Halal & Hypocrisy VI: Poppycock!

Design-wise, this is such an old-school, UK Gold-style bumper, I just *had* to nab it.

So, thanks to some annoyed opinions on Tuesday’s The Wright Stuff, and e-mailed invective on Wednesday’s Metro letters page, I found out about the £50 fine given to Emdadur Choudhury for his Armistice Day poppy-burning

…and then, I got a little annoyed myself.

The general consensus seems to be that not only was his anti-poppy pyromania “disgusting”, but that his fifty quid fine constituted “a kick in the teeth” to Our Brave BoysTM in the forces, past and present. Everyone, from Prime Minister Davy Cameron, to Metro reader Dave Reardon, deems the fine “pathetic” and a gross leniency.

According to Reardon:

It should have been set at £1,000 and he should have been jailed for a minimum of one year.

So much for that hallowed freedom of expression Our Brave BoysTM supposedly bled, bombed, and bayoneted for!

Were I holding the gavel in the trial of Cheeky Choudhury, I’d not only have laughed the case out of court, but fined whoever saw fit to arrest the East End chancer in the first place. Section 5 of the Public Order Act be damned! I’d happily send that piece of creeping draconianism straight to the shredder, where it belongs.

Whatever one’s thoughts on Choudhury and Co.’s performance, can it be said that the ayatollah-wannabes inflicted bodily harm by burning their poppies and shouting their little slogans? If not, then what exactly was being penalized with this court case? Reading about the story from the perspective of the veteran-descended Tony Kibble, it seems to amount to seeking recourse for feeling “sick inside”, for suffering “tears of anger and rage at the disrespect in my eyes”.

In other words, Kibble’s feelings got hurt.

It would appear that this case wasn’t so much about civic justice as civic therapy; District Judge Howard Riddle being reportedly impressed by Kibble’s “typical feelings” about Armistice seems to bear out my analysis. Who knows: maybe they plan to stick a black leather couch in every British courtroom, in anticipation of similar cases?

Seriously, strip away the self-righteous pomp ‘n’ ceremony about the “disrespect” toward this “significant event”, and it becomes clear that this whole sorry fiasco amounts to little more than political correctness for the majority; this time, instead of the abstract ‘ethnic minority member’, ‘Muslim’, or ‘gay’, it’s the “typical” (read: the archetypal Brit) that requires special pandering. These words uttered by prosecutor Simon Ray sound all too familiar…

Their actions went far beyond the boundaries of legitimate protest and freedom of expression.

Pretty much the typical cry of those who support free-speech-so-long-as-it-doesn’t-offend-them, a.k.a. the pro-censorship lobby. You know a nation’s “freedom of expression” is on shaky ground when those who claim to defend it call for bans and penalties against words that offend their precious sensibilities (I’m looking at you, Jon Gaunt! You too, Shami Chakrabarti!).

Incidentally, I once again roll my eyes at the veritable shitstorm that  arises whenever a state functionary or institution fails to garner a desired amount of reverence. Often, such shitstorms throw up some interesting double standards: ever notice how some folk will deride officially recognized PC in one breath, yet castigate anyone who has a bad word for Our Brave BoysTM and the Boys in BlueTM with the next?

I guess it ain’t “political correctness gone mad”, so long as they’re the ones doing the correcting, eh?

image

Speaking of Our Brave BoysTM , I really can’t let this utterance by Gulf War veteran Shaun Rusling pass without comment:

It is one law for them and one law for others. If we set fire to a Koran, there’d be uproar.

If the noise and fury he contributes to doesn’t constitute an uproar, I really dunno what does!

Personally, if someone wants to set their own stuff alight, I really couldn’t give a fuck, whether said stuff be a poppy, a Koran, or a national flag—feel free to blaze it up! If nothing else, it can make for great performance art, and much better therapy than a court of law.

In fact, sod sending Section 5 of the Public Order Act to the shredder: methinks the pyre would prove more poetic…

MRDA's inferno?

Anyone got a light?

~MRDA~

About MRDA

The beast shouting "I" at the heart of the world. Alien misanthropologist in a homo sapiens skinsuit. Pass the wine and get out of my sunshine!
This entry was posted in Civil Liberties, Halal & Hypocrisy, Moral Panic, News, Politics, Religion, Slave Britannia, The Wright Stuff and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Halal & Hypocrisy VI: Poppycock!

  1. jim says:

    political correctness is tyrany dressed up as good manners.

  2. noobcake says:

    Hmm, an interesting view point. I couldn’t care less if people want to burn their own stuff. And I do agree that no one was actually harmed other than a few feelings. Boo hoo, right? But the protest raised some nasty questions about the types of people who think it is acceptable to act that way. It shouldn’t be acceptable to go to those lengths to get your point across.

    The images of “Cheeky Choudhury” might not look out of place in Libya, Iran or other Middle Eastern countries, where it is considered righteous to burn flags of the “enemy” but it’s never going to be acceptable here.

    • S.Legree says:

      Well, folks, remember Joyce , `Lord Haw-haw`.
      If he`d had his way, there`d be NO welfare state for you alien descendants to insult & scrounge off.
      Roll on the Military Junta; gallows await the enemies within.

    • MRDA says:

      Glad you could drop by, noobcake.

      The way I look at it, things like these poppy-burning protests are good tests for the much hyped Brit freedom of speech; when I see folks advocating that inflammatory protesters should be fined/jailed/deported, I tend to think that this country’s populace not as free an tolerant as it likes to imagine itself.

      As for issues of “acceptability” and the comparisons with Middle Eastern lands (“If we did that there we’d be in shit, therefore, we should respond in kind”), I think that to make such comparisons actually plays into the hands of arseholes who want to install Sharia law and put the UK under Dhimmitude. Do we really want to mirror the restrictions of nations like Saudi Arabia here? It’s one thing to be pissed off by the protestors; quite another to call for law to stamp down on them; that ain’t much different from a Saudi theocrat calling for birds to be flogged for not wearing a fucking scarf.

      • noobcake says:

        You make a good argument but there are limits to tolerance that the population are willing to accept. It’s not about reducing our values, laws, morals etc to those like Saudi Arabia, but about allowing freedom of speech up to a point where it becomes offensive to the nation as a whole. I believe there are a growing percentage of people whose tolerance is running out.

        My post Free Ride Britain shows that tolerance only stretches so far before there is a backlash, right or wrong, I suspect it will happen.
        http://noobcake.wordpress.com/2010/09/30/free-ride-britain/

        • MRDA says:

          Nice post.

          I agree that newly-landed immigrants shouldn’t get special treatment over the folk already living here, especially at the extorted expense of the latter. What happened to Craig Baker strikes me as especially laughable, seeing as newly-landed immigrants more closely fit the label of “no local connection”.

          That said, I think you’re having a go at the wrong people when you criticize all those ridiculous trends; it ain’t the immigrants running things; and, as that Jawad bloke says: “If someone gave you a lottery jackpot would you leave it?”. Opportunism and self-interest are reliable human traits.

          More often than not, it ain’t the immigrants and minorities getting offended by Christmas lights and bacon on pizzas, but rather the White Guilt brigade. I make mention of them in a few posts.

          • N. says:

            White guilt brigade you say? Like the one preaching it to me in a thread about gays from Africa? You know, Europeans drained African resources therefore I must pay the price?

            And here in this thread, you’ve got a nice white guilt brigade going on, too. From, now already, evergreen and classical “you are reading Turner Diaries (I think you’ve thrown this one at me, too), to Nazi/racist. You know, typical kosher drivel.

            Mrda, Mrda. You go from wannabe libertarian, who looks down on liberal drivel one moment, to participating in Olympic games of “who can throw more Turner Diaries, Nazis/racists and how wide should Europe open its gates, as per Khazar mafia demands.

            White guilt is the best thing that ever happened to non -. whites. When it wears off, and it will, all hell will break loose. That’s why it’s imperative to keep it alive for as long as possible, hoping it lives to the point of no return for Europe.

        • MRDA says:

          It’s not about reducing our values, laws, morals etc to those like Saudi Arabia, but about allowing freedom of speech up to a point where it becomes offensive to the nation as a whole

          The difference would be only in degree, not kind.

          To say that anyone can “abuse” freedom of speech is to declare there is no such thing. There’s no real difference between someone wanting to prosecute poppy-burners and someone wanting to prosecute those who state that Mohammed fucks kids.

      • Centrist says:

        Sorry, but Freedom of Speech in no way means Freedom of ACTION [of burning poppies of symbolic value].

        £50 was not enough for total disrespect of the soldiers fallen and also currently serving. That man should have got at least a thousand pounds and a few months in jail for ‘incitement of racial hatred’ which he’s bringing upon himself.

        Incitement of racial hatred has come from a member of the very group which our weak government has done so much to protect from the same kind of hatred.

        The way I see it is that these Muslim extremists are aiming their anger at the wrong people here. The soldiers don’t ASK to be deployed in pointless oil wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. The government send them there and they HAVE TO DO IT!

        If Choudary wanted to have a go at anyone, it should’ve been the government who order these stupid, pointless Vietnam-style episodes of bloodshed, not the soldiers who are used as oil currency!

        The soldiers have to fight wherever they’re told or they’ll be sent to jail for refusing.

        MAC make me sick to the stomach. It is very clear that whilst they can burn poppies and disgrace a solemn ceremony of soldier procession, the EDL cannot mount any kind of counter-argument under penalty of being arrested. The scales need rebalancing and the law needs reviewing.

        • MRDA says:

          Actually, the concept of free speech covers expressions such as burning one’s own property (in this case, that poppy).

          Again, you talk of “disrespect” but whoever said anything about the right never to be offended? If we’re gonna start advocating legal penalties for “disrespect”, sooner or later, we’ll find ourselves in the dock, too.

          As for “symbolic value”, well, that’s quite frankly in the eye of the valuer(s), and no where else; whilst a Muslim may shudder at the thought of burning a Koran, I’d look upon the thought with some amusement. To punish someone for not sharing another’s “symbolic valuation” is to essentially legislate taste.

          “Incitement to racial hatred” is another slab of PC horseshit, as distasteful as I find racial hatred. Folk can hate my race as much as they want, as long as they keep their fists to themselves.

          I do agree that Choudhury would be better off aiming his vitriol at the chairwarming warmongers in parliament; that said, don’t soldiers join up with a basic expectation of what their service entails?

  3. noobcake says:

    You’ve clearly given this subject a great deal of thought, more than myself as I admit I tend to look at what I see in the media and what I hear in my own social circle. For whatever reasons why there seems to be so much negativity surrounding issues like immigration, freedom of speech apparently being abused, there appears to have been a sharp uprising in people’s attitudes toward how they view their country.

    The older generation, my grandparents for example, say the country has “gone to the dogs” but I don’t see it that way. Diversity is a good thing. If I’m having a go at the wrong people, as you say, that leads me to think the problem lies with how the country is governed. If situations were reversed and I found myself travelling to, say France, where they gave me benefits, a place to live and freedom to state my beleifs, then I wouldn’t turn it down!

    But if a governing body is supposed to take act for the people, isn’t it a matter of time before the UK becomes a much less tolerant place entirely? Maybe decades in the future where there is a chance that the kids of today (leaders of the future) don’t have the same values or morals as those do in power at the moment.

    • N. says:

      Diversity is a good thing.

      Wow, Mrda, you’ve gotten yourself a cute lil’ kosher liberal group to have an afternoon tea with.

      Diversity is a good thing, you say? Where? In Europe? Let me rephrase it. In Europe ONLY? No?
      So you’d claim about 300 million Europeans migrating to, say, Nigeria, demanding a special status and benefits, paid house (I don’t know whether I should push it all the way with freedom to state their beliefs), freedom to engage in as much crime as they wish, breeding the indigenous population on the brink of survival, claiming special civil rights, throwing people in jail for daring to speak about atrocities they’ll commit and labeling them as racist, demanding that 40,000 rapes they’d commit against women of Nigeria to go unreported… would be a good thing?

      How about 300 million Europeans into… Japan? China?

      And what would you say if Chinese said that China is for Chinese and they do not want Europeans there?

      Ever heard what Japanese think and say about immigrants?

      Let me ask you something else. Do you support what happened in Rwanda?

      Oh dear oh dear. I understand that there are those who fear change, who have a gut reaction to anything new or what they perceive as a threat to their way of life, but seriously dude, Military Junta? Are you even living in the real world?

      I have strong feeling about how other countries strive to keep their identity so why shouldn’t we? But you need to remember that every single country in the world is populated by immigrants, and has been since mankind left Africa.

      Never fails. Always, a self- proclaimed moral liberals, claiming how change is good. I suspect you wrote that while holding a picture of a dear leader of a so called free world, the Teleprompter Messiah. Change we can believe in.

      This arrogant delivery about change. This illogical delivery how every change is a good thing. But, flip some kind of change onto liberals, and they show their true colors. Change is a good thing only when they deem it – and this change always goes at the expanse of Europeans, and never at the expanse of non Europeans. So much for egalitarism.

      We don’t fear change per se. We do fear the change forced upon us, which brings crime and genocide upon European nations. The problem is that people like you do not see any of this. Of course, by the time they get raped on a train station, they either see it a second before they die or continue to dwell in liberal shit: oh, it’s not like all of them are like that.
      Those, who are forcing this change we can believe in on us, are doing everything possible that this change, this diversity doesn’t come anywhere near them, and are daily murdering those, who have been there before them. Yes, Israel. Barbara Spectre does not claim that Israel MUST learn how to be multicultural. No, she is forcing us, Europeans into it. If diversity is so great, and we see daily and more and more it’s not, and it leads to population replacement (seriously, there should be a punishment for people like you, who are advocating a genocide of European nations).

      Now, let me flip it on you. We’ve seen this diversity experiment going on for decades. Let’s try something NEW. How about Europe for Europeans, Africa for Africans, China for Chinese. What say you?

      How very tricky of you to use a word “perceived” when talking about Europeans fearing for our lives in Europe, of all the places, due to non European immigration. Perceived. Surely Swedes in Malmo only perceived their lives being threatened once the non Swedish immigrants started pouring into what used to be their home. Surely, that’s why, due to perception, they ran away from Malmo. And what when there’s no corner for Swedes to run from? Not to mention: why should they run in their own country? Yep, that’s white flight for ya. Whites own this term. Ever wondered why?

      There’s nothing perceived when it comes to number of immigrants becoming higher than that of indigenous people. Someone will prevail. And they don’t even need guns anymore. All they need is traitors like you to claim diversity is strength, give them a free ride for the crimes they commit (especially rape as a weapon of war), give them free food and roof so they can breed even more and voila! You’ve got Kosovo.

      And then, then you have the audacity to ask if he is living in the real world?!

      It doesn’t stop here. You go on preaching about “out of Africa” and how every nation is build of immigrants. How dishonest and presumptious of you! I wouldn’t dare to say that to a Chinese! How his country is made of immigrants anyway, so he should just welcome 300 million Europeans. Would you say to a Chinese how he should welcome, say, 700 million Africans into China? Would you dare and risk being cooked alive?
      No. But. You will force this upon Europe. Boy, are you busy killing Europe, aren’t you?

      You claim you have a strong feeling (that must be something else, I’m sure) how other countries strive to keep their identity. A little bit earlier you claimed how all mankind is from Africa and all nations are made of immigrants. Logical fallacy. If all mankind is from Africa, then there’s only one identity, and therefor you just killed Danish identity. So what makes Danish identity Danish? Danes. They have their ethnic genetic mark, their culture, their language. What happens when your plan of diversity is put into higher gear? What happens when a nation of 4 million people gets run over 4 million Africans, Middle Easterns, Pakis etc? let me help you. Danish identity dies as Danes die.
      Every animal defends its territory. Every other race on this planet is allowed to defend it. Every but white. To defend oneself and be against immigration means you’re racist. Well I’ll be damned, call me racist as long as I survive!

      <iYour vision seems warped to the point of mental issues. Public Executions? Internment? I have a theory about you S.Legree, you are either insanely stupid or you’re just saying all this for fun, to see how others react to an extreme opinion. It is only a minority that think the way you do, and I am grateful for that.

      Minority. Heh, liberals pick and choose when minority is something good, something to be defended. Gays need help cos they are minority. Blacks need help cos they are minority (seriously, ever looked up the the population numbers in Africa as compared to Europe??).

      A person, who is determined to defend his country, his home, his family, is insanely stupid. Jesus, what have we come to?!
      A person who sees the genocidial criminal element of immigration ihas mental issues, whereas a dumb liberal, who shrugs it off while his sister, daughter is being raped by some camel fucker, is a sane moral upstanding wordly citizen.

      And no, it’s not only a minority that thinks the way he does. It’s only a minority that says it out loud. For the time being.

      Your claim about how you’ve never heard about police not wanting to go into rough neighborhoods? Wow. And you dare to say that he doesn’t live in real world. It’s like this all over Europe (yes, in EVERY European country) and USA. And guess what? Whites are not the ones living in these hoods.
      You know what? I’ll give you an assignment. Why don’t you go to Detroit and come back and report about it. What say you?

      This is your “diversity is good”. Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland, France, Germany, Italy….

      This is GENOCIDE. Reality not perception. And when we, Europeans, are minority in our Europe, where will people like YOU be, to speak about minorities and diversity where there won’t be basically any Europeans anymore? Oh, that just brought a huge smile on your face, didn’t it?

      • I’m sorry but you’re rant bored me after the 3rd paragraph. I thought this was a lively debate not a place to rant and rave using any argument you can just to back up your anger.

        MRDA has different views to me, but he has made a sensible argument which I am willing to take on board and think about, even though I may not always agree, at least I give it consideration. In order not to appear stupid you need to learn the rules of arguing or debate. You can not reply to everyone’s comments in one statement, you make reference to my comments and others in one reply. Very amateurish way to put your point across. Also a comment of this size makes you appear angry, intolerant and ignorant.

        I would appreciate it if you didn’t wrap everyone up in the same little pigeon hole and chuck BS at us.

        • N. says:

          I’m sorry but you’re rant bored me after the 3rd paragraph.

          It’s not my style to jump on every grammatical error, however, due to the fact that you, in your desperation of not having a counter argument to the context, went on a typical arrogant rant against British patriot based on his grammatical errors as proof he’s uneducated and typical white trash, I must, as a person whose English is a second language, correct “you’re” to your.

          The fact that my rant bored you comes to me as no surprise. People like you get easily bored with things you are not capabale to understand. At the same time, saying how something bored you, constitutes, in a mind of a typical liberal, as a counter argument against which you have no meaningful response.

          I thought this was a lively debate not a place to rant and rave using any argument you can just to back up your anger.

          Anything that doesn’t nod to your “diversity is good” will be, imperatively, dismissed as something that is not lively, as another empty attempt to avoid taking my arguments. I didn’t just use any argument to back up my anger – I explained the situation of a real world in detailed manner. You, on the other hand, having no arguments, is hanging onto whether a debate was lively or not.

          Anger is used as a counter argument for liberals when it suits them; when they are angry, it’s a good thing. When those, who do not agree with them, are angry, they throw it, due to, again, lack of any counter arguments against context, at us as something irrational. Being angry about the fact that your home land and your survival is set for genocide, I’d say, could not be a bad thing. Or could it?

          MRDA has different views to me, but he has made a sensible argument which I am willing to take on board and think about, even though I may not always agree, at least I give it consideration.

          He has different views than you to, he has different views as compared to yours… But not views TO you.

          An argument that Europeans have the right to Europe and the right to survive is obviously not a sensible argument to you. Obviously. I hope you wouldn’t mind being in the front line of those, who will go first.

          In order not to appear stupid you need to learn the rules of arguing or debate. You can not reply to everyone’s comments in one statement, you make reference to my comments and others in one reply.

          LMAO! You cannot make this up! YOU are telling ME I’m the one that needs to learn the rules of a debate?!What exactly do YOU think is a topic of a debate here? Whether or not something is lively?! Whether or not a detailed and supported with arguments response to the topic at hand is boring?!

          I did not respond in one statement. I quoted every part I decided to respond! Making a reference about someone’s comment and directly, after quoting a part of your post, responding is NOT the same. Some comments do not have the option of a “reply”.

          In order not to appear stupid you need to learn the rules of arguing in a debate: follow the SUBJECT of a debate and counter argument with and within a context of a subject, unless you wanna appear stupid by ranting about whether or not a debate is suppose to be lively! You, as expected, did not tackle ONE single statement I made – and you wanna front as if you a master at debating? Debating WHAT?! A subject of a debate at hand? No.

          Very amateurish way to put your point across.

          In other words, you’ve got NO counter argument for WHAT I said, so you are forced to reduce yourself into pathetic attempt to label my response as amateurish.
          The fact is you have no substantial ammunition to counter WHAT I said, which further proves yet another immaterial to the subject comment here:

          Also a comment of this size makes you appear angry, intolerant and ignorant.

          So, this is your deductive logic at work here: you’ve got NO argument against anything I said, therefore you must claim that the SIZE of someone’s comment is proof that someone is angry, intolerant and ignorant.
          Because a comment of this SIZE would not make a person angry, intolerant or ignorant: Fuck you, you fucking imbecile.
          That, according to your logic, would be a sign of a peaceful, tolerant and very educated person.

          The fact is you HAD to, somehow, somewhere, sneak in the typical response your ilk has mastered to a t: angry, intolerant and ignorant.
          The hilarious thing is that you’re the one that’s ignorant, which you show with your severe lack of knowledge as to what is going on. Intolerant? Yes, you are. Intolerant against those, who simply wish to survive. Angry? More frustrated due to the fact you can’t hang in a debate, so you must reduce it to: you’re ignorant and intolerant (when you really wanted to say other typical adjectives).

          Boy, just how angry, intolerant and ignorant must be every writer who writes a sentence more than your small brain can process. Good thing for you, there’s Facebook with limited to 500 words, and short stories for good night.

          In other words, when you can’t tackle the context, go for the length of it as as proof that the writer is angry, intolerant and ignorant. And tap yourself on a back, saying what a great intellectual and a master of a debate you are.

          I would appreciate it if you didn’t wrap everyone up in the same little pigeon hole and chuck BS at us.

          Well now, that just crashed everything I said. I’ve got no counter argument against that one. You win. Special Olympics, that is.

        • Sigh. I noticed I had spelled “you’re” wrong the moment I pressed Post Comment. In reply to N I have read a few bits of your latest reply and can’t think of anything to say other than: you’re right, I agree with everything you say, I have never read a more insightful comment on a burned out topic. I bow to your wisdom and beg your apology. I retract everything I have thus far said.

          I was going to suggest that instead of having a WP user name and posting endless junk on other blogs, that you grew a pair and set up a blog of your own and state your case there. I would take you more seriously if you set out your ideas and opinions in a good format. That isn’t meant as a dig or jibe or anything, just that it would make sense to do it that way than a squashed up comment like many of these look like.

          That, N, is my last word on the subject. I won’t be posting any further comments on this topic. I’ve said my piece and for me that’s the end of my input because your comments are worthless.

  4. S.Legree says:

    Goosestep? No, just patriotic to my own country & it`s ways; if we`d had lost the war, YOU & your foreign chums would not exist.

    • MRDA says:

      Your references to “gallows” reek of a Final Solution.

      And “what-ifs” amount to mental masturbation.

      • noobcake says:

        Well said! I thought as a nation we had evolved beyond archaic stuff like gallows. What-ifs are fun but are purely for amusement, they don’t add anything constructive to any debate and smack of immaturity & a ignorance.

      • S.Legree says:

        You and your bland deliberate ignorance of the immigration problem reek of mental instability, `mrda`. We, the indigenous population hhave had more than enough of cretinous platitudes like yours, & when the rounding-up, internment, deporting & public executions start, courtesy of the Military Junta that will save this country, you & filthy traitors like you wlll be the first to taste our revenge-: publicly.

        • MRDA says:

          At least be honest and admit that it’s you and your Nazi-wannabe/racial nationalist chums, and not “the indigenous population” as a whole, that has a problem with immigrants (and immigrant-descendants like myself).

          Or maybe you and your “military junta” (LOL!) could (p)re-enact the “Day of the Rope” and self-asphyxiate.

          Your choice, hakenkrauzer.

        • noobcake says:

          Oh dear oh dear. I understand that there are those who fear change, who have a gut reaction to anything new or what they perceive as a threat to their way of life, but seriously dude, Military Junta? Are you even living in the real world?

          I have strong feeling about how other countries strive to keep their identity so why shouldn’t we? But you need to remember that every single country in the world is populated by immigrants, and has been since mankind left Africa.

          Your vision seems warped to the point of mental issues. Public Executions? Internment? I have a theory about you S.Legree, you are either insanely stupid or you’re just saying all this for fun, to see how others react to an extreme opinion. It is only a minority that think the way you do, and I am grateful for that.

          • S.Legree says:

            It wo`n`t be fun for any of you; seen the inner city ghettos, where even the police won`t go? The rioting, drugs, & general stink?
            We, the honest & courageous enough to face iot , are going to do something about it, the armed forces are in agreement with us. So , sub-human low-life, emigrate NOW why you have this ONE chance.

            • MRDA says:

              “So , sub-human low-life, emigrate NOW why you have this ONE chance.”

              You need to stop wanking to the Turner Diaries; the pages must be as crusty-as-fuck, by now!

  5. noobcake says:

    I think that proves my point of you being blind to the world around you. “where even the police won’t go?” You really have no idea do you? This smacks of typical white trash middle England holier-than-thou gibberish. The armed forces are in agreement with who? I have never heard or read or seen any member of the armed forces agree with the rubbish you have to say.

    I find it hilarious that you call me or MRDA sub-human and low-life because that implies we are less than you, strange that you are the one raging against your keyboard, with bad spelling and grammar that points to a poor education. Your views are warped and incredibly one sided, thus proving you do not have the ability to listen to a well reasoned argument.

    In point of fact I am not an immigrant, not that it matters, but you seem hell bent on screaming your hate at anyone and everyone. You have my pity.

    • S.Legree says:

      You will get a rope around your neck, like `lord haw-haw` & his ilk.
      Hate of moral criminals & their syncopants is understandable to those of us with morals higher than pack animals.
      Screaming hate? What were those poppy-burning wogs doing. screaming `British soldiers burn in hell`? They don`t shout that when picking up their giro checks, do they? Grow up `noobcake` , or get out with the other world`s cast-offs.

      • noobcake says:

        Gosh. You really are a very angry person aren’t you? I think the word you were looking for was “sycophants” but then I expected any further reply from you to have at least one error. I didn’t agree with those who burned poppies, I thought it was disgusting behaviour and an insult to those who have died under orders from our leaders.

        However, as MRDA pointed out, our laws do not forbid this, and at the end of the argument it was just “feelings” that were hurt, nothing more. And any sensible person would agree you can’t police the hurting of someone’s feelings. The problem you have is that you think violence and extreme action is how to solve a problem, which puts you on the same level as any terrorist. In this country the democratic ethos is that we, the public, have the power to elicit change through making our vote count.

        I wrote a blog post about Poppy Burning Scum a while back:

        http://noobcake.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/poppy-burning-scum

        I still feel passionately about immigrants coming to this country, or any other country for that matter, and taking without giving. But I now realise that some of my argument was based on a gut reaction and not on reasonable thought.

        I have a good set of morals. I was brought up to show respect where it is due, to protect those who need it, to speak my mind carefully and clearly and never use anger to rule my argument. I am well read, intelligent and able to discuss a broad range of topics, but I will also listen to other points of view and admit where I am wrong and open to persuasion where another point is valid.

        Telling me to grow up and placing my user name in speech marks isn’t much evidence of intelligent reasoning and like I said before it smacks of stupidity, lack of understanding of how the real world works and general ignorance.

        I would like to point out that I’m really enjoying you rage on and on about this issue. You make me smile!

      • MRDA says:

        “Hate of moral criminals & their syncopants is understandable to those of us with morals higher than pack animals.”

        “Moral criminals”? LOL!

        Quit projecting, Legree: you’re the perfect example of a herd animal!

  6. Gay Green says:

    Wow. You’ve got some disturbing pictures buddy. Very well research article. I salute you!

    The most disturbing pic is the girl and donald duck pic.

  7. N. says:

    “Incitement to racial hatred” is another slab of PC horseshit, as distasteful as I find racial hatred. Folk can hate my race as much as they want, as long as they keep their fists to themselves.

    LMAO. You’ve got jokes, MRDA. Double standard, hypocritical jokes. PC horseshit you say? Geez, lately you’ve been full of PC horseshit, to the point I’m starting to think you must be some kinda president of some kinda uber liberal kosher non profit activist organisation.

    See, here’s the problem. If whites said others can hate our race as much as they want (and boy do they, but that doesn’t stop them from flocking into our lands, is it?), as long as they keep their fists to themselves, that would be – you’ve guessed it – racist (and the white guilt brigade just creamed their panties). Then the kosher mafia would ensue with typical: are you insinuating that non whites are more violent, especially to whites? Cos if you are, you’re racist.

    See, whites cannot (so much for supremacy and world domination, when we can’t even say shit about our own survival in our own lands) say what you just said. If I said I don’t care if, for example, blacks hate me and my race as long as they stay away from me (Europe), what do you think would happen? What was your reply when I said this?

    Your references to “gallows” reek of a Final Solution.

    And “what-ifs” amount to mental masturbation.

    Oy vey! Final solution. Holocaust! Naziwhitesupremacistwhogassed6millionjews! Reparations now. We must never forget.

    How did I do? Did I forget something? I think I covered the basics.

    At least be honest and admit that it’s you and your Nazi-wannabe/racial nationalist chums, and not “the indigenous population” as a whole, that has a problem with immigrants (and immigrant-descendants like myself).

    Or maybe you and your “military junta” (LOL!) could (p)re-enact the “Day of the Rope” and self-asphyxiate.

    Your choice, hakenkrauzer.

    Wow. You’re not even hiding it anymore. Nazi, nationalist, racial…
    Your vocabulary shrinked worse than those skulls of po’ Jews.
    Empirical fact: every time a liberal kosher is left without an argument, he will call you a Nazi/racist/white supremacist.

    Very curious case of putting indigenous population in quotation marks when addressing British people of Great Britain. Wow. I get it. It’s not politically correct to address Europeans as indigenous population of Europe, as that would imply we actually OWN Europe and thus should defend it from non Europeans, which would not result in a kosher plan of a white genocide.
    However, in a pure egalitarian move, it’s a must to talk about indigenous population, no quotation marks, of course, of, say Africa, India etc.

    No. It’s not just a few Naziracistswhogassed6millionjews that have a problem with immigrants. The numbers, in every European country, are extremely high. The problem is that whites still don’t feel brave enough, due to white guilt and kosher dictatorship (really, you can call this poster any name you want and nothing will happen to you, because you’re black – whereas whites are persecuted and tried for every damn thing that kosher mafia deems wassist). We’ve been brainwashed with propaganda for decades. The turn cannot happen over night. It is happening tho.
    You’re either lying or are that naive to think that the vast majority of Europeans are absolutely sick with immigrants.

    Hekenkrauzer? Wow. If a British person wants Britain to be for British people he must be a Nazi. Damn this kosher propaganda. I dare anyone to call ME, of all the people, a Nazi.

    Mrda, talking about rope? Did you know that a rope anywhere in USA leads to a massive FBI hunt, ADL, Jesse Jackson, et al news conference about racism, and the rest of the white guilt inducing drugs? Followed by complete silence once a camera shows Jamal putting it there?
    Yet, here you are, talking about rope to a British person, and you get away with it. This is why you love living in Europe so much, isn’t it? The environment and shit.

    You need to stop wanking to the Turner Diaries; the pages must be as crusty-as-fuck, by now!

    OK. That’s it! Write to Abe Foxman to send you an updated manual as to which books you should throw at evil Naziracistswhogassed6millionjews.
    There’s gotta be some other book. Be a little bit creative!

    I don’t know which book I should thrown at you, tho. There’s too damn many to pick. Along with “news” articles.
    Protocols? Communist manifesto? Talmud? ADL.com? Open Society? Paideia? Aipac?
    Mossad?!

    • MRDA says:

      LMAO! You’ve brought so many fucking strawmen to my lawn, I’m wondering if it’s worth my time and effort to peek out the window to watch them burn.

      “LMAO. You’ve got jokes, MRDA. Double standard, hypocritical jokes. PC horseshit you say? Geez, lately you’ve been full of PC horseshit, to the point I’m starting to think you must be some kinda president of some kinda uber liberal kosher non profit activist organisation.”

      Why does my not agreeing with your racial nationalism automatically lump me in with fuckers like Foxman? One doesn’t need to buy into PC Marxoid bullshit to disagree with your views.

      “See, here’s the problem. If whites said others can hate our race as much as they want (and boy do they, but that doesn’t stop them from flocking into our lands, is it?), as long as they keep their fists to themselves, that would be – you’ve guessed it – racist (and the white guilt brigade just creamed their panties). Then the kosher mafia would ensue with typical: are you insinuating that non whites are more violent, especially to whites? Cos if you are, you’re racist. “

      Maybe they would come out with that. I’m not them, however.

      “Empirical fact: every time a liberal kosher is left without an argument, he will call you a Nazi/racist/white supremacist. “

      Empirical fact: when people comment on this blog with threats to ethnically cleanse those they view as “sub-human low-life” and “wogs”, then I’ll mark them with the appropriate designators.

      “Very curious case of putting indigenous population in quotation marks when addressing British people of Great Britain. Wow. I get it. It’s not politically correct to address Europeans as indigenous population of Europe, as that would imply we actually OWN Europe and thus should defend it from non Europeans, which would not result in a kosher plan of a white genocide.”

      Um…I think you’ll find I was quoting Legree’s own usage of the term.

      “Mrda, talking about rope? Did you know that a rope anywhere in USA leads to a massive FBI hunt, ADL, Jesse Jackson, et al news conference about racism, and the rest of the white guilt inducing drugs? Followed by complete silence once a camera shows Jamal putting it there?
      Yet, here you are, talking about rope to a British person, and you get away with it. This is why you love living in Europe so much, isn’t it? The environment and shit. “

      LOL! Wut?

      Ok, read Legree’s comments and then re-read my response; things’ll be a lot clearer.

      “There’s gotta be some other book. Be a little bit creative!”

      Well, tell that to Mr “Military Junta” (LOL!); he seems to have cribbed all his material from that-there book

      • N. says:

        Yes, MRDA, I am well aware you find what I say strawmen.

        Why does my not agreeing with your racial nationalism automatically lump me in with fuckers like Foxman? One doesn’t need to buy into PC Marxoid bullshit to disagree with your views.

        It’s not that you’re not agreeing with me (this is not a contest to me, as to who will win a debate – it’s about winning something entirely else!). Logically, you cannot agree with me. I get that.
        It’s the fact that you’re agreeing WITH Foxman et al. You are repeating what they’ve been saying. You are saying that Europeans must welcome non Europeans. Are you not? And I am against it. And we know how people like me get labeled by Foxman et al: Nazi, racists, supremacist. Who read Turner Diaries, can’t forget that one (damn, gotta get on board and finally read this one).
        You’re not a black man living in London. Period.
        You’re a black man (for the sake of the argument, even tho sometimes I am tempted to Q-tip swab you), living in London, who is against European autonomy, against Europeans having the right to Europe, against Europeans having the right to close the doors on non Europeans. You are in fact advocating (nay, she saying we MUST) what Barbara Spectre et al are: multiculturalism within (only) Europe as an euphemism for genocide of European people. THAT’S why I lump you with those fuckers.

        Whether one needs to buy into PC Marxoid BS to disagree with my views is pointless. The fact that one, via his own words, does buy into it, is what is important. Forcing multiculturalism (seriously, what kinda word is this? Europe has more cultures than any other place on this planet – every nation in Europe has its own rich culture, tradition, language etc. We already HAVE all the multi cultures here. But, multiculturalism is just another euphemism of: replacing the European race. We already talked about this: if I go to Denmark, I wanna see Danish people, I wanna hear Danish language, I wanna eat Danish food – not some Arab screaming Allah Akhbar. If I wanted to see Arab culture, I’d go to fucking SA – and I don’t wanna go!) and diversity (heh, yet another euphemism. No other race is as diverse in its appearance and culture as the white race!) onto (only!) Europeans is what Foxman et al are doing, and you are doing it, too. You claim that some po’ Arab woman has the right to migrate to Europe. You claim that gays from Africa have the right to move to Europe (another Foxman’s student said that if I don’t allow gay refugees from Africa into Europe, I am the one condemning them to death!). I do NOT. You go point to point with Foxman et al, I go point to point against. But then again, I am European, Foxman is not. You live in Europe, so it’s logical to expect you do not wish to leave Europe. But that’s not what you’re saying. You’re saying that Europeans must lay down and welcome hords of non Europeans, which WILL result in genocide of a European race. THAT is what Foxman et al WANT.

        You’re not (just) a black man living in Europe. If that were the case, I wouldn’t have necessarily agree with it, BUT at the end of the day I’d say the man is productive, respects Europe and Europeans and does NOT work against our survival, he only wants a better life for himself, and I can and do understand that. I wouldn’t have claimed you need to be killed or anything like this (I am not claiming you need to be killed!!! or anything like this!!!), but if you’re riding the same line as those, who are working on destruction of Europe, then you have no right to live as one of the many enemies within Europe.

        As for Europeans who ride the ADL/kosher/Rothschild/Soros/Spectre/Foxman (damn, so many enemies!), line, for traitors, there’s always been only one punishment.

        • MRDA says:

          When you’ve finished burning the Zionist strawman version of me you’ve constructed , me and reality’ll be right over here.

          At this stage, you’re sounding like the mirror image of the Christians and Lefties you hate so much (“Don’t agree with me? You MUST be in league with Satan/ the Right”); or, in Dubya parlance, you seem to be operating on the mantra: “Either you are with us, or you are are with the terrorists”.

  8. N. says:

    @Star of David:

    I was going to suggest that instead of having a WP user name and posting endless junk on other blogs, that you grew a pair and set up a blog of your own and state your case there. I would take you more seriously if you set out your ideas and opinions in a good format.

    I don’t make a debate lively enough, I quote and then reply and now not having (how do you know I don’t have a blog?! You don’t, but when has not knowing stopped you from fronting as if you’re an expert?) a blog is proof as to why I’m not taken seriously by your debating highness. Geez, you never run out of excuses as to why you won’t tackle the SUBJECT of a debate, do you? Too hot? Not enough rain? Didn’t eat enough pizza? Any excuse will do in your life.

    My comments are worthless? That’s one of the best counter arguments I’ve gotten. Just kidding. It’s typical.

    But maybe I’m the one who did not understand what this thread is about. Based on your superior intellectual commentary, I think it may have been about how to debate: make a debate lively (Star of David determines what constitutes as lively), do not quote the opposite site and then reply, and have a blog when you state your point if you wanna be taken seriously (cos that’s an imperative of one’s life – to be taken seriously by this Star of David) and last but not least – make sure you avoid all points of a topic and claim that opposition’s arguments are all worthless. Voila! You’re a winner of a debate.

    • I lied. I will post more comments here only because what I say seems to infuriate you so much it has actually become enjoyable for me to watch you argue with such passion. My suggestion for you to use a blog of your own was based on the fact that when someone hovers over your name or Gravatar there are no links or information, as such I deduce that you either choose not to show your blog or you do not have one.

      It seems to me that you cannot help but lower yourself to childish attacks against anyone who replies to you:

      “Too hot? Not enough rain? Didn’t eat enough pizza? Any excuse will do in your life.”

      “Because a comment of this SIZE would not make a person angry, intolerant or ignorant: Fuck you, you fucking imbecile.”

      “Boy, just how angry, intolerant and ignorant must be every writer who writes a sentence more than your small brain can process. Good thing for you, there’s Facebook with limited to 500 words, and short stories for good night.”

      “Well now, that just crashed everything I said. I’ve got no counter argument against that one. You win. Special Olympics, that is.”

      Why do you feel it is necessary to speak in this manner? And to presume you know me from a few comments is ridiculous, I know we all make judgements, it’s in our nature, but you have gone to extreme lengths to write about your own judgements, misplaced as they are.

      I was debating this before you made any comment, so I find it strange that you say I can’t sum up a decent reply to someone else. I’m not a stupid person, nor am I prone to using emotion to support or aid my arguments. I find it amusing that refer to me being a winner of the Special Olympics, to which many people would take serious offence at. Since we don’t know each other do you really think we can reasonably comment on our ability to reason, deduct, argue, from opinions or think logically?

      Unless of course you are the sort of person who enjoys endless debate about who is right and who is wrong.

      I never claimed to be so knowledgeable about this topic, I was just giving my point of view, to which I am entitled, and then to be attacked by you over those views is not only rude but pointless. I’m very interested to read your reply and whether you can be civil or not.

  9. N. says:

    I lied. I will post more comments here only because what I say seems to infuriate you so much it has actually become enjoyable for me to watch you argue with such passion.

    Oh I know you lied. I knew you’d be back for more, as you’re one of those people who cannot even stick to such simple promises as not to reply to someone who doesn’t even have a blog him/herself. Your will is pretty weak.
    While you are correct that I do argue the existence of me and other Europeans with passion, your prognosis of me being infuriated while responding to your immaterial diatrabes are completely off the target. But then again, by now, I am sure you’re used to being wrong about such rather simple things as deciphering basic emotions as a response. Boy, it would be something to see you completely miss the target when faced with cynicism!

    It seems to me that you cannot help but lower yourself to childish attacks against anyone who replies to you:

    You never gave yourself a chance to present yourself as that of an adult mentality.

    Why do you feel it is necessary to speak in this manner? And to presume you know me from a few comments is ridiculous, I know we all make judgements, it’s in our nature, but you have gone to extreme lengths to write about your own judgements, misplaced as they are.

    Oh, so now you’re gonna cry about how I address you, that after throwing judgmental commentary about me, since you couldn’t tackle the context of my comments? Do you suffer from severe cognitive disability, especially in regards to short term memory as to what YOU wrote not too long ago, or are you just disgustingly hypocritical in your “do as I say not as I do”?

    I see you’ve decided to go my route of forming responses. What was that again, that it makes me more or less dumb and not a good debater as I don’t know the rules of a debate as per your debating expertise?
    Eh, just one more of your hypocritical moments.

    I was debating this before you made any comment, so I find it strange that you say I can’t sum up a decent reply to someone else.

    Oh, you want a cookie now, since you claim you were debating this BEFORE I made a comment?
    The fact is, MRDA and I have been debating this very topic in other threads on his blog. But then again, it’s not like you’d inform yourself of the facts before spouting claims of something you know nothing about.
    And just because you made a comment previously, it does not mean you can (and obviously you can’t) sum up a decent reply to someone, anyone else. I’ll give you that, tho: your value of what constitutes of a decent reply naturally greatly differs from what I consider decent reply.

    I’m not a stupid person, nor am I prone to using emotion to support or aid my arguments.

    I’ll skip the stupid person part. Using emotions when making arguments is not a sign of a weak argument, especially when the topic of a debate is a serious matter. In fact, one would have to be a robot to lack any emotions when being involved in a topic so serious as this, or completely personally unaffected.
    Someone, who is not able to present arguments in a shape of facts, will most likely either accuse or bring up emotions of the opposition anyway. The simple fact is, had you had any arguments about WHAT I presented, you wouldn’t drag in the form and size of my replies, nor whether or not I have a blog and numerous other totally irrelevant and immaterial garbage, which had nothing to do with the TOPIC. And then had the audacity to claim your debating skills superior. Comedy. Actually, it’s rather tragicomedy.

    I find it amusing that refer to me being a winner of the Special Olympics, to which many people would take serious offence at.

    Your political correctness and an attempt to quasi-moralise with how many people would take offense to my Special Olympics reference leave me totally unmoved. Or if you wish: I don’t give a fuck about it.
    The fact that you found it amusing, makes me glad. I know there must not be many amusing things in your life. *smiles*

    Since we don’t know each other do you really think we can reasonably comment on our ability to reason, deduct, argue, from opinions or think logically?

    Not knowing someone’s name is not a logical reason to not being able to deduct this someone has weak ability to reason, deduct, argue. All is needed is to read a few of your responses.
    I don’t know your name, but I do know you’re not able to respond with facts in a logical manner to “no, diversity is NOT great” explanation. And no, form and size with which I explained why not is not a sign of deductive, logical, reasoning, rational argument.

    As you can see, the initial topic has been derailed into completely unrelated venue. I wouldn’t put it past you that this was not your plan.

    Unless of course you are the sort of person who enjoys endless debate about who is right and who is wrong.

    I am known for that, yes. But not when it comes to THIS topic. This topic is not a matter of who is right or wrong. It’s a matter of survival.
    You, on the other hand, are of course the type of a person who, while professing and fancying himself as a master debater, enjoys derailing the topics of debates into most mundane, irrelevant spheres, as you cannot constructionally or factually participate within the context of a debate.

    I never claimed to be so knowledgeable about this topic, I was just giving my point of view, to which I am entitled, and then to be attacked by you over those views is not only rude but pointless. I’m very interested to read your reply and whether you can be civil or not.

    You didn’t have to claim you were knowledgeable about this topic; that was obvious from the get go. The problem arose when you went on a rant about ANYTHING but the topic, and claimed to be smart on the top of it all. Surely, if you’d be interested in learning about the topic at hand (or what used to be the topic, before you derailed it into reply size and form and lack or someone’s own blog), you’d ask.

    You are entitled to your point of you, as I am to mine, and if I mention Special Olympics, that is MY point of view to which I am entitled, whether you or your imaginary group of people find insulting or not. And here we come to another hypocritical, double standard of you, precious “diversity is great” liberals. Free speech and the right to an opinion is a basic human right until that human happens to be European, who does not ride the liberal wave of self destruction. When that happens, you peaceful liberals will not hesitate to go on a riot against those, who wanted to speak freely about living free.

    I think we’d both agree there’s one of us here who proved who is pointless.

    Now you’re very interested to read my reply, whereas a few days ago you proclaimed how you’re done as my comments are worthless. You’re such a man of word, aren’t you?

    You really think I give a damn if you’d deem my comments civil or not?

    • Uh-huh, I hear ya pal, it’s a crazy world out there and everyone is screaming to be heard, including those who burn poppies and spit at our armed forces. It seems the whole planet is just circling the drain, waiting for a spark that will ignite another happy world war. Let’s face it the human race is screwed, big time, we argue, fight and seldom agree on anything.

      I’m just glad I can I climb into bed at night with my teddy bear and my plastic date and be thankful everything I see on my pathetic little screen vanishes the second I turn it off. Ignorance is bliss, right Mr N?

      See ya round dickhead.

      • N. says:

        I feel sorry for your plastic, albeit blissful, date.

        Dickehad? An intellectual punch line from a faithful MTV viewer. Sorry I can’t return the favor, as you’re dickless.

  10. N. says:

    When you’ve finished burning the Zionist strawman version of me you’ve constructed , me and reality’ll be right over here.

    So, are you saying you’re not riding the zionist line of how Europe MUST learn to become multicultural (and boy, have we heard this word a lot in these past days, haven’t we?), and how Europe MUST be even more welcoming to non Europeans, whether this is wrapped in a paper of poor Arab women, trying to escape vicious Arab men, so they can freely walk covered in Europe, or poor gays from Africa, where they are persecuted by evil non – progressive (that’s liberal for all you “we are the world” audience) Africans?

    MRDA, your reality and my reality are completely different. And I am not talking about philosophical point of few, as we’re not debating for the sake of debating. The topic is very much serious.

    At this stage, you’re sounding like the mirror image of the Christians and Lefties you hate so much (“Don’t agree with me? You MUST be in league with Satan/ the Right”); or, in Dubya parlance, you seem to be operating on the mantra: “Either you are with us, or you are are with the terrorists”.

    If you had to throw at me one of those typical watered down adjectives, I’d prefer Turner Diaries.
    Christians (Christianity, another in a long line of non European imports to Europe; the damage of this import is obvious) sound more like you, MRDA. Preaching about inclusion, welcoming Somalians into Minnesota (and now Seattle). Preaching about standing with Israel (you may claim you never said you stand with Israel, but boy, you sure do throw every Israeli made adjective at me, or rather – what I say). Christians and lefties are seemingly opposites, yet controlled by the same master: both preach about opening the doors of Europe. Are you sure YOU don’t sound more like them than I could?

    Again, this is not about agreeing with me. This is not a debate whether 80s were musically better or worse than 90s.
    This is about whether Europe will be flooded with non Europeans or not and thus whether Europe will survive or not. Not whether I am right or not, even though, when speaking of European survival, those who want to preserve European survival are the ones who are right, but not in a way of: yes, I won the debate.

    So, in that respect, yes, mantra of whether you are for survival of Europe or you’re against, applies. Just unfortunately not in such a cynically lousy attempt as you wanted to make it.

    Dubya? Really, MRDA? Can I take those Turner Diaries instead?
    Weak of you to drag in someone who did a magnificent job for Khazars. Someone, who professes open Europe is far more Dubya than the one who is against. You know who plays which role here, MRDA. In other words: if you’re not with us, you’re anevilnaziracistwhogassed6millionjews.
    Right, MRDA?

    I don’t think you ever gave your opinion on China welcoming those gays. No, I’m not saying China should or must.

    • MRDA says:

      “I don’t think you ever gave your opinion on China welcoming those gays. No, I’m not saying China should or must.”

      Ain’t got a problem with China doing so. Anywhere where there’s not a lynch mob against them, even if that happens to be the country-next-door. I’m not riding any sort of ‘Western Exceptionalism’ train with my views.

      Also, more generally, I see a difference between immigration per se, and the type of state-incentivized mass immigration being promoted today. I’m pro- the first and sceptical of the latter.

      • N. says:

        I was being cynical re: China. You could substitute for any non-White country. We don’t hear how China, India (not to mention Israel) hasn’t learned to be multi-cultural yet, and will have to – nay – must – accept multi-culturalism.

        I don’t fall for for this immigration populist talk, how people have been immigrating for ever. Just because there’s EU, Slovaks, for example, haven’t migrated to France in droves. European nations are not fond of mass immigration, they prefer their own countries.
        But we’re not talking about THIS kind of immigration here. We’re talking about racial replacement (instead of euphemism, let’s call it what it is: genocide) of European race. That’s why I cynically said how we don’t hear about mass migration of other races into non- White countries.

        China won’t stand for that shit. They watch and learn from USA and Europe. Same for Japan.

        PS: I hear Barbara Spectre’s vibrator (circumcised and kosher, of course) died off in the light of the multi-culti festivities going on in your neck of the woods these days. Boy, Londonistan really knows how to party! Paris, too. Norway, too.

  11. N. says:

    My observation here is that both you and I had our preconceived life philosophies shattered due to reality and facts landing heavy on them. What was on paper could not sustain the weight of reality. Just that I shook it off pretty fast upon hitting the wall head-on, and do not take it as a loss to an ego.
    That, and the fact that you really cannot concede that which is written on paper working against you as the tribe is working against me.

    You know what I say is true, and I know you’re not giving me a nod because of who’s right or who’s wrong. You know this is not that kinda game.

  12. Pingback: Bitch-Hunt! West vs the Rest. « MRDA's Inferno

  13. Pingback: Bitch-Hunt! West vs the Rest. | alternativeanarchy

  14. Pingback: Opposing Circumcision: A Shoah Thing? « MRDA's Inferno

  15. Pingback: Opposing Circumcision: A Shoah Thing? « Attack the System

  16. Pingback: Halal & Hypocrisy VII: He Who Fights Muslims… | MRDA's Inferno

  17. Pingback: Halal & Hypocrisy XI: The Veil of Special Pleading | MRDA's Inferno

  18. Pingback: Cower Behind the Kids!! Arrested Development as Activism | MRDA's Inferno

  19. Pingback: Halal & Hypocrisy XII: Vive la Dissonance! | MRDA's Inferno

  20. Pingback: Halal & Hypocrisy XII: Vive la Dissonance! « Attack the System

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s