Systems and Symbols

Joining Matters Aright

Archive for the category “CUNTS”

Verrrry Interesting

Today I made a comment at Counter Currents Publishing in reply to a post titled “White Extinction”(1).  The basic argument of the post was that Whites are facing extinction and are in need of a homeland.  Here was my comment:

I believe we need White spaces and institutions to guarantee survival.  When it comes to White spaces, the options are either White areas within multi-racial countries or outright White countries.  I agree that an outright White country would be more efficient in maintaining survival, my concerns are with the cost of achieving these all White countries.

What is the cost of partitioning lets say 2/3 of America for Whites only?  How many people are you willing to see die (Whites and non-Whites) to achieve it?

White Nationalists overwhelmingly believe that the Jews rule the Western world. I once thought this way as well, but now realize the situation is (unfortunately) more complicated. It’s more likely that the Western world is ruled by several factions, one of which is world Jewry, but the others being masonic “WASP” Anglo-American elites (with the head being British aristocracy) , and the other being Continental European (with the head being German). In general the Jews and masonic WASPs tend to be aligned. The Continental European side tends to have stronger connections with the Catholic Church and in the last 20 years with Russia.

The last time this group did battle was WWII and since 1945 we’ve had a period of peace. But since the early 2000’s this period of peace has started to unwind.

So what happens when the Anglo-American masonic WASP side starts to see itself loosing its position and decides that its only hope to retain power is to offer North American Whites a “deal.”  Lets say they give Whites full power over the military and the right to force non-Whites off 67% of the land mass of the US.  Mormonism would be the State religion and you’d have to pledge you fealty to the British Royal family. After this new White State is established, the population would have to go to war against the Continental Europeans to “smash the Huns and mongol Russians.”    Over time you’d have to take a chip in your hand, but this would just be to “keep the children safe.”

How many of you would take this deal to get a White State in North America?  What aspects would you reject (Mormonism?, the chip?, war with Europe and Russia?) .

One more question:  Lets say Americans were given total freedom of association (meaning the right to communities, institutions, businesses with who they wanted) and there was end to State financed anti-Whiteness (including a moratorium on non-White immigration) . How many here would still fight for an all White State?

My take on it is this, as much as I’d like an all White State in North America, the cost of getting it would probably be too great. So instead, I’d see total freedom of association and the institutions (media, educational, spiritual) to make White people better off. Then over time as White communities join other White communities, slowly Whites may wish to form something new.  This will be a slower process.  A more organic process to White Statehood.  This way would eliminate the death and suffering involved in cutting out a new White state in North America. It would also greatly reduce the chances for power elites to use us for their bigger plans.

When I checked back at Counter Currents to see if it generated any discussion, I found that at least half of it was erased. Here’s what made it though CC moderation:

I believe we need White spaces and institutions to guarantee survival. When it comes to White spaces, the options are either White areas within multi-racial countries or outright White countries. I agree that an outright White country would be more efficient in maintaining survival, my concerns are with the cost of achieving these all White countries.

What is the cost of partitioning lets say 2/3 of America for Whites only? How many people are you willing to see die (Whites and non-Whites) to achieve it?

One more question: Lets say Americans were given total freedom of association (meaning the right to communities, institutions, businesses with who they wanted) and there was end to State financed anti-Whiteness (including a moratorium on non-White immigration) . How many here would still fight for an all White State?

My take on it is this, as much as I’d like an all White State in North America, the cost of getting it would probably be too great. So instead, I’d see total freedom of association and the institutions (media, educational, spiritual) to make White people better off. Then over time as White communities join other White communities, slowly Whites may wish to form something new. This will be a slower process. A more organic process to White Statehood. This way would eliminate the death and suffering involved in cutting out a new White state in North America. It would also greatly reduce the chances for power elites to use us for their bigger plans.

Here’s the parts that were removed:

White Nationalists overwhelmingly believe that the Jews rule the Western world. I once thought this way as well, but now realize the situation is (unfortunately) more complicated. It’s more likely that the Western world is ruled by several factions, one of which is world Jewry, but the others being masonic “WASP” Anglo-American elites (with the head being British aristocracy) , and the other being Continental European (with the head being German). In general the Jews and masonic WASPs tend to be aligned. The Continental European side tends to have stronger connections with the Catholic Church and in the last 20 years with Russia.   

The last time this group did battle was WWII and since 1945 we’ve had a period of peace. But since the early 2000’s this period of peace has started to unwind. 

So what happens when the Anglo-American masonic WASP side starts to see itself loosing its position and decides that its only hope to retain power is to offer North American Whites a “deal.”  Lets say they give Whites full power over the military and the right to force non-Whites off 67% of the land mass of the US.  Mormonism would be the State religion and you’d have to pledge you fealty to the British Royal family. After this new White State is established, the population would have to go to war against the Continental Europeans to “smash the Huns and mongol Russians.”    Over time you’d have to take a chip in your hand, but this would just be to “keep the children safe.” 

How many of you would take this deal to get a White State in North America?  What aspects would you reject (Mormonism?, the chip?, war with Europe and Russia?) . 

As you the reader can see, there’s nothing in my comments that are vulgar, or violent, or combative. I was perplexed over why this part would be edited?  But then I remembered another comment I posted at CC that was erased outright (never made it through moderation)(2). Here’s what I wrote in that post:

“Race is obviously critical in the WN/Pro-White worldview and organizing principle. We need to talk more about what the concept of “Whiteness” really means. But I still wonder what it is that lies beyond that?  Here are some situations to consider.

Let’s say tomorrow the Anglo-American elites, which belong to an organization like this one (1), come and call a big meeting with the White Nationalist community and offer this. They offer to give White Nationalists a high level authority over 67% of the geographic space of America. They offer to give Whites the power over media, politics, popular culture, with even more power than people suppose Jews to have today. They offer to change the living locations for all non-Whites (from this 67% of the country) except in a few major cities throughout “middle America” where international commerce is conducted.  We’ll say 67 present of the country is under “White Law.”

BUT

Everybody has to take a chip in their bodies to be tracked by organizations owned and ran by the Anglo-American elites (2). I’ll call this #1  “White Nationalist + chip situation.”

Here’s another scenario. An America that has FREEdom OF ASSoCIAtiON along with an end to publicly paid anti-Whiteness.  A more localized political life while setting up economic flows between other traditionalist parties across the world.  Teutons, Russian traditionalists, British nationalists but also Hindus, Japanese, South America indigenous Indians, North American Indians, Chinese Nationalists, Israelis and other Jews who will respect our boundaries. I call this #2 “Traditionalist-Freedom of association” situation.

What situation would you prefer #1 or #2?

I’d take #2.

I wouldn’t be able to accept (for example) the force relocation of the America Indians. Or the forced return of “African Americans” (blacks who are descended from black slaves) to Africa.  I have something that I place above ultimate White racial interests. I couldn’t maliciously fuck over innocent people for my political worldview or metaphysical outlook. Something in my being does not allow me to put racial interests at the very top.

BUT HERE’S A THIRD SCENARIO!!! #3!!!.  Let’s say some Ubermensch-like, White extraterrestrials land one day and say:

“OK you pasted the test. We made you and put you in this situation with non-Whites to see if you’d let yourselves get wiped out. Since you made it this long; you past the test. Now you Whites must kill off every single non-White and every single Jew in the world. Then we’ll build an intergalactic civilization with us teaching you the mysteries of the Universe while you live as colonists for us laying down our law across the universe.”   I call this #3 the “Ubermensch test for US” situation.

Who would take # 3?

To the readers, at least just post the number you’d prefer, if you don’t feel like discussing it. Or feel free to discuss your choice.

So after reading over this comment, I started comparing the two. I looked for aspects that were in the first comment removed that matched the parts that were edited from the latest. From comparing the two it seems that my offenses were in mentioning the Anglo-American-masonic “WASP” elites (3) and from my speculations of possible scenarios in which the Anglo-American-Masonic “WASP” elites could create an all-White homeland in North America if they were faced with the threat of loss of power or loss of existence. I believe the following two words sum up this situation perfectly (watch video below):

(1) http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/02/white-extinction/#more-45475

(2) https://systemssymbols.wordpress.com/2013/11/28/happy-thanksgiving-pilgrims/

(3) https://wikispooks.com/ISGP/organisations/Pilgrims_Society02.htm

*Note: Despite this “verrry interesting” observance, I believe Counter Currents is the best White Nationalist website (outside of the BUGS-White Rabbit sphere) in the world today. I recommend donating to their website.

https://secure.counter-currents.com/donate/

 

Snout Smack: An advocate for Non-Violence

I advocate non-violence in opposing the anti-White globalist pig-dog agenda.  In short, violence doesn’t work.  The anti-White pig-dogs have weapons of the like we’ve never seen before.  They have weapons that can affect weather, microwave weapons which fry your brain, holograms, nukes, and a whole plethora of “unknown unknowns.”  Attacking the globalist elite with violence is attacking them at their strongest point.  It would be like attacking the most fortified section of the Maginot line head on.

In fact, the globalist pig-dogs want you to attack them.  The globalist/NWO agenda was stronger than ever after Oklahoma city.  The same goes for the aftermath of the terrorist attack in Norway.  Attacking the anti-White globalists with violence just gives them a problem to provide a reaction and a solution to (1) . Violence assists the globalist elites in implementing a police-state.  It’s better if they inflict violence on you.  After Waco and Ruby Ridge the alternative right-wing grew in America.  After Oklahoma City this alternative right-wing contracted greatly.

For a historical case study it’s important to examine the former Soviet Union.  Anti-Soviet Samizdat dissidents used a consistent message, rhetoric, and political discourse to attack the system.  They used fax machines and xerox copiers to spread their message. They focused consistent messages on blatant contradictions of the Soviet system.  One example of a consistent message they used was “If Communism is so superior, why do they need walls and armed guards to keep us from leaving?”  They would repeat this over and over and over.  The Berlin Wall fell without a shot being fired.  But if anti-Soviet dissidents had attacked border guards or ambushed the East German police, these attacks would have been used by the Soviet security services as a reason to crack down on dissidents.  The masses would have probably supported this crack-down out of fear of instability.

Another major reason I advocate non-violence is that violence doesn’t punish the guilty.  Blowing up some mid-level bureaucrats or shooting the kids of political leaders does not hurt the globalist pig-dogs in any way.  The average government employee (including the average FBI special agent or CIA analyst) is clueless of the real nature of world power dynamics.  It doesn’t do any good to kill the ignorant (you have to educate and lead the ignorant).  The real guilty parties have paramilitary forces that guard them at all times.  A Bilderberg meeting would probably require two Army Ranger Regiments and 100 Delta Force operatives to it take down.

I also advocate non-violence because one should be confident in what one believes. You don’t need violence when you know you’re right. We have a consistent message (see the mantra above and BUGS in my blogroll) that undermines the legitimacy of the anti-White system.  We have the greatest invention since the printing press (the Internet) at our disposal to spread our message.  We have nothing to fear.  People use violence because of fear.  Fear should not motivate our actions.  Our actions are inspired by a call from the universe.

I pointed out that the strongest point in the system for the anti-White globalists is their military power.  They’re very good at killing.  However, the weakest component in their system is their ideas (the philosophical and scientific basis for their world order).  They have to use misdirection, duplicity, deception, and deceit to further their agenda.  They have to force people to live according to their program. The only weapons we (pro-Whites or other anti-globalists) need are aesthetics, art, music, metaphysics/spirituality, discourse, and a consistent message (see “BUGS” in my blogroll to learn about a consistent message).   This struggle is fought in the realm of imagination, emotion, and spirit. The anti-White globalist zeitgeist is their “systempunkt” (2).  If it goes down the whole system will cascade after it.

Guns, nukes, tanks, HAARP, drones, domestic surveillance systems,holograms, etc are for anti-White, globalist, pig-dogs who know their ideas and vision for man/womyn-kind are indefensible under scientific and philosophical scrutiny.

“The mastery of mind over mind is the only conquest worth having.”  Albert Pike: Morals and Dogma.

(1)  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29C_KNZ7RNs

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systempunkt

Why Can’t Cowards at C-span Call Chossudovsky?

The American Television Station “C-span” prides itself on featuring “provocative” and sometimes “controversial” authors.  They give “radicals” like Bill Ayers (a guy who hangs out with the President probably isn’t that radical) 3 hours on C-span to push his anti-White ideas for American education. Why don’t they invite Dr. Michel Chossudovsky on C-span for 3 hours to talk about Geopolitics, the Anglo-American Elite, and WWIII?  He has a new book provocatively called “Towards a WWIII Scenario” (1).  Why can’t  they invite him on Larry King for an hour?  How about Piers Morgan?  How about the “Fox All Stars” on Sunday morning?  Why don’t they invite him on Fox News’s “Red Eye?”

The fact is these people can’t handle Chossudovsky!   The media bosses (and their globalist superiors) shake with fear at the thought of Chossudovsky smacking their snouts for 3 hours on Cable TV.  The globalists are cowards who know that their worldview and agenda can easily be deconstructed by Chossudovsky.  This guy is near fearless in his discourse.

Chossudovsky is a leftest.  You could probably call him a “socialist.”  But he’s not a sick anti-White genocidal maniac like the “leftists” at the SPLC.  He just believes the masses should have more of a voice in world affairs and he advocates for greater wealth distribution.    He believes in communities organizing local economic capabilities and collectives.  Most important however, is his opposition to the New World Order.  I would describe him as an “International Nationalist.”

Below is a lecture by Chossudovsky which I highly recommend.  This is probably the best of the public speaking work I’ve seen of him.  This lecture should be shown to every college freshman in America.  This talk was given in 2003 and it explains very well why the “world situation” is what it is today.

He talks about a need for creating an anti-war/anti-globalist “discourse.”  Readers of Bob’s Underground Seminar (BUGS:found in my blogroll) will realize he’s talking about a “consistent message.”  A consistent message is intended to delegitimize the ideas and therefore the authority of the power structure.

Watch and take notes:

If you watched the lecture you probably noticed that he predicted Anglo-American-Israeli military actions for the last 8 years.   Now he’s talking about WWIII !!!(2)

Make sure to Check Out “Global Research” in my blogroll (Chossudovsky website).

(1), (2)  http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25185

Letter to the Bilderberg Group

Dear Bilderberg Group,

I was recently examining your list of participants for the 2011 meeting (1).  The thing that stuck out at me as I read was the lack of diversity in your participants.  I thought this may have been an anomaly so I also examined prior participant lists (2).  To my shock these lists too showed a disapointing lack of diversity.   Particularly I point to the lack of Africans, Mestizos, Amerindians, and gay, lesbian, and transgendered people.   This greatly confounded me as it is your globalist pig-dog foundations who proudly fund pro-immgration groups for the purpose of flooding White countries with immigrants from the “developing world.”  For instance Sean Lengell of the Washington Post reports that:

The Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and Democratic activist George Soros were among the liberal funders that have donated millions of dollars to pro-immigration groups, as the Senate continued its debate on a contentious bill that would overhaul the nation’s immigration policy.

Three of the nation’s biggest and most influential pro-immigration groups — the National Immigration Forum, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) and the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) — collectively received more than $3.25 million from Ford Foundation since 2005. (3)

It appears that “diversity is strength” only when it applies to non-global elite spaces?  Globalist elite spaces are VERY, VERY White (and Jewish).  I wonder why anti-White cowards like Chris Matthews haven’t reported this?  Coward Chris Mathews has no problem pointing out the “whiteness” of the Tea Party movement.  But for some reason he doesn’t point out the “race problem” relating your group?  In fact, I’d be surprised if coward Chris Matthews has mentioned your group at all?

I also wonder where all the big “civil rights” and “anti-racist” activists are regarding this issue?  Why isn’t Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton outraged about this lack of inclusion?  Why isn’t the anti-White, genocidal maniac (4) Tim Wise not railing against this?   Why aren’t the anti-White, leftist stooges who use terrorist tactics against American Renaissance meetings (thus denying Amren freedom of speech and association) not conducting “demonstrations of solidarity” against Bilderberg?  The answer is simple: So called “anti-racism” is actually a code for anti-White.

So since the above mentioned anti-white cowards won’t bring attention to Bilderberg’s lack of diversity, I guess it’s my duty to do so.  That is why I, the creator/writer for Snout Smack offers his services to bring diversity to Bilderberg.  I wish to be hired by your organization as “Director of Diversity.”  My demographic goals for the 2012 meeting (In Virginia) are as follows: 12% African, 14% Mestizo Latino (no cheating by using White Latinos), 5% Asian, 1% Amerindian, 3% Muslim, and 3% gay, lesbian, and transgendered people (at least one participant should be transgendered and this person should share a room with David Rockefeller).

I served in your globalist wars in the Middle East and the Balkans and have a master’s degree so my international experience and education should be adequate.  My salary needs are negotiable.  Please leave a comment and email address on how I can contact you or contact one of your spy organizations to get my phone number.

I just want the opportunity to help your organization experience the “joys of diversity” that you force on the rest of us.

sincerely,

Snout Smack

(1) http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2011.html

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants

(3) The 2007 Sean Langell Washington Post article requires a subscription so here’s a reprint:  http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message399702/pg1

(4) http://amren.com/oldnews/archives/2010/11/an_open_letter_2.php

Anti-Whites are CUNTS

I think there’s one thing we can conclude without a doubt and that’s the fact that the anti-Whites are a bunch of CUNTS!

That’s right. The anti-Whites are CUNTS!

Former Reagan official and Congressional aide Bob Whitaker wrote an appeal to President Medvedev of Russia asking for solidarity against the genocidal anti-White globalists (1).  With this appeal the anti-Whites have an opportunity to link their greatest domestic enemy (pro-Whites) with their greatest foreign enemy (Russia).

Liberals have the opportunity to link a “White Supremacist” former Reagan official with the “fascist” Russians. Respectable Conservatives can show their love of diversity by condemning the “racist right” for appealing to the “neo-Stalinist” Russians.

Why don’t the CUNTS at the SPLC have a big “report” warning the public of the “increasing dangers” of the “racist right” attempting to find allies with the “intolerant” Russians?

Why doesn’t Fox’s CUNT O’Reily have a segment about the “bomb throwers” on the “far right” attempting to network with the “gangsters” in the Kremlin?

All we hear is silence?

Why? Because they’re CUNTS who fear a 70-year-old man (Bob Whitaker) with a 200 word mantra.  Even their anti-White organizations (like the SPLC) with millions of dollars of funding can’t chance admitting the existence of Bob Whitaker (see BUGS in my blogroll).

And these people think they’re going to have a new world order?  If you CUNTS can’t handle a 70-year-old man with a 200 word mantra, how do you expect to rule the world when you don’t have Russia; China is moving away from you; the middle east is rejecting your vision of liberal Islam; the EU is disintegrating, and the American economy is falling apart?

I apologize to the readers for the nasty language (CUNTS) but there’s no other word that better describes these people. The anti-Whites have billions of dollars and total control of the media and political establishment but they can’t chance exposing Bob Whitaker’s (BUGS) message because THEY KNOW THIS MESSAGE POINTS OUT THE TRUTH!!!

This post could probably be be called “anti-Whites are CUNTS as told by someone who watched Deadwood too many times.” 🙂 lol

(1)http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2011/09/26/robert-walker-whitaker-and-other-american-dissidents-appeal-to-dmitry-anatolyevich-medvedev-for-solidarity-against-white-genocide/

Post Navigation