It’s not that difficult…..

Italy is one country where a working model for refugee resettlement has already been developed, which I first drew attention to last year using the example of Riace. Now more and more villages are participating:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/2016/04/refugee-settlement-programs-save-dying-italian-villages-160421113908416.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/08/syrian-refugees-revive-italian-village-camini-160830065301496.html

The question is: why aren’t other EU countries (except Scotland, as also previously noted), Germany in particular, emulating this model? There are villages and small towns dotted all over the map, yet the governments would rather keep refugees concentrated in asylum centres that are not only increasingly overcrowded and hence increases stress among occupants and volunteers alike, but also make refugees easy targets for far-right arson and other terror attacks. Unless, of course, Merkel is – as we have suspected long ago – deliberately trying to do a spectacularly bad job of handling the refugee crisis in order to bring on the Zionist-scripted backlash right on schedule, as can now be seen in the increasing popularity of the AfD…..

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/04/europe/germany-alternative-fur-deutschland-afd-angela-merkel/

(Isn’t it suspicious how little media coverage has been given to Italy’s village revival approach to the refugee influx, especially compared to the fence-building approach of Hungary etc.? It’s as if they want people to think that, because it is inefficient to keep refugees in asylum centres, therefore it is acceptable to let them starve on the border rather than try alternative resettlement schemes.)

This entry was posted in Aryan Sanctuary. Bookmark the permalink.

135 Responses to It’s not that difficult…..

  1. Aestheticaf says:

    I really like this post, excellent points are made. It really points out how politicians like Merkel deliberately set up a directive for failure just to set a narrative or cause a reaction.

    It is also nice to see Italian hospitality is not dead.

    By the way AS, have you received my email?

  2. jens says:

    Scots are doing what right wings have said for centuries jews control over mediahttps://m.facebook.com/groups/761627210595899?view=permalink&id=1108552885903328

  3. AS says:

    Here is a good recent Riace video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd78x_dwudo

    Spread the word! The alternative to Angela Merkel is not Viktor Orban, but Domenico Lucano!

    (Note that the mafia has threatened Lucano over his welcoming of refugees. In other words, the attitude found in Italy’s mafia is the same as that found in Hungary’s government. Think about that for a moment.)

  4. TopKek says:

    There are around 2 million immigrants coming into Germany alone per year right now. If Germany were required to give them not just housing, but 24 hour babysitting and make-work jobs, it’d p!ss off German voters even more and send them even faster into the arms of AfD and NPD, not to mention make the government look comical. (By comparison, the US’s Prison Industrial Complex has around 2 million inmates in a country of 330m people, and that awful system was not built in just a year!).

    By the way, didn’t you guys write an article about a year ago saying that refugees should voluntarily refrain from using social services? (Not that the economic cost of immigration is comparable to the ethnic/cultural costs, in identitarians’ calculi, that is)

  5. AS says:

    @TopKek

    “There are around 2 million immigrants coming into Germany alone per year right now.”

    First of all, every EU country should be taking its share. Most of the current refugee problem is caused by Germany having to take far more than its fair share.

    “If Germany were required to give them not just housing, but 24 hour babysitting and make-work jobs”

    That is not an accurate description of Lucano’s model, and is therefore a strawman argument.

    “didn’t you guys write an article about a year ago saying that refugees should voluntarily refrain from using social services?”

    You will have to point to a specific quote before I can tell you whether we intended it to mean what you think it means.

  6. Jason says:

    Here’s a documentary about black people in the Soviet Union https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_TV5vctEog

    They were treated as royalty and the Soviet Union was an actively anti-Racist state. USSR did – just like you want to do – allow race-mixing (they even encouraged it and promoted it) and wanted a race-less world. Just like now the White natives were being oppressed (then they were slaughtered) while the “refugees” were treated like kings and queens and promoted in the media. Black’s even “fled” to the Soviet Union because they wanted to escape racism. Why didn’t they flee to Nazi Germany if they wanted to be free from racism…

    You are the same jewish false opposition as the jewish anti-racists in the USSR.

  7. AS says:

    @Jason

    “They were treated as royalty”

    Thanks for showing that when a racist like you sees “black” people being treated with ordinary friendliness, your warped mind perceives them as being “treated as royalty”.

    “Black’s even “fled” to the Soviet Union because they wanted to escape racism. Why didn’t they flee to Nazi Germany if they wanted to be free from racism…”

    “Black” people were fleeing to the USSR from the USA, not from National Socialist Germany. “Black” people in National Socialist Germany were not fleeing at all. What does that tell us?

    All this video shows is that pre-WWII USA was more racist than pre-WWII USSR, which anyone here could have told you even without watching the video.

    “just like you want to do – allow race-mixing (they even encouraged it and promoted it) and wanted a race-less world”

    We want a world where racially inferior people (e.g. you) are prohibited from reproducing. That is an explicitly racial world.

    “You are the same jewish false opposition”

    We would also prohibit all Jews from reproducing.

    While you waste our time here, this is what your allies are doing:

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/youths-germany-chanting-wing-slogans-attack-refugee-children-151916045.html

  8. Aesthicaf says:

    @Jason

    The White Russian movement that lost to the Bolsheviks was also anti-ethnocentric. You should do some research on them.

  9. Jason says:

    “Thanks for showing that when a racist like you sees “black” people being treated with ordinary friendliness, your warped mind perceives them as being “treated as royalty”.”

    And at the same time the native Russians and Ukrainians (and various other European ethnicities) were being slaughtered, while the Apefricans were being treated as royalty. Maybe that’s the anti-racist Nationalsocialist version too?

    I have no qualms about treating different races that are friendly with respect though.

    ““Black” people were fleeing to the USSR from the USA, not from National Socialist Germany. “Black” people in National Socialist Germany were not fleeing at all. What does that tell us?

    All this video shows is that pre-WWII USA was more racist than pre-WWII USSR, which anyone here could have told you even without watching the video.”
    And what race largely controlled the USSR before the war?

    And that doesn’t show you that jews have never had any problems with miscegenation?
    They even show a lot of jewesses in the documentary who mixed with Blacks in the Soviet Union and their offspring. If jews were the ultimate racists they would have never allowed that.

    Jews are the ultimate mongrelizers and are the most mongrelized people racially on this earth.

    That’s also why God told the Israelites to exterminate the jewish Canaanites in the Old Testament. They are the ultimate race-mixers and degenerates.

    “We would also prohibit all Jews from reproducing.”

    What is your opinion on jews like Barbara Lerner Spectre, saying that the mongrelized jews will lead a multicultural Europe?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ

    “While you waste our time here, this is what your allies are doing:”

    Good. Last week a man where I live was almost beaten to death by a pack of “refugees” while strolling around a “refugee camp”. The jews want to exterminate the White race, but they will never succeed.

  10. anon says:

    >The jews want to exterminate the White race

    why the Jews would want to exterminate the White Race when it is the White Race that allow them to thrive? Do you really believe in jewish vile plan to replace Europeans with muslims, their archenemy?

  11. Jason says:

    Because they see the White race as their ultimate enemy. Just the fact that jews like Emmanuel Celler and his buddies were behind the “immigration reform” in the sixties in the US, and practically every White country, should tell us something. During the crusades the jews even opened the gates for the muslim invaders and backed the muslims,

    “711 July 19, TARIK IBN ZIYAD (Spain)

    A Moslem general. He defeated King Roderick, the last of the Visigoth kings, at the Battle of Rio Barbate (Guadalete) near Xeres de la Frontera. The Jews backed him in his battles. After each city was conquered (Cordova, Granada, Malaga), Jews were often given positions of safeguarding Moslem interests. One of his generals, Kaula al Yahudi, had many Jews under his command.

    712 March, TOLEDO (Spain)

    The Jewish inhabitants opened the gates for the Moslem invaders under Tarik ibn Zayid marking the end of Visigothic rule in Spain and the beginning of 150 years of peace. Thus began what was known as the Golden Age of Spain. The Iberian caliphate was independent of Baghdad and encouraged the flowering of Spanish-Jewish culture at the same time that it was being suppressed by the Baghdad caliphate.”

    http://www.jewishhistory.org.il/history.php?startyear=710&endyear=719

    Jews have always thrived more in muslim cultures and blended in more (and in racially mixed countries/cities, like New York). It’s true though that jews have always had it financially better in Europe and have had an easier time to bribe politicians and kings here. But this always comes back and bites them in the ass in the end (like in Nazi Germany).

    Here the jews are saying that jews have always fared better with muslims than Christians,

    “While Jewish communities in Arab and Islamic countries fared better overall than those in Christian lands in Europe, Jews were no strangers to persecution and humiliation among the Arabs and Muslim.”

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Jews_in_Arab_lands_(gen).html

    ‘Islamization of Europe a good thing’
    Rabbi Baruch Efrati believes Jews should ‘rejoice at the fact that Europe is paying for what it did to us for hundreds of years by losing its identity.’ He praises Islam for promoting modesty, respect for God”

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4299673,00.html

    But no, it’s not a jewish plan to replace Europeans with Africans, muslim Arabs, and other non-White races…

  12. Numinous Sun says:

    @anon:

    There is no such thing as a “white race”; it is a fabrication, a fiction, just like the “Jewishness” is. Neither are grounded in reality.

  13. anon says:

    @Numinous Sun

    They exist in the minds of certain people and thus they can influence their behaviour.

  14. Coyotl says:

    A random Jew says something, so you choose to believe it… they could not ask for dumber enemies. If Jews in Muslim-dominated areas were not persecuted it is because those Muslims were ignorant of their evil. Aryanism has never denied that Islam also carries the baggage of the Tanakh like Christianity. If Christians were more anti-Jew than Muslims then Western Civilization (Judeo-Christian invention) wouldn’t have launched them into such a formidable position of power and in all reality the Jewish problem would have already been dealt with, but it hasn’t.

    You haven’t explained how Jews would thrive in a society without “whites” when most Ashkenazi Jews are pale as snow, and would stick out like a sore thumb.

  15. Pandorastop says:

    @Jason

    “Historian Robert Conquest described the Soviet electoral system as “a set of phantom institutions and arrangements which put a human face on the hideous realities: a model constitution adopted in a worst period of terror and guaranteeing human rights, elections in which there was only one candidate, and in which 99 percent voted; a parliament at which no hand was ever raised in opposition or abstention.”Sergei Kovalev recalled “the famous article 125 of Constitution which enumerated all main citizen and political rights” in Soviet Union. But when he and other prisoners attempted to use this as a legal base for their abuse complaints, their prosecutor’s argument was that “the Constitution was written not for you, but for American Negros, so that they know how happy lives Soviet citizens have.”

    When you read that Jason… does anything stick out? Just read it a few times and think, hard.

  16. Jason says:

    “A random Jew says something, so you choose to believe it… they could not ask for dumber enemies.”

    They’re effin’ bragging about it. If it was just one single jew who promoted immigration to White countries or pro-muslim opinions, then I wouldn’t care.

    “If Jews in Muslim-dominated areas were not persecuted it is because those Muslims were ignorant of their evil”

    No, it’s because both Arabs and jews are race-mixed mongrels with the same Middle Eastern ethnocentric mentalities. Brothers walking hand in hand.

    “Aryanism has never denied that Islam also carries the baggage of the Tanakh like Christianity. If Christians were more anti-Jew than Muslims then Western Civilization (Judeo-Christian invention) wouldn’t have launched them into such a formidable position of power and in all reality the Jewish problem would have already been dealt with, but it hasn’t.”

    Tanakh is a White man’s book and the Hebrews were White. Jews are NOT Hebrews, they descend from the race-mixed Edomite and Canaanite tribes. God told the Israelites to exterminate the Canaanite baby-murderers and race-mixers.

    Abraham was a CHALDEAN White man from the land of Ur. The whole Bible is only written for the children of Israel. And the New Testament i wholly and fully based on the Old Testament.

    “You haven’t explained how Jews would thrive in a society without “whites” when most Ashkenazi Jews are pale as snow, and would stick out like a sore thumb.”

    It’s because they have mixed themselves with Whites for I don’t know how long. Jews are the most mongrelized race on this whole planet… they have Arab, Negro, European, Asian, and all kinds of other races mixture in their gene pool.

    Calling jews White would be like calling Mestizos White.

    Japanese people also have White skin, but nobody would call them “White”. Skin colour is pretty irrelevant when we are talking about race.

  17. Pandorastop says:

    @Jason

    Oh, now I see. You’re a christian identity nut-bar factor 7.

  18. Pandorastop says:

    @Jason

    “Japanese people also have White skin.” “but nobody would call them “White” Wut???

    “Skin colour is pretty irrelevant when we are talking about race.” lol wut???

    So you agree with us but do not agree with us? LOL… k.

    The wheels on the bus go nope, nope, nope.

  19. Jason says:

    @Jason

    “Oh, now I see. You’re a christian identity nut-bar factor 7.”

    Nope. But I’ve read history and the Bible (studied the original words in hebrew and koine Greek). The Israelites were small tribes of White people (Phoenicians, Leuco-Syrians, Celts, Dorian Greek, etc). Read the New Testament and you can see that Jesus and Paul preached in Aryan areas like Galatia (Celts), Corinth (Dorians), Colossae (Scythians), Rome (Romans), Cappadocia (White Syrians).

    Paul even says in Corinthians chapter 10 that the ancestors of those he preached to walked with Moses in the desert and commited race-mixing with Moabite women (which they were punished for).

    And don’t know but I don’t believe Negroes walked with Moses in the Sinai desert.

    The whole Bible is only written for Israel (peopl descended from Jacob, not a country that the Canaanite jews are inhabiting today)… and they were not mongrelized jews.

    “So you agree with us but do not agree with us? LOL… k.

    The wheels on the bus go nope, nope, nope.”

    No true racist believes in the superiority of White skin or light features… race is largely on the inside and manifests itself through actions. White skin and various light features are just that – features of the White race.

    Negroes, Asians, Arabs, jews, and all the other mongrels can never invent or create civilizations like the White man.

    All brown races our invading our countries now because the jews opened the gates and because they want to steal everything that the White man has given this world.

  20. Coyotl says:

    Okay… so the Jews are bragging about their master plan, which is to blow their cover, so that Muslims can take over and they can be buddies? I can’t say you people aren’t lacking in creativity.

    >No, it’s because both Arabs and jews are race-mixed
    Protip: You are too.

    http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552

    As it turns out, everybody is, to such a degree that it requires state-backing to cleanse the gene pool of genetic trash like you.

    >Tanakh is a White man’s book and the Hebrews were White.
    Hebrews, Israelites, Jews, whatever you call them the behavior is the same. It is the same behavior that the Third Reich ROUTINELY criticized as subhuman, by the way. Also, you have ousted yourself as a Jew.

    >Skin colour is pretty irrelevant when we are talking about race.
    You don’t fucking say.

    http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/versatile.png
    http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/versatile-contd.jpg

  21. Jason says:

    “Okay… so the Jews are bragging about their master plan, which is to blow their cover, so that Muslims can take over and they can be buddies? I can’t say you people aren’t lacking in creativity.”

    The fact of the matter is that jews and muslims are Canaanite brothers with the same etnocentric mentality. Both Arabs and Jews hate Europeans more than they hate each other. Both Jews and Arabs support the invasion of Europe. Jews would rather live with Arabs than with Europeans.

    Just a couple of year ago Jewish organizations where I live started to condemn Islamophobia viciously in the media after muslims had attacked jews with insults. Counter-Jihadists responded with anti-Islamic propaganda, and the Jews condemned them.

    “>No, it’s because both Arabs and jews are race-mixed
    Protip: You are too.

    http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552

    As it turns out, everybody is, to such a degree that it requires state-backing to cleanse the gene pool of genetic trash like you.”

    The Jews and their “science” says this, yeah. Most DNA-companies are owned by Jews (like 23andme, Ftdna, and many others).

    “Hebrews, Israelites, Jews, whatever you call them the behavior is the same. It is the same behavior that the Third Reich ROUTINELY criticized as subhuman, by the way. Also, you have ousted yourself as a Jew.”

    Hitler and the Nazis wrongly believed that the Old Testament was a Jewish book. The Hebrews in the Old Testament were not Jews… they SLAUGHTERED Jews and were out to exterminate them (unlike the Nazis who only rounded them up in camps). The very word Canaanite in hebrew means “merchant”.

    “You don’t fucking say.

    http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/versatile.png
    http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/versatile-contd.jpg

    On average mongrels and non-Whites are not as attractive as Whites (especially sub-saharan blacks).

    Look at the negro subhuman POW’s filmed by German soldiers here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-EW3TJn_5E

  22. Pandorastop says:

    @Jason

    Galatia, was in modern Turkey. Phrygia was also in modern Turkey, Cappadocia was in modern Turkey etc.

    You do know that during that period of history Celts and Germanics were slaves in the Roman empire, yes?

    If you’re going to disagree with us at least come up with something not as ridiculous as the Christian Identity movement which just substitutes us for Jews. Just like the ‘black hebrews’ do.

  23. Jason says:

    The Celts lived in Galatia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatia, The White Syrians lived in Cappadocia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leucosyri

    The apostle Peter even mention these people as a chosen holy race (the same words are found in the Old Testament),

    Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
    To God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, (1 Peter 1:1)

    But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession (1 Peter 2:9)

    For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.
    (Deut 7:6)

    Those places were White areas during those times. People move and migrate and mix with other people, so you can’t compare the inhabitants of these areas today with the people who lived there then. For example, The Lebanese today are not the same people as the Phoenicians who lived there over 2000 years ago.

    And yes, I’m aware that different White tribes waged war against each other and treated each other badly. What’s your point?

  24. Jason says:

    And just to clarify, I have never said that ALL White people are descended from the Hebrews. The Hebrews were SMALL tribes of White people.

  25. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >711 July 19, TARIK IBN ZIYAD (Spain)
    >712 March, TOLEDO (Spain)

    The reason the Jews supported Muslims in Spain was that the Muslims were more tolerant of them, not because they hate Christians more than Muslims. But this doesn’t mean that Muslims have a particular fondness for Jews. The Muslims were more tolerant than Catholics in general. Muslims tolerated Christians and Jews. Catholics burned anyone who disagreed with them, whether they be Muslims, Jews or non-Catholic Christians. You talk about these incidents being attacks by Jews on whites. In fact, they were attacking Catholics, not whites. A white non-Catholic would have been better off living under the Muslims than the Catholics and it would have been in their interests to side against the Visigoths as well.

    >Tanakh is a White man’s book and the Hebrews were White.

    The Tanakh is a book of pure evil and if you value its content so much that you’ve used mental gymnastics to convince yourself that the Hebrews were white, you’re as bad as the Jews and basically are a Jew. It doesn’t matter who the Hebrews were. They were evil whether modern Jews are their descendants or not.

  26. AS says:

    @Jason

    “And what race largely controlled the USSR before the war?”

    The same one that largely controlled the USA of the same era.

    “What is your opinion on jews like Barbara Lerner Spectre, saying that the mongrelized jews will lead a multicultural Europe?”

    We oppose Jews leading anything, and we oppose multiculturalism. We want non-Jews of all backgrounds to work together and create a new culture.

    “Hitler and the Nazis wrongly believed that the Old Testament was a Jewish book.”

    Since we believe the same thing, thank you for admitting that we are authentic National Socialists. As for whether or not this belief is wrong, it doesn’t matter. Hitler didn’t dislike the Tanakh as a consequence of believing it was Jewish, he found it easy to believe it was Jewish because he already disliked it on ethical grounds. Even if you had convinced Hitler that the Tanakh was written by “whites”, it would not have changed his ethical evaluation of the Tanakh, but merely have made him despise “whites” more.

    “Aryan areas like … Colossae (Scythians)”

    Scythians are mainly Turanian.

    “Just a couple of year ago Jewish organizations where I live started to condemn Islamophobia viciously in the media after muslims had attacked jews with insults. Counter-Jihadists responded with anti-Islamic propaganda, and the Jews condemned them.”

    Do we even need to point out all the Jews who lead the counterjihad? So you look at one group of Jews condemning another group of Jews and don’t recognize the Zionist trick of controlling both sides in order to make people forget all about the Muslims’ original attack on Jews as the debate has quickly been shifted to whether or not Islamophobia is justified?

    “Negroes, Asians, Arabs, jews, and all the other mongrels can never invent or create civilizations like the White man.”

    They should not want to. Look how your “white man” civilizations treated the Pythagoreans, Bogomils and Cathars (and more recently National Socialist Germany), not to mention the entire “non-white” world throughout the colonial era.

    “On average mongrels and non-Whites are not as attractive as Whites (especially sub-saharan blacks).”

    You are entitled to your tastes. Here are computer-averaged “black” and “white” faces for visitor comparison:

    http://aryanism.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/average-faces.png

    (I personally have almost no feelings for averaged faces. I find individual faces much more interesting.)

  27. Jason says:

    “>711 July 19, TARIK IBN ZIYAD (Spain)
    >712 March, TOLEDO (Spain)

    The reason the Jews supported Muslims in Spain was that the Muslims were more tolerant of them, not because they hate Christians more than Muslims. But this doesn’t mean that Muslims have a particular fondness for Jews. The Muslims were more tolerant than Catholics in general. Muslims tolerated Christians and Jews. Catholics burned anyone who disagreed with them, whether they be Muslims, Jews or non-Catholic Christians. You talk about these incidents being attacks by Jews on whites. In fact, they were attacking Catholics, not whites. A white non-Catholic would have been better off living under the Muslims than the Catholics and it would have been in their interests to side against the Visigoths as well. ”

    It doesn’t matter what the real reason was, the fact of the matter is that Jews are doing the same thing all over again. Jews and Arabs share the same genetics and have the same tribal culture and vicousness (Arabs are even worse). Both Jews and Arabs hate White people and would rather live with each other than with Whites.

    If Jews liked Whites more they would NEVER push this mass-invasion or anti-racism. The immigrants get basically everything free on a platter (computers, tablets, food, etc), but the Jews are not content until Whites have lost all their power.

    “The Tanakh is a book of pure evil and if you value its content so much that you’ve used mental gymnastics to convince yourself that the Hebrews were white, you’re as bad as the Jews and basically are a Jew. It doesn’t matter who the Hebrews were. They were evil whether modern Jews are their descendants or not.”

    By doing that you also consider Jesus to be “pure evil”. You see, you can’t have it both ways. Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament prophecies, descended directly from the line of David, used parables from the OT, upheld the OT-laws, and Moses and Elijah appeared on a mountain with him to confirm to the apostles that he was the messiah.

    So by condemning the OT you have to condemn the NT.

  28. Jason says:

    “The same one that largely controlled the USA of the same era.”

    The jews gained more control AFTER WWII than they had before in the USA. In the USSR the situation was the OPPOSITE. If the mongrelized Jews are the ultimate racists they would have never allowed their own women to mix with black people.

    “We oppose Jews leading anything, and we oppose multiculturalism. We want non-Jews of all backgrounds to work together and create a new culture.”

    But they want the same thing that you want. You both want to mix all peoples and force a “New World Order” where race or sexuality doesn’t matter (it could be because you’re also gnostics?)

    You both want to support the absolute criminal underclass invading Europe (these people who are coming are not regular people who are just fleeing, they are the absolute underclass that their governments and civilians want to avoid). You are dumb as rocks, my mates.

    Why are Jews behind all the open-border reforms for White nations? I don’t know, but I would speculate, just like Lerner Spectre said, that they don’t want a “monolithic” Europe…

    “Since we believe the same thing, thank you for admitting that we are authentic National Socialists. As for whether or not this belief is wrong, it doesn’t matter. Hitler didn’t dislike the Tanakh as a consequence of believing it was Jewish, he found it easy to believe it was Jewish because he already disliked it on ethical grounds. Even if you had convinced Hitler that the Tanakh was written by “whites”, it would not have changed his ethical evaluation of the Tanakh, but merely have made him despise “whites” more.”

    The OT is a mixture of genocidal texts, rules, history, and the most beautiful poetry. A Jew could never have written the books contained in the OT. And just like I said to the “Andalucian Warrior”, you can’t have it both ways. If you belive in the NT you MUST believe in the OT.

    Hiter and the Nazis had a syntax error thanks to Jewish propaganda on this point.

    “Scythians are mainly Turanian.”

    Scythians were mainly light-featured Aryans from Persia. Both Strabo, ancient skeletons and DNA confirm this (modern Slavs are mainly their descendants).

    “Do we even need to point out all the Jews who lead the counterjihad? So you look at one group of Jews condemning another group of Jews and don’t recognize the Zionist trick of controlling both sides in order to make people forget all about the Muslims’ original attack on Jews as the debate has quickly been shifted to whether or not Islamophobia is justified?”

    There are many Jews within AmRen and among many “consipracy groups” too… but this is just so that they can mislead the dumb goys and blame other people (like muslims, blacks, Arabs, or even Whites) for the immigration and degeneration. As quickly as you mention the word Jew they will attack you and ostracize you (David Duke was banned from AmRen after criticising Jews). No true Nationalist supports these Jewish-controlled groups.

    And the difference is that the Jews IN POWER support anti-racism, immigration, homosexuality, and are opposed to islamophobia. A minority of Jews who are NOT IN POWER to make any decisions support CounterJihad.

    The Jews have even now infiltrated the Alt-Right and are trying to steer the movement away from antisemitism and racism (Milo, Rubin and their buddies are effectively doing this).

    So jews in power (at least where I live) are totally opposed to Islamophobia. They even have a famous saying, “Today it’s the muslims, tomorrow it’s the Jews who will be persecuted”.

    “They should not want to. Look how your “white man” civilizations treated the Pythagoreans, Bogomils and Cathars (and more recently National Socialist Germany), not to mention the entire “non-white” world throughout the colonial era.”

    Who gives a damn.

    “You are entitled to your tastes. Here are computer-averaged “black” and “white” faces for visitor comparison:”

    And of course the White man has more attractive features…

  29. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >By doing that you also consider Jesus to be “pure evil”. You see, you can’t have it both ways.

    The NT contradicts itself on many occasions and must have been compiled from multiple sources.

    >Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament prophecies

    Well, he did say that he had come not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it. But then he did abolish many of the rules in the Sermon on the Mount and criticised Jewish traditions. Contradiction.

    >descended directly from the line of David

    lol. Two genealogies are given for Jesus. One in the Gospel of Matthew, one in the Gospel of Luke. Even they contradict each other! They can’t even make a simple thing like that consistent. They clearly just said he was to try to market Christianity to Jews, just like they used OT verses to support that he was the Messiah throughout the Gospel of Matthew, and just like they said he had come to fulfil the law even though he changed and criticised it, and just like how they made up the cartoonish story of Elijah and Moses appearing on the mountain.

    The problem is that because Jesus contradicted himself so much and was so vague in what he taught, it’s difficult to work out exactly what he did believe in, so unfortunately there’s not much we can learn from him. But I’m certain that his views were at least very different from the views of the OT.

  30. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >Who gives a damn.

    I do, but I don’t give a damn about the ‘white race’ dying out.

  31. Jason says:

    “The NT contradicts itself on many occasions and must have been compiled from multiple sources.”

    It does not contradict itself, but there are certainly passages that have been added or tampered with during history (like the woman taken in adutery is a fabrication, certain verses are added, etc). I would never claim that the Bible is a perfect book.

    But you’re a muslim, right?

    “Well, he did say that he had come not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it. But then he did abolish many of the rules in the Sermon on the Mount and criticised Jewish traditions. Contradiction.”

    You could say that he clarified them. He even criticised the pharisees for not executing unruly children.

    “lol. Two genealogies are given for Jesus. One in the Gospel of Matthew, one in the Gospel of Luke. Even they contradict each other! They can’t even make a simple thing like that consistent. They clearly just said he was to try to market Christianity to Jews, just like they used OT verses to support that he was the Messiah throughout the Gospel of Matthew, and just like they said he had come to fulfil the law even though he changed and criticised it, and just like how they made up the cartoonish story of Elijah and Moses appearing on the mountain. ”

    The “jews” were never Christians and Christianity was never marketed to them. According to the Maccabean books and Josephus the “jews” descend (like King Herod who was a mixed Arab/Edomite) from the Canaanites and Edomites who infiltrated the Hebrew religion during 3-200 B.C.

    Right from the get-go Church historians report that White places like Britain were the first areas to be Christianized. Jews persecuted Christians and murdered them.

    Everything written in the gospels (false or not) was marketed to dispersed Israelites descended from Aryans like the Celts, Scythians, Phoenicians, White Syrians, etc (that’s where the apostles went).

    “The problem is that because Jesus contradicted himself so much and was so vague in what he taught, it’s difficult to work out exactly what he did believe in, so unfortunately there’s not much we can learn from him. But I’m certain that his views were at least very different from the views of the OT.”

    Whether or not he was vague, he only came for the lost sheep of the House of Israel,

    “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel” Matt 15:24

  32. Numinous Sun says:

    @Jason:

    “The NT contradicts itself on many occasions and must have been compiled from multiple sources.”

    Yes, it does! Here is partly the reason of why:

    “[Jesus] conversed with His disciples in private, and especially in their sacred retreats, concerning the Gospel of God; but the words which He uttered have not been preserved, because it appeared to the evangelists that they could not be adequately conveyed to the multitude in writing or in speech… and they saw… what things were to be committed to writing, and how this was to be done, and what was by no means to be written to the multitude, and what was to be expressed in words, and what was not to be so conveyed”. – Contra Celsus, Chap. VI. 18 -

    Lastly, many of the Gnostic schools taught that Yahweh is Satan himself. (Which any discerning eye should also be able to see.) So, regardless of who the Hebrews or Jews really are, they still follow Satan…

    “The demiurge or creator god is a lesser and inferior or false god. In most of the systems, this demiurge was seen as imperfect, in others even as evil. This creator god is commonly referred to as the demiourgós used in the Platonist tradition.[10] Different gnostic schools sometimes identified the demiurge as Ahriman, El, Saklas, Samael, Satan, Yaldabaoth, or Yahweh.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

  33. Jason says:

    “@Jason:

    “The NT contradicts itself on many occasions and must have been compiled from multiple sources.”

    Yes, it does! Here is partly the reason of why:

    “[Jesus] conversed with His disciples in private, and especially in their sacred retreats, concerning the Gospel of God; but the words which He uttered have not been preserved, because it appeared to the evangelists that they could not be adequately conveyed to the multitude in writing or in speech… and they saw… what things were to be committed to writing, and how this was to be done, and what was by no means to be written to the multitude, and what was to be expressed in words, and what was not to be so conveyed”. – Contra Celsus, Chap. VI. 18 -

    Lastly, many of the Gnostic schools taught that Yahweh is Satan himself. (Which any discerning eye should also be able to see.) So, regardless of who the Hebrews or Jews really are, they still follow Satan…

    “The demiurge or creator god is a lesser and inferior or false god. In most of the systems, this demiurge was seen as imperfect, in others even as evil. This creator god is commonly referred to as the demiourgós used in the Platonist tradition.[10] Different gnostic schools sometimes identified the demiurge as Ahriman, El, Saklas, Samael, Satan, Yaldabaoth, or Yahweh.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

    I’m certainly aware of the most evil religion that has ever surfaced this earth called gnosticism. Many of the early Church fathers were gnostics themselves before they became “Christians” (Augustine was a Manichean before his supposed conversion). The gnostic infiltration is why so many Christians throughout history have been so obsessed with masturbation, sex, self-mutilation, celibacy, condemning physical pleasure, etc. Gnostics viewed the male sexual organ (totally unlike the Hebrews who condemned even eunuchs) as evil. I hate gnosticism and it ruined the lives of many people and ultimately started the Catholic Church. According to the gnostics mythological “demons” created our bodies and the world, while a good God created the spiritual realm. No wonder that so many people hate “Christianity” today (thank you gnostics).

    It was because of Gnosticism that the Satan myth even started. Satan in Hebrew just means “adversary” and nowhere in the Old Testament or New Testament is it implied that it’s a supernatural being (God is even called Satan when he opposes David, kings are called Satan when they oppose the children of Israel, and people who are “sinners” are instructed by Paul to be turned over to “Satan” so that their “spirit” may be saved, etc).

    By your logic Jesus followed his father “Satan”.

  34. Numinous Sun says:

    @Jason:

    “…nowhere in the Old Testament or New Testament is it implied that it’s a supernatural being.”

    And neither did I.

    “I’m certainly aware of the most evil religion that has ever surfaced this earth called gnosticism.”

    So, ‘shunning the material’ world on a FINITE planet is considered “evil” by you?

    INTERESTING!!! PLEASE ELABORATE ON THIS FURTHER!?

  35. Numinous Sun says:

    @Jason:

    Furthermore, Gnosticism is a ‘collection’ of religions…

  36. Jason says:

    “So, ‘shunning the material’ world on a FINITE planet is considered “evil” by you?

    INTERESTING!!! PLEASE ELABORATE ON THIS FURTHER!?”

    The way they did it by forcing young boys to wear painful “chastity belts”, encouraged people to starve themselves to death, setting up celibacy as the only option, castration, and many other teachings, were clearly wicked and evil.

    If they would have just kept to themselves and not forced their teaching on people it would have been much better.

  37. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >But you’re a muslim, right?

    No. I chose this name to troll people. I don’t come here much any more, but you summoned me by insulting al-Andalus.

    >He even criticised the pharisees for not executing unruly children.

    He did not criticise them for not executing unruly children. He was pointing out their hypocrisy in admonishing him for not washing his hands before eating (i.e. for not following Jewish law) when there were Jewish laws that they themselves did not follow, of which killing ‘unruly’ children was an example. That didn’t mean that he supported those laws and indeed the fact that he did not wash his hands was one of the many proofs that he didn’t follow them.

    >The “jews” were never Christians and Christianity was never marketed to them.

    That’s not relevant to the point I was making, but fine. I’ll rephrase what I said (even though I think you’re wrong): It was marketed to people who believed in the Tanakh, considered themselves God’s chosen people and were waiting for the Messiah.

  38. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >The way they did it by forcing young boys to wear painful “chastity belts”, encouraged people to starve themselves to death, setting up celibacy as the only option, castration, and many other teachings, were clearly wicked and evil.

    You are correct that asceticism in Christianity comes from Gnosticism, and this is one of the god things in Christianity. Having said that, I too was once disturbed by Nicene Christianity’s obsession with asceticism, but I eventually realised that the disturbing thing isn’t the asceticism itself, it is the combination of asceticism with worship of the creator of the material world. They worship a being that created carnal pleasures but told people enjoyment of those pleasures is forbidden, which is sick and sadistic. But if the creator is not worshipped, the anti-materialism/ asceticism is no longer disturbing or illogical.

  39. Jason says:

    “He did not criticise them for not executing unruly children. He was pointing out their hypocrisy in admonishing him for not washing his hands before eating (i.e. for not following Jewish law) when there were Jewish laws that they themselves did not follow, of which killing ‘unruly’ children was an example. That didn’t mean that he supported those laws and indeed the fact that he did not wash his hands was one of the many proofs that he didn’t follow them. ”

    No. He pointed out a REAL law that’s found in the Old Testament and in the ten commandments (honor thy father and mother so tha you may live long in the land Yahweh has given you). A rule for washing your hands before a meal is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. He certainly supported that law and everyhting else in the Old Testament (including polygamy, slavery, the meat laws, genocide, and everything else).

    ” That’s not relevant to the point I was making, but fine. I’ll rephrase what I said (even though I think you’re wrong): It was marketed to people who believed in the Tanakh, considered themselves God’s chosen people and were waiting for the Messiah.”

    But how do you market something to a group who’s not the target? All the people who converted during the first decades of Christianity had blood descent to the Israelites in the Old Testament. The apostle Peter, and the other apostles, wrote to and converted the “exiles scattered abroad” (Israelites who were dispersed after the Assyrian captivity). Jesus and the apostles ministry was only limited to the biological Israel.

  40. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >He certainly supported that law and everyhting else in the Old Testament (including polygamy, slavery, the meat laws, genocide, and everything else).

    Well, he definitely didn’t support the dietary laws because he told his disciples that everything was clean to eat.

    >But how do you market something to a group who’s not the target?

    Are you saying it wasn’t marketed to people who followed the Tanakh?

  41. Andalucian Warrior says:

    By the way, you said Gnostics are evil for forcing boys to wear chastity belts (not a Gnostic practise, but never mind). You also said that the law that ‘unruly’ children should be killed should be upheld. Does that mean that children who rebel against being forced to wear chastity belts should be killed? You can either believe that children should obey their parents unconditionally or that ‘unruly’ children should be killed, but not both.

  42. Andalucian Warrior says:

    I think the problem with you is that you are not good at recognising contradictions.

  43. Jason says:

    “Well, he definitely didn’t support the dietary laws because he told his disciples that everything was clean to eat. ”

    You’re missing the context. The pharisees taught that even one little dirt stain on a platter or piece of food would defile a man if he ate something of it. It was not advocay for eating swine or seafood. Christ himself never ate swine or seafood, and the apostles never did either.

    “Are you saying it wasn’t marketed to people who followed the Tanakh?”

    The dispersed Israelites who the apostles preached to did not follow Tanakh. They were not curcumsised, did not follow the meat laws, or anything else. They were “divorced” from the covenants. Jesus and the apostles mission was to restore that relationship and therefore Yahweh told the House of Israel that he would write his law in their hearts so that they would not have to follow certain laws in the OT,

    “But when God found fault with the people, He said: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, because they did not abide by My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord. I will put My laws in their minds, and inscribe them on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they will be My people”

    Hebrews 8:8-10

  44. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >The dispersed Israelites who the apostles preached to did not follow Tanakh.

    What about the people Jesus preached to in Judea? Did they not follow the Tanakh? If they weren’t the target audience, what was the point of preaching to them?

  45. Jason says:

    “By the way, you said Gnostics are evil for forcing boys to wear chastity belts (not a Gnostic practise, but never mind). You also said that the law that ‘unruly’ children should be killed should be upheld. Does that mean that children who rebel against being forced to wear chastity belts should be killed? You can either believe that children should obey their parents unconditionally or that ‘unruly’ children should be killed, but not both.”

    I myself don’t support that law. But Jesus did.

    And I don’t think that chastity belts were even thought of when that law written. The Hebrews encouraged marriage for young boys in their early teens.

    The list of unruly behavior mentioned in the OT includes “drunkeness”, “cursing your parents”, etc. But I think that for someone to be executed they needed to have a trial and witnesses. And the law was never really fully followed.

    The laws were written in different times to a different (patriarchal) culture.

  46. Jason says:

    “What about the people Jesus preached to in Judea? Did they not follow the Tanakh? If they weren’t the target audience, what was the point of preaching to them?”

    The Israelites who lived in Judea followed the law, yes, and they were also the target. The dispersed Israelites did not follow the law.

  47. Jason says:

    “They worship a being that created carnal pleasures but told people enjoyment of those pleasures is forbidden, which is sick and sadistic. But if the creator is not worshipped, the anti-materialism/ asceticism is no longer disturbing or illogical.”

    This makes more sense.

  48. Andalucian Warrior says:

    >I myself don’t support that law. But Jesus did.

    But you follow Jesus and think the law of the OT shouldn’t be changed?

    >“cursing your parents”

    Why shouldn’t they curse their parents if that’s how they are treated by them?

    >The laws were written in different times to a different (patriarchal) culture.

    A different culture to the one we live in now, but the same culture that you want to replace it, considering that you think we should follow the OT and that ‘polygamy, slavery, the meat laws, genocide, and everything else’ should be followed.

  49. Jason says:

    “But you follow Jesus and think the law of the OT shouldn’t be changed?”

    I never said that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>