White Nationalism, Part II

Great Debates
61

John Hron was a 14 year old Swedish kid of partial Czech descent that was known to stand up and debate the neo-Nazis in his school. (Slavs are to Scandinavian neo-Nazis about the equivalent of Mexicans to the neo-Nazis in America) One night he had the misfortune of meeting some of his debating opponent scum in an environment where they could debate in their way.

Since the linked website doesn’t really tell the story very well post that, I’ll fill in. John swam out about 30 to 50 meters from the shore. His skinhead tormentors then started threatening his friend instead forcing him to call out to John that he should come back or else they would start beating him up in his place.

John, a boy known to always have stood up to his friends just as much as to his ideals decides to swim back. He climbs up on the granite cliffs and although he is already so severely beaten that his face is almost swollen shut he stands up and tells the skinheads to let his friend go and take him in his place.

The two skins who have been torturing and humiliating him for hours accommodate John. They punch him and beat him unconscious this time and then kick his lifeless body into the water where it “sinks like a stone” as one of them observed.

The four skinheads stay around for a bit while John is drowning just meters away from them in shallow water that they could easily save him out of. They drink another bear and then turn away and go home to bed.

Sparc

62

John Hron was a 14 year old Swedish kid of partial Czech descent that was known to stand up and debate the neo-Nazis in his school. (Slavs are to Scandinavian neo-Nazis about the equivalent of Mexicans to the neo-Nazis in America) One night he had the misfortune of meeting some of his debating opponent scum in an environment where they could debate in their way.

Since the linked website doesn’t really tell the story very well post that, I’ll fill in. John swam out about 30 to 50 meters from the shore. His skinhead tormentors then started threatening his friend instead forcing him to call out to John that he should come back or else they would start beating him up in his place.

John, a boy known to always have stood up to his friends just as much as to his ideals decides to swim back. He climbs up on the granite cliffs and although he is already so severely beaten that his face is almost swollen shut he stands up and tells the skinheads to let his friend go and take him in his place.

The two skins who have been torturing and humiliating him for hours accommodate John. They punch him and beat him unconscious this time and then kick his lifeless body into the water where it “sinks like a stone” as one of them observed.

The four skinheads stay around for a bit while John is drowning just meters away from them in shallow water that they could easily save him out of. They drink another bear and then turn away and go home to bed.

Sparc

63

Holy Christ that’s horrible.b That makes me soooo fucking angry.

64

[heavy sarcasm]Halogen, you’ve convinced me.
Jews are smarter and sneakier than the rest of humanity, and they have a successful plan to take over the world. There is only one thing to do.

Can someone tell me how I can become a Jew, please?[/heavy sarcasm]

65

Hey, WNs. A gift especially for you.

66

Sparc, what happened with his killers? Are they in jail? That was one of the most horrible things I have ever read.

67

We are not all the same. In a white nation, segregation rules would not exist because there would be no blacks to segregate from. There would be no blacks to exploit for labor. Thus, there would be no supremacy.

I happen to be in Canada. Shouldn’t I be a bit concerned that a Jewish family almost has a media monopoly and wants all his newspapers to speak with one voice on certain issues, such as Israel?

Stalin didn’t lead the Bolshevik revolution. He took it over, but Jewish dominated groups got the ball rolling. Even Winston Churchill acknowledged this.

Winston Churchill on Jews

You think that the fact that both men and women have to enter the workplace to afford to raise a family is good for the nation? You think motherhood being denigrated is good for the nation? Birth rates are declining in all Western nations because of the triumph of feminism in “liberating” women from family and motherhood. When birth rates are lower than 2.1 needed for replacement, how will society survive when the population ages? By importing immigrants? Let’s see… aging white population that doesn’t have enough kids to even replace themselves + floods of third world immigration = white minority in all previous western countries = a dead western civilization in the future as the third world takes over the developed world by demographics.

I suppose you think that the sexual revolution was good for women? It was good for men who are now free to screw around with a bunch of “liberated women” and not even bother getting married.

In a nation that was about 95% white until immigration opened in the 60’s, don’t you think it’s pretty damn natural that white men would have a history of dominating the government? Or, do you propose an affirmitive action plan where Congressmen should just be planted in the House based on race?

Also, I think it should be pretty clear by now that most of those “white men” in the government aren’t acting in the interests of most white men, or the borders would be shut by now and no one would be pandering to ethnic lobby groups. As for foriegn policy, it’s completely dominated by Jewish interests. Jews also make up a large part of the govenment disproportionate to their tiny fraction of the population.

No, it’s not true at all. It only means that groups that use a strategy to promote their interests as a group will always find ways to dominate over individuals that don’t work as a group. When white people work as a group to promote their interests as a group, Jews tend to find their days numbered, as shown by their history of being constantly booted out of nations.

It’s not world domination, you goof. Are you done with your straw man? It’s conflicting tribal interests.

Culture of Critique

68

Because they only get away with it by sucking tax dollars out of the US and using their lobbying to harass politicians into supporting whatever Israel wants.

Straw man. No one claims that they have “total control”. They have disproportionate control and use it to influence society for their own tribal interests, which most often conflict with the good of the nation.

Sparc, do you really want me to start spamming the thread with cases of black on white crime?

69
70

No thanks on the spam. I’m sure there’s some sort of prepackaged WN black-on-white-crime index somewhere, filled with broken links. But hey, as long as you’re so impressed with anecdotal data, why don’t you try finding some white-on-black crime, or maybe white-on-immigrant crime, since immigration seems to be the biggest burr in your saddle. Who knows, you might even learn something.

71

Statistically, non-white on white crime is the highest.
A lot of people here say that “We don’t care what religion someone is… what’s wrong with them flooding into our nations or owning most of the media?”

Answer: Do you really think that if all the European or North American countries were majority Islamic, they would give a crap about freedom of religion, “liberalism”, “feminism”, and your utopian multi-cult"? Religion, culture, and tribal loyalty shape someone’s beliefs and actions. Jews have the most sway over US media outside of Israel. Is it any wonder that the US media is notoriously pro-Israel, pro-Jewish, pro-social liberalism?

72

John was killed in 1995.

There were four skinheads in the group that assaulted battered and murdered him. Two of them, the youngest (15) and the oldest (18) supposedly carried out most of the torture, the second participated in the first wave of torture but allegedly not in the beating that led to John’s death. It was never established whether the fourth skin actually participated or “only” cheered his comrades on.

The 15 year old and 18 year old skinheads were found guilty of the Swedish equivalent murder in the first degree. They were given sentences of 5 and 6 years prison respectively. Prison sentences are generally very low in Sweden and the maximum possible sentence for murder for an adult would be 8 years. Even if the 5-year sentence would usually be considered severe given that the accused was just barely of criminal adult age, both sentences stirred outrage in Sweden at the time since the court did not find that it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that this was a hate crime, which would have warranted maximum sentences.

Skinhead number three was found guilty of aggravated assault, aggravated robbery (he stole John’s money) and kidnapping. He got community service.

The fourth, also 18 years old was accused of failure to report a sever crime, but his case never made it to trial since the judges threw it out on technical grounds.

In all cases it being 2002 both of the two murderers condemned to prison are free and as far as I know they are walking the streets somewhere in Southern Sweden as I type this.

Remember John Hron, remember that he wasn’t the first one, ponder that as long as the Aryan Nation cooks spread their psychobabble bullshit he won’t be the last one. That’s what you have to debate them on, that is what lays behind their facts, nothing else. Unmitigated anger. Paranoid fear. Irrational hatred. Social angst and feelings of being disenfranchised and alienated.

On that note: Sionnach and Halogen; do you realize that through your spreading your ideology you contribute and support actions like John Hron’s murder. I rarely accuse people of being guilty by association, but in my book you are guilty of supporting John’s murder. I know you disagree, but think about it for a while…

Just consider how it all happened, where these psychos got their ideas from and why they specifically went after John. Go here look at John’s face. If you have the guts, go to the linked police reports and look at the autopsy pictures to see what that young boy looked like after your like was done with him.

Ponder that he would have been a 21 year old man today if your brethren hadn’t ended his life. Ponder that he is dead only because your ilk didn’t like his ethnicity and the fact that he argued against your ideology of intolerance and hatred. Ponder that he was just as Swedish and just as white as his killers although some pamphlet from Nordiska Rikspartiet (the Swedish neo-Nazi party) or Storm (Swedish neo-Nazi fanzine) had made these idiots believe that Slavs aren’t ‘real whites’ and immigrant scum. When you go to bed tonight think of John Hron, think of his killers, think of the fact that they might be one of your internet pals and every time you help spread another one of your sick lies you might be adding that extra measure of mental nitro to one of your fellow neo-Nazis, which will make him explode and kill another innocent person like John Hron.

Hah! The murder of John Hron was White Nationalist on white innocent crime. Again, have a look at his picture. It was a hate crime executed by people you agree with against a person you claim you want to protect from other ‘races’. John was white - get it - white as in pale skin as in of completely European stock as you would put it. Incidentally his mother is Swedish and his father isn’t even Slavic, he is from Bohemian German Czech family - which only adds another sad ironic twist to it all.

Further Sionnach, what about the questions I asked you at the end of the original thread? Are you going to answer them?

Sparc

73

Sparc, you mean those a**holes are free. There is no justice in this world.

74

Statistically–as in so many other ways–you’re full of shit. The highest rates of crime are committed by and against members of the same racial group. Interracial crime is a very small portion of the overall crime rate.

75

Sionnach: I’ve been unable to find anything about this on WN sites, so I’ve got three questions for you:

What’s the WN plan for the Roma and Sinti (Gypsies) in North America and Europe?

What do you think about the treatment of them in Europe (Before, during and after the Holocaust)?

What do you, personally, think about them?

76

Yes you are. All of you. A bunch of mindless clones, spouting the same rhetoric without giving the least thought to what you are saying. As long as it’s against Jews and blacks and immigrants, it’s good enough for you, right?

You and your kind have demonstrated that the concept of “individual” is meaningless to you. If a black person commits a crime, all black people are criminals. If a Jew runs a business, all Jews are money-grubbing rats.

And yet, you will have us believe that you’re not all Nazi skinheads pushing White Supremacy? Sorry. You get what you give.
**

I can honestly say I don’t care whether it’s good for the nation, since I’m not a nationalist. Is it good for the family? Maybe not. But you are more interested in your nation than the people in it.

**

I suppose, like so many other concepts, that of “overpopulation” eludes you, doesn’t it?

**

So, you look forward to being used and treated as breeding stock, then? Knock yourself out, kiddo.

77

And now…for the lighter side of WN. Check this out. I believe PailRyder is tongue-in-cheek, but the others appear to be serious. (Don Black is the founder of Stormfront). ;j

78

*Originally posted by Sionnach *

Sorry, I hate to interject, but do you have any evidence for this?

Birth rates in the United States and Canada (as well as in the rest of the “Developed World” - Western Europe, Japan, Australia) have be declining for a long time - long before “feminism” had “librated” women from family and motherhood. A primary reason for the decline of birth rates in the developed world had to to with the success of the U.S., Canadian, etc. economies.

That’s one way. Another way would be to increase birth rates. But raising a family in a modern, industrialized nation is expensive. To deal with this, countries will most likely to have to establish policies making it more attractive for people to have more kids. But this may come at the expense of policies aimed at dealing with a growing elderly population. And people might not necessarily want to have more kids. Of course, you could always force people to have more kids (a la Ceaucescu in Romania). Which, if white nationalists ever came to power would probably be an attractive alternative :rolleyes:

A much easier solution in dealing with the problem is immigration.

A very good example of the above situation is Japan. Over the next 50 years if current population trends continue, Japan’s population is expected to drop from around 120 million to 90-95 million. Japan has one of the highest (if not the highest) life expectancy in the world and one of the fastest growing elderly populations in the world. Japan also has been very reluctant to open its borders to immigrants. And current attempts by the government to incourage people to have more kids hasn’t worked.

If Japan wants to maintain its current level of economic growth and development, then it is going to have to deal with the issue of allowing more immigrants into the country. If it can’t (or won’t) do this, then it faces the real prospect of economic decline (relative to its current position).

79

IzzyR, that was hilarious. It combined stupidity and paranoia with fascinating results. I think that PailRyder did a good job of winding them up.

80

Sionnach: *In a nation that was about 95% white until immigration opened in the 60’s, don’t you think it’s pretty damn natural that white men would have a history of dominating the government? Or, do you propose an affirmitive action plan where Congressmen should just be planted in the House based on race? *

:confused: What nation would you happen to be talking about here? Your reference to “Congressmen” sounds as though you mean the US, but in that case your estimate of a population “about 95% white” prior to the 1960’s is ridiculously inaccurate. Blacks alone—never mind all the other “non-white” ethnic groups—made up nearly 12% of the US population as far back as 1890, according to the national census in that year. And Canada, of course, had large black and Amerind minorities—not to mention a good many East Asians—by the 19th century as well.

There’s simply no historical support for any claim of some traditionally “95% white” nation in North America. Maybe you were thinking of Iceland?

Hijack: I suppose you think that the sexual revolution was good for women?

Speaking as a woman, why yes, on the whole I do think so. Those of us who don’t subscribe to some bizarro belief that heterosexual mores are fundamentally adversarial—where men only want to “screw around” and women only want to extort marriage as the price of screwing—consider it appropriate for both men and women to make their own individual choices about sexual behavior.