Re: for telling the truth
hp...@lycos.com
> Two British Refugees Still Held in Californiahttp://www.heretical.com/http://www.heretical.com/
>
> Two Englishmen who fled Britain to avoid imprisonment or fines after
> having been convicted of violating "race hate" laws are still being
> held in detention in southern California. On July 11 a court in Leeds,
> England, found Simon Sheppard, 51, and Stephen Whittle, 41, guilty of
> multiple counts of publishing "racially inflammatory" material on the
> internet. Upon their arrival at Los Angeles airport on July 13, the
> pair -- known as the "Heretical Two," after their website -- asked for
> political asylum in the United States, where their "inflammatory"
> writings are constitutionally protected. They are being held in Santa
> Ana Jail, 62 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701, USA.
>
> http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
>
> http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
How long can we preserve free speech in America?
mitch
truth...@nospam.net
Here's a truth for you hpope: you're a hate-filled racist asshole.
In <9aacca5c-9749-470c...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, on
01/19/2009
Topaz
Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
by Thomas Jackson
There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater
horror than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of
offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press
and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and
arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as
part of the inevitable texture of American life. "Racism" is never
shrugged off. For example, when a White Georgetown Law School student
reported earlier this year that black students are not as qualified as
White students, it set off a booming, national controversy about
"racism." If the student had merely murdered someone he would have
attracted far less attention and criticism.
Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full
alert for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach
against it, America is said to be racked with it, but just what is
racism?
Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the
word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock
is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are
rooted in race. When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal
more than this. Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a
clue to understanding what Americans do mean. A peculiarly American
meaning derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are
equal. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been
declared to be equally talented and hard- working, and anyone who
questions the dogma is thought to be not merely wrong but evil.
The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If
blacks, for example, are equal to Whites in every way, what accounts
for their poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of
racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation
for black failure is White racism. And since blacks are markedly poor,
crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive
racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.
All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic.
Any explanation for black failure that does not depend on White
wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of
racial differences. Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their
hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's Whites must have
oppressed them. If Whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they must
oppress them Unconsciously. If no obviously racist individuals can be
identified, then societal institutions must be racist. Or, since
blacks are failing so terribly in America, there simply must be
millions of White people we do not know about, who are working day and
night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no
room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some fashion,
an indictment of White people.
The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to
believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White
racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on
welfare, or takes drugs, White society stands accused of yet another
act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-Whites is standing
proof that White society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For
precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the
same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and
oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange
conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be
committed almost exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black
congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black
mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White people can be racist.
Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State
Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she
explained that all Whites are racist and that only Whites can be
racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without
flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?
Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can,
perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been
forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White
oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable
and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not
an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would
surely be called racism when done by Whites is thought to be normal
when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true.
Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost
tedious to list them: When a White man kills a black man and uses the
word "nigger" while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and
the nation beats its collective breast; when members of the black
Yahweh cult carry out ritual murders of random Whites, the media are
silent (see AR of March, 1991). College campuses forbid pejorative
statements about non-Whites as "racist," but ignore scurrilous attacks
on Whites.
At election time, if 60 percent of the White voters vote for a White
candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for the black
opponent, it is Whites who are accused of racial bias. There are 107
"historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be
preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically White
colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of... the same thing.
To resist would be racist.
"Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything
that could be construed as an expression of White pride is a form of
hatred. It is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect
school instruction and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas
for native Americans to ask them to learn English is racist.
Blatant anti-White prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is
now the law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action, if
practiced in favor of Whites, would be attacked as despicable
favoritism.
All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses
are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club
or association expressly for Whites is by definition racist. The
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights"
organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White
People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but
is said to be viciously racist.
At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action have
set up student unions for Whites, analogous to those for blacks,
Hispanics, etc, and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently,
when the White students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found
themselves to be a minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club
like the ones that non-Whites have. They were turned down in horror.
Indeed, in America today, any club not specifically formed to be a
White enclave but whose members simply happen all to be White is
branded as racist.
Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality
of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn
on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of
Whites (and sometimes men), and never the other way around. No one
proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting
Whites, Hispanics, or Asians. No one ever suggests that National
Hispanic University in San Jose (CA) would benefit from the diversity
of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black
Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the
Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a lack
of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to
celebrate homogeneity. And yet any all-White group - a company, a
town, a school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a
crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as
possible. Only when Whites have been reduced to a minority has
"diversity" been achieved.
Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we
are so often asked to do, is no different from deploring an excess of
Whites. In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess
of Whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that
approximately 90 percent of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are
non-White. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the
country every year are virtually all non-White. It would be racist not
to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is,
of course, only White nations that are called upon to practice this
kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any
other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.
What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated
citizens across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into
thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the
state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor Whites
who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on
celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even if
they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs
and schooling?
Would Mexico - or any other non-White nation - tolerate this kind of
cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet White
Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians
entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed
to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling
numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be
hopelessly racist.
There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non-
Whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of
"hating" another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and
Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and
hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can
come only at the expense of whites. They can demand preferential
treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are
"anti-white."
Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to
affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial
policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called
racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer the
company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy
the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked
and hateful.
Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race
relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their
own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct
from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None
of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, whites must also
champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their
own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own
dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the
displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and
cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, White people are
cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and
cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.
Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is
perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to
love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and
El Salvadorans are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by
setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative
action preferences over native-born whites, but can they be blamed for
accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their
languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take
possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great
people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is
prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for
it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?
No, it is the White enterprise in the United States that is unnatural,
unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let
themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to
dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in the
history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to
strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens. Never before has a
people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in
surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in
history. Of all the races in America, only whites have been tricked
into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only
whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow
"hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their own
kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their
families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they
hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no
ill will towards non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to
participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.
What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly
unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests
of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like
asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his
neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."
What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is
likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of
racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for
their own people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the
idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be
pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of
people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history -
but only so long as the aspirations are those of whites.
Deadrat
news:0t2dn453do3h05dr2...@4ax.com:
> All liberals have is meaningless buzz words. They call people racists.
> Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
>
> by Thomas Jackson
<snipped: racist screed>
A black man is now President of the United States.
Sucks to be you, doesn't it?
Steve
"Deadrat" <a...@b.com> wrote in message
news:q2xdl.9153$8_3...@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com...
Black, you call him black? He was raised white, went to white schools. I
believe the word for that is a name of a cookie.
Bert Byfield
> Black, you call him black? He was raised white, went to white
> schools. I believe the word for that is a name of a cookie.
I don't doubt that you believe lots of silly stuff.
Kickin' Ass & Takin' Names
> "Deadrat" <a...@b.com> wrote in message
>
> news:q2xdl.9153$8_3...@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com...
>
> >news:0t2dn453do3h05dr2...@4ax.com:
>
> >> All liberals have is meaningless buzz words. They call people racists.
> >> Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
>
> >> by Thomas Jackson
> > <snipped: racist screed>
>
> > A black man is now President of the United States.
>
> Black, you call him black? He was raised white, went to white schools. I
> believe the word for that is a name of a cookie.
I believe IT DOESN'T MATTER.
Deadrat
news:lbxdl.536653$yE1.225241@attbi_s21:
>
> "Deadrat" <a...@b.com> wrote in message
> news:q2xdl.9153$8_3...@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:0t2dn453do3h05dr2...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> All liberals have is meaningless buzz words. They call people
>>> racists. Whatever. They don't have anything meaningful to say.
>>>
>>> by Thomas Jackson
>> <snipped: racist screed>
>>
>> A black man is now President of the United States.
>
> Black, you call him black?
I call him what he prefers to be called.
> He was raised white, went to white schools.
And he married a white woman. No, wait. I may be wrong about that. But
he's still got a lot of nerve being raised in your race and going to your
schools!
I believe the word for that is a name of a cookie.
I didn't realize that "Uppity Nigger" was a brand of cookie.
He's still President.
And it still sucks to be you, doesn't it?
Topaz
"There's this hilarious disconnect in the sheeple brain, where they
have been progressively brainwashed over a forty year period into
believing that once they have committed suicide themselves, an
identical civilization will be left behind except with a different
demographic makeup. They will yank the white tablecloth out from under
the dinnerware and the society will remain standing, only
melanin-enriched but otherwise the same.
It's like white people all over the planet were each taking turns
shooting themselves in the head with the same gun, convinced when they
have all killed themselves they will leave the perfect society behind.
I've got bad news for you. What you think of as civilization is joined
at the hip with the Indo-European gene pool. It's not even like oil
and water because it's all an unbroken continuum.
Culture is gene expression. If enough Mexicans inhabit any area on the
planet, that area will look exactly like Mexico in short order.
There's no piece of land on Earth that has a special gas exuded by the
local soil that makes flush toilets, clean running water, air
conditioning and the rule of law. There's no geographic location that
has these properties inherently. Irregardless of whether they are
bright enough to see it and understand why, whites tend to terraform
their surroundings to reflect what is inside them. Everything they
take for granted as the human standard, is in fact a projection of
their own qualities out onto a world that by and large is completely
indifferent to them.
America has already slipped past the demographic failsafe point. There
ain't no going back. Just like the nation formerly known as Rhodesia,
you will hear all sorts of yammering and analysis and whining but
nothing can stop Rhodesia from becoming Zimbabwe once all the
Rhodesians leave. It's a done deal.
There's no legislation. There's no emergency action committee. There's
no orchestrated government reform program. There's no mission
statement. There's no declaration of goals or judicial decision. Once
you change the genetic composition of a country, that country will
come to reflect it's demographics, not the other way around.
I went to high school in Chicago. Trust me, thirty years ago it didn't
look like the background of that news report. That was back when
Chicago schools were the best in the country and had some of the
highest scholastic scores in the nation. Back then, next to nobody
dropped out, ever.
You can't keep the street lights working with only half a nation of
high school graduates. You can't find the manpower to keep the ATM
machines running, to keep the power plant maintained at the dam, to
keep the nuclear reactor running. You can't have good medical care
with no good doctors. You can't have bridges that don't collapse with
no engineers.
America is just like Rhodesia during desegregation. All those
Rhodesians who talked about the coming era of rainbow folk dancing and
singing hand-in-hand with their African friends playing little
ukeleles, where are they now? The wind howls. Tumbleweeds blow past.
Two rabid wild dogs fight over a human ribcage in the streets where
the electricity went off a decade ago and has never come back on.
Where are all those Rhodesians looking forward to an era of peace and
harmony now? Where are they? Answer me. Raped and left for dead.
They're all wormfood now. Their farms burned to the ground, their
children strangled, their wives gangraped and forced to run naked
screaming with burning tire necklaces.
Fools. Dust in the wind. Shot in the back of the head and left for the
buzzards in some ditch on the veldt long ago.
It doesn't matter if I'm the only human being out of six billion on
the planet who knows this. Irregardless of the forcible consensus,
this is the way it will come to pass. I will be demonstrated right and
they will turn out to have been catastrophically wrong. Wishing
otherwise never makes anything so.
In another ten years, Amerikwa will be utterly unrecognizable. I
predict that the first thing that will hit you no matter where you get
off a plane in that country will be the smell. Watch and see."
DonnaGiorno
Topaz
And he is not very Black on the outside either, which explains his
intelligence:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke.
Topaz
"Light on the Dark Continent"
"Eye-opening observations of an American who has lived in Africa
for nearly 20 years."
Racism, Guilt and Self-Deceit (Self-Published) - Gedahlia Braun, 1993,
Reviewed by Jared Taylor, September-October, 1993
Dr. Braun has lived in Africa with only brief interruptions since 1976
and in South Africa since 1988. This book, in the form of a
chronological journal, describes how contact with the dark continent
quickly dispelled his liberal views and led to startling but plausible
conclusions that most Americans--even readers of AR--are likely to
find surprising.
Two Theses
Dr. Braun draws on his years of intimacy with Africans to support two
main conclusions:
The first is that virtually all Africans take it for granted that
whites are smarter than blacks. They haven't the slightest illusion
that they could have invented computers or built airplanes, and they
recognize that blacks and whites differ in moral and psychological
characteristics as well.
What is more, Africans are not the least offended by these
realizations. Unlike whites, they do not see any inherent immorality
in acknowledging racial differences. Some clever, westernized Africans
have discovered--just as American blacks have--that whites are
terrified at the thought of racial differences, and have learned to
manipulate this terror to their own advantage. But they, too, Dr.
Braun finds, can almost always be persuaded to acknowledge the
inherent limitations of Africans.
Dr. Braun's second thesis follows from the first: The vast majority of
South African blacks do not want black rule. They know from their own
experiences with black policemen and black bureaucrats that when
Africans are in positions of power they are corrupt, despotic, and
oppressive. Many blacks mouth the slogans of "liberation" but have
unrealistic, often ludicrous notions of what "liberation" is likely to
mean. Some, when pressed, will even admit that although they know
black rule would be a catastrophe for South Africa they pretend to
support it because they know that is what whites expect them to do.
Ultimately, as Dr. Braun recognizes, his observations illuminate the
terrible flaws in the white man. Without constant urging from liberal
whites, virtually all Africans would be content to put their fate in
the hands of a race that they recognize as smarter and more fair-
minded than their own.
Dr. Braun puts it this way:
(1) Blacks cannot manage a modern industrial democratic society;
(2) blacks know this and would never think of denying it were it not
for white liberals insisting otherwise;
(3) except for those black elites who hope to take power, black rule
is in no one's interest, especially not blacks;
(4) blacks know this better than anyone and are terrified of black
rule.
On what does Dr. Braun base these heretical conclusions? After several
years in Africa, he began to realize that many blacks do not think the
way white liberals keep telling us they do. He then systematically
started asking Africans--even virtual strangers--what they thought
about racial differences and whether they were in favor of black rule.
Unlike most whites, who would be ashamed to ask such questions, Dr.
Braun is utterly uninhibited. He discovered that most blacks are eager
to talk frankly; most have never had an honest conversation with a
white about race and are charmed to find one who is not blinded by the
usual cliches. Just as interestingly, he quickly learned that even
whites who have lived all their lives in Africa--including journalists
and other liberals who claim to speak for Africans--have never had an
honest conversation with a black about race.
For the most part, blacks fear majority rule because they know they
are much more likely to be cheated, robbed or brutalized by other
blacks than by whites.
Many Africans believe, in so many words, that "Whites respect one
another but we don't."
Dr. Braun has concluded that blacks and whites differ as much morally
as they do mentally, and that these differences made economic
development impossible. He wonders whether one of the reasons large-
scale cooperative enterprise is nearly impossible throughout Africa is
that blacks do not trust each other and cannot be counted on to work
together for the benefit of all. He advances the provocative view that
Africans may not have an internalized moral sense but depend instead
on tribal authority to set rules of conduct:
Hence, when they were detribalized (by colonialism, etc.), these
external constraints disappeared; and since there never were any
internal constraints, we witness rampant lack of self-control amongst
detribalized blacks (crime, drugs, promiscuity, etc.). Where there has
been some substitute for tribal control--as in white-dominated South
Africa or the segregated American South--this behaviour was kept
within tolerable limits. But when such controls vanish (as in present-
day South Africa and in large U.S. cities), you get this phenomenon of
widespread unrestrained violence"
Dr. Braun has found that like American whites, most South African
whites are incapable of talking sensibly about race. Like American
whites, they now even take a perverse joy in applauding their own
dispossession. He describes the tempestuous enthusiasm of white
audiences for the anti-white South African movie "Cry Freedom," and
writes, "the positive joy with which they cheer their own demise is
quite amazing, isn't it?" He speculates that this joy stems from "a
fatal flaw in the white race: the capacity for self-flagellating,
exaggerated and unwarranted guilt and the self-hatred that seems to
underlie it."
This self-hatred is at the heart of the white man's increasing
insistence that he is a miserable racist who is to blame for the black
man's failures:
"Once blacks learn that whites think blacks have reason to hate them,
many will be happy to oblige, instinctively realizing their
psychological advantage as the injured party . . . . All in all a
tremendous con game, in which the white man is both instigator and
willing victim."
Deadrat
news:uj4hn459qqn5e9p30...@4ax.com:
So how do you explain your IQ?
<snip/>