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

Old November 2nd, 2008 #81
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuisto View Post
Thanks for the insinuation
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #82
tuisto
Senior Member
 
tuisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: relegational
Posts: 2,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
May I add an insinuation?

...He insinuated himself into the company of those who were celebrated for their conversation...
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #83
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuisto View Post
Yes those. I was vague on purpose.
Why be vague? I am asking, because you seem to be intimating you know or are part of some Templar order with secret documents and what have you.

Perhaps thats because we are misunderstanding each other, but I really don't know. I know of several Templar 'secret' orders per se, but none is really worth notice being simply clubs for bored aristocrats and people who want some excitement with no real strings attached in their lives in order to make them feel special and superior. I don't know if that's what you are suggesting and if it isn't then please do correct, but it seems logical to infer from the way you've been talking.

Secret orders/organisations, and they do exist, are generally unknown to the public, if anything is known it is usually merely the name, and their existence isn't even known beyond members, families of members and the intelligence community (whose business it is to know such things). Their members as far as I know tend to keep rather silent on the matter of belonging to any kind of formal or informal organisation.

Quote:
Thanks for the insinuation
Hardly: your wording seemed to suggest as much and you offered no material evidence for your assertion. If I am incorrect then explain please.

Quote:
Let me ask you this: Have you ever understood the connection of the Genesis quotation I used in connection with the man who is to be held responsible for the name "Hebrew"?
Yes, it is your suggestion but I've not checked it as yet, but it doesn't prove what you are arguing anyway. Your article was wandering about in the Torah and Tanakh and suggesting this proved that jews were not Semites.

As I've pointed out the historical and genetic evidence is against this.

Quote:
I found the concept of one of the main reasons for jewish perversion: namely
the wildly mixing of different races White/Black/Mongoloid mirrored in today's porn business, very credible.
Well the former two aren't actually races per se more colloquial references firstly to an ill-defined group of sub-races and secondly to the Negroid race. You are however essentially right in that the Semite, particularly the jew but it applies to Arabs as well, are an unspecified mix of Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid as well as their own evolutionary mutations.

Does that cause them to be genetic perverts and to have the classic Freudian mentality, which I would assert causes their perversion and their prominence in the pornography business, I really can't say. Since I am not a biologist or a published race theorist and hence not in my estimation qualified to weigh in such important questions beyond varifying and clarifying the actual behaviour itself.

Quote:
Allow me to simply contradict your true believing in a -fraud

http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/AEIPBook.htm
*Sigh* Didn't you read the links I gave you, Tuisto?

Perhaps this review might help you?

They [the links I gave you] addressed the Bjerknes' argument (specifically that book of his) and I already know Bjerknes (as well as Richard Moody Jr and Ajay Sharma: the former trusted Bjerknes and got an absolute pounding intellectually [Sharma seems to be just be a weird quack and a short rebuttal to his basic equation-based argument against Einstein can be found here]) has been sliced, diced and fed to the pigs by more than couple of Physicists on various forums he has gone off spouting his crap about Einstein on. I know he can't hold an argument, because he's been addressed privately by a close friend of mine on his arguments and he stops replying fairly quickly when you take them apart (just in the manner that one scholar disputes with another: tempers fray but you don't just walk away from a debate between scholars because somebody challenged your thesis, especially when it is your main object of scholarly study and the subject of multiple books by you).

If you think he is right then I suggest you take your argument to PhysicsForums and they will explain to you in exquisite detail why it is not correct. I've read Bjerknes' books and his articles, and he hasn't proven his argument but rather he acts like a jew (distorts the meaning of quotes for one example) in order to 'evidence' his predetermined thesis. He also has some really weird ideas about Zionism, National Socialism and the Protocols of Zion (which if you'd read his books you'd know about in at least the general sense).

In the war against the jew the best weapon one can have is sticking to what the evidence suggests and conducting both an elastic defense and a schwerpunkt attack basing yourself on the terrain of the known and reasonably inferable/deducible. If you fight like that you will win against jews. If you step into the realm of speculation without getting your facts at least arguably right and put through a little testing first. You are more than likely to get your fingers burnt, because the jew will attack your speculation and use it as propaganda to convince the majority of readers that you are irrational and therefore not to be heeded.

The jew is the great master of the lie, but he is also a master of derogatory propaganda.
__________________
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #84
Anne
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by F.W. Braun View Post
Anne, leave that Middle Eastern cult with a filthy human sacrifice at its center behind and have a look at the strong and beautiful gods of our ancestors. What a difference in worldview!

Asatru - A Native Germanic Religion.

http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2008...anic-religion/


GENETICS & BEYOND [Stephen A. McNallen]

http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2008...en-a-mcnallen/
I appreciate the gods of our ancestors. Filthy human sacrifice? Aryans were very much inspired by sacrifice. There is no glory without suffering.

Not the greatest source, but still:
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans
Sacrifice was important as were sacrificial rites. For Catholics, for example, mass is a holy sacrifice.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #85
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anne View Post
There is no glory without suffering.
Glory comes from making accomplishments despite the obstacles. Not from suffering as a result of the obstacles.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #86
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
Glory comes from making accomplishments despite the obstacles. Not from suffering as a result of the obstacles.

__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #87
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
http://mises.org/story/2294

Short messages need not be profound. They simply must communicate your ideas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #88
Anne
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
Glory comes from making accomplishments despite the obstacles. Not from suffering as a result of the obstacles.
I was trying to convey that for anything worthwhile, some degree of pain or exertion or cost is required. Perhaps I should have used the word struggle.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #89
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anne View Post
I was trying to convey that for anything worthwhile, some degree of pain or exertion or cost is required. Perhaps I should have used the word struggle.
Suffer, struggle, obligation, should, and try are all words I do my best to avoid. When Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, he first discovered 10,000 ways to not be successful at it. He didn't consider it to be a struggle that he was obligated to suffer over and keep trying at because it should work. He considered it a learning process.

No matter how much pain or exertion is felt when aiming to reach a goal, it's important to realize that aiming for a lofty worthwhile goal is noble. If you aim for the stars and land in the mud, it's better than aiming for the mud and making it. Strategies can always be adjusted as well as goals depending on the improvements of moral values and character of the individual.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #90
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
Short messages need not be profound. They simply must communicate your ideas.
You're a dickhead.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #91
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
You're a dickhead.
Your spiteful jealousy is communicated quite clearly. I'm glad you understand the concepts I instruct.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #92
Anne
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,760
Default

Consider Russell's paradox:

If, in the act of embracing the greater human family, the policies of the Christian churches hasten the demise of those human families who have historically nurtured and maintained them, are they truly "universal" churches? Is it religion?[/I][/QUOTE]

Well, IMO, when Whites revive their tribal instinct, Christianity will be practiced properly and will reflect Natural Law. In the big historical picture, we are in unique times--never before have we had this degree of globalization/commercialization/massive immigration of aliens, etc. Christianity, like all segments of society, will need to go through a "baptism of fire" type of experience.
The key is to balance natural instincts and our spiritual dimension in order to have a healthy, balanced society.

I did a crappy job of copying your quote
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #93
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
Your spiteful jealousy is communicated quite clearly. I'm glad you understand the concepts I instruct.
No offense Mike but he is right, just look in the mirror.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #94
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anne View Post
Christianity, like all segments of society, will need to go through a "baptism of fire" type of experience.

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/tes...eworder.html#3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anne View Post
I did a crappy job of copying your quote
Apology accepted.

Last edited by Mike Mazzone of Palatine; November 2nd, 2008 at 08:35 PM.
 
Old November 2nd, 2008 #95
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anne View Post
I appreciate the gods of our ancestors. Filthy human sacrifice? Aryans were very much inspired by sacrifice. There is no glory without suffering.

Not the greatest source, but still:
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans
Sacrifice was important as were sacrificial rites. For Catholics, for example, mass is a holy sacrifice.
It's great that you're using Wikipedia as your source; however , the reality is that human sacrifice was never practiced among White pagans in all of written history.

Being buried with one's master/husband was considered honorable and it was something that one could escape. Such deep loyalty as to refuse to live without a person is honorable.

As for Christians - their sacrifice was in blood fighting in the name of a spook. When before did anyone fight in the name of a divine entity? It was understood that Gods can favor you in a time of war but never did it occur to anyone that you are fighting for a God. It's the nature of polytheism - since the Gods have different interests than humans the idea that one can call a war for a God wasn't possible.

In my opinion the only sacrifice one makes at mass is one's time.
 
Old November 3rd, 2008 #96
cillian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,377
Default

How does one make a human sacrifice? If sacrifice means to 'give up' something, how do you go about giving up something that you do not posses, such as someone elses life? This would be an offering, given by the person who dies, not a sacrifice on the part of the killer.
 
Old November 3rd, 2008 #97
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by psychologicalshock View Post
It's the nature of polytheism - since the Gods have different interests than humans the idea that one can call a war for a God wasn't possible.
War itself is the health of the state. States are different political groups. A political group will share similar emotions, ideas, decisions, as well as defined state boundaries.

At the quantum level, everything is energy. You see one tornado here and another tornado there yet they're both the same wind. Polytheism became monotheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cillian View Post
How does one make a human sacrifice? If sacrifice means to 'give up' something, how do you go about giving up something that you do not posses, such as someone elses life? This would be an offering, given by the person who dies, not a sacrifice on the part of the killer.
Murder is a win-lose situation. However, a man must be skilled with a sword and shield. An aggressive warrior is engaging in a win-lose deal. An assertive warrior engages in win-win deals.

The aggressive warrior will lead with the sword. If the defender leads with a sword as well a cycle of lose-lose violence begins that will end either with the death of both warriors in battle, or a win-lose victory for one aggressor.

The assertive warrior will lead with the shield. The defender must attempt to maintain territory dominance or yield to his opponent's assertiveness. A win-win deal can be reached by both parties.

Habitable territory and essential resources were far more scarce prior to the development of industrial civilization. However, our mindset of scarcity still exists, and wholesale slaughter of the win-lose variety is still common.
 
Old November 3rd, 2008 #98
tuisto
Senior Member
 
tuisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: relegational
Posts: 2,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
You're a dickhead.
You forgot: "...well circumcised...
 
Old November 3rd, 2008 #99
Mike Mazzone of Palatine
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: With my awesome parents
Posts: 7,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuisto View Post
You forgot: "...well circumcised...
Muh Dik

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=5593
 
Old November 3rd, 2008 #100
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mazzone of Palatine View Post
War itself is the health of the state. States are different political groups. A political group will share similar emotions, ideas, decisions, as well as defined state boundaries.

At the quantum level, everything is energy. You see one tornado here and another tornado there yet they're both the same wind. Polytheism became monotheism.
Afraid I have to disagree, Polytheism is a completely different way of looking at the world. It lacks absolutes (Things that Jews love to say) and adds a sense of unpredictability to the world and in no way get under anyone's feet. Semitic monotheism; however, is a self-absorbed worm that creates a world view completely alien to what one actually observes. Semitic monotheism is abstract and isolates the senses - the ideal Christian has lost any positive feeling towards anything but his Creator. He exists to please that Creator in his self interest. Semitic Monotheism in its bloodthirsty, self-serving and greedy state definitely has no relationship with polytheism which is the complete opposite of it.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 PM.
Page generated in 0.30695 seconds.