|
July 10th, 2012 | #61 | |
drinking tea
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
|
Quote:
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #62 | |
Administrator
|
Quote:
I just get irritated by 'appearance' arguments. Yes, you should dress and look and speak well/good, but if you don't have a consistent, principled position you stick to over time and in the face of hostility, it doesn't matter whether you're an assclown or Jared Taylor. No one will respect or follow you. So let's not underestimate that it all begins with an accurate understanding of the situation and what needs to be done with it. And the willingness and ability to explain this in clear language to anyone you meet, from child to a Ph.D. If you have that, you have the bare minimum you need. And you can augment your political viability by removing obstacles-of-person (bad grammar, spelling, weird dress, tattoos, piercings) that get between the person you're trying to teach and your message. You want everything about you-the-man to back up and reinforce what you're saying, not contradict it. Get it all in line. Believe your bullshit. Live your bullshit. That's how you prove it's not bullshit, it's the real thing. And people will be forced against themselves, against what they've heard, against what they want to think, against their tastes, maybe, to believe that if you're not right, you might be, and you have personal credibility based on your lived integrity. But if we're going to be skulking, giggling nerds who only cut loose behind closed doors, we will never get anywhere. See Rockwell on this. Look at Golden Dawn. Look at the difference between Golden Dawn or the Nazis operated and an AmRen Conference. AmRen is all about people having fun and entertaining themselves. Nazis and Golden Dawn are all about solving problems facing their people. We are not conservatives. The conservatives are our enemies. We must attack them, not emulate them and their failure patterns. Last edited by Alex Linder; July 10th, 2012 at 04:47 PM. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #63 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
Is WN up to that challege? Or are we resigned to admitting we are too stupid and incapable as a group to fight the opposition? |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #64 | |
drinking tea
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
|
Quote:
What would we do? I'm not saying we're too stupid to carry out your plan, I'm saying we are (or should be) clever enough to pick our battles wisely and on this one, we stand no chance. But it won't hurt to try (except wasting time) so have a go. Just don't expect to win.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #65 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
We've been losing, by degrees, for a long time now; starting with our religion. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #66 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
The castle belonging to our clan's ancestors was long ago inherited by a different line whose descendants went on to found a different clan. Being a citizen of the country called Scotland has no more to do with being Scottish than being a citizen of Scotland, Missouri, or Scotland, North Carolina - they are just pieces of dirt named after us as an ethnic group, because we happened to settle on those bits of geography at one time or another. If Scottish citizenship made people Scots, then there are a great many Indians, Pakistanis, Arabs and even negros who could claim to be Scots because they have citizenship in Scotland. Being a Scot is a matter of genetics and ancestry, not one of geography or politics. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #67 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
When someone else asked about this, Sir Crispin Agnew, one of the heralds in Lyon Court issued the following statement: Quote:
|
||
July 10th, 2012 | #68 | |
morsning korsning
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Terra Scania
Posts: 674
|
Quote:
So you are saying that you are 100% scotish, am I right? Even if you; *Don't speak gaelic * Don't speak their accent * Don't have scotish citisenship * Have only visited scotland once * Are being banned from forums because people say there that you are a fraud Being scotish (or any other nationality) isnt just about genetics, its about the little things, like; * Concept of beauty * Work ethic * View on nature * Body language * Expressions of face * Relation to animals * Food culture etc etc etc |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #69 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
|
|
July 10th, 2012 | #70 | |
Holorep survivor
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The wild frontier
Posts: 4,849
|
Quote:
If you thought it wasn't important, then you wouldn't have applied to them. Since you applied to them, you thought it actually was important. Further, I asked you for his actual response. Please post his actual response to you, in full. Not your interpretation of it, not what someone else said about it, but his actual response. Whilst we wait for you to post the actual, official response by the Lord Lyons to your application, did you follow the procedure they outline, and if not, why not? It would have validated your claim to everyones satisfaction, and if you had no claim, you could still have formed a clan, legally, and simply, that it would also be recorded in the offical lawbooks of Scotland. http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/241.html The search for clan chiefs The revival of interest in Scottish ancestry over the last 50 years has encouraged many clans and families, who had not previously done so, to look for a leader. For many clans this has involved searching for the person most directly descended from the last known chief of the clan. A large number of clans who had had chiefs in the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries went into decline after 1745. In many cases it has been possible for genealogical research to establish the identity of the last chiefs descendants and thus to find the person with the closest blood link back to the last chief. In other cases this research is either still being conducted or is now being embarked upon. Once genealogical evidence has been found to identify the person most directly descended from the last chief, application may be made to the Lord Lyon for confirmation that the chiefly Coat of Arms, enjoyed by the last chief, should be confirmed to such a person. The Lord Lyon reviews the genealogical evidence and must be satisfied that the applicant's descent is correctly proved. If the Lord Lyon is satisfied he recognises the applicant as chief of the clan and confirms him in the chiefly Arms. All those who were chiefs prior to 1745 had Arms, although they have not all been recorded in the Public Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland which was only started in 1672. The Scottish clan and heraldic systems have always been closely interlinked. Thus a clan which existed in the past will find its chief in the person entitled, under heraldic law, to bear the historic Arms enjoyed by the last known chief. But the increasing interest in Scottish ancestry has led many families, who had not in the past been regarded as clans in their own right, to look for a leader who could rally the family as a group. While content historically to owe their allegiance as a sept or cadet to a particular clan, such families may now wish to have a distinct identity of their own. Where such a family is able to prove that it has existed historically as an independent family group, then the Lord Lyon may be prepared to recognise them as a distinct clan or name. If a person is able to prove descent from an individual who was historically accepted as the head of the main family within this group, then such a descendant might be confirmed in the Arms and recognised by the Lord Lyon as Representer of the name concerned. The situation may, however, be that a family group has no clear historical evidence of its existence as a group in the distant past. In such a case it may be possible for a group to move towards being treated as a clan or name by various stages. Since the clan and heraldic systems are so closely linked, the first stage would be for there to be a number of individuals using the same surname to record their own Arms. Once there was a significant number of armigers within the group it would be possible for a derbhfine of the group to convene and make a proposal to the Lord Lyon for the appointment of one of the group as Commander. Regulations have been laid down as to the procedure to be followed in the conduct of such a derbhfine. If the Lord Lyon is so minded a Commander will be appointed. Once that has happened a 10 year period must then elapse before any question of a chief can be considered. After the 10 year period a further derbhfine could, if the group desire, be held. This derbhfine could then make a proposal to the Lord Lyon for the appointment of a chief. Again regulations exist for the way in which such a derbhfine should proceed
__________________
Secede. Control taxbases/municipalities. Use boycotts, divestment, sanctions, strikes. http://www.aeinstein.org/wp-content/...d-Jan-2015.pdf https://canvasopedia.org/wp-content/...Points-web.pdf |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #71 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
In Scottish heraldic law, the term "ancient arms" is applied to those coats of arms that were in use prior to the establishment of Lyon Court's Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland that was begun in 1672. The coat of arms I was petitioning Lord Lyon to confirm as ancient arms, was the coat of arms that has been borne by my direct paternal line of Akins ancestors for the past several centuries. The use of this coat of arms - the one that you see in my avatar, can be established back to my 10th great-grandfather, Alexander Akins of that Ilk, who was born in Lanarkshire, Scotland in 1618 and who died in Baltimore Co., Maryland in 1669, which was three years before Lyon Register was established in 1672. However because the evidence for my ancestor's use of the coat of arms is in Maryland, and not in Scotland, Lord Lyon rejected my petition for the confirmation of ancient arms on the grounds that they were outside of his jurisdiction, being here in America and not in Scotland. Therefore he ruled that he had no jurisdiction to confirm the arms, being that his jurisdiction begins and ends within the geographical borders of Scotland. It should also be noted that the person holding the office of Lord Lyon had changed during the time when my application to Lyon Court was pending. When I first applied, Sir Malcolm Innes of Edingight was Lord Lyon, and he retired before ever rendering a judgement on my petition, which was put on hold for several months until Lord Lyon Blair took office. It was Lord Lyon Blair that refused my petition shortly after he became Lord Lyon. Last edited by Steven L. Akins; July 10th, 2012 at 04:32 PM. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #72 | |
Holorep survivor
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The wild frontier
Posts: 4,849
|
More avoidance and evasion.The story keeps changing.
Why for over 5000 posts have you refused to simply post his response, so we can see for ourselves. You duck and dive, evade, ignore, twist and turn when any honest person would have posted such a basic fundamental thing as a matter of course. Have you applied to be registered as a clan, following the standard procedure? Quote:
What matters is the genealogy, not the use of the arms. You need to prove descent, use of the arms within the US is irrelevant. He does have jurisdiction within Scotland, so would be able to confirm your claims regarding geneaology within Scotland. He would have been able to confirm the existence of the clan within Scotland, to confirm the use of arms within Scotland by the clan, been able to confirm the connection between the last ancestor in Scotland, and the first ancestor in the US, as the first ancestor in the us was from Scotland. Title and use of arms would simply have passed to the next in line within Scotland, and the leadership of the clan and all its rights within Scotland would have continued within the family that remained within Scotland. Yours is not the first family where a member has emigrated. Records go back to 1538. At least. http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/
__________________
Secede. Control taxbases/municipalities. Use boycotts, divestment, sanctions, strikes. http://www.aeinstein.org/wp-content/...d-Jan-2015.pdf https://canvasopedia.org/wp-content/...Points-web.pdf |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #73 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
|
|
July 10th, 2012 | #74 |
morsning korsning
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Terra Scania
Posts: 674
|
|
July 10th, 2012 | #75 | |
Holorep survivor
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The wild frontier
Posts: 4,849
|
Have you applied to be registered as a clan, following the standard procedure?
Why do you refuse to post The Letter? What are you hiding, Akins? What shocking secrets are contained in The Letter that you are so terrified we would see? This is like a Sherlock Holmes mystery. Quote:
Its starting date is totally irrelevant. Are you claiming that prior to the Lyons Register, that prior to 1672 there were no official records of clans, coats of arms or people in Scotland? That the Kings of Scotland and the Scottish church and courts had no records? That the church does not hold any records of births, deaths, marriages? That the tax and court rolls do not exist? That there were and are no copies of records of Scottish clans held within England? Being a clan chieftain was a serious matter. They had the power of life and death, gave and took away land, led their people to war, sat in judgement. People went to war over it, thousands died over these issues, massive tracts of land changed hands over it, kings made alliances with them. Many held the equivalent lands and wealth and titles as earls and Dukes and were in line for the throne. Yet you blithely pretend there were no records of any of this. You seem to think it was like being a member of Rotary. In many areas, births and deaths and marriages, and grants of land have been recorded in church and court documents going back to the 800's. These records are all available, and that is what is making you sweat. You have claimed over and over that you have evidence that you can trace your family back over a thousand years to specific individuals. Not such a big deal, many can, especially members of the nobility, and you have assured us that you are descended from the highest nobility. As such, the royal courts would have preserved your records, as would the church. Yet actually producing that evidence seems to be a problem for you.
__________________
Secede. Control taxbases/municipalities. Use boycotts, divestment, sanctions, strikes. http://www.aeinstein.org/wp-content/...d-Jan-2015.pdf https://canvasopedia.org/wp-content/...Points-web.pdf Last edited by Hugh; July 10th, 2012 at 07:58 PM. |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #76 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Quote:
|
|
July 10th, 2012 | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,749
|
If we can, absolutely. Wikipedia is totally jew-occupied territory. All their so-called "rules" go out the window when they are trying to either make hook-nosed demons look "good" - or make us humans look "evil." If we can somehow flip that bias, it would be a great start.
__________________
Smash jewish supremacy. Smash globalism. Smash ZOG. Use ad blockers at all times to starve off the (((beast))). |
July 10th, 2012 | #78 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,506
|
Quote:
First of all, it is now common knowledge that Wiki is a poor source of information when it comes to controversial information/issues. Three years ago, I watched three Creators waste hours of their time, trying to correct minute details on Wiki pages, only to see their efforts amount to nothing when a week later another Kike/Anti/Troll launched the next round of debates on the issue at hand. Haven't any of you fools on VNN figured out yet that Steven L. Akins is a troll, who's M.O. is to get you all to waste hours on end in left field running after a ball that was hit in right field? |
|
July 10th, 2012 | #79 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 555
|
I've been able to make changes to Wikipedia articles, on racial topics, that still stand.
|
July 10th, 2012 | #80 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
|
Making long-standing changes at Wikipedia is possible, provided that your sources are verifiable - that is Wikipedia's criteria. I was told in my arguing with other Wikipedia editors that Wikipedia's purpose was not to publish "truth", but to publish what could be verified in independantly published sources. If you can cite something from a verifiable, published source, they will generally let it stand.
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|