The Decline Of Society

[K-man]

Further to posts placed in 'How did you learn your second language'

Hey zw.

I completely agree with what you said. The UK is practically unrecognisable these days. The advent of new laws from europe have done nothing but weaken a once strong nation. Unfortunately there appears to be a fundamental lack of discipline within society.

[zwmusic]

Good move K. I just have to dash now... I'll join this conversation later on. Cheers.

[soserious]

Yeah, good call.
I too must dash, I`ll catch this a bit later maybe after work.

ss

[soserious]

Yesterday amongst hundreds of customers at work (at the time though it was a quiet period) was this woman and her son (she was perhaps around 40, he a teenager, English) they came out of a screen past the drop box where I was and asked what time a certain film started- I told them taht teh trailers and ads had already finished and it was the start of the film now- they went downstairs to get tickets so they could come back up and go watch it.

Man, I was really touched, I would have done a lot to go out of my way to facilitate them if neccesary- an English mother and son bonding like that, we die and moments like that can never exist again. It was sad and beautiful and happy at the same time, so fragile yet tangible.
Society starts with the family.

What a lot of people don`t figure is that what the problem in Europe is is LOSS. Loss of culture and gene pool, it`s sad.

Very frequently people make assumptions about me, one guy said he first assumed I was NF but said that he didn`t believe I could be given the number and majority of otehrs who are not Indignious Europians who work and watch there, he said it would be like "a black man going to work for the KKK".
Ovcourse I said nothing, it is ignorant of people to continue to assume that anyone who is remotley Nationalist hates everyone else and is evil. That is such a "prejudice" thing for them to assume.
It is not about hate, and then there are seperatists whom they confuse so frequently with supremacists. It`s all absurd and non logical.

I want to get further into this at some stage but I have to get to work in in a few minutes.

But yeah, I will always do my best to help a family who is trying.

[soserious]

THIS (http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/2.htm) faith has NO business on the land of my ancestors. MY land. European land.
keep clicking "next"

[soserious]

Want more?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3okBYEoWkEM&search=anti%20islam

[Spike]

But we being British have the right to settle in any country we choose, not bother to learn the local lingo, meet fellow expats and form a cricket club, dress how we choose, bring our own teabags, Heinz baked beans and sausages, and expect Johnny Foreigner to conform to our standards.

[Little Acorn]

Good point Spike. I havent been to the U.K since the late 80's with my father (who was english). I dunno what its like now, but for me England will always be England, regardless of the backgrounds of the people. I think England has a culture strong enough to withstand some smaller influences from newer arrivals, possibly negative influences. Look at the tv, media, parliament...its still very much driven by white anglo saxon males. Its still very English in the traditional sense.

Then you have the influence of Indians, Pakistani's and just about every nationality in Europe...it all makes for one huge melting pot. Sure it can be disorienting, but you have to learn to embrace it, and enjoy it. Its the same here in Australia, just not on the same scale. Off course here we probably have a more asian orientation..naturally enough since were smack bang in Asia.

England needs to come to grips with the fact that England is in many ways the center of Europe, your gonna get people from every corner of the globe. You have what the busiest and second busiest airports in the world? Embrace it and love it...I know I would if i was living there.

[soserious]

Watch your mouth there, you do not know what you are talking about and your wording couldn`t be worse.
The late eighties was a LONG time ago.


And to address this issue of peoples sticking to their groups- thats human nature, it happens everywhere by all humans.
The problem isn`t that they form groups, it is that they are here in the first place.
Every time one is fucking rude to me or screams in my face or robs me or brings or any number of things that insult I am so tempted to ask them why they are in my country? What the hell right do they have to the land.

Don`t anyone tell me I must "embrace" this shit,

I think England has a culture strong enough to withstand some smaller influences from newer arrivals, possibly negative influences. Look at the tv, media, parliament...its still very much driven by white anglo saxon males. Its still very English in the traditional sense.
WRONG.

Then you have the influence of Indians, Pakistani's and just about every nationality in Europe...it all makes for one huge melting pot

Why the FUCK would true Europeans want a fucking melting pot for their future generations? Dumbass..


England needs to come to grips with the fact that England is in many ways the center of Europe, your gonna get people from every corner of the globe. You have what the busiest and second busiest airports in the world? Embrace it and love it...I know I would if i was living there.

*Furious*
England don`t need to do SHIT to help more destruction of itself.
I am too enraged right now to elaborate and give you a list of reasons why you are so very very wrong.


Remember UNITED KINGDOM IS NOT AMERICA AND IS NOT BASED ON THE SAME PRINCIPLES.

SS

[Valk]

So Zwmusic isnt welcome in your country either?

From what I understand of your rants you're more upset that your gene pool gets mixed up then the vile behauviour of some of those immigrants.

And please keep it civilized SS. For someone who keeps hammering on 'discussing like matures' you seem to reach your boiling point a little too often, a little too quick.

[Axlerod]

I'm sorry SS but I just hope to got that most people in the UK don't have the same kind of warped views that you have.

I find a lot of what you have said saddening and somewhat sickening.

If people at work assumed you were some kind of nazi because of the way you look, then knowing how you think would have done little to change that perception.

I know you don't think you're racist. The old "I can't be racist, some of my friends are 'em" kind of attitude. But you are. Your views on race, culture, society, are outdated, offensive, and, yes, racist.

[Axlerod]

Oh and by the way, on a genetic level there is no such thing as race. It is a social and not a biological construct.

[soserious]

A little too quick?
What is my nickname others gave me?! BERSERKER.
I get angry when I see lies and falsities and when I am not allowed to defend my future generations. Do you think most Europeans want the future to be some amalgamation of religions and everyone to be grey and have no motive but money?

Actually it is MORE than just loss of gene pool, and what is wrong with that in itself may I ask? What is wrong with wanting to preserve the gene pool of MY people in MY homelands? The very same lands that for thousands of years my ancestors have called home, the very land that shaped their bodies and forged their features?
Do you know what we used to do when invaders came? WAR.

Perhaps you want everyone to be mixed- no black, no white just grey, is that so? Are you therefore a Grey supremacist? That would be very racist now wouldn`t it...

ZW by the way is European.
ZWmusic=White: Born in Brazil from Italian/German/Russian background.
He`s genetics are European, that entitles him to be welcome in Europe and Uk in my book.

ss

[soserious]

Oh and by the way, on a genetic level there is no such thing as race. It is a social and not a biological construct.

WHAT??!!

That is the single most stupidest thing I have heard on Cc all year.
You cannot be serious.
There is so much scientific evidence out there to the contrary that it isn`t even funny.
Even "new scientist" has evidence that tehre most definitly are significant distinctions between race.

:roll:

[Axlerod]

If you want to talk about genetic descent then we're all from Africa.

Plus, there is more genetic variation within than between the arbitrary and illogical classifications known as races.

The handful of genes that determine the features which are used to split humans into races are a drop in the ocean in terms of all the genes that make up a human and vary across the entire human gene pool.

[Axlerod]

The new scientist article DID NOT say that races are a genetic fact. It said that the idea is not as completely absurd on a genetic level as conventional scientific wisdom arugues.

It is interesting, and comforting, to note that it was an article saying "hang on there is maybe some evidence to support the idea of races at the genetic level" that is now considered contravertial.

[soserious]

I'm sorry SS but I just hope to got that most people in the UK don't have the same kind of warped views that you have.

I find a lot of what you have said saddening and somewhat sickening.

If people at work assumed you were some kind of nazi because of the way you look, then knowing how you think would have done little to change that perception.

I know you don't think you're racist. The old "I can't be racist, some of my friends are 'em" kind of attitude. But you are. Your views on race, culture, society, are outdated, offensive, and, yes, racist.

You have NO basis for that.

Let me tell you why YOU are prejudice and not I.
At no point did I say that any race was better than another, at no point did I say I hate other races (Racist definition encompasses these two beliefs.) Looks like you`re shit out of ammo against your "racist accusation".

You need to realise the difference between the desire for self determination and race hatred and race supremacy. You sound like a typical brainwashed Political correctness activist.

Go on.. Tell me where I am racist. Qoute it now and explain yourself.

[soserious]

]If you want to talk about genetic descent then we're all from Africa.

Which matters how?
Ovcourse you cannot tell us apart, I mean we all have brown skin and brown eyes and exactly the same physical qualities.. :roll:



Plus, there is more genetic variation within than between the arbitrary and illogical classifications known as races.

talk sense man.


The handful of genes that determine the features which are used to split humans into races are a drop in the ocean in terms of all the genes that make up a human and vary across the entire human gene pool.

So you agree, even though you may not realise you just have.

[Axlerod]

I'm not trying to attack you personally SS. I just couldn't let what you said go without saying something.

And any levelheaded person reading this thread knows that you hold racist views whether I say it or not.

[Valk]

A little too quick?
What is my nickname others gave me?! BERSERKER.
I get angry when I see lies and falsities and when I am not allowed to defend my future generations. Do you think most Europeans want the future to be some amalgamation of religions and everyone to be grey and have no motive but money?

Actually it is MORE than just loss of gene pool, and what is wrong with that in itself may I ask? What is wrong with wanting to preserve the gene pool of MY people in MY homelands? The very same lands that for thousands of years my ancestors have called home, the very land that shaped their bodies and forged their features?
Do you know what we used to do when invaders came? WAR.

Perhaps you want everyone to be mixed- no black, no white just grey, is that so? Are you therefore a Grey supremacist? That would be very racist now wouldn`t it...

ZW by the way is European. He`s genetics are European, that entitles him to be welcome in Europe and Uk in my book.

ss

This thread is about the decline of society and IMO that decline has zero to do with mixed gene pools. I couldn't care less if we would mix or not, I want people to become respectful, civilized human beings.

[soserious]

The new scientist article DID NOT say that races are a genetic fact. It said that the idea is not as completely absurd on a genetic level as conventional scientific wisdom arugues.

It is interesting, and comforting, to note that it was an article saying "hang on there is maybe some evidence to support the idea of races at the genetic level" that is now considered contravertial.

Sources..
Anyone with an ounce of common sense (that hasn`t been brainwashed away by years of anti-white pc bullshit) will understand the differences.

But why are you going down this route? What are you trying to prove?
That we are all the same and the whole Earth belongs to us all.. sure, why aren`t you letting a family of asylum seekers saty in YOUR house and why aren`t you paying for their food?

[Axlerod]

You sound like a typical brainwashed Political correctness activist.

Dammit, without realising I've become brainwashed by logic, reason, and fact.

[Axlerod]

SS throughout this thread (and in your ramblings elsewhere) you conflate biological and cultural issues. I was exploring the weakness of the biological basis of your views (your refernce to european/uk gene pools, and the like).

The cultural/social arguments are completely different. Whether or not someone agrees with asylum policies has nothing to do with biology. It is a social/political decision.

[soserious]

I'm not trying to attack you personally SS. I just couldn't let what you said go without saying something.

And any levelheaded person reading this thread knows that you hold racist views whether I say it or not.

So you have no evidence!
See? You are arguing with me out of YOUR misbeliefs. What are my racist views?
You are a fool, whats more fool is you think I am the fool. You are just not used to hearing such things said and you don`t know how to handle it without getting emotional and name calling me. No a rational sensible person would see my argument is valid.

Racism doesn`t even come into this conversation.

[soserious]

Dammit, without realising I've become brainwashed by logic, reason, and fact.


Show me your reason, logic and fact. Back them up with scientific sources.

[soserious]

SS throughout this thread (and in your ramblings elsewhere) you conflate biological and cultural issues. I was exploring the weakness of the biological basis of your views (your refernce to european/uk gene pools, and the like).

The cultural/social arguments are completely different. Whether or not someone agrees with asylum policies has nothing to do with biology. It is a social/political decision.


What are you talking about??
jesus christ.
THIS Valk, THIS is why I get angry so quick, because of peopel who say THIS type of shit. That Biological race doesn`t matter.
Do you even know Europes history well enough to talk about it?

How dare you just sweep biological race under the carpet like that as if its very mention unsettles you. You fucking coward.

[Axlerod]

Like I said SS I'm not trying to attack you personally. I didn't expect it to change your views but it would have been wrong to just let you say those kind of things without question. I wouldn't like someone to come on this board, see this thread, and think that all people on CC think like that.

I have said my piece and will not comment on this thread again. That of course does not mean that I agree in any way with what you've said or what you might say from now on.

Feel free to go on as you were . . . .

[soserious]

This thread is about the decline of society and IMO that decline has zero to do with mixed gene pools. I couldn't care less if we would mix or not, I want people to become respectful, civilized human beings.


Another person scared to talk about something which society has deemed "evil" to talk about and even "inconsequential".

I can`t believe you.
Are you telling me that people like my sister, my nephews and nieces are not entitled to live on teh land of their ancestors with their gene pool that was made for exactly that?

I would rather be hated for telling the truth than liked for keeping quiet or believeing lies or worse.. propogating them.

[Valk]

Who says I'm scared to talk about it? This thread is (was) about the decline of society but apparently our opinions differ what that decline actually is.

But anyway, what is your definition of the term race then? How many races are there?

[soserious]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasoid%2C_Negroid%2C_Mongoloid

Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Australoid and Capoid are terms that were once widely used in physical anthropology to delineate different races of humans. Caucasoid denoted people indigenous to Europe, North Africa, Western Asia, South Asia and the Western portion of Central Asia. Negroid denoted those indigenous to sub-Saharan Africa and portions of North Africa. Mongoloid designated the people of East Asia, Southeast Asia, the Eastern portion of Central Asia, the Americas, Greenland, Polynesia and the easternmost regions of South Asia. Australoid denoted the indigenous peoples of Melanesia, Micronesia and Australia. Finally, Capoid denoted the Khoi and San populations of Southern Africa.

Then ovcourse there are many differences between even those.

Here are some reasons why the differences are important regarding medicine:
http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/race.htm
I think anyone wants the best medical care for their people. The "no such thing as race brigade" don`t want you to though evidently. (Many more links like this in NewScientist)

[soserious]

Lets get something clear here,
I started off and intend to continue with the argument for Europe and Great Britains RIGHT to self determination, its right to its OWN culture, its right to its OWN values and political ideologies and the right to its OWN inherent gene pool.

I didn`t ask for some ignorant guy to try and dispute the existance of race. :roll:

[Valk]

But whats the problem with Polish immigrants then? They're caucasian and should be free to mingle in our gene pool.

[soserious]

I never said I have a problem with Polish immigrants. (They`re European/ Caucasian afterall).

[Valk]

I believe you said it in a email.

[Valk]

Not only another race, but another ethnic group can fuck up the gene pool as well, dont you think?

So a negroid isnt welcome in Europe, but a brazilian guy (with the common mixed brazilian gene pool) is?

[soserious]

If you want me to be totally Nationalistic then yes, there would be a problem. But frankly I would rather have those who are basically the same people as ours in UK than those from distinct gene pools.

I am not afriad to stand by my guns, I know that there are many people like me who are afraid to speak out for fear of bullying.

Yes, I think I talked about inheritance.
Let me see.....

Damn, I can`t find the email, I had it explained better than I can at this minute, do you have a copy you can send to me again?

[soserious]

Not only another race, but another ethnic group can fuck up the gene pool as well, dont you think?

Yes ovcourse, but Polish and Germanic and such are close enough to be the same. Britain was inhabited by many European stocks over the years- the meditaerainids took the southern edg and part of wales and Ireland, Vikings (Your people infact) Came here and bred, Swedes, Norway, Germanic and French tribes (The Goths, The Vandals, the Celts -Germanic groups these are) Gaul aswell, infact we were doing ok but the Southern Europeans in the Shape of Romans came and "spread peace and democracy" amongst our warring tribes and ovcourse didn`t fail to notice the many tonnes of Gold we had in our lands.. so much gold did they steal from us that its value actually depreciated.


So a negroid isnt welcome in Europe, but a brazilian guy (with the common mixed brazilian gene pool) is?

No. Why would they be?



Do you know the history of Brazil and South America?.. I assume that you do but are being pertinent.
Let me requote myself:

ZW by the way is European.

Quote:
ZWmusic=White: "Born in Brazil from Italian/German/Russian background".

He`s genetics are European, that entitles him to be welcome in Europe and Uk in my book.

ss

[soserious]

Now, lets continue shall we?

Decline of society.

I think that the value placed upon materialism has done much to break down other core values and demoralise people, this has been brought about by the economy.
The economy seems to be some kind of living entity which must be fed frequently and continuously, unfortunatly the countries governing systems has been built upon this economy so breaking it down causes pain aswell as being part of it.
It eats money and humans and shits out toxic waste, pollutants and burned out people.

Humans are taught from an early age that items of clothing, furniture, devices and other products must be used for a short time only. Then replaced and thrown away, thus adding to ones enslavement on the economic treadmill. Is there anyone here who does not know someone in debt? What about someone in debt for spending more on things tahn tehy could afford to? Credit cards and perhaps buying thinsg that weren`t truly neccesary?
Or what about being squeezed out of the world by increasing taxation and other new ways to lose money?

Then we have the breakup of family as a unit. Also this PC nonsense where
men and women are used to make a family but are not part of it (where two gay men have a woman inseminated so they can have a child. Or where men "donate" sperm to couples or Gay women so tehy can have a baby sans the father) This is totally unacceptable, the child must come first as a consideration.

There is far more on these subjects and more, much much more. Feel free to chime in.
Hopefully we can come to some helpful conclusions.

[Valk]

Yes ovcourse, but Polish and Germanic and such are close enough to be the same. Britain was inhabited by many European stocks over the years- the meditaerainids took the southern edg and part of wales and Ireland, Vikings (Your people infact) Came here and bred, Swedes, Norway, Germanic and French tribes (The Goths, The Vandals, the Celts -Germanic groups these are) Gaul aswell, infact we were doing ok but the Southern Europeans in the Shape of Romans came and "spread peace and democracy" amongst our warring tribes and ovcourse didn`t fail to notice the many tonnes of Gold we had in our lands.. so much gold did they steal from us that its value actually depreciated.


So which ethnic groups arent allowed to mix with your gene pool then?

And what if ZW's partner (sorry that I'm using you as an example ZW) had some negroid genes? She isnt allowed here then, isnt she?

[soserious]

Actually if you re-read what I wrote I said "with the exception of London and the South-East."

Outside of that, NO. Ovcourse not.

You are not hearing me- UK particularly has much of europe in its gene pool already. So Europeans are the same stock and thus technically are not a problem. (Turkey wants in to the EU but should not be allowed to be part of Europe and would not be welcome to settle outside of International zones.)

You know at the moment we have 400,000 NEW failed asylum seekers in London? They are not permitted by law to eb here but you know what? They ARE here because teh government is too pussified to send them right back or decline entry in the first place. They are let in to be dealt with later, meantime they go AWOL.

They have NO business here. I`m sure you would love a large community of Muslim immigrants of the Middle-East or Africa moving in on your neighbourhood turning it into their culture, I`m sure you would be praising multi-culturalism then and "embracing it" just as that little acorn guy said he would do. :roll:

[Valk]

Why are you always putting words into my mouths and hang incorrect labels on me?


They have NO business here. I`m sure you would love a large community of Muslim immigrants of the Middle-East or Africa moving in on your neighbourhood turning it into their culture, I`m sure you would be praising multi-culturalism then and "embracing it" just as that little acorn guy said he would do

What the fuck are you on about? Everyone who doesnt agree with you, you try to label as a pussy, a invertibrate. Please.

Just because I dont agree with your seperatist ideas doesnt mean I concur with the idea of other ethnic groups forcing their culture on us.
For your information, Holland is dealing with multi-culturalism longer then today.
Immigrants coming to Holland must integrate in our culture, nomatter what gene pool they're from or not. Even polish immigrants.
Immigrants with no respect for our culture need to get fuck out, simple.

[soserious]

Why? Because I knew you would get pissed at me and state YOUR take on it, I KNOW how Holland is having troubles with this, as indeed is all of Europe.

I provoked you because I am sick of people making me out to be some kind of racist but yet not stating their personal views themselves.
I apologise for being rash with you, I knew it was wrong to stir your anger but wanted a reply with your true thoughts.

Actually I am NOT racist, to those who still think otherwise. Not that I care too much what those who would label me think.
Yes I amk Nationalist and Yes I am part seperatist.
I would not want full seperatism, for many reasons. Yet I do not want full integration because you end up with something either resembling neither side/s or something which is more of the agessive side or even dominant genes. (For example brown eyes being dominant)
Ovcourse Liberal wacks want us all to blend into some mix of everything, no true identity but rather a homogenous single race. No diversity. Yuck.

You know, it wasn`t long ago that I was Liberal, I for most of my life did not know or care. It is only when I took the time to look at reality and truth and the clear cold facts that it started to concern me that the peoples of Europe were in danger of losing everything. Slowly.. things change, slowly but unstoppable under current government and law.




Do Europeans not have a right to exist?
One day with and because of air headed people who bandy about the "R" word at the merest hint of any defiance there will be none.

[soserious]

Just because I dont agree with your seperatist ideas doesnt mean I concur with the idea of other ethnic groups forcing their culture on us.


So what then is your solution?
Integrate and accept their culture fully (because many of them have more conviction of their beliefs and wont let them go)?
Or seperatist legislation with defined International zones?


The thing about Foreign Nationals settling in our countries is that they mix and change the culture and gene pool. Maybe you don`t care but I do,
and I think many other good hearted people do too. It`s not wrong to care either, it`s not shameful to be sad for loss of a people and a loss of their own culture.
You see I don`t hate other races, I just don`t want them threatening mine.


I do not fight out of hate, I fight out of love for my people and fear of what may come. And God damn it the more idiot white trash that get in the way the harder it is and I will turn on my people if neccesary. Worse, WORSE are intelligent educated whites who refuse to accept it as real.
Do the math, we all know what EXPONENTIAL means and are seeing it in action.




European people have a right to exist, now and in the future.


I think we are being our own worst enemies at the moment, in terms of environmental factors and lifestyle, family and nutrition and ovcourse genetics.

[The Big Banana]

So what then is your solution?
Integrate and accept their culture fully

Youve got that backwards, they should integrate or go home.

Ive got no problem with anyone who can speak English and has a clean police record coming to Australia, but they can leave this kind of bullshit (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1071-2276983,00.html) at the front door. I know thats the UK but we have enough of this in Oz too.

[Axlerod]

Ive got no problem with anyone who can speak English and has a clean police record coming to Australia

A CLEAN police record gets you in to Australia now!? My how things change :wink:

I know I said I wasn't going to post on this thread again but I just couldn't resist.

[soserious]

Actually a lot of those first sent to Australia of British descent were chosen for their strong healthy vigorous stock. The common misconception about them all being prisoners is not entirely accurate.
They were sent to colonise Australia and breed.

[K-man]

Well it seems like I've stirred up a right hornets nest with this thread.

What I was getting at is the apparent lack of common courtesy amongst the younger generation. These days it seems that it's all about getting the most for as little effort as possible. The way that capitalist society has evolved does nothing but magnify the problem. Also the do-gooders from Brussels telling the population that they can no longer discipline their children by means of a slap round the legs when they need it. Now dont get me wrong, I understand that we should do everything possible to stamp the abuse of children (I had a strict upbringing) but there is a massive difference between teaching your kids right from wrong and beating them to within an inch of their lives. Its no wonder that kids have no respect for their elders.

Teach them well and let them lead the way..... LMAO

[zwmusic]

But we being British have the right to settle in any country we choose, not bother to learn the local lingo, meet fellow expats and form a cricket club, dress how we choose, bring our own teabags, Heinz baked beans and sausages, and expect Johnny Foreigner to conform to our standards.

Ask the french about it... and the english people settle in France and complain when they decide to impose their way of life (in another country) and don't receive flowers and cheers from the french people. How cheeky can you get? :neut:

[Master Long]

WHAT??!!

That is the single most stupidest thing I have heard on Cc all year.
You cannot be serious.
There is so much scientific evidence out there to the contrary that it isn`t even funny.
Even "new scientist" has evidence that tehre most definitly are significant distinctions between race.

:roll:

Actually, there are more differences between individuals within races than between them. Ask any social scientist. And race was a myth created by the BRITISH as a propaganda tool against the IRISH, that went on to be used by white, greedy landowners in the New World to drive out black landowners and other non-white competition. Sure, prejudice and discrimination have always existed, but that was based majorly on ethnicity. Racial discrimination is only about 400-500 years old. Check your "facts."

Or you can believe all that "cranium size" bullshit.

Oh, and whoever's telling you all Muslims are warmongers is a propagandist and a demogogue. You're making generalizations about countries where people are too afraid to speak up for fear of being killed. Don't believe the bullshit.

[Spike]

Ask the french about it... and the english people settle in France and complain when they decide to impose their way of life (in another country) and don't receive flowers and cheers from the french people. How cheeky can you get? :neut:

I was being sarcastic - the English must be the world leaders in colonising foreign parts and immediately setting up Little England, we owned 25% of the world about 100 years ago.

Some of my best friends are French. :lol:

[Officespace2801]

Actually, there are more differences between individuals within races than between them. Ask any social scientist. And race was a myth created by the BRITISH as a propaganda tool against the IRISH, that went on to be used by white, greedy landowners in the New World to drive out black landowners and other non-white competition. Sure, prejudice and discrimination have always existed, but that was based majorly on ethnicity. Racial discrimination is only about 400-500 years old. Check your "facts."

Absolutely incorrect. For at least 1000 YEARS before the idea of being "British" even existed, the Chinese (Hans) looked down upon those of Turkic, Mongolian, and Manchurian descent. In fact, the only racial group they didn't look down upon is Indian, and solely because it's where Buddhism began.

The PC police have been for years trying to convince everyone that racial discrimination can solely be pointed to whites. Racial discrimination came out of the west completely independently of the east, and I know for a fact that those aren't the only places in the world that it's been seen. Any social scientist that claims that Britain or any other European counry is the genesis of racial discrimination is an idiot. They should be immediately out of a job for such ignorance.

Getting back to the original idea, though....

I agree with TBB. That's generally how I view the situation needs to be here in the US. We have been catering for too long to Hispanics- they're more than welcome to legally (note the word legally...unlike the 11 million jackasses that have snuck over the border and are now demanding citizenship- go fuck yourself) come to the US, but English is our language here and we can EXPECT you to be able to speak it.

[The Big Banana]

Thats right Officespace, and dont forget the Egyptians enslaving the Hebrews en masse for 400 years or so.

[soserious]

Actually, there are more differences between individuals within races than between them. Ask any social scientist. And race was a myth created by the BRITISH as a propaganda tool against the IRISH, that went on to be used by white, greedy landowners in the New World to drive out black landowners and other non-white competition. Sure, prejudice and discrimination have always existed, but that was based majorly on ethnicity. Racial discrimination is only about 400-500 years old. Check your "facts."

Or you can believe all that "cranium size" bullshit.

Oh, and whoever's telling you all Muslims are warmongers is a propagandist and a demogogue. You're making generalizations about countries where people are too afraid to speak up for fear of being killed. Don't believe the bullshit.

Wow, you`re 18.. oh how wise you must be..
First off there IS such thing as race, and that "theres more differences between individuals of race than between races themselves" crap is always taken out of context, I provided a few quick links to respected scientific sites. You didn`t even back up your "opinion".

No one is telling em that "all muslims are war mongerers", but that IS what the Koran and Islam is about.
www.faithfreedom.org run by EX muslims.
I happen to know too many, I totally disagree with their idealogy on fundamental human rights issues and their beliefs, even if they were all peaceful.


Race does exist. Islam does NOT belong in Europe. Europe BELONGS INHERENTLY to white Europeans. Europeans have a society in decline and an environment that is poisined and must fix the problems we craeted.
STOP trying to go off tangent, I will not be dragged into some liberal ignorant argument about the existance of race, especially with those who haven`t done THEIR homework thoroughly enough.

[Valk]

Us Europeans dont really have a right to be in America and Australia then do we?

The Islam has the right to be in Europe because we've given them that right.
Its inherently human to colonize and take over portions of land outside our current kingdom. Its to the owners of that land to stop other groups and if they can't, the story is over.

[soserious]

Us Europeans dont really have a right to be in America and Australia then do we?

Australia, no.
USA well, new evidence is coming to light of ancient caucasoid peopels having travvelled over the ancient permafrost now melted that means that America may have been first discovered by whites. These new discoveries are under observation.


The Islam has the right to be in Europe because we've given them that right.

Don`t be stupid. I am a white European and I gave no such permission. Perhaps you mean that current government legislation allows for them and punishes anyone who tries to stop them.


Its inherently human to colonize and take over portions of land outside our current kingdom.

It`s also inherently human to want to fight and kill and chase away all invaders.

Its to the owners of that land to stop other groups and if they can't, the story is over.

Again, government legislation.
Things need to change politically, things need to chnage in society, big painful changes in all aspects of society.

[Valk]

Well, thats exactly my point. If other groups come here and force their culture on us, its our (the government) job to stop them from doing so.
But because we (the government) dont do anything about it, its more our faults then theirs.

And please dont call me stupid, liberal or a pussy. Just call me Valk, okay?

[soserious]

Changing the government is part of the overall neccesity.

Whilst they still have a strangle hold on truth telling rather than PC nonsense everyday people are miseducated and are effectively destroying the future of Europe. At the same time they find things that I say to be uncomfortable to deal with, though it is they who are misguided, not I. Part of the problem is that they have an instant knee-jerk reaction to what realists say and react immediaetly rather than taking the time to think deeply about its complex nature.



So, who said I am not political?..
Cc doesn`t know me that well.

Our own media is incredibly important, and I don`t mean the BBC lol.

[zwmusic]

I was being sarcastic - the English must be the world leaders in colonising foreign parts and immediately setting up Little England, we owned 25% of the world about 100 years ago.

Some of my best friends are French. :lol:

I know Spike, your irony is truly english, and I find it super. Pitty (I find) that the english is somehow loosing this delightful quality of making fun of themselves. I bet your french friends also appreciate that. :lol:

Actually, I disagreed with you a while back when you said that London is a shithole. I must say... now I agree 100% with you. What's going on with the green and 'pleasant' land?

[zwmusic]

And what if ZW's partner (sorry that I'm using you as an example ZW) had some negroid genes? She isnt allowed here then, isnt she?

WOW! I'm almost a celebrity now, I was quoted more than 3 times in this thread. More than 3 quotes entitles me to some mega reps, plus a cruise to the greek islands and ten years of free fleshlight replacement. :mrgreen

This term 'Negroid' sounds like the afro/yoda genetic make up from Bobo's planet. :lol:

By the way, my partner is made from the best italian recipe (and I'm not telling you, penis enlarged freaks, any more :lol: ).

Guys, I must agree with K-Man What I was getting at is the apparent lack of common courtesy amongst the younger generation. These days it seems that it's all about getting the most for as little effort as possible. The way that capitalist society has evolved does nothing but magnify the problem. Also the do-gooders from Brussels telling the population that they can no longer discipline their children by means of a slap round the legs when they need it. Now dont get me wrong, I understand that we should do everything possible to stamp the abuse of children (I had a strict upbringing) but there is a massive difference between teaching your kids right from wrong and beating them to within an inch of their lives. Its no wonder that kids have no respect for their elders.

We're all civilized folks (appart from Spike :lol: ), of course a sensitive discussion like this one can branch out to some more delicate issues such as race, etc... but let's not forget that some of the worst anti-social behaviour can be generated by people from any background, and like K-Man pointed out, the most despicable simptom of decay in UK is the ever increasing anti-social behaviour and lack of courtesy, specially amongst younger people.

[zwmusic]

And please dont call me stupid, liberal or a pussy. Just call me Valk, okay?

May I still call you Mr Chirurg?

[Valk]

You can call me anything Sweetie.:mrgreen

[zwmusic]

Huh! Now you got me aroused... :puke:

[Valk]

Another person scared to talk about something which society has deemed "evil" to talk about and even "inconsequential".

I can`t believe you.
Are you telling me that people like my sister, my nephews and nieces are not entitled to live on teh land of their ancestors with their gene pool that was made for exactly that?

I would rather be hated for telling the truth than liked for keeping quiet or believeing lies or worse.. propogating them.

Dont you think that the gene pool even within the Causasian race is too diverse too?
So I find it weird that you make such a big deal of mixing races, but that people from the same race, eventhough they differ tremendously in looks, culture and behaviour, can mix freely.

[Valk]

Huh! Now you got me aroused... :puke:

Just step into my car and I'll drive us to a quiet spot not far from here.

[zwmusic]

Only if it's in our old spot...

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/521/lily1vp3.jpg

... but it's okay if it's here.

http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/9029/darkroomfs4.jpg

Now, I bet nobody knows what this place is... Clockie might know.

[zwmusic]

Sorry K-Man, that's an old CC tradition to turn heated up arguments into a gay thread. A bit of british decadence for you. :lol: :lol:

[soserious]

Dont you think that the gene pool even within the Causasian race is too diverse too?
So I find it weird that you make such a big deal of mixing races, but that people from the same race, eventhough they differ tremendously in looks, culture and behaviour, can mix freely.


What the hell are you talking about?
I LOVE the variety Caucasoids have.
How many other races have as much variation and frequency of variation in eye and hair colour for example? NONE.

Caucasoid races have always fought, the ancient Europeans used to fight a lot before Rome spread its Dominance and killed a lot of us. France and England and Spain are old enemies. We all fight and have (had) our own unique cultures.
Interbreeding of an indiginous Frenchman and an English woman will produce a normal European child. Why on earth would I find that a big deal?

Are you seriously trying to insinuate that silly little argumanet about differences between individuals of the same race being larger than those of different races? (Which by the way uses the very existance of race on which to base the formula of its argument- patheticly self defeating itself).

Even a child with no knowledge of race nor history can tell the differences between an African and a Scot.

As I said, I am not going to get drawn into these childish nonsense games about race. If one is truly interested then they will educate themselves, it is not my job to do so, not here, not to you all.

What you may mean is ethnicity. Let me remind you that Great Britain is made up of many different European ethnicities including German, French, Italian, Mediterrainids, Dutch, Swedish and Norweigan.

So if you are asking me if I find it weird for these to interbreed with British peoples then you may understand now why I find it a strange question in itself.

It is not the interbreeding of different races that is teh problem per se, rather it is the breeding out of the host races which is disturbing.

One can compare this to the breeding out of culture and decent values from traditional European to capitalist and throw away society.
It is astonishing that ignorance and stupidity is rewarded, even reveered by so many younger generations and intelligence is scorned. (Take the simpsons as a good articulated example).
The man, whom traditioanlly symbolises security, strength and discipline is warped into a dangerously stupid, childish pathetic excuse of what manhood should be about.
(He does redeem himself sometimes but its clear that the makers intend him to be fundamentally flawed, part of this whole decrepid society).
Bart now, he is made as stupid as sin. Glamourising bullying of more intelligent people. The more intelligent ones are made weak and innefectual.

You know, it is sad. Many of the ancient philosophers were smart and athletic. Intellligence and strength of character and fortitude must be shown to be damn fine qualities once again.

Current ROLE MODELS suck.
Many provide lessons that it is ok to treat women as bitches, hoes and all that other garbage and that the one true thing to be reveered is money cash and material goods that aren`t actually neccesary.

We also have this avoidance of truth of what we are doing to the Earth, out of sight out of mind.. peopel whining that they have to have this that or the other thing. Never mind the fact that we have existed in civilisation for thousands of years without such modern things. Sure they can be useful, even life saving but they are not essential in the raw meaning of the word.

What can be done?
Well, there are a number of things. Many of them unpopular.

[trugain]

:mrgreen What the hell are you guys arguing about?

Cacausion Race is the most diversified? Does it Matter? Host races being put out? Does it matter? When it all boils down, we are all the same on the inside. We are all related in one way or another, whether you belive in evolution or religion, we are all related.

If My great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandfather came from Australia, and move to Europe and had kids with my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandmother from Spain, and my family never moved from Europe, will this make me a true European? :roll:

I mean like it was stated earlier, this is really childish.

Have a nice day!:mrgreen

[zwmusic]

Have a nice day!:mrgreen

You too Sir! :mrgreen

[Valk]

What the hell are you talking about?
I LOVE the variety Caucasoids have.
How many other races have as much variation and frequency of variation in eye and hair colour for example? NONE.

Caucasoid races have always fought, the ancient Europeans used to fight a lot before Rome spread its Dominance and killed a lot of us. France and England and Spain are old enemies. We all fight and have (had) our own unique cultures.
Interbreeding of an indiginous Frenchman and an English woman will produce a normal European child. Why on earth would I find that a big deal?

Are you seriously trying to insinuate that silly little argumanet about differences between individuals of the same race being larger than those of different races? (Which by the way uses the very existance of race on which to base the formula of its argument- patheticly self defeating itself).

Even a child with no knowledge of race nor history can tell the differences between an African and a Scot.

As I said, I am not going to get drawn into these childish nonsense games about race. If one is truly interested then they will educate themselves, it is not my job to do so, not here, not to you all.



So why then are the differences within the Caucasian race good, but when the differences between people become too big (ie. different races) its suddenly bad. A why does it suddenly become bad may I ask?

[Master Long]

Absolutely incorrect. For at least 1000 YEARS before the idea of being "British" even existed, the Chinese (Hans) looked down upon those of Turkic, Mongolian, and Manchurian descent. In fact, the only racial group they didn't look down upon is Indian, and solely because it's where Buddhism began.

The PC police have been for years trying to convince everyone that racial discrimination can solely be pointed to whites. Racial discrimination came out of the west completely independently of the east, and I know for a fact that those aren't the only places in the world that it's been seen. Any social scientist that claims that Britain or any other European counry is the genesis of racial discrimination is an idiot. They should be immediately out of a job for such ignorance.

Perhaps you misread my quote. I acknowledged the existence of ethnic
discrimination all throughout history, which is what you just described, but the idea of "race" (white, black, etc.) was indeed created by the British. This is undisputed and especially well-known amongst anthropologists, who have been trying to atone for the sins of their predecessors for centuries. Remember when the ideas of the "white man's burden" came around? About the same time as the concept of "race", right? There you have it.

DON'T confuse race and ethnicity people, especially SS. There is a massive difference.

[Valk]

Even a child with no knowledge of race nor history can tell the differences between an African and a Scot.


Yes, and between a Spaniard and a Scot.

[Clockers]

Only if it's in our old spot...

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/521/lily1vp3.jpg

... but it's okay if it's here.

http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/9029/darkroomfs4.jpg

Now, I bet nobody knows what this place is... Clockie might know.


Hey zw' I think thats the place where we --------> :twisted:



Oops! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Valk]

IMO there are only 2 different races on this planet:

Heterosexuals and Homosexuals.:mrgreen

[trugain]

Has anyone figured this out? What are we racing for? :lol: :lol:

Have a nice day! :mrgreen

[Officespace2801]

Us Europeans dont really have a right to be in America and Australia then do we?

I'm sure you meant this in a racial way (caucasian), but I just wanted to add that culturally, being American is far different than being European (as a whole or even by individual countries).

I went back and re-read K-Man's post and it seems like he's more concerned with society in general. While there are many facets that can be pointed to when it comes to how society seems to be getting more restless and greedy, I'd like to point out one that always gets a pass for politically correct reasons.

The women's liberation movement/feminism.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women should be forced to stay at home and always defer to the husband on issues. That's not what this is about. One of the side effects of the movement to empower women is this idea that if you are a homemaker, you are somehow WEAKER than other people. Feminists look down upon housewives, despite the fact that it's an extremely important role. And since it's still not widely acceptable for a husband to stay home with children, what it's lead to is children being raised at home alone or in daycares. Thus kids grow up without the proper supervision needed, and parents feel guilty for this which results in them buying things to "make up" for the lost time. So now they're spoiled as well.

Some might say that women in the workplace is a result of capitalism and family's can't survive on a single income. While the former may be true in some cases, on the whole this is flawed. People don't like to feel like they're 'less' than other people, so the only way to show how much 'better' they are is to own flashier and newer things. If you don't have a nice car, you somehow suck. Frankly, it's an inferiority problem rather than a grab for wealth. Any family that budgets properly and lives within their means can live on a single income.

[soserious]

:mrgreen What the hell are you guys arguing about?

Cacausion Race is the most diversified? Does it Matter? Host races being put out? Does it matter? When it all boils down, we are all the same on the inside. We are all related in one way or another, whether you belive in evolution or religion, we are all related.

If My great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandfather came from Australia, and move to Europe and had kids with my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandmother from Spain, and my family never moved from Europe, will this make me a true European? :roll:

I mean like it was stated earlier, this is really childish.

Have a nice day!:mrgreen

This is not even worth posting here if you intend it to be an actual argument.
Nonsense, no we are NOT the same on the inside actually. Yes it does matter.
Either add something past that of simplistic adolescent type liberal views with no real insight and understanding of the core subject or take your nonsense to another thread.

You have also just by way of not caring just condoned the act of arbitrary extermination of my peoples.

[soserious]

So why then are the differences within the Caucasian race good, but when the differences between people become too big (ie. different races) its suddenly bad. A why does it suddenly become bad may I ask?


Oh jesus Christ help me. :roll:
Sorry Valk, :? but my frustrations are great.
Here, let me try and explain.

Ok, lets talk just about differences in caucasoid peoples.
EXAMPLE: Now, when it comes to DNA and genes some genes are recessive and some genes are dominant.
With caucasoid breeding with other races (whom all have predominantly brown eyes) the dominant gene for eye colour will express itself as brown. Therefore blue, green, grey being recessive will be "muscled out" of the options again and again until they become very rare.

Despite Politically correct idiots we are different on the inside, this too is expressed in genes (some diseases are exclusive or almost exclusive to races and ethnicities) for example sickle cell disease is an African disease- its origin believed to have been the bodies adaptation to fight malaria. http://sickle.bwh.harvard.edu/malaria_sickle.html

Then there are other distinctions (which evolved for those of specific indiginous lands to best survive in said lands).
Most obvious and clear is skin tone and strength at protecting from UV damage.
This is why caucasoids suffer far more skin cancers when in countries outside of their indiginous lands than those who still live there, such as Australia and South Africa.

Different climates and environmenta factors and indeed populations create different bodies and minds- this is very important yet many ignorant people often deny the differences or even brush them aside as inconsequential.

[soserious]

Yes, and between a Spaniard and a Scot.

Actually yes, DNA can be taken to find original land of the ancestors upto a certain point. Then you can also use facial cues (these DO exist).
For example Valk, you are quite clearly Dutch looking to me, I can also tell South Africans of Dutch origin quite easily 9 times out of 10.

http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1690600.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s917882.htm

Science has many answers.


God I wish Bobo were here, he understood about this stuff.

[soserious]

DON'T confuse race and ethnicity people, especially SS. There is a massive difference.

I happen to know the difference. :roll: You think I would discuss such things without understanding them?

[soserious]

I went back and re-read K-Man's post and it seems like he's more concerned with society in general. While there are many facets that can be pointed to when it comes to how society seems to be getting more restless and greedy, I'd like to point out one that always gets a pass for politically correct reasons.

The women's liberation movement/feminism.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women should be forced to stay at home and always defer to the husband on issues. That's not what this is about. One of the side effects of the movement to empower women is this idea that if you are a homemaker, you are somehow WEAKER than other people. Feminists look down upon housewives, despite the fact that it's an extremely important role. And since it's still not widely acceptable for a husband to stay home with children, what it's lead to is children being raised at home alone or in daycares. Thus kids grow up without the proper supervision needed, and parents feel guilty for this which results in them buying things to "make up" for the lost time. So now they're spoiled as well.

Some might say that women in the workplace is a result of capitalism and family's can't survive on a single income. While the former may be true in some cases, on the whole this is flawed. People don't like to feel like they're 'less' than other people, so the only way to show how much 'better' they are is to own flashier and newer things. If you don't have a nice car, you somehow suck. Frankly, it's an inferiority problem rather than a grab for wealth. Any family that budgets properly and lives within their means can live on a single income.

Yeah, I have thoughta lot about this issue too. But women are being attacked from 2 extremist sides also. One I believe you are right on, the feminist movement was nonsense since it was really meant to undermine men, what such a movement would really be called is humanist. They cursed men whilst trying to be men. Absolutley ridiculous.
A family needs a good woman as an integral part of its very foundation.
A family needs a man likewise, their roles cannot be interchanged, what I mean is a man must be a father and a woman a mother.
I have tremendous respect for a strong normal healthy family unit.
You have a very important point that during those times whose effects still continue to this day it was seen as a weak persons job to "raise the children", even deferring to have children until after a career or at all.
The role of motherhood was denigrated.

Then we have the opposite side where they are treated as idiots with no rights of their own (such as in Islam).

Any nation, any healthy nation must show love and respect for itself, for its mothers and its fathers, its children and its friends.

I was always envious in many ways of those who grew up with a mom and dad (provided they were decent parents ovcourse).
Society starts with men and women.

[ColdShroom]

Ahhh..

I just read that whole load while hanging a water bottle from me wang.. Good stretch..


Now before I lube up and crank it..


I, for one, respect SS's take on things.

I don't completely agree with his opinion, or at least how I perceive his opinion.. but I don't mind knowing that a white guy is keen on keeping his race white (whatever 'white' means to you).

Personally, I'm big on multiculturalism.. and enjoy having sex with woman of different race/colour.. so I'm probably not high on SS's list. I think it's completely natural.. and would (probably) happen with *any* species that could inter-breed.

I also enjoy the variety of the caucasian gene pool (eye/ hair colour. etc).. but,

and I know you're going to think I'm an idiot, or stupid, or a PC pussy, or whatever else you've been spitting at your 'friends' lately,

What would an interbred human who had all 'dominate genes' look like? Taking the best from each race it was mixed with.

But.. as what I thought the original topic was supposed to be about.. was the lack of civility, across the board.. race/religion is another issue.

[soserious]

Ahhh..

I just read that whole load while hanging a water bottle from me wang.. Good stretch..


Now before I lube up and crank it..


I, for one, respect SS's take on things.

I don't completely agree with his opinion, or at least how I perceive his opinion.. but I don't mind knowing that a white guy is keen on keeping his race white (whatever 'white' means to you).

I don`t know why I was being outcast anyway.

Personally, I'm big on multiculturalism.. and enjoy having sex with woman of different race/colour.. so I'm probably not high on SS's list. I think it's completely natural.. and would (probably) happen with *any* species that could inter-breed.

Right.


I also enjoy the variety of the caucasian gene pool (eye/ hair colour. etc).. but,

and I know you're going to think I'm an idiot, or stupid, or a PC pussy, or whatever else you've been spitting at your 'friends' lately,

My strongest loyalty lies in the survival of my people.

What would an interbred human who had all 'dominate genes' look like? Taking the best from each race it was mixed with.

I said dominant genes, the best genes aren`t necesarily dominant.
Take a black and white couple- take them to Russia, let them breed. The domiannt gene for hair will be African hair, that may be dominant but sure as hell is not the best for Russia..

Besides, it depends on which races and then it is mathematics.

But.. as what I thought the original topic was supposed to be about.. was the lack of civility, across the board.. race/religion is another issue.

No, the original topic is about all of these things. Race and Religion are parts of the problem. They are just things that most people are ignorant about having only heard the marxist junk and political (in)correctness bunk for the last few decades or people simply do not know how to handle such discussions retreating instead onto (what they believe to be) the moral highground directing spurious nonsense at me.

Now, how did we get to this state of a throw away shallow inept society in the first place? More importantly how do we improve our situation?
I think this answer is large and has a lot of complex reasons.
Money seems to be a large culprit here (besides we humans ourselves ovcourse..as the number one culprit).

Yet we have had a monetary system for atleast a few thousand years, so what happened?
Was it industrialisation and the cheap fast manufacture of goods which started in Britain?
Was it the advent of new technologies to alter social bonding and work ethics?
Was it the dumbing down of society, or the advent of television?
(Some television is astounding and worth the time, or funy and clever, or nonsense but fun nonsense, but mainly it is a pitiful brainwashing disgusting way to waste a life. Damaging infact to ones intellect and mental state).
Was it perhaps the feminist movement by way of marginalisng motherhood?
Was it war? Rather the result of the 2nd world war? The after mess.
Was it the population increase? (This has been quite dramatic in a relativley short time to be damn sure) Do people feel less valued and of little significance and worth? Are there simply too many of us to be a successful society? (I have seen suggestions that the largest number of humans that can be sustained globally and at the same time be successful is around 1 billion. Maximum.) According to World population tables we are a little over 6.5 billion estimated.



What can we do about it?

[ColdShroom]

Humanitarianism is inhumane to humanity.

What should by die, we strive to keep alive. 'We' go out of our way to keep the system out of balance. We (try to) feed the starving millions, we keep countries from going to war with one and other, etc..

That.. and industrialism/commericalism. Where the 'system' relies on a massive body of consumers, the dumber the better. Dumb enough to actually buy the shit... and not look a few steps ahead to try to see where all of this is going.

Too many damn people.. and too much effort spent in trying to keep these too many people alive.

We need a good culling.. a bush fire to clean us out.

Personally, I'm still waiting for the giant rock... but if the culling comes from the rot of the younger generation, then so be it.

[The Big Banana]

USA well, new evidence is coming to light of ancient caucasoid peopels having travvelled over the ancient permafrost now melted that means that America may have been first discovered by whites. These new discoveries are under observation.

Yep, American Indians are just tanned ruskies.

[soserious]

No, before American Indians.

I don`t know, so I will not commit to an answer either way until I do- therefore this is my reason for not providing a final answer.

[Officespace2801]

Perhaps you misread my quote. I acknowledged the existence of ethnic
discrimination all throughout history, which is what you just described, but the idea of "race" (white, black, etc.) was indeed created by the British. This is undisputed and especially well-known amongst anthropologists, who have been trying to atone for the sins of their predecessors for centuries. Remember when the ideas of the "white man's burden" came around? About the same time as the concept of "race", right? There you have it.

DON'T confuse race and ethnicity people, especially SS. There is a massive difference.

Anthropologists who believe that race was created by the British = idiots.

I'll offer some visual proof.

http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Minorities/min-Han-2.jpg
Han Chinese girl

http://www.wec-int.org/centralasia/images/ca9.jpg
Uigihur girl

Look at those eyes!!! If there's one trait we'd use to identify someone as being distinctly Asian, it's their eyes. That Turkic girl (which is ironically from the western part of China- the further west you move, the more disparity in the looks) clearly has different eyes. Are they as wide and bulgy as caucasians or blacks? No, but it surely is different.

Further proof can be found during the Ming dynasty of China (which still predates your contention) in which China's vast navy scoured as far as the Horn of Africa to allegedly North America. Why did this navy disband? Everyone else was a barbarian....no need to set up ties with them or be bothered to return.

The fact is, the British didn't invent racism. Even outside of China, there are plenty of examples that predate Britain.

EDIT: By the way, you're using the British terms to identify what a race is. The Chinese basically summed it up into 'Han' and 'Barbarian.' Not as insightful as white/black/ect, but it's still the same idea.

[G-Spot19]

Wow, all this time i have just read and stayed out of this thread, but for some reason i now feel compelled to post. Cant miss a good debate, ive been in the all by goodness:lol:
I dunno, i can understand both sides. I respect SS a ton and i dont see where he is being racist. Its racist for him to be saying that his race is better. However in a way, it does sound like segregation. But U.S. views are different and being territorial so to speak is human instict as well. I however see human beings as we are. One species. Its true that we do have different genetic make up, different appearances, but we are all the same species. Now to defend SS again, he is not saying nothing about pure breds only. Again not being racist. He is saying that only people of English decent, with English genes, should be allowed in England. Basically that a full blooded 100% person of another ethnicity shouldnt be allowed. I respect that, however i disagree. We all are basically made the same. If we had our skins ripped off and you just saw what was underneath, could you tell if Juan was Mexican or Jamal was African. NO. And thats my view on it. A person is a person. I dont even seperate ethnic backgrounds or sexuality. I dunno. I have had sex with black girls, white girls, an asian girl, its a girl to me :lol: The fact is, i love ya like a bro SS, and you other guys as well. WE all can have a different opinion on things. Yes we do have genetic differences, but we are all still human and that is what i look at. I welcome Takahiro Hojoe to my house just as i would welcome Kevin. The fact is no ones views can be changed. SS is not being racist, but i do have friends who are strongly racist. I dont like it, but i dont hate them for it. Each to their own. Now if they beat a guy up or did something to him for merely being black, then i would have a problem. I really love debates, but i think this one is pointless.

[Valk]

Different climates and environmenta factors and indeed populations create different bodies and minds- this is very important yet many ignorant people often deny the differences or even brush them aside as inconsequential.

You dont seem to get my point at all. You think I dont understand all this stuff?
Every post you try to convince there are different races, but I never said there weren't.
All the examples and problems you described are even within the Caucasian race itself. Ofcouse, the differences are greater between races but in the same way races develloped, the differences within races develloped (are develloping) too.
Lets say, if we kept Spaniards and the Finnish People seperated for a million years. Do we get a new race? Two new races? No new races?

Sorry, but you always make it seem like certain things are the way the nature wants it, but you dont seem to understand that things change, devellop and evolute. Thats nature too.
Its just not natural to keep the gene pools seperated. There's too many of us humans and we're much to close to eachother.

[soserious]

You dont seem to get my point at all. You think I dont understand all this stuff?
Every post you try to convince there are different races, but I never said there weren't.

Oh jeez, well thanks for pointing that out to me like a million posts ago instead of me wasting my time! :lol: :lol: :lol: :x


All the examples and problems you described are even within the Caucasian race itself. Ofcouse, the differences are greater between races but in the same way races develloped, the differences within races develloped (are develloping) too.
Lets say, if we kept Spaniards and the Finnish People seperated for a million years. Do we get a new race? Two new races? No new races?

Yes ovcourse (I bet you already know all the answers to your questions.. so why ask? :? ). YES there will definitly be changes, dominant genes and behavioural traits will become more evident and stronger. This has been seen already, thats why we can tell where a persons genetic pool did this very thing (up to a certain point).


Sorry, but you always make it seem like certain things are the way the nature wants it, but you dont seem to understand that things change, devellop and evolute. Thats nature too.

No, ovcourse I understand this, what kind of fool do you think I am?
To add foreign material into a working healthy mix that has the balance right will only add problems. Same vice-versa.
And for the last goddamned time we are NOT the same on the inside. (Not at you Valk, at the world in general)

Its just not natural to keep the gene pools seperated. There's too many of us humans and we're much to close to eachother.

What? So nature isn`t natural..? Whatever, are you talking about nature or society here?

So how about this-
NO AFRICANS
NO ASIANS
NO WHITES
NO VARIETY.
just all the same, all brown eyes black hair mediochre skin?

I am not stupid enough to think that evolution stops, but what evolves from tomatoe soup will be different to what evolves from chicken soup..

Again, I restate my point: That Europe belongs INHERENTLY to white Europeans.
Problem is people keep thinking with their hearts and emotional response in the SHORT TERM.

Let this current society continue and the peoples of Europe will be gone and bred out eventually. Culture, race gone.

I want there to be a future for the indiginous peoples of Europe. Is that such a terrible thing?
I do not want to segregate everyone, but some places should be safeguarded yes.
I mean why, WHY are there so many foreign nationals (in the shape of asylum seekers no less) in Sweden and Norway??


If one is in this discussion (which is about all societies problems and issues- not just race and nationalism) then if you must try and take my argument down then atleast choose a side, an option.
Let all in and eventually lose the host race?
let no-one in?
Let some in in international zones only?
Or other?


Lets say that the 3rd option was in place. Internationla zones only, then we have other issues such as the very way society operates, waste, energy or indeed the alteration of it. Then we have too many people.

Murder some innocent person for no good reason?
Death penalty. Immediaetly as soon as proved guilty. No waiting list. BAM gone.

Pedaphiles on the rampage?
Death penalty Immediaetly once proved guilty. BAM gone.

A druggie thief thug who just makes life miserable for everyone else, sick stock who cant stop asking "got 20 p to spare?" and then spits abuse when you walk on or retaliate back?
Banished, BAM gone.

Cull the totally worthless dangers to others. bad apples will be eradicated.
(Everything would be fair and just, if found guilty by a fair system then BAM.
GONE.)

Why should the strong and honest or down on their luck but trying be dragged down and destroyed by the scum of societal health?
Banishment or Execution, dependant on the proven crime.

[Master Long]

"Scientific racism refers to the use of science (or the veneer of science) to justify and support racist beliefs. The use of science to justify racist beliefs goes back at least to the early 18th century, though it gained most of its influence in the mid-19th century. Works like Arthur Gobineau's An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races (1853-1855) attempted to frame racism within the terms of biological difference among human beings, and with the rise of theories of evolution after the work of Charles Darwin became well-known, it became common to consider some races more evolved than others. These points of view were very common within the scientific community at the time—even Darwin, who was an active abolitionist and considered all humans to be of the same species (against a trend of polygenism popular in anthropology at the time) believed that there were inherent biological differences in the mental capacities of different races. Ideologies such as social Darwinism and eugenics used and reinforced many of these views.

There were also scientists who argued against biological reenforcement of racism, even if they believed that biological races did exist (though some did not). In the sciences of anthropology and biology, though, these were minority positions until the mid-20th century. During the rise of Nazism in Germany, many scientists in Western nations worked to de-bunk the racial theory on which the regime rested its claims of superiority. This, combined with repulsion to Nazi eugenics and the racial motivations behind the Holocaust, lead to a re-orientation of opinion around scientific research into race in the years following World War II. Changes within scientific disciplines—such as the rise of Boasian school of anthropology in the United States—also contributed to this shift. Since then, many of the scientific studies which claimed to support racist claims have since been methodologically debunked by scientists with specifically anti-racist agendas, such as Stephen J. Gould.

The status of the concept of biological race remains very controversial within science, though practically no mainstream scientists admit to using scientific data to justify racist beliefs. Some scientists, such as Arthur Jensen and Richard Lynn, have argued that the threat of being labeled as a "scientific racist" has made the scientific study of race and racial differences politically taboo and has stifled true scientific discourse. Many scientists, though, believe that there is no evidence for typological notions of biological race, nor scientific justifications for racist beliefs."

-Wikipedia, article of "Racism"

[Master Long]

And furthermore:
"It wasn't until the 16th century that the word race entered the English language, from the French race - "race, breed, lineage" (which in turn was probably a loan from Italian razza). Meanings of the term in the 16th century included "wines with a characteristic flavour", "people with common occupation", and "generation". The meaning "tribe" or "nation" emerged in the 17th century. The modern meaning, "one of the major divisions of mankind", dates to the late 18th century, but it never became exclusive (cf. continued use of "the human race"). The ultimate origin of the word is unknown; suggestions include Arabic ra'is meaning "head", but also "beginning" or "origin".

In Society Must be Defended (1978-79), Michel Foucault traced the "historical and political discourse" of "race struggle" to the 1688 "Glorious Revolution" in England and Louis XIV's reign in France, during which conflicting political values were ascribed to ancestral ethnicities (Saxon, Norman, Frankish etc). According to him, these debates initated a form of "popular history" based on ethnic identity, as opposed to the classical juridical and philosophical discourse of sovereignty. In England, it was used by Edward Coke and John Lilburne to demand "inalienable rights" and oppose the monarchy. In France, Boulainvilliers, Nicolas Fréret, and then Sieyès, Augustin Thierry and Cournot reappropriated this discourse. During the 19th century, the discourse developed in two different directions. On the one hand, according to Foucault, Marxists seized this historical and political discourse, replacing the essentialist notion of "race" with the historical and social concept of "class struggle." On the other hand, also according to Foucault, at the end of the 19th century, the notion of "race" was adopted by racist biologists and eugenicists, who gave it the modern sense of "biological race", which was then integrated to "state racism". This displacement of discourse constitutes one of the basis of Foucault's thought: discourse is not tied to the subject, rather the "subject" is a construction of discourse.

The English word "race", along with many of the ideas now associated with the term, were products of the European era of exploration (Smedley 1999). As Europeans encountered people from different parts of the world, they speculated about the physical, social, and cultural differences between human groups. The rise of the African slave trade, which gradually displaced an earlier trade in slaves from throughout the world, created a further incentive to categorize human groups to justify the barbarous treatment of African slaves (Meltzer 1993). Drawing on classical sources and on their own internal interactions — for example, the hostility between the English and Irish was a powerful influence on early thinking about the differences between people (Takaki 1993) — Europeans began to sort themselves and others into groups associated with physical appearance and with deeply ingrained behaviors and capacities. A set of folk beliefs took hold that linked inherited physical differences between groups to inherited intellectual, behavioral, and moral qualities (Banton 1977). Although similar ideas can be found in other cultures (Lewis 1990; Dikötter 1992), they appear not to have had as much influence on social structures as they did in Europe and the parts of the world colonized by Europeans. However, often brutal conflicts between ethnic groups have existed throughout history and across the world, and racial prejudice against Africans also exists in non-colonised countries such as Japan and China. [5]"

-Wikipedia, from article on "Race"

[Master Long]

Why should the strong and honest or down on their luck but trying be dragged down and destroyed by the scum of societal health?
Banishment or Execution, dependant on the proven crime.

Remember this argument, everybody?

See the Holocaust.

[The Big Banana]

even Darwin, who was an active abolitionist and considered all humans to be of the same species (against a trend of polygenism popular in anthropology at the time) believed that there were inherent biological differences in the mental capacities of different races.


Exactly, we are all part of the one race (therefore we can interbreed and have children that arent sterile) but there are subraces or breeds as some might put it. Golden retrievers and Jack terriers are both dogs, but they have intrinsic differences.


many of the scientific studies which claimed to support racist claims have since been methodologically debunked by scientists with specifically anti-racist agendas, such as Stephen J. Gould.


Any scientific examination which sets out to achieve a particular outcome is biased and therefore inherently flawed.


Some scientists, such as Arthur Jensen and Richard Lynn, have argued that the threat of being labeled as a "scientific racist" has made the scientific study of race and racial differences politically taboo and has stifled true scientific discourse.


So they are being prevented from doing scientific research out of fear. Great.

The ten fastest men running over 100m are all negroid, its surprisingly hard to find a list of the ten fastest swimmers of all time, but the current top ten over 100m are all caucasoid. Ashkenazi Jews have a noticably higher IQ score (in the range of 110-120) than that of the general population. All of these things are due to environmental factors that have influenced human development over the years.

[G-Spot19]

Add on to that, how many whites can slam dunk a ball at 6 foot tall. Now how many blacks. Yeah there are alot of differences because we adapt to our surroundings. If we didnt, we would perish.

[The Big Banana]

Im about 6'3" in the old scale and the best I could ever do was dunk a mini ball I got at pizza hut (and I couldnt do that every time). Nowadays I'd probably be lucky to touch the ring. I saw that dunk video you posted and was blown away.

Having said what I have said I should point out that it is actually important for the subraces to interbreed. Just like dogs (I keep using that analogy) where you breed out congenital defects. I remember an Iranian girl I used to work with who came from a small village before she moved to Australia. When she left her husband I asked if she was going back to her maiden name and she told me it was also her maiden name. Apparently its not that uncommon in small villages over there for families to be so intermarried that everyone will have only 2 or 3 family names.

[soserious]

Remember this argument, everybody?

See the Holocaust.

There have been many holocausts.
This is about whites.
you are getting seperatism and Nationalism mixed up with Supremacy.

[Anthrax]

I haven't posted in this mostly because I think it is pointless to argue with SS... I'm mostly against SS, but I'll try to be as neutral as possible for the sake of civility in this thread...

The real question of this whole debate is whether or not is moral to want to preserve physical traits by allowing Europeans to breed with Europeans... Now to say that Europeans have better genes is crossing the line, but there may be traits that are desirable to preserve...

Let's go back to the dogs, since they are easier to understand than humans... A breeder may breed a family of dogs so that it has a specific desirable trait whether that trait is being able to run fast, fur thickness and color, et cetera... A breeder has to do this by inbreeding, making the gene pool smaller... If successful, the breeder can breed dogs that have the desired trait, but he does so at the risk of making those dogs vulnerable to diseases that otherwise would not affect them...

For the survival of a species, however, it is necessary to have a large gene pool so that the species can survive natural selection... For the sake of argument, a disease can appear at any moment that affects Europeans... Europeans with gene pools small enough to be affected by the disease would be wiped out... And why stop there? Let's add diseases that affect Africans, Asians, South Americans, (insert regional group here)... Who would be left behind after all of this? The "brown" people, that is to say, the people in those regions with diverse genetics...

Now the problem here is that physical diversity isn't necessarily the same as genetic diversity... SS desires to preserve the variety of recessive physical traits in his country, however, he is doing so at the risk of diminishing his gene pool... Anyone who takes a biology class knows that recessive traits can be passed on to offspring whether they are actually physically seen, so a mixed breed of humans will not look uniform, but they won't look like his ancestors, and this is why SS opposes interbreeding in his country...

Again, I don't agree with SS's views, but I think this debate is getting out of hand and going nowhere... And please refrain from namecalling...

[Valk]

Good reply,

You piece of Anthrax!

[soserious]

No, all recessives genes are not carried "but unseen". Only a fraction of the offspring will carry the recessive gene. Each time breeding occurs it will be bred out over and over until very rare. Some will still have it in them but most will not. I did biology too.

Next, Europe has a lage enough gene pool of its own for adequate survival against genetic disease. I understand the concept and how and why it works, but Indiginous Europeans have enough variation within the race or breed or whatever you are now calling it to be just fine without Foreign "saviours". :roll:

Why would preserving ones race be immoral or unethical?

Also, at what point did I say one race was better than another? (go on, I dare you to find a quote that never existed)

I will say this though, Whites are the best designed to survive in Europe, Blacks are the best designed for Africa, Asians are the best designed for Asia.
Now to sub this even further into other groupings within races.. it`s not hard to see.

I really do not understand why so many people are turning on me in this thread.

[ColdShroom]

Well.. for starters.. you're being a total dick, and totally over-reacting.

You may be correct on some errors you're pointing out.. but it doesn't make anyone an idiot, a pussy, or a PC twit... it just makes them have a different opinion.

Now, to continue the debate.

What if the climate of Europe is to change? Does the gene pool follow suit?

I was reading an article the other day that some farmer in the UK was switching his crops to olives groves, apricots, and persimmon. Fruits that are normally found in a warmer climate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/5118860.stm

The Earth is changing.. can the gene pool change be allowed to change along with it?

[Master Long]

There have been many holocausts.
This is about whites.
you are getting seperatism and Nationalism mixed up with Supremacy.

"Nationalism is a component of other political ideologies, and in its extreme form, fascism. However it is not accurate to simply describe fascism as a more extreme form of nationalism, although non-extreme nationalism can be seen as a lesser form of fascism. Fascism in the general sense, and the Italian original, were marked by a strong combination of ethnic nationalism and state nationalism. That was certainly evident in Nazism. However the geopolitical aspirations of Adolf Hitler are probably better described as imperialist, and Nazi Germany ultimately ruled over vast areas where there was no historic German presence. The Nazi state was so different from the typical European nation-state, that it was sui generis (requires a category of its own)."

-Wikipedia, on Nationalism

"Separatist movements often have at least a superficial basis in nationalism or in religious fervour. More often than not, however, feelings of inadequate political clout and perceived economic (dis)advantage play an important role."


-Wikipedia, on "Separatism"

Tell me then, with ideas as extremist as your own, what does history dictate such attitudes will lead towards? One idea leads to another, they are not inherently separate concepts.

Furthermore, many people on here assume that the reasons for differences in ethnic traits are all biological, without bearing in mind the vast importance of culture. Different cultures have different diets, influencing their growth and general health. Some cultures stress education more upon their youth, leading to higher I.Qs. Other cultures, such as inner city and ghetto cultures, have come up with fewer opportunities and a less positive outlook on education, causing a reverse trend. Culture tends to have more sway on who we are than the petty genetic differences that are being pointed out. Don't be swayed by biological conspiracy.

[Master Long]

I think this would also be an opportune time to point out the difference between what is valid in an argument and what is not. As a rule, anecdotal evidence is notvalid:

"Anecdotal evidence is often unscientific or pseudoscientific because various forms of cognitive bias may affect the collection or presentation of evidence. For instance, someone who claims to have had an encounter with a supernatural being or alien may present a very vivid story, but this is not falsifiable. This phenomenon can also happen to large groups of people through subjective validation.

Anecdotal evidence is also frequently misinterpreted via the availability heuristic, which leads to an overestimation of prevalence. Where a cause can be easily linked to an effect, people overestimate the likelihood of that the cause does have that effect (availability). In particular, vivid, emotionally-charged anecdotes seem more plausible, and are given greater weight. A related issue is that it is usually impossible to assess for every piece of anecdotal evidence, the rate of people not reporting that anecdotal evidence in the population.

A common way anecdotal evidence becomes unscientific is through fallacious reasoning such as the post hoc fallacy, the human tendency to assume that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second. Another fallacy involves inductive reasoning. For instance, if an anecdote illustrates a desired conclusion rather than a logical conclusion, it is considered a faulty or hasty generalization. [8] For example, here is anecdotal evidence presented as proof of a desired conclusion:

"There's abundant proof that God exists and is still performing miracles today. Just last week I read about a girl who was dying of cancer. Her whole family went to church and prayed for her, and she was cured."

Anecdotes like this are very powerful persuaders, but they don't prove anything in a scientific or logical sense. [9] The child may have become better anyway and this could be an example also of the regressive fallacy. Anecdotal evidence cannot be distinguished from placebo effects. [10] Only double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials can confirm a hypothesis.

Sites devoted to rhetoric [11] often give explanations along these lines:

Anecdotal evidence, for example, is by definition less statistically reliable than other sorts of evidence, and explanations do not carry the weight of authority. But both anecdotal evidence and explanations may affect our understanding of a premise, and therefore influence our judgment. The relative strength of an explanation or an anecdote is usually a function of its clarity and applicability to the premise it is supporting. [1]

By contrast, in science and logic, the "relative strength of an explanation" is based upon its ability to be tested, proven to be due to the stated cause, and verified under neutral conditions in a manner that other researchers will agree has been performed competently, and can check for themselves."

-Wikipedia, on anecdotal evidence

[soserious]

WRONG. Stop being simple minded.
The POTENTIAL for differences are genetic. It is primarily the upbringing and environment that brings out the potential or stifles it.
Also don`t be tempted to use individual cases where bell curves are more accurate. No-ones saying that how you grow up isn`t a strong factor in your physical and mental abilities, but you should realise that biology and genetics DO come first, without them nothing will be achieved even in the best social circumstances.

So, what then?
This is the best you can do? This society NOW? THIS is what you are fighting for? You think everything is best left to its own devices and to continue to rot at its core?

Stop trying to put me in with the NAZI`s.

Anyway, I said I am part seperatist, re-read and you will see that I said I wouldn`t want full seperatism.

Next, Culture comes AFTER the other things, NOT before it!

[soserious]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,363750,00.html

This was 6 years ago, the speed has increased dramatically since then.
Where I work, I am a minority.


Now, what about waste management? Why do we have a culturew here it is ok to buy things we don`t need and throw them away? If we threw all our rubbish on our doorsteps and not in landfills and such then I`m pretty damn sure it would suddenly matter a hell of a lot more..
I am as guilty as anyone, but I am working at it. For one I carry a metal water bottle with me, I don`t buy plastic throw away bottles (Which PET chemicals from the plastics and the manufacturing process cause damage to the environmental flaura and fauna and humans too..)
I am trying to find ways of infinite (to all intents and purposes ) energy sources, I actually have one or two ideas that I have never heard before.
Then I am looking at ways that less waste is made in the first place. Fresh produce to mostly be home grown locally so less shipment and such required.

It`s working out the real benefits to co-exist with the ways that were fine for thousands of years which is tricky.
Yesterday I saw a programme where Oxford and Cambridge took out two Viking Longboats and raced from Denmark to Holland to England.
It was amazing, really beautifully designed boats, very efficient.

I think that the culture needs to be changed, out with the poisinous trash that just promotes people buying shit taht they don`t need with money that they haven`t got to more inventive, wholesome fun lives.
Wont happen overnight, and wont happen under the 3 major governments.

It has to start somewhere though.
To the previous comment about climate change, yes it possibly will, we are all going to die, so by the same logic should we then just resign ourselves to death tonight now? Or should we do what we can given limited time and resources?

[zwmusic]

Hey zw' I think thats the place where we --------> :twisted:



Oops! :lol: :lol: :lol:


He, he, he, he... :puke: :lol:

[Valk]

Ask the french about it... and the english people settle in France and complain when they decide to impose their way of life (in another country) and don't receive flowers and cheers from the french people. How cheeky can you get? :neut:

Well, the Spaniards hate the British too.

But I think the tourists fuck it up too. Thats what the Spaniards base their view on, so normal immigrants who want to integrate just dont get a chance from them.

[zwmusic]

I had a bit of an argument with Matt on that one, spanish people are completely fucked up when it comes to dealing with foreigners. They're simply rude fuckers. Spain is a no-go place for me, unless I have to because of my work.

[Valk]

How comforting for me.:lol:

[zwmusic]

Perhaps if you dress like blood sucking viking monster, they'll shit their pants and respect you. :lol:

[soserious]

Norwegians Resurrect Medieval 'Blasphemy' Law
2006-02-16

"Diversity" breeds intolerance and loss of hard-won rights

By Farahat Al-Abbar, IOL Correspondent

The Norwegian parliament has amended the Penal Code to criminalize blasphemy in the wake of the republication of Danish cartoons that lampooned Prophet Muhammad by a Norwegian magazine, Christian and Muslim leaders in Norway said on Tuesday, February 14.

"Law 150-A, which has been approved by parliament, criminalizes blasphemy and clearly prohibits despising others or lampooning religions in any form of expression, including the use of photographs," Norway's Deputy Archbishop Oliva Howika told reporters after a meeting in Doha with Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars.

Howika was among a Norwegian delegation that also included the chairman of the Supreme Islamic Council in Norway, Mohamed Hamdan.

"Under the new law, the crime of blasphemy will be punished either by a fine or imprisonment," Howika said, promising Qaradawi to fax him a copy of the law after being published in the country's official gazette.

Hamdan regretted the burning of the Norwegian embassy in the Syrian capital Damascus, but said the government had blamed the magazine for the violent reaction.

"The Norwegian government made it clear more than one time that it would not condone blasphemy," he said.

Last September, Denmark's mass circulation daily Jyllands-Posten ran 12 cartoons of Prophet Muhammad. One of the photos showed the prophet as wearing a bomb-shaped turban and another showing him as a knife-wielding nomad flanked by shrouded women.

Many European newspapers, including the Norwegian Magazinet, reprinted the drawings, triggering an outcry across the Muslim world and calls to boycott Danish products and Norwegian products.

Any image of the Prophet -- let alone biting caricatures -- is considered blasphemous under Islam.

The editor of the Norwegian magazine at issue apologized to Muslims on February 10, for publishing the cartoons.

Vebjoern Selbekk, who initially defended his January 10 publication of the cartoons in his magazine as an expression of press freedom, appeared before TV cameras shaking hands after his apology with Muslim leaders.


Why is this happening? Where were they rioting when passion of teh christ was out? Or monty python and the holy grail?

Why are peopel being such (yes I will say it) "Stupid pussy liberals?"

WHY is theer an "Islamic" anything in Scandinavian countries? That very notion makes me sick to my stomach and furious.
I know most of y`all think thats somehow racist of me, but you know what? I don`t care what you think because my argument is damn valid.
I wish they`d get kicked far away from Scandinavia as soon as yesterday. It disturbs me more than anything in UK.

OH, by the way, before you try and brand me bad, reread the headline and ask yourself this:
"is this a step further for democracy and freedom? Or is it a step back towards draconian laws and closer to Islamic laws?"

[Valk]

I was gonna agree with you but then you started your whole "pussy liberal" rant again, so BLEHH

[soserious]

Agree, disagree, whatever.
You think it makes a difference to me? I am glad that I state quite clearly my thoughts, wether I am liked or hated for them all. At least I have the balls to state my case and stick by my guns despite "popular" opinion.

I am not looking for acceptance or agreement but rather truth and for what I believe in. As it happens I bet that a lot of Scandinavians feel the same damn way. I know a lot of other Europeans do.

ss

[ColdShroom]

You sound like you expect religion to be been confined to a specific area, it's country/region of origin.

Hate to point out the obvious.. but religion spreads... globablly. You can not say that it 'doesn't belong' anywhere.

I know what you're saying, and you're entitle to have your opinion, and to be sick to your stomach if you wish, but whether you like it or not, Islam, is a global religion. It has no boundaries.

Now, Islamic Law is another thing.. Radicalism of any sort can be kinda scarey.

Again, it sounds like you expect things to never change. What was in the past, should be in the future. The land your ancestors inhabited, should naturally belong to you.. That is buillshit. It belongs to no one.. and is taken by whoever has the balls/power/influence to do so. It's only natural.


I will add that it's also perfectly normal for you, and for others, to wish Islam, or any other religion to go away.. That's fine by me.. make it happen.. Take to arms if you must (you probably will have to, it's not going away by itself). But to say that 'it shouldn't be there' is simply your opinion, or your wish.. not what God, or nature intended.

[Valk]

At least I have the balls to state my case and stick by my guns despite "popular" opinion.

But you make the mistake to think that everyone that doesnt share your opinion doesnt have balls or is a pussy which ofcourse, isnt true.

I'm just so fucking tired of this 'you're either a liberal or a conservatist'-shit.

[soserious]

I disagree, but O.K, lets say you`re right and I`m wrong, lets run with that thought for the moment:

The land your ancestors inhabited, should naturally belong to you.. That is buillshit. It belongs to no one.. and is taken by whoever has the balls/power/influence to do so. It's only natural.

Then this is exactly what I must do.

ss

[ColdShroom]

Good luck with that.. I'll be checking the BBC to follow your progress.


But... for starters.. how about you deal with that retaining wall problem.. before you kill/displace scores of your own kin.

[soserious]

But you make the mistake to think that everyone that doesnt share your opinion doesnt have balls or is a pussy which ofcourse, isnt true.

I'm just so fucking tired of this 'you're either a liberal or a conservatist'-shit.


No, I said no such thing. I am neither liberal nor conservative and I do not restrict others political affiliations choices to just these either.

[soserious]

Good luck with that.. I'll be checking the BBC to follow your progress.


But... for starters.. how about you deal with that retaining wall problem.. before you kill/displace scores of your own kin.

"Kill?" Who would I kill?
"BBC?" You think I would expose a fledgling to the vultures of the media?? Besides, I wouldn`t start with the UK.

[ColdShroom]

You mentioned the destruction of a housing block, from your misplaced pond.

Ok, so no one is going to die then.. that's good. But try to get the retaining wall problem in order before you go out to liberate your ancestral homeland.

[soserious]

I already have enough things against me on the internet, I am not stupid all day long. I am not going to say anything about what I would or would not do. Thankyou.


The wall is bad.

[soserious]

Look here, http://www.if.cx/conlib.html#chapter4

Now replace "Liberia" with "Scandinavia" and "negroes" with "caucasians". What then? Does it "feel" the same in your mind?

This is the real one:
CHAPTER IV

CITIZENSHIP
Article 27


a)

All persons who, on the coming into force of this Constitution were lawfully citizens of Liberia shall continue to be Liberian citizens.


b)

In order to preserve, foster and maintain the positive Liberian culture, values and character, only persons who are Negroes or of Negro descent shall qualify by birth or by naturalization to be citizens of Liberia.


c)

The Legislature shall, adhering to the above standard, prescribe such other qualification criteria for the procedures by which naturalization may be obtained.

This is the edited alter version:
CHAPTER IV

CITIZENSHIP
Article 27


a)

All persons who, on the coming into force of this Constitution were lawfully citizens of Scandinavia shall continue to be Scandinavian citizens.


b)

In order to preserve, foster and maintain the positive Scandinavian culture, values and character, only persons who are Caucasians or of Caucasian descent shall qualify by birth or by naturalization to be citizens of Scandinavia.


c)

The Legislature shall, adhering to the above standard, prescribe such other qualification criteria for the procedures by which naturalization may be obtained.



Tell me, from the bottom of your heart, no fooling, no hate, no smart comments from me, or you, "would you honestly express the same thoughts and views in public about both of those evenly? Or would you feel more uncomfortable dealing with the caucasians as Scandinavian land only compared to Liberia for blacks?"























































Now, no hate, no swearing, no fooling.
I am calm. Be calm.

If you find that the "caucasian" version made you more uncomfortable, then please ask yourself why?
A lot of the way we are being brought up is to see white as bad and a fair target, it is wrong but if you genuinly felt more uncomfortable with the caucasian version then don`t you think that on some deep level you have been affected by skewed politics? Skewed society?

Reply, don`t reply. Just ask yourself the question, even if you don`t admit it here or now.


ss

[Valk]

Ofcourse I, and most other people have been affected by those race-politics and I agree that sometimes we go overboard with all the political correctness. Its happening here in the Netherlands too.

I understand your viewpoint and I aint calling you a racist.

[soserious]

Ok, thankyou.
I thought perhaps if I remain calm and logical whilst illustrating that we are all being affected by the anti-western anti-white propaganda out there that at least it would make one think. Even if they didn`t admit it out loud.

ss

[The Big Banana]

Fucking Liberians... I have a problem with both, but the Liberian one is the only true one.

[zwmusic]

The POTENTIAL for differences are genetic. It is primarily the upbringing and environment that brings out the potential or stifles it.
Also don`t be tempted to use individual cases where bell curves are more accurate. No-ones saying that how you grow up isn`t a strong factor in your physical and mental abilities, but you should realise that biology and genetics DO come first, without them nothing will be achieved even in the best social circumstances.

Imagine in the worst social circumstances... recipe for a total mess and cultural caos.

I've been reading this thread without much input because I think it's gone way adrift from the original topic. Nevertheless, genetics and racial issues is something everybody tries to cover up due to political correctness, social liberalism or whatever you want to call it. There are few facts which does affect social welfare and race is one of them, whether you accept it or just want to turn a blind eye.

Let me quote Brazil once more. Brazil, land of carnival, gorgeous beaches and happy and warm people, right? WRONG! Violence and discontent is at the heart of every city.

Back in the 40s and 50s there was a policy by the central government, which I don't know how the heck it was implemented but was supposedly intended to whitens the huge black population brought as slaves by the portuguese. How? Genetically. Simply by encouraging racial mix between blacks and whites. An idea far too simplistic and totally mistaken in its judgement. That's why the great majority of the population is neither black or white, they're brown. Now tell me how this can in any way contribute to the welfare of a society, which is plunged in economical caos and social insecurity. Don't ask me why, but it seems that the vast majority of people who populate all the slums and shantytowns are brown. Black people are in fact doing much better than their brown counterpart... coincidence? I don't think so.

[The Big Banana]

Ok ZW. Sure, there may be violence, poverty and general despair, but youre forgetting one very important thing... Adriana Lima is very hot. Therefore this policy was a great success.

[zwmusic]

Yes, she is. But she's one in 10 million. She made her way into the fashion industry and became a model, if it wasn't for that media industry behind her you wouldn't know anything about her existence, would you? That's something very few hot girls manage to achieve. There are hundreds of thousands Adrianas Lima in Brazil, but in the majority of cases all they manage is to make a living by cleaning toilets or scattering empty bottles and cans from wasteland to sell them for few pennies.

[The Big Banana]

Hundreds of thousands of hot, low maintenance girls ay? Hmm.

[zwmusic]

Planning a trip? :lol:

[G-Spot19]

I sure am. Sounds like we found heaven boys!

[The Big Banana]

ZW, out of curiosity, how do you say 'You have beautiful eyes' in portuguese? Phoentically if possible.

[zwmusic]

'Voce tem olhos lindos'. Phonetically would be more or less like: Voce (vosse, last 'e' pronouced like french for 'Pave') tem ('e' pronounced like english for 'trem' just omit the 'r') olhos (first 'o' open, like in 'ought to' 'lh' sounds like 'lee' and the last 'o' closed like in 'post') lindos (leendos, also the last 'o' closed as in 'post').

Tricky to translate phonetically...

[The Big Banana]

Ah, the romance languages are so much nicer to listen to than english.

[zwmusic]

Interesting you said that, many of my english speaking friends told me that brazilian portuguese sounds rather like french, much softer than spanish and portuguese from Portugal.

[Clockers]

Hey zw' how would you say 'I love you Clockie' in portuguese? :puke:



-------------> :D

[zwmusic]

:D He, he... 'Eu te amo Clockie' :shock:

[Valk]

I see you finally reveiled your true feelings.

[zwmusic]

---------->:puke:

[Anthrax]

Can someone get this thread back on-topic? I love reading SS's rambles about nothing...

[Clockers]

I see you finally reveiled your true feelings.



---------->:puke:


About time my friend' thought you'd never reveal them..:mrgreen

[zwmusic]

There will be another confession thread coming up. :lol:

[Anthrax]

Not another one...!!!

[Clockers]

There will be another confession thread coming up. :lol:



Do it! :lol:

[zwmusic]

I confess...


















Maybe another time. :lol:

[Clockers]

Shit' :x and here I was getting all excited..:lol:

[zwmusic]

Let me just figure out how to top TP.

[G-Spot19]

:lol:
Best of luck on that one. Believe him or not, you probably almost soiled yourself when you read his confession. I know i did:lol:

[soserious]

http://www.mexicanfootprints.co.uk/
http://forums.hypography.com/general-science-news/3140-will-footprint-rewrite-history-books.html

So who were the first humans to inhabit America?..
Apparently it is now under more debate and current research due to older footprints found in Central Mexico.
Scientists have unearthed human footprints in central Mexico which they claim are around 40,000 years old, shattering previous theories on how humans first colonised the Americas.

Whos to say there weren`t humans there before this even?

[zwmusic]

you probably almost soiled yourself when you read his confession.

Probably almost? Most definitely.

[soserious]

How about this for declining society?
*long read*

Mental Child Molestation
5th August 2006

Times Educational Supplement (Tes) reporter Adam Luck phoned asking if I stood by "the rant" - a term lefties use to insult and demean an opinion they don't like - which appeared on a BNP leaflet used in the recent Redbridge election campaign.

Also, did I agree with the term "mental child molestation" and the statement on the leaflet which said:

"Not content with Black History Month, special emphasis has been placed on teaching children about black achievement in literature and art (in English) and have also been taught that blacks have invented many of the fundamentals (lightbulb, refrigeration, etc) of Western European civilisation (in science)! This is factually incorrect, wrong, brainwashing at its worst (mental child-molestation) and needs to be dropped forthwith."

Headmaster

According to the Tes, the Redbridge school head master, Mr Beaumont said: "The school regards the [BNP] campaign material as inappropriate, insensitive and unworthy of a multi-cultural community....the school has a duty of care and legal obligation to promote racial harmony and community cohesion. It does this with integrity and to the very best of its ability".

Which of us voted for a government that has passed laws obliging schools to have "a duty of care and legal obligation to promote racial harmony and community cohesion"?

Who is to blame for allowing the situation to develop in Britain where racial disharmony exists and community cohesion diminishing?

See the Tes article here.
http://www.tes.co.uk/2264281

And a local report here.
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/community/display.var.842471.0.bnp_attacks_school_for_celebr ating_black_achievements.php

Nonsense Taught in Schools

So, what is the origin of this nonsense taught in our schools?

Step forward the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), a non-departmental public body and exempt charity established by statute, since October 1997.

From its web site.
http://www.qca.org.uk/

"The QCA is accountable to the Secretary of State for Education and Skills. It develops the school curriculum and its assessment, supports the development of vocational learning, regulates awarding bodies and accredits and monitors qualifications in schools, colleges and the work place"

In other words, the QCA and its board has great influence in just what is taught in our schools.

As would be expected, the Board of the QCA is made up of the "great and the good" who can be relied upon to do the bidding of the Establishment.

See the Board here.
http://www.qca.org.uk/11959.html

Like something out of a futuristic nightmare horror movie, the QCA has devised a method for including an element of "anti racism" within the teaching of science and mathematics!

It comes under "Respect for all - valuing diversity and challenging racism through the curriculum"!

Here, http://www.qca.org.uk/8859.html details of the curriculum are - as you might expect - written out in an over wordy, highly verbose style, evidently by people who need to fill their time and justify their existence by producing acres of meaningless waffle.

Maths to Challenge Racism

They ask "What is the potential in the maths http://www.qca.org.uk/1584.html curriculum for valuing diversity and challenging racism?"

They say:

"Handling data provides considerable scope for raising multicultural and anti-racist awareness...It offers opportunities for considering questions related to multiculturalism and racism".

Perhaps it does, but why should it be taught at the expense of, say, learning multiplication tables or other useful tools?

They then go on to suggest that to teach statistics teachers could consider demographic data about life expectancies or infant mortality rates around the world.

In elementary geometry they could calculate the mean area of accommodation available per person in South Africa for the black population and the white population adding, disgracefully, "the mathematics cannot be challenged, but the questions that follow from such results may address the issues of racism."

Apart from giving a sense of post colonial guilt to white pupils and grievance to black pupils, it's not made clear why the size of a person's living room is connected to "racism" - but, then, clarity is not important to the lunatics of the anti racism industry.

Although irrelevant to gaining skills in maths, pupils are to be told that maths does not come solely from the Greeks; "the peoples of Egypt, India, China and many other cultures have made significant contributions."

In Science

"What is the potential in the science curriculum for valuing diversity and challenging racism?" they ask here. http://www.qca.org.uk/1594.html

One inner-city primary school with a high proportion of children from a mix of ethnic minorities produced the statement:

"We aim to provide a secure, positive learning environment for the children. We value ourselves and respect others regardless of race, faith, gender or ability. The science policy also demonstrates a clear commitment to equal opportunities".

Get that - science teaching committed to equal opportunities!

And how is it done?

".....provide equal access to scientific learning regardless of ethnic and cultural origin, gender or physical and mental ability. Study the work of male, female, European and non-European scientists, so that the contributions to science of both genders and all races is acknowledged and appreciated."

So, never mind teaching kids about the scientific method, just tell them about women scientists and black scientists.

No wonder so many young people have no grasp of science.

It also mentions the electric lightbulb - invented by Edison in 1879.

Gypsies

One class contained "traveller" pupils so the science lesson investigated building materials of the traditional traveller caravans!

In Geography Too

They ask "What is the potential in the geography curriculum for valuing diversity and challenging racism?" http://www.qca.org.uk/1579.html

Pupils were asked to estimate the financial gain brought through tourism to natives of a Caribbean island - and then discussed which of the people who benefited were islanders and black, and how many were in the UK and white.

Again, ideal for giving a sense of post colonial guilt to white pupils and grievance to black pupils.

In "Understanding Migration" teachers were particularly urged to promote the idea that 'British identity' is an ever-changing concept.

No doubt the rubbish about Britain being a "Nation of immigrants" and the Brits being a "mongrel race" was enthusiastically taught here.

In Music

"What is the potential in the music curriculum for valuing diversity and challenging racism?"

Reading through the section on music, as a classical musician myself, I didn't see any passage or sentence which made any sense or connection with my understanding of music. Sentence after sentence of meaningless drivel -

For example :

"Effective teaching in music can make a significant contribution to pupils' ability to value diversity and challenge racism, through providing opportunities for pupils to:

"Engage with a variety of music, exploring values and feelings; make (and respond to) music with others, recognising and valuing different views and contributions; develop understanding of how and why music is created and used, and how it can reflect and influence the feelings and values of those involved; deepen and broaden their understanding and appreciation of music, from that which is familiar to that which is unfamiliar, developing their understanding of their own preferences and the preferences of others; help others appreciate diversity through sharing their own interests, expertise and experiences.

"Above all, music provides the opportunity for pupils to recognise that they can enhance the quality of their lives and the lives of others through making music and sharing diverse musical experiences".

Nothing there about the ennobling effect of a Beethoven symphony, the delight of Listz's piano music or the beauty of a Schubert song.

Aboriginal Music

The QCA say:

"A distinction needs to be made between putting unfamiliar music into a familiar context, and trying to understand unfamiliar music within its unfamiliar context. For example, distinguishing between listening to Aboriginal music in the classroom and seeing the music performed as intended, with information given about the beliefs, values, environment and codes of behaviour of the culture"

Aboriginal music?

"It is essential that, when discussing music that is familiar to the pupil, this music is respected and valued by the teacher and not compared unfavourably to other music. Each type of music needs to be recognised in its own right."

So, Aboriginal music will not be compared unfavourably to Bach or Beethoven.

Perhaps Aboriginal music is just as good as Bach or Beethoven?

Reaching heights of lunacy the QCA says:

"For many pupils, music is one of the strongest influences on, and reflections of, the different cultures in which they live. Music, therefore, provides a real and powerful means of developing cultural understanding and appreciation of diversity."

[that's enough drivel – Ed]

For more details see here http://www.qca.org.uk/1627.html

It is truly "mental child molestation" - getting physically hot and angry reading their website, I telephoned the QCA to demand an explanation and was told that a person by the name of John Brown had led the team who had produced this rot.

He told me he had not been involved in the project, and the ones who had been were no longer involved and had "left the building". Further more, if I didn't like what the government had sanctioned on behalf of our children, then there was nothing I could do about it.

So much for democracy.

Racism In Primary Schools

According to the Yorkshire Post, "racism" is on increase in city's primary schools with increasing numbers of school children under 11 being suspended in Bradford's playgrounds and classrooms.

The inescapable conclusion is that human nature decrees that people prefer to live amongst people of their own type and ancestry - no amount of brainwashing and law making and law enforcement will change that.

Time for a different approach - at least when the BNP is in a better position to do so.

See about Bradford primary schools here. http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1575287

Sends chills through the core..

[zwmusic]

"Effective teaching in music can make a significant contribution to pupils' ability to value diversity and challenge racism, through providing opportunities for pupils to:

"Engage with a variety of music, exploring values and feelings; make (and respond to) music with others, recognising and valuing different views and contributions; develop understanding of how and why music is created and used, and how it can reflect and influence the feelings and values of those involved; deepen and broaden their understanding and appreciation of music, from that which is familiar to that which is unfamiliar, developing their understanding of their own preferences and the preferences of others; help others appreciate diversity through sharing their own interests, expertise and experiences.

"Above all, music provides the opportunity for pupils to recognise that they can enhance the quality of their lives and the lives of others through making music and sharing diverse musical experiences".

What a load of bullshit.

Nothing there about the ennobling effect of a Beethoven symphony, the delight of Listz's piano music or the beauty of a Schubert song.

There's absolutely nothing coherent in what QCA is outlining (previous quote) and agree with this statement, but that's only part of the problem.

Aboriginal Music

Aboriginal music?

"It is essential that, when discussing music that is familiar to the pupil, this music is respected and valued by the teacher and not compared unfavourably to other music. Each type of music needs to be recognised in its own right."

So, Aboriginal music will not be compared unfavourably to Bach or Beethoven.

Perhaps Aboriginal music is just as good as Bach or Beethoven?

WHAT!? :shock: This people are completely out of their minds, this is a disgrace.

Reaching heights of lunacy the QCA says:

"For many pupils, music is one of the strongest influences on, and reflections of, the different cultures in which they live. Music, therefore, provides a real and powerful means of developing cultural understanding and appreciation of diversity."

What can I say... this is becoming a caricature of the ridicule. If this is not decline, I don't know what the meaning of the word 'decline' is.

[soserious]

Yes ZW, it is scary.. it is scary because children are being taught this as truth. I really do not see how this type of nonsense can benefit anyone in the real world.

Here is more declining in societies ability to DEAL with one of teh most natural thing`s in the world, perhaps it is too raw and real and unsanitised.. geez..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060804/od_afp/afplifestyleussocialbreastfeeding_060804023916
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Readers of a US parenting magazine are crying foul over the publication's latest cover depicting a woman breastfeeding, with some calling the photo offensive and disgusting.

Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said though most of those who responded to the poll about the cover photo gave the magazine a thumbs up, she was surprised that some 25 percent expressed outrage.

"There is a real puritanical streak in America," Moran told AFP. "You see celebrities practically baring their breasts all the time and no one seems to mind in this sort of sexual context.

"But in this very natural context of feeding your child, a lot of Americans are very uncomfortable with it."

I don`t know at what time breasts became so heinously offensive (maybe I was asleep??) but there you go..
I think that when a human loses the ability to deal with the human body it`s gotta be some kind of problem.

[Anthrax]

That's because Americans don't know how to separate nudity and sexuality...

[Spike]

Because you live in the land of the free (to repress anybody who's not in the Christian Militia) probably.

[soserious]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5274476.stm
Last Updated: Wednesday, 23 August 2006, 09:52 GMT 10:52 UK



1,425,000 migrants in two years?
Analysis
By Brian Wheeler
Political reporter, BBC News


When a senior official told MPs he did not have the "faintest idea" how many illegal immigrants there were in the UK it plunged an already battered Home Office into fresh crisis back in May.


Migrant workers are filling labour shortages, ministers say

Anyone trying to find the answer to that question in the small forest of immigration statistics released by the government on Tuesday will search in vain.



This doesn`t include illegals and is certianly on the conservative number on legals.

I would have UK divided by a border- the S/E for visitors and English Nationals whow ant to stay there, the rest for ethnic British people. Those above the border not of ethnic English/ British ancestry would be mved to the SouthEast.
Then all mosques and shit like that would be demolished North of the border.
What the UK is afriad to say is that Islam is the biggest threat to our security right now followed by some of our own idiots and politics and way of living.

Don`t like my plan? Tell me why and discuss it (If you`re not of English/British ethnicity you have no say an no right to a say other than simply voiceing your opinion) England should be re-colonised by the English.

[Valk]

So no contact between ethnic English people and the immigrants/visitors?

[Spike]

This doesn`t include illegals and is certianly on the conservative number on legals.


Probably doesn't include the million odd who left either.

[soserious]

So no contact between ethnic English people and the immigrants/visitors?


If the English and British (Scots/ Welsh) want to associate with others then they are welcome to come and go through the south-east borders, or even stay and live in teh south-east with other nationalities and ethnicities.
No problem.

[soserious]

Probably doesn't include the million odd who left either.

Even if approximatley 1 million left it still leaves us with a net increase- and if those who left were mostly British ethnics then we are even more besieged by sheer number and percentage.

One should ask himself if a non British ethnic is somehow worth more than a British ethnic? If the answer is yes then that might explain our readiness to whore out our history, our land, our values and our genes!

What I present is a fair compromise in a world that was never designed to be fair or equal.

[wern]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5274476.stm
Last Updated: Wednesday, 23 August 2006, 09:52 GMT 10:52 UK







This doesn`t include illegals and is certianly on the conservative number on legals.

I would have UK divided by a border- the S/E for visitors and English Nationals whow ant to stay there, the rest for ethnic British people. Those above the border not of ethnic English/ British ancestry would be mved to the SouthEast.
Then all mosques and shit like that would be demolished North of the border.
What the UK is afriad to say is that Islam is the biggest threat to our security right now followed by some of our own idiots and politics and way of living.

Don`t like my plan? Tell me why and discuss it (If you`re not of English/British ethnicity you have no say an no right to a say other than simply voiceing your opinion) England should be re-colonised by the English.

There's no point to voice these sorts of thoughts on CC, for the following reasons (please read before you respond):

The reality is that the "immigrants" (which judging by your comments on this thread so far, you define as non-anglo-saxons, or maybe even non-europeans, regardless of whether or not they hold residency or citizenship in the UK) can't go away. The reality is that the laws which govern the UK can't be changed towards your way of thinking without causing a massive international condemnation and totally shattering the UK's global standing.
Have you considered that perhaps England opened the gates to immigration because it needed foreign skills, or it needed valuable contracts with foreign powers, or foreign allies? To have a white-only policy in a country is to cripple it in the global domain. It is to the supreme benefit of the Anglo-Saxons in the UK that the gates are open to "immigrants".
England throughout the ages has invaded and conquered other areas of the world, and as a result, its migrants, or by your definition, English Immigrants, now reside in other areas where they are the foreigners traditionally speaking, such as the US, Australia, India, China, Hong Kong, South Africa, and on and on.
Many English people leave England to live in other countries because they prefer to live somewhere else.
Therefore, for any English person to condemn foreigners or immigrants, is a condemnation of themselves and their fellow countryman!
- (again, this is by your definition of what an immigrant is. If your definition is different, I will restructure what I have said, but we will end up in the same place)
Many of the members of CC fall into the category of immigrant by your definition, whether they are the same as the immigrants that you find in the UK, or whether they are the exact opposite: Anglo Saxons living abroad.So while your idealistic opinion on the matter can be fun to think about,

in reality there is NO WAY they would be implemented
when you post these highly sensitive ideas on these forums you may be offending other members, even though they haven't said anything about it out of politeness to you, their friend.

[soserious]

I will respond to each point with indignant vengeance later.
In the meantime congratulations, you just made my hit list.

[Valk]

In life you'll meet lots of people who disagree with you and 'vengeance' and 'hit lists' is not the correct way to deal with that.

[soserious]

What am I, 10? "In life you'll meet lots of people".. you mean when I grow up to be a big boy?
Sure daddy.. thanks for the advice. Can I go out to play now?

[Valk]

Sorry to bring it to you, but your attitude towards people who disagree with you is not very mature. You may be mature in other departements of your life, but not this one.

[soserious]

Sorry to "bring it to me" ? I don`t speak street.
You`re going to educate me are you? With your fountain of knowledge and wise words?
Whatever.
Anyway, I have to go to work now.

[K-man]

Wow, you`re 18.. oh how wise you must be.


Mmmmmm! This from someone of 25. Eons apart! LMAO.

I've stayed out of this thread for a while because it has, in many places, moved so far off my original point. I am a little disturbed by some of what has been said, particularly the comments that non English / British should be moved to the South East and furthermore have no say (or right to a say) in any debate about the issue. WTF? Who are you, Hitler??

You'll be putting a wall up around the South East next. Get a grip man. I am of German origin and I ended up living over here due to the fact that my step-father was a member of the armed forces. They married when I was 6 (hardly a choice on my part). Since moving here in '92 I have lived just as any Englishman would have. Go to work, pay taxes etc. etc.

Are you saying that I should be forced to move out of Yorkshire and leave my chidren without their father? If so then your ideals are proper fucked up man.

You continuously rant at people about discussing things maturely and then when somebody offers any opinion that differs to yours you go off on one. Now maybe others don't have the ability (or time) to research their statements to the level that you do (or seem to) but that does not mean you have the right to start slagging them off. Grow up!

So I guess you have another name for your hitlist and frankly I don't give a fuck. If my presence in this country offends you so much then come see me (I'll be in London this weekend) and maybe you could try to begin your ethnic cleansing (or whatever you would sugar coat it as).

RSVP

[Valk]

attempts to revive it in another thread will be dealt with in kind fashion with consequences to the person(s) trying to revive it.

Yes, the Monkey Treatment!

[K-man]

I've said my piece, which is considerably less than some.

I have no wish to cause offence or anguish to anyone (who has not offended me), however this (as I understand it) is an international site and I fail to see how some of the posts in this thread can be viewed as anything other than insulting.

The rules apply to everyone regardless of their post count.

[ColdShroom]

http://colorado.indymedia.org/usermedia/image/5/large/nuclear_explosion.jpg

[wern]

True. Which is why this thread will be monitored and if things don't calm down, action will be taken.

ss has violated the The Rules (http://www.cheekycherry.com/ccforums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=14) of this site repeatedly in this and other posts when he abused members:

The Rules (http://www.cheekycherry.com/ccforums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=14)
8. No being nasty, abusive or unpleasent to anybody else on these forums. We want to nurture our friendly atmosphere... We are ALL friends, so let's treat each other that way. It is perfectly okay to disagree with others opinions and question the validity of their statements, but please do it politely without animosity. Thanks.

ss, while I respect your right to have opinions, and it may be with humour that you responded to my last post, your responses in general to other members who disagree with you have got to stop. Please try to be friendly or at least polite because otherwise these forums will fall to chaos.

To the admins, please monitor and enforce the rules on these forums.

[soserious]

Mmmmmm! This from someone of 25. Eons apart! LMAO. 18 is as far from 25 as 25 is from 32..

I've stayed out of this thread for a while because it has, in many places, moved so far off my original point. I am a little disturbed by some of what has been said, particularly the comments that non English / British should be moved to the South East and furthermore have no say (or right to a say) in any debate about the issue. WTF? Who are you, Hitler??

Who are you, mother teresa? Jesus?
At least I`m not out there plotting to blow people up.

You'll be putting a wall up around the South East next. Get a grip man. I am of German origin and I ended up living over here due to the fact that my step-father was a member of the armed forces. They married when I was 6 (hardly a choice on my part). Since moving here in '92 I have lived just as any Englishman would have. Go to work, pay taxes etc. etc.
Yeah, so? What do you want a medal?

Are you saying that I should be forced to move out of Yorkshire and leave my chidren without their father? If so then your ideals are proper fucked up man. Actually no. I wouldn`t have you moved or interfear in your life.

You continuously rant at people about discussing things maturely and then when somebody offers any opinion that differs to yours you go off on one. Now maybe others don't have the ability (or time) to research their statements to the level that you do (or seem to) but that does not mean you have the right to start slagging them off. Grow up!
Well I am more passionate than they are about said subject.
I do go off on one yes, I am not proud of that and I do let myself down- but how can I explain? I am not trying to excuse myself but I am trying to make you understand the level of emotion you are dealing with..it is high. More than I love my family and would die for them. Since it is about my homelands and people, that is my family and more.

So I guess you have another name for your hitlist and frankly I don't give a fuck.

You`re not on my hitlist- YOU don`t get to decide, hell Valk makes me so angry that I fight with my other friends at work, but he is still my friend though damn he makes me mad sometimes, and I make him mad.

If my presence in this country offends you so much then come see me (I'll be in London this weekend) and maybe you could try to begin your ethnic cleansing (or whatever you would sugar coat it as).
RSVP

How lame was that? I am an agressive violent fucker but even I and I mean ""I"" haven`t been so lame as to try and physically threaten someone.
Do you think I am afraid of you? Do you think I wouldn`t fight and take out my anger and frustrations and vengeance on you? Do you think I am afraid of physical violence?
You hypocrit, I restrain my urges to fight every damn day, EVERY DAMN DAY. Theres thousands more people who I would far more enjoy fighting than some fucking WHITE EUROPEAN.
What most of y`all don`t seem to get is that BRITAIN is made up of white Europeans originally.. German, Scandinavian, Russian, Mediterainids, French, and so on. I couldn`t give a flying fuck about booting you to any part of the Uk. I am British- hundreds to thousands of years ago my ancestors came from Ireland, France, Holland, Norway, and yes even Germany.

Maybe it is YOU who should grow up.

[soserious]

There's no point to voice these sorts of thoughts on CC, for the following reasons (please read before you respond):

The reality is that the "immigrants" (which judging by your comments on this thread so far, you define as non-anglo-saxons, or maybe even non-europeans, regardless of whether or not they hold residency or citizenship in the UK) can't go away. The reality is that the laws which govern the UK can't be changed towards your way of thinking without causing a massive international condemnation and totally shattering the UK's global standing
As what? A puppet of the USA? A soft touch for ilegals and foreign nationals? A disgrace to its forefathers??


Have you considered that perhaps England opened the gates to immigration because it needed foreign skills,

Are you saying that us white brits aren`t smart enough to fulfil our own requirements? Do your history then see how "stupid" we are and how we need others.. then ask yourself why isn`t who-ever from where-ever helping their own people in their own country?


or it needed valuable contracts with foreign powers, or foreign allies?

This is laughable, shows you know squat about the UK`s standing in international affairs.

To have a white-only policy in a country is to cripple it in the global domain.
Japan is VERY nationalist... are they crippled?

It is to the supreme benefit of the Anglo-Saxons in the UK that the gates are open to "immigrants".

I cannot believe you just said that. That has made me extremley angry.


England throughout the ages has invaded and conquered other areas of the world, and as a result, its migrants, or by your definition, English Immigrants, now reside in other areas where they are the foreigners traditionally speaking, such as the US, Australia, India, China, Hong Kong, South Africa, and on and on.

Lame flawed argument. Theres many good ways to counter this, later.


Many English people leave England to live in other countries because they prefer to live somewhere else.

Many people is not me, or most.

Therefore, for any English person to condemn foreigners or immigrants, is a condemnation of themselves and their fellow countryman!

Wow how lame.. and actually illogical since humans are seperate entities and not one homogonous mass.


(again, this is by your definition of what an immigrant is. If your definition is different, I will restructure what I have said, but we will end up in the same place)
Many of the members of CC fall into the category of immigrant by your definition, whether they are the same as the immigrants that you find in the UK, or whether they are the exact opposite: Anglo Saxons living abroad.So while your idealistic opinion on the matter can be fun to think about,

in reality there is NO WAY they would be implemented


Do you, or do you not understand the whole reasoning behind WHY I would say such a thing?

when you post these highly sensitive ideas on these forums you may be offending other members, even though they haven't said anything about it out of politeness to you, their friend.
Well, atleast I have the balls to say what I believe and risk losing friends in the process.

I know.. lets all keep away from those "highly sensetive" ideas and issues just incase we offend anyone.. lets just pretend that everything is ok and nothing needs discussing. :roll:

[wern]

Are you saying that us white brits aren`t smart enough to fulfil our own requirements? Do your history then see how "stupid" we are and how we need others.. then ask yourself why isn`t who-ever from where-ever helping their own people in their own country?
According to the geographical source of the inventions of the last 2 centuries, I am saying the "White-Brits" as you put it are in indebted to the inventions foreign minds. The computer you use wasn't originally invented by a White-Brit, but by Konrad Zuse, a German. The operating system that you us was invented by an American.
The television was invented by Paul Nipkow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Nipkow) who was Prussian.
Your ideal form of government (communism), mobile phones, telephones, Uzi machine guns, fax machines, and even jeans represent a tiny amount of things that were invented by Jews.
The chinese invented gunpowder and paper.
Russians invented the first fixed wing aircraft.

Perhaps once you fill yourself in on some history you may start to become humble, ss.

This is laughable, shows you know squat about the UK`s standing in international affairs.
Care to enlighten me? Perhaps you can present some links to back your statements?

Japan is VERY nationalist... are they crippled?
Japan strives to have an open policy on immigration (http://www.kisc.meiji.ac.jp/~yamawaki/gmj/debates.htm)

I cannot believe you just said that. That has made me extremley angry.
Your emotions are your own problem. As you said yourself:
humans are seperate entities and not one homogonous mass.

If you expect others t give a damn about your feelings, you should show that you care about theirs.

We are not all stupid here ss. Quite the contrary. You can feel that someone is opposing you when they disagree, and you can come away with only hate and anger.
Or you can imagine that some people here have smarts and life experience, regardless of their age. And maybe you can come away learning something from them.


Do you, or do you not understand the whole reasoning behind WHY I would say such a thing?
I believe I do. But this is a penis enlargement forum filled with a multicultural base of members, not a political debate forum for "white brits". So do YOU understand why others aren't happy with what YOU are saying?

Well, atleast I have the balls to say what I believe and risk losing friends in the process.
If it is your wish to lose friends, then you are going about it the right way.

I know.. lets all keep away from those "highly sensetive" ideas and issues just incase we offend anyone.. lets just pretend that everything is ok and nothing needs discussing. :roll:
Any discussion is fine as long as you:

Accept others' disagreement, and either debate it in a reasonable manner, or ignore it
Refrain for insulting peopleI believe that in the real world you don't act like this verbally to people. Please consider the friendships you have fostered all these years at CC. As a friend, I urge you to consider what you say, because most of the people on CC aren't white-brits (like myself), and ARE deeply offended by your remarks, insults and aggressive behaviour, even if they prefer not to post it.

[soserious]

Actually I DO talk like that in real life, I fight with people and switch from calm to hostile all the time.
Do YOU as a non-white non-Brit find it offensive that I don`t want you in my homelands? If so do you think you or anyone like you has a right to feel insulted? I do not think everyone is stupid here, I know there are a number far more intelligent than I, if Spike or Bobo told me to stop posting in this thread for instance then I would stop. You know why? Because I respect them.

I don`t respect people backseat driving on issues that don`t directly affect them just because they have to have a point of view..did it ever occur to you that some points of view will be incorrect? Everyone can`t be right.

Do you really understand my whole intention? If you believe you do then say it to me now, it can`t be worse than anything said already can it.

Do you think I hate other races? Do you think I am racist? If you do then you are truly ignorant. Don`t have such a knee-jerk reaction to these issues as everyone else, then maybe you might see that it is not such an uncomfortable sounding concept.


As for the rest of that shit you replied- I couldn`t care less. I CAN defeat those answers actually but taht will take significant time and energy which I don`t see is going to matter in the end anyway. If I do it will be later. Since it isn`t actually the basis of my argument. Plus it is almost 6am and have not slept. You think I will be humble?? I AM humble. You think I am arrogant? Everyone looks at me as the one who is wrong..but do they EVER look at their own biases?

What makes you think that others give a damn about my feelings? They don`t, it isn`t about feelings anyway. You think I gladly alienate myself from those who I previously called my friends? Are you crazy? I do it because it is what I believe in.
Japan btw was going great guns, opening itself up will ruin it.

[wern]

Do YOU as a non-white non-Brit find it offensive that I don`t want you in my homelands? If so do you think you or anyone like you has a right to feel insulted? I do not think everyone is stupid here, I know there are a number far more intelligent than I, if Spike or Bobo told me to stop posting in this thread for instance then I would stop. You know why? Because I respect them.
I am a white caucasian Australian.

Do you really understand my whole intention? If you believe you do then say it to me now, it can`t be worse than anything said already can it.

Here's what I believe you are trying to say, but I am not totally sure.
You make a distinction between the "White-Brit" and "Foreign" peoples based on linguistic and ethnic history. In this way Foreign peoples can be seen as a foreign presence within "White-Brit" societies, and the Foreign peoples are in many ways the cause of conversion and destruction of social order and values leading to culture and civilization's downfall.
But are the foreign people in any way responsible for society’s decline?

[soserious]

I am a white caucasian Australian.
Ok fine, no problem.



Here's what I believe you are trying to say, but I am not totally sure.
You make a distinction between the "White-Brit" and "Foreign" peoples based on linguistic and ethnic history. In this way Foreign peoples can be seen as a foreign presence within "White-Brit" societies, and the Foreign peoples are in many ways the cause of conversion and destruction of social order and values leading to culture and civilization's downfall.
But are the foreign people in any way responsible for society’s decline?

Foreign people and likewise indiginous people are guilty.
Actually no, no this isn`t my belief at all. :?

[wern]

It's not your belief that Foreign peoples are in many ways the cause of conversion and destruction of social order and values leading to culture and civilization's downfall?

What is your belief?

[soserious]

:? You think my belief is that everything wrong with society is the fault of foreigners?? No no, that`s not what I believe at all. You didn`t think that this has been all about that?!
Man oh man. Look its 6:30am, I still haven`t slept and I have work.
If you, or anyone doesn`t already know what the whole point of these arguments were about then what use is it to keep arguing?

Look, it`s a short argument of which could be encapsulated within a paragraph, if one of you can post a reply with my basic fundamental argument in it then I will continue and discuss it without resorting to agressiveness or bad language ok? Because right now all I can see is that you have all missed my actual argument by steering it off course into things which were never part of it.

Here I`ll help by telling you what it ISN`T about:
It isn`t about hating other ethnicities or races
It isn`t about who invented what
It isn`t about deporting white Europeans

*sigh*

[wern]

Can you please provide a one pargraph summary of what your argument is?

[K-man]

18 is as far from 25 as 25 is from 32..

I am fully aware of the maths, the only point I was trying to get accross was that you are not worlds apart in terms of age and as such that comment was uncalled for.



Who are you, mother teresa? Jesus?
At least I`m not out there plotting to blow people up.

Neither of the above, wimples dont suit me and I'm not good with pain!
Plotting to blow people up?



Yeah, so? What do you want a medal?

No, merely trying to demonstrate that I'm your average everyday person.



Actually no. I wouldn`t have you moved or interfear in your life.

That being the case, we don't really have an issue!



Well I am more passionate than they are about said subject.
I do go off on one yes, I am not proud of that and I do let myself down- but how can I explain? I am not trying to excuse myself but I am trying to make you understand the level of emotion you are dealing with..it is high. More than I love my family and would die for them. Since it is about my homelands and people, that is my family and more.


I understand you are a passionate person but so am I and some of what you have said in this thread is infuriating. Do you write these things with the intent of offending people. If not then I would ask you to think about the readers' perspective as you are writing.



You`re not on my hitlist- YOU don`t get to decide, hell Valk makes me so angry that I fight with my other friends at work, but he is still my friend though damn he makes me mad sometimes, and I make him mad.

Fair enough, you just give the impression that anyone who disagrees with you would end up on said list. As they say, assumption is the mother of all fuck ups, so my bad.



How lame was that? I am an agressive violent fucker but even I and I mean ""I"" haven`t been so lame as to try and physically threaten someone.
Do you think I am afraid of you? Do you think I wouldn`t fight and take out my anger and frustrations and vengeance on you? Do you think I am afraid of physical violence?
You hypocrit, I restrain my urges to fight every damn day, EVERY DAMN DAY. Theres thousands more people who I would far more enjoy fighting than some fucking WHITE EUROPEAN.
What most of y`all don`t seem to get is that BRITAIN is made up of white Europeans originally.. German, Scandinavian, Russian, Mediterainids, French, and so on. I couldn`t give a flying fuck about booting you to any part of the Uk. I am British- hundreds to thousands of years ago my ancestors came from Ireland, France, Holland, Norway, and yes even Germany.

That wasn't a threat, more a demonstration that I would be more than happy to defend myself against such extreme action! No I don't think you are afraid of violence, far from it. Don't get how my original statement makes me a hypocrite though?



Maybe it is YOU who should grow up.

Whatever!

[The Big Banana]

Hmmm, I get the feeling that a lot of people are arguing about totally different topics in this thread and its starting to get rather confusing.

[ColdShroom]

http://images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/157/47063.jpg

[Spike]

You've opened it.:shock:

[zwmusic]

Garden snails... Yummy!

[soserious]

http://nationalvanguard.org/images/teaser/anti-uk%20demo.jpg

Look at this fucker! :evil:

[soserious]

http://www.islamfortoday.com/bradfo7.jpg

Look at the enrichment in action of muslims in Bradford England, how diverse.
How well society is doing.




*sarcasm*

[soserious]

http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/womenchildabuse/ashurachildlebanon1.jpg
Look how we benefit from others cultures and customs, my how enriched we are now that they are here.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/1948/ashura1dn4.jpg

Holding a knife after cutting your babies face? Multicultural.
Smiling when you do it? Diverse.

Look at the multicultural sharia law in action
http://stopfundamentalism.com/images/stories/Projects/stoning.jpg
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index_files/Tehran-stoning.jpg

If you don`t like this, surely you are a filthy racist. Why, even the leftist feminists would be racist if they spoke out over sharia law and its wonderful culture and customs.
Lets not forget that a high percentage of muslims in UK and Europe want sharia law here and to be Islamic states. Ovcourse liberalism must give them concession, it`d be rude not to..


*MAJOR sarcasm*

[soserious]

For you Australians:

Here are some quotes from "Men of Middle Eastern Appearance", that show what they think of White Australians, our values and our way of life.


Islamic-relations forum directer, Kuranda Seyit, as reported in the Queensland Sunday Mail, 4/12/05:

It is time for Australia to fall in line with places such as the UK, where councils have renamed Christmas "Winterval" and replaced references to Christmas on sinage with the words "Festive" and "Winter".

"Australia is now so diverse and there are so many cultures and festivals, we need to acknowledge the need to be inslusive in our identity." He expected his plan would insult some people, but urged a "step-by-step" approach.

"A word like Festival is a good word but the community should make an effort to come up with an alternative to Christmas. Schools will take a leading role in terms of political correctness. The younger generation will grow up and say 'it's not fair'."

Melbourne cleric Abdul Nacer Ben Brika: "This is a big problem. There are two laws -- there is an Australian law and there is an Islamic law."

Melboure's Skeik Mohammad Omran: "We believe we have more rights than you because we choose Australia to be our country and you didn't."

Khaled Cheikho, now on terrorism charges in Sydney: "Sharia law is gonna prevail through this land, it's gonna be ruled by it, you tell Howard this."

Sheik Faiz Mohammad, of Sydney's Global Islamic Youth centre:
"A victim of rape every minute somewhere in the world. Why? No one to blame by herself ... strapless, backless, sleeveless, nothing by satanic skirts, slit skirts, translucent blouses, mini skirts, tight jeans ... What is the consequence? Catastrophic devestation, sexual harassment, perversion, promiscuity."

Keyser Trad, of the Islamic Friendship Association: "The criminal dregs of white society colonised this country ... the descendants of these criminal dregs tell us that they are better than us."

Abdul Jalil Ahmad, advocate of Sharia law in WA: "We are a miority here, we cannot do aything against the law."

The Mufti of Australia, Skeik Taj el-din el-Hilali: called the September 11 atacks "God's work against opressors" and blamed "Australia society" for pack rapes by ganga of Muslim Lebanese youths. He also praised terrorist organisations Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad for their on-going program of suicide attacks against innocent civilians.

Usman Badar, president of the University of NSW Muslim Students Association: "Western values are not worthy of human subscription."

Kurt Kennedy, president of 'Best Party of Allah in Australia': "Allah willing, Australia will become a country full of people who believe in Allah and follow the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him)."

[soserious]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

[Spike]

If you don`t like this, surely you are a filthy racist.

Are you saying you do like it?

such as the UK, where councils have renamed Christmas "Winterval"

News to me. Didn't Birmingham try it one year and got laughed at?

[soserious]

You know I was using extreme sarcasm.. I speak out against the abhorrentness of their culture, technically I am not racist- but I`d gladly be called a racist if the only other position to take was accepting their nonsense.

Actually there`s more, I have heard this down my way. Frankly christianity tacked itself onto a European tradition that is christmas- albeit not called christmas, what is it? Something like winterfest? Though not a currently used English word.

[Spike]

Most Christian things were originally Pagan - they blurred them together so Pagan's would slowly become Christian.

I missed the sarcasm - you didn't use the SarcasticBold Font. :D

[soserious]

Well, I was being as sarcastic as I could be. I didn`t want to just swear and rant, but I didn`t want to make it that easy to tell either.. I think everyone knows my official position on foreign religions and cultures- and it`s not one of shining positivness...

Yeah, it gets on my nerves when Christians bitch about pagans- since Pagans were here first, and since Christianity is a religion of the middle-east.
Islam though I just want out of Europe like yesterday..

[Spike]

Muslims are still only 2.8% of the population - and a handful of gobby ones. I doubt most British Muslims want women stoned, especially the women.

Fanatic Muslims are just as much outside the mainstream as Fanatic Christians.

The world would be a better place if all religions were banned.

[Valk]

You can ban it officially but that doesnt decrease the amount of fanatic fuckers.

[soserious]

Ever been to bayswater (Saudi Arabia)? Or tooting (capital of Pakistan)? My area has a lot more than 2.8% I don`t believe that figure for a second. Is it up to date for this month? Does it include the illegals? I think theres like over 20 million musims n Europe at the moment (atleast) Or maybe it`s 50 million- that doesn`t equate to 2.8%.. not even close..
No such thing as a moderate muslim- is there such a thing as a moderate pedophile? I think not. Since muhammed was a pedophile- bedding little Aisha at age 9. This is a man they revere above almost anythng, was it just a "few fanatics" who rioted after the prophet cartoons? No way.
Islam would be banned and all muslims forcibly deported so fast if I was in charge. No mercy. No concessions. No leniancy. OUT OUT OUT.
:evil:

[Spike]

Around me there's probably only 0.00000001% - a couple run the Chinese Take-Away, and couple of token blacks. Once you get out of the major cities 99% of faces are European.

[soserious]

Not anymore, those places are becoming more rare, why have 2? Why have any? What in 50 years still further when they are still coming here and bringing more and breeding out the natives and gaining in strength? What then? When we are all a minority a rare breed in our own lands, anyone who looks at the figures should find it staggering.

One of my friends at work - a black African, we both talk politics and are both similar in our nationalist views. He believes that London will get worse the more black and asian people there are and that it will be really violent and all the whites will be retreating to the countryside unless we do something now. (His words not mine).

[wern]

If you don`t like this, surely you are a filthy racist. Why, even the leftist feminists would be racist if they spoke out over sharia law and its wonderful culture and customs.
Lets not forget that a high percentage of muslims in UK and Europe want sharia law here and to be Islamic states. Ovcourse liberalism must give them concession, it`d be rude not to..


*MAJOR sarcasm*

People who want sharia law in the UK or in australia should get the fuck out.
They [should] embrace Australia as their motherland and not try to conquer it. But that has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. Not all Muslims are like this.

[wern]

The world would be a better place if all religions were banned.

What about Buddhism???

[Valk]

A chemical XTC warfare would be the best option.

[wern]

chemical XTC warfare? :?

[Valk]

Yes, a chemical warfare with gaseous XTC.

[wern]

Sounds like fun. I'll bring the wine and cheese.

[Valk]

No alcohol with XTC.:shock:

[Spike]

What about Buddhism???

If all religions were banned we'd all end up Buddhists - problem solved.:D

[trugain]

Problem! There is more than one type of Buddhism. Plus, I personally believe people need something to believe in, and they want to be a part of something. So, therefore we have religions, and will forever have religions.

Religions are the biggest gangs- Trugain

[wern]

I agree. Religion in general offers a lot. There are negative aspects to some religions, most likely due to opportunists, but the essence of religion is about spirituality, guidance and hope.

[soserious]

What about Buddhism???

Bhuddism is NOT a religion-actually. I happen to have been studying it for some time.

[soserious]

People who want sharia law in the UK or in australia should get the fuck out.
They [should] embrace Australia as their motherland and not try to conquer it. But that has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. Not all Muslims are like this.


So when the high majority of muslims who want sharia law in Europe actually get it- will these "other ones" do anything to revolt against it? Or will they be as afraid and powerless to fight against it as they are in the other islamic states?
It is not practical, possible or even desirable to pick and choose who are "acceptable" ones. If they truly want to become western then they would relinquish their religion. Islam is not compatible with the West.

[wern]

So when the high majority of muslims who want sharia law in Europe actually get it- will these "other ones" do anything to revolt against it?

Do you have a link/reference to support that the high majority of Muslims in Europe want Sharia law? I would be surprised to find that they do, but anything is possible.

Bhuddism is NOT a religion-actually. I happen to have been studying it for some time.
In some ways Buddhism is very scientific in it's teachings and approaches. But it is a religion.

[soserious]

Do you have a link/reference to support that the high majority of Muslims in Europe want Sharia law? I would be surprised to find that they do, but anything is possible.
I think the majority was Europe, I don`t save evidence. There was a high percent in UK too so that wasn`t hard to find:
Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml
THAT is a large percentage.

In some ways Buddhism is very scientific in it's teachings and approaches. But it is a religion.
It doesn`t have a god or some weird ways of increasing its numbers by murder and intimidation- that`s good enough for me. The Dalai Lama says it`s not a religion in books I have. I trust the Dalai Lama more than the internet.

[K-man]

re-li-gion 
–noun <TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>1.</TD><TD vAlign=top>a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>2.</TD><TD vAlign=top>a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>3.</TD><TD vAlign=top>the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>4.</TD><TD vAlign=top>the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>5.</TD><TD vAlign=top>the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>6.</TD><TD vAlign=top>something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>7.</TD><TD vAlign=top>religions, Archaic. religious rites. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>8.</TD><TD vAlign=top>Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>—Idiom <TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>9.</TD><TD vAlign=top>get religion, Informal. <TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>a.</TD><TD vAlign=top>to acquire a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>b.</TD><TD vAlign=top>to resolve to mend one's errant ways: The company got religion and stopped making dangerous products. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
:lol: (source = dictionary.com)

[soserious]

Aha aha your so clever aren`t you? I will re-state The Dalai Lama says it is not a "religion" the Dalai Lama has more authority on Bhuddism than anyone.
Regardless it is of little consequence as it isn`t a neccesary part of Europes history.

[The Big Banana]

How did buddhism become a part of this conversation? Anyway, Tenzin Gyatso the current Dalai Lama can only speak for tibetan buddhism and, whether he says it is one or not, because buddhism teaches reincarnation, considered supernatural, rather than scientific, it is by definition a religion.

[K-man]

Here we go again!

I am merely pointing out that, despite your beliefs to the contrary (to which you are of course, perfectly entitled), the accepted (by everyone except you & the Dalai Lama) definition of religion does not call for a specific god or deity. Only a collection of shared beliefs.

[Spike]

2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons

We Cheeky Cherryists qualify for religious status. :cool

[The Big Banana]

So do we all agree or disagree on the 5 hour rule?

[Spike]

Damn, we even have our own inquisition.

[K-man]

May I take you all back to what this thread was supposed to be about!

The UK is practically unrecognisable these days. The advent of new laws from europe have done nothing but weaken a once strong nation. Unfortunately there appears to be a fundamental lack of discipline within society.

What I was getting at is the apparent lack of common courtesy amongst the younger generation. These days it seems that it's all about getting the most for as little effort as possible. The way that capitalist society has evolved does nothing but magnify the problem. Also the do-gooders from Brussels telling the population that they can no longer discipline their children by means of a slap round the legs when they need it. Now dont get me wrong, I understand that we should do everything possible to stamp the abuse of children (I had a strict upbringing) but there is a massive difference between teaching your kids right from wrong and beating them to within an inch of their lives. Its no wonder that kids have no respect for their elders.

Teach them well and let them lead the way..... LMAO


I'm not sure that many of the posts here directly relate to the original point. Whilst of course some of you will say that all these issues are contributing factors, I don't think that the religious beliefs of the younger (or older) generation are relevant here. I do not dispute that the many of the practises within Islam are abhorrent and in no way should they be tolerated or condoned within our western society but I am a firm believer that people should be allowed their personal beliefs provided that they fall within the realms of the laws of that particular land. I dont want people forcing their beliefs down my throat and by the same token I would not wish to enforce my own beliefs upon others. That is not to say that I am blind to the issues, more that I am realistic in what I am able to achieve.

[K-man]

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5329696.stm

Go back 15 - 20 years. Shootings were practically unheard of in England.

[soserious]

Yeah, and so were "honour killings" :roll: plus there were less rapes, street robberies, all that shit.

At some stage if you saw a bunch of kids vandalising a bus stop or phone booth you would`ve expected someone (or taken it upon yourself) to go and sort them out and tell them what`s what and kick their butts if they gave you lip. NOW people are afraid of being stabbed or beaten or shot to death if they tried to stand upto thugs. With good reason too.

We`re not even allowed to defend ourselves in our own homes if an intruder comes in without potential of being sued, fined, sent to prison.
If the dumbfucks fall down and hurt themselves they can sue you too.
Ridiculous.

If I was in charge boy, I`d change things.

[K-man]

Now we're getting back to it!

It is utterly ridiculous that people should be afraid to challenge bad behaviour on our streets.

As for the not being able to defend your home thing, well :x :x :x !!

Prisoners rights is another new contradiction! When you break the law, you should lose your liberty and all the rights that are associated with it, end of story. Now they're even talking about giving prisoners the right to vote. WTF??

[CockMessiah]

Take the law into your own hands.

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.
-Benjamin Franklin-

[soserious]

I am well familiar with that quote, it`s one of my favourites.

They`re using this Islamic shit as an excuse to bring in extra ways to take away our personal liberties. What`s worse is those people who accept being assfucked and swallow all the bullshit reasons for it, worse still are those who do all that AND try to convince those of us who aren`t spineless and brainless.
I believe in creating a clear and practical thorough constitution which explains everyones rights and everyones respnsibilities- with a final clause that says that if these things are altered then it is our DUTY as citizens to revolt. I would have a copy of this cut into steel and stone and layed out in public squares in all the towns of the land- so that EVERYONE has the opportunity to know what their rights and responsibilities are as citizens.
This is exactly what I plan for ss-territories.

Like a circle of huge tablets with the constitution on word for word, surrounded by perhaps a garden or something.
I would create a CULTURE that simply was better. It`s hard to do that with many who are unwilling, not impossible though.

Oh, I would also have it taught in schools.

[CockMessiah]

In my opinion, conformation to society is a waste of time and life-essence. I liked your fundamental idea (ss) of the Territories, but the thread digressed into another racial argument. I try to see the big picture, and as cool as that sounds, it doesn't seem practical, but a nice alternative is to become a man of the sea, where international law reigns. One of my ultimate goals is to construct a sea-going catamaran with near total self-sufficiency and travel the oceans, avoiding the bureaucracy associated with identifying oneself with one particular nation.

Speaking of... are new chapters of CC novel in the works?

[soserious]

Gentlemen, what is the most important thing in the world right now? our part of it specifically?
That`s right- money and capital. Now, money and capital needn`t be the evil that it has become, if only things were ordered correctly.

The most important thing any nation should have as the base of it`s very being is this : Its human population (in my strong view this would be the indiginous population, but we are not discussing racialism nationalism here).

All these things that are part of the driving force of our culture, our civilisation in this day and age SHOULD BE SUBORDINATE TO THE HUMAN HEALTH HAPPINESS AND REPRODUCTION.
What we have gentlemen, is a back to front out of sync culture.

I don`t like giving concessions to fundamental thoughts liek that, because you alter and alter and before you know it you are left with a mere hollow shadow of the pure strategy that was once intended- a mockery of us all.

I am not content to be one of the masses whom shrug and accept it, I don`t believe in that at all.

I must write a few rough drafts of the new constitution.
First though there needs to be a few fundamental statements of which the constitution is to serve and be manifest.
Please feel free to help with this- just cut and paste this next bit and add what you think should be there or indeed change it, if one of us does not like what is chnged or written we merely cut and paste it again and alter it yet again until after some time we have each a list of fundamentals for our constitution- each possibly somewhat different, but that is ok.
Ok, I shall start.


1) The state and all of its workings must be subordinate to the health and well being of its citizens.

[K-man]

1) The state and all of its workings must be subordinate to the health and well being of its citizens.

2) All residents (without exception) shall live within the confines of the stated laws of the land.

[soserious]

In my opinion, conformation to society is a waste of time and life-essence.
Yes- if it is an ill society.
No- if it is what you want and is a healthy society.
Yes- if you want to be truly free (ss territories will allow for those anti-social adventure types)


I liked your fundamental idea (ss) of the Territories,
Thankyou.

but the thread digressed into another racial argument.
This is bad, I don`t want it to. Race should not be part of it further than my initial statement that it is for white Europeans only. (I do not mind if others copy my idea and make it for only blacks or asians or indeed mixed, but my territories is for whites. end of.) After that I should not argue or discuss it in that thread you are right. I will return to it soon and get back n tangent.


I try to see the big picture, and as cool as that sounds, it doesn't seem practical,
Current civilisation is not practical, yet it exists. I understand though that it will be tremendously frought with problems, but the effort would be worth it to me.


but a nice alternative is to become a man of the sea, where international law reigns.
Yes, it`s appealing isn`t it?

One of my ultimate goals is to construct a sea-going catamaran with near total self-sufficiency and travel the oceans, avoiding the bureaucracy associated with identifying oneself with one particular nation.
Kind of a Mick Dundee of the oceans. say go for it, would you use sponsors?
Maybe you should create a thread for it.

Speaking of... are new chapters of CC novel in the works?
Yes, but in my mind. I am extremley worn out, tired and I think I am getting ill, ill like my body is old and weary and dying. So everything is done with a dozen things on my mind and in a hostile environment and with much more effort than it should be. Perhaps melodramatic, perhaps not.
My body feels like it is far older than it is (real age vs chronological age)some of my kin die young so it`s either that or I am going through a reaalllllyyy looong illness of somekind.

[soserious]

(You needn`t quote, it`s easier to just paste directly- we would assume that any changes were the most recent posters altercations)


1) The state and all of its workings must be subordinate to the health and well being of its citizens.
2) All residents (without exception) shall live within the confines of the stated laws of the land.
3) All citizens must be taught and allowed to publically view at will the constitution.

[K-man]

1) The state and all of its workings must be subordinate to the health and well being of its citizens.
2) All residents (without exception) shall live within the confines of the stated laws of the land.
3) All citizens must be taught and allowed to publically view at will the constitution.
4) Changes to the law must be ratified (by significant majority) by referendum of citizens. All citizens will be required to vote.

[soserious]

1) The state and all of its workings must be subordinate to the health and well being of its citizens.
2) All residents (without exception) shall live within the confines of the stated laws of the land.
3) All citizens must be taught and allowed to publically view at will the constitution.
4) There must be no changes to the law.
5) All citizens will be required to vote.


We differ, but thats O.K. I have my reasons and I know you have yours. I see positives but also negatives in that.

[The Big Banana]

Sorry to barge in, but if there are not going to be any changes to the law, what is the purpose of voting?

[K-man]

I use the term citizen very deliberately as opposed to resident here. As society evolves changes in the law may well be necessary and as such I think it would be unwise to cast this is stone. Despite the fact that I am a foreigner, I do believe that only citizens should have the right to a say on the future of their country. Voting by citizens should be a legal requirement in my opinion, but that assumes that the state would be responsive to the will of its citizens.

[soserious]

Sorry to barge in, but if there are not going to be any changes to the law, what is the purpose of voting?

You`re not barging in- please, join in.
This is like a brain storm, but a bit more organised. I expect to make mistakes and have contradictions at the early stages. Constructive critisism is fine, indeed take the list and add and alter to what you think.

[Spike]

We`re not even allowed to defend ourselves in our own homes if an intruder comes in without potential of being sued, fined, sent to prison.

That's not actually true - you can use any reasonable force to protect yourself, up to and including killing the intruder if necessary. The police would take a dim view of you shooting someone halfway across your garden with your DVD player.

[Valk]

Yes, but its a little difficult to make a rational judgement when faced with such a situation.

[soserious]

That's not actually true - you can use any reasonable force to protect yourself, up to and including killing the intruder if necessary. The police would take a dim view of you shooting someone halfway across your garden with your DVD player.


No way, remember all the recent fuss over it all? The problem came down to "reasonable force" and what reasonable force actually WAS. No clear distinctions or boundaries leaves us open to the potential for being sued in such situations. That makes me hesitate.

Better to be judged by twelve than buried by six I suppose.

[soserious]

Yes, but its a little difficult to make a rational judgement when faced with such a situation.

right, exactly. This is exactly what they use against you in court.
"Well sir, why did you strike the intruder 3 times? Surely once would have been sufficient? The coroner has confirmed that had he been hit only once he would still be alive. ORDER! I charge you with manslughter, 7 year term"

:x

[Spike]

First the Police decide if charges are necessary, then the CPS decide if you're going to court - not the judge or jury, they can only decide whether you're guilty or not guilty.

In the real world I doubt cracking an intruder over the head 3 times would go beyond making a statement.

[trugain]

3 times is not much if you are in a rage or scared for your life. It all depends on your local government though, some states will say your actions were justified, and others will say you willingly committed murder.

-trugain

[wern]

The concept of only being able to hurt an intruder as an act of self defence sucks, although there is logic behind it. If someone isn't trying to harm you physically, you shouldn't harm them physically. Though I would sorely want to hurt someone if they were robbing my home :x.

2) All residents (without exception) shall live within the confines of the stated laws of the land.

What about visitors?

[soserious]

I didn`t write that, K-man did. I just left it in because I agree with it. "what about visitors?" Yeah, what about visitors?? They must all be abiding by the accepted law- I don`t think you read it right, you were just in a hurry to find something to pick at.
So you thought you`d pick away at ss` posts again did you? :roll: Whatever

[K-man]

What about visitors?

That visitors should abide by the laws of the land should go without saying. :lol:

[soserious]

22 year old man on news just now- he`d been shot dead 3 weeks ago in SE London, Peter Wood(something or other) He had a 3 year old kid and a fiance.
You know why he was shot? For telling off thugs outside his house who were causing trouble- previous to that these same thugs had slashed his face from forehead to lip and left a big cut mark when he came out to stop them damaging his car- what kind of fuckers do that kind of thing?

I-Swear-To-God-If/When-Am-In-Charge-Fuckers-Who-Do-That-Kind-Of-Thing-Will-Be-Found-By-My-Stormtroopers-And-Will-Be-Punished-Badly.

A young guy, goodlooking and healthy with a woman and a child and geared up for a proper family and scum come and mutilate his FACE (face for fucks sake!) and shoot him dead leaving a fatherless child and a mourning woman and a mourning father and family.

These fuckers haven`t been caught yet..
Hold me back..HOLD ME BACK!!!
http://www.sanbenito.k12.tx.us/schools/sbhs/99projects/Dau's%20Web%20stuff/terminator.jpg
SOSERIOUS

[soserious]

And WTF is this shit?!
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329572725-110251,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5319776.stm
:evil:

[soserious]

AND NOW ON BBC1 THERES NEWS ON THE ARMY BEING BASHED BECAUSE THEY ARENT BRINGING IN ENOUGH ETHNICS!!! ESPECIALLY MUSLIM ASAINS!!
WTFFFFFF!!!!!!!!!! RRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

[Spike]

Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, said black boys were suffering from a culture where it was not cool to be clever, and argued that they lacked self esteem and positive role models. "If the only way to break through the wall of attitude that surrounds black boys is to teach them separately for some subjects, then we should be ready for that,"

And what is your problem with that exactly?

And why not use more black/muslims/asians as cannon fodder - the British Army as a long history of this - the Ghurkas spring to mind.

[soserious]

"It would mean fighting against my Muslim brothers and that wouldn't be right"


March 22, 2003
Muslim-American soldier throws grenades at 101st Airborne Command Tent
Update: It's now being reported that this attack was carried out by a Muslim-American U.S. soldier. Unforgivable, craven and cowardly, for which I'm sure he'll be court-martialled, if not executed.
That is, if he's a real GI.
If Muslim-American soldiers will put their loyalty to "Islam" above their loyalty to their country, then Washington, we have a problem and these people will have to be weeded out of the military!

U.S. Troops Attacked in Kuwait; 10 Wounded

A camp of the 101st Airborne Division in Kuwait was attacked early Sunday with grenades and small arms fire, wounding 10 people, including six seriously, U.S. military officials said.

From our reports it appears that a terrorist penetrated Camp Pennsylvania, one or more terrorists threw two hand grenades into a tent," said George Heath, spokesman at Fort Campbell, Ky., home base of the 101st.[Not just "a tent;" it was the Command tent.--Jen]
[...]
The attack, which included small arms fire, happened at a rear base camp of the 101st, near the Iraqi border, U.S. military officials said.

It`s the idea behind it, the continuing notion that everything must have it`s share of nonwhites specifically. It makes me sick.

Also, why should black kids have special treatment?? What about giving other ethnics special treatment too..or god forbid an all white class/school.

What makes me mad is teh thinking behind all this shit. This is not a fucking whorefest country free for all. This is a god damned white country for thousands of years and suddenly we are cutting our own balls off for foreign bloods???
Stupid stupid.

It`s not even "equal" because they always focus on helping nonwhites. Any white Brit whos not been under a rock or far away frm it all knows that that is what has been happening for years now- but now it`s on a new level.