NationStates Jolt Archive

... until you snap into reality. I've been arguing as an "anti-racist" on Stormfront for the past week, since I was getting bored and had no intention of studying every waking moment of reading week.

While their arguments are largely irrational and archaic, I've almost been convinced, or have attempted to internally rationalize the following things:

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)
- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles



I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.

Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.

What is Zog? Are they related to Gog or Magog?

Meh, I consider them beneath me anyway, lmao...

Maybe we can enslave the White Nationalists, :p

Just keep reminding yourself that its bullshit.

But yeah, the appeal of this crap will increase in times of war and economic hardship. I don't think the answer is to censor it though, because that will both feed their victim complex and drive them underground, where they will quietly spread their venom and possibly engage in other, darker illegal activities.

I believe that the solution is to engage them in an open debate, making use of the tools of rhetoric, politics, and science, to discredit their poison and educate as many people as is possible in facts. Thus, we can hopefully reduce white supremacy to the position currently held by the Westbourough Baptist Church: marginalized, without power, and held in contempt even by other extremists.

Also, we need to deal with the wars and economy. Take away these problems, and people will be less likely to use foreigners or other races as a scapegoat.

I wouldn't be surprised if racists commandeer some small Eastern European country during this global economic crisis shit.

What is Zog? Are they related to Gog or Magog?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_Occupation_Government

Basically, the Jews-control-worlds-governments one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_Occupation_Government

Basically, the Jews-control-worlds-governments one.

Thanks.

How odd. I thought Rupert Murdoch controlled all the world's governments. He's not Jewish, is he?

Thanks.

How odd. I thought Rupert Murdoch controlled all the world's governments. He's not Jewish, is he?

Oh shi-

Oh shi-

I was speaking tongue-in-cheek.

I believe that the solution is to engage them in an open debate, making use of the tools of rhetoric, politics, and science, to discredit their poison and educate as many people as is possible in facts. Thus, we can hopefully reduce white supremacy to the position currently held by the Westbourough Baptist Church: marginalized, without power, and held in contempt even by other extremists.

Also, we need to deal with the wars and economy. Take away these problems, and people will be less likely to use foreigners or other races as a scapegoat.

This is exactly what I thought. White nationalists aren't for the most part violent, and I would fully support any public debate. The problem is that people who support white nationalism would likely face persecution and alienation (leaking of the BNP membership list).

That however is the least of the problems engaging in a discussion with these people, because everything we "anti's" say is a product of Zionist propoganda and therefore false :eek2:

I was being tongue-in-cheek.

Even then my comment still works.

Even then my comment still works.

I'm not sure where you're coming from (perhaps you can elucidate?). The cryptic point I was making is that anti-Semites often claim the press is controlled by Jews. I like to make the counter claim that the press is controlled by Rupert Murdoch to illustrate the absurdity of their claim.

I'm not sure where you're coming from (perhaps you can elucidate?). The cryptic point I was making is that anti-Semites often claim the press is controlled by Jews. I like to make the counter claim that the press is controlled by Rupert Murdoch to illustrate the absurdity of their claim.

Oh. I thought you knew. Sir Rupert has Jewish ancestry...

This is exactly what I thought. White nationalists aren't for the most part violent, and I would fully support any public debate. The problem is that people who support white nationalism would likely face persecution and alienation (leaking of the BNP membership list).

Well, they're going to be alienated if they hold to those beliefs. If that ever ceases to be the case, it probably means we've lost big time. However, they should generally be free to speak their mind, so long as they're not advocating criminal activity.

Of course, if they actually cross the line into violence, the government should deal with them swiftly as the criminals they are.

That however is the least of the problems engaging in a discussion with these people, because everything we "anti's" say is a product of Zionist propoganda and therefore false :eek2:

Well, their are different debating techniques depending on your adversary. Against someone who can be persuaded to your point of view, you want to be polite, reasonable, and pointing out flaws/contradictions in their argument. If possible, show how their beliefs and position are not incompatible with yours.

If persuation is highly unlikely (say you're debating a diehard fanatic), your goal should probably shift from persuading them, to simply discrediting them in front of whatever audience you may have. Its still better to do it somewhat politely though, since ranting serves no purpose but stress relief, and its likely to lose you points with the audience.;)

Oh. I thought you knew. Sir Rupert has Jewish ancestry...

You almost had me believing you. Thank goodness for Wikipedia.

You almost had me believing you. Thank goodness for Wikipedia.

Wiki is controlled by the Jews. Its actually called Wikstein. Its run by Bernie Moishewitz out of a reasonably comfortable apartment in the upper west side.

I am going to take a look at these one by one.




- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
If Jews ruled the world why do they live on the only land in the Mideast without oil ??? Seriously if I ruled the world I would take the land with oil if i was going to be in a crap hole desert.

- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
I agree. My character is to wear a kilt get drunk and proclaim to be half Irish and Half Scottish. and those Damn Irish and Scots keep telling me I am only a yank.
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party don't know who they are so they are irrelevant
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
obviously the solution is more perks for whites. i mean Asians in the US have a higher degree completion rate then whites. surely a minimum 70% white emissions quota is in order.
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)Nope how else will I often date Asian girls if your going to lynch me or her for it, that's just not cool.

- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
huh???

- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles





There are some cultural aspects, but they are no where near exclusive to white Europeans. The religious ties of the US Constitution are more closely related to deism.

Well I've essentially given up arguing against racists. As my faith states, that diversity is always to be expected. The intolerant school of racism will always be a component of a democratic society.

I figure it's better to treat the cause, like economic uncertainty, than to fight the symptom of scapegoating.

There are some cultural aspects, but they are no where near exclusive to white Europeans. The religious ties of the US Constitution are more closely related to deism.

Didnt Deism come from White Europeans? and, its beside the point, the US Constitution is almost entirely Secular...The only non-secular portion guarantees rights of people's religion, yet doesnt claim any religion itself, to my knowledge...

Wiki is controlled by the Jews. Its actually called Wikstein. Its run by Bernie Moishewitz out of a reasonably comfortable apartment in the upper west side.

That almost deserves to be in the Sgt Twomey thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=584044). Unfortunately it fails rule 4.

I am going to take a look at these one by one.

Keep in mind that you're arguing against hypothetical white nationalist claims. I'll help clear some of these up for you.


If Jews ruled the world why do they live on the only land in the Mideast without oil ??? Seriously if I ruled the world I would take the land with oil if i was going to be in a crap hole desert.

Base operations of the ZOG are in corporate America. Without it, Israel would never have survived.


huh???

Some groups of white nationalists circle jerk to eugenic wars.


There are some cultural aspects, but they are no where near exclusive to white Europeans. The religious ties of the US Constitution are more closely related to deism.

You'd get a kick out of arguments against that. They're more intellectually devestating than comical, sadly. I wish I've kept an archive of the WN responses I've gotten on Stormfront.

Didnt Deism come from White Europeans? and, its beside the point, the US Constitution is almost entirely Secular...The only non-secular portion guarantees rights of people's religion, yet doesnt claim any religion itself, to my knowledge...

i think the one about wearing a kilt and arguing with irish and scots about not being just a damn yank would have let everyone know i was mostly teasing the white nationalist.

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy

Basically an updated version of a false book written for the Tsarist secret police, that is, the Protocols.


- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context

Eh. Almost every racist says so (including non-white racists, that is).


- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party

More or less like MEP Borghezio of Lega Nord (quod tube & google).


- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people

That's the best part of being an Italian in Italy. I'm white AND aboriginal!


- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)

Yay, they always have to justify genocide, and inventing another genocide looks a good idea to them. It never occurred them that, if they fucked more and wasted less time in playing Nazis, they would produce more of their beloved white offspring.


- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war

White nationalists aren't racist: to them, niggas, gypsies, jews, slavs, wogs, arabs, chinese... they're all the same.


- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles

Basically it's true, though. What would you expect from constitutions written by white, european men in countries where Christianity was the 99% majority religion when not the State religion?
Though we might find a major influx of Illuminism in the US Constitution: you know, when Britain and USA sign the peace treaty on the Rive Gauche...


I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.
Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.
I agree.
The only solution is education. Education keeps young people from believing the lies nazis (& co.) tell.
Also, here in Italy, associations like the ANPI (Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d'Italia - WW2 Partisans' association), the ANED (Associazione Nazionale Ex-Deportati - Camp survivors' association) are doing a great job in saving original documents, and publishing new studies about neonazi movements and racist theories. Nothing debunks racist myths like plain study.

... until you snap into reality. I've been arguing as an "anti-racist" on Stormfront for the past week, since I was getting bored and had no intention of studying every waking moment of reading week.

While their arguments are largely irrational and archaic, I've almost been convinced, or have attempted to internally rationalize the following things:

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)
- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles



I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.

Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.

Perhaps we should organise an NSG raid. Then again, it's probably been done before.

i think the one about wearing a kilt and arguing with irish and scots about not being just a damn yank would have let everyone know i was mostly teasing the white nationalist.

Wait, are you telling me I cant just pick a random point from your post out of context and attempt to make a claim of my own to make it sound like I have intelligence?

What has this world come to? *shakes head* lol

Wait, are you telling me I cant just pick a random point from your post out of context and attempt to make a claim of my own to make it sound like I have intelligence?

What has this world come to? *shakes head* lol

in the case of any conversation involving white nationalist yes. Just nothing really serious to discuss about them.

in the case of any conversation involving white nationalist yes. Just nothing really serious to discuss about them.

Yeah, cant argue with you there...I really dont care what Stormfront thinks...NSG is my moral Compass, :p

Yeah, cant argue with you there...I really dont care what Stormfront thinks...NSG is my moral Compass, :p

anyways i have a fight to pick with the Irish exchange students to pick about weather i am really Irish.

Perhaps we should organise an NSG raid. Then again, it's probably been done before.

Forum wars can get ugly.

Actually, to be honest, my main response to Stormfront is to laugh at the shear hilarity of their stupidity. Though that site can get pretty bizzar. Last time I checked, they had a forum for dissenting view points. I remember one thread where a person claiming to be black was debating them, and you had this thread full of white supremacists calmly, politely explaining to this guy how inferior his race was. One of the more sureal things I've seen.

FORUM WAR!!! FORUM WAR !!!!!
It is our moral duty to raid stormfront.

That's the best part of being an Italian in Italy. I'm white AND aboriginal!

According to white nationalists, though, Italians aren't "real" white people. They're like Gypsys or Mexicans.

FORUM WAR!!! FORUM WAR !!!!!
It is our moral duty to raid stormfront.

What are the logistics required?

Recruit people.
Get them to register secretly on Stormfront.
Choose a thread.
Organise a time.
Attack.

What if there's a spy in our ranks? Do we need secret police?

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media. And I would say that Canada, U.S. and the Australia do all have constitutions with French and British roots. Other than that, I reject the other points you listed.

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media...

Which country? Can't say I can see it in the Australian media.

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media.

Well, its a globalized world, and globally, I'm pretty sure we're a minority.

Not that I'm particularily choked up about it.

What are the logistics required?

Recruit people.
Get them to register secretly on Stormfront.
Choose a thread.
Organise a time.
Attack.

What if there's a spy in our ranks? Do we need secret police?

call me NSG's Cheka

Well, its a globalized world, and globally, I'm pretty sure we're a minority.

Not that I'm particularily choked up about it.

Wouldnt everyone but Asians be a Minority? But, then again, I like Anime, lol...

Wouldnt everyone but Asians be a Minority? But, then again, I like Anime, lol...

Asians include Turks, Israelis, Indians, Indonesians, Chinese, Mongolians, Japanese and so on and so forth. Precisely what is the Asian majority?

Wouldnt everyone but Asians be a Minority? But, then again, I like Anime, lol...

technically they would only be a plurality . Well depending if you divide them between far east Indians and the like.(which they do)

Asians include Turks, Israelis, Indians, Indonesians, Chinese, Mongolians, Japanese and so on and so forth. Precisely what is the Asian majority?

Well, considering the same could be said for "Whites" I was using the same broad definition they use...

Chinese/Japanese/East Asians I suppose, I was joking though, lol...

Wouldnt everyone but Asians be a Minority? But, then again, I like Anime, lol...

Anime sucks. But that's kind of off-topic.;)

Yes, it looks like Asian people are going to be the biggest group for a long time to come. Do I really care? No.

I'd rather live in a post-racial world, where skin color has no more relevancy than eye or hair color. Biologically we're all the same species, and in terms of human interaction, society, and politics, what matters is our knowledge, behavior, and character. Which has little or nothing to do with race. Ergo, race is irrelevant.

Well, considering the same could be said for "Whites" I was using the same broad definition they use...

Chinese/Japanese/East Asians I suppose, I was joking though, lol...

technically we could throw out the Urals as a legitimate continental divide and we can all be part of the Eurasian majority. except the africans and new worlders.

Anime sucks. But that's kind of off-topic.;)

Yes, it looks like Asian people are going to be the biggest group for a long time to come. Do I really care? No.

I'd rather live in a post-racial world, where skin color has no more relevancy than eye or hair color. Biologically we're all the same species, and in terms of human interaction, society, and politics, what matters is our knowledge, behavior, and character. Which has little or nothing to do with race. Ergo, race is irrelevant.

Well, I havent seen an Anime I really like since Cowboy Bebop ended...Although I had started to get into Bleach until one of my friends spoiled it for me by just stating that everyone dies at the end all the sudden...I was like WTF? lol...

But, yeah, I agree, if only we could get there within my lifetime, id be happy...

I think on Stormfront your posts are held for mod approval for some amount of time.

I wouldn't know...

Well, considering the same could be said for "Whites" I was using the same broad definition they use, Chinese Japanese/East Asians I suppose, I was joking though, lol...

One thing you can always count on around here is that someone will see a joke, take it seriously, and then, five pages later...

I think on Stormfront your posts are held for mod approval for some amount of time.

I wouldn't know...

I don't know, but I recall that they have a section set aside for people to post who disagree with them.

I think on Stormfront your posts are held for mod approval for some amount of time.

That does seem like the sort of thing paranoid conspiracy types would do. A while back, someone was talking about a radical leftist/communist forum, and they did the same thing.

I don't know, but I recall that they have a section set aside for people to post who disagree with them.

Yeah, its the place for "anti's" to debate with them, I think the mod of that section is (supposedly) actually Jewish, or was when I was there.

But I believe your posts are still held for approval.

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media. And I would say that Canada, U.S. and the Australia do all have constitutions with French and British roots. Other than that, I reject the other points you listed.

And constitutions with French roots aren't exactly Christian, because the French constitution stems from the (very secular) French revolution.

Vive la République!

Anime sucks. But that's kind of off-topic.;)

Yes, it looks like Asian people are going to be the biggest group for a long time to come. Do I really care? No.

Then again it would be interesting to know if Asians, on the average, see themselves as one group. I doubt that Iranians think of themselves as in the same ethnical group of Sri Lankans, or of Koreans, or of Siberian Russians.

Asia is so fucking big!

Then again it would be interesting to know if Asians, on the average, see themselves as one group. I doubt that Iranians think of themselves as in the same ethnical group of Sri Lankans, or of Koreans, or of Siberian Russians.

Asia is so fucking big!

When I was in Japan, it was politely explained to me by a drunk sarariman that "Filipinos are the Mexicans of Asia".

One thing you can always count on around here is that someone will see a joke, take it seriously, and then, five pages later...

I know, and Im a classic offender in that respect...

I just felt it needed stating in case someone else saw it unfold and thought I wasnt, lol...

Yeah, its the place for "anti's" to debate with them, I think the mod of that section is (supposedly) actually Jewish, or was when I was there.

But I believe your posts are still held for approval.

Any forum Admin who screens posts is probably either highly paranoid, or needs to grow a pair. Or both.

Any forum Admin who screens posts is probably either highly paranoid, or needs to grow a pair. Or both.

Part of me wonders if, because of the (sort of) prominence of stormfront they're afraid of getting swamped with elves and activists and there would be more "anti" traffic than actual bigots.

... until you snap into reality. I've been arguing as an "anti-racist" on Stormfront for the past week, since I was getting bored and had no intention of studying every waking moment of reading week.

While their arguments are largely irrational and archaic, I've almost been convinced, or have attempted to internally rationalize the following things:

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)
- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles



I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.

Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.

How the fuck could ANYone be swayed by EITHER of those two "arguments"?

The second one is high school-level genetics, but I suppose that at least partially answers itself.

But the FIRST one? Ancestry has more to do with character? If that's the case, then why are the majority of these mouth-breathing kin-fuckers in the state they're in? That just invalidates their whole claim!

ANCESTRY IS MORE IMPORTANT TO CHARACTER!

*RAH*

WE'RE WHITE!

*RAH*

AND WE'RE IGNORANT SCUMBAGS!

*RA- wut?

:headbang:

I mean, I know in some states of mind, you only hear what you want to hear, but good grief.

Part of me wonders if, because of the (sort of) prominence of stormfront they're afraid of getting swamped with elves and activists and there would be more "anti" traffic than actual bigots.

Probably. I'm sure their's a lot of people who would troll the hell out of stormfront if they had the chance.

How the fuck could ANYone be swayed by EITHER of those two "arguments"?

The second one is high school-level genetics, but I suppose that at least partially answers itself.

But the FIRST one? Ancestry has more to do with character? If that's the case, then why are the majority of these mouth-breathing kin-fuckers in the state they're in? That just invalidates their whole claim!

ANCESTRY IS MORE IMPORTANT TO CHARACTER!

*RAH*

WE'RE WHITE!

*RAH*

AND WE'RE IGNORANT SCUMBAGS!

*RA- wut?

:headbang:

I mean, I know in some states of mind, you only hear what you want to hear, but good grief.

Except that, to them, they're not ignorant scumbags. And I suppose any failurs in their life they can blame on the Jews oppressing them.:rolleyes:

So basically, just another self-reinforcing delusion.

Probably. I'm sure their's a lot of people who would troll the hell out of stormfront if they had the chance.

It would be worth it to try, but it would take a long time to get through their screening, and after a while some people would just become impatient and quit...

It would be worth it to try, but it would take a long time to get through their screening, and after a while some people would just become impatient and quit...

we must send to china for hackers.

Oh. I thought you knew. Sir Rupert has Jewish ancestry...

Well, if the Bible is even partially factual, doesn't everyone Caucasian have some small part of Jewish ancestry? And what of the Christ Almighty they seem to cherish so dearly? Was definitely a Jew, again, according to their favorite book.

How do none of them...aw, skip it. :(

When I was in Japan, it was politely explained to me by a drunk sarariman that "Filipinos are the Mexicans of Asia".

I'm sure that it was just because Filipinos can speak Spanish. Do Filipinos have Asian Tacos? ;)

ANCESTRY IS MORE IMPORTANT TO CHARACTER!

*RAH*

WE'RE WHITE!

*RAH*

AND WE'RE IGNORANT SCUMBAGS!

*RA- wut?


They don't say "RAH", they say "RAHOWA!".

And to them, ancestry is more important to character for two reasons:

1) Within comparatively few iterations, inbreeding makes ancestry the defining characteristic of pretty much anybody.

2) They're using an old system, where your initial attributes are determined by the race you picked. And since they're "purists", they don't allow multi-classing or anything else...

So, after a few generations, you get a master race with three thumbs, anemia, bad teeth, and eyes so close together, they can see out their own nostrils.

They do get "alcohol resistence +2" though.

I'm sure that it was just because Filipinos can speak Spanish. Do Filipinos have Asian Tacos? ;)

Made out of boiled chicken and shoe leather?

Well, if the Bible is even partially factual, doesn't everyone Caucasian have some small part of Jewish ancestry? And what of the Christ Almighty they seem to cherish so dearly? Was definitely a Jew, again, according to their favorite book.

How do none of them...aw, skip it. :(

Eh, no. If the Bible is even partially factual, EVERYONE, not just the whites, has some small part of Jewish ancestry. Stemming from Noah.

Also, you clearly aren't familiar with the Multiple Jesii. Expecially with the Aryan Jesus.

They don't say "RAH", they say "RAHOWA!".

And to them, ancestry is more important to character for two reasons:

1) Within comparatively few iterations, inbreeding makes ancestry the defining characteristic of pretty much anybody.

2) They're using an old system, where your initial attributes are determined by the race you picked. And since they're "purists", they don't allow multi-classing or anything else...

So, after a few generations, you get a master race with three thumbs, anemia, bad teeth, and eyes so close together, they can see out their own nostrils.

They do get "alcohol resistence +2" though.

Y'know, in some troubled parts of the world, people are yelling "REVOLUTION! REVOLUTION!". Here in the States, in some pockets of humanity, it's "EVOLUTION! EVOLUTION! Give us our thuuumbs! 'Cause they see thumbs on TEE-vee and start hoppin' around like mad baboons.

-- Bill Hicks (how I WISH he were here to distill this mess for us)

Y'know, in some troubled parts of the world, people are yelling "REVOLUTION! REVOLUTION!". Here in the States, in some pockets of humanity, it's "EVOLUTION! EVOLUTION! Give us our thuuumbs! 'Cause they see thumbs on TEE-vee and start hoppin' around like mad baboons.

-- Bill Hicks (how I WISH he were here to distill this mess for us)

He's having a cheeseburger and an Irish Car Bomb with George Carlin (off the wagon since he died) on the planet of the Elohim.

Well, if the Bible is even partially factual, doesn't everyone Caucasian have some small part of Jewish ancestry? And what of the Christ Almighty they seem to cherish so dearly? Was definitely a Jew, again, according to their favorite book.

How do none of them...aw, skip it. :(

Where in the Bible does it say Caucasians have Jewish ancestry? I've heard a theory that England was populated by a lost tribe of Israel, but it's not Biblical and not really supported by archaeology.

The closest thing I've ever been able to find in the Bible to a Caucasian is an ethnic group called the Rephaim ("they faught like pale ghosts" or something like that) but I think they were obliterated.

It's possible that the middle east was totally sheltered from the influence of northern europeans until the advent of the roman empire, or that no one really cared about skin tone then.

In fact, writers in the Bible hardly ever describe people by their skin tone... they always refer to them based on their country of origin or their accomplishments. Perhaps a lesson for us all?

Eh, no. If the Bible is even partially factual, EVERYONE, not just the whites, has some small part of Jewish ancestry. Stemming from Noah.

Also, you clearly aren't familiar with the Multiple Jesii. Expecially with the Aryan Jesus.

Well, I hadn't seen any mention of either Fu-Manchu-bearded conquerors or rice fanatics who are good at math and who have differently-lidded eyes than caucasoids, but hey, I'm just slingin' stereotypes to make a point.

And it would be "Jesi" not "Jesii". Savage. ;)

Eh, no. If the Bible is even partially factual, EVERYONE, not just the whites, has some small part of Jewish ancestry. Stemming from Noah.

Also, you clearly aren't familiar with the Multiple Jesii. Expecially with the Aryan Jesus.

See, it was fun when they'd switch off, like "Muslim Jesus" would trade outfits and haircuts with "Catholic Jesus" and they'd have wacky adventures like in the Parent Trap...

But these days, World Church of the Creator White Supremacist Jesus mostly just hangs out with Mel Gibson...even got an exec producer credit on the coming sequel to "Bird on a Wire."

Where in the Bible does it say Caucasians have Jewish ancestry? I've heard a theory that England was populated by a lost tribe of Israel, but it's not Biblical and not really supported by archaeology.

The closest thing I've ever been able to find in the Bible to a Caucasian is an ethnic group called the Rephaim ("they faught like pale ghosts" or something like that) but I think they were obliterated.

It's possible that the middle east was totally sheltered from the influence of northern europeans until the advent of the roman empire, or that no one really cared about skin tone then.

In fact, writers in the Bible hardly ever describe people by their skin tone... they always refer to them based on their country of origin or their accomplishments. Perhaps a lesson for us all?

Psst -- look up "caucasian" in a dictionary. Likely the first entry. I'll wait.

See, it was fun when they'd switch off, like "Muslim Jesus" would trade outfits and haircuts with "Catholic Jesus" and they'd have wacky adventures like in the Parent Trap...

But these days, World Church of the Creator White Supremacist Jesus mostly just hangs out with Mel Gibson...even got an exec producer credit on the coming sequel to "Bird on a Wire."

"Fried Squab on a String"?

"Fried Squab on a String"?

"Bird on a Wire 2: The Jews Started All the Wars of History"

"Bird on a Wire 2: The Jews Started All the Wars of History"

Ah -- genius. You shoulda been a producer.

Ah -- genius. You shoulda been a producer.

Yeah...I heard they got Goldie Hawns daughter to reprise Goldie Hawn's role.

Well, if the Bible is even partially factual, doesn't everyone Caucasian have some small part of Jewish ancestry? And what of the Christ Almighty they seem to cherish so dearly? Was definitely a Jew, again, according to their favorite book. How do none of them...aw, skip it. :(

Not every white supremacist/nationalist is of the Christian Identity stripe(which itself is not Christianity, by the way). Of course, if any of them ever bothered to read The Bible, they wouldn't be white supremacists in the first place...

As for the rest, you're forgetting the amazing human capacity for self-delusion. It's like the people who claim that Communism will work if you just "do it right."

Not every white supremacist/nationalist is of the Christian Identity stripe(which itself is not Christianity, by the way). Of course, if any of them ever bothered to read The Bible, they wouldn't be white supremacists in the first place...

As for the rest, you're forgetting the amazing human capacity for self-delusion. It's like the people who claim that Communism will work if you just "do it right."

Isn't there some group calling itself "Jesus Christ, Christian" thats into the white supremacy thing?

I've always loved that name..."Jesus Christ, Christian".

...And it would be "Jesi" not "Jesii". Savage. ;)

Jesus is fourth declension, Sirrah. It declines as follows:

Nom sing: Jesus
Acc sing: Jesum
Gen sing: Jesus
Dat sing: Jesui
Abl sing: Jesu

Nom plu: Jesus
Acc plu: Jesus
Gen plu: Jesuum
Dat plu: Jesibus
Abl plu: Jesibus

And you may wish to use "I" instead of "J".

;)

And it would be "Jesi" not "Jesii". Savage. ;)

Ouch. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Ouch. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

you failed the language of your fore fathers and you are to be kicked out of Italy.

Ouch. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Save your mea culpas. Intangelon stuffed up just as badly.

Isn't there some group calling itself "Jesus Christ, Christian" thats into the white supremacy thing?

Yeah, it's a complete disgrace and definitely not Christianity. They actually got their pants sued off a couple or so years ago and lost a bunch of money and property (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Jesus_Christ_Christian)

Where in the Bible does it say Caucasians have Jewish ancestry?

I'd say about: Genesis, part II, 11. All men having the same language and living in the same place, and willing to build a tower as symbol of their union.

you failed the language of your fore fathers and you are to be kicked out of Italy.

And you are to be kicked out of Anglo-Saxon countries. (It's "forefathers"!):D

Anyway, I'll move to Spain. Near Nanatsu.

And you are to be kicked out of Anglo-Saxon countries. (It's "forefathers"!):D

Anyway, I'll move to Spain. Near Nanatsu.

Reminds me of a joke.

Q. How do you circumcise a whale?
A. Four skindivers.

Yeah, it's a complete disgrace and definitely not Christianity. They actually got their pants sued off a couple or so years ago and lost a bunch of money and property (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Jesus_Christ_Christian)

Nice...

Jews are a demonic race from Eve and Satan, they say?



Satan: Hey, baby...

Eve: Depart from me, serpent! I got in big trouble last time I talked to you!

Satan: I know, honey, but you know, can't a pimp get some forgiveness?

Eve: We got thrown out of the garden! I had to squeeze babies out! Of my vagina!

Satan: Really? Gross. Anyway, you want to go over behind that tree over there?

Eve: No!

Satan: You look nice today...

Eve: Really? I haven't really worn clothes a lot before...

Satan: Well, seriously, you've got a knack for it, you look really great...

Eve: Really? No, come on....really?

Jesus is fourth declension, Sirrah. It declines as follows:

Nom sing: Jesus
Acc sing: Jesum
Gen sing: Jesus
Dat sing: Jesui
Abl sing: Jesu

Nom plu: Jesus
Acc plu: Jesus
Gen plu: Jesuum
Dat plu: Jesibus
Abl plu: Jesibus

And you may wish to use "I" instead of "J".

;)

If it were in the fourth, its dative and ablative plurals would be "Jesubus", not "Jesibus", iirc.

Actually, it's because of this: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Jesi
. Since english-speakers have invented this funny bent "I", that is "J".

Satan: Hey, baby...

Eve: Depart from me, serpent! I got in big trouble last time I talked to you!

Satan: I know, honey, but you know, can't a pimp get some forgiveness?

Eve: We got thrown out of the garden! I had to squeeze babies out! Of my vagina!

Satan: Really? Gross. Anyway, you want to go over behind that tree over there?

Eve: No!

Satan: You look nice today...

Eve: Really? I haven't really worn clothes a lot before...

Satan: Well, seriously, you've got a knack for it, you look really great...

Eve: Really? No, come on....really?

Yeah, I've never seen it myself. You must have gotten that bit out of the Apocrypha or the Book of Mormon or something...

If it were in the fourth, its dative and ablative plurals would be "Jesubus", not "Jesibus", iirc.

Not according to Wheelock's Latin Grammar.

Actually, it's because of this: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Jesi
. Since english-speakers have invented this funny bent "I", that is "J".

Love it.

Not according to Wheelock's Latin Grammar.
I'll take your word. I don't have my latin grammar handy.

Love it. Looks like a half-cooked wiener.

Save your mea culpas. Intangelon stuffed up just as badly.

Hey -- at least I was close. Give a guy some credit for attending a rural school that offered no Latin, and who had to learn what little he does know from singing in and conducting choirs (which teaches many words, but nearly no grammar). Trust me, I can pronounce the effluvium outta some Latin.

Had I the time, I'd gladly take a course in the language. Though you being an expert, perhaps you can tell me which era I've learned to pronounce given my limited exposure:

all vowels = five pure shapes, A (ah), E (eh), I (ee), O (oh), U (oo)
CI = CHI (not KI)
V = V (not W)

I seem to recall someone once telling me that I had learned to pronounce "Renaissance" Latin, and the likes of Ovid or Caesar wouldn't have understood me or might have taken me for a barbarian.

If it were in the fourth, its dative and ablative plurals would be "Jesubus", not "Jesibus", iirc.

Actually, it's because of this: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Jesi
. Since english-speakers have invented this funny bent "I", that is "J".

Never understood the J. At least the Y had the Germans and French as champions with that whole u-umlaut vowel they've got going. But English just HAD to have THREE ways to make that glide sound (yell), and TWO to make the hard G (gem). Our alphabet is overpopulated/a bit redundant. Were we saving those extras for some kind of emergency?

... until you snap into reality. I've been arguing as an "anti-racist" on Stormfront for the past week, since I was getting bored and had no intention of studying every waking moment of reading week.

While their arguments are largely irrational and archaic, I've almost been convinced, or have attempted to internally rationalize the following things:

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)
- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles



I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.

Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.

Just remember, these guys are the bottom of the food chain in more ways than one-if your species is as fragile as they seem to think theirs is, then it probably deserves a darwinian end-just as any society overcome with self-gratification and self-pity deserves to be allowed to extinct itself.

Any halfway successful farmer knows that "Purebreeding" results in defective animals. The human body is an animal, lack of genetic diversity leads to severe defects, lack of survival characteristics, and weakness in the wild.

Wolves and Mutts share certain common themes-they're more adaptable than pure-breeds, tend to have better, sharper, and more efficient instincts, tend to handle conditions better, and tend to have fewer weaknesses across-the-board. White Racists obviously are themselves, through their own efforts, trying to destroy their particular branch of the human species by making it less adaptable, less capable, and less survivable in the uncontrolled conditions known as reality.

Dogs, esp. Purebred, make good SERVANTS to man, Wolves are better Predators and better at self-mastery. Using Mendelian averages, therefore, a bloodline with lots of hybrid vigour will tend to have greater strength in a world whose environment changes-and requires less external support. From a Eugenic standpoint, the best option for preserving the positive aspects of the Anglo-Saxon tradition, is to breed with as many other races as possible as a means to reinforce your culture's dominance-through a combination of strength and adaptability. Therefore, Interracial pairings are the best bet for strengthening the cultural values these inbred/overbred retards (BNP for example) pretend to value.

In short, Racism is a short-path to making oneself and one's descendents biologically inferior.

Although I had started to get into Bleach until one of my friends spoiled it for me by just stating that everyone dies at the end all the sudden...I was like WTF? lol...

You know, one of my mates had almost convinced me to lose my anime virginity by watching Bleach, and then you go and do that.

- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people

Aboriginal people wish they were only as marginalized as black people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Wpk_VUOybE

That almost deserves to be in the Sgt Twomey thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=584044). Unfortunately it fails rule 4.

And also Hammurab is Sgt. Toomey, along with Jhahannam, Baldwin for Christ and the Ghost of Ayn Rand.

Yeah, I have at times felt tempted by their positions, though mainly because intense doubt about almost everything seems to pervade my life. As such I find myself worrying if Holocaust denial might have a point in the same way I worry about the possibility of getting hit by a car on the way to a coffeehouse or something.

... until you snap into reality. I've been arguing as an "anti-racist" on Stormfront for the past week, since I was getting bored and had no intention of studying every waking moment of reading week.

While their arguments are largely irrational and archaic, I've almost been convinced, or have attempted to internally rationalize the following things:

- the ZOG is real, therefore any good argument against racism/tolerance is a product of misinformation propogated by a global Jewish conspiracy
- ancestry has more to do with your character than does sociological context
- the BNP is a very reasonable and just party
- white people are heavily marginalised and disadvantaged compared to aboriginal and black people
- interracial relationships are genocidal, and it should be outlawed through draconian measures (or lynching)
- white nationalists love racial diversity... so they can totally pwn non-white people in the next eugenics war
- the US, Australian and Canadian Constitutions are based on the same underlying white European Christian principles



I could go on. It was a fun trip treading the dark waters of internet racism, but I was overwhelmed and frankly concerned about the mass brainwashing the unemployed, outsourced or rejected young people might encounter.

Has anybody felt this way? It seems like a very real threat to our great societies, especially in times of economic uncertainty, Islamophobia and the rise of white nationalism in Europe.
Why bother arguing with kooks? Just leave them alone.

Perhaps we should organise an NSG raid. Then again, it's probably been done before.
Don't. Then you'll have them coming here and vandalizing our boards.

FORUM WAR!!! FORUM WAR !!!!!
It is our moral duty to raid stormfront.
No, it's not.
So don't.

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media. And I would say that Canada, U.S. and the Australia do all have constitutions with French and British roots. Other than that, I reject the other points you listed.

Which country? Can't say I can see it in the Australian media.

Don't see it in the US either, sorry.

No, it's not.
So don't. Not even a little? :(

And I can't say anything to them - I'm actually Jewish, so they'll reject me as a mouthpiece for the ZOG.

I would enjoy the possibility of a forum war, but as Kat has vetoed it, I'll hold back... unless they start it first.

Why bother arguing with kooks? Just leave them alone.

I argue with them to gain insight into their ideology. This is important because I am a target group of their hostilities. Calgary, which I frequently visit, is considered a hate-crime capital of Canada.

I have to know my enemy before I engage it.

...Don't. Then you'll have them coming here and vandalizing our boards...

It was said entirely in jest. I would hate to see NSG vandalised.

Not even a little? :(

don't worry i already started it. posted from 20 different accounts proclaiming NSG calls them a bunch of trolls and idiots. and challenging them to counter.

don't worry i already started it. posted from 20 different accounts proclaiming NSG calls them a bunch of trolls and idiots. and challenging them to counter.

:eek2:

We're all gonna get forum banned!

:eek2:

We're all gonna get forum banned!

up to 30 accounts posting garbage. and i think they have locked the new members function.

And constitutions with French roots aren't exactly Christian, because the French constitution stems from the (very secular) French revolution.

Vive la République!

Ah, but the U.S. Constitution was written two years before the French Revolution started, dear Risottia.

Ah, but the U.S. Constitution was written two years before the French Revolution started, dear Risottia.

he is likely referring to Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu

he is likely referring to Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu

I can only hope and pray that you had to look that up, and didn't have it memorized for just such an occasion. :tongue:

I can only hope and pray that you had to look that up, and didn't have it memorized for just such an occasion. :tongue:

I am a history major(and just had to write a paper on the fellow) what do you think ?

Ah, but the U.S. Constitution was written two years before the French Revolution started, dear Risottia.

Ever heard of Illuminism, sir?

Ever heard of Illuminism, sir?

The belief system whereby a believer makes a claim that he has been illuminated or experienced enlightenment of a spiritual nature?

I am a history major what do you think ?

I'm no history major, and I cannot remember the whole name of Montesquieu... but hey, you don't need to be a history major to know that Montesquieu is probabily the most influential political thinker in modern history.

Nope.

Sorry. I mistranslated. "Age of Enlightenment" in English.

(it's 03.11 CET here, and I'm sleepy.)

I'm no history major, and I cannot remember the whole name of Montesquieu... but hey, you don't need to be a history major to know that Montesquieu is probabily the most influential political thinker in modern history.

yeah. I just added a parenthesis to elaborate further when i thought about how big his full name was. It is a pity the French were so dead set against listening to him for such a long time.

Sorry. I mistranslated. "Age of Enlightenment" in English.

Oh, that. Yeah, I've heard of it. I was just arguing that the U.S. could not have been influenced by the secular French roots that sprang out of the French Revolution.

The Age of Enlightenment totally had an impact though. Can't argue that.

Sorry. I mistranslated. "Age of Enlightenment" in English.

(it's 03.11 CET here, and I'm sleepy.)

Illuminism works too several of my history books refer to the age of enlightenment as such.

Oh, that. Yeah, I've heard of it. I was just arguing that the U.S. could not have been influenced by the secular French roots that sprang out of the French Revolution.

Ok. My point was that the American Constitution and the French Revolution stem from the same French intellectual movement; sorry for not being clear.

Oh, that. Yeah, I've heard of it. I was just arguing that the U.S. could not have been influenced by the secular French roots that sprang out of the French Revolution.

The Age of Enlightenment totally had an impact though. Can't argue that.

Ok. My point was that the American Constitution and the French Revolution stem from the same French intellectual movement; sorry for not being clear.

None of this compromise. you both have to fight to the death.

Where in the Bible does it say Caucasians have Jewish ancestry? I've heard a theory that England was populated by a lost tribe of Israel, but it's not Biblical and not really supported by archaeology.

The closest thing I've ever been able to find in the Bible to a Caucasian is an ethnic group called the Rephaim ("they faught like pale ghosts" or something like that) but I think they were obliterated.

It's possible that the middle east was totally sheltered from the influence of northern europeans until the advent of the roman empire, or that no one really cared about skin tone then.

In fact, writers in the Bible hardly ever describe people by their skin tone... they always refer to them based on their country of origin or their accomplishments. Perhaps a lesson for us all?
Um... Question:

What color do you think Jews are?

Um... Question:

What color do you think Jews are?

Fuchsia.

done.
Risottia you get gladius and shield.

None of this compromise. you both have to fight to the death.

I decree this thread becoming temporarily the "God is no Pokémon" thread. By the powers given to me by the OPer of that thread, I assume godhood and cannot die. Hence I win, objectively, because (A=B and B=C) => A=C, in fact.

:D

I decree this thread becoming temporarily the "God is no Pokémon" thread. By the powers given to me by the OPer of that thread, I assume godhood and cannot die. Hence I win, objectively, because (A=B and B=C) => A=C, in fact.

:D

Yeah...but...uh...

Come on, Ayn Rand! Back me up here!

Yeah...but...uh...

Come on, Ayn Rand! Back me up here!

I heard u liek mudkipz

I heard u liek mudkipz

This is a tale explaining the manner in which my way of life was rotated along a Y axis until it reached a position roughly 180 degrees from that which it started. If I could have 60 seconds of your time, simply place your posterior in the selected location, and I will relate to you the details of how I was made the male monarch of the district of the City of Los Angeles, California located at coordinates 34.08333 -118.44778.

In the western region of the “City of Brotherly Love” known as Philadelphia, my mother expelled me from her womb and indeed that is also where I spent my childhood, in my mother’s care. The majority of my time was spent in a recreational area containing such diversions as a jungle gym, swing set, sand box, etc. I was typically at the height of leisure while frequently at a temperature slightly below what might be considered standard room temperature. Outside of my educational institution I was engaging in a game of basketball with some of my friends, when a couple of gentlemen who seemed to be of the disposition to cause a great deal of mischief began causing a great deal of chaos and disharmony in the area in which I lived. I was involved in one rather small bout of fisticuffs after which my mother became concerned for my general safety and well-being, and she informed me that I would be moving in with her sister and her sister’s husband in the previously mentioned community located at the previously mentioned location.

I implored my mother to relent approximately 24-48 hours ago, yet she gathered my belongings in a somewhat flat, rectangular shaped piece of luggage and expelled me from her presence. She placed her lips upon my cheek in an affectionate manner and handed me a pre-purchased pass for public transportation. I placed the headphones for my personal music system into my ears and verbalized the idea that I may as well impact this situation with my foot. Traveling in the highest available level of comfort, this is indeed an unfortunate situation (although I make this statement with some irony). Consuming the juices obtained by the squeezing of the fruit of a Citrus sinensis from a piece of glass stemware commonly reserved for the sipping of sparkling wine originating from the Champagne region of France, I pause to wonder if this is indeed how the residents of the admittedly upper-class neighborhood located at the previously mentioned location commonly live. Indeed, I find this situation may be rather to my enjoyment.

I puckered my lips and exhaled forcefully to produce a shrill note in order to gain the attention of a taxicab driver, and as the driver approached I observed his California vanity plate which, in place of the traditional jumble of alpha-numeric characters, used only the letters F, R, E, S, and H, spelling out the word “fresh”. Additionally, from his rear view mirror dangled a pair of oversized, fur-covered cubes decorated to look like the six-sided dice commonly used in gambling and board games. In such a situation I could have made a statement about the unusualness of this particular taxicab to the point of it being nearly unique. Instead I cogitatively decided against it and instead informed the driver that he should deliver me to what was to become my new home in the community located at the previously mentioned location.

We pulled up to a large domicile sometime between the hours of 7 and 8 o’clock, and in a loud tone of voice I informed the cab driver that at some undetermined point in the future I would again detect his odour through my sense of olfaction. I gazed about the region of land that I was destined to rule, reflecting on my arrival: Here I would claim my rightful place upon the throne, from which I would govern the previously mentioned community of Bel-Air as monarch.

-snip-

You win an internet for that performance, sir. Thanks for the lulz!

Calgary, which I frequently visit, is considered a hate-crime capital of Canada.

I've always been a bit skeptical of the phrase 'hate-crime.' It seems like an unnecessary modifier. If, say, you jump someone out of nowhere and whup their ass, it's 'assault' regardless of whether you did it because you wanted money or because you didn't like the way they looked.

I've always been a bit skeptical of the phrase 'hate-crime.' It seems like an unnecessary modifier. If, say, you jump someone out of nowhere and whup their ass, it's 'assault' regardless of whether you did it because you wanted money or because you didn't like the way they looked.

Cop killing is an unnecessary label too, killing people is murder regardless of their occupation. I suppose terrorist is an unnecessary label as well, since they too ultimately murder people.

Why do we use the specific term 'racist' when labeling somebody who is intolerant of other races, when they could be described as bigots :confused:

Do you see how you completely missed the point of using the term? I'm not saying hate-crime is more heinous than other forms of assault, I am being specific about the type of assault that occurs in the hate-crime capital, which is hate-crime.

Do you see how you completely missed the point of using the term? I'm not saying hate-crime is more heinous than other forms of assault, I am being specific about the type of assault that occurs in the hate-crime capital, which is hate-crime.

No, I don't see that at all. If you were being specific about the type of assault that occurs, you would use terms like 'assault and battery', 'assault with a deadly weapon', 'assault with intent' 'aggravated assault' or the like, instead of the amorphous term 'hate-crime'

Cop killing is an unnecessary label too, killing people is murder regardless of their occupation. I suppose terrorist is an unnecessary label as well, since they too ultimately murder people.

Why do we use the specific term 'racist' when labeling somebody who is intolerant of other races, when they could be described as bigots :confused:

Do you see how you completely missed the point of using the term? I'm not saying hate-crime is more heinous than other forms of assault, I am being specific about the type of assault that occurs in the hate-crime capital, which is hate-crime.


The problem comes in this: when you talk "Hate Crime" you're really saying "Thought Crime". It really doesn't make a difference to an assault, robbery, murder, or rape victim whether the crim did it because their skin is a different colour-though it might make it somewhat easier to get the verdict "Guilty" if you have a clearly expressed motive (A black victim and a neo-nazi perp, for instance-it's easy to prove motive there), but affording special protections to certain classes of citizen based on "Race" or religion kind of runs counter to the whole idea of a nation founded on ideals of equal justice.

Nonetheless, there is a point to your argument that has to be taken into account-namely, that some factors aggravate a given crime. A man who runs a kid over by accident likely shouldn't face the same penalty as a child-molester who kills his victims to keep them from talking.

At its core, Racism is really about weakness-the weakness of its adherents, their inability to cut the mustard, and their inability to take responsibility for their own lives. It's a giant game of blaming someone else for one's failures-and you can find the strongest examples of racism in the prison-system itself-among the inmates, the failures of the human race, people who've chosen to lay all the blame for their fundamental weakness and inferiority on someone else, rather than stepping up to being responsible and productive people.

Racists should be marked as what they are-failures who should be segregated from the rest of the body of the people and prevented from reproducing-but we have to wait for them to do something to lock them up (Presumption of Innocence)-to that purpose, we have "hate crime" legislation to add mandatory extensions to sentences for crimes committed by these human failures, so that we can place them into a place, a society, where they can be prevented from doing further harm...for a time.

The problem being that such concepts can be (and have been) extended and distorted, and can be further distorted to be used as a weapon, and there's really no solid criteria encoded to limit the ability of Lawyers for the prosecution to abuse the term-it can be used, therefore, as a weapon to silence non-radical, non-racist dissent, and we have only to rely on the ethics of LAWYERS to protect society from such distortions.

Notably, Lawyers don't have the kind of ethics that human beings have-they're generally of the "It's Legal? then it's moral" code of operation, and thrive on ambiguity and selective-interpretation.

Cop killing is an unnecessary label too, killing people is murder regardless of their occupation. I suppose terrorist is an unnecessary label as well, since they too ultimately murder people.

Cop killing isn't written into the code of law it is only murder. A hate crime makes a murder or an assault labeled as "worse". When in reality it is the same action. Even the intent issue is a little off as most assaults murders ETC are done with malice.

Why do we use the specific term 'racist' when labeling somebody who is intolerant of other races, when they could be described as bigots :confused:

Do you see how you completely missed the point of using the term? I'm not saying hate-crime is more heinous than other forms of assault, I am being specific about the type of assault that occurs in the hate-crime capital, which is hate-crime.

if the crime is not any more heinous then why should it have any different of a sentence? Or you wish to make thought crimes a prosecutable? Intent should not affect sentencing.

The problem comes in this: when you talk "Hate Crime" you're really saying "Thought Crime". It really doesn't make a difference to an assault, robbery, murder, or rape victim whether the crim did it because their skin is a different colour-though it might make it somewhat easier to get the verdict "Guilty" if you have a clearly expressed motive (A black victim and a neo-nazi perp, for instance-it's easy to prove motive there), but affording special protections to certain classes of citizen based on "Race" or religion kind of runs counter to the whole idea of a nation founded on ideals of equal justice.

I like this bit, with reservations. Even with a black victim and a Neo-Nazi perp, while race may be a motivating factor, I think it might be harder to prove that it was the motive, unless the crime has obvious racial overtones, such a body left hanging with a sign on it that say 'Niggers Go Home' or some such. A simple mugging could be just that, and the victims skin color could be incidental, regardless of the perp's ideology.

Nonetheless, there is a point to your argument that has to be taken into account-namely, that some factors aggravate a given crime. A man who runs a kid over by accident likely shouldn't face the same penalty as a child-molester who kills his victims to keep them from talking.

Which is why we have a graduated system already in place, with progressing punishments from 'misdemeanor' to 'felony' and degrees within those graduations.

At its core, Racism is really about weakness-the weakness of its adherents, their inability to cut the mustard, and their inability to take responsibility for their own lives. It's a giant game of blaming someone else for one's failures-and you can find the strongest examples of racism in the prison-system itself-among the inmates, the failures of the human race, people who've chosen to lay all the blame for their fundamental weakness and inferiority on someone else, rather than stepping up to being responsible and productive people.

To describe prison inmates as "fundamentally weak and inferior" and "the failures of the human race" is, I think, a bit simplistic as well as undeservedly harsh. I would describe them as maybe "people who had made bad decisions" or "chosen the wrong avenues of behavior." Generally, the only thing that separates a convict from you or me are bars and a choice.

Racists should be marked as what they are-failures who should be segregated from the rest of the body of the people and prevented from reproducing-but we have to wait for them to do something to lock them up (Presumption of Innocence)-to that purpose, we have "hate crime" legislation to add mandatory extensions to sentences for crimes committed by these human failures, so that we can place them into a place, a society, where they can be prevented from doing further harm...for a time.

I don't like this bit at all. Advocating that a group of people(however distasteful)should be locked away from society and sterilized merely because you don't like the way they think grates on me in a big way. Also, the assumption that 'racist' = 'criminal' is in itself an odd Moebius strip like embracing of their point of view.

The problem being that such concepts can be (and have been) extended and distorted, and can be further distorted to be used as a weapon, and there's really no solid criteria encoded to limit the ability of Lawyers for the prosecution to abuse the term-it can be used, therefore, as a weapon to silence non-radical, non-racist dissent, and we have only to rely on the ethics of LAWYERS to protect society from such distortions.

Here you start out with a good point, but you kind of derail it when you go off about lawyers and their ethics. People are going to focus on that bit, and miss the beginning.

Notably, Lawyers don't have the kind of ethics that human beings have-they're generally of the "It's Legal? then it's moral" code of operation, and thrive on ambiguity and selective-interpretation.

Same thing here, except more so. Generally. I'd avoid sentences like "X don't have the kind of ethics that human beings do" while it may grab attention, it gets people's dander up and they miss your point.

I like this bit, with reservations. Even with a black victim and a Neo-Nazi perp, while race may be a motivating factor, I think it might be harder to prove that it was the motive, unless the crime has obvious racial overtones, such a body left hanging with a sign on it that say 'Niggers Go Home' or some such. A simple mugging could be just that, and the victims skin color could be incidental, regardless of the perp's ideology.



Which is why we have a graduated system already in place, with progressing punishments from 'misdemeanor' to 'felony' and degrees within those graduations.



To describe prison inmates as "fundamentally weak and inferior" and "the failures of the human race" is, I think, a bit simplistic as well as undeservedly harsh. I would describe them as maybe "people who had made bad decisions" or "chosen the wrong avenues of behavior." Generally, the only thing that separates a convict from you or me are bars and a choice.



I don't like this bit at all. Advocating that a group of people(however distasteful)should be locked away from society and sterilized merely because you don't like the way they think grates on me in a big way. Also, the assumption that 'racist' = 'criminal' is in itself an odd Moebius strip like embracing of their point of view.



Here you start out with a good point, but you kind of derail it when you go off about lawyers and their ethics. People are going to focus on that bit, and miss the beginning.



Same thing here, except more so. Generally. I'd avoid sentences like "X don't have the kind of ethics that human beings do" while it may grab attention, it gets people's dander up and they miss your point.

I'm not advocating Sterilization. I'm advocating separating them and limiting their opportunities to pollute the gene-pool in accordance with their own standards revolving around the ideas of Eugenics. A criminal is caught, he's either not a very good/smart crook, or he's too weak to function in a civilized society-either way, it comes down to inability-inability to obey the law, or inability to successfully skirt it. using their own "Superior/Inferior" standards, these people are fundamentally unfit to contribute to the next generation, and should be housed in facilities that prevent them from doing so, or reduce the rate at which they add to the next generation of inmates.

(Personally, I think locking people up for the crimes they do is generally enough-it prevents them, for a time, from doing it again, and provides the salvageable ones with a chance to think hard and long about how they got there-and how they might avoid a return stay.)

Never understood the J. At least the Y had the Germans and French as champions with that whole u-umlaut vowel they've got going. But English just HAD to have THREE ways to make that glide sound (yell), and TWO to make the hard G (gem). Our alphabet is overpopulated/a bit redundant. Were we saving those extras for some kind of emergency?

And why do you have a personal pronoun for each gender? Why not just have only one like in Finnish?

UBER SNIP

Can you imagine Will Smith trying to pull that off?

And why do you have a personal pronoun for each gender? Why not just have only one like in Finnish?

Because Finnish is stupid, and personal pronouns make everything easier. You're more likely to know who somebody's talking about.

Because Finnish is stupid, and personal pronouns make everything easier. You're more likely to know who somebody's talking about.

What about a genderless one?

I'm not advocating Sterilization.

Could of fooled me:Racists should be marked as what they are-failures who should be segregated from the rest of the body of the people and prevented from reproducing-
'Prevented from reproducing' by any other name...

A criminal is caught, he's either not a very good/smart crook, or he's too weak to function in a civilized society-either way, it comes down to inability-inability to obey the law, or inability to successfully skirt it.

It's got nothing to do with an inborn 'ability/inability' to either follow or sucessfully break the law. Neither criminality nor lawfulness is genetic. A criminal is a criminal because he chooses to break the law, not because he is incapable of obeying it.

And why do you have a personal pronoun for each gender? Why not just have only one like in Finnish?

We would try that, but then the feminists would bitch about discrimination and sue people.

Could of fooled me:

It's got nothing to do with an inborn 'ability/inability' to either follow or sucessfully break the law. Neither criminality nor lawfulness is genetic. A criminal is a criminal because he chooses to break the law, not because he is incapable of obeying it.


Taken honestly, you're right-but we're not talking about addressing things honestly. People who choose to break the law, should be punished for their choice-breaking the law.

However, that's an HONEST assessment. The problem in this subject, is that it involves a precept that's fundamentally dis-honest: that 'Race' matters...at all.

Notably, most people are fundamentally dishonest, choosing to shirk responsibility and lay blame on "Others' while identifying themselves based on false ideas like Racial Identity. Taken to the logical end, such folks believe in Eugenics.

Belief in Eugenics as a predictor of behaviour is a core tenet of racist belief patterns-so, using their belief patterns, one comes to the conclusion (really, inescapable) that in a world run according to the "Function" of Eugenics, most Racists are themselves unfit to reproduce.

i.e. I'm judging them based on THEIR 'moral structure' for the sake of this argument. Who your parents were has and should have no bearing on your actions and choices with regards to issues like criminality or financial success, nor be used as an excuse for the same...but if someone WERE (and many ARE) using such a measure, then obviously, they should save the rest of us a headache or three and simply not produce offspring so that such deviancies are reduced.

This follows closely to both the Leftist concept of "Collecive Guilt/Generational Guilt", and on the Racist concepts of Eugenics determining criminality-which means it has (roughly) bipartisan support, and in the end supports both sides' idea that humanity is perfectable as a collective.

I should add the disclaimer that while I'm arguing something that is, fundamentally based on indefensible concepts, I don't believe in those concepts-your parents might shape you by how they raise you, they might damage you by drinking or drugging while you're in the womb, or exposing you to toxins during development, but there's no "Smart Gene" or "Ethical Gene"-I believe that a person is exclusively responsible for their own actions, and that each individual is exclusively answerable for those same actions.

However, at the same time, I DO believe that Criminals are people-they chose a lifestyle that gets them into prison, and they should be brought to justice in that system...for what they DO, not what they are, or claim to be.

AND I tend to believe that most lawyers can be defined as parasitic entities who thrive on continuing the misery of other people. Sorry, but that's a matter of choice and behaviour as well. I believe fully that Lawyers' main activity is not respecting the law, nor upholding it, it is manipulating and exploiting and expanding the Law...and I think most of them have fewer morals and ethical limitations than a typical used-car salesman with the "Easy Credit" sign in a poor community.

Cop killing isn't written into the code of law it is only murder. A hate crime makes a murder or an assault labeled as "worse". When in reality it is the same action. Even the intent issue is a little off as most assaults murders ETC are done with malice.


if the crime is not any more heinous then why should it have any different of a sentence? Or you wish to make thought crimes a prosecutable? Intent should not affect sentencing.

Intent has always affected sentencing. We differentiate between spending three weeks carefully plotting to kill your aunt so you'll inherit her money and flipping out and stabbing your wife when you caught her cheating on you. Both victims are equally dead, but we still consider those crimes to be different. Similarly, killing someone because they belong to some category of people is an aggravating factor, and strongly implies a higher chance of recidivism - after all, most people only have so many wealthy aunts or cheating wives, but they're going to encounter plenty more black people.

Taken honestly, you're right-but we're not talking about addressing things honestly. <snip>
You could have stopped right there. That statement pretty much sums up all eugenics-based arguments, all social class arguments, all cultural superiority arguments, etc, whether they are presented by racists or against racists (or other groups).

Can you imagine Will Smith trying to pull that off?

I don't think there's a human alive that could pull that off.

I'd love to see him try though. :tongue:

I can't believe I have to argue over the use of the term 'hate-crime'.

I'm not saying it is illegal to be racist, or it be made a thought-crime. In fact I've never even said hate-crime should carry a heavier punishment than normal-crime. I am not arguing for hate-crime to have more weight than normal-crime.

If I were to say hate-crime have a different legal meaning than assault, that would be different.


Hate-crime is a specific kind of crime with a racist intent. Spray painting 'kike' on a synagogue is a specific type of vandalism, namely hate-crime. Kicking down an immigrant and calling her 'chink' and yelling go back to Chinkdom is an assault with a racist intent, making it a hate-crime. If Calgary is the hate-crime capital of Canada, there are more racially motivated assaults than the national average of such occurrences.

Ah Calgary. The most dangerous place to be an aboriginal gay person.

I can't believe I have to argue over the use of the term 'hate-crime'.

Arguing about the meaning of things is what Internet forums are for, besides no topic should be outside of discussion, on the Internet or in society.

Hate-crime is a specific kind of crime with a racist intent.

Too narrow. You can have 'hate-crimes' that are motivated by things other than race. Things like sexuality or ideology or religion. That, and it can be tricky to prove 'intent.' Like I said, even with something that seems cut-and-dried, like say a black victim and a Neo-Nazi perp, while race may be a motivating factor, I think it might be harder to prove that it was the motive, unless the crime has obvious racial overtones, such a body left hanging with a sign on it that say 'Niggers Go Home' or some such. A simple mugging could be just that, and the victims skin color could be incidental, regardless of the perp's ideology.

White people are in fact slowly being marginalized by the popular media.

Buwhahahahaha.

Every time I think about becoming racist I mull it over a tasty Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwich. Which I wouldn't be able to enjoy because Peanut Butter was a discovery/invention of a black man. I really enjoy my PB&J so I can't be a racist.

Every time I think about becoming racist I mull it over a tasty Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwich. Which I wouldn't be able to enjoy because Peanut Butter was a discovery/invention of a black man. I really enjoy my PB&J so I can't be a racist.

I'm going to start presenting this very rational and logical argument to racists I know, who universally enjoy peanut butter. I tip my hat to you, sir.

Every time I think about becoming racist I mull it over a tasty Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwich. Which I wouldn't be able to enjoy because Peanut Butter was a discovery/invention of a black man. I really enjoy my PB&J so I can't be a racist.

actually While George Washington carver invented a lot of products for the peanut, he was not the inventor of peanut butter. Modern Peanut butter was invited by a doctor in ST. Louis. Those who continue to claim Carver try to use a policy of his of not patenting food products, and the one reference to a paste neither mentions roasting or salting.
But before you go turn into a racist.
The Aztecs and Incas technically invented peanut butter before white people even knew what peanuts were(or that America existed). After all Peanut butter is just ground and cooked peanuts with a little bit of salt.
So thank the Native Americans if your going to thank anyone.

Every time I think about becoming racist

This is the sad part.

I can't believe I have to argue over the use of the term 'hate-crime'.

I'm not saying it is illegal to be racist, or it be made a thought-crime. In fact I've never even said hate-crime should carry a heavier punishment than normal-crime. I am not arguing for hate-crime to have more weight than normal-crime.

If I were to say hate-crime have a different legal meaning than assault, that would be different.


Hate-crime is a specific kind of crime with a racist intent. Spray painting 'kike' on a synagogue is a specific type of vandalism, namely hate-crime. Kicking down an immigrant and calling her 'chink' and yelling go back to Chinkdom is an assault with a racist intent, making it a hate-crime. If Calgary is the hate-crime capital of Canada, there are more racially motivated assaults than the national average of such occurrences.

Its still just Vandalism. spray painting Kike may be motivated by hate or it might be motivated by someone knowing it is shocking. two people arguing and uttering racial slurs at each other is not a hate crime its a fight.
And in those incidents where the motivation is clearly heinous and the perpetrator would pose a risk a greater society by being motivated by an emotion that makes him more likely to repeat the offense.
Just like cop killing it is already in the judges ability to factor these sorts of things into sentencing with out using written law to tie their hands.

Hate crimes are called hate crimes because the motivation for it is far more despicable. Spray painting "Christ Killers" on a synagogue or burning crosses on a black person's lawn is a far more provocative act than spraying your name on a train, or setting fire to a rubbish bin, since the mentality and the motive behind the acts are born of a viewpoint which in the past has seen genocide and other atrocities as the logical result of such a mentality. To suggest that these crimes are "only assault" or "just vandalism" is to ignore the historical significance of the words or actions. It whitewashes the fact that until recently, many of these acts were accepted, and even promoted, as appropriate and just things to do.

In regards to the OP, I do not find any White Nationalist argument convincing, and am horrified to see my politicians pushing for votes by using the same fear-mongering language that these despicable human beings utilise. I spend a lot of energy demonstrating the ridiculousness of these arguments to less enlightened friends who don't perceive the obvious flaws and the inevitable conclusion of these viewpoints.

-snip-

-- Bill Hicks (how I WISH he were here to distill this mess for us)

I was just about to name him. He being from the deep south, white and a common man .. you'd think he should be able to come off to some of them as having sense yeah?.. But neh .. They'd write him off as a brain washed muliti-cultural bafoon. :rolleyes:

Did you know there is a movie in the making on Bill by Opie? :tongue:

Ron Howard is cool.

1. Arguing about the meaning of things is what Internet forums are for, besides no topic should be outside of discussion, on the Internet or in society.

Fair enough. I will remind you that you are skeptical of using the term 'hate-crime'. Crimes motivated by an identifiable group should be generalised, because a crime is a crime irregardless of intent (even if it is contrary to my understanding of judicial processes).

Yet, here you are achknowledging what a hate-crime is:

You can have 'hate-crimes' that are motivated by things other than race. Things like sexuality or ideology or religion.

This essentially defeats your argument that the term hate-crime is an unnecessary modifier in the context of my post:

Calgary, which I frequently visit, is considered a hate-crime capital of Canada.

The term hate-crime can be interchanged with "'hate-crimes' that are motivated by things [like race,] sexuality or ideology or religion" which you suggested in your reply.

That, and it can be tricky to prove 'intent.'

That is irrelevant in designating certain crimes as hate-crimes. You should argue with those involved in judiciary affairs or NSG lawyers.


A simple mugging could be just that, and the victims skin color could be incidental, regardless of the perp's ideology.

That is an argument you could use (fruitlessly) on a debate discussing hate-crime legislation. You were specifically addressing me on your reply, the use of the term hate-crime, so this is off topic.


2. Its still just Vandalism. spray painting Kike may be motivated by hate or it might be motivated by someone knowing it is shocking.

Yes it is in essence vandalism. But I already defined what is accepted outside of the legal context as a "hate-crime". If you reject vernacular definitions, I will direct you to section 718.2 on the Criminal Code of Canada:

718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:

(a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,

(i) evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor,

shall be deemed to be aggravating circumstances;

Canadian law clearly has reservations for specific types of crime, defined as a an offence that was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor.

I am fairly certain that the US, or whatever country you come from has similar hate-crime laws.

So I am correct in distinguishing hate-crime vandalism and not-hate-crime vandalism.


two people arguing and uttering racial slurs at each other is not a hate crime its a fight.

Irrelevant to the discussion, because I never said two people arguing is a hate-crime.

On a lighter note I just remembered some more ridiculous statements made by white nationalists. Here are examples:

Of course, you might say that it's unfair that you would be held accountable for the actions of other non-Whites, and you'd be absolutely correct. Welcome to our world. We Whites have been held accountable for the actions of other Whites - even Whites from other countries and other periods in history. Even in East Asia, during the Boxer Rebellion, White Americans were expelled from China merely because of their race.

I believe in absolute reciprocity of treatment. So, if you're Vietnamese, then your treatment in Western countries should be the same as Westerners received in the "Hanoi Hilton." If you're Japanese, then your treatment in Western countries should be the same as Westerners were treated in Japanese POW camps during World War II. Similarly, how the Chinese treated us during the Boxer Rebellion will be how they are treated here in the United States. Blacks will be treated accordingly based on how blacks treat Whites in places like Zimbabwe and South Africa. And so on.

Since Whites have been judged and condemned based on the worst among us, so you must face similar judgment as a race. However we are judged is how you will be judged. That, to me, is absolute fairness and equity based on the precedents already set by non-Whites and anti-racists.

Apparently the white Americans have been enslaved as a race.



OK... this has been niggling me forever. Here's the question:

GIVEN that 2,000 years ago, Europe was full of barbarian tribes lobbing spears at each other, and America was full of barbarian tribes firing arrows at each other and Africa was full of barbarian tribes throwing spears at each other, and given that Europe, America and Africa are places that are very fertile and very rich in all kinds of resources...

IF we are "all the same" as liberals like to say...

WHY have Europeans progressed from primitive tribalism to writing to building cities and discovering electricity, computers, flight, medicine and spaceflight and are on the very verge of traveling to another planet, while Africa is *STILL* full of primitive superstitious warlike tribes that never invented one single thing?

I'd appreciate any answers from liberals and multicultis and, hey, let's hear from some of the darker races too.

Thanks in advance for your no doubt enlightening responses.

Europe was the only land to cultivate technology. Nope, Europe never transplanted science and philosophy from their eastern friends. Averroes was white! Papermaking is a result of European alchemy!


? Logic dictates it's the multiculturalists who hate. They want all God's unique and wonderful people thrown into the blender of racial chaos. Meanwhile, people here understand the value and uniqueness of God's creations, from the spotted owl to Europeankind. People here invision societies where each people can have the freedom to have their own unique people and their values, ethnics and culture represented.

He has a very good understanding of evolution, it apparently stopped after white European became a homogeneous group of people.

White nationalist sentiment from a minority: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=535452] The entire thread is just rich!


We always hear multiculturalists and mass immigration fanatics talk about how the Western nations need to take in hordes of immigrants from the third world because they live in poverty and the only way they can escape it is by coming here.

He is exactry right, what are we doing sending foreign aid when they could just come here!

GIVEN that 2,000 years ago, Europe was full of barbarian tribes lobbing spears at each other

Given that 2000 years ago Augustus' Roman Empire was spreading over a good half of Europe and all the shores of the Mediterranean, with paved roads, aqueducts and public thermae everywhere... the one who wrote that is a total moron.

This is the sad part.

To be fair, social programming can take a long time to overcome. That's partly why I see the topic about the Satanist as such a breakthrough for me, because I didn't have to first sit myself down and run through the whole, "I don't share his beliefs which seem odd and unusual to me, but my own beliefs versus his are not the point. He is entitled to all the protections I am."

This time it just came naturally. Er...not that the subject has come up before per se, but the fact that jumping to the defense of his religious freedom was my natural response and not one I had to work to take out of moral obligation is a big one. For me.

i know of no nation whose territory's first inhabitants were of light skin tone.

i know of no nation whose territory's first inhabitants were of light skin tone.

Well, the first inhabitants any where in the world were probably microbes or something of that sort. If you mean "first human inhabitants," then maybe Europe?

Hate crimes are called hate crimes because the motivation for it is far more despicable. Spray painting "Christ Killers" on a synagogue or burning crosses on a black person's lawn is a far more provocative act than spraying your name on a train, or setting fire to a rubbish bin, since the mentality and the motive behind the acts are born of a viewpoint which in the past has seen genocide and other atrocities as the logical result of such a mentality.

More importantly, the POINT of a hate crime is to terrorize a specific group. Spray painting "Dale Was Here" is just vandalism. Spray painting "Kill All Kikes" is about terrorizing Jews. Physically speaking, both are just three words being spray painted on a surface...but they're not the same crime.