"Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspiracy"

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby jumpy64 on December 19th, 2015, 2:29 pm

pov603 wrote:One thing though that keeps coming back to me is that the 'west' if taken in general terms, is a 'white-made' society, I know it could be argued, forged on the backs of brown, black, yellow races, nevertheless, if viewed against the backdrop of 7 billion people, 'whites/westerners' only account for maybe 1 billion of those. Therefore it is 'us' who are the minority yet we are made to feel like 'we' are the cause of the world's woes.

I totally agree with the whole of your post, pov603, although I've quoted here just the last bit to save some space.

I think we, as whites, should take pride (even if you don't want to say it ;) ) in our accomplishments (which other races evidently admire, or envy, otherwise, as you point out, they wouldn't want to come in our countries), and even in our tolerance, but we should also make sure that this tolerance is not taken advantage of any more than it's already been.

We are culturally and morally inclined to accept as part of our societies anybody of any race and color who's willing to abide to its values and its rules, and even to improve them (and in fact I'm actually including in my "white people" definition all really integrated and civil people of any race, color and creed), but we should stop those who are destroying them from continuing to do so.

I know this sounds like an almost impossible thing to do with practically all of our media people, politicians and decision-makers being in the pockets of JPMs and of the much more numerous traitors who collaborate with them, but can we at least become conscious of the necessity of doing it? At least here, in a highly intelligent and perceptive community such as CF?

Even if we've been the cause of some of the world's woes, by now we've more than made up for this "fault", and we shouldn't let hostile groups make us forget that we've also been the cause for the most progressive and advanced things in the world, to the benefit both of us and of anybody else (ending slavery is a most notable example of this).

So let's shed the guilt, return it to the sender, raise our head and let's be proud of who we are. We've been so heavily conditioned that such an invitation will sound "questionable" even to most white people, and probably even among the well-intentioned readers of this forum, but everybody else is proud of who they are, and especially the ethnic group which clearly seems to me less deserving of this kind of pride, so why shouldn't we?

We can get better, of course (and our research into the machinations of the world's PMs certainly helps a lot in this sense), but only from a position of self-esteem, with our heads up, and not from a position of guilt and shame, with our heads down. After all, we can go only in the direction our eyes are pointed towards.
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Kham on December 19th, 2015, 5:03 pm

Whites, blacks, yellows, browns... This race paradigm was set up by those in charge. There is no scientific proof of race. By using the rhetoric of our controllers we limit our thinking to those same confines.

White guilt ... Is a subliminal directive, a term designed by the controllers. If the media never used the term 'white guilt' then most likely westerners would never have even thought of taking on the responsibility for slavery. I know I personally did not participate in such actions. Why should I feel guilty for the heinous crimes of those bastards that dealt in slavery? Because we were told to feel guilty by the media on account of the term they invented called 'white guilt'.

Seems to me that in order to think the clearest on any topic, one must shed all the rhetoric given to us by the controllers of society. The invention of rhetoric in the first place was to control the minds of the masses.
Posts: 105
Joined: June 25th, 2015, 10:30 am

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby jumpy64 on December 20th, 2015, 2:10 pm

Kham wrote:Whites, blacks, yellows, browns... This race paradigm was set up by those in charge. There is no scientific proof of race. By using the rhetoric of our controllers we limit our thinking to those same confines.

Actually, Kham, you got it backwards. The rethoric of our controllers is that race doesn't exist, and that's why racial discrimination (a positive term in my opinion, because being able to discriminate, to distinguish is always good, and doesn't necessarily imply a judgment, so I'll use it instead of the negative "racism") is "bad" or even "absurd". Of course, this is because they want us to accept white genocide as "multiculturalism". The next step is to convince us that different sexes (they call them "genders", a neospeak word I generally refuse to use) don't exist either, and they've already advanced pretty far in that direction.

Always, of course, with the help of "science", or I should say fake science, which is the current materialistic religion, an integral part of their bogus paradigm. And you have swallowed it hook, line and sinker, I'm afraid, if you say that race doesn't exist.

I'm a little reluctant to even try to give you proof of the objective, observable existence of different races, if you don't see it, but I'll suggest you to read the following article, if you are willing to shed your conditioning: http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/07 ... construct/

On the other hand, you can read https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ab ... e-in-races to see what the "controllers" would want you to believe.

And by the way, if you've read at least some pages of this thread, you should know that these "controllers" belong to the most racially-conscious and supremacist ethnic group on earth, so their double standards in this, like in a lot of other matters, should itself be a clear indication of how things really are.

Kham wrote:White guilt ... Is a subliminal directive, a term designed by the controllers. If the media never used the term 'white guilt' then most likely westerners would never have even thought of taking on the responsibility for slavery. I know I personally did not participate in such actions. Why should I feel guilty for the heinous crimes of those bastards that dealt in slavery? Because we were told to feel guilty by the media on account of the term they invented called 'white guilt'.

I agree with you here: differently from the objectivity of race, "white guilt" is a media construct, a "subliminal directive", as you say, but also an explicit one.

Kham wrote:Seems to me that in order to think the clearest on any topic, one must shed all the rhetoric given to us by the controllers of society. The invention of rhetoric in the first place was to control the minds of the masses.

Yes, you're right. So now please walk the talk. ;)
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on December 20th, 2015, 4:09 pm

omaxsteve wrote:
There was a very interesting exercise in discrimination performed by a teacher, Jane Elliott, in 1968, that I believe demonstrates both the lure and danger of discrimination towards a minority group. You can read about it here;; http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/lesson-of-a-lifetime-72

Perhaps after reading the article above , you will have a better understanding why I find this whole thread "objectionable" and it really does not matter to me that is directed towards Jews. I would feel exactly the same if the group being targeted in this topic were Muslims, dark-skinned people, Mexicans, or any other group.


Steve O.

So I read the article. What it shows for me is how vulnerable people are to influence from authority figures. How easy it was for the teacher to encourage the children to hurt their peers. This is the same outcome we see with the Stanford prison experiment and the experiments by Stanley Milgram (with the fake electroshocks). Milgram stands out because he acknowledged the importance of the authority factor where in the other cases, especially the Stanford prison experiment and the version of the BBC, this factor was hidden. Instead the focus was on how evil "spontaneously" arose in otherwise normal people.
Makes me wonder how much of the worst cases of racism are the (historical) consequence of mind control by the state in its broad sense, including organised religion, the media and other criminal organizations and the ultra rich. State sponsored anti-racism is probably not the best answer to state sponsored racism. I agree with Kham and jumpy64 that its better to shed all the rhetoric, even if they don't yet agree what the rhetoric is.

But after reading the article I don't have a better understanding why omaxsteve finds the whole thread objectionable. As it happens, I know what it feels like to be culturally discriminated against. At age 3 or 4 our family moved from Belgium to the Netherlands were we were the only Belgians I knew. The actions by teachers and children had a big impact on my life, but I am not complaining.

I hope someone with an understanding of US media can answer Steve's questions posted here:
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 1#p2398631
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby ICfreely on December 20th, 2015, 8:10 pm

Steve O,

'Jeremy' was 15 & clean until the Ritalin. Psychiatry is a pseudoscience and a crime against humanity! I'd be glad to elaborate in the 'Psychiatry' thread. I agree with you, Kham and Jumpy about not feeling any guilt for our forefathers alleged misdeeds!


When in Rome do as Romulus (not Remus)! Got it! Having said that, 'pride' is one of the seven deadly sins for a good reason, is it not? Do I detect a little Jew envy? I wouldn't be surprised if one day you found yourself rollin' through the streets of Rome in a Chevy Super Sport bumpin' Too $hort (while updating your J-Date account), on your way to the 'Goy Pride Parade.'

I know a Nigerian guy who hates the term 'African American.' He isn't too fond of Americans of African descent either. His motto is, "Never trust a nigga without an accent!" Go figure... :rolleyes:
Posts: 555
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby jumpy64 on December 20th, 2015, 9:49 pm

Guys, I’ve just re-read, with more attention, the article I linked to before when responding to Kham. It’s titled “Why race is not a ‘social construct’”, and I want to recommend it again at http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/07 ... construct/

I find its arguments irrefutable by any sensible and truly independent thinker. I think the author, Greg Johnson, is a genius of an almost totally lost art: the art of COMMON SENSE, that we should all recover - freeing ourselves from the mental chains of egalitarianism, moral relativism, false or perverse individualism and political correctness intentionally created to bind us - if we are to understand how things are going in our current society and then do something about it.

In fact, he wrote at least another absolutely brilliant article titled “In defense of prejudice” at http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/12 ... prejudice/

Actually, it’s so great that I have to quote it here almost in its entirety, because Johnson says what I think (and more) much better than I ever could, especially in English :). And of course it’s totally relevant to this thread. It even specifically mentions the Jews, so… :P

Here it is, with just a little abridgment and a few underscorings in bold:

Years ago, a friend told me a parable about a species of hominid that did not live to inherit the earth. These hominids regarded each and every entity as entirely unique. When a tiger leaped out of the darkness and dragged one of them to his doom, this did not prompt any generalizations about tigers as a group. Thus when a new tiger began to prowl the shadows at the verge of the firelight, he was not judged on the basis of the other tiger’s behavior. Indeed, if the first tiger came back, they would not have judged him on the basis of his past behavior either, because that was then, and this is now: two unique, individual moments in time.

But even though tigers are not always man-eaters, and man-eaters are not always hungry, these poor creatures still went extinct, because their problems were not limited to tigers. They could not learn from any experiences at all. They were just too dumb to survive.

Survival, you see, requires the ability to learn from past experiences so that one can predict and even control future ones. To do this, however, one must recognize that there are not just individual beings, but kinds or types of beings. Individuals belong to the same kind if they share a common nature. And, since what we can do follows from our nature, we can infer that if a tiger is dangerous once, it will probably be dangerous again. And if one tiger is dangerous, it is probable that other tigers are dangerous too. Thus if one of us is killed by a tiger, we can take reasonable precautions to make sure that it does not happen again.

Drawing conclusions about kinds based on individuals is called inductive generalization. Induction allows you to infer that all members of a kind are “like that” based on one’s experience of individual members. These purple berries made me sick today, so they will probably make me sick tomorrow, since their nature and mine will probably not change overnight. And since you have the same nature as me, they might make you sick too. And since the purple berries on this bush are the same as the ones on the first bush, they’ll probably make us sick too. The flesh of this animal tastes good to me, so it will probably taste good to you too, since we have the same nature. And other members of its kind will probably taste good to us as well, since they have the same nature too.

However, induction also teaches that natural traits tend to graph along bell curves, with a large number of typical cases in the middle, and small numbers of atypical cases on each end. Typical purple berries will make us sick, but on every bush there might be some that have no negative effect and others that are downright toxic. Thus, inductive generalizations hold “not always, but for the most part.” In terms of any given trait, “Not all X are like that.” But most of them are.

Inductive reasoning is, therefore, probabilistic. There is always the possibility that one is not dealing with a typical instance of a kind. But it is not likely, since the atypical is by definition rare. Furthermore, as we experience more particulars, it becomes less likely that we are dealing with outliers, and our generalizations about a type become increasingly fixed. We even come to have a sense of what outliers are typical.

Although this is not common parlance, one could refer to a well-established inductive generalization as a “stereotype,” which comes from the Greek stereos (στερεός), “fixed” or “firm,” and the Greek typos (τύπος), or “type.”

Inductive generalization does not just allow us to learn from past experience, which would be of merely theoretical interest. Induction also has important practical implications, for it allows us to predict future experiences based on past ones, thus allowing us to act advantageously, even intervene in the course of events and control natural phenomena.

Another word for predicting future experiences is pre-judging them. Another word for a pre-judgment is a prejudice. Now, some prejudices may be utterly baseless and irrational—e.g., prejudices rooted in bad inductive generalizations, superstition, or mental illness—and acting on them may lead to disaster. But well-founded inductive generalizations (stereotypes) are the basis of well-founded prejudices that can be highly advantageous—for instance, helping us to discriminate between dangerous breeds and gentle ones, poisonous mushrooms and edible ones, etc.

Induction, by giving us the ability to predict future events, is the foundation of practical reason, which is the primary human means of survival. Induction is also the basis of science and technology, which allow us to more deeply understand nature and thus to predict and control her better. Induction is thus the foundation of the ongoing conquest of nature that we call modernization and progress.

Stereotypes and well-founded prejudices may be a triumphs of inductive reasoning and the foundations of common sense, science, technology, and progress. But today, when it comes to judging human beings, we are told that stereotypes and prejudices are evil and that each individual should be judged on his own behavior, not on the basis of the past behaviors of his kind. We are told that it is an injustice to judge individuals based on group membership.

This viewpoint is a kind of perversion of individualism. I myself defend a kind of Aristotelian individualism. I hold that the purpose of life is the actualization of our individual potentialities for excellence. In terms of politics, a well-ordered society should encourage individual self-actualization and excellence, as long as it does not undermine the common good of society.

The perverse individualism I reject, however, has nothing to do with individual self-actualization. Indeed, it basically amounts to a moral imperative to be stupid, since it is an attack on inductive generalization as such, which is the foundation of practical reason, science, technology, and the modern world. Perverse individualism demands that we behave like the hypothetical hominids discussed above, which were simply too stupid to survive.

False individualism is really an applied form of nominalism, which is the theory that there are no natural kinds in the world, only individuals, and all concepts of kinds are merely social conventions or “constructs.” According to false individualism, justice requires that we ignore all groups — except, somehow, “humanity” — and judge each individual as an individual, without any preconceptions based on his membership in any merely constructed category, such as race. Nominalism, however, is metaphysically false. There are real natural kinds. Individual members of those kinds share natural traits that allow us to make probabilistic predictions about them based on what we know of their kind.

An individualist could, however, reply that even though nominalism is metaphysically false and there are natural kinds, we should still set aside our well-founded stereotypes and prejudices and judge each and every human being as an individual. In effect, we have to treat every individual as a potential outlier, even though most of them are not. Why? Because, apparently, every individual is of infinite value, so rendering justice is an absolute value and committing injustice is an absolute evil. We must act as if nominalism is true, because otherwise there is a vanishingly small possibility that we might be unjust to a stranger.

This position is a moralistic absurdity, for it simply cannot be practiced. There are seven billion people on this planet. It is impossible to treat each and every one as a special snowflake, and if one tried it, even with the limited numbers of people we encounter in our individual lives, it would consume all one’s time and make it impossible to pursue one’s own goals, i.e., to actually live. Because the purpose of life is self-actualization, and the time we have is short, we just cannot get to know everyone we deal with.

One of the ways that civilization advances is by giving us means of dealing with greater numbers of people than we can ever know as individuals. The market economy, for instance, allows individuals to interact with millions of others around the globe through a largely anonymous symbolic medium that, at least in theory, allows all participants to pursue their individual self-actualization.

Psychologists have observed that the human mind cannot deal with more than 150 or so direct personal relationships, which means that if we could deal only with people as individuals, civilization would regress to the complexity of a hunter-gatherer band or agricultural village.

Well-founded stereotypes and prejudices make possible highly complex societies by allowing us to size up individuals at a glance and to choose to embrace or avoid them. Since natural kinds are limited in number, we actually create artificial kinds with visible distinctions — accents, clothing styles, even uniforms — that allow us to chart a course through complex social situations at a glance. For instance, a black man dressed in a ghetto clown costume signals danger, whereas a black man dressed in a police uniform signals trustworthiness.

Furthermore, if stereotyping is wrong, why do people go to great lengths to stereotype themselves? We all want to find like-minded people, and dressing in a certain way is one means to communicate the group we belong to, e.g., hipster, preppy, metal, redneck, businessman, career woman, slut, prole, gay clone, black thug, etc. Blacks go to great trouble and expense to dress like thugs, in order to communicate that they are dangerous, or that they aspire to be. Why do white liberals think it is disrespectful to take their signaling seriously? […]

Under what conditions do we want to be judged as special snowflakes? We all want a fair shake when we are applying for a job or are on trial for our lives. But even then, chances are we are trying to conceal as much as we reveal. Moreover, we know that employers often can look only at the most superficial criteria simply because they lack the time to dig deeper. But we hope that we can at least expect justice from the criminal justice system. Beyond that, when nothing really crucial is at stake, we are content to navigate with prejudices and stereotypes, i.e., to play the odds with others and accept that others do the same with us.

Since nobody can judge each and every person as an individual all the time, it stands to reason that people only trot out this imperative to use as a weapon against others. Universalists of both the Left and Right typically deploy it against any form of racism, nationalism, tribalism, or antipathy to various religious groups or categories of sexual deviants. Of course, if you prod these universalists just a little, you find that they have some rather poorly formed and emotionally charged stereotypes and prejudices about their opponents.

“Not all Xs are like that,” the universalists say, implying that it is a mortal sin not to appreciate the uniqueness of every special snowflake. And since group membership can never be a basis for excluding someone from our society, there can be no racially and ethnically homogeneous societies, and we cannot uphold any norms of social and sexual behavior. Thus perverse individualism is just a tool to make us incapable of resisting ethnic dispossession and social decadence. What kind of people preach (but do not practice) “blindness” to race, ethnicity, religion, and sexual identity as a moral imperative? Obviously people who are up to no good.

If you propose discrimination against pedophiles, you will be told that they aren’t all child molesters, and you can’t do anything against them until after they have been caught. If you propose discrimination against blacks or mestizos because of their propensity to criminality, you are told that they are not all like that, and we can’t do anything against them until they actually commit crimes. If you propose discrimination against Muslims on the grounds that their religion mandates lies, rape, terrorism, murder, enslavement, and the overthrow of all governments, you will be told that not all Muslims are like that, and we can’t do anything against them until after they have committed a crime. If you propose discrimination against Jews because they are a hostile elite working to corrupt our politics and culture and destroy our race by promoting white guilt, miscegenation, and race-replacement immigration, you will be told that they aren’t all like that, and it would be collectivism to treat them simply as an enemy group. We have to treat all members of problem groups as if they are innocent, until proven otherwise. It is immoral to try to separate ourselves entirely from problem groups. Instead, we need to give them a chance, which boils down to a chance to harm us. And that means no borders and no standards.

These perverse individualists might even try to argue that the soldiers of an invading army are not all out to kill us, so it would be unjust to kill them just because they carry arms against us. But at that point, we would see what they really are and stand them against a wall. Of course by then it might be too late.

I am a nationalist because I believe that racial, ethnic, and religious diversity within the same political system are not strengths but weaknesses. They are constant sources of simmering tension that frequently boil over into hatred and violence. Thus the best guarantee of peace and harmony is to create separate homelands for all peoples. A healthy society also requires norms regarding sexuality, marriage, and child-rearing. Thus a society has to practice discrimination. We have to discriminate between who is us and who is not. And within our group, we have to discriminate between the normal and abnormal, the optimal and suboptimal, the law-abiding and the criminal.

We can freely acknowledge that there are some good blacks, Muslims, and Jews. There just aren’t enough of them for our tastes. But even if these groups were equal or superior to us — and they are bound to be superior in some ways — in the end they are simply not us, and we wish to create societies for ourselves and our posterity. We are not creating a team for a sporting event or a spelling bee by recruiting exceptional outliers from a wide range of different groups. We seek to create homogeneous communities with full ranges of both average specimens and outliers, i.e., organic white communities, which are one in blood and culture but diverse in abilities, opinions, and interests, so that all of our people have places to call home.
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Farcevalue on December 20th, 2015, 11:33 pm

Warning: Rant ahead

I disagree with the premises (if they are to found) in both of the references cited by Greg Johnson. I find the "social construct phraseology" particularly troublesome, better to contrast concepts versus objects or the difference between the abstract and the physical.

A tree is an object, a forest is a concept. Once all the trees are removed, so goes the forest. To extend the metaphor to race and its implications, it's plain that there are physical differences in different types of people, which has been ascribed (whether absolutely, I am unsure) to migration and adaptation to different environments. As it is obvious that a spruce is not a pine, it is similarly obvious that people for the far east have different physical attributes that those from that Caucasus mountains or the plains of Africa. So what? When racism is brought up it is always as it relates to behavior and more particularly morality, and who has the moral high ground and why. As I mentioned in an earlier post, no one really cares what color the car is that is about to hit them.

In the second passage referenced, Johnson continues to conflate concepts with objects when describing himself as a nationalist with particular political persuasions. A nation is also a concept, as are governments. A constitution is a piece of paper (I guess accepting that definition may be one the thing I have in common with Dubya ;)).

It is absolutely possible to navigate a world of x billion people while treating each one as an individual, so long as moral constructs can be universalized and reversible. For moral constructs to be universal and reversible, they can only be negative in nature: I have the right to not be assaulted, raped, murdered, defrauded or burgled and so does everyone else. Period. This is the reason that any political system or nation state is a non starter and will require scapegoats. I will sooner live with a community that sports every race under the sun and demands nothing than a homogenized community that requires x percentage of my resources for "protection".

Are you worried the Jews have corrupted your government? Well, what did you expect? You have a friggin' government. It's like complaining about how a mugger is spending your money after he has robbed you. It's worse, it's like posting on Facebook like whiny little bi*#+s every four years about how if we get enough people talking about the Muzlims or the Mezcans we can get our muggers to do the right thing with the money they stole.

Laws are ink on paper, put there by psycopaths, ignore every one you can so long as doing so causes no harm. Don't give any money to anyone that isn't offering an explicit value in return (i.e. tax). Don't legitimize the system by voting. Laugh at anyone so self important as to call themselves a senator. Recognize a judge is a man in a black dress. If you don't want to trade with bespectacled folks with larger than average noses, don't.

Granted, these are simple but not easy solutions. Being the only person in your town to not pay property tax may not be the safest route at the moment, but in the long term, it's the only way. Once we have relieved ourselves from the superstitions of statism and belief in the authority of those who call themselves government (now those are open conspiracies) there will be precious little mischief left for any particular race to get up to.
Posts: 383
Joined: August 27th, 2011, 12:21 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on December 21st, 2015, 12:11 am

Wow. If Greg Johnson is such a genius, I wonder why he needs all these straw man arguments.

We can freely acknowledge that there are some good blacks, Muslims, and Jews. There just aren’t enough of them for our tastes.

Please tell me how did you count them?
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby JLapage on December 21st, 2015, 6:00 am

I am truly wondering about this thread and its purpose. Jump, you are complaining about Jewish supremacism/racism and countering it with white racism? I sense, either a little bit of naivete or maybe intentional race baiting in your long posts.Didn't Mussolini already try the racist approach? And I wonder if you know why he failed.
Posts: 115
Joined: April 23rd, 2013, 2:38 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby jumpy64 on December 21st, 2015, 11:50 am

Farcevalue wrote:It is absolutely possible to navigate a world of x billion people while treating each one as an individual, so long as moral constructs can be universalized and reversible. For moral constructs to be universal and reversible, they can only be negative in nature: I have the right to not be assaulted, raped, murdered, defrauded or burgled and so does everyone else. Period. This is the reason that any political system or nation state is a non starter and will require scapegoats. I will sooner live with a community that sports every race under the sun and demands nothing than a homogenized community that requires x percentage of my resources for "protection".

I like your vision, Farcevalue, but who is going to establish the universal and reversible moral constructs you talk about? The one you are envisioning is a world in which I guess the overwhelming majority of Cluesforum members could live happily ever after. As it seems to me, we are part of a pretty homogeneous western intellectual elite of educated people with common moral values (no to lies and manipulation, respect for others, etc.) who would recognize your moral constructs spontaneously. But since you'd like to include everybody of any race or creed in your community, please tell me how you would convince people who do not share them to uphold your moral constructs.

Do you remember the Muslim guy in the video "With Open Gates" I embedded on page 26 of this thread, who says he has "big balls" and so he thinks he has the right to impregnate every woman he wants? How would you convince him that women have the right not to be assaulted? And how would you convince a Jewish supremacist who thinks that the Goyim exist only to serve the Jews? Or an African guy who can barely read and doesn't even know what an "universal and reversible moral construct" is?

To live well together, we have to form functional communities, homogeneous at least in their values, as the one you describe, in which someone who thinks he has the right to assault others wouldn't fit. So let's go back once again to the one we are all part of here as an example, because every time I try to adopt a wider perspective I get knee-jerk reactions from people screaming "white racism!", like JLapage as the most recent and blatant example.

As I said, Cluesforum works well because it's a sufficiently homogeneous community ruled by one moral leader who, let's face it, runs a pretty tight ship. I mean, everybody can subscribe to Cluesforum, but it's Simon who, based on the value he attributes to what members express in it, decides who stays, is to be suspended or has to go.

Trolls, as an example, are certainly not welcome here, and they can be expelled if discovered. As expelled would also be, sooner or later, people who subscribed to this forum only to try and convince us that the official media version of world events is the truth.

Now, Cluesforum is an international community, in the sense that anybody from any part of the world can subscribe to it. Nevertheless, it seems to me that we have an overwhelming majority of male Western people of European descent here. Therefore, from a racial and “genderistic” perspective, Cluesforum could be accused of being a racist and male-chauvinistic community, and Simon, as its "president", could be considered a "white supremacist", all the more so because he's a Northern European.

So imagine that a troll who’s been expelled from our community and who happens to be black appeals to an "Internet Interracial Authority" saying that Cluesforum is a racist community overwhelmingly composed of white people, and he’s been expelled because he’s black. And imagine also that a supporter of the official media version of world events who happens to be of Jewish descent does the same accusing Simon Shack to be an anti-semite.

Other “dissidents” (in relation to this community’s values) might do the same, until the Internet Authority decides to intervene and warn Simon that he must reinstate all the black, Jewish and Muslim members, and even encourage other representatives of the aforementioned groups (in addition to more women) to subscribe, if he doesn’t want his community to be shut down on the grounds of “racism” and “white supremacism”.

If Simon was forced to cave in to try and save his community, can you imagine what would happen to Cluesforum? We’d have trolls and “officialists” swarming in and accusing all the best, more critical and perceptive members of our community of being “racists”, “anti-semites” or “male chauvinists”. There would be some resistance, of course, but sooner or later the official version of media events would become prevalent here too, because people with different convictions would be booed away by the new majority as being at least “politically incorrect”.

In the end our community would dissolve, or become the opposite of what its creator intended it to be. At a certain point Simon would be overthrown with a “democratic” majority vote, which would elect a mulatto transgender with Jewish ancestry as Cluesforum’s new president.

So please, think hard about this before accusing me of things we could all be accused of one day by a hostile group bent on destroying a community like Cluesforum and its values.
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on December 21st, 2015, 3:08 pm

jumpy64 wrote:So please, think hard about this before accusing me of things we could all be accused of one day by a hostile group bent on destroying a community like Cluesforum and its values.

I don't understand. You seem proud of these racist ideas and if someone calls it racism they have to beware because of some fictional "Internet Interracial Authority"? I don't think you should use this forum to promote your personal views if you don't provide a single fact to defend them.

And suppose you were right that people live better lives in homogeneous homelands, how would you put this knowledge into practice? How would you go about to create these homelands? How do you decide where an individual of mixed heritage should go to? Would you create a separate country for Italian homosexuals? What about Italian Muslims, and other non Christians, do they get their own homeland?
And if you figured this out, how are you going to implement your plan? People are not going to move voluntarily so you need some system of repression. Which one are you going to pick? Democracy will probably not work because for some reason similar plans have seldom gotten a majority of the votes. So I guess you would go for an enlightened dictatorship. Good luck with that.
Jews in Israel are trying this for a long time, not too much restricted by morals, do you think you can do better?
Or would you try to achieve your goal without the state? Perhaps by trying to make the lives of blacks, muslisms and jews so miserable that they would leave voluntarily?

If I were a JPM, these kinds of ideas are exactly the ones I would promote, together with multiculturalism. Divide and conquer.
My own plan would be more in the line of "recruiting a team of exceptional outliers from a wide range of different groups" with the task of getting rid of the most evil people.
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Farcevalue on December 21st, 2015, 3:19 pm

jumpy64 wrote:So please, think hard about this before accusing me of things we could all be accused of one day by a hostile group bent on destroying a community like Cluesforum and its values.

There was no accusation leveled in my post. I find the race issue less than constructive as it is tertiary to demonstrable problems that are more readily identifiable and opposable.

An internet forum is not analogous to a government; in the case of the latter the problem is the inability to opt out.

I am a bit disappointed that the Open Gates was cited as factual, it's obviously a collection of clips shot in different places at different times, with a smattering of CGI and an agenda. Nevertheless, the point about the universality of negative rights is that no one has to understand them. People know instinctively they have the freedom to not be violated, that's why it takes 20,000 hours of government schooling and a constant stream of media propaganda to convince them otherwise. In the case of the huevo grande impregnator, any of his potential victims is within their rights of not being violated to resist his attempts with whatever force is necessary, up to and including death. Should the victim be unable to provide their own defense due to a strength/size disparity, they are within their rights to outsource their defense to someone else. This happens all the time as it is when people defend those they know or care about.

Under a government this is all flipped on its head: government has the mandate to violate the rights of peaceful people through taxes and regulations. Cops are paid for protection when they have no legal obligation to provide it and suffer no consequences for not doing so. They also rarely suffer consequences for inflicting harm on those they are paid to protect. Through taxes, inflation, opportunity cost due to regulations, crony capitalism and a host of other restrictions and mechanisms for confiscation, anyone who trades valuable time and resources with those who want/need them are receiving a small percentage of the total value of their efforts. The rest goes to the system to forge bigger chains, stronger cages and more convincing lies.

This is obvious and indisputable, the same as conflicting shadows in videos that are supposed to represent the same time and place. That is the value of Cluesforum, the evidence of the lies on display here are unequivocal, one only needs a pair of functional eyes (in fact, there is enough audio evidence hear to convince the blind, as well).

The race thing is far less clear and I question the cost to benefit ratio. For example, John friend has a video of an interview with someone that was working across the street from the site of the San Bernardino hoax who states she heard no shots, which casts a lot of doubt on the official story. A curious newcomer may be compelled to visit Friend's site where they will find links to Stormfront, videos of Friend at a 9/11 memorial gathering with a megaphone blaring on about the Jews, as well as some well documented research. Will they be more likely to take the time to look at the research or abandon the site altogether? Perhaps they will look at both and be convinced of the fakery and the race issue, then what? Convince everyone they know that everything will be better if different (better, let's face it) races are in charge of the same methods of confiscation and control?

People are well conditioned to resist the obvious, cognitive dissonance is deeply rooted though lifetimes of repetition. It seems a bridge too far to add another layer of complication to the equation. I am not challenging the veracity of your research, anyone that has spent any time at all looking at their environment knows that the level of influence wielded by those with particular names and dietary requirements in relation to the size of their demographic is exponentially out of proportion to say the least. I prefer to disable the flamethrower than just give to someone else and hope for the best.
Posts: 383
Joined: August 27th, 2011, 12:21 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby smj on December 21st, 2015, 5:07 pm

I was gonna start a thread on the fakeologist forum; but it seems my ipad doesn't want to cooperate. So I reckon I'll come over here and make this my farewell post to the "pretty homogeneous western intellectual elite of educated people with common moral values" collective known as cluesforum instead.

Courageous cosmotheistic racial souls


Over on our brave future solver of the solar system's site there's a thread on the "Jewish question". It was started by another courageous European that goes by the handle jumpy64. But don't take my word for it; he'll tell us how courageous he is himself. Here he's addressing another brave soul who figured out that the Smithsonian is full of shit:

"Now I understand why I thought you were a man. I think that, in addition to your value as a brilliant researcher, you have more balls than anybody else in this forum. For what I've seen here so far, the only ones who can be in your league are Simon most of all and a few others, possibly including myself (I know I shouldn't say this, but I see no reason to hide my self-esteem behind false modesty, which I consider another form of the "political correctness" that's killing us)."

So seeing as jumpy the ballzy is no fan of the fucking Jews; he used the brave future solver of the solar system's forum to pay "tribute to a most inspiring and courageous author who spoke out on the 'Jewish question': Dr. William Luther Pierce (1933-2002), the founder and leader of the National Alliance, a major White nationalist organization in the US."

It seems jumpy wants whites to take more pride in their whiteness or whatnot; in order to assuage the guilt that the fucking Jews make them feel:

"I think we, as whites, should take pride (even if you don't want to say it) in our accomplishments (which other races evidently admire, or envy, otherwise, as you point out, they wouldn't want to come in our countries), and even in our tolerance, but we should also make sure that this tolerance is not taken advantage of any more than it's already been."

Jumpy admires cojones of course; so he took great pride in discovering that his pale brother in (make believe) arms had the cojones to write some really crazy shit. so let's just take a look at the accomplishments of the heroic Dr. pierce.

Pierce was born on 9/11/33 and got his Phd in physics at colorado-boulder. those crazy fucking cosmologists, the gamovs, hustled in boulder of course...

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p2395438

He then taught physics at Oregon state. linus pauling hustled at osu as well; he was the famous crystal scryer that brought the psi symbol to molecular valence bond theory...

http://alpha.chem.umb.edu/chemistry/ch6 ... Theory.pdf

...they gave linus the hustlers' academy award for his computational wave function bullpsience. he got another nobel for saving us from the nukes, so we could all be one world or none of course:

"One person, Linus Pauling, has won two undivided Nobel Prizes. In 1954 he won the Prize for Chemistry. Eight years later he was awarded the Peace Prize for his opposition to weapons of mass destruction.

The atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a turning point in Pauling's life. Together with other scientists he spoke and wrote against the nuclear arms race, and he was a driving force in the Pugwash movement. It sought to reduce the role of nuclear arms in international politics and was awarded the Peace Prize in 1995.

In 1959, Linus Pauling drafted the famous "Hiroshima Appeal", the concluding document issued after the Fifth World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs. He was one of the prime movers who urged the nuclear powers the USA, the Soviet Union and Great Britain to conclude a nuclear test ban treaty, which entered into force on 10 October 1963. On the same day, the Norwegian Nobel Committee announced that Linus Pauling had won the Peace Prize that had been held over from 1962."
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... facts.html

...pierce, gamov, and linus were all highly accomplished white boys so jumpy the ballzy must be proud of course.

After his very brief career in academy jumpy's hero hung out with another proud white boy, george lincoln rockwell. rockwell was the son of the vaudeville performer doc rockwell of course:

"Both parents were vaudeville comedians and actors; and his father's acquaintances included Fred Allen, Benny Goodman, Walter Winchell, Jack Benny, and Groucho Marx."

The narrative tells us that rockwell started the american nazi party and was assassinated so pierce started his own group, the national alliance...


...he then had to acquire a compound to start his cosmotheist community church to give white folk a reason "to love themselves" of course:

"We know it because deep inside all of us, in our race-soul, there is a source of divine wisdom, of ages-old wisdom, of wisdom as old as the universe. That is the wisdom, the truth, which we in the National Alliance want to make the basis of our national policy. It is a truth of which most of us have been largely unconscious all our lives, but which now we have the opportunity to understand clearly and precisely."

...more on this cosmological bullpsience later; first let's review how jumpy's hero helped drive the oklahoma city "bombing" narrative.

The narrative tells us that pierce, the physicist and cosmological preacher, wrote a couple of genocidal screeds. we're told tim mcveigh passed out copies of the turner diaries at gunshows back in the amorphous day; and that a copy of the turner diaries was found on timmy when he was miraculously pulled over for a traffic violation shortly after the "bombing":

"The Turner Diaries influenced several activists. The two most important were former National Alliance member Robert Mathews, and non-racialist Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

Mathews and his group The Order, named after an elite cadre within the novel, in 1984 conducted a robbery spree in the Pacific Northwest netting roughly $4 million. It also murdered two people: a white man, Walter West, whose name is almost never mentioned in accounts of the group, and a Jewish radio talk show host whose name is always mentioned. The Feds burned Mathews to death during a fiery shootout in Washington state.

Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was also apparently a big fan of the novel, which he’d formerly sold at gun shows and given to friends. According to Pierce, McVeigh’s bomb was not modeled after the bomb in the novel. McVeigh’s was far more sophisticated and operated by a different trigger mechanism. The bomb in the novel was an ammonium nitrate fertilizer and fuel oil bomb, while McVeigh’s was an ammonium nitrate fertilizer and nitromethane bomb. Nitromethane is a powerful liquid explosive used as a rocket and racing fuel. It is unstable like nitroglycerine, but less sensitive.

Of the Oklahoma City bombing drill, Pierce said:
"I feel as sorry as anyone else if a little white kid gets killed in one of these things. For that matter, I feel bad if a white kid gets killed in an automobile accident. But I don’t advocate that we ban automobiles because people get killed in them, including innocent people who might have grown up to be great scientists or poets. In the same way, I am not in favor of calling off a war because some border incidents or battles take innocent lives. Actually, the sooner the war to save our people takes place the better, because even more innocent lives will be lost if we wait. The sooner such a war, the cleaner it will be. It’s going to be a mess later on. (Robert S. Griffin, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce, 2001, p. 172)"
http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07 ... nd-hunter/

Jumpy's hero fantasized about a revolution that finally put the down-trodden white man back in charge:

"The result of the Revolution is not the creation of a tiny white ethnostate, nor even reconquest of the United States and Europe, but total global victory. (Recall the title of George Lincoln Rockwell’s 1963 autobiography This Time the World.) A white government seizes control of the entire planet on the 110th anniversary of the “Great One’s” birthday—April 20, 1999."

...pierce's courageous "racial soul" also gave to the narrative 'hunter', a heart-warming tale of the discriminate slaughter of niggers, fucking jews and their miscegenetic enablers. hunter was dedicated to another narrative device provocateur who had three names of course...


...we're also told a copy of hunter was found on mcveigh's accomplice's property as well. here's a sample of jumpy's cosmotheistic hero's illuminous prose:

"An instant calm fell over Oscar, the expected calm for which he had been waiting. With a smooth motion, neither too hurried nor too slow but precise and deliberate, he lifted the rifle from beneath the blanket on the seat beside him, raised it to his shoulder, and, left elbow braced against the door, carefully squeezed off two shots.
The ear-shattering reports echoed through the huge lot, but Oscar remained calm as he put the rifle down, restarted his engine, and accelerated smoothly toward the exit ramp. As he turned at the end of the lane, he paused to glance back toward the van. The mulatto’s body was sprawled out into the roadway; the woman apparently had fallen backward, beside the van, and was not visible. Both shots had been head shots, and Oscar was quite certain both the man and the woman were dead. He had seen their skulls literally explode into showers of bone fragments, brain tissue, and blood as the high- velocity projectiles struck them.
The icy calm stayed with Oscar all the way home. Not until he had put the car in the garage, entered the house, and taken off his coat did it give way to the euphoria he always felt afterwards. He whistled contentedly to himself as he gave his rifle a quick cleaning and then returned to the garage to change his license plates. It took him only two minutes to remove the special plates and replace them with his regular ones.
He carefully checked the adhesive-backed plastic letters and numerals which he had pressed onto the flattened plates. He had been worried about the adhesive not holding the thick plastic pieces to the metal, especially in this cold weather. He pried gently at the edge of a letter with the blade of his pocket knife. The adhesive resisted, then gradually yielded, so that he was able to work the blade between the plastic and the metal and, with a few seconds of effort, peel the entire letter loose. That was reassuring, but he was still mindful of the time, a few days ago, when he had arrived at home and found a number missing from the plate altogether! After that he had done some experimenting with different adhesives. It took him nearly 20 minutes to peel loose all of the plastic pieces and rearrange them into a new pattern this time, but he did not begrudge the extra effort required.
How fortunate, he thought, as he turned out the garage light, that his automobile was such a common model. There must be 10,000 tan Ford sedans practically indistinguishable from his in the Washington metropolitan area. Still, he was pressing his luck to keep using the same modus operandi. Six times in a little over three weeks— 22 days to be exact— with the same car, the same rifle, the same routine, just different parking lots and different license numbers, was really too much, he thought to himself.
But more than two weeks ago he had made up his mind that he would not vary his style until the news media broke their silence on the killings. There had been a big news splash after the first double shooting, three weeks ago. “Interracial couple gunned down in parking lot,” the Washington Post headline had screamed, and the other media also had stressed the fact that the two victims were a Black male and a White female, even though the newsmen had no way of knowing then that the gunman had a racial motive. The naughtiness of the notion that he might have apparently was too titillating for them to resist.
When the second double killing came four days later, it had been mentioned briefly on the inside pages of the Post and then quietly dropped. The third, fourth, and fifth pairs of shootings had been greeted with total media silence. The reason was clear: at some time between the second and third shootings it had dawned on the media people that the killings were racially motivated, and the realization frightened them. They didn’t want to encourage any would-be imitators, or even give hope to a great many Americans who would cheer anyone who might be going around picking off racially mixed couples."
https://theendofzion.com/wp-content/upl ... hunter.pdf


Now for the cosmotheistical bullpsience. the symbol for the national alliance is the good ole völkish life rune; which coincidentally of course is the same as the ancient psi symbol...


...which was coincidentally inverted and put in a circle for pauling's anti-nuke movement. your average gullible ape calls it the peace symbol of course...


...and by gullible ape i mean anyone that believes they descended from apes because some fucking hustler from cambridge told them so. so i reckon (assuming that pierce wasn't an operative- which is exactly what he was) that pierce is a courageous, gullible, and proud white ape:

"Pierce described his form of panentheism as being based on “[t]he idea of an evolutionary universe … with an evolution toward ever higher and higher states of self-consciousness,” and his political ideas were centered on racial purity and eugenics as the means of advancing the white race first towards a superhuman state, and then towards godhood. In his view, the white race represented the pinnacle of human evolution thus far and therefore should be kept genetically separate from all other races in order to achieve its destined perfection in godhood."
http://renegadetribune.com/cosmotheism- ... am-pierce/

...oops, I meant courageous, gullible, and proud white space-ape:

"Cosmotheism is a scientific White racialist spirituality based religion, a convergence of meditation, White separatist ideologies, cosmic consciousness, evolutionary theory, neo-eugenics, human genetic engineering, visions of galactic colonization and transhuman/post-human thought. Because Cosmotheism embraces White racial internationalist goals & European racial separatist philosophies, it's a religion that closely parallels Ben Klassen's religion, 'The Church of the Creator', in that based on the strict ethno criteria for membership, only racially and eugenically conscious Whites, Europeans or Caucasian stock may join. Therefore, it's not enough to be of White racial stock alone to be a member, but one must also have transhumanistic, post-humanistic and neo-eugenic White racial consciousness and belief systems of the 21st century as a starting point, and thus embrace the idea that White people must separate from non-Whites and then consciously direct their own genetic evolution upward toward the highest states of consciousness and being, and using all science to achieve this vision whether using using post human technologies, biotechnology, medicine and quantum physics. The goal is to become a completely separate post-human species to then first colonize our solarsystem with space stations as a jumping point, and then seek out other Earth like planets in the galaxy, while also terraforming almost-earth-like-planets across the milkyway galaxy. The vision of cosmotheism seeks to create a White genetic rainbow expanding across the cosmic fermentation at sub light speed, until eventually the whole universe is colonized with post human europeans who will each continue to their upward evolutionary path to Godhood.
Dr. William Luther Pierce the prescient founder of the National Alliance created the futurist religion Cosmotheism to teach the European peoples of the world, the true reason for their existence and give them a higher purpose, which is upward evolution and specialization toward Galactic Neo-Sapients."
https://archive.org/details/Cosmotheism ... therPierce

...funny thing is this fucking jew had the exact same religion; which makes sense to me because every fucking jew i've ever met looked white to my untrained eye...


"Further, there are more similarities between Cosmotheism and the Judeo-Christian tradition than the simple fact that both are monotheist. Pierce’s Cosmotheism speaks of a specific race charged with a special mission vis-à-vis God. What can this remind us of except God’s covenant with the Israelites, the Chosen People? In fact, certain forms of Jewish Kabbalism actually claim that it is the task of the Jewish people to “complete” God’s creation through the observance of the Law. In recent times the Israeli writer Mordekhay Nesiyahu formulated a kind of secularized version of this doctrine, which he actually termed “Cosmotheism”! (I have no idea if William Pierce knew about this, but if he did I’m sure he must have found it disturbing.)
In sum, Pierce’s theory is very much in the Judeo-Christian spirit. It is monotheist. It sees a particular people as (in effect) entering into a special covenant with God and playing a role of cosmic importance. It has a linear conception of time: it raises the history of scientific progress up into the dimension of the sacred. It even promises a kind of immortality to the members of the race who accept this mission and take part. If we find the Judeo-Christian tradition problematic, then we must find theories like Cosmotheism problematic as well."

But whatever I'm bored; if jumpy the ballzy ain't an operative he ought to be able to see thru this psientific cosmological bullshit. if he can't, perhaps his sacred cow is in the way.

Maybe jumpy should move his proud white European ass to Texas because I ain't seen no white guilt in the lone star state. but beware brave jumpy, don't be running around praising some operative who fantasized about slaughtering interracial couples; you never know, you could run into a pale ass half-breed like myself and you'd find out damned quick who was made from the better stuff...

...so, so long y'all and fuck the Jews of course.
Posts: 70
Joined: September 10th, 2014, 11:29 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby simonshack on December 21st, 2015, 10:03 pm

This thread has been temporarily locked by fellow admin Critical Mass - a decision I agree with, in order to give us all some time to ponder a bit about where it is going. Thoughts and tips by all and sundry are welcome in the Chatbox. For now, let's all relax and enjoy our - uh - 'white' xmas. :P
Posts: 6524
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy


Postby jumpy64 on December 22nd, 2015, 5:09 pm

I’m not sure many people here were holding their breath waiting for my comment on what happened to the “Open Conspiracy” thread, but I couldn’t find the time to write something earlier. Maybe it’s been better this way, so I had some time to simmer down and to see things more in perspective.

So first of all, I want to say that I’m sorry if my thread, especially in its last pages, has hurt some people’s feeling, but I’ve pushed the “race issue” (too much, apparently) not because I’ve always been a “racist bastard” as some of you who don’t know me personally may think, but because I’ve discovered that the conspiracy I’ve tried to unveil is first and foremost racially based.

As I’ve said maybe a few times :P , it’s carried out by a hostile ethnic group against the white European race in particular. They are the true racists, not me. The ultimate aim of their “multicultural” plan is the genocidal elimination of the white race. I have much less doubts about this than when I started the thread. Actually, I have no doubts at all by now. In fact, “multiculturalism”, among other things, is enforced only on the white European race. “Europe is too white”, Jewsters like Barbara Spectre say, but they don’t say that “Africa is too black, or China or Japan are too yellow, so let’s bring more white people there”. Of course they can’t say openly “Let’s get rid of this particularly vicious breed of Goyim who repeatedly dared to oppose our world domination plans in the past”. Not yet, at least, but they may be getting there soon, also considering the lack of resistance on the "victims" part, I'm afraid.

Therefore in addition to uncovering, with the precious help of some members that I’d like to thank – namely Apache, Seneca (although I ruffled his feathers in the end, and I’m sorry for that too), ICfreely, Pov603 and Flabbergasted in particular – some facts that I found pretty damning, I’ve also tried to find if some, however partial and tentative, solutions to the problem could be found. And I have actually found some on a personal level – which have been expounded in the second part of my aborted three-part series on “What to do” – and then I thought, too naively or presumptuously perhaps, that the first thing to do, on a collective level, was raising the race consciousness of white people, not necessarily because they’re the best (although I think our civilization and its fruits, especially before the progressively more relentless parasitical infestation of the last century, speak for themselves), but mainly because they were the ones particularly under attack.

Probably I did it in the wrong way in the end, but not for lack of trying. For sure, one that turned out to be a fatal mistake was quoting, no matter how in passing, William Luther Pierce’s fictional works without having read them until the end. I had read half of “The Turner Diaries”, and knowing what Pierce said about every race having the right to their own territory, I could have never imagined his novel would come to such an absurdly destructive ending as it actually did. In fact, I even doubted Critical Mass’ word when he told me how it ended, and I have later apologized with him for that. I have also distanced myself from that book (although not from most of the rest of Pierce's work, which I still find enlightening) in no unclear terms.

But evidently it wasn’t enough, because in the thread’s last post before it was locked, smj mocked, attacked and even threatened me mostly for what Pierce had written in his novels. Being a self-defined “pale ass half-breed”, I can understand that he was pretty furious with someone who, in his imaginative writing at least, had declared himself willing to exterminate mixed-race people like him.

So smj, you’re free to keep your hard feelings towards me if you want, but please know that I have none towards you. I even hope that if we will ever meet in Texas (which is not totally impossible, since my girlfriend is from there) it will be over a steak and a glass of wine (or beer, if you prefer) and not in a punching fight. And most importantly, I hope you will reconsider your decision to leave Cluesforum because of me. It’s always the best site in the world wide web for “exposing media fakery”, and even if you didn’t like my thread, there are so many interesting others to choose from.

Having said that, I think blocking a successful thread (at least in terms of its 39.000 views and 448 replies) after such an offensive and threatening post (even though, as I said, I don’t really resent it), without even giving me the opportunity to answer it in a civil manner, as I think I’m doing now, is unfair.

Therefore I ask the administrators to consider the possibility of adding at least this post to the locked thread. I would appreciate it as a sign of respect for my maybe misguided and unsuccessful but sincere and well intentioned efforts in creating something of value for this forum.

Because even if this thread will be unlocked sooner or later, my attitude towards it, if and when I will feel like contributing to it again, will be different. I consider my experiment of trying to raise the “white consciousness” of this forum’s members a failure, and I won’t resume it. If anything, I will post only other researches I’ve already done lately on subjects like “white slave trade”, “big pharma” and others, always from the perspective of a Jewish involvement in them, of course. And also other members will be able, if so inclined, to add valuable posts like the one Simon personally promised me about the “Jewish side” of 9/11. I, for one, really look forward to it.

Anyway, whatever you will decide, I take this opportunity to join Simon in wishing you and all Cluesforum members (and readers) a “White” Christmas. ;)
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests