Letters

[Alex Linder]

Ed Meese Says Reagan Regretted 1986 Amnesty
By Allan Wall on February 16, 2013 at 2:29pm

We ought to learn from history, though often we don't, but the relentless drive for amnesty for illegal aliens sure ought to be subjected to historical analysis.

Michael Reagan, adopted son of Ronald Reagan, has been utilizing his late father's reputation for years, and presents himself as the official spokesman for "What Reagan would Do/Think about XYZ Subject in the News".

This is the vein of his pro-amnesty statement posted over at Newsmax.com entitled Mike Reagan: Embrace Rubio Plan in which he declares that

The bold and bipartisan Senate immigration plan put forth by Sen. Marco Rubio is a good step in the right direction and should be embraced as such by conservatives of all parties who want to continue the “Reagan legacy.”

Make no mistake about it, my father Ronald Reagan would be happy to see the Republicans taking a leadership position on this issue as they join with common-sense Democrats.

If a plan like the Rubio one was implemented, it would change the perception by the immigrant population that many conservatives are anti-immigrant.

It goes on and on (you can contact him here) and here's how it ends:

Ronald Reagan said politics is the art of negotiation. You’re never going to get everything you want but you’ve got to move the ball down the field, and that is what people like Marco Rubio, Eric Cantor and Jeb Bush have been doing. We need to look at these things and find the areas of agreement. Ronald Reagan looked at things and said let’s find areas of agreement and make that the start of negotiations, instead of areas of disagreement where you never start at all. If you’re going to use my father’s name, use it correctly and understand Ronald Reagan was truly a uniter.

So once again, Michael Reagan has set himself up as the authentic spokesman of his deceased father. Ed Meese, however, has reported that Ronald Reagan regarded the 1986 amnesty as his biggest presidential mistake. Here's an article from Conservative Heritage Times which contradicts the Michael Reagan pro-amnesty stance:

According to Ronald Reagan himself, as told to his trusted long-time friend and U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, the biggest mistake of his presidency was signing the 1986 amnesty for what turned out to be more than half the five million illegal immigrants in the country. Reagan was uncomfortable with the amnesty but was persuaded by some of the leaders of his own party (still living) that it would only affect a small number of illegal immigrants and would assure that Congress would follow through with more vigorous enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. The misnamed Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was touted by its supporters as “comprehensive immigration reform” that would grant amnesty only to a few long-settled immigrants and strengthen border security and internal immigration enforcement against employers who were hiring illegal immigrants.

Internal enforcement was critical to Reagan. He knew that the real key to stopping illegal immigration was to cut off the job magnet at the employment place. He was also honest enough to call what he believed would only be a small amnesty by its real name—amnesty. He did not try to deceive the American people into thinking it was not really an amnesty, a deception much in vogue with many politicians today.

There are various accounts of how many amnesties were expected with passage of the 1986 amnesty. Figures range from 300,000 (Gingrich, who voted for it) to about 2.1 million. Some reasonable estimates center around 1.2 million. The actual result was 2.7 million. Close to one third of the amnesties given were based on document fraud.

For the first six months after the amnesty there was a modest fall in illegal immigration, but within 12 months illegal immigration was breaking all previous records, rising to 800,000 per year. Friends and relatives of the newly legalized immigrants began to pour into the United States. They were followed by more illegal job seekers who saw continued opportunities for more amnesties. In fact, the 1986 amnesty resulted in six more amnesties from 1994 to 2000, awarding legal status to another 3.0 million illegal immigrants. By 1997, the number of illegal immigrants in the country was already back up to the 5.0 million in the U.S. before the 1986 amnesty. Amnesty has proved to be a slippery slope. Amnesties beget more amnesties and more illegal immigrants. Can you imagine the consequences of amnesty for the 11 million or more illegals now in the United States?

There were 5.0 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. in 1986 because we had allowed cheap-labor special interests to dominate immigration policy to the point of non-enforcement. We had become lax on border security and had ceased to enforce immigration laws at the workplace. Lack of enforcement at the workplace was by far the more important of the two chief causes of illegal immigration, as it is today.

Reagan thought he was trading a small amnesty for all-important workplace enforcement and increased border security. But once the amnesty was done and multiplying far beyond expectations, the special interests went to work at killing enforcement at the employment place. The chief culprits were the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and large agriculture corporations that lobbied Congress into backing off enforcement.

According to a 1997 report by the Center for Immigration Studies, the cost of amnesty for 2.7 million illegal immigrants had accumulated to $156.7 billion (in 1986 dollars!) by 1997. The net cost after $78 billion in tax collections was $78.7 billion dollars. This amounts to a subsidy per amnestied illegal of $29,148 in 1986 dollars, which is an important indirect subsidy for the employers of illegal workers. But U.S. workers paid the highest price. The 1986 amnesty displaced 1,872,000 American workers over the next decade. This and downward pressure on American wages are not adequately accounted for in the report. In fact, downward pressure on U.S. worker income may be the largest cost to the American economy of amnesty and excess immigration levels.

Only 36 percent of the 1986 amnesty recipients spoke English well, and only 28 percent of those over age 24 had graduated from high school.

Recently the liberal media has been pushing its pro-amnesty agenda by painting a false picture of Reagan on immigration and amnesty. Reagan saw that illegal immigration was becoming a big problem and wanted to stop it. He was persuaded to allow a relatively small amnesty as a bargaining chip to strengthen border security, and more importantly, workplace enforcement. Reagan wanted to fine employers $3,000 to $10,000 for each illegal immigrant deliberately hired. Congress betrayed him on the enforcement measures and probably the extent and eventual costs of the amnesty. Blindness to likely consequences and costs of social legislation seems to be an inherent characteristic of liberal politicians of both major parties. One of the great shortcomings of progressives is their inability to progress to step 2 or 3 in thinking through the logical consequences of legislation. They have an unshakeable faith in the wisdom of the latest poll of uninformed voters. Reagan should have known better than to trust the happy-clappy liberals and servants of the big dollar lobbyists. He made a big mistake, but he admitted it.

Ronald Reagan was not comfortable with amnesty. He was pro-enforcement, and he admitted to Edwin Meese that the biggest mistake of his presidency was to sign the 1986 amnesty. We should learn from the wisdom Reagan gained by bitter experience. Any amnesty is a slippery slope to national economic and social disaster.

Ronald Reagan's Biggest Mistake - According to Reagan Himself, (Conservative Heritage Times, January 2nd, 2012)

http://www.vdare.com/posts/ed-meese-...d-1986-amnesty

[Alex Linder]

Section 13 Update: Lemire Files Devastating Legal Brief on Section 13 and the Corruption of the CHRC

ttp://www.radicalpress.com/?p=2110

[Editor's Note: There are currently two pivotal Freedom of Speech cases before the courts in Canada; one a Canadian Human Rights Act Sec. 13 and the other (mine) a Criminal Code of Canada sec. 319(2).

Without a shadow of a doubt the most sublimely ridiculous and asinine is that of Marc Lemire and the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission. It will likely go down in the annals of Canadian jurisprudence as the most heinous, vindictive and spurious case of futile frivolousness ever to have been given a semblance of credibility by Canadian law.
For one piddley-assed post on Marc's website many years past that wasn't even Marc's and when Marc was made aware of it removed it immediately only to be then harassed, hounded and forced to spend years of his life attempting to defend this crass, callous vendetta of hatred toward him and all Canadians by those who would seek to turn Canada into another Soviet Bolshevik gulag of absolute repression and censorship, it beggars the imagination to think that this sort of atrocity could be taking place in a nation that purports to be a "democracy".

I could say the same for my own situation and do consistently even though in my case I have purposely been in the face of these censorious sonsabitches for years knowing what their ultimate agenda is and knowing damn well that to kowtow to their maliciousness and lies and universal deception will only lead to further and further repression for all of us who value and honour our collective right to express our thoughts and ideas in any way, form and manner we so choose.

Any help you can give to Marc please do. First we have to beat these bastards back on the sec. 13 front and then go after them in the normal court of law over their despicable use of sec. 319(2) to keep Canadians dumbed down and ignorant of what's really going on in the world and here at home.]

Sincerely

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
"Digging to the root of the issues since 1998"




Begin forwarded message:

From: "Marc Lemire" <[email protected]>
Subject: ** Section 13 Update: Lemire Files Devastating Legal Brief on Section 13 and the Corruption of the CHRC
Date: 13 February, 2013 8:19:34 PM PST
To: "'Marc Lemire'" <[email protected]>

Marc Lemire Case Update - Feb, 2013

http://blog.freedomsite.org/2013/02/...-brief-on.html

Dear Friends of Freedom and Liberty;

Earlier today, I filed with the Federal Court of Appeals a devastating critique of Canada’s Internet censorship laws and the fanatical corruption of the misnamed Canadian "Human Rights" Commission. These are the legal documents which will bring a final end to Canada's draconian thought control apparatus: Section 13 of the "Human Rights" Act.

Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Appellant Marc Lemire

The Memorandum of Fact and Law (written by brilliant freedom fighter Barbara Kulaszka) is a concise review of the nine years of persecution the Canadian “Human Rights” Commission has dragged me through for daring to post a single article on my website – which I did not even write. It is a shocking and clinical review of all that goes wrong, when an out of control government agency with a “Nazi fetish” is unleashed. From spying on Canadians with the possibility of entrapment, to threatening Internet Service Providers (ISP) to force deletion of content they don’t like.
The Memorandum of Fact and Law is backed up by a mountain of evidence that would put the OJ Simpson trial to shame! At the Federal Court, we have filed thick stacks of evidence in what the court calls “Appeal Books”. These contain the transcripts and evidence from my massive 3 year hearing before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, where I beat down the censors and the Tribunal found that Section 13 was unconstitutional!


Here is just some of our evidence from the Tribunal Hearing


Here are the "Appeal Books" filed this month with the Court of Appeals

The battle is not yet over, but we have the will and the strength to carry on.
George Orwell once said: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”. Human Rights Commissions = DECEIT! And we are the revolutionaries for freedom that will set the Internet free!

-Marc Lemire
February 13, 2013

Can I count on you to support the cause of freedom and rid Canada of this disgusting though control legislation? My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and I have demonstrated what two dedicated freedom fighters can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's racket. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such fanatical censors. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit when we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.

I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case.

Please support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Marc Lemire is the only person to beat the CHRC in it's 33 year history!

http://www.stopsection13.com/support.html

Marc Lemire
762 Upper James St
Suite 384
Hamilton, Ontario
L9C 3A2

[Alex Linder]

Russianist Reply
15 minutes ago

I'm starting to think that Mississippi politicians are really making an effort to under-perform the other states on any measure they can. Here are some stats from 2011:

50th (dead last) in percentage of the population with a high-school diploma or equivalent
50th (dead last) in median family income
49th in Health Index
49th in Personal Income per capita
1st in Obesity
2nd highest unemployment rate
1st in percentage of population below the poverty line
1st in child death rate

(Also, more self-identified conservatives than any other state. Which is a matter of personal choice and I'm sure is just a coincidence)
http://www.venturamojo.com/2011/03/0...-in-education/


fahren416 21 seconds ago
That's what happens when half your population is niggers. The whites are conservative because, well, niggers.

http://gawker.com/5984987/mississipp...?post=57535682

[Alex Linder]

kenstar41 @fahren416 59 minutes ago
Does the 416 in your name mean you're from Toronto? Dear God, please say yes...
From: "Emory University President Praises Three-Fifths Compromise As Great 'Pragmatic' Solution"

[this guy is hoping i'm from toronto so he can run to the hate police, mostly likely. i told him yes. we'll see how he responds.]

[Leonard Rouse]

416*F. . .the temperature at which the Kindle catches fire?

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Leonard Rouse

416*F. . .the temperature at which the Kindle catches fire?

haha, i was sorta thinking of that book, but i just wanted to get on there quick, so the name has no real meaning.

[Alex Linder]

[fromm]

We Win One: We'll Be Spared Turbanned Mounties or Negro Hockey Players on our Currency

For the better part of two decades, many branches of government and many large corporations (the banks are among the worst) in Canada have waged a relentless campaign not to reflect Canada as it is, including its multiculti components, but to show us the nation they want to impose on us where the founding settler European people are a small minority or a distant and unregretted memory.

I was waiting for my luggage at Pearson Airport in Toronto tonight. Above the luggage carousel was CBC News Headlines on television. The negress announcer was talking to perky reporter Ashley Tomlinson, also a negress, about an old White couple in Quebec who'd been kidnapped. A visitor from Japan might have been forgiven for wondering whether there are any White people in Canada at all. CBC Newsworld is almost as bad. The other day I was watching Suhana Meharchand, one of the Little Rascals. She was earnestly chatting with a Chinese reporter shivering in the Maritimes and reporting on the cold winter weather. Neither looked at all like the stalwart East Coasters digging out from after a big dumping of snow.

We the European founding/settler people still are 82 per cent of this country. Although you'd never know that from government and other advertising and imaging,

However, as the following article from the Calgary Herald (February 10, 2013) shows, the good news is that it looks as if we dodged the bullet in terms of the images to be shown on our new plastic currency notes.

"The Bank of Canada considered celebrating gay marriages, black hockey players, and turban-wearing RCMP officers on its new plastic bank notes — but eventually nixed them all in favour of the more traditional images of a train, a ship and a monument.

Internal documents show that focus groups and a Bank of Canada team reviewed a series of currency images intended in part to reflect the diversity of Canada's population, particularly the country's varied ethnic character.

Images that were considered included a Chinese dragon parade, the swearing in of a new citizen, Toronto's annual Caribbean festival, children of different ethnic backgrounds playing hockey or building a snowman, and a person in a wheelchair playing basketball.

The image catalogue was drawn up in 2008 by The Strategic Counsel, a market research firm hired for $476,000 to help the Bank decide how to illustrate its new series of polymer $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 bills. The first note, the $100, began circulating in November 2011."

We won this one, but one must wonder at the demons motivating some decision makers to celebrate the oddballs, the freakish or totally unrepresentative minorities. In this case, better sense prevailed. One wonders just who made up the "focus": groups

The whole thing verges on humour. Why must our currency feature (hint hint, hope hope) images of gay weddings, black hockey players, turbanned RCMP, wheelchair riding basketball players? Once again, poor old Canada is just a wilderness waiting patiently for someone - anyone to imprint a character.

The Herald article reminds us of an earlier controversy over the image on the $100 note: "An earlier, uncirculated version of the $100 note, illustrating the theme of medical innovations, showed a female medical researcher with distinctly Asian features. But later focus groups raised questions about her ethnicity, prompting the bank to erase the Asian features in favour of a Caucasian-looking ." Didn't we have REAL medical innovators, like Drs. Banting and Best who discovered insulin, who were neither Asian nor female? REAL sport superheroes who were not black? REAL RCMP, 99.999% of whom were not wearing turbans? the worst) in Canada have waged a rel...entless campaign not to reflect Canada as it is, including its multiculti components, but to show us the nation they want to impose on us where the founding settler European people are a small minority or a distant and unregretted memory.



Our tax dollars pay for quite enough government sponsored diversity propaganda. Do we really need it on banknotes we cannot escape? Imagine squandering half a million dollars to discover how "intolerant" we are. The list of themes that the focus groups found inappropriate -- and the ninnyish justifications -- should be sufficient to dismiss their objections to ANY submission.

A Western contractor of my acquaintance is a man who worked for more than 30 years in the Canadian Arctic. He is a man who really did something for this country. He built structures across the Arctic. He pointed out that bank notes are not really a form of external propaganda. Few foreigners will see our notes and marvel -- if that's their feeling -- at our "diversity." The hypothetical Chinese doctor or turbaned Mountie would have been intended as internal propaganda and brain tenderizing to acclimatize European Canadians to their planned replacement and dispossession.

Paul Fromm
Director
CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE



Calgary Herald Feb 10 2013

OTTAWA - The Bank of Canada considered celebrating gay marriages, black hockey players, and turban-wearing RCMP officers on its new plastic bank notes — but eventually nixed them all in favour of the more traditional images of a train, a ship and a monument.

Internal documents show that focus groups and a Bank of Canada team reviewed a series of currency images intended in part to reflect the diversity of Canada's population, particularly the country's varied ethnic character.

Images that were considered included a Chinese dragon parade, the swearing in of a new citizen, Toronto's annual Caribbean festival, children of different ethnic backgrounds playing hockey or building a snowman, and a person in a wheelchair playing basketball.

The image catalogue was drawn up in 2008 by The Strategic Counsel, a market research firm hired for $476,000 to help the Bank decide how to illustrate its new series of polymer $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 bills. The first note, the $100, began circulating in November 2011.

Drawing on focus-group discussions and workshops with Canadians in six cities, the consultant found strong support for themes of "diversity, inclusiveness, acceptance of others/multiculturalism." Eventually, 41 image ideas covering several themes were tested and given scores.

Among the highest-rated images were those of children of different ethnic backgrounds building a snowman; faces of individuals from different cultures celebrating Canada Day; an image of a hand of many colours; and children of different ethnic backgrounds playing hockey. These selections were then presented by the Bank of Canada team to officials at Finance Canada for further vetting.

Many images proposed at the start of the process did not make the cut. Rejected were illustrations of a gay marriage, an RCMP officer wearing a turban, and "hockey with a twist ... with a black player."

The reasons for early rejection are not clear in the heavily censored documents, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.

The images that were finally approved for the reverses of the five new bills — the last two denominations, the $5 and $10, are being released later this year — lack reference to Canada's diversity of ethnicity, culture and colour.

The final images that were chosen all appear in the original 2008 lists. The $5 note will show robotic arms built for space programs and the $10 note, a train. The $20 note depicts the Vimy Ridge memorial in France, while the $50 has a picture of an icebreaker. The Queen and prime ministers occupy the fronts of the notes.

An earlier, uncirculated version of the $100 note, illustrating the theme of medical innovations, showed a female medical researcher with distinctly Asian features. But later focus groups raised questions about her ethnicity, prompting the bank to erase the Asian features in favour of a Caucasian-looking woman.

When The Canadian Press broke the story about the erasure last August, spokesman Jeremy Harrison said the Bank of Canada was striving for "neutral ethnicity" in its depictions of people on bank notes.

Harrison referred to "the Bank's long-held principles for bank note design, one of which is to avoid depicting any particular ethnic group when including people as representative images of a theme on a bank note."

Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney within days apologized for the incident, saying the design process would be reviewed "in light of these events. ... Our bank notes belong to all Canadians."

Asked why the bank in 2008 considered depicting people of different ethnic backgrounds when it was contrary to the institution's "long-held principles," Harrison said that focus-groups were given "the freedom to generate the widest possible range of ideas."

He also said the image lists from 2008 were themselves not final, but winnowed further in 2009 for presentation and approval by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in January 2010. Harrison declined follow-up questions: "We have nothing further to add."

The Strategic Counsel reports and image lists from 2008 contain other sometimes surprising elements that did not make the grade:

— Images of hockey were rejected by some as they would "glorify a violent sport."

— Suggested military images sparked controversy arising from Canada's role in Afghanistan, and from some people's preference for peacekeeping over warfare. The Vimy Ridge memorial, which was the image chosen for the $20 note, was seen as "sufficiently distant in time."

— A suggestion to depict ice wine was rejected by some because "alcohol should not be shown on bank notes."

— Proposals to depict "safe cities" and Canada's so-called "no gun" culture were rejected because the theme might not endure over the lifetime of the bank notes, e.g., cities might become more crime-ridden.

— Aboriginal art was snubbed by a few participants because "enough had been done by way of promoting aboriginal art."

— Images that included snow "may become more controversial should global warming progress," and are best avoided, said some.

— Pictures of wind turbines and solar panels were rejected because "clean energy is a controversial concept."

— Portraits of Terry Fox, Liberal Prime Minister Lester Pearson, and medicare trailblazer Tommy Douglas were all nixed.

The Bank of Canada has been dogged by other controversies after the release of the new plastic bank notes, including claims, since discounted, that they're prone to melting when placed near common heat sources; that the stylized maple leafs on the bills depict a European tree, not a native Canadian variety; and that vending-machine operators weren't given enough time to calibrate their machines to accept the new $20 notes.

The bank says the polymer bills will better thwart counterfeiters and last longer than traditional paper-cotton notes.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...#ixzz2KVoPEFsb

[Alex Linder]

Alex Linder
February 18, 2013 at 8:24 pm

Remember, pro-freedom unites everyone, and every group gets what they want, except for the parasites, jews, and true believer statists.

Yes, but the problem is half the white population is white niggers. Racialists talk about crime and jews, which is necessary, and what sets us apart, but what also could set us apart is talking about the state being the worst way to do everything except gang warfare. The better whites don’t need government to do anything except leave them alone. It’s like a racial protective umbrella/association at the federal level. What the working classes need is a government that stays out of the money, not one that is taking in half their income and then shuffling some of it back out for education and welfare. If ordinary white men can’t run their own lives without programs from the federal government, then our cause is worthless.
Alex Linder
February 18, 2013 at 8:48 pm

In this economic climate (which is probably not going to get better anytime soon) you have to be willing to use government to help the White working class, or you won’t ever get enough of their votes to attempt whatever else it is you want to do.

You’re mistaking the cause for the cure. Times are bad because of big government. Only one man is saying that, and he is the one who got any whites fired up. Stealing his thunder is quite possible.

More broadly, you can’t defeat power by preaching against power itself as a matter of principle (in other words by being liberal, in the correct sense of that word). It’s delusional.

It’s a matter of where the power is vested. My view is that most of it belongs with individual white men, not with the state. You’d prefer ordinary white men be bossed around by the likes of Erich Gliebe and Kevin Strom.

The right way to go is to take advantage of the economic wisdom of the libertarians and combine it with our racial knowledge.
Alex Linder
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 18, 2013 at 8:53 pm

Mr. Linder honestly thinks that killing kids like Breivik (supposedly )did is a good strategy?

Killing the enemy does work. That’s how the enemy took power, after all.

Like most Westerners he seems to be entirely unaware of the existence of true Christianity as opposed to false, Judaized Western ‘Judeo-Christianity’ (which is in reality an oxymoron)…

Every single subset of the jebus cult claims it and it alone represents true christianity. It’s one thing, among many others, that makes the thing a joke and a waste of time. Imagine if science were like religion! Where every single nattering nut claims his number is the REAL freezing point. Religion is thinking for people who can’t think. It must be taken into account as a political factor, but in no other way.
Alex Linder
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 18, 2013 at 9:01 pm

Right now, White racialists do not have any structure in place

This is far overrated as a problem. The real problems are

1) defining “we”
2) figuring out what “we” want
3) figuring out how to structure an organization so that the leadership kernel is protected

I have the answers to the first two (see my Strategy section); the third is more a technical matter than anything. A party or organization can spring up overnight — Tea Party, for instance. It means little unless the organization knows who it is and what it wants. As the tea party did not, hence it’s being coopted into more feckless, gelded conservatism by the Glenn Becks.

Also, the mindset is far too much in the democratic voting vein when the thing that really matters is protection – both physical fighting and intellectual/electronic security. This is what Golden Dawn’s example shows. If you have the ability to fight and protect your core, then even a 7% in the voting booth is enough to scare the power structure into openly talking about banning your group! Think about that. The irony is that even National Socialists like Hadding are trapped in the conservative democratic-pandering mindset I made fun of.

Which is it Hadding? Do you want a master state that dictates what kind of toilet paper we can buy? Or do you want to walk around all genial and grinny, asking middle-class women what you can do to make their lives more pleasant?
Alex Linder
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 18, 2013 at 9:16 pm

The only thing I did not like was the fact that you guys don’t seem to understand vegetarism. I stopped eating meat well over a decade ago, and I’m extremely healthy. I even fitness (with weights) 6 to 8 hours every week, go jogging and move only by bicyle.

Vegetablers can be healthy, but they are certainly guilty of bad taste, which is a worse crime than bad health. Meat tastes better than vegetables. That’s why normal people eat meat. Along with it being the best source of proteins. If you want to scramble around like a mouse nibbling on beans and nuts, go for it, but you’ll notice that vegetarians are the only eaters who feel the need to defend what they eat, and that’s because meat is so damn good only a nut would give it up. Meat has to be lied about it’s so good – all the garbage about it causing heart attacks is a staple lie in the mass media, akin to diversity being a strength. If you have to argue, a vegetarian meal can be just as tasty as X meat dish, you’ve already lost and become absurd. You never see anyone say something like “Cooked properly, a steak can be just as tasty as quinoa with chickpeas and tomatoes.” If you choose to reject one of the greatest physical pleasures in this world, that’s your business, but don’t expect others to see you as anything but a nigger toe (and that’s an old-school term for a nut).
Alex Linder
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 18, 2013 at 9:30 pm

On another note, for Mr. Linder’s edification…

Here is an excerpt from ‘The Program of the Golden Dawn’ in English which I just came across (regarding Christianity) :

The Golden Dawn is opposed to Church-state separation. She seeks to restore the prestige of the (Orthodox Christian) Church and to remove all the decadent and internationalist members of the clergy.

Religions that offend the Greek tradition and history and damage the strength of the nation will be banned. Greek Orthodoxy reborn once again, will be a pioneer in the struggles of the nation.

That is what they say – now. In my opinion they are insincere, and making a mistake. Their entire history, on view in their magazine, is racialist in the way we’re all familiar with. Now, on the verge of serious power, they are faced with a wide array of enemies, domestic and foreign. It makes no sense to get into a battle on the religious front too. So they downplay their own past and present a united front with the church when it comes to such things as going after, say, Corpus Christi, a play by a fag depicting Jesus and the disciples as fags.

In my view, Golden Dawn is making a mistake. Already the top Orthodox guy in Greece has denounced the party, as have lesser clerics. They have found the stray one to bless their office, but the ones at the top, and many of the rank and file, already attack the party, and will continue to do so, and with greater fervency, as GD’s power grows and as they are urged to by the usual international forces. And then again, as I point out tirelessly, the jebus cult is universalist. That cannot be changed. That’s why you find in Greece the church is perfectly willing to aid these noxious pest illegal aliens from Pakistan and Nigeria. What does the church care? One man is as good as another.

In any case, anyone who tries to sell you that Golden Dawn is a christian cultural conservative party as we are long familiar with in the West is completely wrong. It’s something else entirely – the real thing.
Alex Linder
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 18, 2013 at 9:35 pm

Hadding
February 16, 2013 at 8:03 pm

I am all about criticizing conservatism, but I do not agree with personally attacking conservative individuals.

If you attack Pat Buchanan or Jared Taylor personally, his supporters are going to see you as an enemy. By contrast, if you say that what Buchanan or Taylor says is right in this way but wrong in that way, then you get some agreement.

The question should be how best to reach out to people that follow conservatism. I would submit that an ad hominem attack on their hero is not a good way.

This above is a good example of how no one is as dumb as a smart guy.

You’re completely wrong. How do the winners in this society do it? They ad hominem until their lungs fall out. it’s all they ever do. They literally never argue for their position, all they do is smear their oppoents. And it works.

Others are not like you, Hadding. You’re confusing your own preference with dmonstrated, manifest reality.

If you attack people by name, their supporters will assume you are strong and right. And if the man doesn’t respond, and the two are remotely on the same level (so it can’t be played off as some critic not worth taking note of) them the non-respondent will be seen as weak, and begin to lose his followers to the attacker. Jared Taylor can’t pop his smarmy lying head up without getting attacked by those who pose my questions to him. He’s still around, yes, he hasn’t died yet like Sam Francis, but no one is scared of him, and that means no one takes him serious. Which is as it should be. He is a clown, a liar, and an anti-White, and his very existence is proof there is no real White movement – yet.

http://thewhitenetwork.com/2013/02/0...#comment-12047

[Alex Linder]

fahren416 @Stan_the 2 minutes ago

I understand what your side claims. But I can see it isn't so. You live in a delusional world, in which discrimination against white men somehow transforms into 'white privilege.' If there really were white privilege, and if the government really were run by and for white men, wouldn't white privilege consist in laws discriminating in favor of white men, rather than against them?

Your side is so hateful because the extraordinary psychic energy you have to expend to keep your upside down world in place leaves you with no room for gratitiude, honesty or simple respect for anyone else. Edit

[Pat Bateman]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

fahren416 @Stan_the 2 minutes ago
Your side is so hateful because the extraordinary psychic energy you have to expend to keep your upside down world in place leaves you with no room for gratitiude, honesty or simple respect for anyone else. Edit

This really has to sting.
These neurotic, inversive little fucks expending so much energy to diminish "the normals" (another derisive term from the leftist fictionary) only to have their whole smarmy charade unraveled in one sentence.
Well done.

[Alex Linder]

bumpdat @fahren416 2 minutes ago
ZOMG
Can we report burner accounts for horribleness, because this is past trolling.
From: "Mentally Retarded Man Granted Last-Minute Stay of Execution in Georgia"

justsaying1313 @fahren416 8 minutes ago
STFU. How smart are white people? They used slaves, freed them, and now cries about the things the worse of them do. Shit, you deserve it all for bring slaves here in the 1st place, free them for the 2nd place, and not deporting them 1st in the 3rd place. If it was put to a vote to give them each a million dollars I would vote for it. and laugh while it broke this shit filled nation.

I laugh every time a criminal kills innocent white people, because they should have never agreed to enslave people. you idiots.

From: "Mentally Retarded Man Granted Last-Minute Stay of Execution in Georgia"

fahren416
They were brought here by jews. Farrakhan compiled a book from jewish sources proving jews utterly dominated the slave trade. Beyond that, I agree with you. Whites should send niggers back to African en masse. I do appreciate your admitting the pleasure you take in seeing whites murdered by simians. I know you feel that way, but it's nice to see you admit it. Good job.




Anteater_Poop @fahren416 17 minutes ago
People who think like you should really have their brains donated to science. Like is it nature or nurture that creates horrible pieces of shit?

From: "Mentally Retarded Man Granted Last-Minute Stay of Execution in Georgia"


MortimerWiseblood @fahren416 4 hours ago
He's from a religious fambly, Dude.
From: "When Is It OK For A Coach To Shove A Player?"


Stan_the @fahren416 15 hours ago
Hilarious post, dude. "Imagine if everything men wrote were about men or from a man's perspective...." What do you mean, imagine?? Haven't you understood *anything*?
From: "Duke University Will Train Feminist Bloggers"

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Pat Bateman

This really has to sting.
These neurotic, inversive little fucks expending so much energy to diminish "the normals" (another derisive term from the leftist fictionary) only to have their whole smarmy charade unraveled in one sentence.
Well done.

Thanks. I think what I said is true. The hatred just seeps out of these people. No one can be that edgy unless there's something he's uncomfortable about, and what they're uncomfortable about is knowing, at some deeper level, that they're deliberately and destructively inverting the truth in their politics. That alone accounts for the wild hatred in their responses.

[Alex Linder]

The Heretics' Hour, Live, Monday, Feb. 18, 9-11 pm Eastern time (6-8 Pacific) on The White Network, "Treaties of Saint-Germain and Trianon - How they reshaped Central and Southeastern Europe and created two brand new countries"

Two treaties from WWI that are somewhat overshadowed by the Treaty of Versailles, which the Germans of 1920 were forced to sign, were the Treaty of Saint-Germain between the Allies and Austria, and the Treaty of Trianon between the Allies and Hungary. Carolyn describes the events taking place at the end of the war, the Bolshevik interference, and how helpless and excluded the former Central Powers were in the determination of their fate by the victorious Allied Powers: France, Great Britain, United States and Italy. She then describes in detail who lost and who gained, and the consequences for all involved. Phone calls taken in the 2nd hour at 1-830-443-4911.

A good 2 minute video on the breakup of Austria-Hungary can be seen here.

See you then,

Carolyn Yeager

http://thewhitenetwork.com/

[Alex Linder]

[Paul Fromm]

But What Did Pope Benedict Do For His Own People?

From 1944 to 1948, over 16 million ethnic Germans were forcibly expelled from former territories in East Prussia, the Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Romania, Poland and the Sudetenland. At least three million were murdered; hundreds of thousands of German women were raped. In a cold blooded policy to break German civilian spirit AFTER the war, food imports were curtailed to Germany by the Allies, over the strong opposition of many leading figures including former President Herbert Hoover. A million Germans needlessly starved to death.

Over a million German soldiers who had surrendered were kept off the official books and deliberately starved to death or allowed to perish from disease in open-air detentiuon camps primarily on the orders of Supreme Allied Commander Gen Eisenhower. The deaths of a million German soldiers who should have received the protection of the Geneva Conventions were recorded simply as "other losses" -- the title of a powerful expose by Canadian author James Bacque. [Other Losses available from C-FAR Books for $40; C-FAR, Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA.]

.The following article shows what Pope Benedict did for other people. Did he ever raise his voice for his own? he went to Auschq\witz and prayed and made all the politically correct denunciations. He travelled to Palestine and made the required lament for another people at Yad Vashem.

"Calling himself 'a son of Germany, he prayed and asked why God was silent when 1.5 million victims, most of them Jews, died there during World War II." But did this "son of Germany" ever ask how God could have been silent while U.S. and British bombers burned 250,000 unarmed civilians to death in mass firebombing raids on an unprotected city, Dresden, February 13, 1945?

And no friend of free inquiry and himself not a historian, he, on cue, denounced those who question the Hollywood version of World War II, the so-called "revisionists."

[jerusalem post]
Jewish leaders praise Pope for stance on Israel

As Pope Benedict resigns, Sephardi Chief Rabbi says he should be remembered for battle against anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial.

The pontiff is widely seen as having helped promote relations between the Church and the Jewish people, and was ardent in his denunciations of anti-Semitism throughout his time as pope, condemning a resurgent form of anti-Semitism and deploring the phenomenon of Holocaust denial.

According to Shmuel Ben- Shmuel, head of the Foreign Ministry’s Department for the Diaspora and Religions, Benedict continued along the path of his predecessor John Paul in working toward the removal of theologically antagonistic doctrines held by the Church toward Jews.

“He adopted a warm and friendly stance to the Jewish people and sought to overcome the history of the Church’s persecution of the Jews,” Ben-Shmuel said.

Last month, significant progress was made in relations between Israel and the Vatican, which are now on the verge of formalizing diplomatic relations and were first opened in 1993.

Related:
As pope steps down, chief rabbi lauds Vatican ties
The agreement will be fully ratified once a new Israeli government is formed.

Ben-Shmuel also noted that Benedict was the first pope to openly criticize radical Islam, a move that sparked outrage and intense criticism from the Muslim world.

In 2009, Benedict visited Israel on a historic three-day trip in which he emphasized the importance of strengthening Catholic-Jewish relations, and visited Yad Vashem, where he described the Holocaust as “an atrocity” that should never be allowed “to disgrace mankind again.”

However, the pope was criticized in some quarters for not directly referencing the Nazis in his speech. Former chief rabbi Yisrael Lau criticized the pope at the time for saying that “millions” were killed instead of six million and using the word “killed” instead of “murdered.”

Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar said that Benedict should be particularly remembered for saying that God never abandoned his covenant with the Jewish people, and that Jews were Christians’ “older brothers” and “ancestors.” Amar also praised his strong stance and battle against all forms of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.

Rabbi David Rosen, the honorary adviser to the Chief Rabbinate on interfaith matters, described Benedict as a friend to the Jewish people who had worked toward improving relations, with a stance the pope had publicly emphasized in his visit to Israel and on other occasions.

Rosen, a former Irish chief rabbi and also the director of interreligious affairs for the American Jewish Committee, noted that “our concern now is that he might not have a successor who has the same commitment that he had to Jewish-Catholic relations.”

While Benedict, who was a member of the Hitler Youth in Germany as a child, came into the papacy under a cloud of suspicion, Rosen told The Jerusalem Post that “contrary to public perception, he actually has been excellent for the Jews.”

Benedict confronted his birth country’s past when he visited the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz. Calling himself “a son of Germany,” he prayed and asked why God was silent when 1.5 million victims, most of them Jews, died there during World War II.

Jewish communal organizations and rabbinic leaders around the world were quick to react to the pope’s statement with praise for his continuation of John Paul’s efforts to strengthen Jewish-Catholic relations.

“The papacy of Benedict elevated Catholic-Jewish relations to an unprecedented level,” said World Jewish Congress president Ronald Lauder on Monday. Not only did Benedict maintain John Paul’s achievements, he gave the relationship between the two faith communities a “solid theological underpinning,” Lauder added.

He also noted that no pope before Benedict visited as many synagogues as he did and that he “met with local Jewish community representatives whenever he visited foreign nations. No pope before him made more strides to improve the relationship with the Jews – on so many levels.”

The pope was also praised for his strong stand against Holocaust denial by church leaders.

Jewish leaders, Lauder included, expressed their hope that Benedict’s successor will choose to contribute to interfaith efforts.

Rosen noted that as the first pope in centuries who will be alive following the end of his pontificate, Benedict will have at least a “moral and psychological influence” over the election of his successor.

This, he continued, may be the reason for his abdication: to ensure that the Church continues in a traditional direction.

“He sees himself as the defender of the true faith against the inroads of secularism, and therefore being able to ensure that his legacy continues is probably a factor in his decision to resign,” Rosen said.

Despite not having the same “emotional commitment” to dialogue as John Paul, European Jewish Congress president Dr.

Moshe Kantor noted that “his intellectual commitment as expressed in his firm stance against the collective and individual guilt of Jews in the killing of Jesus is one that must appreciated by Jewish communities.”

Reiterating the hopes voiced by other Jewish communities around the world that are worried about the upcoming papal transition, Vivian Wineman, the president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, told Sky News that “we have been gratified by the efforts of the papacy to engage in interfaith [dialogue], particularly with the Jewish community. We hope and expect this to continue when Pope Benedict’s successor is appointed.”

Both British Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks and Chief Rabbi of Rome Riccardo di Segni also voiced their appreciation for Benedict.

Sacks called the pope “a man of gentleness,” noting that he was a “compassionate individual who carried with him an aura of grace and wisdom.”

Di Segni told the Post that despite disagreements, which were “inevitable given the essential differences between the two worlds,” the Jewish community of Rome always appreciated the pope’s “will to underline the Jewish roots of Christianity as a presupposition to a respectful and productive relationship.”

[Pat Bateman]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

Thanks. I think what I said is true. The hatred just seeps out of these people. No one can be that edgy unless there's something he's uncomfortable about, and what they're uncomfortable about is knowing, at some deeper level, that they're deliberately and destructively inverting the truth in their politics. That alone accounts for the wild hatred in their responses.

You're right - that parroted ideology is more an implement of abuse than a genuine position. That they become enraged when scoffed at points to the inherent falseness of their ideas. They're at a loss with you, because their jew memes fall flat when they try to apply them to arguments that are clearly destroying them - so they have no choice but to delete your comments.
A time-honored jewish tradition: if you can't win fairly - then cheat and kill.

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Pat Bateman

You're right - that parroted ideology is more an implement of abuse than a genuine position. That they become enraged when scoffed at points to the inherent falseness of their ideas. They're at a loss with you, because their jew memes fall flat when they try to apply them to arguments that are clearly destroying them - so they have no choice but to delete your comments.
A time-honored jewish tradition: if you can't win fairly - then cheat and kill.

I think the twat site banned me, but still have my fahren416 on the others.

[Alex Linder]

here on facebook censoring an LRC writer
http://lewrockwell.com/rappoport/rappoport21.1.html

[Pat Bateman]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

I think the twat site banned me, but still have my fahren416 on the others.

Well - you encapsulated their entire kike agenda in a single post.
And much like Facebook - neither venue was intended to disseminate truth.

fahren416 7 days ago:

"Don't you get it? The entire point of Jezebel is to encourage young white women to hate white men and not to want children.
Frankfurt School. Attack on white culture by anti-white jews.
Jezebel is jewish poison. If you're reading this as a non-jew, realize most of the writers are jews, and all of the articles are intended to damage you."

[Alex Linder]

white sports fans DONT love niggers.
http://deadspin.com/5986019/espn-urg...?post=57664232

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Pat Bateman

Well - you encapsulated their entire kike agenda in a single post.
And much like Facebook - neither venue was intended to disseminate truth.

fahren416 7 days ago:

"Don't you get it? The entire point of Jezebel is to encourage young white women to hate white men and not to want children.
Frankfurt School. Attack on white culture by anti-white jews.
Jezebel is jewish poison. If you're reading this as a non-jew, realize most of the writers are jews, and all of the articles are intended to damage you."

They banned me as farhren416. But I just got a new "burner" account. Very quick and easy, anyone who reads the gawker sites should get one. They give you a pw and dont track you or anything. Takes just a few seconds.