems that unless it runs to his rules , conforms to his opinions he has a tantrum and shit's all over the blog while pretending points backed by fact or logic were never made.
24 January 2013 18:58


Very concisely put.

To be blunt, I also find this little creep irritating beyond words. At first I thought it was just me, but then I tried an experiment.

Depending on whether one clicks "comments" to open a thread (with my settings, anyway), that thread will open at the last post, requiring one to scroll upwards to the beginning. By the same token, clicking elsewhere (on the title) opens at the beginning of the thread, requiring one to scroll downwards to the last posts.

Each has its virtues. Very busy threads with a hundred or more responses, I prefer opening at the bottom, then scrolling up to the last familiar one (saves time) ... but by the same token, I am reading all posts backwards -- end first.

And here's where we come to the point of this rather windy post ... every post written by the infant who has stolen my nick is a lowering of the tone of the blog. How do I know this?

Because every one ... and I mean every one of his posts has a sarky, snarkey, tailpiece. This is how I can recognise his posts ...

A few examples:-

... Yeah that's right, it was.
You fuckin prick.
HAHAHA.

... This is because you are obsessed with Jews. It is your religion. (A perennial favorite)

... Another simpleton.

Because on certain "nationalist" (HAHAHAHAHA) sites, they think that if we completely re-write history (basically make it up) and pretend that everything is the fault of people who have a tiny fraction of their DNA which can be traced back to the Levant 2000 years ago, then the public will magically 'wake up' and everything will be alright.*

*Also, contrails are really chemicals released by Jews to brainwash us, HAHAHAHAHAH, nuclear weapons do not exist, HAHAHAHAHAHA, steel magically doesn't lose its strength in buildings attacked by Jews so that thermite has to be used to bring them down, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, and the Rothschilds own way more gold than exists in the Earth's crust, AHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Another 'nationalist' living in la-la land.

German-Polish border dispute! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The assumption that a person who defends people from undue hatred must be one of them. What a simpleton.

I could go on ... but then that would make me him. This child is living proof that jews are no brighter than the rest of us.

This is the kind of person, who, a few short years ago would have been shunned by all who knew him as an irredeemable creep -- and no doubt, still is, in reality. However the anonymity of the web and a clever-dick attitude, allows him some small cachet.

Perhaps, moderation is better.

UN
.

John said...

Savant,

I wish they were japanese. A throughly nice people with a tinge of justifiable hatred for the outside world that only got out of control once in their 3,000 year history. They keep themselves to themselves and make decent consumer products. Good art. Decently turned out women, and a basic sartorial elegance. Some of the women are extremely beautiful.
If only they were jap.

Dr. Wassell said...

UN. Yes, I noticed this too about your alter ego. EVERY response ends with a nasty and childish jibe. His paymasters won't be happy.

AnalogMan said...

Why are you people still reading the troll's scratchings? Just click next to its handle, and - poof - it's gone.