Both accusing each other of (basically) what VNN had already said, proving Alex was right about both of them.
Even Brad's jewish pal kane123123 admits in that thread that Hunter played a part in the hacking of thephora members passwords.
What is Brads justification ? "So what? People on thephora were harassing my jewish friend kane123123. Anything that happened to the random innocent people who's passwords were hacked/ emails read & employers contacted got what they had coming to them (even though these weren't even the people who were harassing kane)"
Basically in Brads eye: Anyone who outs his jewish friend kane deserves to have their passwords hacked/their emails read/and their employers contacted. Not even just that but anyone who merely posted on the same forum as the people who posted kanes name deserved it too apparently!
He puts a jews privacy above whites.
He is no WN.
No, he's not. His entire history screams with one voice: unstable
I will repeat yet again, for the umpteenth time:
it is a only matter of time before Gummi Boy flips back to anti-racism, and when he does that, he will burn all of his current flock of WN "friends."
WN, as a minority hated by jews and the whiteskin dupelings and sellouts who serve them, particularly in the executive capacity (presidents and cops and bureacrats), need to be particularly selective in their choice of associates. Giving people second chances for all but minor infractions is simply not rational. When someone's behavior demonstrates he is defective, deranged, or disloyal, the right policy is to cut with him - immediately, and for good.
So yeah, we were right. All it took is a little tiff between the two and it all comes out, before that mum was the word.
Do the people who left VNN for O.D. (a website run by someone who hacked WNs passwords & is currently friends with jews) feel stupid yet? or was it because Alex criticized Johnson for being homosexual (Which apparently has also been shown to be true, yet again)
There were two attitudes toward what I/we said: that it was a lie; that it might be true, but shouldn't be expressed. BOTH are wrong.
It is true, and it is relevant, that Johnson is a queer.
But that said, it is a fact that Johnson is far more reliable and basically stable, even as a dick-sucking sodomite, than Pill-Poppin' Paddington.*
But he still should admit what he is publicly, to the WN circle who read him. And he should quit defaming me and others merely because we let the public know a highly pertinent fact about him.
As I've written before, there are ways to fight the enemy, and there are ways to in-fight. When I "attacked" Johnson, I didn't say ANYTHING negative about him that wasn't true, and I kept to the sole charge I know to be accurate, and to his discredit. That is how you infight.
People who infight by spewing character defamation and inventing lies about someone by that action prove they are character defectives themselves. And nearly as bad, they prove they are stupid.
Loyalty is rarer than brains. A movement like ours needs loyalty very badly. But we don't have it. Not much of it. And not just among people either. Our disloyalty begins in our inability to figure out who we are. Our promiscuous intellectual disloyalty leads us to imagine we can mingle with other parties and causes, yet still achieve success. It doesn't work that way. We should and must viciously and vigorously discriminate against wrong and foreign ideas, not just play along by pretending that since there are certain overlaps in our outlooks we are all on the same side. This indiscriminateness kills our cause intellectually, and virtually, and prevents it from ever taking off in the offline world.
Quit lying about who you are.
Quit trying to have it both ways.
Quit trying to be slick.
None of these works. All of them fail.
Until the principle that neither jews nor jew-excusers can be White Nationalists
is understood, accepted, and embraced - made the foundation of our politics - our cause will continue to languish, indistinguishable from conservatism.
* Actually, thinking this over, I've overstated it. Johnson is consistent philosophically. He keeps a position, defends it ably and consistently. But he himself is not quite as stable as I said above, and I'm not referring to the TOO/OD/whatever imbroglio(s) because I don't care or have any inside knowledge of them. But in his reaction, his overreaction, to my assertion about his predilections, he did show the instability and poor judgment we need to be wary of. My charge rattled him enough to induce him to respond with a slew of personal, irrelevant charges, in a desperate attempt to distract attention from himself by creating a monster. The interchange showed he lacks judgment and control. Judgment in that he knows what I said was the truth, and he ought to be smart enough to realize that he can't hide the truth forever, and when it does come out, he will look the worse. But even with his bad judgment, he showed additional foolishness in the way he chose to respond. He could simply have denied the charge. Instead he dipped into all the stuff the high-road crew always imagines it finds at VNN and in our approach. What's notable about the "high roaders" is the way everything devolves into friends and personal feelings. They like someone who supports jews, so they overlook his politics. They like a WN who lies about others more often than he breathes, so they overlook his shitty character. We "low roaders," as they call us, don't do that. We don't break bread with jew-loving anti-Whites, even if they call themselves white nationalists. Neither do we tolerate known liars, reputation assassins, or loose-charge makers (ie, those who call others jews or informers). So VNN may take what the politically unsophisticated call the low road in politics (as if there were a high road in politics!), but we take the high road when it comes to reputations and principles. We stick to our principles, and we shun character defectives. The self-proclaimed high road crew has no principles and shuns no one it likes. It's "high road" is purely formal, external, and verbal.