Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 24th, 2012 #21
elbwgreez
Senior Member
 
elbwgreez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,506
elbwgreez
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
No, it's not a mass hallucination--Basically it means that, as a society, we attach a lot of meaning to race. For example, some might take a black person's physical appearance to mean that they will inherently act a certain way or like certain things, whenever there's nothing that physiologically mandates that.
Is every person born innately equal in every way? I'll answer that - no. Your ideology is based off that totally false premise. Geographic/temporal separation created distinct human populations over that differ in form and especially mental abilities. Blacks are born stupid, relative to Whites and Asians. That's a general statement, not an absolute. However, I am quite disgusted by White females anthropomorphizing blacks so often. You make yourselves fools in our eyes. It's disheartening.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #22
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

Groups have traits, just like individuals.

Did you know that one in three black males goes to prison?

We look at crime rates per 100,000 population, and so on.

Rates of psychopathy, such a jew white collar crime.

And we look at rates of achievement. Virtually all major achievement is White.

(See Charles Murray's book Human Accomplishment.)

The black violent crime rate is 7 to 8 times the White rate- according to Federal sources (Department of Justice, FBI, etc.)

The group traits- on a probabilistic basis- of jews and negroes are so hellaciously bad that we want full and permanent separation.

The Color of Crime pdf: http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #23
Sam Fisher
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near the kike hive
Posts: 1,078
Default

Niggers, whom you liberal twats adoringly call African-Americans, are the second cause of all the negative and bad things about this world. Second only to the jews themselves:

Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, African-Americans are 10.8 percent of the population, but are responsible for 66.3 percent of homicide, 40 percent of rape, 62 percent of robbery, 45 percent of aggravated assault, and 26 percent of burglary.

Note: In Pennsylvania, Hispanics are 5.7 percent of the population, but are responsible for 13 percent of homicide, 20 percent of rape, 9 percent of robbery, 9 percent of aggravated assault, and 7 percent of burglary.

Florida

In Florida, African-Americans are 16 percent of the population, but are responsible for 54 percent of homicide, 39 percent of rape, 56 percent of robbery, 43 percent of aggravated assault, and 38 percent of burglary

Arkansas

In Arkansas, African-Americans are 15.4 percent of the population, but are responsible for 59 percent of homicide, 24 percent of rape, 62 percent of robbery, 42 percent of aggravated assault, and 32 percent of burglary.

Oklahoma

In Oklahoma, African-Americans are 7.4 percent of the population, but are responsible for 45.3 percent of homicide, 17.7 percent of rape, 51.7 percent of robbery, 25.5 percent of aggravated assault, and 26.6 percent of burglary

Rhode Island

In Rhode Island, African-Americans are 5.7 percent of the population, but are responsible for 67 percent of homicide, 24 percent of rape, 42 percent of robbery, 28 percent of aggravated assault, and 24 percent of burglary.

Texas

In Texas, African-Americans are 11.8 percent of the population, but are responsible for 30 percent of homicide, 24 percent of rape, 43 percent of robbery, 29 percent of aggravated assault, and 28 percent of burglary.

In Texas, Hispanics are 37.6 percent of the population, but are responsible for 42 percent of homicide, 41 percent of rape, 37 percent of robbery, 38 percent of aggravated assault, and 38 percent of burglary.

Note: African-Americans and Hispanics are responsible for 72 percent of homicide, 65 percent of rape, 80 percent of robbery, 67 percent of aggravated assault, and 66 percent of burglary in the Lone State State.

Connecticut

In Connecticut, African-Americans are 10.1 percent of the population, but are responsible for 38 percent of homicide, 33 percent of rape, 51 percent of robbery, 38 percent of aggravated assault, and 22 percent of burglary

Maryland

In Maryland, African-Americans are 29.4 percent of the population, but are responsible for 77 percent of homicide, 49 percent of rape, 77 percent of robbery, 53 percent of aggravated assault, and 48 percent of burglary.

Georgia

In Georgia, “Non-Whites” are 45.1 percent of the population, but are responsible for 77 percent of homicide, 65 percent of rape, 82 percent of robbery, 63 percent of aggravated assault, and 61 percent of burglary.

Wisconsin

In Wisconsin, African-Americans are 6.3 percent of the population, but are responsible for 57 percent of homicide, 32 percent of rape, 73 percent of robbery, 32 percent of aggravated assault, and 31 percent of burglary.

Washington

In Washington, African-Americans are 3.6 percent of the population, but are responsible for 19 percent of homicide, 12 percent of rape, 31 percent of robbery, 19 percent of aggravated assault, and 16 percent of burglary.

Oregon

In Oregon, African-Americans are 1.8 percent of the population, but are responsible for 15 percent of murder, 10 percent of rape, 18 percent of robbery, 10 percent of aggravated assault, and 6 percent of burglary.

California
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...olor-of-crime/

New Jersey

In New Jersey, African-Americans are 13.7 percent of the population, but are responsible for 68 percent of homicide, 46 percent of rape, 63 percent of robbery, 45 percent of aggravated assault, and 35 percent of burglary.

In New Jersey, Hispanics are 17.7 percent of the population, but are responsible for 20 percent or homicide, 30 percent of rape, 20 percent of robbery, 25 percent of aggravated assault, 18 percent of burglary.

Combined, African-Americans and Hispanics in New Jersey are responsible for 88 percent of homicide, 76 percent of rape, 83 percent of robbery, 70 percent of aggravated assault, and 53 percent of burglary.

Michigan

In Michigan, African-Americans are 14.2 percent of the population, but are responsible for 63 percent of homicide, 30 percent of rape, 70 percent of robbery, 50 percent of aggravated assault, and 31 percent of burglary.

Kentucky


In Kentucky, African-Americans are 7.8 percent of the population and 13.3 percent of poor people, but are responsible for 27 percent of homicide, 13 percent of rape, 44 percent of robbery, 28 percent of aggravated assault, and 19.3 percent of burglary.

Missouri

In Missouri, African-Americans are 11.6 percent of the population and 20.4 percent of the poor, but are responsible for 60.7 percent of homicide, 43.7 percent of rape, 70.9 percent of robbery, 41.8 percent of aggravated assault, and 41.6 percent of burglary.

Iowa
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...olor-of-crime/

Virginia
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/color-of-crime/

Alabama
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...migration-law/

Tennessee
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...olor-of-crime/

North Carolina
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...olor-of-crime/

South Carolina
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/201...bery-homicide/


http://www.occidentaldissent.com/color-of-crime/
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #24
DiCarlo
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Right of Stormfront
Posts: 988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
I'm posting here in hopes of gainng some insight into what, exactly, contemporary white supremacists believe.

I'm a left-leaning white female who believes--quite staunchly--that the concept of race is socially constructed, and that skin color alone doesn't signify any inherent differences in mental capacity/crime rate/etc. While I understand that many "white power" people attribute their beliefs to supposedly higher crime rates among minorities, I think that (in cases where it can't be attributed to institutional racism) any disperity between whites/non-whites is largely due to socio-economic factors.

However, I totally understand that many of you probably disagree with me on this. I also understand that many of you are afriad of losing your culture or "muddling" your race.

What I don't understand, however, is how this justifies slavery, lynch mobs, genocide, etc. Do you think that these things were just, or you find fault in them, too? Do you simply believe that races should be separate to protect unique cultures, or do you legitimately belive that whites are "better"?

Please note that I'm trying to be civil here. I don't expect to "convert" anyone, nor do I expect my own views to change. I am simply trying to see the logic behind something that I don't understand. Thanks!

The people of color, the niggers, spics, and illegals, you support and defend are the racists. We are simply reacting and we need to if Whites are to survive. The genocide is aimed at Whites. Whites only make up around 10% of the population of the earth. Your nigger friends are in no danger of slavery, or genocide, so what the hell are talking about?

Call it racism or race realism. Think about it. Hispanics see themselves as a separate group from others, blacks, whites, etc. and advance their own interests and agendas. You have blacks doing the same as do asians. Break it down even further. Chinese look out for chinese interests and see themselves as separate from Japanese interests and so on. Non-white nations are often nationlistic and allow little or no immigration. Could one imagine China allowing mass immigration of whites or blacks to the point that these two groups became sizeable minorities or the majority? No way and neither would Mexico or any other non-white nation. So when you say that whites are “racist” or “race realists”, it really means that whites are behaving like non-whites, looking out for their own distinct group and its’ interests and that’s a GOOD thing.

I think of thousands upon thousands of Latinos marching in support of Latino illegal aliens, or hundreds of thousands of blacks marching on Washinton to project their black solidarity. We all know what would be said about whites if they marched in such a manner. We know what would be said, and these disinformation artists here are saying it.

Liberals like you, led by jews, have infringed on the natural right of Whites, and only Whites, to choose who we associate with.

I believe that people of all races, cultures and ethnic backgrounds should be afforded the same basic human rights to sovereignty, self-determination and freedom of association; the rights to preserve their unique racial and cultural heritages. However, I don't believe that those rights should come at the expense of any one group or groups of people. Unfortunately, diversity has come at the expense of White people in their own nations on every imaginable level. That's why I've taken an active part in the white nationalist community, and that's why I encourage all conscious whites who are concerned about the futures of our people and nations to take on active roles.

Diversity is a weapon of ethnic warfare intended for use solely against Whites. Liberals in America have condoned racism and discrimination against all white citizens in favor of all non-whites (including non-citizens) via affirmation action, forced integration, busing, housing laws, etc. Liberalism is explicitly anti-White and pro-jew. Liberalism is about elevating nonwhites, particularly blacks, over whites, and about turning whites into non-persons. Liberalism is pure racism under the guise of anti-racism. What "anti-racism" really means is simply anti-whiteness.

Since the Civil Rights Act black crimes on white citizens have increased geometrically. But one wouldn't be aware of this fact due to a corrupt jew controlled media. Their purpose: to empower non-Whites while demonizing Whites. Also, the white victims of black on White crime usually do not speak out for fear of being cast a "racist". However, if there is a white rape of a black victim, which is so extremely rare that statisically it averages 0.0, it will be splashed all over the news. One has only to remember the Duke rape case fiasco in which all three of the white accused were absolved of the crime.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #25
Jill
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 13
Jill
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
So you're saying you don't believe that blacks act in predictable ways, historically documented ways? Or that his is not due to their racial qualities but to something else like...what?
Like socio-economic standing. It's not that blacks are inherently more likely to commit crimes, it's that people living in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. And minorities are more likely to experience poverty because the white-dominated society is working against them. Also, blacks are more likely than whites to be prosecuted for the same crimes.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #26
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,556
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
What I don't understand, however, is how this justifies slavery, lynch mobs, genocide, etc.
You're operating at a vague, general level when you don't have the basics in place, and in fact have been brainwashed. You want to learn you, say, but you don't truly understand that...you aren't right on this stuff. We are. We know your arguments backwards and forwards. We came through the same brainwashing you did, and found our way here - by persistent doubting and questioning. Perhaps you are beginning this process, but probably not. When it first becomes real emotional possibility to you that we, not you, know what we are talking about, the odds are that you will flee out of fear, because the truth is actually pretty frightening, given the powers backing the lie. It is too much for the vast majority of women to handle, most certainly. Because the truth is that the truth on these matters is not merely different from what you've been taught, it's precisely the opposite...on very nearly every single point.

You seen matrix? This site is the red pill. Your whole life you've been fed blue pills.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #27
Sam Fisher
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near the kike hive
Posts: 1,078
Default

Quote:
Should race play a role in how the media reports crime?

Ever notice that the media is pushing a political agenda? Certain minor events are reported endless while some major events are ignored. It all depends on the political agenda of the news outlet. It is no secret that the agenda is usually a left-wing one.

This agenda is especially pronounced when it comes to crime. The media does not like to report black crime. Even when an at large suspect posed an immediate danger to the public, the media would rather ignore it.

I’ve written about this issue for years online. I got a big break in 2007. The LA Times issued an official online statement admitting that it was standard practice in the newspaper industry to censor of the race of minority crime perpetrators.

In the past year, a multitude of media bosses have publicly confessed to censoring black crime. Some of them proudly confess, and say that the censorship is for the public’s benefit. Some of them even call critics “racists” for asking for accurate news coverage.

All of these “media elites” place political correctness far above public safety. For the past year, I've been collecting news articles on the subject. Here are my complete findings.

The TV Show COPS

John Langley, creator and producer of the TV show COPS bragged to conservative columnist Ben Shapiro that he censors black crime.

Langley states “What irritates me sometime is critics still watch something and say ‘oh look they misrepresent people of color.’ That’s absolutely not true. Au contraire. I show more white people than statistically what the truth is in terms of street crime. If you look at the prisons it’s 60-something percent people of color, and 30-something percent of white people. If you look at COPS it’s 60 percent white and 40 percent, it’s just the reverse. And I do that intentionally, because I don’t want to contribute to negative stereotypes.”

Langley boldly admits to censoring black crime for political reasons.

Associated Press

Tom Kent, deputy managing editor for standards and production at The Associated Press recently admitted that the AP censors black crime.

Last March Kent said that race is not usually mentioned unless it is a “hate crime.” As you know, the media rarely declares black on white crime to be a “hate crime.” Only the extremely rare white on black crimes are ever considered a “hate crime” in the media.

Kent said that if the police are looking for an at large suspect they may mention race. However, Kent stated “but once a person is captured, it probably would not be germane to the story.”

In other words, unless the perp is white or the police specifically ask for it, the AP censors the race of black crime perpetrators.

New York Times

Philip Corbett, associate managing editor of the New York Times recently confessed to censoring black crime.

Last March, 18 black males aged 16-27 were arrested for allegedly gang raping an 11 year old Mexican girl in Cleveland, Texas. The radical New Black Panther Party actually held a rally at an all black church demanding the release of the perpetrators. Over one hundred local blacks attended the rally.

The New York Times ran an article that critics say blamed the victim and her family. It also expressed shock that members of the public were supported the accused perps.

However the Times completely censored the fact that the perpetrators are black. The newspapers also portrayed those who were supporting the perps as “Texans.”

There was a backlash against the New York Times for their insulting coverage.

The New York Times published a follow-up admitting their first piece “lacked balance.”

Philip Corbett, however, defending censoring the race of the perpetrators. He said that mentioning the race of a crime perpetrator does “not really providing any useful information and it could be sort of boiler plate.”

By “boiler plate,” Corbett means that it would be politically incorrect to inform the public the truth about crime in America. He feels that political correctness is more important than public safety.

Chicago Tribune

Last June Chicago Tribune senior vice president and editor Gerould Kern admitted the newspaper censors black crime in a rather nasty response to his critics.

Kern stated, “we guard against subjecting an entire group of people to suspicion because of the color of their skin."

His admission of guilt came after a series of brutal racially motivated mob attacks against white people in Chicago. The Chicago Tribune censored the race of the perpetrators and concealed the nature of the attacks.

When critics attacked the Tribune for their coverage, Kern proudly boasted of the papers' censorship and personally insulted the white victims. He ranted, “there is no evidence to suggest that the victims were singled out because of their race.”

Following the diatribe by Chicago Tribune Editor Kern, Chicago Tribune opinion page writer Steve Chapman, who calls himself “a minority of one,” stated the same thing and defended the practice.

Chapman, who is on the far left, states “It’s the newspaper’s sound general policy not to mention race in a story, whether about crime or anything else.” Chapman then got very nasty in his diatribe defending censorship. He states that people who advocate accurate reporting of crime stories “fear or dislike blacks.”

Chapman also decided to take a jab at the innocent white victims of black mob violence in Chicago. He claimed the race of the perpetrators was not relevant. Then he said stated “what good would it do to trumpet the skin color of the thugs? So pedestrians on Michigan Avenue can run away when they see two or more African-Americans?”

Obviously Chapman would rather see more innocent white people attacked than report the news accurately.

Washington Post

In August of 2010 the Washington Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander stated that the paper censored race. He said that Weekend News Editor Robert E. Pierre supported the censorship.

The Post came under criticism by readings for censoring black mob violence on the local metro system.

Alexander whined, “The Post should always be sensitive to overplaying stories, especially if race is involved.” Keep in mind that Alexander is talking about a story that the Post was criticized for downplaying, not overplaying.

Pierre attacked critics of the paper’s coverage as “racial insensitive.”

LA Times

The LA Times was the first newspaper I ever noticed openly admitting to racial censorship. This was back in 2007. The paper made an online database of homicides. They offered a sort of apology for including the races of the perpetrators. They stated that it was normally their policy to censor this information.

On June 6, 2007 the LA Times made this official statement. “Racial information was once routinely included in news stories about crimes, but in recent decades, newspapers and other media outlets stopped mentioning suspects’ or victims’ race or ethnicity because of public criticism. Newspapers came to embrace the idea that such information is irrelevant to the reporting of crimes, and may unfairly stigmatize racial groups.”

By “public criticism,” they are referring to bullying by radical racial groups like the NAACP.
http://www.examiner.com/article/shou...-reports-crime
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #28
Sam Fisher
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near the kike hive
Posts: 1,078
Default

Here are some very basic tenets that all WNs of any size, stripe, affiliation, or lineage can agree upon:


WHITE NATIONALIST POSITION STATEMENTS




POSITION STATEMENT ZERO: CONCERNING THE DEFINITION OF "WHITE" AND "WHITE
NATIONALIST"

Proposition zero. A White person is a human being of solely native European
ancestry; or a human being who, if they have non-European antecedents, is
nonetheless of a physical and genetic makeup that is within the range typical of
people of solely European ancestry; or, the child of two Whites.

Proposition one. A White Nationalist is a White person who is, by their actions
and their voluntary public declaration, politically committed to the welfare of
Whites, and to their continuing survival as a distinct and reproductively isolated
group of human beings.




POSITION STATEMENT ONE: CONCERNING WHITE HOMELANDS

Proposition zero. White Homelands are living spaces controlled by White
Nationalists and dedicated to the habitation of White people.

Proposition one. Only White people may reside in a White Homeland.

Proposition two. Attempts to introduce non-whites into White Homelands, as family
members, sex partners, employees, or for any other reason, shall be cause for loss
of civil rights within the Homeland and banishment.

Proposition three. White Homelands shall offer comfort, aid and succour to other
White Homelands, and to White Diasporas.

Proposition four. Notwithstanding proposition three, a White Homeland may
unilaterally refuse the entry of any White or group of Whites without cause being
required to be shown.

Proposition five. White Homelands may be of any size or configuration.

Proposition six. The forms of government within each White Homeland are not to be
specified.

Proposition seven. White Homelands may from time to time fuse together into larger
Homelands, or fission into smaller Homelands. Fusion of Homelands shall only take
place by mutual consent: however, there shall be a unilateral Right of Secession
of any Homeland or part of a Homeland from the larger entity, that shall not
require that larger entity's consent.




POSITION STATEMENT TWO: ON THE CONDITION OF WHITE DIASPORA

Proposition zero. A White Diaspora is a group of White Nationalists living
elsewhere than in a White Homeland, and therefore not in political control of
their living space.

Proposition one. White Diasporas shall stay reproductively separate from non-
whites.

Proposition two. White Diasporas shall stay culturally separate from non-whites.
This shall require the exclusion of cultural memes that oppose White Nationalism.

Proposition three. White Diasporas shall help and protect Whites who live in the
same area as them, and shall attempt to guide these Whites toward an awakening to
White Nationalism.

Proposition four. White Diasporas shall strive to create White Homelands by all
practical means, including the consensual division of shared living spaces into
racial Homelands. Established White Homelands shall aid White Diasporas in this work.

Proposition five. White Diasporas may have economic relationships with non-whites,
and shall not indulge in gratuitous aggression against non-whites.




POSITION STATEMENT THREE: CONCERNING THE COLLECTIVE DUTIES OF WHITE NATIONALISTS.

Proposition zero. White Nationalists shall form an ethnic group that behaves as an
evolutionary unit.

Proposition one. White Nationalists shall enforce reproductive separation between
White Nationalists and others.

Proposition two. White Nationalists may recruit from Whites. White Nationalists
may freely marry Whites who are not White Nationalists, but are obliged to strive
to bring up their children as White Nationalists.

Proposition three. White Nationalists shall collectively beget, bear and rear
children in sufficient numbers to maintain the group's population and increase it
where possible. Those who do not reproduce or cannot find a suitable mate shall
use a reasonable portion of their resources to aid those who have children.

Proposition four. White Nationalists shall live by a rule of mutual altruism. They
shall favour each other economically whenever legally possible, and they shall
deal with each other honestly.

Proposition five. White Nationalists shall strive to avoid or resolve internal
conflicts, and shall work to deescalate conflicts which they are involved in.

Proposition six. White Nationalist organisations and individuals shall charitably
aid poor and needy White Nationalists in their community, and shall extend charity
to Whites if possible.

Proposition seven. White Nationalists in good financial health shall contribute a
substantial fraction of their income to collective projects dedicated to the
welfare of White Nationalism as a whole.




POSITION STATEMENT FOUR: CONCERNING WHITE NATIONALIST STRATEGY TOWARD OTHER RACES.

Proposition zero. White Nationalists intend to coexist peacefully with, and
separately from, other races.

Proposition one. Members of other races shall not be permitted to reside in White
Homelands, even peacefully. Persistent incursions shall be considered an act of
war.

Proposition two. White Nationalists shall not encroach upon the Homelands of other
races.

Proposition three. White Nationalists may trade knowledge and goods with other
races, or may refuse to so trade, as they see fit.

Proposition four. Other races who do not encroach upon White Homelands shall be
treated with justice and courtesy.

Proposition five. White Nationalists shall strive to avoid or resolve conflicts
between Whites and other races, so long as those conflicts are not caused by
incursion upon White Homelands.

Proposition six. All White Nationalists everywhere are obliged to aid in the
expulsion of other races from a White Homeland, even if they do not reside in that
Homeland.




POSITION STATEMENT FIVE: CONCERNING THE STATUS RELATIONSHIP OF MEN AND WOMEN
WITHIN WHITE NATIONALISM

Proposition zero. There is no built in hierarchy of sexes.

Proposition one. Men and women have the same civil rights.

Proposition two. There shall be no legislation to artificially equalise or
otherwise mandate the relative status or the relative numbers of men and women
within any profession or occupation including government, and there shall be
no arbitrary prohibitions laid upon the types of work that either sex may
perform.

Proposition three. Marriage is a contract freely entered into. There shall be no
forced marriage or forced breeding. Breaking the marriage contract (eg by
adultery) shall entail penalties sufficient to compensate the innocent partner.

Proposition four. Heterosexual monogamy shall be the normal form of marriage.

Proposition five. Women shall not be drafted for the military defence of White
Homelands, though they may fight voluntarily.





Copyright JohnJoyTree 2005. Distribute freely.





Permission is granted to modify these statements in any way to produce a new body of work, provided the body of work so created is not named the White Nationalist Position Statements.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #29
DiCarlo
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Right of Stormfront
Posts: 988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Like socio-economic standing. It's not that blacks are inherently more likely to commit crimes, it's that people living in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. And minorities are more likely to experience poverty because the white-dominated society is working against them. Also, blacks are more likely than whites to be prosecuted for the same crimes.
Why haven't poor Whites been historically prone to violent crime? This liberal theory of yours is nuts. It just doesn't hold water. It's a jew authored lie. What's true is that niggers are violent people. Wake up! Cant you see?


www.thugreport.com


We don't call ourselves White Supremacists either, but if we chose to call ourselves that and continued in our non-aggressive ways, or did not seek to subjugate those of other races, what's wrong with understanding and firmly believing that the White race is the best? We simply desire to preserve our own White heritage. Recognizing and understanding that there are intrinsic differences in culture, behavior, tradition, and even genetics among the different races does not make one a supremacist. Of course, most people prefer the association of their own racial or ethnic group, and frankly, most people think of their group as the best.

You are under the false belief that people are all the same. There are genetic distances between different peoples and different peoples therefore have legitimate conflicts of interest. There are deep psychological roots to ethnocentrism that make us attracted to and more trusting of genetically similar others. These biological realities will not simply disappear, no matter how fervently liberal social scientists and other political and cultural elites wish they would.

Last edited by DiCarlo; July 24th, 2012 at 11:55 PM.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #30
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,556
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Like socio-economic standing.
My goodness. What a novel theory. I have never come across it before. You must tell others about it.

Back in the Great Depression whites in America were considerably poorer than your average black is today. Yet they committed crimes at levels far below what blacks commit today. That says your theory is wrong.

Quote:
It's not that blacks are inherently more likely to commit crimes, it's that people living in poverty are more likely to commit crimes.
Impoverished whites don't commit crime at the level blacks do. You won't find any slice of society where blacks aren't committing vastly more crime than whites are, per capita.

Quote:
And minorities are more likely to experience poverty because the white-dominated society is working against them.
Really? How is white society working against them? By spending a trillion dollars on them in the welfare state? By racially discriminating against whites and for blacks via 'affirmative action'? By portraying them as brilliant geniuses on every tv show ever heard of? This when they're only 13% of the population and committing half the violent crime? And 90% of the interracial crime? And pretty much 100% of interracial rape? And if you raise a fist or word against these 'people' it's a hate crime? Are you seriously contending that white society, that just voted for an African president, is working "against" blacks? That is the opposite of the truth.

If white society were working against them, they wouldn't be here. Whites don't get any benefits out of having blacks around, indeed they suffer immensely. Blacks are incapable of forming or sustaining civilization. Have you seen what they've done to Detroit, where they are the 90% majority? It used to be the most beautiful city on the continent, and they destroyed. All by themselves. With endless tax monies and federal help, they couldn't even keep the lights on. Detroit is literally reverted to a natural state.

Quote:
Also, blacks are more likely than whites to be prosecuted for the same crimes.
Really, which ones?
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #31
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Like socio-economic standing. It's not that blacks are inherently more likely to commit crimes, it's that people living in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. And minorities are more likely to experience poverty because the white-dominated society is working against them. Also, blacks are more likely than whites to be prosecuted for the same crimes.
Yet millions of White people in Appalachia live in poverty and they commit far less violent crimes than do blacks.

Why is that?

Quote:
As early as 1971, West Virginia’s crime rate was the lowest in the nation, at 1,401.4 crimes per 100,000 people. Although the national crime rate peaked in 1980 and has since fallen substantially, West Virginia still had the lowest rate in the nation until 1998. That year, the West Virginia crime rate reached 2,547.2 crimes per 100,000 people, second-lowest in the nation. In 2004, the state’s crime rate was seventh-lowest, standing at 2,777.4, compared to the national rate of 3,982.6.

West Virginia’s low crime rate is generally attributed to the rural nature of the state. Thirty-two percent of West Virginians live in a rural jurisdiction, as compared to 10.3 percent of the population nationwide. Other elements, including population density, age demographics, the mobility of the population, the jurisdiction’s infrastructure, economic conditions, cultural factors, and the degree of support for law enforcement also contribute to the absence or presence of crime in a community. Certainly, West Virginia’s high average age and low population density are among the factors contributing to the low crime rate in the state

So much for the poverty-crime argument as applying to White people in WVA.

http://www.datehookup.com/Thread-732560.htm
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #32
Carl Corey
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 240
Carl Corey
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
I'm a left-leaning white female who believes--quite staunchly--that the concept of race is socially constructed, and that skin color alone doesn't signify any inherent differences in mental capacity/crime rate/etc.
Blacks in the USA have 5% smaller brains. This is scientific fact, look this up.

The smaller (and more primitive) brains of Africans in turn are the cause of poverty in Africa.

IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

Two simple truths they won't teach you in school.
 
Old July 24th, 2012 #33
Fred O'Malley
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jewnited Snakes of Amnesia
Posts: 13,622
Default

Jill, it is far more than skin color. There are brain differences, hormonal differences, attitudinal differences, assimilation differences, productive differences, predisposition differences, etc.

Jews are an invading parasitical nation who desire the total destruction of the white race, they hold the reigns of mass media with which they inundate your mind with their thoughts and control the debate. They also use it to manipulate your politicians who need media to get elected. They control your country. Think not? Do a search: Jews in Obama's administration, then Bush, then Clinton, etc. Jews hold every key position in our government. Check it out for yourself.

Jews manipulate blacks to do their bidding, make war on whites. Jews started and ran every black organization; feminism which destroys white families; the homo industry is jewish, and this is only the tip of the iceberg.

We are white, we want to form our own society, where our children and women can be safe and secure. Where we can prosper without government run by kikes stealing our substance and using it against us.

War is in our future and you better decide which side you'll take. We don't want war, but to be free, we must take our freedom from those who've taken it from us. It falls to us because there is no one else.

Please, read the kikes' holiest of books, the Babylonian Talmud, not the cleansed version they put out for goyim consumption.
www.talmudunmasked.com Open the links on the left side of the page and then read this: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Then finally, read this A Jewish Defector Warns America: Benjamin Freedman Speaks

If you don't doubt your own position after seeing these truths, which you inherently know and understand to be true via your race, then you aren't as smart as I hope you are.

Race is all there is, especially when it comes to EVERY other race touting their greatness, but when it comes to whites, our racial identity and accomplishments are deprived by the jews and their mind-bending media. People like you want to know the truth within them is really true, but are afraid to be ostracized and socially destroyed./
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #34
Jill
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 13
Jill
Default

Thank you all for your heartfelt replies!

This has been interesting, and I've certainly learned a lot, although none of you have managed to persuade me even a little bit.

Here's how I see it: The whole "whites are being discriminated against/victimized/etc." argument certainly sounds nice, but, unfortunately, it isn't very accurate. Whites still make up the vast majority of congress, and, obviously, the ratio of black to white presidents doesn't do much to make the white race seem victimized. Whites are in a position of power. In the U.S., we are the majority, and this society is designed to benefit us. Our position of power and privilege means that minorities are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action programs are meant to compensate for this socially-imposed disadvantage--NOT to attack or victimize whites.

You could go and read "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," but I sort of doubt that any of you really care.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #35
DiCarlo
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Right of Stormfront
Posts: 988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post

What I don't understand, however, is how this justifies slavery, lynch mobs, genocide, etc. Do you think that these things were just, or you find fault in them, too? Do you simply believe that races should be separate to protect unique cultures, or do you legitimately belive that whites are "better"?

!

You speak of slaves, lynchings, and other things that haven't happened in America for a hundred years. You imply because of racism we are oppressing blacks and other non-Whites, while the evidence shows this is a lie. It isn't we, the Whites, who are the racists at all. We Whites are not oppressing the peoples of other races. White Europeans produced Western Civilization. Not Asians or Africans, not anyone else. RACE is real and RACIAL differences are real. We Whites have a right to our own countries and nations, just like everyone else. We are White Nationalists and we aim to have our own White country. Loving your own race is nothing more than loving your own family. It is natural and it is part of the stability humans need to form stable civilizations and societies and for personal happiness.

White people are the only ones who are falling over themselves to accept others and bending over backward to show they are not "racist" while daily we are faced with open contempt and hatred, indeed, extreme violence from other races merely because we are White. Why are the civilizations produced by white Europeans the only ones that should be diverse? Why don't Ethiopians worry about having a half white president? Why doesn't China have a European in it's communist controlled parliament? Because they don't question their right to survive as a unique people because it's suicidal to do so. It isn't an issue to them that they should maintain themselves because they do not suffer multiculturalism, which societal suicide. Why can't whites do the same without being labelled a "racist" or a "bigot" or whatever new buzzwords jews come up with?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #36
DiCarlo
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Right of Stormfront
Posts: 988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Thank you all for your heartfelt replies!

This has been interesting, and I've certainly learned a lot, although none of you have managed to persuade me even a little bit.
Here's how I see it: The whole "whites are being discriminated against/victimized/etc." argument certainly sounds nice, but, unfortunately, it isn't very accurate. Whites still make up the vast majority of congress, and, obviously, the ratio of black to white presidents doesn't do much to make the white race seem victimized. Whites are in a position of power. In the U.S., we are the majority, and this society is designed to benefit us. Our position of power and privilege means that minorities are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action programs are meant to compensate for this socially-imposed disadvantage--NOT to attack or victimize whites.

You could go and read "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," but I sort of doubt that any of you really care.

Well, you might want to THINK first instead of relying on your preconceived notions. You have not refuted any of the hundreds of sound points and principles we have produced. You're anti-White because you're BRAINWASHED!


Affirmative action has done nothing but lower the standards in America, because monkeys can't do the same job that a man can, and liberals can't figure that out. End of story.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #37
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Thank you all for your heartfelt replies!

This has been interesting, and I've certainly learned a lot, although none of you have managed to persuade me even a little bit.

Here's how I see it: The whole "whites are being discriminated against/victimized/etc." argument certainly sounds nice, but, unfortunately, it isn't very accurate. Whites still make up the vast majority of congress, and, obviously, the ratio of black to white presidents doesn't do much to make the white race seem victimized. Whites are in a position of power. In the U.S., we are the majority, and this society is designed to benefit us. Our position of power and privilege means that minorities are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action programs are meant to compensate for this socially-imposed disadvantage--NOT to attack or victimize whites.

You could go and read "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," but I sort of doubt that any of you really care.
Why don't you look into how well cities with a majority black population and black mayors are doing.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #38
Serbian
Senior Member
 
Serbian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,115
Serbian
Default

Hey Jill, would you like a side order of gypsies to go with your niggers?













__________________
Don Black's Stormfront ''Russians''
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=456327
Russia Insider
https://russia-insider.com/en
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #39
Fred O'Malley
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jewnited Snakes of Amnesia
Posts: 13,622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post
Thank you all for your heartfelt replies!

This has been interesting, and I've certainly learned a lot, although none of you have managed to persuade me even a little bit.

Here's how I see it: The whole "whites are being discriminated against/victimized/etc." argument certainly sounds nice, but, unfortunately, it isn't very accurate. Whites still make up the vast majority of congress, and, obviously, the ratio of black to white presidents doesn't do much to make the white race seem victimized. Whites are in a position of power. In the U.S., we are the majority, and this society is designed to benefit us. Our position of power and privilege means that minorities are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action programs are meant to compensate for this socially-imposed disadvantage--NOT to attack or victimize whites.

You could go and read "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," but I sort of doubt that any of you really care.
Don't be stupid, take an academic approach, do the research for yourself.

You came here with views you question yourself. I think you know that the stuff you said in the quoted post is pure garbage. If you'll actually do the research yourself, using the starting points we've given you, you'll soon kick out that nigger you're living with and come back to reality.

I don't mean to be insulting, but you insult both our and your own natural intelligence. You have courage, but is it enough to look the truth in the eye?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #40
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default they hold the reigns

REINS, although they reign

 
Reply

Tags
liberal, questions, social construction

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:57 PM.
Page generated in 0.22820 seconds.