"Tikkun Olam" is Hebrew for "repairing the world." Repair--meaning the world is broken. According to the jew, their god "chose" them to fix the world. So how is it "broken"? There are many things that need to be fixed--starvation, poverty due to corporate greed, etc; all of which is acceptable, but the aspect of TO that concerns National Socialists is their idea that "god" made one type of human ("Adam") and that they must blend all Gentiles together to re-form that human.

My perspective on the jews is this: They've been hated for thousands of years; basically since written history has been around. Why?

The jew will tell you "there's no reason, it's just because of intolerance." Gentile intolerance, specifically. Occasionally they'll mention jewish intolerance, but it is almost always qualified--"well, it's not as bad as what's been done to us."

The reality is that they've been hated because of their self-appointed mission to "repair the world." Repairing the world to jewish standards means to destroy the world of Gentile cultures, civilizations, and Races.

We stand against this.

If you truly value global diversity, stand with us.

"Rachel was very committed to fighting anti-semitism."

That's a laugh. By aligning herself with the Palestinians, she was embracing anti-semitism. Palestinians, like most Arabs, have nothing on the Nazi's for hating Jews, except for the resources to kill them.

The funny thing about this though is the NSM group, are playing you TESC types as chumps. They found a way to get your goat good and it's working. NSM/Nazi's are scumbags, but they got a checkmate on you guys.

I still believe you are going to regret the day you all decided to spar with these guys. If you would have layed low, we would be done with them. But you keep poking the dog, and they are coming back again, and again, and again. Their child psychology worked on you children.

The reason I don't give Rachel Corrie the benefit of the doubt that, at the least, she was apathetic toward violence against Israeli citizens is because of the picture in which she is burning the US flag. Every time I hear about how peaceful her mission was, I look at that picture and see an angry, angry woman.

Also, I think Zionism should be the intended discussion in some of these posts, not Semitism.

You said it was ok to be against terrorism and against oppression. Are you taking that back and making me choose sides?

What makes it ok for Israel to take land away from people who lived there for centuries? Why is Israel different from South Africa under Apartheid? Why do Israelies get to go take the land, subjugate the population and build a wall? What makes that ok? Does might make right?

I think you have chosen sides, and clearly Rachel did. Yes its ok to be against both, I am.

Israel says it was theirs, Palestinians say it was theirs.

Does might make right?? I don't know, ask an American Indian.

I'll answer this in "jewish style"--I'll answer with a question:

If the jews see the world as an "us-v-them" contest (jew-v-Gentile) then why don't they remove themselves?

After all, they have Israel, they have the world's fourth largest army (never mind the nukes) and could easily conquer Gaza, the West Bank, and probably large chunks of Syria and Egypt as well...then they march the Pals and the others to the Red Sea, give them a Wal-Mart life raft and tell 'em to start swimming. After having done this, every jew in the world could easily move there and set up house.

A jewish country, devoted entirely to the jewish people, their culture, and goals. Now that's an idea! I'd suspect there'd be far less anti-Semitism, especially directed at individuals.

Wait a minute...if they all moved there, then they couldn't be "a light to the nations", could they? They wouldn't be able to study Torah; they'd have to grow their own food, and make their own infrastructure. Naaah...you can't have a country devoted to jewish interests, where *all* jews could live, because then you couldn't influence Gentile nations. And it violates one of the seven Noahide commandments for us: Gentiles are tasked with making the infrastructure of a society, within which the jew provides his "enlightenment."

Or is this incorrect? I'm going to come back here once more (maybe twice) to close up any loose ends, feel free to be SPECIFIC why my assessment is incorrect.

The components of such an award should include a duck, very small stones, and wood.

And the recipient should wear a false nose, made of a carrot.

;-)

Again not quite right, Rick. Here, on the Blog, so far you're correct. However, out in the streets, who's going to have a bullhorn to direct the crowds to "shout us down"? The simple fact is that your kind does not allow for differences of opinion on one topic, and one topic only: the reality of racial differences. And that's ok, we know who is leading you, and we know their intentions. We're not asking for special consideration nor concessions.

"Sunshine is the best disinfectant, John. The more people are exposed to your ideas, the more they will see that the just don't add up."

Is that why the NSM is the fastest-growing WN organization in the country? Is that why you're afraid to read and debate our views? You have yet to quote a single statement I've made and ask for evidence. *That* is how you show that our ideas "just don't add up." So far, you haven't done any adding.

Indeed, sunshine is best. Prepare for blinding light, Rick. We're on the move, and increasing.

"For example, you portray yourself as victims, but then preach the elimination of people of color. That must be the cause of more than a little cognitive disonance for your folks (or denial, I suspect)."

Wrong again, Rick. We don't preach the elimination of coloreds "as policy." (I challenge you to find that phrase in the 25 points on the main NSM site) I will concede that occasionally one does find such phrases...but that is intended for a different audience, and not intended to be acted on.

What we want is for the different Races to strive for their survival in their own countries, where they can develop their own "style" of success. Let's reverse things to illustrate: Imagine a pow-wow, with hundreds of Native Americans, decked out with full regalia, dancing a storm. What would happen to their culture if we replaced their People--their Blood--with Whites? Easy answer--their culture would be destroyed. White people dressed up as Indians don't make for an authentic Native American culture. The same is true for White culture--dressing up non-Whites does not make an authentic White culture. Is an all-White culture and People less desirable than an all-Native American culture and People?

"Let's start from the beginning: what makes America what it is? Why is America as creative, productive, powerful as it is? The answer is: we are a country made up of many different people, from many different cultures, with many different ideas, customs, and beliefs."

How many Asians signed the Declaration of Independance, Rick? What were the immigration laws prior to 1964? For the first 170 years we were a White nation, by law...Even the egalitarians admit this. America prior to the 1960's was, for all practical purposes, a White nation.

America is currently in a state of hard decline. We are surviving on the remnants of a past glory. Why do you think we have Bush jr. in office? Why do you think we have the Patriot Act? And PA2 in the wings? And our current aggression in the Middle East? (Soon to include Iran) We are descending into tyranny. By the way, what do you think of "Aztlan", and "reconquesta" (sp?)?

"Countries that are homogeneous (as you claim is your ideal) are not as innovative or creative..."

I know it's April 1st Rick, but come on, be real. ;)

Let's list a few countries in history that might be called "innovative or creative":

Roman Empire (had strict racial laws until about 50-100AD, coinciding with its decline)

Nearly all European countries, starting about 1200AD

United States (1790-2000; however as the numbers of non-Whites goes up, our "scoring" in areas such as education-v-the world goes down; currently we are almost out of the top 20)

Note that those are all White countries. Name one African country that is "innovative and creative." Name one Middle East country that is "innovative and creative" (I concede Israel; think "Arab"). Name one Asian country that is "innovative and creative." (Copying Western technology doesn't count)

"...This means that if you were to achieve your goal of "racial purity," that country would soon be swept into the dustbin of history, never to be heard from again."

There are two ways countries are destroyed, Rick. The first is by military defeat, and the second is by loss of the original Blood that founded the country.

John Says,"There are two ways countries are destroyed, Rick. The first is by military defeat"

This country kicked the crap out of your idol.....and he took the cowards way out with a self-inflicted gun shot wound to the head.

Punks follow punks I guess